I deny the news report aired in TV network this evening that I threatened President Aquino with excommunication in the interview with Radio Veritas this morning. While the prevailing... ...sentiment of a number of bishops was that of dismay and frustration over the reported stance of the President regarding artificial contraceptives, imposition of the canonical sanction has not been contemplated by the CBCP.
I stated that the initial approach of this issue is to be in the spirit of dialogue and not of confrontation. Threat of excommunication at this point of time can hardly be considered to be in line with dialogue. I maintained that the traditional position of the Church is that human life starts at conception and not at implantation. Some contraceptive pills and devices are abortifacient. Any completed act to expel or kill the fertilized ovum is considered to be an act of abortion.
I went on to say that the penalty of excommunication is meted out to the principals and accomplices of abortion when certain conditions are verified. Canon Law and Morals demand that the sanction is imposed under moral immutability of the sinner. The Church intervenes in this issue because this is a moral question. Among other things this concerns the right to life particularly of the unborn child in the mother’s womb. The bishops support the initiatives of the laymen to protest the passage of the RH bill. When asked whether the bishops will participate in mass action, I replied that we would be considering our options what steps to take when we have to cross the bridge.
+NEREO P. ODCHIMAR, DD,
Bishop of Tandag, CBCP President
30 September 2010
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Friday, September 3, 2010
"Better than I"
I was trying to catch the message of this music video. Honestly, I seldom appreciate animated clips and films but this one... mind you... made my day complete!
This cartoon clip is "FOR ADULTS... ALSO!"
This cartoon clip is "FOR ADULTS... ALSO!"
Panuntunan sa Buhay...
mayroon akong 5 panuntunan sa buhay... prinsipyo.., yung tipong napapagnilayan ko lang kapag nasa kagipitan... tulad ngayon!!!
una: matakot sa Diyos!
pangalawa: mangarap! mangarap! at muling mangarap!
ikatlo: magsikap na tuparin ang pangarap!
ikaapat: sundin ang kalooban, wag ang iba... kasi hindi sila ang mahihirapan sakaling magkamali ka!
ikalima: 'wag makialam sa iba!
una: matakot sa Diyos!
pangalawa: mangarap! mangarap! at muling mangarap!
ikatlo: magsikap na tuparin ang pangarap!
ikaapat: sundin ang kalooban, wag ang iba... kasi hindi sila ang mahihirapan sakaling magkamali ka!
ikalima: 'wag makialam sa iba!
MASTURBATION AND PREMARITAL SEX: THEIR MORAL PROBLEMS AND THE STANCE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
by JULIUS DE SAGUN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1: Preface
Chapter 2: A Situationer: The Elation in Masturbation and Premarital Sex
2.1 Masturbation
2.2 Pre-marital Sex
Chapter 3: The Moral Problem in Masturbation and Premarital Sex
3.1 Masturbation Condemned
3.2 Sex: Proper to Married People Alone
Chapter 4:The Theological Response of the Church: Towards a “Theology of the Body”
4.1 Necessary Affirmation of Man’s corporeality
4.2 The Dignity of the Human Body
4.3 The Body: Temple of the Holy Spirit
Chapter5:Conclusion
5.1 Theological Reflection
5.2 Summary
Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω
CHAPTER I
1.0 PREFACE
1.1 INTRODUCTION
“Sex” is always an interesting matter yet, as a topic, it is always perceived by many as taboo. Remember: “To the pure, everything is pure but to the impure, nothing is pure.” (cf. Titus 1:15)
In a world wrapped in tensions brought about by poverty of all kinds, natural calamities, and social oppressions, people cannot help but look for way out of their miseries. For some who have no possible way to escape from the trouble, they just look for some temporary remedies that can make them feel better off at least for a dumpy moment. Some people resort to vices like smoking, alcoholism, gambling, etc. Some others, however, resort to sexual acts as quick relief for tension.
The Catholic Church in her teachings, at one hand, resolves to oppose the practice of all kinds of “sexual misconducts”. Moreover, many people, even baptized Catholics, still engage into practice of sex outside marriage and masturbation (apart from other forms of sexual acts), believing that these are just natural for human maturity and growth. Where then does the problem lie, such that the Catholic Church lingers in opposition to premarital sex and masturbation, no matter how pleasurable it shows?
The option of the researcher to write on this topic is rooted on his longing to understand “sex” and “sexuality” in the light of priestly life. Along with it is his desire to understand sex outside marriage and masturbation in the context of celibacy and chastity which are demanded by Catholic Priesthood. The complexity of the thoughts of Moral Theology, however, particularly in the realm of Sexual Ethics cannot all be contained in this brief study. If the student-researcher will try to do so, he may not be able to express the depth of such theological thought, which had been developed and continuously developing in Catholic Church’s whole existence.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
In his research, the student-researcher will try to spot the problems on the phenomenon of masturbation and pre-marital sex, as specified by the Catholic Church through Moral Theology.
Hence, the student-researcher will answer the following questions in his research:
1.2.1 What makes Masturbation and Premarital Sex Moral Problem?
1.2.2 What is the response of the Catholic Church to these moral problems?
1.3 SCOPE AND LIMITATION
The student-researcher will try to analyze the theological points of Moral Theology that qualifies masturbation and pre-marital sex as moral problem. This study will not focus solely on the psychological development of man that affects his sexual behavior. Rather, it will analyze Church’s consciousness of realities on the lives of the people engaged in the problem at hand. Hence, the student-researcher will focus his study mainly on the analysis of the problem along with the response of the Church on the matter.
1.4 RATIONALE
The research seeks to expose some realities that are being experienced by the common people – as they grow as “sexual beings”. In the light of Moral Theology, this research seeks to evaluate the problem of masturbation and pre-marital sex along with the response of the Church on the matter.
Furthermore, this research also serves as a reminder that the theology students’ intellectual interventions in realities are not just confined to the classroom setting, but that these interventions actually make them aware of the common problem faced by many if not all of human beings. Thus, the researcher will know to balance his response when these problems arise both to him and to others too.
CHAPTER II
2.0 A SITUATIONER: THE ELATION IN MASTURBATION AND PRE-MARITAL SEX
“The language of sex is easy to speak but hard to make meaningful!”
- Lester Kierhendall
In order to put the mindset of the audience into context, the author desires to begin with the definition of terms at issue.
2.1 MASTURBATION is a self stimulation of genital organs by means other than intercourse aiming at orgasm (cf. Merriam Webster Dictionary). Those means, for males, are usually by one’s own hands. More so, other parts of the body may be involved especially among females and the use of other objects too. Almost the same as the aforementioned definition, the “cyberspace” commonly known as the internet refers to masturbation as “a sexual stimulation, especially of one's own genitals stimulation performed manually or by other types of bodily contact, by use of objects or tools, or by some combination of these methods” (cf. Wikipedia: “Masturbation”)
The studies of Alfred Kinsey, a sociologist, show that 90% of male and 60% of female have tried masturbation sometime in their lifetime. (cf. Kinsey. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, 499 and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, 520.) Frequency of masturbation is determined by many factors, e.g., one's resistance to sexual tension, hormone levels influencing sexual arousal, sexual habits, peer influences, health and one's attitude to masturbation formed by culture. More so, medical causes have also been associated with masturbation.
Need not to say, masturbation is very much popular to many (if not to all) of young people and old ones alike. It is a quick source of pleasure for a weary body tired in toils and thirsty in flesh. For males, many engage into it thinking that it is a safe way to orgasm without the harm of impregnating a woman. Thus, it is asserted that after experiencing the pleasure of orgasm, the one who did masturbation has no responsibility towards another person, so that it is called “safe”. Masturbation, moreover, can be part of a full repertoire of sexual intercourse. It may be used as an interlude, foreplay, or as an alternative to penetration. For some people, non-penetrative sex or “frottage” is the primary sexual activity of choice above all others. Participants who do not want full sexual intercourse thus still enjoy mutual masturbation.
Mutual masturbation is practiced by people of all sexual orientations. When used as an alternative to penile-vaginal penetration, the goal may be to preserve virginity or to prevent pregnancy. Some people choose it as an alternative to casual sex because it results in sexual satisfaction without actual sex. For some people, masturbating with friends helps lift the stigma they feel surrounding the act. This helps them develop their orgasm, increase its pleasure, and inspires them to masturbate on a more frequent basis.
2.2 PRE-MARITAL SEX (or fornication) is identified as an act of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman occurring before marriage. (cf. Kinsey) More so, premarital sex is generally used in reference to individuals who are presumed not yet of marriageable age, or between adults who will presumably marry eventually, but who are engaging in sexual activity prior to marriage.
Many lovers around the terrain commonly assert that sex is desirable and necessary to prove a relationship to be real and authentic. Premarital sex, as a topic, is always timely. Much as a topic, others would say that it is also a pleasurable act to be performed. Usually, people do not formally learn about it in a classroom setting but on peer conversations. For those who do such act, they share their experience while and after performing such act. As a result, the topic tickles the young minds of their peers who deign to experience the same pleasure which their colleagues enjoyed. The process continues and the topic persistently spread throughout the terrain. Often, this phenomenon is called machismo.
CHAPTER III
3.0 THE MORAL PROBLEM OF MASTURBATION AND PREMARITAL SEX
“The body is not for immorality, but for the Lord.”
- 1 Corinthians 6:13b (NRSV)
This verse proves that exploitation of the body is very much morally unacceptable even in scriptural sense.
The exploitation of the body is an immoral act, a way of going against God’s will and, therefore, a sin. “When sin is defined as a transgression of God’s law, we add that it is a voluntary transgression.” (cf. Piet Schoonenberg. Man and Sin: A Theological View, 16.) Thus, sin is one’s personal and free decision to deviate from the ordination of God and to choose idols. By “idols”, it may refer to man’s choice which opposes God’s design. “As love goes out to God and creation, so sin, which is a denial of love, is also directed against the whole reality of God and his creation, of the world and its God.” (cf. Schoonenberg)
More so, to contextualize the aforementioned claims in this study about the moral problems of masturbation and premarital sex, it is quite important to consider and note the following:
3.1 MASTURBATION CONDEMNED
Many look at masturbation as an alternative to sex. Sexologists regard continual masturbation as a normal outlet for adults in certain circumstances –e.g.: in prison, in the armed forces, on trips away from home and spouse, etc. Thus, masturbation has been a diverting force for suppressed sexual drive. Meanwhile, the same sexologists asserted that “when adults prefer masturbation to normal intercourse, we are dealing with an abnormal situation.” (Wiliam Masters and Virginia Johnstons. Human Sexual Response, 95.) This problem is much seen in a psychological sense.
The Catholic Church condemns the practice of masturbation by saying: “masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action”. (Cathechism of the Catholic Church # 2352)
In the Sacred Scripture, there is no clear and explicit moral prohibition of masturbation in either the Old Testament or the New Testament. However, some moralists see the following Pauline references as the “ultimate scriptural word against masturbation” (Gennaro P. Avvento. Sexuality: A Christian View, 100.):
(1) “Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor boy prostitutes… will inherit the Kingdom of God.” (1 Cor 6: 9b-10, NAB)
(2) “Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lust of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies.” (Romans 1: 24, NAB)
(3) “Now the works of the flesh are obvious… adultery, impurity… I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God.” (Galatians 5:19-21, NRSV)
Furthermore, it is quite significant to look at the point of the Second Vatican Council on the matter, it says, “Although it cannot be established that the sacred scripture condemned masturbation by name, the tradition of the Church has rightly taken it to have been condemned by the New Testament when it speaks of ‘uncleanness’ and ‘unchastity’ and other vices contrary to chastity and continence.” (Sacred Congregation on the Doctrines of Faith. Personae Humanae # 8.)
Gennaro P. Avvento, a Catholic moralist, enumerated some of the statements of the Church’s magisterium that condemn masturbation:
(1) Pope Leo IX’s De Malitia Masturbationis: Masturbators should not be admitted to Sacred Orders.
(2) Decree of Sacred Penitentiary, 1904: Masturbatory acts of women during the absence of their husbands are gravely illicit.
(3) Pope Pius XII’s The Christian Education of Youth: Adolescent lapses such as masturbation should be seen as grave faults.
(4) Sacred Congregation for Religious, 1952: Habitual masturbation is an impediment to religious life.
(5) Guide to Formation in Priestly Celibacy, 1974: Masturbation is a sign of sexual imbalance.
(6)Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith, Persona Humana, 1975: Masturbation is immoral for all followers of Christ.
Much had been said against the immorality of masturbation. However, it must be clear that immorality of masturbation is viewed in the context of psycho-spiritual realm. As a person grows up and develops physically, masturbation becomes his way of coping to bodily changes and to the challenges of the environment. Masturbation “becomes morally wrong when it becomes psychologically harmful” (cf. Avvetto, 104) and threatening to one’s spirituality due to an abuse of the body.
3.2 SEX: PROPER TO MARRIED PEOPLE ALONE
“It is the human capacity for responsibility and fidelity that makes marriage possible; it is the human inclination to infidelity that makes marriage necessary.”
- Gennaro P. Avvento
Fr. William F. Allen, a sexual ethicist wrote: “Premarital sex exposes [people] to a sort of sexual obsession and deprives [them] of all the superior values outlined in Christian tradition on marriage.” (cf. William F. Allen. Sexuality Summary, 152.) Sexual action done outside marriage is morally unacceptable to the Catholic Church. It is a way of using one another for sexual gratification. Therefore, premarital sex is immoral. The fundamental casual factors of premarital sex are often identified with the following: (1) lack of available courses on sex and family life (or Sex Education); (2) depiction of sex by the media and environment; (3) problems caused by breakdown of family ties which leads to the loss of support structure for a meaningful future.
Another term for premarital sex is fornication that is a practice of “sexual intercourse with mutual consent between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman”. (cf. Avvetto., 118.) “It has viewed that all forms of premarital intercourse as fornication, as violation of personal dignity, as manipulation and hence gravely sinful.” (cf. Avvetto) The Catholic Church condemns such practice, saying: “Fornication is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered to the good of the spouses and the generation and education of children.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 2353)
The sacred scripture also forbids the practice of premarital sex as indicated by the following:
(1) “If a man has carnal relations with a female slave who has already been living with another man but has not yet been redeemed or given her freedom, they shall be punished...” (Leviticus 19:20, NRSV)
(3) “Be sure of this, that no immoral or impure or greedy person, that is an idolater, has any inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and of God.” (Ephesians 5:5, NRSV)
It is quite important to recognize that sexual intercourse is an expression of one’s whole being and the deepest core of his or her personality to someone whom he or she has chosen to remain with for the rest of one’s existence. Sex is beautifully willed by God as an expression of union between hearts-in-love yet “sex is prostituted when it becomes a source of self-enslavement and not a growing phase in the total development of mutual concern between two people.” (cf. Bertocci, 131.) Often, spoiling the urges of the flesh moves one to practice sex outside marriage.
“The argument against premarital sex ran as follows; the procreative characteristic of sex requires that the couple be in a permanent set of relationships in order to be able to assume the obligations owed to the potential progeny. This entails stability of their union and exclusive fidelity of one to another.” (cf. Allen., 150.)Such union pertains to marriage. Hence, full intimacy should be reserved for married state that is designed for a lifetime commitment to an exclusive sexual and physical relation.
The Second Vatican Council speaks of human’s sexuality and faculty of reproduction by noting that it wondrously surpassed the endowment of lower forms of life. Vatican II then “dealt one by one with the principles and rules which relate to human sexuality in marriage and which are based on specific purpose of sexuality.” (cf. CDF, Personae Humanae # 5)
“Marriage both encourages and symbolically expresses the growth in unity that the lovers experience in every area of their lives. Sexual intercourse before marriage is no preparation for marriage; it ‘tests’ very little. In a word, a so called ‘marital intercourse’ withdrawn from the real context of marriage is hardly calculated to keep love honest, let alone growing.” (cf. Bertocci, 124.) “In marriage, the physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual communion.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 2360) Hence, couple should recall the values laid by the Catholic Church and the Sacred Scripture - trust, honesty, fidelity, unity, and integrity - for married life. Then, looking into their hearts, they should ask themselves whether or not these values are being practiced and lived.
CHAPTER IV
4.0 THE THEOLOGICAL RESPONSE OF THE CHURCH: TOWARDS THE “THEOLOGY OF THE BODY”
“God created man in his own image, in the image of god he created him,
male and female he created them.”
-Genesis 1: 27
4.1 NECESSARY AFFIRMATION OF MAN’S CORPOREALITY
A Moralist, Andre Guindon writes: “By denying corporeality, human tenderness necessary fights sensuality which will try to ascertain its rights to existence” (cf. The Sexual Language: An Essay in Moral Theology, 90.) Thus, human spirituality cannot be attained when human corporeality is denied. After all, Christianity teaches that human being is composed of both body and spirit. On this point, CCC writes: “the human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal (body) and spiritual (soul).” (CCC # 362, italics mine) For a spirit to be holy, one must also make one’s body holy. Hence, holiness must be found inside and out.
At a hand, Christian morality maintains that performing masturbation and premarital sex is immoral and therefore sinful. It is slavery from flesh and a direct destruction of the body, the temple of the Holy Spirit. On the other hand, people should understand that feeling is a significant part of corporeality. The denial of this fact “would go against the explicit article of the Christian Creed” (cf. Guindon, 90.) which affirms both body and spirit as fundament components of human being. Both body and spirit complements each other and nothing goes higher than the other. Therefore, even the “urge” for bodily pleasure is a part of man’s corporeality. It is normal but not to be spoiled. And so, sexual desire must be properly dealt with. Misconception of this fact is dangerous.
Furthermore, in the imbalance prospect on man’s corporeality and spirituality, taking the latter as higher than the former, Paul Ricoeur insightfully claimed that every sexual action would fall short to: 1) meaninglessness of sex; 2) meaningless sex as an answer to existential failure; and 3) quest for sexual fabulousness. (cf. Ricoeur. Wonder, Erotism, and Enigma,133.)
4.2 THE “DIGNITY” OF THE HUMAN BODY
Being created in God’s own image, man receives a dignity higher than other creatures. The Church affirms this, saying: “Being in the image of God, the human individual possesses the dignity of the person, who is not just something, but someone.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 357) More so, the use of the term “image” can be cheaply assumed as the “physical appearance” as though pertaining to body or corpus.
The Catholic Church maintains the Dogma of the Incarnation of Jesus which gives a higher dignity to the human body which Jesus himself possessed upon His incarnation. “In reality, it is only I the mystery of the Word made flesh (incarnation) that the mystery of man becomes clear.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 359, italics mine) Through Jesus’ incarnation, which summit is His crucifixion, man was redeemed from all calumnies and impurities. This point is affirmed by the new CCC, it says: “Christian, recognize your dignity and now that you share in God’s own nature do not return to your former base condition by sinning… Never forget that you have been rescued from the power of darkness and brought into the light of the Kingdom of God.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 1691)
Regarding the practice sexual acts, Second Vatican Council declares: “When assessing the propriety of conjugal acts, determining if they accord with true human dignity, it is not enough to take only the good intention and the evaluation of motives into account. Objective criteria must be used: (1) criteria based on the nature of human person and his action; (2) criteria which respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving; (3) and the criteria on human procreation in the context of true love.” (cf. CDF, Personae Humanae # 5)
4.3 HUMAN BODY: TEMPLE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
“The human body shares in the dignity of ‘the image of God’: it is a human body because it is animated by a spiritual soul and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, the temple of the Holy Spirit.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 364) When one becomes a believer, the Holy Spirit becomes a part of himself. The body becomes a container, or a "house," or so to say, a "temple." St. Paul clearly affirms the actual physical body of man as the “Temple of the Holy Spirit”, he says:
“What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, ‘I will live in them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Therefore come out from them, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch nothing unclean; then I will welcome you, and I will be your father, and you shall be my sons and daughters’, says the Lord Almighty.” (cf. 2 Corinthians 6:16-18, NAB)
With Paul's logic exhorts people to touch not the “unclean things” (this applies to physical uncleanness, such as joining your body with a prostitute, or eating things God has declared unclean, and it also applies to the spiritual standing, don't partake of the doctrines of demons). More so, Paul expressed here that God care about humans’ weak and fragile body as the scripture tells.
There are people who opt to offer their whole body to God alone by preserving purity and chastity. “Chastity… is not sensitively defined in terms of whether a person has or has not had sexual intercourse. Chastity basically consists in the motivation and practice that keep sex from being self-centered and self-indulgent and that constantly dedicates it to the growth of the value. Chastity must be protected within the marriage bond as well as outside it.” (Bertocci. Sex, Love, and the Person, 130.) Conversely, St. Paul warns those who do otherwise by performing any malicious acts that obliterates the human body, he says:
“Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy that person; for the temple of God, which you are, is holy.”
(cf. 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, NAB)
God purposefully and purposely created people instituted His eternal laws to ensure that His creations would not fail. God was angered when man; being fallible creations, tripped over God’s will (cf. Genesis 3). Then, Jesus, the "Son of God" came along and fixed everything. He cleaned up the mess that man did against His Father’s will, at the cost of his own life. This is the way Jesus’ redeemed man from the power of sin, even from slavery from sexual misconducts.
