Pulpit politicized
Zona Libre/Bong Z.Lacson
“THE PULPIT should be reserved for the exposition of the Word of God and the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom, and should not be utilized by any person to defend himself nor malign others directly or indirectly on a particular issue.”
The access to the pulpit given by a number of priests to Gov. Eddie T. Panlilio to advance his political ends has merited a complaint-letter to Archbishop Paciano B. Aniceto
Those who signed the letter (in order of appearance now): Rosve Henson, Kambilan president; Joseller Guiao, Pampanga vice governor; Cris Garbo, board memder; Jerry Pelayo, Candaba Mayor; Raul Macalino, Councilors’ League of Pampanga president; Joel Simpauco, Association of Barangay Captains of Pampanga president; Lolo Go, former Balas supervisor; Armando Canda, Conscience; Andres David, Rotary Club of Southern Pampanga president; Emil Miranda, Ibaca Foundation; John Eric Tumang, SKF president.
The complainants cited a video of Panlilio addressing the parishioners of San Matias parish “explaining his side” of the recall issue “in the guise of expounding on his call for good governance and responsible citizenship.”
If this went on – Rosve, Yeng, et al said – it might “create divisiveness, discord and even heated arguments inside the holy ground.”
Now, what if “some articulate and vociferous parishioners challenged the governor’s pronouncements”?
Yeah, what if? Would the pro-Panlilio parish priest then tell them to shut up under threat of excommunication?
“By using the Church as forum to advance his political agenda,” Panlilio’s ready access to the pulpit is “lopsided favor” he enjoys “over the other parties, particularly the proponents of the recall movement.”
Fair is fair – the letter writers, invoking his “unquestionable sense of fairness and uprightness,” asked the good Apu Ceto: “If your Eminence (sic) deemed it reasonable that such political activity may be allowed by the Mother Church as in the case of Gov. Panlilio, may we also REQUEST, without being disrespectful and presumptuous, that the same privilege and equal opportunity be provided the opposite side as well to air their version of the issue.” With the reminder there that “most signatories of the recall are flocks of the Catholic Church.”
Now, what if Apu Ceto accede to this request? And what if he did not? I dare not speculate.
We have quoted it here and we quote it again: “…yet politics and the pulpit are terms that have little agreement. No sound ought to be heard in the Church but the healing voice of Christian charity. The cause of civil liberty and civil government gains as little as that of religion by this confusion of duties. Those who quit their proper character, to assume what does not belong to them, are, for the greater part, ignorant both of the character they leave, and of the character they assume. Wholly unacquainted with the world in which they are fond of meddling, and inexperienced in all its affairs, on which they pronounce with so much confidence, they have nothing of politics but the passions they excite.” That was Edmund Burke in his Reflections on the Revolution in France written in 1790.
Isn’t that Panlilio precisely that Burke wrote about?
For political exigency, Panlilio has found expediency in the Church and the priesthood. The very institution he disobeyed, the very sacrament he is now suspended from.
Even as Panlilio invoked the spirit of ecumenism in getting rid of the Marian image at the Office of the Governor – an act that did not sit well with the saradong Catolico (devout Catholics), he now seeks not only solace but a platform for his political agenda in the Holy Mass itself.
Now, there is a captive audience there – within the confines of the holy sacrifice – that Panlilio has found most expedient. Given the utter lack of audience in his talks outside the Mass, even on church grounds.
A case in point was his Sindalan sojourn some Sundays ago. With his motorcade of passenger-challenged 12 vehicles, Panlilio arrived at the Sindalan chapel yard where he was slated to speak after the Mass. Despite the appeals of the priest, the churchgoers promptly went on their various ways – to the mall or home – after the final blessing. Leaving Panlilio to talk to members of his own party of 12 non-passengered vehicles. And they say that Sindalan is staunchly pro-Panlilio!
So, it had to be the Mass that Panlilio must access. No matter the sacrilege he brings with his political agenda there.
Religion, ‘tis been clichéd, is the last recourse of scoundrels. Counter-clichéd I dared ‘tis politics. Whichever, Panlilio finds himself entangled there.
