Our sense of religious morality is so cockeyed that we now want the President to pay the price for a mislabel!

So, the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) chair found out that the Sports Utility Vehicle (SUV) is not a Pajero but a Montero and a bunch of second-hand utility vehicles.

Is this really what matters with the issue between some of the bishops from the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) and PCSO that we are incensed about? Is this really the fundamental issue that the Blue Ribbon Committee investigating the Bishop-PCSO affair has to quibble with?

I can understand why some legislators would nitpick with the precise description of the vehicles to aid them in their legal investigation. But to take umbrage at the imprecise description of the acquired vehicles is downright overacting, if not, oversimplifying.

Is it not overacting to demand from PNoy that he apologize to the bishops because of this issue? Is it not oversimplifying to force him to kick one of his chairs out because of an inaccurate vehicular pronouncement?

What about asking the CBCP to fire those bishops who deliberately procured and used gambling money in the name of God? What about demanding the resignation of one of their bishops who asked for a Montero SUV as a birthday gift and who promised an unending support to a former President? What happened to the inviolability of the separation of Church and State?

Guess what? None of these demands will our legislator do.

In fact, our legislators were so lenient with the bishops during the investigation that some of them became geographers for a day. I was amused how they authoritatively described to the public the contours, features, and inhabitants of the land areas where the parishes are located which made the use of those vehicles to appear as a necessity.

We know that our country is a rugged archipelago with hills, mountains, valleys, rivers, and coastlines. It is also an island with rural areas as well as urban areas and it is in the latter where our bishops live.

Is it a priority for the PCSO to divert the funds directly intended for indigents to the dubitable needs of bishops? What about the propriety of the bishops asking for and spending gambling money for any reason at all?

Sadly, the CBCP will not also do it.

And why is that? Well, for one cardinal reason. When all is said and done, the issue between the CBCP and the PCSO is not political nor legal but ideological.

By ideological, I mean the ideology of dominant morality that defines the way things ought to be for our country. In a country permeated with religious fervor and sometimes fanaticism, it is very difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff--the important from the unimportant, the significant from the insignificant.

It is a truism that in the skirmish between the definitions of what is moral or immoral, the dominant religious institution wins over the existing political institution, right or wrong. This is to say, that what we see, hear, and read daily is subconsciously filtered through the lens of our adherence to the dominant ideology of organized religion rather than our belief with our political organizations.

Take for instance, how we morally pilloried PNoy for acquiring a Porsche with his own money and for his own recreation, while we allowed the bishops to go scot-free for the flimsy reason that the acquired vehicles from gambling money were exclusively used for God’s work and not for personal comfort.

What is wrong with this scenario? Nothing! Except that PNoy is an easier scapegoat. Never mind that he has been unfairly attacked with so many negative ad hominems. As a politician, he is an easier target to blame for all of our problems both morally and institutionally as well.

That we’d rather punish a President who is morally upright and praise the Bishops with dubious characters can now be explained.

In the minds of many Filipinos, the bishops should be trusted more than we should trust the President. After all, the bishops allegedly serve God while PNoy only serves the people.