To Light a Fire !

In Reply to: God and Pope Under Attack (Part 2)

2010-07-21T23:31:00.000-07:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

65-100722

In Part 2 of his PDI OUTLOOK column (4^th paragraph) last July 15, Rigoberto Tiglao described Part 1 of his column last July 8 as “the assault on the church as an institution purportedly mediating between God and man”. Immediately after this, he posed the following rhetorical question: “How can the worst kind of sexual deviants -- those preying on the innocent -- speak for God and morality? Worse, there have emerged documented allegations that the present Pope, in his previous job since 1981 as head of the Vatican unit with authority in such cases, knew about these cases, but failed to act on them.”

Several paragraphs later, Tiglao took care of answering his own rhetorical question but with obvious prejudice as follows:

“These cases of sexual abuse worldwide have not only severely eroded the Church’s credibility as an institution of morality, and as God’s representative on earth. They have also put into question the credibility of the Vicar of Christ, the Pope himself.

xxxxx Investigations by the New York Times xxxxx and by other European journalists have definitively shown that Benedict was informed of the accusations since the 1990s and perhaps even earlier but had failed to act on them, allegedly even in effect ignoring them.”

There is nothing whatsoever in Tiglao’s July 15 column that would even thinly suggest some evenhandedness or balance in his treatment of these vicious accusations and allegations against Pope Benedict’s supposed failure to act or “even in effect ignoring” these “cases of sexual abuse worldwide” despite its perpetrators being “the worst kind of sexual deviants”!

The truth of the matter WILL REFUTE Tiglao’s diatribes! Consider that under Canon Law and common sense, it was the bishop of the diocese to which the offending priest belonged, who had to take immediate action and the duty to report the alleged crimes to the local police IF evidence of guilt was strong. Besides, Cardinal Ratzinger who was thousands of miles away had no legal standing nor practical means to be an effective complainant for such complex matters with such faraway police authorities.

Nevertheless, as the Catholic World Report publisher, Father Joseph Fessio, S.J. explained in the Letters (to the Editor) section of the June 2010 issue of his magazine, then Cardinal Ratzinger was “one of the few major prelates who took decisive action to respond to it. Thus some sixty percent of the cases reported by the bishops to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) were sent back to the bishops because the evidence was so strong (and so), a long canonical process (at the CDF) was not needed. The bishops (therefore) could and should have taken immediate action and reported those priests to the authorities.”

What Tiglao and the world’s media may also have forgotten, is that even more pronounced is the prevailing policy in most of the secular systems for criminal justice throughout the world to exercise PRUDENCE, such that:

1. The identities of the victims are assiduously protected from the glare of media publicity.

2. Considering that the allegations of any criminal wrongdoing may be FALSE, thus the accused who is “presumed innocent until proven guilty” STILL has a right to the protection of his/her reputation. And so U.S. civil libertarians have always insisted on the sacredness of the Miranda Doctrine which has been adopted here in the Philippines together with the underlying philosophy that “it is better to run the risk of having ten among those truly guilty getting away scot-free, than to have just one innocent person wrongly convicted of a crime.” That is why Criminal Law jurisprudence and the Rules of Court are stacked up in favor of the accused who does NOT have to prove his/her PRESUMED innocence, but instead has to be EXPLICITLY proven by the prosecution under proper DUE PROCESS, to be GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.

Tiglao et al may also not be aware of the fact further emphasized by Fr. Fessio, that as early as the year 2001 even before such scandals erupted in the U.S., Cardinal Ratzinger and Pope John Paul II had already begun exercising their MORAL command responsibility, by mandating that “all credible allegations of child abuse by priests (should) be reported to the CDF”.

Be that as it may, the most unfortunate fact still remains, which Tiglao has emphasized, that the moral credibility of the Catholic Church especially among non-Catholics, has been “severely eroded”!

But this is precisely why we Catholics ought NOW to make an act of the will to remain steadfast in our Faith, on the SOLID PREMISE that we believe, nay we KNOW that Christ’s promise to Peter and his Papal Successors, despite the periodic and seemingly irreversible onslaught of skepticism, derision and all sorts of attack against the Mystical Body of Christ and His Vicar here on earth, even if as fearsome as the gates of hell -- is ROCK SOLID as ever in its TRUTH. Moreover, as many of us Catholics believe in the Fatima prophecies to be nearing their epiphany, we expect that the Immaculate Heart of Mary will SOON triumph, and the Sacred Heart of Jesus will thereafter reign over a heretofore skeptical mankind.

And so dear Pope Benedict XVI, we who believe in you, unabashedly AFFIRM with fervent faith and humble contrition for our own shortcomings as people of God: “YES, we BELIEVE Our Lord’s solemn declaration that you are Peter! And upon such a Rock, our one, holy, apostolic and Catholic Church is FOREVER built and subsists, so that even Hell itself and the powers of death will NOT prevail against this Rock of Faith. For wherever sin of even the worst kind is found, yet truly God’s grace all the more abounds…”

Eduardo B. Olaguer

Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate

of the Philippines

*****

In Re: God and The Pope Under Attack (Part 1)

2010-07-20T23:29:00.000-07:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

64-100721

According to columnist Rigoberto Tiglao (PDI issue of July 8, 2010), the rise of atheism and agnosticism is the triumph of science as “the only tool to obtain objective truth”. Such a sweeping statement admitting no exceptions, is most typical of those who do NOT understand “science” as it is now and always has been. For if Tiglao’s theory is true which it is NOT, and such falsehood is demonstrable even by COMMON SENSE, therefore Tiglao’s 2-part article itself would a priori be violating “objective truth” per se because its presentation is by no means a scientific treatise whatsoever.

In fact, being obviously NOT a qualified science practitioner himself, cosmologists and particularly those involved in theoretical quantum physics will cringe at Tiglao’s seemingly (to a science tyro) impressive statement that “science, with mathematical elegance and rigor, is going to the very depths of reality (super-string theories) and to the start of time (the Big Bang)”. And thus according to science-tyro Tiglao, “there is no need for the childish creation myths of religion”. It is therefore apparent that his conclusion is based on the naïve theory that science alone can explain cosmological reality (the whole physical structure of the universe) in full, down to the infinitesimally small nuclear quantum level, strictly by means of physics and mathematics. And worse: for IF SO, therefore we Catholics who sincerely believe in the Holy Trinity One God, including those among Tiglao’s PDI associates, are childish myth-fanatics or the like!?!

But in fact the Tiglao-cited “super-string theories” (for indeed there are several theoretical variations at odds with one another), are still infinitely far from “going to the very depths of reality”. As of now these theories consist of mere trial-and-error ATTEMPTS over the past 20 years to verify its YET UNPROVEN MAIN ASSUMPTION “that physical matter at the quantum level is a string-like membrane or combination of infinitesimally small compositely structured quanta”, and NOT the classic quantum physics STANDARD MODEL’s single point-like specks (e.g. electrons and quarks). And their researcher-scientists have NOT yet even arrived at the initial stage of mathematically DEBUNKING existing contrary theories under Einstein’s widely accepted General Theory (yes, also still a theory up to now!) of Relativity or the old classic Standard Model based on quantum particle physics.

In fact String and Super-String theories have been overtaken by a more recent and CONTRADICTORY theory - - that of the theory of Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG) as the latest alternative to String Theory or M-Theory, its more technically acceptable name. LQG’s main theoretical ASSUMPTION (thus its parallel attempts in competition with String theorists to prove its assumptions as mathematically correct), is that space is NOT continuous, but comes only in specific quantum units of area and volume. The term “loop” refers to its mathematically implied existence of “small loops marked out in spacetime”. The dynamic quantum geometry of space over infinitesimally short periods of time is what is referred to as spacetime.

But Tiglao’s worst error is his implicit conclusion that science as exemplified by the EXPLORATORY mathematics of those behind Super-string theories, has already and forever demolished any reasonable belief in God and His creation of the world out of nothing; and implicitly, that all these mind bogglingly complex yet mathematically precise (conceptually) infinitesimal structures are mere products of RANDOM CHANCE.

For had Tiglao correctly understood the basic aspects of “String Theories”, the reverse conclusion is MORE REASONABLE, which is that there must be a sovereign Super-Intelligence behind it all! For it is basic in the science of statistics with its unique mathematics on permutations and combinations I first learned in our Higher Algebra (Math 30) course in U.P. under Prof. Manuel Bendaña, that with MORE FACTORS involved, the GREATER are the odds against the random occurrence of a specific event. For example, picking the shortest route covering 100 towns by mere chance will have odds of 1 in 100-factorial, where the latter number is 100 x 99 x 98 x 97 … x 2 x 1. Thus even the most modern computer engaged in solving this classic Traveller’s mathematical problem would take tens of millions of years to arrive at the complete answer. For the skeptic, try multiplying with a calculator just the first five (5) factors to get an idea of how many permutations and combinations are involved, each of which the Traveller cum computer must still analyze to get the shortest route.

And so let’s consider that thus far, String Theories’ mathematical models and equations (from my old copy of the Special Edition of the Scientific American, February 2006) IMPLY, not prove but merely imply, as follows:

1. Aside from the four dimensions of length, width, height/depth and time, there are SIX extra DIMENSIONS that are too small to have yet been detected.

2. It also suggests that our present observable universe with its present approximate radius of 13.4 billion light years, may just be “one random valley (or universe) out of a virtually infinite selection of valleys (or multiverses) in a vast landscape of possibilities”.

3. This infinite landscape or “spacescape” has perhaps 10⁵⁰⁰ “valleys”, each one of which has its own set of “Laws of Physics” that operate uniquely in separate vast “bubbles of space”. (Pls. note that 10² is 100, 10³is 1000. Thus 10⁵⁰⁰ has 500 zeros in it all in all!)

4. Our present visible universe would thus be “only one relatively small region within one such bubble”. (Note: From the article by Raphael Bousso and Joseph Polansky in the Special Edition (The Frontiers of Physics) in my old copy of The Scientific American, February 2006.

And yet Tiglao unabashedly proclaims that a) all these are already existing

realities and b) all these by inference, are products of random chance arising from OUT OF NOTHING, in keeping with Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. Is it a reasonable or a cock-eyed conclusion based on common sense?

Furthermore, let me also correct Mr. Tiglao’s Bible exegesis on the “virgin birth” of Jesus Christ from the Blessed Virgin Mary’s womb. Its scriptural proof is NOT primarily much less exclusively based on the Old Testament, but from the New Testament i.e. from the Gospels of St. Matthew (1:18-25) and St. Luke (1:26-38) whose translations from the original text have NEVER been seriously questioned as to their correctness.

At any rate, Mr. Tiglao’s selection of popular and seemingly heavyweight atheist-witnesses for his persecution/prosecution of God e.g. Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Victor J. Stenger among others, as his testimonial evidence to prove that “God is a myth”, in contrast to his choice of little known lighweight “defenders” such as John Polkinghorne (a former priest), Karen Armstrong (a former nun) and Antony Flew (an atheist allegedly converted to theism!), clearly smacks of a rigged Trial Court with himself as the only member of the jury.

And contrary to Tiglao’s primary thesis that science, particularly physics and mathematics “is the only tool to obtain objective truth”, his primary witness Richard Dawkins’ book The God Delusion, similar to the Tiglao column, is mostly a hodge-podge of passionately bitter polemical criticisms of the alleged downright STUPIDITIES of fanatics in all religions. And so Dawkins VULGARLY describes them as merely “sucking up to their God”. The book is also larded over with a lot of pseudo-metaphysics that would easily be fried crisp if subjected to the 24-carat metaphysical and theological brilliance of St. Thomas’ Summa Theologica.

On the other hand, Sam Harris’ The End of Faith, so highly touted too by Tiglao, uses the 9-11 tragedy at the New York City Twin Towers, as his ultimate exhibit in his litany of CONDEMNATORY EVIDENCE versus ALL kinds of religious FAITH. Thus he extrapolated those Twin Towers as proof that: the perpetrators of such a heinous act were allegedly men of “perfect faith”. ERGO, all such “pretensions to theological knowledge” are EVIL per se… whether from a Buddhist, Christian, Hindu or Muslim, etc.

How I wish Gilbert Keith Chesterton our Thomas Aquinas of the 20^th century and par excellence defender-through-common sense of our faith, were still alive! He would have easily and simultaneously put both Dawkins and Harris down on the floor, whether figuratively or even literally, during any debate.

Tiglao’s third seeming heavyweight witness for the prosecution of God and all religions, is Victor J. Stenger together with his book “The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows That God Does NOT Exist”. Stenger is the only one among Tiglao’s witnesses who uses modern physics as the major part of the proffered evidence. Thus Stenger, the professional particle physicist and lately active in philosophy and popular fora on religious skepticism, insists that if God exists, some evidence of His existence should be detectable “by scientific means”, and that there is none of such evidence whatsoever. On the other hand, Stenger claims that based on all the SAME scientific evidence available, the conclusion should be that “beyond reasonable doubt the universe and life itself exists” without any alleged Sovereign Prime Being to thank and acknowledge as the Creator. In short: if I can’t prove my presence/innocence, therefore I must be non-existent/guilty beyond reasonable doubt?!?

And so I now present as my rebuttal witness, Stenger’s colleague in the science profession. He is Charles Townes, a former UCLA professor, co-inventor of the laser and a Nobel Prize winner in Physics. And in March 2005 at the age of 89, he was the recipient of the Templeton Prize for “Progress towards Research and Discoveries about Spiritual Realities”, with a cash award of USD 1.5 Million.

Townes’ simple and straightforward rebuttal testimony is that “Many people don’t realize that science basically involves assumptions and faith. But nothing is absolutely proved. Wonderful things in both science and religion come from our efforts based on observations, thoughtful assumptions, faith and logic”. Townes concludes that it is “extremely unlikely” that the findings of modern physics will ever prove that life and humanity are “just accidental”, thus leading to the reasonable religious belief that the universe has an intelligent author-creator. For indeed if there is such a God, which we Christians DO BELIEVE to be true, therefore faith and reason will NOT, can NOT CONTRADICT each other.

Lastly, I call on my early boyhood’s love, Mathematics - - the quintessential SCIENCE- - as my last witness for the DEFENSE of GOD and for the purpose of showing that contrary to Tiglao’s theory, Mathematics itself, through its unavoidably esoteric and complex but necessarily THEORETICAL mathematical models, is NOT INERRANTLY capable of solving all the mysteries of cosmological and quantum realities. And so I offer as my exhibit-in-evidence page 30 of my old copy of another Special Edition of the Scientific American on “The Mysteries of Mathematics”. I refer in particular to an article written by John L. Casti entitled “Confronting Science’s Logical Limits” originally published in October 1996, where John L. Casti asked the following crucial yet ILLUMINATING question:

“How do we know that mathematical models of a natural system and the system itself bear any (exact or otherwise) relation to each other?”

And that is exactly why Nobel Prize winner Charles Townes says: “Science basically involves assumptions and faith.” Deo gratias et AMEN!

*****

God and the Pope under attack (Part 1)

By Rigoberto D. Tiglao
Philippine Daily Inquirer
July 8, 2010

THAT CERTAINLY IS AN ATTENTION-GRABBING headline that, some critics say, is this newspaper’s flavor. But I assure you, it’s accurate. And it is certainly news in a country where Masses are held even in malls, where prelates pontificate on politics, and where a jogging cleric’s rants are news sound bites.

The 21st century is seeing the most intense attacks on belief in God in general and the Roman Catholic Church in particular. The siege is both on the intellectual level, the subject of the first part of this column, and on the cultural and institutional level, next week’s topic.

In high school, practically the only intellectually rigorous argument against the existence of God was Bertrand Russell’s essay, “Why I Am Not a Christian” (published 1967), which during those times you couldn’t even find in local bookstores.

Not anymore, the first decade of the century has seen a slew of books by the planet’s most respected intellectuals debunking religion, and arguing that God is simply in the genre of Santa Claus, Zeus, or the sky-god Bathala—fairy tales necessary in humanity’s infantile phase, but now unnecessary. Not only that, these have become bestsellers, so widely in demand that they are mostly now in paperback, a sure sign that a lot of people have read them and a lot more are likely to buy the cheaper edition.

UCLA neuroscientist Sam Harris probably ignited current interest with his short “The End of Faith” (2004). It argued that the rejection of reason, which is what religious faith is, has led to humanity’s monstrosities—from the brutal wars waged by the tribes of Israel to the medieval crusades to the latest jihadist car bomber. Even the Holocaust is said to have been justified by the anti-Semitism that the Good Book bred when one Gospel blamed the Jewish mob, not the Romans, for the Messiah’s crucifixion.

Several top-caliber intellectuals and scientists stepped out of their specialized fields to write books debunking religion, among them, particle physicist Victor Stenger (“God: The Failed Hypothesis. How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist”), biologist and consciousness-research pioneer Daniel Dennet (“Religion: Breaking the Spell”); Oxford University evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins (“The God Delusion”); and respected intellectual and journalist Christopher Hitchens “God is Not Great.”

One of the memorable trivia (at least for me) in Dawkins’ book was his ridicule of the pantheon of Catholic saints: “The Catholic Community Forum helpfully lists 5,120 saints, together with their areas of expertise, which include abdominal pains… anorexia… bowel disorders. ” (Fortunately, the Filipino faithful now has its patron saint, St. Lorenzo Ruiz, martyred in Japan in 1637, the sole Filipino saint after five centuries of Christianity, and for a country with the planet’s fourth biggest Catholic population.)

On the other hand, many of Hitchens’ points stupefy this Jesuit-educated columnist. Example: If the Ten Commandments were the word of God, how come it didn’t prohibit slavery and rape, among the heinous crimes all humanity abhors? His answer: The Commandments were simply a tribal code—as all tribes have in one form of another. Slavery and rape were acceptable 4,000 years ago, if inflicted on a conquered tribe.

There have been, of course, a slew of counter-attacks against the atheist books by scholars of Dawkins’ or Dennet’s caliber, notably from University of Cambridge professor of mathematical physics and former priest John Polkinghorne (“Quantum Physics and Theology: An Unexpected Kinship”), former nun and professor of religion Karen Armstrong (“The Case for God”), and perhaps one of the most respected philosophers of the past century, Anthony Flew (“There is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind”).

These, however, actually would give little comfort to Catholics. For instance, it turns out that Flew’s “conversion” means he still does not believe in “the Gods of the Christian and the Islamic Revelations,” but rather in “the God of Aristotle or Spinoza.” That’s an abstract god; you might as well believe in Yoda’s “The Force.”

The rise of atheism and agnosticism do not seem to be a fashion, but the result of the triumph of science starting in the past century as the only tool to attain objective truth. Even 200 years ago, the story of Adam and Eve would have been so easy to believe. Impossible now after Darwin and the reality—not theory—of evolution by natural selection. Science, with mathematical elegance and rigor, is going to the very depths of reality (super-string theories) and to the start of time (the Big Bang). There is no need for the childish creation myths of religion.

And I do not mean only natural sciences. Without the development for instance of anthropology and linguistics, the following claims could never have been brought up:

• That the word “virgin”, as in Jesus borne out of a virgin, is a mis-translation from the Hebrew almah of the Old Testament which only means “young woman.” And after all, virgin births are almost always a feature of ancient Mediterranean religions, from the Egyptian god Horus to Greek heroes to even the Roman Emperor Augustus. (Cf., James Still, “The Virgin Birth and the Childhood Mysteries of Jesus.”)

• That “virgin” as in the dozens of “virgins” that a jihadist martyr would purportedly enjoy in the afterlife as his reward is a mis-translation from a word in Syriac (a language other than Arabic used in the Koran) that means “white raisins.” (Cf., Ibn Warraq, “Virgins, What Virgins?”).

(Next week: The cultural and institutional siege against the Church)

Email: rigoberto.tiglao@gmail.com

OPEN LETTER TO P. NOY’s JUSTICE and FINANCE A-TEAM

2010-07-14T19:03:00.001-07:00

The following article will be published tomorrow or the day after in the Philippine Daily Inquirer. If you agree with it substantially, kindly pass on or alert others of kindred spirits.

Eduardo B. Olaguer

*****
OPEN LETTER TO P. NOY’s JUSTICE and FINANCE A-TEAM

We, the Advocates of Truth in Lending associates hereby announce that we are joining the national clamor “to defeat the enemies of the state through good governance… by wielding the tools of justice, social reform and equitable governance” as was so sincerely and inspiringly proclaimed by President Noy Aquino in his inaugural address.
Thus we humbly dare to speak for the tens of millions of our countrymen who for so long have suffered with us, especially during the last twelve years, from unconscionably and iniquitously EXCESSIVE interest rates which have gone as high as 36% per annum that have been routinely imposed by commercial banks under the supervision of the Bangko Sentral; or those surreptitiously collected by quasi-financing companies NOT supervised by the latter charging at least 45% per annum; or by installment-sales Dealers of motorcycles/tricycles with their going rate of at least 58% p.a. AND, worst of all, by giant department stores and their “SUPERMALL” owners-BANKERS who charge their BONDED agents/dealers 2-month fixed interest charges of 5% to be added to and payable with the principal in 4-equal installments every 15 days, which actually translate to an effective rate of 57.6% per annum when computed on the basis of the Bangko Sentral’s statutory and mathematical definition of effective “Simple Interest” for such installment credit transactions. In turn, these agents/dealers recruit their own customers who will pay for their purchases on installment using the bank-and-mall-owner’s Credit Cards, at the higher rate of 7% (instead of 5%) for two months’ credit as the add-on interest charge, payable together with the principal in 4 equal semi-monthly installments. These naïve customers enter into such atrociously objectionable contracts, OBLIVIOUS of the universally recognized mathematical fact, (but certainly KNOWN by the mall-owners-bankers) that they are being actually charged interest at the stupendous rate of 80.64% per annum, based on the Bangko Sentral’s statutory formula. That formula has the force of law because it is mandated by Section 2i of CB Circular No. 158 which are the Implementing Rules and Regulations of The Truth in Lending Act (RA 3765).
The root cause of this free-for-all nationwide GRAVE SOCIAL INJUSTICE perpetrated by means of gouging naively trusting consumers with unconscionably USURIOUS interest charges, is the fact that Ferdinand Marcos issued P.D. No. 1684 on March 17, 1980 thereby authorizing the old Central Bank to prescribe the maximum rate of interest. And so in 1982, the Jobo Fernandez-led Monetary Board WENT OVERBOARD by issuing its infamous Circular No. 905 which provided among others, that: “The rate of interest …. on a loan … regardless of maturity and whether secured or unsecured, that may be charged or collected by any person… should NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY CEILING prescribed under or pursuant to the Usury Laws as amended.” (emphasis added)
Nevertheless in various landmark Decisions e.g. Corazon G. Ruiz vs Court of Appeals (GR. No. 146942), Medel vs Court of Appeals (299 SCRA 481), Sps. Solangon vs Salazar (GR. No. 125944), the High Court has been consistently INVALIDATING excessive e.g. 3% per month (which is actually 42.576% per annum!), stipulated interest rates, and instead has reduced them to the legal rate of 12% per annum! And in Almeda vs PNB and Court of Appeals (256 SCRA 307) the High Court has reiterated that “Any contract which appears to be heavily weighed in favor of one of the parties so as to lead to an unconscionable result, IS VOID”! (emphasis added)
It is high time therefore that P.Noy’s A-Team of policy and decision makers in the fields of economics, finance and justice working in collaboration with Congress, should immediately take steps to REPEAL this highly anachronistic and INIQUITOUS Presidential Decree No. 1684. Otherwise, it will only be in our oft belittled “Pilipines” where there continues to be such a barbarically CRIMINAL albeit legalized USURY imposed by and/or in collaboration with seemingly respectable Christian businessmen including prominent Catholics who despite being conscienceless USURERS, routinely participate in the “Holy Sacrifice of the Mass” and even dare to receive the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. They ought to be reminded that whether legal or not, USURY remains MORALLY ABHORRENT. (vide Catholic Catechism paragraphs 2409 and 2536)
Hopefully therefore, our most respected Catholic economists will all see the GRAVE SOCIAL INJUSTICE in such a sad state of credit affairs, considering that no country in the whole wide world has ever attained sustainable long-term economic growth and stability, while burdened by high interest rates, and MUCH LESS when UNCONSCIONABLY EXCESSIVE. Thus our Supreme Court’s aforecited Decisions enlightened by its Justices’ mostly intuitive grasp of real economics AND with a deep sense of SOCIAL JUSTICE, have been consistently STIGMATIZING interest rates greater than 18% per annum as “iniquitous and contrary to public policy”, even if mutually agreed to by both borrower and lender!

