The REAL Santa Claus worships the Christ Child

Who says Santa Claus is the man of the Christmas season?

JESUS IS AND WILL ALWAYS BE THE MAN OF THE CHRISTMAS SEASON!!!

The Santa you see on TV, and virtually everywhere, is just the secular impostor.

He's the REAL Santa Claus: Saint Nicholas of Myra. Even he pronounces that Christ must be the Center of the Season.

And take note: he was the one who beat the hell out of Arius when he can't take what the heretic was saying.

hahahaha

Well, according to a story, when Arius was arguing that Jesus Christ was not God (which Manalists and other anti-Catholic sects follow unkowingly), Saint Nicholas rose up and smacked Arius in the face. Because of this, he was stripped off of his episcopal authority, confiscating his copy of the Gospels and the omophor or pallium, and was detained.

While inside the cell, Jesus and Mary appeared to him and asked him why the saint was in prison. Bishop Nicholas replied, "Because I love you, my Lord and my God." Christ gave him a new copy of the Gospels and the Blessed Mother vested him again with the omophor, bringing back his authority as bishop.

Years later, Dutch people transformed the traditional Saint Nicholas into Santa Claus, and since then, became a popular culture figure every Christmas, which secularists copied and made impostors.

I find it ironic though that secular Santa impostors have the nerve of shouting "Ho ho ho! MERRY CHRISTMAS!" I guess, they should realize that they're saying OUR line.

But imagine, Santa Claus isn't just making a list of who's naughty or nice, he's also beating the hell out of anyone who disregards the Reason for the season, Jesus Christ, the Child in the manger of Bethlehem two thousand years ago. So you better watch your theological thinking and prioritizing this Christmas, or you'll get a knuckle sandwich from Ol' Saint Nick aside from coal while shouting "HO HO HO!".

Can he also be the Patron of boxers? hahahahaha

Anyway, here's what Sir Ishmael Ahab and Fr. Jojo Zerrudo have to say.

Even Beauty Queens Believe in God...and in Dignity

Miss Philippines Shamcey Supsup 

Miss Universe 2011 and Miss Angola Leila Lopes

We have to laud Miss Philippines and Miss Universe 2011 3rd Runner-up Shamcey Supsup for her very Theist answer when she had her final push for the crown. 


She was asked by Vivica Fox if she would change her religion or religious views if it is because she would marry the man she loves. And this was her answer: 


"If I would have to change my religious beliefs, I would not marry the person that I love. Because 
the first person that I love is God, who created me.

"I have my faith and my principles, and this is what makes me who I am. If the person loves me, 
he'll love my God too." 


Maybe this answer cost her opportunity for the crown. Some even say that the competition is biased or "lutong labanan"

Either way, it was a good answer.

Mind you, we are still speculating if Shamcey is a Catholic or not, but for sure, she is a Maroon. Being a crowd and online favorite is the best consolation a candidate may have. On the sidelines, Miss Universe 2011, Miss Angola Leila Lopes, also had a very good answer when Lea Salonga (yes.... that misguided woman became judge) asked her. I'll still find for what she answered.

For sure, Shamcey would be welcomed home a beauty queen...but not for neo-atheists and "freethinkers". We may say that they'll use women's rights as an excuse for her answer.

Shamcey Supsup may be a very weird name, maybe weirder than Venus Raj, but at least being 3rd Runner-up was a big leap from 4th Runner-up last year. Anyway, congratulations Ms. Shamcey! That answer you gave made us think that there are still beauty queens who believe in God and in dignity.

Anyway, my scoop about this pageant is purely accidental.

Filipinos and Counter-Cultures (A Commentary for "Filipino Hippies")

Here's a blog post of my colleague in Communication Arts, Ms. Paula Solmerano, about counter-cultures. I don't have that much idea about it, but I guess in the prevailing social issues and attitudes can be inserted here as additions to what she posted, of course, with her permission. You can see the original post HERE. 

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

Filipino Hippies

The world must need more love, because the last hippie has yet to die.

-Jesse Walker

            Counter-culture as defined in most references is a culture or way of life of particular people living in a society whom oppose or reject the dominant culture, norms, or behavior existing in that society. Some sociologists believe that culture in a society is never without a counter-culture. [And that is correct. Yet social issues today are so confusing that no one can distinguish what is the culture and what is the counter-culture.] To date, the most popular counter-culture was the ‘hippies’ which began their cultural revolution in the West during the 1960’s.  [which also brought about the Sexual Revolution that started the opening of the Pandora's box of contraceptive mentality and also the liturgical abuses that were practiced as a misinterpretation of the documents made at the Second Vatican Council.] However, locally speaking, some counter-cultures also existed and continues to exist in the Philippine society.

