The CBCP is registered as a religious organization.
It is a misconception to think that any organization that participates in religious activities is automatically classified as a religious organization. A religious organization is actually a type of non-stock corporation. A religious group must apply for religious organization status with the SEC and BIR.
To register as a religious organization, an organization must participate exclusively in activities with the following nature:
- religious
- charitable
- educational
This condition must be met to qualify as a religious organization and receive tax-exempt status from the BIR.
Participating in partisan politics is a political activity — not a religious, charitable, or educational activity. If a religious organization participates in a political activity, it no longer meets the condition above, and is disqualified from being registered as a religious organization.
It also loses its conditionally-given tax-exempt status.
By actively campaigning against pro-RH candidates, the CBCP is participating in partisan politics, which is a political activity. This disqualifies them from their previous classification as a religious organization. This also disqualifies them from receiving tax-exempt status.
Therefore, the SEC should revoke CBCP’s status as a religious organization, and the BIR should remove the CBCP’s tax-exempt status.
If the CBCP ceases to be a religious organization and loses its tax-exempt status, it may campaign against pro-RH candidates all it wants. It may even run as a party-list candidate.
But they should not be allowed to participate in political activities and receive tax benefits at the same time.
Yet they have been doing so for a very long time, and they will continue to do so until somebody stops them. Ideally, our politicians should, but they are too busy and too scared. Meanwhile, the CBCP continues its political meddling while enjoying tax-exempt status.
When elections are over and our politicians finally have time — not to mention guts, for they can finally stop worrying about the Catholic vote — it will be too late. The CBCP will already have done its damage.
The CBCP may not be able to influence the voters, but they can certainly influence the politicians.
Traditional media helps, but it is not enough, because they, too, are afraid of the CBCP. Some are willing to take a stand, but they are in the minority. Yet with the power of new media, there is something you can do:
- Learn more about how the CBCP is violating our constitution.
- Spread the message through your social networks.
- Speak out against the CBCP’s political meddling.
Let’s not allow the CBCP to violate our constitution and make cowards of our politicians any longer. Keep the church out of politics and politics out of the church!
Popularity: 1% [?]
I agree, the Church has been brazenly violating its status; it can be against the RH bill without politicking it they see at as a moral issue, then talk about as a moral issue and not as a political issue with bullying and machinations unbecoming of religious leaders.
exactly :)
Gibo has put to print for all to see that he is strongly in support of the Reproductive Health Bill. In the VERA files interview, he acknowledged that the CBCP is against the RH bill. Gibo says that the CBCP may not fully understand the RH bill but he repeated that his support for the RH bill will not waver despite the current CBCP opposition. The Roman Catholic Church is philosophically opposed to provisions in the Reproductive Health bill. It makes sense that the CBCP reminds its parishioners about its core beliefs and also to identify to its parishioners the candidates who support passage of RH bill.
I know that Villar is against the RH bill. I believe that Jamby is also against the RH bill but I may be wrong. I know that in September, people were saying that NoyNoy was pro-Reproductive Health. I think that NoyNoy is now against RH. Erap supports the RH bill. Perlas also is for passage of the Reproductive Health Bill. In addition there are Perlas documents which mentions Perlas support for abortion during the first few weeks of pregnancy.
Apparently, the odds are that the CBCP’s opposition to the Reproductive Health Bill will be ignored by Pilipinas legislature. The bill will be approved by Congress and will be presented to Pilipinas president who can veto or approve immediately or allow to pass into law.
NOYNOY is still PRO-RH Bill and that is what i like about him he never think about the opinion of the Bishop’s he cares more about the situation of the filipino people. The CBCP should stop meddling with political affair.
we are now in 21st centuries not in 15th centuries i don’t need another Father Damaso in this societies.
i still don’t know why, why are we still afraid of the BISHOPS??
try to read the bible for god sake, if we are equal to the eye’s of god why we need a bishop’s to ask for god’s forgiveness and graces?? if god is our father why we need bishop’s to seek for his presence??
PINOY wake up god is not a solution for everything, he is just merely a guide for yourself.
Correction on Gibo.
http://www.thepoc.net/commentaries/3767-why-gibo-teodoro-changed-his-mind-on-rh-bill.html
I will be the amateur Devil’s advocate here for the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines. hehehehe!
