The account of Fr. Gerardo Tapiador, Bishop Bacani’s deputy, is perhaps the most credible, that his case wasn’t even close to that of Antipolo Bishop Crisostomo Yalung who sired a child with a married woman and whose resignation was accepted by the Vatican. Fr. Tapiador suspects that this woman had an "axe to grind" because Bishop Bacani didn’t give her any legal help when one of her siblings was charged with theft. Mind you, we’re not saying that this woman maybe lying, but then, Bishop Bacani’s reputation as a man of the cloth is also on line… I just hope we didn’t blow this case out of proportion.
Meanwhile, on the local front, at least there’s a piece of good news for the Catholic Church in Cebu City when City Prosecutor Jose Pedrosa cleared former Basilica del Sto. Nino Rector Fr. Apolinario "Jing" Mejorada of the complaint of acts of lasciviousness filed against him by an altar boy. This case was big news a couple of years ago and coincidentally, it came out together with the story of Msgr. Bacani’s case.
Yes, while the Augustinian priest has been cleared by the Fiscal’s office, there will always be a cloud of doubt on this sexual incident… whether it was what it really is. What Fiscal Pedrosa found wrong was that the suit was brought out in the public scrutiny for monetary considerations. Indeed it really took the complainant five years to decide to bring this matter out in the open. If the altar boy was really aggrieved by the misconduct of the priest, he should have reported this immediately!
Frankly speaking, when this case blew up in the front pages of our local dailies, I already heard of this case more than a year earlier, but was sworn to secrecy. But then, the altar boy was "hushed" through monetary motivation. But when the sex scandals by priests in the USA came into media’s attention, then again the ex-altar boy or the people behind him revived this case and finally went on to file the case. So clearly, this case boiled down to money and more money. Being aggrieved by the "touching" incident was obviously not important to the former altar boy or his handlers.
Thus, I fully subscribe to the arguments of Fiscal Nicolas Sellon when he said, "he who comes to court must come with clean hands" and that, "the law should never be used as a tool to unjustly enrich oneself at the expense of others." Indeed, too often, people use our laws and the courts to file unnecessary suits just to enrich themselves… even to the point of lying before a judge.
As to the question whether the Catholic Church will survive this scandal, I’m sure she’ll survive it. Let me remind you of what our Lord Jesus Christ himself said in Matthew16, "the gates of Hell shall not prevail upon her".
That of course is expected… after all, a motion for recon is always in order if one loses in court and doesn’t accept defeat. But I’m troubled by what’s written in that letter when Binay said, "Needless to state, from the start of the litigation, we have taken into account the possibility of a "hometown" decision in the case, which was why we made sure that all our evidence were presented and the issues we raised fully ventilated. It is therefore in the best interest of the parties to wait until the final resolution of the controversy, whether before the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court."
I’m just wondering what was in the mind of Mayor Binay when he virtually accused Judge Meinrado Paredes of issuing a "hometown" decision. What if this case loses in the Court of Appeals? Can we also accuse them of a "hometown" decision… after all the Court of Appeals is based in Manila? If this happens… and the case is elevated to the Supreme Court and wins there… will we again be accused of having a "hometown" decision because Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. is from Cebu? Politicians like Mayor Binay should be more careful in accusing our judges in their correspondence. If I was the judge in this case… I’d feel insulted!
Because they didn’t accept the TRO, the National Executive Board (NEB) has considered the Cebu Council as dissolved. In fact, the representatives of Cebu were not even allowed to participate in a conference in Mindanao. Here’s one against Imperial Manila! There is no doubt in my mind that the Cebu Council preceded the NEB… hence it should be allowed to exist under its old by-laws. But no, the NEB couldn’t put their "bata-batas" under those by-laws because they would have to be elected into the local board… while the NEB wanted merely to put their people in the board by mere appointment.
If you ask me, the Local Cebu Council’s by-laws is far more democratic than the NEB by-laws. If there’s any hometown decision, it is that the local Cebu Council has the full support of the Province of Cebu and all the local government units in Cebu. After all, no one here wants to be under Binay’s control!