♠ ♠ ♠
As we are now quite aware, the DOJ has junked the criminal complaints of Ka Jun Samson and Lito Fruto against members of the Sanggunian for lack of probable cause. We are admittedly sad about the turn of events, but we continue to exist and strive for a better tomorrow. Let us learn to accept the decision like true gentlemen – firm and unshaken and contemplate our next move. As Christians, we are taught to submit to government and the laws of the land. A decision was reached thus the proper recourse is to respect it. Period. We learn from each process and make the necessary adjustments. Bickering and throwing accusations at each other only worsens the situation. Criticizing the courts on their decision does nothing positive for the cause but diminishes whatever respect that remains.
♠ ♠ ♠
Some quarters and there are a few, have been insisting on the continuous recognition and support of the incumbent Executive Minister being the anointed leader of the Church and that all controversies pointing to his office be purged. It is said that issues on corruption, abuse of authority, etc. should fall only on the Sanggunian and their accommodating subordinates.
I’ve always wondered why most of our ministers and workers including the Church populace hold revere not the office of the Executive Minister but the person behind it. Is it because the person supports a direct lineage from the last messenger or is it because he was ordained and anointed by his predecessor to lead the Church? Is this the reason why we consider him untouchable and unquestionable? Several bible verses have been presented explaining total submission to the anointed one and the cliche that we can never go wrong if we do so.
But take my dare. Show me one verse in the bible that condones bad behaviour with total submission by any of His anointed leaders. Then and only then will both our positions be considered analogous.
Now, touching on bad behaviour. What is the essence of a true leader in the eyes of his constituents and dependents? Let me give you an example. The late minister Ka Vivencio Pineda voluntarily relinquished his position when his son was implicated in a case of estafa. The family was packing up to leave the compound when Ka Erdy took notice and advised Ka Bening to stay put until instructions to the contrary were given. Such was Ka Bening and countless other ministers who regarded their function as a ‘trust’ and not a ‘profession’. This is known as ‘delicadeza’.
How are we now? Apathetic or more appropriate ‘pakapalan’. To mention a few – it is common knowledge that Ministers Ka Arnel Tumanan and Jun Santos have problematic daughters but continue to exercise their ministerial functions. How about our Ka Eduardo? Why the sudden rush of formerly expelled minister Jojo de Guzman back into the fold and his marriage to Gemma, or the marriage of Kristine with T.J. Orosa? Was there a question of morality involved here? Is there such a thing as ‘untouchable and unquestionable’ where royal blood is concerned?
Is it not within the bounds of bad behaviour when you expel your own 80-year-old mother and wife of your predecessor for more than 45 years of sublime reign and another 80-year-old widow of a minister residing in the States? What harm if any, could these fine golden ladies do to the Church that necessitated their expulsion? And how about the countless families apostatized without due process from the same church administration which demands due process from the courts when they are on the receiving end.
And so dear brethren and friends alike, with all due respect, I don’t buy the theory that the Executive Minister is exempt from liability and bad behaviour. Rhetorically speaking, to kill a venomous snake, you have to sever its head; to terminate Medusa’s wrath there is only one option – yes, cut off her head. And on a more fictionalized level, only one way to end the misery of a ‘living dead’ or zombie – a bullet or thrust to its head.
That being said, taking an actual scenario in comparison; the drug cartel, slavery in all forms, tyranny, and the like all fall under the category of “organized” crime. To cut the supply, you need to identify and terminate the source or its head. Otherwise, the supply will just continue with new or replaced traders and middlemen. In a democracy, an incompetent or oppressive head is easily replaced thru Election. In a dictatorship, we need a revolution.
But in our case where the Church is at stake, to implement such extreme measures are not needed. The practical option would be to just let it be and fate take its course. With not enough funds coming in and the huge overhead it maintains, what do you expect? Our ministers entered into business deals without any expertise in this field. So without any business competence aggravated by God’s indignation, what is there to expect? A bleak outcome indeed for the Church. The only question is how long it’ll take. The current administration being desperate as it is will do everything it can to try and squeeze out of this mess – prolong the misery as they say (and getting richer by the day).
Now, this is just a hypothesis. If another group should step in, the huge problem on finances will remain but at least there will be a starting point to remedy the already bankrupt organization. On a side note however, should Jun Santos and family be expelled, they would still be richer tenfold – all foundations including discretion of funds are at their sole disposal. If my observations are correct, there is no clause for the return of the funds to the Church in any unforeseen event. The Executive and Sanggunian by this time I’m sure would have already made plans for their own immediate safety and departure wherever that may be.
As for us the remaining silent majority left behind, we will have to face the ridicule of the world for being such naive people. But actually.. so what? Fall down seven times, stand up eight. We will recover but this time a more responsible and vigilant group of God’s children. You can count on it.