Surely the CBCP is a religious corporation. However being such, it has the right to expression of religious belief and practice (which your ten commandment style enumerating of constitutional rights conveniently left out)
The expression of religious belief cannot be constrained by law unless it is a grave threat to public safety. Surely some of the bishops’ belief may be considered political and their expression in the public sphere may constitute a political act. However how political this may sound or be, the bishops can always claim that they are exercising their right to worship and thus the State has no business or right in preventing them.
This is the same argument that the Iglesia ni Cristo uses on proposals to make their practice of commanding their members to vote for a particular candidate illegal.
And another thing, the CBCP is just saying and publishing its anti RH stance in the media and press. Surely this is part of its rights to free speech.
Also the CBCP or the INC are not registered as political parties. Unless one can prove that they are actively in the business of running the State (in mandating a religious test or appointing officials) then it you cannot say they violate the separation and establishment clauses in the constitution.
I attended only the UP College of Law as an science undergraduate participant in a “practical law” class. The law prof then told us something about church-state separation based on Justice Hugo Black’s
“The “establishment of religion” clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa.”
Which I think is adopted by our Supremes. In fact the Philippine Supreme Court tends to uphold religious freedom paramount in a few precedent setting cases like that involving the Jehovah’s Witnesses on saluting the flag and a exceptions on Philippine marriage laws.
Surely the Devil still has rights to practice religion, Ryan. As Thomas More famously said
“I give the Devil the benefit of law for my own safety’s sake!”
Oh I forgot, the CBCP spokes-priest on the RH bill may be considered by many as an idiot but as a true libertarian, I will defend his right to be one and to worship as one!
They do have the right to be idiots, but they don’t have the right to both campaign and receive tax-exempt benefits. I hope I made this clear. They CAN campaign, but not as a tax-exempt religious organization.
What is the Philippine courts’ legal definition of “.. to campaign?”
Doesn’t Philippine campaigning require dancing girls, or at minimum, free telephone calls?
If the Ateneo de Naga were to provide a description of the Church’s position on abortion as well as natural family planning versus condoms, is that campaigning? If the Ateneo de Naga does more to evaluate sections of the Repro-Health Bill versus Catholic core beliefs, is that campaigning? If the Ateneo de Naga were to continue to do more by listing down all the senatorial candidates along with what each candidate has said about the the Reproductive Health Bill, is that campaigning?
What items are “IN” and what items are “out-of-bounds”?
Thanks blackshama,
You are basically saying that they can say that their politicking is a religious practice, not a political one. It all boils down to this. As elmot said, they can discuss their moral take on political issues, but they cannot go beyond that and actually campaign against politicians, which however hard they try cannot be disguised as a religious practice. In the end, if you campaign for or against candidates, you are participating in politics, not religion. There is a loophole though. A bishop, for example, can say he is against a certain candidate If he clarifies that it is his own opinion and not representative of the Catholic church or CBCP. But as it is, they make no such clarification and make it seem as if the entire church is against RH (or any other issue) when survey after survey (the valid ones) make it clear that this is not the case.
Ryan. The CBCP makes that disclaimer when a bishop promotes a specific candidate. But it really boils down to the person in the pew!
As for lay church leaders like Mike Velarde, he isn’t part of the hierarchy but for all intents and purposes, heads a congregation. There is a gray area here. So too with the so called “brothers” “sisters” “apostles”, “sugo ng Diyos” etc.
Also, church institutions are tax exempt only with regards to their religious function. Once the church makes money let’s say from non-religious activity, they get taxed. But the church is quite savvy in this. Church run schools are operated as a business and as a franchise but are tax exempt since the church has the right to educate its flock.
I do know of a Protestant minister who took a secular teaching job for additional income (remember the guy isn’t celibate and have a family) He complained to the school that he was being imposed an income tax and as a minister be exempt from it. But the school said that teaching wasn’t a religious function (at least if you teach chemistry).
While I won’t go as far as taxing the churches, I would go that we should register the churches and recognize or qualify who among them are clergy. Too many “religious groups” are in the business of fleecing the desperate (most of them poor) in the Philippines. And most of them have close links with politicians. But that is not surprising, politicians fleece all of us in the Sacrament of Elections!
Some religious groups often have dubious accountability to their members especially with regards to where the money went.
In my research I have not read about the CBCP making a disclaimer of any sort. Can you point me to some sources to add to my research?
Thanks for the info on when the church gets taxed. Someone should do a study on how their operation really works so we know whether this is indeed savvy or plain illegal.
