Bishop Shinji Amari

 

22.Bishop Shinji Amari, et. al vs. Ricardo Villaflor, Jr. G.R. No. 224521, February 17, 2020 (no er-ee relationship, purely ecclesiastical affair)

FACTS: Respondent filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, the controversy stemmed from the letter of petitioner to respondent wherein he was informed of his removal as a missionary of the Abiko Baptist Church, cancellation of  his American Basptist Assosciation (ABA) recommendat recom mendation ion as a natio national nal missi missionary onary and exclu exclusion sion of his membership in the Abiko Baptist church in Japan. Respondent claims that there is an er-ee relationship between him and petitioners and that he was dismissed due process valid cause for and the reason thatwithout he refused to sign aand resignation letter vacate the property where he built his house and church building. Peti Pe titi tion oner ers s on th the e ot othe herr ha hand nd,, alle allege ged d that that th ther ere e was no er-ee relationship and the dismissal was purely  an ecclesiastical affair. That respondent was a missionary  sponsored by petitioner and later was appointed as an instru ins tructo ctorr at the MBI MBIS S or mis missio sionar nary y Bap Baptis tistt Ins Instit titute ute and Se Semin minary, ary,tha thatt how howeve ever, r, res respon ponden dentt tol told d petiti petitione onerr that th at he ca cann nnot ot co cont ntin inue ue te teac achi hing ng du due e to th the e dist distan ance ce where hi whe his s mi mis ssi sio on wo work rk was an and d MBI BIS. S. Hen enc ce, his appointment as volunteer teacher was cancelled. Peti Pe titi tion oner er al also so al alle lege ged d th that at re resp spon onde dent nt re refu fuse sed d with wi thou outt ju just stif ifia iabl ble e re reas ason ons s to be tr tran ansf sfer erre red d to ot othe herr areas of mission work as it was discovered that he had built his personal house on the land owne owned d by petitioner petitioner without its consent.  The Labor arbiter ruled that the dismissal was illegal due to the reason that respondent was appointed as in inst struc ructo tor, r, th that at ap appo poin intm tmen entt pa pape perr wa was s su suff ffic icie ient nt evidence to show an er-e r-ee re rellationship. And that

 

responden respon dentt can cannot not be term termina inated ted at any time witho without ut  just cause.  The NLRC reversed the ruling and simply ruled that the expulsion was an ecclesiastical affair, and affords no remedy in civil courts.  The CA however, ruled in the same way as the Labo La borr ar arbi bite ter, r, th that at th ther ere e wa was s an er er-e -ee e re rela lati tion onsh ship ip.. Hence, this petition.

ISSUE: Won the CA erred in ruling that respondent was illegally  dism di smiiss ssed ed de des spi pite te th the e fact fact th that at th the e dispu ispute te in inv volv olves an ecclesiastical affair. HELD: Yes, Ye th the ea CA er erre red. d.ryTh The e co court urt ruled ed that th re resp spon onde dent ’s remova remo val ls, as miss missio iona nary of Ab Abi iko rul Ba Bapt ptis ist t atCh Chur urch ch is nt’s an ecclesiastical affair and the respondent failed to establish er-ee relationship. Before a case for illegal dismissal can prosper, an er-ee rela re lati tion onsh ship ip mu must st be es esta tabl blis ishe hed d firs first. t. In th this is ca case se,, it wa was s incu in cumbe mbent nt up upon on re resp spon onde dent nt to pro prove ve th the e ex exis iste tenc nce e of th the e same.  To determine the existence of an er-ee relationship, the four-fold test must be used to wit: 1. 2. 3. 4.

