Halo-halong ewan....

A lot of things (and I mean A LOT) happened during the interval between this post and my previous one.

-the Liturgy discrepancy...
-the earthquake in Visayas...
-the upcoming presidential elections in the United States...
-Pro-life month...
-the Chief Justice Corona Impeachment saga...
-tons of schoolwork and extra-curriculars...
-and those I have no freakin' idea of.

Anyway, this post just shows how bored I am, and how I waste my time in a mandatory seminar. What a way of wasting time, eh.

Sorry for the sarcasm.

Ranting Bloggers

I admit, I rant whenever I write a blog. Remember Alter Ego? I was told by a friend of mine to watch what I'm writing. He said, though it's good, some people would be offended that they'll run after my neck. But anyway, that's not the point.

The point is when you rant, you're more egoistic than you could ever imagine. Of course it is an opinion, a violent reaction, perhaps. But sometimes, there are some bloggers out there who, for the love of God, the sanctity of life, the Church, Tradition, and of the Pope, will scrutinize EVERY SINGLE MOVE the local Churches do (and I mean, the Dioceses and Archdioceses here in the Philippines as well as other Ecclesial hotspots over the world).

As a fellow ranter, here's my unsolicited advice:

I once was told by a media practitioner about watching TV: "If you don't like what you see, change the channel." Now, if you don't want the shepherding style of a Bishop, transfer to another diocese. If you don't see the beauty of the Church here in the Philippines, why not reside in Rome? I guess you'll realize how beautiful our faith is through its structures. Or better yet, tell the Bishops what YOU feel before leaving. Tell them everything you know until they understand what you mean.

My Youth: The Transition Blog Post

This would be the last day this blog would be called "Media, Society, and God". Tomorrow, it will have a new name, and I hope a new format would be expected here. But before I bid goodbye to the old title, here's what I can say on the recently-concluded National Youth Day, and also a reflection on it.

My Youth: The Final Post as Media, Society, and God

Being young is, traditionally, being underestimated or inexperienced by most of your older peers, and even by your own age bracket. I feel this. All of the time.

Ever since I failed to become an honor student, teachers and fellow students never expected something out of me other than graduating High School. In college, it’s the same thing, but I felt that it was already jaded too much that I said to myself “Nah. A lot of people happened to be in the position I am in, so why should I worry too much?”

But there was a significant change in my life.

Joining the two most practical organizations in UST isn’t just actually mere choice of org or what; I initially based myself on what will I learn from them, and eventually, how I would face the world with all that I have. 

I admit: I’m an attention-hungry person.

But it all changed when I realized “Why should I grab the attention of others than being you? Why should I even care about it?”

Until I realized there’s a lot of things I can excel, maybe not in academics, though I should keep it top priority, and I could master it little by little. I found about Katolikong Pinoy, and I became active ever since.

But the inferiority complex remains, being the youngest of its five active Administrators. And with a background in media, since I’m a Communication Arts student, I feel that they’re expecting me to be more than just a Facebook admin, which a lot of people are taking for granted. Besides, some pages on Facebook are just nonsense.

Anyway, what I’m trying to tell you is that I feel blessed that I covered the final event of National Youth Day for an episode on our YouTube program “TSEKPoint”, currently on post-production. Being one of the admins is one great task. I thought most of our core members are available on that day; it turns out, only me and my fellow admin, Kuya Ryan Rayos, were there—the latter as part of the documentation staff on one of the festival sites on the recently concluded event, making me, technically, representing KP. There were also some friends whom I happened to meet at the Cuneta Astrodome: Kuya Mark Vertido, one of KP’s former admins who now works on the CBCP-Episcopal Commission on Youth; and Paolo Cobangbang, O.P. from the Rosarian Youth Movement, the youth arm of the Company of St. Dominic in which I long to become part of.

I brought with me the Philippine flag which became the rally point of our members on that Pro-Life rally last March 25, expecting that some of them would come and join in the celebration. But the opposite happened. Actually, one of our fellow members tried to come, but he’s from Bulacan, so he told me he can’t make it, and I understood why.

