|
Saturday, March 01, 2003
Editorial: A puzzling admission?
Some lawyers are baffled by the “soft and partial” admission contained in Fr. Jing Mejorada’s counter-affidavit relative to the acts of lasciviousness and child abuse complaint he is facing.
Which is not that surprising, really.
After all, lawyers view things differently, often in a not so altruistic sense. Consider what one unidentified legal practitioner said: “If the truth cannot set you free, then by all means, lie.”
That, in turn, best sums up the reasons why the legal profession sucks at times. But that is a different story altogether.
So, back to Fr. Jing. In his counter-affidavit, he admitted to having touched and fondled the complainant and the witness, both former altar boys of the Basilica del Sto. Niño. But he only got as far as the thigh because the then teenagers resisted.
A lawyer described that admission as a “legal suicide,” since any act that is motivated by lascivious intent is an act of lasciviousness.
Note, too, that the priest admitted he kissed the complainant in another instance, but the latter did not resist.
Actually, it is difficult to divine what was in Mejorada’s mind when he made and signed that counter-affidavit. One is even tempted to say he must have been ill advised, but not until one considers that a good lawyer is representing him.
So one goes to the kind of situation the man is in. Consider that he is no ordinary accused but is a priest as well. As an accused, he is forced to play the legal game, whose rules, both said and unsaid, often contradict the teachings of the Church.
In this sense, the good priest was caught in a dilemma that has confronted priests and lay people (and, yes, even Christ himself) through the centuries, though with certain variations: follow the ways of man or be true to what is being preached.
Or, to put it in another way, choosing between the flesh and the soul.
In Mejorada’s case he can lie about what happened between him and the altar boys and maybe escape a jail term. But he knows, too that, based on the Church’s own teachings, he will eventually get his comeuppance—from somebody up there.
Or the priest can admit his faults, tell the truth and ask for forgiveness and, again based on the Church’s own teachings, save himself from eternal damnation. But that would also mean court conviction and a possible jail term.
Looking at the choices, one need not be puzzled then by the contents of Fr. Jing’s counter-affidavit.
COA’s turn
Information on how some Cebu City barangays are spending the money given to them by Mayor Tomas Osmeña as part of the controversial P32-million appropriation has started filtering in and it is disturbing.
As expected, some barangay officials seem not to know anything about prioritizing meager resources, or maybe they know but are just after personal gains. And so they purchased items that already border on the luxurious.
What is interesting now is how the Commission on Audit (COA) will view the spending binge when it starts conducting a post audit. Will the mayor be vindicated, or will this prove the case of those opposing the manner the money is being disbursed?
(March 1, 2003 issue)
Want Sun.Star news on your mobile phone? Click here.
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
[ return
to top ]
[ home
]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
SUPERBALITA
WEEKEND
|
