The bitter aspirin.

Dear Lord, I have never wanted something so badly in my life. I wanted some petty things back in the past and yeah, some of them were not good for me (I figured a few months later). But this, THIS, *this* particular prayer is really something I want so so so badly (and I don't think it will be bad for me). Lord, please grant this particular prayer.

I want to work as a                  in the                              . You know, yesterday I saw the announcement in their website. When I read the ad, you saw my reaction: my eyes twinkled, my heart skipped a beat and bam! I fell in love with the job in an instant. Oh, how I felt that I am truly meant to be               !

You saw how I obsessedly edited various materials back in college. I edited whatever I caught gaze upon: articles, bulletin posts, teasers, ads in the TV and radio, and practically whatever I saw. Whenever I heard/saw an error in my friends' grammar, "nagpapanting ang tainga ko." A little grammar nazi you might call me, but I also edit myself most of the time.

I edited manuscripts for a few college friends. That I did without pay. I even volunteered to do the editing. I am so passionate at it. You know that because you saw the things I did. I spent sleepless nights editing stuff. You know how much effort and passion I invested to get myself ready for this job. And now, the time has come.

I know it was not an accident when I clicked that link that led me to that website that led to that link that led me to that job vacancy page. You crafted that very moment because you don't play dice with the universe; you don't play dice with me or my laptop. And so with eagerness, I respond to the link's calling; I respond to your calling if this is your will. But I cannot guarantee any certainty at this point in my life. Even when I get the job interview, it won't even be an assurance that I will get the job given that I'm timid and tend to stutter and let's face it, I suck at job interviews.

And so, I am left with my barrenness and lack of ability. Right now I need no one but an all-knowing and all-mighty Friend who never left me in all my challenges in life. Please help me. And yes, I don't mind begging if this career is what is at stake.

*If* this job is not for me, well then... Please turn it around and make it for me. Just kidding, Lord. If this is not for me, I would probably be lonely for a few days. Of course it will be frustrating. When you want something so so so badly and you don't get it, would you have a feast? Of course, you won't. But, this entire experience will be like a bitter aspirin I must swallow: it tastes awful but through it, I shall be well.

I love You, Lord. Whatever kind of aspirin I will swallow.

___________________________________

PS. Lord, just so you know, I asked the help of two of your best friends: your very own mother Blessed Mary and your martyred servant, Lorenzo Ruiz (whose feast day was yesterday). Ha! You can't say no to them, can you!

Quinque viae (2)

In my last blog, I mentioned the first three components of St. Thomas Aquinas' Quinque Viae, or The Five Ways. Here are the fourth and fifth components to complete the five ways to describe God.

Fourth argument: Standard of Perfection (ex gradu)

"The fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like. But “more” and “less” are predicated of different things, according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum, as a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest; so that there is something which is truest, something best, something noblest and, consequently, something which is uttermost being; for those things that are greatest in truth are greatest in being, as it is written in Metaph. Now the maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God" (Aquinas, n.d.).

The fourth statement simply states some things have varying levels or degrees, and thus, a level of perfection exists in them. We think of God as something perfect; if something is perfectly good, then that is His. It is Him Himself. Which was why Leo Trese stated that "Strictly speaking, God is not wise; He is wisdom." In the Bible, it was not stated that God is loving, but there was the very phrase "God is love." It means that perfect Love is God Himself; Love is the very essence of Him. We look at this concept of deity in the same manner.


Fifth argument: Grand Designer (ex fine)

"The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God" (Aquinas, n.d.).

Why is everything so orderly? Back then, it was hard to think that all things in the universe happened ramdomly, without much of a plan or design. And so the fifth argument answers this. The fifth way states that with all this laws existing in nature, there must be a guiding and that somehow planned the grandeur that is the universe. And so this ultimate designer is God.

Quinque viae (1)

I had encountered this lesson four years ago, but it continues to be one of my most loved topics in Philosophy 1. Saint Thomas Aquinas, in his book Summa Theologica, introduced five ways to somehow "prove" the existence of a Deity. This explanation was not meant to be a proof in itself; rather, it tends to exhaust the ways in which God could be defined and described.

I love these five ways because they stand alone; meaning, religion and all deity-related experiences and biases are out of the argument. Even if there were no religion that existed in the world, people could still infer logically and reasonably that such belief in a Deity is reasonable enough and cannot be obsolete.

First argument: the Unmoved Mover (ex motu)

The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God (Aquinas, n.d.).

A leaf lands on grass because it was blown by the wind. The wind blows because of the movement of the earth. The universe (multiverse if you're a modern physicist) moves and moves because it is being moved by something... But there had to be something that started all the moving. This something is the first mover, the sole cause of all movements. And this something, or Someone, is God.

Second argument: the First Cause (ex causa)

The second way is from the nature of the efficient cause. In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossible. Now in efficient causes it is not possible to go on to infinity, because in all efficient causes following in order, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether the intermediate cause be several, or only one. Now to take away the cause is to take away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be no ultimate, nor any intermediate cause. But if in efficient causes it is possible to go on to infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate effect, nor any intermediate efficient causes; all of which is plainly false. Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God (Aquinas, n.d.).

The second argument is very much like the first; they both dwell on the "first initiator" argument. Here, however, we focus on the cause of events rather than motion.  Life has ripple effect on other lives and things have ripple effect on other things as well. The ecosystem is one good example of such. Animals become consumers but also become consumed. Plants consume energy from the sun, then dies and becomes part of the soil in which another life will depend once more. It has been a cycle. But there must be someone or something that did not need any cause. And this is God who practically is the cause of everything.

The third argument: Contingency (ex contingentia)

The third way is taken from possibility and necessity, and runs thus. We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, since they are found to be generated, and to corrupt, and consequently, they are possible to be and not to be. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which is possible not to be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence – which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God (Aquinas, n.d.).

This argument borders on the "limitedness" or being finite of things. There was a time when all these things in the universe existed. That time is now. But these things exist due to something's existence, and this something's existence was due to another thing's existence. There must be one thing that had to exist without the help of any other pre-existing thing. That one thing must have existed before anybody or anything else. This one thing's essence must be to exist. This something, or Someone, is God, who practically existed before anything else did.

(to be continued)