Separation of Church and State: A Perspective of a Catholic Lay

This legal principle of the "Separation of Church and State" is often used by anti-Church crusaders who preached a dualist worldview of the separation of the sacred and the profane-- the church deals with the sacred and politics with the profane. In so doing, they attempted to delimit the church activities within the realm of the spiritual, the sacred reality; to confine the church ministries within the altar and other sacramental activities which concerns only to the salvation of the soul. Christian evangelization does not hold such a worldview as it speaks of holistic and integral evangelization which concerns itself of total human development and social justice. 

However, Atty Jo Imbong did not argue on this integral evangelization approach where the church is not only concern with the spiritual well-being of the human persons but also to their material needs. Instead, she recognized the distinct role of the State and the Church: "(The Church and the State) may differ in their domain and purpose, but they do not necessarily antagonize or cancel each other.  In fact it is only through their co-existence and harmony that the well-being of man is achieved, that is, the State providing for the material goods of man and religion ministering to man’s spiritual needs. This co-existence comes about because they have a common form of reference–man’s well-being."

***

Separation of Church and State

Atty. Jo Imbong
PRO  BONO

Separation of Church and State

SEPARATION of Church and State is a legal principle misunderstood and wrongly invoked to discredit the pro-life agenda. This is unfortunate, for the principle actually protects the realms and mandates of those two institutions which are both oriented to human good. To dispel the error, I am posting a refutation of U.P. Professor Florin Hilbay’s Paper that was published in a broadsheet on June 7, 2012.

What the Constitution says on the principle of separation is, One, the State cannot establish a national religion, and Two, the State cannot interfere in the free exercise of religious belief of its citizens.

Another AteneoFaculty Statement on RH Bill

Another position paper promulgated by the faculty of the Ateneo de Manila University, one of the prominent Catholic universities in the Philippines, who actively support the proposed RH Bill in Congress. However, the 160 faculty only speak for themselves, individually or collectively, and "in no way speaking for the Ateneo de Manila University, the Society of Jesus, or the rest of their colleagues." In the statement below, it stated:

"As members of the academe who value academic freedom and responsibility, we wish to put knowledge at the service of national development goals that promote the wellbeing of the majority of our people. In so doing, we seek to ground our claims on the current scientific consensus and empirical evidence, including the lived experience of the poor and marginalized."

The 2012 statement further explained: "Having read and studied HB 4244 (the Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population and Development Bill) as well as the proposed amendments by the bill’s authors, we conclude that it is rights-based; supportive of State obligations to protect and promote health under the Philippine Constitution and international covenants and conventions; and in accordance with what Filipinos want, the vast majority of whom consistently say in surveys that they support the RH Bill."

CBCP Statement: A Matter of Fairness

CBCP Statement on the recent voting in the House of Representatives ending the debates on the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill

It was not supposed to happen. The agreement was to vote on August 7, 2012, when every side would have been ready and prepared to defend its cause as in any democratic setting.

Unfortunately, in a move remarkable in its stealth and swiftness, the ruling group of the House of Representatives, on August 6, 2012, managed to force a vote that terminated the period of debates on the RH Bill. It came a full day too soon, just when “no one was looking”. Except for the cabal of schemers, people were caught off-guard by the suddenness of the execution, especially those who oppose the Bill on faith or principle.

We are dismayed by the display of naked power. We lament the unilateral disregard of prior agreement in the pursuit of selfish goals. We detest the unbridled resort to foul tactics. We denounce the brazen disregard of the basic tenets of fair play and attempt to railroad the passage of the Bill. Not least, we question the surrender of legislative discretion to an intrusive President, reminiscent of the events leading to the impeachment proceedings.

The Catholic Church and those who are similarly minded ask for nothing more than fairness. After all, we have as much right to expose the dangers and ills of the Bill as those who promote it. So much is at stake in this fight for life: protection of women’s health against harmful contraceptives; preservation of parental authority over minor children; protection of the youth against valueless sex education; wrongful discrimination of the poor; wasteful disbursement of billions of pesos for contraceptives while many of the poor die of cancer, tuberculosis, dengue and other ailments without the benefit of medicine; suppression of dissent and civil liberties through threatened imprisonment and gradual annihilation of the Philippine race through systematic reduction of maternal fertility rate.

