26 February 2008

Communal Action according to GMA's spin doctors and the bishops who love her


Here is a 1-page ad which appeared today on the Phil Star. It's a selection of quotable quotes from Catholic Church officials, many of them bishops, collated to create the impression of a consensus favoring a rather narrow interpretation of what "communal action" means, i.e., pray, organize, cry yourself hoarse, do anything so long as it won't lead to the President stepping down from office.

"We in the Mindanao block want GMA to finish her term until 2010." (Bishop Juan de Dios Pueblos of Butuan)

"I support the Arroyo administration". (Bishop Martin Jumoad of Basilan)

"There was 'not enough reason' to support the calls for Mrs. Arroyo's resignation, but her administration should rectify the purported corruption. My own stand is no resignation." (Auxiliary Bishop Jose Collin Bagaforo of Cotabato)

Suffice it to say I am deeply embarrassed by these statements' collective assault against sensibility, reason and morals.

As to my other sentiments, charity and prudence dictate that I speak no more.

People Power Anniversary Rally in Legazpi City - 25 February 2008

Photos courtesy of Bayan Bikol

Consider this post my vicarious participation in the EDSA Day celebration here in Legazpi. Too bad I was holed-in the whole morning inside the Chancery. We had a meeting of the Board of Consultors. The Redemptorist priests in the pictures are Fr. Brian Espejo, CSsR and Fr. Oliver Castor, CSsR, respectively.

22 February 2008

Bishops split on Arroyo quit call, But all urge truth in NBN deal, end to corruption

Comment on an excerpt:

"Mass for Truth

"In Legazpi City, Fr. Rex Paul Arjona, chancellor of the Legazpi diocese, said the bishops of Albay province would make their stand known in time.

"It may coincide with the Mass for Truth and Accountability scheduled for Friday in Ligao City, hometown of whistle-blower Lozada.

"The Mass will be celebrated by Auxiliary Bishop Lucilo Quiambao."


The Misa para sa Katotoohan asin Paninimbagan has been postponed to 27 February, Wednesday, due to bad weather. Although the weather has already improved today, the rains, which poured almost daily for more than a week, have caused floods and landslides, making unpassable a number of roads within the province.

The main presider for Wednesday's Mass will still be Bishop Lucilo Quiambao, the Apostolic Administrator (no longer Auxiliary Bishop). The homilist will be Monsignor Ramon Tronqued, Vicar General of the Diocese. In the morning, a meeting of Church lay leaders, NGOs and academe representatives will be held at the Social Action Center to discuss the concrete steps the diocese will be taking as far as "communal action' is concerned.


Bishops split on Arroyo quit call
But all urge truth in NBN deal, end to corruption

By Inquirer Bureaus

Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:59:00 02/22/2008

MANILA, Philippines -- There is a strong demand among bishops in the provinces for the truth to emerge in the scandal-ridden National Broadband Network (NBN) project, but President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s resignation or ouster is an issue that divides them.

Of the 12 prelates reached by the Philippine Daily Inquirer on Tuesday and Wednesday, only one -- Puerto Princesa Bishop Pedro D. Arigo -- openly said the President should step down.

“She should resign,” Arigo said. “Tama na, sobra na (Enough is enough)!”

Zambales Bishop Florentino Lavarias said he would abide by whatever decision the leaders of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines would reach regarding the calls for Ms Arroyo’s resignation.

Pampanga Bishop Pablo Virgilio David, on the other hand, said he was calling for the resignation of the members of the Arroyo Cabinet.

David said the CBCP was categorical in saying that Catholics should “reject evil.”

No qualified successor

“I ask the Catholics among [the Cabinet officials] to stop receiving communion, confess their lives and make the sacrifice demanded of them -- repair the damage they’ve done to the nation’s soul and well-being,” he said, adding:

“They still have a way out of the hell they are in now.”

Six Church leaders -- Bishops Carlito Cenzon of Baguio, Florentino Cinense of Tarlac, Crispin Varquez of Borongan, Martin Jumoad of Basilan and Juan de Dios Pueblos of Butuan, and Cotabato Auxiliary Bishop Jose Collin Bagaforo -- want Ms Arroyo to complete her term.

Varquez said that while he agreed that Malacañang under Ms Arroyo had committed some blunders, there was no qualified candidate to take her place.

Bagaforo said there was “not enough reason” to support the calls for Ms Arroyo’s resignation, but her administration should rectify the purported corruption.

“My own stand is no resignation,” he said.

Church as ‘energizer’

Bacolod Bishop Vicente Navarra called on the people to back whistle-blower Rodolfo Lozada Jr. and on Commission on Higher Education Chair Romulo Neri to speak the truth about the scrapped NBN deal with China’s ZTE Corp.

But Navarra stopped short of calling for the President’s resignation, saying: “The Church is just an energizer in the campaign against corruption.”

Laguna Bishop Leo Drona said he was one with the CBCP in its call for communal action in the face of the purported bribery and overprice that attended the NBN-ZTE deal.

He said communal action simply meant that the people should “pray together, reflect together, decide together and act together.”

General Santos Bishop Dinualdo Gutierrez said that instead of stepping down, the President should take a leave of absence for some “soul-searching.”

Gutierrez also said he did not expect the CBCP to initiate moves to oust Ms Arroyo. He said that if there would be change, it should start with the people themselves.

“But the initiation should be a product of faith and discernment -- soul-searching, analyzing and asking what is God’s will,” he added.

There are 98 bishops in the country, according to the CBCP.

‘So much corruption’

Jumoad of Basilan said he continued to support the Arroyo administration.

“But at the same time, I also recognize the existence of so much corruption, and I hope [the ongoing protest actions] will wake her up [so she can] correct where she is wrong,” he said.

Pueblos of Butuan, who is known for his closeness to the President, said: “We in the Mindanao bloc [of the CBCP] want GMA (Ms Arroyo) to finish her term until 2010.”

He said the bloc would request a meeting with the CBCP leadership in Manila so it could air its position on the latest scandal to rock the Arroyo administration.

Pueblos conceded that there was a real need to combat “rampant corruption in government,” but said the campaign must “start at the grass roots level and not from the top.”

He said those involved in the NBN-ZTE deal should be criminally charged and tried.

Cenzon of Baguio said he was not among those calling on Ms Arroyo to step down because there were “no established or proven grounds” for her to do so.

Cinense of Tarlac said he could not support the calls for resignation because he had yet to hear the complete story: “I cannot make a judgment based on what I read in newspapers and see on TV. I’m still waiting for more information. I’m still studying the issue.”

Mass for Truth

In Legazpi City, Fr. Rex Paul Arjona, chancellor of the Legazpi diocese, said the bishops of Albay province would make their stand known in time.

It may coincide with the Mass for Truth and Accountability scheduled for Friday in Ligao City, hometown of whistle-blower Lozada.

The Mass will be celebrated by Auxiliary Bishop Lucilo Quiambao.

But a streamer on the concrete fence of the Redemptorist Church in Barangay Gogon carries this message: “Oust Gloria!”

For a while, the message had merely read: “GMA resign!”

Last week, Bishops Ramon Villena (Nueva Vizcaya and Quirino) and Rodolfo Beltran (Mt. Province and Ifugao) and Cagayan Archbishop Diosdado Talamayan issued a statement urging the faithful “not [to] seek confrontation, certainly not revolution or violence” amid the crisis.

They said they wanted “communal action for deep reflection, discernment, sobriety and for the way of peace.”

Slow burn

The CBCP leadership expects a slow-burn anticorruption drive against the administration rather than a sudden toppling of Ms Arroyo.

Jaro Archbishop Angel Lagdameo, the CBCP president, said on Wednesday that apathy and cynicism about the last “people power” revolt that brought Ms Arroyo to power in 2001 meant that many Filipinos were in no rush to take to the streets again despite the NBN-ZTE scandal.

“The Filipino people, we together through communal action, must discover a new brand of people power,” he had said.

Lagdameo called last week for communal action but said civil society groups should take the lead in “a sustained national campaign against graft and corruption.”

Going with people

“We are not actually turning our back to [people power]; we have to go where our people are going,” he told Reuters. “If that (people power) is there ... who are we to stop it?”

Lagdameo also said that even if the CBCP were to call for immediate rallies, he doubted that it would get the hundreds of thousands that poured into the streets in 2001 and 1986.

“Our youth seem to be very satisfied about what is going on in their lives,” he said, smiling. Reports from Julie Alipala, Aquiles Zonio, Orlando Dinoy, Edwin Fernandez, Franklin Caliguid, Ma. Cecilia Rodriguez and Grace Albasin, Inquirer Mindanao; Desiree Caluza, Cristina Arzadon and Yolanda Sotelo-Fuertes, Inquirer Northern Luzon; Russell Arador, Cesar Villa, Carmela Reyes and Tonette Orejas, Inquirer Central Luzon; Redempto Anda, Romulo Ponte and Joanna Los Baños, Inquirer Southern Luzon; Eliza Victoria, Inquirer Research

21 February 2008

Battle of the Pictures

How Malacañang operators attempted a show of strength and support for GMA.
Strange how a picture, supposedly worth a thousand words, can only manage to say one thing: PANIC!


How the University of Santo Tomas decided to speak up concerning NBN-ZTE.
Strange how a hitherto insignificant yearbook photo, blurred by age and outdated technology, can speak so eloquently about school pride and redemption.


In this oh-so-postmodern battle of arresting images, sound bites and catch phrases, almost everybody but the staunchest in-denial supporter knows who is winning. Looks like some people still haven't learned their lesson ever since the "Harapan" incident over ABS-CBN. Or in episode after episode of "1 vs 100".

Truth is not in numbers. It's in the adequation between what one says and what is real. Get the truth first, then the numbers will follow. Not the other way around.

20 February 2008

DLSU, PREX & ZTE-NBN: The Church's involvement thickens

Nuns serving as bodyguards. Two rival Catholic universities joining forces to act as champions of truth and accountability. Bishops issuing pastoral letters. Civil society groups trying to wring to the last revolutionist drop of meaning the bishops' ambivalent message of "communal action". Lay Catholic groups organizing mass actions. And now, Parish Renewal Experience (PREX) national head couple Manny and Maribel Gaite. It was Deputy Executive Sec. Manny Gaite who gave (loaned?) Jun Lozada P.5Million so he could find relative comfort in cold London/Hong Kong.

Whoever says the Philippine Church should not interfere in politics doesn't know this country well enough. For many members of the Church, involvement is not so much a matter of choice, as a matter of office, or duty, or even necessity. It is partly borne out of the reality that, other faiths notwithstanding, this is a Catholic country. The operative principle here, it seems, is "6 degrees of Catholic separation". Am I feeling triumphalistic? Hardly. Just look at the players involved in this latest scandal. Considering that most of them are Catholics doesn't really make a strong case in favor of 350+ years of Catholic presence.

Maribel Gaite explains her husband's moral uprightness and describes her family's "moment of darkness". Manny Gaite then states his case. The Gaite couple's separate statements both underscore the pain and anguish brought upon the innocents by this latest national preoccupation. Like statistics of extra-judicial killings, the steady flow of info upon info tends to numb the national consciousness from the chilling effects this scandal has caused the families of those involved.