Being alone out there was actually scary. Good thing I noticed Brother Paolo during the Mass before the event, especially in Communion where he kneeled in front of a priest in order to receive the Body of Christ. After the Mass, the areas near the delegates were opened for the non-delegates to buy food. I was one of those who took the opportunity to get in and interact with the delegates, as well as rendezvousing with Kuya Ryan and Kuya Mark. One of the people in the ECY, Ate Nirva, asked me “Papaano ka nakapasok dito?” taking into consideration that non-delegates are hands-off in the area where the stage is realistic, if you know what I mean. I answered her, “Ewan ko nga po eh! I found the gates open and hindi naman po ako nasita ng mga taga-security.” She replied: “You are meant to be here!”

Well, I was shocked when I heard it, since I never showed up in ECY’s prep and planning—actually, only once—due to my ma-trabahong subjects, as well as my other duties as an organization officer, a student, an admin of a more-than-125,000-likes-strong Facebook page, and as a son. The night went well for me though the setbacks. And besides, it does not matter. I can still catch up with the next NYD in Visayas, wishful thinking that I can finance my trip there. I’m still considered young until I reach 30. My mom told me “Bata ka pa. Marami ka pang opportunities para maging involved.” And I guess she was right all along. But I’m never too young to do extraordinary things out of ordinary circumstances.

This leads me to the last line of the chorus of NYD’s theme song this year: “We are never too young to come as one. We can make a stand!” For the record, I am one of the youngest affiliates in Filipinos for Life, a pro-life group behind the Facebook page “I Oppose the RH Bill”, aside from being the youngest KP Admin. I’m even invited to be part of the Manila South core group of Defensores Fidei Foundation, a non-profit apologetics organization in which my apologist idols, Fr. Abe Arganiosa and Atty. Marwil Llasos, O.P., are part of.

Too many expectations. Too many opportunities. I cannot turn them down, but since I’m still a college student, the best thing that I can consider is to postpone their offers if and when it will still be available in the near future. I’m still young. I should be making the most out of my youth without compromising my duties and interests, because, as they say: “minsan lang maging bata”.

The Battle for Existence Continues: the Rosary Month Editorial

(originally made as episode for TSEKPoint, the video commentary program of 100% KATOLIKONG PINOY! now made as a blog version)

This October, we celebrate the Month of the Most Holy Rosary, and there’s no other celebration that could parallel the way the Dominicans honor the Blessed Virgin Mary. Every second week of October, the Order of Preachers, as well as the throngs of people who have a very special attachment to Mary (besides, we were called as the "a people who loved Mary"--"pueblo amante de Maria") because it is the Blessed Mother who interceded to the Child in her arms to preserve the Pearl of the Orient from Calvinist desacration. 

1645 was the year. The Philippines was in total chaos. Revolts were sporadic in the Islands; two earthquakes reduced Manila to ruins; and its Archbishop-elect, Fernando Montero de Espinosa, died before he even took possession of his cathedral. And to make the situation worse, the Dutch are prowling the Philippine shores, desperate to capture poorly-armed Spanish galleons, kick the Spanish regime out of the Philippines, and spread the Protestantism of Calvin. In short, with all these ominous events, the Dutch were resolved that this weak state of the Spanish government in the Philippines is enough to decapitate its rule and incorporate the islands with Formosa (now Taiwan) and Indonesia, both of which were Dutch colonies. It was do or die. If the Spaniards and Filipinos lose, the Philippines will cease to exist.

The Dutch had more or less 15 battleships, divided into three squadrons. The only defense the Spanish-Filipino forces had were two (and later three) galleons, a galley, and a few brigantines (all of them refitted for war). Aside from these makeshift warships, The crew of the Encarnacion (the flagship), the Rosario (the admiral ship), as well as the other warships had weapons and torches on one hand, and rosaries on the other. This only shows that their greatest arsenals were prayers and their devotion to Our Lady of the Most Holy Rosary. 

The first battle was fought on March 15 the next year with the two Spanish-Filipino galleons facing five Dutch battleships—with odds in favor of the latter—off the coast of Corregidor. But their resilience and prayers made the Spanish-Filipino crew draw first blood with minimal damage and zero casualties.

