The mote in one's eye

Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines president Angel Lagdameo, the archbishop of Jaro in Iloilo, has come up with a strongly-worded statement issued jointly with four other bishops.

The statement condemned the prevailing state of corruption in the Philippines and assailed President Arroyo for either failing to do something about it or for being at the very core of its existence.

There is no argument about the prevailing state of corruption. But it is grossly unfair to heap all the blame on Arroyo for something that has been there for many many years before she even joined politics.

Such unfairness does not speak well of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines. On second thought, maybe it does speak volumes of the kind of leadership now prevailing in the country's main religion.

Lagdameo said the statement was "the product of communal discernment" with the four other bishops, namely Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Oscar Cruz, Masbate Bishop Joel Baylon, Bataan Bishop Socrates Villegas, and Legazpi Bishop Emeritus Jose Sorra.

Going over the names of the four other bishops, one realizes that the statement does not come as a surprise. In fact, the statement was a natural expectation from the four. To say it was a "product of communal discernment" is hogwash you do not expect from bishops.

"The time to start radical reforms is now. The time for moral regeneration is now," the statement said. But wait, are the bishops talking about corruption in government or corruption in the church? The statement sure can apply both ways.

The statement went on: "In the past few years up to today, we have watched how corruption has become endemic, massive, systemic and rampant in our politics. Corruption is a social and moral cancer."

Whoa again. Was Lagdameo talking about politics or of the church? For in a fair and broad context, the word politics in the immediately preceding paragraph can certainly be interchanged with the word church without the meaning getting skewed or out of whack.

Corruption, if we only cease to be hypocritical about it, lies more squarely at the door of the church than of government. The church is not immune to corruption. It is merely being very secretive about it. More importantly, it is more to blame for it than govenrment.

This is because the church has failed in its duty to shepherd its flock. If corruption is being committed with great ease, not just in government but in the wider society, it is because more and more people no longer see it as bad or wrong.

 And why do people see it as bad or wrong when they also see it practiced among the leaders of religion and morality. Okay the numbers may not be the same. But the personalities more than make up for the shattering effect of numbers.

Look, an ordinary person committing a sin is less grievous than a priest committing the same sin. An ordinary person did not spend years and years trying to discern right from wrong, the way that a priest did.

So, before Lagdameo starts casting the first stone, he should first try to determine if he and his fellow bishops are without sin. And he can begin by asking what has the CBCP done about those priests and bishops who have given the church a very bad name.

We are not saying Lagdameo and the bishops should not come out vocally against corruption and other sins. But they would do a better and more credible job out of it if they first start cleaning their own backyard in a way that the public can see and appreciate.