Reflection on Pre-Cana Seminar
 |
Sta. Cruz Parish: Pastoral Center |
When Gwen and I went to Sta. Cruz Church to attend its Pre-Canna Seminar, we certainly did not expect its topic to be about the controversial RH Bill and the artificial contraceptives that it promotes.
At first, I am thinking about how family planning relates to managing marriage. Mr. Alejandro, the speaker, started discussing about how the population of the country is not even a problem that the government should be addressing. He said that by asking the civilians to use artificial contraceptives, the government is only taking the easier route and not solving the root of the problem at all. When he claimed this, my thoughts started to shift from what I know and the information he was feeding me. While I may not be an Economics major student, I know that the Philippines is not overpopulated though the staggering increase of population is apparent.
 |
With Mr. Alejandro |
According to Mr. Alejandro, the Church endorses natural family planning since it is the healthiest way of employing family planning measures. Further, it does not cause any physical harm on the individuals who decide to use it. I wholeheartedly agree with him on this one. The infamous RH Bill prompted me to know more about the content of the bill and the possible effects it will have on our country. I was shocked when I read about the possible health consequences one will suffer if he/she uses artificial contraceptives.
As a firm believer of life starting at the conception process, I was alarmed to find out that most of the artificial contraceptives such as oral contraceptives (pills) and IUDs prevent the fertilized egg from implanting itself on the wall of the uterus. This process, personally, is not preventing pregnancy at all; it is forcefully eliminating the chances to live of an innocent life. It is cruel and inhumane; it is abortion.
 |
Lecture on the Natural Family Planning |
I previously thought that by allowing the would-be mothers to decide on their own if they have the capacity to raise the children, then the standard of living would surely increase. Individuals who prefer not to have children simply because they cannot afford them need not worry about providing enough sustenance for their families. I thought that poverty might even be alleviated. I thought wrong.
Artificial contraceptives are the government’s solution to poverty. I personally think this is the government’s short-term remedy to the country’s continuing dilemma. This short-range fix would only alleviate poverty temporarily, however, the Filipino culture that it would change would surely linger on. The conservative culture and traditions of the Filipinos would be eradicated, and in its place, would be the hedonistic sexual lifestyle of the community.
I did not really imagined that I would learn so much about the difference of natural and artificial birth planning methods. Moreover, I certainly did not expect my awareness and thoughts of the RH Bill to be exceedingly incorrect. Being a business student, I have always looked on things on the micro- (household) and macroeconomics perspective. I did not realize that I have lost sight of what is morally good and ethical. With the new understanding that I have appreciated, from being a supported of the RH Bill, I have now become someone who shuns the Bill.
Mr. Alejandro told us that the politicians and medical experts who propagate the RH Bill mostly have “something” in it for them; while I reluctantly accept this as a fact (since somehow, I still believe that there is an inkling amount of justice in our political system), I know what he said was probably true.
 |
Outside the Sta. Cruz Church |
Based from my personal experience, I believe that the Church and the advocates of pro-life should focus on delivering the accurate information to the public. Without having access to information, individuals, such as myself, will be easily persuaded to accept and support the usage of artificial contraceptives. That is why the availability of truthful information should be implemented. When the individuals can verify the information, then they can make sound conclusive decisions about the subject matter.
Reflection on Archbishop Cruz's Seminar
 |
| Archbishop Cruz at TYA |
Gwen and I decided to attend Archbishop Oscar Cruz’s seminar on the Yuchengco Auditorium since he was really vocal about his opinions about the RH Bill on media and we thought that by attending his seminar, we could gather more information about his stand on the said Bill. Additionally, his animated persona assures us that the seminar would definitely not be mind-numbing; rather, it would be filled with laughter.
The message from Archbishop Cruz that lingered to me most is, “If you want an easy life, DON’T GET MARRIED!” Honestly, I was surprised when he said this; not because I do not agree with his statement, but because of the way he blatantly delivered this statement. I did not expect a priest, an archbishop like him, would say this about the marriage life.
Archbishop Cruz proceeded to discuss the twelve impediments of marriage. I personally agree with most of his points. For me, individuals under 16 years old are really incapable of sustaining the marriage; further, I believe that as long as the person is emotionally immature, then it would be quite difficult for the person to endure the hardships that are entailed with the married life. At a young age, it cannot be expected for the individuals to think and act maturely. Their mindsets and priorities are still roughly crafted. This is true especially since what I want now is different from what I desire when I was a kid. Some of the things that satisfy me before cannot make me feel contented now. A simple example would be the material things; before, dolls and playhouses make me feel infinitely happy, now, I indulge myself with the innovative gadgets.
The archbishop criticized committing to a person who was divorced or annulled before. He said that the cause of failure of the previous marriage would lead to the decline of the relationship and marriage of the subsequent affair. I thought that there must be a way for the succeeding relationship to work. Personally, I believe in giving second chances. After all, it is possible for the person to change and improve himself before welcoming another relationship. Archbishop Cruz defended his statement by claiming that couples that decided to end their ties could have resorted to all possible measures to salvage their marriage, without ending up in separation. It is true that by divorcing or annulling your spouse, you are inadvertently taking the easy way out. Couples could bravely address their marital issues and exert effort to make the marriage work.
Also, Archbishop Cruz vehemently opposes marriages between blood relatives. He explained that most of these marriages result to offspring who are abnormal. Children born from these families usually are with “defects”. They have illnesses that render them incapable of performing normal activities. The offspring from such marriage are often incapacitated to act the natural tasks of a normal person.
The next discussion that Archbishop Cruz focused on was the symbolisms in the wedding ceremony. He explained that the veil of the bride symbolizes the resources that the husband will provide for the family. The groom gives the “arrhae” to the bride as a representation of his support for his wife and their family.
 |
| Archbishop Cruz |
The Archbishop also highlighted the topic of annulment. He defined annulment as nullifying the union between the husband and wife through the “flaws” of the wedding. By annulling the marriage, the records of the marriage between the couple will not be recognized by the state at all. It was as if they were never married from the start. Annulment, unlike divorce, takes longer time frame for the courts to examine. Archbishop Cruz cited reasons on how annulment can be approved by the courts. Further, he said that these instances could always be given as excuses for the dissolution of marriage.
Personally, I feel that individuals should not enter into marriage if they are not mature enough to handle the trials and difficulties of the union. In wedding vows, the phrase “’til death do us part” is the most memorable for me. The couple should take the announcement of the vows seriously; they should mean what they have claimed. While I am sure it giving up is the easier route, it should not even be an option for individuals who have promised that they will be together until the day they die.
Reflection on Interview
 |
My Uncle Jason and Aunt Genelin |
When we interviewed Aunt Genelin and Uncle Jason, it felt like their relationship is fresh yet stable; they were so carefree and caring for one another that you’d never think they were married for almost 15 years now.
Being Aunt Genelin’s niece and flower girl during her wedding, I never knew that they had long distance relationship before marriage. I have always heard about how long distance relationships are hard to maintain and how the “love” between couples fade because of distance. Of course, it would be romantic to think that as long as the love between a couple is strong enough, they could maintain their relationship, however, I am not really an idealist. True enough, what my aunt and uncle claimed about the difficulties of sustaining their relationship is reality. They had to exert more effort in making the relationship work, it surely required more commitment, and in the end, it became a testimony of how far they are willing to go for each other.
Like any other normal relationships, my aunt and uncle do have disagreements and arguments. According to my aunt, it was not really about their relationship; rather, it was mostly about how she just could not get along with her in-laws. She expressed that she appreciated the advises of her in-laws, however, she does not wish for them to interfere on her relationship with their son; further, it irked her as well when they try to control how she nurtures her children.
 |
| Gwen and I with my Uncle Jason and Aunt Genelin |
I realized, through our interview, that for the relationship to work, it is imperative that the spouses communicate with each other properly. My uncle and aunt claimed that they always talk things through and resolve any conflicts and misunderstandings right away. It is their way of fixing any differences of ideas that they have had. I definitely agree with them. Communication is essential for any kinds of relationships to work. It makes us open to opinions of others, and at the same time, pushes us to share our thoughts as well. Further, communication strengthens the bonds amongst individuals and makes us grasp the differing points of views of other people as well.
When it comes to expenses and financial costs, I was surprised that they do not really divide the expenses. In my family, while I do not know the exact division of costs, I know that my father is the provider of the family. My mom is a practicing dentist, and I know she receives stable income, however, most of the household expenses were paid by my dad. Also, my aunt said that they own joint bank accounts. My dad and mom do own joint bank accounts, but they also have separate bank accounts. Honestly, I do not know which of the two financial arrangements are better. Owning joint bank accounts must mean that the couples trust each other wholly, but does owning separate bank accounts illustrate otherwise? I digress.
I admire my aunt and uncle for spending time with each other through their hectic schedule. Both of them are working; my aunt works for a bank while my uncle helps out in the family business. According to them, having a job is not just for practicality’s sake, but for self-improvement as well. It made their family more financially secured and stable, and it made both of them feel accomplished and contented.
Through their demanding schedules, they can still manage to spend quality time with their children, Jaiverck and Jaslin. Based on their narration, they go out at least once a week, eating out, watching movies, or just hanging out at the malls. Of course, they also some quality time alone, as a couple. It is admirable that even after being married for so long, they are not feeling “sawa” of each other yet. They shared that aside from the frequent dates, they also maintain the sweetness they have even before marriage. They constantly text sweet nothings to each other and they are not shy to express their care for the other person.
I am quite envious of the relationship they share. It was full of hardships and difficulties, but all those challenges assured them of the love they have for each other. Those hindrances made them stronger, and united them more.
Love is not love when it can be easily given up. It is not love when you turn your back on the person you claim you love. It certainly is not love when there is no trust. While I am naïve when it comes to love, I know that any relationship, romantic or otherwise, simply would not just work without any effort from both parties.