About taxing the church — why not? They are clearly into politics anyway, and they are no longer doing work that can only be done by them. The logic behind tax-exempt status is the government cannot fulfill certain duties and subsidizes groups who can do it for them.
When the church spends time politicking they are using public money to do so, and are performing a function that the government is very capable of doing itself.
But yes, the more transparency we have, the better. Right now, schools, radio stations, publications, and other church facilities that are tax-free are being used for political purposes, and no one is held accountable.
@Ryan. Archbishop Ledesma when he was CBCP president said similar disclaimers in public in interviews with the press (especially about certain bishops favoring Erap during the plunder trials). But we don’t know if this is just his personal opinion or the opinion of the CBCP. But then again he is the president of that conference. Now I don’t believe that the CBCP has a formal written disclaimer.
“The CBCP makes that disclaimer when a bishop promotes a specific candidate.”
Do you mean you don’t have proof of this statement other than hearsay? Would really appreciate a source for this. Also, you made a general statement, as if the CBCP makes the disclaimer EVERY time they promote a specific candidate. I believe this is blatantly false, that if ever they do make a disclaimer, it is extremely rare.
This should be the case but I doubt any politician will tell the CBCP this.
it is hard to pinpoint who influences who. parang ang tanong diyan eh which came first, the chicken or the egg?
politicos ask church leaders to endorse/anoint them because church leaders gain from politicos.
church leaders campaign for or against politics because it is they and their flock who helped put them in power, anyway.
sino ang naunang nakisuyo kanino?
magulo, malalim ang isyu dahil panahon pa ni Rizal, ganito na tayo.
Sabi nga ng isang Kanong geographer “There really is no space for the secular” in the Philippines. Kahit nga sa UP. May crucifix sa biology building. May belen sa tapat ng Quezon Hall pag pasko. Nag bible studies ang mga born again sa Palma Hall lobby etc.
Yung secular space ginagawang religious space!
You are right. The politicians and priests help one another. I have said previously that we are a theocracy disguising as a democracy. But the burden, the responsibility of breaking the evil cycle lies with the politicians more than the priests. Priests are part of a theocracy after all. Politicians should respect our secular democracy, whichever religion they belong to.
Why would a politician insist on having crucifixes removed from public schools when constituents do not protest against the presence of the crucifixes?
Has there ever been a lawsuit filed against the Education Department or mayor-this or governor-that by a group of secularists or atheists or separation-church-state-group?
Without “putting-money-where-mouth-is” and contributing to a legal fund to push the envelope with separation-church-state, then por-nada, hindi ba?
And remember, foreign money is coming in (from Saudi Arabia, Syria as well as USA, Canada) the foreign NGO’s pushing their religious beliefs.
There is no doubt the church is reestablishing its dominion in this country. I hope we don’t see the repeat of the annual custom of the Archbishop of Manila to spread the Spanish flag on the pavement of his cathedral, to notify the Governor General and his suite to attend, and in their presence walk upon the symbol of Spanish civil authority. I also hope we don’t have to do what Aguinaldo’s men did to the first three friars captured in battle, who were strung with bamboo spits, smeared with oil, roasted and minced to pieces, that elicited this comment from an American visitor: “Not a nice, civilized or christian way for the Filipinos to do, but what deep-rooted hatred it displayed.”
This is the result. When religion and politics are mixed. You have
radicals, fundamentalists and extremists fostering religious agendas.
Ryan,
You are correct, of course, the Church should not engage in politics. However, the government should not also invite them in, as Ms. Arroyo does with every public speech, seeking God’s blessings or help or guidance. Of course, the beauty of relying upon a higher being for things is that one does not, oneself, ever have to own up to any problems or mistakes. Just place them at the foot of the Lord, that good and passionate and forgiving Soul – - that Sucker for human folly.
If I may babble a bit here, it seems to me a nation of laws prides itself on having an upstanding set of laws and the systems to communicate and enforce them. But there is evidently is little such pride in the Philippines. The pride is instead found in bending or sliding past the laws, or in slick ways of using them to get ahead, personally.
The whole debate about revising the constitution is therefore so much malarkey, as the one that is in place says a lot of good things. They are just roundly ignored or manipulated, as will be the new constitution.
I think the core weakness is the broken system of justice, not so much those whacko church meddlers. When the policing and judicial systems enforce the laws, the Church will stay out of the way. They are mainly just lunatics doing wild-eyed things detached from any rational thought. Alas, superstitious Filipinos really love that stuff . . .