Admittedly it will take at least a year for the repeal of Presidential Decree No. 1684 even assuming OPTIMISTICALLY, that the shaky majorities in both the Senate and Lower House will be in agreement.
In the meantime however, there is SO MUCH that is DOABLE and OUGHT BE DONE IMMEDIATELY, in order “to defeat the enemies of the state through good governance” strictly on the basis of that little known and much less understood nor appreciated old Central Bank Circular No. 158 which provides the statutory teeth for the Truth in Lending Act together with the wellknown relevant provisions of our Civil and Penal Codes vis-à-vis commercial obligations and contracts.
These forgotten statutory teeth of CB Circular No. 158 which was issued in October 1963, are the technical provisions under Section 2i thereof, which contain the statutory definitions (hence with the force of law) of Simple Annual Interest Rates i.e. interest rates per annum, and the statutory limitations on the widely mis-used interest computation formula I = PRT/365, as follows: (with emphases and comments added)
“Simple annual rate” is the uniform percentage which represents the ratio, on an annual basis, between the finance charges and the amount to be financed.
In the case of a single payment upon maturity, the simple annual rate in percent is determined by the following method:
finance charge 12 x
amount to be maturity period
financed in months

Addendum: (Comments)
a) Let the “finance charge” or interest be denoted as I
b) Let the “amount to be financed” or Principal be denoted as P
c) Let the “maturity period in months” be denoted as T and 12 as the number of months in one (1) year.
d) And thus by substitution with the above algebraic symbols, the “simple interest” formula with LIMITED APPLICABILITY is the result, per CB Circular 158 (2i) derived as follows:
The Simple Annual Rate R = I/P x 12/T or: R = 12I/PT
e) And by transposition, it becomes:The Interest Charges or Finance Charges I = PRT/12 where T is the maturity period expressed in months which may often be less than 12 months, and R is the given or resulting Simple Annual Rate as the case may be, while P is the principal or amount to be financed
f) And so if the maturity period T will be expressed in days (which may often be less than 365 days) instead of months, necessarily the denominator 12(months) should be replaced by 365 (days). Thus the formula becomes: I = PRT/365, Thus too:
I = P x R x T/365, where P is the Principal, R is the given Simple Annual Rate, and T is the maturity period expressed in days, at the end of which “one single payment” of interest I is due.
g) Hence I = PRT/365 MAY NOT BE USED on a monthly/quarterly basis PRIOR to loan
maturity!

In the case of the normal installment type of credit of at least one year in duration, where installment payments of equal amount are made in regular time periods spaced not more than one year apart, the simple annual rate (R), in percent, is computed by the following method:

Number of payments
finance charge in a year x
amount to be total number of
financed payments plus one

In cases where the credit matures in less than one year (e.g., installment payments are required every month for six months), the same formula will apply except that: the number of payments in a year would refer to the number of installment periods, as defined in the credit contract, if the credit matures in one year. For example, the number of payments in a year would be twelve for this purpose in a case where six monthly installment payments are called for in the credit transaction.

Incidentally, RA 3765 requires all establishments extending credit, to have all the above statutory provisions posted prominently within their premises!
Sad to say, our commercial banks and other commercial lenders or financiers are favored with the obvious and benign tolerance of the Bangko Sentral whose chief executive Governor as well as its Chairman of the Monetary Board who is often the Secretary of Finance, are both usually former Presidents of our biggest commercial banks. Thus it practically explains why our local BIG MONEY LENDERS have succeeded in SUPPRESSING the statutorily-mandated FULL publication of CB Circular 158. And as a result, the formula I =PRT/365 and the more complicated formulae for installment purchases on credit, are often FRAUDULENTLY mis-used or ignored in computing the monthly or quarterly interest charges on loans and/or their corresponding “effective” rates. And so the FRAUDULENT compounding and bloating of already bloated interest rates well beyond their contractually stipulated Simple Annual Rates are cleverly or even CRIMINALLY DISGUISED! And so too unfortunately today, virtually a handful of borrowers outside big corporate boardrooms know for a fact that Section 2i of CB Circular No. 158 PROHIBITS the use of the formula I = PRT/365 except for interest charges covering “single payments upon maturity”!!! And worse, installment-sales buyers/customers unwittingly accept installment payment plans whose effective interest rates range from 57.6% per annum to as high as 80.64% per annum!
In addition to our urgent recommendation for the immediate STOPPAGE of such widespread fraudulent victimization of innocent borrowers, we also completely agree with the incoming administration’s LOGICALLY CORRECT policy of FIRST IMPROVING TAX COLLECTION EFFICIENCY, before even considering the oppressive alternative of RAISING TAX RATES or TAXING OTHER NEW SOURCES of commercial revenue. Thus for example, it is a far simpler matter of IMMEDIATELY ORDERING the B.I.R. to APPREHEND and PENALIZE those responsible for the widespread commercial banking MALPRACTICE of NOT ISSUING OFFICIAL RECEIPTS on interest charges collected from borrowers, instead of increasing the Withholding Tax on such earnings. For it is a widely known fact that instead of O.R.s, merely Debit Memos and/or Statements of Account are issued by these banks to acknowledge interest payments directly deducted from the borrowers’ bank deposit accounts, thus facilitating large scale TAX EVASION…
Our collective records show that all the abovedescribed commercial lending malpractices among others, have been brought up repeatedly to NO AVAIL to the official attention of both the Bangko Sentral and the B.I.R. as well as in various judicial courts over the last ten years. Nevertheless, these FRAUDULENT malpractices have continued UNABATED with ever growing IMPUNITY!
Thus in a letter-complaint dated 5 April 2000 addressed to members of the House and Senate Committees on Banks, with a copy furnished to Mr. Rafael Buenaventura as Governor of the Bangko Sentral, one of our incorporators brought up the mathematically precise fact that the STATUTORY formula I = PRT/365 when fraudulently mis-used on a monthly basis instead of only for single payments of interest and principal “UPON MATURITY”, and if applied on an 18% per annum Promissory Note, such mis-use results in an effective rate of 19.56% per annum, or an illicit gain of 8.67% MORE (19.56/18), in terms of EFFECTIVE interest income earned by the lender-bank. Applying this ILLICIT incremental gain of 8.67% on Two Trillion Pesos in commercial bank loans outstanding in 1999 with an assumed average stipulated interest rate of 18% per annum, he conservatively estimated in April 2000 that the fraudulent incremental “boondoggle” was around P31 Billion per year. That was TEN YEARS AGO! That amount should now be at least DOUBLE on an annualized basis.
In comparison, the one-time Bolante boondoggle in fertilizers worth some P728 Million, PALES in comparison. Therefore: tama na, sobra na!

The Incorporators
ADVOCATES FOR TRUTH IN LENDING, INC.
(In the process of incorporation)
P.O. Box 745 Araneta Center
Cubao, Quezon City 1135

Atty. Nelson A. Clemente Atty. Nathaniel A. Lobigas
Romeo J. Jorge Eduardo B. Olaguer
Priscilla D. Zapanta Carmelito R. Zapanta
Atty. Runy M. Sarda

MARY, “Mediatrix of All Grace” (Part 2)

2010-02-12T01:43:00.000-08:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

62-100212

One of the most significant features of the Catholic Church that distinguishes it from any other religion or “church”, is its constant and endless stream of “private” supernatural revelations as distinguished from the “public” or official revelations contained in the Old and New Testaments. Particularly significant are the claims for such private occurrences during the past two centuries involving the Blessed Virgin Mary and Her prophetic announcements of apocalyptic Divine Justice “soon” to be faced by mankind.

Starting with La Sallete (1846) and Lourdes (1858), both in France, Fatima in Portugal (1917), Beauraing (1932) and Banneux (1933) both in Belgium, Amsterdam in Holland (1945-59),Garanbandal in Spain (1961-1965), Medjugorje in Bosnia-Herzegovinna (1981 up to now), Akita in Japan (1973), Kibeho in Rwanda (1982-88), Hrushivan in Ukraine (1987) and Lipa in the Philippines (1948 and 1992-94), plus many more albeit less known, Our Lady’s singleminded core message has been centered on Her urgent pleas for constant prayer (particularly Holy Mass and the Rosary) with sincere penance, as the only way towards spiritual conversion (metanoia) into the safety and salvation in Her Son Jesus Christ. She makes these requests together with stark reminders about the ever worsening material, political, economic, moral and spiritual crises confronting the whole world.

Regardless of whether or not we believe in those private apocalyptic revelations, there is nevertheless widespread acceptance of the fact that modern civilization is now threatened with imminent near-total chaos and/or destruction, as a result of any one or a combination of probable events such as a global economic meltdown, warming of our oceans particularly those in the polar regions, extreme weather conditions, our planet Earth’s collision with an asteroid, Richter Scale 7 to 8-magnitude earthquakes, tsunamis, diseases like SARS, swine or bird flu, and even nuclear war erupting from any of the explosive geo-political controversies involving Palestine, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Taipei, Russia, Europe, China, the U.S. and the Middle East.

On February 16, 2006 CNN Television aired a scientific panel discussion during which it was claimed that as many as 142 million lives could be lost through a pandemic Bird Flu outbreak. Earlier it was posted on the website of <> that on September 17, 2005 Islamic fundamentalist President Ahmadinejad of Iran addressed a prayer right there in New York City during a speech before the General Assembly of the United Nations, to Iran’s and all Moslems’ expected liberator and “Messiah”, the so-called 12^th Immam, who is expected to come soon. And thus he said a month later on October 26, 2005 as reported by the Al Jazeerah News, that the 12^th Immam’s return would be the start of a world-wide conflagration whereby Iran would triumph over her enemies and the annihilation of Israel. This is one of the reasons why practically all major nations except Russia and China, are moving heaven and earth to stop Iran from producing its own nuclear weapons. They fear that with such WMDs, it will enable Iran to make good its threat to “wipe Israel off the face of the earth.”

And just a couple of days ago, the Eastern seaboard of the United States was again blanketed with almost a meter thick of blizzard-driven snow, causing the virtual paralyzation of the whole region including the Federal government in Washington D.C. for four successive days. Widespread speculations soon followed about a coming “Snowpocalypse” or even “Snowmaggeddon”. And practically every recent moviegoer was also reminded about Nostradamus and the related film of his predictions concerning his version of “Apocalypse Now”, widely shown in movie theaters throughout the world.

But from Our Lady’s supernatural point of view, such probably imminent physical catastrophes, though also a part of her own prophetic warnings, are NOT her main concern. In fact she considers that such cataclysmic natural phenomena, social upheavals and economic meltdown involving MAMON and his MONEY, including a geo-politically triggered nuclear war, are but God’s ultimate alternative recourse other than Our Lady’s pleas, in order to drive home the fundamental existential fact -- that without Jesus Christ, Who is the Way, the Truth and the Life, mankind will surely sow and regretfully reap his own terrible destruction.

And so I still vividly recall that evening when my late dear departed brother, Antonio B. Olaguer, S.J. and I were gifted with the rare privilege of having a marathon after-dinner tête-tête with Lipa’s visionary Teresing Castillo sometime in 1993 or thereabouts. It was some 45 years after Our Lady had completed Her first series of apparitions circa 1948 as Mediatrix of All Grace. And this second time around, through Her own voice perceived by Teresing to be emanating from a “globe of light”, She repeated Her global warning e.g. “The days are counted and judgment will come!”, and that “God’s wrath is still held by my (Our Lady’s) pleading hands… (for the world) to repent and be converted ….. (because as our Mother, she) would not like to be witness to His plan of punishment.”

And much later in November of 2006, I was once again providentially privileged in being one of those invited, aside from Teresing Castillo, separately but following each other, to confer privately with the latest visionary from Ireland, Anne, who describes herself as a simple Lay Apostle.

The private supernatural messages coursed through Anne since the year 2003 are contained in eight booklets or Volumes and other books published by Direction for Our Times and distributed here in the Philippines by former Ambassador Howard Dee’s Assisi Development Foundation. The Volumes have a formal Imprimatur from retired Bishop Federico O. Escaler, S.J.

Seeing Anne and Teresing Castillo from a short distance warmly greeting and embracing each other there at the top floor of the Intercon Hotel in Makati City, later on made me realize that it was a rare yet edifying opportunity to be a witness for a particular truth: the truth that their acceptance and obedience to Our Lady’s messages and urgent pleas for prayer and penance were a sure guarantee of a deeper universal truth – that these two visionaries, as Our Lady’s and Her Son’s true friends and disciples, had been destined to become “victim souls”, to be immolated by long years of suffering including SLANDER and VILIFICATION, but always for the sake of Christ and in Christ.

Coincidentally but certainly providentially too, the first of the eight booklets of the messages given to Anne contain Our Lady’s affirmation of those previously given by Her to Teresing which I have cited earlier. It reads as follows: (with emphases added)

Thursday, July 17, 2003

Blessed Mother: “Do you hear My Son’s voice? He is calling His children with authority. Dear little ones, He does this in an effort to save them. The Voice of my Son bears authority and that is why He says His children will know that it is He, their God, who calls out to them. My little ones must make a choice now. And they must choose God and all that is good. Chosen ones, it is time to pray, and you have been called upon to pray. Join your mother in this mission of mercy to your fallen brothers and sisters. Together we minister to their souls, preparing their souls to melt with love for the Divine Rescuer, who seeks them out at this time. Truly, we call you with an unparalleled urgency. You feel this in your hearts and this is an accurate, divinely placed, knowledge. Little ones, be joyful. God has chosen you to help Him and that is wonderful for you and for every soul that you reach. Through you, I will reach out to many. I am helping Jesus, with every grace available to me at this time. Much of this grace comes from your prayers and sacrifices and little offerings. So do not begrudge me these gifts. Children, I am also using, in a special way, the lives of my holy ones who are consecrated to me. Priests and religious, holy men and women, console my heart in extraordinary fashion right now and I am maximizing the tremendous graces I receive from these righteous souls. Religious in the world are under attack. Be brave, religious souls. Your mother defends you as her own and you will be raised up to your rightful place soon. Instead of being honoured by the world, you are reviled and slandered. This will not endure. I want to say that there are those religious who have disappointed my Son and turned to the evil one. Do not think, oh souls of Satan, that you will escape divine justice. And for you who have damaged innocent souls? All of heaven quakes with the retribution that will be yours. I say this to you with a special gravity. Repent. Admit your sins and become cleansed. Only in this way will you enter into the Kingdom of God. Children, be reflective during these times. We are with you, and preparing the world for a marked change. I bless all of you and seek to lead you to my Son.”

And much earlier on October 29, 1977 our Blessed Mother gave a similar, albeit milder warning through Reverend Father Stefano Gobbi (Message No 138 from Our Lady Speaks to Her Beloved Priests), as follows: (with emphases added)

138

October 29, 1977

Feast of Blessed Michael Rua

Doubts and Perplexity

a. “Do not be surprised, beloved sons, that my Adversary does everything he can to obstruct this work of mine.

b. His favorite weapon is to sow doubts and perplexity about what I am doing in the Church. He tries to base these doubts on reasons which are seemingly solid and justifiable. Thus he instills a critical attitude toward whatever I tell you, even before you have received and understood my words.

c. You happen to hear of certain brothers of yours who are cultured men and often even experts and masters in theology, who reject those things I tell you, because they sift all my words with their minds, which have already been filled with the richness of their culture. And so they find insurmountable difficulties precisely in those phrases which are so clear to the simple and small.

d. My words can be understood and accepted only by one whose mind is humble and well-disposed, who has a simple heart, and whose eyes are clear and pure. When the Mother speaks to her children, they listen to her because they love her. They do whatever she tells them, and thus they grow in knowledge and life.

e. Those who criticize her even before they have listened to her and those who reject what she says before putting it into practice, cannot be her children. These people, even though they increase in learning, cannot grow in wisdom and life.

f. I tell you this so that you will not be troubled if you hear that even the learned and the teachers find difficulty in my words, while everything appears so clear and simple to whomever I call to be little. Look to your heavenly Mother who knows very well where and how to lead you so that the plan of her Immaculate Heart may be fulfilled. Do not allow yourselves to be either discouraged or surprised by the doubts and the perplexities which can even increase, without however being prejudicial in any way to my great work of love.”

Therefore it has to be emphasized that the much more significant and essential messages given by our Blessed Mother to both Anne and Teresing as well as those through Father Gobbi, have to do with God’s LOVE for mankind, now expressed more often during this Marian Age, through our Blessed Mother. She pleads with us to repent and to reconcile with Her Son Jesus Christ preferably through the intercession of Her Immaculate Heart. And it is precisely such seemingly unsophisticated, thus incredible to the sophisticated and even irrelevant, messages that most of the secular world will reject. In fact, Christ Himself predicted such a typical reaction from among “the wise and learned” (Matthew 11:25). For indeed whenever we are so full of our proud thoughts, we reject divinely inspired promptings and messages which to the simple, poor and oppressed, are so limpidly edifying.

And so I believe we should pray for and take real pity on the Papal Nuncio and the President of the University of Sto. Tomas who at that time in 1948, orchestrated the condemnation of Teresing Castillo’s and her other reliable co-witnesses’ testimonies concerning Our Blessed Mother’s private revelations, as the “Work of the Devil!”

And yet there are still too many Catholic bishops and priests nowadays, who think that it is fashionably “progressive” for them to consider all private supernatural revelations as mere superstition or at best irrelevant.

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate of the Philippines

February 12, 2010

THREE CHEERS!!!: FOR THE FIVE PAST PRESIDENTS OF OUR INTEGRATED BAR

2010-02-04T01:42:00.000-08:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE! 61-020410

I have always believed that a “NO BRAINER” in any profession or work is basically a “NO BRAINER” too for ordinary persons gifted with common-sense, even if they are in some OTHER field or discipline.

Thus for us ordinary non-lawyers who have an adequate understanding of the English language and a College-level grasp of basic logic, a provision of our Constitution which states that the appointment of a successor-in-office to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court SHOULD be made by our President within ninety days after that judicial office becomes vacant, is NOT CONTRADICTED but merely QUALIFIED by another provision which mandates an EXCEPTION to the prior rule. And so such appointments are EXPLICITLY prohibited by our Constitution from being made, starting two (2) months prior to a Presidential election and until the end of the incumbent President’s term of office. Besides, as in the case of the incumbent Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato Puno who will retire on 17 May 2010, the mandatory period for making his successor’s appointment extends 90 days after May 17 or until August 14, 2010. And since by EXCEPTION the prohibited period will end much earlier on June 30, 2010 therefore, there will still remain some 45 days for the next elected President to fulfill the mandate of the law.

For most basic it is in LOGIC that an EXCEPTION is NOT a CONTRADICTION! Thus my Merriam Webster Collegiate Dictionary (10^th Edition) defines “EXCEPTION” as an “exclusion: a case to which a rule does not apply”; whereas “CONTRADICTION” is defined as a situation wherein two related propositions, statements or rules CANNOT BE TRUE OR POSSIBLE, BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. Thus if one of the two is true or possible, the other one must be false or impossible. And conversely, if one of the two is false, the other one must be true. As an example, the Christian proposition that “God exists” is contradictory to atheists’ belief that “There is NO God!” But such is NOT the case in the abovecited provisions of our Constitution! And so in contrast, the statement “All souls will be eternally saved EXCEPT those who refuse to be saved!” just like those Constitutional provisions, do NOT contain a contradiction at all. Indeed a NO BRAINER…

And so in order to “cure the contradiction” (sic!), or more precisely, to FELONIOUSLY circumvent thus KNOWINGLY VIOLATE the law, PGMA wants to make the appointment prior to March 12, 2010 when the 2-month prohibitory period kicks in, even if there is still NO VACANCY in the position of SC Chief Justice at that time obviously because Chief Justice Puno would NOT YET have retired prior to May 17, 2010!

Thus the public statement issued by the past (covering the last 10 years) National Presidents of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, should please all lovers of logic and common-sense, particularly with respect to the following:

v The proposal… to circumvent (the) Constitution… is sheer arrogance of power.

v It is preposterous (and) ludicrous… to claim… the proposition is necessary…

v It is sheer sophistry to say now that this rule of succession (Section 2 of the Judiciary Act of 1948) has been repealed by the 1987 Constitution… (considering that the latter) provides that “all existing laws not inconsistent with this Constitution shall remain operative until amended, repealed or revoked”.

v It insults the intelligence of even the most puerile mind for anyone to argue that the Chief Justice is not a member of the Supreme Court. (For if so according to PGMA and her mouthpieces, the successor to Chief Justice Puno is NOT covered by the pre-election ban KUNO!)

But the Attorneys/Past IBP Presidents Raoul R. Angangco, Jose Aguila Grapilon, Arthur D. Lim, Teofilo S. Pilando and Feliciano M. Bautista saved what was best, for the last, when they cited Section 261 of the Omnibus Election Code and Section 3(a) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. 3019) both of which “impose the penalty of imprisonment and permanent disqualification from public office” on violators thereof. Thus by inference, on the basis of those statements from our courageous and clearheaded IBP Past Presidents, those harsh provisions of existing CRIMINAL laws would clearly be applicable in particular to Supreme Court Associate Justice Renato Corona or to anyone else “who succumbs to the temptation of power and accepts an illegal appointment to become the next Chief Justice (because he/she) benefits from the proceeds of the crime and shall stand criminal prosecution.” (emphasis added)

For the benefit of those who may disagree, the abovecited statements are reproduced here below in FULL together with the relevant Constitutional provisions involved.

But the most vexing question remains: why would the President of the Philippines and her would-be accomplices to such an obviously NO BRAINER criminal act with CONSPIRACY to boot, take such a GREAT RISK of becoming convicted felons incarcerated behind PRISON BARS? What’s behind it all? Are they that desperate?

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate

of the Philippines

February 04, 2010

Relevant Provisions of our Constitution

Article VIII Sec 4. (1) The Supreme Court shall be composed of a Chief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices. It may sit en banc or in its discretion, in divisions of three, five, or seven Members. Any vacancy shall be filled within ninety days from the occurrence thereof.