The scriptures, being God's Word, tells man how to please God by obeying His will and doing what is appropriate for one’s body and soul. False teachings that say that it is fine to be a "carnal" alone approve a defiler, reprobate, delinquent or lascivious view of life. For God, it matters what man does with his body.
CHAPTER V
5. 0 CONCLUSION
5.1 THEOLOGICAL REFLECTION
Being true to the objective of doing this study - that is to understand “sex” and “sexuality” in the light of priestly life along with it is his desire to understand sex outside marriage and masturbation in the context of “celibacy” and “chastity” which are the fundamental demands of the Catholic Priesthood (cf. Introduction), the researcher desires then to close this with his theological reflection on the matter.
Ω Ω Ω
“My Call: Live a Pure Life”
God calls us in different state: in married life, single blessedness, or in celibate life. Celibacy is not for all. It is a particular vocation for those who deemed to follow Christ in the consecrated life. Thus, it is a charism – a gift from God. Furthermore, celibacy is an abstention from sexual relations, or so to say; the state of being unmarried. Particularly, the consecrated persons: priests, nuns, and religious have to be healthy celibates for they are called to be engaged with God and His people alone. Most of the time, people connects celibacy with the issue of “sex”. This is the very reason why celibacy appears not so pleasing in the modern times. In fact, a very few number of young people are choosing this as their way to sanctity. It is as though many cases of sexual misconduct of the consecrated people can be blamed upon the rising of their idea about sex and the lack of right knowledge of it.
On the other hand, some of the young people are engaged in sexual activities at their early age. They are comfortable in speaking of things regarding their sexual experiences only to their colleagues at their age. Usually, the youth are hesitant to talk about such topics with the authoritative figure who can give them right information about sex and sexuality. It is because they are afraid of reprimands, disciplinary actions, and judgments from authorities like parents and formators. This fear is rooted from the belief that “sex” is bad. It is also true as in the cases of many young candidates to priesthood and even to a few numbers of ordained pastors. This case challenges the Church and its promotion of vocations among the youth. Moreover, it must be clear to the young people that the openness of their mind about sex is not to be faced through trial. They need to be guided to a proper way of understanding their sexuality.
“The consecrated celibacy of the sacred ministers actually manifests the virginal and supernatural fecundity of marriage, by which the children of god are born, not by flesh and blood.” For somebody living out celibacy, it simply means: (1)...that the development of full humanity is more important than genital expression; (2)...that there are more important thing than sexual potency; (3)...that self-transcendence is more fully human than self-fulfillment.
This is the only way to make the ministers of the church healthy celibates. Good thing, the church has opened its doors in addressing this issue. In fact, many formation houses and seminaries are now open to the issues concerning their candidates’ tensions and conflicts in the area of sex and sexuality. In this regard, the formators are duty-bound to pay special attention to this issue by giving their candidates proper information and knowledge.
To be celibate also means to be empty for God, to be free and open for His presence in many people and to be available for His service. Hence, the choice of celibacy is an act of radical rejection of a number of myths that our society holds as facts: (1)…that genital sex is absolutely necessary for a person to be fully human; (2)…that sexual relation is the only way to insure one against loneliness; (3)…that sexual orgasm and experience of sexual intercourse is the only proof of one’s masculinity or femininity; (4)…and that sexual fulfillment is the ultimate purpose of life.
With celibacy, therefore, one guards himself against all irresponsible use of sexual power whether inside of outside marriage, ordained and lay alike. For after all, even married people can also be chaste.
5.2 SUMMARY
Sexuality is part of man’s nature being a corporeal being (composed of body). This fact is undeniable, as much as soul is to be affirmed as human’s fundamental component. Sensualities, like urges for bodily pleasure, are natural to human body. This urges, however, have to be channeled without deviating from God’s design. Sex for this matter, being a sexual channel, must be done in the context of marriage. Perhaps any sexual act derived from lust, like masturbation, is not morally acceptable.
By definition, masturbation is the self-stimulation of genitals by use of one’s hands or by other gadgets. Meanwhile, premarital sex is a sexual act between a male and a female outside marriage. Both masturbation and premarital sex are seen as “abnormal” psychological behaviors. This is true, no matter how pleasurable they appear for those who are engaged in it.
More so, masturbation and premarital sex are sinful in the sight of the Catholic Church’s teachings. .The Church asserts that performing such acts is a mistreatment of the human body which has the dignity given upon his creation by God Himself. Masturbation and premarital sex both ravage the human body – the “Temple of the Holy Spirit”. God deserve but a pure and clean body as His “temple”. These prove that masturbation and premarital sex are both immoral – better still, they are sins against God’s design.
Oppositions on the practice of such sexual misconducts had been unanimously supported by the pillars of the Catholic Church namely: Sacred Scripture (although not explicit), Tradition, and Magisterium.
LIST OF REFERENCES
BOOKS (BIBLIOGRAPHY):
Allen, William F. Sexuality Summary. Ohio: Alba Communications, 1977.
Avvento, Gennaro P. Sexuality: A Christian View. Connecticut: Twenty-third, 1984.
Bertocci, Peter A. Sex, Love, and the Person. New York: Sheed and Ward, 1967.
Guindon, Andrei. The Sexual Language: An Essay in Moral Theology. Ottawa: University of Ottawa, 1976.
Kinsey, Alfred. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1948.
____________. Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1953.
Masters, Wiliam and Johnstons, Virginia. Human Sexual Response. (Boston:
Little, Brown, & Co., 1969), 95.
Paul Ricoeur. Wonder, Erotism, and Enigma. New York: Harper and Row, 1964.
Schoonenberg, Piet. Man and Sin: A Theological View. Indiana: University of Notre Dame, 1965.
Turner, Philip. Sex, Money and Power. Cambridge: Cowley, 1985.
CHURCH DOCUMENTS:
Catechism of the Catholic Church
Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church,
ENCYCLICAL LETTER:
Pope Paul VI, Sacerdotalis Caelibatus.
Sacred Congregation on the Doctrines of Faith. Personae Humanae.
SACRED SCRIPTURES:
New American Bible
New Revised Standard Version
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1: Preface
Chapter 2: A Situationer: The Elation in Masturbation and Premarital Sex
2.1 Masturbation
2.2 Pre-marital Sex
Chapter 3: The Moral Problem in Masturbation and Premarital Sex
3.1 Masturbation Condemned
3.2 Sex: Proper to Married People Alone
Chapter 4:The Theological Response of the Church: Towards a “Theology of the Body”
4.1 Necessary Affirmation of Man’s corporeality
4.2 The Dignity of the Human Body
4.3 The Body: Temple of the Holy Spirit
Chapter5:Conclusion
5.1 Theological Reflection
5.2 Summary
Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω
CHAPTER I
1.0 PREFACE
1.1 INTRODUCTION
“Sex” is always an interesting matter yet, as a topic, it is always perceived by many as taboo. Remember: “To the pure, everything is pure but to the impure, nothing is pure.” (cf. Titus 1:15)
In a world wrapped in tensions brought about by poverty of all kinds, natural calamities, and social oppressions, people cannot help but look for way out of their miseries. For some who have no possible way to escape from the trouble, they just look for some temporary remedies that can make them feel better off at least for a dumpy moment. Some people resort to vices like smoking, alcoholism, gambling, etc. Some others, however, resort to sexual acts as quick relief for tension.
The Catholic Church in her teachings, at one hand, resolves to oppose the practice of all kinds of “sexual misconducts”. Moreover, many people, even baptized Catholics, still engage into practice of sex outside marriage and masturbation (apart from other forms of sexual acts), believing that these are just natural for human maturity and growth. Where then does the problem lie, such that the Catholic Church lingers in opposition to premarital sex and masturbation, no matter how pleasurable it shows?
The option of the researcher to write on this topic is rooted on his longing to understand “sex” and “sexuality” in the light of priestly life. Along with it is his desire to understand sex outside marriage and masturbation in the context of celibacy and chastity which are demanded by Catholic Priesthood. The complexity of the thoughts of Moral Theology, however, particularly in the realm of Sexual Ethics cannot all be contained in this brief study. If the student-researcher will try to do so, he may not be able to express the depth of such theological thought, which had been developed and continuously developing in Catholic Church’s whole existence.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
In his research, the student-researcher will try to spot the problems on the phenomenon of masturbation and pre-marital sex, as specified by the Catholic Church through Moral Theology.
Hence, the student-researcher will answer the following questions in his research:
1.2.1 What makes Masturbation and Premarital Sex Moral Problem?
1.2.2 What is the response of the Catholic Church to these moral problems?
1.3 SCOPE AND LIMITATION
The student-researcher will try to analyze the theological points of Moral Theology that qualifies masturbation and pre-marital sex as moral problem. This study will not focus solely on the psychological development of man that affects his sexual behavior. Rather, it will analyze Church’s consciousness of realities on the lives of the people engaged in the problem at hand. Hence, the student-researcher will focus his study mainly on the analysis of the problem along with the response of the Church on the matter.
1.4 RATIONALE
The research seeks to expose some realities that are being experienced by the common people – as they grow as “sexual beings”. In the light of Moral Theology, this research seeks to evaluate the problem of masturbation and pre-marital sex along with the response of the Church on the matter.
Furthermore, this research also serves as a reminder that the theology students’ intellectual interventions in realities are not just confined to the classroom setting, but that these interventions actually make them aware of the common problem faced by many if not all of human beings. Thus, the researcher will know to balance his response when these problems arise both to him and to others too.
CHAPTER II
2.0 A SITUATIONER: THE ELATION IN MASTURBATION AND PRE-MARITAL SEX
“The language of sex is easy to speak but hard to make meaningful!”
- Lester Kierhendall
In order to put the mindset of the audience into context, the author desires to begin with the definition of terms at issue.
2.1 MASTURBATION is a self stimulation of genital organs by means other than intercourse aiming at orgasm (cf. Merriam Webster Dictionary). Those means, for males, are usually by one’s own hands. More so, other parts of the body may be involved especially among females and the use of other objects too. Almost the same as the aforementioned definition, the “cyberspace” commonly known as the internet refers to masturbation as “a sexual stimulation, especially of one's own genitals stimulation performed manually or by other types of bodily contact, by use of objects or tools, or by some combination of these methods” (cf. Wikipedia: “Masturbation”)
The studies of Alfred Kinsey, a sociologist, show that 90% of male and 60% of female have tried masturbation sometime in their lifetime. (cf. Kinsey. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, 499 and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, 520.) Frequency of masturbation is determined by many factors, e.g., one's resistance to sexual tension, hormone levels influencing sexual arousal, sexual habits, peer influences, health and one's attitude to masturbation formed by culture. More so, medical causes have also been associated with masturbation.
