Religion and Politics in the Philippine Setting

THE RUN-UP to the general elections has drawn  religious leaders into the political fray, with some openly supporting certain candidates. 

In February,  Mike Velarde, leader of El Shaddai, and Pastor Apollo Quiboloy, controversial founder of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, went public with their endorsements of Ferdinand  Marcos, Jr. and Sara Duterte. 

Meanwhile, lay groups affiliated or identified with the Catholic Church such as Couples for Christ, Council of the Laity of the Philippines, and Ligaya ng Panginoon  formally expressed support for the Leni Robredo and Kiko Pangilinan tandem.

The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) issued on the 36th anniversary of the EDSA revolt a pastoral letter raising alarm over the historical distortion of the Martial Law and  People Power events, calling on the faithful to stand up for truth.

The level of involvement of individuals and organizations identified with religion has provoked some to complain that such endorsements violate the Constitutional principle of  the separation of Church and State. Not all the media reports which quoted these charges explained what that is and what it means.  

Church and State relations in history 

The paramount role of the Roman Catholic Church in public affairs goes back to the colonization of the country by Spain, whose conquest of the archipelago employed, in real and symbolic terms, the sword and the cross. While the Spanish friars presented other aspects of colonial power and authority, the two institutions, Church and State, were one in the exercise of colonial power,  which was not without tragic effects on the lives of Filipinos.  

In time, as Spanish colonization proceeded, religious edicts and orders led to the unequal treatment of Filipino secular priests, those whose vows were outside such religious orders as the Dominicans or Capuchins, among others. They articulated the need for reforms within the colonial Church. Some of their ideas helped shape the  national resistance, inspiring leaders  of the revolution against Spain. 

The commemoration of the martyrdom of the three priests Burgos, Gomez and Zamora on February 17, 1872 was a timely reminder of how complex a role religion has Player in Philippine history. 

The Catholic Church was the state religion for 400 years of the country’s existence as an outpost of the Spanish empire. The Spanish friars’ political influence persisted, imposing the weight of authority of both state and church through edicts and pastoral directives. 

Not surprisingly, in 1898, the framers of the Malolos Constitution were decisive in enshrining the separation of Church and State. The provision on state religion, Article 5,  read: “The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and State.”

The Americans who took over the islands maintained the idea of a secular state, and  equal respect for and treatment of all religions. While still predominantly, Catholic, the population  opened up to other faiths and some joined Protestant churches. 

Article II, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution states that “The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.” 

The principle does not interfere with religious leaders’ imposing their choice of candidates on their flocks. An outstanding example is the Iglesia Ni Kristo (INK) whose members are believed to vote as one according to the guidance of the current head of the church. 

Neither does the Constitution prohibit the engagement of religious personalities or even leaders of religious groups in political activities as citizens. Voting is believed by many as an act of conscience and conscience is often shaped by religion and moral precepts. 

Religious groups are however banned from registering as political parties, as stated in Article IX-C, Section 2.5 of the 1987 Constitution. Additionally, the Omnibus Election Code prohibits religious and non-religious leaders alike from coercing subordinates into voting for or against any candidate. 

Surveys have shown that “religiosity” remains part of the national character, and that religious leaders retain remarkable degrees of respect. Respect for “men and women” of the cloth is evident, despite the common failure of members of the flock to practice religious teachings. But history has also left a strong anti-clericalism tradition among Filipinos. The interrogation of priests’ participation in political affairs is thus a recurring theme. 

More recent experience 

A provocative example of the Church’s engagement in political affairs, Cardinal Jaime Sin in 1979 issued a pastoral letter on the struggle for human dignity. The letter, delivered seven years into martial rule, was a reaction to circumstances that called for vigilance in behalf of a fair and just society. 

Part of the letter read: “Access to power by any group of persons can end up in abuse and tyranny. A society of justice and peace can be created and can survive only if we are willing to make the needed sacrifices, and exercise continual vigilance. It is to the attainment of these objectives — and not to the flowering of violence — that our present crisis challenges us.”

Years later, during the Power People Revolution, Cardinal Sin spoke over the church station Radio Veritas urging the public to stand with “our two good friends” in Camp Crame on EDSA. Sin, then the highest official of the Roman Catholic Church in the country,  enjoined the people to unite with defectors Fidel Ramos and Juan Ponce Enrile toward the defeat of the Marcos dictatorship.

Sin’s proactive stance vs. the Marcos regime has driven many Catholic religious leaders to shy away from political positions, some deriving this view from  Vatican directives. But enough priests and nuns retain the belief that political issues reflect moral choices and involve judgments that cannot be separated from religious convictions. 

Currently, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines has issued a pastoral letter for the elections on the 36th anniversary of the EDSA Revolution. The letter calls on all citizens to use their  vote for the good of society. It also raised concern over a “neglect of truth,” particularly in the distortion of abuses recorded during the martial law years,  ahead of the polls.

Bishop Pablo David, President of the CBCP, recalled the invitation of Pope Francis toward a renewed appreciation of politics for the common good.

David clarified that the Church does not want to appropriate the laity’s role in the ordering of society. “Nor do we intend to usurp the role of the government. We are here to provide moral and spiritual guidance in accord with our mission of proclaiming the truth from our faith,” David added.  

In 2019, Fr. Amado Picardal wrote an opinion piece on  Rappler which similarly argued that “[The separation of Church and State] is not about what the Church is forbidden to do – getting involved in politics. It is about what the state is prohibited from doing – the establishment of an official state religion and the use of public money to support such religion.” Picardal added that there is no explicit prohibition on any religious group from participating in political activity. As citizens of the country, members of religious groups are free to exercise and fulfill their civil rights and obligations.

Indeed, Article III, Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution provides, “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.” 

In a similar vein, BusinessMirror in an editorial defended the CBCP’s commentary on political issues. Its editorial titled “Separation of Church and State” condemned the practice of attacking the assembly’s positions solely on the grounds that they are a religious organization.

For journalist Joel Pablo Salud, history remembers the Catholic Church’s part in the resistance against tyranny. “With its resources and influence, the Church alone stood between Marcos and a population too bamboozled as to what to do given the sudden barrage of restrictions to its freedoms and display of open violence by the State,” Salud wrote in Licas News.

Forthcoming endorsements from religious leaders should prompt media to provide more context about the relationship of  State and  Church. 

And in this critical period, a vigorous exchange about the virtues or vices of candidates should be encouraged in principle.