Bully Joe and His Riders

For the people of an Ole West town called Pueblo Del Diablo, big bad Bully Joe is not only the mayor but the king and the messiah. For his band of horse-riders, his thunder-like voice is authoritative and so powerful. He owns the meanest mouth in town that no amount of mouthwash could cure. His tongue is as deadly as a rattlesnake and the smell of his breath is as foul as a cartful of horse shit and those of a farting skunk combined. This made the big mouth of this balding ol' fellow as threatening and deadly as a lighted bundle of dynamite sticks. He loves to boast all his achievements. He openly and very often claimed that he is a good leader and nobody in town could match him. His diehards would apparently die and kill for him for gold coins either from his own pocket or the town’s coffer.

No ordinary citizen in Pueblo Del Diablo dared to cross his path to contradict him. Much more openly say something messy about him. Not even the sheriff or the local banker, the blacksmith, the guns and ammunitions dealer, the tavern owner including the pimps and the beautiful ladies who sing and dance. He only get advises from the gang members who are close to him. He does not mind what others feel as a result of what he blurted out. There are times that he has the tendency to put in shameful situation even his own men. They are scolded for shortcomings even in public. For him, the only important thing is to say what he wants to say, regardless of the gravity of collateral damage. It does not matter how, when and where did he say it. Much more the consequences of what his tongue just wielded. What is only important to him is to express his mind. No more, no less.

Big bad Bully Joe does not mind if he would be hurting your feelings or emotion and your dignity as a person, especially those who are not from his side or does not believe his politics. Those who do not go along with his group are mercilessly treated like a brutal Apache. They are considered traitors and destined to be hanged or tied in a cactus in the middle of the desert until hungry vultures feasted on them.

That’s Bully Joe for you. The Old West leader who see through his eagle sharp eyes are just two colors: black and white. No in-betweens. “White” are his allies who follow his line of thinking and command, and "black" who does not go with him are “enemies”. May they are criminals, dignitaries or just ordinary citizens.

He does have, no doubt, a good horse sense. A so-called horse sense is a good judgment or sound sense an intuitive skill developed from experience. He initiated progress and development in Pueblo del Diablo but those improvements are not enough. You cannot get respect only on what you do but also on what you say and how you say things. As well as how you treat your critics and others who do not care for what you’ve done.

This is what Bully Joe seems to forget. He failed to value people above all other assets and physical or cultural changes. Because of this, not long ago, he had been abandoned by his faithful and experienced lieutenants and rangers because he is so distant when leading, when pursuing certain mission. Not knowing the disagreements and troubles between his riders behind. Many of them developed thick knees or a feeling of abandonment in the middle of something. Especially every time he aimlessly opens his big bad mouth, spitting fire of arrogance and disrespect of ordinary people and hurting the employees of the US Federal government. Some of his men are also tired of this personality. Some of them too are hurt by such bad manners but the only thing they can do is to protest in silence. Many are either too loyal or just being blinded. Many of them feel that their leader is superior in all aspect, so ahead of them in many ways as a person that they cannot fully cope-up with nor follow. Unlike the dusts on their shoulders and hats that they could easily ward off.

While on their way to fetch a ranking government official from Kansas to visit Pueblo Del Diablo, mean Bully Joe moved too far in front of the pack with his Colt 45 pistol around his waist and a Winchester rifle tucked in a holster below his horse’s saddle. After almost an hour of ride away from his group, Bully Joe just realized that he’s already away from them. He, unknowingly isolated himself as a leader.

The next night, his loyal friends, his trusted men and women mourned for his death. His peers were down with deep sorrow. Across the street, majority of the people of Pueblo Del Diablo are happy and jubilant. Drinks are free at the tavern courtesy of the local banker once badmouthed by their leader. The peasants who are maltreated and his erstwhile ally who parted with him and he once insulted in public brought bread, cheese and pudding. While the sheriff and his two deputies are alert in their post. The whole town was flooded with endless music and dances and a drop of solitude.

Bad old man Bully Joe died. He was shot in the back by one of his lieutenants near the cliff. He was mistaken for an Apache, an enemy. That’s what his most trusted man in the pack informed the town folks…

--------
(Photo: Moneymaker.com)

Two Born Blind Stories

If you do not know Zatoichi by now, chances are you are not closely following this blog or you are not into old martial art movies. He is the blind swordsman and one of our childhood screen heroes. Zatoichi, a blind masseur and a master swordsman, is a fictional character featured in one of Japan's longest running series of films and a television series set in the Edo period. And to know how avid I was as his fan, you my revisit my entry called “Swordsmen in My Memory” two years ago.

In ancient Japan (and even today here in the Philippines) giving massages was a traditional occupation for the blind, since blind persons and masseurs were on the lowest social level, no better than beggars because in said country, I read somewhere, it was common to think of the blind as also being retarded or perverted. They are society’s discards. Just like in Jesus’ time.

This Sunday’s gospel is about a blind man who was healed (John 9:1-41) by Jesus. As we celebrate the 4th Sunday of Lent it would be helpful to think of those things that made us hopeless and the miracles we did not notice. This is where we find the blind man in John’s narrative. The guy was born sightless way and, as far as he knows, no one had ever been healed of being born that way and so he resigned himself to his situation to the point that when Jesus came by, he didn’t even ask for healing.

“How does it really feel to be blind?” I often asked my self when I was young every time I watch my sword-wielding hero on silver screen. “I prefer to be blind if I am that brave and invincible,” I often tell my self, feeding my childish fantasy. It is only when I grew up, raised a family of my own that I realized that in a way, I was also born blind.

Most of us have blind spots, presumptions, ideas and perceptions that we don’t even think about changing. These blind spots are major thorns in our lives. They can cause untold harm not only to others but to inner us. Even a quick reading of today’s Gospel shows us in a graphic way how blind the Pharisee’s were to Jesus and to his work. These religious leaders were leading people into the darkness, not into the light. Their interior lives had become hardened, like platinum bars. They had become so smug and sure of themselves that they were not able to recognize Goodness itself as it was shown to them in the person of Jesus. They were as blind as a person could be.

By the way, in the many Zatoichi films that I’ve watched, little of my swordsman’s past revealed especially how he became blind and how he developed his incredible swordsmanship. I am not concerned with those things anymore, then and now. All I enjoyed was how that blind wanderer played dice, sing and dance, aside from killing the bad guys with his mighty cane sword. How he is helping the people in need unlike the disciples in the gospel who are more concerned on the intellectual problem on why the man is blind than helping him. And Jesus told them that not all pain and suffering is because of sin, some of it is so that God can be glorified.

May this Sunday’s gospel and the Zatoichi story from my childhood days remind us of this lesson: Discovering and accepting our blindness is the foundation for receiving sight from the Lord.

Including our fictitious movie characters and idols...

-------
(Photo : Google Images)

Limping Lumps: Characteristics of Political Broadcasts in OCM

Both our two rival political groups in Occidental Mindoro lump together “communication” and “propaganda” in their separate respective radio programs and stations. And as a result, relevant and important messages mostly fall on deaf ears if not hardly sink in and only taken for granted. The developments and the accomplishments of their bosses that they want to convey, no matter how realistic and commendable those accomplishments are, have been ineffective and irrelevant as far as educating majority of our people on political matters. I assume that the only ones who are intensely and “intelligently” following such radio programs are - though respective production people and anchors may deny it- partisan “hardliners” from both political fences, few “politically- interested” observers like me and thousands of those who just want to listen for cheap entertainment. Or a breather while in the middle of something in their homes and workplaces. This pointless political war make us limp in hardships as a people than sprint towards our common dream of political maturity.

To start with, this reflection paper focuses only on a specific means of media communication but the most potent here in our locality, the radio. This little endeavor is hoped to initiate discussions among local radio practitioners on how to generally transform our current situation from this extremely sad political reality.

We have two main radio entities in Occidental Mindoro with direct control of politicians: Two DWDO FM stations which are operated by the Provincial Government headed by Gov. Josephine Y. Ramirez-Sato broadcasting from Mamburao and San Jose and another two FM stations owned by the local political leader and former congressman, former governor, now San Jose mayor Jose T. Villarosa. They also had studio and transmitter sites in the capital town of Mamburao and San Jose, the most progressive town in the province. These companies practically covered all of Occidental Mindoro and parts of MIMAROPA provinces. The biggest trouble with FM stations is that they are hardly accessible to rural areas and upland communities where majority of people who are in dire need of information resides. Where FM radio, usually electricity-operated, is very rare. The common people, the farmers, fishers and the indigenous peoples, prefer to listen to AM stations rather than FM stations because of the former’s mass appeal. If our leaders really want to empower the masses through information, why did our politicians prefer FM stations than AM? Why they targeted the few politically conscious midtown citizens and its nearby areas (which are FM followers) than the much wider but voiceless rural communities that are hungry of hearing good, apolitical news- aside from basic services such as health and livelihood- from their LGUs? But that’s another story.

