Thursday, April 19, 2007 Malig: Of the separation of Church and State By Jun A. Malig Cognition
ARTICLE II, Section 6 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution maintains that the separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.
But how should we define this provision?
In the highest law of the land, which has been patterned after the Constitution of the United States of America, the separation of Church and the State can be found under the Declaration of Principles and State Policies.
However, there is no doubt that the particular provision mimics the First Amendment in the US Constitution that states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..., which was ratified by the Americans in 1791, when the political, social and economic life of every Filipino were still controlled by the Spanish military and Catholic clergy.
The separation of Church and the State guarantees an atmosphere of absolute religious liberty to each citizen. It prohibits government regulation or endorsement of religion or religious activities. The State or the government is barred from controlling or even assisting any religious organization. And thus, the State guarantees the continued vitality and diversity of religious beliefs.
Since the separation of Church and State is among the usually misunderstood and misrepresented concepts in political discussions, let us rephrase it as the separation of organized religious organization and governmental authority. This more elaborate phrase connotes the necessity for religious and civil authorities NOT to have the same people as their leaders.
Because the State or any public official cannot dictate or control organized religious bodies, organized religions or their leaders should also not control the function of the government. In my humble opinion, any leader of an organized religion should first officially resign from his organization before participating in a certified political or governmental undertaking like the electoral process. He should do this if only to show respect to the universally accepted concept of separation of Church and State.
The concept is a two-way street. While the government or its representatives should exercise a hands-off policy in concerns and matters of the church, the church or any of its representatives should also keep a hands off stance on governmental affairs. No one can serve two masters at the same time. A priest, for example, should not actively and directly participate in the affairs of the State, especially if such participation involves intent to be in an executive civil position.
This column is about the separation of Church and State. It is not about the too complex issue of good governance, which, by the way, cannot be ascertained on the mere basis of the political leaders outfit. (Of course, there is no way to know if the person in sheep’s clothing is certainly a sheep and not a wolf. Even Saint Paul and the Catholic Church have warned and admitted the presence of wolves in sheep’s clothing that actually devours the flock instead of protecting them).
While the State cannot dictate upon religious organizations what to preach or how to preach, an organized religion or a religious leader cannot also cause the government to adopt its doctrines or his beliefs on what is right or what is wrong. Unless, of course, the religious leader decided to absolutely relinquish his position and title from the organized religion. A mere leave of absence from the organized religion does not do justice to the separation of Church and State principle.
Last year the Vatican, through a communication signed by Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, the prefect for the Congregation for Bishops, expressed its displeasure at the decision of retired Bishop Fernando Lugo to join the national elections in Paraguay in 2008. In the name of Jesus Christ, I ask him to seriously reflect about his behavior, the letter reportedly stated.
In response to the Vatican letter, Lugo presented his resignation to Papal authorities.
In December last year, the Kenya Episcopal Conference of the country’s 27 Catholic bishops issued a five-point Vatican-linked edict warning priests against dabbling in politics or even accepting public appointments.
In the area of party politics, priests should not take sides, as it will divide the local community. Canvassing or even urging people to vote for particular candidates or parties leads to confusion and division, the bishops said in their edict.
