senators absolve poor bishops

11 July 2011

Sen. Franklin Drilon said the Senate would have no reason to hold the bishops accountable if they agreed to turn over the SUVs to state-run Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO).

Sen. Francis Escudero said he was not keen on grilling the bishops after they agreed to return the SUVs and after the CBCP opened an inquiry into the matter. “I hope it would end [the controversy],” Escudero said over dzBB.

Sen. Ralph Recto said the bishops could not be absolved of any crime they did not commit. “They did not commit any crime. The legal burden is on the one who gave it,” Recto said in an interview, referring to the old PCSO board. “The real issue is propriety. The allegations basically are that they were bribed.”

hmm. are these senators running for re-election already? making sure they get the support of the church?  so what else is new.

MANILA, Philippines—The Catholic Bishops’Conference of the Philippines on Monday said that the seven bishops linked to the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office fund mess are ready to accept responsibility for their action and to face the consequences should their actions be proven unlawful, anomalous and unconstitutional.

“We assure you that their action was done without malice,” says Tandag bishop Nereo Odchimar, CBCP president reading a prepared statement during a press conference at the Pope Pius XII Center in Manila.

yeah, sure, without malice maybe, but certainly without any sense of propriety and ethics either, much less of political correctness.  akala ko ba, anti-gambling ang simbahan.  so what’s going on?  for the alleged sake of the poor that they allegedly serve they are willing to compromise — at least the money is from legal gambling and not from jueteng? lol

whatever happened to the spirit of sacrifice and the vows of poverty?  what exactly has the church done for the poor anyway in the last hundred years that has made any difference in this blighted catholic country of ours?

if anything the church gets richer by the year and yet her princes have the gall to compete against poor Filipinos for meager government funds.

read this too from elizabeth angsioco and weep.

Posted in church, money, senate

8 Responses to senators absolve poor bishops

  1. July 13, 2011 at 1:15 pm
    manuelbuencamino

    This SUV business has to be placed in the context that it is only one among a series of improprieties that started with the “envelopes and dinners” after the Garci expose.

  2. July 13, 2011 at 11:22 pm

    “Malice” means intent to commit a wrongful act, where “wrongful” does not have to mean a crime. Imagine a deal where the quid is the birthday gift; the quo is support, presumably in the political arena. Is there intent? Since it is a deal, it must involve a prior act of bargaining; so it cannot be done out of inadvertence or negligence. There must have been intent to, if you will, seal the deal. Is the deal wrongful? With respect, it is. I would bet that their Graces’ “apology” wouldn’t convince St. Peter at the gates.

    • July 14, 2011 at 2:23 am
      GabbyD

      ““Malice” means intent to commit a wrongful act, where “wrongful” does not have to mean a crime.”

      exactly. they (heck, i) dont know what they did wrong, legally. but whatever they did, they want to make amends.

      thats why those words are exactly appropriate.

      • July 16, 2011 at 2:33 am

        I suppose we should remember: “Forgive them Father for they know not what they do,” or something to that effect.

  3. July 13, 2011 at 11:38 pm

    yes, too reminiscent of gloria’s i-am-sorry

  4. July 14, 2011 at 5:36 pm

    Oh, not to worry, those “Graces” know one visit, just one, into the confessional with one of any of them officiating the confession will convince St. Peter of their holiness/saintliness.

  5. July 16, 2011 at 2:31 am

    @Bert: I tried to find out but couldn’t. Do bishops confess to one another? If not, to whom?

    • July 16, 2011 at 12:02 pm

      I don’t know, Orlando. I just think that bishops are priests too and having been elevated to their rank I supposed would not barred them from doing their priestly functions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

twitter

follow @stuartsantiago on twitter

recent comments

  • © Angela Stuart-Santiago