Faith Without Harm: Rethinking the Use of Animals in Religious Celebrations in the Philippines

By Atty. Heidi Marquez-Caguioa

The Philippines is a nation deeply rooted in faith. Across towns and cities, religious celebrations from fiestas to Holy Week observances are expressions of devotion, identity, and community. In many of these traditions, animals are used as symbols: doves for peace, carabaos in processions, or other living creatures incorporated into rituals meant to honor the divine.

But as society evolves, so must our understanding of compassion.

Today, we are called to ask a difficult but necessary question: Should animals continue to suffer in the name of faith, symbolism, or tradition?

When Devotion Overlooks Welfare

In the wake of the recent controversy that shook the Catholic Church, particularly the Diocesan Shrine and Parish of the Immaculate Concepcion in Malabon, the traditional Easter “Salubong” used a live dove. The Salubong”” was initially intended as an expression of faith symbolizing peace, hope and resurrection . But the ritual was met with criticism and condemnation because a dove was restrained with its wings spread out, used as a prop, and tied along with hundreds of balloons that were released in the air.

While often well-intentioned, the use of animals in religious celebrations can result in significant harm. This is because animals used in these settings are frequently not handled with proper care, exposed to loud crowds, noise, chaos, heat, and even smoke, and at times made to perform acts not naturally done like kneeling of carabaos during fiestas. Furthermore, animals may be placed in unnatural and stressful conditions and objectified rather than treated as living or sentient being.

This, thus, sparked public concern and renewed scrutiny. What may have been intended as a symbolic act instead highlighted a deeper issue: the disconnect between meaning and method.

Doves, which are often seen as symbols of peace, are in reality highly sensitive a animals. When released in uncontrolled environments, especially when restrained, exposed to artificial smoke, or forced into unnatural situations, they can experience extreme stress, disorientation, injury, or death. This is not symbolism. This is suffering.

Faith Calls for Compassion, Not Harm

It is quite concerning that religion to date permits and/or tolerates the use of animals in a manner that is unnatural, cruel or exposes animals to unnecessary pain and harm when at the very core every major religion including Christianity is a call to love, mercy and stewardship of creation. Using animals in ways that cause fear, injury, or death stands in direct contradiction to these values.

Animal Cruelty is Prohibited by Law

In the Philippines, animal welfare is not just a moral issue, it is a legal one.

Under Republic Act No. 8485, as amended by Republic Act No. 10631, acts that cause unnecessary pain and suffering, cruelty to animals, including any act of neglect and abandonment are prohibited and considered as a criminal offense.

Importantly, while the law exempts certain killing of animals used in religious rituals and practices of recognized religion or sect, it does not provide blanket exemptions for cultural or religious practices when these result in harm. The use of humane method and practices has always been required. This means that even long-standing traditions must be re-examined if they compromise animal welfare.

Why This Moment Calls for Reflection

This conversation is especially urgent today because of the growing public awareness about animal welfare. Filipinos are increasingly vocal and conscious about how animals are treated. Incidents of animal cruelty, specially as they are often shared online, are often met with strong public reaction and calls for accountability.

Research and studies are extensively done over years establishing a clear link between how animals are treated and the social development of the youth. As a parent myself, I have seen that how young people treat animals reflects and is closely linked to empathy, behavior and social responsibility. It matters then that when harmful practices are normalized, especially in religious settings, it sends a wrong message.

As the churches and religious institutions are among the most trusted and influential entity that had profound influence on faith, moral and conscience of the community, they have the power to shape not just beliefs but also behavior, even in politics.

The church therefore, has that institutional responsibility to ensure that its teachings are reflected not only in words but in practices and that it should include the promotion and protection of the vulnerable and the voiceless animals. By promoting humane and ethical treatment of animals, it affirms a deeper truth consistent with the teachings of the catholic faith that stewardship, love, compassion and respect must extend not just to humans but to all living beings.

We call then on the Church leadership to rethink and seriously ponder: If a tradition, practice or even a ritual is meant to honor God would cause fear, pain, suffering or even death, then there is a great disconnect between the teachings and the practice.

It is high time that the Church end the use of animals in harmful religious practices. Faith should never require suffering. Symbolism should never come at the expense of life.

About the Author: Atty Heidi Marquez-Caguioa is the president and program director for Animal Kingdom Foundation (AKF). She is a lawyer by profession, a staunch animal welfare advocate, and policy practitioner involved in various work promoting animal welfare and promotion. She plays an active role in animal rescue and rehabilitation operating one of the biggest animal shelters in the country, while working to promote and institutionalize stronger animal protection measures. Her advocacy focuses on bridging law, enforcement, and community action to advance humane and sustainable practices.

The AKF website is akfrescues.org.

Photos are screen grab from video that circulated online. Credit to the owner of the video.

This article also appears in the Manila Standard