The Encarnacion and the Rosario were then dispatched as escorts to the incoming galleon San Luis. They were then blockaded by seven Dutch warships at Ticao Island for about a month, and was lifted afterwards to sail for Manila. The Spanish galleons, then, chased them to an encounter near Marinduque on the 29^th of July. The Dutch waited till nightfall for their fire vessels to be at maximum effectiveness. The Dutch ships encircled the Encarnacion, desparate to capture or destroy the Spanish flagship. They were then fired upon by the Rosario from behind, doing much damage to the enemy squadron. The fire ships then closed in on the two-ship Spanish fleet, hoping to set them on fire, but to no avail. They were heavily bombarded and capsized. The battle lasted till dawn the next day, resulting to a Dutch rout. Again, another victory for the Spanish-Filipino forces with two injuries, but with no deaths, as General Lorenzo de Orella y Ugalde prayed through the intercession of the Virgin before the battle. This was supposed to be the bloodiest among the five battles. 

Two days later, on July 31, 1646, another battle ensued off the coast of Mindoro, this time, with the Spaniards and Filipinos on the offensive. Still in high morale after the previous fight, they cornered the Dutch ships for battle, surprised on how powerful were the Dutch cannons compared to theirs. Resilient and undismayed, they fired upon the Dutch ships, echoing the famous battlecry: “¡Viva la Virgen!” to the sound of their cannons. After four hours one Dutch vessel sank and the rest retreated. Again, no casualties were made on the side of the Spanish-Filipino crew.

After this, General Orella retired as commander of the fleet, turning it over to Captain Sebastian Lopez, thus making him captain of the Encarnacion, while Agustin de Cepeda replaced him as captain of the Rosario. The crew fulfilled its promise before the battle that if they win, they will march barefoot at the Santo Domingo Church in Intramuros. The intermission was important for the Spanish-Filipino fleet to reorganize its crew, do repairs to the ships, and to replenish their supplies. However, they became complacent, believing the Dutch will never again set sail over the Philippine waters. The galleon San Diego was en route to Acapulco when it was harassed by three Dutch ships near Fortune Island. Luckily the poorly-armed ship escaped the trap without an escort and went back to Manila. 

The San Diego was hastily remodeled as a battleship and joined the Encarnacion and the Rosario in the campaign. On Sept. 16, 1646, the now three-ship-and-one-galley-strong Spanish-Filipino fleet met the three-ship Dutch squadron at the port of Calavite in Mindoro. At the height of the battle, the Rosario drifted in for the kill—one ship against three. Admiral Cepeda prepared his crew for broadside fire, and the Dutch fled in the crew’s tenacity.

General Sebastian Lopez ordered the fleet to return to Mariveles to await orders from the Governor-General and to do repairs. On October 4, the San Diego was moored in the port, with the Encarnacion guarding it from a distance. The Rosario was again drifted away from the fleet, this time the Dutch, with three ships, have the flagship, the Encarnacion, as their target. General Sebastian ordered to move the ship, and the final battle for existence was about to begin.

With cunning movement and furious bombardment, the Encarnacion singlehandedly inflicted heavy damages to the enemy ships, causing them to flee. When the wind died down, the galley then attacked the Dutch ships, particularly the Dutch flagship. When it was about to be sunk, the wind blew again, allowing the Dutch to escape despite the pursuit of the Encarnacion and the galley. That final battle tolled four deaths aboard the Encarnacion. 

General Sebastian Lopez again fulfilled their vow of marching barefoot to the shrine of the Virgin of the Rosary. From that time on, all efforts of the Dutch to capture the Philippines were already in vain.

Celebrations were made in Manila, for their death sentence was lifted. An ecclesiastical committee of the vacant See of Manila then convened to investigate if the said series of battles were to be declared as miracles. And true enough, they were for the following reasons:

First, despite the bitter fighting, only fifteen people from the Spanish-Filipino crew lost their lives;

Second, the Encarnacion and the Rosario were old galleons supposed to be incapable of a long-term campaign, yet they won with unexpected results; and

Finally, the crew prayed the Rosary, and implored the intercession of Our Lady of the Most Holy Rosary, which was also the agent of the victory of the Holy League under John of Austria at the Battle of Lepanto decades ago. 

This only shows that for those who pray, prayer is powerful; and if coupled with human efforts, there will be great results.

