I keep wondering why people keep mouthing off that the church should mind its own business with regards to social issues. We don’t leave a child alone to progress on its own once it’s born into the world. For a society like the Philippines that’s relatively young (1989) I think it needs at least some guidance. The church shouldn’t back off completely but it sure as hell shouldn’t be imposing unreasonable punishments like excommunication like some insecure power tripping guardian.

I remember my classes with Father Adolfo Dacanay, particularly how he talked about the three consciences (Being, Knowing, Applying). The three are equally important in the application of self in the world as the first allows us to assume the Self, the second gives us knowledge and perspectives to shape our conscience, and the third is our acceptance and praxis of what we decide to follow from the information provided for the second.

Church guidance should only be the second. It shouldn’t powertrip. Fr Dacanay said in one class that “I don’t think that God will ask you in heaven if you followed the school rules, or if you did what your priest asked or if followed what the church said. He will likely ask you if you did the good that you knew and if you shunned the evil that you knew. The Church cannot make a decision for any one man but can merely guide him into the formation of his conscience so that he could make the right one…” We must not forget, however, the conscience is not a free pass to do what we want and say to authority figure that this is what we want because this is what we believe in. It answers only the question of your morality and nothing more.

My points are:

1. Don’t dis the church. They mean well. Do however, question their use of their power, their emerging lack of social theology.

2. Just because the church is power tripping, doesn’t mean you should reject their statements through and through. Examine your definition of right and wrong, form your conscience and really see if you’re against it.

3. Make a decision, stand firm, but examine it once in a while. Just because you believe it now doesn’t mean it’ll hold up.

4. Beware the consequences. Your conscience is not a free pass in the world for your morality.

5. Fr. Dacanay is awesome.

Well the logic I thought up and imagined was a little more complicated than this. But then again, suppose the whole point of working with a flow chart was to simplify our understanding of whatever is being presented to us. While the chart does that, it didn’t really include all the information I wanted in there; particularly the premises, assumptions and the scope of concepts.

The first premise would be that the society is a society geared towards self improvement. We’ve all heard of horror stories about teaching in the United States where “No one wants to learn, no one wants to listen…” (Boston Public circa 2002). In the Philippines however, we have a cultures of our public school students wanting to improve themselves. All the stories I’ve heard and all the experience I’ve had in public school education has lead me to the conclusion that the only difficult students are the students that have other problems (tackled in the portion of this essay that will talk about the scope of concepts). Kids here want to learn. Given the chance and motivation to open a book (assignments, book reports, research projects etc) they would. Direction and mentorship is still key. The other premise would be that the society is democratic by nature.

Interest is key in learning. While ability is still one to consider, motivation won’t last if it’s merely based on the ability to wow the ladies or arouse the gentlemen. There will always be someone considerably better. Democracy allows for this interest to be propagated into a skill set that the learner can use. Not really the last premise (you’ll see), would be that the information has to be, at the very least, accurate. Wikipedia could be a good source. You just have to make sure you know where the information is coming from.

The scope of concepts is a bit tricky; mostly because I don’t want to give the impression that it’s too general or specific. Let’s give it a try anyway. First is that advocacy inputs come in different forms. Consider a child, brilliant as the stars in the evening sky, but is too hungry to read. A stubbed toe, a painful tooth or even the tire of a 10 kilometer hike can impede on learning. Amartya Sen’s analysis of entitlements would show that there are different dimensions to attaining capabilities or capacities. Not having to worry about a beating at home because you read too much, or the pain in your chest when you run, or the hunger you feel when you read stories all contribute to learning.

When I mean career I don’t mean just offices or jobs that are on top of a knowledge economy. Included there are people who study and learn how to raise animals, plant rice, manage farms, work with wood or metal or any material and all possible jobs out there. They’re important in society. Don’t assume that these things can’t be innovated. The toilet you sit on has been innovated in either design or in the way it’s installed. Fyi.

Lastly would be the idea of economic improvements. Economics in this case are limited to business and industry. Included in premises is that industry improvements and innovations should be made. Intellectual property? I hope knowledge still becomes communal. Large scale industrial improvements are what drive the economy. Remember when we were an English power house in Asia? Call Centers. Lots of them and that helped our economy. The final premise is that the money goes back into schools either through the government or the industries that thrived.

Whoosh. I wonder if this made sense to anyone. Wassails.