01 Sep When Men Become Pilyo: Why INC Lost on EDSA
JUAN SAYS: If you were expecting a PILYO answer from our resident Pilyo Mars Arias, you won’t find any here. If anything, his take on the article that came out on Rappler (INSIDE STORY: The end of the Iglesia ni Cristo Protest) made us think even more.
We thought that their shouting VICTORY on the streets meant that they have achieved their purpose, thus the questions in our heads on what agreement have they forged with the government. The government denied any agreements, there by making the INC look like losers walking away from their biggest fight. We would like to believe that they have already lost on day 1 by angering the whole of Metro Manila. And they didn’t win any heart (nor soul for that matter) by being defensive and unclear of their sentiments. Bakit nga ba nagrally sa EDSA? Para sa Mamasapano? Parang ang labo yata! They didn’t win any of us by fighting with us, and threatening us that we will all burn in hell. This is not exactly the way to win souls if that was the purpose. If anything, they just alienated themselves even more.
A lawyer’s perspective on why the INC lost on EDSA.
The INC lost on EDSA. What was going for them through out their decades long success was their secrecy and perceived unshakeable unity.
If the accounts are to be believed, the INC lost because 1. They failed to muster the numbers from their ranks and 2. The anti-Aquino sector did not join their cause. Worse, those that did support them (Binay, Grace Poe and Harry Roque) were lambasted on social media as opportunists and trapos.
On another note, without a visible and vocal leader in EDSA, the INC members’ obedience was made a laughing stock instead of being feared and/or respected.
Worse still, by flocking to EDSA and engaging in concerted activity, it showed that it’s current leadership panicked. Why else would they order their members to engage in a rally when according to INC practice (and doctrine) they are forbidden to do so?
The INC also lost because they used a legal argument as basis to converge in EDSA. Legal arguments can be passed upon by the courts, and there are legal experts that can sway public opinion. If the INC just used doctrine and/or faith, no one can tell them they’re wrong with any degree of certainty.
In any case, this story is still developing. For all we know, the aggrieved party may come to a settlement with the respondents and withdraw the complaint. If that happens, it would already be a private arrangement BUT definitely not covered by the Doctrine of Separation of Church and State.