There has been an allegation that Father Flavie, the renowned priest who filed a complaint for plunder against the Vice President with the Ombudsman, avidly follows a Facebook page that deals with adult content. While this should not be an issue, at least ordinarily, the fact that he is a cleric means it may cast serious doubt on his probity and integrity.
You see, the thing about priests is that their supposed influence is not based on some legal authority but directly emanates from their moral ascendancy on account of their unique position in society. That they should always act with, or at least maintain the appearance of, propriety in all their dealings certainly goes without saying.
Besides, Father Flavie is no ordinary missionary priest. He was once bestowed the Ramon Magsaysay Award for his “lifelong mission to uphold the dignity of the poor and the oppressed.” He is also an active political activist and is known to have provided assistance to families of drug war victims. More importantly, he has been unequivocally vocal about holding former President Duterte accountable for his alleged wrongdoings.
To be honest, I couldn’t care less whether or not the reverend father may be into porn or even some kinky stuff. For as long as he does not do anything unlawful or illegal, that is fine by me. Besides, that particular allegation has not even been verified.
However, I also get why some people are taking advantage of this issue against him. Just like other priests that came before him, he is so active in politics that many are wondering whether or not what he does goes against the supposed separation between Church and State.
Unfortunately, most people do not fully understand this concept. In fact, they think that religious leaders should not talk about politics, let alone meddle in the affairs of the State, and should simply focus on their religious teachings.
Well, it turns out the law actually allows the Church to get involved in political discourse. In fact, any priest or pastor can even run for political office. He can join any mass movement or even organize one while remaining part of his congregation.
According to the Supreme Court, such separation simply means religion does not control the government and government does not control religion. It also means that there is no official state religion and that freedom of religion is respected by the State.
Therefore, just like any ordinary citizen, clergymen should not be prohibited from articulating their sentiments, criticizing the government, or participating outright in critical socio-political decision-making processes.
In fact, they should be encouraged at all costs to get across their concerns and provide guidance to their flocks. However, whether or not they should be followed is another story.