(Disclaimer: In writing this article, I have carefully considered the words in voicing my opinion. I do not favor any person, class or belief, nor do I hate any religion, in this article. The topic of this article is my professional, and to an extent, personal opinion on the wisdom and logic behind the declaration of holidays by the chief executive.)
Today, Ka Eraño Manalo is going to be laid to rest. My sincerest condolences to his family and the entire Iglesia ni Cristo.
But must everyone feel mournful of the spiritual leader's demise? I do not agree.
Since we adhered to the American notion of democracy, the separation of the Church and the State was enunciated in the Constitution. It sprung forth from the lessons we derived during the Spanish era, when religious doctrines were laid down as public law, and the violation thereof carries with it state sanctioned penalties. Today, religion can neither dictate what the state should or should not do nor can religion hold any clout on political decisions made by duly elected leaders. The primacy of the Church is in the spiritual field and the government, as an institution, is shielded from it, hence it can decide on highly contentious issues without requiring religious imprimatur.
The Constitution in Section 5 of Article III further states that "No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights." It clearly provides for the rights of the people to exercise their religion within the bounds of law and the morality of their dogmas.
But the decision of the President to declare that today shall be a day of national mourning for the spiritual leader is unprecedented. It was even declared a special non-working holiday - a holiday as defined by the Labor Code and as understood by the common man. The question herein is a political in nature, hence, it is beyond the bounds of a constitutional controversy and within the wisdom of the promulgating authority. But the logic behind is open for interpretation and question.
Who is Eraño Manalo for the Filipinos? Is he a endeared by the entire population so as to render him worthy for the declaration of a holiday? Are his contributions to the society enough to merit him such honor? Will the funeral entourage consist of millions of Filipinos that a holiday has to be declared for all of them to view it? Is he a soldier to merit him honor guards from the Philippine Military Academy? Who is Eraño Manalo to a non-Iglesia ni Cristo?
I answer that he is an ordinary Filipino, like you and me, not much different but not much the same.
Again, I do not question the honor bestowed on him, if such honor is due. But to honor him like that reserved to Presidents and heroes is much different. When Cory Aquino died a month ago, she was buried with honors because she was a former Head of State and Commander-and-Chief. Her casket was carried on top of a truck, and hundreds of thousands flocked the streets to bid her adieu, and it could have been a million had the weather been kinder. She was an international icon of democracy.
She deserved it. Does Eraño deserve it too?
Probably he does, for founding a religion that tells its members to vote only the candidates they choose. Wise decision for Gloria Arroyo. The Philippine President has decided to declare the burial of Ka Erdie as a holiday and she moves the celebration of our Independence Day from the 12th of June to the nearest Monday. Holiday economics? Or a pure blatant attempt at politicking?
Again, I do not disagree at giving honor when honor is due. But if politics mar the grant of honor, it loses its altruistic character and gives it a face of disgrace.
My sincerest apologies to those who do not agree with my opinion and you are free to comment.
Ka Eraño Manalo, may you rest in God's peace.
No comments:
Post a Comment