Catholics but not de cajon

On February 26, 2010, the Archdiocese of Davao, together with the Holy Cross of Davao College, held a Presidential Mock Elections. Many were encouraged to participate, but only few responded. (I'm not one of those few.) Of the almost 9,000 population of HCDC, only 1,000-plus voted.

Meanwhile, in the said mock elections, Noynoy Aquino won. (I will give the specifics later.)

It's a curious thing that Noynoy won, at least as far as HCDC is concerned. In the first place, HCDC is a Catholic school. As such, it subscribes to the teachings of the Catholic Church. One of its teachings is the sanctity of life. Which is why the Catholic Church opposes the Reproductive Health Bill because, the way the Hierarchy interprets it, the bill undermines the sanctity of life.

This same bill Noynoy Aquino supports.

Now how can we explain this anomaly? It could mean that Holy Crossians are ignorant of Noynoy's stand on the RH Bill. Or Noynoy's stand on the RH Bill is the least of the voter's consideration, which means that voters still don't think about issues and the candidate's stand on them. Or Holy Crossians, though most of them are Catholics, simply are not de cajon; they know just how to think for themselves. They have a mind of their own.

The Catholic Church as a lobbyist

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="300" caption="(Photo courtesy of www.nationalreview.com)"][/caption]



The fact that Catholic believers are launching an all-out war against the passage of the RH Bill into law is no cause for alarm. By all indications, it does not mean that we are going back to the middle ages when there's no distinction between the state and the church. It isn't a return to history. Far from it.

We should rather see the role especially of the Catholic Church in a different light. When the Catholic Church is vehemently opposing the RH Bill, in my opinion, it assumes the role of the lobbyist. The Catholic Church thus becomes one among many players of our democratic system that tries to use state apparatus to protect its special interest. Shutting its members from the debate over the passage of the RH Bill because it is entirely a secular matter betrays the democratic ideals that we espouse.

This, I realized after reading Robert Samuelson's Lobbying is Democracy in Action.

"We are a collection of special interests, and one person's special interest is another's job or moral crusade," writes Samuelson. "If people can't organize to influence government—to muzzle or shape its powers—then democracy is dead."

In the Philippine political context, it so happened that the Catholic Church wields considerable power so that it can influence the government like no other other interest groups can.

But the Catholic hierarchy should be too careful to not get lost along the way. While it has the right to oppose the RH Bill, it may be well to remind its hierarchy and its members that the state does not exist for Catholics alone.

Manuel L. Quezon III had it right when he issued this caveat: "our Republic does not exist for Catholics alone, and this means that their faith and morals cannot be made the exclusive basis for state policy."