Religion, hate and diapers

So can we stop talking about adult diapers now?

Radio and TV commentators, columnists, even Facebook pundits, could not seem to have enough of—or say enough on—these, uh, sanitary necessities.

If you will pardon me, just thinking about them gives me the heebie-jeebies. Or maybe it’s just the thought that someday I may have need of them—and that day is nearer than you think, or I may realize.

If the Metro Manila Development Authority traffic personnel or their bosses feel adult diapers are the way to go, let’s leave it at that and wish them all the luck. Let’s not obsess about their underwear. It’s none of our business how they do their business.

Maybe the media were just running out of new coverage angles. After all, in the coverage of the annual feast of the Black Nazarene, year after year the same issues crop up—traffic, crowd control, injuries, even deaths. And a death, even as I write this, has already taken place. An “hijo de Nazareno,” or “son of the Nazarene”—as lay faithful who shepherd the image through the crowds of devotees are known—was reported to have died from a heart attack while doing his duties.

Every year, the often-fervid coverage of the Black Nazarene procession has included reports on the fatalities and injuries among the devotees. Ambulances are stationed along the route, while the Manila city government this year was even constrained to ban vendors of “banana-cue,” fish balls and even bottled soda because of the number of foot injuries (many devotees follow the procession in bare feet) caused by the sharp, pointed barbecue sticks and sharp-toothed bottle caps.

We can only surmise how much all these preparations—the traffic diversion, the fielding of law enforcers and healthcare workers, the loss of trade among shop owners and vendors in the area, even the emergency road repair work—costs the national and city government, and the Archdiocese of Manila. How are the expenses shared? And is it fair or even constitutional to allot public money to be used to secure and manage a religious event?

* * *

Well, some may argue, we are a predominantly Catholic country, and spending for the safety and protection of the Black Nazarene devotees is a form of public service.

After all, there is no stopping these believers from flocking to Quiapo Church or taking part in the procession. Taking precautions or spending for them is just a proactive means to prevent tragedy. But a priest made a strong point the day before the feast when he urged the elderly, the pregnant, or the merely delicate to stay away from Friday’s frenzy. “The Nazareno is in the church every day,” the priest pointed out, “you can visit him any time you want.”

And what about the teaching that “God is everywhere”? That His presence need not be contained in a religious image, however reputedly miraculous, or our prayers to be directed to an icon to have them answered?

Shouldn’t local Church authorities be making a stronger effort to teach Filipinos an adult faith? Shouldn’t they be striving to build a faith that doesn’t need Nazarenos or Santo Niños to be expressed and exercised?

Or is it precisely the aim of the local Church to keep Filipinos infantile and naive? To make them invest their belief—and their donations—in images and icons in the hope that these will be reciprocated by divine favors?

* * *

Some of the same points may well be raised in regard to the visit next week of Pope Francis, preparations for which far exceed even the frenzy surrounding the feast of the Nazarene.

Of course, the expense may be justified in that the Pope is coming not just as a religious leader, who is visiting as the “father” of Filipino Catholics, but also as a head of state, of the Vatican, which is technically a sovereign state.

Providing a fitting welcome to the Pope is thus a point of pride not just for Filipinos but also for the Philippine state. God forbid that something untoward should happen to him while in our midst!

But again the question is raised: Is the papal visit, and the official fuss and bother, not a violation of the principle of the separation of church and state? Is this not a case of the state “favoring” one religion over others?

To his credit, Pope Francis has insisted on keeping his visit on a low key, stressing time and again that he is coming mainly to show commiseration with the survivors of “Yolanda,” the strongest typhoon to make landfall ever. But the media hype has raised his visit far above his humble objective.

* * *

I am writing this at a particularly sensitive time, what with the killing of 10 journalists and two policemen in Paris which was supposedly religiously motivated.

The gunmen apparently felt the shooting was necessary to “avenge” Allah, or the sensitivities of his believers, because the staff of Charlie Hebdo had repeatedly poked fun or ridicule at Islamists—as well as at politicians, public figures and other religions.

Pope Francis has himself cautioned against intolerance. Indeed, a media company even tried to market T-shirts marking the papal visit, with one of them summing up one of the Pope’s exhortations as “No Race, No Religion.” This may have been an unfortunate shortening or summing up of the Pope’s message, but already the T-shirt’s message has been condemned by no less than the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines.

The CBCP president, Archbishop Socrates Villegas, has stated that the Pope “has never said and taught that religion and race do not matter, because they most certainly do. It is what selfish, uncharitable and judgmental people do with religion and race that is a problem.” But just who are these people? And is not the way the visit is being hyped precisely part of the problem?