Below are postings I made in Manolo Quezon's blog clarifying the need to seek a common ground for dialogue on the current issues and the need to promote the common good:
On the need for Dialogue based on a Common Ground
"I think [with respect to the CBCP Luneta prayer] it’s also possible that people of faith are realizing that a collective appeal to a higher being is a more constructive response to the deterioration they see in the behavior of legislators than an escalation of angry rhetoric or personal attacks. Although I’m a Catholic, I haven’t made up my mind about going on Sunday because I’m not sure how much prayer there can actually be in such a large crowd.
I agree that the religious groups have vested interests in the current situation, although that should legitimately be the promotion of peace and the common good.
I’m hoping the rally can build some bridges between the sectors at conflict and open some real, thoughtful and mutually respectful dialogue."
When a poster expressed doubt about the possibility of building "bridges", I explained:"By bridge, I meant common ground among people in seeming conflict. For example, is it possible that people on different sides of the Cha-Cha issue may actually love this country? Or that they want a bright future for their children? Or desire the upliftment of more Filipinos? Or believe in a God of love? I think so. If so, these can be starting points for dialogue and creative problem. Who knows where things can go after that? Still, I find that more appealing than a spiral downwards to chaos, factional hatred or, dare I say, civil war. 
I’m not a historian so Manolo might give his inputs here, but it seems to me that the countries we now acknowledge as stable and well-developed went through their own political crises and WORKED THEM THROUGH. It wasn’t always neat, and oftentimes it was preceded by bloodshed, but real progress occurred only when people and their leaders took responsibility for the common good, not just their sectoral interests while simply branding others. I think we can reach this level of thinking and we can really BE a nation, instead of just being co-located accidentally in 7000 islands. IMHO, common ground and dialogue are not only possible for progress, they are necessary. Especially since I presume we prefer a non-authoritarian route. Prayer and discernment can open our minds to these possibilities."
On the Common Good
When a poster questioned whether anyone could or should actually speak about the common good since good can vary among different individuals, I explained that:
"While Oxford dictionary may be right about there being no “strict” definition of the common good, may I offer for your consideration two definitions from two Johns which may be useful for our discussion here. I think that talking about the common good is important because the CBCP often speaks of the common good and a consensus on the common good is basic to nation-building — which is why the phrase appears in the Preamble of the Philippine Constitution as in “We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society and establish a Government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good, …”
The definitions:
1. From Harvard philosopher John Rawls, author of A Theory of Justice: “certain general conditions that are . . . equally to everyone’s advantage”
2. Originally from Pope John XXIII in the papal encyclical Mater et Magistra (Mother and Teacher)and reemphasized in the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church: “the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily”
The similarity between the two Johns’ definitions is striking considering that Rawls is secular while Pope John is Catholic. This indicates that there tends to be consensus on the common good.
Common examples of conditions which are part of the common good range from the physical (such as clean air and good roads) to social services (such as free basic education and social security) to institutions (such as free markets and the rule of law ), etc. A quick check of the examples against the definitions of the two Johns will clarify why they are part of the common good.
The government has the DUTY to promote the common good because it promotes the dignity and development of every citizen.
The danger in the current situation is that private good or special interest (some say “vested”) is being mixed up with or is harming the common good. This needs to be guarded against and is why the Church is against the recent acts of the House majority — these were seen as brazen acts which harm the common good, i.e., the rule of law, in this case. It is important for ALL citizens, faithful or otherwise, to understand, promote and defend the common good. It is a foundational principle of our republican democracy.
By the way, republic comes from “Res Publica” which is Latin for “the public thing” and refers to what individuals in a community hold in common or place above their self interest."
I think that the concept of the common good is critically important during these times in our country.
No comments:
Post a Comment