This was also a sign of determination that the Spaniards will never surrender the faith they practice and preach to the natives. This was a battle for survival—a battle for the existence of the Philippines itself, which Nick Joaquin said:

"Imagine the Philippines as part of Indonesia! That seems incredible today - but it's a might-have-been of our history. There was a time in the 17th century when our fate hung in the balance. Had events gone the other way, THERE MIGHT HAVE NO PHILIPPINES AT ALL.” 

The battles were part of the Eighty Years’ War between Spain and the Dutch and her allies. Their battlefield was extended to the colonies, threatening to conquer and destroy Spanish culture from the Filipinos. If not for this gallant, almost predictable defense, we would be speaking Dutch instead of English, and we will not have this kind of procession. More importantly, if we just sat down and let the Dutch take over the Philippines, we would not have become the predominant Catholic country in Asia, from which we owe our culture to, for we are already indoctrinated by the heresy of Calvin. 

A coincidental fact: Spain and the Netherlands faced each other again, this time; in the FIFA World Cup Finals in Johannesburg last 2010. Just as almost 400 years ago, the Spanish emerged victorious against the Dutch and won that year’s championship, their first in football. 

Now, another battle is ongoing; though a truce is formally implemented from now until January next year. It is not about territories or indoctrination of heresies, but of ideologies of what life is all about. 

It was on October 7, 2010 that Filipinos for Life, and in the partnership of 100% Katolikong Pinoy, launched the Facebook page called “I Oppose the RH Bill”, in response to the all-hell-broke-loose web war made by neo-atheists, freethinkers, and most of the people who associate themselves to the pro-RH crowd, specifically those who question the alleged involvement of the Catholic Church in politics, as Carlos Celdran assumes. We at 100% Katolikong Pinoy plugged the page instantly, since we also experience anti-Church bigotry through statements and trolling, and sometimes, divides the line between loyal Catholics and dissident, nominal Catholics, not to mention anti-Catholic statements about the “doctrine” of contraception. 

Ever since the establishment of the lines between those who claimed that the RH Bill was for women’s rights and for those who proclaim that life is sacred and should be left alone, TV debates have already aired, thousands of arguments have already been raised, both houses of Congress take this bill into consideration than other more important legal documents pending for ratification, most especially now that Senator Lito Lapid exposed that the RH Bill’s budget is about 13.7 million Pesos. Imagine that.

This is another battle for existence. But this time, it is not fought with ships or cannons, but with ideologies and arguments. And this time, what hangs in the balance is the destiny of our moral and socio-economical status, as well as the lives we are living and the lives yet to exist. 

The belligerents are the pro-life groups, dauntlessly spearheaded by the Catholic Church, and the groups who favor contraception, abortion, divorce, same-sex marriage, and the abuse (or to put it in their point, the exercise) of the freedoms of speech, choice, and expression. Instantly, groups of individuals, as well as large institutions and organizations take their sides, whether in overt or in covert manner, contributing to their consecutive camps.

As far as everyone can see, there seems to be a deadlock between them, if not an uphill advantage of one of them. A deadlock since the pro-RH are supported by celebrities people see, hear, and talk about in the media; while the pro-life camp only have a handful, mostly, the least talked-about (of course Manny Pacquiao and Sen. Tito Sotto are exceptions). But when it comes to things like proof, as well as exposure in charity works specially in times the Filipinos are on their knees, it is the Catholic Church and the pro-life NGO’s (if ever there are; but of course there are) who is the first to respond to the needs of the victims of calamities and the ire of nature in general; the pro-RH camp falls silent in these situations either because they don’t have the capacity to do so, or because they think it is not part of the argument, yet paradoxically, they point out the alleged wealth of the Catholic Church—that they have enough resources to purchase vehicles.

If that is the case, at least the Church uses it for the common good, of course comparing to some anti-Church organizations that have the luxury to produce advertisements about their cause and create full-scale campaigns out of their own pockets. 

In 1646, we have defended Manila, dubbed as the Rome by the Pasig by Nick Joaquin, from the Calvinist Dutch. Now, we face much more influential enemies: DEATH and its cohorts. Of course there are people outside the Church who support us in our campaign against this threat to the country's survival; the only problem is that some of them independently fight these monstrosities for their own benefits. We hope that these allies of ours may soon realize that we are fighting the same enemies and that they may agree to join forces to achieve a more decisive victory. 

To summarize, we are still facing a battle, in one way or another. But the battle we insist in this episode is not just a personal one, but it is a battle for reputation and respect. The Philippines is considered to be the last impregnable fortress of true Catholicism outside the Vatican. Malta has already succumbed to the legalization of divorce, and many predominantly Catholic countries, even Spain and Italy, have already been secularized as a society. It is up to us, the gallant men and women striving for sanctification, to remain loyal to the teachings of Christ through His Vicar and through His Church and to justify our reputation as the Rome of Asia. For this, we say, the battle for our existence continues. 

AXIOS! Imus Bishop is the next Philippine Primate

Manila Archbishop-elect Luis Antonio Tagle

Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, the current Archbishop of Manila, submitted his retirement letter in 2007, as it is mandatory for bishops reaching the age of 75, but his resignation was accepted by the Pope four years later; and today, we wake up with a new shepherd of the most influential Archdiocese in the country, since it was the very first diocese established in the Spanish times. Archbishop-elect Tagle, having the episcopal motto "Dominus Est" (It is the Lord), is currently the third Bishop of Imus and the diocese at the threshold of its Golden Jubilee this year. This was his official statement: 


His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI appointed me, a humble servant to succeed His Eminence Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales to the Metropolitan See of Manila. I face this heavy responsibility with much trepidation. Leaving the Diocese of Imus, my beloved our home, at the threshold of its Golden Jubilee is not easy. But faith in our gracious Lord and love of the Church give me strength. I know that I would find much good will and zeal for mission in the clergy, religious and lay faithful of the Archdiocese of Manila. In our openness to the Holy Spirit, we could render a joyful and robust witness to Jesus Christ, all for the glory of the Father and the good of the Church and of society, especially of the poor. I entrust the Archdiocese of Manila and my ministry to the loving care of Our Lady, Mary Immaculate.

+ Luis Antonio G. Tagle
13 October 2011 




Just a few suggestions for the Archbishop-elect: 


First and foremost, we pray that you may follow the footsteps of Davao Archbishop Capalla in promoting the beauty of the Liturgy, so as to influence the suffragan dioceses you are about to administer as Metropolitan (namely, Novaliches, Pasig, Parañaque, Antipolo, Malolos, San Pablo, Cubao, Kalookan, and Imus), without compromise and impurities. I expect that you will face the SSPX for this, but remember that the Church will never be prevailed by the gates of hell as long as you are in communion with the Successor of Peter (Matt. 16:18). 


Secondly, your predecessor, Cardinal Rosales, have created a program called "Pondo ng Pinoy". We hope you will continue and strengthen this program. 


And finally, may you continue to uphold the sanctity of life.... And I think everyone knows about that.... 


Anyway, Bishop Chito, as he is colloquially known, is very much exposed in the media, currently hosting a Sunday Gospel reflection program over Studio 23(?) and over YouTube. I very much expect that he will be known as the media-friendly Archbishop. 




To Manila Archbishop-emeritus Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, we thank you for shepherding Manila, and extendedly, the whole country, in our beliefs. You have fought a good fight. You have finished the run. And you have preserved our faith, just as St. Paul proclaimed. May the Lord bless you in your retirement. 


To Manila Archbishop-elect Luis Antonio "Chito" Tagle, we are congratulating you for being the new shepherd of the Archdiocese of Manila. 


AXIOS! AXIOS! AXIOS! 




Just a footnoter: Looks like someone isn't THAT happy for this....

De Quiros' stupid blah

Conrado de Quiros doesn't know what he's saying. I better understand what Atty. Marwil Llasos, O.P. has to say here. And here's what I can comment:

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

CONRADO DE QUIROS GOT IT ALL WRONG ON THE MOTHER OF GOD!!!

(http://opinion.inquirer.net/11425/mother-of-god)

Inquirer columnist Conrado de Quiros opens his column with a sound bite from Cebu Archbishop Jose Palma, “If we fight against the RH bill, we will make Mama Mary happy.” [We really will be!] Then he pounced upon the Cebu Archbishop and incoming CBCP President, “Palma may not know it, but he has just produced one of the richest ironies of late.” To de Quiros’ mind, yes. [and his mind may have hallucinating tendencies.] But not to faithful Catholics who comprise the majority in this country.

