The Background Of Nationalism Theology Religion Essay Example

towards the present and past in order to understand their individuality. His goal is to empower Filipinos to recognize their true selves and claim their own civilization as their own. In 1956, Father Dela Costa was commissioned by the Church to write a pastoral letter regarding the inclusion of Jose Rizal's works, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, in the Filipino students' reading curriculum. It is not widely known, but Father Dela Costa actually had a positive view of Rizal and considered him as a nation builder. He emphasized that Rizal did not blindly love his country and implied that the struggles faced by Filipinos under colonial rule were not solely caused by it. According to Schumacher, the Catholic Church did not view Rizal's books negatively and would not impede the political and social aspirations expressed in his novels.Upon closer inspection, Rizal's novels do not directly criticize the Church but instead shed light on certain issues within it, such as "unfaithful priests" and an excessive fear of saints. It is crucial to understand that these problems do not undermine the entirety of Catholic philosophy. Horacio Dela Costa posited that Rizal aimed to expose crimes committed by members of the Church in order to tarnish its principles. The Jesuit Education emphasizes the integration of morality and intellect, emphasizing the connection between faith and intellectual pursuits. This implies that those who have received a Jesuit education should ensure their moral values are evident in their rational endeavors, using reason to discern right from wrong while appreciating goodness regardless of obstacles. Dela Costa applied this perspective when analyzing Rizal and his two novels, scrutinizing Rizal's motivations through his

writing. It would have been easier for Dela Costa to align himself with the majority of bishops who condemned the inclusion of Rizal's novels in school curricula, as expressed in his pastoral letter. However, Dela Costa opted for a more positive outlook on Rizal's beliefs and viewed them as reflective of his own sense of morality and goodness. He acknowledged that negative aspects were portrayed in Rizal's novels concerning religion, such as corruption embodied by characters like Fr.Damaso and Salvi or Tiago's religious complacencyDela Costa used his intellect and moral compass to delve deeper into Rizal's writings, rather than dismissing them as mere criticisms against the Church. He concluded that Rizal was not anti-Church because his works did not present a negative image of Catholic philosophy. Instead, they exposed injustices and wrongdoing committed by individuals within the Church, regardless of their position. Dela Costa recognized how Rizal portrayed excessive fear towards saints, immoral behavior among spiritual figures, and other unholy matters that portrayed faith in a negative light during that era. While others saw only accusations and criticisms against a powerful institution in Rizal's writing, Dela Costa saw his morality and sense of goodness shining through. It is important to have a realistic understanding of the world where suffering exists. In today's world, people may be tempted to ignore unpleasant things, but a Jesuit education should teach individuals to confront and accept the reality of a suffering world while also finding goodness and God in everything. Dela Costa would not have supported Rizal's criticism of the Church if he did not choose to see the world as a whole with both positive and negative aspects.

He understood that Rizal aimed to address suffering at its core without blaming or accusing the Church for holding a negative view. On the topic of Free Trade and Poverty, Fr.Dela Costa believedDe La Costa's argument was that free trade between industrial and agricultural states has a negative impact on the agricultural state. He believed that negotiations should consider national interests and social justice. Gatdula agrees with this perspective, stating that De La Costa's statements remain relevant in today's context of free trade. De La Costa's past works continue to serve as important models in contemporary society.

Regarding poverty, De La Costa emphasized personal responsibility and urged individuals to make their own decisions and accept the consequences instead of blaming colonial masters or mother countries for their shortcomings. While his words did not directly address poverty among the poor specifically, they still hold significance.

According to De La Costa, individuals have the ability to control their lives and those in poverty should take charge and improve their circumstances rather than placing blame. This viewpoint, shared 40 years ago, highlights the ongoing issue of poverty addressed by De La Costa. He observed that within Filipino culture, there is a tendency to attribute negative outcomes in our lives to others. This is particularly evident in our electoral system where we elect government officials but hold them accountable when they fail instead of recognizing our own responsibility as the ones who elected them.Furthermore, Fr. De La Costa highlights the necessity of combined efforts from every individual for the attainment of economic development in our nation. Although this fact is undeniable, he raises the inquiry as to whether or not each

and every one of us is willing to contribute towards this shared objective.