What drives corruption in a religious country?

A special committee of the United Nations has just released the results of a review, stating that “corruption remains pervasive in all branches of government and the wider public sector” in the Philippines. It has recommended that the country “promptly, independently, and impartially investigate and prosecute all cases of corruption, particularly high-level corruption, including corruption in the government and the judiciary, and if a person is convicted, apply penalties commensurate with the offense.”

This observation validates what the Transparency International (TI)’s Corruption Index had earlier found. Among 180 countries in 2023, the Philippines ranked 115th in corruption perception at 34. The highest score in TI’s Corruption Index is 100; the lowest, zero. Beyond the numbers, it is not hard to imagine that rampant and unbridled corruption is one of the major causes of widespread and abject poverty, which, to its victims, means powerlessness, marginalization, and exclusion.

These findings made me wonder how and why this situation can happen in a religious country like the Philippines. At the heart of this inquiry is the understanding that organized religion, particularly Roman Catholic, the most predominant Christian denomination in the country, encompasses and integrates correct beliefs with ethical living. Its basic ethics prohibits actions associated with stealing, lying, and bearing false witness. Addressing corruption solely through prohibitions is often ineffective; there must be consequences and enforcement mechanisms to minimize, if not eradicate cognitively dissonant behaviors.

Several factors must be recognized to explain its prevalence and persistence to avoid committing what social psychologists call fundamental attribution error. These include a culture of impunity, a personalist orientation, and an increasingly secular and consumerist environment that nurtures a form of religion lacking a transformative and liberating function for society as a whole.

Can religion serve as a solution, or is it part of the problem? Is there a facet of intense religiosity that either impedes or fosters a culture of corruption? What messages have church leaders conveyed to their supposed corrupt members who may not be aware that their actions do not square with their religious beliefs and shared moral values of honesty, truthfulness, and social justice? In this election season, what inspiration and support can the institutional church provide to its good laymen and women who, without fear or favor, are waging their uphill battles against high-stakes corruption?

In addition to issuing pastoral letters on public morals and delivering parenetic homilies, I suggest that the church “promptly, independently, and impartially” confront the perceived divide between its beliefs and ethics directly if it aims to “deprivatize” (as J.B. Metz puts it) its convictions and make a meaningful impact on the lives of the countless voiceless victims of pervasive and fatal corruption.

NOEL ASIONES,
noelgasi2000@yahoo.com