How could they, in their respective ways, rightly empower the people through mass media if their PR teams fail to convey public information and communication that would stir the interest of the masses and the general public? If the only thing they could offer are same old issues and concerns and communication approaches, techniques and methods? Programs of such kind becomes senseless as far as educating the public is concerned and irrelevant due to poor selection of stories and items to be presented on air. Most of the topics that they like to discuss can right away be predicted in each episode: from irritating praises for their (political) patron /patroness to personal attacks against fellow but rival broadcasters. Not properly elaborated and discussed are the pressing concerns and burning issues that general public or the majority of the people wanted to know or ought to be informed of. Not to mention other political stunts that these self-acclaimed media people chronically employ. This is because, primarily, their patrons-principal are both guilty of lumping communication and propaganda together like what I have premised above.

Dr. Joseph Goebbels in 1931 said, “Even the most brilliant political theories will have no impact unless they are put in a form that the people can understand.” And I couldn’t argue more because nobody in his right mind wants to understand humiliating words coming from supposedly public servants such as politicians and broadcasters. But before we go further to my suggestions, let us first distinguish “communication” from “propaganda”. Communications aims to empower the audience by giving them information that they themselves can weigh and act upon. On the other hand, propaganda aims to influence, often subvert, the thinking of that audience. Their patron-principal have to decide which of these two is to be prioritized based on their objective in relating to the public. In short, “communication” here deals with two-way process of sending messages and getting feedbacks while “propaganda” is persuasive talking (or writing). Concretely, communication is what the politicians usually do in press conferences while propaganda is what they talked about onstage during political rallies and other campaign sorties.

Thus, it is annoying, if not disastrous, to put the communicator and the propagandist in one radio talk show like what we are hearing in most programs (and stations) nowadays. More so, if the hosts are in a dilemma whether if s/he going to be a communicator or a propagandist. In short, separate these two tasks and delineate these two functions. I am saying this from the point of view of apparently non-partisan listeners which compose the majority of their audience. Especially if they (the anchors or hosts) have two different or opposing intellectual standpoints on issues, other than their partisan political views, due to their different experiences before they jumped in to the job, much more great differences in beliefs and ideology. But it would be good if they adjusted themselves to such reality in gradual manner but it’s not an assurance that their listeners who are privy to their backgrounds would easily understand that. The people will just be confused between “developmental” and plain image-boosting, the kind that utilizes persuasion towards a desired political gain.

Needless to say, the communicator and the propagandist work hand-in-hand towards a common goal. Their loyalty to their patron-principal is ideally second only to their loyalty to God and country, to truth and to the citizenry. To paraphrase Goebbels, the communicator is nothing without the propagandist, but the propagandist is also nothing without the communicator. Having mentioned these, I would like to take off to my second point.

My second observation deals with their means of presentation. Both political camps are confined only to political talk shows or a public affair programs without taking into consideration the fact that majority of the listeners are already tired of talks about politics (or hearing politicians talking) and truly hates programs of this kind. This includes their target audience in far-flung communities and villages. All of their paid or sponsored programs only employ such overused broadcast type and format. I must agree that there’s nothing wrong with the talk show, but why not toy with the idea of trying a new approaches? In our modern world, stereotyping and complacency are considered mortal sins. To many, talk shows, no matter how light when presented, to common people, are overly intellectual or political thus so annoying and disinteresting. Another way of making the talk shows more interesting is to bring them in public places where the setting is similar with that of a press conference and hold it with live audience where they could participate live. By so doing, we already have a captive audience of our own. We must also conduct a sort of research or survey on what topics are closest to people’s hearts and minds in terms of immediacy and relevance. Do not just impose topics or covertly selective. We get our topics from the non-aligned listeners and not just from our avid supporters or party members. We may get it also from events unfolding right at our very eyes. Presenting a sincere and balanced news selection is what the people ask even from a politically-partisan broadcast practitioner. Every broadcaster of whatever political line is duty bound to present factual reports as informative and formative as possible.

Drama is still, no doubt, the most followed type of radio presentation in provinces like us. Advocacy spots also gained momentum lately in national media. All we need is a sustained funding, considerable amount of creativity and a great deal of hard work with our objective of minimizing the boring, non-empowering and the nearly passé talk shows we have in mind.

If the local media war is inevitable might as well humanize it, so to speak. Allow me to conclude by way of saying that we can humanize this media war by way of these simple steps (that I guarantee you are very familiar of): First, by putting into action ethical standards that I need not elaborate for they are already in the KBP Code of Ethics. Secondly, by learning not only from our patrons-principal but even perhaps from their (and our) mortal enemies and remembering that in this world, much with politics, nothing is permanent and no one is indispensible. If we lack intellectual capacity and we are too lousy when it comes to thinking capability. A good communicator or propagandist needs brain than voice, unequalled wit than brute force, credibility than ability. Without those traits, you can easily fall prey to narcissism of your patron-principal.

A principled communicator or propagandist need not to bootlick his/her patron-principal redundantly and wantonly in the entire duration of his program. Without noticing it, we in the process are giving away our own identity, principles and whole self. On the other hand, our being propagandist or communicator is not a license of going overboard. We should always be reminded of our limitations to remember that ours is distinct realm and be aware that our work is a little apart from our principal’s governance and administrative functions. As free and unique individuals, we all have the right to show a little discomfort whenever our patron-principal does something detrimental to dignity of others by, say, being folksy or to convey whatever remarks or gesture of objectivity and levelheadedness, if not moral uprightness. This is to make them feel that we have principles of our own and it’s up for us how to make our patrons-principal understand us. We maybe paid propagandists and communicators but we remain human beings and not worthless puppets. With regards to our enemy, ignoring them more often is still our best option. Shoot the message and completely ignore the messenger. Beyond this is stepping down to their level and if I may add, allowing ourselves to be treated as mere puppets.

In addition, rude remarks and bullying in whatever form is intolerable regardless where it came from and whoever uttered those. Arrogance, as I am mentioning time and again, usually defeats the purpose of awareness-raising propaganda and genuine communication. Arrogance contributes nothing in this particular learning process, in the holistic development of man and in keeping his dignity intact, no matter how demonic that man is. Somehow it would put into jeopardy all the good things we are presently doing and bound to do, especially if our bullying and arrogance became habitual that even the Revised Penal Code and Jesus’ teachings cannot control. Even the bravest knight cannot morally defend an arrogant king unless the former conspire with the latter for mutual gain or in exchange of privileges or favor. In this sense, the communicator and/or the propagandist became slave not only to his/her earthly lord but more so to Opportunism and its evils.

As communicators or propagandists, we are tasked to say what we like so long as we are forbearing. Again, avoid anything that would be vulgar, and try to remain essentially sincere to all our audience or listeners, whether they come from our side or elsewhere….

----------

(Photo: Nazi propagandist Dr. Joseph Goebbels on a radio show in the 40s in Germany. Image from Google)

Transfigured Learning?

Somebody posted this arresting question for a thread in our Facebook group some days back: “Ano na bang nagawa mo sa Mindoro?” (What have you done for Mindoro?) A question addressed to us members. Sensing that the poster-initiator is a teacher by profession, I thought she’s just employing one of the contemporary teaching strategies defined in the 2002 Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) of the Department of Education or DepEd, a method called “Moral Dilemma”. This is a strategy where teachers do a “role-play” and act as devil’s advocates, throw controversial question/s to the class to initiate discussion. This strategy according to DepEd manual and other resource materials is one of the important steps or effective teaching strategy for it gives the pupils and students opportunity to test their reasoning against others or against each other.

So, we members of Unlad Occidental Mindoro Group objectively participated but we did nothing personal against each commenter on the process. We posted our different views and opinions. But I just wonder why rational and assertive people are always mistaken for a hot head (if not a troublemaker) nowadays even how cautious and courteous we are in conveying our views and opinions? Lucretius is right, “What is food to one man is a deadly poison to others.” We are even told to keep our heads cool.

Indeed such gesture of initiating a supposedly intellectual discussion coming from a young mentor is admirable because as we all know, learning goes beyond the four corners of the classroom and it should transcend from structured or formal to popular learning approaches or pedagogies. And for me, Facebook could also be a venue for such learning. She impressed me immediately. But her succeeding post made me realize I was wrong. She apparently just posted it out of the blue. No nothing. Aimlessly at that and I was disappointed.

