IN AN interview with DZRH, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) Spokesperson said: “Kapag merong isang abusive spouse [at] hindi mo naman ‘yun ginamot – ‘yung kanyang pang-aabuso – hinayaan mo lang silang maghiwalay, kapag nakakuha ulit ‘yan ng mapapangasawa abusive pa rin ‘yan.”
That was his reaction to House Bill No. 9349, known as the absolute divorce bill, which was passed last May 22 in the House of Representatives. His solution was to give more teeth to Republic Act No. 9262 or the Anti-Violence Against Women and Children (VAWC) Act and for officials not to disengage on the excuse that a domestic squabble is involved.
Seeking better law enforcement is laudable. However, it’s not a reason to oppose divorce. The Anti-VAWC law stresses that there is a power struggle between the abuser and the victim. Precisely, it prohibits mediation of VAWC cases. In the meantime, while reliefs under the law are being processed, why should a female victim be forced to wait and remain in the relationship? And, no, she should not be portrayed as perpetuating a cycle of violence because she wishes to be freed of it. If the argument is that divorce won’t solve abusive marriages, perhaps church weddings, the sacrament of marriage, should not be extended to the abusive Catholic man from the very beginning.
Meanwhile, the pastoral letter of Lingayen Archbishop Socrates Villegas threatened condemnation — “Catholics who apply for and obtain divorce and re-marry are in a seriously, morally wrongful state!” It threatened isolation — “for the true Christian, divorce cannot be an option.”
In the case of Iglesia ni Cristo, their website has a video (date not available) similarly saying, “Just as idolaters and murderers will not be saved, so will those who divorce their spouse and marry another, will not be saved as well.”
All these statements are no different from the words of a female senator who remarked, “alam naman ng lahat I have a very happy family life, so I’m not in favor of divorce.” One tells everyone they will go to hell; the other says to hell with everyone.
Insisting on religious teachings, however, does not have to exclude and offend. Take Bishop Pablo Virgilio David (Ambo) for example. He is the CBCP President. When he spoke about divorce, I could not help but listen.
Direct and brief, Bishop Ambo began his May 24 homily at the San Roque Cathedral in Caloocan as follows. “The question that is posed to Jesus is plain and simple: ‘Is divorce in accordance with the Law of Moses?’ YES OR NO? And Jesus answers, not with a plain YES or NO. His answer is a YES, BUT… which twists it into a NO.”
Then, Bishop Ambo connected the divine by appealing to the human, that is, what makes us weak and strong (and therefore full of potential), and showing humility through his attempt to reflect, for our sake: “That makes me understand now why Jesus’ answer is a YES, BUT. YES, our promises are human and fragile and can be dissolved by law when broken. BUT NO, we don’t make that into an excuse for giving up on our humanity. No doubt, we are weak, fragile and sinful, and often unable to keep our promises, but we are also capable of forgiveness, of healing, and mending our broken relationships, of renewing our commitments, of rising above our conditionalities because we believe in the grace of loving unconditionally as we have been loved by God in Jesus Christ.”
Although I am for divorce – as a lawyer, I have handled cases of nullity and legal separation; and like other lawyers, I have seen the inequities of our rules and processes – I appreciated Bishop Ambo, how he strived to talk to the faithful, treating us as equals.
Tensions are high whenever religion is involved. Having worked in the 15th Congress, I witnessed this. There was a divorce bill as well as a reproductive health (RH) bill, and the latter was even more controversial. During those years, the Catholic Church threatened pro-RH legislators with excommunication, and it campaigned against them in the elections through its Team Patay versus Team Buhay tarpaulins.
It’s no wonder conversations about divorce can get tricky. It’s difficult for a Filipino to consider it, much less express support for it. One can be pro-divorce and still be filled with guilt, that sense of failing God, and a constant dread of the consequences of voting for it. If church and government leaders want to resonate with the public, especially with those who are in abusive relationships, they should be careful in posturing with superiority and branding divorce as anti-family. We need more of them to show us their true wisdom and empathy./PN