Article VII Sec. 15. Two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his term, a President or Acting President shall not make appointments, except temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety.

Article VIII Sec. 9. The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower courts shall be appointed by the President from a list of at least three nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council for every vacancy. Such appointments need no confirmation.

Article XVIII Sec 3. All existing laws, decrees, executive orders, proclamations, letters of instructions, and other executive issuances not inconsistent with this Constitution shall remain operative until amended, repealed or revoked.

STATEMENT OF PAST NATIONAL PRESIDENTS

OF THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES

We, the undersigned past National Presidents of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, strongly condemn the actions of a powerful yet subservient few who are proposing to commence the procedure in nominating applicants for the vacancy to be left by Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno prior to his mandatory retirement on May 17, 2010.

Under Section 15, Article VII of the Constitution, the President is prohibited from making any appointments at least two (2) months prior to the next Presidential Elections. In fact, the Supreme Court categorically declared in the case of In Re Appointments, 298 SCRA 408 (1998), “that this ban not only applies to the Executive but also to the Judiciary.”

The proposal to appoint a Chief Justice is obviously intended to circumvent this Constitutional prohibition against midnight appointments and lay the basis for the outgoing President to appoint a Chief Justice of her choice despite the absence of a vacancy. This is sheer arrogance of power.

It is preposterous for those behind this ludicrous proposal to claim that the proposition is necessary in order for the Supreme Court to function unhampered by the “hiatus” occasioned by a vacancy in the High Tribunal. At present, the Supreme Court is composed of Chief Justice Puno and 14 Justices. Upon the retirement of Chief Justice Puno, 14 Associate Justices will be more than enough to constitute a quorum.

At that point in time, by operation of law, the most senior Associate Justice will then take the place of Chief Justice Puno as Acting Chief Justice pursuant to Section 2 of the Judiciary Act of 1948. This is a time-honored tradition observed for more than half a century in the history of the Supreme Court.

It is sheer sophistry to say now that this rule of succession has been repealed by the 1987 Constitution. Section 3 Article XVIII of the 1987 Constitution provides that “all existing laws not inconsistent with this Constitution shall remain operative until amended, repealed or revoked.” The framers of the 1987 Constitutional Commission are clear in their deliberations that in the event of the inability of the Chief Justice to act in any capacity, for any reason, including his retirement, the most senior Associate Justice shall assume the position as Acting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

In fact, the same rule of succession was followed in 1992 at the end of the term of Chief Justice Marcelo B. Fernan where then Associate Justice Andres R. Narvasa assumed the position as Acting Chief Justice prior to his official appointment as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. To argue an implied repeal is disingenuous.

It is also a misrepresentation of the letter and intent of the law to say that the President can appoint the next Chief Justice even in the absence of a nomination from the JBC. The flimsy justification advanced in support of this position is that Section 9, Article VIII of the Constitution on the power of the JBC to submit nominations refers only to “members of the Supreme Court.”

It insults the intelligence of even the most puerile mind for anyone to argue that the Chief Justice is not a member of the Supreme Court. Section 4(1), Article VIII of the Constitution clearly states that the Supreme Court is composed of a Chief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices. Since the ratification of the 1987 constitution and the establishment of the JBC, all appointments of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, including the appointment of Chief Justice Puno by the incumbent President, were issued on the basis of the list of nominees submitted by the JBC. It taxes credulity how such a misinterpretation of the Constitution can be foisted upon our people.

What is clear is that anyone taking part in this shameful conspiracy to trample upon the Constitution in blind obedience to the whims of today’s wielders of power will have to contend with penal laws that punish their actions.

Section 261 of the Omnibus Election Code defines the issuance of midnight appointments and promotions during an election ban as an election offense and punishes with imprisonment and permanent disqualification from office all principals, accomplices and accessories in this illegal act.

Section 3 (a) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act also punishes with imprisonment and disqualification from public office anyone “persuading, inducing or influencing another public officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules and regulations duly promulgated by competent authority or an offense in connection with the official duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such violation or offense.”

That both penal laws impose the penalty of disqualification from public office emphasize that these acts constitute a clear betrayal of public trust. Let it be known that apart from individuals now obviously complicit in this attack against our fundamental law, anyone who succumbs to the temptation of power and accepts an illegal appointment to become the next Chief Justice benefits from the proceeds of the crime and shall stand criminal prosecution.

When the powerful begin to misinterpret clear provisions of law to suit their selfish ends, the law becomes a tool for the mighty when it was meant as protection for the weak.

We implore the Judicial and Bar Council to stand in defense of the rule of law and to restore decency in the process of succession to the highest office in our judicial establishment. We ask them not to bow down to the blatant abuse of power by a partisan few.

We simply ask people in whom we have reposed our trust to serve our nation, to follow the Constitution, to act with a modicum of decency, and to stand on the right side of history as we join hands in defeating the machinations of those betraying the public trust.

Signed

RAOUL R. ANGANGCO

(1995-1997)

Signed

JOSE AGUILA GRAPILON

(1997-1999)

Signed

ARTHUR D. LIM

(1999-2001)

Signed

TEOFILO S. PILANDO

(2001-2003)

Signed

FELICIANO M. BAUTISTA

(2007-2009)

MARY, “Mediatrix of All Grace” (Part 1)

2010-02-01T00:15:00.000-08:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

60-100201

My wife Daisie and I together with four other married couples/lay associates of ours in the Marian Movement of Priests (MMP) were highly privileged last Thursday, to have been assigned to the 9AM-to-11AM slot for the Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, there at the World Trade Center as the MMP lay members’ prayer support for the Second National Congress of Priests.

Among the organizers’ gifts of appreciation to each of us was a booklet entitled “I am MARY, Mediatrix of All Grace” authored by Teresita L. Castillo, and published with a) the Imprimatur of His Eminence Ricardo J. Cardinal Vidal (Archbishop of Cebu, Philippines); b) a FOREWORD from the Archbishop of Lipa, Batangas, His Excellency Ramon C. Argüelles; and c) a corresponding MESSAGE from the immediate past President of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines and Archbishop of Jaro, His Excellency Angel N. Lagdameo.

I thought I was already quite familiar with the entire story about Our Lady’s series of private apparitions with many instances of “shower of petals” and “messages” given to Sister Teresita when she was still a 21-year old Carmelite Novice in their monastery at Lipa City in 1948, and again, some 43 years later in 1993 and 1994. For sometime in 1994 I had a long private interview with her together with one of her priest-confidants, my brother, the late Antonio B. Olaguer S.J. And four years ago she and I also discussed there in her house in Parañaque, the latest congruent and CONFIRMATORY messages being given since 2004, to Anne the Lay Apostle from Ireland and published in a series of booklets being distributed in the Philippines by Direction for Our Times through the Assisi Foundation of former Ambassador to the Vatican, Howard Q. Dee.

But reading for the first time her own personally-written account of those supernatural events (for I had intuitively believed in her since the first newspaper reports in September 1948 about those events, when I was still a first year high school student at the Ateneo de Naga), made me feel as if her story were as fresh, exciting yet even more edifying and COMPELLING than before!

Yes, I tried for the past couple of days to reach her through the telephone. For I wanted to ask her permission to reproduce her booklet in this Website, for the purpose of discussing its profound ramifications for all of us and in connection with my previous blog articles on basically the same matters pertaining to our Catholic Faith. Apparently I am only one of many thousands who would like to talk to her after having read her booklet. Thus her telephone must have been taken “off the hook” because it is now constantly emitting a “busy” signal.

And so, considering the fact that her booklet has no mention of any “copyright” claim nor any name of the Printer or Publisher, and is apparently NOT FOR SALE, I have come to the conclusion that Teresing Castillo will not mind if I repeat her full story in this blog and website of the Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate – <www.catholicxybr.org>

Here it is therefore, dear readers and visitors, so that you may all know Jesus Christ even more intimately through Mary, his Mother and ours too.

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate of the Philippines

www.catholicxybr.org

February 01, 2010

Whereto and Whatnow Philippines? (Part 5/Conclusion)

2010-01-18T01:43:00.001-08:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE

59-100118

The first half of the Philippine Daily Inquirer editorial last January 3 entitled “Sources of Hope” was somewhat parallel to that of the CBCP President’s message for the New Year, thus it started as follows: (emphasis added)

The Latin phrase “annus horribilis” has been in the popular lexicon ever since Queen Elizabeth II used it to describe 1992, a year plagued by misfortune for her property and her family. The same has been said of 2009; it surely qualifies as one of the worst years in living memory.

It comes as no surprise, then, that polled before the year ended, an overwhelming majority of Filipinos from all walks of life (89 percent, according to the Social Weather Stations) expressed hopefulness about this year.

We have dwelt on the disasters and the grim events that hogged the headlines in 2009, the political and economic difficulties that beset a nation battered by natural calamities.

What we wish to do now is point out that even as official irresponsibility and impunity alienated the public, and the economy and nature battered the citizenry, we were able to witness heroism and compassion temper these events, giving hope and providing inspiration to all of us.

Suffice it to say that if we saw our political institutions preferring to live lavishly, lie constantly, exercise impunity with a near-total failure on the part of the citizenry to exact accountability, we saw individuals and even groups demonstrate how to serve humbly, and live lives that bear authentic witness to truth and public service.

While still far less prevalent than we hope, these witnesses to virtue and duty have helped the public to realize that official corruption and indifference have a price; and that the public has the means to change the situation for the better.

Former Prime Minister (and recent convert to Catholicism) Tony Blair’s World View column entitled “A time of tests”, was also all about the tough times that decision makers have to face today. It ended up with the following conclusion:

“So no matter how difficult it is, we should remember what it is we believe in and why.”

“So now is the moment, even among all the uncertainty, for some clarity- and that clarity comes best from a worked-out strategy based on a strong set of convictions.”

TOUCHE! And thank you dear Mr. Blair…

If we combine the first half of the PDI editorial with Tony Blair’s last few lines, surprisingly and providentially we end up with a combined commentary that leads to a very Christian point of view and logical synthesis as well. On second thought, it should not be surprising at all, considering that some 90% of our people are Christians as well as Mr. Blair, most of whom we can safely presume to have acquired a certain level of HOPE which is one of the three Christian theological virtues, from where all human virtues are rooted, e.g. justice and fortitude.

Thus to synthesize: the local examples of “heroism and compassion” triggered by Ondoy and other disasters have truly given “hope and provided inspiration to all of us” and constitute “authentic witness to truth and public service”, even in the face of the government’s penchant for “irresponsibility”, telling lies to the public with “impunity” and the citizenry’s frustrated-efforts to “exact accountability”.

And Tony Blair’s suggested solution to the world’s equally or even more complex, problems of security, global warming and economic meltdown, for the purpose of achieving “clarity” in order to arrive at effective remedies and authentic service for the common good, starts, common-sensically, with what the decision-makers truly believe in -- “a worked-out strategy based on a strong set of convictions”. Indeed, any rational and potentially effective solution to any problem must start with one’s clear idea of what a “GOOD” END RESULT should be, and WHY.

And so I submit that there can be no better and clearer template, for such a set of convictions or beliefs for our predominantly Christian nation than that familiar and acceptable Doxology, the Lord’s Prayer: the “Our Father” which most of us already know! In fact the Catechism of the Catholic Church which the great John Paul II left as one of his most enduring legacies to us Catholics, emphatically states that the Lord’s Prayer “is truly the summary of the whole gospel.” (paragraph 2761), a topic which is discussed in the very last sections of the Catechism.

But for far too long we Filipino Christians have implicitly yet mindlessly accepted the conventional secular notion that it is possible “TRULY to be good” merely for its own ABSTRACT sake. The late Jesuit Father John P. Delaney used to refer sarcastically to this commonly misunderstood tautology about moral goodness or virtue as “it is good to be good”. It is Christianity’s basic belief however, that Christian values are morally “good” because these stem directly from our FAITH in Jesus Christ who gave and LIVED the most authentic examples of all virtues including “heroism and compassion”, in obedience to “Our Father”, thus showing us “the Way, the Truth and the Life” via the Christian and Blair-suggested “set of convictions”. And all these are embodied in the Gospel as God’s Eternal Word, and synthesized by our Lord Himself in the “Our Father” prayer.

Thus for example, for the last 2,000 years the Gospel and the Catholic Church Magisterium have been consistent in teaching the TRUTH about the sacredness and inestimable value of even JUST ONE HUMAN PERSON, whose body, soul and spirit are worth more than “the whole world” (Matthew 16:26). Why? Because ALL PERSONS are created by God in His own image and likeness for the purpose of enjoying eternal life with Him in Heaven. In fact that was one of the first truths about our Catholic Faith that I learned from my Kindergarten teacher, the Benedictine nun Mother Gracia in St. Scholastica in 1940 – that “God made me to know Him, to love Him and to be happy with Him forever in Heaven!”

I am aware that statements like these are JARRING to the sensibilities of people like former President Fidel V. Ramos. He even considers it a violation of the Philippine Constitution and Filipinos’ freedom of conscience, when our Bishops boldly and publicly proclaim the truth of the sacredness of human life by urging us Catholics NOT TO VOTE for candidates who support the Reproductive Health Bill’s provisions which promote the suppression of human life from becoming NASCENT, or even from attaining full maturity in their mothers’ wombs, by suffocation through contraceptives/abortifacients.

Nevertheless it is such transcendental faith-AND-moral issues which our Catholic Bishops are DUTY-BOUND to continue to speak out on, as forcefully and boldly as they may, because that is precisely what and why by solemn and sacred oath they have dedicated themselves to do and LIVE FOR and even DIE FOR! Thus to “Our Father”, these Bishops have pledged “Thy Will be done!”

Thus too, Pope Benedict XVI exhorted his African bishop-colleagues during their recent weeks-long Synod, for them to “deal with reality, but from the perspective of God and His Word”, and that “reconciliation, justice and peace are not possible without a profound purification of the heart, without a renewal of thought, a metanoia (conversion), without a newness that MUST come precisely from the encounter with God.” (emphasis added)

And so just like the PDI editorial, Tony Blair’s World View and William Esposo’s Noy or Never proposition last January 3 of the New Year, certainly NONE of these were “unconstitutional”, nor a violation of anybody’s “freedom of conscience”, obviously because these were not being imposed but merely proposed. And in the case of our Catholic Bishops’ exhortation to our voters, it was given to us Catholics in the context of their sacramentally conferred moral and spiritual authority, albeit with caritas in veritate or charity in truth, to boot! For such is the “heart of the Church’s social doctrine” according to Pope Benedict XVI in his latest encyclical, which by implication Fidel V. Ramos would similarly consider as violative of the Philippine Constitution if copies of Caritas in Veritate were to be distributed to us by the Catholic Bishops of the Philippines…

Providentially just like Tony Blair’s column piece, last Sunday’s First Reading for Holy Mass from the prophet Isaiah, and Responsorial Psalm as well, are both fitting reminders to us Catholics and Christians alike including Fidel V. Ramos, and also for me, to cap this last part of my series of articles about our nation whom Providence has gifted to us all in His unlimited Love and Wisdom..

The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; upon those who dwelt in the land of gloom a light has shone. You have brought them abundant joy and great rejoicing, as they rejoice before you as at the harvest, as men make merry when dividing spoils.

For the yoke that burdened them, the pole on their shoulder, and the rod of their taskmaster you have smashed, as on the day of Midian. For every boot that tramped in battle, every cloak rolled in blood, will be burned as fuel for flames.

For a child is born to us, a son is given us; upon his shoulder dominion rests. They name him Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero, Father-Forever, Prince of Peace. His dominion is vast and forever peaceful, from David’s throne, and over his kingdom, which he confirms and sustains by judgment and justice, both now and forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will do this! (emphasis added)

Psalm 98: (Responsorial Psalm)

ALL THE ENDS OF THE EARTH HAVE SEEN THE SAVING POWER OF GOD!!!

Amen…..

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER
Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate of the Philippines
www.catholicxybr.org
January 18, 2010

Whereto and Whatnow Philippines? (Part 4)

2010-01-12T02:01:00.001-08:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE

58-100112

Recounting basically the same horror stories cited by Patricia Evangelista on events which recently besetted and besotted our nation, former Justice of the Supreme Court, Isagani A. Cruz unlike his half-century-or-more younger Daily Inquirer colleague’s cynical tone, nevertheless concluded his New Year’s first Separate Opinion article, with clear optimism by invoking “the blessing of Almighty God”.

It is Ms. Evangelista’s cloying yet understandable cynicism about our nation’s future, which young Senator Noynoy Aquino and his think-tank supporters such as Philippine Star columnist William M. Esposo, should take note of very seriously.

Yes, it is a highly probable fact that somewhere around at least 40% of our voters, about a third of whom are of the same age-generation as Patricia Evangelista, presently agree with Mr. Esposo that it should be “Noy or Never” on May 11, 2010. That 40% is indeed a significant plurality which even at this early stage of the pre-election period, might be sufficient to propel Senator Aquino to the Philippine presidency this coming May 11, assuming that NP candidate Manny Villar’s recent rally in the latest opinion surveys will not be sustained.

But for those of us of an older generation such as former Justice Isagani A. Cruz, who like me is perhaps also ambivalent about or at least NOT AGAINST a Noynoy Aquino presidency, my concern is NOT about his NOT WINNING on May 11, 2010…

My main concern about Senator Aquino is about AFTER his winning the presidency yet FAILING THEREAFTER to validate the hopes of oft-disappointed young idealists like Patricia Evangelista.

Thus my REAL FEARS of his possible simple FAILURE or even gross BETRAYAL of those hopes and “dreams” of some 40% of our voting population who have presently put their TRUST in Noynoy Aquino’s perceived honesty and integrity, have little to do with his relative lack of hands-on executive experience. For I would have the very same fears if Manuel Villar and even more so if Erap Estrada were ahead in the opinion polls.

In fact Senator Aquino’s campaign for the Presidency thus far has been handled, presumably under his overall leadership, far more competently than his political rivals have expected, despite Aquino’s rejection of BIG MONEY contributions because of the usual strings attached to it. There is apparently a reasonably cohesive working relationship between the old Liberal Party survivors with their recent balimbing recruits, and the various volunteer groups led by simon-pure personalities from civil society, and with all of them submitting themselves to the leadership of the Senator. Albeit it may be only thus far, considering that Senator Aquino is still ostensibly the frontrunner in the surveys.

And so let us suppose that Benigno C. Aquino III is elected President of the Philippines on May 11, 2010. Let us also presume that he will win despite attempts or fears of a) assassination plots by either a breakaway extreme-left group of ideological fanatics or by elements of a right-wing CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY abetted by highranking pro-Lakas Kampi military and civilian stooges in government; and b) a failure of elections CONTRIVED by COMELEC insiders and politicians designed to trigger a coup d’ etat or Martial Law under the latter’s military allies. I truly hope and pray however, that such DEVILTRY will be FRUSTRATED, for otherwise utter chaos and violence will ensue throughout our nation.

But will such an initial and seemingly self-accomplished Noynoy Aquino success in leadership by being elected President continue for another six years in terms of not just a normally effective national GOVERNANCE but a never-before-seen but NECESSARY MORAL LEADERSHIP? Will he be able therefore to gather together and inspire better than did his mother circa 1986 and Fidel V. Ramos circa 1992, an A-TEAM of at least a THOUSAND NEW honest AND competent co-leaders and colleagues in government throughout those next six years, to form a) a cohesive and competent Cabinet, b) allies in the House of Representatives and the Senate to support his legislative agenda, and c) many others in the Civil Service competent and trustworthy enough to clean up and streamline the Bureau of Customs, the Bureau of Internal Revenue, the Department of Education, the Philippine National Police and the Armed Forces of the Philippines at the very start? For the real “dream” about Noynoy Aquino is not merely about his becoming a better President than the present one, which should not be too difficult, but for him to be a GREAT President.

And so above all, how will he accomplish the absolutely necessary radical moral conversion of those abovecited Top 1000 co-leaders and associates including HIMSELF, PLUS at least another one hundred thousand mid-level bureaucrats and frontliners in those key agencies including the COMELEC, the judiciary, the Coast Guard, the DPWH, and the members of BOTH COVENS in Congress (NO PUN untended!), plus hundreds of other agencies which directly dispense justice and other essential services for our people especially to the poor? And where will he get honest and competent replacements for those to be booted out, quick enough and smoothly enough without fanning a nationwide rebellion of the MOST CORRUPT and intransigent government employees who are expected to defend their cash-cow SINECURES perhaps with their very lives?

And lastly, how fast will he acquire the Solomonic wisdom to adjudicate internal controversies on wide ranging and complex matters of law, economics, education, foreign affairs, the environment, job creation, reproductive health, peace and order, as well as the resilience to absorb all the stresses and strains from all the above while burdened by the expected FIERCE infighting for political and financial spoils among his closest allies, friends and relatives, AND, still have the gumption to fend off the political attacks and continuing personal defamation from the various groups among the new opposition? I hasten to add however that neither Manny Villar, nor Erap Estrada would necessarily do any better (to say the least) under those same circumstances, given the usual TRAPO type of leadership they have demonstrated in the past. Not even Cory Aquino herself nor Fidel V. Ramos, much less Ferdinand Marcos and PGMA who all went through their respective post-election gauntlets, were able to prevent the Philippines from SLIDING DOWN and being overtaken, just on ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE and good governance alone, one after the other by Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, and now even by Vietnam.

Yes dear Chair Wrecker and your kindred spirits of good will, on those terms I agree with you but with a slight twist: NOY et al or NEVER AGAIN!

Patricia Evangelista therefore, may be justified in her cynicism considering the fact that our corruption blighted nation has to pass like a wounded camel through a needle’s eye just to survive for the next six years, REGARDLESS of who our President may be.

To the twelve apostles who in shock asked for Our Lord’s explanation upon hearing His “camel through the needle’s eye” reply to the rich young man seeking His guidance in reaching heaven (Matthew 19: 20-26), Christ’s answer was that what is impossible to man does NOT apply to God for whom “all things are possible”. Thus Solomon (for a while), Ignatius of Loyola, Mother Teresa of Calcutta and many other true believers, albeit highly exceptional cases, succeeded by God’s grace even beyond their own imagination, in the governance of their respective- institutions and above all, in the moral/spiritual conversion of their own selves, even without any previous executive experience and in the face of seemingly impossible odds…. And so by the same God’s grace with the help of at least tens of thousands of his real friends and supporters, is I believe, the ONLY WAY Benigno C. Aquino III will become a truly great President/Chief Executive of the Philippines despite the daunting tasks he will have to face, EVEN AS OF NOW!

Thus I thank former Justice of the Supreme Court, Isagani A. Cruz for the last phrase in his January 3, 2010 Separate Opinion in the Philippine Daily Inquirer – “under the blessing of Almighty God”. For it leads to the only feasible and realistic solution of the many gargantuan and Aegean stable type of complex problems facing our people, the vast majority of whom are Catholics and/or Christians.

For if God Our Father Almighty and our Christian Faith are irrelevant to our nation’s prospects of rising from the pits the present and previous administrations have brought us to, then there would be NO COMPELLING REASON for objecting to any CPP-NPA scheme to have Joma Sison or Satur Ocampo as our next President anytime soon.

And almost certainly if Noynoy Aquino is elected President this year but FLUNKS thereafter, Mar Roxas would become the next hopelessly sacrificial candidate of the Liberal Party, just like the Gibo Teodoro of today. And the young generation of talented idealists like Patricia Evangelista will have become even more cynical vis-a-vis all political reform possibilities.

And so we could have, if not Joma Sison, a re-invented General Hermogenes Esperon as dictator, or else a President Jinggoy Estrada, or a new CON-ASS generated new Constitution, soon begetting a Prime Minister Gloria Macapagal Arroyo with Matt Defensor or even Danilo Suarez as her puppet ceremonial President, together with Agnes Devanadera or even Mirriam Defensor Santiago as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court with all of them acting as Defensores Gloriae. Take your pitiful pick….

And so, would that Senator Noynoy Aquino or whoever is elected as our next President, will re-read and take to heart the Biblical advice which the late Jaime Cardinal Sin caused to be engraved at the EDSA Shrine soon after those historic days in February of 1986. It is the same advice given during a private appearance by God, Yahweh Himself, to Solomon after begging God during the dedication ceremonies for the New Temple in Jerusalem, “to keep the promises” Yahweh made to David his father.

“I have heard your prayer. I choose this house to be the place where sacrifices are to be offered to me. When I close the skies and there is no rain, when I command the locust to devour the land, when I send an epidemic among my people, and my people who bear my name humble themselves, and pray and look for me, and turn from their wicked ways, then I MYSELF YAHWEH will hear from Heaven and forgive their sins and restore their land.” (2 Chronicles 7:12-14)

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate of the Philippines

Whereto and Whatnow Philippines? (Part 3)

2010-01-07T02:00:00.000-08:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE

57-100107

The recent New Year’s Message of His Excellency, the Most Reverend Nereo P. Odchimar, DD who is the Bishop of Tandag, Surigao del Sur and the recently elected President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), is as follows:

Dear People of God,

“Happy New Year!” This greeting may not just remain a simple wish; its realization is within reach. Now, more than ever, we hold the promise of a happier Philippines, despite the tragedies that happened in the preceding year.

Institutions need change. No less than the late Holy Father, Pope John XXIII of holy memory, said when he convoked the Second Vatican Council: “Ecclesia semper reformanda est”. (The Church must always be in the process of reform). 2010 in our political life is an election year; people through the exercise of their right of suffrage will effect a power shift in the executive and legislative branches of our civil government. We must retain what is good, promote what still needs improvement and discard what is base and corrupt. However, admittedly and sadly, a number of us have remained myopic by focusing our attention only to the satisfaction of the moment, swayed by the glitter of money and promises of patronage, and do not raise our eyes beyond election time to the resultant situation created by our indiscretion. Those who have allowed, much worse abetted, corruption to thrive in our midst, do not have the right to complain.

If we were a part of the problem yesterday, we can also be a part of the solution today. We hold the key to a better tomorrow. We need an informed electorate enlightened through voters’ education, a vigilant citizenry who will guard against the attempts of some to frustrate the genuine will of the people, and steadfast persons who stay undaunted by intimidation of ruthless politicians, in order to put into office reliable leaders who would guide our nation in the coming years.

The poor constitute the greater part of our population. They are remembered and courted by politicians during the campaign period. “Poverty alleviation”, “more jobs” and “upliftment of the masses” are some familiar refrains chanted by candidates and issues incorporated into their attractive platforms. If only there is political will, the economic situation of our people would be far better that it was generations back.

Social transformation starts within ourselves. Election is an opportunity we cannot afford to miss. Over and above the factors beyond our capacity, with our great faith in God and in ourselves, we can still make our wish for a happy new year a reality. God bless us all.

+NEREO P. ODCHIMAR, DD
Bishop of Tandag
CBCP President
December 30, 2009

With all due respect to His Grace, there is the likely possibility that the message was composed for him by somebody else. Nevertheless the composition will be viewed by most Filipinos as “de cajon”, or worse, naively optimistic about the supposed powers of “political will”. For it is chockfull of what we at the Asian Institute of Management’s Faculty many years ago routinely recognized as mere “motherhood” statements, with which practically nobody will disagree yet most everybody else will have completely forgotten just a few minutes later. If Father John P. Delaney, S.J. our UP Students Catholic Action (UPSCA) chaplain were still alive, he would probably also instantly label those statements as namby-pamby piosities - - his pet peeve.

But my own overall critique of the message itself, which was supposedly given for and in behalf of some 130 active and retired bishops in the CBCP, goes deeper. And so I surmise that the good Bishop of Tandag is NOT exclusively the cause of its insipidity.

Being new on the job as CBCP President, His Grace must have tried hard to come up with a message that would NOT be seriously OBJECTIONABLE to any sizeable number of other bishops. In short, his main priority had to be that of NOT TERRIBLY DISPLEASING anybody. But it also meant that NEITHER would it TRULY PLEASE anybody. And thus the more important question or issue is “Why is it so?”

Again with all due respect to all 130 or so pastors-members of CBCP, I believe that such is the case because they as Catholic bishops have NOT and NEVER have reached any reasonably acceptable level of positive agreement, much less a majority consensus whether in principle or in actual observance, on their own faithful performance of perhaps the most NEGLECTED, yet most important and most difficult duty as Catholic bishops!

Canon 387 of the Roman Catholic Church’s Code of Canon Law, under Book III, Part II, Section II, Title I, Chapter II (BISHOPS) and Article 2 thereof, states (with emphases added) as follows:

“Mindful that he is bound to give an example of holiness, charity, humility and simplicity of life, the diocesan Bishop is to seek in every way to promote the holiness of Christ’s faithful according to the special vocation of each. Since he is the principal dispenser of the mysteries of God, he is to strive constantly that Christ’s faithful entrusted to his care may grow in grace through the celebration of the sacraments, and (thus) may know and live the paschal mystery”.

The iconic Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and future Pope made a similar yet far more trenchant observation while being interviewed by Vittorio Messori in August of 1984, as follows: (vide pages 58 to 62 of the Ratzinger Report)

The decisive new emphasis on the role of the bishops is in reality restrained or actually risks being smothered by the insertion of bishops into episcopal conferences that are more organized, often with burdensome structures. We must not forget that the episcopal conferences have NO THEOLOGICAL BASIS; they do not belong to the structure of the Church, as willed by Christ, that cannot be eliminated; they have only a practical, concrete function.

The new Code of Canon Law… prescribes the extent of the authority of (such) conferences, which cannot validly act “in the name of all the bishops unless each and every bishop has given his consent, (except if) it concerns cases in which the common law prescribes it or a special mandate of the Apostolic See…. determines it” (CIC, Canon 455, 4 and 1). Thus no episcopal conference, as such, has a teaching mission; its documents have no weight of their own save that of the consent given to them by the individual bishops.

…… It happens that with some bishops there is a certain lack of a sense of individual responsibility, and the delegation of his inalienable powers as shepherd and teacher to the structures of the local conference leads to letting what should remain very personal, lapse into anonymity…. It happens then that the search for agreement between the different tendencies and the effort at mediation often yield flattened documents in which decisive positions (where they might be necessary) are weakened…. Well, the really powerful documents against National Socialism (Hitler’s Nazism) were those that came from individual courageous bishops. The documents of the (German Bishops) Conference, on the contrary, were often rather wan and too weak with respect to what the tragedy called for.

….. Thus, in many episcopal conferences, the group spirit and perhaps even the wish for a quiet, peaceful life or conformism lead the majority to accept the positions of active minorities bent upon pursuing clear goals….

….. It seems very nice always to decide together. This way however, entails the risk of losing the “scandal” and the “folly” of the Gospel, that “salt” and that “leaven” (which) today are more indispensable than ever for a Christian (above all when he is a bishop, hence invested with precise responsibility for the faithful) in the face of the gravity of the crisis. (emphases added)

And so if it is true that our Catholic Bishops have never achieved any real consensus as to what they ESSENTIALLY OUGHT TO BE, day-in and day-out, as truly thus “HOLY” Catholic Bishops, therefore it should not be a surprise to us that their collective message on New Year’s Day or on any important issue for that matter, will be as UNCONTROVERSIAL, as possible.

In contrast, the very caption “Working and Praying in 2010” of the January 3, 2010 column piece of Fr. Jerry M. Orbos, SVD in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, immediately captured the full flavor and essence of applicable Catholic Church teachings on how Pinoy People of God must live their lives throughout this year. Ora et labora! And like Fr. Manoling V. Francisco, S.J. whose main theme in the Philippine Star (God’s Word Today) was “Mary, the Star of Bethlehem”, a controversial yet most fundamental Catholic Marian dogma of Mary being the true Mother of God, was quietly yet boldly presented. Fr. Orbos too, though not as a surprise at all to those who know him well, similarly albeit briefly acknowledged Our Lady’s being the Theotokos.

Incidentally, Jesuit Father Manoling Francisco is a prime albeit rare proof of Jesuit exemplar Father Reuter’s assurances to me that not all Jesuits of today have junked our Blessed Mother as part of neo-Jesuitry’s so-called New Theology now being taught by Jesuit theologians at the Ateneo de Manila at all levels including its Grade School. For in his wellknown sacred music and its lyrics, as well as in his theology, Father Manoling like Father Jim Reuter have kept the faith and charism of their founder St. Ignatius of Loyola, including OBEDIENCE to the Pope….. Thus we learned from the likes of other real Jesuits such as John Delaney, Horacio de la Costa, William L. Hayes, Lorenzo Ma. Guerrero when public veneration and filial devotion for Our Lady was a true-blue Ateneo tradition, that the surest way to our Lord Jesus was through Mary. Ad Jesum per Mariam!

But the most pleasant surprise was reading the Postscript piece of veteran newspaperman and regular columnist of the Philippine Star, Federico D. Pascual, Jr. For I thought for a while that his caption “Ít’s still the same bad world out there” would have the same cynical point of view as that of Patricia Evangelista’s Method To Madness in the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

Instead however, more than 80% of his column space was devoted to Papa Bene’s message on January 1, 2010 on the occasion of the annual celebration of the World Day of Peace. Thus in contrast to that of the CBCP President, the Pope’s homily for that occasion was given prominence by Mr. Pascual. And like Frs. Orbos and Francisco he also found relevance for his readers and significance for the occasion in bringing the Blessed Virgin Mary into the picture as the Mother of God by using the Pope’s easily understandable yet poignant presentation. And thanks too to Mr. Federico D. Pascual Jr. whom I suspect has NOT been blessed with nor perhaps even considered any formal priestly vocation other than the common priesthood we Catholics share in Baptism and as the “priest of the basic Church” as padre de familia to our own kith and kin, a prominent Catholic layman-professional Journalist has unabashedly given public personal testimony on his Catholic Faith. Rara avis! Nowadays, a rare bird indeed…

And so in solidarity with Fathers Orbos and Francisco, and with my fellow “priest of the basic Church” Federico Pascual, I shall repeat what I wrote in one of the paragraphs of my December 8, 2009 LIGHT A FIRE blog.

“But more importantly I dare say: our Catholic bishops will ultimately be able to arrive consistently at a comprehensively Catholic yet credible even if controversial, PUBLIC declaration on the faith and moral aspects of any TRULY IMPORTANT national issue, ONLY for as long as a clear and cohesive MAJORITY among THEMSELVES are personally and habitually attuned to the same basic theological, ecclesial and philosophical MOORINGS, coupled with a truly PRAYER-FILLED MARIAN spirituality, in solidarity with their first-among-equal brother, the Bishop of Rome, Peter’s Successor!”

And so I submit that it will NOT be any of our current Presidential candidates who will lead us to the Promised Land. For I believe it will and SHOULD BE such Catholic Bishops and priests who will inspire and will lead PINOY People of God, BY THEIR HABITUAL EXAMPLE as Christ’s faithful shepherds of His flock and by His grace through the Holy Sacraments especially the Eucharist and by His Divine Providence, back to moral righteousness in our politics, governance and citizenship.

The wise authors of Canon Law 387 were surely aware of the simple yet fundamental fact that the ultimate opposite alternative to the habitual “HOLINESS” its provisions demanded from our Bishops, was and still is, SINFULNESS or betrayal of Jesus Christ! Since the heydays of the Greek philosophers Aristotle, Plato, Socrates followed by their Roman counterparts such as Galen and Virgil – they all gave the highest moral value to virtues such as justice, honesty and fidelity to vows. More importantly, they themselves practiced what they preached!

Let me close this article by revisiting just four samples of recent and most genuine contemporary private supernatural revelations wherein our Blessed Mother and Jesus Christ Himself have been issuing dire warnings to Catholic bishops and pastors who have been unfaithful to their sacred duties such as those mentioned in Canon Law 387 and who have rejected related dogmas of the Church.

From the Rev. Father Steffano Gobbi’s To The Priests, Our Lady’s Beloved Sons, a Blue Book compilation of the 604 messages Our Lady had been giving over a period of 25 years to Fr. Gobbi until December 31, 1997, which has been granted an IMPRIMATUR by some 200 or more different Bishops and Cardinals (including Cardinal Sin circa 1990) since 1973 when the earliest messages were first published by the Marian Movement of Priests, a worldwide apostolate with more than 200,000 priest-members.

Message No. 420, given in Sao Paolo, Brazil on March 13, 1990

When the Son of Man Returns

a "You read in the Gospel: 'When the Son of Man returns, will He still find faith on earth?' (Luke 18:8)

b Today I want to invite you to meditate on these words, uttered by my Son Jesus. They are grave words, which cause one to reflect and which succeed in making you understand the times through which you are living. First of all, you can ask why Jesus has uttered them: to prepare you for his second coming and to describe for you a circumstance which will be indicative of the proximity of his glorious return.

c This circumstance is the loss of faith.

d Also, in another part of holy scripture, in the letter of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians, it is clearly announced that, before the glorious return of Christ, a great apostasy must take place. The loss of the faith is a true apostasy. The spread of the apostasy is therefore the sign which indicates that the second coming of Christ is, as of now, close at hand.

e At Fatima, I have foretold to you that a time would come when the true faith would be lost. These are the times. Your days are marked by this painful and significant situation, which as foretold to you in holy scripture: the true faith is in the process of disappearing in an ever increasingly greater number of my children.

f The causes of the loss of faith are:

(1) the spread of errors which are being propagated, and are often taught by professors of theology in Catholic seminaries and in Catholic schools and which thus acquire a certain character of credibility and legitimacy;

(2) the open ,and public rebellion against the authentic Magisterium of the Church, especially against that of the Pope, who has from Christ the duty of preserving the whole Church in the truth of the Catholic faith;

(3) the bad example given by those Pastors (Bishops!), who have allowed themselves to be completely possessed by the spirit of the world and who become propagators of political and sociological ideologies, rather than messengers of Christ and of his Gospel, thus forgetting the mandate received from Him: 'Go into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature.'

g Thus, in these days of yours, apostasy on the part of many of my poor children is inundating you more and more.

h When the Son of Man returns ...

i If indeed his return is close at hand, then my motherly action becomes more concerned and vigorous, in order to assist all my children to remain ever in the truth of the faith. This is why I have asked you to consecrate yourselves to my Immaculate Heart. This is why, in these times of yours, I have spread everywhere my Marian Movement of Priests: to form the little flock, reunited in the prayer of the cenacles and watchful in expectation - the flock gathered together and formed by me to ever preserve the true faith.

j Thus, when the Son of Man returns, He will still find the faith on earth in all those who will have consecrated themselves to me, allowing themselves to be gathered together in the heavenly garden of my Immaculate Heart."

--o--

2. And from the Lord Jesus Himself as was dictated to Maria Valtorta (Q43:514) on October 30, 1943, referring to abortion as the “crime of crimes” in section 45, page 70 of the book The End Times as revealed to Maria Valtorta, as published by Editions Paulines, Centro Editoriale Valtortiano SRL, translated from Italian to English by Paul T.Y. Atworth.

Jesus says:

“I am the Merciful One. I am indulgent and I forgive. There is so much that I forgive. I forgive what I see you do out of human weakness, not what is done out of deliberate human self-interest. I will never be as severe a judge as with those who, with their thinking sold to Satan, commit more crimes than outlaws, lead others to commit crimes, and above all commit the crime of crimes, thus leading souls to mistrust God.

“Nowadays this crime of homicide and deicide is not the monopoly of a few. They kill bodies and souls and kill the idea of God in souls, making them blind like empty eye-sockets.

“The crowds make it out (realize it) too late. But I see, at the instant you think and act. And all of you, ungodly of flesh and spirit, will be judged with an extremely severe judgment.”

From Volume One Chapter 8, pages 144-145 (with emphasis supplied) of Direction for Our Times, given through Anne an Irish-American who was invited by both Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales and Archbishop Angel Lagdameo in November 2006 to speak to several large audiences of priests, nuns and lay people in Metro Manila and in Iloilo City.

Thursday, July 17, 2003

Blessed Mother:

”Do you hear My Son’s voice? He is calling His children with authority. Dear little ones, He does this in an effort to save them. The Voice of my Son bears authority and that is why He says His children will know that it is He, their God, who calls out to them. My little ones must make a choice now. And they must choose God and all that is good.

…

Priests and religious, holy men and women, console my heart in extraordinary fashion right now and I am maximizing the tremendous graces I receive from these righteous souls. Religious in the world are under attack. Be brave, religious souls. Your mother defends you as her own and you will be raised up to your rightful place soon. Instead of being honoured by the world, you are reviled and slandered. This will not endure.

I want to say that there are those religious who have disappointed my Son and turned to the Evil One. Do not think, oh souls of Satan, that you will escape divine justice. And for you who have damaged innocent souls? All of heaven quakes with the retribution that will be yours. I say this to you with a special gravity. Repent! Admit your sins and become cleansed. Only in this way will you enter into the Kingdom of God.”

From the booklet written by Father Edward Carter, S.J. entitled “Tell My People”, published by the Office of Media Affairs, CBCP under Fr. James B. Reuter, S.J. on page 61 thereof:

Jesus:

“My beloved friend, remind My people that the Church was born from My Heart, pierced with the soldier’s lance on Calvary. From My pierced Heart the Church with her sacraments was born. Two of these sacraments, the Eucharist and Baptism, were symbolized by the Blood and Water which flowed forth from My pierced side.

…

“I am Lord and Master. I request that all My people listen to My words and respond to them. I love My people with a tremendous love, and in this great love I give them this message!”

“My church is experiencing critical and very difficult times. There are many divisions. There are many false teachings - including some put forth by certain theologians. These false teachings occur because those responsible are not in proper union with My vicar, the Pope, and the Church Magisterium. I want all My children to pray daily for the cure of many and serious ills of the Church. With increased prayer and sacrifices for the health of the Church, that day will soon come when the Church will be purified and revitalized. When that day comes, the Church will be a light to all nations as never before. When that day comes, the renewed Church will be characterized by the triumph of the Immaculate Heart and the reign of My Sacred Heart. Thus the message of Fatima will have reached fulfillment.”

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

1045 Aurora Blvd., Quezon City

Whereto and Whatnow Philippines? (Part 2)

2010-01-05T01:15:00.000-08:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

56-100105

Part 1 of this forthcoming series of articles was written more than a year ago. It is re-printed at the tailend of this article as Part 1 thereof. Several recent noteworthy events and circumstances led me this New Year to decide on writing an extended commentary in relation to those events.

My last blog on December 8 last year was triggered by a Franciscan priest-friend of mine. He had been extremely bothered by the frontpage news about a diocesan priest in Lubao, Pampanga who had elevated PGMA’s sufferings from the intense media criticism of her electoral aspirations to the House Speakership, up to the same level of self-sacrifice as those of Our Lord Jesus Christ during His crucifixion. Incidentally, I suspect that many more of our Catholic priests and bishops may have had similar if not even more agitated reactions to such a gross comparison.

At the end of the previous year, the newly elected President of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, His Excellency the Most Reverend Bishop Nereo P. Odchimar came out with a press release urging our voters to make use of the coming national elections as a rare opportunity to boot out our current coven of corrupt politicians. Incidentally too, the spoken-for spokesperson of Malacañang soon after complimented the good Bishop for his reminder and added the more significant spin that allegedly PGMA had not felt alluded to by the Bishop’s pre-election message as perhaps the most obvious political croc in this corrupt caboodle.

And so last Sunday, the last day of the Christmas Season, I decided to take this renewed re-entry into our fast heating-up cauldron of political commentaries, soon after having read the column pieces of a) Federico D. Pascual Jr. of Postscript (“It’s still the same bad world out there”); b) William M. Esposo in As I Wreck This Chair (“Why for over 40% of voters 2010 is Its NOY or Never”); c) Fr. Manoling M. Francisco, S.J. in God’s Word Today (“Mary, the Star of Bethlehem”); d) The PDI Editorial (Sources of Hope); e) former Supreme Court Justice Isagani A. Cruz in his Separate Opinion; f) Fr. Jerry M. Orbos, SVD (Working and praying in 2010); g) Patricia Evangelista’s Method to Madness, and lastly h) former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair’s World View (“A Time of Tests”).

If I still had some indecisiveness in tackling as a single topic such a vast and complicated array of political matters with moral/religious ramifications, it must have dissipated like the firecrackers’ smoke of the New Year’s Eve after I tediously had to listen to the rambling Sunday homily of a religious priest (not a Franciscan nor a Jesuit). He started off, supposedly as an alter Christus, by repeating a TV advertisement’s joke about three other “Kings” who came with the Magi to greet the newborn child Jesus, namely Chowking, Tapaking and some other kinky King my ears and the sound system mercifully failed to register.

And while listening that evening to ANC’s Maria Ressa skillfully guiding a most interesting discussion on TV (Numbers Game) among a very distinguished and surprisingly sober panel of political partisan spinmasters and political survey professionals, I was also led to choose the unifying theme for my own series of articles.

Thus let me introduce that binding thread by recalling, imperfectly I’m afraid, the following elocution piece chosen for me during my Freshman high school days by my Jesuit Scholastic mentor, the future martyr in Mindanao, Fr. Godofredo Alingal, S.J. – a piece written by his fellow Jesuit and the future founder-organizer of our Christian Third Force’s Light a Fire enterprise against martial law.

Jewels of the Pauper

(by Horacio de la Costa, S.J.)

There is a thought that comes to me sometimes as I sit by my window in the evening, listening to the young men’s guitars, and watching the shadows deepen on the long hills, the hills of my native land.

You know, we are a remarkably poor people; poor not only in material goods, but even in the riches of the spirit. I doubt we can claim to possess a truly national literature. No Shakespeare, no Cervantes has yet been born among us to touch with immortality that which in our landscape, in our customs, and in our history, is most original, most ourselves. If we must need give currency to our thoughts, we are forced to mint them in the coinage of a foreign tongue. For we do not even have a common language.

But poor as we are, yet we have something. This pauper among the nations of the earth hides two jewels in her rags. One of them is our music. We are sundered one from another by eighty-seven dialects; but we are one people when we sing! The kundimans of Bulacan awaken an answering chord in the lutes of Leyte. Somewhere in the rugged north, a peasant woman croons her child to sleep; and the Visayan listening, remembers the cane fields of his childhood, and his mother singing the self-same song.

We are again one people when we pray! This is our other treasure, our Faith. It gives somehow, to our little uneventful days, a kind of splendor as though they have been touched by a king. And have you ever noticed how they are always mingling our religion and our music? All the basic rites of human life – the harvest and the seedtime, the wedding, birth and death – are among us, drenched with the fragrance of incense and the coolness of music.

