THIS essay is not about letter-writing or a certain type of distance learning, though I must say that what I have in mind must be the original from which these activities sprung.
I am referring to our constant correspondence to grace, actually a duty that we have to be more aware of and more adept in. It’s actually a most indispensable duty without which Christian life would practically be a sham, no matter how colorfully we show our Christianity.
The basis for this duty is the truth that we are God’s creatures who have been endowed with the dignity of being his children also, sharers in his divine life.
God is not content with creating us only. He made us very special, making us in his very image and likeness. This he did by giving us a spiritual nature, with our intelligence and will, that allows us to receive supernatural grace, that in turn elevates us above our nature to be able to participate in his life.
God’s sharing his life with us is a permanent feature of our relationship, whether we are aware of it or not. This can only be broken in hell, when by our own sins we produce an irremediable rupture from him.
This point is worth reiterating, since a common thinking is that while it may be true that God created us, he already left us to be on our own after our creation. This thinking is called in philosophical circles as Deism.
Just to be direct about it, my simple dictionary describes Deism as “the belief, based solely on reason, in a God who created the universe and then abandoned it, assuming no control over life, exerting no influence on natural phenomena, and giving no supernatural revelation.”
Though not professed formally, it is in fact the attitude many of us have. And this has to be corrected, precisely because it is wrong.
God’s relationship with us does not stop with creating us. While God continues to be present in all his creatures, he is especially present in us, and in fact he shares what he has with us.
This is what our faith teaches. After considering that the Son of God became man, called Jesus Christ, and that he offered his life for us, and through the Church and the sacraments remains with us—all this could only mean that he so loves so that he wants to share what he us with us.
We need to go back to this truth many times, to relish it and to engrave it more deeply in our heart so that it can truly shape the way we think, speak and act, so that it can truly shape our life.
We can presume that God never stops prompting us with his grace, precisely to share his life with us. But he does not impose himself on us. He waits for us to correspond to his grace freely.
The problem is that we most of the time ignore these uninterrupted promptings. We forget him, put him at the sidelines, and use him only as some kind of ornament.
Correspondence to grace is our effort to do our part in this relationship of love between God and us. It is supposed to be an existential relationship, lived moment to moment. We are not meant to be alone. We are meant to be with God always.
Thus, our intelligence and will, our spiritual faculties that open us the possibility of being elevated to share in God’s life, should be properly focused. Their main and constant object is God, not just anything we want to know and will.
Using our intelligence and will to pursue only our own personal goals would be an abuse of these faculties, and sooner or later, disastrous consequences would start appearing.
This is the common sickness we have at the moment, so common that it looks like the normal thing to have. Unless focused on God, our faculties cannot resist the lures of what are known as the capital sins: pride, avarice, envy, wrath, lust, gluttony and sloth.
We always need to correspond to God’s grace to the point that we can echo what our Lord once said: “I always do what pleases him (his Father).” (Jn 8,29) That should our attitude always.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Witness vs. whistleblower
WITH the brewing and bruising political “telenovela” we are having at the moment—hopefully it will last only for a season—it might be good to know the distinction between a witness and a whistleblower.
The comparison, for sure, is not idle. Nor is it merely theoretical and abstract. With passions raging, having clear ideas about critical elements involved is truly helpful. It’s a must. It facilitates prudence.
Otherwise, we will be teetering on the edge of stupidity. Never discount that possibility. We have seen it before: massive euphoria over People Power only to fall flat on our faces later precisely because essential duties were ignored.
We have had a number of shameful flashes in the pan. And this is because we tend to leave reason, restraint, prudence and charity behind. We simply burn in our righteousness, not realizing we have already lapsed into lack of charity, justice and even common sense.
The current communal search for truth now being called by some bishops has to take the necessary precautionary measures. But one element that should be borne in mind is the distinction between true witnessing and mere whistleblowing.
Both have to do with truth handling. But a true witness is much more than just a whistleblower.
The whistleblower simply tells on an anomaly or a crime. The witness goes way much further, confessing and testifying not only on an event, but rather on his whole life, his global vision of things and outlook.
The testimony of a whistleblower is limited to a specific time, place and act. That of a witness covers everything. The whistleblower usually creates a stir from time to time. The witness simply lives as witness all the time, in big and small things, in times ordinary and extraordinary.
Only a few can be a whistleblower. But everyone is expected to be a witness. More, the whistleblower should try to be a witness always. This requires effort. In fact, it demands nothing less than continuing conversion.
That is the problem. We often fail to be a true witness. This is simply because we don’t get in vital contact with God who is the truth. We live sincerity in a selective way, only getting those truths that benefit us, while shunning those that require sacrifice. We sometimes invent our own “truth”!
Thus, when we happen to be a whistleblower without being a witness, then all sorts of crazy things happen as we let ourselves play into the hands of the devil. We play the devil’s game. We don’t behave as instruments of God’s providence. And mind you, the devil can be very creative.
Whistleblowing and witnessing have to come from God and end in God. They’re never just one’s strictly personal affair, developed according to one’s personal strategy only, and readily exploited by others, usually politicians with selfish personal agendas.
