Rejoinder to Duterte: the Church as people of God

“I am a sinner,” Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who would become Pope Francis, said when asked if he would accept his election as pontiff. “But I trust in the infinite mercy and patience of our Lord Jesus Christ, and I accept in a spirit of penance.”

In this rejoinder to President-elect Rodrigo Duterte, I cite the Pope’s words to underline the fact that the Church considers itself a deeply flawed instrument in the hands of God who works wonders, and thus is able to heal the wounds of a hurting, deeply divided world. I also write from the perspective of “pilgrim voices”—those of us engaged in an essentially unfinished journey.

“People of God” best captures the core of the Church articulated in the 2nd Vatican Council. “Church” does not refer to clergy alone, but to faithful and lay, including those of us who may belong but do not in any official manner represent the Church. It is this modest voice which aspires to respond in the name of the nameless—“we, the people of God.”

It is in this spirit that I accept the President-elect’s invitation not so much to debate as to dialogue on the ways in which the Church can both help or hinder our country’s progress and our people’s welfare. I do not agree with all the positions taken by my Church, but because I have learned to love this imperfect vessel bequeathed by our Lord to Peter, I accept it, warts and all, and in this context wish to share my thoughts.

I have always believed in the “moral miracle” that is the Church. It is a flawed institution composed of men and women with feet of clay. The miracle is that it has survived through the centuries, though it has been misled and debased by lesser mortals. It has survived corrupt popes, monks of dubious reputations, priests who abused the people’s trust. Yet, precisely because He Who is Lord is able to write straight with crooked lines, we are now witness to a living institution that is engaged in some of the most inspired initiatives in our world today, which continue to inspire our youth:

• The “preferential option for the poor,” the mission to the most vulnerable and marginalized in society, as in the favelas of Latin America and townships like Soweto in South Africa.

• The sustained struggle for social justice expressed in the papal encyclicals Populorum Progressio (The Progress of Peoples) and Pacem in Terris (Peace on Earth), addressing the aspirations of the wretched of the earth and the demands of workers, peasants and the urban poor.

• The unerring call to care for the earth expressed in Laudato Si! (the first line of praise from the Canticle of St. Francis) which courageously challenges the captains of industry and world leaders to bequeath a healthier future to our children as the planet confronts the demands of climate justice.

• The healing appeal to forgiveness and reconciliation, to a just peace for our times, stated forcefully in and out of season in countries torn by fratricidal armed conflict in Africa, Asia, the Americas, Europe and the Middle East.

We can find many faults with our Church, its extravagant trappings, its gilded temples and its ornate processions, its princes who may be out of step with their flock, or those in authority who may abuse the gentle and the innocent in their care.

Saints, it is said, are sinners who keep on trying. In our country, the Church has had a checkered history with a mixed review. But the people of God have journeyed forward, faltered, and perhaps at times failed—but not for want of trying. Witness how it has inspired the people power experience 30 years ago which, though faintly, still resonates today, and resonated in the May elections, particularly because on the opposite sides of the political divide stood a Marcos heir and the once-largely-unknown Leni Robredo.

In the political arena, the Church is responsible for the formation of conscience, so that the faithful are able to make informed choices. It was Archbishop Antonio Ledesma, SJ, prelate of Cagayan de Oro, who articulated the “five Cs”—conscience, competence, compassion, companionship and commitment—as criteria in his attempt to assist the people in deciding on their candidates.

When we speak of the separation of Church and state, I believe what is largely at issue is the prohibition of the Church’s intervention in the state’s affairs, and vice versa. What is most objectionable is when religious leaders of different denominations, sects or churches order their adherents who to vote for, without leaving space for discernment, discussion or dissent.

We must abandon this dubious practice in future elections. The directive or prescription by church people to vote for certain candidates under pain of proscription is an objectionable practice that should be stopped once and for all.

Obviously, this dialogue remains unfinished. No one is destined to have the last word. That is not the nature of an honest dialogue, where the objective is not to score points but to appeal to reason, and attempt to reach some form of understanding which at times results in some kind of consensus.

It is my hope that we of different faiths and diverse political persuasions can continue to respectfully exchange thoughts, debate or dissent if we must, with one end in mind: to improve the lot of our people in the margins of society. At the end of the day, that is what being servant-leaders is all about: not so much to lead as to serve our people, particularly the lowliest, where His face shines most brightly.

Ed Garcia taught political science at the University of the Philippines and interdisciplinary studies at Ateneo de Manila. He now serves as consultant on formation at FEU Diliman. He worked at Amnesty International and International Alert in London for over 20 years, and is one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution.