walk the talk- June 21, 2005

“Human beings need two things: something to believe in and something to belong to. To be successful, a parish [or a community, a marriage, a friendship, a team, a nation, any human organization] must be a place where both needs are met.”
Timothy E. O’Connell, Making Disciples

This is a tribute to Jaime Cardinal Sin, the late archbishop of Manila (Philippines) who just passed away. Cardinal Sin was an example of a true disciple committed to the kingdom of God as the mission of the church, and to the common good as the purpose of any political institutions. His commitment to end dictatorship in the Philippines and to bring about freedom, solidarity, especially with the poor, and democracy will never be forgotten. The way of conversion had become his way of living. May the Most High grant him the eternal reward. May the Lord grant us to be courageous disciples and genuine prophets, like cardinal Sin. The legacy of cardinal Sin is a call to live and give account of our faith in the public arenas where the dignity of the human person is at stake. our faith in the Trinity, our hope for the Kingdom of God, and our charity are what the world of today longs for and what God is offering to creation though us. Through cardinal Sin's legacy, Christ is reminding us that there is no genuine human growth and happiness if we don't believe in the the values of the Kingdom of God that he came to realize and if we don't build a genuine human solidarity that he came to inspire.

THE CONTEXT OF THE 8th CENTURY B.C.E. PROPHECY: THE PROPHET AMOS.

Introduction

Who is a prophet? The word 'prophet' today evokes for some people names such as Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Dorothy Day, Oscar Romero, John Paul II, and etc. A prophet, like those mentioned above, is understood as a charismatic personage who critiques and judges his/her society. Driven by a religious experience, the prophet -nābi’- speaks in the name of God by interpreting the signs of times to his/her contemporaries. Since revelation is not restricted to a particular moment in history but happens within the course of history, prophecy cannot be held as finished with the death of John the Baptist. God continues to reveal Godself in the total historical process through events or signs of times and peoples who incarnate and speak God’s word.
Prophets therefore do not foretell the future; but as they interpret events and present situations, they present the future as consequence of an action or another. While prophecy is evaluated through its interpretation of the signs of times, these signs of times and the audience differentiate a prophet from another. A prophet interprets events or sign of times in a particular time history, in a particular place in the world, and addresses a particular people. This is true especially if we look at the history of prophecy in ancient Israel. From Moses to Malachi, everyone of the prophets differs from the other according to the moment of history where they appear and to the situations that they address. The 8th century BCE prophecy is typical as it laid the foundations of the classical period of prophecy that started with Amos.
In this paper, hence, we intend to look first at the socio-economic, religious and political context of 8th century BCE prophecy. We will, secondly, discuss the book of Amos within that context. This analysis will lead us to understand the importance of prophecy today and particularly the significance of the book of Amos in our contemporary world.

The Eighth Century B.C.E Prophecy

The 8th century BCE is a foundational time for understanding the history of Israel and the changes in the prophetic tradition within that history. It is characterized by the revival of the imperial desires of Assyria in the Fertile Crescent. Assyrian Empire existed between the tenth and the seventh centuries (900 - 600 BCE). This period may be comprised, in Assyria, from few decades before Tiglath-pileser III to the death of Sennacherib. In Israel, this period extends from the last kings of the dynasty of Jehu in the northern kingdom to the religious reforms of Josiah in the southern kingdom. And concerning prophecy, this period marked the passage from the primitive prophets, such as Elijah and Elisha, to the first classical or writing prophets, namely Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Micah.
In fact, the latter are called classical because their prophecies had been written and conserved under their names by themselves or by their disciples. Instead, from the former prophets, we only have stories about their deeds, about them. Various socioeconomic, religious and political aspects contributed to this change. These events, not only affected the Israelites, but also, constituted the concerns of the prophets. What, then, may be those situations?

The Political Context of 8th Century BCE.
Since the 9th century BCE, Assyria had changed its policy about the treaties with vassal or conquered nations. Instead of dealing only with the king, the treaties were signed with the whole nation. The people were responsible for keeping the treaties. Therefore, a rebellion brought punishment on the king and the nation; a punishment that consisted of mass deportation. The prophetic oracles were no longer addressed to the king alone, but to the whole people. Later on, Tiglath-pileser introduced the “policy of two-way relocation”[1](Hershel Shanks, Ancient Israel. p.174). The deported nation was replaced by another from a different place. This is what was applied to Samaria in 722 BCE. (2 kings 17:6.24)
Also, while the domination of Damascus over the Aramean states – Syria, Phoenicia, Israel, Judah, and Philistia- was declining, Assyria rose and inaugurated the era of powerful empires. First, Adad-nirari III (811-783 BCE) opened the way to the Assyrian imperialistic domination through his two western military campaigns (805-802 BCE). These campaigns not only ended Damascus’ claims over the other Aramean states, but they gave Adad-nirari III a tribute of gratitude from these states that viewed him as savior (2 kings 13:5).

This situation offered Israel and Judah to stand against Damascus. Joash (801-786 BCE) of Israel had the opportunity of defeating Ben-Hadad of Damascus three times (2 kings 13:25). In the Judah, Amaziah (800-783 BCE) was trying to control the trade route in the Edomite territory (2 kings 14:7). It was, however, in this period that Joash attacked Amaziah. After breaking the northern wall of Jerusalem, looting the temple and the royal court, Joash brought some hostages in Samaria; Judah became a vassal of Israel (2 kings 14:8-14).

Thereafter, Judah under Uzziah (783-742 BCE) and Israel under Jeroboam II (786-746 BCE) enjoyed a long period of peace and prosperity, since Damascus had been weakened and Assyria was busy trying to control the Urartu (a region around lake Van, north of Assyria). It is during this time that Amos, Hosea and Micah prophesied.
The second rise of Assyrian empire and its apogee came with the accession of Tiglath-pileser III (745-727 BCE). He cultivated military power and administrative skills. He bound vassal states with treaties; and he used mass deportations and resettlement to punish rebellions. During his first western military campaign (743-738 BCE), he conquered Arpad in Syria (740 BCE), while the nations from Damascus to Arabia paid him tribute. In Israel, the moral decline under Jeroboam would result in Zechariah, his son, being assassinated and ending the Jehu dynasty. Menahem (747-738 BCE) thus king would continue with Jehu policy toward Assyria, namely of paying tribute. It was during this period that Isaiah started his ministry in Judah, followed by Micah.
Also, during this period, assassinations would continue in Israel and they resulted in the accession of Pekah (737-732 BCE) who would team up with Razin of Damascus to attack Ahaz (735-715 BCE) of Judah in order to convince him to join their anti-Assyrian coalition. Against Isaiah’s advice, Ahaz would call upon Assyria and introduced Judah under Assyrian vassalage. Called upon for help, Tiglath-pileser would undertake his second western military campaign (734-732 BCE). Damascus fell in 732 BCE; the other Syro-Palestinian states, including Judah and Israel paid tribute to Assyria which extends it borders until the Wadi-el-‘Arish. A part of Israel’s population would be deported; and the king, Hoshea (732-724 BCE) became an Assyrian vassal.
However, supported by Egypt, Hoshea gave in to anti-Assyrian sentiments around him. Angered, the Assyrian king Shalmanaser V (727-722 BCE) would undertake a military campaign that ended in the vassalage of Egypt, and the destruction of Samaria in summer of 722 BCE by Sargon II (722-705 BCE). Israel’s populations were deported (Isaiah 7:8b) and resettled in Halath (northeast of Nineveh), on the Harbor (the Khabour River), and in the highlands of Medes (northwest Iran). The kingdom was divided into various provinces like Dor, Megiddo, Gilead, and Samaria was repopulated and rebuilt as capital province.
In Judah meanwhile, Hezekiah (727-697 BCE) resisted to join the Ashdod revolt that Sargon II defeated in 712 BCE (Isaiah 19-20). With the Egyptian backing, Hezekiah rebelled against Sennacherib (705-681 BCE) who, weakened by his victory over Egypt and Judean cities could not sustain the siege of Jerusalem (Isaiah 36-37). Though the city was miraculously spared, Judah paid a heavy tribute to Assyria until the fall of Nineveh in 612 BCE.

The Socioeconomic Context.
The Syro-Palestinian states were among various trade routes from Egypt to the Persian Gulf through Damascus and Nineveh and further east. Most of the trade was about luxury goods such as precious metals, ivory, exotic woods and animals. This market controlled by Damascus might have been the cause of the expansion of Assyria, which since Tiglath-pileser III controlled the Syrian trade routes, the costal highway, including the Via Maris. Also, the vassal nations, after being looted, were bound through treaties to pay tribute to Assyria. These tributes were used to finance military campaigns and to sustain the Assyrian administrative structures.
Besides, the Assyrian policy of mass deportation in order to punish rebellions emptied various territories of their populations and then repopulated by other exiles. This practice discouraged any ideas of returning to one’s original land. In 722 BCE, Samaria was filled with a new exile population that was mixed with the Israelite remnants that constituted the ancestors of the Samaritans; this case would stir controversy upon the return from Babylon and until Jesus’ time about the land and the ancestry. The mass deportation of 722 BCE was not only a social problem, but also a theological challenge.
The first half of the 8th century was a peaceful and prosperous time for both Israel and Judah. Both Jeroboam II and Uzziah enjoyed prosperous and long reign, even though Uzziah got leper and left the regency of Judah to his son Jotham. Both kingdoms were at peace with each other and extended their respective kingdoms.
During this period, the stratification of society started by Solomon attained its summit. The upper class was a minority made of the king, the royal family and the aristocratic nobility –governors and maintainers of royal estates; and the lower class was made of artisans, laborers, herdsmen such as the prophet Amos who formed the majority. While the upper class was accumulating the wealth, the lower class was starving and extorted. The family-based farming was transformed into a production for export that benefited only to the upper class. The culture of olive oil was prominent at this time, and exchanged for luxury goods. Those who could not pay their loans were reduced to slavery. The local justice like the property rights done by the king and his officers was not without abuses (Micah 2:2). Also, the international trade was a source of substantial wealth and of competition between Israel and Phoenicia, on one hand, and Judah and Philistia, on the other, against Damascus. The western costal trade routes and the southeastern trade routes (kings’ highway) were controlled by Jeroboam II. As production increased, consumerism, individualism, greed and overconfidence grew as well. It was this situation, not different from ours today, that Amos (and Micah in Judah) criticized and denounced its moral and religious downfall that would lead to the chaos of 745-722 BCE. Also, the deuteronomistic historian, from the perspective of the fall of Samaria and deportation gives a very negative assessment of Jeroboam II (2 kings 14:23-29).

The Religious Context
Under Jeroboam II and Uzziah, the temple of Jerusalem in Judah and the sanctuary of Bethel in Israel were prominent religious centers, places for sacrifices and other offerings. Some of the wealth accumulated, such as gold and ivory, furnished these sanctuaries. For the prophets, nevertheless, justice was more important than cultic sacrifices.
Under Assyrian vassalage, the Assyrian policy toward local religious cults was ambiguous (Joseph Blenkinsopp, A History of Prophecy in Israel. p. 83). Sometimes, the Assyrian cult was imposed and supported by vassal annual tribute. Local cults were destroyed and/or restored, like in 2 kings 17:24-28. And the Assyrian military campaigns were conducted in the name of Ashur –Assyrian god; and the treaties of vassalage, called “yoke of Ashur”, were signed in the name of Ashur, the “lord of all lands”.
For Israel, however, the fall of Samaria was not only a human disaster, but also a theological challenge. Since war between human nations involved war between their respective deities, could Yahweh be defeated by Ashur? Also, the loss of the land questioned the relevance of the covenant with Yahweh. For the prophets Amos and Hosea, the fall of Samaria was a logical consequence of the religious and social discrepancies of under Jeroboam II. Hosea, particularly, denounced the religious syncretism that the international trades brought in Israel, advocating for the purity of faith. This syncretism was also observed after 722 BCE as new people were brought in Samaria and mixed with the Israelite remnants. In Jesus’ time, the Jews reproached the Samaritans for the syncretistic religion.
In Judah, the fall of Samaria was not without religious and theological impacts. We should not forget that king Hezekiah initiated series of religious reforms that Josiah would finish after discovering the Book of the Law from the northern kingdom. He fortified the walls of Jerusalem, secured the water supply by building the tunnel of Siloam, and conducted the purification of the Temple (Isaiah 22:9-11). These reforms not only enhanced the importance of the temple, but also became the reason of the miraculous deliverance of Jerusalem from the siege of Sennacherib (2 kings 19:35-37). This confidence on the temple and the city would be challenged by the Babylonian invasion in 597 and 586 BCE.

The Prophet Amos and his Book

The Prophet
Amos is among the twelve Minor Prophets, but the first of the Classical or Writing Prophets. He was a herdsman or a shepherd from Tekoa, in Judah. He ministered at Bethel, in Israel, during the flourishing and long reign of Jeroboam II (1:1; 7:10-17) around 760s BCE. For being a Judean and not from the company of prophets, he exercised his ministry not without opposition and persecution. The priest Amaziah of Bethel accused him of conspiracy and creating an upheaval in the community. Eventually, Amos was expelled from Bethel but not before predicting the death of Amaziah, his family and the whole nation (7:10-17). Nevertheless, Amos spoke in the name of God who he encountered through a religious experience (7:15). For him, a prophet is called and sent by Yahweh (2:11). That Amos predicted the fall of Samaria when the Assyrian threat was not obvious questions about the exact dating of his ministry (John J. Collins, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible with CD Rom. p.287). However, there are aspects that may confirm Amos’ ministry. First, the portrait that Amos gives of Israel corresponds to the prosperous reign of Jeroboam. Secondly, Amos may have foreseen the chaos that followed the death of Jeroboam and culminated in the fall of Samaria (745-722 BCE).
Moreover, Amos has been called the prophet of social justice. He witnessed the injustices against the poor and weak and warned his generation against the destructive consequences of the moral outrage –injustice, consumerism, individualism, idolatry, overconfidence, and indifference- that the socioeconomic and political prosperity was leading to (3:1-2; 4:1; 9:7-8). The ruling class was enriching itself by exploiting the poor. He witnessed, as shepherd, the first hand experience of the simple people in Israel. For him, the just and egalitarian social order in the traditional villages was the way of living the covenant. For Amos, justice means sharing equally the resources; justice means taking care of the weak and treating with compassion the poor. “A society that neglects justice –mishpat- and righteousness –sedeqah- does not deserve to survive.” (Blenkinsopp, p.96).
Finally, Amos sees the silence of God or absence of the Word as one of the worst punishments (8:11-12). Also, Amos understands events as the milieu for encountering the Lord. The signs of times signal the coming of Yahweh, "the day of the Lord", who brings with him not only judgment, but mostly salvation (4:12-13).

The Book of Amos
According to Ceresko (Anthony R. Ceresko, Introduction to the Old Testament, p.198-199), the book of Amos might have been edited in three stages. The main part was collected by Amos or his disciples from Amos' preaching in Israel around 760s BCE. After 722 BCE, a rework expanded the book to meet the context of mid-7th century BCE Judah (2:4-5). The credibility of the prophet was justified by the fall of Samaria. At this stage, we may identify some deutoronomic elements (2:4c). A final editor in the 6th century BCE, late exilic or postexilic, revised the book in order to address the Exiles or the newly returned from exile and introduced a messianic perspective (9:8c-15).
Moreover, the book of Amos may be divided into three parts. After the prologue (1:1), Amos begins by proclaiming the sins and the consequent judgments of each of the Syro-Palestinian nations (1:2-2:16). The second part contains woes against Israel (3:1-6:14). And the third part of the book reports of visions about Israel (7:1-9:8b) and an autobiographic note at the confrontation with the priest Amaziah (7:10-17). The book ends with a messianic epilogue (9:8c-15).
To the gentile nations, Amos reproaches their numerous crimes –“for three crimes of …, and for four”- against humanity. The justice of God is universal, and not limited to Israel only. Concerning Israel, the crimes are not only humanistic, but also touch the covenant with Yahweh that requires justice and righteousness. But scholars discuss if the covenant was already codified like the actual book of Deuteronomy or was still kept as a collection of traditions (Collins, p.290).
Also, Amos criticized the religious cult of Bethel and the way exodus was understood in Israel. For him, the celebration of the experience of exodus should call forth responsibility instead of overconfidence and indifference to justice. Amos does question the real significance of the election of Israel. Yahweh is the savior of Israel as well as of all nations. In that sense, Amos continues in denouncing the social injustice, and particularly the luxury and extravagant consumerism of the ruling class (4:1-3; 6:4-7). To disregard the covenant can bring only disaster, a punishment from God who is the master of history and acts in history. Therefore, according to Collins, Amos may be a “strict monotheist” who cannot resist prophesying when Yahweh speaks (Collins, p.291)
Concerning the religious cult in Bethel, Amos has nothing to say. For Amos the true religion consists in practicing justice. Religion is not about a sophisticated liturgy, nor about expensive offerings. Amos rejects liturgical music as well as animal sacrifices. “The service of God is about justice.” (Collins, p.293) Amos, hence, does not ask for a liturgical renewal, but a moral renewal. The commitment to God has to be practiced not in the sanctuary, but rather in the marketplace, where the rich cheat and exploit the poor.
Therefore, Amos sees the advent of the Lord as a day of judgment. His visions culminate in the total destruction of Israel (9:1-8b). The kingdom will be destroyed, along with its population. While, the visions are pronounced against the rich, the poor also will perish as well. Even the sanctuary of Bethel cannot not stand, since its cult is not worthy. For the postexilic editor, however, the last word of God is hope for his people. Observing the return from the Babylonian exile, the prophet projects a messianic ending and the restoration of Davidic kingship.

