To all Editors, Station Managers/News Editors
Statement of Bishop Jesus Varela (Chairman) -
on the Church/Government Dialogue
on Family Planning
In the interest of correcting
certain misimpressions regarding the statement borne out of the initial church/government dialogue of Aug. 14, 1990 on the matter of family planning, I as Chairman of the Church panel would like to state that:
- The statement is not an endorsement by the Church of the Family Planning Program of the government:
- The Church, with constant firmness in its long standing teaching, condemns contraception, sterilization, and abortion. This teaching will be reemphasized in the forthcoming CBCP pastoral letter.
The statement, contrary to the understanding of some, is neither an agreement nor an accord. Rather, it is a statement which merely identifies points of dialogue, including common and divergent concerns.
questions in this regard will be answered at a PRESS CONFERENCE which will be held at the CONFERENCE ROOM at the second floor, CBCP building, Intramuros, Manila at 10:00 a.m., August 16, 1990.
Manila, 15 August 1990
(Sgd)+JESUS Y. VARELA, D.D.
For verification please call the Episcopal Commission on Familly Life at telephone number 494-880, CBCP Building.
August 14, 1990
The government today presented the Philippine Family Planning Program (1990-1994) before a panel of bishops designated by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the
Philippines (CBCP) in a dialogue arranged at the request of President Aquino. The CBCP panel was headed by Bishop Varela and had Bishops Bacani, Claver, Quevedo and Cariņo as well as Father San Juan as
members. The government panel was headed by Secretaries Bengzon and Estanislao, with Undersecretary Taguiwalo of DOH, Dr. Corazon Raymundo of UPPI and Dr. Rebecca Ramos of Fabella Memorial Hospital as members.
The government presentation covered the principles which guide the Family Planning Program as well as the implementation details that will operate in the field. The discussions that followed were serious,
substantive and amicable. Premised on the varying roles of the Church and the government, there was a meeting of minds although further discussions are clearly needed. In sum, all agreed that the Program is
in substantive consonance with the following points:
- The Program endeavors to respect the freedom of conscience of individuals and particularly of married couples. It is also reassuring that the freedom of conscience of health care providers is being
- The Program limits itself to married couples of reproductive age who of their own accord, based on their conscience have decided to manage their fertility guided by their religious beliefs and morals. The
Program will not be undertaken to reduce fertility or population growth.
- The Program limits itself to couples who within the context of family life wish to space or limit births for objective reasons. The Program excludes abortion including the prevention of a fertilized ovum
from reaching full maturity, and fertility management of unmarried individuals.
- The means allowed under the Program are limited to what is legally available in the Philippines. Abortion being illegal, any practice found to lead to or to induce abortion would also be deemed illegal on
the basis of medical evidence evaluated by government authorities.
- The means allowed, which include natural family planning, IUD's, sterilization and oral contraceptive pills, are made available to those who opt for them. If any of these methods are determined to be
abortifacient, they will be disallowed.
The Church reiterates its objections to contraception and sterilization and expresses its reservations about the moral acceptability of certain aspects of the Program. But in a pluralistic society and
recognizing the freedom of those who disagree with Church principles, the Church respects the government's toleration of other means that the conscience of others may not object to and that the law on abortion does not
forbid. Nonetheless, the Church seeks a greater emphasis on natural family planning as consistent with moral teachings and religious beliefs.
All parties agreed that further discussions are desirable and
necessary. In addition, a mechanism for consultation would be established providing for an annual dialogue on the implementation of the Program, and a defined procedure for looking into and correcting problems and
violations that occur in the field. In this regard, it was emphasized that the consistently with which the principles are followed by the Program in the field, including the participating nongovernment
organizations (NGOs), was regarded by all as a matter of quality assurance and a measure of sincerity.