Inside Philippine politics & beyond

Dear Bishops, please ban all elected officials from standing as wedding and baptismal sponsors of non-relatives

Share:
LinkedIn0
Pinterest0

Just my opinion

By Raïssa Robles

On its own, the Catholic Church can greatly help reduce corruption and political dynasties by banning all elected officials from standing as “ninong” or “ninang” in weddings and baptisms of those not related to them up to the second degree. The ban can be lifted the moment the politician leaves office.

I know it goes against the grain of Philippine culture. And I know I sound naive, maybe even un-Filipino. But let’s face it: this is one practice that has enabled politicians to extend their political influence way beyond their bloodline. It has allowed them to convert non-relatives and strangers into one vast, extended political network based on personality,  favors and largesse. The unspoken agreement is that the newlyweds will be obliged to the politician-sponsor never mind if he had been involved in an anomaly or he was non-performing. In return, the politician might give jobs, government contracts or other political favors to his “inaanak” (godchild) or the latter’s parents.

I am asking the bishops to do this because they have long advocated a change in the political culture of patronage and this will be an immense contribution to that change. I am also challenging them to walk their talk.

Because of this practice, Filipino politicians have always focused on building political networks based on personal ties, gratitude and favors (paid for perhaps using taxpayers’ money) rather than on political principles or public service Government procedures in hiring and bidding and licensing are bent to accommodate godchildren and their parents.

In the Catholic faith – at least according to the priests who give couples a spiritual talk before marriage – wedding sponsors are people expected to guide the newlyweds in their new life, including in the spiritual aspect.

But this is just mostly talk. The reality is that the “godfather” practice has long been perverted by politicians as a way to keep them in office indefinitely. I remember Joseph Estrada, when he was a mere senator, telling us Senate reporters that his days were filled with going to every “kasal, binyag, libing” all over the country. He credited his vast network of “inaanak“, which he started building up as a town mayor, to his election to the upper legislature.

When the crowd started gathering along the Edsa highway to pressure Estrada to give up the presidency in January 2001, then Cavite Governor Ramon “Bong” Revilla stepped onto the makeshift stage at Edsa and shouted, “Ninong, bumaba ka na.” (“Step down, Godfather.”)

The fact that Revilla called Estrada “Ninong” showed that the relationship had meant something to him.

The practice is rampant and socially acceptable, it seems. Some journalists even ask sitting high officials to be their wedding sponsors.

The Catholic Church and Philippine politics have long allowed the practice of ordinary people acquiring a powerful “Ninong” politician.

However, the same is also practiced by wealthy businessmen whenever they marry off their children or have them baptized in Church. It is in these situations where the practice can seriously pervert governance and lead to corruption, especially when these wealthy businessmen need government approval of franchises or contracts or licenses or state permits for their corporations. How many times has a high government official overruled a disapproval by a subordinate official in order to favor a godchild or a parent of his godchild?

That politicians expect something in return for becoming a “ninong“or “ninong” – and this relationship was not just for any spiritual or Christ-like purpose – was brought home to me by some remarks made publicly by Senator Juan Ponce Enrile. In his published memoir, Enrile indicated that he expects some form of gratitude from his godchildren, and they should help him in turn when he is in need.

On page 672 of his memoir, Enrile talked about how one of his godchildren failed him big time when he was arrested by the government over the 1989 coup attempt. He wrote:

“that coup attempt forced the government to act against me with even more vehemence. No less than then Secretary of Justice Franklin Drilon who came from ACCRA, the law firm which I set up years before and who was my wedding godson when he married his first wife, Violata Calvo, ordered me to be charged with the crime of ‘rebellion complexed with murder and other serious offenses’ – a crime that the Supreme Court had long ruled as non-existent in the landmark subversion case of People vs. Hernandez and People vs. Lava.”

Again in 2013, when Enrile delivered a privilege speech in the Senate lambasting fellow Senator Miriam Santiago, he also pointed to the fact that Senator Miriam was his godchild:

“But levity aside, what I know, Mr. President, is that after her graduation from the UP College of Law and her bar examination, I hired her in 1969 to work for me in the Department of Justice where I was then the Secretary of Justice. When she got married, she asked me and my wife to be her wedding sponsors.”

Dear Bishops, please ask around – how many godchildren does the average Filipino politician have? Or the top politicians have? And where do you think they get the money to buy the wedding and baptismal gifts? Do they charge it to their office representational expenses – in other words, to our taxes? How many political favors have they granted to their “inaanak” and their parents? How many political favors have they asked in return?