            One manifestation of cultural opposition is evident in the Philippines’ religion history during the pre-colonial period. Even before Catholicism becomes the dominant religion in the country, in the past, it can be considered as an opposition to the then prevailing religious system—Animism.  Animism can be used to describe the indigenous spiritual traditions practiced by people in the Philippines during pre-colonial times. It is a collection of beliefs and cultural mores anchored in the idea that the world is inhabited by spirits and supernatural entities, both good and bad, and that respect be accorded to them through nature worship. These spirits are known as ‘diwatas’. In this belief, some worship anitos and others even practice magic. This religion, in the past, holds the record of dominance for the whole archipelago but when Catholicism started to spread in the northern part of the country, the shift of the once principal to a minor religion ensues.

             In short, today’s leading religion, Catholicism, was then part of minor subculture in Philippine society which in the course of history, developed to be the main religion in its opposition and desire for propagation. Nowadays, only a handful of indigenous tribes continue to practice Animism. [and a number of people also practice its Western counterpart, Wicca, which is considered a cult by the Catholic Church.]

            As an example now of the present existence of cultural opposition in the country, youth again can be fairly counted. It seems that Philippines has its own “hippies”—only more socialites in sense--with the like of Katipunan ng mga Kabataang Kadre (KKK), an underground socialist youth in Mindanao. These young people, described as dynamic, bold and daring, is a sector, composed of various sub-sectors, which transcends to different sectors and classes of the society (Antoine, 2010).

            On the anniversary of Bonifacio Day, year 2009, the socialist oriented youth from the Bangsa Moro people, Indigenous Peoples of Mindanao and from the majority nationality, proclaimed the creation of a new underground, revolutionary socialist, anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist youth society called the Katipunan ng mga Kabataang Kadre (KKK) or the Society of Young Cadres. This society is mainly based in Mindanao with elements in various parts of the country. It reflects the desire of the young revolutionaries to slowly unlearn and out-grow the Stalinists and Maoist orientations that they inherited. This is also to help create a counter –culture against the rising culture of careerism, opportunism, commercialization, and reformism that they view as the main culprit of havoc and confusion in various social sectors. (http://www.internationalcamp.org/spip.php?article244&lang=fr)  Furthermore, according to the socialist youth there is a need to organize and mobilize all the anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist youth under the banner of revolutionary socialism towards the realization in Mindanao, Philippines, and the world. [Looks like the idea is a fusion of Islamo-indegeous and communist thought, I presume.]

            Clearly, this example somehow violates one of the main considerations in defining what a counter-culture is: being not necessarily a social movement and members are often unorganized. However, the mere existence of the citizens having the same outlook against the existing social concerns of Philippine society presently already proves a fact that such culture exists in the country prior to the formation of their movement. This youth socialites stand for what they believe as the more proper way of living life and how social system in the country should change and not be tolerated anymore by its people. Indeed, an opposition of what is constantly happening in Philippine society. [Uh-huh]

            Lastly, the counter-culture that has been existing in the past, present, and in high chances, still continues to exist in the future shows the manifestation of Filipino colonial mentality. [Take, for example, the Sexual Revolution, which ushered in the ST films here in the Philippines, which in turn paved the way to pornography and voyeurism, and now, the RH Bill.]  At first thought colonial mentality may seem to be irrelevant in discussing Philippine society, but as Manuel L. Quezon said, “It is not, at least not entirely.” [Though some of Quezon's critics argue that he was a Janus-faced politician--facing the Filipinos, he speaks of his ardent desire for independence, on the other hand (or should I say face), he speaks with the Americans about other plans. Thus, Quezon is a counter-culture himself, much like Jekyll and Hyde]

            In an article of Manuel Quezon entitled Philippine Racism, he discussed the significance to highlight colonial mentality as part of Filipino culture. For some reasons, it already has became a characteristic of Filipino culture which therefore promotes a different  yet common subculture in the country—people who account a big part of their life by patronizing everything colonial and  deride anything that gives pride to what truly is “Filipino”. This culture is simply evident through the lifestyle some Filipino follow and their standpoint of beauty, in both aspects—physical and material. Sadly, even in media, this kind of lifestyle is portrayed. [and, sadly, even mimicked for the sake of ratings.]

             Furthermore, Quezon said, “The colonial mentality constitutes a weakness in the structure of our national society which we can ill afford.”. If one were to argue that this is a mere mentality or behavior, not a counter-culture of Filipino nationalism why therefore it affects society so much that it cannot afford to completely manifest in the culture of the country? The answer is because; it is indeed already a sub-culture continuously opposing the dominant nationalistic culture which ought to really rule. However, it may not be imperative that this kind of culture in Philippine society be eliminated, only minimized. As a result of the mentality, a sub-culture materializes and its defect in Philippine society can cause it to crumble.

            Aside from these three cases presented, the existence of counter-culture in Philippine society can also be pointed through a number more examples. These examples only prove that Philippines, just like any other country, has experienced, and still experiencing, counter-cultures.