Concluding Remarks

The aim of this paper was to look at the context 8th century BCE prophecy and to discuss the book of Amos within that context. The 8th century BCE was characterized by the rise and apogee of the Assyrian imperialistic power over the Syro-Palestinian nations, including Israel and Judah. This led, along with internal chaos, to the fall of Samaria and the deportation of Israel’s population in 722 BCE. Also, by the end of the century, the surviving kingdom of Judah was reduced to vassalage. Economically, the first half of the century profited to Israel under Jeroboam II and Judah under Uzziah, as both kingdoms prosper from international trades. And religiously, the cult in both Bethel in Israel and Jerusalem in Judah continued, but not without the risk of syncretism from Assyrian religion, and the critiques of prophets. The fall of Samaria was a theological challenge viewed, however, as the realization of prophetic oracles.
It is in this context that prophets like Isaiah, Micah, Hosea, and especially Amos ministered. Amos, after his encounter with God, prophesied in Israel against the ruling and oppressing upper class during the reign of Jeroboam. He criticized religious cultic, luxury, injustice and overconfidence of Israel. For Amos, social justice is the real cult that pleases God. Amos preached the destruction of Israel and neighboring nations as judgment of God. But his book ends on a note of messianic hope added by later editors.
The book of Amos is still relevant today. Consumerism, individualism, injustices, and indifference to the poor are behaviors observed even today. In a globalized world, wealth is in the hands of a few while the majority starve to death. The rich become richer and richer, while the poor become poorer and poorer. Amos reminds us that social justice and the equitable distribution of world’s resources are what we are called to do. The legacy of Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Dorothy Day, and John Paul II, in the footsteps of Amos reminds us that religion without justice and righteousness is empty. The message of Amos is a call to praxis, in the sense of liberation theology.

Bibliography

1. The Catholic Study Bible- New American Bible, 1990
2. Blenkinsopp, Joseph. A History of Prophecy in Israel: From the Settlement in the Land to the Hellenistic Period. (Philadelphia, PA. The Westminster Press, 1983. pp 80-137)
3. Ceresko, Anthony R. Introduction to the Old Testament. A Liberation Perspective. Revised and updated. (New York. Orbis Books, 2002. pp 181-208)
4. Collins, John J. Introduction to the Hebrew Bible with CD-ROM. (Minneapolis. Fortress Press, 2004. pp. 283-324)
5. Shanks, Hershel. Ed. Ancient Israel: From Abraham to the Roman Destruction of the Temple. revised and expanded. (Washington, DC. The Biblical Archeology Society, 1999. pp.155-188.)

Notes

[1] Shanks, p.174

Case Study: What Model of Development?

Authors: Pascalis, Ky & Matt.
The following paper was presented at the end of the course Living the Moral Life
The first part of the paper deals with our christian moral perspective (plus normativity and conscience) in which we tried to solve the case study; and that is the second part.
Send your comments; don't be shy.

Introduction

No one begins from zero. Whatever one knows, they know from experience whether individual, through others’, or communities’ or culture. Our conceptual knowledge comes from a reflection on data from experience. Thus philosophical or theological ethics are no exception. The good is universally accepted as the goal of morality but its understanding and its means are differently formulated from a culture to another or from an individual to another. Take polygamy for example, while it is good in Muslim and traditional loops of Nigeria, it is regarded as bad by westerners and Christians. Just as there is a Muslim ethics, a Buddhist ethics, likewise there is a Christian ethics with its specific sources, its understanding of the Good and its means. These Christian sources, which include faith and reason –or Revelation, Magisterium, human experience and critical thinking, try to answer to the following question: what kind of actions do I have to perform as a follower of Jesus Christ? In our analysis, we will explore three aspects to moral decision-making, followed with a description, and analysis, of possible resolutions to the many dimensions to the case. First, we will define Moral Vision including the Christian understanding of the Good, the human person as the criterion of any morality, and the means to achieve the Good or the formation of the character. Second we will look at Normativity and its relationship with the various ethical methods. Finally we will look at Conscience and its relationship to this case.

Moral Vision

What is Christian ethics? What are its majors concerns? How does Christian faith influences the understanding of morality? These are some of the questions that this section on a general analysis of Christian moral vision attempts to explore. This analysis will give first the Christian understanding of the Good as the goal of moral life. Secondly, the Christian understanding of the human person as the criterion and agent of morality will be described. Finally, this section will look at the formation of the character as the means of achieving the Good.

God: the Ultimate Good
“So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.”[1]
According to Aristotle, the is good happiness; for the hedonists, the good is whatever is pleasant; for the stoics, being good is being courageous, etc. but for Christians, God is the good. God is the font of all goodness, said Saint Bonaventure. All creatures, visible or invisible, are reflection of the absolute goodness, perfection and holiness of God, or they all participate to God’s goodness. God is the only center of value. It is Jesus encountered through the Scriptures who reveals God’s goodness and perfection. It is through faith in Jesus that one claims to believe that God is the only and ultimate reason for being moral. “The Christian is moral because God is good, and because the goodness of God, always and everywhere present to us, enables and requires us to be responsible for the goodness of the world.”[2] The moral life has to do with who God is for us, and how we have to respond to his call. The moral life integrated into faith, becomes a response to God. The Christian is the one responding to questions such as: what does God desire from me? Who does God call me to be and what is he allowing me to do and be? We, Christians and through Jesus, experience God as primarily love, as our Father who loves us, and whose living presence or grace is given to us and allows us, His children, to be like Him. Thus, the moral life is a love discerning God’s grace in the world and responding to it. Accordingly, sin is more about hurting God’s love for us than breaking a law, or a command. Therefore, faith in God is for me the scope that defines the value of all creatures, the scale through which the wrongness or rightness of an act is evaluated. Consequently, Christian moral life appears as a critical thinking informed by faith in the God of Jesus.
Also, we know God by observing God acting. Human morality has to be governed by what we may know about God’s goodness in action. Among many attributes of God, we know Him as the Creator and the end of all creation. God is the alpha and the omega of all being; all creatures are part of Him and dependent on Him. As God’s stewards, we are co-responsible of the well being of the whole creation. All creatures are good, but none should be made absolute at the detriment of God. Besides, God gives direction to our lives since our ultimate purpose is to love Him and enjoy fully His goodness. Consequently, my conscience becomes the internalized voice of the One to whom I have vowed my loyalty and freedom.
Moreover, God is beneficent, “self-diffusive” goodness. He cares for His creatures and freely gives them His love and grace. In return, the moral life becomes a thanksgiving to all God’s gifts that He endowed us. Just like God is concerned for the well being of the whole creation, so should we be.
All in all, for Christian ethics, the God experience through faith in Jesus Christ is the Good, the unique center of value. We cannot do and pursue the good, unless we are intimately related to God. He enables and requires from the human beings love and gratitude, as the basics virtues of moral life. Since the human beings are the moral agent, it is time to look at the Christian understanding of humanity.

