Spiritual man vs. carnal man

THIS distinction, I believe, is most basic and indispensable to be

known by all. I would even go to the extent of saying that it would be

criminal to be ignorant of it, since it gives us the two fundamental

choices we have to make in our life. We cannot go on with our life

without knowing and making these options, one or the other.

    The distinction comes from St. Paul. In his first letter to the

Corinthians, he talks about what is to be spiritual and what is to be

unspiritual or sensual, carnal, worldly. First he says that a man is

known by the spirit that is in him.

    “For what man knows the things of a man, but the spirit of the man

that is in him?” (2,11) Then he talks about two basic spirits: the

Spirit of God or the spirit of the world. “Now we have received not

the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we

might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God.” (2,12)

    Then he describes this truth of faith, this doctrine in this way: “We

impart this (Spirit of God) in words not taught by human wisdom but

taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who

possess the Spirit.” (2,13)

    A comparison between the spiritual man and the unspiritual man

follows. “The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit

of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand

them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man judges

all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.” (2,14)

    The spiritual man enters and will have the “mind of Christ.” The

unspiritual man remains simply with his own mind. This is a

distinction that can only be accessed through faith, with reason and

everything else, and not only by reason alone.

    In the gospel of St. John, we are also told about the spirit being

the principle of life proper to us. “It is the spirit that gives life,

the flesh is of no avail,” our Lord says (6,63).

    We have to be clear about this, because discussing this truth by

reason alone will only lead us nowhere, in spite of the flashes of

intelligence and all that can take place.

   

    And so, there’s no point convincing people about this truth using

reason alone. As St. Paul said, it is “not taught by human wisdom but

taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who

possess the Spirit.”

    So those who do not have the Spirit yet, or who appear not to have

it, I suppose the thing to do is to use the spiritual and supernatural

means more than the human ones.

    That is, we have to intensify our prayer, sacrifice, recourse to the

sacraments, ascetical struggle, hard work and study, development of

virtues, giving good example, living Marian and other devotions, etc.

    Again, in the gospel of St. John, our Lord talks about the need to be

born again of water and the Spirit, that is, from the flesh to the

Spirit, because “that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that

which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” (3,6)

    These words have clear reference to the need for the sacrament of

baptism that incorporates us into the body of Christ, the Church, and

leads us to receive all the other gifts from God given to us through

the Church—other sacraments, word of God, etc.

    We can never exaggerate our need to keep our union with God all day,

that is, to be very spiritually alive and avoid lapsing into being

unspiritual, sensual, carnal or worldly.

    We contend with powerful enemies of our spiritual soul, and so

anything that will help to keep these enemies at bay, especially in

our vulnerable moments, is always welcome.

    We contend with our own weaknesses and the many temptations around.

We have our erratic and rebellious testosterone, our tendency to

greed, pride, vanity, etc. It certainly would be a good idea that we

develop a certain lifestyle, supported with an appropriate plan or

program of activities that would keep us always with God.

    For one, the practice of daily mental prayer would be good, going to

Mass and Communion, Holy Rosary, spiritual reading, continual

aspirations that would keep us in constant dialogue with God, would be

very helpful.

    The bottom line is that we should be aware of our responsibility to

develop and keep our spiritual life healthy and vibrant.

Academic freedom

IT’S a hot, controversial issue, this thing about academic freedom. And it’s understandable because what is involved is something very intimate to a person working in an academic community.

Ideas, theories, views, opinions are so personal that anything that would tend to obstruct them can be very painful. Everything has to be done to avoid such predicament, therefore.

And so, I somehow understand why this academic freedom can be defined in its extreme form, as Wikipedia would have it, as:

 “The belief that the freedom of inquiry by students and faculty members is essential to the mission of the academy, and that scholars should have freedom to teach or communicate ideas or facts (including those that are inconvenient to external political groups or to authorities) without being targeted for repression, job loss, or imprisonment.”

Some parties involved in this issue have even gone to the extent of describing academic freedom, again taking from Wikipedia, as having the following properties:

a) “Academics, both inside and outside the classroom, have unrestricted liberty to question and test received wisdom and to put forward controversial and unpopular opinions, whether or not these are deemed offensive, and,

b) “Academic institutions have no right to curb the exercise of this freedom by members of their staff, or to use it as grounds for disciplinary action or dismissal.”

Still, while I and any decent man would respect such freedom, I also could not help to point out that such take on academic freedom is one-sided and is oblivious and quite naïve of other factors and conditions that need to be taken into consideration also.

This extreme form of academic freedom has to contend also with the rights of the other parties involved. And more basic to the issue would be that some structure be made in the academic community where a healthy exchange of views could be done, and clear guidelines have to be made.

The dynamics of this exchange of ideas should be closely monitored and managed, otherwise there would be chaos and confusion. And rules of the game should be clearly spelled out for this.

