As every course in representative government points out, the right of the citizenry to criticize the government emanates from the fact that tax payments made by the citizens fund all government operations. Because of their tax-free status under the 1987 Constitution, organized religions, therefore, are not supposed to criticize the way the goverrnment is run. In other words, they can’t have their cake and eat it, too.
Sadly, the restriction is more honored in breach than in compliance because many organized religions openly support and endorse partisan candidates for elective public office, and meddle in the affairs of the government. Some even dictate what its faithful may or may not watch in the cinemahouses.
Take for instance the late Jaime Cardinal Sin, who was the archbishop of Manila during the administration of President Ferdinand Marcos, and thereafter. While Cardinal Sin was all praises for the Marcos couple whenever he officiated masses at Malacañang during the martial law years, the cardinal also maintained extraordinarily warm ties with leaders of the political opposition. He was particularly partial to ex-Senator Francisco “Soc” Rodrigo, a staunch defender of the Catholic Church during his time.
Because Cardinal Sin knew that it was better for him to have the strongman in Malacañang as a friend instead of an enemy, the cardinal did not put up any serious protest against the extensive family program launched by the Marcos administration. Sin also refrained from making critical remarks against the strongman regime.
Whenever Cardinal Sin’s photograph with President Marcos is published in the newspapers, Sin was always all smiles. The cardinal never protested the publicity he got with Marcos.
Cardinal Sin’s role in the so-called February 1986 Edsa People Power Revolution made him a national hero in the eyes of the anti-Marcos camp and its publicists. Because President Corazon Cojuangco Aquino, who seized power in Edsa 1986, openly acknowledged that she owes her presidency to the cardinal, Sin became a major power broker in the Aquino administration. The extent of his influence was second only to Aquino’s brother, the lackluster and arguably unpopular Jose “Peping” Cojuangco Jr.
In the 1992 presidential elections, it was evident that Cardinal Sin wanted Ramon Mitra Jr., who was a Roman Catholic, to win over Fidel Ramos, a protestant. Alas, the cardinal’s influence was no longer there. Ramos was proclaimed winner even when he only a plurality president, with second placer Miriam Defensor-Santiago protesting the outcome of the polls. Mitra placed fourth.
For the virtual entirety of the Ramos administration, Cardinal Sin was its staunchest and loudest critic, especially of the family planning methods endorsed by Ramos’ health secretary, Juan Flavier. Pressed by the news media to explain why he was breathing down on Ramos when he didn’t even vote for Ramos, Sin publicly announced rather ludicrously that he openly campaigned for Mitra but secretly voted for Ramos. Holy smokes! That’s political duplicity plain and simple.
Luis Cardinal Tagle is Cardinal Sin’s successor. While Cardinal Tagle does not find it irregular for the Church to meddle in the affairs of the government, he takes offense when a citizen criticizes the Church for its meddling in government affairs.
For example, when an Intramuros tourist guide had had enough of the clergy’s interference in Philippine politics, the tourist guide went to the Manila Cathedral and in the middle of a meeting of church officials, he displayed the sign “Padre Damaso,” a name associated with the villanous friar in Jose Rizal’s novel Noli Me Tangere. The tourist guide wanted to remind the contemporary Catholic clergy that they were going back to the wicked ways of union of Church and State.
Manila church officials immediately filed criminal charges against the tourist guide, which ultimately ended up in the conviction of the latter. Cardinal Tagle later appeared on television and said that the church had already forgiven the tourist guide, and it just so happened that it was the “people of the Philippines” who pursued the case against the accused.
What hogwash! Every law student knows that a criminal case of the nature filed against the tourist guide would not have ripened into a conviction were it not for the active prosecution of the case by the private offended party, in this case the church officials of Manila. Tagle probably thought that television is patronized only by the gullible.
The clergy preach that people should forgive other people because there is virtue in being forgiving. This is also one of the lessons taught in the Lord’s Prayer. When the Manila clergy pursued the criminal case against the tourist guide, it seems like the clergy forgot to practice what they have been preaching.
While humility is another virtue priests preach during their sermons, the priests running a famous university in Manila practice the opposite. The private security guards of this university are required to stand at attention each time a priest walks by. This special treatment is not even accorded to lay faculty members of that university
Ranking officials of the Catholic church in the Philippines travel the streets using an entourage of high-end luxury vehicles. They wear jewelry and nice leather shoes. What happened to their vow of poverty?
About a month ago, the news media reported a priest who was caught with a minor girl inside a motel. After high church officials relieved him of his duties, nothing was heard from him again. Anyway, is celibacy among the clergy in danger of extinction?
Tuition in Catholic schools are very steep, thus making basic education beyond the reach of poor Filipinos. Fees for church weddings, baptisms, and confirmations are also costly. Considering that the Church is tax-exempt, where does all that money go?
Since President Rodrigo Duterte is serious about constitutional changes, he ought to revoke the tax-exempt status enjoyed by all organized religions under the 1987 Constitution.