Emil Jurado: Overpopulation is a fallacy

In the mainstream media, more voices supporting the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill are arguing the case by pounding biased criticism and rhetoric against the Church leaders instead of educating their readers concerning the proposed bill in Congress. A reader can easily identify the anti-Church sentiment of these writers. They usually asked the Church leaders as moral guardians to self-examine their ad intra problems like how they dealt with the cases on child molestation by homosexual priests and the covered-up of these cases by the bishops worldwide.  If ever they presented the side of the Church, they tend to distort the message of the Church and attack her for being unmindful of the sad flight of the poor, as if the bulk of the problem of the historical poverty of the Third World countries, like the Philippines, is caused by the moral teaching of the Church on contraceptives. 

RH Bill: From the Economists' Viewpoint

This article, written by 30 economics faculty of the University of the Philippines published in PDI (7/28/2012), "is an updated and abridged version of an earlier paper first issued in August 2008 and reissued in February 2011. It also partly derives from an older paper titled “Population and Poverty: the Real Score” [December 2004]." The reference to former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's stand on the RH Bill provides a historical input regarding the nuances in the discourse of RH Bill issues and concerns.

POPULATION, POVERTY, POLITICS AND RH BILL

CHILDREN on NIA Road in Quezon City. JOAN BONDOC

The population issue has long been dead and buried in developed and most developing countries, including historically Catholic countries.

That it continues to be debated heatedly in our country merely testifies to the lack of progress in policy and action. The Catholic Church hierarchy has maintained its traditional stance against modern family planning (FP) methods, particularly modern (also referred to as “artificial”) contraceptives.

Selected Writings of Prof. Dan Maguire

Poverty, Population and the Catholic Tradition

Daniel C. Maguire, S.T.D. (Doctor of Sacred Theology)

The following address was delivered on May 19, 1993 as part of the Panel on Religious and Ethical Perspectives on Population Issues convened by the NGO Steering Committee at Prepcom II of the International Conference on Population and Development at the United Nations.

 

Because I speak as a theologian trained in Rome in the Catholic tradition, it might seem that my testimony is unnecessary since the Vatican is represented here in the dual roles of a nationstate and a non-governmental observer. Since, however, Catholicism is considerably richer than any segment of it, including the Vatican, and since it is essential for the preparatory committee to understand that in order to avoid sociological naivete, my testimony from the field of Catholic theology will not be seen as superfluous. Although many of the views that I will express - particularly in the areas of artificial contraception and abortion - are not the views of the Vatican, they are the dominant views of Catholic theology and this Preparatory Committee must be aware of that if it is to do justice to the Catholic peoples and to Catholic thought.

Prof. Dan Maguire's Letter to the US Bishops

Letter from a Catholic Theologian to All 270 United States Catholic Bishops

By Daniel C. Maguire, Marquette University.
maguired@juno.com

 

In what may be considered an act of undefeatable hope, I decided to write to all 270 U.S. bishops. Beyond a doubt they could be among the most influential religious leaders in the nation if only they could get off what I call the pelvic issues and address, in prophetic style, the basic biblical concerns of poverty, justice, and peace on an imperilled earth.

Even though the bishops are not theologians, they pontificate on theology and bring their form of theology into the political arena, forbidding Communion to pro-choice politicians but posing for pictures with war-making presidents and legislators. The pastoral letter on Peace in 1983 "The Challenge of Peace," spelled out the criteria for a "just war." George Bush's invasion of Iraq violated all of its criteria, the pope called the invasion "a defeat for humanity," and yet the bishops and most Catholic theologians and laity stand meek and mute throughout this disaster. The press then consider the bishops' statements to be "Catholic teaching." The press tend not to understand the difference between Vatican theology and Catholic theology---the latter being more broadly based and more infused with the "wisdom of the faithful" (sensus fidelium).

A Response to Church-Despiser

One cultured despiser of the Church, brunogiordano, whom I suspect to be a member of Filipino Free Thinker, recently quoted a paragraph from Prof. Daniel Maguire, which highlighted among others that "(The Catholic Church) has a strong 'pro-choice' tradition and a conservative anti-choice tradition. Neither is official and neither is more Catholic than the other."

Prof. Maguire sent two pamphlets--(1) "The Moderate Roman Catholic Position on Contraception and Abortion"; and (2) "A Catholic Defense of Same-Sex Marriage"-- to the US bishops urging them to listen to the voice of Theologians and the wisdom of the laity (sensum fedilium). These two voices--the theological magisterium (teachings of the theologians) and sensus fedilium (experience-fed and graced-wisdom of the faithful)-- can complement and correct the hierarchical magisterium (teachings of the Pope and the bishops).