Unfortunately, insensitive as it may appear, the question has to be asked: who is telling the truth? Gaite or Lozada? Logic dictates that between two contradictory statements, there can only be two results: one of them is right and the other false, or both of them are false. Is it possible that they are both telling the truth as they see it, and still both be guilty of collusion, in one way or another, to a/several case/s of robbing the people? Since as of the latest "Harapan", Lozada enjoys the confidence of a whooping 92% of the Kapamilya public, Gaite naturally feels unjustly judged.

To Manny Gaite, my litmus test would have to be this: Above and amidst all of it, do you still consider yourself pro-PGMA? If you are as upright as your wife claims you are (and I'm almost inclined to think so, too), then why are you still there in Malacañang? Why still make yourself party to the many stealing, cheating and lying being done there? And if you think I'm judging already this present dispensation, you understate my sentiments.

Ideally, Manny Gaite should enjoy presumption of innocence. But in real life, he carries the burden of guilt, which means he has to do more than just prove he had no hand in the attempts not to have Lozada attend the Senate hearings or that he acted out of humanitarian consideration. It also entails explaining the paradox - which he and his wife created - that he is an immaculate sheepdog yet totally not out-of-place in that lair of wolves called Malacañang.

Rightly or wrongly, so many people in government will be judged not by hard evidence but by perceived loyalty to the President. Then again, can you blame the public, they who, through the likes of Lozada, now have an inkling as to how they've been robbed and raped, repeatedly, without impunity, by those in power?

P.S. For a circumstantial-evidence-backed, but generally convincing (at least for me), opinion on Manny Gaite's involvement in the NBN-ZTE-Lozada affair click this blog.


From: edgardo feliciano <edfel415@yahoo. com>
To: groups prex <prex@yahoogroups. com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 4:47:26 PM
Subject: PREX THE LORD!!! letter of ate abel and statement of kuya manny

Dear Br. Bernie FSC and my Lasallian family,

I would like to respectfully furnish you and our community with a copy of the statement of my husband, Deputy Executive Secretary Manuel Gaite in the light of the repeated public allegations of Mr. Jun Lozada against him.

The words of St. Augustine "No one can claim a monopoly of the truth" are what have kept my husband and I going at this darkest hour of our family life. I fully stand by the integrity and honesty of my husband and I know he is not capable of doing anything as dishonorable as what Mr. Lozada have kept telling the senate and the media.

It is very sad that when my husband finally got a chance to face Mr. Lozada in the senate and state the facts from his side, Mr. Lozada so easily got away with his very damaging statements in the previous days. I vividly recall how in a previous senate hearing before my husband was called to testify, not to mention in many media interviews, Mr. Lozada so freely maligned the name of my husband, saying among others, that it was my husband who told him to lie, go to Hongkong to evade the senate, and allegedly used the term "delatory tactic" to orchestrate the entire cover up.

When my husband finally got his chance to be heard in the senate, at one point, Mr. Lozada corrected himself, saying he must have confused my husband with another lawyer. And Mr. Lozada so easily got away with it, just like that, and still earned himself the description of a very credible and consistent witness thereafter.

Last Saturday night, when my husband was not there in the "Harapan" to be able to promptly refute, clarify or correct Mr. Lozada's heavy allegations, Mr. Lozada again so freely accused my husband, saying that the same gave him P 500,000 pesos to keep him away from the Senate.

The next day, which was the 100th year of our town Fiesta where my husband happens to be the parish centennial celebration president, was a very trying time for us as a couple, when he had to stand up in our parish and thank all those who have supported him for the celebration. Although I know how he must have been hurting inside, I never heard him utter any word to use the opportunity to air his side in the face of such damaging accusations. It was also the same time when my own La Salle community was hailing Mr. Lozada a hero in our nation's search for truth, someone whose words cannot be questioned anymore, someone against whose words, a differing view would only be condemned.

