By CBCP News
February 6, 2021
Manila, Philippines

Bishop Broderick Pabillo of Manila told priests to leave their comfort zone and reach out to the margins of society or else risk becoming just under “maintenance mode”.

As the archdiocese opened its celebration of the 500th anniversary of the arrival of Christianity in the Philippines, he told parishes to continue on their “missionary mode” especially to the “peripheries”.

“Being in a state of mission is not optional,” Pabillo said in his homily during Mass at the Manila Cathedral on Saturday.

“It is the necessary condition if we want to be renewed as a living church, and not just be a museum that is visited once in a while but could not change lives,” he said.

The celebration also marked the 442nd anniversary of the elevation of Manila as a diocese, the first in the Philippines, having under its jurisdiction the entire country.

In 1595, Manila was raised to an archdiocese with Nueva Segovia in Ilocandia, Nueva Caceres in Bicol and Cebu in the Visayas as its suffragan dioceses.

But even with deep historical roots, Pabillo warned of “the danger of becoming monument”.

“We may have these, but let us not, as church, be just antiques, museums and artifacts whose main concern is preservation and conservation,” he said.

Reflecting on the Jubilee year’s theme, “Missio ad Gentes,’ he asked the parishes to continue this “expanding mission of Manila to which we are all heirs to”.

Continue reading

Activities and Special Projects

DATE	ACTIVITY	LOCATION / VENUE
4 April 2021 (Easter Sunday)	National Quincentennial Celebration of the First Easter Mass (Simultaneous Opening of the Jubilee Year of the  500 YOC in all Parishes)	Cathedrals and Parishes
14 April 2021, 10:00am	Reenactment of the First Baptism	In front of the Magellan’s Cross Cebu City
14 April 2021, 4:00pm	Mass and Renewal of Baptismal Promises and Baptism of 7 Children	Basilica del Sto. Niño, Cebu City
14 April 2021, 7:30pm	Cultural Show	Basilica del Sto. Niño, Cebu City
18-22 April 2022	Second National Mission Congress, Mission Sending  and Closing of the Jubilee Year	Cebu City

N.B.  In case mass gatherings will not yet be allowed due to the pandemic caused by Covid-19, all the activities above will be live streamed and posted in different Social Media accounts.

Online Activities Connected with 500 YOC and Year of Missio Ad Gentes
DATE	ACTIVITY	LOCATION
28 November 2020, 3:00pm	Launching of the Year of Missio ad Gentes	Live streamed and posted on the CBCP Episcopal Commission on Mission Facebook page (ECM FB)
Every Sunday 11:00am-12:00nn (Started First Sunday of Oct. 2020)	Catechesis on Mission	Radio Veritas
Every 2nd  Saturday of the Month 3:00 pm- 4:30 pm (First episode aired on Oct. 10, 2020)	Talks on Mission and Personal Testimonies of  Filipinos Doing Mission Abroad	CBCP ECM FB
Every 1st and 3rd Saturday of the Month.  3:00pm starting March 2021	Virtual Pilgrimage	Live streamed and posted on the CBCP ECM FB page and TV Maria
23 Jan, 27 Feb, 27 Mar 2021; 3:00-4:30 pm	Webinars on Mission for Youth	CBCP ECM FB
10 April 2021	Pista ng Pananampalataya at Misyon	CBCP ECM FB
May – July 2021 (Weekly)	Lecture Series on Philippine Church History  ( CHAP)	To live streamed or recorded and  posted online
22 May, 26 June 2021; 3:00-4:30 pm	Webinars on Mission for Ecclesial Movements	CBCP ECM FB
24 July 2021; 3:00-4:30 pm	Webinar on Mission for Clergy	CBCP ECM FB
28 Aug, 25 Sept 2021; 3:00-4:30 pm	Webinars on Mission for CLE Teachers, Campus Ministers and Catechists	CBCP ECM FB
September  2021	Webinar/Online Short course on Historical Research/writing to help those who wish to write local Church history (parish, diocese, congregation, association, etc.) [CHAP]	8-10 Topics to be posted online weekly
23 October 2021; 3:00-4:30 pm	Webinar on Mission for Pastoral Workers, Parish and BEC Leaders	CBCP ECM FB
27 November 2021; 3:00-4:30 pm	Webinar on Mission for Women Religious	CBCP ECM FB

Continue reading

“As each one has received a gift, use it to serve one another as good stewards of God’s varied graces.” (1 Pet.4:10)

Dear People of God,

We mark this year the 500th year of the coming to our shores of the Christian Faith.  Our commemoration of the event is an acknowledgment of this immense gift to our people and our land.  We did not only receive the Faith, but also allowed it to take root and grow in our Filipino culture throughout these years.  With this gift of Faith, we have become God’s people, partakers of “divine mysteries” (1 Cor 4:1).  We are grateful to God for this immeasurable gift.

We are not, however, the ultimate owners of this special gift.   We are ‘stewards’ -‘katiwala’ (tinugyanan, katalek) of God’s gifts. ‘Is there anything that we did not receive as gift?’ (Cf. 1 Cor. 4:7).  Each gift we receive is meant to be shared to one another.  And so, ‘we are gifted to give’; we must share the Faith.

