Philippine politics and the Catholic Church
In the wake for the much-loved late Senator Juan Flavier, in UP, last week, we heard talks about how he used to catch the ire of the Catholic Church when he dared to push aggressively the government's campaign against unrestrained population growth. Despite the alleged strong, albeit silent, campaign by many priests against him, Senator Flavier made it to the Senate, although he was the poorest candidate and remained to be the poorest Senator, based on his statement of assets, liabilities and net work. And he died still a poor man. The conclusion in UP was then: It is possible to be holy and honest even if one opposes the Church. With due respect, I want to correct this line of reasoning because it suffers from a lot of fallacies of ''non sequitor'' and '' argumentum ad absurdum.''
First of all, Senator Flavier was not against the Church. It just happened that his population control advocacy collided with the position of the Church. Second, to stand against some Church policies, that are not ''matters of doctrine or matters of dogma,'' has nothing to do with holiness and unholiness. Third, the Church does not excommunicate Catholics who are conscientious objectors to some of its policies, especially if their objections are in good faith. Fourth, remaining poor is not at all an indication of being holy or being Catholic. And fifth, the opinion during that wake was not an official position of UP as an institution. UP is the citadel of multi-dimensional opinions. It is the last bastion of democracy. UP is the haven of both faithful believers and conscientious objectors.
Well, while in the State University, we read the learned thesis of a UP professor, Dr Rosalinda P. Ofroneo's THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN PHILIPPINE POLITICS, as well as Dr Virgilio A Rivas' THE ROLE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN POLITICS AND SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION. We compared them with Ateneo Professor Dr Dennis T. Gonzales' THE CATHOLIC CHURCH'S POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT. We learned a lot from them and drew some convergences and divergences from the three dissertations. The church's involvement in Philippine politics might have started with the role of GOMBURZA or Fathers Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora and their ultimate execution by guillotine due to their opposition to some policies of the ruling Spanish elite in the Church. Rizal unmasked these in both the NOLI and the FILI.
Today, it is not unusual to hear sermons in Sunday masses that are very ''political'', because they involve fundamental issues of governance, in fact, a few priests are bordering on the brink of naming names who are involved in corruptions and shenanigans. Of course, the bishops would normally warn young priests from straying beyond the boundaries of the Church teachings and matters of government that are usually divided by the so-called separation of church and state. But despite the admonition '' to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's," the barriers are often nebulous and confusing. To my mind, there is nothing wrong in this, because priests are Filipino citizens and the Church is part of the nation, or the whole nation is part of the Church (although other religious groups may disagree to the last part, of course).
- Latest
