Democracy is not always the Voice of God

A so-called democratic government is not perfect but it is more favourable than a tyrannical dictatorship. The real essence of democracy must prevail as the majority of the populace wishes. This is the main purpose of the election process. Right or wrong after that said day as more majority shall prevail. If the right or wrong decision of the majority is the subject of the judgement, we will know after the term of office.

Since time and memorial, the basis of electing leaders here in our nation is transactional compounded with personality and not analytical. Transactional for the reason that people elect officials base on favours that could be return and compounded with personality on the basis that such candidates are either relatives or popular. On the other hand, when we say analytical, electing leaders should be base on principles and abilities of such to honestly serve the constituents. All the elections, gave us the opportunity to change this wrong habit but apparently it did not happen and just basically repeating history. The candidates that have the qualification and intellect were defeated by even more popular candidates lacking experience, intellect or ability. With this, we can call democracy as democrazy.

In a Christian dominated country like the Philippines, the most important teachings of the Bible are the supremacy of God in the kingdom of man. The Bible clearly teaches that God changes times and seasons.   God sets up kings. God removes them from power.  The wisdom of those who are wise comes from him. God gives knowledge to those who have understanding. (Daniel 2:21) Furthermore, this is the decision of the alert and watchful angels. So then, let all people everywhere know that the Supreme God has power over human kingdoms and that God can give them to anyone that God chooses—even to those who are least important. (Daniel 4:17). God cannot deceive and God cannot lose. God puts and eliminates the kings. The victory of any candidate does not mean that it is the will of God. This is the will of the people. God created man with freedom of choice and respect the freedom of God.

During elections, we always hear the saying in Latin, "Vox populi, VOX DEI," or 'the voice of the people is the voice of God.' This election overuse saying maybe not exactly politically correct but biblically right. The voice of the people may not always reflect the voice of God. The people paid no attention to Samuel, but said,   No! We want a king, so that we will be like other nations, with our own king to rule us and to lead us out to war and to fight our battles.  Samuel listened to everything they said and then went and told it to the Lord. (1 Sam. 8:19-21) But it worked out nicely the reign of Saul. Removed him and replaced his appointed king. In this story the voice of the people are not expressions of the voice of God.

Let us look at another biblical story, when Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!”   All the people answered, “His blood is on us and on our children!”  Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.  (Matthew 27:24-26).

It is not a Biblical premise that the majority is right or the minority is wrong. “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life and only a few find it. (Matthew 7:13-14)

Democracy at the time of the prophet Samuel has resulted in predicaments. Democracy at the time of Pilate also brought more frictional predicaments. Democracy is great if the practice of freedom is within the dimensions of righteousness. For example, does it make sense for Israel to seek the king that is not yet ready to rule the dominion? Is it righteous for the Pilate to sentence to death a person without sin or a crime simply because the public wants? Will it be correct and morally sound to give the leadership of our country to someone who lacks the experience, qualification, intellect, morality and ability? That's democracy, as long as the quantitative majority rules even if qualitative minority have the sense of the right direction they are still to be considered as Rejects of the Democratic Process.

Unreasonable risk to democracy is the wrong that can be considered right or correct based on the decision numerical supremacy. And the right may be considered wrong because it is not popular. A democracy that lacks sense and define reasons will always result to political and economic tragedies. The practice of democracy should be on the border of righteousness that is guided by principles and idealisms. Thus, reasonable minority is much stronger than the more popular decision of the majority.

Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

National President

1st Philippine Pro-Democracy Foundation, Inc.

drteope@yahoo.com