These are the bonds that bind us together. This is our soul that makes us one. And as long as there remains in these islands one mother to sing Nena’s Lullaby, one boat to put out to sea with the immortal rowing song, one priest to stand at the altar and offer God to God, this nation may be conquered, trampled upon, enslaved, BUT IT CANNOT PERISH! Like the sun that dies every evening, it will rise again from the dead…

-- o --

Somewhere up there Horacio Dela Costa may be sheepishly grimacing over that so prophetic last line of his piece written circa 1940. For just about a year later, Japanese troops inexorably invaded our shores to wreak havoc on our people and to subjugate our nation. The damage inflicted by them to our nation’s Christian soul became apparent in 1945, when in turn we were just as cruel and barbaric in our vengeance on helpless captured Japanese soldiers.

And so some 65 years later, too many among the present generation such as Patricia Evangelista are now the young-turned-cynical too soon. They are eloquent proof of the continuing havoc, both moral and physical, being inflicted on our people but with FAR MORE SERIOUS DAMAGE, than during the Japanese invasion. And the saddest part of it all is the UNDENIABLE FACT that this moral and physical strangulation of our people almost to the point of asphyxiation, has gone on and on under the governance of our leaders 99.9% of whom are our fellow Filipino Christians including many PROMINENT CATHOLICS who have long been nurtured in the Roman Catholic Faith at the Ateneo, La Salle, San Beda, U.S.T., Letran and Assumption College too… among others.

Thus on April 30, 2008 I wrote the following piece, (slightly re-edited) now Part 1 (by hindsight) of this series.

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

42-20080430

Whereto and Whatnow Philippines? (Part 1)

I must confess that for sometime now I have refrained from filling up this blogspace.

It was not so much because of time and duty constraints. It was more out of a feeling of near hopelessness about the deeply rooted malaise and crises of all sorts gripping our nation. For it looked like practically everything had gone from very bad to much worse particularly during the last few months.

But hope I must, regardless of how bleak and frightening are the economic, political, moral AND religious crises confronting our people. Most distressing is the fact that consistently all the most credible Opinion Surveys indicate that almost two out of three of our citizens, whether rich or poor, in the cities or the countryside, emphatically blame the top national executives of the government for such a terrible and still worsening state of our nation.

Consider that all this obviously widespread national condemnation of our benighted leaders, have been confirmed repeatedly by our National Conference of Catholic Bishops, as well as by practically all major and credible newspaper and other media editorials, opinion writers and bloggers. And yet a substantial number of our most prominent Catholic bishops still habitually and publicly exalt a top government official who, by COMMON SENSE, by universal democratic principles, and by established management rules of governance, must be held accountable, nay CULPABLE, for allowing our nation to become such a near hopeless basket case.

Furthermore, in addition to gracing such widely publicized photo-ops officially as Catholic bishops in their full episcopal regalia while praising that official so extravagantly for supposed excellent moral qualities and good governance, these bishops also blithely dismiss even the most credible, persistent and documented accusations of corruption and mismanagement against this official, her relatives and associates. WHY, for heaven’s sake? Simply because impeachment attempts, Senate investigations and judicial proceedings even in our Supreme Court have been shamelessly sabotaged and/or immorally stymied by subservient and similarly corrupted political allies, appointees and underlings in government.

In short, the national consensus is that there is a pandemic crisis of truth vis-à-vis mind-boggling corruption all the way up to the highest levels of our government!

Providentially, last April 17 in Washington, D.C. Pope Benedict XVI recently explained to leaders of U.S. Catholic institutions that a true understanding of the real roots of any “crisis of truth”, must point to its underlying crisis of faith. Thus Papa Bene re-affirmed the Gospel by inferring that LOGICALLY and historically especially for Christians, a BETRAYAL of their Christian FAITH must be the real and primary factor underlying the habitual lies, the enormous thieveries or the shocking immoralities of those who have solemnly sworn to uphold the TRUTH but instead do exactly the opposite with shameless impunity.

And so these betrayers of the public trust must have been for some length of time, without real Faith in God. Thus MAMON and his demons inevitably lure them into enslaving their own selves under their personal idolatries and addiction to endless political power and illicitly enormous wealth, rank selfishness and inordinate pride as well, such that for them no lie is ever too obvious, no “hypocriSHE” ever too shameless.

Thus I recommend that our Catholic leaders such as Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and her crony government officials and favorite bishops read the editorial piece in the April issue of The Catholic World Report (CWR) written by its Editor George Neumayr, which succinctly submits that moral disorders and many other institutional disasters inevitably follow in the wake of mendacity and falsehood, because “drawing back from truth does not attract people but alienates them.”

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

1045 Aurora Blvd., Quezon City

www.catholicxybr.org

NOTE: Part 3 should follow soon, God willing. It will dwell on Bishop Odchimar’s message to our voters, and in relation to the Postscript article of Fr.(?) Federico Pascual, Jr., and those of Fathers Jerry Orbos, SVD and Manoling Francisco, S.J. And Part 4 will be in relation to the opinion articles of William M. Esposo and Justice Isagani A. Cruz vis-à-vis Senator Noynoy Aquino and PGMA. I shall tackle the PDI editorial and Tony Blair last in Part 5.

HEAVEN HELP THE PHILIPPINES!

2009-12-08T00:56:00.000-08:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

Feast of the Immaculate Conception

December 8, 2009

55-091208

HEAVEN HELP THE PHILIPPINES!

It is quite ironic that Catholic Christendom throughout the world today, celebrates and honors an immaculately conceived woman who is “full of grace”. And yet here in the Philippines we now seem to be endlessly bogged down with leaders conceived in graft and corruption, and thus forever “full of greed”!

Coincidentally, a Catholic religious priest-friend of mine has recently sought my comments, hopefully to sort his way out of his own quandary and embarrassment over contrasting reactions including near-blasphemous statements in the news media coming from his brother priests and various bishops concerning a most powerful albeit uniquely small lady. She it is who is singlemindedly aiming to become the next Speaker of our House of Representatives, DESPITE being for more than nine years already, not only the de facto speaker but the most reviled President of our nation EVER!

Well, now that an even more factually and legally complicated issue has suddenly surfaced vis-à-vis martial law which has been proclaimed over the province of Maguindanao, I suspect that my Franciscan priest-friend’s quandary and embarrassment might be exacerbated by NAÏVE and/or IMPRUDENT statements on the matter coming from a few of our habitually voluble-in-media Catholic bishops.

Furthermore, I too will disappoint my priest-friend because I for one would not be capable of marshalling the necessary yet DELIBERATELY HIDDEN facts and circumstances underlying that small woman’s REAL MOTIVE in wanting to be the next Speaker. The truth could be much WORSE than what I suspect it to be! And much less would I be able to DISCERN and DISTILL any hitherto undisclosed RELIGIOUS FAITH or PUBLIC MORAL ISSUES (other than the age-old paganistic ADDICTION TO POWER and political self-preservation) that are involved and are IMPORTANT ENOUGH such that even our Catholic bishops should weigh-in publicly over the matter.

IN CONTRAST the issue of MARTIAL LAW, even if only in “Maguindanao as of now” is at least a HUNDRED TIMES more FACTUALLY and LEGALLY complicated. Thus it is far more important than a small woman’s politically self-destructive and last minute desperate attempt to survive the expected horrendous judgment of our BLIGHTED nation. And so I suppose bishops should leave this most recently developing tragic complexity to others more capable and qualified to sort out if they still can, BEFORE it blows up in the face of that very same small lady would-be Speaker. For in truth she is the single most accountable and BLAME-WORTHY public official whose brazenly corrupt political and financial CODDLING of a whole tribe of FRANKENSTEINS have brought Maguindanao and MINDANAO to the brink of imploding and/or exploding anytime NOW.

And so I beg our Catholic bishops, please, not to further complicate the confusion of our people by suppressing their own urge to publicize their premature personal opinions on this obviously POLITICAL and LEGAL issue of martial law. They should wait UNTIL they are reasonably certain about the real facts and over-ridingly relevant faith/moral principles IF ANY, underlying such an ESSENTIALLY political-legal controversy. For it would be far far better for their own credibility as pastors and moral guardians, to be SILENT when UNSURE or out of their element, than to be quick-on-the-draw but DISCORDANT and thus DISCREDITING THE ENTIRE MYSTICAL BODY OF CHRIST….

But more importantly I dare say: our Catholic bishops will ultimately be able to arrive consistently at a comprehensively Catholic yet credible even if controversial, PUBLIC declaration on the faith and moral aspects of any TRULY IMPORTANT national issue, ONLY for as long as a clear and cohesive MAJORITY among THEMSELVES are personally and habitually attuned to the same basic theological, ecclesial and philosophical MOORINGS, coupled with a truly PRAYER-FILLED MARIAN spirituality, in solidarity with their first-among-equal brother, the Bishop of Rome, Peter’s Successor!

For as of now, Heaven Help the Philippines, perhaps only a FEW but still TOO MANY of our Catholic Bishops are certainly NOT LOYAL ENOUGH to the perennial teachings of the SOLID MAGISTERIAL AUTHORITY of those whom God has anointed over the past two millenia as Bishops of Rome. And so as a DIRECT RESULT, far more TOO MANY of their own teaching Catholic FACULTY within their dioceses, including Catholic priests of wellknown Catholic religious orders, are openly teaching moral and theological FALSEHOODS with utter IMPUNITY to our unwary Catholic children, including the young would-be-priests and nuns, especially in our own biggest, most prestigious and supposedly Catholic schools, seminaries and universities. Shades of the prophesied great apostasy during the coming end times!

So sad, and yet so true. And so in this 21^st century prophesying end-of-epoch phase of human history, Our Lady “full of grace” has continuously prophesying as far back as some 92 years ago in Fatima, Portugal that her faithful devotees who have been consecrated to her Immaculate Heart, particularly her beloved truly Christ-centered Catholic priests and bishops, shall lead the loyal remnants of Christ’s Mystical Body into a new heaven and a new earth, in a total and PERMANENT victory with Jesus Christ as the Returning King.

Maranatha! Come, Lord Jesus come…

LESSON ON BASIC THEOLOGY: From the Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta

2009-07-03T19:18:00.000-07:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!
54-090702

It was my first visit to a Home for the Sick and Dying Destitutes run by the Missionaries of Charity (MC), a relatively new congregation of religious nuns founded by Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta a little more than half a century ago.

I was invited last Wednesday for that visit by a friend Runy Sarda together with a group of his Fildravo Engineering employees, headed by his HR Manager Nelia Ganzon. Fildravo had been helping out every Wednesday in preparing and serving lunch to dying or soon-to-die destitutes there at the MC community Formation House compound in Tayuman, Tondo.

I saw Mother Teresa’s nuns unhurriedly yet lovingly taking care of their poorest of the poor soon-to-die wards, AS IF these destitutes were their closest of kith and kin or most intimate friends. This seemingly unbelievable behavior was soon clearly explained to me as to what their motives were and as to why the MC congregation had been fantastically flourishing worldwide. For why would they and even their millions of admirers like those Fildravo executives, so spontaneously take care of these destitutes to the extent of feeding them like their own babies, especially those who could not use their own hands and had to chew their food so very slowly?

The full explanation was just a few steps away from the working nuns. For another group of their confreres on their knees upon a cement floor, was reciting the Holy Rosary very slowly with obvious fervor. They were praying before the Blessed Sacrament exposed in a monstrance! Now and then, one of them would bow down to the floor at least TWICE before leaving the Chapel and the Rosary-praying group, in order to go back to work, and be promptly replaced by another nun who just came back from work!

Ora et labora cum amore! From Jesus Christ Himself who spent forty days in the desert praying and fasting, wondrously emulated by those solitary contemplative monks in the deserts of Palestine and Syria such as St. Anthony, and by the monastic example of St. Benedict at Monte Cassino, thereafter by St. Francis of Assisi, and some 2,000 years later by Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta and her disciples – they all have been reminding us throughout the ages that with God’s love in Jesus Christ as our motive for apostolic work, nothing is impossible!.

But without such Christian faith and love, everything and every poor helpless person would be looked upon as merely economic utilitarian objects. That is why without some level of spiritual conversion, the anti-life Reproductive Health Bill’s supporters in Congress or even those so-called ‘Catholic School’ theology professors, will remain obstinately blind. Blind they will be, to the supernatural reality of the transcendent preciousness of unborn human lives, who like our dying destitutes are all gifted by God with priceless immortal souls in His own image and likeness, and for all of whom His Son Jesus Christ suffered and died on the Cross.

And so these nuns of the Missionaries of Charity do not actively much less publicly solicit donations to fund their works of charity. Neither do they advertise what they are doing. In fact it is prohibited to take live pictures of themselves and their beneficiaries. They depend mostly on spontaneously inspired volunteers, donated goods and dribbles of money from thousands of admirers such as Runy Sarda. So they pray and work and thus flourish like the original and still faithful Carmelite contemplatives of St. Teresa of Avila and similar prayerful congregations today, whether as contemplatives in strict privacy or not.

And yet the entire compound was spotlessly clean! Runy et al washed and scrubbed the dining tables together with the floor, with generous amounts of soap and water immediately after lunch was over. I was told that this was being done THREE times a day. And the beds for the sick in the wardrooms with their immaculate bedsheets were even more of a marvel to me when I peeked in, afraid to dirty the super-hygienic floor with my shoes.

Talking to Runy’s brother Moti, who had recently been initiated to such tables-and-floor scrubbing routine after many years of a very comfortable life-style in Florida near Tiger Wood’s estate, he whispered to me with a moist eye: “After only 3 Wednesdays like these, it has become a reality check for me. My own problems now seem miniscule…”

It is also well known that the number of their new postulants and novices from far and wide are growing by leaps and bonds, such that they already have some 20 still growing MC communities just in the Philippines alone. Plus about a hundred professed Filipino sisters assigned abroad!

Yes indeed, it must be true that “In everything, God works for the good of those who love Him, whom He has called according to His plan.” (Romans 8: 28)

And so I give many thanks to Sr. Mary John Vianney, MC, of the Immaculate Heart of Mary community in Tayuman, Tondo for that most edifying sojourn at their oasis of love and generosity.

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER
Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate of the Philippines
<>
E-mail: <>

Attached is a reproduction of the providentially appropriate monthly message received from the Lay Apostles of Jesus Christ the Returning King, sent by the office of former Ambassador Howard Dee c/o the Assisi Development Foundation, Unit 503-506, Prestige Tower, Ortigas Center. <>

Monthly message as given to Anne, a lay apostle.
Lay Apostolate
ViewThursday, July 2, 2009 9:43:42 AM
To:The Secretariat

On the first of every month, Our Lord gives Anne a new message about His call to service.July 1. 2009JesusMy dear apostles, how grateful you will be that I have given you these opportunities to serve. You will look back at your time on earth and you will see that the opportunities I gave to you to serve others as apostles, were truly My greatest acts of mercy to you. You see that My service requires sacrifice. You see that often My service causes you suffering and perhaps you think that it would be easier to live your life without such a call to serve. It is true that often by rejecting My call to service in a day, you can diminish your immediate suffering. I acknowledge this truth. It is evident to all that service to Jesus Christ comes with an enhanced call to sacrifice. While I acknowledge this, I ask that you, too, acknowledge this. You are giving Me your day and I am then taking you from things that would give you instant gratification and asking you to delay gratification for the sake of others. It can appear in these moments of your life, that you are giving something up. What you do not see is that the more you serve Me and the more you abandon yourself to My call, the more grace you receive. You are giving up earthly pleasures and receiving a constant stream of heavenly pleasures. Compare the two. Earthly pleasures last for moments. Heavenly pleasures last for eternity. Perhaps you do not understand the difference. Only in heaven will you have complete understanding but let it be noted that heavenly pleasures come through you, blessing you, and then spread out, blessing all those around you. Your soul is open to receiving heavenly graces, not just for you but for the whole world. Imagine how beautiful a soul looks to heaven when that soul is an open recipient of heavenly graces. Thank you for helping heaven. Thank you for helping those around you. And thank you for helping Me. Regardless of your suffering and regardless of your sacrifices, there will be a moment when you will thank Me for allowing you to participate in this, My renewal.
-- Lay Apostles of Jesus Christ the Returning KingDirection for Our Times - Manila SecretariatAssisi Development FoundationUnit 503-506, Prestige Tower,F. Ortigas Jr. Road, Ortigas CenterPasig City 1605Tel. No. (02) 632-1001 to 03Fax No. (02) 632-7844www.mariansolidarity.com

Letter Reply to Tom Borromeo

2009-06-29T02:15:00.000-07:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

53-090629

Letter Reply to Tom Borromeo

From: Ed Olaguer

To: Tom Borromeo

Monday, June 29, 2009

cc: Paul Horrigan ; Tony Roxas ; Manny Amador ; PV Beley ; Dicky Boncan ; "gooseling2002@yahoo.com"

Fr. Christian Saminal ; Fr. Greg Gaston ; Fr. Joey Paras ; Fr. Jun Bermejo ; Fr. Paulo CRS ; Fr. Ramon Merino ; Fr. Renato Oliveros ; Fr. Cayo Estrada ; Fr. Richie Santos ; Fr. Ted Milan Torralba ; Fr. Zen Taufik ; "tingsdb@yahoo.com" ; rodney hart ; "lruthocampo@yahoo.com" ; "riveral_b@dlsu.edu.ph"

Subject: 26 U.P. Law Professors Support RH Bill

Dear Tom et al:

There you go again dear Tomas Borromeo, disturbing my peace and equanimity this fine Monday morning of the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul…

Levity aside, yes I was already much disturbed upon reading the same news article last weekend, considering that I am a post jubilarian U.P. graduate, circa that historic period of Jesuit Father John P. Delaney’s chaplaincy at Diliman as the icon par excellence for our U.P. Students Catholic Action (UPSCA) and faculty community.

The RH Bill and the Philippines of today is I believe, mirrored in microcosm by our UPSCA’s running battles in Diliman against the U.P. Board of Regents in their definition of academic freedom and separation of Church vs. State, all of which smacked of liberal utilitarian humanism laced with anti-clerical motives.

Upon reflection on those seemingly halcyon days of my youth, in comparison to today’s national moral confusion worse compounded and confounded everyday, let me share with you Father Delaney’s battle plan so to speak, for UPSCA in those days.

Yes he constantly taught us through his daily homilies, lectures and weekly campus newsletter (U.P. Chizmiz), how to use every available logical and faith-based argument vis-a-vis the faith-and-moral issues confronting us in those days, e.g. hazing, loyalty to the teachings of Holy Mother Church, love of country, cheating in class, premature frequent dating leading sooner or later to physical intimacies between boys and girls, and of course many issues related to U.P.s much vaunted “academic freedom” for its professors and overall policy of liberal utilitarian humanism…

For the superficial minded observants of Father Delaney’s activities as Catholic Chaplain at the Diliman campus, his often fierce and uncompromising yet elementary logic with Catholic faith-based arguments, with some isolated acerbic asides, (e.g. the “pachydermic” sensibilities and lack of “cerebral capacity” among his habitual critics), must have seemed to be his only albeit effective weapon offered to us UPSCANs for our arsenal as young and militant Catholic defenders of and witnesses to our Catholic Faith.

And yet for every hour he spent arguing against his adversaries, he must have spent a thousand times more time, unrelenting energy and wisdom while exhorting us his flock to be always “centered in Christ” to the level of “heroic virtue”. Thus he urged us to concentrate more on “being” in Christ, not only as much but even more than “doing and working” for God, through Jesus Christ as God, and particularly for the poor and oppressed because they were truly “our brethren in Christ”.

Thus he used every formal and informal opportunity, even during our person-to-person chit-chats, to urge us to begin our days and live the rest of the day with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, through our conciousness of the “Holy Eucharist in us” and devotion to Our Lady and Her Rosary. And so John Delaney even counted the number of daily and Sunday consumption of the Sacred Host. These numbers rapidly increased throughout the eight years of his chaplaincy, such that more than a dozen other Jesuit Fathers from Chabanel Hall (Jesuit refugees from Red China) and from the Ateneo, were eventually required to help him out regularly. Yes, the young Fathers Reuter, Gough and Horacio de la Costa were among those 5-star Jesuit priests assisting Father Delaney, particularly in distributing Holy Communion to vast numbers of Holy Mass participants, and hearing Confessions everyday.

Reading Tom’s email early this morning, I must confess, momentarily depressed me. For I was again reminded that we lay Catholics who are publicly and consistently opposed to the RH Bill are pitifully so few.

And yet Tom’s message soon nudged me back to a decent level of resurgent courage. For it reminded me once again of the spiritual and supernatural essence of Father Delaney’s battle plan for us UPSCANs some sixty years ago. It also brought back today’s Gospel to my attention.

In today’s Gospel reading, Christ pointedly emphasized to Peter, that it was not “flesh and blood” (e.g. mere human reasoning, much less liberal utilitarian humanism) that led Peter to profess who Jesus truly was (i.e. the true God and true man) but “my Father in Heaven” who gave Peter that gift of faith in Jesus.

But I must however ‘blame’ Tom Borromeo for also reminding me, even if indirectly, to plead with our clergy, especially our Bishops and particularly those in Metro Manila who have the prime duty and jurisdiction in enforcing Ex Corde Ecclesia on our so-called ‘Catholic’ schools, universities and seminaries, thusly: “To preach continuously, discuss, reiterate, edify, be at the disposal of everyone – it is an enormous responsibility, a great weight, an immense effort.” (St. Augustine of Hippo, Sermon 339, 4)

And so albeit belatedly, thank you most sincerely, dear Tom Borromeo!

Ed Olaguer

P.S. Here below is the subject “highly disturbing” e-mail from our pesky Tom Borromeo

FW: ABS-CBN News: 26 UP Law Profs Support RH Bill

Tomas Borromeo

Dear Frs., all,

Now we know the ‘slippery slope’ of heterodoxy our dear departed Bro. Andrew at DLSU
and Frs. Tanseco, Genilo (Genovesi) et al, got their ‘Catholic’ institutions into.

They mask all of these abominations w/ terms like ‘loyal dissent,’ ‘informed choice,’ and
their most favourite, “ACADEMIC FREEDOM.”

To paraphrase Bro. Andrew: “What is keeping De La Salle from being a ‘world-class’ institution
of learning is her being Catholic!”

DLSU accepted a Ford Foundation grant and thus ‘sold her (Catholic) soul...’

Let us move that ALL PHILIPPINE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITES, COLLEGES, SCHOOLS FOLLOW: (Ex Corde Ecclesiae document attached)

“EX CORDE ECCLESIAE”
‘FROM THE HEART OF THE CHURCH’

APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
JOHN PAUL II
ON CATHOLIC UNIVERSITIES

“WHAT DOES IT PROFIT A UNIVERSITY

IF IT GAINS THE WHOLE WORLD

BUT LOSES THE SOULS OF IT’S STUDENTS.”

------ Forwarded Message

Subject: Re: ABS-CBN News: 26 UP Law Profs Support RH Bill

Dear Everyone,

Here are some historical tidbits that could shed light on how and why the UP professors so easily lent their endorsement to the RH Bill. You see, PLCPD is not the only black hole in the RH constellation. Some of you will remember "REPROCEN" from way back 1996.