De Quiros proceeded to answer his own question: “Who was Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ?” He noted how Mary is depicted today as “white Anglo-Saxon.” This betrays the columnist’s limited worldview on Marian iconography. [Not to mention his limited taste for religious images] De Quiros must have forgotten [Forgotten? Or is it just that he doesn't care if he forgets it?] that closer to home, Nuestra Señora de la Paz y Buenviaje in Antipolo is a brown virgin and far from the “white Anglo Saxon” depiction that De Quiros claims Mary is depicted today. De Quiros is oblivious of the Morenita of Guadalupe who is depicted, well, with Indian and not white Anglo-Saxon features. [The image of Our Lady of La Naval de Manila may be a white virgin, but it is more Asiatic in her look than what de Quiros assumes as "white Anglo-Saxon". And I have to quote TPC for this: IDJIT!] I can go on to list depictions of the Blessed Virgin Mary that are not white Anglo-Saxon but with rather ethnic or native features (La Vang, Akita, Kibeho, etc.). [And the list goes on.]

The Inquirer columnist observes that “[o]ccasionally, you see a more Pinoy version of the Madonna and Child in paintings, that of a brown-skinned and gusgusin mother and child (ah, but artists have always been the boy who can see through the emperor’s new clothes). And occasionally you see belens that have the same brown-skinned, if not gusgusin, version of the Madonna and Child. But so only occasionally.”But brown-skinned Madonnas are not alien to Filipino piety. They have been with us since the Spanish times. Guadalupe is brown and so is the Antipolo. In Bicol, the Peñafrancia and the Salvacion are brown virgins. Yes, we have black Madonnas, too. Piat in Cagayan, Guadalupe in Loboc. Not to forget the oldest Marian image in the Philippines, De Guia. [Attorney, I guess he forgot to mention the Black Madonna of Poland, the one Bl. John Paul was affiliated to in the years prior to his papacy. And about gusgusin, what about it, huh?]

De Quiros notes that what we generally see in churches is a Mary clad in white, grasping a rosary with hands that have never seen a day’s work. But what about the other depictions of Mary I pointed? De Quiros must have only seen the images of Our Lady of Fatima or Our Lady of Lourdes. But these are depictions of Mary in her eschatological lot. What De Quiros does not realize is that Marian iconography is not about portraits or actual pictures of how Mary looked like in Palestine 2000 years ago. [Tumpak!] Iconography is intended primarily to convey theological truth. [Looks like he didn't learned that in his fine arts school, or he didn't want to learn it.]

Then De Quiros pontificates that Mary represents the Filipino woman in far more ways than the Catholic Church has been able to fathom. [Actually, it's the other way around. Or it is that the Filipino perspective is but a bit and piece of the overall representation and perspective of the Church.] The implication is that only De Quiros is able to fathom that truth. [Truth? (pukes)]

Conrado De Quiros is correct that the term “Mama Mary” signifies a mother. He is correct. [...and the only thing he got right] Mary is first and foremost a mother. It is in being a mother that the glory of Mary lies. Motherhood is a precious gift of God that contraception thwarts. [Well.... I already see the article's true colors.] Then De Quiros, with an air of infallibility, declares that “’Mama Mary’ already invests Mary with a rich or middle-class provenance. The wife of a karpintero is not called “Mama” by her brood, she is called “Inay.” [So? What's the fuss about it, de Quiros, huh? Don't you call your mother "Mama"? hahahahaha. Hey, wait.... If Mary can't be called "Mama" to you, then what will you call her in her role as a mother?] I wonder what is the source of De Quiros’ ex cathedra declaration that the wife of karpinteros is not called “Mama” but “Inay” by her children. I have neighbors who are carpenters and their children call their mothers“Mama.” De Quiros is clearly generalizing. [Stereotyping can be another word.]

So what if we call Mary “Mama Mary”? “Mama” is a more universal term of endearment used for mothers and by calling Mary such title underscores her universal motherhood. [And most of the time, even infants have "mama" as their first word.] Mary is not just the mother of the poor but also of the middle class and the rich. She is the mother of us all. By insinuating that since “Mama Mary” is of rich or middle class provenance, hence, not appropriate for the poor, De Quiros seems to involve Mary in a class struggle. That smacks of Marxism to me. [Social stratification?]