Every gift is a responsibility. We recognize every gift, nurture it, generously share it with others, and gratefully return it with increase to the Lord. This is the meaning of the Spirituality of Stewardship.

After five centuries of striving to live the Christian Faith more fully, we heighten consciousness of our identity as stewards.  We are stewards of life, talent, time and material resources. These gifts are given to us for service, that we may become channels of God’s Providence to one another. The Holy Scriptures remind us: “as each one has received a gift, use it to serve one another as good stewards of God’s varied grace”        (1 Peter 4:10).   We are certainly blessed not only when we receive, but especially when we give.

God calls us to serve one another more generously, especially our poor brothers and sisters. The Lord Jesus made his own the prophecy of Isaiah, “the Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring glad tidings to the poor” (Lk. 4:18). We, then, take the banner of preferential love for the poor.  On this, Pope Francis tells us: “Our preferential option for the poor must mainly translate into a privileged and preferential religious care” (Evangelii Gaudium #200).

In this spirit, we re-affirm the mandate given us by the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines (PCP II) in 1991, namely: “tithing,  after a good pastoral catechesis, shall be introduced with the end in view of the gradual abolition of the Arancel System” (PCP II Decree #118).

The ‘arancel’, which is the fixed amount asked for services given in our churches, can be a hindrance for the poor to receive God’s grace and blessings. Let us do our best, then, to remove obstacles to genuine service, especially to the poor.  For in the end, ‘each of us will give an account of ourselves to God’ (Romans 14:12).  And we heed the Lord Jesus’ instruction to his disciples as he sent them on mission:  “Without cost you have received; without cost you are to give” (Mt. 10:8).

Therefore, we, as Church in the Philippines, once more commit ourselves to the gradual abolition of the arancel system. This is a concrete step in renewing ourselves in the practice of stewardship, praying that others may see us truly “as good stewards of God’s varied graces” (1 Pet. 4:10).

We commit ourselves to education, formation and catechesis in the Spirituality of Stewardship for our clergy, religious and laity in our dioceses, parishes, communities and families, in view of adopting a concrete stewardship program in our dioceses to replace the arancel system as soon as possible.  In view of this, we will also put up a service arm that will concretely assist the dioceses that are having a difficulty in implementing this program. We envision local churches, parishes and BECs (Basic Ecclesial Communities) sustained by a generous sharing of resources, where those who have none are not left out of spiritual and material care, where stewardship is a way of life.  This is a true image of the Church.

Brothers and sisters, we are all part of this endeavor for we all belong to the Church, the one family of God.  We all share responsibility for the Church.  Thus, we encourage all the baptized to regularly, wholeheartedly and generously contribute to the Church so that we can fulfill our common mission of spreading the Good News, of serving humanity and caring for the whole of creation.  For ‘the earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world and all who live in it’ (Psalm 24:1).

Let us not be afraid to give freely and cheerfully, even in times of crisis and difficulty like the Covid-19 pandemic that we are presently experiencing. Let us sustain the spirit of generosity that has spontaneously overflowed during this pandemic and has kept our communities in operation. We will look back with amazement and gratitude at these times, wondering how we got by even at the height of the lockdowns that we thought would seriously challenge the sustainability of our parishes. 

St. Paul reminds us:   “God is able to make every grace abundant for you, so that in all things, always having all you need, you may have an abundance for every good work” (2 Cor. 9:8).  May we not waver in our trust in God, for He never fails to provide for our needs.  In all things, let God be our priority.  Did not the Lord Jesus himself assure us: “seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given you besides?” (Mt. 6:33).

For the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines:

+ ROMULO G. VALLES, D.D.
Archbishop of Davao
CBCP President
28 January 2021

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

The question of the use of vaccines, in general, is often at the center of controversy in the forum of public opinion. In recent months, this Congregation has received several requests for guidance regarding the use of vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19, which, in the course of research and production, employed cell lines drawn from tissue obtained from two abortions that occurred in the last century. At the same time, diverse and sometimes conflicting pronouncements in the mass media by bishops, Catholic associations, and experts have raised questions about the morality of the use of these vaccines.

There is already an important pronouncement of the Pontifical Academy for Life on this issue, entitled “Moral reflections on vaccines prepared from cells derived from aborted human fetuses” (5 June 2005). Further, this Congregation expressed itself on the matter with the Instruction Dignitas Personae (September 8, 2008, cf. nn. 34 and 35). In 2017, the Pontifical Academy for Life returned to the topic with a Note. These documents already offer some general directive criteria.

Since the first vaccines against Covid-19 are already available for distribution and administration in various countries, this Congregation desires to offer some indications for clarification of this matter. We do not intend to judge the safety and efficacy of these vaccines, although ethically relevant and necessary, as this evaluation is the responsibility of biomedical researchers and drug agencies. Here, our objective is only to consider the moral aspects of the use of the vaccines against Covid-19 that have been developed from cell lines derived from tissues obtained from two fetuses that were not spontaneously aborted.

