God's will
God's will
Posted 11:51pm (Mla time) Mar 21, 2005
By Conrado de Quiros
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A12 of the March 22, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
BISHOP Oscar Cruz had some interesting things to say about the Department of Health's nationwide campaign for responsible parenthood a couple of months ago. "First," he said, "there was the 'Ligtas-Tigdas.' Now there is the 'Ligtas-Buntis 2005.' What is supposed to be sacred, such as human sexuality, has now become a dangerous liability. What is to be treated with dignity, such as human pregnancy, is now considered a dirty disease."
He went on: "When shall this country treat its citizens with respect? When will it learn to make its people its precious asset? When will it truly acknowledge that it is its population, such as the OFWs, that keep it somehow economically afloat?"
Comes now Bishop Jesus Dosado proposing something drastic, which is that the people pushing for or supporting government's "anti-life policies" be barred from taking Holy Communion, or themselves voluntarily refrain from doing so. They are not worthy to receive Christ, he says. Artificial birth control methods go against the will of God.
Well, Cruz has a right to be a little peeved that the DOH should put "buntis" [pregnancy] on the same plane as "tigdas" [measles]. Which should be a lesson in taking semantics as seriously as health: Both are a matter of life and death. The day you suggest that pregnancy has the same characteristics as chicken pox is the day you invite the wrath of God, or his self-professed representatives on earth, down on your cause. I know that Gabriel Garcia Marquez once compared the symptoms of love to those of cholera (in "Love in the Time of Cholera"): stomachache, dizziness, vomiting. But that is love, or at least the situation when one is waiting for word about whether one's love is requited or not. Not pregnancy.
A better word would have been "iwas," or avoid, rather than "ligtas," or cure, though even "iwas" -- particularly with its association with "iwas-pusoy" -- is bound to raise the hackles of those who think pregnancy is a consummation devoutly to be wished by every woman at every turn (of the screw). Those who think so being the bishops and priests, who, not quite incidentally, are all men. I wonder how women priests, or women bishops, would feel about this when, or if, the day comes, though to the current Church the concept of women priests probably comes more directly from the devil's mind than contraception. Fortunately for priests, who have been known to get some of their female parishioners pregnant, they personally do not have to bear the fruits of their labor for nine months, and face the diatribe of gossipy neighbors. Their objects of love, or lust, do. If they themselves did, they might develop a new appreciation for the words "ligtas" and "iwas." Or at least understand why, though truly pregnancy is not a malignancy, it is a consummation often devoutly to be avoided, or prevented.
Just as well, human sexuality may be sacred, but that doesn't mean the couple -- and I can hear cries of "Heretic!" coming my way with the added qualification, man-and-woman or otherwise -- should be gritting their teeth and whispering fervently, "In aid of heaven," while in the throes of its more intense expressions. Sacred is not opposed to pleasurable, or even fun. Unfortunately, most people do not have the iron discipline of some of us and can pull the thing out before it inundates the womb with its cascading glory. Concupiscent youth certainly does not, even the married variety, which, as another Church injunction assures, is the only context in which youth can release its concupiscence.
I cannot imagine a more anti-human, or indeed anti-life, view of sex than that it is burden to be endured to add to the number of carbon units in this planet. It is certainly anti-women, turning them into sows or cows to increase the stock, or as that local word so graphically puts it, "palahian." I've heard that word often used in conjunction with women with big hips. Big hips equals easy pregnancies, equals a bigger tribe, or race ("lahi").
As to denying supporters of birth control Holy Communion, that is guaranteed only to plunge the number of communicants to record lows, if not the number of Catholics, or Christians, themselves in this country. If that proposal were applied to Spain, for example, home of the Opus Dei and the friars who brought us to this pass, there will be very few left to queue up to Holy Communion, or indeed to Mass itself. Certainly, there will be no public official to do so, government having legalized divorce in 1981 and abortion in 1985. Today, sex-change surgery in that country falls under the national health plan.
I agree with Cruz that government does not treat its citizens with respect, it does not see its people as its most precious resource, it does not appreciate what its overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) in particular are doing to keep the country afloat. I disagree that that is shown by government's family planning program. In fact, it is shown by everything except government's family planning program. Government's lack of respect for its citizens and appreciation for the OFWs is shown first and foremost by the recklessness with which it advertises its leading role in the rape of Iraq. That war has been deemed by no less than the Pope itself as immoral and it has been shown by Robert Tarongoy as idiotic in the extreme, shoving as it does our OFWs in the path of harm. Why isn't the local Church fulminating against it?
In the end, it isn't just government that's showing contempt for the people. The Church is, too. You do not show respect for human beings by equating dignity with fertility, the divine spark with vulgar number. In any case, the growing litter the women of this country will be towing behind them isn't likely to land in Church, it is only likely to land in jail.
It's hard to see how that can be God's will.