Bibliography

Antoine. (n.d.). Philippines. Retrieved July 23, 2011, from http://www.internationalcamp.org/spip.php?article244&lang=fr

Quezon, M. L. (n.d.). Philippine Racism. Retrieved July 23, 2011, from http://www.quezon.ph/familyinfo/philippine-racism/

Religion in the Philippines. (n.d.). Retrieved July 23, 2011, from http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title=Religion_in_the_Philippines 

------------------------------------ 

Blogger's Note: Paula Solmerano is currently a Communication Arts Junior at the University of Santo Tomas. At the time of this post, she works as a trainee and an undercover reporter for ABS-CBN Sports. Ms. Solmerano also blogs at Beneath a Dreamer's Apophthegm

Taking from here, Ms. Solmerano was right. There are existing counter-cultures which do not only shape society, but divides it into two or more schools of thought. 

The greatest example we can tackle here is the issue of contraception and the other issues related to it. Advocates of contraception are further divided into splinters of thought: on one hand, those who favor contraception as essential medicines and nothing more; on the other, those who favor contraception who also are advocates for abortion, divorce, same-sex marriages, euthanasia, secularism, neo-atheism, and even religious bigotry. In the three latter advocacies, there are still more collateral damage which they are pursuing--the discrediting and taxing of religious organizations, specifically the Catholic Church; the "education" of young minds to adhere neo-atheism; and much more. 

There is a loophole in these, however. It seems they only target Catholics--prelates, clergy, religious, and laity--just because, for them, they have the guts of opposing all of these, and they are the most rational among the religious institutions in the country, and basically, across the globe. Besides, what can they get from the other religious groups aside from their support? 

Aside from this prevailing word war on venues and in the Internet, there are many more counter-cultures that continues to make this country a house divided. 

Anyway, Thank you, Paula, for letting me do a commentary about this. 

:D

Minding one's own business

Just so you know, I'm not siding anyone here. This is just a self-analysis that ran for the past few days: 

Of course people extend help to anyone in need. On one hand is the claimant of being "the largest charitable institution in the world"--the Catholic Church; on the other, one of the few legit number games being subscribed by millions and millions of Filipinos--which is the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office. Now, everyone is aware that there is a conflict between these two charitable institutions just because a bishop of the said Church allegedly purchased an SUV, presumably for good intentions and unselfish purposes. 

Now here comes the people who sensationalized this actually small issue in the hopes of discrediting religious organizations; besides, they have hatred for the Church--the Catholic Church, that is--just because it is the trend or they really have reasons of their own. In effect, people are glued to the media and started thinking like: "What the hell is going on?" or "Why in the world do these guys make a headline out of this? Isn't there something else?" and so on. 

But before a further mudslinging, let me ask: Do we have faults of our own that makes us unworthy of accusing someone for a misconduct he or she intentionally or unintentionally made? This is actually the reflectionary worth of a story in the Gospels where the Jews made Christ decide if the woman they caught of adultery be stoned to death or not; of course, with the corresponding consequences in His part. And what did He said? "Whoever is without sin, cast the first stone." (John 8:7) 

And you know what happened next. 

It is not the bishops or the PCSO who share the burden of the problem: It is the people who just made this issue worse in the hopes of promoting a different kind of atheism and agnosticism--even a different kind of Christianity deviant to what is true. These people cannot mind their own businesses so they mind others'. 

And anyway, which is more speculative: A bishop having an SUV (not necessarily received from PCSO) for practical purposes or someone in the government who had a Porsche for luxury but sold it away due to criticism?

Catholicism, a Balance of Heart and Mind: The 1st Anniversary Blog

The Angelic Doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas, a mere priest of God on earth, is preaching the bishops in Heaven. He is responsible for the marriage of Faith and Reason in Christian Philosophy.

I was supposed to make this blog last January 19, but since it was in the middle of the Prelims Week, I was that groggy to even type this entry. Anyway, better late than never….

And before I continue, all the things I put here are partly subjective and opinionated.

A couple of weeks ago in our Catholic Social Teaching class, I was conversing with a classmate and friend of mine about proving the injustices of Fundamentalism and Secularism. Why injustice? Well, we agreed that both sides disregarded either faith or reason—in this case, Fundamentalism is more of faith and Secularism is more of reason.

Okay…now let’s define them: Fundamentalism is defined as a lifestyle of belief, that we need a God to save us, and that salvation comes from faith and Scriptures ALONE (which is un-Biblical, anyway)—sometimes taking it out of context; on the other hand, Secularism is a lifestyle of living a good life without expecting, or even believing in anything supernatural; that humans only have one life to live, and will all end up in an eternal bliss of nothingness akin to Nirvana and contrary to the Christian Heaven of the Platonic World of Forms.