1. As the Instruction Dignitas Personae states, in cases where cells from aborted fetuses are employed to create cell lines for use in scientific research, “there exist differing degrees of responsibility”[1] of cooperation in evil. For example,“in organizations where cell lines of illicit origin are being utilized, the responsibility of those who make the decision to use them is not the same as that of those who have no voice in such a decision”.[2]

2. In this sense, when ethically irreproachable Covid-19 vaccines are not available (e.g. in countries where vaccines without ethical problems are not made available to physicians and patients, or where their distribution is more difficult due to special storage and transport conditions, or when various types of vaccines are distributed in the same country but health authorities do not allow citizens to choose the vaccine with which to be inoculated) it is morally acceptable to receive Covid-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process.

3. The fundamental reason for considering the use of these vaccines morally licit is that the kind of cooperation in evil (passive material cooperation) in the procured abortion from which these cell lines originate is, on the part of those making use of the resulting vaccines, remote. The moral duty to avoid such passive material cooperation is not obligatory if there is a grave danger, such as the otherwise uncontainable spread of a serious pathological agent[3]–in this case, the pandemic spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19. It must therefore be considered that, in such a case, all vaccinations recognized as clinically safe and effective can be used in good conscience with the certain knowledge that the use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with the abortion from which the cells used in production of the vaccines derive. It should be emphasized, however, that the morally licit use of these types of vaccines, in the particular conditions that make it so, does not in itself constitute a legitimation, even indirect, of the practice of abortion, and necessarily assumes the opposition to this practice by those who make use of these vaccines.

4. In fact, the licit use of such vaccines does not and should not in any way imply that there is a moral endorsement of the use of cell lines proceeding from aborted fetuses.[4] Both pharmaceutical companies and governmental health agencies are therefore encouraged to produce, approve, distribute and offer ethically acceptable vaccines that do not create problems of conscience for either health care providers or the people to be vaccinated.

5. At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary. In any case, from the ethical point of view, the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one’s own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good. In the absence of other means to stop or even prevent the epidemic, the common good may recommend vaccination, especially to protect the weakest and most exposed. Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines produced with cell lines from aborted fetuses, must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent. In particular, they must avoid any risk to the health of those who cannot be vaccinated for medical or other reasons, and who are the most vulnerable.

6. Finally, there is also a moral imperative for the pharmaceutical industry, governments and international organizations to ensure that vaccines, which are effective and safe from a medical point of view, as well as ethically acceptable, are also accessible to the poorest countries in a manner that is not costly for them. The lack of access to vaccines, otherwise, would become another sign of discrimination and injustice that condemns poor countries to continue living in health, economic and social poverty.[5]

Continue reading

2 February 2021

When they have a dispute, they come to me and I decide between one person and another, and I make known to them the statutes and instructions of God. (Exodus 18:16)

As oral arguments on the Anti-Terrorism Law of 2020 begin in the Supreme Court, we pray that sound judgment founded on our nation’s values and Constitutional protections of democracy, civil liberties, and the respect for human life and rights will guide the court.  We firmly believe that the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is a repressive law fashioned around an ambiguous definition of “terrorism.” Not only will the Anti-Terrorism Council be emboldened with broad powers that impinge on those reserved for other branches and offices of government, but implementation of this law will be ripe for militarism and abuses of human rights.  With concern for democracy and the protection of human life, we pray that the Supreme Court will be able to discern the dangers and pitfalls of this legislation.  We urge them to uphold democracy and civil liberties, by striking down the repressive and ambiguous law.

The perverse and rampant pursuit of red-tagging witch-hunts in recent months demonstrate clearly the pernicious character of unchecked labelling of persons.  Coupled with a severe weakening of protections of civil liberties under the Anti-Terrorism Law of 2020, democratic space, freedom of speech and association, and other human rights will be under threat. Even more, the very lives and liberty of those who express dissent or stand to assert the rights of the people will be placed in peril. Those in power have already demonstrated their desire for overreach and broad discretion in going after so-called “enemies of the state” or “terrorism.” Their folly in attacking church people, artists, members of the academe, development workers, and even former government officials lays bare great danger in undermining the checks-and-balances and due process under the law.  The Supreme Court is especially placed to judge these dangers and assure that civil liberties are safeguarded and democratic rights upheld.

As Church leaders, we will continue to speak out for the welfare of the people.  The valiant and competent lawyers serving as our counsels will unmask and set straight the grave dangers of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 in today’s oral arguments.

As Church leaders, we vehemently oppose the law on the following grounds:

1.  An overly broad and amorphous usage of the term terrorism, which will surely be utilized by state forces for attacks on dissent and curtailment of human rights and civil liberties.

2.  A weakening of the judicial system and the constitutionally enshrined function to check-and-balance the actions of other branches of government, including state forces under the administrative branch.

3.  Allowances for surveillance, wire-tapping, and invasion of privacy without any evidence of any alleged suspect’s wrongdoing.4.  Arrests and holding of persons without warrants or charges, duly and speedily processed through the courts.

5.  A removal of financial penalties to be awarded to persons detained under false pretense, thus increasing the likelihood of gross impunity to be committed by state forces.

Continue reading