Emmanuel and the politics of presence

SIGNS AND WONDERS DIWA C. GUINIGUNDO

- DIWA C. GUINIGUNDO

A FLOOD CONTROL-THEMED nativity scene is displayed among the entries in the Belen Making Contest at the MBC Media Group building in Pasay City, Dec. 13.

(THE PHILIPPINE STAR/NOEL B. PABALATE)

“Happy birthday, Jesus.” Beneath this familiar Christmas greeting lies a demanding idea: God did not address humanity’s deepest failure from a distance. He did not issue instructions from afar or rely on intermediaries alone. He came near. He entered history. He took on flesh. Emmanuel, God with us, was not an abstraction, a slogan, or a policy statement. He was presence made real, authority made visible, and commitment made costly.

The Gospel of John captures this with stark clarity: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The Logos, or word, did not remain theoretical. After four centuries of waiting, God did not send another commandment or reform agenda. He sent Himself. Salvation came not only with truth, but with proximity.

That choice offers a powerful lens for governance in the Philippines today. If the central failure of humanity required God’s incarnate presence, then persistent national failures —weak institutions, uneven growth, recurring corruption, vulnerability to disasters, and political exclusion — cannot be resolved by plans, budgets, and rhetoric alone. They require a government that is likewise with the people: present in execution, visible in accountability, and credible in leadership.

WAITING, THEN ACTING

Before Christ's coming, Israel endured long periods of conquest, decline, and silence. Institutions weakened. Authority was imposed rather than trusted. Hope narrowed. The people waited.

The waiting ended not with a decree but with action. “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” God entered the constraints of human life — time, space, vulnerability. Presence was not symbolic; it was costly.