The foundation both of learning and of faith are exchanges toward changes in status or figures. Next Sunday, March 20, is the second Sunday of Lent and the gospel highlights the transfiguration event on Mount Tabor. In the transfiguration of Jesus, apostles Peter, James and John are made to have a sneak preview, just like in a movie trailer, of what Jesus exchanged for their sake, and the Father asks them to make an exchange. Rather than listen to Moses and Elijah, they are now to listen to Jesus, the new Moses and final prophet. The voice of the Father is heard, “This is my beloved son listen to him.” Gradually, the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant is taking place. This is the new moment for their faith for the apostles learned two important things: to follow the law (Moses) and to be witnesses or prophets (Elijah).

When we were students, we are taught by our teachers that there are 6 objectives why books and other reading material are used as learning tools: to inform, entertain, persuade, describe, narrate and criticize. (“Reading Links Teachers Manual” (p.129); by Maria Lourdes B. Aguinaldo, Editor.) But if we look deeper, such objectives are also in the ingredients if not the main menu of dishes that the popular media is putting on our table today. This includes the electronic media and specifically, social networking sites such as Facebook. The six objectives, in a text book, must be complete and one cannot stand without the other.

And just like in DepEd’s BEC teaching strategy, this is the “moral dilemma”, the “teaching strategy” that God laid for us. To follow His teachings is the most fundamental education a Christian could ever learn. May this process and Transfiguration story be the turning point in our lives this Lent.

If life is all about exchanges, faith and learning as life dimensions are also about exchanges and changing figures for the better…

-------------

(Photo : Saint Joseph College Seminary (SJCS) students)

Ash Wednesday and Clint Eastwood

Ash Wednesday is fast approaching and it’s on, you’ve guessed it right, Wednesday, March 9! You know, I hate attending the masses on Ash Wednesday because of long and boring waiting hours of falling in line twice, one for the communion and the other for distribution of ashes. And despite of this, I have been religiously (no pun intended) attending Ash Wednesday masses since my wife and this job got me some 19 years ago. Though not considered a Holy Day of Obligation, all Roman Catholics are encouraged to attend the Mass marking the beginning of the Lenten season.

When I was a teenager, I’d rather watch outlaw Josey Wales ride his horse and draw his two guns as fast as lightning than witnessing Fr. Juvenal “Bunny” Caoili, SVD (May his soul rest in peace. He passed away last Feb. 27 at the UST Hospital after suffering from cardiac arrest. ) dip his right thumb in the ashes, making the Sign of the Cross on each person's forehead, and say (in Tagalog): "Turn away from sin and be faithful to the Gospel."

“The Outlaw Josey Wales” as what movie addict like me would recall is a 1976 film about a Missouri farmer joins a Confederate guerilla unit and winds up on the run from the Union soldiers who murdered his family. It was directed and starred by US actor turned politician, Clint Eastwood. Yes, the same Eastwood who said: “I've never met a genius. A genius to me is someone who does well at something he hates. Anybody can do well at something he loves - it's just a question of finding the subject.” I told you a while ago, I hate going to Mass on Ash Wednesday but I’m still doing it well. Eastwood, perhaps, finally found his elusive “genius” in me (Ahem!).

Seriously, even though we love our job the things we hate come along the way. You might be as famous director as Clint Eastwood and you are working with the actors and crew that you hate. Or you might be a broadcaster or a propagandist or a PR person of a politician that must convey overly politically stuffs to bootlick your patron that you are sick of airing over and over again. But instead of dropping it hook, line and sinker, it would make a genius out of you to just get over with it objectively and upright.

It’s a tall order but the first thing to do is NOT to hate anything or anyone. But let us be constantly reminded during private moments with ourselves that we need to do those things we hate to do because of certain situations that we are in. We have to do it and we are making history out of it, a challenge that we have to struggle in every minute of our lives to see how good we are.

Here is little Catechesis: The Church emphasizes the penitential nature of Ash Wednesday by calling us to fast and abstain from meat. Catholics who are over the age of 18 and under the age of 60 are required to fast, which means that they can eat only one complete meal and two smaller ones during the day, with no food in between. Catholics who are over the age of 14 are required to refrain from eating any meat, or any food made with meat, on Ash Wednesday.

But it’s important to know that these- fasting, abstinence and doing the things that we do not like- aren’t about punishing ourselves or making ourselves suffer. Most of the time, saying “no” to our every comfort and convenience is a “yes” to the One who showed genuine love by washing our feet and perished on the cross. To turn away to the things that divides our thoughts, hearts and whole being.

May this season of Lent I may find ways not to truly hate, but to do things as brave and cunning as the outlaws in cowboy movies like Clint Eastwood’s “The Outlaw Josey Wales” …

-----
(Photo Google Images)

Not a Feminist

In a way, I feel that I should not be the one writing this for I am not a feminist and obviously not a woman. Anyway, I am just doing this to give thanks to four important women in my life: my mother, my wife and two daughters. I look forward seeing my girls, Sophia and Anawim, fighting for women’s integral emancipation when they grow old. It’s up for them if they want to be feminists or not. Being a lay worker of the Catholic Church, you can accuse me from this point on of having “anti-feminist” stance and I wouldn’t mind for it maybe true.

March is the commemoration of the Women’s month marking the economic, political and social achievements of women all over the world. Each year round around the globe, International Women's Day (IWD) is celebrated March 8. Organizations, governments and women's groups choose different themes each year that reflect global and local gender issues. Many of them preferred to ‘localize’ their own themes to make them more specific and relevant.

The IWD theme for 2011 as prescribed by the United Nations (UN) is this: “Equal access to education, training and science and technology: Pathway to decent work for women”. The first IWD event was held in 1911 so this year, 2011, is its Global Centenary Year.

I just hope that someday, my two daughters will not join radical feminist groups attacking religious institutions, just like what happened in March 8, 2000 when a group of militant feminists in Montreal, Quebec, set burning crosses on the steps of a Roman Catholic church as a part of a wider ransacking of the building following an IWD march. Burning of crosses is a patented action contributory to the dreaded cult Ku Klux Klan, by the way.

Over the years, feminists have successfully spread their ideology of women’s empowerment through positions of influence in academia, politics, media and the entertainment world. Here in the Philippines, women’s groups, being NGOs and political parties, continue to gain prominence over the decades. Women groups and feminist organizations sustaining to criticize, sometimes mock the Church over issues such as reproductive health. They continue to defy the teachings of the Church by distributing condoms on Valentines’ Day, by cheering on that sacrilegious act at the Manila Cathedral last year. All of those pro-RH Bill stunts were done in the name of women’s rights. Anyone who is not supportive of their stance is considered “anti-feminist”. But in my case, let it be. And taking the risk of getting the ire of some militant quarters, here’s an appropriate quote to drive my point: “Whatever positive image the word feminist may have had, it has been tarnished by those who have made it their own, and I, for one, am content to leave the militants in full possession of the term [feminist].”— Dale O'Leary in her book “The Gender Agenda: Redefining Equality” (p. 23)

Definitely there is no monolithic women's movement and there is no monolithic women's agenda. The current feminism – be it Christian, Catholic, Wiccan, Pagan, Marxist or almost any other kind- is merely a consequence of modern liberalism that demands the replacement of absolute moral standards. Nobody could rightly claim that theirs is authentic or genuine.

Since I am not a feminist (and as I said, some quarters may tag me as “anti-feminist”) I am just wondering, what does a woman can offer to society and to others that is uniquely feminine? For me, it is feminism is when girls demand to be treated better, resisting predatory sexual attitudes and behaviors at home and workplaces and elsewhere. Feminism is when male and female are not discriminated in politics, economics and other social spheres. Feminism is when women say no to being reduced to service counters for men. Feminism is when women whisked off the dirt of self-hatred caused by a society which makes them feel bad about themselves with its emphasis on being famous, rich, slender, fair, hot and sexy. Feminism is also about modesty and decency. But that’s feminism for me no matter how narrow and disturbing are my definitions.

I told you, I have a very limited, weird, and you may put it as dangerous, view of feminism. If I may reiterate, I dream that my two daughters would someday embrace the full richness of their femininity seeing themselves not as jigsaw puzzles to be solved but as hammers and anvils or concrete answers to many hindrance and bottlenecks that beset our culture. That, rather than being ashamed of those qualities that deeply defines it, they would embrace their sensitivity, maternity and receptivity. That in the quest for equality they would not seek to ‘masculinise’ their personality, but rather they would seek a relationship of complementation (‘complementarity’) with men.

