Faith and Governance in the Philippines: A Dangerous Embrace?

By Louis ‘Barok‘ C. Biraogo — February 6, 2025

PICTURE this: a nation where 81% of its citizens believe that the Bible should shape national laws. Where nearly three-quarters see religion as inseparable from their identity as Filipinos. And where more than half insist that their leaders must share their faith to earn trust. This isn’t some distant theocracy—it’s modern-day Philippines, according to a recent Pew Research Center survey. But beneath these numbers lies a complex web of legal contradictions, social tensions, and ethical dilemmas that demand closer scrutiny.

The findings are striking, even for a country steeped in Catholic tradition. Fifty-one percent of Filipinos want the Bible to have a “great deal” of influence on legislation, while another 30% favor a “fair amount.” Only 11% think it should have no influence at all. These figures reflect not just religious devotion but also a cultural mindset that conflates piety with patriotism. Yet, they raise urgent questions about what such attitudes mean for democracy, pluralism, and minority rights in one of Asia’s most vibrant yet fragile republics.

A Constitution Under Strain

Let’s start with the law. The Philippine Constitution is clear: church and state must remain separate. Article II, Section 6 declares this principle “inviolable,” while Article III guarantees freedom of religion. It’s a framework designed to protect both believers and non-believers, ensuring that governance remains rooted in reason and evidence rather than dogma.

But here’s the rub: if lawmakers were to heed the majority’s wishes and draft policies based on biblical teachings, they’d risk violating constitutional safeguards. Consider past battles over reproductive health laws or divorce—issues where the Catholic Church has wielded outsized influence. Each time, courts have stepped in to uphold secular principles, reminding us that public policy must serve everyone, regardless of creed.

Yet the survey suggests that many Filipinos either misunderstand or reject this balance. Their preference for Bible-based laws could embolden politicians to push unconstitutional measures under the guise of popular will. What happens when democratic majorities clash with constitutional protections? That’s a question Filipinos may soon face head-on.

Religious Nationalism and Its Discontents

This debate isn’t merely academic; it’s deeply political. The Pew report frames these attitudes within the broader phenomenon of religious nationalism—a worldview that equates national identity with adherence to a dominant faith. In the Philippines, this means privileging Christianity, particularly Catholicism, above other belief systems.

Such thinking carries risks. For one, it marginalizes minorities—Muslims, indigenous peoples, atheists—who already struggle for recognition in a predominantly Christian society. Imagine being an atheist lawmaker trying to argue against Bible-inspired legislation or a Muslim student forced to recite Christian prayers in school. These aren’t hypothetical scenarios; they’re lived realities for many Filipinos today.

Moreover, religious nationalism can erode social cohesion. Younger generations, especially in urban areas, tend to be more secular. They’re less likely to see faith as essential to being Filipino. This generational divide could widen existing fault lines, pitting traditionalists against progressives in ways that undermine national unity.

Ethics in the Public Square

Then there’s the moral dimension. Should public policy reflect universal principles of justice and human dignity—or the tenets of a specific religion? Advocates of Bible-based laws often argue that scripture offers timeless wisdom. But critics counter that cherry-picking verses to justify policy decisions invites bias and exclusion.

Take LGBTQ+ rights, for example. Many Filipinos oppose same-sex marriage on religious grounds, despite growing global acceptance of equality. Or consider reproductive health: activists fought for years to pass a law providing access to contraceptives, only to face fierce resistance from conservative groups citing Catholic doctrine. These examples highlight the tension between personal morality and public ethics—a tension that won’t disappear anytime soon.

Power Dynamics at Play

To understand why these debates persist, we must examine who stands to gain—and lose—from greater religious influence in governance. Religious institutions wield significant sway in the Philippines, shaping everything from education to electoral outcomes. Politicians, eager for endorsements and votes, often cater to clerical demands, creating a symbiotic relationship that blurs the line between spiritual and temporal authority.

Meanwhile, marginalized groups find themselves sidelined. Indigenous communities, for instance, practice animist traditions that predate Christianity yet receive little recognition in mainstream discourse. Similarly, atheists and agnostics face stigma for rejecting organized religion altogether. By amplifying the majority’s voice, surveys like Pew’s inadvertently silence these quieter ones.

Lessons from Abroad

Globally, countries offer mixed lessons on balancing faith and governance. Indonesia, despite being Muslim-majority, maintains a secular constitution and protects minority rights—a model worth emulating. France takes a stricter approach through laïcité, banning overt religious symbols in public spaces to ensure neutrality. Neither system is perfect, but both underscore the importance of safeguarding pluralism in diverse societies.

Contrast this with nations where religion dominates politics—Pakistan, Iran, or Saudi Arabia come to mind. There, theocratic impulses often stifle dissent, suppress women’s rights, and fuel sectarian violence. Is this the path Filipinos wish to tread?

A Way Forward

So how does the Philippines navigate this minefield? First, policymakers must reaffirm their commitment to secular governance. Laws should derive from evidence and universal values, not scriptural interpretations. Civic education campaigns could help bridge the gap between public opinion and constitutional ideals, fostering a deeper understanding of why separation matters.

Second, religious leaders should focus on moral advocacy without seeking legislative power. Faith can inspire compassion and service without dictating policy specifics. After all, true spirituality transcends denominational boundaries, speaking to shared humanity rather than sectarian interests.

Finally, civil society must step up. Interfaith dialogues, grassroots activism, and media watchdogs play crucial roles in holding elites accountable and amplifying marginalized voices. Democracy thrives when every citizen feels heard—not just those who shout loudest.

Conclusion

The Pew survey paints a vivid portrait of Filipino aspirations—but also exposes fault lines that threaten the nation’s future. As the Philippines approaches its 2025 elections, voters must ask themselves: Do we want a government that reflects our deepest convictions, or one that respects our collective diversity? The answer will shape not only the next administration but generations to come.

History warns us: when faith stifles freedom or freedom tramples faith, both crumble. Nations rise or fall on the wisdom of their people. The question is—will Filipinos rise to the occasion?