Our Church leaders should be the first to know this distinction and to realize the enormous challenge of helping the flock live as genuine witnesses of the truth, that is, of God, no less. We should not just stop in encouraging people to be mere whistleblowers.
This requires a tremendous amount of prayers, of sacrifices, and of catechizing, giving good example and constant pastoral care. This also requires a deep grounding in the Church’s social doctrine, so as to come up with clear, not confusing practical indications.
I think the devil is happiest when we, the Church leaders and officials, start going to the streets, shouting and demonstrating, and recklessly spewing statements and judgments everywhere, while neglecting our nontransferrable priestly duties.
An indispensable element for any search for truth, for any effort at being sincere is charity, which includes a lot of understanding for everyone including the culprits, and not taking sides.
Christ forgave all and was even willing to offer his life for that. We can do no less. He taught us this in the Our Father—“Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us.”
This is the most challenging part. While we have to be most rigid and strict in looking for the truth, we should also be most kind and lenient in dispensing understanding and mercy. We respect the laws. We don’t take them into our own hands.
The comparison, for sure, is not idle. Nor is it merely theoretical and abstract. With passions raging, having clear ideas about critical elements involved is truly helpful. It’s a must. It facilitates prudence.
Otherwise, we will be teetering on the edge of stupidity. Never discount that possibility. We have seen it before: massive euphoria over People Power only to fall flat on our faces later precisely because essential duties were ignored.
We have had a number of shameful flashes in the pan. And this is because we tend to leave reason, restraint, prudence and charity behind. We simply burn in our righteousness, not realizing we have already lapsed into lack of charity, justice and even common sense.
The current communal search for truth now being called by some bishops has to take the necessary precautionary measures. But one element that should be borne in mind is the distinction between true witnessing and mere whistleblowing.
Both have to do with truth handling. But a true witness is much more than just a whistleblower.
The whistleblower simply tells on an anomaly or a crime. The witness goes way much further, confessing and testifying not only on an event, but rather on his whole life, his global vision of things and outlook.
The testimony of a whistleblower is limited to a specific time, place and act. That of a witness covers everything. The whistleblower usually creates a stir from time to time. The witness simply lives as witness all the time, in big and small things, in times ordinary and extraordinary.
Only a few can be a whistleblower. But everyone is expected to be a witness. More, the whistleblower should try to be a witness always. This requires effort. In fact, it demands nothing less than continuing conversion.
That is the problem. We often fail to be a true witness. This is simply because we don’t get in vital contact with God who is the truth. We live sincerity in a selective way, only getting those truths that benefit us, while shunning those that require sacrifice. We sometimes invent our own “truth”!
Thus, when we happen to be a whistleblower without being a witness, then all sorts of crazy things happen as we let ourselves play into the hands of the devil. We play the devil’s game. We don’t behave as instruments of God’s providence. And mind you, the devil can be very creative.
Whistleblowing and witnessing have to come from God and end in God. They’re never just one’s strictly personal affair, developed according to one’s personal strategy only, and readily exploited by others, usually politicians with selfish personal agendas.
Our Church leaders should be the first to know this distinction and to realize the enormous challenge of helping the flock live as genuine witnesses of the truth, that is, of God, no less. We should not just stop in encouraging people to be mere whistleblowers.
This requires a tremendous amount of prayers, of sacrifices, and of catechizing, giving good example and constant pastoral care. This also requires a deep grounding in the Church’s social doctrine, so as to come up with clear, not confusing practical indications.
I think the devil is happiest when we, the Church leaders and officials, start going to the streets, shouting and demonstrating, and recklessly spewing statements and judgments everywhere, while neglecting our nontransferrable priestly duties.
An indispensable element for any search for truth, for any effort at being sincere is charity, which includes a lot of understanding for everyone including the culprits, and not taking sides.
Christ forgave all and was even willing to offer his life for that. We can do no less. He taught us this in the Our Father—“Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us.”
This is the most challenging part. While we have to be most rigid and strict in looking for the truth, we should also be most kind and lenient in dispensing understanding and mercy. We respect the laws. We don’t take them into our own hands.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Our Christian identity
THE topic emerged in a recent get-together the Pope had with some priests of Rome . Someone, commenting on what the Pope said in another occasion about our Christian identity, asked:
“How can one propose to young people that the Christian ‘I’, once it puts on Christ, is no longer ‘I’ because there is the communal subject who is Christ?
“How does one propose, Your Holiness, this conversion, this new modality, this Christian originality of being a communion that effectively proposes the newness of the Christian experience?”
I thought the question is most relevant to us these days given our bishops’ call that we subordinate our personal good to the common good, and also their call for some communal action, given the current political controversy.
The Pope replied by saying that the question has to be asked everyday by everyone who realizes he is responsible for others. Then he went into some theologico-historical discussion of the point, very characteristic of him.
For us now we can ask the same question and see how we can effect this transformation of the ‘I’ into a Christian ‘I’ that has a strong communal character because we are supposed to have put on Christ already.
We cannot deny that this is one of our main problems. We seem to be Christians by name or by appearance only. We tend to be individualistic. We are not very consistent with our true Christian identity.