During my days in human rights advocacy works, feminism and women’s rights deals only with equality for women, equal treatment under the law, equal education, equal opportunity, equal dignity and respect. But today, based on my following of current events, I discovered that this brand of feminism had been almost totally superseded by the ideology of radical feminism, particularly Marxist feminism. The philosophy of equality-based feminism is a passé already, from my view point. Women rights advocates today no longer interested in discerning the important role of women in Philippine society based on our own culture and tradition, on the effects of contraceptives and abortion, on the complementary role of father and mother in parenting, and all they want to discuss is the total liberation of women. They are more of a revolutionary than a reformist.

If women hope to improve their status they must embrace their womanhood and those qualities that mark their true genius as women. Equal, but not the same as men, capable of bringing something unique, distinct and essential to human relationships and interaction. I repeat, forgive me for I am not a feminist nor a militant and a radical. Not anymore…

------
(Photo: New Centrist Files)

EDSA Questions, Whatever

Is the 1986 EDSA People Power relevant to Occidental Mindoro? Are we, people of Occidental Mindoro, able to nourish and flourish the seed and richness of such great historic event and spirit? All I know is there are college students today, when asked questions such as these, would automatically quip, “Whatever!”

On the other hand, is Ferdinand Marcos for you (based on whatever and whichever information you have) a deliverer from under development or a dreaded dictator, or both? All I know is there are a lot of politicians that learned a lot from him because they went through the same channel.

To describe in a sentence or two the political stint of Marcos, he began his career with the murder of Julio Nalundasan, his father’s political rival, in 1935 and ended with the assassination of Benigno S. Aquino, Jr. in 1983. Though he denied his participation is said killings, many people believe that he had a personal hand on these. Those who gathered at EDSA 25 years ago today believe that his entire political life was based on fraud, deceit, and plunder, and his two decades as president have come to epitomize the worst excess of autocratic rule.

Though Marcos and his local allies allegedly masterminded election frauds such as ballot switching and despite his generally perceived notoriety, his first term as head of state was not a bad one. He allocated a large sum of budget for improvement of infrastructure such as buildings, streetlights, recreation centers, among many projects. Based on such performance, especially infrastructure, therefore Marcos was re-elected to a second term.

Under Marcos, the heydays of clannish system in Philippine politics began. This is exactly the same situation we are experiencing in Occidental Mindoro today. The clannish political system still exists. And that was no longer Marcos’ fault. It’s my fault as a voter and as a citizen. It is our fault. To many, especially for those who benefit from a politician, it does not matter if his/her patron is a bureaucrat- capitalist as long as s/he delivers visible projects such as infrastructure.

After the so-called EDSA Revolution, almost all national, provincial and municipal officials were replaced by President Corazon Aquino as Officers in Charge (OIC). Peter O. Medalla, Jr., became the province’s OIC Governor. Unlike in Oriental Mindoro, where high tension situation ensued between OIC-Governor Benjamin “Chippy” Espiritu and the incumbent Hicoblino Catly, the transition between Madalla and Arsenio Villaroza became peaceful. Villaroza was a political ally of Marcos and served as governor from 1960 to 1986.

Medalla is a protégée of Vice President Salvador Laurel and at the same time one of the officials of United Democratic Opposition (UNIDO) in the province. Remember that Aquino and Laurel, though the former was a Lakas ng Bayan (Laban) bet, as part of agreement then of the two political parties, both campaigned under the Lakas-UNIDO coalition. In the 1988 regular election, Medalla became Governor together with Josephine Ramirez (now Sato), a lawyer by profession, as Vice Governor. And the rest became history for the San Jose born lady politician.

Try to imagine the fundamental events, the current issues that we are facing today in the province, the socio-political, economic and cultural realities in the province, and ponder on these questions: Are we ready to honor the memory of EDSA by pursuing transparency in governance regardless who will be side swept in the process? Are we learning and spreading its lesson by amplifying the voice of the silent majority than the authoritative voice of the politicians? Are we pursuing initiatives for change without political leanings? Are we actively living the values of EDSA in our community, work places or whatever we do here at Facebook? Do we have inspiring and deepening commitment to such spirit by focusing on the things that unite us instead of those that divide us?

And answering “Whatever” to these questions would lead us to nowhere as a people …

------
(Photo: Google Images)

Friends Augustine & Jerome

Saints Jerome and Augustine never met – not unlike many of our Facebook friends today - but they developed a cordial respect for each other despite their serious differences in views and opinion as extensively presented here. As a scholar, St. Jerome was best known for his exegetical studies chiefly to his revisions and translations of the Bible. Some early theologians said that Jerome missed being a theologian by not applying himself in a consecutive and personal manner to doctrinal questions. In his controversies he was simply the interpreter of the accepted ecclesiastical doctrine. On the other hand, in Augustine, inferiority in breadth and originality of view is most evident.

The lengthy discourse of the two great Church’s doctors started when Augustine, in a friendly manner, criticized Jerome for some phrases of the latter’s translation of the bible. During those days, letter delivery was a haphazard process and letters were considered public domain, just like our modern-day social network shouts or tweets or anything posted in our walls that can be viewed by others. Augustine’s letter took almost 10 years before it landed on the hands of Jerome. It had been read and copied along the way. In fact, it would seem, according to the book “If Augustine Were Alive” by Theodore Tack, OSA, that Jerome got one of the copies and wasn’t even sure it was from Augustine. Jerome wrote a rather blistering letter in reply which reached Augustine in just few months. Jerome was over assertive in his every conviction and because of this he and his former friend, Rufinus, parted ways over doctrinal differences.

How Augustine of Hippo replied to Jerome of Bethlehem is admirable: “I shall most gratefully receive a rebuke offered in such a friendly way … If I receive your correction calmly as medicine, I shall not be pained by it … And even though because of natural or personal weakness I cannot help feeling saddened … it is better to put up with the pain while the abscess on the head is being healed, rather than not be cured so as to avoid the pain.” Indeed, as friends we must be willing to accept correction live by it, as well as praise and appreciation.

Despite the fact that these two saints never met, they have the highest respect for one another and their succeeding exchanges showed real friendship despite occasional misunderstandings and contrasting opinions. That was because both Augustine and Jerome clothed themselves with humility. Many of our “friends” during our discussions here at Facebook are not doing the same. Many are getting worse everyday and not changing their ways!

Pride attacks our humility like in a deadly, senseless war. Pride is the most fundamental enemy not only of humility but of friendship. As one of the 7 Deadly Sins, Pride can be categorized into 3 demons, err… dimensions: pride of material possessions, pride of origins and pride of personal talents. Pride makes us rude and arrogant, negative qualities that we all hated in an acquaintance.

In his “Sermon 137” (nos. 3, 9), Augustine reminded us that, “Pride lurks even in good works, seeking to destroy them.” But many proud Facebook users, boastful as they are, hate quotes of wisdom from men and women of faith like Augustine and Jerome…

------
(Photo : Googleimages)

All About Love, Almost, Again

To you young lovers out there, behold! I am in no way a certified lover of romantic stories or movies neither I’ve never been into buying chocolates and roses when I was a teenager. As I grow old, I become a learner. By the way, this entry is a follow-up to my last year’s V-Day post that can be revisited here.

To be honest, even today, I still grapple with the concept of love and romance or its combination, romantic love. All I know is love elicits reaction that cannot be equaled by and compared to any other human emotions. And ultimately, this is expected to lead us to being with one flesh to someone and guide us to marriage. It can also be an experience of learning for our next encounter with it. It can make us fearless and courageous to commit ourselves to another human being, to borrow the familiar tagline of DWRR 101.9, “for life”. As such, if you’re a girl and your friend curiously asked you this between giggles, the day after your honeymoon: “Have you already lost your virginity?” you will answer back madly (perhaps shyly or proudly): “Hell, no! I voluntarily gave it away!”

Many young people who were steadies somewhat confused between “feeling good” and “falling in love.” (I have reservations with the term “fall in love” but I explain that later.) Lovers or sweethearts struggle to change the other by setting rules taken from each other’s “likes and dislikes” lists, aiming for the relationship to last. They work hard to be comfortable and compatible with each other. But most of the time, young lovers end up with a break-up because such “rules” are broken by either or both of them a consequently lead to limbo, of losing one’s own identity. Love, romantic or otherwise, can be defined radically like this: “When two unselfish people who are deeply aware that love or romance is not for personal excellence nor beauty and aesthetic value that are hinged on commercialism.” So, selflessness has a huge and workplace because humanity by and large is taken with romance and romantic love. Selflessness make love gets stronger everyday.

Every time I hear the old song “When I Fall in Love” being played, I often wonder why there is such English phrase “falling in love”, where in fact true and genuine love is not something to “fall” into. True love is not the bottom of a cliff but the roots and branches of a life-giving tree near it. “God is love”, this strong statement also shows us to whom, aside from each other, to cling to when the relationship is on the rocks. But believing in love as well as God is not enough. And you will be able to find them most of the time in the most turbulent flight of your life. Truth to tell, love comes your way even if you do not find it.