The AIDS Epidemic – why blame the Church?

The penchant of anti-Church writers to put blame to the Catholic church the ills in society, particularly the recent editorial of the Philippine Daily Inquirer blaming the Catholic church for the AIDS epidemic in our country, is disturbing. I recently found the article of Sr. Verzosa dealing with the said editorial. Here she published the full text of Fr. James McTavish in response to the PDI editorial. I also included below the editorial for easier reference.--jsalvador

The AIDS Epidemic – why blame the Church?

Sr. Mary Pilar Verzosa, RGS

Lovelife

BEING a member of PHILCHAN (Philippine Catholic HIV AIDS Network), I am always on the lookout for any publications on the topic dealing with HIV-AIDS.  This group was started over a year ago with Bishop Broderick Pabillo as chairman because this advocacy is part of some NASSA projects. I was quite peeved then when I came across the Editorial of Phil. Daily Inquirer last July 8, 2012 titled “Overlooked Epidemic” because once again, the bias of some writers against the Catholic Church was evident. I alerted members and indeed, quite a few responded immediately. I would like to quote from this letter made by Fr. James McTavish, a physician and moral theologian, to make sure that it will reach many people since, in our experience,  we are never sure if a letter we send to a newspaper will ever get published.

The Power of the Pork Barrel

Below is the editorial of The Daily Tribune commenting on how the Aquino Administration maneuvered the closure of the interpellation of the proposed Reproductive Health (RH) Bill in the House of Representatives. As expected, the subservient House members to the whim of BS Aquino displayed the tyranny of numbers. Some congressman thought that the RH Bill has been exhaustively debated for more than a decade. However, if one read the various opinions of the columnists, the intellectuals in society, there are grey areas that remained largely misunderstood. For example, we still find columnists criticizing the Church for equating contraception to abortion, without exploring the reasons provided for by the Church. In so doing, they urged people to read the RH Bill, as if they alone have the time to read, arguing that the RH Bill was clear on its language that abortion is unlawful. But the Church is aware of this provision. The Church does not refer to direct abortion but on the use of contraceptives which are abortifacients. I think the debate, for a long time, has been confined within the four corners in Congress and the Church’s plenary assembly. The majority of the people are not involved in the debate. In fact, both sides are accusing each other for misinformation to the public. 

--oOo—

Devil and the deep blue sea

It would be an unenviable situation that congressmen allies of Noynoy will find themselves in today as the House votes on the Reproductive Health (RH) bill since it seems that they are caught between the devil and the deep blue sea.

Their position becomes more precarious as the House majority leader pushed nominal voting for the bill instead of the mere raising of hands.

On Local Issues

Below were two of my commentaries on articles in the local newspaper written by Bobby Nalzaro: Capitol's tv ad and Playing safe?.

--oOo--

I became interested in the local media when Bobby Nalzaro accused Governor Gwen Garcia, who will be running for senator in 2013 elections, for using the TV Ad of the province of Cebu for her exposure at the national level. The TV Ad, focused on Gov. Gwen Garcia, will be aired on national television. For Nalzaro, the ad was not really intended to promote Cebu but to sell Garcia to the Filipino people using the people's money. I thought that was my first and last comment. However, his recent tirade against Congressman Osmena and criticism against the Catholic church call for another comment.

On Congressman Osmena: Playing safe?

His sour relationship with Cong. Tomas Osmena, as far as I recall, has a long history when the latter was then the Mayor of Cebu. I think his attack against the congressman is a continuing tirade and as such I need not react.

As reported, Cong. Osmena will abstain from voting of the RH Bill in Congress today. "I told Raul, I am in favor of the RH bill, but I value our alliance more, so I will just abstain,” he said.

Open Letter to BS Aquino by F. Sionil Jose

Dear Noynoy,

You are now swamped with suggestions and advice, but just the same, I hope you’ll have time to read what this octogenarian has to say.

You were not my choice in the last election but since our people have spoken, we must now support you and pray that you prevail. But first, I must remind you of the stern reality that your drumbeaters ignore: you have no noble legacy from your forbears. It is now your arduous job to create one yourself in the six years that you will be the single most powerful Filipino. Six years is too short a time — the experience in our part of the world is that it takes at least one generation — 25 years — for a sick nation to recover and prosper. But you can begin that happy process of healing.