Bishops versus Queen

November 13, 2008

By Antonio C. Abaya

Those were harsh words that five Roman Catholic bishops spoke against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, as quoted in the Oct. 29 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

“Twenty million hungry Filipinos will disagree with the proclaimed ‘ramdam ang kaunlaran‘ (progress is felt’) – which is the administration’s favorite mantra – with their own experience. ‘Ramdam ang kahirapan, ramdam ang gutom.’ (Poverty is felt, hunger is felt’),” Jaro Archbishop Angel Lagdameo said yesterday.

“The benefits of the much proclaimed economic growth are not felt by the masses,” the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) president said in a statement which he issued jointly with three other bishops and the vocal administration critic, Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Oscar Cruz.

Asked by reporters later if he thought President Macapagal-Arroyo was corrupt, Lagdameo unhesitatingly said “yes.”

Asked if the President deserved to be removed from power, he said “the answer should come from the people who see what’s happening in our country.”

Lagdameo said in a press conference that the statement, which called for “immediate reforms,” was the product of communal discernment” with Cruz, Masbate Bishop Joel Baylon, Banga-Bataan Bishop Socrates Villegas and Legazpi Bishop Emeritus Jose Sorra.

“In the past few years up to today, we have watched how corruption has become endemic, massive, systemic and rampant in our politics. Corruption is a social and moral cancer,” said Lagdameo, who clarified that he was making the statement as the archbishop of Jaro and not as the CBCP president.

“In response to the global economic crisis and the pitiful state of our country, the time to rebuild our country economically, socially, politically is now,” Lagdameo said.

“The time to start radical reforms is now. The time for moral regeneration is now. The time to conquer complacency, cynicism and apathy and to prove that we have matured from our political disappointments, is now. The time to prepare for a new government is now,” he said.

Villegas stressed that they were not calling for another mass revolt.

“We are making this statement because we believe that if we had been less corrupt we would be better prepared to face the impending global crisis. The problem of the Philippines is not population, the problem is corruption, Villegas said.

End of quotes from the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

Many concerned Filipinos would agree and sympathize with the bishops’ sentiments. But, realistically speaking, how do the bishops propose to convert those sentiments into political action and reality?

How do we start radical reforms now? How do we encourage moral regeneration now? How do we conquer complacency, cynicism and apathy now? How do we prepare for a new government now?

To achieve these goals, there must be a political movement, and there must be a fearless and charismatic individual to personify that movement and articulate its goals, someone to publicly carry the torch for that movement. Most people, especially Filipinos, will not rally around an abstract idea, no matter how noble and compelling it may be.

And – pray, tell – what are these “immediate and radical reforms” that the bishops want to push? Judging by Bishop Villegas’ last line, it could include equating the use of condoms with abortion.

Barack Obama‘s ‘Change We Need’ and ‘Yes We Can’ would not have won the commitment of tens of millions of Americans if there was no Barack Obama to personify and eloquently articulate it.

Do the bishops have someone in mind, our own Barack Obama? If they do, I doubt if they will publicly name him or her. And they shouldn’t, as they should not involve themselves in partisan politics.

About three years ago, Archbishop Lagdameo expressed the need for a “new breed of leaders,” which I supported in one of my columns. But my Thursday group met with him and seven other bishops to find out how this “new breed of leaders’ could come to prominence, seeing that Philippine media tend to publicize only trapos, coup plotters and communists. Our impression was that the bishops had no practical method on how to bring about this transformation. Or, if they had one, they did not want to tell us.

Ten months ago, at the height of the ZTE broadband scandal, a previously unknown individual, Jun Lozada – who was/is neither a trapo nor a coup plotter nor a communist – shot up to prominence because of the weight of his testimony before the Senate committees investigating the scam, and his apparent readiness to risk his life in doing so.

Lozada became the man of the hour as no Filipino has ever become since the beloved Ninoy was assassinated in 1983. Because he spoke mostly in Filipino – eloquently and with deadpan humor, at that – Lozada connected with all levels of society. Even our maids and drivers followed the senate hearings and the TV interviews every day.

In his many forays into schools and universities, he was welcomed and embraced by the young people like a rock star. No public figure has excited the young people of this country as Lozada did, since Miriam Defensor-Santiago ran for president in 1992 (and topped all public opinion surveys and straw votes in and out of schools at that time.)

But Lozada was eventually gagged by no less than the bishops, who banned Catholic schools from further inviting him to their campuses, even as Malacanang’s paid hacks in media stumbled over each other bad-mouthing him, both for the benefit of the embattled Black Queen.

I am not sure if Archbishop Lagdameo and the other White Bishops-critics of President Arroyo participated in the gagging of Lozada, but they certainly did nothing to protest or prevent it.

In chess, as in our cannibalistic politics, it is almost impossible for just two (or even more) White Bishops to checkmate the Black King, without the help of White Knights and White Rooks. Lozada could have been one of the White Knights and the Catholic schools and the NGO community could have been the White Rooks. Even without a White Queen, the White Bishops can checkmate the Black King, but not if the White Knights are gagged and the White Rooks are purged of sentiments inimical to the Black Queen…

On the other hand, the Black Queen is very powerful. She has her own Black Bishops who are rewarded generously for their loyalty. Her Black Knights – the AFP and the PNP – are coiled to strike at a moment’s notice. Her Black Rooks – the Lower House and (soon) the Supreme Court – are impregnable, while upfront, her eight willing pawns – Ronnie Puno, Eduardo Ermita, Hermenigildo Esperon, Raul Gonzalez, Bert Gonzales, Prospero Nograles, Joey Salceda and Nene Pimentel – are eager to change the rules of the game so that the Black Queen can reign forever.

Check?!!!? More like bundles of cash in paper bags. *****

SWAP WITH THAILAND. During a round table discussion of current events yesterday with some faculty members and students at the Lyceum of the Philippines, a student asked how to resolve the impasse regarding the request of former Thailand prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra for political asylum in the Philippines.

I suggested a swap: We will grant political asylum to Thaksin, as long as, and at the same time that, Thailand agrees to grant political asylum to President Arroyo. Fair? *****

Reactions to tonyabaya@gmail.com. Other articles in www.tapatt.org and in acabaya.blogspot.com. .

Written by admin · Filed Under Antonio Abaya, Columnists