Hieronymus

Posted on 19. Nov, 2009 by Hieronymus in Oplan Pepe

Losing My Religion

I began questioning my religion in high school. And lost it in college. I remained an agnostic for 20 years after that, and later, in my readings, on diverse subjects (the sciences, history, biographies, literature, philosophy), I happened by a book by a famous biblical scholar (JD Crossan). It was as if I had discovered the man behind the Jesus myth, and it was quite inspiring-almost like meeting Jesus again, but for the first time. This inspired me to try and see how lived (versus believed) Christianity might be. And so after 20 years of agnosticism, I re-joined a church (the Anglican/Episcopal Church).

The beauty of its liturgical style, and the intelligence of the way they approached their faith swept me along for about 3 years. While I participated in the services and dabbled in bible study, I never for once believed in the divinity of Jesus, though I thought I would open up my mind (and heart) to the possibility of God. Of course, I did not have in mind a concept of God as a person, but as an ultimate reality. So when I prayed with them, it was for me a symbolic act of attempting to connect with the “All-ness” of reality (whatever that might mean), rather than communication with a divine being or person. Plus the beauty of their liturgy helped me as almost a form of practical (or ritual) meditation.

That didn’t last long, because sooner or later it became difficult to go on fraternizing with people who felt “one-with-you” in spirit, when I couldn’t very well return the favor- I was not a “Christian” in their sense, but only in my own private, and thoroughly off-synch sort of way– which really wasn’t Christian at all.

I found that, at the end of the day, belonging to a church meant sharing a FAITH–believing in something was the point of it all. So while I thought that the revolutionary program and spirit of Jesus was what was significant, they felt that believing incredible claims about him was the whole point of church membership and fellowship. But I didn’t come to that glaring realization on my own. It took an honest conversation with my wife, who was an emerging atheist, to snap me out of church and back to reality!

So I left the church again. This time I was able to admit to myself that I was an atheist, and shed the label of agnostic.

[Image by Hans Musil]

Anna Gan

Posted on 16. Nov, 2009 by Pepe in Oplan Pepe

Anna Gan — Cafeteria Christian

I was baptized a Catholic, received my first Communion as a Catholic and even went through Confirmation as one -not because my parents were fervent believers, but because it was a requirement for the school they wanted to enroll me in. While I value and treasure the education given to me (and have a belief in a Supreme Being) , I do question why the Church has chosen to repress others of different faiths and chosen to push its own self serving agenda through the ages.

In an age where women have been acknowledged as equals and have become pastors to their community, the Catholic church still only admits men into the priesthood. Women who wish to serve God become nuns. That is sexism hiding behind a “holy” cloak, and if the Church bewails the shortage of men who want to become priests, they shouldn’t be surprised.

After many were persecuted and some made martyrs during the Roman era, Catholics went on to torture others in the Inquisition, trying to weed out witches and those who did not subscribe to their faith (a practice which predated the Jewish Holocaust). They persecuted fellow Christians (Protestants) during the time of Mary Tudor -and the conflict strangely continues in Ireland (a country with pagan roots before the arrival of Christianity). The Church also tried taking the Holy City (as if the Israelites and Palestinians needed more trouble) during the Crusades. How does one reconcile being part of that faith, when we’ve been told “thou shall not kill” and “thou shall not covet” -then turn a blind eye as people invent loopholes to justify their actions in the name of God?

Then you wonder about the donations you make when they pass that bag or basket during Mass. Does it help feed or clothe the poor? Educate novices on the path to serving God? Or feed the great coffers of the Vatican, whose treasures rival any kingdom’s? This Church whose influence and power has grown through the millennia, and strangely does not protect its churchgoers, but instead protects the false servants — those who have families on the side, the ones who rob from the coffers, or even the ones who molest their own church followers.

And now, when we are being told to avoid mass consumerism, to become less materialistic and more spiritual -the Church still says birth control is bad? Worse, it meddles with the affairs of a nation that also has people of other faiths that have lived here for centuries -and deems “bad” a law allowing better access to reproductive health materials. Uncontrolled population growth, especially among the poor who have the least access to information/resources has led to crimes, mendicancy, malnourished/illiterate children and malnourished/illiterate women dying from pregnancy/childbirth complications.