The Catholic Church refers to Mary as the Virgin Mary and we do take it as a matter of faith. And we take it, as what God’s Word teaches us, that the Holy Spirit had a hand in Mary’s pregnancy (Lk. 1:35). We don’t force this belief on De Quiros – he is free to reject it. It is obvious that De Quiros does not believe the clear teaching of Scripture. Fine. But he should not disparage those who do. [But he did it, anyway. Damage done.]

In stating that “it is inconceivable that Joseph and Mary did not have normal physical relations before and after the birth of Christ,” Conrado de Quiros has just taken the ranks of heretics like Helvidius.  [Unleash the Jackhammer! hahahahaha] Here, De Quiros clearly embraces Helvidian or Antidicomarianite heresy, the denial of the perpetual virginity of Mary. The Inquirer columnist justifies his heretical belief by stating that “[a]s far as I know, the instructions of the angel who came to visit Mary did not include a ban on sex, or stipulated that she marry Joseph to keep up a front. The marriage was for real.” What is his basis? His private interpretation of Scripture. [Now he's among the ranks of the 'sola scriptura' people.] Let’s chop to bits and pieces De Quiros’ “exegesis.”

De Quiros says that the “instructions of the angel who came to visit Mary did not include a ban on sex.” [HERESY! HERESY! HERESY!] And who says it does? The Gospel account is about God’s invitation to Mary to be the mother of the Messiah. The angel tells her how her motherhood would come about, without the agency of a man. The angel was not imposing a ban on sex to Mary. There was no need to as it is clear in the passage that Mary was a virgin and determined to remain so as expressed in her question, “How can this be since I do not know man?” (Lk. 1:34). [He would be blind ignorant that he read this verse.]

Conrado de Quiros goes on to state that the angel’s instruction did not stipulate “that she marry Joseph to keep up a front. The marriage was for real.” [HERESY! HERESY! HERESY!] The Catholic Church does not teach, in fact it condemns, the heretical notion that the marriage of Mary and Joseph was not real. Obviously, De Quiros’ grasp on Catholic teaching and theology is nil. [It's a double-standard]

De Quiros is correct that Mary was the mother of a single child. Yet, his reason why it is so is absurd. He avers that “[t]he faithful will say that was because God caused Mary—or Joseph—to be barren afterward.” [Okay.... Do I have to say that again?] Who are these faithful who say that? The truth of the matter is no Catholic faithful will ever say such thing for the simple reason that the Catholic Church never teaches that God caused Mary or Joseph to be barren! Just what is De Quiros’ source for Catholic teaching? [Let me guess.... From himself?]

Another thing. God did not order Mary to be chaste. She already was. And how could Joseph’s fate be worse than Job or anybody else since he was privileged to be the foster-father of the Son of God? De Quiros’ assumption of course is that sex is all that it takes in this life. Joseph, as true husband to Mary, has rights over Mary but that does not mean that he exercised it. [Emphasis mine.]

De Quiros comments that “[t]he faithless, or downright sacrilegious, will say that was because they practiced family planning.” I wonder who are these faithless or downrightly sacrilegious people De Quiros is referring to. [Maybe he's one of them.... ehem...ehem.]

Conrado de Quiros categorizes Mary as dirt-poor. Poor, yes. Dirt-poor, no. [DIRT-POOR? Good thing I don't blow up easily.... But I'll be, but not here.] How else could Mary ever have the luxury of a donkey in going to Bethlehem from Nazareth and from Bethlehem to Egypt and back to Nazareth? A dirt-poor woman could not afford a donkey. And Joseph, too, was not dirt-poor as he was a “tekton,” an artisan – some sort of a skilled worker with a steady income. [Catechism 101: St. Joseph is an artisan, okay? AN ARTISAN!] Clearly, De Quiros’ command of Biblical studies is simply bereft. [Actually, I don't get it at all.]

Then here’s the rub. De Quiros stated that “[o]nly in the end for Mary to see the same son arrested by the authorities for being a troublemaker. Only in the end for Mary to see their friends, their neighbors, and their entire community rise against him. Only in the end for Mary to see him nailed to the cross like a common criminal. Maybe Mary had the profoundest of faith and was convinced her son, though of her loins was not of this world, but she was a mother, too. And what mother would not have wept at the sight of her son’s agony? And what mother would not have wished things had been different and her son had met with another fate?” Oh, so De Quiros would rather that Mary should not have consented to have a son in the first place. If Mary had the same thinking as De Quiros, the Savior would have not been born. [In the first place, he is not the master of time and space.]

