On August 17, 2020, the government’s policy-making body on COVID-19 response—the IATF—recommended to President Rodrigo Duterte to return Metro Manila to general community quarantine (GCQ) but with stricter implementation of the guidelines. What could be stricter than the police having apprehended 320,000 people in the last few months on curfew or quarantine violations—it is a wonder. After such militaristic lockdown, no real qualities of a medical quarantine and still increasing cases, the question of whether the more effective interventions from rigorous, practical study have been in place begs to be asked. And not just whether the guidelines need to be stricter, harsher, sometimes also equivalent to being impracticable.
Another harsh order is the 10-person capacity for religious gatherings or Church activities as these activities are considered “mass gathering” which are limited to 10 people under the GCQ. Manila Archdiocese Apostolic Administrator Bishop Broderick Pabillo found this guideline illogical.
In a radio interview on August 20, he said that most churches are bigger than restaurants and other establishments allowed to operate in larger capacities. Dine-in at restaurants or food chains are allowed up to 30% capacity.
“Sana lang hinihiling naming na kung bibigyan nila ang mga business enterprises ng mas maraming kapasidad, dapat ang simbahan ay ganon din,” he said.
Large churches have large capacities. The Our Mother of Perpetual Help Shrine, also known as Baclaran Church, have a 2,000 sitting capacity and 9,000 standing capacity. The 30% capacity of this could be as small as 600+ and as big as 3,000. However, with the current limitation set by the IATF, a mass can only have 10 people, presumably including the priest or mass celebrant and at least one assisting the presider. Meanwhile, a milk tea shop or food chain that could sit 30 (15 tables of two perhaps) would be allowed to accommodate 10 people at a time.
The sitting capacity of the National Cathedral of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente along Taft Avenue is 700 people. A 30% capacity alike those given to food chains and businesses would allow at least 210 people, a number so far from current 10 people limit.
If social distancing is the issue, then why allow only 10 people in religious gatherings or in churches, but allow 30% in commercial establishments?
As early as June 14, 2020, Bishop Pabillo, in his homily in a Mass held at the Radio Veritas Chapel criticized the government in its COVID-19 response, including the limitation set on religious services.
In that Mass, Bishop Pabillo declared, “Religious activities should not be necessarily considered as mass gatherings because we have safeguards to control the people who come to our religious services.”
He is not resolved to the celebration of the Mass via livestreaming even as lockdowns eased, which the IATF had recommended or advised those who had been asking about or looking forward to attend mass—usually dismissively.
Pabillo said, “Online masses are not the same as the real Eucharist; For this, we clamor to the IATF to consider religious service as essential services and not just consider us in the category of entertainment, among movies and beauty salons.”
It is hard to believe that religious service is allowed of 10 people maximim “mass gathering” while transport services are allowed of 50% commuters and dining in restaurants are allowed 30%. Eating meals in restaurants or food chains have less protection because a person who is eating cannot wear a face mask and/or face shield while doing so, sometimes in enclosed or airconditioned spaces. Churches are usually open air ventilation and churchgoers need not take their face masks or shields off.
Bishop Pabillo said the celebration of the Mass with livestreaming is “not enough to provide for the spiritual needs of the public” and that is true for our dire situation today. We have been pushed beyond our limits.
Is this order of the IATF to limit religious gatherings to 10 politically motivated? Many of our countrymen right now need the solace and sanctuary they find in their churches, masses and congregation.
But at the same time, an socially active church is a potent tool for education and enlightenment of the people—but at the same time would be considered a potent enemy of the state that has cracked down even on social media posts in the past months.
A church as venue of protest can be a good option in this country where tyrannical acts are becoming commonplace. Churches in Metro Manila became the venue of protests even before the Duterte regime imposed a lockdown in March 2020. The churches are used by the leaders of the Church and church people as venue for ecumenical prayers before joining the protests on the streets.
On July 27, 2020, elements of the Manila Police District (MPD) suppressed a “protest” against the government inside Quiapo Church. They confiscated “placards and other protest materials” carried and displayed by protesters while the Mass is ongoing.
There was no violation of the “mass gathering and social distancing” as the church authorities observed health protocols. MPD Director Rolando Miranda claimed that the protesters “disrupted the mass,” but he admitted that the protests has not violated any law. It is time for the leaders of Philippine Churches to demand for “justice” in celebrating the Eucharist and other rigorous gatherings that would be considered mass gatherings.
Big Roman Catholic churches like Baclaran Church, Quiapo Church, Sta. Cruz Church and other churches near Malacanang could become venues of protests. Protests during the Arroyo administrations happened at San Miguel Church near Malacanang. Thus, “protest inside the church” is the reason of the imposition of 10% church-goers in attending religious service.
Even though, protests inside the churches might be prohibited by Church leaders and authorities but reflection for social justice and peace, prayer for the promotion of human dignity and lighting of candles against tyranny and restoration of democracy can be done inside the church even in time of pandemic.
With the more than five months of observing COVID-19 lockdown or quarantine protocols, the level of people’s consciences and consciousness are increasing. This pandemic has demonstrated the unjust system perpetuated by different people sitting on the top post of the nation and amplified our yearning for social justice. It is time for us fulfill this yearning.