As blind as the Church is, its own members do fall from grace, and without birth control, may resort to the extreme measure of abortion -a form of murder. Or if they go through with the pregnancy, abandon the child (there have been cases of newborns left in the worst situations: trashbins, restrooms, places where no straight-thinking mother should leave a defenseless child) and in some cases repeat the cycle of pregnancy and abandonment. A morbid joke says that if men could become pregnant, abortion wouldn’t just be legalized but actually become a sacrament –ironic, when you consider that those in power are men. It’s actually amazing that castration/sterilization didn’t become a prerequisite for the priesthood, perhaps to acknowledge that one may be a servant of God, but still a whole human being.

In a country that also has other faiths, which has decreed in its revised Constitution the separation of church and state, politicians still allow themselves to be bullied by the clergy -thanks to 300 years of Spanish rule (mostly by the cassocked set). To preserve the sanctity of a family or the appearance of one, our convoluted laws do not allow divorce but offer as an alternative separation or annulment -probably one of the last dinosaur-minded nations to do so. With the recent party-list status of LGBT group Ang Ladlad denied by the Comelec for “immoral grounds,” one realizes that separation may have been declared on paper, but has yet to take effect in reality. Take note that for years, the Comelec has held office in Intramuros, also the homebase of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP).

The hypocrisy of being Catholic revealed itself when I enrolled for one year for college in a convent school. There, young ladies could smoke (in a designated area), could whisper about the boys they were going to meet (and the things they were going to do) – and students mysteriously vanished mid-semester for, ahem, health reasons. But other students who were not Catholics were prevented from practicing their faith. Despite being fellow Christians, they could not openly pray, and were told not to evangelize or proclaim within school grounds. There, a student with extremely short hair had to report to the dean of discipline and was given a choice between wearing dangling earrings and red lipstick -or not attend school at all (interestingly enough, there was a faculty member or lecturer who seemed to have trans-sexual leanings and was allowed to wear what s/he pleased as long as it was “decent”). The same student who was the target of ethnic ridicule, for some strange reason, by a religion teacher who declared that she looked like a drug addict (one supposes that prior to her becoming a respected member of the faculty, this educator had first-hand experience in the appearance and demeanor of substance abusers). Despite having above-decent grades, I chose to remove myself from this environment -for I had no wish to be molded by the half-informed or hypocritical set that proclaimed themselves enlightened.

Religion isn’t really an opiate of the masses, it’s the people who abuse it and make it a tool for propaganda who make it so.

Anna, part of a new generation of freethinkers, banding together to fight for a secular Philippines.

Anna, isa sa mga bagong Pepe na nagsalita na sapagka’t pagod na sya maging pipi.

[Anna, one of the new Pepe's who has finally spoken up because she's tired of being silenced].

Rona Co

Posted on 13. Nov, 2009 by Pepe in Oplan Pepe

Rona Co, 30, journalist, former Catholic:

I don’t consider myself a Catholic. Though I was raised by a conservative Catholic family and studied in a Catholic school, I’ve long decided that I don’t want to be one anymore.

I’ve always had so many questions about the religion which I felt was shoved down my throat while growing up. The first seeds of doubt came when one of my grade school teachers – a Dominican nun – told us a story about how the Virgin Mary stopped “God the Father” from literally axing the earth. She said, “God was so mad at everyone for being sinful that He decided to just end the world. But the Virgin Mary intervened, she said, and asked God to give us another chance.”

She told us that story to illustrate how powerful the Virgin Mary is and how we better stay as loyal and obedient minions of the Church. I was scared shit for several days after hearing that. But then again, I thought, “There’s no way she could have known about that story even if it were true.” Though her story does not reflect the entire teachings of the Catholic Church, that’s when the questions started pouring in.