And then De Quiros asks, “Why should a proposal for the poor to breed children beyond their ability to raise them make Mary happy?” His question assumes that the Church teaches and encourages the poor to breed children beyond their ability to raise them. [Where can I read that in Humanae Vitae or Evangelium Vitae? Or any Catholic Social Encyclical? I think I see nothing about what he wrote.] That is a false assumption. The Church also teaches responsible parenthood but insists on natural family planning to achieve it. De Quiros did not point out the fact that the Church differs only in the means and not on the end of responsible parenthood. 

De Quiros argues that a decent life is impossible in a huge family which, in the urban slums in particular, dooms many of the girls to a life of prostitution and the boys to a life of crime. Prostitution and criminality are not attributable to big families alone. The government, too, has a big role to play in this regard. [Everyone has a share of the blame. That's for sure.]

It would also seem that to De Quiros that the poor do not have the right to have children. Thus, if we are to follow De Quiros’ logic, the poor should be sterilized so that they can no longer procreate. This is most welcome in a Nazi regime. [The Holocaust redux?]

De Quiros further posits that “[c]ontraception is not abortion, where you can argue for an “unborn child.” He forgets that abortion is a back-up to contraception and most contraceptives, like morning after pills and IUD are abortifacients. Conception occurs at fertilization and these contraceptives (pills, IUD) prevents implantation of a fertilized ovum thus killing it. [Contraception and his more evil twin-brother, Abortion.]

Then De Quiros says “[u]nless you want to propose that couples never express their love for each other intimately unless they are willing to risk having another mouth to feed, even if they are not prepared to feed it.” I wonder who is suggesting that to De Quiros. Definitely not the Catholic Church. [ehem.... LagLagman... ehem.... ehem.... Angsiokoy.... ehem....] Couples are free to intimately express their love for each other, by all means. Yet, if they partake of the pleasure, they too must accept the consequences. If they can’t risk another mouth to feed, then they should abstain from intimacies or otherwise avail of natural family planning. [Common sense by Atty. Mars. :D]

As expected, Conrado de Quiros ends his column by scoring the bishops and taking them to task for their position against the RH Bill. In essence, he wants the bishop to stop their opposition against the RH Bill because one of them asked for an SUV on his birthday. That’s clearly a non sequitor and an ad hominem attack. [...and should I say outdated and outrightly stupid?] In melodramatic fashion, De Quiros decries how one bishop who asked for an SUV during his birthday led to the “grabbing the food that should go to the mouths of hungry street kids, seizing the medicine that should go to the bodies of infants afflicted with dengue, putting on hold the classroom that should go to enlighten the benighted.” [Drama. What a pretense.] After shedding crocodile tears for the plight of the poor as if he is the only one concerned about them, De Quiros generalized, “[i]f the bishops would just show a little more concern for the living…” [Oh, please.... SHUT UP.] Of course the bishops are concerned for the living. They run charities and social action programs that Conrado de Quiros vaguely know about. What about De Quiros? What has he done so far to help the poor? [Were his paintings even appreciated by the most uneducated people whose only concern is to survive? Why not he stop ranting and start working? Jeez.]

We may also ask him back if condoms can be eaten by the hungry street kids, or pills could go to the bodies of infants afflicted with dengue, or sex education will improve the quality of education in the classrooms that should enlighten the benighted. [Beat that, de Quiros! BEAT THAT! hahahahahahaha] Madre de Dios!

¡Viva Cristo Rey! ¡Viva la Madre de Dios! 

[Vivat Christus Rex! Vivat Mater Dei! Mabuhay!]

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

Huzzah to Atty. Mars!

There's one quotation we all know: "Hamakin mo ang lahat, 'wag lang ang nanay ko. Dahil kapag pinatulan mo 'yan, ibang usapan na yun."

Here's what I mean:

You can hurt anyone you please. But if you hurt one's mother, expect retaliation.

Much more if you have hurt the Mother of Christ.

So the next time this crackpot artist writes for a newspaper or organizes an exhibit, you know what to do.