|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
|
Editorial 26 July 2005 | TruthForce! Bishops Abandon Prophetic Role - Succumb to GMA Option Nicanor Perlas 12 July 2005 The presidency of Gloria Macapaga-Arroyo (GMA) has been the most divisive in Philippine history. In four short years, GMA has splintered business and many government agencies, including the military, Senate and the House of Representatives, and the judiciary. And, thanks to GMA, who co-opted many of its leaders, the split in civil society has been so pervasive that, as a whole, civil society has lost its unified and effective voice in the present crisis. Yet, Catholic Bishops chose to get on board the sinking ship of GMA.
Dividing the Church After agonizing for almost six days, the more than 100 bishops comprising the CBCP, released their statement. They said: "Therefore, in a spirit of humility and truth, we declare our prayerfully discerned collective decision that we do not demand her resignation. Yet neither do we encourage her simply to dismiss such a call from others. For we recognize that non-violent appeals for her resignation, the demand for a Truth Commission and the filing of an impeachment case are not against the Gospel." (Emphasis added.) Even though this may not have been their intention, the statement of the Bishops gave immediate comfort to GMA who thanked them profusely. Even if many of the bishops do not like GMA who has become the symbol of the worst attributes of traditional politics, their statement has given a boost to her political fortunes. Against the best interests of most, the CBCP statement effectively aligned the bishops with the position of the traditional politicians ("trapos") whom the CBCP has criticized heavily in the past and in their own present statement. It also revealed that the CBCP is out of touch with large segments of the Catholic faithful, who earlier had asked GMA to resign and who were downloading, by the hundreds of thousands, the "Hello Garci" ring tones, spoofing GMA. The day before they released their statement, many of the Bishops were moving towards the "Resign GMA" option. Then, the Apostolic Nuncio, the Vatican ambassador to the Philippines, gave a talk. The following day the CBCP released a statement that contradicted the original sentiments of many of the Bishops. How they can justify this to their conscience is a question that only they can answer. The Bishops did their best balancing act. They miscalculated badly. In the words of an SMS message that has been circulating: "BISHOPS SAY IT IS OK TO STEAL VOTES BIGTIME!" The CBCP had hoped to foster clarity, hope and peace. Instead, their statement sowed further confusion, hopelessness, and apathy. They have given comfort to actions by GMA that are widely perceived and judged as fraudulent and immoral. The statement further brings Philippine society closer to a violent resolution to the present crisis in governance. What is important now is to do an in-depth analysis of the CBCP statement since the statement is being used by GMA, her administration and allies to re-conquer lost moral and political territory. In this way, the general public can come to its own conclusion regarding the CBCP Statement. But, before doing so, it is important to remember a few things about GMA. These facts about her will clarify why the statement of the CBCP, in ultimately supporting GMA, has given hope to a president who has lost all moral moorings and is dragging down the nation with her.
Fraudulent, Immoral and Questionable Acts by GMA GMA claims that the vote-counting was already finished during the time the tapes were taken. In reality, the vote-counting was still going on and GMA, as the person in the tape, was trying to influence the outcome of the counting. GMA therefore is lying, at the same time, as she is apologizing for her lapse of judgment (read: cheating) in calling a Comelec official. For all her loud appeals to let the constitutional process take place, GMA tacitly supported, in national TV, plans by governors loyal to her to fragment the nation and undertake the constitutionally illegal act of establishing provincial or regional governments autonomous from the national government. Some even allege that the idea came from GMA herself. This incident highlights another reason why GMA can no longer be President. She is willing to destroy this country for the sole purpose of maintaining her power.
Deconstructing the CBCP Statement
Failure to Uphold Morality The Bishops do not believe that the tapes are conclusive in proving the guilt of GMA. "In this grave situation, various groups take advantage of one another, manipulate situations for their own agenda and create confusion among our people sometimes by projecting speculation or suspicion as proven fact, with the aim of grabbing power." This statement clearly reveals that most likely, many of the bishops have not informed themselves directly regarding the contents of the tapes. It is clear that, in the tapes, GMA conspired with a Comelec official to commit the immoral act of rigging the votes of the last national election. In paragraph 3, the bishops raise the issue of trust as a moral issue. "At the center of the crisis is the issue of moral value, particularly the issue of trust." They then go on to explain how increasingly, through time, more and more people are losing their trust in the political institutions of the country. And on the particular matter of GMA herself, while acknowledging the increasing clamors for GMA to resign, the Bishops write: "On the other hand there is also a wide manifestation of support for the chief executive by a cross section of society. " Relying on Wrong Information Here the Bishops make another factual mistake. They should have paid attention to recent surveys released, for example, by Pulse Asia that show that GMA does not have the support nor trust of the majority of Filipinos. On July 7, just a few days, before the CBCP released their statement, Pulse Asia showed the following alarming facts about GMA's fictitious "wide manifestation of support".