In high school, I once thought that our barangay leaders in Tondo should help organize seminars on family planning because there were (and there still are) so many young teens getting pregnant, and parents without decent-paying jobs having more kids. But it was also during that time that many Catholic schools – including mine – actively mobilized their students to join protest actions against the UN Cairo conference in 1994. We were bombarded by posters and placards with photos of aborted babies, saying that abortion is what being pro-choice is about. I remember debating with myself on that issue, because even at that time I knew that family planning, population management, and caring for one’s reproductive health do not equate to abortion.

College was a breath of fresh air because things were openly discussed despite my university’s Christian leanings (DLSU). I began to seriously ask questions and formulate my own thoughts on issues such as the use of contraceptives, family planning, the absence of divorce in the Philippines, the correlation of our country’s economic development and overpopulation, the lack of respect of our society for same-sex relationships, and many other things.

After college, I decided that I don’t want to belong in a group that continually tries to hamper the growth of our country by blackmailing politicians for supporting causes/bills I support. And when I had my son in 2008, I refused to have him baptized in Catholic rites, despite my family’s protests. I told them that I want my son to grow up free from an oppressive belief system. Besides, I don’t want him added to the Catholic statistics in this country and be used as a convenient excuse not to pass the RH Bill.

I can no longer be an accessory to the Church’s crime of depriving the people – women especially – their much-needed reproductive health services. A new generation of Pinoys are growing up in my community in Tondo and the same things that happened to their parents – early pregnancy, not being able to finish school due to lack of resources, etc. – are happening to them as well. We cannot remain blinded by this cycle of poverty and ignorance because it’s something that we can prevent.

Lastly, I cannot stand by a religion that does not respect the rights, beliefs, and choices of human beings. Soon, our lawmakers have got to look at the possibility of passing laws on divorce and same-sex marriage without fear of getting blackmailed or – que horror – losing in the elections. And it will only happen if we – former Catholics, Catholics who support these causes, members of other religions, atheists, whatever – stand up for our beliefs and speak out.

We’ve got to be the balls for our lawmakers. And we’ve got to tell the Catholic Church that enough is enough.

Rona, part of a new generation of freethinkers, banding together to fight for a secular Philippines.

Rona, isa sa mga bagong Pepe na nagsalita na sapagka’t pagod na sya maging pipi.

[Rona, one of the new Pepe’s who has finally spoken up because she’s tired of being silenced].

Reproductive health bill – My Perspective And Thoughts

Posted on 10. Nov, 2009 by Nelson Fontanilla Bedayo in Oplan Pepe

At only 24, my niece had already three kids. Her husband is jobless. They subsist on buying and selling anything for a day’s meal. Their kids are malnourished, and it is heart-breaking to see their pitiable conditions. They can’t even buy school supplies for their two grade-school kids. Being the only employed next of kin, I see to it that I give them some financial help, just to afford their kids to go to school. Sadly for me, that doesn’t end there. From hospital delivery to hospitalization of any sort, they will be running to me. But am I being so cruel for sometimes getting so pissed off by their nuisances? ”Why make so many kids when you can even hardly eat?” ”Because there is no more available contraceptives in the health center”, was her prompt reply. When the poor have only their stomach as priority, anything else would be a luxury-and buying the once free contraceptives are beyond what they can afford.

My piece of resentment however, is nothing in comparison with the condition of the poorest families with multiple children. But why did the government stop the supply of the once free-to-access contraceptives available in our local health centers? Has our national leadership been so indifferent and oblivious to the fact that over-population causes more economic misery to our country? Are the UN reports on the Philippines’ over population and all its encompassing ill effects on the society in general becoming irrelevant? Our government officials are presumed more knowledgeable on any issue, and therefore have more access to facts from any national and international researches on population growth in the country.

Few would argue with me that poverty is not a blessing, but it’s a curse. The evils in our society has its roots traced on poverty. Although it may be one’s choice to tread that evil path, his or her decision is one way or another influenced by poverty. Over-population as everyone knows is the main root of poverty. I myself am a living testimony to that. We are ten siblings. As a kid, I dreamed of becoming somebody. But how could I? I was just lucky to have finished high school. Were it not for my determination and untold sacrifice, I would have not graduated from high school. I even came to a point of cursing myself for having been born poor. Why not? How could my parents support us all when we are ten?