Do you think this “religious” relationship leads to better governance? Or perverts democracy?

Please remember that the most famous “godfather” in literature was that created by Mario Puzo in his novel – and while the fictitious character wasn’t an elected politician he operated exactly the same way Filipino politicians do – through personal favors that would be called in.

Banning elected officials from being “ninong” and “ninang” in weddings and baptisms of Filipinos not related to them by blood or marriage up to the second degree does not even need any congressional legislation or Comelec-administered referendum. All it needs is a directive from you all in the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines. Which is expected to meet at the start of every year.

There are sitting politicians who no doubt do not like the practice — and implications — of being made godfathers. But when strangers or prominent businessmen come to their office to request such a favor, how do they say “no” without angering them? So a ban will help politicians say “no” and not spend much needed money for gifts.

I don’t know about you, but I believe it will go a long way to leveling the political playing field and reducing that bond of gratitude that prevents many Filipinos from throwing out rogue politicians from office.

Comments

  1. A goddaughter’s expectation…

    “I’m hoping na tutulungan ako ni LP campaign manager Sen Drilon since ninong ko siya sa kasal.”

    Twitter, February 11, 2013

  2. A goddaughter’s consideration…

    “Sen Drilon is my ninong. I consider him my 2nd father. I hope he remembers inaanak niya ko sa wedding.”

    Twitter, February 11, 2013

  3. Learned from church insider.

    Many parishes now abuse the system handing envelopes to principal sponsors before the wedding mass and collecting alms during ceremony. Private Wedding mass was already prepaid, thus collection must not be done anymore. some church organizations request the collection from wedding as source for raising funds for their activities, social or church related.

    No wonder, in Newport, Pasay city church was erected first along with Resorts casino before hotels and condos were constructed. That big Shrine of Jesus Church besides MOA was well known as wedding venue only since it did not have nearby parishioners until the sprouting of condos lately in that Aseana area.

    More wedding or baptismal sponsors, more collections. Big time tax free business.
    Some priests or Catholic church dioceses have lost their moral ascendancy.

  4. It is an advocacy worth the pursuit. There are times when Philippine reforms and progress can be achieved only by being unFilipino. What is claimed to be culture but which is artificially acquired can always be discarded, even if it has been tolerated and practiced for many decades. This is one such instance. This ‘ninong-ninang’ business has been prostituted, truly. We at CPM can contribute— as Raissa has already done so for her first blog of the year—and start spreading the word. But the most effective persuasion can only come upon active espousal and promotion by the CBCP. It is about time that the CBCP took control of its rites and rituals instead of the supposed Catholic faithful riding roughshod over them. May I request someone within our circle of CPMers who may have access or close relation to a Bishop to take up the matter with him, submit his findings in this discussion and let it blossom into sanity from there. The debate has commenced. It is an advocacy worth the pursuit. Let it be enrolled as a CPM contribution to reform.

  5. agree ako diyan.
    it can make a difference.
    in fairness, hindi lang naman ang mga politiko ang nag-e-exploit ng practice na iyan.
    ginagawa na rin iyang commercial ng mga nagpapakasal at nagpapabinyag.
    nowadays, not only a dozen pair were being sought to be sponsors, paramihan na ang trend.
    mas maraming sponsor, mas maraming bibgyan ng sobre. mas malaki ang offering.
    iyan naman ang maaaring hadlang sa ating mga naghahangad ng ban.

  6. I agree to Raissa’s good idea. But as she says it may come true via a miracle!

    The Pope is coming soon. So, why not whisper to His Holiness on this and at the same time give this written message to him:

    “Dear Pope Francis & Bishops, please ban all elected officials from standing as wedding and baptismal sponsors of non-relatives”

    and just add this: ‘It is without doubt Holiness, without the BAN, it is a great source of corruption in the Philippines. A miracle is all what the people expects on this. Thank You.’

    Who is the sleuth CPMer here who can deliver this? Volunteers?

  7. If I am not mistaken, the late Sen. Juan. Flavier refused to be ninong to anyone during his stint at the Senate

  8. It’s a great idea that will surely cut down influence-peddling/corruption via religious ceremonies. But I very much doubt this ban can be implemented. Sigh.