The "Reproductive Health, Rights and Ethics Center for Studies and Training" was the pioneering work of Prof. ALFREDO F. TADIAR , who in 1996 "undertook extensive research into the legal and constitutional provisions on reproductive rights and abortion. His work provided the legal basis for the promotion of women's reproductive rights, of which he was a firm advocate". He started out as Director of a Ford Foundation-funded, 3-year project to set up and make operational a centre that "focused on questions of legal and medical ethics related to reproductive health". He served as the first Executive Director of the pioneering Center for Research, Studies and Training on Reproductive Health, Rights and Ethics (REPROCEN) as a joint project of the UP Colleges of Law and Medicine. Like Dr Juan Flavier, he had received extensive support from the UNFPA and the USAID and other US/EU front orgs and foreign interest groups for projects on family planning, population control, population management, reproductive rights, "IEC/M", etc. It is not surprising that REPROCEN very rapidly acquired an international character. He was designated as International Adviser to the Board of Trustees of the International Women's Health Coalition based in New York. Since the 1980s, he has served at various times as Chairman or Member of the Board of Directors of two other Philippine NGOs—the Women's Health Care Foundation and Institute for Social Studies and Action. His wife FLORENCE TADIAR is a household name in Philippine abortion advocacy. [ NB: All this was happening during the pro-abortion Clinton Administration (1993-2001), but continued well into the Bush years. ]

In collaboration with Ex-Cong. NEREUS ACOSTA (of PLCPD & AFPPD ), Prof. Tadiar was able to infiltrate his redefinitions of reproductive ethics into Catholic institutions and universities like AdMU and DLSU through 'academic' conferences and seminars on ethics and law. For example, Tadiar worked closely with DLSU sociology Prof. PILAR RAMOS JIMENEZ , then coordinator of the Task Force on Social Science and Reproductive Health. The overt aim of Prof. Jimenez' (likewise Ford Foundation-funded) task force to coordinate NGOs for the promotion of RH; the covert aim was to advocate the legalization of abortion in the Philippines . The RH task force held office in the DLSU Social Development Research Center, Behavioral Science Department where she was Dean.

Upon Tadiar's retirement, Prof. ELIZABETH AGUILING-PANGALANGAN , wife of ex-Dean Raul C. Pangalangan, assumed Chairmanship of REPROCEN. She authored "Reproductive health, rights, and their progeny: norms in case and statute law" and masterminded the filing of charges against former Manila Mayor Atienza. She is the central RH advocate in UP Law today. MORE .

REPROCEN began in Malcolm Hall at UP Diliman, but it has now gone "global", with its main offices in Wall Street, New York City.

=====================

Here is a sampling of landmark academic papers pushed during REPROCEN's early years in the Philippines:

Tadiar, Alfredo F. The Limits of Protection to the Life of the Unborn. Quezon City, Philippines: Institute for Social Studies and Action, 1993.

Ramos Jimenez, P., and Yadao, P.M.P., eds. Participatory Research in Sexuality and Reproductive Health. Manila: Social Development Research Center, De La Salle University, 1993.

62:30303 Tadiar, Florence M.; Robinson, Elizabeth T. Legal, ethical and regulatory aspects of introducing emergency contraception in the Philippines. International Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 22, No. 2, Jun 1996. 76-80
pp. New York, New York. In Eng. "This article describes the complex influences of regulatory laws, religion, politics and ethics on the provision of emergency contraception in one large developing nation -- the Philippines, which has no law specifically governing the use of emergency contraception. Although emergency methods are little-known in the country, several factors suggest that they may be well suited to the Philippines."

Correspondence: F. M. Tadiar, University of the Philippines, College of Public Health, Manila, Philippines. Location:Princeton University Library (SPR).

=====================

The strategy we see here is a standard component of Planned Parenthood social engineering ops. It involves taking and holding the academic high ground by invoking academic freedom. They can mess around like magicians every which way behind the academic wall -- before the show begins. In the end, there's nothing true. It's all sleight-of-hand. Or perhaps we should say sleight-of-mind, intellectual conjurements.

The UP Profs are Tadiar's peers and proteges. They are professors of (supposedly) the most prestigious college of law in the Philippines, but who appear to be betraying Philippine sovereignty by allowing themselves -- through REPROCEN's influence -- to be utterly beholden to foreign institutions and governments. They tout the Philippine Constitution, but have not the diligence to read the proceedings thereof in order to grasp what it truly contemplates. They should have exerted due diligence before signing their pro-RH manifesto, for in doing so, they have given a very bad name to UP Law, which is now downgraded in the minds of many to no more than a school of sloppy investigation, sophistry and subterfuge.

Eventually, magic's greatest secrets will be revealed!

Z

PS: These are the enemies we are called to love. The first step is understanding who they are and where they are coming from.

LINKS:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfredo_Flores_Tadiar#Advocacy_for_reproductive_rights
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nereus_Acosta
http://www.dlsu.edu.ph/faculty/fis/faculty_info.asp?fac_id=103921503
http://plcpd.org.ph/about.asp
http://www.afppd.org
http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.67/pub_detail.asp
http://law.upd.edu.ph/new/index.php/faculty/regular-faculty/aguiling-pangalangan-elizabeth-a
http://reproductiverights.org/en/our-regions/asia/philippines?more=1
http://reproductiverights.org/en/contact-us

2009/6/26 Melvin Castro fr_melvin@yahoo.com

Most certainly, we cannot let our guards down. We may have won this round, but we will never know what they might come up with Congress resumes session after the SONA.

We ask our lay faithful most especially to form "core family groups" in your areas to continue the formation and education (or re-education). On our part, the priests would continue to strengthen the Family and Life ministries.

We beg our Family and Life groups to consider, really consider, entering into the mass media apostolate. Contemporary families and contemporary generation are greately and/or gravely influenced by mass media.

And of course, we pray, begging Our Lady, Mediatrix of All-Grace, to obtain true conversion for all.

And please do not forget to pray for us priests, it's the Year for Priests...

Fr. Melvin

--- On Fri, 6/26/09, Manny Arejola <angatingkanlungan2010@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Manny Arejola
Subject: Re: ABS-CBN News: 26 UP Law Profs Support RH Bill
To: "Rosie
Date: Friday, June 26, 2009, 7:14 AM

Dear Rosie:

I do not know any of this people, so I do not know how to tell them that they endorsed a deadly formula to destroy our women. But if you know any of these people, kindly transmit this note to them.

Thanks.

Manny
=================================

To these 26 UP Bigots, isang tanong lang: BINASA BA NINYO ANG HB 5043?

I bet you, none of you ever did! I bet you nagtiwala lamang kayo sa paglulubid ng buhangin ni San Pascual!

Nakoryente kayo ni San Pascual tulad ng pagkakakoryente niya sa mga Obispo at mga Pastor na Evangelical!

Sayang. Isinugal ninyo ang inyong pangalan para sa isang panukalang batas reminiscent of the years of Martial Law!

Pati ba naman kayo sasali pa sa kabalbalan ni mercenary San Pascual? How much did San Pascual promise you of the P5B Lagman is trying to suck out of the system?

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Rosie B. Luistro <rbluistro@gmail.com > wrote:

26 UP Laws Profs support RH Bill
26 UP law profs support RH bill
abs-cbnNEWS.com
Created 06/24/2009 - 15:44

Moves to pass House Bill 5043 or the "Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2009" continued to gain momentum as 26 faculty members including former deans of the University of the Philippines College of Law issued a statement in support of the proposed measure.

The faculty members who recently signed the position paper, are expressing their full support for the passage of the controversial legislation.

"We believe that the bill supports Constitutionally guaranteed State obligations to protect and promote the right to health of the Filipino people. It brings to life the ideals of equality, justice, and respect for human dignity that lie at the core of our fundamental law by guaranteeing that all Filipinos have access to quality information and services in reproductive health," the statement read.

"Amid pervasive socio-economic inequality, the availability and accessibility of reproductive health care is an indispensable step towards improving the quality of life of millions of Filipinos," it added.

The 26 UP College of Law professors are Froilan M. Bacungan, Merlin M. Magallona, Raul C. Pangalangan, Marvic F. Leonen, Elizabeth Aguiling-Pangalangan, Araceli Baviera, Eduardo A. Labitag, Myrna S. Feliciano, Domingo Disini, Carmelo Sison, Rowena Daroy Morales, H. Harry Roque, Ibarra M. Gutierrrez III, JJ Disini, E. Leo Battad, Florin T. Hilbay, Rommel J. Casis, Tristan Catindig, Jose C. Laureta, Concepcion Lim Jardeleza, Antonio M.Santos, Carol Ruiz-Austria, Rafael Morales, Rowena V. Guanzon, Alfred Molo III and Stephanie Gomez-Somera.

Ramon San Pascual, Executive Director of the Philippine Legislators Committee on Population and Development Foundation, Inc. (PLCPD) lauded the law professors, who in the face of heavy opposition of Catholic hierarchy against the bill have bravely acknowledged not only the constitutionality but also the very humane character of this proposed measure.

"Despite what happened on the last days of Congressional session where the RH bill was bypassed by other less important issues, particularly by ConAss resolution, we remain confident and steadfast that this bill will become a law soon. And we find inspiration from people who continuously express their support and clamor for the passage of the bill," he said in a statement.

He said advocates of HB5043 are pushing for the bill's passage once the 3rd regular session starts in July.

"Activities to make lawmakers understand the urgency of passing the bill are already lined-up, RH advocates are still holding on to Speaker Prospero Nograles' promise that they will vote on this bill under this Congress," he said.

Below is the full statement from the UP College Faculty of Law

STATEMENT AND POSITION PAPER OF THE U.P. COLLEGE OF LAW FACULTY IN SUPPORT OF THE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL (HB 5043), AN ACT FOR A NATIONAL POLICY ON REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, RESPONSIBLE PARENTHOOD AND POPULATION DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER PURPOSES

We, the undersigned faculty members of the University of the Philippines College of Law, in our capacity as lawyers, educators, and citizens, express our full support for the Reproductive Health Bill (HB 5043) currently pending in the House of Representatives.

We believe that the bill supports constitutionally guaranteed State obligations to protect and promote the right to health of the Filipino people. It brings to life the ideals of equality, justice, and respect for human dignity that lie at the core of our fundamental law by guaranteeing that all Filipinos have access to quality information and services in reproductive health. Amid pervasive socio-economic inequality, the availability and accessibility of reproductive health care is an indispensable step towards improving the quality of life of millions of Filipinos.

The bill likewise serves to empower Filipino women in making informed choices about their health – decisions which ultimately affect the lives of their families and communities. Ensuring their right to equality before the law is not only crucial to the health and wellbeing of women and their families, but is also essential to assuring their effective participation in national development.

Similarly, we assert that the bill's adoption of the human rights framework in dealing with reproductive health is a welcome and long-overdue initiative that more appropriately reflects the emerging international consensus that treats the issue as one that principally involves fundamental rights, free and informed decision-making, and women's empowerment.

Contrary to the contention by some groups that the bill encroaches on religious freedom, we maintain that it does precisely the opposite. By providing citizens and their families with adequate information and a variety of options on reproductive health, the bill empowers them to make sound decisions. By enabling choice, the RH bill neither compels individuals nor families to resort to family planning methods or health interventions but rather empowers them to make sound decisions and access information and services for their health and wellbeing. This is fully consistent with the principle of mutual respect for religious differences enshrined in our constitutional order.

Apart from being fully in accordance with the precepts of our own Constitution and the principles established under international conventions, recent surveys have also indicated that the bill enjoys the support of the majority of Filipinos. There is therefore no further reason, whether legal or political, for our elected representatives in Congress to stand in the way of the bill's enactment into law, despite the continued protestations of certain interest groups.

We hereby call on both houses of Congress to immediately pass the Reproductive Health Bill and for those who have stood against its passage to summon up the wisdom to act, not on the basis of faulty assumptions or in the service of vested interests, but for the common good of the Filipino people.

Signed by 26 faculty members of the UP College of Law including former Deans Froilan M. Bacungan, Merlin M. Magallona, Raul C. Pangalangan and Dean Marvic F. Leonen, Professors Elizabeth Aguiling-Pangalangan, Araceli Baviera, Eduardo A. Labitag, Myrna S. Feliciano, Domingo Disini, Carmelo Sison, associate professors Rowena Daroy Morales, H. Harry Roque, Ibarra M. Gutierrrez III, JJ Disini, E.Leo Battad, Florin T. Hilbay, Rommel J. Casis and professorial lecturers Tristan Catindig, Jose C. Laureta, Concepcion Lim Jardeleza, Antonio M.Santos, Carol Ruiz-Austria, Rafael Morales, Rowena V. Guanzon, AlfredMolo III and Stephanie Gomez-Somera in May 2009, Quezon City, Philippines.
as of 06/24/2009 6:06 PM
__._,_.___

------ End of Forwarded Message

ON PADER REYOOTER

2009-05-27T20:02:00.000-07:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

52-090528

ON PADER REYOOTER

In today’s OPINION page article of the Philippine Star is the following “love story”:

'I love you, Father Reuter'

MANILA, Philippines – I was 12 when my mother divorced my father. He was a tall, golden haired, blue eyed American, who had left California to serve in WWII and returned home proudly flourishing a delicate souvenir from the Philippine Islands.

My tiny mother, observing this new world through almond shaped eyes, saw the rest of tall, white America bending down to look at her. They would speak slowly and loudly at her, remarking to each other, “Isn’t she cute?” My mother had a PhD in English literature and did not like to be referred to as cute. After two painful decades of having to buy her shoes in children’s stores, she broke the law and with two half white daughters, escaped back to the city of her own youth: Manila.

I was not yet a teenager when we stepped off the President Wilson Ocean Liner. The intense heat, the bugs, the constant swirl and hum of laughing people was overwhelming. My mother moved quickly to hide us, and within a few weeks, my younger sister and I were installed in a Philippine Catholic girl’s school: St. Paul’s College of Manila.

It was confusing to us. We were barely religious, maybe only very slightly Catholic… at Christmas. Who was St. Paul? We were children, why were we going to a college? Ah, the confusion was only beginning.

Both of us came equipped with English and Spanish. The lingua franca was Tagalog, which we could not read, write or understand.

Both of us were much larger than the Asian girls our age. My sister was a blonde. I had long masses of curly hair. Like a slow motion dream, we were buried alive in a landslide of shimmering, pitch black tresses that flowed from the heads of tiny, graceful nymphs. These girls didn’t guffaw their laughter, they giggled demurely. They didn’t argue a point; they pursed their lips and lowered their eyes. They didn’t push or shove, they pouted and turned away slowly, lifting high one perfectly curved eyebrow. We were wildflowers blown into a hothouse of exotic orchids. They wanted to talk about love. They looked us over and asked …did we have a brother? We had no brother. Ohhh, tooooo baaaaad.

We also didn’t have the right shoes. The right socks. The right book bags.

This was the 1960’s and we’d been raised by bohemians who had encouraged us to speak our minds, ignore our appearance and argue both sides of the communist take over of Cuba.

We were American peasants in bad need of a full spa make over.

To make matters worse, we had no father. Not only had my mother married a white man, she had divorced him and come back home with two fatherless girls. This information produced a wave of deep shock that washed over everyone around us. Where is your father? Will he come to get you? Will you ever see him again? Doesn’t he love you? Does he have another wife?

My sister being younger took it more in stride and prospered, artfully winning friends with her honeyed locks and dimpled smile. I closed and toughened. My mother had managed to escape imprisonment on the wrong planet and one day, I would do the same. I was an alien who would never, ever paint her fingernails.

Then, one morning, studying alone on the stone steps of the school chapel, my life was changed forever. I looked up to see a tall man in a white cassock crossing the quadrant, Sister Nieves and Sister Joanna hurrying to keep up with him. He was talking in the loud voice of the white man, not hushing his tones for propriety sake. He was striding along purposefully like the white man, not mincing his step to accommodate the women. The bright sun on his golden, white man hair haloed him, making his approach akin to that of a brilliant comet. Was I dreaming? Was this a saint? Was I dead but didn’t know it yet? He came straight towards the chapel and hypnotized by my approaching destiny, I could not move. Looking down at me, a homeless animal crouched on the stone steps, he smiled and said; “you must be the fatherless girl”. His eyes were blue, blue, blue. This was the first white man I had seen since I’d come to the Philippines. In coloring and shape he looked startlingly like my father, whose memory had begun to evaporate within me … except for his coloring and shape.

Sister Joanna said; “her name is Lotis”.

Sister Nieves said; “Lotis, this is Father Reuter”.

I was paralyzed, like the kitten before the tiger that will consume it. Father Reuter put his large, white gold hand on my curly head and said; “come, talk to me, I’ll hear your confession”. Confession? What was that? What should I confess? That I felt ugly and stupid? That I hated this place? That I hated myself? Ignorant of the concept of personal sin, unaware of what confession was supposed to consist of, these were the things I told him.

I talked to Father Reuter that day and many, many more days over the years to come. He heard my “confession” in person every week or so, and the rest of the time I talked to him in my heart, in my dreams, in my prayers. In reality he did not treat me any differently than any other little girl. I was no special pet or favorite. I don’t know if he even thought of me at all outside the confessional. I am unaware if I ever made any particular impression on him. No. It was him who made the impression on me.

Father Reuter had been sent by the Jesuits, to the Philippines, just before WWII and wound up interned by the Japanese. At wars end, the Jesuits asked him to stay on for a bit and he did…returning to the US for a visit only once in the next 60 years. There was nothing of the effeminate about this priest. Nothing soft or flabby or repelling. His love was not vague, distant, or carefully guarded. A gruffly practical, quick tempered, get to the point! kind of priest, he could grab you by the back of the neck, give you a shake, stare you down and demand immediate love and obedience in the same instant. He was a steely eyed, unflinching priest, who rarely whispered when he could shout, loved with an iron fist, and was simultaneously feared and adored by all who knew him.

In this day of gross immorality, I don’t know if anyone can understand how, without the slightest hint of sexual impropriety, a little girl can love her priest and find her salvation through him. But it is true. Father Reuter was more than a man or a priest. He was a father.

Before I knew God in the personal way I do now, I knew Father Reuter in place of Him. Before I could accept God as my Father, Father Reuter was there to create that role for me. I was a lost child who would have been lost forever if not for this celibate male taking me for one of his children. He encouraged me to speak and communicate my thoughts. He pushed me to develop my voice. He made me understand that even if I didn’t fit in I was valuable and gifted.

After high school I went on to a life filled with many elaborate diversions. I did foolish things and I was pushed by my curly, wild nature to adventures that sorely tried all around me. I can remember times I would pause for an instant and think; “I should go to Father Reuter for advice”, but pride mixed with shame, would erase the impulse. In my heart nestled a deep fear he would be so angry at things I had done, he would no longer love me. Anyway, I was an adult now, capable of dealing with life.

I no longer needed a father of any kind.

I finally did go to see Father Reuter, but only recently, some 40 years since I had last seen him at my graduation. I am not taller than I was in high school, but bent over with age he is now shorter than I am. His slightly trembling hands and feet are misshapen with arthritis. His golden hair is gone. He was seated in a wheelchair wearing his white cassock, and when I entered he struggled to rise and kiss me. I looked into his eyes and they were blue, blue, blue. I was twelve again and struck dumb with love. I could not talk much and in his fatherly way he understood and did the talking for me. Nothing important really, just making enough sound to ease the tension and let the ghost years slip away. As time dissolved between us; the feeling of his strength, the powerful force of his love, the intensity and vigor of his fatherhood, coiled and wrapped itself around my heart, pulling me to my knees before God, in the very deepest gratitude for this man.

Dear, dear man of God. I have never said this to you but I have always wanted to: I love you Father Reuter and I always will. — Lotis Key-Kabigting

[Source: The Philippine Star (Opinion) Thusday, May 28, 2009]

There is nothing else I can truthfully add to Ms. Kabigting’s soul-stirring account of her own personal “love story” starring James B. Reuter S.J., except to say a thousand times over, “AMEN!”

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate

of the Philippines

www.catholicxybr.org

cxaphil@yahoo.com

HOPING WE WILL BE ONE, FOREVER

2009-05-27T02:26:00.000-07:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

51-090527

Fr. Reuter has written his last column on "The Philippine Star" newspaper today. For those who have not seen it - read on . He has written such a beautiful prayer in the end. He is waiting to be called, please pray for him.

HOPING WE WILL BE ONE, FOREVER

I am in Our lady of Peace Hospital , on the Coastal Road , and it is really 3:00 A.M . The planes coming and going from the airport are roaring over my head.

Everything is peaceful and quiet. Even the roaring planes add to the feeling of peace and quiet.

I am ten days away from my 93rd birthday. God has been kinder to me than I deserve, giving me such a rich life, in such a beautiful country, among such gentle people. He has blessed me with so many kind, affectionate, generous loving friends.

I found that the best time for me to write was 3:00 A.M. My mind is clearer, my heart is warmer, and I am overwhelmed with the goodness of the people God sends to me.

In this column I have always tried to be positive - presenting the goodness of people, and the wisdom of God's Providence as I saw it.

I have tried to give.... to give the only thing I have to give ... Myself. I have tried to share my thoughts, my feelings, the wonderful holiness that I see in the simple, gentle people that God sends to me.

As soon as I came to the Philippines I realized that the Filipinos were the loveliest people in the world. It was a gift of God, a special blessing, that He sent me here.

I have been thanked for giving my life to the Philippines.... But whenever you give, you always get back more than you have given.

Thank you .

* for your gift of friendship through these many long years

* for reading "At 3:00 A.M.." from the time I started writing my column

* for your reactions through letters and phone calls when you liked or did not like what I wrote

* for sharing your stories which inspired me to write them so they could inspire others

* for your love and concern

*for your prayers which comfort me and which I need.

I have tried to be a priest. A priest is a bridge ...a bridge between God and man.... a channel of God's love, peace and joy.

What I have found in the Philippines is union ....union of hearts and minds... It is marked by sharing.... The simple, gentle Filipino is willing to share all he has, with everyone.

That is holiness ... That is sanctity ... That is being like God.

In heaven we will all be one - united in heart and soul .... Loving each other.

In this column written at 3:00 A.M. that was my only message ...give...give yourself.... love.

And when I presented this, I discovered what it meant, myself.

Being strong, sometimes, means being able to let go. I know that now is the time to " let go". I have been up at 3:00 A.M. to write my column for many many years. It is now time for me to stay in bed until the sun comes up and the birds start to sing.

This is not goodbye. Wherever I am, whatever I do, you are always in my heart and in my prayers. All of you.

God bless!

The song is ended ... but the melody lingers on .. and on ... and on.

I love those who have read this column...And I hope that they love me.

* * *

For those who are interested, here is my prayer that I would like to share with you.

Lord God,

Look down upon us, this day, this hour.

Regardless of what has gone before,

or what will come after,

give us the grace to consecrate this time entirely to You –

all the actions of our body and soul.

May all the thoughts that come to us be true

May all the things to which our hearts go out

be beautiful, with the beauty of God.

May all the things we want be good.

Give us the light to see Your Will,

the grace to love it

and the courage and strength to do it.

We ask you this through Christ Our Lord.

Amen.

