Van Vugt: A Non-partisan Church Is A Silent Church

THE official stand of the clergy regarding politics is non-partisan. That means they don’t endorse any particular candidate. But that means also that they won’t advise against any particular candidate. They stay out of politics and leave it to the lay to be involved in politics.

This policy is, in my opinion, inconsistent with their being called to be prophetic witnesses, to announce the good and denounce the evil.

"The Manny Pacquiao Blog". Click here for stories and updates on the Filipino boxing champ.

This policy is tantamount to keeping silent, and silence means consent.

During the Second World War when Hitler systematically exterminated millions of Jews in the so-called Holocaust, most of the bishops in the Catholic church including the Pope himself did not openly speak out against that horrible crime, a crime against humanity. In the absence of clear moral directions, some so-called “good” Catholics collaborated with the Nazis. The Church kept silent.

Afterwards, even Pope Pius XII has been accused of collaboration with the fascist regime of Hitler. Pius XII’s silence, albeit diplomatic, was unworthy from a pastor whose duty it was to guide and counsel, whatever the risks. His silence was, to say the least, unheroic.

When our country was terrorized by Marcos during the 14 years of Martial Law, most of the bishops of the Catholic church kept silent. The official policy of the Church was critical collaboration. The word collaboration itself has a bad connotation. It indicates somehow cooperating with the enemy, a betrayal.

Now that the country is being ruled by a president who is widely believed to be the most corrupt president in Philippine history, the Church again has kept silent most of the time. It failed to openly denounce GMA’s wrongdoings and the lies and corruption of her allies in government. The real issue has all the time been corruption, and so will be the real issue in the coming elections corruption. How can we get rid of a corrupt government system and corrupt government institutions?

Therefore, my question is: Why can the Church not openly endorse candidates who are perceived by most people to be principled leaders, people of honesty and integrity, candidates who can bring back the country to normalcy and restore a true democracy? Why can the Church not openly advice against certain candidates who clearly are corrupt? I do admire those two Bishops, Vicente Navarro and Ramon Arguelles for openly endorsing presidential candidate JC de los Reyes. I believe this is not only because De los Reyes is against the RH Bill but he is also believed to be in all his youthfulness an honest and incorruptible candidate, and so would be Nicky Perlas, but most of all, Noynoy Aquino.

I believe both de los Reyes and Perlas have no chance of winning in the coming elections, but nevertheless they deserve to get the support of the Church, because they have stood up for their principles and had the courage to file their candidacy despite all the odds against them.

Above all, Noynoy deserves to get the full support of the Church, lest the Bishops will only have themselves to blame when he loses and the country will fall back again into the same old system of corruption.

(For your comments email: arnvv@yahoo.com or call: 0926-3123366)