What is religious freedom?

A kind of controversy erupted recently because a party-list congressman had the brilliant idea of filing a bill, ironically entitled “Religious Freedom in Government Act,” practically banning God in public places. The premise on which the proposed bill stands says:

“The state cannot be seen as favoring one religion over the other, in allowing the prominent conduct and display of religious ceremonies and symbols, respectively in public offices and property.”

And so among provisions are the following: “Religious ceremonies shall not be undertaken within the premises and perimeter of their offices, departments, and bureaus, including publicly owned spaces and corridors within such spaces and corridors within such offices, departments and bureaus.

“Religious symbols shall not be displayed within the premises and perimeter of their offices, departments and bureaus, including publicly owned corridors within such offices, departments, and bureaus...”

If I may say so, this is a crazy idea simply because no one is forcing anyone else to pray or not to pray in public places, to hold some religious activities or not in these places. Things depend on the religious sentiments of the people involved, whether they are in public or private places.

What’s wrong is when you prohibit them to express their religion in public places just because they are government properties. Religion cannot be confined to being purely personal, individual affairs and expressed only in private and secluded places. This is not religious freedom at all.

One carries and lives his religion wherever he is and we should respect this right anytime. The only limitation to this right insofar as public places are concerned is when public disturbance is involved. Otherwise, it should be made to be lived and expressed in the manner desired by the persons involved.

So if more or less everyone or at least a majority agrees to pray before starting their work in government offices, or to put some religious images on their desks, or to have Mass on First Friday, no law should prohibit them from doing so.

Obviously, not everyone can agree to these things, and so a certain tolerance should be exercised by those who don’t agree, and a certain sensitivity and magnanimity should also be practiced by the majority toward the minority in any issue of religion.

In this regard, we have to remind the Catholics and Christians who form the majority in our country to be delicate in living their religion especially when practicing it would cause some unnecessary disturbance in public.

So far, I have not witnessed any big problem in this matter in our country. I believe we are quite a tolerant and understanding people. We hate imposing things on others. We have managed to live in harmony despite the great variety and differences in our religious beliefs and practices.

On the contrary, banning the practice and expression of religion can indicate not religious freedom but rather intolerance and tyranny. It is forcing everyone to tend toward what are called as religious indifference or agnosticism or relativism or atheism.

Of course, everyone is free to assume those beliefs if he chooses them. But they should not be given some undue favorable position to the detriment of those who choose to live their religion even in public places.

It might be relevant to cite a point in the Catechism that talks about religious freedom, especially in the context of a country where you have a composition of majority and minorities in the area of religion:

“If because of the circumstances of a particular people special civil recognition is given to one religious community in the constitutional organization of the state, the right of all citizens and religious communities to religious freedom must be recognized and respected as well.” (2107)

The Catholics in general, whether they are the majority or minority in a given country or place, abide by this teaching. This is the official stand to which everyone is asked to live. Obviously, we need continuing formation and reminders for this ideal to be attained.

But religious freedom is the most fundamental of all our rights and freedoms, since it involves human freedom in its core. On it are based all our other values pertaining to other levels and aspects of freedom, human rights and duties.

It’s also a subject that needs to be studied and understood more penetratingly. We should not be restrained in doing so just because we want peace, order and harmony. We can only achieve true peace, order and harmony when we take this task more seriously.

Otherwise, we will have false versions of religious freedom, prone to be distorted even more.

***

Email: [email protected]