Joe
Filing a lawsuit regarding this CBCP-interference separation-church/state will be beneficial. An outcome of such lawsuit will be the precise articulation of the CBCP practices that the separation-church-state folks demand to be curtailed (along with which Philippine laws were violated). The hard part, of course, is finding money to fund the lawyers to push the separation-church-state issues.
The separation-Church-state requires citizens willing to file lawsuits against local or the national government.
UP n,
I agree that litigation is a proper and correct approach. I would contribute to this cause if I knew how to do it, and would trust that the money would go where it belongs. It is just as worthwhile contributing “before the cause” to shape social engines that determine the well-being of society, as well as after the tragedies, to rectify the failings of same (e.g., relentless ferry sinkings or flood disasters).
Joe
and it is worthwhile to repeat these sentences :But there is evidently is little such pride in the Philippines….. The whole debate about revising the constitution is therefore so much malarkey, as the one that is in place says a lot of good things.
However, I find comfort that the majority Pinoys-in-Pinas did not get baited into opportunistic PeoplePower surge-the-gates. Majority up-and-down the quintiles have allowed 1987 constitution on term limits to be the reason why GMA will not be president come July2010.
UPn,
No need to get gung-ho nor paranoid now on people power, we will deal with the sins of Gloria Tiyanak once she loses the fake strap of immunity.
segué…just watch this last night at mgm:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0196632/
…the 1925 scopes trial. worth one’s while…
…watched
Some Filipinos (the faithful, they call themselves).. some Filipinos have no problem with what the CBCP does proselytizing about the Reproductive Health bill. Ryan Tani and other Filipinos disagree and want the CBCP to change their behavior. Since the CBCP will not change its behavior, then the State should impose its will on this non-profit organization. Closing all the churches will be a step, or maybe expelling all priests and bishops out of the Philippines. Saudi Arabia can do this — no Catholic or Lutheran proselytizing inside Saudi Arabia — their constitution allows it. Too bad though Pilipinas 1987 Constitution is written the way it is.
Then a solution is to put a wall between bishops/priests and mayors/governors/congressmen and others. You know, prevent the association between religious and the elected officials. But this is allowed by the Constitution so the 1987 Constitution need to be amended to get this done, right? If “needs to be amended”, then Ryan Tani and cohort should get the ball rolling towards the Constitutional amendment.
Come on, guys!!! Think of something. Surely you can write down a few suggestions and ideas! What exactly is the CBCP doing that is illegal?!!!!
The CBCP can say that GMA can go jump in the lake, what about that?! Congress should pass a law that says that the CBCP can not spread the gospel, is that okay, or is that too much? Congress should pass a law that says that “excommunicastion-blah-blah-blah” is NOT LEGAL in the Philippines, will that work, or is that the State overstepping the boundaries between church and state?
Ryan Tani, I believe, has thought about this issue longer so I look to him to find specific actionable items to suggest. I am sure Ryan Tani will say “unconstitutional” if white-shama were to say “The CBCP should not proselytize.” The only thing I can think of right now is this — “The CBCP can not teach any Filipino about Roman Catholic Church’s position on abortion.” Wait, did I say “teach”? Ryan Tani says “teach/education” is allowed, so that won’t work.
I got another — the CBCP can NOT provide any funds to any government initiatives. Oh, wait, that’s too heavy-handed, we want CBCP’s support of hospices and free clinics.
This one — the CBCP can not present paper-bags with money to mayors, governors, any elected official. That should be illegal under any circumstance (even charity-work since the presentation of money is violation the wall between church and state). It should also be illegal for any mayor, governor, elected official to present paper bags with money to bishops, nuns, priests (even if it is tuition-money for the schooling of the elected official’s children).
And you can decide if it is legal for the CBCP to do a paragraph-by-paragraph analysis of the Reproductive Health Bill from the point of view of Buddhist beliefs or Islamic beliefs or MartinLutherKing-protestant beliefs or Vatican Roman Catholic Church beliefs. The CBCP can not teach fiction or religious beliefs, only science.
to Ryan Tani: I presume that with another two hours careful thought, you can list down the specifc CBCP practices that you want stopped. Your challenge is to determine if it is possible, by force-of-law, to stop the CBCP practices that you disagree with without the State break the wall between Church and State.
Here is another one if you are running out of ideas. Tax-exemption privileges should be removed from ALL.
