CHAPTER 11: LOVE OF GOD

Overview
Loving God is rooted on man's yearning to find meaning in ii Man yearns to discover his origin,
nature, and purpose. This tendency of man relating himself to his Creator is expressed in religion.

The Meaning of Religion

The word comes from the Latin "religare", or to bind back. Religion is a bond or a fellowship
between man and his Creator. Subjectively, religion is the habit inclining a person to render worship the
Supreme Being. In this sense, man is said to be religious by nature because he feels himself duty bound to
revere and adore God. Objectively, religion is a system of beliefs, rituals, moral practices and laws
pertaining to the divine worship of God. In this sense, religion is called a creed or faith. The different
religious sects, also called religion, are differentiated by their creed.
Religion refers also to the community of believers with a hierarchy of officials. In this sense, it is called a
church or a sect.

A Search for Meaning

Religion expresses man's yearning to discover the meaning of human existence. He yearns to
discover his origin, his nature, and his purpose in life. All religious systems aim to teach the faithful the
meaning of human life.
This is not to say that all religions are equal, that all speak of truth. Some religions, like animism,
are rudimentary and non-rational in forms. Some have a complex theological system, Such as Buddhism,
Hinduism, Catholicism, Islamism, or Protestantism. Some religions are false, such as the cults which are
based on ignorance, superstitions, or greed for money.

Acts of Religion
Acts of religion are human acts pertaining to the practice of religion. They include:
1. Faith is the act of assenting to religious truths.
2. Devotion is the act of obedience to God's will.
3. Prayer is the act of communicating with God.
4. Adoration is the act of proclaiming the glory of God.
5. Sacrifice is the act of binding oneself in the service of God.
Actions which are contrary to religion include:
1. Blasphemy is the act of mocking God.
2. Presumption is the act of believing that God, being all loving, does not punish evil.
3. Fanaticism is excessive subservience to one's faith.
4. Sacrilege is the act of desecrating sacred objects.
5. Idolatry the worship of creatures other than of God

Worship of God
An act of religion is a worship of God. The worship of God is the proclamation of the glory of
God, acknowledging God's dominion over the created universe, in worship, the faithful elevates his mind
and heart to God in reverence. "The highest goal of man", says Bernard Haring, "the noblest of his
actions, is the recognition and the hallowing of God's Name in thought and in deed in the world".
The worship is internal when it consists of the acts of the intellect, such as in praying, or in
affirming one's faith. It is external when involves bodily actions expressing homage to God, such as
attending religious services, or rendering charitable acts. In order to be meritorious, external worship
should come from the heart-an act of internal worship. Being inside a church, fasting, praying, or giving
charity do not constitute an act of worship unless they are done to adore God.
 Worship is private when is done by a person alone and by his own initiative. Worship is public
when it is done by a group of believers as communal manifestation of faith. Religious services are public
worship.
The worship of God consists of the duty to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him:

1. The Duty to Know God

Man tends towards knowing God by the force of his rational nature. In reflecting upon
himself, man inevitably discovers the presence of God as Creator and Supreme Lawgiver.
Philosophers prove the existence of God by aluding the phenomenon of cause and effect. 1ne
universe is proof of God's presence.
Man arrives at the knowledge of God, both by logical deduction or by an act of faith. Faith is
like the conviction of a child who is born and grows up without knowing his parents. He believes that
he has parents and he believes that his parents, whoever they may be, love him. It is not contrary to
reason that a child believes in his parents and in their love for him. Religion is not necessarily against
reason.
Faith is not demonstrable by reasoning, but faith is true if it does not contradict rational
knowledge of nature, In the realm of conduct, the distinction between what is objectively good and
objectively evil points to the existence of a law, which though clarified by men, is "not Simply made
by human thinkers, no matter how wise (Francis Reilly, God's Questionable Existence: 984)
The ancient Greek philosopher regarded the universe as "cos- mos" or beautiful because of its order
and harmony. The same galactic order so moved astronaut John Glenn to declare: " Could this have
just happened? Was it an accident that a bunch of flotsam and jetsam suddenly started making these
orbits of its own accord? I can’t believe that. This was a Plan. This is one big thing in space that
shows there is a God. Some Power put all this into orbit and keeps it there" (Why I Know There is
God, Reader s Digest, 1965, 543).
In Christian theology, man is God's image. It is impossible to man to look at himself and not
find God there. "No need to belabor this point: thanks to human reason we can contemplate the
possibility that we are what we are only because we have received a spark of Universal Intelligence"
(A. Cressy Morrison, How to Live With Life, Reader's Digest, 550).

2. The Duty to Love God

We cannot love what we do not know. But knowing God does not necessarily lead to
love of God. One may know a person and yet not be moved to love him. Loving God is our
emotional response to the presence of God.
Loving God in a religious sense is putting one's trust in God. It is not a mere emotional
reaction, or a pious sentiment akin to being infatuated with a person. Paul Tillich speaks of the
love of God in the platonic term of "eros", the drive toward reunion with things and persons in
their essential goodness and with the good itself. And since the good itself and God are identical,
loving what is good is a manifestation of love for God (Morality and Beyond: 56).
This should mean that anything good we do 1s an act of love 1or God.

3. The Duty to Serve God

Serving someone is to attend to his needs. God is omnipotent and 1S everything. God
does not need our services in the sense of a master needing a servant to give him something.
However, the servant serves the master by simply obeying his wishes.
Serving God is respecting His plan and purpose in creating the universe. According to St.
Augustine, the "eternal law is God's wish to respect creation and not do disturb or destroy its
order. In this sense, we also speak of the "laws of nature" as the order of things in nature.
Accordingly, man serves God by being himself-a rational being. Man, when he acts irrationally,
 contradict the wishes of God for him. In the concept of the Filipino, a human being is "tao and is
expected to act like one.
In religion, the concept of serving God translates to sanctifying oneself, or saving oneself,
or saving one’s soul from the corruption of Sin. Sin is an irrational act and renders the human
soul ugly in the eyes of God. Man puts himself in the service of God when he conforms with
God's Will for him not eat "the forbidden fruit" which is sin.

Institutional Religion
A group of believers, subscribing to the same faith, practices, ritual and laws, recognizing a
hierarchy of officials, constitutes a sect or a church. A church has its theological doctrine as the basis of
its moral teachings. Membership in a church is a matter of personal choice. Such membership does not
make a person pious or morally upright. But his spiritual needs are better served when a person joins a
church. A church offers the faithful direction, support, and encouragement in his search of a meaningful
life.

Freedom of Religious Worship

Our Constitution provides for the freedom of religious worship This means that the citizen is free
to choose his religion. The State should not require a state religion, or pass a law prohibiting the practice
of religion. The State may not interfere with the religious activities unless they disturb peace and order or
constitute a criminal act. For purposes of governance and to safeguard public order, it is within the
authority of the State to regulate the celebration of religious service, rites, or ceremonies.

Religious Tolerance
One's faith is as good as that of another. It is scandalous that some sects would criticize and
deride each other, mocking each other's doctrine and practices. Religion is sacred to a person. One should
grant to another the same right he has to practice his faith in accordance with his conscience.
Religious intolerance is viewing someone's religion as an error which needs to be corrected. This
is a dangerous view and history 1s witness to abuses against persons in the name of religion, such as those
perpetrated in the time of Inquisition for which the Pope John Paul II had expressed apology. The holy
war or "jihad" which is waged in many parts of the world today is immoral. No true religion approves of
murder, suicide, genocide, or any act of terrorism.
It is religious tolerance when we recognize the faith of another person as his cherished
possession, truly belonging to him as an act binding him to God. It is religious tolerance when, instead of
ridiculing a person as an "infidel', we allow that person to search the truth so that his desire to participate
in our faith becomes voluntary. It is religious tolerance when, instead of looking at differences, when join
hands in prayer and in the pursuit of what is beneficial to mankind.

Ecumenism
Ecumenism which seeks unity and cooperation among churches is a tangible expression of religious
tolerance. The Second Vatican Council explains its aims: "The term "ecumenical movement" indicates
the initiatives and activities planned and undertaken, according to the various needs of the Church and as
opportunities offer, to promote Christian unity. These are: first, every effort to avoid expressions,
Judgments and actions which do not represent the condition of our separated brethren with truth and
fairness and so make mutual relations with more difficult; then, "dialogue between competent experts
from different Churches and Communities. At these meetings, which are organized in a religious spirit
each explains the teaching of his Communion in greater depth and brings out clearly its distinctive
feature. In such dialogue, everyone gains a true knowledge and more just appreciation of the teaching and
religious life of both Communions. In addition, the way is prepared for cooperation between them in the
duties for the common good of humanity which are demanded by every Christian conscience; and
wherever this is allowed, here is prayer in common. Finally, all are led to examine their own faithfulness
to Christ’s will for the Church and accordingly to undertake with vigor he task of renewal and reform
( Decree On Ecumenism, Nov 21, 1964, The 16 Documents of the Vatican I, p. 213)
Ecumenism is a tacit admission that disagreement and disunity among churches is a source of
scandal. 1he promise of unity and cooperation may not be impossible after all.

Reading:
Men have Forgotten God
Alexander Solzhenitsyn

When I started going to school in Tostov-on-Don, the other children, egged on by Komosoll
members, taunted me for accompanying my mother to the last remaining church in town, and tore the
cross from around my neck. A few years later, I heard a number of older people offer this explanation for
the great disasters that had befallen Russia: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened".
Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of the Russian Revolution; in
the process I have collected hundreds of personal testimonies, read hundreds of books, and contributed
eight volumes of my own. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause
of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more
accurately that to repeat" "Men have forgotten God".
What is more, if I were called upon to identify the principal trait of the entire 20th century, I
would be unable to find anything more precise than to reflect once again on how we have lost touch with
our Creator. The failings of human consciousness, deprived of its divine dimension, nave been a
determining factor in all major crimes of this century.
Dostoyevsky warned that great events could come upon us and catch us intellectually unprepared.
That is precisely what has happened. The 20 th century has been sucked into the vortex of atheism and self-
destruction. This plunge into the abyss is a world process, East and west, and has aspects that are
dependent neither on political systems, nor on levels of economic and cultural development.
It was Dostoyevsky, once again, who said of the French Revolution and its setting hatred of the
church that "revolution must necessarily being with atheism." But the world had never before known a
godlessness as organized, militarized and tenaciously malevolent as that practiced by Marxism. Within
the philosophical system of Marx and Lenin, and at the heart of their psychology, hatred of God is the
principal driving force, militant atheism a central pivot. To achieve its ends, communism needs to control
a population devoid of religious feelings. The degree to which the atheistic world longs to annihilate
religion, the extent to which religion sticks in its throat, was demonstrated by the web of intrigue
surrounding the attempt on the life of Pope John II in 1981.
Yet in Russia-where churches have been leveled, where tens of thousands of priests, monks and
nuns were tortured, shot in cellars, sent to brutal camps, where a triumphant atheism has rampaged un-
controlled for two-thirds of a century, where even today people are Sent to labor camps for their faith -
the Christian tradition survives. It is here that we see the dawn of hope; for no matter how formidably
communism bristles with tanks and rockets, it is doomed never to vanquish Christianity. The West has yet
to experience a communist invasion; religion remains free. But the West, to0, 1S experiencing a drying up
of religious consciousness. Since the late Middle Ages, the tide of secularism has progressively inundated
the West. This gradual sapping of strength from within is a threat to faith that is perhaps even more
dangerous that any attempt to assault religion violently from without. The meaning of life in the West has
ceased to be seen as anything lofty than the "pursuit of happiness", a goal that has even been solemnly
guaranteed by constitutions. The concept of good and evil have long been banished from common use. It
has become embarrassing to appeal to eternal concepts, embarrassing to state that evil makes its home in
the individual human heart before it enters a political system. (National Review, July 22, 1983, transl. by
A. Klimoff, Readers Digest, Nov. 1986, p. I18).

