Marriage redefined?

US President Barack Obama came out of the closet sometime ago and
announced that he is for same-sex marriage. He said that was the
conclusion of his long period of “evolving.”

Many political observers, however, say that he originally was for it,
then against it, then was reconsidering, and then finally is for it
again. They say this flip-flopping is a reaction of a political animal
to changing political conditions.

Well, we know how this stance is called in our country.
“Weather-weather lang ni, bai.” To a certain extent, this attitude is
valid given the temporal nature and autonomous character of politics.

But when used indiscriminately, it can enter into forbidden territory
as when it is applied on matters of faith and morals, and on the fixed
nature of things. And I am afraid this is what is happening in this
present issue.

Marriage is not a political issue that has to be defined, and its
problems resolved, solely or mainly in a political way. Marriage has a
universal, immutable nature, applicable to all of us regardless of
race, gender and whatever condition we may be in. When nature of
things is involved, we just accept it, we don’t redefine it.

Marriage simply has to be a stable relationship between a man and a
woman, because it involves a love that entails the use of sex whose
primary purpose is procreation before it provides pleasure and other
benefits to the couples concerned.

That’s simply the nature of sex and marriage. It is not a religious
imposition, but rather a result of careful, comprehensive metaphysical
study of the matter. If we pursue this study thoroughly, then we will
arrive at the conclusion that marriage in itself has properties of
exclusivity, unity and indissolubility.

Of course, people can have varying understanding of the nature of sex
and marriage, and so we just have to undertake a continuing
discussion, clarification and formation. The government should also
feel the duty to do this. This is everyone’s responsibility.

But we just cannot stop at the level of
“that-is-your-stand-and-this-is-mine,” since the issue at hand is not
a matter of opinion or personal preferences. It binds everyone to
conform to this nature of sex and marriage, in a way that should be
more forceful than the binding quality of our tax and traffic laws.

Ironically, the latter laws on taxes and traffic are more strictly
pursued than our marriage laws. It seems we are now having the wrong
priorities, the wrong emphasis on our varied concerns.

I was shocked when I heard President Obama’s reasons for supporting
same-sex marriage. They had the usual rationalizing taste of the
tolerance bit. It’s a reasoning that has overreached its purpose,
trying to go to a bridge too far.

This alibi about tolerance, while it has its merits, should not be the
only, much less, the primary consideration to make especially in
issues like marriage. There are many other more fundamental and
indispensable considerations that precede it.

Obama was quoted as saying: “No matter who you love or what God you
worship, you can still pursue happiness—I will support you every step
of the way."

So, if one happens to love an animal in a sexual way, he is free to
marry it, and bestiality can now be elevated to the level of marriage?
Or if one happens to fall in love with his own sister, or his own
brother, he can also marry her or him, and incest can be marriage?

Anything is always possible with man. That’s why we need laws based on
some absolute truths to guide and educate us.

Or if one happens to believe in violence and terrorism as his own God,
it would just be ok? The words of Obama did not include any qualifier
as to who can be the object and God of one’s love and devotion.

I may be exaggerating and blowing out of proportion Obama’s words, but
these words certainly give us a direction that, in their most lenient
interpretation, can be considered as potentially dangerous.

There are things that we can not and should not tamper. Marriage is
one of them. Everything has to be done to strengthen it. Those who
violate them, while we always have to be charitable and fair, should
be dealt with clearly, and even strongly.

I have no problem with gays. I know many of them and they are
excellent persons, workers and friends. But let’s not call what is
wrong, right, and bad, good, just because we are friends.

To be legal is not enough

WHILE in some reunion recently with former college
classmates and colleagues at work during my pre-priesthood years when
I myself was active in the professional field, I was struck by one of
the comments I heard in our conversations.

            A friend who is also an economist mentioned that the
different ways many Western governments took to tackle the global
economic crisis that started sometime in 2008, taken from both the
capitalistic and socialist models, could not adequately resolve the
problem because they just relied on certain laws and policies
prevailing in their respective countries at that time.

            Many of these political and economic leaders are
discovering that it takes more than just following purely economic and
civil laws to resolve the problem in a way that could be considered
most fair.

            I have always believed that merely following articulated
laws or man-made laws, whether in business or in our life in society
in general, would not be enough, since these laws would always be in
need with the proper spirit for them to be as they should be.

            These laws, at best, can only give some kind of guideline.
They dispose us to the ways of truth, charity, justice. But they
cannot by themselves achieve those goals unless they are animated by
the real source of truth, charity and justice which can only be God,
our creator and Father.

            At best, they can somehow regulate the external aspects of
a given problem or situation but are quite silent on the internal
aspects. They can be good in sanctioning the macro dimensions of our
economy or political life, but are again very tentative in the micro
level.

            These laws and policies cannot function on their own. They
need a deeper foundation, a terra firma that in the end could only be
God and his laws and standards. It’s the hesitation or even aversion
to put God in the core of our legal systems that would somehow pervert
our laws and policies even if they are formulated with the best of
intentions.