The Human Person Adequately Considered
“Let us make [hu]man in our image, after our likeness… God created [hu]man in his image; in the divine image he created him [them]; male and female he created.”[3]

Morality starts with the human person. Respecting the human person is respecting the Creator incarnated in the humanity of Jesus. According to Gula[4], the understanding the moral agent has shifted from the human nature to the human person. An action was right when it respected the natural purpose of each human faculty, according to the structure and function of the body. The new morality from Vatican II, instead, is concerned about the person him/her self. It establishes that the human person, image of God, adequately and integrally considered is the criterion of the morality of an act.[5] What does this mean? First, the human person is image of God. It is the relationship with God that defines the humanity. Divine faithfulness and love sustain human dignity, not human achievements. “The biblical truth about human person is that being image of God is irreversible.”[6] Through free choice or decision, one can lose divine likeness; but no one, under any circumstances and for any reasons, can lose his/her dignity as image of God. All human beings share in the common human condition or the orientation towards the ultimate goal, God. Also, the Christian faith into God as Trinity makes a big difference in the understanding of the human person. For Gula, Trinity “means that God is eternally the giver or lover (Father), the receiver or beloved (Son) and the gift or love which binds them together (Spirit). When God expresses divine love outside of the Trinity, nature comes into being, with the human person being the point at which nature reaches self-consciousness.”[7]
Therefore, the human person is where nature responds to God by offering itself. God-Trinity can creates only a relational, and communitarian being, like Him. The human person is one redeemed by Jesus.
Second, then, the human person is a relational being, communal at its core, essentially and existentially directed towards others. Into interdependent, human persons are mutually responsible of each other. True freedom is the one that leads one to give him/her self up to/for others, just like God does. The more one is involved into the well-being of the human community, the more the humanity of each person is enhanced, and vice-versa. Also, the human person lives into social groups made of political, economical, cultural…structures that guarantee human dignity and the common good. Therefore, issues such as global solidarity and development, promotion of peace and disarmament, stewardship of God's creation, economic justice, role of government and subsidiary, rights and duties of citizens, option for the poor and many others that concerned common good and human dignity are strongly addressed by the Christian social ethics.
Third, the human person is an embodied subject. The human person makes use of autonomy, self-determination, conscience, freedom and knowledge for a moral discernment. The human person is not an object of exploitation. Human body is essential to being integrated person, image of God, to being human and living human life. The body expresses our interiority. We are called to respect it according to the laws of biology, to develop our potentials and to accept our limitations.
Fourth, the human person is an historical subject, located in time and space. The cultural context in which one lives provides an understanding of values. Human beings integrate their past into the present in order to anticipate the future. And everyone is called to progress and develop.
Finally, “the human person adequately considered” is fundamentally equal but uniquely though equal in our human condition and human nature, each human being is unique and original in their genetic endowment, unconscious motives, social-cultural context, beliefs, worldview, dispositions and affections, intentions, and imagination.
Thus, Christian morality is personalistic as it considers “the human person adequately considered” as the criterion of morality. The human person needs to be informed and educated so that one may grasp this understanding of the human person in his/her quest of the good. This is the aim of the point that follows.

Formation of the Character
For Christian ethics, the moral agent is primary on the behavior. The first concern of Christian ethics is the human person who engages her/himself in free choices and moral actions. The emphasis is not primary on decisions and actions. Christian ethics tries to move from the question ‘what ought I to do?’ to the question ‘what ought I to be?’ Morality is thus a response to God, the ultimate good, according to what God makes possible and calls for in me. The Christian asks then the following question: who do you want me to be, Father? This reflection leads then to the formation of moral character, as what one ought to be before the Lord. The formation of the moral character includes also aspects such as fundamental option, sin and virtue, and conscience. While the latter will be developed in another chapter, let us look at the other three aspects.
A human person is not just acted upon, agent, able of self-agency and self-determination. As Gula says, “If someone dumps a load of lemons on your porch, don’t complain. Make lemonade”[8]. One is what she/he chooses to be. Self-transcendence is a human characteristic. When one chooses to direct his/her life by certain beliefs and values, all his/her action will be conform to the at previous choice. These choices have to be free and responsible. This freedom of choice is part of the basic freedom that requires the involvement of our whole being. Basic freedom is deciding about our identity and who we want to be; namely, basic freedom is about the fundamental direction or stance of our lives in accordance with our personal identity.
Through baptism, one applies her/his basic freedom in professing faith in God and commitment in the promotion of love and life. One accepts therefore her/his identity of child of God. The fundamental stance that flows then is the discipleship. The identity of the Christian as child of God and his/her fundamental stance as disciple of Jesus are the context in which his/her actions will be evaluated. They are highlighted “through committing oneself to a way of life that is stable enough to sustain a perduring quality of life...”[9] the fundamental option becomes then a free choice rooted in our identity as children of God and manifests our basic freedom of self-agency to decide how one wants to live his/her fundamental stance. Understood in this context, then, sin is any attempt to break the fundamental stance in which all human beings are called to be children of God. Sin is more about breaking a relationship with God and others than about breaking a law. While venial sin touches simple everyday choices, mortal sin hurts our coral identity, our fundamental orientation towards God. Social sins are all those structures that prevent human persons to be fully human and to live free.
As a result, Christian morality conceives freedom as engaged not much in selecting between two objects, but rather in who a person wants to be, in our being disciples. This freedom needs, therefore, to be supported by certain knowledge. It is not sufficient to know by head what morality requires; one needs to know in the heart. Moral knowledge should push one to decide and act in a genuine way that articulates his/her moral freedom. Freedom and knowledge help us choose and acquire virtues or the habitus of the disciples. Virtues are basic values that have become part of our being, values that have become our routine, our inclination. A virtuous person is one acting naturally through values acquired by everyday training, by a lifelong metanoia. Christian morality aims to form a Christian character, namely a disciple of Christ. The real disciple is the saint. In other words, the goal of Christian morality is holiness, which is fully found in God alone.

Application to the Case
Applying this Christian moral vision on our case, we discover that many values defended by Christianity are threatened. First, justice is questioned here in the issue around the distribution of wages from agricultural production. People are not guaranteed to benefit fully from the fruits of their labor. Especially, women won’t be paid fairly. Eventually, the lack of justice creates poverty and overpopulation. Population, besides being an ecological issue, becomes a social issue when human beings are unwilling to share the richness of creation. This results from the dependence of the Nigerian economy on western capitalism that does not care for local population. Justice is at the center of Christian social teaching. Every human person should benefit from the fruits of his/her labor and be paid wages that help one have a decent and human existence.
Second, in dictatorship, one cannot guarantee human freedom. Such a government cannot impose anything for the sake of common good. Also, imposing contraception, AIDS testing for women, and sterilization is dehumanizing. Human beings are not considered as adults and able to make responsible choices. Besides, the church still consider contraception and sterilization as anti nature, and against life. The issue of women rights in a polygamist society is raised here. Moreover, the clash between western culture and Yoruba traditional culture is manifested in the opposition between personal freedom and communal welfare. The Christian position on this issue is that the quest for the common good should protect also individual rights. Also, there is an understanding of the human person that needs to be criticized and integrated within the community.

Normativity

There are three methods that can apply to this case, and each has a different outcome, and focus. For my initial look into the case the method that made the most sense was the teleological method. Since the government is imposing regulations on the community, and those regulations are in part the cause for the problem in this case, the deontological method would not be the best choice, if we wish to reach a solution that both parties can benefit from. Instead of focusing on the law, and what the government says, so we give our initial thought to teleology. We need to look at the goals of the government and the goals of the community to see if there is a viable solution to achieve these goals.

Teleological Method
The first step is to posit various goal oriented solutions and their possible outcomes. The disadvantage of this method is that we can never predict the future, and that is what we are focusing on so whether or not we actually attain our goal will not be known until time passes. The other downside is that this method causes us to almost ignore the present situation and only judge the correct path to follow based on its possible future outcome.[10] So what outcomes do we hope to achieve? Ultimately we may want a peaceful cooperation between the government and the people they govern. In relation to the situation that the people find themselves in it seems that the goal would be that of pleasing both the government, and the people. That is a general goal; as per the specifics the government wants a 10% increase in production, and population control. It can be deduced from the situation that the government would rank these goals in the order given. If the people were to produce the 10% more while continuing with their traditional familial practices the government would overlook the large population. The people seem to have the biggest problem with the limiting of the number of children a woman can have. The fact that each group involved has separate goals causes trouble for this method. If we focus on one set of goals we inadvertently ignore or overlook the goals of the others. This is when a look into the norms will give us more understanding in the case.