I have silently watched and listened to how our La Salle brothers and other members of our La Salle community, many other religious and former government leaders have repeatedly affirmed the credibility of Mr. Jun Lozada to a level seemingly beyond doubt, calling others whose words do not jibe with his story as corrupt and merely covering up for the President. Even then, I prayed I would not be tempted to pass judgment against the brothers although in my hearts of hearts, my question was how could some of the brothers whom I thought knew me personally and my husband quickly judge him purely based on the allegations of Mr. Lozada?

During the MBC meeting the other week, I learned that Dean Juico stood up for my husband whom he had known since the time of Pres. Cory and asked the MBC to at least hear first what my husband had to say in the senate before asking him to resign based on Mr. Lozada's very serious allegations) . I was surprised to learn today from Dean Juico that it was only a couple of days ago when Br. Armin was able to recall that DES Gaite is my husband. It bothers me because I had thought that considering that if the allegations of Mr. Lozada are all true, the people charged would be punished; at least due diligence must have been done by persons supposedly discerning and courageously standing up for the truth. I know I'm not an authority in spirituality but many innocent people could be irreparably damaged through trial by publicity and even our own search for truth if our means are not as carefully consistent with our sincere ends. This is not to discredit anybody nor to criticize those who fully support the crusade for truth of Mr. Lozada as well as those who believed him completely but rather to contribute to our communal discernment of Truth for our country.

The thing that get me going these days, as I have said, are St. Augustine's words No one can claim the monopoly of the truth. Truth is neither yours nor mine. It is God's. We all hold in our fragile hands a piece of Truth and I believe the call is for us to put those pieces together, humbly and with a readiness to hear other sides, even a contrary view, believing the best and not the worst in each other in order to build our country from where we are, however broken or in need of healing.

This will be my first time to say publicly that my husband has served four presidents as an honorable man. And in all those times, not one president I recall, can claim perfection nor freedom from any allegations. What if by any chance, not all that Mr. Lozada are saying are true? Can we still bring back the good names of people and their families should they be later proven innocent in the court of law, or completely erase the clouds of doubt that have been sown in the minds of people against them?

All I ask is for you to give my husband and all others concerned the benefit of the doubt and the human right of presumption of innocence unless proven guilty. Loving my husband as much as I do, I would not in any way attempt to obstruct justice, if he has truly done anything unlawful or dishonorable.

Since I am currently serving in your august school as Director of our Center for Social Responsibility and Human Development, which I consider the closest to a Center for Ethics that we have at the moment, I would understand it should you honestly feel I no longer have the credibility necessary for the good name of the Center.

I have humbly attached for your kind attention the statement of my husband. In a way it's our joint statement since a part of what was recounted there happened when I was there. While I informed him that I would send you a copy of his statement, I did not tell him anymore of this emotional transmittal letter from me, which I will also copy furnish him.

I only wish good things for Mr. Lozada and the rest of us.

Yours sincerely,

(Signed) MRS. MARIBEL R. GAITE

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

STATEMENT

It’s unfortunate that all my efforts at helping Jun Lozada have been twisted by him or made to appear as part of a scheme to prevent him from testifying in the Senate hearing on the NBN/ZTE project.

I would like to emphasize that from the start, I did not seek Jun Lozada to provide him with legal advice. It was he, through CHED Chair Romy Neri, who sought my legal assistance.

The information about his travel to London (not Hongkong) came from him, after I explained to him that one of the valid reasons not to appear at the scheduled Senate hearing on 30 January 2008 was a previous schedule that one can no longer cancel. The decision to go ahead with the trip was his, not mine. As I have said in the Senate hearing last 11 February 2008 , I did not arrange his travel documents much less purchased his ticket nor funded his foreign trip.

With regard to the P500,000 that I extended to him through his brother Owe Lozada on 4 February, the same was made upon Jun’s instance, after he had texted me that it was so cold where he was (which I assumed was in London), with not even a proper winter clothing and running out of funds. He also said in his text “hindi ko na po kaya ang ganitong buhay”, which I assumed referred to the threats to his life he had been so afraid of before he left. I believed him, I pitied him. That text came at about 2 A.M. of 3 February 2008 . When my wife saw the text and asked me about it, she also felt pity for him and asked if there is any way I could help him.