Clearly GMA has a massive trust problem, which, in the CBCP's own statement, is a moral issue over which they have the competence to say something about. (See below.) CBCP basically took as fact the Palace propaganda that GMA enjoys wide support with the general public. And from this fictitious basis, they issued their problematic statement. They basically ignored that GMA, time and time again, has betrayed the people's trust and has therefore gained the dubious reputation of being the most mistrusted president in recent history. In the process, the Bishops have avoided their responsibility of giving moral guidance to their followers. Internal Contradictions In paragraph 6 of their statement, the Bishops state: "With Pope Benedict XVI we do not believe in the "intrusion into politics on the part of the hierarchy." Here we now begin to see the harvest of the talk given by the Apostolic Nuncio who must have conveyed the sentiments of Pope Benedict XVI to the Bishops." But we are to interpret human activities such as economics and politics from the moral and religious point of view, from the point of view of the Gospel of Jesus and of the Kingdom of God. We are to provide moral and religious guidance to our people." This statement contains three contradictions. First the CBCP support for GMA, given the actual on-going political debates, is definitely "an intrusion into politics". Their statement has given a new lease on life to the GMA Presidency at the time GMA needed it most. Their statement intruded into politics by stopping the momentum of calls asking for GMA's resignation. Second, as we have seen above, their moral, religious and political point of view is out of step with the facts of the case. Therefore, they failed to walk their talk. There is a clear case for a moral censure against GMA on the basis of their unity with Pope Benedict XVI. They failed to do this. They have failed to uphold their own conscience and mandate. And third, the CBCP was selective in the interpretation of social teachings of the Church with regards to Church-State relations. The Church recognizes state autonomy as long as it defends the common good. Once the State stifles this then the Church has the right to express its concerns as a matter of responsibility. "Pope Leo . . . frequently insists on necessary limits to the State's intervention and on its instrumental character, inasmuch as the individual, the family and society are prior to the State, and inasmuch as the State exists in order to protect their rights and not stifle them." Centesimus Annus (CA) 11 (Emphasis added.) Did not GMA stifle the rights of millions of Filipinos by engaging in fraudulent attempts to rig the presidential elections? "The Church, therefore, by virtue of the Gospel committed to her, proclaims the rights of man; she acknowledges and greatly esteems the dynamic movements of today by which these rights are everywhere fostered. Yet these movements must be penetrated by the spirit of the Gospel and protected against any kind of false autonomy. For we are tempted to think that our personal rights are fully ensured only when we are exempt from every requirement of divine law. But this way lies not the maintenance of the dignity of the human person, but its annihilation." Gaudium et Spes (GES) 41 Does not this statement by Pope Paul VI clearly state that, as a matter of principle, when the situation warrants, the leadership of the Church has a moral, spiritual and prophetic obligation, to step over the "false autonomy" of the state and denounce state actions that have become an insult to the dignity of the human person? Is the CBCP now willing to throw away over 100 years of the Catholic Church's own social teachings just to accommodate GMA? Selective Reading of Social Teachings of the Church The Catholic Church's own social teachings also call for decisive action, not just a pastoral message. When the State violates human rights, the Church leadership should be true to its own social teachings. They have to intervene decisively in order to redress the situation. "Today more than ever, the Church is aware that her social message will gain credibility more immediately from the witness of actions than as a result of its internal logic and consistency." CA 57 Furthermore, in an earlier TruthForce! editorial (3 July 2005) we already explained the moral responsibility of the Church when confronted with irresponsible state behavior. Pope Paul VI also advises against "shirking earth responsibilities". Anyone, or any institution, that fails to do this, is guilty of a great "scandal". This was the kind of scandal that was highly condemned by the prophets of old and even by Christ. (See GES 43.) From their own standards, the CBCP Statement is "great scandal". And in this "stubborn fight" it will be necessary sometimes to "destroy" "structures of sin" [the oppression of dysfunctional or destroyed democratic institutions) which robs human beings of their dignity. "Man receives from God his essential dignity . . . [but] he is also conditioned by the social structure in which he lives . . . . The decisions which create a human environment can give rise to specific structures of sin which impede the full realization of those who are in any way oppressed by them. To destroy such structures and replace them with more authentic forms of living in community is a task which demands courage and patience." CA38 (Emphasis added.) The GMA government has become a giant "structure of sin". Despite many promises, the problem of poverty continues unabated, condemning millions to an existence unworthy of their human dignity. The GMA government has also welcomed the wholesale rape of the environment by "selling" the Philippines as the mining destination of the world while paying lip service to ecological and social responsibilities associated with mining. Corruption is rampant in the government. Billions of pesos are stolen, worsening the fiscal crisis, and removing funds away from a "preferential option for the poor", in the words of the social