Finally! Our 4 postulants from Myanmar are with us. Welcome!
Fraternity
On August 9th we celebrated national day. A time to be proud of the achievements of Singapore. In only 44 years, the young, tiny city-state has become one of the most developed countries in Asia. No one would contest that. But, how do we measure development?
We routinely divide the world between developed and developing nations; a more “politically correct” terminology than the outdated first and third world countries.
But who decides when one country stops being “developing” and becomes “developed”? Which criteria do we use to determine what development means? Do we look at the per capita GDP? At the political regime? At the competitiveness of the nation? Do we judge it by economic standards? Citizen’s contentment? The quality of its infrastructures? Government service? All of the above?
Little more than a month before Singapore celebrated its 44th birthday the church issue the latest papal encyclical “Love in Truth”. The topic? Development. It may come as a surprise to many that the Church worries not only about spiritual matters but about secular issues such as development.
In fact, in 1967, Paul VI wrote Populorum Progressio (the development of nations), precisely on the same issue. Benedict XVI wants that document to be a landmark for successive documents to constantly promote the true development of nations. A political agenda or undeniable duty of the church?
So what does the church say about development? And even more importantly, is Singapore considered developed by the church’s standard?
The church tirelessly teaches that persons, not systems, are the point of reference in all social issues, development included. In the words of Fr. Lebret O.P., quoted by Paul VI in Populorum Progressio n. 14: “what counts for us is man—each individual man, each human group, and humanity as a whole.”
One sentence summarizes the whole understanding of the church’s teaching on authentic development: Development “cannot be restricted to economic growth alone….; it must foster the development of each person and of the whole person.” (PP 14). In the latest encyclical, the Pope defines development as the progress “from less human conditions to those which are more human” (Caritas in veritate, 8 )
So, is Singapore developing properly? The first thought that comes to my mind is that in Singapore, some persons are more developed than others. If we need to look at the development of “each person”, each person counts, and that means, even the worst off.
I cannot help but thinking about the conditions of “foreign workers” in Singapore, which are even named differently from “expatriates”, who are, I thought, also foreigners, and also working. Many people seem to be concerned about the “in-humane” way in which they are transported to their working sites, and there have been some measures to fix this embarrassing problem.
However fixing the transport problem only avoids the serious issue. Do this workers live in humane conditions? Do they have proper housing, like a Singapore citizen is entitled to have? Do they earn enough to support themselves and their dependants? I am sure that if the last question was answered satisfactorily, there would not be transportation issues.
In other countries –developed, that is—foreign workers are entitled to a minimum wage that serves them to have normal housing, transportation, schooling and health care like any other citizen.
According to the understanding of the church, all workers deserve a “remuneration… to cultivate worthily his own material, social, cultural, and spiritual life and that of his dependants.” “The simple agreement between employee and employer with regard to the amount of pay to be received is not sufficient for the agreed-upon salary to qualify as a “just wage.” (Compendium… 302). Regarding migrants, the social doctrine of the church believes that “host countries must keep careful watch to prevent the spread of the temptation to exploit foreign labourers, denying them the same rights enjoyed by nationals… and the right of reuniting families should be respected and promoted.” (Compendium… 298)
The latest encyclical expresses the dignified work in the following terms: “work that is freely chosen, effectively associating workers, both men and women, with the development of their community; work that enables the worker to be respected and free from any form of discrimination; work that makes it possible for families to meet their needs and provide schooling for their children, without the children themselves being forced into labour; work that permits the workers to organize themselves freely, and to make their voices heard; work that leaves enough room for rediscovering one’s roots at a personal, familial and spiritual level; work that guarantees those who have retired a decent standard of living. (CV 63)
So back to our question, is Singapore truly developed? Or in other terms, is Singapore developing each person and the whole person? In team racing, what decides which team is the winner, they clock the time of the last member of the team. So what matters is not that they have good runners, but that the worst runner of their team is better than the worst runner of other teams. In sports, that is considered a fair “measurement.” It marks the difference between individual and team competition.
Applying this to development means that a country is only so much develop as the least developed of its inhabitants. In a country with no basic salary, the remuneration for work is at the mercy of the labour market. Other developed countries respect those rights of the worker. To go “ahead” in the development race with different standards of dignity is simply cheating. And if the developing of Singapore needs to achieve the right standards, there is still some room for improvement.
Certainly, Singapore has gone beyond the economical achievement. Racial and religious harmony should be counted as one of the most impressive social development and due credit should be given.
In the end, the question should not be, Is Singapore already developed? As if Singapore, or any other nation for that matter, could afford to sit down and dwell in their successes. The proper question should be, Is Singapore developing properly in the right direction towards true development? Statements or labels do not answer that question. Rather, actions to improve the dignity of all in Singapore are the only appropriate response.
