Not the end of the world as we know it

The passage of Senate Bill No. 2865 and House Bill House Bill No. 4244 is not something the Philippine Roman Catholic body, both the Church and its people, should be afraid of. It is not “doomsday” nor “Armageddon” nor the day when evil triumphed over good, as what some hard-core and traditional Catholic thinkers in the country are trying to paint.

The Philippine Roman Catholic leadership’s bragging rights of being the last bastion of Catholicism in Asia is losing its value in Vatican’s powers of corridors. How our Catholic bishops have bragged for ages that the Philippines has maintained Catholic beliefs to guide the country’s political, socio-economic, moral and cultural behavior due to the strong leadership of the local Catholic bishops – that brag has worked until now.

philippines_nuns
[Photo courtesy AsiaOne.com.]

Look at our movies, our literature, our celebration, or how government leaders are held hostage by the so-called “Catholic vote”. Look at how our bishops managed to put down governments twice through a peaceful revolution. This performance helped the Philippine Catholic leadership become an “apple of the eye” by the Vatican. The pope visited us twice if that is not some sort of a “favor”.

But the back drop of this “resume” by our local Catholic leadership are realities of morality that continue to hound the predominantly Catholic Filipino society. Divorce, abortion and incest in high-walled residences of rich Filipinos remain largely unreported while we make “telenovelas” out of divorce, abortion and incest cases in poor families that local news networks find it so valuable to put in their headlines. I will talk about “tabloidism” by local news networks next time. It is a question of morality when priests and bishops receive favors from local politicians, organizations with un-Catholic advocacies and moneyed-people and it also becomes a question of morality when these “partnerships-by-convenience” are accepted by society.

Point of the story is, we became this cute and cuddly little “baby” of Vatican with an unchanged and spoiled “lampin” for so long. Now, we could no longer hide this “moral stench” in the “lampin”; the stench that we have been trying to ignore for a long time is stinking.

The passage of Senate Bill No. 2865 and House Bill House Bill No. 4244 is a call to the Philippine Roman Catholic body to pay “attention” to its main mission. This is to ensure that the morality of the Filipino society is guided by true Catholic teachings.

The Philippine Roman Catholic body has had its hands too busy with too many pre-occupations that it has ignored its main mission. It tried meddling with politics, business, government policies, health policies, industry regulations and even foreign affairs while losing focus of its true mission.

A politician can remain a politician with its morality intact and sound. A miner, or a mining company, can do the same, do its job and abide by the rules of morality. A Filipino can support the RH bill with its morality intact. We don’t need a Philippine Catholic Church who will be too busy teaching us how to run our government, how to run and regulate our industries, or how to implement state policies.

Because who will make sure that we have our moralities intact and that we continue to be guided by teachings of morality? Well, they are busy fighting politicians, joining elections and toppling down governments, busy arguing with legislators, busy playing regulators to the mining industry, and busy doing business.

In the meantime, the “lampin” remains unwashed and unattended.

What’s the next stench coming out?

Yes, legalization of divorce in the country?

print

About The Miner

I am working with a large-scale mining company that adheres to responsible mining and sustainable development principles.

39 Comments on “Not the end of the world as we know it”

  1. Legalization of divorce will always remain an impossible dream in this country. Those who will oppose such law are powerful and unbeatable. As Matt Monroe sings: ” we must bear with unbearable sorrow” the torture of living with a spouse we no longer love or even tolerate. All for the sake of preserving marriage. But how do you preserve a marriage for example when you know your spouse is cheating on you? Or who regularly beats you up? If your spouse merely has bad breath you can live with that. But if you are sure he or she has been cohabiting with another when you are not looking you have to be a saint to be able to bear it and live under the same roof much less sleep in the same bed. I wonder how the anti-divorce people will argue.

  2. In every relationship there always be problems that will arise. Determine the cause of the problem and seek professional help. The idea of divorce is just an excuse and it simply means that you didn’t spend enough time knowing your partner or you’re not communicating effectively with him/her. Talk to your partner. Don’t let your children suffer the consequences of your immaturity.

  3. @The Miner

    How I wish I could see your examples of Catholic leaders bragging about something. I would like to see your criteria of bragging.

    From online dictionary:

    brag (brg)
    v. bragged, brag·ging, brags
    v.intr.
    To talk boastfully.

    “The passage of Senate Bill No. 2865 and House Bill House Bill No. 4244 is a call to the Philippine Roman Catholic body to pay “attention” to its main mission. This is to ensure that the morality of the Filipino society is guided by true Catholic teachings.”

    What morality are you talking about?

    The way I interpret your post, you’re referring to those Catholics in name only or the modern Catholics definition of morality – “moral relativism”.