Need not to say, masturbation is very much popular to many (if not to all) of young people and old ones alike. It is a quick source of pleasure for a weary body tired in toils and thirsty in flesh. For males, many engage into it thinking that it is a safe way to orgasm without the harm of impregnating a woman. Thus, it is asserted that after experiencing the pleasure of orgasm, the one who did masturbation has no responsibility towards another person, so that it is called “safe”. Masturbation, moreover, can be part of a full repertoire of sexual intercourse. It may be used as an interlude, foreplay, or as an alternative to penetration. For some people, non-penetrative sex or “frottage” is the primary sexual activity of choice above all others. Participants who do not want full sexual intercourse thus still enjoy mutual masturbation.
Mutual masturbation is practiced by people of all sexual orientations. When used as an alternative to penile-vaginal penetration, the goal may be to preserve virginity or to prevent pregnancy. Some people choose it as an alternative to casual sex because it results in sexual satisfaction without actual sex. For some people, masturbating with friends helps lift the stigma they feel surrounding the act. This helps them develop their orgasm, increase its pleasure, and inspires them to masturbate on a more frequent basis.
2.2 PRE-MARITAL SEX (or fornication) is identified as an act of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman occurring before marriage. (cf. Kinsey) More so, premarital sex is generally used in reference to individuals who are presumed not yet of marriageable age, or between adults who will presumably marry eventually, but who are engaging in sexual activity prior to marriage.
Many lovers around the terrain commonly assert that sex is desirable and necessary to prove a relationship to be real and authentic. Premarital sex, as a topic, is always timely. Much as a topic, others would say that it is also a pleasurable act to be performed. Usually, people do not formally learn about it in a classroom setting but on peer conversations. For those who do such act, they share their experience while and after performing such act. As a result, the topic tickles the young minds of their peers who deign to experience the same pleasure which their colleagues enjoyed. The process continues and the topic persistently spread throughout the terrain. Often, this phenomenon is called machismo.
CHAPTER III
3.0 THE MORAL PROBLEM OF MASTURBATION AND PREMARITAL SEX
“The body is not for immorality, but for the Lord.”
- 1 Corinthians 6:13b (NRSV)
This verse proves that exploitation of the body is very much morally unacceptable even in scriptural sense.
The exploitation of the body is an immoral act, a way of going against God’s will and, therefore, a sin. “When sin is defined as a transgression of God’s law, we add that it is a voluntary transgression.” (cf. Piet Schoonenberg. Man and Sin: A Theological View, 16.) Thus, sin is one’s personal and free decision to deviate from the ordination of God and to choose idols. By “idols”, it may refer to man’s choice which opposes God’s design. “As love goes out to God and creation, so sin, which is a denial of love, is also directed against the whole reality of God and his creation, of the world and its God.” (cf. Schoonenberg)
More so, to contextualize the aforementioned claims in this study about the moral problems of masturbation and premarital sex, it is quite important to consider and note the following:
3.1 MASTURBATION CONDEMNED
Many look at masturbation as an alternative to sex. Sexologists regard continual masturbation as a normal outlet for adults in certain circumstances –e.g.: in prison, in the armed forces, on trips away from home and spouse, etc. Thus, masturbation has been a diverting force for suppressed sexual drive. Meanwhile, the same sexologists asserted that “when adults prefer masturbation to normal intercourse, we are dealing with an abnormal situation.” (Wiliam Masters and Virginia Johnstons. Human Sexual Response, 95.) This problem is much seen in a psychological sense.
The Catholic Church condemns the practice of masturbation by saying: “masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action”. (Cathechism of the Catholic Church # 2352)
In the Sacred Scripture, there is no clear and explicit moral prohibition of masturbation in either the Old Testament or the New Testament. However, some moralists see the following Pauline references as the “ultimate scriptural word against masturbation” (Gennaro P. Avvento. Sexuality: A Christian View, 100.):
(1) “Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor boy prostitutes… will inherit the Kingdom of God.” (1 Cor 6: 9b-10, NAB)
(2) “Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lust of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies.” (Romans 1: 24, NAB)
(3) “Now the works of the flesh are obvious… adultery, impurity… I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God.” (Galatians 5:19-21, NRSV)
Furthermore, it is quite significant to look at the point of the Second Vatican Council on the matter, it says, “Although it cannot be established that the sacred scripture condemned masturbation by name, the tradition of the Church has rightly taken it to have been condemned by the New Testament when it speaks of ‘uncleanness’ and ‘unchastity’ and other vices contrary to chastity and continence.” (Sacred Congregation on the Doctrines of Faith. Personae Humanae # 8.)
Gennaro P. Avvento, a Catholic moralist, enumerated some of the statements of the Church’s magisterium that condemn masturbation:
(1) Pope Leo IX’s De Malitia Masturbationis: Masturbators should not be admitted to Sacred Orders.
(2) Decree of Sacred Penitentiary, 1904: Masturbatory acts of women during the absence of their husbands are gravely illicit.
(3) Pope Pius XII’s The Christian Education of Youth: Adolescent lapses such as masturbation should be seen as grave faults.
(4) Sacred Congregation for Religious, 1952: Habitual masturbation is an impediment to religious life.
(5) Guide to Formation in Priestly Celibacy, 1974: Masturbation is a sign of sexual imbalance.
(6)Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith, Persona Humana, 1975: Masturbation is immoral for all followers of Christ.
Much had been said against the immorality of masturbation. However, it must be clear that immorality of masturbation is viewed in the context of psycho-spiritual realm. As a person grows up and develops physically, masturbation becomes his way of coping to bodily changes and to the challenges of the environment. Masturbation “becomes morally wrong when it becomes psychologically harmful” (cf. Avvetto, 104) and threatening to one’s spirituality due to an abuse of the body.
3.2 SEX: PROPER TO MARRIED PEOPLE ALONE
“It is the human capacity for responsibility and fidelity that makes marriage possible; it is the human inclination to infidelity that makes marriage necessary.”
- Gennaro P. Avvento
Fr. William F. Allen, a sexual ethicist wrote: “Premarital sex exposes [people] to a sort of sexual obsession and deprives [them] of all the superior values outlined in Christian tradition on marriage.” (cf. William F. Allen. Sexuality Summary, 152.) Sexual action done outside marriage is morally unacceptable to the Catholic Church. It is a way of using one another for sexual gratification. Therefore, premarital sex is immoral. The fundamental casual factors of premarital sex are often identified with the following: (1) lack of available courses on sex and family life (or Sex Education); (2) depiction of sex by the media and environment; (3) problems caused by breakdown of family ties which leads to the loss of support structure for a meaningful future.
Another term for premarital sex is fornication that is a practice of “sexual intercourse with mutual consent between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman”. (cf. Avvetto., 118.) “It has viewed that all forms of premarital intercourse as fornication, as violation of personal dignity, as manipulation and hence gravely sinful.” (cf. Avvetto) The Catholic Church condemns such practice, saying: “Fornication is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered to the good of the spouses and the generation and education of children.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 2353)
The sacred scripture also forbids the practice of premarital sex as indicated by the following:
(1) “If a man has carnal relations with a female slave who has already been living with another man but has not yet been redeemed or given her freedom, they shall be punished...” (Leviticus 19:20, NRSV)
(3) “Be sure of this, that no immoral or impure or greedy person, that is an idolater, has any inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and of God.” (Ephesians 5:5, NRSV)
It is quite important to recognize that sexual intercourse is an expression of one’s whole being and the deepest core of his or her personality to someone whom he or she has chosen to remain with for the rest of one’s existence. Sex is beautifully willed by God as an expression of union between hearts-in-love yet “sex is prostituted when it becomes a source of self-enslavement and not a growing phase in the total development of mutual concern between two people.” (cf. Bertocci, 131.) Often, spoiling the urges of the flesh moves one to practice sex outside marriage.
“The argument against premarital sex ran as follows; the procreative characteristic of sex requires that the couple be in a permanent set of relationships in order to be able to assume the obligations owed to the potential progeny. This entails stability of their union and exclusive fidelity of one to another.” (cf. Allen., 150.)Such union pertains to marriage. Hence, full intimacy should be reserved for married state that is designed for a lifetime commitment to an exclusive sexual and physical relation.
The Second Vatican Council speaks of human’s sexuality and faculty of reproduction by noting that it wondrously surpassed the endowment of lower forms of life. Vatican II then “dealt one by one with the principles and rules which relate to human sexuality in marriage and which are based on specific purpose of sexuality.” (cf. CDF, Personae Humanae # 5)
“Marriage both encourages and symbolically expresses the growth in unity that the lovers experience in every area of their lives. Sexual intercourse before marriage is no preparation for marriage; it ‘tests’ very little. In a word, a so called ‘marital intercourse’ withdrawn from the real context of marriage is hardly calculated to keep love honest, let alone growing.” (cf. Bertocci, 124.) “In marriage, the physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual communion.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 2360) Hence, couple should recall the values laid by the Catholic Church and the Sacred Scripture - trust, honesty, fidelity, unity, and integrity - for married life. Then, looking into their hearts, they should ask themselves whether or not these values are being practiced and lived.
CHAPTER IV
4.0 THE THEOLOGICAL RESPONSE OF THE CHURCH: TOWARDS THE “THEOLOGY OF THE BODY”
“God created man in his own image, in the image of god he created him,
male and female he created them.”
-Genesis 1: 27
4.1 NECESSARY AFFIRMATION OF MAN’S CORPOREALITY
A Moralist, Andre Guindon writes: “By denying corporeality, human tenderness necessary fights sensuality which will try to ascertain its rights to existence” (cf. The Sexual Language: An Essay in Moral Theology, 90.) Thus, human spirituality cannot be attained when human corporeality is denied. After all, Christianity teaches that human being is composed of both body and spirit. On this point, CCC writes: “the human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal (body) and spiritual (soul).” (CCC # 362, italics mine) For a spirit to be holy, one must also make one’s body holy. Hence, holiness must be found inside and out.
At a hand, Christian morality maintains that performing masturbation and premarital sex is immoral and therefore sinful. It is slavery from flesh and a direct destruction of the body, the temple of the Holy Spirit. On the other hand, people should understand that feeling is a significant part of corporeality. The denial of this fact “would go against the explicit article of the Christian Creed” (cf. Guindon, 90.) which affirms both body and spirit as fundament components of human being. Both body and spirit complements each other and nothing goes higher than the other. Therefore, even the “urge” for bodily pleasure is a part of man’s corporeality. It is normal but not to be spoiled. And so, sexual desire must be properly dealt with. Misconception of this fact is dangerous.
Furthermore, in the imbalance prospect on man’s corporeality and spirituality, taking the latter as higher than the former, Paul Ricoeur insightfully claimed that every sexual action would fall short to: 1) meaninglessness of sex; 2) meaningless sex as an answer to existential failure; and 3) quest for sexual fabulousness. (cf. Ricoeur. Wonder, Erotism, and Enigma,133.)