EXERCISE NO. 20 Date

Name: Section:

A. Essay: Answer briefly. 5 points each. Refer to the attached rubric.

1. What is the meaning of religion as a natural habit?

2. What is the meaning of “Freedom of Worship”?

3. What is religious intolerance?

4. What is the aim of a religious system or church?

5. What is Ecumenism?

B. Write a reflection paper after reading the “Men have Forgotten God”. Refer to the attached rubric.
CHAPTER 12: LOVE OF SELF

Overview:
Love is the tendency towards what is good. We love self when we value our person, recognize the
goodness in us and the tremendous powers 1or personal improvement.

Love and Selfishness

It is true that loving ourselves means being concerned with what we are, what we want to have
and accomplish. But our preoccupation with ourselves must be regulated by our concern for others.
Love of self is not the same as selfishness. Selfishness is with- drawing to ourselves, putting
ourselves ahead and above all others. Love thrives on justice, on what is honest and beautiful. Selfishness
is the overflowing of greed and pride. A selfish person sees only him- self. He is a narcissist who adores
himself.
No man Iives for himself. The concept of "man for others is not a novelty. We find ourselves in
the self of another. The commandment "Love your neighbor as yourself" tells both the why and the how
we need to care for others. We must love others because they are like us, a person. We must treat them
the way we want to be treated. Because we are social by nature, we are not true to our self when we
exclude others persons.

Ethics of Self-perfection
It is the duty of every person to actualize his potentials. In the biological sense, it means growing
up healthy and strong. In the moral sense, it means molding our character. Natural law, which is the law
of our human nature, requires us to grow and develop physically, intellectually, and spiritually. we need
to become "persons in the community of persons". Ethics is about our maturation or perfection.
The process of moral maturation demands sacrifices as one must prefer what is good and avoid
what is evil. Moral character is shaped by discipline and hard work in the manner iron is pounded into a
tool by fire and hammer. Apolinario Mabini in his Verdadero Decalogo exhorts: "Cultivate the special
talents which God has given you life, working and studying hard to the best of your ability, without
separating yourself from the path of goodness.
Buddha admonishes :" Whatever individuals do, whether they remain in the world as artisans,
merchants, and officers of the kind, or retire from the world and devote themselves to a life of religious
meditation, let them put their whole heart into their task; let them be diligent and energetic, and, if they
are like the lotus, which, although it grows in the water, yet remains untouched by the water, if they
struggle in life without cherishing envy or hatred, they live in the world not a life of self but a life of truth,
then surely joy, peach, and bliss will dwell in their minds" ( The Teachings of Buddha, compiled by Paul
Carus, Thomas Dunne Book, 1998, p60).
Jesus tells the rich young man: "if you wish to be perfect, go and sell all that you possess and give
money to the poor and you become the owner of a treasure in Heaven. Then come back and follow me"
( Mt. 29-21; Mk 19:17-22; Lk 18:18-23).
Duties towards the Self Man is made up of body and soul. It is the duty of a person to preserve
his self and cultivate all of potentials-biological, intellectual, and moral. Loving oneself means fulfilling
these duties:

1. Biological Duties: The biological duties include those pertaining to the preserve of life. This means we
should take care of our bodily functions and health. It 1S the duty of everyone to take nourishment,
observe personal hygiene, and perform such tasks that contribute to one’s. physical well-being.
Moderation should define our desire for physical comfort and plea sure. Aristotle speaks of the need to
subordinate our lower instincts to our higher instincts so that we liberate our mind to seek truth as the
highest value. Unreasonable obsession with clothing, food, Cosmetics, or sensual delights -dulls the mind
and imprisons the spirit.

2. Intellectual Duties: It is the duty of everyone to overcome ignorance by learning a skill or acquiring
knowledge. One needs not be a scholar, but he must be knowledgeable at least of that thing pertaining to
his livelihood and citizenship. Knowledge promotes self-reliance, rendering a per- son useful to himself
and to others. However, the ignorant is a burden to himself and to society

3. Moral Duties: Moral duties are those pertaining to the development of attitude and character. A person
must develop a positive outlook in life and conduct his affairs honestly. The cultivation of moral values
marks the good and decent person. Man's perfection lies on the possession of such values that truly reflect
his humanity. Moral integrity 1s the crowning glory of man, enthroning him as the greatest of all of God's
creation.

Heroes and Saints

Heroes and Saints are role models of what we ought to be as persons. Heroes and saints are not
born, but made. They nurtured those attitudes and habits that set them apart from ordinary men. They
shaped their character and decided their destiny.
lt is false to believe that situations make a hero. Situations are merely the opportunity for a person to
prove his worth. The same game of basketball shows who the more skillful player is. The same Situation
may produce either a hero or a villain. The greatness of moral character is tested in a situation.

Basic Rights of the Person

Correlative to our natural duties are the rights necessary to our protection and perfection. Loving
oneself presuppose the following rights: (1) the right to life, (2) the right to private property, and (3) the
right to education.

1. The Right to Life

The right to life is the most basic and fundamental. It is the foundation of all human rights. The 1987
Constitution expressly guarantees this right, imposing on the State the primordial duty of safe- guarding
Iife against any violation or abuse.
The right to life secures us not only from physical harm but pro- vides for the promotion of our
economic, cultural and spiritual growth. Jose C. Sison writes
"Moreover, the right to life also means the right to live consistent with the dignity of every human
person, of keeping body and soul together. So that if a person lives under a condition of squalor and
extreme poverty as would render his existence nothing better than a mere being that breathes and moves
and no longer a “(person” created to the image of likeness of his god, then he is also deprives of his right
of life. Anything therefore that deprives a person of his physical, moral, spiritual, Intellectual and social
well-being is violation of this right (The Most Precious Right, A Law Rach Day (K.ee;s troubic Aaway,
Phil. star, February 19, 1988).
The right to life is an inalienable right. We may not give up our life, nor one may take it away
arbitrarily. The law of self-preservation is a natural law. Yet, there are other values much higher than lite
itself. For these values, we may risk our life. Risking one' s life 1s not the same as committing suicide,
like jumping from a tower because life becomes unbearable. It means that one may risk life in taking on
dangerous jobs, in defending the country in times of war, or in de- fending truth or religious faith. One
may risk life in resisting evil, such as when refusing to be intimidated into doing what is morally wrong.

2. The Right to Property

 The right to life implies the right to property. In hjs encyclical on the Condition of Labor, Pope Leo
XIIl declares that it is within man's right to have things, not merely for temporary and momentary use, but
in stable and permanent possession (Five Great Encyclicals, Paulist Press: p. 3).
Man’s survival would not be assured if he does not have means for supporting his life. St. Thomas
Aquinas distinguishes between the right of possession and the right or use. The right of possession
bestows on a person the exclusive dominion over external and material things to the effect that he may
acquire and dispose of them by his Own authority. The right to use bestows on a person the right to make
use of his property in the manner consistent with social justice.
"Man", says Thomas Aquinas" should not consider external and material things as exclusively his but
as common so that he should readily share them to the needs of others (Summa Theological, I1-11, 9.66,
a. -2) More importantly, a person may not use his wealth to secure unjust advantage over others.

3. The Right to Education

The right to education derives from natural law, since man is endowed with intellect and will. Every
child is entitled to be educated by his family, by the State and by the Church. The 1988 Family Code
defines support of children as to include schooling or training tor some profession, trade or vocation, even
beyond the age of majority ) Title VI, Art. 194).
Filipino parents are deeply concerned with the education, looking at it as a form of inheritance
bequeathed to the children. They would work long hours, or sell properties, in order to send their children
to colleges or universities. The right to education imposes on the State the duty to protect and uphold it
specially in those cases where parents are physically and morally incapacitated. In the encyclical Chris-
tian Education of Youth, Pope Pius XI makes this observation:
It pertains to the State, in view of the common good, to promote in various ways the education
and instruction of youth. It should be- gin by encouraging and assisting, of its own accord, the initiative
and activity of the church and the family, whose successes in this field have been clearly demonstrated by
history and experience. It should moreover supplement their work whenever this falls short of what is
necessary, even by means of its Own schools and institutions. For the State more than any other society
1s provided with the means put at its disposal for the needs of all, and it is only right that it use these
means to the advantage of those who have contributed them (Five Encyclicals, 49).

Reading
A Universal Right
Jose C. Sison

In the enumeration of the bill of rights, all our Constitutions, from 1935 to the 1973 and finally to
the present 1987 Constitution, have fittingly started off with an identical provision which indeed serves
and the anchor of all the other civil rights and liberties guaranteed by the fundamental law. Said provision
can be said to be the most invoked and oftentimes the most abused clause by virtue of its all-embracing
dictum that "no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property which out due process of law, nor
shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws" (Art. IV, sec. 1).
In fact, while ordinarily one must be a citizen of the Philippines in order to get the full protection
of its laws, the guarantees extended by the above cited section of our Constitution are universal in their
application and includes all persons within its territorial jurisdiction. This can easily be deducted from the
word "person" which the Constitution uses. Such word is so encompassing that it does not regard any
differences as to race, color, or nationality. It includes even artificial persons, or private corporations
within the scope of the guarantees in so far as their property is concerned. This is the settled juris-
prudence established way back in the early days of the American regime in the Philippines where it was
held that the "due process" and "equal protection of the laws" clause in the Philippines Bill of Rights are
like the provisions found in the fourteenth amendment of the Us Constitution, and therefore, in its
interpretation, the decisions of the S Supreme Court may be referred to and used (SmithBell v. Natividad,
40 Phil. 136)
But the more significant aspect to consider is the order of enumeration in the said section. When
it mentions "life, liberty and property, it establishes a certain hierarchy of importance. In other words,
when the Constitution mentions "life and liberty" ahead of property, it values life and liberty more
popularly known as: human right, Over and above property or property rights. The primacy of human
rights over property rights was duly recognized and amply expounded in one case, where our Supreme
Court speaking through Mr. Justice Makasiar, looks at human rights as "supremely precious in our
society" which "need breathing space to survive" thus permitting government regulation only "with
narrow specifity" (Phil Blooming Mills Employees Organization vs. Phil. Blooming Mills Co., Inc. 51
SCRA 189) (A Law Each Day (Keeps Trouble Away), Phil. Star, Feb. 1988).