    From Wiki:

    “Moral Relativism

    The philosophized notion that right and wrong are not absolute values, but are personalized according to the individual and his or her circumstances or cultural orientation. It can be used positively to effect change in the law (e.g., promoting tolerance for other customs or lifestyles) or negatively as a means to attempt justification for wrongdoing or lawbreaking. The opposite of moral relativism is moral absolutism, which espouses a fundamental, Natural Law of constant values and rules, and which judges all persons equally, irrespective of individual circumstances or cultural differences.”

    I usually label this moral relativism as cost and benefit morality. (To hell with the cost of morality, it’s the benefits that count, the bottom line.)

    They label those Catholics who are sticking with moral absolutism as old fashioned. They’re the politically incorrect crowd as they would be called.

    “What’s the next stench coming out?

    Yes, legalization of divorce in the country?”

    Why be contented with that in badmouthing Catholics.

    How about same sex marriage?

    Catholic teachings are nuisance on one’s freedom to choose, isn’t it?

    Like brother to sister or father to daughter or mother to son union. Or even man to animal!

    How good life would be if these things are not forbidden in Catholic teachings.

    In our modern time, there are already advocates of these:

    – same-sex intercourse, bestiality, incest, and pederasty (sexual freedom, heh…)

    – infanticide for disabled (they decide who live and those who will not)

    – mercy killing or euthanasia (the right to choose how and when to have a quality death with dignity)

    – gender neutrality (it’s parent 1 or parent 2. No more mom or dad.)

    I see these people as those who will not be bothered by Catholic teachings. ACLU, NAMBLA, SFC (Sex Freedom Coalition) are their advocates.

    1. From Merriam-Webster’s:

      Brag – to talk or assert boastfully; arrogant talk or manner; boast, crow, plume, swagger

      Lifted from a newspaper:

      One Catholic leader saying: “…do not to lose heart…God “will finish the war for us!”

        1. Trosp, johndoenymous@gmail.com,

          It’s in the 18 December 2012 Philippine Daily Inquirer. The speaker is Bishop Camilo Gregorio of Batanes. The complete quote reads

          “God has a good plan for us. He tolerated (the Church) losing the battle to purify all of us. It is saddening but God will finish the war for us. We did our best.”

          The article is entitled “Batanes bishop tells anti-RH Catholics: God will finish the war for us!”

        2. If you read the entire statement of the good bishop it doesn’t sound condescending, much less arrogant-sounding. It’s the headline that makes it such.

        3. aris,

          Quite frankly it sounds more like “sour grapes” if you take all the statements of all the priests and bishops in the article. Poor losers who can’t accept the loss, trying desperately to convince people that they’re on the winning side.

        4. Its been in the papers I think a couple of days ago. I dont want to name names I am sorry. But he is a bishop.

          Another bishop said yesterday: “…candidates who favor open-pit mining should not be elected into office because they are anti-life…”

          There is no connection between one mining method and one being anti-life so I call that “arrogant talk” which to my humble comprehension qualifies as bragging.

          Cheers.

        5. @Miner

          “…do not to lose heart…God “will finish the war for us!”

          “…candidates who favor open-pit mining should not be elected into office because they are anti-life…”

          Those opinions by your criteria are bragging and arrogant talk, heh…

          I’m convinced that if you don’t like an opinion, instead of refuting them, you take the easiest way to discredit them by ad hominem.

          And you are a blog poster, heh…

        6. About this arrogance, Ilda has handled it very well in her post at antipinoy – http://antipinoy.com/noynoy-says-the-dardnest-things-part-2-of-does-noy-have-a-separation-anxiety-disorder/

          Snippet –

          Penoy has made this assertion:

          “Marami na ho akong sina-sacrifice. Baka yung humihingi sa akin na mag sacrifice e wala pa naisa-sacrifice baka gusto nilang sumali sa sacrifice [I have made a lot of sacrifices. Maybe those who are asking me to sacrifice, have not sacrificed anything. Maybe they want to join me]”

          And Ilda’s rejoinder for that one:

          “I don’t know what the heck he was smoking when he said the above but he was definitely not being humble then and there. What sacrifice was he talking about? Did he mean that he actually sacrificed something because he ran for the presidency? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought it was all an act of his love for the country. For heavens sake, he is not even willing to make the sacrifice of leaving his comfort zone and dedicate his time to remaining in Malacanang where he can do more work. He is not even willing to sacrifice his smoking addiction for the benefit of his health and for the benefit of the public. Again, what sacrifice is he talking about? And those who agree with him that his smoking habit is not a big deal are just kidding themselves. Even the Department of Health has weighed in on the matter by saying that “it may be difficult to secure the incoming president if he is outdoors, puffing cigarettes away“.

          The point where to agree or disagree why Penoy is arrogant is explicitly put up by Ilda.

        1. “One Catholic leader saying: “…do not to lose heart…God “will finish the war for us!”

          The Miner, according to your reference-

          “Brag – to talk or assert boastfully; arrogant talk or manner; boast, crow, plume, swagger”

          So, is that bragging by your citeria?