On the occasion of Valentine’s Day on Monday remember that when you love, you cling to each other, to other people, to community and to God roots and branches…

-----
(Photo from Googleimages)

Not Apart, But A Part*

The saddest news story that I’ve stumbled upon the net in the last few days happened in Sidney but I had a feeling that some sectors in Philippine society would like to push the issue of legalized euthanasia for public debate sooner or later. Though it happened some years ago, not unlike the Reproductive Health Bill, this issue will ultimately take the center stage, stir public debates and will haunt us as Filipino believers and citizens in the years to come. Like a tsunami from far away seas that ripple down to foreign shores.

The tragic drowning of a toddler diagnosed with Rett syndrome, a disorder that often leaves patients with severe physical and intellectual disabilities, found a “great irresponsibility”, according to a lengthy investigation of authorities, on the part of the parents of two-year old baby named Maia Comas. Two months before her death, her parents, 36-year-old Pablo Comas and 31-year-old Samantha Razniak were very disappointed with the diagnosis which stated that their daughter having said incurable but non-terminal disease.

Ms. Razniak rattled government social workers by telling them: “Do you understand that she will grow into a young woman and have the mind of a 2 to 10 year old. The head, hands and feet all stop growing. I don’t want to see my daughter become a monster, to become ugly… I’d rather her die now than die slowly.” She continued by saying, “I want to get on with my life and not see all this ugliness – clinics, home disabled people, doctors.” Mr. Comas felt much the same. He once asked a social worker: “Why do they keep children with these disabilities alive? It doesn’t seem fair on the children.”

Why am I imparting you this? On Friday, February 11, 2011, the 19th World Day of the Sick will be commemorated. Catholics celebrate the event along with the Feast of our Lady of Lourdes. In his letter to the bishops of different dioceses, Fr. Luke Moortgat, Executive Secretary of the CBCP-Episcopal Commission on Health Care, encouraged them to establish diocesan and parochial commission for the handicapped, sick, elderly and dying. He added that, “This will surely serve as strong motivation for us all to care more for those who are now the most forgotten and neglected in our society”. This could be materialized by organizing the so-called 1% Movement from the ranks of professionals geared towards caring for said neglected sectors of our society.

Like Maia Comas, regarding children with incurable diseases, the clergy and lay people are requested to organize the preparation and administration of the sacrament of confirmation for the children with terminal illnesses that could also be a little sign of concern of parents who suffer much.

In his Message Pope Benedict XVI emphasized this challenge:”Dear brothers and sisters, for this World Day of the Sick, I also invite the political authorities to invest more and more in health systems that are a help and a support for the suffering, above all the poorest and the most needy …” But remember that the recently declared over-all champion when it comes to serving the sick is none other than Mother Teresa of Calcutta (1910-1997; beatified in 2003; feast day September 5) who was found on the streets washing the wounds of the lepers. And this is what she taught us that, “One of the greatest diseases is to be nobody to anybody.”


BXVI also invites us to reflect on the mystery of suffering, be sensitive to the sick, care especially for those who suffer, both individuals and society must join hands towards this end. The social teaching called Spe Salvi (No. 38) has this to say : “A society unable to accept its suffering members and incapable of helping to share their suffering and to bear it inwardly through ‘com-passion’ is a cruel and inhuman society."

Just as cruel, irresponsible and selfish as the parents of a that lovely cherubim from Australia named Maia…
--------

(*From the title of CBCP-ECHC Letter. Photo: AP)

Respect Life, Regardless

February is Pro-Life month in the Philippines. Pro-life Philippines Foundation together with the Episcopal Commission on Family and Life (ECFL) and Couples for Christ Foundation for Family and Life (CFC-FFL) are spearheading various events nationwide to promote pro-life family values among the people. Near the entrance of the Saint Joseph Cathedral here in San Jose, anti-abortion photo exhibit can be seen by the Mass-goers and the public in general. Series of related activities aimed to highlight the value of the family and sanctity of life were laid by parishes in Occidental Mindoro. On Sunday, February 6, is Pro-Life day in the Philippines.

February as Pro-Life month was declared by the late President Corazon Aquino in 1987 when she issued Proclamation 214 stating, “February is Respect and Care for Life Month”. It is worthy to note that the celebration centers only on the aspects of abortion and euthanasia. While I recognize abortion, euthanasia and death penalty as different concern, all of them point to the same fundamental value: safeguarding the sanctity of life. But here in the Philippines, little is said on an equally important but controversial, issue of death penalty or capital punishment. While Catholics in general are battle-ready to defend our stand on these two life-threatening issues, the issue of death penalty is also part of it and it should not be overlooked in our present pastoral concerns.

Allow me to begin by telling you a story about a man who was sentenced to die by lethal injection in Texas on October 26, 2004. A book called “A Saint on Death Row” by Thomas Cahill centers on Dominique Green, 30, an African-American and the latter’s conversion from an angry and embittered boy to a man of forgiveness, compassion and generosity. Based on the book which was reviewed here, Green created a community among these isolated and desperate men, helping them to forgive, advising them on their legal rights and teaching by his own example. Green’s last message to the author is this: “What is important about a life is not its length but its intensity and direction.” Green maintained his innocence until the end but it is viewed that contributory to his execution was his being poor and black, unable to hire good lawyers and therefore unable to prove his innocence. That’s already Texas, how much more here at home?

With the rising heinous crimes in the country today, specifically the recent brutal killings of car dealers Emerson Lozano and Venson Evangelista, some sectors of society clamor for the re-imposition of death penalty. But many believe that the poor and the powerless will only be victimized by said proposal of re-imposition. In the 1998 data of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) showed that more than half of the convicts earned less than the government mandated minimum wage. In a survey conducted among 425 convicts that year, 105 or 24.7% were agricultural workers, 103 were construction workers, 73 were transport workers, and 42 were in workers in sales and services. Only 6% finished college while 32.4 % finished various levels of high school while the remaining did not go to school or have finished only elementary or vocational education. I am sure that this trend stays with death penalty around.

In short, social conditions of poverty and injustice which often provide the breeding grounds for serious crime. With the re-imposition of death penalty we opted not to consider Jesus in our practical and civic decisions and undertakings. Gut-level reactions may cry out for vengeance, but Jesus' example in the Gospels invites all to develop a new and different attitude toward violence. The education we got, especially from Catholic schools and our faith, encouraged us to embody Jesus' message in our everyday tasks as public servants, as citizens.

The United States Catholic Bishops’ Conference (USCBC) in November 1994 issued a statement called “Confronting a Culture of Violence - A Catholic Framework for Action” stating that, "Increasingly, our society looks to...increased reliance on the death penalty to deal with crime. We are tragically turning to violence in the search for quick and easy answers to complex human problems. A society which destroys its children, relies on vengeance fails fundamental moral tests....We cannot teach that killing is wrong by killing....This cycle of violence diminishes all of us—especially our children."

That’s the call from America. Down here in the Philippines, this year’s theme and call for the celebration is, “Filipinos, Unite for Life”.

------
(Photo : Staticbuyit.com)

A Greenhorn Once

It was my 12th birthday when I watched “The Green Hornet” at Golden Gate Theatre along Gen. Dunckel Street here in San Jose, Mindoro. I remember that Bruce Lee, my childhood movie hero, had been long dead when the original film was shown. As a gift, my uncle gave me two pesos so I quickly ran across the street, lined towards the petite, old, fat lady with a big mole on her right chin who was inside the ticket booth. As I have told you before, aside from my favorite swordsmen, Bruce Lee, the first Chinese fist that shook Hollywood, also became part of my childhood memories. His last film, “Enter the Dragon”, has a little connection with important family predicament we are currently in.

If it’s Lee, it’s got to be martial arts all the way and the philosophy behind it in part. Because of Kato (Lee, as co-star), “The Green Hornet” – adapted from a radio serial in the ‘30s and TV show in the ‘60s – became popular in widescreens especially in Asia (During our days, even the 1974 ABC championship games were shown in theaters).

Today, January 23, is my birthday and the re-make of “The Green Hornet” is showing in major cinemas in Manila for five days now. According to reports, the film is raking money from the viewers and still a top grosser in the US and elsewhere. The picture sold about $34 million worth of tickets during the three days beginning January 14, 2011, said its distributor, Columbia Pictures. “The Green Hornet” 2011 edition is directed by Michael Gondry, starring Seth Rogen as “Britt Reid”, the callow cowboy, and the new “Kato”, his driver-mechanic and side-kick, is Jay Chou. Seth Rogen also wrote the story.