“What is sex?” the five year old asked her Father. Her father was hoping he heard wrongly. “What did you ask?” “Daddy, what is sex?” He sighed, sat beside her, pondered for a while, and measuring his words, tried to explain the birds and the bees to his puzzled daughter. When he considered his first lesson on the topic finished, he sighed again in relief and asked her, “did you understand?… but, why did you ask me that question?” The daughter was still trying to digest the confusing situation but explained to her father, “Mommy said dinner will be served in a couple of secs.”
This Sunday’s theme is “New technologies, new relationships and Promoting a culture of respect, dialogue and friendship.” Our religious authorities have requested that we do not use the pulpit “to engage in socio-political activities to canvass for or against the matter.” Do new technologies account as virtual pulpits? Technically no, I hope, and then that restriction would not apply to this post. But even if it does, I will not engage in a socio-political activity that canvass for or against the matter of AWARE. Still, can we promote a “culture of dialogue and friendship” by avoiding issues or by talking about them? Is this fear of debating well-founded or typical panic of control-freak institutions?
The AWARE saga has taught us a few lessons but also left some unanswered questions. Do religions have a role to play in the public realm? Is faith an exclusively private issue? Jesus himself said, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s”. Does it not mean that religious and social matters should be kept separate?
The word “maunday” comes from a verse version of the Latin “mandatum” command. It refers to Jesus’ command “you ought to wash one another’s feet” (Jn 13:14).
Just once, Jesus allowed the people to take over. For a time He had been preaching and healing. He had to face misunderstanding and lack of faith while trying to assert His identity as the Son of God. Then, He allowed them to do what they wanted. Before He was active, then He was passive. No more corrections, no more plans, just submitting Himself to the errors of their decisions.
It is easy to praise God, when we are blessed, but how about when we are in the middle of misfortune?
In his book, “The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals” Darwin tries to explain how the expressions of humans came about. In his studies, he realizes that many artists fail to depict faithfully these expressions:
Today we celebrate the feast of St. Thomas Aquinas. Details about his devouted life and intellectual prowess are well known. However the question remains whether his teachings are still relevant after seven centuries. What I find particularly relevant today is his overall approach as one of the best exponents of a philosphical tradition known as realism.
Very great interest attaches to the life of St Margaret of Hungary, because by rare good fortune we possess in her case a complete copy of the depositions of the witnesses who gave evidence in the process of beatification begun less than seven years after her death. No doubt the fact that she was the daughter of Bela IV, King of Hungary, a champion of Christendom at a time when central Europe was menaced with utter destruction by the inroads of the Tatars, has emphasized the details of her extraordinary life of self-crucifixion. The Dominican Order, too, which was much befriended by Bela and his consort Queen Mary Lascaris, was necessarily interested in the cause of one of its earliest and most eminent daughters. But no one can read the astounding record of Margaret’s asceticism and charity as recounted by some fifty witnesses who were her everyday companions without realizing that even if she had been the child of a beggar, such courage as hers –one is almost tempted to call it the fanaticism of her warfare against the world and the flesh — could not but have a spiritual influence upon all who came in contact with her. Bela IV has been styled “the last man of genius whom the Arpads produced”, but there were qualities in his daughter which, if determination counts for anything in human affairs, showed that the stock was not yet effete.
him on 2 May 1909. Almost another century after his beatification, he was canonised by Pope John Paul II on 1 October 2000. His feast is celebrated on the 15th of January.
St. Francisco de Capillas began his pastoral ministry at once, and these years, 1644-1646, are called the Golden Age of the mission. Along with Father Díez, he founded the Lay Dominicans in China. He also converted huge numbers of Chinese in all the towns and villages. Especially worthy of mention were his highly virtuous life and conduct, which won him the love and respect of all whom he met. On 4 November 1646 Father Díez died, assisted by the gentle saint. On that same day, the Tartars entered the city, destroying, looting and killing, and with an Imperial edict to kill the missionaries.
At the beginning of this Ordinary Time we read the beginning of the letter to the Hebrews and the beginning of the gospel of Mark. Both readings refer to the importance of timing. 
The season of Christmas ends only today, even if most people whose minds are already set on the Lunar New Year, think that Christmas is long over. However, there are good reasons to include today’s feast, the Baptism of the grown up Lord, within the festive, joyful and child-like season of Christmas.
- Today he is the patron saint of the canonist, and in Spain, the patron saint of lawyers as well.
This was rescued from the previous deleted blog:
Sometimes dreams are shattered. We yearn to do this or that, only to find that life has different plans. St. Basil and St. Gregory Naziancen had plans. They wanted to become hermits but were appointed bishops in times of persecution. Their dreams of being in solitude and quiet were shattered by a daunting mission. Had they become hermits, we may have never known of their inner spiritual riches. Sometimes, some good dreams are well shattered.