Moral Norms
Moral norms are the criteria for judging the sorts of persons we ought to be and the sorts of actions we ought to perform in a faithful response to Gods call to love. They are expressions of moral truth and not always translated into laws within a community. They provide stability and consistency and identify to the community what is expected of the individual members. [11] The norms that are held by a community give us insight to what they hold dear, and believe to be important. There are various types of norms that we will need to pay attention to in this case. Formal norms pertain to the sorts of persons we ought to be. The types of moral absolutes one finds within formal norms relate to that which is permanent and reflects what is universal to humankind such as security and the golden rule. Synthetic terms also reflect formal norms held within certain communities or cultures. These terms bear a moral qualification as part of their meaning. An example of this would be the word ‘lie’ within the word one gets a sense of its wrongness as opposed to ‘falsehood’ which carries no moral qualification. Material norms pertain to the types of actions we ought to perform but do not take into account all aspects of the action.[12] The moral absolutes found in material norms indicate to us what actions are always required or forbidden, and that no one can claim total knowledge of any specific action. Virtually exceptionless norms are those that replace the thought of absolute norms. Since one cannot demonstrate an absolute norm, one sees it as a virtually exceptionless norm that highlights values that in almost every case should be preferred. For Christians one has to take into account the norms related to Jesus, they realize that the call of the reign of God requires a response. The moral imagination also plays a role in normativity, it allows us to make appropriate connections between moral experiences and abstract ideas related to them, helps us appreciate the limitations of moral norms, and helps us apply moral norms.[13]

Community Norms
The norms that are present in this community revolve around familial relationships. The existence of polygamy is a cultural norm within this community, not everyone practices it, but it seems to be an accepted practice. The role that children play in the life of the people is also an important norm to attend to. They are seen as gifts from God, and that you will have as many children as God wills thus they do not believe in contraception. The children are also expected to work the crops of their father. This is a patriarchal society so the norms that revolve around the men and women in the community greatly affect our case. The man is the head of the household and is the sole beneficiary of the work that the women and children do in the crops. Each wife has a separate budget to work with to feed herself and her children. If the man has multiple wives then there are multiple budgets, not a single-family budget. The women earn their own living through trading which supports them and their children. When a child is born the husband follows a 3-year period of abstinence with that wife as a period of time for mother-child bonding. There is a sense that this is a very strongly held norm as in the text it states that if this is not observed the husband will be publicly censured. In this society the larger the family the more prosperous they are, it also carries status within the community.

Norms and the Methods
The way that norms work in relationship with these models depends greatly on the method chosen. Within the teleological method the importance or relevance of the norms is measured by the consequences of upholding these norms. An example of this in relation to our case would be setting the goal that of producing the requested 15 percent increase in production. There are several norms that come into conflict when seeking this goal that of the men do not work the crops, and the norm that the women provide the income through trading in their extra time to care for their children. If we uphold the norm that women and children work the crops the women will have less time to trade thus having less money to care for their children. If we insist that women will not work more, thus allowing them the time to trade and earn an income, then the norm that men do not work the crops must be conceded. The teleological method assesses the value of the norms involved and chooses the option, which produces the greatest possible value in its consequences. The hub of moral reality method, which is a relational responsible method, uses norms in a much different way. In this method one chooses what to do by determining what action is most proportionate to the meaning of the whole relational context. Using the previous example this method would look into the relationship the norms have with the people involved, and the relationships of the people involved.

Conscience

Making a judgment about the Case Study also requires us to consider the role of moral conscience. In order to do this task, we should first understand what moral conscience is and how it works when we make judgments. First, we notice that moral conscience is usually misunderstood with psychological superego. On one hand, superego means that moral development and maturity is subjected to the external control of laws and authority due to the fear of punishment and the yearning for being lovable (Gula 125). Superego makes people submitted to laws and authority without much questioning why they have to do that; it usually makes people to have blind obedience. In terms of superego, people try to follow “should” and “have to,” that is, they try to precisely follow the regulations, orders, commands of laws and authority and focus on individual action apart from total context. Superego makes people rely on external guidance (Gula 126). On the other hand, moral conscience is more internal and self-directing. It is the development of morality for oneself as one’s character, and it leads to personally moral maturity. People of moral conscience will not blindly follow authority; rather, they learn and develop their commitment to love of values (Gula 127). Thus, they committed to the values in freedom and focus on larger context of person’s life. In short, moral conscience is an expression of the whole person in making moral decisions in three dimensions: 1) conscience/1 (synderesis) is the general sense of morality; 2) conscience/2 (moral science) is to search objective moral values such as moral teachings and norms; and 3) conscience/3 (conscience) is to judge and act based on perception and reasoning (Gula 131-133).
Moral conscience is formed by to follow natural law that helps us to build up moral characters and to do reasonable acts. For a Christian, it also is a dialogue with sources of moral wisdom such as human experiences, Christian values, and Catholic teachings that helps us to act in our Christian characters formed by Jesus’ words (Gula 137). The formation of conscience helps us to see, interpret, and value issues morally. It helps us to see the reality, not what we want to see. In making moral decisions, we must include the teachings of magisterium because: 1) it is the teachings of the church authority guided by the Holy Spirit; 2) it provides a structure to confused issues and helps us understanding the Gospel’s teachings; 3) it fosters, protects, and improves human values. Including authority teaching in making moral decision does not mean blindly obedience nor to ignore it. A good Catholic wants to obey the teachings of authorities, but if they cannot due to their own situations, they have to resolve the issue as best as they can (Gula 160). The Church values conscience, which is defined as the sanctuary of a person in solitude with God whose voice guides him/her inwardly (John Paul II, # 55). However, moral conscience may have the possibility of error because of human invincible ignorance. Thus, “the conscience must be ‘confirmed by the Holy Spirit’ (cf. Rom 9:1); it must be ‘clear’ (2 Tim 1:3); it must not ‘practise cunning and tamper with God's word’, but ‘openly state the truth’ (cf. 2 Cor 4:2)” (John Paul, #62). Jesus has warned us, "The lamp of the body is the eye. If your eye is sound, your whole body will be filled with light; but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be in darkness. And if the light in you is darkness, how great will the darkness be" (Mt 6:22-23).

Application of Conscience to Case Study
In the case study, the role of moral conscience affects us to make the judgment in various ways. The main issue is how to achieve the goal of increasing agricultural products while keeping the birth rate low. Conscience requires us to respect both the tradition and culture of the Yuroba society and human freedom. We should consider both the traditional practice of polygamy and the quest for freedom, especially the freedom of women, in making choice for family plan. Also, we examine the problem of overpopulation and global competition as well as the quest for better life and social justice. Nigeria is “the most populous nation in Africa” (Gudorf 199), and it has to endure the pressure of controlling the birth rate from “developed nations” (Gudorf 202). In the quest for global competition and improvement of people’s life, the plan of the government is reasonable, but how to achieve it should be considered because it conflicts with the tradition of polygamy and big-sized family. Also, conscience requires us to be sensitive to the possibility of conflict between religions where the plan of the government from the North of Muslim Hausa culture with the South Yoruba villages where many Christian live (Gudorf 199). Moreover, conscience also helps us see the issue in the light of social change possibility for life improvement and equality for women. We should consider the issue both in common morality and in the light of Christian morality, that is, how to deal the issue with the best possibility in terms human dignity as well as the Gospel’s teaching.

Relational Responsibility Method
The wheel hub method to moral reality is the method that will achieve the most accurate gathering and measuring of the information that is needed to come to a conclusion with this case. It allows one to view the various influences that are pertinent to the case. This method allows these influences to be in dialogue with the facts of the case, both allowing a deeper view of the facts, and in turn allowing the facts to give keys to the importance of the various influences.

Authority and Principles
There are multiple layers of authority present within this Yoruban society. Starting with the country government on down to the individual people within the community. The principles that drive these authorities, and the authority they actually hold with the people are important. Each spoke on the wheel is related to the next. Authority is related to right reason, principles, affectivity, and individual and group experience. Right reason tests the authorities involved instead of taking what they say without qualification. Principles are related to authorities in that they carry authority of their own within the community that holds to these principles. Affectivity influences the way we look at authority in that it can balance attitudes held toward the experts’ knowledge by being placed in perspective through questioning and use of common sense. Individual and group experience also gives us insight into the role that authority plays in the community. When one looks at individual and group experience, one can discern where they place authority in their lives.

Peer and Expert Authority
The colonel who presented the plan to the district officials emerged from a military culture, which eliminates any need to consult with subordinates, and also from a Muslim Hausa culture that dictates less independence and fewer economic roles for women. Keke Omuji, the district official for a small state in southwestern Nigeria fears that army authoritarianism and Hausa attitudes could be real problems. He is the one who has to tell his district what needs to be done. He gathers together the village chiefs and elders, the president of the market association, the officers of the Trader Clubs, and the doctor and nurses who ran the health clinics. The fact that these groups show up when he calls them together is important in showing us his power and importance within the district. This meeting also shows us what other groups have authority in the district for he would not have invited them if they did not. Within these groups there are individuals that show leadership and authority by speaking up when they feel they have something important to say. Christine Ciroma is the first one of such people to speak. She was trained as a nurse practitioner in the United States, having a western education may influence the types of objections she raises. She is also one of the health workers and a member of a prominent local family; both tell us that she must carry some authority. One fact that we do not want to overlook is that Keke responds to Christine, and that the district official would find it important enough to respond to her lets us know that she definitely has authority. The next person to speak is Edward Oyeluso, an elder. Being an elder gives him authority, as well as the fact that this is a patriarchal society, since he is a man he has a certain authority, valid or not it is there. Chief Simi follows Edward and also for the same reasons carries authority, although probably in a different way since he is a chief. The only hint at a lack of authority is that neither of the men are given a response by anyone, much less the district official Keke. Betty Olysanye is the next to speak, and the authority she carries is evident in that immediately Keke attempts to respond to her objection. One thing that must be noted about peer authority in the Yoruban culture is that one of the ever-present norms is that the needs of the community come before the needs of the individual, so much more authority is given to community, or the group, than an individual.[14]

Authority in Tradition
The Yoruban tradition carries much more authority than any of the individual people in this district. There are several points of reference within the text. The first indication of it is within the fear Keke has about the success of the plan. This fear comes from knowing the society and their traditions and the authority that they hold with the people. Other instances that show the strength of tradition revolve around the relationships between men and women. Christine is the first to express concern about the women’s role. The language she uses shows us that there is something in the tradition that she fears will never change, things that are unchangeable have a certain power to them. There are many such instances that show the power of tradition over women, men and children alike.