EXERCISE NO. 21 Date:

Name: Section:

ESSAY: Answer briefly. 5 points each. Refer to the attached rubric.

1. What duties do we have towards the self?

2. What is the basis of the right to property?

3. What is the right to education?

4. If the right to life is inalienable, why is it considered patriotic dying for one’s country?

B. Write a reflection paper after reading the “A Universal Right”. Refer to the attached rubric.
CHAPTER 13: BIOETHICS

Overview:
Recently coined, bioethics comes from "bio" which means life and "ethics which means morality.
Bioethics is that branch of Ethics which deals with the problem of life, health and death.
Bioethics is an interdisciplinary effort which "examines the ethical dimension of problems at the
cutting edge of technology, medicine, and biology in their application to life" (Thomas A. Shannon,
Introduction to Bioethics, 2).

The Meaning of Health

We refer to health as bodily fitness, consisting in the absence of pain or illness. Health, however,
in its holistic sense, include the bodily, psychic, spiritual and religious dimensions of man ( Bernard
Haring: 47). A healthy person is one who is physically fit, emotionally balanced, mentally alert, and
morally upright.
The basic assumption of bioethics is that human life must be preserved and protected by all
necessary means. Accordingly, scientists and medical practitioners should seek the promotion of life and
health in every way possible, motivated not by monetary gains or fame, but by appreciation of the gift of
life.

Personal and Social Responsibility

Life is precious. It is natural duty for every person to preserve it. Health is a personal
responsibility and one is held accountable for the neglect of his body. This requires that we adopt such
care and lifestyle that fosters health. We cannot ignore, says Bernard Haring, “the old health rules such as
the proper rhythm between work and leisure, fasting and prayer, and learning about the mutual
conditioning and oneness or body and soul" (Ibid, 49).
With regards to satisfying our physical needs and wants, Aristotle advices moderation. Too much
of anything is dangerous. Too much eating causes obesity. Promiscuity leads to sexually transmitted
diseases. We owe it to our self, family and society to be healthy. It is immoral to live recklessly, exposing
oneself to dangers and sickness without regard to the burden such acts may impose on the family and
society. Every illness and disease is a social problem.
Therefore, for the common good, the State institutes health pro- grams even as it regulates the
activities of the individuals to prevent them from harming themselves. The ban on smoking in public
places is an effort of government to curtail a seemingly innocent habit. Even more so, the State needs to
act against gambling, alcoholism, hooliganism, drug addiction, prostitution, and other activities which are
detrimental to the physical, mental, and spiritual well-being of the citizen.
Physical environment contributes to health. People should learn how to practice hygiene in their
persons and in their surroundings. Cleanliness is next to godlessness, so it is said.

Crimes against Life

Some actions identified as intrinsically evil because they are will- fully detrimental to life and health are:

1. Suicide
Suicide is defined as the intentional killing of oneself by one's own volition and hands.
Suicide is immoral because it contradicts basic instinct. It is contrary to natural law. Life is
sacred, a gift from God. Therefore, for the Filipino one must take good care of his life and health
as an act of gratitude to God.
Directly killing oneself is suicide. But a person does not commit suicide when he puts himself in
danger in pursuing a lawful job. Doctors, for example, risk being infected with an illness.
2. Euthanasia
Euthanasia, or mercy killing, is the deliberate extinction of human life to prevent further
pain and suffering. Euthanasia is morally objectionable because it would give the sick and the
aged, the right to request the "service" of euthanasia. It would give reason for the State to put to
death those it considers useless and a burden to society, such as the aged, the retardates, or the
handicapped.

3. Mutilation
Mutilation is the cutting off of a limb or removal of an organ integral to the human body
for commercial purposes. Mutilation is morally permissible as a medical process, such as the
amputation off gangrenous leg.
It is immoral to sell one's body parts, such as the kidney, the liver, eyes, or heart. Moral and legal
laws provide that the body, its parts and functions, are not valid objects of contracts. For this
reason, prostitution is immoral. Likewise, surrogate motherhood whereby a woman "rents out"
her womb for childbearing by means of artificial insemination is immoral. However, it is morally
permissible for purpose of saving life for a person to donate his body organ.

4. Contraception
Methods to prevent pregnancy are called contraceptives. Artificial contraceptives are
those methods and devices invented by man, such as the drugs, IUD or condom. Christian
morality condemns artificial contraception as contrary to natural law. It holds that the natural
purpose of the sexual act should be respected and accepted Artificial contraceptives besides lead
to promiscuity.
Natural contraceptives are those dependent on the natural bio0- logical process, such as the
rhythm method approved by the Catholic Church. This encourages married couples to abstain
from sex during the fertile days of the woman.

5. Sterilization
Sterilization is a type of contraceptive method. It is a surgical operation which renders a
man or a woman incapable of transmitting life. Sterilization is carried out by vasectomy for the
male and by tubal ligation for the female. Moralists give the following distinctions:
a) Therapeutic sterilization is intended to preserve the well-being of the whole body and is
therefore permissible. b) Eugenic sterilization is intended to prevent procreation in an otherwise
healthy and normal person. This is contrary to natural law and is prohibited. Forced sterilization
of retardates, or of poor people. is discriminatory and violates the human rights of these persons
(Henry Davis, Moral and Pastoral Theology: 11-156). Enforced sterilization. according to
Bernard Haring is usually followed by anxieties, frustrations, distress, and has a strong negative
influence on the expression of one’s sexuality to the extent that it may impair mental health (Ibid.
17). c)Punitive sterilization is intended as a punishment for certain criminals, as practiced in some
countries. Such punishment is ineffective and useless, since sterilization does not extinguish
sexual tendencies and a sterilized rapist can still commit the same crime (fienr Davis: 161).

6. Drug Addiction
Drug addiction is the state of psychic or physical dependence, or both, on a dangerous
drug. arising in a person following the use of drug on a periodic or continuous basis.
Drug addiction is a habit which is acquired by indulging in the use of prohibited drugs. The use of
addictive drugs is regulated by the State, for example, by the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, as
 amended by P.D. nos.44. 1675, 1683. 1708 and Batas Pambansa Blg. 179. Some identified drugs
are prohibited and their use constitutes an illegal and an immoral act.
While drug addicts are regarded as victims, drug pushers and manufacturers of prohibited drugs
are criminals.

7. Alcoholism
Alcoholism is the state of dependence on the stimulation of wine and liquor. In extreme
cases, alcoholism has the same evil effect on health as drug addiction. Alcoholism saps a person s
energy, dulls his mind, and destroys his capacity for creative activity. Due to their erratic
behavior and short span of attention, alcoholics are incapable of holding jobs as well as
establishing a meaningful relationship with others Drinking wine is not evil in itself. Intoxication,
however, is self- degrading and unhealthy. The advice is for people to consume wine moderately.

8. Abortion
Abortion is the intentional expulsion of a fetus which cannot sur- vive by itself outside of
the womb of the mother. Some countries favor abortion as a method of regulating population. The
Philippines is one among those countries that punish abortion as a criminal act.
Moralists distinguish between indirect and direct abortion. a) Indirect or therapeutic
abortion is that which is performed for the purpose of saving the life of the mother. This is
morally permissible. The case does not imply that the mother's life is Simply preferred over that
of the child. The choice is between a life which can be saved and a life which cannot be saved.
The moral dilemma is to let both die or to save that of the mother (Bernard Haring, Free and
Faithful in Christ, 34).
The unencephalic fetus is cited as example. Not only that the defective fetus cannot
survive, it cannot fully develop into a self-sufficient human life. Thus, it is justifiable to abort it
rather than have it endanger the life of the mother (bid.) It does not, however, belong to
therapeutic medicine to abort a fetus because it is afflicted with some kind of genetic disease, or it
possesses the risk of developing such defect or ailment. The fetus, not the mother, is the patient in
this case and "killing the patient is no therapy whatsoever" (lbid.). What could be done, or should
have been done, insofar as genetic disease is foreseeable, is to avoid conception. After
conception, the only moral remedy is for immediate treatment upon the birth of the child.
b) Direct or Selective Abortion is the expulsion of the fetus by the willful wishes of the
parents for purposes other than saving the life of the mother who is not endangered at all. This
type of abortion is not justified for whatever reason, whether to regulate the size o the family, to
eliminate an unwanted child, to regulate population, or to maintain one’s social standing in the
community.

Pro-life vs. Pro-choice:

The debate on the morality of abortion has two opposing camps.

Pro-life advocates adhere to the principle calling for the protection and preservation of human life
in all its forms. Fr. P. J. Talty writes:

"First, lite is present from the moment of conception, and secondly, that life will develop into a
human being, unless it is crushed out of existence. In other words, there is already a human being there in
its first stages of development, like a tiny rose-bud that will one day open into a beautiful bloom. Life is
there from the first moment. It is a growth; it is a living thing, with a not just a piece of tissue, distinct life
of its own. Anyone who destroys it destroys the human being that is to be. A Christian writer of the
second century had al- ready expressed this very clearly in these words: "It makes little difference
whether one destroys a life already born or does away with it in its nascent stage. The one who is to
become a man is already a man" (Two Burning Questions, 1976, p.5).

Pro-choice advocates maintain that the mother, being a human being, and not merely a machine
of procreation, has the right and the freedom to decide when to continue or terminate pregnancy. The
State has not authority to prohibit abortion, since this belongs to the do- main of the parents, especially
the woman, as a matter of human right (Gerald Winslow, Abortion and Morality, Health and Home, Vol.
31, no. 2, Mar-April 1990)

Proponents of pro-choice do not deny the value of human life. But they insist that there are other
reasons that justify abortion other than that of saving the life of the mother. One Such reason is the socio-
economic capability of the parents, especially of single parents. Thus, they maintain that the ultimate
decision whether to continue or discontinue pregnancy belongs to the mother or to the parents of the
child.
Commentary: It is not denied that pregnancy is an intimate personal matter which concerns the
woman or the family. But it must be pointed out that such unwanted pregnancy would not be a moral is-
sue if the couples admit to the prior responsibility of conjugal love and sex. Pregnancy is a foreseeable
result of the sexual act. Hence, couples should exercise prudence in exercising their marital rights. There
are available to them morally permissible methods of preventing pregnancy.
It is unreasonable for couples to be reckless with the sexual act and arrogate for themselves the
"right" to determine whether the off- spring of such act of love should live or die. Plainly in this situation,
the parents are the criminals, the judge, and the executioner. The child has no fighting chance.
Pregnancy though a private and intimate event has a social dimension. It cannot be left entirely on
the moral decision of the mother and/or of the father. In would be tantamount, to giving parents the right
to commit murder. The State or the Church has the authority to prohibit abortion for the same reason that
they have the right to prohibit adultery even if the sexual act is a private and consensual affair.

