Respect, Not Restriction
We enjoy so much freedom here in the Philippines that we usually take it for granted. That is, until and unless there’s a seeming threat to limit or remove our freedom.
In 2009, someone questioned before the Supreme Court about holding Catholic masses at the basement of the Quezon City Hall of Justice. “He wanted to implement a nationwide ban on the holding of any religious mass or rituals inside halls of justices.” [1] He claimed it violated the separation of Church and State. According to section 5, Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution,
No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights. (Emphasis added)
But in a recent en banc decision, the Supreme Court turned down the petition. According to the decision,
Allowing citizens to practice their religion is not equivalent to a fusion of Church and State… A public street may be used for a religious procession even as it is available for a civic parade, in the same way that a public plaza is not barred to a religious rally if it may also be used for political assemblage. [2]
However, according to the lone dissenter, Justice Marvic Leonen, “[The decision] weakens our commitment to protect all religious beliefs”. [3]
Yet, with all due respect to Justice Leonen, let us keep in mind that the Separation of Church and State was against establishing a State religion or the government favoring one religion over another. The intent of that separation is “to keep government out of the affairs of the church, not to keep the church out of the affairs of government.” [4] It was not about prohibiting the practice of religion in government offices per se. The decision impacts not only Catholic masses but also Evangelical Bible studies, Muslim prayer times and other religious practices held in government offices. It’s not far-fetched to imagine that, had the Supreme Court decided otherwise, it could lead to a prohibition of prayer in public schools too. That’s not fearmongering for we already saw the consequences of its (wrong) application in the USA. Nowadays, we see adverse reaction from some segments of society when a lawmaker or a government official quotes a Bible verse in support for or against a position regarding political issues. (Whether the verse quoted is misquoted or not is another issue.) They say that one’s beliefs must be kept to oneself and that faith is a private or personal thing. I beg to disagree.
Why should Christian citizens not be free to campaign for or against a certain polity based on their moral convictions—convictions that are derived from their religious faith? Speaking a religious opinion in public is not compelling people to accept that viewpoint! The nature of a free society requires that people should be able to base their political convictions on whatever reasoning process and whatever authority they prefer, and they should be free to attempt to persuade others that their reasoning is correct. [5]
Simply put, the Separation of Church and State advocates freedom of religion and not freedom from religion. It was about respect of religion and not about its restriction. (But in the practice of our faith, we should consider the feelings or be sensitive to those who do not share it. Yet, that’s another topic for another time.)
We should be thankful that our highest court in the land recognized the spirit or the intent of that Separation provision. That’s why we need to continue to pray for our country!
First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:1-4, ESV)
Brothers and sisters, let us protect our freedom of religion and not take it for granted.
[1] Lian Buan (9 April 2017), “Can masses be held inside courts? SC says yes,” Rappler, retrieved from http://www.rappler.com/.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Wayne Grudem, Politics - According to the Bible: A Comprehensive Resource for Understanding Modern Political Issues in Light of Scripture, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010). iBooks.
[5] Ibid, emphasis added.
Image credit: Rappler
