Friday, October 19, 2007 Malilong: Tabogon priest’s defense of Fr. Ejares By Frank Malilong The Other Side
THE gospel last Sunday was about the healing of ten lepers, only one of whom came back to thank the Lord. Tabogon priest Fr. William Ybanez must have been creative enough to tie the gospel to his defense of his friend and fellow priest, Fr. Ben Ejares and his hitting back at those whom he thought are the latter’s tormentors.
I was told that I was particularly named, according to my spy. “Kini si Frank Malilong nga columnist sa ambot unsang peryodikoha kulang na lang molayat dihang gi-dismiss ang kaso sa iyang kliyente nga si (Crisologo) Abines. Nganong moreklamo man siya karong gi-dismiss ang kaso ni Fr. Ejares?
Dear Father: First of all, “taga-SunStar tawon ko ‘Dre.” And while it is true that I was happy that my client was finally vindicated after being hounded by some of your fellow men of the cloth, flogged mercilessly by a relentless media and unnecessarily dragged to court despite the evidence (or lack of it) by publicity-riding prosecutors, I didn’t gloat. Wa tawon ko maglumpat-lumpat ‘Dre uy.
Secondly, it is not accurate to say that I am complaining because the case for acts of lasciviousness filed by some students of the Abellana National School against Ejares was dismissed by the city prosecutors. It was the blasphemous suggestion that God abets playing with the bra straps of a penitent by a shepherd that got my goat.
I do not know Ejares. The only time I saw him was when I attended mass in a chapel behind a school for the rich in Kasambagan. I was not comfortable with his style but it did not in any way influence my attitude towards him. To each his own and if he drove the rest of the flock---including the sisters who ran the chapel---in titters, who am I to bitch?
I won’t even say that Ejares did commit the acts that he was accused of.
Maybe he did, maybe he did not. That’s for the prosecutors to decide. They are the ones who have the experience and training for this kind of job. They are the ones who have seen the witnesses and observed their demeanor. If they had simply said that the facts and the law called for the dismissal of the complaint that would have been enough, as far as I am concerned.
If the prosecutors had simply invoked the doctrine in People vs. Anonuevo (that approaching a girl from behind inside a church and after the mass had begun, forcibly embracing her and kissing her on the left cheek and at the same time fondling her private parts is not lascivious “considering the religious atmosphere and the persons of many persons) I would have understood. The law may be harsh but it is the law.
But why the allusion to priests being the alter ego of Christ especially in the context and under the circumstances that it was used? That was not only unnecessary and irrelevant; it was and is blasphemous and heretical.
There’s my beef, Padre William. Let the prosecutors get Ejares off the hook if they believe that he is not guilty but let us leave God out of it.
A grateful heart is a cheerful heart, the Redemptorist priest said in his homily at the 9:30 mass last Sunday. Most people have to wait until they’re dead or have to give huge contributions to the Church before their names are mentioned during the sermon. I’m happy that I didn’t have to do either. Thank you, Fr. William.
