How Can Catholic Rightists Call Themselves Pro-Life?

Guest Article

By Andrew Lim

UNHOLY ALLIANCE

Recent developments point to a forming alliance between the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) and far right Filipino politicians who reject the RH bill.

Jose Descallar, staff of Michael Velarde ( Buhay party list representative) said this after the re-election of US President Barack Obama:

• “If we will not hold our ground and make a lot of noise about our protests against anti-life measures specifically the RH bill, Malacanang will push for passage in the next Congress... ”

• “The task at hand, therefore, is to make sure that pro-lifers get elected.”

• “And junk Akbayan,Gabriela, Kabataan, ACT-Teachers, Bayan Muna and other such party-list groups. “

• “[There is also a] need to make pro-life issues an election/political issue, and to emphasize the Christian responsibility to evangelize politics. One way of doing this is by supporting and voting for pro-life candidates. ”

On November 16-17, the CBCP will hold in Cebu a “Philippines for Life” Congress 2012 featuring among others, the following speakers: Kit Tatad, Lito Atienza, Jackie Enrile, Mitos Magsaysay and impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona.

Among the conference topics will be “The State of Philippine Politics Today, “ “Population and Good Governance: Real Keys to Progress”, “RH and MDG: How to Mangle the Filipino Soul” and “The Role of Vigilance in Preserving Faith and Freedom”.

THE INCONSISTENCY OF IT ALL

What is ironic is that the political histories of these invited personalities are striking examples of what is bad about Philippine politics and are incredibly inconsistent with Christian/Catholic doctrines.

By hijacking the term “pro-life” they have framed the debate such that they appear to be pro-life all the way – from conception to birth to adult life. Really?

Mangling the Filipino Soul? Martial law, with all its unspeakeable horrors did that. And both Tatad and Enrile took active roles in it, as spokesperson and administratoir, respectively. Good Governance? Ask Renato Corona about midnight appointments and undeclared mllions. Or ask Lito Atienza about his support for Gloria Arroyo. State of philippine politics? Ask Jackie Enrile how being a son translates into an inherited Senate seat. Or ask his bullying victims in the past. And lastly, what do you make of Cagayan Representative Rufus Rodriguez who has been stonewalling the passage of the RH bill as a “pro-lifer”, but supports the death penalty for foreign drug traffickers?

In my personal view, you cannot call yourself pro-life if you supported martial law and the oppression it created.

You cannot call yourself pro-life if you supported corrupt regimes and electoral cheating.

You cannot call yourself pro-life if you justify midnight appointments and underdeclare substantial assets.

You cannot call yourselves pro-life if you support plagiarism, and indirectly teach our youth that it is okay to cheat and copy as long as you can get away with it.

You cannot call yourself pro-life if you support the subjugation of indigenous cultures, employ violent methods in imposing your religion, take control of another country's resources in the name of “spreading Catholicism.” Which is exactly what happened in the Chamorro Islands during Pedro Calungsod's time. And yet the CBCP honors his “sainthood”.

Respect for life does not end at birth, as Thomas Friedman, op-ed columist at the New York Times writes. To quote him: “ Respect for life has to include respect for how it is lived, enhanced and protected- not only at the moment of conception but afterward, in the course of that life. “

MORAL HAZARD?

In effect, is the CBCP creating a moral hazard by forging alliances with these right wing Catholics?

(A moral hazard is a situation where some can take huge risks without fear of the consequences since somebody else will cover for them. It encourages an escalation of reckless risk taking.)

Are right-wing politicians now shielded from the consequences of their recklessness and abuse by the CBCP, since it tacitly endorses them by enlisting their support for their anti-RH cause?

Do these politicians' “pro-life” stand wash away their transgressions in the political sphere?

Won't this encourage more of their reprehensible behavior in the future?

Viewing the world through the narrow monochromatic lens of its anti-RH stand like the defeated Republicans in the US, the local Church hierarchy are just pushing themselves even more to the sidelines and irrelevancy. Politics, governance and democracy are much larger than religion- the refusal to analyze the issues and insistence on dogma results in the boxing in of these ultra conservatives.

