"A pure and simple faith is as distinct from fanaticism as the flame from smoke or music from discords: only the fools confuse them." (Noli me Tangere, Joze Rizal: 1887, 1912 translation by Charles Derbyshire)

While it is true that the Catholic Church in the Philippines has always been at loggerheads with proponents of population control, and in recent history, clashed anew with women's rights advocates who emphasized rights, choice and the quality of life in family planning, the local debate now seems to have taken a turn to the basis of Catholic teaching itself.

In response to the anti-reproductive health rally announced by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines on July 25, 2008, commemorating the 40th anniversary of the Humane Vitae, women's rights advocates and NGOs led by the Reproductive Health Advocacy Network (RHAN) held their own march a day earlier. While holding a mock burial march, RHAN sounded off the alarm on the soaring rate of maternal mortality in the country, an issue seemingly ignored by the Church in its insistence and emphasis on a "procreation" imperative in marital sex. Ten Filipino women die in childbirth every day. Over 473,000 pregnancies are terminated annually despite the long-standing penal prohibition on abortion.

The Reproductive Health Bill currently pending before the 14th Congress is the third version of the measure opposed by the Catholic hierarchy since the 12th Congress. While the bill continues to be stalled in Congress, however, the clamor for reproductive health care has led to the adoption of locally sponsored provincial and City ordinances introducing reproductive health services. The first RH ordinance was passed in 2006 in the province of Aurora and more recently, Lanao Del Sur province and several cities including Quezon City, Angeles and Antipolo have followed suit.

The Catholic hierarchy's most recent tirade against supporters of RH was a call to deny the sacrament of Holy Communion to Catholic law makers. After the statement was issued, one sponsor, Rep. Mark Llandro Mendoza, backed out of sponsorship. The lead sponsor of the RH Ordinance in Quezon City, Philip Juico, received similar threats from a priest in Cubao, Quezon City. Juico, who is a Catholic, was planning to get married in the City but has now arranged to be married elsewhere. He also told the media that flyers were distributed labelling him as "Satan's agent" (In Filipino: "Kampon ni Satanas") Father Aris Sison of the Cubao diocese in Quezon City, who allegedly made the threats, denied having made them and instead blamed "overzealous" people who acted in their own capacity in calling the Councilor "Satan's agent." He insisted, however, that "Catholic teaching from the Vatican was not subject to discussion."

Similarly, former Senator Kit Tatad, who is a known Catholic conservative, challenged the lead author of the RH Bill, Rep. Janette Garin, in a public forum, even went as far as to claim that moral law proscribes legislation in this area (apparently referring to contraceptive practice, choice and availability). Senator Franklin Drilon on the other hand criticized the CBCP for resorting to threats saying that while the Church is perfectly free to express its opinion on contraception, it cannot force others to agree with them.

Meanwhile, more Catholics have began challenging the hierarchy's refusal to discuss the issue more openly, if not, more honestly. Columnist John Nery clarified that the encyclical in the context of church teaching, is anything but dogma:

It is also possible to argue from "theory," that the theology behind "Humanae Vitae" is not above discussion. Indeed, the encyclical's language is lucid, and the Pope's sympathy for the plight of married couples transparent.

Citing Prof. Daniel Maguire, feminist columnist Rina Jimenez-David pointed out how "Catholic teaching on contraceptives and abortion has been anything but consistent over the years." Michael Tan drew attention to the historical events surrounding the issuance of the Humanae Viate and pointed put how Pope Paul VI's encyclical contradicted majority opinion within Vatican II, initiated by Pope John XXIII.  His Pontifical Commission on Population, Family and Birth which issued a report open to the use of contraceptives by married couples:

In the end, the commission issued a majority report, supported by 30 of the 35 lay members, 15 of the 19 theologians and nine of the 12 bishops. The commission observed that "the regulation of conception appears necessary for many couples who wish to achieve a responsible, open and reasonable parenthood in today's circumstances.

Prof. Raul Pangalanan meanwhile reminded the Catholic hierarchy about the "separation of church and state," criticizing its heavy-handed attack on the sponsors of the bill, pointing out that the draft law addresses the health needs and choices of both Catholic and Non-Catholics. He also calls the allegation by the Catholic hierarchy that the bill legalizes abortion an outright lie.

Acknowledging the diversity of Catholic opinion on the matter in its editorial, the Inquirer chided Archbishop Jesus Dosado of Ozamiz for conflating contraceptives with abortion. Earlier, a Filipino Catholic priest doing missionary work in Hong Kong aired his own disagreement with the Catholic hierarchy, saying that the disproportionate emphasis on contraceptives was working against the interests of the Filipino people, specifically the poor. He accused the CBCP of practising "selective morality," in the face of more urgent problems in the country such as extra-judicial killings, poverty and the plight of those who lost loved ones in the MV Sulpicio lines tragedy.

Aptly so, Manuel L. Quezon III's column comes as a reminder that resistance to the church's authority (and abuse) is no less than integral to the formation of national identity:

"Our founding fathers, from different walks of life, were united by their opposition to "frailocracy," which was why, as our first president was sworn into office, the altar at Malolos town was hidden behind a curtain."

That the Catholic hierarchy in the Philippines is now being challenged to be more transparent about the basis of its positions in Catholic teaching, theology and Church history, lends an ironic twist to the entire issue. In seeming inability to even articulate the theory and theology behind its own encyclicals, it has chosen to invoke them as rigid law which it wishes to impose on the secular Philippine state and as a consequence, on every Filipino.

Related Post

• Carolina Austria, The Catholic Church's Abortion Trump Card