      • I think, that can be implemented, can be done. though not all at once. we can start small. big things come from little things. one priest at a time banning multi sponsoring politicians acting as ninong or ninang while in office. god will provide, no need for priest to worry the ban will cause loss of revenue, less money in the coffer. if people find out priest is steadfast and not corruptible, they might just attend masses regularly and give donations more often. god said once, look at the birds in the sky, they worry not where the next meal comes from, or something similar.

        priests are set in their ways and are maybe resistant to change. I dont expect deluge with priests all over the country acting as one and immediately applying the ban. one courageous priest at a time will do until the habit catches up. and more priests will join.

    • @ Marmee,

      Tama ka pero sayang din ang kikitain nang simbahan saka malakas pa naman magbigay ang mga politiko lalo na kapag malapit na ang election… Hindi mangyayari yan lalo na mayroon din naman silang karapatan kahit sa ano mang bagay…

      • that’s how politicians perpetuate corruptions: sinali yong mga pari. give them hefty donations lalo na if election is nearing. priests then repay or oblige to repay the deed by endorsing politicians, campaingning for them, saying good things about them, brainwashing church goers about how good politicians are. priests rarely say no to money, donations are always welcome.

  9. I hope they heed your call, but I have my (severe) reservations about an organization that moves as glacially as the CBCP.

  10. THE GODFATHER CULTURE

    We had discussed this before under the topic of “amoral familism”. First observed in Sicily, Italy, the birthplace of the Mafia. Real families morphed into “families” which were wholly engaged in crime, evolving their own moral code.

    While no one disputes the value of family as an institution, sometimes it gets distorted in family oriented societies like ours. Families, specially large ones are turned into justifications for crime (since it is expensive to maintain them, more so if there are several).

    Also, have you noticed that unlike elsewhere, “thou shalt not kill and thou shalt not steal” is trumped by “honor thy father and thy mother” in this country? A thieving poltician is justified as “mapagmahal na ama at mapag-bigay”.

    Look at the previous families in power and how corruption was handled by the entire clan.

  11. I support this.

    Unlike in previous posts where I was hyper-critical of the Church, my starting point now is that they can be a powerful force for the common good, in alliance with those of different beliefs.

    It is time for the RCC to take back control of its rites and rituals and not allow its followers to sculpt it to their own tastes. The Church does not sanction actual crucifixions on Lent but they go ahead and do it. Last year, devotees did not even allow Cardinal Tagle to finish the mass. And did you see the trash and damage they leave behind every year? The Church has ownership of these events but is too effette to get its message across and retain control over it. Does the Church sanction Santo Ninos dressed as basketball players or boxers? And yet the faithful insist on having it. The Church bans dealing with the occult but so many faithful Catholics are superstitious and dabble in the black arts. See how little control it exerts over its followers?

    Tangentially related to this topic will be my piece on “Mercy and Compassion: Does it Extend to the Corrupt?” which will come out tomorrow evening, January 11, 2015 in Joe America’s blog, Society of Honor. It is an exploration on why some facets of the faith inadvertently lead to impunity and pervasive corruption.

  12. Another funny encounter in Congress Cong Tupas confronting his godfather Cong augusto Syjuco

  13. PS.

    I wasn’t in town when it happened but really?!? Bong really said those Ninong words? And look at who he is with now in jail!

  14. Daring the Catholic Church to walk the talk. Quite a refreshing twist to the usual challenge.

    The Catholic Church (Philippines) has, especially recently, shown itself to be two-faced about politics, influenced by past favors, selective in its actions and condemnations.

    Now here’s a challenge that’s not as earth-shaking as the Reproductive Health Bill or gay marriage, not as pesky as Constitutional Change but significant enough to send a clear message across society about what is and what is not welcome in the administration of its sacraments. Surely, a lot of us would want more from them but this is a small but potentially very significant move.

  15. beyond reasonable to ban but rules could be implemented to limit number of sponsors to 4. Only names will be listed and allowed to stand, same as in baptism in US, sponsors are limited.

    But before Church can do it they have to pass rule that maximum of 2 priests could officiate and only 1 Bishop to preside total of 3 including Homilist.

    DongYan wedding had 8 Bishops plus 1 bus of priests. will they get more points or blessings with the number of Bishops and priests?

    maybe the bishops are meant for them for 8 girls and the priests for boys soccer team. LOL!

    • why unreasonable?

      we’re just talking of banning them from sponsoring non-immediate members of the family.

