Amen to Secularism

(September 23 - October 5, 2007)
by Minnie I. Salao

Minnie Salao

I grew up in an environment where Catholicism was the only religion. I was resigned to the belief that religion was a personal issue and need not to be discussed. I would usually brush off any conversation on religion as I always thought that it would end up as a heated debate. Finding myself in an IAF program on religion was my way of opening up to an inter-faith dialogue.

I joined a two-week seminar with participants from states that were classified as predominantly Christian, Muslim, mixed and secular. The topic “Liberalism and Secularism was experimental,” and indeed it was a challenging but worthy feat. The mere fact that Catholics and Muslims and Jews were in one room was already remarkable. Bringing them together to discuss religion was of course even more momentous.

What is secularism? The general notion is that it is the separation of state and religion. However, this definition is biased towards the state because only religion’s interference in its affairs is considered. For as long as religion does not impinge on politics then secularism is achieved. But it must be said that the state also has a role towards religion. It has to ensure that freedom of religion is observed and respected, and that rules are applicable to all, regardless of religion.

The program included a lecture on philosophers that discussed religion and liberalism theories. Prominent liberal thinkers emphasized religious tolerance. John Locke said that any religious practice or form should be allowed provided that it does not do harm to others. David Hume asserted that reason is more important than belief. Adam Smith, the Father of Economics, also related the invisible hand of the market to religion.

We had a working session where we discussed the influence and impact of religion on the political and social sphere. I was grouped with the Latin Americans and Russians. It was interesting how we easily came to the agreement that religion plays an important role in anchoring a nation and its people. In spite of the fact that we came from three different continents, we shared the same notion that religion provided, more than food on the table, hope and resilience. We also noted that in nations where a particular religion is practiced by the majority, people tend to be more dependent on it and would subscribe to its teachings rather than to the law.

The other working sessions were more stimulating when participants of different denominations were put into one group. These discussions were taxing as consensus was hard to build. In the end, we would just create a matrix juxtaposing our respective religion’s stand on issues. We also had a debate on violence against women and abortion, two issues where religious values tend to conflict with individual choice.

I especially enjoyed our visit to a Catholic school in Dresden. We toured the campus and it was interesting for me to see on the bulletin board art posters on the different religions. The principal welcomed our questions on the school set-up. A co-participant asked on their staff composition and the principal explained that they hire teachers of no particular denomination as long as they have a religion. This answer elicited a discourse on employment discrimination. The principal patiently explained that having faith is one of the core values of the school, and teachers must possess this in order that students learn to practice it too. He also offered the information that a certain percentage of their funds come from the Catholic Church. Hence, I inquired whether the Church makes any impositions on the school’s curriculum, and the principal vehemently responded “no.” Coming from the Philippines where the school curriculum (i.e. inclusion of sex education) is practically dictated by the Church, this was a pleasant pronouncement.

Another important point raised was whether there was any conflict between the principles of science and religion, for example, American creationism or the religiously-motivated rejection of evolution. The principal, as well as the science teacher who was also present, told us that this was a non-issue at the school. It was simply a matter of presenting Darwinian theory and the biblical story at two equal levels and allowing the students to evaluate the concepts themselves.

Another informative meeting was in Cologne where an Islam mosque is being built. The City Council admitted that it was a tough decision to support its construction, but they recognized the presence of the Muslim community that needed it. Among the dissent was the mosque’s possible distortion of the silhouette of Cologne. The cathedral’s dominance of the Cologne skyline became the basis of the architecture of the mosque. Interestingly true.

The most impassioned discussion was of course on religious radicalism. Note that the term was radicalism and not fundamentalism. It was agreed upon by the group that the latter was not a reason for extremism. How can Al Qaida justify terrorism by citing the teachings in the Quran? Why was the Muslim community offended by the Dutch caricature on Mohammed? What is the root of religious separatism? People try to rationalize their actions by the quoting their holy books which is greatly subject to interpretation. What is needed is an open mind in understanding the message. Believers should not take the Word verbatim but look at it from a liberal point of view and apply it depending on the context.

Assessing the influence of religion in the Philippines, I would say that the country is still far from detaching religion from politics. Catholicism is embedded in the culture, and it has become the identity of the nation. The role of the Church in affecting change in governance cannot be disregarded. The two People Power revolutions were sparked by the Church, and it is believed that no political leader can ever inspire a movement as such without the backing of the Church. Politicians cannot ignore religious groups because of the block votes they provide. We witnessed the overwhelming victory of a priest in the May 2007 elections. We attribute the indifference of our citizens to Erap’s acquittal of plunder to our Catholic values of compassion and forgiveness.

In spite the majority of Filipinos being Catholic, the country is tolerant of other denominations. We may a continuing Moro insurgency in the south, but we persistently engage them in the peace process. We celebrate Eid’l Fitr with the Muslim community by declaring it a national holiday.

One of the lecturers in the seminar said: The core of tolerance is ignorance. I was taken a back by that statement. Can we simply close our eyes to the growing dissension because of our differences in beliefs? Should we just shut our ears to the demands of the other faiths? For the entire duration of the seminar, I was asking myself what was my purpose for attending. In the end, I realized that simply speaking up and sharing my views to allow others to understand – and not ignore – my religion was significant enough. We can steadfastly hold onto our religious beliefs, but we cannot plainly choose to discount other’s faiths. It is only by being sensitive to other’s conviction that we can harmoniously co-exist.

I left the Academy in search of a term that means greater than tolerance. Fortunately, in a conference I attended in December 2007, it hit me — the word is respect.

The next time I go to Makati Cinema Square, I can now see our Muslim friends as more than just DVD sellers!