4.2 THE “DIGNITY” OF THE HUMAN BODY
Being created in God’s own image, man receives a dignity higher than other creatures. The Church affirms this, saying: “Being in the image of God, the human individual possesses the dignity of the person, who is not just something, but someone.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 357) More so, the use of the term “image” can be cheaply assumed as the “physical appearance” as though pertaining to body or corpus.
The Catholic Church maintains the Dogma of the Incarnation of Jesus which gives a higher dignity to the human body which Jesus himself possessed upon His incarnation. “In reality, it is only I the mystery of the Word made flesh (incarnation) that the mystery of man becomes clear.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 359, italics mine) Through Jesus’ incarnation, which summit is His crucifixion, man was redeemed from all calumnies and impurities. This point is affirmed by the new CCC, it says: “Christian, recognize your dignity and now that you share in God’s own nature do not return to your former base condition by sinning… Never forget that you have been rescued from the power of darkness and brought into the light of the Kingdom of God.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 1691)
Regarding the practice sexual acts, Second Vatican Council declares: “When assessing the propriety of conjugal acts, determining if they accord with true human dignity, it is not enough to take only the good intention and the evaluation of motives into account. Objective criteria must be used: (1) criteria based on the nature of human person and his action; (2) criteria which respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving; (3) and the criteria on human procreation in the context of true love.” (cf. CDF, Personae Humanae # 5)
4.3 HUMAN BODY: TEMPLE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
“The human body shares in the dignity of ‘the image of God’: it is a human body because it is animated by a spiritual soul and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, the temple of the Holy Spirit.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 364) When one becomes a believer, the Holy Spirit becomes a part of himself. The body becomes a container, or a "house," or so to say, a "temple." St. Paul clearly affirms the actual physical body of man as the “Temple of the Holy Spirit”, he says:
“What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, ‘I will live in them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Therefore come out from them, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch nothing unclean; then I will welcome you, and I will be your father, and you shall be my sons and daughters’, says the Lord Almighty.” (cf. 2 Corinthians 6:16-18, NAB)
With Paul's logic exhorts people to touch not the “unclean things” (this applies to physical uncleanness, such as joining your body with a prostitute, or eating things God has declared unclean, and it also applies to the spiritual standing, don't partake of the doctrines of demons). More so, Paul expressed here that God care about humans’ weak and fragile body as the scripture tells.
There are people who opt to offer their whole body to God alone by preserving purity and chastity. “Chastity… is not sensitively defined in terms of whether a person has or has not had sexual intercourse. Chastity basically consists in the motivation and practice that keep sex from being self-centered and self-indulgent and that constantly dedicates it to the growth of the value. Chastity must be protected within the marriage bond as well as outside it.” (Bertocci. Sex, Love, and the Person, 130.) Conversely, St. Paul warns those who do otherwise by performing any malicious acts that obliterates the human body, he says:
“Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy that person; for the temple of God, which you are, is holy.”
(cf. 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, NAB)
God purposefully and purposely created people instituted His eternal laws to ensure that His creations would not fail. God was angered when man; being fallible creations, tripped over God’s will (cf. Genesis 3). Then, Jesus, the "Son of God" came along and fixed everything. He cleaned up the mess that man did against His Father’s will, at the cost of his own life. This is the way Jesus’ redeemed man from the power of sin, even from slavery from sexual misconducts.
The scriptures, being God's Word, tells man how to please God by obeying His will and doing what is appropriate for one’s body and soul. False teachings that say that it is fine to be a "carnal" alone approve a defiler, reprobate, delinquent or lascivious view of life. For God, it matters what man does with his body.
CHAPTER V
5. 0 CONCLUSION
5.1 THEOLOGICAL REFLECTION
Being true to the objective of doing this study - that is to understand “sex” and “sexuality” in the light of priestly life along with it is his desire to understand sex outside marriage and masturbation in the context of “celibacy” and “chastity” which are the fundamental demands of the Catholic Priesthood (cf. Introduction), the researcher desires then to close this with his theological reflection on the matter.
Ω Ω Ω
“My Call: Live a Pure Life”
God calls us in different state: in married life, single blessedness, or in celibate life. Celibacy is not for all. It is a particular vocation for those who deemed to follow Christ in the consecrated life. Thus, it is a charism – a gift from God. Furthermore, celibacy is an abstention from sexual relations, or so to say; the state of being unmarried. Particularly, the consecrated persons: priests, nuns, and religious have to be healthy celibates for they are called to be engaged with God and His people alone. Most of the time, people connects celibacy with the issue of “sex”. This is the very reason why celibacy appears not so pleasing in the modern times. In fact, a very few number of young people are choosing this as their way to sanctity. It is as though many cases of sexual misconduct of the consecrated people can be blamed upon the rising of their idea about sex and the lack of right knowledge of it.
On the other hand, some of the young people are engaged in sexual activities at their early age. They are comfortable in speaking of things regarding their sexual experiences only to their colleagues at their age. Usually, the youth are hesitant to talk about such topics with the authoritative figure who can give them right information about sex and sexuality. It is because they are afraid of reprimands, disciplinary actions, and judgments from authorities like parents and formators. This fear is rooted from the belief that “sex” is bad. It is also true as in the cases of many young candidates to priesthood and even to a few numbers of ordained pastors. This case challenges the Church and its promotion of vocations among the youth. Moreover, it must be clear to the young people that the openness of their mind about sex is not to be faced through trial. They need to be guided to a proper way of understanding their sexuality.
“The consecrated celibacy of the sacred ministers actually manifests the virginal and supernatural fecundity of marriage, by which the children of god are born, not by flesh and blood.” For somebody living out celibacy, it simply means: (1)...that the development of full humanity is more important than genital expression; (2)...that there are more important thing than sexual potency; (3)...that self-transcendence is more fully human than self-fulfillment.
This is the only way to make the ministers of the church healthy celibates. Good thing, the church has opened its doors in addressing this issue. In fact, many formation houses and seminaries are now open to the issues concerning their candidates’ tensions and conflicts in the area of sex and sexuality. In this regard, the formators are duty-bound to pay special attention to this issue by giving their candidates proper information and knowledge.
To be celibate also means to be empty for God, to be free and open for His presence in many people and to be available for His service. Hence, the choice of celibacy is an act of radical rejection of a number of myths that our society holds as facts: (1)…that genital sex is absolutely necessary for a person to be fully human; (2)…that sexual relation is the only way to insure one against loneliness; (3)…that sexual orgasm and experience of sexual intercourse is the only proof of one’s masculinity or femininity; (4)…and that sexual fulfillment is the ultimate purpose of life.
With celibacy, therefore, one guards himself against all irresponsible use of sexual power whether inside of outside marriage, ordained and lay alike. For after all, even married people can also be chaste.
5.2 SUMMARY
Sexuality is part of man’s nature being a corporeal being (composed of body). This fact is undeniable, as much as soul is to be affirmed as human’s fundamental component. Sensualities, like urges for bodily pleasure, are natural to human body. This urges, however, have to be channeled without deviating from God’s design. Sex for this matter, being a sexual channel, must be done in the context of marriage. Perhaps any sexual act derived from lust, like masturbation, is not morally acceptable.
By definition, masturbation is the self-stimulation of genitals by use of one’s hands or by other gadgets. Meanwhile, premarital sex is a sexual act between a male and a female outside marriage. Both masturbation and premarital sex are seen as “abnormal” psychological behaviors. This is true, no matter how pleasurable they appear for those who are engaged in it.
More so, masturbation and premarital sex are sinful in the sight of the Catholic Church’s teachings. .The Church asserts that performing such acts is a mistreatment of the human body which has the dignity given upon his creation by God Himself. Masturbation and premarital sex both ravage the human body – the “Temple of the Holy Spirit”. God deserve but a pure and clean body as His “temple”. These prove that masturbation and premarital sex are both immoral – better still, they are sins against God’s design.
Oppositions on the practice of such sexual misconducts had been unanimously supported by the pillars of the Catholic Church namely: Sacred Scripture (although not explicit), Tradition, and Magisterium.
LIST OF REFERENCES
BOOKS (BIBLIOGRAPHY):
Allen, William F. Sexuality Summary. Ohio: Alba Communications, 1977.
Avvento, Gennaro P. Sexuality: A Christian View. Connecticut: Twenty-third, 1984.
Bertocci, Peter A. Sex, Love, and the Person. New York: Sheed and Ward, 1967.
Guindon, Andrei. The Sexual Language: An Essay in Moral Theology. Ottawa: University of Ottawa, 1976.
Kinsey, Alfred. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1948.
____________. Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1953.
Masters, Wiliam and Johnstons, Virginia. Human Sexual Response. (Boston:
Little, Brown, & Co., 1969), 95.
Paul Ricoeur. Wonder, Erotism, and Enigma. New York: Harper and Row, 1964.
Schoonenberg, Piet. Man and Sin: A Theological View. Indiana: University of Notre Dame, 1965.
Turner, Philip. Sex, Money and Power. Cambridge: Cowley, 1985.
CHURCH DOCUMENTS:
Catechism of the Catholic Church
Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church,
ENCYCLICAL LETTER:
Pope Paul VI, Sacerdotalis Caelibatus.
Sacred Congregation on the Doctrines of Faith. Personae Humanae.
SACRED SCRIPTURES:
New American Bible
New Revised Standard Version
Thursday, September 2, 2010
NAMING MY "TOP TEN REGRETS"
AUGUST 19, 2010
10. If I had a choice, (this one, I will always have!) I might have not entertained any of my regrets! Kasi, this time I have more courage to set foot on the ground all new to my being! My regrets from the past are "blessings" for my future... I realized: "With God, no regrets!" YAhoooo!... (- end of top 10 regrets list -)
9. If I had a choice, (kaso di na mabawi eh!) I might have inquired about the fare cost from Masinag to Katipunan. Kasi, all those months I paid P16, pero P12 lang pala... (Kapag kulang ang bayad galit ang driver, pero pag labis patay-malisya naman! Madugas ang amfp!)
8. If I had a choice, (kaso wala eh!) I might have not enrolled the courses being taught by boring professors. Kasi sinasabihan ako ng doktor na may "insomnia" pag di makatulog sa gabi! (Ang totoo, I had enough sleep naman during daytime... sa classroom! LOL!)
7. If I had a choice, I might have paid for my SSS contribution 2 years earlier! Kasi sana makakapag LOAN nako ngayong taon, sayang!... (Note: better to avail LOANs than to wait for my pension when I reach 65 yo,. kasi 41 years pa hintayin! Buti yung iba jan, malapit na! haha)
AUGUST 18, 2010
6. If I had a choice, (this one I could have next time) I might have slept earlier. Kasi kung anu-anong pumapasok sa isip ko ngayon... delikado! (Dont get this wrong: "Pleasure is everywhere though... FB is a good souce of it! LOL") It's my choice to go to bed now!
