Sunday, October 01, 2017

Catholic Pedophile Priests on Guam 32

Catholic Pedophile Priests on Guam. 

Then the USA Today article shifts to Guam, where 14 separate priests stand accused of child molestation. 

In 2016 The Independent reported that a “Catholic priest who sexually abused “maybe 20” boys was instructed to say prayers to repent for his crimes.”

Faces of pedophiles. Father Louis Brouillard. Pedophiles look like this. New York Daily News

Reverend Louis Brouillard, aged 95, yes, 95, admitted to molesting boys on Guam between the 1940’s and the 1970’s, and said he “got the impression that kids liked it.” 

“At that time, when I was that age, I got the impression that kids liked it, so I went ahead.”

More recent claims were made against Archbishop Anthony Apuron, who was “temporarily removed from running the archdiocese’s operations as the Catholic Church investigates the allegations against him.” 

Pope Francis stripped Apuron of his administrative authority over the Catholic Church in Guam in 2016, and appointed Archbishop Savio Tai Tai Hon to replace him.

In a video statement from Rome, Archbishop Apuron insisted that “he asked for the appointment (of Archbishop Savio) and welcomes it.” I wonder whether Archbishop Apuron fled to the Vatican, seeking sanctuary there. 

Three former altar boys accused Archbishop Apuron of child molestation in the 1970’s when he was a parish priest. Mr. Leo B. Tudela, now aged 73, attested, “I feel cheated and molested by people who were supposed to be my protector, comforter and God’s guardian angels.” 

Archbishop Anthony Apuron, accused pedophile. Pacific Daily News

Archbishop Apuron denied the allegations against him, and incredibly, is not facing any charges. As of 2016, the date of these articles, no law suits were filed against him. 

In 2013, Archbishop Apuron removed the Reverend Paul Gofigan as pastor of Santa Barbara Church in Dededo, saying that “Gofigan failed to terminate the employment of a known sex offender.” In January 2014, Gofigan threatened to file a defamation law suit, claiming that Archbishop Apuron slandered him.

Mr. Vincent P. Pereda bluntly stated, “Apuron is a “serial child molester.” Mr. Pereda resigned from an archdiocese review board after more than 30 years as a counselor, program manager and clinical administrator. 

“After hearing all the accounts of sexual molestation and rape that have been publicly disclosed by the victims that have bravely come forward, I have no doubt that Anthony Apuron can be considered a serial child molester who has perpetrated his criminal sexual conduct behavior undetected and / or unreported over many years.”

The complicating factor for Mr. Pereda was that Archbishop Apuron helmed the very archdiocese review board that received accusations against him. We have seen in this long testament that pedophiles repeatedly gravitate to positions where they can suppress, delay, divert and distract allegations of child molestation. 

In 2016 the Archdiocese of Agana rebutted allegations made against the local Catholic Church and Archbishop Apuron. In a press release, the Archdiocese claimed that the church was under attack, and “targeted by a series of lies” which directly undermined the authority of Archbishop Apuron.

In the press release, the archdiocese stated, “These malicious, insulting and calumnious attacks are using the media to publicly lynch and defame the archbishop without any sense of justice, morality or common decency and disregarding the most elementary forms of justice or due process.”

“It is important to point out,” Mr. Pereda wrote, “that in light of the archbishop being identified as the alleged offender, the sexual misconduct policy cannot involve him in any way whatsoever.”  He continued, “Since the policy involves him making major decisions and determinations regarding the handling of sexual abuse/misconduct cases, it is a flawed policy.” 

“Pereda said many have referred to Apuron as a pedophile, a sex offender who has a primary interest and sexual attraction to children, as well as a hebephile, a sex offender attracted to adolescents.”

The Survivor’s Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) demanded Archbishop Apuron’s immediate resignation in 2016, saying in a statement that “The time for Apuron’s petty threats and continued secrecy is over.”

A spokesperson observed, “Speaking out against a sitting archbishop is rare—and even dangerous.”

In a video rebuttal in 2016, Archbishop Apuron denied allegations that he abused an altar boy 40 years previously. He said that “malicious ads” were placed in local newspapers, and “As predicted just four days ago, these malicious ads have resulted in a false accusation of sexual abuse.”

The Archbishop asked the faithful to pray for him and for those who are “behind this concerted effort to injure our Catholic Church.” He concluded, “I will continue to defend the faith and give my life for the truth.”

Advertisement, Concerned Catholics of Guam, May 8, 2016, Pacific Daily News

The ad in question took up a full page, and was purchased by Concerned Catholics of Guam. Another organization, Laity Forward Movement, held almost weekly protests against Archbishop Apuron. “They expressed their frustration with the archbishop. They couldn’t take it anymore.”

A year earlier, Archbishop Apuron retained an attorney who sent a legal threat letter: “This letter serves as a demand to you to immediately cease and desist from making any further defamatory comments or publications against Archbishop Apuron’s reputation and character.” The letter was sent by Archbishop Apuron’s legal counsel, Michelle R. Neal, of Sacramento, CA.

She wrote, “Your conduct has caused and continues to cause grave harm not only to Archbishop Apuron and the church in Guam, but also to the universal church.”

The chancellor of the archdiocese, Father Adrian Cristobal, said that the lawyer acted because of the “constant harassment” by a critic named John C. Toves. Allegedly in 2014, Mr. Toves sent letters to Vatican representatives to demand an investigation into Archbishop Apuron.

Mr. Toves sent a letter to Archbishop Martin Krebs, a Vatican delegate for the Pacific Islands, and to Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect for the Congregation of Bishops, and to Cardinal Fernando Filoni, prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.

Mr. Toves was quoted saying that he welcomed a lawsuit, “because it would allow for access to confidential church documents.”

One article that ran in the Pacific Daily News observed, “A 2010 Vatican policy states sexual abuse allegations against bishops are supposed to be investigated by the Vatican, not locally.”

At least two alleged clerical molesters were previously punished on Guam, with Father Raymond Cepeda defrocked in 2009 and the Reverend John Wadeson removed from active ministry by Archbishop Apuron himself.

Incredibly, Mr. Brouillard, who retired as a priest more than 30 years ago, still receives funds from the Archdiocese of Agana on Guam. They are still paying a retirement pension to this admitted pedophile. 

Mr. Brouillard said that his last pension payment from the archdiocese was for the amount of $550. Mr. Brouillard was defrocked as a priest by the Diocese of Duluth in Minnesota in 1985, just four years after he was shuffled there, apparently to cover up his sex crimes. 

In 1985, “the Diocese of Duluth removed Brouillard from practicing as a priest after he was credibly accused of sexual abuse.”

Deacon Steven Martinez, who was the chief financial officer for the Archdiocese of Agana from 2006 to 2012, said that Archbishop Apuron signed checks that amounted to $900 a month, which were then sent to Mr. Brouillard’s residence in Minnesota. 

Later the amounts were reduced to $650 a month. The payments were noted as Mr. Brouillard’s “monthly stipend.” At the time that Mr. Brouillard left Guam, in 1981, the archdiocese still did not have a retirement fund. 

Links in order of precedence. 

This is my 32d installment on the pedophilia epidemic. 

Read dispatches 1-31 and forthcoming segments at, or on Medium:


Post a Comment

<< Home