In the meanwhile, folks, inform your congressmen and any and all May2010 that their support of the Reproductive Health bill is needed. You may have a better chance making an elected official find some backbone.
No leader after Macoy has been able to repeal the repressive censorship law (P.D. 1986), which still exists to appease the church. Isn’t it also illegal that church members are active on the MTRCB? To add insult to injury, no one is questioning this.
I say we tax ‘em all, because I’m convinced they WON’T change their ways…and our politicos have NO backbone to oppose the church. It would be nice to see which lawyers would be willing to take a case against them.
Here’s my suggestion if the passage of the RH bill fails: Everytime we see the “collection” bag being passed around during mass, don’t donate a cent. Instead, take all the money inside…hahaha!
“Stop CBCP politicking now!”-Title of this article
can’t be done. this just an exercise in shadow boxing.
for now, it cant be done.
“Stop CBCP Politicking Now!”.
I want CBCP to step aside as many United Nations Millenium Development Goals initiatives on educating the 16-and-older about reproductive health, condoms and public health issues are put in place.
I do understand that it is Roman Catholic Church religious beliefs that is the basis for their opposition to abortion, condoms/IUDS.
Illegal if the CBCP hands out bribery money to candidates or mayors/congressman/others; illegal (to me) if the CBCP puts posters or hands out literature — “Elect NoyNoy” or “Elect Jamby”; illegal (to me) if candidates give bribes to priests and bishops so that the candidate receives endorsements.
Other CBCP actions like them expressing disapproval of the Reproductive Health bill because they believe that section-this or section-that will support abortion or condoms — that is Catholic religious beliefs. Ryan Tani and a whole lot other Filipinos can object to the Catholic religious beliefs about condoms or ReproHealth bill. To pass laws to stop CBCP, though, is for the state to mess up with church/state separation.
To stop CBCP is to give more censorship powers to Malacanang — dangerous!!!
Tama ba ang legal parlance mo Ryan sa tax exemption status ng CBCP? Hindi naman sila exempted sa VAT at Income Tax ah, sa Real lang, and I think you have a weak interpretation of “exclusivity” especially in light of Herrera vs. Q.C. Board of Assestment Appeals, 3 SCRA 186. :)
RH bill or NO RH bill may not matter. Majority are just too illiterate to understand the advantages and disadvantages. They may understand the basic theory but in practice, pinoys in majority lack the proper education , exposure and foundation BUT they are all manageable. they all can be manipulated due to ignorance of the law even your own representative in Congress can be very ignorant of the law. Good Governance is lacking among the many politcians of this country. Even if the RH bill will pass, there will be problems of implementation and distribution. Basic public management must be working properly first.
The cities may be a little advance in technology and process but the provinces are represented by backward regulators and implementators.
In order for any policy and new legislation to work, a centralized vision and mission of policy and procedures must come from the department heads, trained the sub level including the very bottom .. the barangay kapitan. Too bad the heads of many departments are also backward to manage our people. A good example is Comelec head , Dep-Ed head… and many executive heads of this country. Its frustrating to see a country full of hope becoming hopeless. Replace those stupid people in politics.
To move a country forward and faster, majority must be a college graduate. At least one in every household of 5 members must have a college degree.
yeah, bright idea. tell that to the family on wheels or those who sleep under the bridge.
they sleep under the bridge because they cannot afford to send one child to college or they are children of a poor family who cannot afford to pay rent. When a stomach is hungry, the brain lacks the blood supply and nourishment to think of what kind of life a person may live. A demented brain may think that sleeping under the bridge is like sleeping on a bed. This is a problem, a given problem. It’s not new. This problem is a result of poor governance. That’s exactly the purpose of a public servant-to provide employment and income to every filipino including affordable education and scholarhip to the poor. Overpopulation is also a result of poor governance and poverty. When people lacks the entertainment option, the basic thing they can do is to engage in sex. It’s free and better than anything else.. lol
Politician and the Church mixed. It is a WITCH BREW!
Thanks for the comments, guys. Instead of wasting any more time writing articles like this (and replying to comments) I’m going to start working on something more concrete. I’ve already done as much research on this as someone in my position (amateur) could, and I’ve already heard the counter-arguments from you guys, which has also helped my understanding (again, thanks a lot). But now I’m bringing this to the pros. The next time I post something here it will be news about the concrete steps we are taking to start the fight for secularism. Raising awareness is no longer enough. It’s time to take this to court.