PAIN AND SUFFERING

In Christian ethics, pain and suffering are means of identifying with the sufferings of Christ.
Accordingly, while it is morally permissible to minimize pain by means of medicines and medical
procedures, using physical suffering as an excuse for suicide or euthanasia is im- moral. The sick and the
dying need more love and attention, not death. says Bernard Haring (ibid. 87)
However, moral law does not require the use of extraordinary methods and expensive devices in
order to prolong life which is given up for lost. Withdrawing life support devices to allow nature to take
its due course is not considered immoral. What is prohibited on moral grounds are all positive and direct
actions intended to extinguish life, like poisoning or overdose of drugs.

Genetically Modified Organism

Advances in medical science and in genetic engineering are controversial among ethicists. There
are those who think scientists are tinkering dangerously with our environment and natural resources. But
there are also those who predict an unprecedented productivity and prosperity for man in the future.
The application of genetic engineering has resulted in crops of great sizes and resistant to pests.
While this effort would boast food production and supply, there are those who fear that genetically
modified organism (GMO) may yet prove detrimental to human health.
Cloning is the technology of duplicating an organism by manipulating DNA. The experiment was first
successful with the cloning of a sheep. Other successes with farm animals are recorded. Cloning a human
being is said to be a possibility. When this happens, we may learn the lesson from the novel
"Frankenstein". The scientist succeeded in creating a monster. We just need to look around to see the ill
effects of technology in the environment and in human life. Some of man's "bright" ideas, like the atomic
bomb, are disastrous to mankind.

Reading
A Woman's Right to Her Body
Santiago Dumlao Jr.

(This is an excerpt of the author s reply to a letter writer who claims that a woman has a God-
given right "to use her body in any- way she likes" so that neither the State nor the Catholic Church has
the right to tell her what to do with her body since they do not "pay when the bills come in ) Veritas,
March 12, 1990.
You say that "the real issue here is the God-given right of a woman to use her body in any way
she likes". From this premise, you there- fore affirm, "I will have a child when I want to at the right time
and the place. Or none at all." I held the opposite view. You cannot, because you "own" it, use your body
in any way you like. In the first place, you don't' own it in the ownership sense of being able to use and
dispose of it as you like, without inhibitions or restrictions. You cannot kill yourself, for ex- ample, or
physically wound or dismember yourself, simply because you want to. In other words, you don't own
your body or life to do as you please. There are limits we should recognize, limits imposed by society
and, more importantly, by the sacred nature of our bodies. Other people have a stake over your body (i.e.,
by extension, your life), to keep it healthy, secure, nourished, protected. Your parents who brought you
into this world certainly have a stake in your body and life, in its continuation or cessation. In fact, the
state has a stake in your body (and life), in its preservation and protection, under our kind of civilized
society. That's why we have rules of conduct, and penalties for inflicting on other physical injury to the
body, or even emotional injury (e.g., mental anguish from libel), So there are per- sons or entities aside
from and outside of you who have some rights to and interest in what you do with your body. Just to drive
home the point some more, does the wife have the sole right to do what we believe must be done with our
bodies" ( as you say), totally ignoring the desire of a husband to have a child? Wouldn't this be a wife's
very selfish insistence on what she wants to do, violating the covenant of marriage, certainly (in the least)
the intention of procreation, implied in the act of marriage?
Perhaps where we really are poles apart is in the way we regard the human body. You, seem to
regard the body as essentially physical matter, to be possessed and handled simply as a functioning
anatomy.
I happen to be a Bible-reading, God fearing person. And I believe the human body is the temple of God.
As Scripture says: "Do you not know that you are the temple of God and the Spirit of God dwells in you?
If anyone destroys God's temple, Gold will destroy that persons; for the temple of God, which you are, is
holy" (I Cor. 3:16-17)

I also believe that we are made in the image of God, and that we should all try to act in that
image. "Do you not know that your body 1S a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from
God, and that you are not your own?" (I Cor. 6:19).
You may dismiss this as gobbledygook from some ancient writings of dubious credibility,
inappropriate to an enlightened age of resurgent womanhood. "God has given us intelligence to be able to
think, you say. But intelligence unaccompanied by wisdom can some- times mislead, don't you agree?"

EXERCISE NO. 22 Date:

Name: Section:

Essay: Answer briefly. 5 points each. Refer to the attached rubric.

1. What is the holistic meaning of health?

2. What is the basic assumption of bioethics?

3. How is drug addiction immoral?

4. Why is it immoral to sell one’s body, its parts or functions?

5. Are we to value life for its own sake?

6. Give two reasons why you are in favor or against abortion?

7. Is plastic surgery for purposes of aesthetics or beauty as vanity; therefore, immoral?

B. Write a reflection paper after reading the “A Woman's Right to Her”. Refer to the attached rubric
CHAPTER 14: Work Ethics

Overview:

The right to life implies the right to work. Working is the means by which man can preserve his
life.

The Meaning of Work

Working is both a right and a duty. Work is the legitimate use of our mental and bodily powers
for economic gain or profit.

1. Work is the use or application of our physical powers to accomplish a task. It is use" because nobody
can own another person's body, nor can anyone sell his body, any part or function of it. We say
"legitimate use" because not every activity which provides income, is not work in the moral and legal
sense. Thus, stealing is not work; neither is prostitution since it debases the human body and dignity.

2. Work is for the purpose of obtaining an economic gain for the worker. It belongs to the essence of
work that it is compensated. Such compensation is based on justice and takes the form of a wage or
salary. Any form of slavery or forced labor is immoral.

The Right to Work

Working is both a right and a duty. The right to work derives from the right to life. Man has basic
needs which must be satisfied in order for him to survive. Therefore, the right to life implies that a person
has to right to private property, to those means necessary for him to sustain himself and his dependents.
Pope Leo XIII makes states:

"When a man engages in remunerative labor, the very reason and motive of his work is to obtain
property and to hold it as his own private possession. If one man hires out to another his strength or his
industry, he does this for the purpose of receiving in return what is necessary for food and living; he
thereby expressly proposes to ac quire a full and real right, not only to the remuneration, but also to
disposal of that remuneration as he pleases... But it is precisely in this power of disposal that ownership
consists, whether the property be land or movable goods." (Encyclical on Condition of Labor, in Five
Geat Encyclucals, p3)

The Duty to Work

Work aims to promote life. It is a natural duty since every person is endowed with bodily and
mental powers to that he may take care of himself and not become a burden to others. This obligation is a
greater responsibility when one becomes the head of a family. "For it is a most sacred law of nature", says
Pope Leo XIII, that a father must provide food and all necessities for those whom he has begotten; and,
similarly, nature dictates that a man's children, who carry one, as it were, and continue his personality,
should keep themselves from want and misery in the uncertainties of this mortal life." (op. cit.)

Laziness is evil. A man who is habitually lazy does not deserve to eat or to be fed, according to
the Bible. In Deberes de los Hijos del Pueblo (Duties of the sons of the country), Andres Bonifacio says
that “the work which sustains you is the basis of love, love for oneself, love for the wife and children,
love for the brothers and countrymen".
Capital and Labor

Capital refers to the owner or investors of an industry. Labor refers to the hired workers
employed by the industry. Capital and Labor complement each other. Unfortunately, their relationship is
often strained.

The Labor Code of the Philippines defines the relationship between capital and labor. But no
amount of legislation can truly harmonize men unless everyone submits to the concept of justice and acts
accordingly. Jaime Cardinal Sin writes: "Peace is the fruit of justice which requires, first of all, that
persons and their inalienable human rights are promoted and defended. It demanded that in the realm of
industrial relations, the reciprocal rights and duties of both labor and management are respected and
promoted" (Pastoral Letter, Industrial Peace: A Christian Imperative, May 1990).

The Question of Wage

The question of wage, how much labor should be paid and how much capital is willing to pay, is
often the bone of contention. It is claimed that wages are fixed by mutual agreement between capital and
labor. In practice, however, what is "mutual agreement" is the dictate of Capital or management, offered
to workers on "take it or leave it" basis. This is clearly unfair to workers who, because of poverty, end up
rationalizing their acceptance of such condition - "mabuti na sa wala".

Leo XIII condemns this unfair labor practice and warns capital: "Doubtless before we can decide
whether wages are adequate, many things have to be considered; but rich men and

masters should remember this - that to exercise pressure for the sake of gain, upon the indigent and
destitute, and to make one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and
divine. To defraud any one of wages that are his due is a crime which cries to the avenging anger of
Heaven "(Ibid. 9

In the Philippines, the determination of the minimum wage is the responsibility of National Wage
Board and the Regional Tripartite Wage Board. The aim is to establish a system of standards that would
assure wages as fuir and equitable to both capital and labor.

The Family Wage

The minimum wage may not necessarily commensurate for workers to maintain a modest
standard of living. Way back in May 1949, the Catholic Bishops of the Philippines have proposed that a
just wage is the family wage", that is, one which commensurate to the needs of a modest average family.
We quote the document because the concept is relevant today as it was before since the economic
situation had hardly changed:

"In the present economy the great bulk of the country's land and wealth are possessed by a small
minority to whom the rest must come for work. Such an economy can be justified only if this great
majority of the people can obtain in return for their work a wage that will supply them with the minimum
human standard of living which we have defined above; a wage, namely, that will enable a man to
provide a sufficiency of decent food and clothing for himself and his family, a decent home, security for
sickness and old age, and the means and leisure for moderate and wholesome recreation. To all of these
every man has strict right; and when the only means by which a man can obtain them is in exchange for
his labor, he must be able to obtain them in exchange for his labor. In other words, a man's labor must be
worth at least a wage that guarantees him all these. Such a wage we call "family wage" (Pastoral Letter on
Social Justice).
Factors for Determining Wages

Pope John XXIII declares that in determining wages "the norms of justice and equity should be
strictly observed". In Mater et Magistra (Mother and Teacher), 1962) he writes:

“This requires that workers receive a wage sufficient to lead a life worthy of man and to fulfill
family responsibilities properly. But in determining what constitutes an appropriate wage, the following
must necessarily be taken into account: First of all, the contribution of individuals to the economic effort;
the economic state of the enterprise within which they work; the requirements of each community,
especially as regards over-all employment; finally, what concerns the common good of all peoples,
namely, of the various states associated among themselves, but differing in character and extent".

The Rights of Labor

The Philippines is a signatory to the United Nations International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights. We cite pertinent provisions:

1. The State Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right to work, which include the right of
everyone to the opportunity to gain his living by work which he freely chooses or accepts, and will take
appropriate steps to safeguard this right (Part III, art. 6).