teachings of the Church. And this litany barely describes the impressive "structure of sin" that has become the GMA administration. In its selective recall of its own social teachings, the CBCP has turned its back on its own prophetic and spiritual responsibilities. It lacked the "courage" to "destroy" the "structure of sin" which now governs the Philippines. Choosing a Specific Political Option While Arguing Against It Then comes paragraph 7 which has been a source of discouragement for many. "In the welter of conflicting opinions and positions our role is not to point out a specific political option or a package of options as the Gospel choice, especially so when an option might be grounded merely on a speculative and highly controvertible basis. In the present situation we believe that no single concrete option regarding President Macapagal Arroyo can claim to be the only one demanded by the Gospel." Then, in the next sentence, they make the statement that "we do not demand her resignation". There is a huge contradiction here. The CBCP has placed itself into a deep hole. They say that not one specific political option (including the GMA option to stay) has the support of the Gospel. Yet they declare, shortly after, that they do not want GMA to resign. But this opinion they prefer is precisely one of those options "regarding President Macapagal Arroyo", an option that goes contrary to what a majority of Filipinos want. In effect, not only do the Bishops violate their own standard by preferring one of the options. They are also saying that their preferred option is not "demanded by the Gospel". In other words, the CBCP preference has no theological or moral basis. The CBCP also fails in its task of providing moral guidance on the basis of the Gospel. Failure of Clarity and Courage In Paragraph 8, the CBCP reminds all that "a just political and moral order is best promoted under the present circumstances by a clear and courageous preference for constitutional processes that flow from moral values and the natural law." Unfortunately, the CBCP statement fails its own preferred standard. Its own statement is not "clear" due to contradictions already pointed out. Nor is it "courageous" because it places its support on a decadent government which has already lost the support of a majority of Filipinos. Is there a hint of fear of what the future may bring once GMA is out of office? Ignores Own Advise to Consult The CBCP urges "people in our parish and religious communities, our religious organizations and movements, our Basic Ecclesial Communities to come and pray together, reason, decide and act together always to the end that the will of God prevail in the political order." This is an important suggestion. Unfortunately, in a significant number of cases, the Bishops did not consult with their own priests and lay leaders in coming up with their decisions. This is a complaint that has been heard in many dioceses around the country since the CBCP statement was released. Again many Bishops exempted themselves from their own advice. Conclusion The CBCP statement has failed to provide the necessary moral voice in our time of deep division and crisis. Its statement is riddled with contradictions. In a number of instances it does not follow its own advice. It has no recommendations to the structural problem of Philippine democracy which it discusses in its statement. And when it is brave enough to render a political judgment as a necessary adjunct to a moral concern, it falls short. Instead it gives comfort to an immoral bankrupt government. In the end, the CBCP statement has only intensified the divisions that GMA has successfully created in Philippine society. It has not stopped the fragmentation of the nation. Worse, its own weight as a moral force in times of crisis will now suffer serious erosion. That erosion has begun now that the CBCP has lost its moral force in the present bitter struggle to determine the future of this country. Its prophetic voice has been compromised with serious consequences for its own future. Already, many, especially among the poor, are starting to rethink what it means to be a Catholic. In a recent consultation, the head of a delegation of urban poor leaders informed the body that they were debating among themselves whether they want to remain within the Catholic Church. They are asking: "How can the Bishops take a moral standard lower than most people who do not have their training and sophistication?" If the Bishops are uneasy about the Cardinal Sin model of Church and State relations and his socially engaged spirituality, then, with their statement, they have successfully buried Sin's spiritual legacy to the Filipino nation. In the process they have betrayed their own high principles as expressed in Vatican II and their own social teachings. The CBCP statement, contrary to its own peaceful intention, will now hasten the onset of the violent scenario. People are angry. They are frustrated. With the CBCP decision, the momentum for a peaceful, constitutional process offered by resignation, has just been lost. And if violence thus erupts, then CBCP will only have itself to blame for unwittingly triggering the violent scenario that was already waiting in the wings, just waiting for the right time to erupt. When this happens, the damage to the reputation of the CBCP will be difficult to repair in the years to come.
Christ once said. The Sabbath is made for men, not men for the Sabbath. Governments, institutions, norms are there to advance human dignity and the common good. When they fail miserably, one owes no spiritual allegiance to these human-made social arrangements that have become "structures of sin". For those who truly follow Christ, they have the responsibility to peacefully "destroy" these "structures of sin" and liberate human beings from economic, political, and cultural slavery. Only then can a better Philippines emerge.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Top of Page Feature Article Archive Editorials |
| © CADI, 1999-2005 | |