Now let’s compare them:

People who “believe in God and accept Jesus as their (Personal) Savior” and “believe in the power of prayer and the sole rule of the Bible” are generally called Fundamentalists. These are the Protestants ranging from Lutherans, Baptists, Calvinists, and Adventists; but it also include sects and cults like the Mormons (baptism of the dead and the Book of Mormon), Witnesses (“Respecting to flags are like worshipping idols!”), Manalists (who think that it was in 1914 that Christ reestablished His Church through a certain Felix Manalo as the “Last Messenger/Angel”, though it was only a corporation registered in the Securities and Exchange Commission), Sorianists (who blabber at others as if they were the only ones right), Quiboloyans (who regard Apollo Quiboloy as the “Appointed Son of God”), Evangelicals and Televangelicals (who are known in the Philippines as the “Born-Agains”), and Pseudo-Christians (with their unususal approach) among others.

People who generally do things as they are, on the other hand, to the extent of being a dimwit for a cause (everybody knows who this is), or who doesn’t care if they would become amoral as far as culture is concerned (TAKE NOTE: AMORAL! The ignorance of what is right from what is wrong), are called Secularists. Mostly, these people are atheists ranging from the mainline (“I personally don’t believe in the concept of a Supreme Being; but I respect someone if he thinks otherwise”), to the “freethinking” ones, who have a high tendency to become oxymoronically ignorant (“We have to remind the Theists that the gods they make are but figments of their imagination.”), to the radicals (THERE IS NO GOD! PERIOD!). Well, there could be an interchange between being a freethinker and a radical atheist, and may result to a new profile called Neo-Atheism. We also consider in this scope the concepts of Fascism, Socialism, Imperialism, Darwinism, and even Agnosticism and Humanism. We’ll deal more on atheists in another blog.

Now, we see that they are opposite poles, perhaps two sides of the weighing scale—that when one side is favored and the other is shunned, it would create imbalance: ideologically speaking, it would create injustice, since justice is resembled with a weighing scale.

Secularism creates injustice for it only focuses on the human person as a social being who lives a good life, then dies without looking forward to afterlife. Fundamentalism focuses on the personal and spiritual aspect of the human being, even to the point where one shuns the historical and literary concepts of interpreting of Sacred Scripture; besides, they believe that ONLY the Bible is THE authority—no (Sacred) Tradition nor Magisterium, and this creates injustice. What’s worse is that they misinterpret the state of eternal happiness, which we call Heaven, where virtually everyone (or only their sect or cult) would go after they die, which contradicts what was written: that “…nothing unclean shall enter it….” (Rev. 21:27). That would be further discussed and cleared out in the blogs I follow, since I’m still in my formative stage in fully engaging anti-Catholic apologists.

So, if Fundamentalism and Secularism are two imbalances, there should be a balance. You would ask: What, then, is the balance? To tell frankly, it’s Catholicism.

Based on the exposition above, Secularists are more of the thinking man, sometimes over-thinking that they would only blabber irrationally in the end; while Fundamentalists are more of the feeling man, more of the “holy” blabbering to be exact (speaking in tongues, I presume?), basing themselves in praise and worship and spiritual life and analyzing Scriptures and applying them in real life even if out of context. But there are other Fundamentalists who go to a point where they depend their lives on faith and grace and Scriptures and justification (somewhat, a resemblance of a Juan Tamad figure), and not on the works of their hands anymore. Catholics could balance thinking and feeling through prayer and study just as man is nutritive, sentient, and rational with respects from Aristotle.

Fundamentalism has produced theologians, religious leaders, pastors, and professionals; while Secularism has given us scientists, philosophers, thinkers, and institutional people. The Church has produced both sets of people, ranging from lay preachers, apologists, religious men and women, bishops and priests, youth leaders, social movers…name it, the Catholic Church could produce it! (That is, as long as it is for God’s glory….) 

Within its 2,000 years of existence, the Church is the only social institution who successfully attempted to intertwine faith and reason—heart and mind—emotion and rationality—body and soul. All these are credited to our Christian philosophers; the greatest of them goes by the name of St. Thomas Aquinas, whose solemnity we have celebrated a few days ago. His legendary work, the Summa Theologiae, is not just a philosophical classic or a reference for the necessity of Christianity: it is the primary evidence, among other works, of the marriage of faith and reason, their interaction, and their interrelation.

“In the age when Christian thinkers were discovering the treasures of ancient philosophy, and more particularly of Aristotle, [Saint] Thomas [Aquinas] had the great merit of giving pride of place to the harmony which exists between faith and reason.  Both the light of reason and the light of faith come from God, he argued; hence there can be no contradiction between them…. Although he made much of the supernatural character of faith, the Angelic Doctor did not overlook the importance of its reasonableness” (Bl. John Paul II, “Fides et Ratio” 43.).

The Angelic Doctor said: “When reason ends, faith begins”; and I reply: When faith is sufficient, reason must enter.