Poor families with multiple children can hardly feed their family. Sending all children to school would be a hard task resulting to some children having to sacrifice. And some who have started school, tend to stop and are forced to look for jobs just to help the family get by. But less education and less qualification do not equate with good job; and so the misery goes on. And the cycle continues. Sad to say, this cycle of poverty cannot be alleviated as our population continues to soar.

If our government is determined to improve the quality of life of its citizenry, it will do its utmost to enact and implement laws that would benefit its citizens. According to various researches, poor living condition is rooted in an over-population of a certain country. Our country has a distinction of one of the most densely-congested countries in the world per capita. But all the while, what is our government doing to address this compounding problem of over-population? On the video link below, you will be appalled at how the former Manila mayor Atienza gives his perspective and stand towards the issue of over-population. His confident talks and irrational viewpoint, in a way gave me a sense of embarrassment as a Filipino. And he is only one of those treading the corridors of power with the same stand on this issue.

So much has been written for and against the controversial Reproductive Health Bill. The debates are getting intense and personal in some cases. All media communications are never short of platforms in tackling this issue. Everyone seems hell-bent on getting their voices heard. It is noteworthy though, that even an average citizen is so in-tune with this issue, because so much is at stake- the future of our children and our children’s children. But would this collective voice by many turn out to be futile? A big yes, maybe! Not because of the poor being against it, but because of the sinister force that is behind the improbability of its passing into law. This force is the immensely powerful Roman Catholic Church. This influence-wielding church has dominion over peoples of the earth, and its heirarchy creates its own policies that dictates its church members to obey them.

The Philippines proudly distinguishes itself as the only predominantly ‘Christian nation in Asia’. Our country is a world-renowned bastion of democracy. The rights of every citizen is enshrined in and guarded by the constitution. This very same constitution that stringently commands the inviolability of the separation of the church and the state. But this is regrettably only on paper. The Catholic church for the last century, has been the driving force behind any setup in the country’s political landscape. They are being feared by our leaders. This fear stemmed from what this church is capable of doing. Most politicians would always seek its blessings in any election and therefore would do what pleases the church.

It is a sore truth that the Catholic church will exercise its power and influence to ensure that the Reproductive Health Bill doesn’t get enacted into law. This is the bill that would ensure a better future for an average Filipino family. This is the bill that guarantees a quality of life for each life-loving citizen. This is also the very same bill that would statistically increase the worth and productivity of every citizen, hence a big factor to improving the country’s economy. However pro-poor and pro-family, this bill as the Catholic church would contend is anti-life and in a sense, evil in its entirety. This church asserts that life starts from the stage of fertilization, and that it is tantamount to murder when a couple uses contraceptives, such as condoms or pills and the likes. The use of such contraceptions they further contend, is one way of encouraging pre-marital sex or perversion of any form. And I also contend that their reason is impeccably-dogmatic moronic form of reasoning, that defies any universal law of logical reasoning.

The impasse in Congress regarding this bill is so polarizing, that it is uncertain whether this bill gets enacted into law or not. This early, our legislatures who are vocal with their support of this bill, have been branded by the church as anti-life and are not good Catholics. The pulpit has become a powerful tool to admonish members, to be conscientious and not to vote for these politicians. In here requires a firm resolute, whether you are with them or against them. And this effective bullying has kept the president from interfering with this issue, because her political career is on the line.

Our population explosion needs to be addressed, for it is only a matter of time before everything gets out of hand. It is like a ticking bomb waiting to explode. And the underlying effects could be crucial to the survival of our country, economically and morally. It is the duty of every religious denomination to coax their flock into moral fortitude. And this duty includes instilling in them the virtues of moral propriety and self-control. Sex is a sacred thing that is a gift, meant to be enjoyed by any married couple. Therefore any sex outside of marriage is a sin. This is the domain where the church should be visible. But the choice of how and when to procreate should be dependent upon a married couples’ discretion. Many unwanted pregnancies have caused a family to break apart. Accidental babies have become burden to an already struggling big family.