They are placing themselves in difficult situations like what Romney faced- having to associate with extremists who reject abortion in rape cases because "some girls rape easy" or "God wanted it to happen" and because “some rapes are legitimate. “

Which makes me think: what are these so-called “pro-lifer's“ stand on pregnancies due to rape?

To paraphrase Friedman, just call yourselves “pro-conception to birth, to hell with life after that conservative”, not pro-life. Because as I demonstrated above by pointing out the politics they have practiced , they do not really care about life after birth – the quality of life or the integrity and justice required in the course of life.

SOURCES:

1. “Re-election of pro-abortion US President impetus for PH pro-lifers to intensify advocacy”, CBCP for Life website. Nov 7, 2012.

2. “Pro-life leaders to speak at National “Phils for Life” Congress 2012 in Cebu”, CBCP for Life website. Nov 10, 2012.

3. “An Alternative View of Pedro Calungsod” (In the Context of the Spanish Chamorro Wars 1671-1698) Society of Honor by Joe America, blog post by Andrew Lim. Oct 26, 2012.

4. “Why I Am Pro-Life” by Thomas Friedman, New York Times Sunday Review. Oct 27, 2012

5. “Solon bares small wrinkle on prolife stand” Inquirer Online News Nov 7, 2012.

An Alternative View of Pedro Calungsod

Guest Article

By Andrew Lim

AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW OF PEDRO CALUNGSOD

In the context of the Spanish-Chamorro Wars 1671-1698

Applying what a Filipino historian wrote, it could be a case of veneration without understanding.

Pedro Calungsod

Let me get this out of the way first: this is not an attack on the canonized Pedro Calungsod. The reverence for him by many Filipinos is well-placed and well-intentioned. Dying for one's beliefs is a noble act, and there are lessons to be derived from it.

But history is indeed written by the victors, and this is no exception. What is sorely lacking is the viewpoint of the vanquished- the Chamorro natives.

The widely accepted context is that the indigenous peoples of the islands formerly known as the Ladrones were “barbarians”, “uncultured” and needed to be “saved” by converting them to Spanish Catholicism, which parallels the Philippine experience. This begs the questions of who defines what, and who needs to be saved from what.

SPANISH ATROCITIES

There is plenty of historical evidence on the brutality of Spanish authorities in the Marianas – if it had happened today, the perpetrators would have been brought to the International Court of Justice in the Hague! Large scale clashes include Hurao's attack on the Agana forts (1671-1672), Aguarin (1676-77) and the Apurguan uprising (1684).

Robert Haddock on A History of Health on Guam: “. . . as the Spanish eventually quelled the Chamorro rebellion, “peace” was established at the price of the extinction of a race.”

Francis X. Hezel, SJ writes: “ What began as a religious mission to proclaim the gospel of peace soon degenerated into an out-and out war of military conquest which, as the histories have it, killed off vast numbers of native Chamorros before the missionaries were finally able to make believers out of the few survivors.” (From Conversion to Conquest: the Early Spanish Mission in the Marianas, Journal of Pacific History, pp 115-137, 1982.)

SPREAD OF DISEASE

An Infographic (Rappler, 10/21/2012) on the life of Calungsod states that “... Calungsod's group is blamed for babies who got ill allegedly due to baptism.” This was not unfounded. Although baptismal water is unlikely the means of transmission, there is evidence that there was an introduction of new diseases – measles and smallpox, previously non-existent in the islands, and inadvertently brought in by the Spaniards themselves. The Chamorros had no natural immunity to these, and medical care by physicians was largely unavailable. Then there are also cases of infertility due to venereal diseases which was brought by Spanish soldiers. (Destiny's Landfall, by Robert Rogers. p71.)

Based on the first census of the Marianas, the population in 1710 was a mere 3,539 – a big drop from an estimated 20,000 to 30,000 due to the combined effects of oppression and disease.

WHAT THE NATIVES FELT

Hurao was a Chamorro chief who organized resistance to the Spaniards in the islands in the 1600s.