In summary, faith pertains to the heart and emotions as reason is related to the mind and objectivity. Fundamentalism is injustice for it is more of faith than reason; and Secularism is also injustice because it is more of reason than faith. Catholicism balances faith and reason, and in effect, manifests justice. So that means, Catholicism is justice to the dispensing of faith and reason; Catholicism is the balance of heart and mind.

Rizal's Concept of God

Cesar Montano, portraying Rizal in Marilou Diaz-Abaya's film "Jose Rizal" produced by GMA Films. Here, Rizal uttered his last words (which were one of Christ's last words): Consummatum est! (It is done!)

Since today is Rizal Day, I would share to you a letter that somehow proves that Jose Rizal, one of the most talked-about Filipinos of the Spanish era, is a Theist--and a Catholic one when he was executed. Wanna see the link? Click here and judge for yourself.

Rizal, Dapitan, 9 January 1893 || To Fr. Pablo Pastells

Rizal explains his concept of God.  Note: This letter is a composite of the English translation of the Epistolario Rizalino by the National Heroes Commission / National Historical Institute (which is incomplete) and that of Fr. Raul J. Bonoan, S.J., The Rizal Pastells Correspondence(Manila: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1994), pp. 161-165  

Dapitan, 9 January 1893

Very Reverend Father Pablo Pastells, S.J.

My very Reverend Father,

I have read attentively your precious as well as profound letter of the 8th ultimo [= December, the last or ultimate month - rly] and I remain very grateful to you for the interest you continue showing me.

These days I have examined my beliefs and their foundations; I have reviewed what little has been left to me by the shipwreck of faith,as my dear Professor Fr. Sanchez would say, or the solid bases that have remained firm despite so many tempests. I should like to be most sincere, the most accurate possible in the definition and exposition of my ideas because I esteemed Your Reverence very much not only for what you are, not only for what you have been to me in my adolescent years (to me always a loved and sacred memory)[Bonoan speculates that Pastells may have been Rizal’s spiritual director or confessor in past years. - rly] but also because Your Reverence is one of the few persons who, far from forgetting me in adversity, has extended his hand to me with so much benevolence.

I reply then with pleasure to your question and I shall un-bosom myself sincerely so that Your Reverence may see if everything has been lost or if there is still something left that may be useful.

I believe firmly in the existence of a Creator more than by faith, by reasoning and by necessity. Who is He? What human sounds, what syllables of language can enshrine the name of that Being whose works overwhelm the mind that thinks of them? Who can give Him an adequate name when a little creature hereabouts with an ephemeral power has two or three names, three or four surnames and numerous titles and epithets? We call Him God, but this only recalls the Latin Deus, the Greek Zeus at most. What is He? I would attribute to him all the beautiful and holy qualities that my mind can conceive in infinite degree, if the fear of my ignorance did not restrain me. Someone has said that each man forms his God according to his image and likeness, and if my memory does not fail me, Anacreon [It was Xenophanes – rly (from note found in the Bonoan translation] said that if a bull could imagine a god, he would imagine a horned bull bellowing in a superlative degree. Notwithstanding, I dare to believe Him infinitely wise, powerful, good. My idea of the infinite is imperfect and confused on seeing His wonderful works, the order that prevails among them, their magnificence and overwhelming extent, and the goodness that shines in everything. The lucubration [laborious work - rly] of a poor worm, the last creature on the little ball of the earth, however crazy they may be, can never offend His inconceivable majesty. His thought humbles me, and makes me giddy. How many times my reason tries to raise my eyes towards that Being as many times it falls stunned, dazzled, crushed. I am overtaken by fear and I prefer to keep silent to being the bull of Anacreon.

Permeated with this vague but irresistible sentiment before the inconceivable, the superhuman, the infinite, I leave its study to brighter minds. I listen in suspense to what the religions say and incapable of judging what exceed my strength, I content myself with studying Him in his creatures, my fellow creatures, and in the voice of my conscience which can only proceed from Him. I try to read, to divine His will in what surrounds me and in the mysterious inner sentiment that I feel within myself whose purity above all things I try to maintain in order to act according to it. Many religions pretend to have that Will condensed and written down in their books and dogmas but aside from numerous contradictions, from the varied interpretation with respect to the words, from many obscure points.  [The older English translation of the Epistolario ends at this point as they had an incomplete manuscript.  What follows is from the Bonoan translation. (Note: the paragraph numbering system of Bonoan is not used.) - rly] Is it possible that he who makes the sun rise for all and the air to blow everywhere to give life, he who has endowed everyone with intelligence and reason for life here on earth, has also hidden from us what is most necessary for our eternal life? What shall we say of a father who heaps candies and toys on his children, but gives food only to one of them, educates and rears him alone? And what if it so happens that this chosen one refuses to eat while the others die looking for food?