MY REPLY: To Colonel ARIEL O. QUERUBIN’s Letter

2009-05-24T23:31:00.000-07:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

No. 50-090525

MY REPLY:

TO COLONEL ARIEL O. QUERUBIN’s LETTER

NOTE: Ariel Querubin is a former Marine Colonel of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. Eight years ago he was recognized by the Philippine Military as most deserving of its HIGHEST POSSIBLE award for valor and leadership in the field of battle, the Medal of Valor, He is now however, languishing in a very cramped and unhealthy detention cell at Camp Aguinaldo in Quezon City, for having publicly rallied his troops and subordinate officers in support of their Marine Commanding General’s protest against corruption in government.

Recently he announced that he is running for the Senate. His handwritten letter to me is as follows:

May 8, 2009

Dear Sir Ed,

May the Peace of Christ be with you!

I have no doubt in my mind that the Lord has all the while been preparing me for public service. I was left for dead in 1989, and he allowed me to spring back to life. I have been imprisoned as a soldier, but I fully regained the honor and right to wear a soldier’s uniform after having been awarded the Medal of Valor in 2001. As my military career was very much back on track, I was again challenged to choose between right and wrong, between honor and injustice, between good and evil.

Even as we all work for a vibrant and prosperous Philippines, my dream is for every Filipino to enjoy the essence of freedom from poverty, fear, and injustice, to feel the tangible benefits of good governance, and to live comfortably in a society that fosters the unity of the family, protects human rights, and upholds the dignity of all.

I have not had an easy life. My life story has been replete with vivid encounters with injustice, poverty, corruption, and war. These painful experiences have shaped this dream. I never succumbed to the lure of material wealth. The physical, mental, and emotional hardships have been painful, but I never sold my soul.

I am fully aware that some people would insist that men in uniform should stay away from politics; that we would serve best our nation if we were fighting wars in Mindanao; that we have no business in meddling with the affairs of the state as we have been formed and trained in the rudiments of war, and not in the civil service, much less in politics. I agree but that assumes that the people who have been entrusted with the public trust have been sincere, honest, and have been true to their pledges.

As a young soldier, armed with idealism and the fire of youth, I have offered my life to defend this country from all its enemies. I have suffered long and hard for the principles that I hold dearly. Many of my loved ones have suffered with me – maybe not physically, but certainly have shared in the misery and hardships that I have endured. The fire of idealism still burns in me, but I have been wiser not to engage fire with fire.

With a lot of circumspection, I have decided to run for the Senate in 2010. I have no political pedigree. I have no political machinery. I have no financial resources. But I do have honor. I do have principles. I do have courage.

I believe I am ready to take on this new role, (and) with your prayers and support this dream is not too far-fetched. It takes the collective effort of every member of this society to make things improve for a country in disarray… a country that has been plundered… a country whose hope is running dry…

All I can do on my end, is to make the best effort possible to make society better, stand by my principles, and fight for what is right. There is hope for this country and our people; all we have to do is believe.

This I will do, if not for myself and our generation, then at least for our young children and their children. My warmest regards and God bless us all.

Mabuhay ang Pilipinas!

Sincerely yours,

(Signed)

ARIEL O. QUERUBIN

Email: querubinariel@yahoo.com

Here was MY REPLY to him:

Dear Ariel:

May the Lord God, of whom you say that you have no doubt in your mind, “has all the while been preparing (you) for public service”, BLESS and INSPIRE YOU even more so. But above all, may the Lord grant you the grace to keep in your heart and follow HIS Gospel’s words and instructions FAITHFULLY ALL THE TIME, not only during your forthcoming election campaign but above all, if and when He graciously allows your truly successful election as a Senator of the Philippines.

For your trials and temptations if and when you will become a Senator, particularly those involving lust for power, money, adulation and flattery - - aside from that of the flesh – will be exponentially far more intense than whatever you may have already experienced as a Catholic Christian soldiering for the Philippine Marines.

As you well know yourself, many other prominent Catholics and/or Christians who have been so elected, or are still the top officials of our country, probably had the very same highly noble thoughts, and motivations when they first pursued their public service ambitions. But to our Nation’s collective grief and near despair, most of them have UTTERLY BETRAYED their own souls -- and more so our people, time and time again, particularly when they were already occupying the highest seats of power and influence in our government.

I dare say that you too will probably end up just like them, IF YOU WILL HAVE STRAYED AWAY from the Lord’s Gospel, into mere mouthings of seemingly pious platitudes and hypocritical public speeches.

However, ever since the few times I have visited you in prison, you have led me into again being hopeful despite having been fooled a number of times into believing other politicians or at least very disappointed with their selfish partisan antics, to say the least. I shall therefore continue to pray for you and help you to pursue your noble objectives, modest as my contribution will be in the estimation perhaps of our very materialistic society. And so, I wish and pray that HEAVEN HELP THE PHILIPPINES through Ariel O. Querubin, in one way or another…

Again, may God bless you, your loving wife Bong, your dear children as well as your loyal, sincere friends and political supporters.

Yours in the Lord,

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate of the Philippines

To Light A Fire

“Ed Olaguer”

In Pursuit of Love or Perdition?

2009-04-01T21:02:00.000-07:00

TO LIGHT A FIRE!

49-090331

In Pursuit of Love or Perdition?

Vincent J. Genovesi, S.J. is the relatively unknown Jesuit author of the moral theology reference book entitled “In Pursuit of Love”. It is apparently a favorite textbook on sexual morality used by Jesuit professors especially for priests and nuns studying at the Loyola School of Theology and at the Ateneo itself. As its sub-title indicates, the book presents itself as a seeming authority on Catholic moral teachings on Human Sexuality. As of last week however, Genovesi has become no longer an obscure person, at least within the confines of Metro Manila Catholic schools of theology of whatever kind.

Aside from having studied at those ultra-liberal-modernist-theology oriented Jesuit schools such as Fordham in New York City and Woodstock in Maryland and being a professor at St. Joseph’s University in Philadelphia, Genovesi’s seeming authoritativeness as a teacher on sexual morality, appears to be due to the fact that he is a veritable mouthpiece of the much more wellknown and original core group of DISSENTING Catholic theologians. They have long fulminated against official Catholic teachings on premarital sex, contraception, abortion, ordination of women, clerical celibacy among others.

And so from start to finish, the book is rife with footnotes ascribing such seeming authoritativeness and intellectual gravitas to the similar earlier opinions of those original and media glorified modernist DISSIDENTS. Thus Charles E. Curran the ordained Catholic priest who was disqualified from teaching Catholic Theology by the Vatican as early as 1986, and Jesuits Richard A. McCormick, S.J. (died 2000), Francis A. Sullivan, S.J., Karl Rahner, S.J. (died 1984), to name a few, compose the core group of this Jesuit dominated “footnote-periti” of the book In Pursuit of Love.

And so too in the wake of our nationwide controversy on the Reproductive Health Bill, it was not surprising why the Internet’s local chain of interlinked e-mail addresses among rival Catholic school faculties and alumni intelligentsia, was filled with criss-crossing comments and counter-comments soon after someone had posted the original critique with its palpable outrage over the Ateneo Jesuits having the gall to publish the book for local distribution through their Jesuit Communications Foundation.

I confess that I too received a fair amount of those comments about Genovesi’s book, most probably because the e-mail senders still remember that on July 31, 2005 (Feast of St. Ignatius of Loyola) I must have shocked a good number of personalities within my own Jesuit and Ateneo alumni circle of friends, as a result of my hardhitting comments and shocking revelations in my autobiography Light A Fire II , about the “neo-Jesuit rebellion” against the Roman Catholic Papacy.

In truth I received enough of those Genovesi-related materials via the Internet to prod me ASAP into looking for and buying the book immediately! And also, to revive my long dormant Blog by writing this commentary.

With all due respect to everybody, thus I submit that from a truly Catholic conviction, Genovesi’s treatise should be considered as in pursuit, NOT of LOVE, but of moral PERDITION and CONFUSION – whether willy nilly or not, but certainly because of the author’s non-Catholic point of view!

There is no other conclusion logically possible for authentic Catholics, for the simple reason that Genovesi’s In Pursuit of Love (GIPOL, henceforth for brevity) is based on philosophical propositions, factual allegations and definitions of terms which are obviously contrary to the perennial and authentic teachings of the Catholic Church Magisterium. And more particularly in fact, GIPOL directly contradicts the most recent Papal encyclicals on the subject matter, i.e. Humanae Vitae, Evangelium Vitae, Veritatis Splendor and Vatican II itself, in a manner and tone which suggest as if these magisterial teachings were written by doddering old-fashioned clergymen and ignoramuses on the Catholic Theology on faith and morals.

On Authentic Catholic Teaching

Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium or Light of the World) has already emphatically re-affirmed the 2,000 plus years old doctrine, that our Catholic bishops united with the Pope are the Catholic Church’s “authentic teachers”, that is, teachers endowed with “the authority of Christ.” GIPOL however repeatedly manifests in no uncertain terms, that the late 20^th century albeit contrary opinions of Genovesi, Curran, Sullivan, McCormick, Rahner et al are at a superior level of logic, as well as moral and theological authoritativeness.

Furthermore, in Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum) it is ALSO RE-AFFIRMED that “the task of authentically interpreting the Word of God, whether written or handed down, has been entrusted EXCLUSIVELY to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ” (DV10)

And yet according to GIPOL: ( page 67, Chapter2 )

“To speak, then, of authentic teachings of the Church does not mean that such teachings are always or necessarily true or accurate. Rather, the authentic teachings of the Church are those that are official or authoritative because they are proposed by the hierarchical magisterium.” (page 67, ibid with emphasis added)

And thus by GIPOL’s convoluted logic such “authentic” teachings, despite being “official” or “authoritative”, are supposedly “NOT always NOR necessarily true or accurate”. Therefore, GIPOL has clearly yet arrogantly laid down their self-serving basis for Church-wide disobedience to the Magisterium. For the unavoidable conclusion from GIPOL’s grossly faulty logic is that the authentic teachings of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church are NOT reliable, may even be erroneous, and thus surely non-infallible… while their own dissenting views are presumed to be reliable, and even supposedly consistent with the opinions of a majority of Catholic theologians.

And yet in Genovesi’s singleminded attempts to convince his readers that the Catholic Church Magisterium is allegedly teaching outmoded and erroneous moral principles, particularly on sexual morality and contraceptives, the author merely succeeded in highlighting the monstrous features of GIPOL’s mainly neo-Jesuit road map to perdition. Thus for example, the following:

Morally wrong but still supposedly okay!

Second; intercourse outside marriage might be seen as an objective moral wrong but subjectively not sinful in the following scenarios: (1) after dating steadily for three years, two young adults become engaged with plans to be married within a year. After prayerful reflection and careful discussion, they honestly believe that given their mutual love, intercourse would not be wrong for them; this is their sincere judgment. Objectively, they may be mistaken in their evaluation and an objective moral wrong may be involved, but there would probably be no serious sin on their part; (2) two teenagers, who have been bombarded by the sexual fireworks of our society and who find themselves pushed to false sophistication, may wind up in a relationship that stirs their feelings far more than they understand or can cope with; their passions prevail and become their masters, leading the couple into periodic episodes of genital involvement. Here again, objective moral wrong exists, but if there is truly a curtailment of the couple’s freedom, the reality of serious subjective guilt or sin seems unlikely. Pastorally, of course, these teenagers need to be informed of the human and spiritual harm associated with their activity. It is to be hoped, too, that they can be brought to a change of behavior.” (GIPOL, page 175 with emphasis added)

Twitting Church Teaching

“…After recognizing that it is morally permitted to engage in sexual intercourse while maintaining the desire and intention to avoid conception, we must then ask whether any means other than periodic abstinence may be used morally to achieve the intended goal of not procreating.

The answer offered both by Humane Vitae and by the long-standing Catholic tradition is no. The argument offered is that contraceptive intercourse is against the natural order of things as intended and established by God, who wills that the procreative and unitive dimensions of the conjugal act be kept inseparable. (NOTE: Hence contraception is an intrinsic evil!) As suggested earlier, however, this line of reasoning appears flawed in that God and nature have seen to it that in no small measure the procreative and unitive dimensions of human sexuality are separable and separated – during a woman’s cyclic periods of infertility, after menopause, and in instances of biological sterility. (NOTE: Separate in time/space, but nevertheless inseparable in their purpose, by God’s sovereign Will!)

Two Wrongs Make it Right?

…As we shall see, any number (big deal!?!) of Catholic theologians now maintain that assuming spouses are responsibly motivated and are not acting out of selfish or materialistic contraceptive mentality, the use of artificial contraception does not constitute a moral evil or sin and is not even an objective moral wrong.” (page 201, ibid, with emphasis and comments added! )

“… adolescents, young adults, and anyone else who cannot be dissuaded from engaging in non-marital, pre-marital, or extra-marital intercourse, should be encouraged to a careful use of some kind of contraception. Moral responsibility would seem to demand this course of action.” (page 223, ibid) NOTE: Obviously their student priests, nuns and even bishops would be included among “anyone else” who are being “encouraged” by GIPOL to indulge in contraception in order to cover-up their illicit sexual activities!

GIPOL’s topsy-turvy hierarchy on moral authority:

Should it happen that a seemingly infallible teaching not be received or accepted as such by the body of the faithful, we are given some indication that the magisterium has failed to fulfill the necessary conditions for teaching infallibly and thus exceeded its competence to do so… But what can be maintained is this: while it is not the faithful’s acceptance or reception in faith that makes a particular teaching of the magisterium infallible, nonetheless, such acceptance by the believing community does certify or notarize that the teaching is in fact infallible. (page 71, GIPOL) NOTE: Thus according to these Jesuit dissidents, it is now the lay faithful in general, and NOT the hierarchy, who may certify that in fact any such teaching by the Magisterium is “in fact infallible!” And just who will they be? And what is their minimum number necessary so that such “faithful” lay people will qualify as a group to become some sort of super-magisterium, PRAY TELL!

In short, just because an inchoate number of DISSIDENT Catholics have rejected the Papal encyclical Humanae Vitae (HV), then GIPOL presumes Pope Paul VI must have “failed to fulfill the necessary conditions for teaching infallibly and thus… exceeded (his) competence to do so”. And per GIPOL, only if and when this present selective rejection of HV by these dissidents will have turned into UNIVERSAL acceptance, would there be a “certification” or “notarization” that HV is in fact infallible! But that’s the same kind of veto power the Pharisses wanted to impose on Jesus Christ…

The most HIDEOUS of GIPOL monstrosities are from Rahner & Curran:

For now I propose we listen to some of the theological voices in the consensus that denies there can be (NOTE: in other words, there CANNOT BE) any infallible teaching when dealing with specific moral norms and questions. According to Karl Rahner, S.J., “apart from wholly universal moral norms of an abstract kind… there are hardly any particular or individual norms of Christian morality which could be proclaimed by the ordinary or extraordinary teaching authority of the Church in such a way that they could be unequivocally and certainly declared to have the force of dogmas”. A similar but perhaps slightly stronger position is taken by Charles Curran: “There has never been an infallible pronouncement or teaching on a specific moral matter; the very nature of specific moral actions makes it impossible, in my judgment, to have any infallible pronouncements in this area.” (page 72, ibid with emphasis added)

For us Christians, to be directed by a true moral conscience means that we are giving honest expression to our desire to live in the manner we think, (NOTE: To each his own truth!) best embodies the kind of love revealed in and by Christ for our imitation. (page 83, ibid)

NOTE: Charles Curran is the priest who was formally prohibited and disqualified by Pope John Paul II in 1986 from teaching theology in any Catholic institution! And Karl Rahner (died in 1984) among his many other dissenting propositions, questioned the validity of our Catholic belief in the REAL PRESENCE of Christ’s body and blood, soul and divinity in the Blessed Sacrament…

Obviously, these dissident Catholic theologians’ opinion in the preceding text (page 83, ibid), endorse a universal kind of moral relativism to be embraced even by Christians. It is a relativism where everybody has his/her own definition of moral truth, and is encouraged to behave as they see fit and “do his/her own thing” provided they themselves “think (it) best” to do so.

More of GIPOL’S most noxious dissident monstrosity: (page 232, ibid)

RESPONSIBLE (sic!) DISSENT FROM AUTHENTIC FALLIBLE TEACHING

Earlier in this volume we considered the essential role the magisterium plays in the articulation and explanation of moral teachings. We indicated that the Church clearly has a right and a duty to address any issue of personal or public morality. [CAUTION: Please note the cleverly camouflaged thus seeming concession to “the Church” having a clear right and duty to address moral issues. Consider however that “the Church” they are referring to is NOT the Magisterium, but the Church in general, thus certainly and self-servingly including themselves as dissidents! The following textual continuation makes this point more obvious….]

(continued) We noted as well that the clear theological consensus today maintains that with regard to specific norms of morality, the magisterium has never exercised its official teaching authority in an infallible way by means of any solemn definition issued either by a pope or by the college of bishops gathered together in an ecumenical council. [NOTE: Until the year 1996 when the 1^st Edition of GIPOL was first published by the Order of St. Benedict, Inc., Collegeville, Minnesota, therefore such a supposed “theological consensus” would like us Catholics to believe that ever since Christ ascended to Heaven, we never had the benefit of any official, infallible and specific Catholic moral teachings at all!]

But what about AFTER 1996?

Moreover, there is still some discussion about whether the magisterium could ever teach infallibly concerning specific moral norms. Francis A. Sullivan, S.J. claims that most Catholic theologians (how does Sullivan know that for sure?) and moralists now judge that the particular norms of a morality based solely on the natural law are simply not proper matter for irreformable or infallible teaching. As Sullivan rightly observes, the judgment of these moralists “rules out not only the possibility of the infallible definition of such a norm, but also the claim that such a norm has ever been, or could be, infallibly taught by the ordinary universal magisterium. (page 232, ibid, with emphasis added)

In short, even the specific moral norms from the Ten Commandments, or its synthesis in the Two Greatest Commandments, supposedly have NEVER been and could NEVER ever be considered as infallible, according to GIPOL!

HOW DO WE REFUTE SUCH MONSTROUSLY HERETICAL PROPOSITIONS?

A point by point refutation of even just the most fundamental fallacies in GIPOL would surely require a much longer presentation. It would also probably be too tedious and too difficult for ordinary Catholics to understand much less to digest and remember.

There is a simpler yet equally logical way to prove that a proposition is FALSE. It is done by first assuming for the sake of argument, that the proposition is true. And if by proceeding arguendo, step by step from that assumption, you end up unavoidably in an obviously false or untenable conclusion, (Reductio ad absurdum!), then you will have logically proven that such a proposition was really and demonstrably FALSE.

And so assuming for the sake of argument that the teachings of ALL the Popes starting from St. Peter and the various Catholic magisteria united with these Popes during their lifetimes including the present one loyal to Benedict XVI, per these Jesuit dissident theologians Genovesi, Sullivan, McCormick, Rahner et al, yes -- ALL THOSE magisterial teachings -- should be “ruled out”, or DISQUALIFIED. Let us even presume that all these were invalid, not only as to the “possibility of the infallible definition” of any moral norm, but also the claim that any such norm has “ever been, or could be, infallibly taught by the ordinary universal magisterium”, as is being claimed by GIPOL on page 232 thereof.

If we accept the foregoing assumptions, we will also therefore not be able to AVOID coming to the mindboggling and faith-shattering conclusion that: Any Tom, Dick and Harry’s claim for a moral truth will be just as valid or non-valid as somebody else’s! Also, there will be NOTHING which Catholics or any other religious group may claim to be a truly moral certitude! And so, nobody but nobody could truly claim any moral principle is absolutely true, much less impose that belief on the conscience of anybody! In short, its either moral RELATIVISM or worse, ethical NIHILISM! Reductio ad absurdum!

And here is what my old Webster’s College Dictionary has to say on NIHILISM.

1. Philosophy

a) the denial of the existence of any basis for knowledge or truth

b) the general rejection of customary beliefs in morality, religion etc. also ethical nihilism

And from Wikipedia: “the term nihilism is sometimes used synonymously with ANOMIE, to denote the general mood of despair at the pointlessness of existence when they realize there are no necessary norms, rules or laws (or are simply claimed to be destructively amoralistic).

Need we say anything more? Or shouldn’t we all exclaim with great sadness to be addressed even to ourselves, to these dissident Jesuit theologians, to their Jesuit confreres and their students at the Ateneo de Manila, and to local Church authorities who as shepherds of Christ are supposed to defend His flock from marauding wolves especially those disguised as sheep, or even as false pastors: “Ubinam gentium sumus?” For where and how in the world have we the supposedly loyal sons and daughters of numberless saints all of whom were absolutely loyal to the Church Magisterium, such as St. Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles, Ignatius of Loyola, Francis Xavier, Robert Bellarmine, St. Benedict, St. Benilde, Thomas Aquinas or the Blessed Virgin Mary herself, and yet have sunk ourselves down to such disastrous depths of moral absurdity and permissiveness?

Post Script

Last week NBA basketball star Allen Iverson, (who was recently traded by the Philadelphia 76ers to the Detroit Pistons), was ordered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, to pay a hefty penalty of $260,000 to a certain Marvin Godfrey. The 3-judge Appeals Court ruled that Iverson was GUILTY of being NEGLIGENT in having done nothing to prevent nor to stop the bar-room brawl in 2005 initiated by Iverson’s own bodyguards, where the outnumbered victim, Marvin Godfrey, was overwhelmingly and severely beaten up.

At about the same time last week, this time at Notre Dame University in South Bend, Indiana (where in 1952 I failed to join my late brother Valdemar in Notre Dame’s College of Engineering by not having met its academic requirements), the Catholic Bishop of Indiana, John D’ Arcy publicly announced over the diocesan Website, that he would no longer attend this year’s Commencement Exercises, as a result of U.S. President Barack Obama’s having been invited as its primary Guest Speaker, even without the Bishop’s prior knowledge nor consent.

Bishop D’ Arcy emphasized that he made his decision after much prayerful discernment, and that he intended no disrespect for the U.S. President. He did so simply because “a bishop must teach the Catholic faith in season and out of season”, and not only by his words - - but by his actions. He further added: “My decision is not an attack on anyone, but in defense of the truth about human life. The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions. Indeed the measure of any Catholic institution is not only what it stands for, but also what it will NOT stand for”. (Ateneo Jesuits, please note!)

Some four years ago I was able to obtain from the Internet, a copy of a Jesuit priest’s letter written on October 25, 2001 to his Superior General. I had it reproduced in toto in Chapter 19, page 305 of my autobiography LIGHT A FIRE II. Here it is once again, for it is similar in substance to that of Bishop D’ Arcy’s objections about Obama.

Dear Fr. Kolvenbach,

Thank you for your letter of 3^rd September. I apologize for not replying sooner. These last few weeks have been traumatic, culminating in a collapse and my hospitalization at the end of October for four days. It was not life-threatening, just the result of the tensions of the last 30 years, as a result of which I will be retiring in the next few months.

In confirming your decision to refuse me permission to publish my book, Pope’s Men: The Jesuits Yesterday and Today, you say that you have no objection to my manifesting conscience on this matter; only to the manner in which I have made it, i.e., by a book of this nature. I accept this. My concerns can be briefly stated in this open letter. This will enable me to manifest that conscience most directly and ease the pressure on it.

That conscience has been under strain since 1968 when the Society as a whole, despite Fr. Arrupe’s exhortations on the matter, refused to support Paul VI on Humanae Vitae. Since Ignatius founded the Society to campaign for God in faithful obedience to the Papacy, and to put aside all judgment of our own to obey in all things our Holy Mother, the hierarchical Church, our duty here was clear and our refusal to do it was scandalous.

