Cebu Priest's Political Activities Stir Canonical and Moral Debate in Catholic Community
In a nation where faith profoundly intertwines with daily life, the actions of clergy naturally carry significant moral and social weight. This is precisely the situation surrounding Fr. Crisinciano “Ciano” Ubod, a priest assigned as parish priest of the Archdiocesan Shrine of Santiago Apostol in Compostela, Cebu, whose recent conduct has ignited widespread concern among the faithful.
Political Allegiance Contradicts Pro-Life Teachings
The issue extends far beyond mere personal political stance; it delves into the boundaries of priestly duty, the integrity of the pulpit, and the unity of Catholic teachings. Fr. Ubod has gained public recognition—through video-recorded homilies disseminated on social media and statements attributed to him—as a supporter of former President Rodrigo R. Duterte. Duterte is currently facing proceedings at the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity related to the “war on drugs.” For a church that stands firmly as pro-life, this association creates a profound contradiction.
More alarmingly, reports suggest the alleged use of the sacred pulpit to convey partisan messages. Even if dismissed as mere rhetoric, jokes, or personal opinion, such actions conflict with the social teachings of the Catholic Church, which protect the sanctity of life from conception to natural death and reject state-supported killings implemented as policy.
Signature Campaign Escalates Canonical Concerns
The controversy intensified with reports that Fr. Ubod led or fervently supported a signature campaign bearing the slogan, “Tay, kami naman ang pipirma sa’yo,” allegedly using a template clearly naming the Compostela church as “Fr. Ciano Ubod Church.” If verified, this raises serious canonical issues. Canon law explicitly calls priests to serve all, not act as political organizers favoring one faction. Utilizing parish resources, symbols, or church authority for partisan campaigns could constitute canonical misconduct and potential abuse of office.
This situation underscores a broader tension within the Catholic community in the Philippines, where clergy involvement in politics tests the limits of ecclesiastical discipline. The faithful are left grappling with questions about how to reconcile personal political views with the church's unwavering moral teachings. As discussions unfold, the Archdiocese of Cebu may need to address these allegations to uphold the sanctity and neutrality expected of its clergy, ensuring that the pulpit remains a space for spiritual guidance rather than political advocacy.
