Freedom of religion under threat

POPE Benedict has decided to make religious freedom as the theme of next year’s World Day of Peace. I find this development very interesting and most relevant. The Pope is quite direct on this. Religious freedom fosters peace, he says. It does not undermine peace, much less, destroy it.

In the communiqué that announced this papal decision. It is mentioned that "in many parts of the world there exist various forms of restrictions or denials of religious freedom, from discrimination and marginalization based on religion, to acts of violence against religious minorities.”

What I know is that lately, there had been threats and open attacks on this most fundamental aspect of our freedom. Religious persecutions have surged in India, Indonesia, China and in many other countries. Priests and other Church workers have been killed, churches burned, etc.

In France, students at public schools cannot wear head scarves and large crucifixes. The European Court of Human Rights has prohibited crucifixes from walls of Italian schools.

In the US, there seems to be drift to reduce freedom of religion to mere freedom of worship. That means religion is relegated to the private life of individuals, denying it public expression. This can be observed in the recent speeches of President Barack Obama and Secretary Hillary Clinton.

Religious freedom is the freedom of all freedoms. It’s freedom at its core. It’s the freedom that touches on the most basic and deepest need of man—to believe or not to believe in God or simply in ourselves in whatever frame of mind we can have.

From here spring all the other aspects of freedom—our understanding of human rights, freedom of expression, etc. This freedom of religion simply has to be respected, fostered and defended.

Obviously, the other part of this matter is that religious freedom is also the most delicate aspect of freedom. It can be the most mysterious, the most elusive in terms of understanding it and living it.

But in spite of this character, or rather because of it, we should be unrelenting in our pursuit to really know it and live it. We can never say enough of this effort, choosing to ignore the question for the false reason of avoiding so-called unnecessary trouble.

This excuse is the one offered by President Obama and most likely by Mrs. Clinton herself in talking about freedom of worship more than freedom of religion. Obviously it has its valid point. That’s always the nature of an excuse. It offers a valid point, but it can miss the more crucial part of an issue.

In this case of the freedom of religion, while everything has to be done to avoid public disorder and conflict in order to uphold religious freedom, it should never be reduced simply as a strictly private, personal affair of freedom of worship.

We have to find a way where the true nature of religious freedom can really be seen and appreciated, one that obviously will avoid public disorder and conflict. Thus, the Pope’s message for next year’s World Day of Peace can be most helpful.

In that message, the Pope highlights the basis for freedom of religion. And this is nothing other than the equal and inherent dignity of man. Here are some relevant words of that communique which I think are worth reflecting on.

¨This notion of religious freedom offers us a fundamental criterion for discerning the phenomenon of religion and its manifestations. It necessarily rejects the ´religiosity´ of fundamentalism, and the manipulation and the instrumentalization of the truth and of the truth of man.

¨Since such distortions are opposed to the dignity of man and to the search for truth, they cannot be considered as religious freedom.

¨Rather, an authentic notion of religious freedom offers a profound vision of this fundamental human right, one which broadens the horizons of ´humanity,´ and ´freedom´ of man, allowing for the establishment of deep relationship with oneself, with the other and with the world.¨
We may have to go through these words slowly. It will be an effort that will be truly worthwhile, since it would bring us to the true nature of religious freedom that is now badly understood, let alone, lived.

We have to be wary of the caricatures presented often in the media. They come as a result of some dangerous twists to accommodate perhaps some practical reasons. But such distortions will ultimately destroy the substance of religious freedom.

We may have to go slow but in the right track, rather than go fast but out of track.