The money that I handed over to his brother on February 4, was something that I considered he has to account for when he comes back from London that is why I asked his brother to sign an acknowledgement receipt (copy attached), a fact that he sometimes omits in his public statements. I was surprised when I learned that he was coming home already the day after I gave the money. Did he really need the money or was he just baiting me? It is not true, as claimed by Lozada, that the money I gave to him through his brother, was meant to prevent him from appearing in the Senate hearing nor make him tell a lie if he appears in the hearing.

I wish to state that no government fund was used in the money that I gave to Mr. Lozada.

With the way Jun Lozada has twisted my response to his personal appeal, deceived me about his dire circumstances, publicly and repeatedly dragged my name into a controversy I have no personal knowledge about, I regret that my act of compassion for him was taken advantage of, and was used to suit his story.

Lozada's Prayer




Today I start the Change I Want to See
The prayer Rodolfo "Jun" Lozada adopted

Lord, let me be the change I want to see;
to do with strength and wisdom
all that needs to be done,
and become the hope that I can be.
Set me free from my fears and hesitations.
Grant me courage and humility.
Fill me with Spirit to face the challenge
and start the change I want to see.
(Today, I start the change I want to see.)
Even if I’m not the light, I can be the spark.
In faith, service and communion,
let us start the change we want to see,
the change that begins in me.

Reclaiming our Humanity

Homily by Fr. Manoling Francisco, S.J.
MASS FOR JUN LOZADA
La Salle Gymnasium, Greenhills

17 February 2008

On this Second Sunday of Lent, during which we are asked to reflect on the Transfiguration of Jesus Christ, I wish to touch on three themes that have to do with our moral transformation as a people: first, Ascertaining Credibility; second, Rediscovering our Humanity; and third, Witnessing to the Truth. In so doing, I hope to invite all of you to reflect more deeply on how we, as a nation, might respond to the present political crisis in which our identity and ethos, our convictions and integrity, in fact, who we are as a people, are at stake.

I. ASCERTAINING CREDIBILITY

Jun, as Sen. Miriam Santiago has grilled you to ascertain your credibility (or was it to undermine your credibility?), allow me to raise some important questions to consider in the very process of discerning your credibility. Allow me to do so by drawing on my own counseling experience.

Very often, a young rape victim initially suppresses his or her awful and painful story, indeed wills to forget it, in the hope that by forgetting, he or she can pretend it never happened. But very often, too, there comes a point when concealing the truth becomes unbearable, and the desperate attempts to supposedly preserve life and sanity become increasingly untenable.

At this point the victim of abuse decides to seek help. But even after having taken this step, the victim, devastated and confused, will tell his or her story with much hesitation and trepidation. It should be easy to imagine why. In telling the truth, one risks casting shame on himself or herself, subjecting oneself to intense scrutiny and skepticism, and jeopardizing one’s safety and those of his or her loved ones, especially when one dares to go up against an older or more powerful person.

Similarly, it is easy to imagine why Jun would initially refuse to challenge the might of Malacanang. Who in his or her right mind would accuse Malacanang of crimes against our people and implicate the First Family in a sordid tale of greed and corruption, knowing that by doing so, one endangers one’s life and the lives of his or her loved ones? We are, after all, living in dangerous times, where the government has not hesitated to use everything in its power to keep itself in power, where it has yet to explain and solve the numerous cases of extra-judicial killings.

But Jun is in his right mind. His story rings true especially in the face of the perils that he has had to face. And by his courage, Jun has also shown that it is not only that he is in his right mind; his heart is also in the right place.

Hence, my personal verdict: Jun, I believe that you are a credible witness. And if hundreds have gathered here this morning, it is probably because they also believe in you. Mga kapatid, naniniwala ba kayo kay Jun Lozada? Naniniwala ba kayo sa kanyang testimonya? Kung gayon, palakpakan po natin ang Probinsyanong Intsik, si Mr. Jun Lozada.