2. The State Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of just and
favorable conditions of work, which ensure, in particular:

a) Remuneration which provides all workers as a minimum: (i) Fair wages and equal remuneration for
work of equal value without distinction of any kind, in particular women being guaranteed conditions of
work not inferior to those enjoyed by men, with equal pay for equal work; and (ii) A decent living for
themselves and their families in accordance with the provisions of the present Covenant b) Safe and
healthy working conditions;

c) Equal opportunity for every one to be promoted in his employment to an appropriate higher level,
subject to no considerations other than those of seniority and competence;

d) Rest, leisure and reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay, as well as
remuneration for public holidays (Art. 7)

3. The State Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure:

a) The right of everyone to form trade unions and join the trade union of his choice subject only to the
rules of the organization concerned, for the promotion and protection of his economic and social interests.
No restriction may be place on the exercise of this right other than those prescribed by law and which are
necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public order or the protection of
the rights and freedom of others;

b) The rights of trade unions to establish national federations or confederations and the right of the latter
to form or join international trade union organizations;

c) The right of trade unions to function freely subject to no limitations other than those (prescribed by law
and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public order or for
the protection of the rights and freedom of others;
d) The right to strike, provided that it is exercised in conformity with the laws of the particular country
(Art. 8)

Unionism

Every worker has a right to join a union in order to protect his livelihood and to cooperate in
building social order. The Catholic Bishops declare that "it is morally wrong, (and in our country a crime
punishable by law, for any one to interfere with this natural right either by threats or by discrimination
against those who join such associations” (Pastoral Letter on Social Justice).

Labor, if it is unorganized, can have no effective voice to protect its rights and to bargain
collectively with Capital. Therefore, for as long as unions are peaceful and seek their objectives by lawful
means, they are beneficial to the members and to society as a whole.

Morality of Strike

A strike is an organized cessation of work by workers for the purpose of forcing management to
meet their work-related demands, such as increase in wages and benefits, or improve working conditions.
For a strike to be legal, it must be in accordance with the rules defined by the Department of Labor. For it
to be morally permissible, the following conditions must apply:

1. There is a sufficient and just reason for holding a strike. A strike should not be resorted to unless all
other means of conciliation or dialogue with management had been tried.

2. The intended good results must outweigh the evil effects of the strikes, such as losing a week's wages,
or incurring the ire of industry officials.

3. The means employed are lawful. Threats, harassment, or physical violence should not be employed
either by labor and capital to attain their respective purpose.

Morality and Personnel Management

Morality is founded on justice. Hence, any attempt at personnel management must be guided by
what is just. The nuances of a human relation are so broad for law to cover all aspects. Often, it is the
spirit of the law rather than the cold legal technicalities which solve problems. Cardinal Jaime Sin invokes
the principle of charity and solidarity in a pastoral letter, stating:

"Despite their many conflicting interests, people belong to the world of labor and that of capital
must realize that they all share humanity and must embrace each other as brothers and sisters and decide
to live as such. Efforts to attain industrial peace will recede when and where persons are looked upon with
hatred and scorn; they make progress when and where persons are embraced in respect and in love. Love
and solidarity call upon labor and management to go beyond the narrow confines of their groups and
work for the common good of the country and for the attainment of peace for everyone." (Industrial
Peace: A Christian Imperative)

Basic Duties of Workers

1. Work honestly and diligently.

2. Comply with all rules of the workplace.

3. Respect the employer and officers.

4. Don't cheat or steal.

5. Don't waste time.

Basic Duties of Employers

1. Compensate workers justly.

2. Treat workers as your equal.

3. Provide safe and healthy environment.

4. Allow time for vacation.

5. Don't impose unjust rules

Reading:

Industrial Peace: A Christian Imperative

Jaime Cardinal Sin
(Excerpt from the Pastoral Letter on the celebration of Industrial Peace Month, May 1990)

We are, however, obliged as pastors to point out some fundamental Christian and moral
principles and values that are indispensable if we are to attain and promote true and authentic industrial
peace. These basic principles are:

a) Justice: Peace is the fruit of justice which requires, first of all, that persons and their inalienable human
rights are promoted and defended. It demands that in the realm of industrial relations, the reciprocal rights
and duties of both labor and management are respected and promoted. Where no justice reigns, true peace
cannot be.

b) Respect for the Personalities and Values of Labor: Labor is, first of all, an activity that proceeds from
the human person as its proper subject and is primarily directed to the good of persons. From the
Christian standpoint, the primary basis of the value of labor is the person himself who carries it out. Thus,
labor possesses an inherently personal character and value that may not be compromised if we are to
attain true and lasting industrial peace.

c) Priority of Labor over capital: The personal value of labor demands that capital should serve labor and
not the other way around. Capital can never be set as an economic entity over and above the human
person and his work. Neither should capital be opposed to labor or labor to capital, and still less can the
actual people behind those concepts be opposed to each other.: (Laborem Exercens, no.13.

d) The Principle of Charity and Solidarity: Despite their many conflicting interests, people belonging to
the world of labor and that of capital must realize that they all share the same humanity and must embrace
each other as brothers and sisters and decide to live as such Efforts to attain industrial peace will recede
when and where persons are looked upon with hatred and scorn; they make progress when and where
persons are embraced in respect and love. Love and solidarity call upon labor and management to go
beyond the narrow confines of their groups and work for the common good of the country and for the
attainment of peace for everyone.
e) True Dialogue in Search of the Common Good: Conflicts must be resolved by means of peaceful and
honest dialogue. True dialogue presupposes the willingness to search for what is true, good and just for
every group, for everyone. It is, in the word of John Paul II as: “search for what is and what remains
common to people, even in the midst of tension, oppositions and conflicts" (Message for World Day
Peace, 1983). Dialogue demands openness and willingness to listen to and feel the situation of other
party. Finally, true dialogue is the search for what is good by peaceful means. The participants in dialogue
must be determined to act in such a way that the factors which bring people together will be victorious
over the factors of division and hate" (ibid).

EXERCISE NO. 23 Date:

Name: Section:

Essay: Answer briefly. 5 points each. Refer to the attached rubric.

1. Why do we have the right to work?
2. Why does the right to life implies the right to work?
3. What moral virtues should define the relation between capital and labor?
4. What is meant by “family wage”?
5. When is a labor strike legal and moral?

B. Write a reflection paper after reading the “Industrial Peace: A Christian Imperative”. Refer to the
attached rubric
CHAPTER 15: LOVE OF NEIGHBOR

Overview:
Neighbor is any person other than oneself - parents, relatives, friends, officemates, superiors and
strangers. Even our enemies are neighbor whom we ought to respect. In its widest sense, it includes all
creatures.

Principles of Neighborliness
How we should treat others is expressed negatively by the golden rule-"do not do unto others
what you do not want to be done to you". The positive formulation of this rule is the command "Love
your neighbor as yourself". Jesus Christ teaches that the two greatest commandments are, first, to love
God and, second, to love the neighbor.
Two significant virtues regulate our relationship with one another charity and justice. Justice
requires that we render to another what is due to him. Justice implies a law binding us to give what we
owe to another either in terms of respect or payment of a debt. Charity, on the other hand, is rendering to
another something which is not due to him by the demand of a law. Charity is expression of goodwill and
love on the part of the giver.
In the social order, justice takes precedence over charity. One must first render justice to his
neighbor before he may rightly claim loving his neighbor. In the moral order, charity is higher than justice
because it is doing good to another Out or love and not out of an obligation imposed by a law which is the
case with justice.

Meaning of Justice
St. Thomas Aquinas defines justice as the firm and constant will to give to each his due (Summa
Theologica, l1-l1, 58). This means giving to someone what is his own or his right. By right we mean that
which is strictly owed according to proportional equality. By 'someone we mean the object or receiver of
justice, oneself, another person, or the community.
"Proportional equality" is not treating all persons the same way in strict mathematical equation.
Because people differ with one another, their claim to rights differs with those of others. For example,
your parents have a greater claim than your friend to your love and care. (Bernard Haring, The Law of
Christ, 1, 515)

Types of Justice
We distinguish four applications of justice:

1. Commutative justice regulates the rights of persons towards one another in accordance with
the principle of equality in give and take. The object of commutative justice is the private advantage or
profit. It requires that one may not take advantage of another person by violating his right, say, to his life
or interest. It is commutative justice that, for example, obliges a person to pay his debts, or compels the
employer to pay a just wage. Common violations of commutative justice include theft, fraud, and unjust
damage to property or reputation.

2. Distributive Justice regulates the rights of persons as members of the community. Since the
members of the community are not equally situated, whether morally or economically, it is the
responsibility of the community to determine the proportionate share of each member in the privileges,
aids, burden, and obligations towards the community. It is due to distributive justice that, for example,
citizens of a given community do not pay the same amount of taxes relative to their income.
 3. Legal Justice regulates rights of the community or those charged with the welfare of the
community. The aim of legal justice is the promotion of the common good. The officials of the
community exercise legal justice by passing such laws that would promote the common good. The
citizens exercise this virtue by faithful obedience to the laws which promote the common good.

4. Social Justice regulates of rights of persons towards the weaker members of the community
those who are poor and needy. Social justice, being concerned with the welfare of the community, must
at- tend to the needs of all its members, especially those who are poor, weak, and disadvantage. Was it
Ramon Magsaysay who said those who have less in life must have more in law"? Social justice is based
on the principle that the wealth of the earth belongs to everybody. Hence, social justice requires that
wages should not be based solely on what is materially equitable as may be determined by law, but on
cent life for him and his family. what the laborer needs to sustain a (Bernard Haring, Law of Christ, II,
27-30).

5. Vindictive Justice regulates the rights of the community or State to restore public order by
punishing criminals in proportion to their guilt. The aim of vindictive justice is "the furtherance of the
common welfare (public order and security, universal respect for jus- tice, confidence in authority) and, if
possible, correction of the guilty (Barnard Haring, op. cit., 50)

The Goal of Social Justice

Vitaliano Gorospe explains social justice as a preferential option 1or the poor and a way of
sharing one’s talent, treasure, and time with the needy. "In practice, he says, magpakatao para sa kapwa
means three things: (1) sharing with others especially the poor; (2) "subversion in the sense of struggling
1or structural and cultural change, simplicity of life style, because by having more and more, the great
majority of the poor may have less and less (Filipino Values Revis ifed,172).
Social justice is a prominent concept in the social philosophy of the Catholic Church ever since
Pius XI wrote Quadragesimo Anno in 1931. The goal of social justice is the promotion of equal chances
and opportunities in life. In Populorum Pregressio, Pope Paul VI expresses the same view, looking
forward to the development of man, " from less human conditions to those which are more human'", or,
"the passage from misery towards the possession of necessities, victory discourages, the growth of
knowledge, the acquisition of over culture (no. 20-21). "Less human conditions" refers to lack of material
necessities for those who are without minimum essential for life; oppressive social structures caused by
either abuse of power or abuse of ownership. Pope Paul VI exhorts modern man to bring about the
conditions for a true and authentic human existence.
Rejecting violence and bloody uprisings and revolutions, the Pope Paul VI cites the need for
reforms, "bold transformations, innovations that go deep". Towards this goal, private initiative and public
authority must work and apply their resources in programs that will "reduce inequalities, fight
discriminations, free man from various types of servitude and enable him to be the instrument of his own
material betterment, of his moral progress and of his spiritual growth".