5. If I had a choice (of course, I never had!), I might have named myself "John". Kasi my birthday is St. John's feast day! A holy man! (yung kapangalan man lang ay banal! Kasi yung Julius... asus!)
4. If I had a choice, I might have eaten more squash! Kasi it is very hard to depend on eye glasses! Kahit kaharap na, di pa din nakikita! Losser talaga! (yung iba na nagsusuot ng eye glasses para magpa-cute, sana sila na lang malabo mata! LOL)
3. If I had a choice (certainly, I had!), I might have eaten less and worked out more when I was younger! Kasi mahirap pala pag tumatanda na mataba! Eternal Realization: Diet is a myth!
2. If I had a choice (of course, I had!), I might have not registered myself in this "addictive" FACEBOOK! (booh!) Kasi there is no such thing as "Online Pastoral Year" or "cyber-apostolate"! Presence is always the best!
1. If I had a choice, I might have entered into a Minor Seminary 11 years ago... as young as 12 years old!
10. If I had a choice, (this one, I will always have!) I might have not entertained any of my regrets! Kasi, this time I have more courage to set foot on the ground all new to my being! My regrets from the past are "blessings" for my future... I realized: "With God, no regrets!" YAhoooo!... (- end of top 10 regrets list -)
9. If I had a choice, (kaso di na mabawi eh!) I might have inquired about the fare cost from Masinag to Katipunan. Kasi, all those months I paid P16, pero P12 lang pala... (Kapag kulang ang bayad galit ang driver, pero pag labis patay-malisya naman! Madugas ang amfp!)
8. If I had a choice, (kaso wala eh!) I might have not enrolled the courses being taught by boring professors. Kasi sinasabihan ako ng doktor na may "insomnia" pag di makatulog sa gabi! (Ang totoo, I had enough sleep naman during daytime... sa classroom! LOL!)
7. If I had a choice, I might have paid for my SSS contribution 2 years earlier! Kasi sana makakapag LOAN nako ngayong taon, sayang!... (Note: better to avail LOANs than to wait for my pension when I reach 65 yo,. kasi 41 years pa hintayin! Buti yung iba jan, malapit na! haha)
AUGUST 18, 2010
6. If I had a choice, (this one I could have next time) I might have slept earlier. Kasi kung anu-anong pumapasok sa isip ko ngayon... delikado! (Dont get this wrong: "Pleasure is everywhere though... FB is a good souce of it! LOL") It's my choice to go to bed now!
5. If I had a choice (of course, I never had!), I might have named myself "John". Kasi my birthday is St. John's feast day! A holy man! (yung kapangalan man lang ay banal! Kasi yung Julius... asus!)
4. If I had a choice, I might have eaten more squash! Kasi it is very hard to depend on eye glasses! Kahit kaharap na, di pa din nakikita! Losser talaga! (yung iba na nagsusuot ng eye glasses para magpa-cute, sana sila na lang malabo mata! LOL)
3. If I had a choice (certainly, I had!), I might have eaten less and worked out more when I was younger! Kasi mahirap pala pag tumatanda na mataba! Eternal Realization: Diet is a myth!
2. If I had a choice (of course, I had!), I might have not registered myself in this "addictive" FACEBOOK! (booh!) Kasi there is no such thing as "Online Pastoral Year" or "cyber-apostolate"! Presence is always the best!
1. If I had a choice, I might have entered into a Minor Seminary 11 years ago... as young as 12 years old!
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
CHASTITY: MY VOCATION
God calls us in different state: in married life, single blessedness, or in celibate life. Celibacy is not for all. It is a particular vocation for those who deemed to follow Christ in the consecrated life. Thus, it is a charism – a gift from God. Furthermore, celibacy is an abstention from sexual relations, or so to say; the state of being unmarried. Particularly, the consecrated persons: priests, nuns, and religious have to be healthy celibates for they are called to be engaged with God and His people alone.
Most of the time, people connects celibacy with the issue of “sex”. This is the very reason why celibacy appears not so pleasing in the modern times. In fact, a very few number of young people are choosing this as their way to sanctity. It is as though many cases of sexual misconduct of the consecrated people can be blamed upon the rising of their idea about sex and the lack of right knowledge of it.
On the other hand, some of the young people are engaged in sexual activities at their early age. They are comfortable in speaking of things regarding their sexual experiences only to their colleagues at their age. Usually, the youth are hesitant to talk about such topics with the authoritative figure who can give them right information about sex and sexuality. It is because they are afraid of reprimands, disciplinary actions, and judgments from authorities like parents and formators. This fear is rooted from the belief that “sex” is bad. It is also true as in the cases of many young candidates to priesthood and even to a few numbers of ordained pastors. This case challenges the Church and its promotion of vocations among the youth. Moreover, it must be clear to the young people that the openness of their mind about sex is not to be faced through trial. They need to be guided to a proper way of understanding their sexuality.
“The consecrated celibacy of the sacred ministers actually manifests the virginal and supernatural fecundity of marriage, by which the children of god are born, not by flesh and blood.” (cf. Pope Paul VI, Sacerdotalis Caelibatus, 24 June 1967) For somebody living out celibacy, it simply means: (1)...that the development of full humanity is more important than genital expression; (2)...that there are more important thing than sexual potency; (3)...that self-transcendence is more fully human than self-fulfillment.
This is the only way to make the ministers of the church healthy celibates. Good thing, the church has opened its doors in addressing this issue. In fact, many formation houses and seminaries are now open to the issues concerning their candidates’ tensions and conflicts in the area of sex and sexuality. In this regard, the formators are duty-bound to pay special attention to this issue by giving their candidates proper information and knowledge.
To be celibate also means to be empty for God, to be free and open for His presence in many people and to be available for His service. Hence, the choice of celibacy is an act of radical rejection of a number of myths that our society holds as facts: (1)…that genital sex is absolutely necessary for a person to be fully human; (2)…that sexual relation is the only way to insure one against loneliness; (3)…that sexual orgasm and experience of sexual intercourse is the only proof of one’s masculinity or femininity; (4)…and that sexual fulfillment is the ultimate purpose of life.
With celibacy, therefore, one guards himself against all irresponsible use of sexual power whether inside of outside marriage, ordained and lay alike. For after all, even married people can also be chaste.
Most of the time, people connects celibacy with the issue of “sex”. This is the very reason why celibacy appears not so pleasing in the modern times. In fact, a very few number of young people are choosing this as their way to sanctity. It is as though many cases of sexual misconduct of the consecrated people can be blamed upon the rising of their idea about sex and the lack of right knowledge of it.
On the other hand, some of the young people are engaged in sexual activities at their early age. They are comfortable in speaking of things regarding their sexual experiences only to their colleagues at their age. Usually, the youth are hesitant to talk about such topics with the authoritative figure who can give them right information about sex and sexuality. It is because they are afraid of reprimands, disciplinary actions, and judgments from authorities like parents and formators. This fear is rooted from the belief that “sex” is bad. It is also true as in the cases of many young candidates to priesthood and even to a few numbers of ordained pastors. This case challenges the Church and its promotion of vocations among the youth. Moreover, it must be clear to the young people that the openness of their mind about sex is not to be faced through trial. They need to be guided to a proper way of understanding their sexuality.
“The consecrated celibacy of the sacred ministers actually manifests the virginal and supernatural fecundity of marriage, by which the children of god are born, not by flesh and blood.” (cf. Pope Paul VI, Sacerdotalis Caelibatus, 24 June 1967) For somebody living out celibacy, it simply means: (1)...that the development of full humanity is more important than genital expression; (2)...that there are more important thing than sexual potency; (3)...that self-transcendence is more fully human than self-fulfillment.
This is the only way to make the ministers of the church healthy celibates. Good thing, the church has opened its doors in addressing this issue. In fact, many formation houses and seminaries are now open to the issues concerning their candidates’ tensions and conflicts in the area of sex and sexuality. In this regard, the formators are duty-bound to pay special attention to this issue by giving their candidates proper information and knowledge.
To be celibate also means to be empty for God, to be free and open for His presence in many people and to be available for His service. Hence, the choice of celibacy is an act of radical rejection of a number of myths that our society holds as facts: (1)…that genital sex is absolutely necessary for a person to be fully human; (2)…that sexual relation is the only way to insure one against loneliness; (3)…that sexual orgasm and experience of sexual intercourse is the only proof of one’s masculinity or femininity; (4)…and that sexual fulfillment is the ultimate purpose of life.
With celibacy, therefore, one guards himself against all irresponsible use of sexual power whether inside of outside marriage, ordained and lay alike. For after all, even married people can also be chaste.
Dialogue: A Common Mission of All Religions
ABSTRACT:
Dialogue with our neighbors of other faiths is the only way we can continue our works of human promotion and human rights. To refuse relationships with other religions is to invite suspicion, enmity and fear. Even if ours is the most noble and humanitarian cause, we cannot expect that all our neighbors of other faiths will perceive it that way.
REALITY:
An interreligious dialogue is often misconceived as intellectual discussions amongst scholars. However, the term could also mean "interreligious relations" or "interreligious cooperation." In other words, what is prescribed is not just about academic discourses but about genuine interactions, relationships and partnerships with other religions. For that to become a reality, the respective players have to take some basic steps. More so, Christian religions must open up to the possibility of an inter-religious dialogue to promote solidarity among religions.
REFLECTION:
Christian religions do not bind in solidarity with other religions is because of superiority complex. Often, Christians think that they are no longer in need of integrating with other faith. The classical adage, “extra ecclesiam nulla salus” turned to be arrogant because the Church itself also needs to be saved. Thus, Christianity must humbly recognize that other faith could also lead the world to salvation for as long as it promotes the values demanded for salvation. More so, unity among all the peoples is necessary because of the belief that all will return to one and the same God, whatever name He might be called.
RESPONSE:
Therefore, it must be regarded that religions are legitimate means of salvation, but that ultimately this salvation is brought about through God’s might through human cooperation. All religions have an equally deep faith. We thus approach every other faith and its adherents reverently through “dialogue“, having God as the absolute center of such relationship which aims at unity and integrity in the area of fraternity, if not in belief. This must be rooted in the conviction that even though religions have varied ways of praising, worshipping, they still adore the same Deity though in different names.
CONCLUSION:
Furthermore, while remaining faithful to the traditions of our respective religions; the Religions in the world have opted to place priority on the dialogue in their mission. For, only through a dialogue will the Religions discover what it means to be truly Religious as well as truly human related to each other. For instance, by way of dialogue, the Church will be able to baptize people in the Jordan of world’s religiousness as well as to pass through the Calvary of world’s poor. Thus, only then will the Church truly inculturate and be able to walk the Emmaus of the world’s cultural matrix as one of her very own. Such is the mission of religions in the world.