Religious Authority
The religious authority within the community is not very visible. The Magisterial authority is influential specifically in our group finding a resolution to the case. Since our group comes from the Roman Catholic Church there is a magisterial authority over moral issues of contraception, marriage, and justice. We must recognize such authority and the role it plays in such a situation. Since the community is not a distinctly Christian community it cannot have absolute authority in any way shape or form, however we, as Catholics, must consult our faith to give us guidance on the issues relevant to this case.

Group Experience
The case describes issues within a Yoruba village. Two cultures coexist and seemed in opposition. There is a western worldview that is taking roots and a traditional worldview that struggles to survive. The village is multi-religiously constituted: Christians, Muslims and Yoruban. Polygamy, overpopulation and agriculture seem shared experiences, along with injustice against women. Most of the people are opposed to the decisions of the government. These decisions, namely the imposition of contraception and sterilization with the increase of production, are in opposition with traditional values family solidarity, children and communal ownership of the land.
Individual Experience
Ø Keke: is the government agent. He calls the meeting just to inform the population about the government’s decisions. He is not concerned by what would be right. Instead of speaking on behalf of the people, he is concerned about pleasing his superiors.
Ø Christine, a nurse trained in USA, married to a catholic, she is against polygamy. She expresses health concerns over Keke’s propositions. She worries about privacy and medical deontology. She challenges the authority and proposes traditional solutions to issues of contraception and sterilization.
Ø Siti, a nurse and Muslim, made her husband write a contract stating that he won’t marry a second wife. She is against polygamy. She argues inn the sense of Christine, showing that contraception threatens traditional abstinence.
Ø Alice, a nurse as well, seems to defend her brother’s job. She argues in the sense of western worldview against polygamy and women rights, challenging her colleagues. For her, it is time to throw away traditional culture and open up to western culture.
Ø Betty Olusanye questions Keke’s plan, regarding women’s health, family size, fair wages, production and poverty. She does identify the government as the responsible for such plans.
Ø Chief Simi expresses the traditional understanding of children and the reasons of polygamy. He fears that contraception and sterilization may spoil the future of the family. For him, family size depends on the ability of a woman to have many children, and for economic reasons, at best two wives may be “affordable”.
Ø Edward Oyeluso raises also the reason behind the practice of polygamy and the issue over the status of women in the traditional and patriarchal society. As an elder, he symbolizes the cultural tradition and heritage.

Reason/Analysis
We think that the case study present a complicated issue. On one hand, we consider the reality that Nigeria, as the most populous country in Africa, has to cope with. On the other hand, we consider the problem that the Yoruba people, especially the women, are facing. We recognize that in today’s relationship between countries, the effect of globalization should be considered. In the reality of globalization, others affect Nigeria. It has to face with the problem of overpopulation; and its government has to consider it seriously. Nigeria expects to receive funds from the United Nations for health improvement, and it expectation to improve people health and reduce child birth death should be encouraged in the sense that it respects human lives and tries to improve living condition. But receiving fund for health care goes along with birth control as a condition since a better health care means more survive children that make the problem of overpopulation worse. The plan to increase field production is good since more crop products means more food for people and also contribute to the national prosperity. The 10 percent more products will be contributed haft for local market and haft for export (Gudorf 200). Having more products for export also helps economic growth nationally, and the government’s plan is good in that sense because in general, a country without economical growth will be left behind; it will face more disadvantages in international relations, possibly more foreign controls. Thus, the government’s goals of increasing crop products and lowering birth rate are generally good; they sound morally since they respect human life and seek to improve people’s life condition.
But the ways that the government applies to achieve such goals should be reconsidered since they are not morally good. First, the government’s plan of increasing field crops violates the fairness and social justice between men and women.. It forces them to work more, and it controls their body. Though Keke insists that increasing field crops will not be a problem since women either can be paid for their extra work or the extra crops can be used for family expense, but the men object such ideas since paying women for their extra work will “take all their profit from the extra production” (Gudorf 200). This objection reflects the selfishness of men. They want to have extra crops without paying extra wages. In common sense, if they do not do extra work, they should not claim the extra profit. Paul said, “If a man will not work, he shall not eat” (2Thes 3:10). The extra profit should be paid for the women since they will work more. The majority of women will not do more work unless they and their children will be better off (Gudorf 202), and they are morally right in such decision. Their argument reflects the fairness and equality. Thus, to call people to participate in the plan, the government should address more on the men’s cooperative attitude.
Second, the other side of the plan, to lower the birth rate, by requiring the women to visit a clinic annually violates the tradition of large-sized family and the freedom of women. Especially, it is unjust when it aims to punish only women if they fail to do so. The objections of Edward Oyeluso and Chief Simi indicate that men like to have more children since larger household size means better status and power in Yoruba society (Gudorf 200-201). The women concern more about how the government forces them to control birth rate. Betty Olusanye feels that the plan will not bring benefit to women but control them more (Gudorf 201). Also, the nurses fear that they have to do immoral works such as to monitor, report, and force women to use contraceptives (Gudorf 202). This plan obviously affects the life of women; and the way it carries out is unjust for women. In terms of Christian morality, this way to achieve birth control is immoral since it forces women to do something against their conscience; neither is it in accordance with the teaching of the church. Though we will not encourage women to do such contraception in the way that the government wants, but if a woman does so, we do not think that she is morally responsible for that action since she is forced to do so.

Resolution

Within this case there are many issues that we felt needed to be addressed. Each of these could benefit from more information, from the government, the community, and the individuals involved in the case. With several of the problems we can only posit educated guesses because there is a large enough gap between the information we need and the information that we have. The issues that we address are abuse of power, polygamy, woman’s rights, contraception and overpopulation, and individual versus communal rights.

Abuse of Power
Several key players fit into this problem. The most evident in the government, instead of holding councils with the chiefs, which is the way to get things done in the Yoruban society[15], they send in district officials to tell the people what they are going to have to do, under penalty of military involvement. Not only does it seem that from a western view this as an abuse of power, however the reaction that the people have is much the same as ours, and it is evident that it is not accepted even among them. The government here is not the only one abusing the power, or authority, that is given them. Keke could have made this transition much easier, and more widely accepted had he followed and recognized the leadership already present in the communities. We believe that to curb this abuse this is exactly what is needed to be done, recognize the leadership within these communities and follow the long standing, traditional, channels of communication.

Polygamy
When our group decided to look into polygamy as a moral issue within this case we knew we would have to look at it from a distinctively Christian point of view. Not just marriage itself, but the relationships that exist within the communities. Marriage is exactly what links these communities together, in one way or another most of the people in these villages are related to one another. We cannot just walk into this sort of situation and declare that monogamy is the rule, and that all other than the first spouse were illegitimate, that would create chaos within the community as well as cause a great injustice to those women, as widows, with no family, or financial support. They would more than likely be lead to prostitution or starvation. As Christians we are to care for the dignity of the human person and this course of action would not accomplish this goal. If we are to suggest a distinctly Christian solution to this problem the best option would be to recognize the existing structure, not negating any of the prior commitments, but stress the importance of monogamy, just short of insisting that it be the norm.

