Faith in our public life

A speech delivered recently by an American archbishop is, I think, worth noting. The Archbishop is Charles J. Chaput of Denver who gave an address last March 1 before a group of Protestant pastors in Houston, Texas. The topic was "The vocation of Christians in public life."

The speech was about how Christians, particularly the lay faithful occupying official functions, need to live their faith in public, living it in complete consistency and visibility, without hiding or diluting it.

The theme is very relevant to us, because in the world stage today, especially in developed countries like the US and Europe, there's this notorious tendency for Christian politicians to feel a certain unease regarding their faith.

They appear to be ashamed of it, giving the impression that their faith hardly has anything to do with their work. Perhaps they believe that their faith is completely irrelevant to their public actuations, a position that really has no basis. Or, worse, their faith has nothing to say about their work.

Thus, they tend to suspend at least parts of it, or they treat it purely as a private thing with absolutely no public effect. And so there develops a type of dichotomy in their public life and private life, their public views and positions and their conscience, an unhealthy situation, to say the least.

This kind of mentality, sad to say, is also gaining ground in our local scene, and this is what should worry us. We have to correct it, because it is wrong and has dangerous consequences.

In the US, this mentality became an official doctrine with the pronouncement of the former president John F. Kennedy, the first and so far the only Catholic president in the US.

Precisely to the same audience of Protestant pastors in Houston 50 years ago, he described how he as Catholic could be a good president if elected. At that time, there was some public concern over how a Catholic would behave as president.

To pacify that worry, Kennedy proceeded to articulate a doctrine of rigid and absolute separation of Church and state.

In Chaput's words, Kennedy "began the project of walling religion away from the process of governance in a new and aggressive way. He also divided a person's private beliefs from his public duties. And he set the national interest over and against outside religious pressures or dictates."

This Kennedy doctrine prepared the ground for secularism and relativism to take root in society as Christian politicians practically did nothing to stop them. They just flowed with the fashions, with what was popular, and adopted positions openly anti-Christian, saying it was just a public position but personally they were still Christian.

And so, we can see in these countries delicate moral issues that we need to resolve very clearly: abortion, confusion about sexual identity and human nature, disconnection of science and technology from morality, lack of respect for freedom of conscience, questionable educational thrusts in schools, etc.

These issues are slowly invading our shores, and we just have to strengthen our faith, especially that of our leaders, for this eventuality.

Faith and religion are always involved in these issues. While these issues have to be considered under many aspects, we have to understand that the considerations of faith and religion, being so basic in us, should be given priority.

It's in our faith and religion that the fundamental and ultimate meaning of the issues are given. It's where our ultimate common good is determined. The practical, the legal, the social, cultural and historical aspects have to somehow defer to them.

Contrary to some views, being consistent to one's faith and religion in public office does not make him a fanatic, a fundamentalist or detached from reality. Quite the opposite is true.

Obviously, this task is not the primary duty of the clerics, but rather of the laity. They need to be competent and clear about their priorities.

Certainly, they have to do this task properly, knowing which part of the issues are open to opinion and therefore can change, and which are of the nature of the eternal truth, that should not be changed.

They have to master the art of dialogue, knowing how to argue in defense especially of the uncompromisable part of the issues with forcefulness, flexibility and naturalness. This is where their leadership can truly be shown.

 When they make a position, they should refrain from calling it the Christian position, because there can be other positions different from theirs but just as Christian also.

* * *

Email: [email protected]