            When crafted, developed and lived independently of God or
when pursued outside a loving and faithful relationship with God,
these laws can easily be manipulated to suit one’s self-interest at
the expense of the common good. They would miss the finer points of
ethics and morals so crucial in our life, personal and social, here on
earth.

            And in that set-up, it would always be the more powerful,
in terms of wealth, fame, talents, etc., who would dominate and tend
to exploit the others. Their authority, which is supposed to be a
sharing of the authority of God, would be used not to give glory to
God and to serve others, but more to give glory to themselves and to
be served by others. In short, there is always the tendency for people
to abuse their authority.

            In that set-up, what are often excluded, deliberately or
unintentionally, would be the elements of mercy and compassion, the
need for sacrifice, detachments from things and others that are
necessary and at the same time unavoidable in our life here on earth.

            It is a set-up that is blind to these things and is prone
to follow the law of the jungle or the law of Talion that usually
caters to the baser instincts of men and hardly goes beyond them. The
higher values of faith and morals are disregarded, if not frowned
upon.

            The requirements of our moral and spiritual life, so
inalienable in us that even in our mundane activities like business
and politics they are always relevant, are often unmet if not totally
ignored.

            It is a set-up that tends to give a knee-jerk reaction to
things at the expense of a more comprehensive attitude. It is often
taken up by the passion and the excitement of the here-and-now and is
quite subjective at the expense of a longer and more objective view of
things.

            We need to overcome the fear or whatever bias we have
regarding the need to involve God in our human affairs. We cannot say
that just because what we are doing are purely business or politics,
God should not be involved.

            While it’s true that there is a certain legitimate
autonomy in our temporal affairs, it does not mean that God has
nothing to do with them. Yes, we need to uphold that autonomy and
should not unduly mix God and religion in living out those affairs,
but it does not mean that God is not the beginning and end of these
affairs.

Be contemplative to be realistic

THERE are certain myths that we need to get rid of. One of

them is that to lead a contemplative life practically takes one out of

reality. Hardly anything can be farther than the truth.

            It is precisely when one is truly contemplative that he

gets a good grasp of reality. He becomes more objective and his vision

and understanding of things in general would be more complete. That’s

simply because, to put it bluntly, he is more in a position to see

things the way God, the Creator and our Father and the ultimate

measure of reality, sees them.

            He just does not depend on his senses. Though he uses them

to the full, he goes much further than what sense data would provide

him. Not even does he depend only on his intelligence that already can

penetrate into the essence of things and can transcend from the

sensible to the intelligible in all their forms and possibilities.

            He uses his faith, activating it in a working life of

piety and contemplation. Faith is a gift from God given to us in

abundance and that sheds the best light we can get to see, know and

understand things. This is where God shares what he knows with us.

            To be sure, to be contemplative does not do away with the

senses and our intelligence. Our need and use of faith in our

contemplative life will never do away with our senses and

intelligence. It, in fact, makes use of them to the max, but goes much

further.

            So to be contemplative never means that one isolates and

detaches himself from the world. The contrary is true. It makes one

more immersed in the world. Its interest is never limited but rather

is open to the all developments in the world.

            Obviously, given our human condition, we will always have

a particular or specific viewpoint and interest, but it’s an angle

that is open to the universal reality. A contemplative life that is

not open to the whole reality is not a genuine contemplative life.

            In fact, a true contemplative will always feel the need to

know more about other fields that he is not familiar with. He would at

least have an open mind, willing to listen and learn from them. Thus,

he would always feel the need to be versatile and adaptable. He avoids

being rigid and one-track-minded.

            His desire to know more about persons will be insatiable.

His knowledge of persons would always deepen and expand. He is not

contented with knowing them superficially. He has to probe the mystery

that each person is, guided by his faith and love of God that would

drive him to do so.

            This need can only be satisfied when one is truly humble.

Humility makes one always realize his inadequacy and possibility to

know more and learn more. A proud person simply does not feel this,

and tends to say enough and stop knowing more.

            And while it’s true that due to our human condition, our

limitations and those of the world, we need to distance ourselves from

time to time from the world to be able to meditate and contemplate,

it’s an exercise that is meant to enhance our immersion both in God

and in the world.

            A contemplative always feels the need to be recollected to

make sure that faith leads the way instead of the senses and the

intelligence simply leading the way. We cannot deny that the latter

always have the tendency to dominate. That tendency is simply an

indication of our deeply embedded pride and vanity that are always our

problem.

            That’s why to be a contemplative will always involve some

self-denial. No one can be a contemplative unless he knows how to

discipline and put his senses and intelligence in their proper place.

It is a self-denial that would lead him to vividly feel the push of

faith and love of God to immerse himself in the lives of others and in

the world in general.

            This is not an easy thing to do, since we will always have

to contend with the tricks of our weakened flesh that wants to

dominate us, not to mention the wiles of our wayward world and the

devil.

            But we also have ways to cope with this predicament. We

can deepen our humility, grow in our skill at spiritual warfare,

polish the art of always rectifying our intentions and correcting

ourselves whenever we find ourselves in error.

            Yes, to be truly contemplative would make us more in touch

with reality.