Women’s Rights
Another issue that this case raises is about women rights. Being a woman seems a curse in this patriarchal and sexist society. How can one guarantee the dignity of woman in society where she is looked upon as a machine for procreation and a force of production? The government is unjust towards them in proposing them lesser wages than they deserve. Moreover, the government does not respect their freedom and responsibility when it imposes a sterilization and contraceptive plan. Some changes need to be made in this Yoruban society. Men and women are created equal. Women are image of God and deserve their human dignity. Although in a patriarchal society a male child is the bearer of family name, girls need to be given the same chance and the same opportunities, especially regarding education and respect in their homes. The dignity of a mother of a wife does not depend on the number of kids she can have, or on how much she contributes to the economy of the family. Also, for Christian tradition, children are not the primary goal of marriage. Children flow from mutual love that God infuses in a man and a woman, and that brings them together. It is hard to maintain such an understanding of marriage and of the dignity of women in a polygamist society. Polygamy needs to be banned from human society. It is one of the factors in the spread of AIDS, due to infidelity, and one of the causes of overpopulation. A ban over polygamy would be a step against overpopulation before contraception.
In addition, the role of women in a society is very vital. As human persons, their freedom and responsibility have to be respected. The government should not impose anything prior to a public consultation. The understanding of the traditional abstinence needs to be retrieved and updated in order to give a chance to women to convince their husband. Also a consensus should be achieved between the government, women and their husbands about the extra work and proportionate wages. The increase of production should not be fostered to the detriment of justice. This justice includes also the preferential option for the poor. The women need wages that allow them to a decent and human life.

Contraception and Overpopulation
Many wrongs are committed in the proposed population control of the government to various groups of people. Not only is contraception is an issue mainly for Catholic Christians, but it violates the bodies and freedom of women, which was discussed in the previous section. The encyclical Humanae Vitae reemphasized the Catholic Church’s teaching that it is intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence. The problem here is that we are facing a serious problem with overpopulation. Overpopulation is a serious concern for it is estimated that by the year 2030 if the trend continues the population of this region will increase from 520,000,000 in 1990 to near 1,200,000,000[16]. If we ignore the teaching of the church and support the enforcement of contraception we may, in the long run, have an effect on Overpopulation. If we follow the teaching of the church then we risk overpopulation. The question here is whether or not is realistic to attempt a natural method like natural family planning. This is where we must gather more information about the local people, and assess their attitudes to such a method. However that only gets us past the method of population control, not the underlying issue, which is the norms that are present within the community that surround the family life and children as have been previously stated. A solution to this latter dilemma

Individual versus Communal Rights
Finally, individual rights seem in conflict with communal ownership and rights. For the Christian morality, individualism and communal tyranny are both sinful. The goal of communal structures is the common good, which guarantees individual welfare. As a military regime, the government has lost its credibility and legitimacy; therefore, it cannot pretend to be an agent of the common good. Personal interests will always motivate whatever decision such a government can take. On the other hand, women and men of this village should acknowledge that overpopulation endangers world welfare. Also, they need to think about poor village that would benefit from the increase of production. Therefore, in order to restore confidence into the government, the military regime needs to be removed and replaced by a government issued from the people.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we acknowledge that there are many pieces of this case that are missing and that could lead to a better understanding and solution of the problem. But still, we believe that the resolution of this case should happen at two levels. First, at the local level, a dialogue needs to start between the different cultures and religions in presence. It can be a dialogue between modernity that is invading the village and traditional culture that strives to preserve itself. Also, Christians – and merely Catholics-, Muslims and Yoruban need to dialogue about the understanding of traditional values and on how to address public issues such as poverty and overpopulation. In particular, the Catholic Church has the task of inculturation with her vision of marriage within this polygamist society. Finally, this case requires a national and international solution. At the national level, the government should be changed and replaced by one elected by the people. National structures can guarantee the common good if they have the people’s approval. And at the international level, consideration should be given to the capacity of the Nigerian people to be responsible and self-governing. International structures should not impose on people foreign decisions without examining the context.

Bibliography

1. Gula, Richard M. Reason Informed by Faith: Foundations of Catholic Morality. New York: Paulist Press, 1989.
2. John Paul II. Veritatis Splendor. 6 August 1993. Encyclicals. 8 December 2004 http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0222/__P6.HTM.
3. The New American Bible. Catholic World Press. 1991.
4. Wolfe, Gudorf, Ethics and World Religions: Cross-Cultural Case Studies, Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1999.
   

Notes:
[1] Mt.5: 48
[2] Richard M. Gula, S.S., Reason Informed by Faith. Foundations of Catholic Morality, p.44
[3] Gen. 1, 26-27
[4] Gula, p.63
[5] Gula, p. 63-74
[6] Gula, p.64
[7] Gula, p.65
[8] Gula, p. 77
[9] Gula, p.79
[10] Gula, P301-305
[11] Gula, p.283
[12] Gula, p.286-297
[13] P.290-297
[14] Wolfe & Gudorf. Ethics and World Religions: Cross-Cultural Case Studies. p. 202-205
[15] Wolfe & Gudorf, P. 202-205
[16] Wolfe & Gudorf, P. 212

walk the talk- June 19, 2005

“[A person] always looks for a model or example to follow. What determines one’s being is the image one adopts.” Abraham Heschel.

happy father's day to my dad, my uncles, and to all the fathers out there. May God our heavenly father bless you. Thanks for caring and protecting us.
" Are not two sparrows sold for a small coin?Yet not one of them falls to the ground without your Father's knowledge.Even all the hairs of your head are counted. So do not be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows." (Mt 10:29-31)

walk the talk- June 18, 2005

“Time is on the side of those who love.”
from unknown source.

EVANGELIZING MISSION IN ASIA TODAY: A DIALOGUE OF LIFE

INTRODUCTION
“Just as in the first millennium the cross was planted on the soil of Europe and in the second on the that of America and Africa, we can pray that in the third Christian millennium a great harvest of faith [my italics] will be reaped in this vast and vital continent [Asia].”[1] This sentence of the pope has stirred some controversy and critique. Many interpreted the “great harvest of faith” as meaning conversion and proselytism in a continent where Christians are accused of coercing conversions from other religions. However, we may understand the pope as urging for an effective evangelization in the pluralistic society of Asia. This “great harvest of faith” points also to a new understanding of the evangelizing mission of the church, which includes not only the proclamation of the Gospel, but also the commitment for the kingdom of God through human promotion, liberation and dialogue. Dialogue seems to sum what evangelization is about. Indeed, dialogue the spirit of evangelization. Dialogue is at the core of evangelization, because the whole history of salvation of is an endless dialogue of salvation between God and creation[2]. The Lineamenta notes it even more clearly:
God’s offer of salvation to humankind is always a question of dialogue…The entire mission of Jesus was constant dialogue with humanity… The whole mission of the church is, therefore, one of dialogue.[3]

Thus, evangelization has to be a dialogue of life, namely a holistic, inclusive, and soteriological dialogue that engages in the quest for fullness of life and dignity of all creatures.
This is particularly the aim of the Church in Asia: “that they may have life and have it abundantly.”[4] For the FABC, evangelization is not a dialogue with concrete human beings shaped by their cultural heritage, their religious traditions, and their socioeconomic backgrounds. Thus in Asia, evangelization is a “Triple Dialogue” of life with these three dimensions of human life[5]. Accordingly, by examining the three components of this Triple Dialogue, this paper aims to show how evangelization in today’s Asia has to be a dialogue of life. Each component, i.e. religions, cultures, and people will be preceded by a view of the realities and challenges in its regards. This paper is based on some documents from and on the Asian Synod of 1998 and other readings from the FABC and various Asian theologians.

INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE AS DIALOGUE OF LIFE.
Since Nostra Aetate, the Church has recognized that other world’s religions have elements of truth or semina verbi that have to be respected, collected and used in building the Kingdom of God. This has been a reality in Asia where the church is blessed and challenged to grow in such a religious pluralism.
Asia is the birthplace of great world religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, Shinto, Sikhism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, traditional religions, and indeed Christianity. It is in this pluralism that Asia tries to maintain harmony and balance. It is in this religious richness that Asia is looking to quench its thirst for fullness of life. The sacredness of the human being, social justice, the essential unity of humanity, and hope in a world where love and justice reign are among the values that these religions foster. They all believe in self-sacrifice, solidarity and forgiveness as sources of peace. They all believe also in a compassionate God who incarnated in Buddha, Siva, Krishna, Jesus, or in the sayings of Muhammad has shown that God cares for the weak[6].
Therefore, interreligious dialogue in Asia has to be a life-giving process, a liberative action, as stated by the pope: “Built in the hearts of people, it is a church that faithfully and lovingly witnesses to the risen Lord Jesus and reaches out to people of other faiths and persuasions in a dialogue of life toward the integral liberation of all”.[7] Evangelization as dialogue carries better the mission of Christ of gathering all peoples in communion, within the Trinity. Interreligious dialogue should take prophetic stances against social sins that alienate the weak; religious anthropocentrism that justifies the tyranny of humans over the nature; and all dehumanizing practices or beliefs. Asian Interreligious dialogue should address religious differences that bring about violence and develop communitarian ethics in which everyone watches over his/her brother and /or sister. This dialogue includes also the sharing of religious experiences as shown in people like Anthony de Mello, Henri Le Saux, and others. Interreligious dialogue as mission is a spiritual experience, because only a mystical approach can let God be God, the Holy One over all religions. A theological-philosophical approach has to support this liberative action and contemplative act, as it has been done by Raimon Panikkar and others who have developed a theology of religions.
Consequently, interreligious dialogue calls the church to liberation, a deep metanoia. The church itself must be a place of dialogue and communion. The new evangelizers should be people who know very well their faith, imbued by the simplicity and humility of Christ, liberated from the western conquistadors mentality; and respectful of and opened to other faiths. Interreligious dialogue challenges the Church’s Christology and practice of conversion and proselytism. How to proclaim Jesus as only savior and life giver without betraying the other partners in dialogue? Despite these doctrinal challenges in the Asian church, interreligious dialogue is essential to evangelization in Asia, and bring new and holistic energy to this liberative mission. It is a dialogue of life that, in addressing religious concerns, it aims to penetrate, improve and learn from cultural contexts that bear those religions. Dialogue with cultures is the next step.