The The The The

sele selection ction an and d engage engagement ment of the e employe mployee e p paym ayment ent o off wag wages es po power wer of d dism ismiss issal al pow power er to contro controll the emplo employee’ yee’s s conduct conduct

First, the court ruled that the reliance of the LA and the CA on the th e ap appo poin intm tmen entt pa pape perr as ev evid iden ence ce of th the e er er-e -ee e re rela lati tion onsh ship ip is misplaced. The same refers to his appointment as an instructor including his duties and responsibilities, however, respondent was removed as a missionary of Abiko Baptist church and not as an instructor instru ctor of MBIS. The removal as a missiona missionary ry may have affected

 

his status as instructor but the court is not convinced that there was illegal dismissal.  The court ruled that respondents removal as a missionary is different from his status as an instructor, that respondent held two different diffe rent position positions s and means that being a missio missionary nary of petit petitioner ioner is separate from being an instructor. Second, the court ruled that there was no payment of wages as there was no concrete evidence showing that respondent received monthly compensation. That the said love gifts came from ABA and Abiko Baptist Church in Japan, respondent even admitted that the main bulk of the fun und d came fro rom m donor American Baptist associatio asso ciation. n. In short the funds did not came from petitione petitioners. rs. That the designation of salaried missionary is not determinative of the existence of an er-ee relationship. Absent any clear indication that the th e am amou ount nt re rece ceiv ived ed by re resp spon onde dent nt ca came me from from pe peti titi tion oner ers. s. Th The e second test is not established.  Third, the court finds the dismissal of respondent as inherent in religious congregations as they have the power to discipline their members. Especially with the nature of respondent’s position which calls on the exercise of supervision by the church. Lastly, as to the power of control, the court ruled that the duties and responsibilities of respondent prov rovided in the appo ap poin intm tmen entt pa pape perr fail failed ed to es esta tabl blis ish h th that at su such ch du duti ties es ar are e th the e duties only of a missionary, as the document refers to respondent’s status as an instructor of MBIS.  That respondent’s appointment as instructor was by virtue of  his membership with Abiko Baptist Church it is one of his duties as a missionary. That such matters are ecclesiastical in nature which the state cannot regulate unless there is clear violation of secular laws. That even his alleged exclusion as instructor is beyond the power of review by the state. It is up to the members of the religious congregation to determine. Respondent as member of the religious congregation, must be subject to a certain sense of control for the church to achieve the ends of its belief. Hence, the court ruled that respondent failed to establish clear and convincing evidence that such relationship exists. His dismissal as a missionary therefore is a purely ecclesiastical affair.

 

Notes:  An ecclesiastical affair is '"one that concerns doctrine, creed, or form of worship of the church, or  the adoption and enforcement within a religious association of needful laws and regulations for the government of the membership, and the power of excluding from such associations those deemed unworthy unwor thy of memb membershi ership.' p.' Base Based d on this definition, definition, an eccle ecclesiast siastical ical affair involves the relat relationsh ionship ip between betw een the churc church h and its membe members rs and relat relate[s] e[s] to matt matters ers of fait faith, h, reli religious gious doctrines, doctrines, worship and governance of the congregation. To be concrete, examples of these so-called ecclesiastical affairs in which the State cannot meddle are proceedings for excommunication, ordinations of religious ministers, 24

administration of sacraments and other activities with religious significance." matters, on the other hand, have no relation whatsoever withattached the practice of faith, worship or  Secular doctrines of the church. In this case, there were three (3) acts which were decided upon by the Abiko Baptist Church against respondent in its November 24, 2011 2 011 Letter, to wit: (1) removal as a missionary of Abiko Baptist Church; (2) cancellation of the ABA recommendation as a national missionary; and (3) exclusion of membership from Abiko Baptist Church in Japan. To the mind of the Court, the exclusion of membership from Abiko Baptist Church in Japan and the cancellation of ABA recommendation as a national missionary are ecclesiastical matters which this  jurisdiction will will not touch upon. upon. These matters are exclusively determined determined by the church church in accordance with the standards they have set. The Court cannot meddle in these affairs since the church has the discretion to choose members who live up to their religious standards. The ABA recommendation as a national missionary is likewise discretionary upon the church since it is a matter of governance of congregation.