          How about the Catholic’s morality that you are qualifying as “moral stench”?

          And J.Saint, as for for your “Quite frankly it sounds more like “sour grapes” if you take ALL the statements of ALL the priests and bishops in the article. Poor losers who can’t accept the loss, trying DESPERATELY to convince people that they’re on the winning side..”

          Can you point to me as to where sour graping have been the statements of all those Churrch leaders. How the’re poor losers to you, by your criteria of course.

          Let’s unpack their statements.

  4. the philippines doesn’t need the church.
    it needs decency and integrity, and new role models, not propagandists who run a religion like a cash business.

      1. The Philippine Catholic Church might as well be autocephalic from the Vatican itself.

        I have never seen a branch of the Catholic Church so rabid and so immersed in politics like the one here.

        1. MidwayHeaven,

          You aren’t the only one shocked by the behavior of the Catholic leadership. It exposes the ugly side of the church; the part that enjoyed the unrestricted temporal power that goes back to the days of the Spanish colonization. They seem to think they can still poison the minds of the Catholic faithful and exercise control over politics, government and business. Must have caused a traumatic shock among the priesthood who were convinced they could sway the congress without much effort.

        2. What the Church has been imploring was for the politicians not to make a political issue out of moral one. IMO, there is nothing wrong with it since is already a God teaching time immemorial.

          The bill was passed and the Cuirch is not exempted in mandatory compliance to a law that is against the to what God is teaching.

        3. What the Church has been imploring was for the politicians not to make a political issue out of moral one. IMO, there is nothing wrong with it since is already a God teaching time immemorial.

          The bill was passed and the Church is not exempted in mandatory compliance to a law that is against to what God is teaching.

          Cost and benefit morality in living color.

        4. Trosp,

          The issue of Reproductive Health is a political one. Once it was introduced as a bill and put up for debate, it became part of the process to formulate (make) government policy. That is the very definition of a “political issue.”

          The Catholic Church CHOSE TO INVOLVE ITSELF in the political process by attempting to control the outcome of the vote on the RH Bill. They did not simply present the Vatican’s point of view at the hearings. They did not limit themselves to giving advice or counseling the Catholic faithful. They cajoled, they held mass rallies, they threatened lawmakers (including the President) and engaged in a campaign of intimidation against anyone who expressed support for the bill. They took the uncompromising position that lawmakers should vote against the RH bill…OR ELSE.

          On top of that the church resorted to lying about the content of the bill in their zeal to convince lawmakers. At the height of the debates, Bishops made idiotic, overemotional pronouncements about divine retribution in the form of Typhoon Bopha to frighten people in an attempt to turn them against the bill.

          The church did not argue the issue on the basis of morality. They used political dirty tricks to achieve their ends. That is the shocking behavior I refer to. The Catholic Church has more than enough learned intellectuals to argue the church’s position. Yet they chose to make the debate ugly and inflammatory. Hardly the kind of moral stance the Catholic Church is known for.

        5. I love how you brand it as the Philippine Catholic Church.
          I have to say that I find the Bishops more extreme than those from other states, including the Vatican.

        6. J. Saint

          I would suggest to have our exchange of opinion this way, let’s finish the previous one and then proceed to a new one. The previous one was –

          “And J.Saint, as for your “Quite frankly it sounds more like “sour grapes” if you take ALL the statements of ALL the priests and bishops in the article. Poor losers who can’t accept the loss, trying DESPERATELY to convince people that they’re on the winning side..”

          Can you point to me as to where sour graping have been the statements of all those Church leaders. How they’re poor losers to you, by your criteria of course.

          Let’s unpack their statements.”

          If you say you pass, then we’ll go to your new comment.

  5. I agree with the idea of the article and really it has been an issue for ages. And it would be an issue even after we’re done on this earth.

    It would take several lifetimes for people to realize the folly of submitting to a belief system that requires nothing as proof of existence.

    Just look at how one self-confessed Catholic here keep on demanding from the author of this article proof of statements he made about the issue. Pathetic.

      1. Why will the author prove anything to you? Why will a self-confessed Catholic like you demand proof on someone just sharing ideas and thinking on relevant issues. Unlike you, he was expressing an opinion on something he understood and comprehend. If you do not agree with him you can express your contrary opinion and challenge him, if you are capable which I doubt, to disprove your position. Asking for proof from someone with the intent to use such proof to attack its source is just rude and pathetic.

        To remain a good Catholic, I suggest, you stop doing that.

        1. IDIOT, THIS IS YOUR PREVIOUS COMMENT –

          “Just look at how one self-confessed Catholic here keep on demanding from the author of this article proof of statements he made about the issue. Pathetic.”

          I’m not demanding anything from him. I’m refuting him, idiot,

        1. What I hate is when opinion is being masqueraded as facts.

          Everyone is entitled to opinion and for me, no one is entitled to invent facts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.