Based on what I’ve just seen from its short trailer on TV and reading from film critics throughout the net like Florence Waters of UK-based “The Telegraph”, the new “Green Hornet” is no longer Karate neither a Kung Fu oriented flick unlike the original. According to some movie critics, that’s where the big disappointment lies. The 3D gadget-weapons, SFX and such dimensions in this movie kicked into limbo the martial arts and martial art actors all the way. When I was young, the combination of body, mind and spirit is more important than any device, apparel or gadget.

Those were the days when I was still a greenhorn.

In this new version “Kato” is played by Taiwanese musician Jay Chou. In real life Chou can play piano, guitar, cello, flute, zither and jazz drum – but people doubt if in real life he can do push-ups using only his two fingers or break a wooden board using his bare fist.

What movie buffs like most about the original characters of “The Green Hornet” was their message: real super-heroes are not ego-centered individuals who don fancy costumes; they are clever but quick and humble. They use their inner-strength and they bow before they leave the crime scene. The people who first brought us “The Green Hornet” showed us and conceived and brought to world a martial arts hero in Bruce Lee. And the new “Green Hornet” gave us its exact opposite that almost made Lee and other martial artists who passed away rise from their graves.

But maybe times are changing now. People love gadgets more than their inner and physical strengths. People love machines and devices more than their fellowmen. There are instances that teen-agers are stabbed to death by snatchers for holding on to their I-pods and modern cellular phones. They will keep their gadgets even more than their dear lives. Or even kill to have them.

Or perhaps that’s really how things are today. I do not understand it because maybe I am getting old. Youngsters may call it generation gap but allow me to simply put it this way: I am no longer a greenhorn…

--------
(Photo from Google Images)

The Pacquiao-Marquez III That Never Was

I would rather see Manny Pacquiao fight against Juan Manuel Marquez than Shane Mosley. I may be wrong but I think that the Pacquiao-Marquez three-peat would surely add more emotion and drama and a great prelude to Pacquiao-Mayweather, the most anticipated fight in boxing history. It’s a dream fight where practically all of us in Boxinglandia would be very hungry to witness. Mosley is not the popular foe against our hero. But no doubt, Mosley is willing to fight and had a chance, no matter how slim, against Manny. (Remember that in boxing, a lucky punch can change everything by just a wink of an eye.)

In Filipino billiards and pool parlance, the recent matchmaking “shot” made by Bob Arum and Freddie Roach is called “plesing” (actually “placing”). It is a shot when the object ball is rolled or “placed” on a safe side. I am wondering why Mosley, with his age (he will be only 4 months away from his 40th birthday when he climbs the ring on May 7 in Las Vegas) and his lackluster performance against Sergio Mora that ended with a worth-yawning split draw, in Arum’s nose in this very hour, Mosley is the worthiest fighter among the three contenders in Juan Manuel Marquez and Andre Berto (27-27-0; 21 KOs). Mosley, no doubt, was a great fighter but his days are now over. While Berto on the other hand is just still in the middle of his career and still has a lot of punching ahead of him.

If only Arum were a painter, he is now painting a tiger out of a kitten model. In his recent public appearances, he’s falsely projecting Mosley as the type of opponent who can beat Pacquiao and the one that could generate large pay-per-view sales. But Arum and company just gave me and my drinking buddies something that we do not truly want. Well, majority of the Filipino fans, on the other hand are not mindful of matchmaking and other down-the-ring intricacies. Money matters in boxing such as these are immaterial to the ordinary Filipino boxing fanatics, it seems. What is of utmost importance for us is seeing our boy win and if possible, via the most spectacular victory in the sport: a brutal knockout.

But why I pick Juan Manuel Marquez over Mosley? First, I believe that Manny would win over Marquez and it will turn out to be tougher than the impending duel with Mosley. That man from Mexico who reportedly drinks his own urine will surely give the congressman from Sarangani couple of powerful combos and counterpunches. Second, and this is important : Marquez and Pacquiao have something to settle, to prove to themselves and to their respective countrymen.

The Pacquiao-Marquez III, for me is more emotionally-charged than what we are about to witness in five months time. True, Marquez was mauled by Floyd Mayweather,Jr. in their last bout at the MGM Grand Garden Arena in September 2009 but if the rematch did materialize and Manny won against Marquez - especially if via early round KO - this would add excitement to the much-awaited brawl between Pacquiao and Mayweather. I believe that the Marquez-Pacquiao trilogy will be entertaining and more enticing to the general public that the recent match booked by Arum, et al.

Maybe Manny and Floyd, Jr. are not really meant for each other (?) but let us all hope against hope.

Though Marquez acknowledged Manny as a great fighter, he said before his fight against Mayweather that, “He (Manny) does not want to fight me. I want the best pound-for-pound boxer, bring in Floyd Mayweather Jr.” Marquez wants the world’s boxing superhero very badly for the latter snatched the former’s WBC super featherweight title. That was three years after that controversial split decision in May 2004. Marquez wants vengeance. He wants no Zorro, the only Mexican legend that was never been defeated by the Pacman, in his training camp.

In addition, a win against Mosley would prove nothing except we will be more get used to Pacman’s winning streak. It would be same as usual while a win against Marquez will seal the deciding contest that endlessly haunt our champ. Some years ago, Ricardo Lois, a boxing expert from LA Examiner said, “Honestly, it’s Pacquiao who needs a third fight with Marquez. To remove the throbbing thorn Marquez has left in his kingly paw.” Maybe it’s not yet time for removal of such a thorn. It may come later, or never.

If not for Pacquiao-Dela Hoya, this unfinished issue could have been settled long time ago. And now that the fight against Mosley is already finalized, that golden opportunity, once again, slipped through the fingers of Marquez.

More than three months ago, Arum reportedly commented why he preferred the other contenders than Mosley, “He (Mosley) is going to be 40 and he’s in the lighter weights, where speed is so important. He’s on a show with guys … old enough to be his son.” According to Kevin Iole of Yahoo Sports, Mosley got the fight, not only because he is the least likely to win compared to Marquez and Berto, but because Mosley is now officially out of the Golden Boy Promotions. Here involve the grand business tussle between rival promoters that most of us do not understand. But that’s how the wind blew in different direction and why Arum flip-flapped that fast. The Top Rank boss does not want to loose his baker, err, boxer, giving him his daily bread.

Well, if Arum only a wind instrument, he is a weather vane.

I can do nothing but to settle for this fight at hand. While with great anticipation we wait for the possibility of Pacquiao-Mayweather till eternity, we Filipinos deserve to enjoy the Pacquiao-Mosley fight - and hopefully the weather won’t be a spoiler - this coming May…

------
(Photo from Google Images)

Bible Week and Doomsday

Do you know that there’s a certain presidential proclamation initiated by the late Ferdinand E. Marcos but continued by his staunch rivals and predecessors in Corazon C. Aquino and Fidel V. Ramos during their respective terms? It is the Presidential Proclamation No. 1923 signed by former initiator of the dreaded Martial Law on October 27, 1979. Since then, various Christian organizations in the Philippines – both the mainstream Protestant groups and the Catholics – celebrated the National Bible Week and the National Bible Sunday. Marcos, in said decree recognized the Bible “as an excellent source of principles for the development and personal discipline.” This was re-emphasized by President Corazon C. Aquino via Presidential Proclamation No. 44 in 1986 declaring every last week of January as National Bible Week celebration. This was later sustained by Fidel V. Ramos by proclaiming Presidential Proclamation 1067 emphasizing that “national attention be focused on the importance of reading and studying the Bible, in building the spiritual, moral, and social fiber of our citizenry.” In certain ways, this unity among Christian denominations and sects that we are trying to achieve is one of the mysterious ways how God and/of the Bible work(s) for us believers.

But here is the saddest thing: Majority of Filipino Christians, especially the youth, was more excited with the upcoming performances of Bruno Mars on April 8 and Justin Bieber on May 10 than learning from biblical characters even an inch from Aaron to Zophar. It seems today that nobody cares anymore about the Bible Week celebration much more with the Holy Scriptures itself. All the Christian congregations are expected to, among other activities, to organize an interchurch service honoring the Bible at which several passages are read, the hymns that pay tribute it, and the sermon addresses its influence not only in spiritual and moral issues, but in our art, literature and music. On their part, at least, city and municipal mayors may proclaim Bible Week in our city or municipality and feature the event to local media especially those they have direct hand. It is expected that those members of religious groups, Catholic or not, working in public offices such as LGUs initiate such activity in their respective work places.

This year’s theme: May They Be One: “Becoming One Nation in the Stewardship of Creation” is inspired by Psalm 8:3-6. As destruction and degradation of nature spring from greed, the church leaders unanimously agreed to pursue with the new government its thrust against graft and corruption, focusing on becoming better stewards of the country’s resources.

