RH Bill and the Church

To show the seriousness of its opposition to the Reproductive Health Bill that is awaiting plenary approval at Congress, the Roman Catholic Church called its faithful not to choose candidates who would vote in favor of the bill. Can the Roman Catholic Church speak for all Christians in the country? What compelling reason does it have to challenge the state on a matter of public policy?

Firstly, according to the Catholic doctrine of the church, ecclesiology in theological parlance, there is only one church of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the fullness of God’s grace in Jesus Christ subsists solely in the Roman Catholic Church. Certainly, the overflowing abundance of God’s grace is far greater than what the church can hold but it is only partially available outside the church. Hence, the Catholic Church in the Philippines can speak with authority to all Filipino Christians.

Secondly, in Roman Catholic theology there are certain matters that are solely the prerogative of God, such as the conception and termination of human life. Human beings are endowed by God with freedom but its exercise is not absolute but relative to God’s sovereignty being the author of life. The conception of human life is not to be tampered with for whatever reason. Hence, the use of contraception which literally means “against” conception is an intrusion of God’s prerogative. For the same reason, suicide is a sin because it robs God of his rights. The application of any human means or tool that interferes with the natural conception of human life as a result of sexual intercourse is considered violative of divine law. The greatest offence against God is hubris, the usurpation of God’s office.

For the Catholic Church, birth control or family planning or whatever name it may come is not subject to human debate because it lies outside the purview of human freedom. It should not come as a surprise that some of the arguments against the RH bill coming from the Catholic Church show little appreciation of the letter as well as the spirit of the bill. Those who are engaged in the debate could have failed to engage the church on theological grounds. It may be possible to demonstrate the necessity, soundness and beneficial effects of a state policy, but for the church that is irrelevant and of no consequence because human reason must bow down to divine truths. Perhaps it’s simply beyond non-Catholics to realize that human reason does not operate where the church exercises its teaching authority, the magisterium, over the faithful.

From the perspective of a non-Catholic, like myself, a compromise that insures the right of the state to preserve the well-being of the citizens and that also preserves the right of the church to teach the faithful is not possible to achieve as regards the RH Bill. In other words, what might be a fair and balanced compromise bill would actually do violence to the integrity of both the church and the state. A possible way through of this imbroglio is to allow both sides to do their duties: let the state craft a bill that would uphold the citizens’ well-being, and also let the church teach the faithful the right understanding of the faith to protect them from sinning. Then give the people who are both citizens and Roman Catholic the freedom to choose and do what their mind and conscience tell them. In the final analysis, the state and the church should not deprive the people the freedom to decide for themselves.