Duties towards Neighbor

Because rights and duties are reciprocal, any right we claim for our self becomes a duty towards
our neighbor. For instance, our right to our life becomes our duty to respect and protect the life of another
person. We may classify our duties towards the neighbor as () those pertaining to his body, (2) those
pertaining to his soul, and (6) those pertaining to his property.

1. Duties to our Neighbor's Body. Every person has a right to his life, bodily health and well-
being. This right comes from the force of natural law and we are bound respect it, both morally and
legally. It becomes therefore our duty with regards to our neighbor's right over his body and life, to
refrain from any activity that may, directly or indirectly, violate such right. The Decalogue expresses
these duties as commands, requiring the omission of certain acts because they are unjust. These prohibited
acts are intrinsically evil, such as murder, abortion, rape, slavery, human trafficking, drug pushing,
kidnapping, torture, and other unjust acts that threatens a person with bodily harm.

2. Duties to our Neighbor's Soul Every person has the right to the truth and to the good that
befits his rational soul. This is a right coming from natural law, since man is endowed with the intellect
for knowing the truth and the will for de- siring that which is good. Accordingly, it is our duty, with
respect to our neighbor's right to truth, to be honest towards him, telling him what he has the right to
know or to helping him acquire such knowledge necessary for his development. For example, because
children have the right to education, parents have the duty to educate their children according to their
means.
A person who has the authority over a person, such a parent over his child, has the right to be informed, if
his serves a reasonable purpose, about the activities or under their charge.

Thus, teachers only have the moral obligation to counsel erring student, but to report
wrongdoings to the school officials or to the parents. In the same respect, manufacturers or sellers of
consumer goods, such as food or medicine, have the duty to inform the buyers about the ingredients of the
product, or to warn the patient of any adverse or side-effect of a medicine, as the case may be. Thus, we
speak of truth in advertising. Some actions prohibited in this regard are lies, cheating, fraud, slander,
gossips, misrepresentation, falsification, perjury, rumor mongering, superstition, fortune telling, and other
acts which hide, obscures, or muddles the truth.
3. Duties to our Neighbor's Property. Every person has the right of ownership over things
honesty acquired. This right implies the moral power to use and to exclude other persons from such use.
"Property refers to external and material goods which, strictly speaking, can be possessed, disposed of, or
consumed, such as food, clothes, house, land, and money. However, the term "property" may mean the
result of our work or achievement. In this Sense, we speak of reputation or "good name as a property.
Writing, work of arts, or inventions are also property, called "intellectual property.
On every person is imposed the corresponding reciprocal duty to respect the property of the
neighbor in all its forms. Prohibited acts in this regard are- stealing, trespassing, invasion of privacy,
plagiarism, arson land grabbing, vandalism, squatting, malversation, and many other acts which deprives
a person the right to own and use his property. Correcting an Injustice One who willfully violates the right
of another person is bound by natural law, and also by the laws of society, to rectify any act injustice he
has done. This effort to correct injustice is čalled-restitution the verb to restore or "to bring back.
The concept of restitution in the ancient law of Talion demands an eye for an eye and a tooth for a
tooth", which the Filipino translates as buhay ang inutang, buhay ang kabayaran". In some cultures,
restitution for an act of murder is accomplished by paying blood money to the family of the victim.
Restitution is a difficult thing, especially where the damage done is not materially quantifiable, such as in
the case of physical injury, damage to one 's honor, or death. In cases where the damage is materially
quantifiable, such as the amount of stolen money, restitution is accomplished by paying back the amount
plus some compensatory amount for the anguish and emotional distress suffered by the victim. The rule
is-the greater the damage, the greater 1s the restitution. Since the determination of restitution cannot be
left to the decision of the parties concerned without the risk of committing further injustice, the
determination of restitution becomes the responsibility of Court of justice. Punishing a crime, such as
with imprisonment, constitutes restitution. It is not rare that the Court decides not only on the terms of
imprisonment as commensurate to the crime but rules on such other monetary penalties to compensate for
moral damages in those cases when the crime has caused scandal, embarrassment, anxiety and Worry on
the victim.

The Principle of Self-Defense

 Apolinario Mabini refers to the principle of self-defense when he States: "Love your neighbor as
yourself because God has imposed upon him as well as upon you the obligation to help and not to do to
you what he does not want to be done to him by you; but if your neighbor, failing in this sacred duty,
attempts against your life, liberty, or interest, therefore, you must destroy him and annihilate him, be-
cause the law of self-preservation must prevail" (Verdadero Decalogo, no. 9).
Our inalienable right to life includes its defense from an unjust aggressor. An unjust aggressor is
anyone who without proper authority and just reason attempts against our life or interests, such as a
robber, rapist, kidnapper, or a murderer. Under normal circumstances, injustice done to us by another is
settled in a Court of Justice, after the commission of a crime. The principles of self-defense anticipates a
situation where a victim, with- out the means to take recourse to the police or the court, is being
threatened here and now by an unjust aggressor and in is in immediate danger. In this case, the law of
self-preservation grants the probable victim a reasonable defense of his right in defense of his life. A per
son has the right of self-defense either by incapacitating or killing an unjust aggressor, such as one who
threatens to shoot him.
In order for an act of self-defense to be legal and moral, the following conditions must apply:
1. The attack is unjust. The attack comes from an aggressor who is acting in his own private
authority and not from duly constituted authority. A criminal who is sentenced to be exPecuted by the
State may not claim self-defense and kill the prison guards. Inversely, police officers do not have the
authority to summarily "salvage" criminals unless they are attacked first and placed in immediate danger
to their life.
2. The attack is serious in nature. An attack is serious when it is an attempt to cause death to a
victim who is then placed in a grave danger to his life.
3. The defense must be simultaneous to the attack. The defense should be made at the same time
as that of the actual attack. A defense before or after an actual attack is not self-defense. Though a person,
anticipating an attack against him, may adopt preventive measures to prevent or discourage it, any act of
de before the actual attack is not self-defense but an act of aggressor itself, so that the role of victim and
aggressor are reversed. According, one may not put himself ahead of the event by killing his adversary
who has verbally threatened him but not engaged presently actual physical aggression. Likewise, when
the period of time between attack and defense is significant enough, an act of self-defense alter an actual
attack is not self-defense but an act of vengeance, which is putting the law in one's hand.\ 4. The means
employed for defense are reasonable. The purpose of self-defense is to protect oneself and not to commit
murder. Therefore, the victim may not kill the aggressor when it is possible to incapacitate him and thwart
his evil purpose.
5. The motive of the defender is honest. The only laudable motive for self-defense is to save one's
life from an unjust attract. It should not be taken as an opportunity to exact vengeance or punishment on
the aggressor.

Capital Punishment
Capital punishment, or the Death Penalty, is a controversial topic. Some countries demand it,
others condemn it as an unjust and immoral punishment even for them whose guilt had been established
beyond any reasonable doubt. The Philippine Constitution reserves the death penalty for "heinous crime"
as defined by law (RA 7659). President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, however, using her presidential
powers has suspended the death penalty on Easter Sunday, 2006. The debate on the issue continues. The
Pros and Cons: (1) The pros, or those who are in favor of death penalty, like the Volunteers against Crime
and Corruption (V.A.C.C), believe that the State, like the private individual, has the right of self-defense
in defending society from criminals. Death penalty is a just, especially when imprisonment is not
sufficient or commensurate to the crime committed. Henry Davis, a theologian, thinks that every person
has the right to live without "unjust molestation" from others. Capital punishment is therefore necessary
for peace and security of life and property. It is a deterrent against crimes. He writes:
"God has given to the State the right over life and death, as he has given to every man the right of
self-defense against unjust aggression. This moral power of the State has been universally acknowledge in
Christian tradition. It is explicitly declared in Scripture to have existed in the Jewish State (Exodus 22,
18); 1t was recognized in the Roman polity by S. Paul (Rom. 13-4): "For he (the prince) is God's minister
to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, fear for he beareth not the sword in vain". (Moral and
Pastoral The- ology, I1, 151-152).
However, death penalty is morally permissible under the following conditions:
1. The criminal is given "due process in court
2. The crime must be grave and serious
3. The guilt of the criminal is sufficiently proved beyond any doubt (op. ciu.)
(2) The "Cons", or those wh0 are not in favor of capital punishment, like the Catholic Bishops Conference
of the Philippines (CBCP), consider death penalty inhuman and unchristian. Theologian Brendan Soane
points out that the sacred text in the Scripture in support of death penalty belong to an old order, "written
at a time when blood vengeance was exacted for murder and it was believed that the blood of the victim
cried out from earth until it had been avenged by the blood of the murderer". He writes: "Precisely, Jesus
repudiated the law of talion, which demanded an eye for an eye and a tooth 1or a tooth. Instead, Jesus
taught us to love our enemies and do good to those who harm us. Although this does not mean that we
should not punish at all, 1or we have seen that punishment can be good and just, it is a claim on us to
temper the severity of punishment with a mercy which is born of love (Capital Punishment, 20-24)
It is also argued against the death penalty that it does not deter criminals to indulge themselves in
their evil ways. If death penalty 1s a deterrent against crime, then society would have rid itself of
criminality long time ago. The fact is that there are other ways for punishing criminals, punishments
which are humane and just.
Capital punishment should not be compared to a medical surgery to remove a tumor for the
purpose of preserving life. The life of the victim of a crime is not preserved by taking away the life of the
murderer. Neither is the peace and order in society preserved since it has been already disturbed prior to
the mortal punishment of the criminal and the death of any number of criminals does not necessary results
in harmony in society. Furthermore, death penalty effectively and with finality destroys the life of a
person, preventing him to make amends and to reform his life.
Theologian Bernard Haring believes crimes are the result of socio- environmental conditions and
says "the State has not right to uphold death penalty unless it has done all its power to give better
education and to care for a more just and humane environment". He further notes: "A supreme court that
practically forces parents to send their children into an educational system where the teaching of religion
and an ethics based on faith is forbidden should not be entitled to endorse the death [penalty, for many
crimes flow from that very system of education (Free and Faithful in Christ, 39).