But I do not mean by this that I completely disregard what the sacred books, religious precepts, and religious dogmas have to say. On the contrary, these books are, in the final analysis, the insights of men and whole generations put down in writing, the knowledge of the past on which the future is built. Most of these religious precepts are condensations or formulations of the precepts of the natural law; as such, they are for me God's word.

When there arises a conflict among them, I decide in favor of that which is most in conformity with nature's law; because for me nature is the only divine book of unquestionable legitimacy, the sole manifestation of the Creator that we have here in this life clear, perennial, living, powerful, capable of overcoming our blunders and errors, incorruptible, one that cannot play false in spite of human caprice, with its laws constant and unchangeable in all places and for all times. Your Reverence will object that the page we possess from this book is of little value and that, while we can achieve perfect knowledge of our planet; however we could only have an imperfect knowledge of the Creator, just as we can have no perfect knowledge of the sculptor from a small statue or sketch. I agree, but ex ungue leonem [we know the lion by its claws - Bonoan] and at least the path we pursue is a sure one and universally apt for uniting all inhabitants of the earth into one single religion. And who knows but that the weak mind of man might well explode like Sirius and Aldebaran [two brilliant stars – from note by Bonoan - rly] if we propose to it too great an object?

Therefore in the light of the knowledge of the past and present, I weigh things, try to determine their causes and the finality of their activity, and strive to follow the direction they take. I see in everyone an inborn desire to know; I see the world outside full of colors, qualities and incentives that nourish this desire; I see misery as the chastisement of ignorance, well-being as the prize of knowledge. And I come to the conclusion from my humble reasoning that the Creator desires man to perfect himself by growing in knowledge. Reflecting on the mysterious sentiment of sympathy, its dynamism and transformations, I become aware of the impulse that commands us to love one another, and I take as God's word the religious command that everyone must love the neighbor as himself. Seeing how freedom when overrated destroys and ruins the principle of life in a living thing which can subsist by itself, seeing the daily lesson in all creation of how weak creatures-from nestling birds to young lions in the den-are given support and protection, but as soon as they can get on by themselves, freedom and room for action; I find justification for the precepts of charity and respect for the rights of others. At first glance, after a superficial examination, we get the impression that the law of struggle holds sway and it is might that wins the day. But after careful study, when we contemplate the skeletons of gigantic monsters now gone from the face of the earth, when we read in history the epitaphs of great and mighty empires which lived off the life and freedom of humanity, when we see how the cat lives on as the tiger disappears, how shopkeepers increase in number as conquistadors vanish; we become better aware of the principles of peace, the triumph of the mind and the law of universal harmony -- harmony which follows the world in its rapid course, demanding life for all and freedom for all' Those who consume more than they produce incur the hatred of the world, and victory belongs only to the one who seeks the perfection of others as well as his own.

These are the fundamental principles of my religious ideas. I admit they do not constitute a complete system, because in spite of all the studies we have done, we are still in the slow process of reading from this grand book. But these principles have the advantage of being open to all, of constituting legitimate divine revelation, and of being able to unite one day all consciences, without resorting to quarrels, anathemas and bloodshed. There are no anathemas and prohibitions, but a free forum for discussion; no miracles as proofs, but facts and experience give their verdict. There is no fear of apocryphal accounts or forged manuscripts: death is the fate of everything that does not conform to nature.

Regarding the immortality of the soul and life eternal, how can I believe in the death of my consciousness, when everything around me tells me that nothing is lost but things merely change? If the atom cannot be annihilated, is it possible for my consciousness which rules the atom to be annihilated? To deny eternal life, one would have to come back from the other side of eternity, and this return would be itself a confirmation of life eternal.

Regarding redemption, I have stronger faith in this matter than many of those who perhaps take me for a heretic. I believe in the redemption by the Word which has been decreed from all eternity.  Humanity can fall three or even a thousand times on life's bitter road, but it will always find salvation. And the greater the crisis, the greater the victory will be. In the end humanity will rise again triumphant and glorious, for the work of God cannot perish.

Basically, my religious ideas are perhaps in agreement with yours (I hope you do not mind the company); but if the road I have taken is a great shock to you, I ask for your pardon in the name of the God who has made beauty to consist in variety within unity. Perhaps it will not be so bad a thing if we differ a little bit even as we worship the same Creator. My ideas may be erroneous, but at least I am convinced and sincere, arising as they do from my humble judgment and my heart. Come the day for offering sacrifice, I shall approach the altar with the product of my own efforts, a faith truly my own, the best I can offer. Others will offer hecatombs [An extravagant offering of animal sacrifice to the Greek gods - rly] they have bought or borrowed, foreign ideas, well-studied positions, imposed beliefs -- all stereotyped offerings, more precious and worthy than my own. But he to whom these are directed will be the judge. I submit myself to his judgment.

