This was how Archbishop Angel Lagdameo of the Archdiocese of Jaro, Iloilo described the discussions on his controversial Jan. 3 circular obliging parish priests to retire at the age of 65.
Seven bishops, including Msgr. Enrique Perez, JCD, parish priest of Our Lady of Peace and Good Voyage in La Paz, Iloilo, and 12 priests have questioned the circular, saying it violates their rights as provided for under the Canon Law.
But Lagdameo, in a statement, said the protesting priests have presented an "incomplete picture of the issues currently discussed on the level of the priests."
The process of consultation with the archdiocesan clergy on the retirement age, Lagdameo said, started as early as May and June last year and resumed in September.
"Because of emerging issues, we intend to continue with the process of consultation," he added.
Perez, however, countered that the archbishop never mentioned in the consultation that the questionnaires "were for the formulation of an age of ‘obligatory retirement.’"
"The questions were for an optional retirement which, if optional, will depend upon and be to the advantage of every priest who has become tired or wish to pursue other activities. I do not think there was ‘incompleteness’ in the discussion of the issue," he said.
Under the Canon Law, Perez said a parish priest who reaches the age of 75 "is requested to offer his resignation from office to the diocesan bishop who, after considering all the circumstances of person and place, is to decide whether to accept or defer it."
This, he said, contrasts with the "imprudent decision" of Lagdameo to "oblige" archdiocesan priests to retire at age 65.
"Is it incomplete to inform the media that there are suspicious motives to the actuations of Archbishop Lagdameo? Is it incomplete to explain to the laity that all that the priests are asking is their own right to be upheld?" he asked.
Perez quoted the protesting priests as saying in their statement of protest that "if the consensus after due consultation is advocated as the just and reasonable cause, this cannot be true because the consultation was about the retirement age of 65 as an option and not as an obligation."
Lagdameo, in his statement, gave assurances that his circular "was not intended to formulate a juridical norm against Canon Law," and that on the contrary, "my disposition was for pastoral reasons."
He reminded the protesting priests that there are proper fora in the Catholic Church "to ventilate our opinions, our ideas, our plans, our sentiments and even our anger."
The protesting priests have urged Lagdameo to revoke the circular and call for another consultation. Otherwise, Perez earlier said the priests will remain in their parishes "for as long as" the Canon Law permits.