“THE PULPIT should be reserved for the exposition of the Word of God and the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom, and should not be utilized by any person to defend himself nor malign others directly or indirectly on a particular issue.”
The access to the pulpit given by a number of priests to Gov. Eddie T. Panlilio to advance his political ends has merited a complaint-letter to Archbishop Paciano B. Aniceto
Those who signed the letter (in order of appearance now): Rosve Henson, Kambilan president; Joseller Guiao, Pampanga vice governor; Cris Garbo, board memder; Jerry Pelayo, Candaba Mayor; Raul Macalino, Councilors’ League of Pampanga president; Joel Simpauco, Association of Barangay Captains of Pampanga president; Lolo Go, former Balas supervisor; Armando Canda, Conscience; Andres David, Rotary Club of Southern Pampanga president; Emil Miranda, Ibaca Foundation; John Eric Tumang, SKF president.
The complainants cited a video of Panlilio addressing the parishioners of San Matias parish “explaining his side” of the recall issue “in the guise of expounding on his call for good governance and responsible citizenship.”
If this went on – Rosve, Yeng, et al said – it might “create divisiveness, discord and even heated arguments inside the holy ground.”
Now, what if “some articulate and vociferous parishioners challenged the governor’s pronouncements”?
Yeah, what if? Would the pro-Panlilio parish priest then tell them to shut up under threat of excommunication?
“By using the Church as forum to advance his political agenda,” Panlilio’s ready access to the pulpit is “lopsided favor” he enjoys “over the other parties, particularly the proponents of the recall movement.”
Fair is fair – the letter writers, invoking his “unquestionable sense of fairness and uprightness,” asked the good Apu Ceto: “If your Eminence (sic) deemed it reasonable that such political activity may be allowed by the Mother Church as in the case of Gov. Panlilio, may we also REQUEST, without being disrespectful and presumptuous, that the same privilege and equal opportunity be provided the opposite side as well to air their version of the issue.” With the reminder there that “most signatories of the recall are flocks of the Catholic Church.”
Now, what if Apu Ceto accede to this request? And what if he did not? I dare not speculate.
We have quoted it here and we quote it again: “…yet politics and the pulpit are terms that have little agreement. No sound ought to be heard in the Church but the healing voice of Christian charity. The cause of civil liberty and civil government gains as little as that of religion by this confusion of duties. Those who quit their proper character, to assume what does not belong to them, are, for the greater part, ignorant both of the character they leave, and of the character they assume. Wholly unacquainted with the world in which they are fond of meddling, and inexperienced in all its affairs, on which they pronounce with so much confidence, they have nothing of politics but the passions they excite.” That was Edmund Burke in his Reflections on the Revolution in France written in 1790.
Isn’t that Panlilio precisely that Burke wrote about?
For political exigency, Panlilio has found expediency in the Church and the priesthood. The very institution he disobeyed, the very sacrament he is now suspended from.
Even as Panlilio invoked the spirit of ecumenism in getting rid of the Marian image at the Office of the Governor – an act that did not sit well with the saradong Catolico (devout Catholics), he now seeks not only solace but a platform for his political agenda in the Holy Mass itself.
Now, there is a captive audience there – within the confines of the holy sacrifice – that Panlilio has found most expedient. Given the utter lack of audience in his talks outside the Mass, even on church grounds.
A case in point was his Sindalan sojourn some Sundays ago. With his motorcade of passenger-challenged 12 vehicles, Panlilio arrived at the Sindalan chapel yard where he was slated to speak after the Mass. Despite the appeals of the priest, the churchgoers promptly went on their various ways – to the mall or home – after the final blessing. Leaving Panlilio to talk to members of his own party of 12 non-passengered vehicles. And they say that Sindalan is staunchly pro-Panlilio!
So, it had to be the Mass that Panlilio must access. No matter the sacrilege he brings with his political agenda there.
Religion, ‘tis been clichéd, is the last recourse of scoundrels. Counter-clichéd I dared ‘tis politics. Whichever, Panlilio finds himself entangled there.
posted by A.Caesar Z. Lacson at 10:59 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home