This is not meant to be a novel. But my disturbed emotions get the better of me. And through this blog, I am able to convey my perspective, my thoughts and my sighs about an issue, not ordinary in scale, but is powerful enough to affect you, myself, and anyone who dreams of a better Philippines. It is high time that we band together, and exercise moral and pragmatic thinking, so that each of us impact one another in a productive way. Let us help support the Reproductive Health Bill pass into law. Contraceptions for married couples do not equate to being anti-life, but it is synonymous to a quality life. Your family and my family rightfully deserve a better future.

Visit my blog, ¡Soy Negrense!

Cat and Marie

Posted on 10. Nov, 2009 by Pepe in Oplan Pepe

I began to write on my views of the Catholic Church and my own experiences with religion, when it hit me that I had in my possession a story much more powerful. That of a lady named Marie, a spunky woman I am proud to call my maternal grandmother.

Marie was an undeniable charmer — a looker with great legs, almond eyes, and for many years, an 18-inch-waist. She was well known for her high cheekbones, smoky voice and her ability to say and act what she felt, whether you liked it or not. A trait, many say, she inherited from her equally strong-willed father. Being an only child, Marie was the sparkle of her dad’s world and as much as he tried to instill his views on her, even from a young age his bright progeny spoke her own mind and knew exactly what she stood for.

Her disappointment in the Catholic Church stemmed from an incident done to her beloved father while she was just a child. Growing up in Baguio in the 1950’s, her parents were living in a mining camp while she was an “interna” at various Catholic schools. Due to her frail health and upon the family doctor’s recommendation, my great-grandfather enrolled her in the Episcopalian school Brent, because it had better food and medical care.

My great-grandfather was a practicing Catholic, so his decision to put his only child in the American missionary run school was one of necessity rather than desire. Sadly, the Belgian Bishop of Baguio didn’t feel the same way and announced in front of the whole congregation during a Sunday mass at the Baguio Cathedral that my proud and religious Lolo and his wife were to be denied the Sacraments for placing their child in an institution that would soil her mind with false doctrines.

For many years, my great grandfather, hurt and proud, shunned the Catholic faith. He only began going to Mass again, albeit grudgingly, when he had to “set an example” for his grandchildren.

Some time before Marie got married, the same bishop attempted to warmly hug her in front of her extremely religious soon-to-be mother in law and fiancé. Remembering the pain this robed man caused her father, she pushed him and his rosary far away from her chest, gave him an icy look, and to the shock of her soon-to-be in-laws, walked the other way.

One thing Marie firmly believed throughout her life was the right for women to lead their lives anyway they pleased. A phrase I often heard her say to the girls in our family while growing up was, “Don’t ever be a doormat.” She believed women had just as much entitlement as men to feel empowered, to make decisions that would lead them to reach their own dreams and live their personal passions. Being a prodigious reader, I clearly remember her insisting when I was 13 that I read the Jean M. Auel classic, The Clan of the Cave Bear, because she felt the book’s heroine, Ayla, was a far better example of a woman who we could proudly call the mother of the human race. Unlike, in her own half-joking words, “that ninny Eve.”

Throughout most of her life, Marie was a strong advocate of contraception as a choice and viewed it as a way for women to lead lives away from the trapdoor of deprivation in a third world country. While doing charity work with the women of Davao for over almost 20 years, she and her mother were actively involved in a foundation that offered birth control pills, ligations, or vasectomies to any family with three or more children. The local church tried its hardest to fight her private cause. They pleaded, argued, and gave her their cold shoulder. But there was nothing they could say or do that would make her change her mind. She felt that all women deserved this alternative and there was no way in hell the church was going to rob them of it. Through the years, countless women thanked my grandmother for her help. Because of her refusal to bend to the church’s rules, their families were happy, their children well fed and educated, and their lives thriving and nourished.