Let us put aside the religious question and please accept a small gift which I am sending through the kindness of the Fathers. I have nothing here, there are no stores selling art objects. Nonetheless, I owe you so much I thought I ought to send you a small token, however poorly executed, of my gratitude. It is a small statue of St. Paul in an attitude of prayer. If you wish, you can have someone who knows about ceramics to bake and harden it. This would make me happy, for you would remember me always in your prayers.

Concerning the improvement of health conditions in this town, I think the problem ought to be taken seriously. This year, unfortunately, there is a lot of work to be done and I doubt if there are enough workers available. It will be necessary to ask a good number of people to work for some months, and spend some amount of money to build a perfect network of canals and drainage facilities, to disinfect some mangroves and raise the ground at some places. This is not a matter for ten or twenty Pintakasi [Patrons; benefactors of projects – rly (from footnote of Bonoan)] alone, and it will not suffice to dig two or three canals which will fill up after the first few rainfalls. This is a matter of the greatest importance; it concerns the health of the people, on which depends their economic as well as moral well-being. We will need brick, lime, labor and money. I am sure you could do something if you tried; but unfortunately Your Reverence is far away and busy with so many things while out here we lack labor and materials. I am willing in every way to do anything I can for the service of the people. Please do tell me what to do.

We are in good health here. Don Ricardo will write Your Reverence and I presume that in his letter he will thank you for asking me to convey to him your best regards. The Fathers are well.  Father Sanchez has progressed much in his study of the language. We shall meet one day to talk about the formation of the tenses of Tagalog verbs.

A man from Calamba has come here to look over the farmlands with a view to moving to this place the townspeople of Calamba who have been dispossessed of their homes and properties. He was greatly pleased with the lands in Libulad and Duhinob and is now writing Calamba inviting them to come over.  These people are hard-working, peace-loving, but cognizant of their rights; and I have no doubt but that if they are granted some concessions, they will give life to this District. They ask that for at least three years while they are building their town and starting to cultivate their fields, they are exempted from the requirement of personal service. [Mandatory labor required of citizens in Spanish times – rly (from a footnote by Bonoan)] In effect, in the first few years, they need all their resources for one massive effort to clear the forest, build their homes, plant, look for their food, and acclimatize them to the place.

It will be a big help also if the authorities in Laguna don’t place any obstacle to this emigration. His Excellency the Governor can issue a decree to this effect, as Don Ricardo has already said. If this plan pushes through, I will have no difficulty whatsoever remaining in this District forever.

My best wishes for a happy new year and many happy returns on your feast day. I remain always your devoted and loyal servant. Respectfully yours,

José Rizal 

SK vs. Parish Youth Min Part 2: How Catholics (and Atheists) react

Along with Part 1 of my blog was a discussion on 100% Katolikong Pinoy's Discussion Board on Facebook about the matter that is left dangling since my last post. The verbatim discussion could be viewed here.

The first who commented (we call him DK here) said that the situation depends on the circumstance it currently has; and it seems to be inevitable that such situation (i.e., "...may Hudas sa grupo [sic]...pera-pera lang yan....") exists.

The next comment (from Philip) replied that he sees an "inaction in both [the SK and the Parish Youth Ministry]"; furthermore, he pointed that the SK is merely "a breeding and training ground for future clowns" and the PYM is "more...with hormones than with the Faith of the Church." I asked the guy who said this on who is better aside from his point-of-view; his answer was that the Youth Min was better, though, according to him, it does not mean the latter was doing their mission--and there are still things that they should go through.

And a series of arguments--rational and irrational--follows:

DK: talo pa ni philip ang Judge ah...hehehe...nalibot mo na ba lahat ng simbahan boi?!? bka pag nkakita ka ng malupet na PYM maging katolikong sarado ka..hahahaha

none of the above kp dyan.. .wala kang hustisya! hahaha

DEPENDE PDIN ANG SAGOT DYAN!!hahah..hindi kasi ntin magegeneral yan e.

Philip: @DK, I know what I am talking about. How about you have you seen it all? It doesn't mean someone can't prove something the other side of the coin is correct... That's a fallacy in argument... Isn't it DK that your group FRC Youth is a part of that? And if indeed I see a PYM doing their objectives well that will not make me reconvert to being a Catholic...

What's the point of your argument is to debase me to bring yourself up. That didn't help DK because I see you way down below?

IJR (me): How do you see him way down below?

DK: to bring my self up?!?! Lolz.. im done with that thing mr.know it all.. stop judging people na halos case closed na.. at wala nang pag asa yung tao.. .tumingin ka nga sa salamin.. .

i didnt saw it all, but ive already seen a better PYM and a bulls*** one.. kaya DEPENDE ANG SAGOT KO.

Philip whote: And if indeed I see a PYM doing their objectives well that will not make me reconvert to being a Catholic...

dahdahDK replied: nakita mo ba ang salitang "baka"???

you see me down below?! yah, yan din ang binubulong sakin madalas ng dimonyo.. .pero salamat sa mga taong itinataas ako pinapadamang mali ang dimonyo. SALAMAT SA INYO.