Thing is we cannot deny the fact that academic communities have their basic constitution that, no matter how imperfect it is, should be respected and upheld, unless legitimately revised.

So if an academic institution defines itself as religious or Christian or Catholic, etc., then certainly any position that smacks of atheism or agnosticism or that contradicts an official teaching of said faith, would be out of place.

We cannot invoke here the excuse of freedom of conscience, because personal conscience cannot fly without reference to an objective moral law that is authoritatively taught by a legitimate institution.

Freedom of conscience, which is often used as the rationale for academic freedom, does not work in a vacuum. To function well, it needs a proper environment that can consist of a moral law based on human nature as defined by a lawful authority.

Otherwise, anybody can just go against these official doctrines invoking all sorts of self-created justifications, or justifications derived from inadequate foundations.

Such is the case when in talking about what is moral, only considerations derived from practicality, popularity, convenience, etc. are made. The spiritual and the supernatural aspects of man are completely ignored.

The conflict in this issue of academic freedom actually boils down to what conception of man one has. Is man simply a biological, social, economic and political being, or is he a creature of a God who made him in his image and likeness, and therefore has spiritual and supernatural dimensions?

One thing good about this debate or dialogue on academic freedom is that it surfaces very basic issues that should be tackled by all of us, especially now when we are marching on to a fast-paced development and progress.

We seem to take these fundamental things in our life for granted and to focus only on what is here and now, what is immediately felt, what is just earthly and temporal such that we forget the other transcendent dimensions of our life.

I really hope and pray that this discourse can go on, involving as many parties as possible and covering as many aspects as possible as well. Let’s hope that the media can help in facilitating this public discourse.

Let’s also hope that all parties who participate in it do so with honest intentions and good dispositions, keeping a good grip on our emotions and passions that can easily spoil the whole thing.

There’s always hope. Controversies can be opportunities for greatness and enlightenment rather than just problems.

Loving in its purest state

WE have to make sure that our pursuit for love goes all the way to its purest state. We have to be wary when we get entangled along the way, getting contented only with some relatively good thing, since our goal is to reach the absolute good who is God.

“Deus caritas est,” St. John describes the essence of God. “God is love.” We cannot and should not settle for anything less. To aim at this love, we are given some guidelines—the Ten Commandments which spell out God’s designs for us. They dispose us to love.

But our Lord, Jesus Christ, spells out these Ten Commandments further by telling us that the greatest commandment is to love God with all our might, etc., and the second greatest commandment is to love our neighbor. He therefore tells us that loving God goes always with loving our neighbor. Both loves cannot be separated.

He reinforced this teaching by giving us what he termed as the “new commandment,” and that is, that we should love one another as he himself has loved us. Christ, therefore, makes himself the standard of our loving.

More than that, Christ actually makes himself the very power that would enable us to love God and others properly. That’s why he once said, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” In short, we cannot love properly unless we are with Christ.

An immediate practical corollary would be that we should at least be in constant touch with Christ. At least we have to look for him, see his example, be familiar with his teaching, enter into a living relationship with him, for we are told by our faith that Christ is alive. He is no mere historical figure.

In fact, he tells us through his apostles, “Behold, I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.” (Mt 28,20) These words should be deeply ingrained in our consciousness, so we can act and live according to this truth.

And what can we learn from him? How has he loved us? Of course, many, even infinite lessons. But we can cite a few.

He adapted himself to our lowly, base and wounded nature. He forgives us all the way, from the bottom of his heart and always. He took to himself the burden of the consequences of our own sins, again all the way to death, and death on the cross.

From these considerations alone, we can learn that we need to think always of the others, because thinking of them is also thinking and loving God himself. Let’s remember that Christ only had one purpose for coming to us—and that is to save us according to the will of his Father. His mission with us is in obedience to his Father.

We need to strengthen this attitude of thinking always of the others in ourselves. This attitude will bring us to God, as well as make us forget our own personal miseries which many times really have no objective basis. They are often invented by us, or are self-inflicted, precisely because we tend to think a lot about ourselves instead of the others.

We have to clearly see the connection of how loving the others is also loving God, with the implication that we forget ourselves more. We have to understand that whatever personal needs we have to consider—including our need for comfort, some pleasure, etc.—should be considered always in relation to God and to the others. Otherwise, we poison ourselves, if we just think in terms of our own selves.

And how should we love the others? Well, how does Christ love us? We are told to love without measure. That is the essence of love which Christ exemplified by loving us all the way to the cross. “No one has greater love than he who offers his life for his friend,” he himself says. And that’s quite obvious.

Even if we are still sinful, Christ continues to love us, ever willing to forgive us as often as necessary. We have to be wary of our tendency to base our loving on some reason. We need to love even if we run out of reasons for loving. This is the love in its purest state, the love lived by Christ.

In our daily affairs, let’s see to it that this love is present, and is the motive and driving force of our actions. Again, this is possible only when we are with Christ.