I will never forget a conversation I had with her at the age of 17 over an afternoon merienda. I had come straight from school to see her while she was visiting from Cebu. As the humid Makati air danced around us, we caught up with each other’s recent lives. “So your mom tells me you have a boyfriend now,” she said rather matter-of-factly. “Yes, I do.” I replied while piercing my cubed pieces of sweet Cebu mango with a fork. She nodded, took a puff from her slim cigarette, exhaled, and said in the same no-nonsense voice, “Are you on the pill?” This was in a nutshell my grandmother, practical and no bullshit. Growing up, I always knew the women of my family were far from the naïve matrons of bygone years who thought that their little fragile flowers would remain virgins till their wedding day. My cousins and I were taught early on to be healthy, responsible, and be with partners who valued and loved us. And because of this upbringing, we have never felt guilt or shame from love. A message I have every intention of passing on to my own children.

Marie left us on April of 2008. Though her spirit wanted to keep fighting, a destructive cancer finally weakened her body till we all accepted it was time to say goodbye. I know beyond a doubt that if she were still with us she would be fully behind the passing of the RH Bill. She may not have been a practicing Catholic, but she certainly had her own version of faith, an ideology stronger than that of a religious institution designed by men. Belief in a God who doesn’t want to see women trapped in a life of hardship and poverty, a life where hearts are chronically plagued with pain and worry as to how to provide for their families.

The Philippine Catholic Church keeps claiming that the RH Bill is a destructive force in the celebration of life. To this I ask, how? Through the Bill, women will be able to follow their dreams, couples can raise families when they can afford to have them, and children will have a better chance to grow up with food on their tables and books to read from school. Isn’t living a quality life the best way to celebrate it? A life where there is enough for everyone, thus becoming a bigger number than the sum of its parts so that it churns love like butter till it’s uncontainable and spread onto the community surrounding it. That is one of the bigger lessons Marie taught me and one that I wanted to share with all you. That a life worth living is one where you can design your path, believe and speak what you know in your heart to be true, not what a religious sect says to be fact, and live your days on earth with quality and fulfillment. If we can all learn a little from her on this, then I think she would be pleased.

How the CBCP turned our Congressmen into Cowards

Posted on 09. Nov, 2009 by Filipino Freethinker in Oplan Pepe

“The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.”

- Article 2, section 6 of the Philippine Constitution

“There must be no separation between God and Man. Without these conditions, the (RH) Bill if enacted into law will separate our nation from Almighty God.”

- CBCP President Angel Lagdameo

Almost two years ago, Speaker Prospero Nograles proposed a study that could prevent the CBCP from making cowards of our Congressmen.

The study could reveal that the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) has no right to scare politicians with threats to campaign against them, and that the religious organization will lose tax-exempt status if it continues to do so.

As the elections draw near, the results of the study become more relevant. Sadly, it’s because of the timing that the study remains a proposal. As an online reporter for CBCP said, “Politicians tend to be wary of going against Church teachings for fear of losing votes.”

So as long as our politicians are afraid of some priests, the study will not happen. The CBCP will continue to meddle in politics, and our politicians will continue to let them. For instance, three groups will decide the fate of the Reproductive Health (RH) bill: Pro-RH politicians, anti-RH politicians, and anti-RH priests.

By now it should be clear that the CBCP is a critical part of this political debate. They have campaigned against pro-RH politicians, asked them to resign, and even tried to do their job for them, pushing for their own version of the bill. They are doing everything in their power to order politicians to their side and threaten those who don’t obey.

And it’s working. Our politicians are scared. Even our Secretary of Defense is “very afraid.” Before the RH debates resume, pro-RH politicians will try to get the blessings of some bishops. I believe the Church’s favor is a major factor most politicians consider before even hinting that they support the RH bill.

On the other hand, the CBCP is not afraid of our politicians. They wield the Catholic bloc vote (which is a myth, by the way) that got them enough political clout to be invited to a Senate hearing. And when they weren’t pleased with what they heard, they walked out, in disrespect to the privilege they’d been given.

Such political meddling is what motivated Speaker Nograles to propose the removal of their tax exempt status. But the CBCP simply shrugged off the threat. A CBCP spokesman further said that removing their tax-exempt status would require a change in the Constitution. I presume it is out of fear that Nograles later clarified that he was not proposing to remove it, only to study what the Constitution really says about the issue.

