I JUST would like to put in my two
cents’ worth in this
issue of separation of Church and state. This issue has been hogging
the limelight lately, and all sorts of ideas have arisen, including
the wrong and dangerous ones.
To be sure, both Church and state have to be united and have to know
how to work in tandem, because both serve the same people who are both
Christian faithful and citizens. Of course, their service is distinct
from each other, not divided, much less hostile to each other, with
the Church working for the spiritual and eternal common good, and the
state for the material and eternal common good.
The separation of Church and state has to be understood
properly. When Christ said, “Render to Caesar the things that are
Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s,” (Mt 22,21) he
certainly did not mean that there are two mutually exclusive
authorities here on earth.
God is the supreme authority to whom even the most
powerful earthly authority has to pay obeisance. After all, as St.
Paul said in his Letter to the Romans, “there is no authority except
from God, and those which exist are established by God.” (13,1)
We have to junk that notion that all authority here on
earth simply emanates from the people. That’s a Godless understanding
of authority and power that would consider these values detached from
God’s providence and fully dependent on our common will, considered as
the supreme will beholden to no higher authority.
We need to understand that “the things of Caesar” are also
part of the “things of God” except that given our earthly condition
and the way we handle “the things of Caesar,” meaning all our temporal
and mundane affairs that have to be regulated by an earthly authority,
we enjoy a certain autonomy that is proper to our human nature that
enjoys our God-given freedom.
Part of the peculiarity of our temporal and mundane
affairs, especially our politics, is that there are no uniform
positions to be regarded as so necessary as to be assumed by everyone.
Things would depend on a great variety of conditions—one’s background,
aptitude, culture, history, orientations, personal preferences and
taste, etcetera. And these, complex and complicated as they are, have
to be respected.
Of course, the way to resolve and integrate all this vast
variety of different positions has to be agreed upon by a certain
consensus. In this regard, we have to contend with the reality that
there will be no “perfect” position in a given issue or “perfect’
solution to a given problem.
We just have to contend with what is workable and
effective for at least a period of time and to the majority of the
people without entirely neglecting the preferences of the minority.
While we should try our best to accommodate everyone, we should not
forget that we cannot please everyone. We just have to learn with that
fact of life.
So, any politician or political program that touts to have
all the solutions to all the problems of the country, i.e., that
promises a utopia, is definitely a false leader and a questionable
program.
The Church actually has something to say on anything about
our temporal and earthly affairs, since everything in our human
affairs has a moral and spiritual bearing. Yes, this can include our
politics. In fact, our political activities carry with them a heavy
moral and spiritual burden that would and should be of great concern
to the Church.
The Church may not have the competence to talk about the
technicalities of these human affairs, but it not only has the
competence but also the authority to speak on the moral and spiritual
aspects of the issues involved.
Within the Church, the hierarchy and the clergy, from the Pope down to
the latest deacon, should not be partisan, though they can and in
certain instances should talk about the moral and spiritual
dimensions. In this, they should avoid even sounding partisan.
These pronouncements, put as reminders, suggestions or clarifications,
should not be considered as partisan. Rather, they simply are views
which the rest of the faithful are invited to consider.
It’s the laity in the Church who can be partisan based on their
conscientious assessments of the issues involved. In resolving their
differences, everyone is invited always to be respectful and
charitable.
The Church leaders can only take strong positions in politics when
serious issues needing clear Christian guidance are involved. The
laity themselves should also take active part in this. Let’s remember
that the Church includes both clerics and laity.
issue of separation of Church and state. This issue has been hogging
the limelight lately, and all sorts of ideas have arisen, including
the wrong and dangerous ones.
To be sure, both Church and state have to be united and have to know
how to work in tandem, because both serve the same people who are both
Christian faithful and citizens. Of course, their service is distinct
from each other, not divided, much less hostile to each other, with
the Church working for the spiritual and eternal common good, and the
state for the material and eternal common good.
The separation of Church and state has to be understood
properly. When Christ said, “Render to Caesar the things that are
Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s,” (Mt 22,21) he
certainly did not mean that there are two mutually exclusive
authorities here on earth.
God is the supreme authority to whom even the most
powerful earthly authority has to pay obeisance. After all, as St.
Paul said in his Letter to the Romans, “there is no authority except
from God, and those which exist are established by God.” (13,1)
We have to junk that notion that all authority here on
earth simply emanates from the people. That’s a Godless understanding
of authority and power that would consider these values detached from
God’s providence and fully dependent on our common will, considered as
the supreme will beholden to no higher authority.
We need to understand that “the things of Caesar” are also
part of the “things of God” except that given our earthly condition
and the way we handle “the things of Caesar,” meaning all our temporal
and mundane affairs that have to be regulated by an earthly authority,
we enjoy a certain autonomy that is proper to our human nature that
enjoys our God-given freedom.
Part of the peculiarity of our temporal and mundane
affairs, especially our politics, is that there are no uniform
positions to be regarded as so necessary as to be assumed by everyone.
Things would depend on a great variety of conditions—one’s background,
aptitude, culture, history, orientations, personal preferences and
taste, etcetera. And these, complex and complicated as they are, have
to be respected.
Of course, the way to resolve and integrate all this vast
variety of different positions has to be agreed upon by a certain
consensus. In this regard, we have to contend with the reality that
there will be no “perfect” position in a given issue or “perfect’
solution to a given problem.
We just have to contend with what is workable and
effective for at least a period of time and to the majority of the
people without entirely neglecting the preferences of the minority.
While we should try our best to accommodate everyone, we should not
forget that we cannot please everyone. We just have to learn with that
fact of life.
So, any politician or political program that touts to have
all the solutions to all the problems of the country, i.e., that
promises a utopia, is definitely a false leader and a questionable
program.
The Church actually has something to say on anything about
our temporal and earthly affairs, since everything in our human
affairs has a moral and spiritual bearing. Yes, this can include our
politics. In fact, our political activities carry with them a heavy
moral and spiritual burden that would and should be of great concern
to the Church.
The Church may not have the competence to talk about the
technicalities of these human affairs, but it not only has the
competence but also the authority to speak on the moral and spiritual
aspects of the issues involved.
Within the Church, the hierarchy and the clergy, from the Pope down to
the latest deacon, should not be partisan, though they can and in
certain instances should talk about the moral and spiritual
dimensions. In this, they should avoid even sounding partisan.
These pronouncements, put as reminders, suggestions or clarifications,
should not be considered as partisan. Rather, they simply are views
which the rest of the faithful are invited to consider.
It’s the laity in the Church who can be partisan based on their
conscientious assessments of the issues involved. In resolving their
differences, everyone is invited always to be respectful and
charitable.
The Church leaders can only take strong positions in politics when
serious issues needing clear Christian guidance are involved. The
laity themselves should also take active part in this. Let’s remember
that the Church includes both clerics and laity.
No comments:
Post a Comment