Remar (a Catholic pinch-hitter): In my own observation, Parish Youth Ministry. . .in fairness sa kanila. . . hekhek. .:p

Philip: dk yes you are bringing yourself up... your arguments and words does but isn't it wonderful to think that you have not even changed a bit... but gone far worse...

so if even a really awesome PYM comes... to change you and your bad habits... nothing will happen...

IJR: (I was misunderstood on whom the post was addressed) How do you say so? Could you tell us how come you know these things?

Philip: Ian that last comment of mine is for dk alone...

for other people i see much hope... ok?

DK: Lolz.. .look at the mirror philip. hahaha

Philip: yes... and i see a happy person looking back...

one who can stand up for what he believes and will not tolerate liars and pretenders...

DK: liars and pretenders? look at the mirror philip... hahahaha...

Philip:rotfl... i am happy with who i am because i don't lie even to myself or to others just to look good...

or pretend that i am happy or make myself look sad or emo so that others will love me...

have you tried that dk... looking at yourself?

DK: sino nag sabi nyan? bitter lang yan.. Lolz.. nyahaha... .

r u happy?! oh common' tanda mo na.. .wag na tayo mag lokohan.. nyahaha

Philip: yup i am happy if you can't deal with it...

that's your problem...

c'est la vie....

Kuroro (another pinch-hitter): DK at saka si Hapon

parang sa friendster pa ito huh?!


sa thread:

YOUTH APOSTOLATE OF FATIMA

DK: hahaha .. as someone said to me .. ill rest my arguments with philip.. . ^_^

By this point, I called it quits. As of the moment I am currently writing this post, there are no updates yet.

To analyze, it is still the townspeople's discernment who is more felt in making the youth more useful in society, especially if their children are willing to give their time, talent, and effort to their community. But according to Fr. Abraham Arganiosa, a Somascan priest, apologist, blogger, and educator, the Church and the State must not compete in the betterment of the youth; instead, must work together for this purpose. Fr. Abe also suggests that the SK must be depoliticized so that it might function on their duty: to make the youth aware of the social concerns of their respective barangays, and to cooperate with the local Church in terms of moral and spiritual concerns.

In conclusion, every minor in a certain community should not just be aware of their personal--sometimes hedonistic and utilitarian--concerns. Instead, they should also be knowledgeable of their environment and how could they help; for the adults and elders, then, they should guide--NOT restrict--the young on how they progress in their service in the community, even if it means to widen their idea of service from a personal aspect to a mutual one.

Carlos Celdran: Dauntless or Dimwitted?

My Christian Ethics professor at UST told our class that there are times that freedom, though a right, is misused and abused. Carlos Celdran's case is a blatant and current example.

The drama unfold at the second anniversary of the "May They Be One" Campaign of the CBCP-Episcopal Commission on Bible Apostolate and some Protestant denominations in the country. Celdran, a tour guide who, under the mocking guise of the execution dress of Jose Rizal, protested inside the See of Manila in what he called "interference of the Church in politics" which goes against the separation of the Church and the State, disturbed the solemnity of the Eucharistic celebration by showing a placard with the name "Damaso"--remembering the character of Rizal's novel "Noli me Tangere"--which is pointed to the bishops and priests: among them, Cardinal Rosales, Metropolitan of Manila and Archbishop Edward Joseph Adams, Apostilic Nuncio to the Philippines.

Two points clearly manifest in this conflict:

1. The barbaric approach of persons who blatantly oppose a controversial issue; and

2. The wrong portrayal that leads to misinterpretation.

Celdran, probably an Atheist or Agnostic, had no idea (or did not care if he had an idea?) that a place of worship is not an agora--in this case, the Cathedral is being kept from secular conflicts. As a civilized person, I would not let myself be THAT desperate just to be seen on TV and on the Internet. I should say that what Celdran manifested was barbaric behavior; one of my closest professors told me through chat that good manners is universal, even if you object religion and spiritual thought. This is what Celdran lacked.

For Filipinos, Rizal is a man of calmness and does not get arrogant easily. The perversion Celdran showed only certifies his ethical lunacy; not only because of the above-mentioned point, but also in what he wore. Rizal NEVER made an in-the-face protest against some of the friars, though he sarcastically spoke and made literature condemning their secularism; and Rizal died a Catholic--repenting and retracting EVERYTHING he said and wrote against the Church or its clergy. With what Celdran wanted to tell everyone present with his three-pieced dress, there is somehow a contradiction.

Well, if you ask me, what Celdran did was insane; not because I am Catholic, but because what he did was unethical: an abuse of the freedom to express. In short, he did not placed his protests at the right place and at the right time; if he had done it, he wouldn't have been jailed.