Dialogue with our neighbors of other faiths is the only way we can continue our works of human promotion and human rights. To refuse relationships with other religions is to invite suspicion, enmity and fear. Even if ours is the most noble and humanitarian cause, we cannot expect that all our neighbors of other faiths will perceive it that way.
REALITY:
An interreligious dialogue is often misconceived as intellectual discussions amongst scholars. However, the term could also mean "interreligious relations" or "interreligious cooperation." In other words, what is prescribed is not just about academic discourses but about genuine interactions, relationships and partnerships with other religions. For that to become a reality, the respective players have to take some basic steps. More so, Christian religions must open up to the possibility of an inter-religious dialogue to promote solidarity among religions.
REFLECTION:
Christian religions do not bind in solidarity with other religions is because of superiority complex. Often, Christians think that they are no longer in need of integrating with other faith. The classical adage, “extra ecclesiam nulla salus” turned to be arrogant because the Church itself also needs to be saved. Thus, Christianity must humbly recognize that other faith could also lead the world to salvation for as long as it promotes the values demanded for salvation. More so, unity among all the peoples is necessary because of the belief that all will return to one and the same God, whatever name He might be called.
RESPONSE:
Therefore, it must be regarded that religions are legitimate means of salvation, but that ultimately this salvation is brought about through God’s might through human cooperation. All religions have an equally deep faith. We thus approach every other faith and its adherents reverently through “dialogue“, having God as the absolute center of such relationship which aims at unity and integrity in the area of fraternity, if not in belief. This must be rooted in the conviction that even though religions have varied ways of praising, worshipping, they still adore the same Deity though in different names.
CONCLUSION:
Furthermore, while remaining faithful to the traditions of our respective religions; the Religions in the world have opted to place priority on the dialogue in their mission. For, only through a dialogue will the Religions discover what it means to be truly Religious as well as truly human related to each other. For instance, by way of dialogue, the Church will be able to baptize people in the Jordan of world’s religiousness as well as to pass through the Calvary of world’s poor. Thus, only then will the Church truly inculturate and be able to walk the Emmaus of the world’s cultural matrix as one of her very own. Such is the mission of religions in the world.
The God-Problem: Why Does He Allow Natural Disasters?
History would tell us that natural disasters are not new to our country. Year after year, many lives and possessions are being either ruined or sternly affected by successive natural disasters such as earthquake, landslide, hail storm, typhoon, volcanic eruption, and the like - not noting yet their strength, gustiness, or magnitude . When such disasters come, it is not an issue whether you are rich or poor, young or old, man or woman in order to get spared from its force. Nobody draws exempted from its effect.
Our natural pursuit for “order” is innate in us and any chaos is unacceptable, be it in the environment or in other field. This explains why when natural disasters hit us, the situation is found uneasy and people commonly ask - if God loves his creatures, why does He allow natural disasters to hit us? It comes so easy for the people to blame God for the harsh fate of many houses being drowned in mud and flood during typhoons, or the lands covered by lava during volcanic eruptions, or the agricultural areas bunged by loam on the hillside during landslides, and the like adverse effects of calamities. However, people seldom ask themselves of their contribution on such throbbing tragedies brought about by their irresponsible stewardship over the earth. Yes, environmental phenomena will come and we do not have any control over it. But, human beings can lessen its effect.
It is quite significant here to go back to God’s command to human beings in Gen 1:28: “Fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over all the living things.” This command speaks of responsibility over the earth which God placed in the hands of human beings. Thus, it carries out the duty to take care of the earth, to make it fruitful and NOT TO ABUSE the environment. Sadly, human beings do the latter, most often than not. When we look around us, we will notice the grave abuses of human beings in the environment. The forest degradation, quarrying and mismanaged wastes speak of it.
However, while many languish because of ruthless effects of the disasters, still many exult for being spared from it. The latter, however, must express their joy not just by mere saying: “Thank you, Lord for sparing us from the calamity.” More so, they must add: “Since you have been kind by sparing us, teach me to be kind too to my brethren who were less fortunate. Allow me to help them, Lord.” Hence, every time when natural calamities take place is an opportune time to lend hands and to share what we preserve with those who were unfortunate enough for not being able to save anything from the disaster. After all, it still pays to re-echo the well-known Filipino song which says: “Walang sinuman ang nabubuhay para sa sarili lamang. Walang sinuman ang namamatay para sa sarili lamang. Tayong lahat ay may pananagutan sa isa’t isa.” (Nobody lives for himself alone. Nobody perishes for himself alone. All of us are accountable for each other.) If we face disasters and our fellows seem not to care, then that would be the worst disaster that has come our way.
Natural phenomena, therefore, are not purely disastrous. It should not be seen as purely God’s fury that leads human beings to doom due to wickedness. These could also be seen otherwise - as God’s way of uniting the apparently divided Filipino people. Of course, the experience of loss of lives and hardly-earned possessions is painful. But in the long run, we will realize that there is a grace behind loss and a reason why God allows natural disasters: first is the lesson of valuing the environment; the second is the message that despite the development of science and technology, we still do not have full control over everything and thus, we still need God; and the third is to let us relive the spirit that binds us as Filipinos… bayanihan!(helping others in dire need)
Our natural pursuit for “order” is innate in us and any chaos is unacceptable, be it in the environment or in other field. This explains why when natural disasters hit us, the situation is found uneasy and people commonly ask - if God loves his creatures, why does He allow natural disasters to hit us? It comes so easy for the people to blame God for the harsh fate of many houses being drowned in mud and flood during typhoons, or the lands covered by lava during volcanic eruptions, or the agricultural areas bunged by loam on the hillside during landslides, and the like adverse effects of calamities. However, people seldom ask themselves of their contribution on such throbbing tragedies brought about by their irresponsible stewardship over the earth. Yes, environmental phenomena will come and we do not have any control over it. But, human beings can lessen its effect.
It is quite significant here to go back to God’s command to human beings in Gen 1:28: “Fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over all the living things.” This command speaks of responsibility over the earth which God placed in the hands of human beings. Thus, it carries out the duty to take care of the earth, to make it fruitful and NOT TO ABUSE the environment. Sadly, human beings do the latter, most often than not. When we look around us, we will notice the grave abuses of human beings in the environment. The forest degradation, quarrying and mismanaged wastes speak of it.
However, while many languish because of ruthless effects of the disasters, still many exult for being spared from it. The latter, however, must express their joy not just by mere saying: “Thank you, Lord for sparing us from the calamity.” More so, they must add: “Since you have been kind by sparing us, teach me to be kind too to my brethren who were less fortunate. Allow me to help them, Lord.” Hence, every time when natural calamities take place is an opportune time to lend hands and to share what we preserve with those who were unfortunate enough for not being able to save anything from the disaster. After all, it still pays to re-echo the well-known Filipino song which says: “Walang sinuman ang nabubuhay para sa sarili lamang. Walang sinuman ang namamatay para sa sarili lamang. Tayong lahat ay may pananagutan sa isa’t isa.” (Nobody lives for himself alone. Nobody perishes for himself alone. All of us are accountable for each other.) If we face disasters and our fellows seem not to care, then that would be the worst disaster that has come our way.
Natural phenomena, therefore, are not purely disastrous. It should not be seen as purely God’s fury that leads human beings to doom due to wickedness. These could also be seen otherwise - as God’s way of uniting the apparently divided Filipino people. Of course, the experience of loss of lives and hardly-earned possessions is painful. But in the long run, we will realize that there is a grace behind loss and a reason why God allows natural disasters: first is the lesson of valuing the environment; the second is the message that despite the development of science and technology, we still do not have full control over everything and thus, we still need God; and the third is to let us relive the spirit that binds us as Filipinos… bayanihan!(helping others in dire need)
Ecumenical Stance: My Comment on the Fact that the Catholic Church has not yet joined the National Council of Churches in Some Countries
Reality:
It was confirmed that in some countries, the local Catholic Church has not yet joined the National Council of Churches. This council is the association of different faith denominations which are aiming at unity and integrity in the area of fraternity, if not in belief. It is rooted in the belief that even though different religions have varied ways of praising, worshipping, they still adore the same Deity though in different names.
Reflection:
It might be possible that the reason why the local Catholic Church in some countries does not join the National Council of Churches is rooted in pride. The leaders of those local Churches think that they are self-sufficient and no longer in need of integrating with other faith. Even history, one can notice such inward attitude of the Catholic Church upon reflecting on the ecclesiological formula of St. Cyprian - outside the Church there is no salvation. According to David Bosch, a missiologist: “The classical Catholic adage, extra ecclesiam nulla salus (“outside the church no salvation”) seemed to have been turned into its opposite –inside the church there is no salvation.”
This assumption is being criticized by the ecumenical conferences in Uppsala (1968) and Bangkok (1973). They say that the Church is arrogant in this expression because the Church itself is also needs to be saved. These conferences proposed that there should be no assumption that salvation is offered to those who are baptized in the Catholic Church alone. Otherwise, the Church might come to be introvert, self-centered and inward-looking.
Another possible reason is the cost of membership in the National Council of Churches. In the favorable note for the Catholic Church, it might also be possible that the membership in NCC is expensive and unaffordable for the local Church.
Response:
The Catholic Church must go back to Jesus Christ. Thus, there is a need to be humble, as Jesus is its model. Hence, the Catholic Church must also recognize that other faith could also lead the world to salvation for as long as it promotes the values demanded by heaven. This is also proposed by the Declaration on Ecumenism of Pope Paul VI: NOSTRA AETATE. Herein, the Catholic Church is being demanded to be united with all people, even with those in different religions. Unity is necessary because of the fact that they will all return to one and the same God.
Therefore, there is nothing wrong if all the local Catholic Churches around the world will join the National Council of Churches.
It was confirmed that in some countries, the local Catholic Church has not yet joined the National Council of Churches. This council is the association of different faith denominations which are aiming at unity and integrity in the area of fraternity, if not in belief. It is rooted in the belief that even though different religions have varied ways of praising, worshipping, they still adore the same Deity though in different names.
Reflection:
It might be possible that the reason why the local Catholic Church in some countries does not join the National Council of Churches is rooted in pride. The leaders of those local Churches think that they are self-sufficient and no longer in need of integrating with other faith. Even history, one can notice such inward attitude of the Catholic Church upon reflecting on the ecclesiological formula of St. Cyprian - outside the Church there is no salvation. According to David Bosch, a missiologist: “The classical Catholic adage, extra ecclesiam nulla salus (“outside the church no salvation”) seemed to have been turned into its opposite –inside the church there is no salvation.”
