Two very interesting, related events took place in the Philippines roughly a week before the arrival of Pope Francis in the country.
First, the Court of Appeals upheld the conviction of controversial tour guide and political activist Carlos Celdran for having supposedly violated Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code which penalizes “anyone who, in a place devoted to religious worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony, shall perform acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.” Earlier, Celdran was convicted by the Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC) in Manila, and his conviction was affirmed by the city’s Regional Trial Court (RTC). He was sentenced to imprisonment ranging from two to thirteen months.
Celdran’s case began in September 2010 when he allegedly interrupted a meeting of representatives of different religious denominations held at the Manila Cathedral. Dressed in a Rizal-era gentleman’s attire, Celdran displayed a placard bearing the word “Damaso” for all to see. “Damaso” refers to Padre Damaso, the villainous friar in Jose Rizal’s novel Noli Me Tangere.
As Celdran was led out of the cathedral, he verbally denounced the bishops for their interference in politics, particularly in the proposed reproductive health law then pending in Congress.
Thereafter, Monsignor Nestor Cerbo, rector of the Manila Cathedral, filed a complaint against Celdran with the office of the city prosecutor of Manila. After the preliminary investigation of the complaint was resolved in favor of Cerbo, the corresponding criminal case in the name of “the People of the Philippines” was filed against Celdran before the Manila MTC.
The second event—Manila Archibishop Luis Antonio Cardinal Tagle announced to the public that the Roman Catholic Church had actually forgiven Celdran. He “clarified” that the criminal case against Celdran him was filed not by the Church but by “the People of the Philippines.”
Cardinal Tagle must have been so desperate to polish the image of the Church as a kind, forgiving entity that he tried to pull a fast one on the Filipino people and, possibly, members of the Vatican delegation who were already in the country ahead of the Pope. Tagle was not straightforward when he made his “clarification” because he conveniently failed to mention that Monsignor Cerbo lodged the complaint which triggered the criminal case against Celdran in the first place.
Although a criminal case is prosecuted in the name of “the People of the Philippines” as complainant, there is a private complainant involved, i.e., the person who filed the original complaint with the public prosecutor. If the private complainant does not pursue the case at the preliminary investigation, the case is usually dismissed and never makes it to court. It is only in cases involving very serious offenses like murder, etc. where the criminal case is eventually filed in court by the public prosecutor regardless of whether or not the private complainant pursues it. Criminal cases filed in the MTC are not considered very serious offenses, compared to those directly filed with the RTC.
In other words, Cardinal Tagle wants the people to think that the Church is not interested in pursuing the criminal case against Celdran, and that Celdran is a free man, when the truth of the matter is otherwise. Tagle engaged in doubletalk, a kind of speech often associated with politicians.
The Lord’s Prayer teaches the faithful to “forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us.” Clergymen repeatedly preach that people should be more forgiving towards others. Doesn’t that apply as well to the leadership of the Church? Tagle did not discuss this matter.
Cardinal Tagle has been tagged as one who may someday succeed Pope Francis, a compliment he seems to relish a lot. However, that scenario may be a pipe dream for Tagle as long as he is engaged in doubletalk. Someone should tell the cardinal that Pope Francis does not tolerate doubletalk, as seen in the Holy Father’s candid public admissions that there are serious problems confronting the Roman Catholic Church today, e.g., pedophile priests, corruption, etc.
Padre Damaso has been in the consciousness of millions of Filipinos, due mainly to Republic Act No. 1425, the 1956 law which requires public and private schools, including those operated by Catholic religious orders, to include Rizal’s novels in their curricula. So far, Catholic high schools seem to comply with the law, as seen in the Rizal textbooks their students are required to read.
Numerous films and plays have been made about Noli Me Tangere, with Padre Damaso as the principal villain, thus contributing to the friar’s infamy. Critics once branded Jaime Cardinal Sin as Padre Damaso for his perceived intrusion into the field of politics. Nobody among the Catholic faithful in the Philippines considered any of these acts as “notoriously offensive” enough to their feelings as to warrant the filing of a criminal case.
Here comes Celdran displaying a placard with the word “Damaso” on it during a meeting, not a mass, at the Manila Cathedral. Then he verbally denounces the bishops for their meddling in political affairs. If the Catholic faithful were able to tolerate the films, plays, and remarks relating to Padre Damaso mentioned above, the Catholic faithful ought to be able to tolerate what happened at the Manila Cathedral.
An expert in Constitutional Law has opined that the Celdran case is not even about any disrespect Celdran may have committed, but about the freedom of speech. He has a good point.
Anyway, to sustain a conviction under Article 133, it is imperative that the act complained of is “notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.” Otherwise, the accused must be acquitted. From all indications, the Celdran case will eventually reach the Supreme Court.