Obviously, this coherence in our Christian identity is a daily effort. It involves the interplay of God’s grace and our personal correspondence. It just cannot be frozen into some social, cultural or legal form. It has to be worked out and lived at every moment.
Much less is this Christian identity built up by transitory emotions and passions that happen to grip us because of some socio-political controversies. We as Christians have to know and behave better than that.
Our Christian identity, of course, is hitched on Christ’s identity and mission. Our ‘I’ should be in accordance with what St. Paul once said: “I live, now not I, but Christ lives in me.” (Gal 2,20)
We have to arrive at that point when we can say in all sincerity that we each are “another Christ, if not Christ himself” (alter Christus, ipse Christus)
Our thoughts, desires and feelings should be such that we become aware these are not only ours, but also Christ’s. And since they are Christ’s, then they should be lived with everyone else in mind. Love for God automatically entails love for others.
This is an ambitious goal, but not impossible. It’s both hard and easy.
In the first place, this is what Christ wants. Besides, we are given the means, and we have the capability. We are assured of God’s grace, we have Christ’s saving doctrine and the sacraments. And we have the freedom to assimilate and use them.
But we have to see to it that we are existentially connected with Christ. Our problem often is that this vital linkage is missing, and we just go on some automatic mode that show certain Christian forms absent the substantiating Christian spirit.
If that Christian spirit is truly present, any pursuit for truth will always be infused by charity, done in the spirit of meekness and humility, never confrontational, willing to suffer and even to die rather than create an agitated communal mess.
Everyone is looking for the truth, but if we are truly Christian, we also have a Christian way for doing that. This way was taught and lived by Christ himself, and is now taught and elaborated, attuned to our times, by the Church magisterium.
It’s mortifying to hear some of our Church leaders cackling in strident dissonance just because of a political issue. What kind of redemption are they working for?
The whole affair makes one wonder whether they have common sense or basic prudence, or are we already entering the end days when false prophets claiming to be Christ start appearing?
We have to start looking into the kind of formation and background of our leaders. Hopefully we won’t have a Pandora’s Box. Whatever, all of us have to help one another and do something about this bungle.
“How can one propose to young people that the Christian ‘I’, once it puts on Christ, is no longer ‘I’ because there is the communal subject who is Christ?
“How does one propose, Your Holiness, this conversion, this new modality, this Christian originality of being a communion that effectively proposes the newness of the Christian experience?”
I thought the question is most relevant to us these days given our bishops’ call that we subordinate our personal good to the common good, and also their call for some communal action, given the current political controversy.
The Pope replied by saying that the question has to be asked everyday by everyone who realizes he is responsible for others. Then he went into some theologico-historical discussion of the point, very characteristic of him.
For us now we can ask the same question and see how we can effect this transformation of the ‘I’ into a Christian ‘I’ that has a strong communal character because we are supposed to have put on Christ already.
We cannot deny that this is one of our main problems. We seem to be Christians by name or by appearance only. We tend to be individualistic. We are not very consistent with our true Christian identity.
Obviously, this coherence in our Christian identity is a daily effort. It involves the interplay of God’s grace and our personal correspondence. It just cannot be frozen into some social, cultural or legal form. It has to be worked out and lived at every moment.
Much less is this Christian identity built up by transitory emotions and passions that happen to grip us because of some socio-political controversies. We as Christians have to know and behave better than that.
Our Christian identity, of course, is hitched on Christ’s identity and mission. Our ‘I’ should be in accordance with what St. Paul once said: “I live, now not I, but Christ lives in me.” (Gal 2,20)
We have to arrive at that point when we can say in all sincerity that we each are “another Christ, if not Christ himself” (alter Christus, ipse Christus)
Our thoughts, desires and feelings should be such that we become aware these are not only ours, but also Christ’s. And since they are Christ’s, then they should be lived with everyone else in mind. Love for God automatically entails love for others.
This is an ambitious goal, but not impossible. It’s both hard and easy.
In the first place, this is what Christ wants. Besides, we are given the means, and we have the capability. We are assured of God’s grace, we have Christ’s saving doctrine and the sacraments. And we have the freedom to assimilate and use them.
But we have to see to it that we are existentially connected with Christ. Our problem often is that this vital linkage is missing, and we just go on some automatic mode that show certain Christian forms absent the substantiating Christian spirit.
If that Christian spirit is truly present, any pursuit for truth will always be infused by charity, done in the spirit of meekness and humility, never confrontational, willing to suffer and even to die rather than create an agitated communal mess.
Everyone is looking for the truth, but if we are truly Christian, we also have a Christian way for doing that. This way was taught and lived by Christ himself, and is now taught and elaborated, attuned to our times, by the Church magisterium.
It’s mortifying to hear some of our Church leaders cackling in strident dissonance just because of a political issue. What kind of redemption are they working for?
The whole affair makes one wonder whether they have common sense or basic prudence, or are we already entering the end days when false prophets claiming to be Christ start appearing?
We have to start looking into the kind of formation and background of our leaders. Hopefully we won’t have a Pandora’s Box. Whatever, all of us have to help one another and do something about this bungle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)