B. INCULTURATION AS DIALOGUE OF LIFE
Asia is a continent of diverse cultures and ethnic groups intrinsically influenced by their religious beliefs and practices. Each ethnic group has its own local languages that carry their worldview and thought pattern. Asian people are very religious and firm believers in transcendental realities. Their worldview is organic, holistic, dynamic and pluralistic, contrary to western architectonic and mechanistic worldview. The Yin-Yang and Tao Te Ching express that balanced, and harmonious Asian mindset. Also, Asian cultures carry a sense of togetherness, unity, community and solidarity. They emphasize family life over individualism, and oneness of the whole cosmos over divisions; despite on going ethnic conflicts in some regions.
Therefore, the evangelizing mission of the church in Asia for the Kingdom needs to penetrate and be penetrated by these cultural realities in order to fully express the Asian face of Jesus. Evangelization in Asia has to be a dialogue of life between Christian faith and Asian cultures. In other words, evangelization has to be humble incarnation or inculturation of Christianity into the Asian context. The Christian faith, though it transcends any culture, is always carried by and lived in a particular cultural context. Inculturation supposes attending to the context and developing culturally contextual or local theologies. To evangelize does not mean to import western theology and cultures, but rather the dialogue of life within the local community between people’s experience and cultures and the Gospel, in order to build up a meaningful faith for the local people.
Moreover, inculturation is not only a liturgical priority or a method of evangelization. Inculturation needs to be spirituality. It is about the whole human life, namely theology, philosophy, psychology, thought pattern, etc. As dialogue of life, inculturation is intrinsically directed toward action, toward social transformation. By inculturating Jesus liberator, inculturation becomes a liberating process itself. Christianity borrows mythologies, stories, values, proverbs, celebrations –like the ancestors’ cults and the lunar year- etc from Asian cultures. Meanwhile, it denounces all dehumanizing cultural oppressions. Through inculturation, women, and the outcastes –Dalit in India and Burakumin in Japan- recover their human dignity; the question of ethnic conflicts like the Tribals in Sri Lanka is tackled. Inculturation needs to address contemporary phenomena such as globalization, individualism, secularism, materialism, consumerism and sex tourism, which are poisoning Asian cultures that promote solidarity and love.
Thus considered, evangelization as inculturation and contextualization calls for autonomy of local churches from western paternalism. Inculturation needs to penetrate theological settings and seminaries, formation of missionaries, and religious life. Local churches should, however, address the question of syncretism and the “purity of faith”. Instead of worrying about how far should inculturation be carried, evangelizers should ask themselves whether Asian people have believed in Jesus as “the Teacher of Wisdom, the Healer, the Liberator, the Spiritual Guide, the Enlightened One, the Compassionate Friend of the Poor, the Good Samaritan, the Good Shepherd, the Obedient One…the Incarnate Wisdom of God”.[8] Only Jesus thus presented can bring hope to Asian people crushed under poverty and suffering, and longing for full and liberated humanity.

C. HUMAN PROMOTION AS DIALOGUE OF LIFE
Asia has a long history of oppression and suffering through western colonization, martial law, militarism, dictatorships, communism and capitalism. As a third world continent, Asia is going through socioeconomic problems, such as the increasing demography, foreign debt, prostitution and sex tourism due to poverty, migration, corruption and injustices, etc. What Asia needs today is an evangelization that brings hope and social change. Evangelization has to be a liberating praxis for human promotion, a prophetic proclamation of the Kingdom and its values of justice and peace for all. Indeed, Jesus came to save the whole human being, with a preferential option for the weak, the marginalized, the sick, the oppressed, and the poor.
Thus as human promotion, evangelization will rise from the Asian people’s experience; as dialogue of life, it will address Asian people’s pain and suffering and generate a genuinely Asian liberation. This liberation is a hic et nunc salvation, since the glory of God is that the human being lives fully and humanly (Ireneous). This liberation is for the young people without future, for women –especially young girls- illiterate and abused, for the many indigenous in search of self-determination, for the minjung in search of justice and human rights. In other words, liberation breaks down margins and all structures of sin that keep Asia poor, and builds up a community founded on reconciliation, peace and justice.
Evangelization in Asia has to develop a new form of compassion, solidarity and charity. Instead of a paternalistic charity, Asia needs an empowering charity that challenges the powerful. Therefore, the evangelizing church must become the refuge of the weak and powerless[9]. Only a disciple church, one that follows Jesus up to the Calvary, can proclaim Jesus the way to the Kingdom. Only prophetic church can foretell about the coming of the Kingdom.

CONCLUSION
The aim of this paper was to show how evangelization in today’s Asia has to be a dialogue of life. Evangelization has to be a dialogue because the whole history of redemption is a dialogue between God and the universe. This dialogue reached its summit in Jesus, the incarnate word of God, fully human and fully divine. It is a dialogue of life, because the totality of life is what Christ offers to the world. Particularly in Asia, evangelization deals with human beings wrestling with concrete religious, cultural and socioeconomic issues. Thus, evangelizing mission in Asia is a Triple Dialogue.
First, evangelizing Asia is engaging in interreligious dialogue as dialogue of life with Asian pluralistic religions. This interreligious dialogue is a forum where all religions share their liberating potentials and spirituality in order to protect human dignity. It creates a communion typical of the kingdom of God. Second, evangelizing Asia is inculturation the Christian faith into Asian cultural heritage. By borrowing symbols, theologies, philosophies, mythologies, worldviews and languages from Asian cultures, the Christian community will let a genuine Asian face of Christ shine and liberate Asian cultures from their dehumanizing structures, beliefs, and practices, by bringing in the values of the Kingdom. Finally, evangelizing Asia is to bring life to all those who are denied human dignity and who live at the margins. Evangelization is a liberating force against political, economic and social structures that, in oppressing Asian minjung they keep Asia under poverty. Evangelization brings hope in Asian women and young people so often neglected. Thus, whether with religions, cultures or poverty, evangelization is a dialogue of life, a holistic liberation for the Kingdom of God. This Kingdom is founded on the belief that Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

[1] John Paul II, “Ecclesia in Asia”. In Origins, vol.29, No.23, p.359
[2] Jacques Dupuis, “A Theological Commentary: Dialogue and Proclamation”. In Redemption and Dialogue ed., William R. Burrows, New York, Orbis Books, 1993, p.125
[3] Kroeger H. J., MM, “Milestones in Interreligious Dialogue”, in Review for religious, vol.56, May-June 1997 p.274
[4]New American Bible, John 10:10
[5] Veliath D. SDB, “Inter-Religious Dialogue”. In Church in the Service of Asia’s Peoples, ed. Jacob Kavunkal, SVD, alii, Pune, Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, 2003, p.336
[6]Therukattil G., MCBS, “The Liberative Potential of Asian Religions”. In Church in the Service of Asia’s Peoples, ed. Jacob Kavunkal, SVD, alii, Pune, Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, 2003, p.350
[7] Veliath D., SDB, “Inter-Religious Dialogue”. In Church in the Service of Asia’s Peoples, ed. Jacob Kavunkal, SVD, alii, Pune, Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, 2003, p.335
[8]D’Sa, F. X., S.J., “Inculturation in Asia.” In Church in the Service of Asia’s Peoples, ed. Jacob Kavunkal, SVD, alii, Pune, Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, 2003, p.315
[9] Bishop Julio X. Labayen, OCD., “Mission in Asia Today: Some Paradigm Shifts”. In Religious life in Asia. Re-imaging Religious Life in Asian Societies, vol.1, No.1 (August 1998), p. 82-83