Since 1965 four General Congregations have accepted that some of us have been remiss in our duty of obedience to the popes and the hierarchical Church and promised we would change our policies, but we have not. Too many Jesuits are still giving the opposite impression and going unchallenged. I was not so long ago told by a distinguished Catholic academic that he admired Jesuits because they “can say and do what they like in the Church and get away with it”. I pointed out to him that we are not all tarred with the same brush. He was more than a little surprised.

Fr. Arrupe warned that if three popes have called us to account, then it is Christ the Lord who expects something better of us. He also warned us that to fail in fidelity to the Papacy is to sign our own death sentence. Far from resenting John Paul II’s intervention in 1981, he saw it as an occasion for demonstrating that wholehearted obedience to the Holy See to which we are vowed. Our response generally has been quite different, doing the minimum necessary to ensure no further action was taken against us and feeling aggrieved that we have been wrongly treated.

You yourself have reminded us that fidelity to the Holy See is of the essence of our vocation, and when the 33^rd General Congregation asked you to look again at the rules for thinking with the Church in the light of the Council you said that they are as valid today as ever. My experience of the Society tells me that that is not the way Jesuits on the whole think. The general view is that we are an autonomous organization in the Church and should be allowed to proceed as we think fit.

Far from superiors generally giving us a lead in faithful obedience to the Pope and the Magisterium, too many (of these superiors) regard anyone who insists these are the essence of the Jesuit vocation, as stupid or malicious. I on many occasions have had to resist pressure from such men to abandon these ideals; this is a complete perversion of Jesuit obedience; to have been subject to such pressure is a form of spiritual and mental torture, a scandal that should not be allowed to pass unchallenged.

I write this letter on our patronal feast day, and I cannot help reflecting on Campion’s words, when on his capture he was taken before the Queen. His fidelity to the Papacy being challenged, he told his questioners that that was “my greatest glory”. Such is the tradition of the English Province. Not till we return to it will our work flourish. My prayers will continue to be that the day will come.

Yours in Christ,

Rodger Charles, SJ

--o--

Our children and grandchildren at the Ateneo de Manila and in other Catholic schools where these rabidly dissident yet supposedly “still Catholic” theologians’ PREDILECTION for moral relativism and/or ethical nihilism have been taught or promoted in one form or another, have therefore been morally and intellectually beaten up black and blue, since the 1960s. Thus in comparison, such INTRINSIC EVIL perpetrated on thousands of young minds, has been certainly far worse than the physical trauma Iverson’s bodyguards inflicted on just one person. As Fr. Rodger Charles, S.J. expressed in his letter, it is our “own death sentence” and a form of “spiritual and moral torture” and a “scandal that should not be allowed to pass unchallenged.”

I shudder therefore over what the Divine Supreme Court will deem as a just and appropriate “millstone” type of sentence or judgment,* even on those who merely have negligently stood idly by and unconcerned, all the while that our innocent children and grandchildren and even theirs too, have been repeatedly scandalized, mauled and mutilated, morally and intellectually, for heaven knows how long!

And for those who have been actually teaching or deliberately abetting such monstrous falsehoods? Lord, PLEASE have mercy… ESPECIALLY on Thy REPENTANT sons and daughters whose souls have been uniquely consecrated to Thee, particularly as priests and bishops of Thy one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church…

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate

of the Philippines

www.catholicxybr.org

cc:

The Catholic Bishops of the Philippines

* Matthew 18: 6-7

The END TIMES (Part IV)

2008-11-19T00:48:00.000-08:00

48-081119

To Light A Fire!

(Re: Ruben M. Tanseco, S.J.)

More than four years ago on 8 August 2004, a Sunday, Ruben M. Tanseco, a Jesuit priest and Founder/Head of the Jesuits’ Center for Family Ministries for many years and up to now, published his usual Philippine Star newspaper column, ironically labeled as GOD’s WORD TODAY. The subject title was “Population Crisis”, whose full text can be downloaded for free from <>.

I shall zero-in on Tanseco’s main propositions in that column which were recently repeated verbatim by another Philippine Star columnist, Ms. Domini M. Torrevillas in support of the morally objectionable Reproductive Health Bill.

Those arguments in Tanseco’s August 2004 column are, I believe, based on outright FALSEHOODS! That column piece also constitutes a clear case of open and unabashed rebellion of a Catholic priest who is a Jesuit at that, against the Catholic Magisterium-- a rebellion so emphatically and repeatedly bewailed by Our Lord and the Blessed Virgin Mary in their various messages to the world, given through visionaries such as Maria Valtorta, Father Stefano Gobbi, “Anne” the Irish lay apostle and Father Ed Carter, S.J.

Hereunder are excerpts of those most offensive and FALSE propositions in Tanseco’s 8 August 2004 column, which should have been sub-titled as MORAL CRISIS, instead of Population Crisis. And so according to that Tanseco column piece:

“There are two moral positions within the same Church, as far as responsible parenthood is concerned. The official Papal position, and the non-official, responsible dissenting position of quite a number of moral theologians, bishops, clerics, and laity. Why is there room for a responsible, dissenting position? Because the official position, though normative, is not an infallible doctrine. It is not a dogma. The Second Vatican Council teaches us that the final arbiter of moral decision(s) is one’s informed and responsible conscience. (Declaration on Religious Freedom, #3).” [emphasis supplied]

This method (Natural Family Planning), as the only one supported by the official Church for the last how many decades, has not worked effectively in our country, as far as control of population is concerned. Just to single out one reason, among others: For so many poor, uneducated couples, learning NFP as the only means of family planning is too difficult, cumbersome, and needs much discipline and spirituality. Many are not able to make it. The poor are already deprived of so many things, and to deprive them of love-making when they spontaneously feel like doing so is to make their lives even more miserable.

This responsible, dissenting position is advocated by eminent theologians, like the late Karl Rahner, Bernard Haring, and others.

We are currently facing a very serious situation of over-population. Our percentage of annual population growth is one of the highest in the world. Coupled with our poverty crisis, which our President is doing her best to solve in due time, our over-population problem is a crucial, national emergency situation that needs the active cooperation of all.

To be faithful and prudent stewards of the Lord, as Jesus tells us in today’s Gospel reading, let us all be actively involved in promoting responsible parenthood, using both the official and non-official moral means of family planning.

Whatever is for the ultimate good of our people and our country is clearly the will of our all-loving and compassionate God.

Tanseco’s Falsehood No 1: (Re: Tanseco’s first paragraph in his 8 August 2004 piece)

The Declaration on Religious Freedom or Dignitatis Humanae its Latin Title (DH for brevity) was promulgated by Vatican II with the joint approval of Pope Paul VI. It was a re-statement of a perennial Catholic doctrine stating that religious freedom is an inviolable and universal human right. However, a key portion of DH was necessarily devoted to freedom of conscience, because conscience is the principal faculty of a person’s soul together with his FREE WILL that FREELY exercises its right to religious freedom and is responsible for its consequences. Thus DH was addressed to the whole world and not just to Catholics, consistent with the Church’s role as Lumen Gentium (Light of the World). Therefore, regardless of whether or not the person is a Catholic, AND whether or not the moral issue involved is a dogma or teachings of Protestant sects, Jews or the Catholic Church, whether officially proclaimed ex-cathedra by the Pope as an infallible teaching or not, AND, whether or not it is the objective TRUTH that is being offered for belief, NEVERTHELESS the right and freedom to believe, or REJECT any or all such teachings, in conscience, STILL APPLIES to everybody!

Tanseco’s proposition and its initial premise are therefore both false yet so cleverly misleading because:

Aside from his opinion that Catholic teaching on sexuality and contraceptives are supposedly NOT infallible, that Tanseco-supplied qualification is immaterial according to DH (as shown above) for freedom of conscience to be applicable per se even to Catholics. And yet he further jumps to the FALSE conclusion, false both in fact and in logic, that Vatican II allegedly “teaches us that the final arbiter of moral decision(s) is one’s informed and responsible conscience.” As will be shown here later, per DH and other Vatican II documents, it is true that one’s conscience is ultimately responsible for its moral decisions, but certainly the decision-MAKER is NOT the final arbiter or final judge of the rightness in truth, or culpability for the error in the decision! And so we come to:

Tanseco’s Falsehood No. 2

For a person to be a “final arbiter” on any issue, whether moral, political, civil or criminal, it means that he is the FINAL JUDGE on the matter.

But if one may decide on a matter as the FINAL arbiter or judge thereof, whether rightly or wrongly, in good faith or not, or well informed or not, responsible or not, that person should consequently be immune to any liability or culpability whatsoever. And yet not even the Supreme Courts of democratic nations have that kind of absolute immunity or finality of judgments, because in the future they could be impeached or a new Court with different members may rule otherwise!

And so in all civil and ecclesiastical courts, more so before God, anybody’s claim to innocence due to his alleged sincerity and maturity of conscience is still subject to challenge and therefore NOT final!

Obviously therefore, Tanseco’s conclusion is patently FALSE, and HORRIBLY MORE SO in his succeeding statement that allegedly, that is what “The Second Vatican Council teaches us”, and which is supposedly based on Section 3 of Dignitatis Humanae. Please note in addition, that his column piece does not specify where and how Dignitatis Humanae says so. But before discussing that misrepresentation of DH Section 3, let me first come to the next focal point of his errors.

Tanseco’s Falsehood No. 3

Tanseco claims that there is room for his own personal so-called “responsible dissenting position (shared with) quite a number of moral theologians, bishops, clerics and laity”. For according to him, the official positions of the Catholic Church on sexuality and contraceptives including responsible parenthood are allegedly “though normative, is not an infallible doctrine. It is not a dogma.” Supposedly!

Yet clearly contrary to Tanseco’s assertions, here is what the “definitive edition” of the Catechism of the Catholic Church has to say on the moral crux and doctrinal premises of the matter at issue, following Tanseco’s own presentation and line of reasoning.

Part One, Section Two, Chapter 3 (with emphasis supplied)

The Teaching Office

889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a “supernatural sense of faith” the People of God, under the guidance of the Church’s living Magisterium, “unfailingly adheres to this faith”

890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:

891 “The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful – who confirms his brethren in the faithful – he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals… The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium,” above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine “for belief as being divinely revealed,” and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions “must be adhered to with the obedience of faith” This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.

Thus it is clear that God’s promise of infallibility to the one, holy Catholic and apostolic Church, covers the following two instances:

1. The Roman Pontiff, the Pope, not just “by” but in virtue of his office, when as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful… he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals.”

2. And it “… is also present in the body of bishops when together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium, above all in an Ecumenical Council.

Thus Papal Encyclicals such as Humanae Vitae, Evangelium Vitae and Spe Salvi are usually preceded by an introductory paragraph conveying that these are being issued by the Pope as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful “to the Bishops, Priests and Deacons, Men and Women Religious, and all the Lay Faithful.” Such encyclicals also incorporate numerous supporting statements and decisions from previous Popes and Councils.

From Part One, Section One, Chapter 2

88 The Church’s Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes, in a form obliging the Christian people to an irrevocable adherence of faith, truths contained in Divine Revelation or also when it proposes, in a definitive way, truths having a necessary connection with these.

89 There is an organic connection between our spiritual life and the dogmas. Dogmas are lights along the path of faith; they illuminate it and make it secure. Conversely, if our life is upright, (Tanseco et al, please take note!) our intellect and heart will be open to welcome the light shed by the dogmas of faith.

Thus contrary to Tanseco’s assertion that non-dogmas are not infallible, our Catechism states that the “fullest extent” of the authority of the Catholic Church Magisterium is behind its official teachings, whether it be in the “form (of ) dogmas” or even when defining other “truths having a necessary connection with these.” For dogmas are inter-related sections of the ENTIRE DOCTRINE of the Catholic Faith!

Thus too, the dogma on the sacredness and inviolability of life with its “apodictic” (meaning: with absolute certainty) commandment such as “Thou Shall Not Kill”, is necessarily related to the subsidiary truth proclaimed by the Church that human life with a body and an immortal soul, starts at the moment of conception. And so the dogma on the Immaculate Conception was proclaimed by Pope Pius IX in 1854 and extraordinarily confirmed by Our Lady herself in her apparitions at Lourdes, France a short time later.

Still however, anybody may in conscience, whether informed and responsible or NOT at all (for nobody really knows except God Himself!), nevertheless accept or reject any or all of the official teachings of the Church Magisterium. But for Tanseco to say that rejection and/or acceptance of the same teaching are both morally correct per se, is an absurdity and thus a FALSEHOOD. Much more so, if as Tanseco claims in his column, that such conflicting decisions on DH-related issues are both consistent with being “faithful and prudent stewards of the Lord”.

And yet a mere eight months or so later on April 24, 2005 in that same column space, Tanseco advocated an even more startling proposition on Human Sexuality, as follows:

“The Church’s proposition on contraception is untenable. Because the Church’s leaders lack a true understanding of women and the struggles of family life, its teachings are no longer challenging but simply dismissed by most Catholics who have concluded that the Church is wrong.”

But the worst is yet to come, as follows:

Tanseco’s most egregiously blatant FALSEHOOD! (No. 4)

Tanseco must have known, or at least ought to have known as a supposedly responsible and truthful Catholic priest and opinion-writer, that even before its Section 3, Dignitatis Humanae already spelled out its major premises in Section 1 as follows:

“On their part all men are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and His Church, and to embrace the truth they come to know, and to hold fast to it. This Vatican Council likewise professes its belief that it is upon the human conscience that these obligations (i.e. to seek the truth and to hold fast to it) fall and exert their binding force.

Thus in the above official text, there is absolutely no room for relativism to fit in, as far as such OBJECTIVE TRUTH is concerned. Thus too Henry Cardinal Newman concluded that “conscience has its obligations precisely because it has an inviolable right to be free!” Otherwise, conscience becomes an absurdity by being trivialized, into various contradictory interpretations of the truth regarding moral issues, and to be decided arbitrarily by billions of individual consciences. Such will be the case even if per Tanseco’s thesis, they will all claim to be “informed and responsible”. Thus too, moral anarchy would still be the unavoidable result of Tanseco’s theory.

Moreover our DH text is categorical in that man’s obligation to “seek the truth and hold fast to it” has a “binding force” on the human conscience. Thus as in secular civil law, “CONSCIENCE” as the “OBLIGEE” (the party burdened with an obligation), is bound to perform such an obligation in favor of, or owing to an independent OBLIGOR. Therefore, as in civil law as well as by common sense logic, the individual conscience cannot be the ‘Final Arbiter’ over such obligations to be rendered as the Obligee and for the benefit of the Obligor -- no matter how supposedly well informed and responsible the Obligee may be.

As to the misinterpretation of Section 3 of Dignitatis Humanae, I surmise that Tanseco’s untenable basis for his “final arbiter” theory are these statements in that section’s penultimate paragraph:

“On his part, man perceives and acknowledges the imperatives of the divine law through the mediation of conscience. In all his activities a man is bound to follow his conscience, in order that he may come to God.” (emphasis supplied)

But even without considering the earlier principal premises and definitions of terms made in the previous sections 1 and 2, those two sentences cannot be logically interpreted to mean that simply following one’s conscience, makes the person at the same time and automatically, as the “final arbiter” on the moral issues involved.

Providentially for us all however, in late May of this year, the Vatican Curia’s Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, issued a comprehensive set of official instructions and teachings on Authority and Obedience. A key section apropos to our key issue on conscience, was included, as follows:

Obedience and Objections of conscience (emphasis supplied)

27. “Here one could ask: Can there be situations in which a person’s conscience would not seem to permit following the directives given by persons in authority? Can it happen, in short, that the consecrated person must state in relation to the norms or to their superiors: “It is necessary to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29)? This is the case of the so-called objection in conscience of which Paul VI spoke, (Evangelica Testificatio) and that should be considered in its authentic meaning.

“If it is true that conscience is the place where the voice of the Lord resounds, the voice that indicates to us how to behave, it is also true that it is necessary to learn to listen to this voice very attentively in order to know how to recognize it and distinguish it from other voices. In fact, it is necessary not to confuse this voice with those which emerge from a subjectivism that ignores or disregards the sources and criteria that cannot be given up and are mandatory in the formation of judgments of conscience: “It is the ‘heart’ converted to the Lord and to the love of what is good which is really the source of true judgments of conscience”, (Veritatis Splendor, 64) and “freedom of conscience is never freedom ‘from’ the truth but always and only freedom ‘in’ the truth”(Veritatis Splendor, 64)

Here is what the Blessed Virgin Mary speaking to Rev. Father Stefano Gobbi and Our Lord Jesus himself through Maria Valtorta, through “Anne” the Irish Lay Apostle and through Rev. Fr. Father Edward Carter, S.J., all have to say to ALL of us and to priests such as Ruben M. Tanseco, S.J. as well as to their superiors in their congregations and in the Catholic Church as well:

From message No. 211 given in Manila, Philippines to Fr. Gobbi on October 13, 1980:

Do Not Sin Any More

a "Today you are gathering here, in a cenacle of prayer, and recalling my final apparition at the Cova da Iria which was confirmed by the miracle of the sun.

b From this land (the Philippines), dear to me for the love and devotion with which I am loved and venerated, I make again to the world the anguished appeal which I made on that same day at Fatima and which summarizes, in a few words, the message which I came from heaven to communicate to you.

c Do not sin any more!

d Do not offend any more my Son Jesus, who has already been too much offended. Return to God by your conversion along the way of prayer and of penance.

e Alas, this message of mine has remained unheeded. And thus humanity has continued to hasten along the road of rebellion against God, in the obstinate rejection of his law of love. Thus it has come even to the denial of sin, to the justification of even the gravest moral disorders in the name of a falsely conceived liberty (of conscience). Thus Satan, my adversary, has succeeded in making you fall into his seduction.

f Many have thus lost the awareness of sin and so it is more and more committed and justified. The sense of guilt, which is the first step to take along the road of conversion, has practically disappeared.

g Even in those countries of the most ancient Christian tradition, the great crime of killing children still in their mother's womb has gone so far as to be legitimized. This crime cries for vengeance in the sight of God. (RH Bill Supporters, please note!)

h This is the hour of justice and mercy. This is the hour of chastisement and salvation. The heavenly Mother intercedes before God for you because never, as in the present time, have you been so menaced and so close to the supreme test.

i For this reason I beg you to repent and to return to God. Through you, sons especially chosen by me and consecrated to me, my apostles in these latter times, I want this anguished appeal to reach to the very limits of the earth.

j From this blessed nation, upon which I have a great design of love and of light, I gather you all into the refuge of my Immaculate Heart."

--o--

Message No. 384: June 11, 1988

The Great Apostasy

a "On the feast of my Immaculate Heart of this Marian Year, consecrated to me, beloved sons, I am calling all of you to enter into the heavenly garden which I have built for you, during these painful and bloody moments of the purification.

b The hour of the great apostasy has come. What has been foretold in Holy Scripture, in the Second Letter of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians, is now on the point of coming to pass.

c Satan, my Adversary, with snares and by means of his subtle seduction, has succeeded in spreading errors everywhere, under the form of new and more updated interpretations of the Truth, and he has led many to choose with full knowledge-and to live in - sin, in the deceiving conviction that this is no longer an evil, and even that it is a value and a good.

d The times of the general confusion and of the greatest agitation of spirits has come. Confusion has entered into the souls and the lives of many of my children.

e This great apostasy is spreading more and more, even through the interior of the Catholic Church. Errors are being taught and spread about, while the fundamental truths of the faith, which the authentic Magisterium of the Church has always taught and energetically defended against any heretical deviation whatsoever, are being denied with impunity.

f The episcopates are maintaining a strange silence and are no longer reacting. When my Pope speaks with courage and reaffirms with force the truths of the Catholic faith, he is no longer listened to and is even publicly criticized and derided. There is a subtle and diabolical tactic, woven in secrecy by Masonry, which is used today against the Holy Father in order to bring ridicule upon his person and his work and to neutralize his Magisterium.

g Those children of mine who, often unknowingly, allow themselves to be carried along by this wave of error and of evil are victims of the great apostasy.

h Many bishops, priests, religious and faithful are victims of the great apostasy.

--o--

Message No. 420, given in Sao Paolo, Brazil on March 13, 1990

When the Son of Man Returns

a "You read in the Gospel: 'When the Son of Man returns, will He still find faith on earth?'

c This circumstance is the loss of faith.

f The causes of the loss of faith are:

g Thus, in these days of yours, apostasy on the part of many of my poor children is inundating you more and more.

h When the Son of Man returns ...

--o--

And from the Lord Jesus Himself as was dictated to Maria Valtorta (Q43:514) on October 30, 1943, referring to abortion as the “crime of crimes” in section 45, page 70 of the book The End Times as revealed to Maria Valtorta, as published by Editions Paulines, Centro Editoriale Valtortiano SRL, translated from Italian to English by Paul T.Y. Atworth.

Jesus says:

“I am the Merciful One. I am indulgent and I forgive. There is so much that I forgive. I forgive what I see you do out of human weakness, not what is done out of deliberate human self-interest. I will never be as severe a judge as with those who, with their thinking sold to Satan, commit more crimes than outlaws, lead(ing) others to commit crimes, and above all commit(ing) the crime of crimes, thus leading souls to mistrust God.

“Nowadays this crime of homicide and deicide is not the monopoly of a few. They kill bodies and souls and kill the idea of God in souls, making them blind like empty eye-sockets.

“The crowds make it out (realize it) too late. But I see, at the instant you think and act. And all of you, ungodly of flesh and spirit, will be judged with an extremely severe judgment.”

From Volume One of Direction for Our Times, Chapter 8, pages 144-145 (with emphasis supplied)

Thursday, July 17, 2003

Blessed Mother:

…

Priests and religious, holy men and women, console my heart in extraordinary fashion right now and I am maximizing the tremendous graces I receive from (earned by) these righteous souls. Religious in the world are under attack. Be brave, religious souls. Your mother defends you as her own and you will be raised up to your rightful place soon. Instead of being honoured by the world, you are reviled and slandered. This will not endure.

I (also) want to say that there are those religious who have disappointed my Son and turned to the evil one. Do not think, oh souls of Satan, that you will escape divine justice. And for you who have damaged innocent souls? All of heaven quakes with the retribution that will be yours. I say this to you with a special gravity. Repent! Admit your sins and become cleansed. Only in this way will you enter into the Kingdom of God.”

And lastly from the booklet of Father Edward Carter S.J. entitled Tell My People, on page 61 thereof:

Jesus:

…

“I am Lord and Master. I request that all My people listen to My words and respond to them. I love My people with a tremendous love, and in this great love I give them this message!”

“My church is experiencing critical and very difficult times. There are many divisions. There are many false teachings - including some put forth by certain theologians. These false teachings occur because those responsible are not in proper union with My vicar, the Pope, and the Church Magisterium. I want all My children to pray daily for the cure of many and serious ills of the Church. With increased prayer and sacrifices for the health of the Church, that day will soon come when the Church will be purified and revitalized. When that day comes, the Church will be a light to all nations as never before. When that day comes, the renewed Church will be characterized by the triumph of the Immaculate Heart and the reign of My Sacred Heart. Thus the message of Fatima will have reached fulfillment.