This assumption is being criticized by the ecumenical conferences in Uppsala (1968) and Bangkok (1973). They say that the Church is arrogant in this expression because the Church itself is also needs to be saved. These conferences proposed that there should be no assumption that salvation is offered to those who are baptized in the Catholic Church alone. Otherwise, the Church might come to be introvert, self-centered and inward-looking.
Another possible reason is the cost of membership in the National Council of Churches. In the favorable note for the Catholic Church, it might also be possible that the membership in NCC is expensive and unaffordable for the local Church.
Response:
The Catholic Church must go back to Jesus Christ. Thus, there is a need to be humble, as Jesus is its model. Hence, the Catholic Church must also recognize that other faith could also lead the world to salvation for as long as it promotes the values demanded by heaven. This is also proposed by the Declaration on Ecumenism of Pope Paul VI: NOSTRA AETATE. Herein, the Catholic Church is being demanded to be united with all people, even with those in different religions. Unity is necessary because of the fact that they will all return to one and the same God.
Therefore, there is nothing wrong if all the local Catholic Churches around the world will join the National Council of Churches.
EMBASSMENT (piece delivered in our homiletics class)
1. ASSERTION:
We should be meek and unassuming at all times.
2. STORY-TELLING:
I was not yet a diocesan seminarian of Imus when I had my first chance to meet the prestigious and well-known bishop of Imus, Msgr. Luis Antonio Tagle, D.D. Not so long ago, I was just hearing his name on the account of his brilliant homilies and peerless teaching skill. Likewise, I see him most often on his television shows. I could hardly forget my longing back then to see Bishop Tagle in person for the simple reason that I never admire anybody the way I admired him.
My desire was realized when I had my exposure program in a parish in Cavite while I was still applying in the diocese. My parish priest was invited by Bishop Tagle for a dinner in a good restaurant to settle some things over the table. Very timely, the priest asked me to accompany him in going out with the bishop. At first, I acted as if I was not willing to join them by saying so many reasons which in fact are all lies. The truth was, even if they don’t invite me, I planned to insist myself in going out with them. That is how I describe my frustration back then to meet my idol. I succeeded, anyway.
The awaited night came. I wore the best clothes in my closet, best pair of shoes in the rack, and sprayed the most expensive perfume that I ever got in my life. I could not draw and well imagine the excitement beaming in me on that moment. My parish priest and I left right away to fetch the bishop in Imus. Upon the Bishop’s boarding, I was on a star-struck that I could no longer speak. When he talked to me, I tried to answer politely anything that he said. I felt so fulfilled and happy until when we arrived in our destination.
At the restaurant, the porters recognized the Bishop right away that they opened the door of the car to warmly welcome him. Thinking that porter will do the same for me, I waited for a moment for them to open the door beside me. But they never did, so I opened the door and got out of the car in my own risk. Jokingly, I told the Bishop of what I thought of but he just laughed. The bishop then was warmly greeted by the people who recognized him. I also smiled and nod my head before the people but they did not mind me. Upon entering the restaurant, Bishop Tagle and my parish priest entered right away without passing over the guard’s safety check. Thinking again that the guard will also let me pass, I followed the Bishop outright. But to my dismay, I was stopped by the guard and was asked to go back to the main door for checking. With disappointment, I said: “I am with Bishop Tagle, why do I have to pass this checkpoint?” and the guard replied with a degrading smile.
I tried hard not to feel bad but I felt so dismayed and just wished that I should have not joined them in that spree. The dismay subsided when we had a dinner over the fine carte du jour and I had a good conversation with my idol whom, I realized, is indeed a brilliant and a simple person. From time to time, other guests in the restaurant are coming close to the Bishop to greet him. But, there was this certain group of not-so-aged people who came to the Bishop for a picture taking. Thinking then that I might get embarrassed if they will not ask me to join them in their picture taking, I excused myself and intended to cope as if going to the wash room. But to my surprise, one of those among the group asked me to stay foot for a while. I said “ok” and I posed with the group ready for the picture taking. I gave my best smile that the camera could capture. Meanwhile, the person whom I thought was the one to take the picture placed the camera on the table and said “You” pointing her fingers to me, “come and take a picture for us!” I did not know how I would react. My joy and smile was changed with cursing face. Well, I still tried to enjoy that humiliating night because of the rare chance to meet my idol. However, that experience made me realize that too much assumptions and pretentions would not always bring out the best upshot.
3. ASSERTION:
Indeed, we should remain meek and unassuming at all times.
We should be meek and unassuming at all times.
2. STORY-TELLING:
I was not yet a diocesan seminarian of Imus when I had my first chance to meet the prestigious and well-known bishop of Imus, Msgr. Luis Antonio Tagle, D.D. Not so long ago, I was just hearing his name on the account of his brilliant homilies and peerless teaching skill. Likewise, I see him most often on his television shows. I could hardly forget my longing back then to see Bishop Tagle in person for the simple reason that I never admire anybody the way I admired him.
My desire was realized when I had my exposure program in a parish in Cavite while I was still applying in the diocese. My parish priest was invited by Bishop Tagle for a dinner in a good restaurant to settle some things over the table. Very timely, the priest asked me to accompany him in going out with the bishop. At first, I acted as if I was not willing to join them by saying so many reasons which in fact are all lies. The truth was, even if they don’t invite me, I planned to insist myself in going out with them. That is how I describe my frustration back then to meet my idol. I succeeded, anyway.
The awaited night came. I wore the best clothes in my closet, best pair of shoes in the rack, and sprayed the most expensive perfume that I ever got in my life. I could not draw and well imagine the excitement beaming in me on that moment. My parish priest and I left right away to fetch the bishop in Imus. Upon the Bishop’s boarding, I was on a star-struck that I could no longer speak. When he talked to me, I tried to answer politely anything that he said. I felt so fulfilled and happy until when we arrived in our destination.
At the restaurant, the porters recognized the Bishop right away that they opened the door of the car to warmly welcome him. Thinking that porter will do the same for me, I waited for a moment for them to open the door beside me. But they never did, so I opened the door and got out of the car in my own risk. Jokingly, I told the Bishop of what I thought of but he just laughed. The bishop then was warmly greeted by the people who recognized him. I also smiled and nod my head before the people but they did not mind me. Upon entering the restaurant, Bishop Tagle and my parish priest entered right away without passing over the guard’s safety check. Thinking again that the guard will also let me pass, I followed the Bishop outright. But to my dismay, I was stopped by the guard and was asked to go back to the main door for checking. With disappointment, I said: “I am with Bishop Tagle, why do I have to pass this checkpoint?” and the guard replied with a degrading smile.
I tried hard not to feel bad but I felt so dismayed and just wished that I should have not joined them in that spree. The dismay subsided when we had a dinner over the fine carte du jour and I had a good conversation with my idol whom, I realized, is indeed a brilliant and a simple person. From time to time, other guests in the restaurant are coming close to the Bishop to greet him. But, there was this certain group of not-so-aged people who came to the Bishop for a picture taking. Thinking then that I might get embarrassed if they will not ask me to join them in their picture taking, I excused myself and intended to cope as if going to the wash room. But to my surprise, one of those among the group asked me to stay foot for a while. I said “ok” and I posed with the group ready for the picture taking. I gave my best smile that the camera could capture. Meanwhile, the person whom I thought was the one to take the picture placed the camera on the table and said “You” pointing her fingers to me, “come and take a picture for us!” I did not know how I would react. My joy and smile was changed with cursing face. Well, I still tried to enjoy that humiliating night because of the rare chance to meet my idol. However, that experience made me realize that too much assumptions and pretentions would not always bring out the best upshot.
3. ASSERTION:
Indeed, we should remain meek and unassuming at all times.
Suffering
There are so many people dying of hunger, sickness, poverty, oppression, etc. For sure, God is never happy seeing his people suffering. However, I still want to know why God – all merciful and loving – allows many people get drowned to different kinds of suffering. This question always comes to my mind every time I see my countrymen suffering from poverty.
The world tends to define poverty and riches simply in terms of economics. That is the easiest way to look at it. However, we need to broaden that definition. For us Filipinos, poverty is a state characterized by lack of means. The poor person then is one who either temporarily or permanently finds herself or himself in a situation of weakness, dependence, and humiliation. The poor then does not have the means to accomplish the end that they desire. The scriptures promise that God will take care of such people, because they have to rely on him for they have no one else to rely on.
With the situation of poverty, who then is at fault? Poor person may themselves be to blame for their poverty to some degree. An author, Dorothy Day wisely said, “What the Gospels forever takes away from Christians is the right to judge between the worthy and the unworthy poor.” When we sit in judgment, we stand aloof and apart. If we critique who is unworthy or worthy, our criteria will always e cultural and too often self-interested.
A person might be at fault to some extent. But we should also realize that poverty is an oppression with which one surrenders after repeatedly being put down. People who have never been in this downtrodden situation can be very unsympathetic. Those who are in the higher economic status could easily characterize the poor people unmotivated and lazy. The poor then have nobody to turn to. This state is often called “victim behavior.” Those who do not experience such poverty could never understand this behavior of the oppressed for such does not fit their criteria. Hence, they misinterpret and misjudge everything the disadvantaged do.
SUFFERING caused by poverty then is undesirable and the behavior of the oppressed is deadly. But one thing is for sure, God will never abandon the poor as He had promised in the scriptures.
The world tends to define poverty and riches simply in terms of economics. That is the easiest way to look at it. However, we need to broaden that definition. For us Filipinos, poverty is a state characterized by lack of means. The poor person then is one who either temporarily or permanently finds herself or himself in a situation of weakness, dependence, and humiliation. The poor then does not have the means to accomplish the end that they desire. The scriptures promise that God will take care of such people, because they have to rely on him for they have no one else to rely on.
With the situation of poverty, who then is at fault? Poor person may themselves be to blame for their poverty to some degree. An author, Dorothy Day wisely said, “What the Gospels forever takes away from Christians is the right to judge between the worthy and the unworthy poor.” When we sit in judgment, we stand aloof and apart. If we critique who is unworthy or worthy, our criteria will always e cultural and too often self-interested.
A person might be at fault to some extent. But we should also realize that poverty is an oppression with which one surrenders after repeatedly being put down. People who have never been in this downtrodden situation can be very unsympathetic. Those who are in the higher economic status could easily characterize the poor people unmotivated and lazy. The poor then have nobody to turn to. This state is often called “victim behavior.” Those who do not experience such poverty could never understand this behavior of the oppressed for such does not fit their criteria. Hence, they misinterpret and misjudge everything the disadvantaged do.
SUFFERING caused by poverty then is undesirable and the behavior of the oppressed is deadly. But one thing is for sure, God will never abandon the poor as He had promised in the scriptures.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)