Contrary to the common belief among Christians, bibles are not all the same. Some Christians gradually removed seven chapters of the Old Testament book and some other parts that contradicted some of their teachings. So each believer should know which Bible is to be used. Even the “prophet (of doom) of the hour” Harold Camping and his followers at Family Stations, Inc. are using different bible for his prediction of the second coming of Christ this coming May 21, 2011. According to some reports, Camping fanatics are aggressively spreading the message of doom through billboards, benches at bus stops, the caravan, and mobilize volunteers to distribute pamphlets in various corners of the city, from Bridgeport to Little Rock, Arkansas. And to spread the message outside the U.S., they even have a group of volunteers who would go around Africa and Latin America. This church group is claiming that the prediction is based on their bible.

Well, as we all know, there’s nothing new with this sort of doomsday brouhaha. Camping himself predicted that the world end in 1994. William Miller, another world acclaimed religious leader had predicted the world’s end was on October 22, 1844 but, as we say, the sun still shines brightly to this day. The sun, just like the Bible, is true and essential for today as always.

Sacred Scripture or the Holy Bible is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit. It challenges us to spread the Good News of salvation. It also continues to be relevant to both saints and sinners, to people like Ted "The Golden Voice" Williams then and now, to acclaimed bloggers and lowly lumberjacks…

-----
(Photo from Philippine Bible Society)

The Rabbits Who Stayed

According to Chinese calendar, 2011 is the year of the Rabbit and may all the Filipino here and around the globe lick our wounds brought about by the war-torn year of the Tiger. May 2011 become a year of magical persuasion rather than sheer or ferocious force and help us value things and people who were through the years, are still with us today while others just died, faded or simply went away.

My mother, more than 70 years of age, is from far-away Zambales and whenever she remembers the place where she was born and grew up, in her memory come a vivid picture of this big and wheeled “rabbit”. Yes, she’s referring to one of the buses of the Philippine Rabbit Bus Company (PRBC) operating to and from Manila and selected provinces in northern Luzon along strategic routes. To my mother’s memory, the Philippine Rabbit is a symbol of a new life because it was the first transportation that helped her find her luck here in San Jose and eventually met my late father and started a family of their own. The Philippine Rabbit is still alive and kicking through the years.

By the way, people say (perhaps from an urban legend), the name Philippine Rabbit was named by accident. They say that the first of its buses were mistakenly painted “Philippine Rabbit” instead of the intended “Philippine Rapid.” The PRBC went into dark times in the 90’s when its workers led a strike which resulted to temporary suspension of its operations. With changes in corporate decisions and management strategies, the company was able to survive until today though its area of coverage was narrowed. Indeed, it continues to strive to be competitive with leading and mushrooming bus companies in terms of number of units and providing quality and reliable service to its patrons, I doubt if this “rabbit” could regain its former status in the past. But the effort of the Philippine Rabbit to stay alive is still there as long as there are people who patronize and cherish them.

Just like how we, her children, cherished our mother.

We had a sari-sari store when I was a kid and this “rabbit” made me and my playmates salivate a lot. It is actually our favorite candy. It was the most popular candy during our time. The White Rabbit candy was born in Shanghai, China in 1943. In fact, in 1972, Premier Zhou Enlai even used White Rabbit candies as a gift to American president Richard Nixon when the latter visited China. Here in the Philippines, its distributor is Cheng Ban Yek & Co.

But I remember a classmate who was taken to a doctor because of a certain sickness. His eyes, finger and fingernails turned yellow and he was yellow all over. From then on, each time she goes to school, he carried a bagful of White Rabbit candy inside his lunch pack. The doctor, he said, told him to munch a lot of White Rabbit. I am still wondering to this day: Is the candy really cured him from jaundice or other diseases related to it? (To my FB friends out there who are in medical profession, please enlighten me on this.)

Just recently, in July 2007, the White Rabbit was banned for distribution within the country after the Bureau of Food and Drugs (BFAD) tested it for formaldehyde, the substance that is used for preserving corpses. The Chinese candy-maker protested that BFAD was "extremely irresponsible" for not confirming the authenticity of the test products and further added that their product was target of confectionary counterfeiting in Asia. After submitting their samples from their own factory to an internationally certified laboratory in Shanghai, it received clearance of any formaldehyde tainting.

Nothing really escapes politics. Even sweet and seemingly innocent things like candies…

-----
(Photo : Google Image)

Father Jejemon (Not A Film Review)

The Philippine’s King of Comedy took hundreds of roles in various flicks he made in his very long showbiz career. Gay, cowboy, taxi driver, farmer, soldier,- name it, never in his decades-old career he portrayed a priest in a movie. It's his first time for such a role. In an interview, the 82-year old Dolphy said, "Yon na lang ang role na hindi ko nagagampanan, pari. Naalok sa akin 'yan ng uncle ko na pari na namatay na." In the forthcoming Metro Manila Film Festival (MMFF) that would run from December 25, 2010 to January 7, 2011, Dolphy’s own movie outfit, the RVQ Productions, will be offering an entry called “Father Jejemon”, directed by Frank Gray Jr. and written by Bibeth Orteza and Rhandy Reyes. It’s a good movie no doubt and a surefire hit not only for children but for the general public as well.

No problem came until the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) chair Grace Poe-Llamanzares received complaints that some scenes in “Fr. Jejemon” were “violative of Catholic sensibilities.”

In particular, some lay groups within the Catholic church were complaining a scene that shows the consecrated host falling on the cleavage of a woman. Another is the consecrated host getting stuck in a woman’s dentures. “OA naman ‘yang mga paring ‘yan. Anong masama kung ipakita na may nahulog na ostiya sa suso, nangyayari naman talaga yan,” says a middle-aged costumer who was watching news on TV inside a noodle house where I am eating. By the way, she’s wearing a crucifix.

Let us go back to the controversial MMFF entry. "Due to the feedback we received regarding the trailer of Father Jejemon, I have ordered a second review of the scene in the movie being questioned. Please note that the MTRCB board is given the autonomy to decide what rating to prescribe,” Poe-Llamazares said.

I have my own reasons to believe that the woman inside the Rizal Street noodle house is indeed a Catholic. Moving on, lay people are expected to speak up on issues that don’t respect the sacredness of the Eucharist, and that's why here I am jotting this. “They (referring to the two movie scenes) are negative, the movie does not give a good reflection on the priesthood,” former CBCP President and Jaro Archbishop Angel Lagdameo said in a message yesterday. CBCP-Episcopal Commission on Social Commission and Mass Media (ECSCMM) executive secretary Fr. Francis Lucas said, “I think religion should be respected and (they should consider) the sensibility of people, things we hold sacred.” The two priests were interviewed by CBCP News yesterday.

To make fun out of religious and holy objects is sacrilege. Sacrilege means the profanation of something or somebody or some place set aside for the worship, glory and service of God. Sacrilege, whether acknowledged or not, is no longer the shocking things as it was for our Catholic ancestors, our grandfathers and grandmothers. It has become part of our daily life, as a matter of fact, in our present social setting - especially how it is employed in modern media – it is almost already normal if not fashionable!

Remember that many Catholics even cheered Carlos Celdran when he disrupted a Holy Mass at the Manila Cathedral just some months back?

Sacrilege in modern times is multi-faceted. Catholic faith and practice, morality and tradition are not only questioned, they are sacrilegiously derided and dismissed as irrelevant, or ridiculed by Catholics themselves. In modern day movies and television shows, we take “in vain” religious objects and sacraments. In the streets and casual talks, we coupled them with left and right blasphemies. How can people like them respect the law (of the land) if they do not respect or they are insensitive towards his/her own, or other people’s religion or faith?

But the rule is very simple : “Sancta sancte tractanda sunt” (Holy things must be treated holily) …

My HR-RH Dilemma

It is International Human Rights Day today and it’s been 62 years since the United Nations (UN) passed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). With all honesty, time came when I cannot grasp anymore and I am so confused about some human rights questions in my mind. This pertains to current discussions related to “reproductive health” in Philippine RH Bill. This is what I call then as my “HR-RH” dilemma. There was no such animal called “Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2010” or HB No. 96 during my days in human rights (HR) movements. When I talk of HR, I had only cases of violations in mind,- arrest and detention, summary execution, torture, involuntary disappearance, etc. Based on my recent experience, HR discussions now became broad and some are even wayward and that’s not unexpected.

I am fully convinced, then and now, that religion of whatever origin, Christians or not, cannot be taken away or excluded in any institution or instrument, like the UN and UDHR, which are aimed at establishing a social order respecting rights and dignity of the human person. This vision of life in this world can gradually be achieved if believers anchor it firmly into religious deep.