Posted 11:51pm (Mla time) Mar 21, 2005
By Conrado de Quiros
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A12 of the March 22, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
BISHOP Oscar Cruz had some interesting things to say about the Department of Health's nationwide campaign for responsible parenthood a couple of months ago. "First," he said, "there was the 'Ligtas-Tigdas.' Now there is the 'Ligtas-Buntis 2005.' What is supposed to be sacred, such as human sexuality, has now become a dangerous liability. What is to be treated with dignity, such as human pregnancy, is now considered a dirty disease."
He went on: "When shall this country treat its citizens with respect? When will it learn to make its people its precious asset? When will it truly acknowledge that it is its population, such as the OFWs, that keep it somehow economically afloat?"
Comes now Bishop Jesus Dosado proposing something drastic, which is that the people pushing for or supporting government's "anti-life policies" be barred from taking Holy Communion, or themselves voluntarily refrain from doing so. They are not worthy to receive Christ, he says. Artificial birth control methods go against the will of God.
Well, Cruz has a right to be a little peeved that the DOH should put "buntis" [pregnancy] on the same plane as "tigdas" [measles]. Which should be a lesson in taking semantics as seriously as health: Both are a matter of life and death. The day you suggest that pregnancy has the same characteristics as chicken pox is the day you invite the wrath of God, or his self-professed representatives on earth, down on your cause. I know that Gabriel Garcia Marquez once compared the symptoms of love to those of cholera (in "Love in the Time of Cholera"): stomachache, dizziness, vomiting. But that is love, or at least the situation when one is waiting for word about whether one's love is requited or not. Not pregnancy.
A better word would have been "iwas," or avoid, rather than "ligtas," or cure, though even "iwas" -- particularly with its association with "iwas-pusoy" -- is bound to raise the hackles of those who think pregnancy is a consummation devoutly to be wished by every woman at every turn (of the screw). Those who think so being the bishops and priests, who, not quite incidentally, are all men. I wonder how women priests, or women bishops, would feel about this when, or if, the day comes, though to the current Church the concept of women priests probably comes more directly from the devil's mind than contraception. Fortunately for priests, who have been known to get some of their female parishioners pregnant, they personally do not have to bear the fruits of their labor for nine months, and face the diatribe of gossipy neighbors. Their objects of love, or lust, do. If they themselves did, they might develop a new appreciation for the words "ligtas" and "iwas." Or at least understand why, though truly pregnancy is not a malignancy, it is a consummation often devoutly to be avoided, or prevented.
Just as well, human sexuality may be sacred, but that doesn't mean the couple -- and I can hear cries of "Heretic!" coming my way with the added qualification, man-and-woman or otherwise -- should be gritting their teeth and whispering fervently, "In aid of heaven," while in the throes of its more intense expressions. Sacred is not opposed to pleasurable, or even fun. Unfortunately, most people do not have the iron discipline of some of us and can pull the thing out before it inundates the womb with its cascading glory. Concupiscent youth certainly does not, even the married variety, which, as another Church injunction assures, is the only context in which youth can release its concupiscence.
I cannot imagine a more anti-human, or indeed anti-life, view of sex than that it is burden to be endured to add to the number of carbon units in this planet. It is certainly anti-women, turning them into sows or cows to increase the stock, or as that local word so graphically puts it, "palahian." I've heard that word often used in conjunction with women with big hips. Big hips equals easy pregnancies, equals a bigger tribe, or race ("lahi").
As to denying supporters of birth control Holy Communion, that is guaranteed only to plunge the number of communicants to record lows, if not the number of Catholics, or Christians, themselves in this country. If that proposal were applied to Spain, for example, home of the Opus Dei and the friars who brought us to this pass, there will be very few left to queue up to Holy Communion, or indeed to Mass itself. Certainly, there will be no public official to do so, government having legalized divorce in 1981 and abortion in 1985. Today, sex-change surgery in that country falls under the national health plan.
I agree with Cruz that government does not treat its citizens with respect, it does not see its people as its most precious resource, it does not appreciate what its overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) in particular are doing to keep the country afloat. I disagree that that is shown by government's family planning program. In fact, it is shown by everything except government's family planning program. Government's lack of respect for its citizens and appreciation for the OFWs is shown first and foremost by the recklessness with which it advertises its leading role in the rape of Iraq. That war has been deemed by no less than the Pope itself as immoral and it has been shown by Robert Tarongoy as idiotic in the extreme, shoving as it does our OFWs in the path of harm. Why isn't the local Church fulminating against it?
In the end, it isn't just government that's showing contempt for the people. The Church is, too. You do not show respect for human beings by equating dignity with fertility, the divine spark with vulgar number. In any case, the growing litter the women of this country will be towing behind them isn't likely to land in Church, it is only likely to land in jail.
It's hard to see how that can be God's will.
posted by Dante at 12:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home