Read his speech to his fellowmen, it eerily sounds like the letters written by our own heroes:

The Spaniards would have done better to remain in their own country. We have no need of their help to live happily. Satisfied with what our islands furnish us, we desire nothing. The knowledge which they have given us has only increased our needs and stimulated our desires. They find it evil that we do not dress. If that were necessary, nature would have provided us with clothes. They treat us as gross people and regard us as barbarians. But do we have to believe them? Under the excuse of instructing us, they are corrupting us. They take away from us the primitive simplicity in which we live.

They dare to take away our liberty, which should be dearer to us than life itself. They try to persuade us that we will be happier, and some of us had been blinded into believing their words. But can we have such sentiments if we reflect that we have been covered with misery and illness ever since those foreigners have come to disturb our peace?

Chamorro Agriculture by Js. Arago

Before they arrived on the island, we did not know insects. Did we know rats, flies, mosquitoes, and all the other little animals which constantly torment us? These are the beautiful presents they have made us. And what have their floating machines brought us? Formerly, we do not have rheumatism and inflammations. If we had sickness, we had remedies for them. But they have brought us their diseases and do not teach us the remedies. Is it necessary that our desires make us want iron and other trifles which only render us unhappy?

The Spaniards reproach us because of our poverty, ignorance and lack of industry. But if we are poor, as they tell us, then what do they search for? If they didn’t have need of us, they would not expose themselves to so many perils and make such efforts to establish themselves in our midst. For what purpose do they teach us except to make us adopt their customs, to subject us to their laws, and to remove the precious liberty left to us by our ancestors? In a word, they try to make us unhappy in the hope of an ephemeral happiness which can be enjoyed only after death.

They treat our history as fable and fiction. Haven’t we the same right concerning that which they teach us as incontestable truths? They exploit our simplicity and good faith. All their skill is directed towards tricking us; all their knowledge tends only to make us unhappy. If we are ignorant and blind, as they would have us believe, it is because we have learned their evil plans too late and have allowed them to settle here.

Let us not lose courage in the presence of our misfortunes. They are only a handful. We can easily defeat them. Even though we don’t have their deadly weapons which spread destruction all over, we can overcome them by our large numbers. We are stronger than we think! We can quickly free ourselves from these foreigners! We must regain our former freedom!

As told to French Jesuit Father Charles Le Gobien, secretary to the French Jesuit missions in 1700. ( Histories des Isles Marianes Paris 1700.)

Thankfully, in current times, the respect for indigenous cultures is now part of CBCP teaching.

Viewed from this perspective, Pedro Calungsod, by being a loyal ally/assistant of the imperialist Spanish forces led by Diego de Luis de San Vitores , was a small player in the subjugation of an indigenous people that had its own thriving society and culture. Rina Jimenez-David, the Inquirer writer cites his small role in her opinion column, “Saintly saling pusa” (saintly accidental participant).

In reality, it was an imperialist war; it was a war to gain access to more resources and to establish a forward staging base for the Spaniards in the ongoing battle with Portugal and England for world supremacy at the time.

So next time you feel like praying for intercession from Blessed Calungsod, say a prayer, too for the Chamorros who suffered and died defending what was really their own – their land and their culture - from an invading force.

It should make you ask: Is the destruction of an indigenous culture worth the price of missionary work, of which Calungsod was part of?

Sources:

1. A History of Guam, Lawrence Cunningham and Janice Beaty. Bess Press 2001. Guam Department of Education.
2. The Chamorro Spanish War 1671-1698. The Guam Website. (http:// NS.Gov.Gu)
3. Diego Luis de San Vitores Wikipedia entry.
4. Hurao's speech. Guampedia.com.
5. Saintly “saling pusa” by Rina Jimenez-David, Inquirer column October 20, 2012.
6. Northern Mariana Islands. Spanish colonial rule, .p2. Britannica.com
7. Timeline: Pedro Calungsod, Inquirer October 21, 2012.
8. Destiny's Landfall, Robert Rogers. University of Hawaii Press. 1995.
9. What history says about Pedro Calungsod by Paterno Esmaquel II Rappler article October 21, 2012.
10. Infographic: Life of Pedro Calungsod, Visayan teenage saint, Rappler article, October 21, 2012.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and do not necessarily represent the views of The Society of Honor, Joe America, other contributors or those who comment on this blog.