      • Unreasonable because it infringes on freedom of personal choice. Church does have authority banning personal choices of bride or groom or parents because no church dogma is violated. Unlike contraceptive pills, though falling under personal choice, it contradicts church teachings. Church teachings condemn LGBT but still nobody is banned to participate in religious ceremony. At least, Pope Francis has opened the window for understanding LGBT and divorce couples.

        However, political godparents thru delikadeza could refuse the request to become sponsors but for the church to decree a ban on politicians is beneath the power of the church. Decreeing the limits of sponsors and those standing in front of the altar during ceremony is within the power of the church.

        After politicians next to request to be banned are doctors so they would not give free consultations, businessmen so they will not give discounts, lawyers so they will not notarize for free, etc. Filipinos have this cultural thinking “knowing or close to somebody with power, wealth, doctorate degree, or celebrity status grant them certain status of power, wealth, knowledge and popularity too. Akin to being in the hot kitchen they can catch fire easily. Napoles was a high school dropout who exploited this thinking to her advantage.

        Banning a certain profession in religious rites is unique unachievable idea in Filipino culture. Limitation in numbers thru Church decree, yes. But first, limit the number of officiating clergies and bishops.

        • The church has had history of exercising religious authority over our personal choices. My parents used to tell me that, in the old days, priests would not baptise children if their names did not come from saints, or saintly people listed in religious calendars. If I were born in that era, no Catholic priest would baptise me as Yvonne.

        • medyo ganon yata if you’re divorced. you cannot be remarried in the catholic church. princess caroline of monaco did have that problem. she wanted to annul her 1st marriage to philipi junot and be allowed to remarry in church, but pope john paul (?) refused to give her annulment.

        • at one stage, church looked down on those that committed suicide and ended their own lives. against the will of god daw iyan, some priests refused to say mass for those that took their own lives, refused to bury them too in hallowed grounds too. I think, things are relaxed now, and people learned not to tell priests if family member commited suicide.

        • Baptism has existing decree, one name must be accepted catholic identity. Not unusual many Filipinos have Maria or Jose as first name followed by common name.

          Ditto with divorcee, can’t remarry until first marriage is annulled. No decree banning individualities except excommunication for those deemed committing grievous offenses.

          Of course everything is possible, church could pass a decree but in reality church won’t do it. Even in Italy, they don’t ban all notorious mafias, maybe selective individual sanction by the priest in his parish. For one thing enforcement against faith is a problem. How could compliance be enforced? Ban in one town, travel to next town to practice the faith.

        • softly, gently, there’s another way of doing it. share the wealth, diffuse it. let wealth trickle down. instead of politicians or the wealthy seeking also the wealthy to be sponsors, why not ask the poor and the needy to be sponsors? sounds radical but. reverse tradition. instead of keeping wealth among themselves, receiving gifts from sponsors on christmases and anniversaries as the norm, why not share and give give gifts to the poor sponsors who barely have anything? the poor would appreciate gift more than the wealthy who already have so much.

          priests can spearhead the trend. talk about it from the pulpit. say it’s okay for the rich to have those not related to them, the poor and the needy, as sponsors. give instead of receive.

          but as raissa said, ban, then I say ban. ban politicians from multi sponsoring, ban their sponsoring spree while in office. and if that does not work, because politicians dont like the word ‘ban’, then, maybe, their focus can be changed. multi sponsor the poor, the illiterate and the needy.

    • only one godfather and one godmother is allowed for baptismal, proxy is not allowed, in one of the catholic countries in europe.

      • the same as in weddings. only two sponsors as witness/godparents.preferably very close family members. i am also closing my fingers that our beloved bishops will think and do some corrective measures about this “commercialization” tradition/s.

        • Isang dosena lang! Kakaunti!

          Dingdong Marian wedding, yung ring side seats ng MOA arena reception napuno sa principal sponsors lang. yung mga pari at madre Hindi nagkasya sa nosebleed sections ng arena. Yung nagreklamong mainit dinala sa skating rink ng MOA

        • yes, ma’am raissa. kaya noong bininyagan ang aking mga anak ay isang ninong at ninang lang. wala akong kamag-anak kasi hindi puede ang proxy.kaya brother ng husband ko at pinsang buo nilang ang sponsors. noong bininyagan na din ang panganay na anak ng brother-in-law ko husband ko ang ninong at isang pinsan nila ang ninang. for their second child. ako iyong ninang at iyong husband ng pinsan nila…