So what’s actually written in the Constitution? First, let’s look at how the CBCP understands it.

Should religious leaders choose candidates for their flock? According to Archbishop Antonio Ledesma, “that should be left to the wisdom and conscience of the mature Christian voter.” That answer might have contributed to his losing the CBCP presidency. Because where the CBCP is concerned, it’s the wrong answer.

In 1998, the CBCP released Catechism on the Church and Politics. Here are some excerpts:

What does “separation of Church and State” mean?

Separation of Church and State is strictly defined in the 1987 Philippine Constitution to refer to two points: (1) that no religion may be established as the official religion of the State; and (2) that the State may not favor one religion over others. At the same time, the State shall forever allow the free exercise and enjoyment of religion and shall not require any religious test for the exercise of civil or political rights…

To be noted is the fact that nowhere does the Constitution prohibit Clergy and Religious from partisan politics. What prohibits them from active involvement in partisan politics is the Church’s own laws and traditional wisdom.

Is there any case when the Bishops can authoritatively order the lay faithful to vote for one particular and concrete option?

Yes, there is, and the case would certainly be extraordinary. This happens when a political option is clearly the only one demanded by the Gospel… In this case the Church may authoritatively demand the faithful, even under pain of sin, to vote against this particular candidate…

- Catechism on the Church and Politics Part 2

This tells us two things about how the CBCP understands secularism. First, that they can be involved in partisan politics. Second, that they should be involved and order their flock to vote for or against candidates in cases where it is “demanded by the Gospel.”

One such case is the RH Bill, as emphasized by CBCP President Angel Lagdameo:

Even as we recognize the right of the government to enact laws, we also reiterate that there must be no separation between God and Man. Without these conditions, the (Reproductive Health) Bill if enacted into law will separate our nation from Almighty God.

Now it becomes clear why the CBCP has been so active in politics, especially in opposing the RH Bill. They believe it is their divine obligation and constitutional right.

But in their understanding of the separation of church and state, they don’t see the full picture. What does our Constitution actually say?

“The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.”

- Article 2, section 6 of the Philippine Constitution

“No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.”

- Article 3, section 5 of the Philippine Constitution

“No public money or property shall be appropriated, applied, paid, or employed, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion, or of any priest, preacher, minister, other religious teacher, or dignitary as such…”

- Article 6, section 29 of the Philippine Constitution

I think they read only this much, but even here they only see half the picture. Secularism means more than the state not interfering with church. It works both ways. The church must not interfere with the state. Religious organizations must not be involved in partisan politics. They totally missed this point even when our Constitution makes it absolutely clear:

“One-half of the seats allocated to the party-list representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from … sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector.”

- Art. 6, section 5(2) of the Philippine Constitution

“Religious denominations and sects shall not be registered (as a political party, organization or coalition, by the Comelec)”

- Art. 9, C, section 2(5) of the Philippine Constitution

The last item makes it clear that religious organizations cannot register as political organizations. This is because religious organizations, unlike political ones, receive tax privileges:

“Charitable institutions, churches and personages or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-profit cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and improvements, actually, directly, and exclusively used for religious, charitable, or educational purposes shall be exempt from taxation.”

- Art. 6, section 28(3) of the Philippine Constitution

This is repeated in the Corporation Code…

Non-stock corporations may be formed or organized for charitable, religious, educational, professional, cultural, fraternal, literary, scientific, social, civic service, or similar purposes, like trade, industry, agricultural and like chambers, or any combination thereof…

- Batas Pambansa Blg. 68 Title 11 Section 88

Any corporation sole may purchase and hold real estate and personal property for its church, charitable, benevolent or educational purposes, and may receive bequests or gifts for such purposes.