Reading:
In Defense of the Death Penalty
Esteban B. Bautista

(Excerpt from an article published in the Philippine Star, March 26, 1990, by the author who is
then the Director of the institute of Government and Law Reform, U. P Law Center). Capital punishment
is a form of self-defense. It is resorted to by society to protect itself and its members and secure them
from the destructive acts of certain individuals or groups of individuals. These acts constitute a direct
assault on the life or security either of society itself or of that of its individual members. The crime of
treason goes to the very life of the state itself; while the crimes of murder, rape and robbery with
homicide. to give but a few examples, constitute a direct attack on the life and security of its members.
Capital punishment, far from being just retributive, is therefore, based on necessity. And this is no less
than the necessity of self-preservation of society itself (both in its barest existence and as an ordered and
civilized aggrupation) and the preservation of its members, who otherwise would live intolerable lives
subject to the constant threat of wanton destruction or deprivation, bereft of security in their persons and
property and of peace.
Far from being barbaric and uncivilized, therefore, the death penalty is intended to preserve
civilized society. Remove it and you will be encouraging, through forbearance or a show of helplessness,
the commission of barbaric acts. The point is that, in dealing with realities, in dealing with the serious
business of maintaining an ordered society, only in the context of which human life would be worth
living, it is idle and even foolish to indulge in absolutes, abstractions, and generalities like such a "high
respect for life that would prohibit extermination no matter for what purpose. he extermination of life may
be justified if something good, not to speak of greater good, is achieved thereby. The head of a snake may
be smitten oft in order to save the life of a man. The analogy may be carried to that of a man who
commits a heinous crime. Since in so doing he is no less a beast than the snake. Thus, his extermination in
order to protect the members of society and society itself, so that they may live in safety and in peace and
a well-ordered life, would well be justified. Salus populi est suprema lex. The welfare of the people is the
supreme law. (Calalang v Williams, 70, Phil. 726)
The claim that the death penalty has not proven to be a deterrent to the commission of crime or
that it has never been empirically proven to be a deterrent is based on pure speculation, not on data or
statistics. Indeed, the burden rests on those making this claim to present the evidence to prove their case,
if they have any. to unseat an institution that is as old as civilization itself and older than any constitution
or statute of the world. If we follow their reasoning, we might as well propose the abolition of all
penalties since the crimes for which other penalties are imposed continue to be committed, are even
increasing, anyway.

EXERCISE NO. 24 Date:

Name: Section:

Essay: Answer briefly. 5 points each. Refer to the attached rubric.

1. Which two virtues regulate social relations among people?
2. What is the meaning of justice?
3. In what sense is justice higher than charity?
4. What is restitution?
5. What is moral basis for public information

B. Write a reflection paper after reading the “In Defense of the Death Penalty”. Refer to the attached
rubric.
CHAPTER 16: MARRIAGE

Overview:
Persons acquire special duties on account of their moral and legal relationship to one another.
One such relationship is established in marriage. The 1988 Family Code of the Philippines defines
marriage as "a special contract of permanent union, between a man and a woman entered into in
accordance with the law for the establishment of conjugal and family life" (Title I, Chapter I, art.)

Nature of Marriage
Marriage is a moral and legal contract between a man and a woman. It is a moral contract because
it is entered to by both parties, acting freely and voluntarily. It is legal contract because it is solemnized in
accordance with the law. The subject of marriage is the man and woman giving their respective consent to
live together as husband and wife. For Christians, marriage i1s of divine institution. As such, man is not
free to alter the nature of marriage and, upon entering the married state, a person becomes subject to its
divinely made laws and its essential properties (Pope Pius XI, Casti Conubbi, Encyclical on Christian
Marriage, No. 6).
By definition, therefore, "gay marriage”, or marriage between two same sexes, though legalızed
in some countries, is not strictly a marriage in its moral sense. Other forms of marriages which are not
morally admissible in Christian society are "polygamy which is having more than one wife or husband at
the same time, and "polyandry" which is having more than one husband at the same time. "Bigamy" is
contracting marriage while an existing marriage is still validly in effect.

Legal Requirements for Marriage

1. Contracting parties must be a male and female of legal age. Both are at least 18 years old free
from any legal impediments as defined by law. Some legal impediments are: (a) existing previous
marriage, (b) mental or psychological incapacity, (C) consanguinity, such as that between a brother and
sister, (d) treachery or deceit, such as pretending that one is single (Family Code, Art. 35-38).
2. Free and voluntary consent must be expressed in the presence of a solemnizing officer. This
means that the consent to marry is a social act entailing obligations towards the community. Thus, wed-
dings are celebrated in public, or at least in the presence of two wit- nesses. Hence, the mutual consent of
man and woman to love and live together as husband and wife does not constitute a marriage. This is
called "cohabitation", a status which does not grant legal rights and privileges to the couple.

The Purpose of Marriage

Marriage has the twofold purposes of establishing a conjugal life (companionship) and the
establishing of a family (procreation and support of children). The married state constitutes a conjugal
society, "the stable union entered into by a man and a man for the procreation and education of children
and for mutual support and helpfulness" (Paul Glenn, op. cit., 231.
Marriage is a natural institution derived from the human nature. While having children does not
constitute marriage, it is in marriage that the care and education of children are assured. The primary
purpose then of marriage is the procreation and the care of children. This is why marriage by nature and
by divine plan is a permanent relationship in order to safeguard the welfare of the children.
The secondary purpose of marriage is mutual support and companionship. Marriage is entered to
by a man and woman who love each other and commit themselves to supporting and helping each other.
Without such love and appreciation for the other, neither man nor woman should contract marriage
because the stability of union sought in marriage would be difficult to establish or maintain. Thus, love
which draws spouses in marriage must be more than physical attachment, sexual attraction, or infatuation.
Such desire must be a deep and meaningful commitment to love, respects, and cherish each other.
 This is why in our opinion companionship is the primary purpose of marriage and not the
secondary, in traditional view, to that of the procreation and care of children. Love is the motive for
marrying and is the foundation why marriage lasts even when the union is not blessed with children.

Marriage as Sacred
Marriage is not simply a civil contract, a piece of paper as some Would deride it. It is sacred
union of the souls of the spouses. "By matrimony", says Pope Pius XI, "the souls of the contracting
parties are joined and knit together more directly and more intimately than are their bodies, and that not
by passing affection of sense or spirit, but by a deliberate and firm act of the will, and this union of souls
by God's decree, a sacred and inviolable bond arises (op. Cit., no. 7)
Marriage is sacred on account or God who instituted it. It is sacred on account of man "through
generous surrender of his own per- Son made to another for the whole span of life" (ibid, no. 9) Man is
directed by his nature to seek another person in marriage, but he is not compelled to enter it Out or
necessity. Man is free to choose whether to marry or not. But once married, a person is required by the
nature of marriage to fully give oneself to the spouse.

The Indissolubility of Marriage

The Family Code affirms that marriage 1s a permanent contract. This means that the validity of the
contract, once rendered effective by law, remains in force until the death of one of the spouses. The
indissolubility of marriage derives from the expressed commitment of the spouses to given themselves to
one another, wholly and completely for the rest of their earthly life. Therefore, marriage is not a
temporary arrangement that lasts only for as long as the couple wishes to stay together.
There are those who regard marriage as a convention which do not apply to them. They consider
themselves "liberated", not needing papers, to express their commitment to one another. They believe that
their love for one another is so deep and strong to last them a lifetime. While this kind of lasting love is
possible outside marriage, it does not render marriage unnecessary. Instead, marriage which pre- supposes
the sincere love of the couple for each other turns a mere personal promise into a public and sacred vow.
A wedding for that matter is not simply a ceremony, a theatrical presentation, but the affirmation of the
solemn vow by the spouses "to have and to hold", to accept responsibility for each other... until death.
The welfare of the children likewise requires that marriage be permanent and stable. If marriage were a
temporary arrangement, the care and education of the children would not be assured. Natural law requires
that children are to be nurtured by parental love, care and guidance. Hence, divorce which results in
"broken homes" is contrary to natural law and has a lasting adverse effect on children. Jean de Fabreguez
declares that "for the sake of both the one and the other for the true work of man which is to build the
future, we must give a pledge to the future" (Christian Marriage: 62)

The Meaning of Conjugal Love

It is obvious that a man and a woman do not desire marriage only to have sexual intimacy since this can
be had even without having to marry each other. Motivated by their love for one another, a couple
commit themselves to build a life together. Conjugal love therefore is not the result of biology. It is a
rational response to a deeper meaning
of life by sharing self with another in the spirit of love. "By means or the reciprocal personal gift of self,
proper and exclusive to them, husband and wife tend towards personal perfection, to collaborate with God
in the generation and education of new lives" (Pope Paul VI, Humanae Vitae, Encyclical on Birth
Control, no.8)
Characteristics of Conjugal Love:

1. It is human. It is not merely the appetite of the senses. It is instead "an act of the free will, intended to
endure and to grow by means of the joys and sorrows of daily life, in such a way that husband and wife
becomes one only heart and one only soul, and together attain their human perfection'"(ibid.).

2. It is total. It is a special form of friendship of generous sharing of everything, without under

reservations or selfish calculations. Whoever truly loves his marriage partner loves not only for what he
receives, but for the partner's self, rejoicing that he can enrich his partner with the gift of himself" (ibid.).

3. It is faithful and exclusive until death. Love, if it must be genuine, must be lasting. This permanence
comes from the vows of fidelity to each other. A conditional love, where certain factors foreseen or not
are provided as prerequisite to fidelity, Is not authentic love. It is timid and selfish love because it puts
personal interest above the interest of the union itself. It belongs to the essence of love itself that it be
faithful and exclusive, because happiness and security cannot thrive in an atmosphere of uncertainty and
fearful anxiety (ibid.).

4. It is fecund. It is fertile because it helps husband and wife grow in mutual respect and love and
concern for each other. Its fertile because such love is not exhausted by the spouses, but is transferred and
continued in the children. Fecundity, in this sense, is not measured by the number of children a couple
have, but by the quality of love shared in the family (ibid.).

Sex and Marriage

Despite today's focus on sex, sex is not that all important in a happy marriage. This conclusion is
arrived at by Ellen Fran and Carol Anderson who conducted a study of 100 happily married couples
whose ages range from their early 20s to their early 60s. The report says:
"In examining the responses to our questionnaires, we discovered that over 90 percent of the
couple had less-than-perfect sexual relationship. Yet more than 80 percent rated their marriages as *very
happy" or "happy". Almost all of these individuals denied this lack of sexual bliss was a problem for
them, and none expressed a need for change. Apparently, a sexual problem is not synonymous with a
marital one (How Important is Sex to a Happy Marriage, Reader's Di- gest, August 1979, 102-104).
Sex is a normal biological need. In this sense, sex is natural and moral. However, the sexual act in
order to be human must be a responsible act the same way that reason regulates the act of eating, sleeping,
or working. The possible end result of the sexual act, pregnancy and the subsequent birth of a child, is
indicative how important it is to respect this bodily function. One does not plunge himself into the river in
order to enjoy a swim. He needs to think about the possible danger of such action. Sexual intimacy
outside of marriage is immoral because it is contrary to right reason. It is allowing oneself to be ruled by
his passions without paying attention to its evil consequences.
In marriage, sex is a permissible act even when procreation is not intended. What is required is
that "each and every marriage act (quilibet matrimonii usus) must be open to the transmission of life". To
deliberately frustrate the natural end of making love by artificial means in order to enjoy its pleasures but
not to accept the responsibility over the possible birth of a child is considered immoral.

