MANILA, Philippines - Very recently, Ms Gina de Venecia, wife of former Speaker Jose de Venecia, suggested before the media that some bishops had received donations and favors from Malaca?ang. She went as far as to implicate the archbishop of Manila.

I just would like to know what is morally wrong about bishops receiving assistance from government officials, including the Philippine President? If it can be shown that these bishops used such donations for themselves, there is definitely every reason to object; but absent any evidence of conversion, what moral or legal objection can there be? Is it not a fact that the Speaker, members of the House of Representatives and senators use their countrywide development funds, supposedly for local government projects? Do they not lend assistance to those who approach them for help? Therefore, if there is no moral or legal objection to the members of Congress doling out funds to those who request assistance, why discriminate against the President?

It is not difficult to see why these aspersions of impropriety, if not illegality, are made against bishops these days. When the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines announced that it would not decide for the people on the resignation of President Macapagal-Arroyo, many were disappointed because they would have wanted the CBCP to chant the same refrain that has dominated the clearly anti-GMA sector of Manila and the media.

Our bishops chose to be prophetic, even pointing out the corruption that was in media itself. They now suffer the slings and arrows of a mob outraged. But God's prophets have never been popular. In fact, unpopularity seems to be the better measure of the true prophet.

-FR. RANHILIO
CALLANGAN AQUINO,
dean, Graduate School of Law,
San Beda College,
Mendiola, Manila