Jun, we hope that by our presence here, you may find some consolation. Pope Benedict XVI writes that “con-solatio” or consolation means “being with the other in his or her solitude, so that it ceases to be solitude.” Jun, be assured that your solitude is no longer isolation as we profess our solidarity with you. Hindi ka nag-iisa. We are committed to stay the course and to do our best to protect you and your family and the truth you have proclaimed.

II. REDISCOVERING OUR HUMANITY

What makes Jun a credible witness to us?

I think Jun is credible not simply by virtue of his being an eyewitness to the unmitigated greed of some of our public officials. Perhaps more importantly, Jun is credible because he has witnessed to us what it means to be truly human.

Which leads me to my second theme: What does it mean to be human? How might we rediscover our humanity?

Allow me to quote Pope Benedict XVI, who in his latest encyclical, Spe Salvi, has written: “the capacity to accept suffering for the sake of goodness, truth and justice is an essential criterion of humanity, because if my own well-being and safety are ultimately more important than truth and justice, then the power of the stronger prevails, then violence and untruth reign supreme. Truth and justice must stand above my comfort and physical well-being, or else my life becomes a lie. . . For this … we need witnesses—martyrs …. We need them if we are to prefer goodness to comfort, even in the little choices we face each day.”

Our Holy Father concludes, “the capacity to suffer for the sake of the truth is the measure of humanity.”

Isn’t this the reason we emulate our martyrs: Jose Rizal, Gomburza, Evelio Javier, Macli-ing Dulag, Cesar Climaco and Ninoy Aquino? They have borne witness for us what it means to be truly human—to be able to suffer for the sake of others and for the sake of the truth.

I remember Cory recalling a conversation she had with Ninoy while they were in exile in Boston. Cory asked Ninoy what he thought might happen to him once he set foot in Manila. Ninoy said there were three possibilities: one, that he would be rearrested and detained once more in Fort Bonifacio; two, that he would be held under house arrest; and three, that he would be assassinated.

“Then why go home?” Cory asked.

To which Ninoy answered: “Because I cannot allow myself to die a senseless death, such as being run over by a taxi cab in New York. I have to go home and convince Ferdinand Marcos to set our people free.”

Witnessing to one’s deepest convictions, notwithstanding the consequences, is the measure of our humanity. Proclaiming the truth to others, whatever the cost, is the mark of authentic humanity.

Jun, we know you have feared for your life and continue to do so. But in transcending your fears for yourself and your family, you have reclaimed your humanity. And your courage and humility, despite harassment and calumniation by government forces, embolden us to retrieve and reclaim our humanity tarnished by our cowardice and complicity with sin in the world. You have inspired us to be true to ourselves and to submit to and serve the truth that transcends all of us.

III. WITNESSING TO THE TRUTH

This leads us to our third and last theme: witnessing to the truth. In his encyclical, Pacem in Terris, Pope John XXIII exhorts that it is the fundamental duty of the government to uphold the truth: “A political society is to be considered well-ordered, beneficial and in keeping with human dignity if it grounded on truth.” Moreover, the encyclical explains that unless a society is anchored on the truth, there can be no authentic justice, charity and freedom.

Every government is therefore obliged to serve the truth if it is to truly serve the people. Its moral credibility and authority over a people is based on the extent of its defense of and submission to the truth. Insofar as a government is remiss in upholding the truth, insofar as a government actively suppresses the truth, it loses its authority vested upon it by the people.

At this juncture, allow me to raise a delicate question: At what point does an administration lose its moral authority over its constituents?
First, a clear tipping point is the surfacing of hard evidence signifying undeniable complicity of certain government officials in corruption and injustice, evidence that can be substantiated in court.

