[Philippines: the islands of evil] Altar of Secrets Sex, Politics, and Money in the Philippine Catholic Church #6/93
QUOTA SYSTEM
It took four more years before the CBCP finally sat down to come up with a guideline on clerical sexual misconduct. This underwent several changes. In 2002, a head committee tasked to prepare the first draft presented it to the plenary. A second draft was made, incorporating the suggestions by the bishops. The third draft included proposals from the clergy. In July 2003, a fourth draft was submitted to the plenary. Then on September 1, 2003, the CBCP permanent council approved the protocol.
One contentious issue that Cruz strongly opposed was the “quota system,” which allowed a priest to remain in the ministry if he fathered only one child. It is only when he begets a second child that he will be dismissed from the ministry.
To Cruz, such a quota system is totally unacceptable. “It is as if [they are] saying it is okay for a priest or even for a bishop to sire a child, but not more than one. This is pure baloney,” Cruz said in an interview.12
The Canon law, Section B, paragraph 43 in the CBCP pastoral guideline states that “a cleric or religious who lives with a concubine or continues in an external sin against the sixth commandment that causes scandal is to be punished with suspension (Canon 1395)k12. Suspension is likewise a just penalty to be imposed on a cleric who fathers a child for violating perfect and perpetual continence (Canon 277) and for causing scandal (Canon 1395).”
“It is as if [they are] saying it is okay for a priest or even for a bishop to sire a child, but not more than one. This is pure baloney.”
The guideline also stated that when it could be determined that the fathering of the child was an isolated case, “the ministry of the priest must be saved.” The diocese, “out of charity,” will assist in helping the priest meet his financial obligation to the child and such expenses will be reimbursed.
Apparently, the bishops took their cue from the Vatican, which rejected the “zero tolerance” policy that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) sought to adopt in June 2002 against pedophile priests in response to the widespread reports of the abuse of minors and children by men of the cloth. If Rome is averse to a “one strike, you are out policy,” how, then, can the CBCP be holier than the Pope?
But Cruz argued that the Vatican rejected the proposed “zero tolerance” policy in the USCCB charter “only if and when the fact of pedophilia has not been sufficiently established or proven prior to the application of the ‘zero tolerance policy.’” The USCCB has since revised the Charter for the Protection of Children and Youth People. In 2005, it approved the revised charter and was given imprimatur by the Vatican on January 1, 2006.13
Retired Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Oscar Cruz
Based on the Essential Norms for Diocesan/Eparchial Policies Dealing with Allegations of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Priests or Deacons, promulgated in May 2006, a single act of abuse is ground for permanent removal from the priestly ministry and dismissal from clerical state.
The guideline, as it is, does not correct sexual misbehavior but appears to condone it. As a guideline, it does not have the force of law. Moreover, it was not approved by two-thirds of the membership of the CBCP; only the CBCP permanent council gave it a thumbs-up. Cruz argues that to be binding, it should have been approved by the entire plenary.