It is unlucky that the debate on the RH Bill, has focused only on whether it should be passed or rejected in its present form. To pass or to reject it would not be good for us as a nation, as some sectors would claim. The Catholic Church is firm in saying that the proposed bill has serious flaws that can lead to violations of human rights and freedom of conscience. So it must be rejected totally. On the other hand, pro-RH advocates want it passed also in its totality on the very same ground that through this legislation, human rights - particularly the right to maternal health - is enacted by the State. But here are questions that need to be settled the moment the discussion starts:

As it was in the beginning, the Church insists that protection of life must start from fertilization, is the State hold to same position regarding protection of human life? (It is not specified in the Constitution whether conception means fertilization or the implantation of an embryo in the womb.) For the Church, using contraceptive medications and devices prevent the implantation of an embryo. If the State take this similar stand, is it willing to conduct scientific evaluation and studies of medicines and devices provided by the bill and those with abortifacient effects be banned, regardless if the bill is passed or not?

For the purpose of protecting academic freedom and respecting religious traditions, should not the right of religious schools to write and implement their own sex education curriculum consonant to their religious traditions be respected? The Constitution allows religious instruction in public schools only if the parents consent in writing. Should a similar provision be enacted relative to sexuality education? Is the State amenable to respect the conscientious objection of individual teacher who refuse to teach subject on sex education that violates her/his religious beliefs?

Assuming that HB No.96 is already enacted into law as it is and you are a doctor in a public hospital; since this particular law prohibits the refusal of health care services and information based on a patient’s marital status, gender or sexual orientation, age, religion, personal circumstances, and nature of work; would you continue to administer an IUD to a minor who requested for it?

These are just three examples. The bottom line: Both the pro and anti RH Bill should initiate constructive and respectful dialogue leading to concrete actions that would correct it and somewhat soften their hard-line positions and make room for an open dialogue. This is a more positive move towards working for the good of our people, with special concerns for the unborn, the youth, women and families in problematic situations. The merit of the bill itself should be highlighted and not just distinct moral or legal rhetorical persuasions. Without totally surrendering what we believe in.

These are the main points of the authors of "Towards Critical and Constructive Engagement (Talking Points for Dialogue on the RH Bill)" a proposal issued jointly by Loyola School of Theology and the John J. Carroll Institute on Church and Social Issues few months back that can be read here.

As what the proposal observed,total rejection of the bill, however, will not change the present high rates of lack of health care among women, infant mortality, maternal deaths, and abortions. “Does the Catholic hierarchy want these dehumanizing conditions to continue?” pro-RH advocates rightfully ask. It is imperative that both the proponents and opponents of the bill sit and talk together to amend its objectionable provisions and retain those that can make a contribution to protection of the dignity of Filipinos, improve their quality of life and promote, protect and defend their human rights. Not without considering the importance of rich global experiences, references, views and trends related to it. Be it pro or con, to expand each other’s horizon. But of course we cannot be neutral in situations detrimental to human dignity and human rights of our neighbors.

Some years ago, reportedly many western human rights NGO have tried to insert into the UNDHR the term “reproductive rights” in order to export contraception and abortion globally and tie it to international aid poured into governments in the Third World or developing countries like the Philippines. Here at home, RH supporters insist that the bill is the solution to women’s rights and economic development for the poor and not primarily about population control or, as the HB No.96 terms it, “population management”. Using such language in international instruments can persuade and attract growing number of various feminist and women liberation movements and women rights advocates from all over the world. And it apparently did.

In his address to the United Nations (UN) General Assembly commemorating the 60th anniversary of the UDHR, Pope Benedict XVI challenged the UN and the rest of the world leaders: “This is all the more necessary at a time when we experience the obvious paradox of a multilateral consensus that continues to be in crisis because it is still subordinated to the decisions of a few, whereas the world’s problems call for interventions in the form of collective action by the international community.” The UDHR, according to Benedict, cannot be applied piecemeal “according to trends or selective choices” that actually compromise universal human rights. I am sure that these words of the Pope are rooted in human dignity that is usually subjected to the decisions of the few global elites, both in private and public spheres, of different ideological leanings.

Anna Halpine, founder of the World Youth Alliance - a worldwide coalition of young people committed to promoting the dignity of the person - wrote in an article entitled, “Philippines’ Population Bill Speak With Forked Tongue”: “Population control or population management relies on the assumption that government can and should curb population growth in order to provide the goods necessary for economic development: education, opportunity, housing, protection and stewardship of natural resources. But if the government priority is managing the population according to a schedule of targets and goals, what of the dignity and rights of the persons being “managed”?” She observed further that: “It is obvious to anyone who bothers to actually read the Philippines bill that population management tops the hierarchy of principles. The idea that it is primarily concerned with the promotion of human rights, or women’s rights is an illusion.”

If our legislators including concerned groups are bound to re-open the issue of reproductive health in different forum and venue, it must take-off from the bill’s terms and merits. In such a dialogue, aside from Church and government leaders, leading economists might be engaged and the data available from countless national population policies in the past, especially during the Marcos government, should be re-visited and scrutinized.

To summarize, what I want to emphasize is this: A population management bill should not be offered to citizens only if it is sugar-coated with necessary maternal health reforms or increased women’s health and rights. Women’s maternal capabilities and women’s rights are not only women’s true essence but liberating tool in this patriarchal world. Not merely icings on a legislative cake in the hands of neo-Malthusian bakers.

Why not call HB 96 plainly and simply by what it intends to do: “Population Control” Act? …

-----
(Photo from Google images)

Complacency is Against the Spirit of Advent

Complacency is a sin and it haunts us all. Even as a Church worker, I am also personally guilty of committing this 8th Deadly Sin (Is “complacency” falls under “sloth”?). Most of the time I say, ”Pwede na ‘yan” or “That’s okay as long as it serves the purpose.” But I also believe - based on my observation on socio-political realities in Occidental Mindoro and as a member of the local media then - our most wicked sin as a people is also complacency.

In today’s Gospel (Matt 3 : 1-12), John the Baptist is telling us that as we, new children of Abraham, await the coming of the Kingdom, we cannot rest in complacency. “Bear fruit in keeping with repentance,” John told the crowds gathered there at the Jordan River. This sermon no doubt, is a call out of complacency. He further said, “Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire”. Presumably, John was just trying to “micro scare” the people maybe because they already had a long history of complacency that time. Not unlike today in our province.

Most of our people are guilty of apathy and indifference. For instance, only few civic organizations stood with the Church in its fight against the Mindoro Nickel Project (MNP) and the Small Town Lottery (STL) operation in the province before. Only few joined the PPCRV pollwatchers during the last elections, just to mention two of our current social concerns. The people act more diligently in self-serving activities initiated by their political patrons or political groups than those initiated by the Basic Ecclesial Community (BEC) or their PAKRIS. It’s Advent time once again and may we be reminded that John’s sermon calls us to bear the fruit of repentance and it calls us into the kingdom of God.

As worker of our local Church, it is my Christian duty to go beyond my comfort zones (Here’s a very concrete example : What people do most of the time in Facebook,- finding, chatting, sharing, exchanging something unimportant or naughty with friends and relatives; joking and commenting to a thread, playing Mafia Wars and Farmville , etc.) and do things in line with my faith, with my beliefs, with my work, with my vocation. Whenever. Whether I go, physical or virtual. Because if I do not maximize the potentials of the internet in blogging about socio-political realities in my place, if I do not share news and updates to all the interested people all over the net, if I will not impart related social teachings and doctrines of my Church, I will be doing nothing and become irresponsible worker in His vineyard. For it is not only for what we do that we are held responsible, but also for what we do not do. Still, many of us do not consider the act of “not doing” as a sin. Both the laity and those belong to the ordained ministry who are not expecting intervention from God - and from themselves - to this saddening situation is also somewhat guilty of such a sin. Yes, we should not rely unduly on our competence. Strength lies in improvasion. But many leaders of social and religious institutions have overlooked this fact. Including mine.

But hey, let us set this straight for clarity. I am not insinuating that we aimlessly expect or look for something new. All I say is we must be prepared to anticipate something new rather than remaining where we are. We have to make change happen and not just waste our time in the waiting shed. According to Pope Benedict XVI, "It is important that the Catholic laity proficient in social communications take their proper place in proposing the Christian message in a convincing and attractive way." In a way, BXVI is giving us social communicators this challenge against complacency.

If I were right in saying that “Complacency is against the spirit of Advent”, so therefore, the opposite of expectation is also complacency. Because when we are complacent, we are expecting for nothing more, nothing better as believers and as human beings. Therefore, we are not expecting, anticipating the Kingdom.

Unlike how John foresaw something new in the person of the Emmanuel…

-----
(Photo from ministrydepot.com)