- Batas Pambansa Blg. 68 Title 11 Section 113

…and in the National Internal Revenue Code:

The following organizations shall not be taxed under this Title in respect to income received by them as such:

(E) Nonstock corporation or association organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, athletic, or cultural purposes, or for the rehabilitation of veterans, no part of its net income or asset shall belong to or inures to the benefit of any member, organizer, officer or any specific person;

- Republic Act 8424 Chapter 4, Section 30 E

Note that these 3 documents emphasize that religious organizations, who receive tax-exempt status, should be “organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, athletic, or cultural purposes, or for the rehabilitation of veterans.”

Partisan politics is not an authorized purpose. So once a religious group starts politicking, it no longer qualifies for tax exemption, and should be stripped of its tax privileges.

The CBCP’s involvement in politics should put their tax exempt status into question. Which is what Speaker Nograles did in February 2008:

Speaker Nograles said that in the US, tax exempt privileges being accorded to religious organizations, charitable institutions and non-profit organizations has some preconditions under its Internal Revenue Code (Section 501) and among which is the prohibition for any organization or institution which availed of tax privileges from “conducting lobbying activities and in participating and intervening, directly or indirectly, in political campaigns.”

Let me remind you that our Constitution, Corporation Code, and Tax Code do have the same preconditions. But in our case, what’s mentioned is what a religious organization can do. It only says what cannot be done implicitly (by its not being mentioned).

But the US, whose constitution and secularism are the basis of our own, explicitly states what a religious organization cannot do:

All IRC section 501(c)(3) organizations, including churches and religious organizations, are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office…

Religious leaders cannot make partisan comments in official organization publications or at official church functions.

Religious leaders who speak or write in their individual capacity are encouraged to clearly indicate that their comments are personal and not intended to represent the views of the organization.

- IRS Tax Guide For Churches And Religious Organizations

They also elaborate on how churches can avoid politicking when it invites candidates to speak, holds public forums, and releases voter guides. But in every case, they make it very clear that the mere indication that a church supports or opposes a certain candidate is grounds for removal of tax privileges.

Now let’s review:

Does the CBCP support or oppose certain candidates? Do their religious leaders ”clearly indicate that their comments are personal and not intended to represent the views of the organization”?

“If you know of a congressman or senator who voted in favor of the Reproductive Health Bill, my request is not to vote for them in the next elections.” .
- Bishop Arturo Bastes over Radio Veritas

(Cardinal Vidal) is now considering whether Aquino should be included in the Church’s list of politicians who should not be voted.

- Archbishop Ricardo Cardinal Vidal

Castro also said the Church’s family and life ministry with its affiliate groups nationwide might resort to bloc voting in the 2010 elections to ensure the defeat of “anti-life” politicians.

- Fr. Melvin Castro, executive secretary of the CBCP’s Commission on Family and Life

As you can see, CBCP’s politicking has gone beyond mere indication into blatant intervention. These are only three of the many similar cases you can find on their website alone.

What about the thousands of violations that go unchecked when priests give sermons about who Catholics should vote? The pulpits and church buildings, like the website and Radyo Veritas, are tax-exempt properties that should not be used for political, taxable purposes.

The CBCP has to decide what to use their resources for. Either they use it exclusively for religious purposes, or occasionally for political intervention. They can’t have it both ways.

In any case, our lawmakers must require CBCP to stop politicking or lose their tax-exempt status. What’s taking them so long to do this? Maybe they’re not sure whether there are violations in the first place. Or perhaps they just don’t understand what separation of church and state really means. If they did, speaker Nograles wouldn’t think that the issue needed to be studied.

In that case, why don’t they do the study already? I imagine it won’t take much effort. I got all this from a few hours of research online. With their experts, research teams, and related cases in other secular countries around the world (even the cases in the US are more than enough), they have all the resources they need.

More importantly, it’s their responsibility. If there’s the slightest chance that our Constitution is being violated, then our politicians should not put off the study any longer.

Unless, of course, our Congressmen are paralyzed by fear. I’m afraid no Church-fearing candidate would want to follow through and risk losing the Catholic vote. But our Congressmen must not forget. As public servants, it’s not the Church, not the bishops, not even the Catholics they should be afraid of. It’s the Filipino citizens — regardless of religion — that our representatives should respect.