Responsible Parenthood
When marriage is blessed with children, it becomes the primary responsibility of the parents to
care for them. There was a time when parenthood meant simply providing food, clothing, shelter, and
education to the children. Today, responsible parenthood includes the ability to make an honest decision
on the size of the family, how many children a couple may be able to support adequately within their
means.
 In spite of the intimately private nature of this decision, it has a wide socio-moral implication,
making such decision-making a difficult task. Concededly, the decision has to be made by the parents
themselves. But such decision shall not be based solely on personal motives without regard for morality
and the common good. Thus, Pope Paul VI writes:
"In the task of transmitting life, therefore, they are not free to proceed completely at will, as if
they could determine in a wholly autonomous way the honest path to follow but must conform their
activity to the creative intention of God, expressed in the very nature of marriage and of its acts, and
manifested by the constant teaching of the Church" (Humane Vitae, no. 10).

Family Planning is a program for regulating the size of the family. The aim of family planning is
not morally objectionable. What Christian moralists, like the Catholic Bishops Conference of the
Philippines, find morally inadmissible are the artificial methods of contraception favored by the
government.

Rights and Duties of Husband and Wife

The Family Code lists these reciprocal rights and duties of married couples:
1. The husband and wife are obliged to live together, observe mutual love, respect and fidelity,
and render mutual help and support (art. 68).
2. The husband and wife shall fix the family domicile. In case of disagreement, the court shall
decide (art. 69).
3. The spouses are jointly responsible for the support of the family 70)
4. When one of the spouses neglects his or her duties to the union or commits acts which tend to
bring danger, dishonor or injury to the other or to the family, the aggrieved party may apply to the court
for relief (art. 72).
5. Neither spouse may exercise any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity
Without the consent of the other. The latter may object only on valid, serious, and moral grounds. In case
of disagreement, the court shall decide (art. 73)

The Family Code affirms the equality between the husband and the wife both are made responsible, for
example, for the support of the family. This is a deviation from the Filipino concept that puts the man as
"head" of the family, the "padre de familia"" who exercises full authority over the family. Likewise, the
intrusion of the court in settling family matters is also notable since it runs contrary to the com- mon
perception that family feud or quarrels are private matters of the family.

The Authority of the Husband

The Family Code affirms the equal sharing of authority by husband and wife over the children
and the affairs affecting the family. Christian tradition upholds the authority of the husband over the wife
and the children. This does not mean, however, that the husband is superior to the wife. It assumes,
however, that husband and wife have different functions in the furtherance of the welfare of the family. In
conferring of authority on the husband, the competition for power which often paralyzes marriages is
minimized or avoided. Minor decisions in the family are settled quickly, allowing more time for couple to
enter into a meaningful dialogue on matters of grave importance. Indeed, when decisions affecting the
family must be made, it would be wise for husband and wife to sit together and talk, but the final decision
must be affirmed by the husband as having the primary authority over the family. The Filipino
differentiates between the function of husband and wife. The father is the "haligui ng tahanan", or the
pillar which sup- ports and carries the weight of responsibility for the family. The mother is "ilaw ng
tahanan, the light that gives life and moral guidance for the family.

Legal Separation
 Legal separation is a legal process allowing husband and wife to live separately from each other
with the marriage bond remaining in force. Legal separation differs from annulment of marriage which
nullifies the marriage contract, thereby allowing husband and wife to live separately and enter into
marriage with another partner. The Family Code provides for legal separation on the following grounds
(art. 55):
1. Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a
common child, or a child of the petitioner
2. Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political
affiliation;
3. Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the
petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or connivance in such corruption or inducement;
4. Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than Six years, even if
pardoned;
5. Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent;
6. Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent;
7. Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in the Philippines
or abroad;
8. Sexual infidelity or perversion;
9. Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner,
10. Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year.
While legal separation is provided by law, it shall not be decided unless the Court has taken steps
towards the reconciliation of the spouses and, despite such efforts, that reconciliation is highly
improbable" (art. 59).

Adultery
Conjugal love is total and exclusive between the husband and the wife. Adultery is infidelity to
the marriage vows. Adultery is commit- ted when either the husband or the wife indulges in sexual
intercourse with any third person. Adultery is morally and legally prohibited. The evil of adultery is even
worst when it is committed with an- other married person so that the moral damage is on the respective
marriages of both of them. The Decalogue condemns both the act of adultery and the adulterous desire
when it commands: "You shall not commit adultery" and "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife".
Because evil first begins in the mind, it becomes possible for even the unmarried person to commit
adultery in thought or desire and in deed. I say to you that anyone who so much as looks with lust at a
woman has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Mt 5:28). Adultery is a sin against chastity,
fidelity, justice and charity.
Adultery is against the common good of society because it wrecks the family and destroys the
lives of the innocent partner and innocent children.

Concubinage
Concubinage is living together of a man and a woman without any intent of marriage. Sexual
intercourse between two persons neither of whom is married is fornication. It is immoral because it is a
sin against chastity and involves complicity in the sin of another. The most degrading form of fornication
is prostitution which is sex for hire. The guilt is shared not only by the prostitute and the customer, but
also by the pimp and the Owner who facilitate the commission of an immoral act.

Divorce
Divorce is the legal act which dissolves the marriage contract and grants to the married couple the
right to remarry. Divorce contradicts the permanent character of marital union.
Advocates of divorce argue that a man and a woman have the right to correct a mistake when marriage
does not work for them. This is illogical because it assumes that divorce will guide them in making a
better choice the second time around with a new partner. It Is also argued that couples who cannot have
children should be al- lowed to change partners so as to accomplish the purpose of procreation. This
argument wrongly assumes that having children is a requirement for marriage and for keeping it.
While the divorce is legalized in some countries, it is wrong and immoral because it contradicts
natural law and the reason why God has instituted it in the first place. Likewise, by destroying the family,
it does not contribute to common good of the community. Jaime Cardinal Sin writes: "I fail to see how
divorce can be an aid in nation building. In the United States, where virtually one of every two marriages
ends in divorce, the figures speak for themselves. And they are appalling. In a special message sent not
too long ago by the Governor of California to the State Legislature, he said that 75 percent of all juvenile
delinquents, and more than 50 percent of all penitentiary inmates came from broken homes." (Marriage
on the Rocks, Address to Cheers Executive Club members, January 22, 1976).

Reading
Who has the right to Life?
William M. Esposo
(Excerpt from his column As I Wreck This Chair, The Philippine Star, Sunday, August 5, 2007)

Some responses to my recent column, "Who can solve the poverty problem" argued that only population
control holds the key to the solution in other words, prevent the poor from having more children. Liars
and crooks in government are truly our scourge as a nation, but more baneful yet are those who can so
readily rein in on the human right to procreate and bring forth life, as though prescribing an antibiotic to
fight infectious bacteria. However, population control that is aimed primarily at eradicating poverty calls
for depriving those already deprived of education and opportunity of their right to procreate. In this
context, population control becomes selectively biased towards those who have the means to have more
children. Somehow, I think this is one twisted way of applying Hitler's formula - you don't have to gas
them like Hitler did, just don't allow them to procreate. The issue is a moral and an ethical one. Nobody
has the right to prescribe who has the right to life. Nether socio-economic stature nor educational
attainment justifies one man to have the right to deprive another from the right to live or the right to be
born. We know that the moneyed elite, no more 10% of our population controls over 85% of the nation's
wealth and resources. Because of them, the great majority must endure being run by laws and policies that
cater only to the rich and seeks only to preserve the unjust status quo. If there is one socio-economic class
that ought to be depopulated, it must be the cause of the problem and not the victims. Even if we are
successful in curbing our population by half- to say, 40 million, we will still be struck with the same
poverty problem. The situation will not change for as long as the mechanisms and dynamics of an
oppressive system remain in place. We will still be running under the same equation of less than 105
holding 85% of the whole wealth pie. Mahatma Gandhi had the appropriate words for it: *The world has
enough for every man's needs but not enough for every man's greed.
The best example that disproves this population control fallacy is Japan. Japan has a population
of over 125 million and has very little natural resources compared to the Philippines. And yet, Japan's
solidly middle class and egalitarian society has not known the kid of poverty incidence we have. East
Timor on the other hand has a much smaller population compared to ours. But I don't think a poor
Filipino would want to relocate there.

EXERCISE NO. 25 Date:

Name: Section:
 A. Essay: Answer briefly. 5 points each. Refer to the attached rubric.
1) Why is legal separation being discouraged?
2) What is responsible parenthood?
3) How to love your neighbor?
4) What is the meaning of justice?
5) How is drug addiction immoral?
6) Explain your thoughts about the “Reading: A Woman’s Right to Her Body” not less than 250
words.
7) Are you in favor of abortion?
8) What do you think is your duty to yourself?
9) Explain the following, “Education is not a privilege but a right” not less than 250 words.
10) Explain your thoughts about the “Reading: “Men have Forgotten God”.

B. Write a reflection paper after reading the “In Defense of the Death Penalty”. Refer to the attached
rubric.

ESSAY/EXPLANATION RUBRIC
Outstanding Good Fair Poor Very Poor
5 4 3 2 1
Well written and Writes fairly clear. Minimal Somewhat unclear. Lacking effort. Very
very organized. Good grammar effort. Shows little effort. poor grammar
Excellent mechanics. Minimal Poor grammar mechanics.
grammar Good presentation grammar mechanics. Very unclear.
mechanics. and organization. mechanics. Confusing and Does not address
Clear and concise Sufficient effort Fair choppy, incomplete topic.
statements. and detail. presentation. sentences. Limited attempt.
Excellent effort Few No organization of
and presentation supporting thoughts.
with detail. details.
Demonstrates a
thorough
understanding of
the topic.

REFLECTION PAPER RUBRIC

Above Meets Approaching Below
Expectations Expectations Expectations Expectations
4 3 2 1
Reflective The reflection The reflection The reflection The reflection does
Thinking explains the explains the attempts to not address the
student’s own student’s demonstrate student’s thinking
thinking and thinking thinking about and/or learning.
learning processes, about his/her learning but is vague
as well as own and/or unclear about
 implications for learning the
future learning. processes. personal learning
process.
Analysis The reflection is an The reflection is The reflection The reflection does
in-depth analysis an attempts to analyze not move beyond a
of the learning analysis of the the learning description of the
experience, the learning experience but the learning
value of the derived experience and value of the experience.
learning to self or the learning to the
others, and the value of the student or others is
enhancement of the derived learning vague and/or
student’s to unclear.
appreciation for the self or others.
discipline.
Making The reflection The reflection The reflection The reflection does
Connection articulates Multiple articulates attempts to not articulate any
s connections between connections articulate connection to other
this between this connections between learning or
Learning experience learning this experiences.
and content from experience and learning experience
other content from and
courses, past other content from other
learning, life courses, past courses, past
experiences and/or learning learning
future goals. experiences, experiences, or
and/or personal goals, but
future goals. the connection is
vague and/or
unclear.
TOTAL 12 pts.