Hence, during the Marcos Regime, the manipulation of Snap Election results as attested to by the tabulators who walked out of the PICC was clear evidence of the administration’s disregard for and manipulation of the collective will of the people in order to remain in power..

During the Erap Administration, the testimony of Clarissa Ocampo, claiming that Pres. Erap had falsified Equitable Bank documents by signing as Jose Velarde, was the smoking gun that triggered the rage of our people.

Allow me to respond to the same question by pursue an alternative track of argument: an administration loses it moral authority over its people when it fails in its fundamental duty to uphold the truth, when it is constituted by an ethos of falsehood. When a pattern of negligence in investigating the truth, suppressing the truth and harassing those who proclaim the truth is reasonably established, then a government, in principle, loses its right to rule over and represent the people.

Regarding negligence: Do the unresolved cases, such as the the failed automation of the national elections, the fertilizer scam, the extra-judicial killings, and the “Hello, Garci” scandal, constitute negligence on the part of the GMA Administration to probe and ferret out the truth?

Regarding covering-up the truth: Does the abduction of Jun Lozada and the twisting and manipulation of his narrative by Malacanang’s minions constitute concealment of the truth? Was the padlocking of the office of Asst. Gov’t Counsel Gonzales who testified before the Senate regarding the North Rail project anomaly an instance of covering-up the truth?

Regarding the suppression of the truth: Does the issuance and implementation of E.O. 464, which prevents government officials from testifying in Senate hearings without Malacanang’s permission, constitute suppression of the truth? Was the prevention of AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Senga and six other officers from testifying before the Senate with regard the “Hello, Garci” scandal tantamount to a suppression of the truth? Was disallowing Brig. Gen. Quevedo, Lt. Col Capuyan and Lt. Col. Sumayo from appearing before the Lower House an instance of hindering the truth from surfacing?

And regarding harassment of those who proclaim the truth: Are the abduction of Jun Lozada and the decision to court-marshall Gen. Gudani and Col. Balutan for disregarding Malacanang’s order not to testify before the Senate examples of punishing those who come forth to tell the truth?

By conflating one’s responses to all these questions does one arrive not at hard evidence showing culpability on the part of some government officials, but a gestalt, an image which nonetheless demands our assessment and judgment. I invite all of you then to consider these two methods of evaluating and judging the moral credibility of any government, the moral credibility of our present government.

Allow me to end with a few words about an Ignatian virtue, familiaritas cum Deo. To become familiar with God involves the illumination of the intellect, coming to know who God is and what God wills. But it also involves the conversion of the affect, the reconfiguration of the heart. Becoming familiar with God entails transforming and conforming my thinking, my feeling and my doing in accordance to the Lord’s, which can only be the work of grace.

Familiarity with God thus entail rejoicing in what God delights—the truth; abhorring what God detests—falsehood; being pained by what breaks the heart of God—the persecution of truth-seekers. Familiarity with God means sharing the passion of God for the truth and the pathos of God whenever the truth and the bearers of truth are overcome by the forces of the lie.

On this Second Sunday of Lent, as we contemplate the transfiguration of Jesus Christ on Mount Horeb, we pray that our hearts and minds be so transfigured and so conformed to the mind, heart and will of the Jesus, our way, our life, and our truth.

May the Lord bless and protect you, Jun, and your family. May the Lord bless and guide us all into the way of truth. Amen.


Dragging the Church into the NBN-ZTE Scandal

A side event to the NBN-ZTE investigations, the latest scandal to hit the present administration (what does the opposition call it now, the "great-grandmother of all scams"?) was a not-often seen (or heard) public tussle between two Catholic Church leaders over the media. The repartee between "Running Priest" Father Robert Reyes and Bayombong Bishop Ramon Villena was aired last 15 February over ABS-CBN's early morning show, Umagang Kay Ganda. The article quoted below details the story.

I didn't get to watch the episode but several friends who did told me about it, and expressed how much they didn't like what "that priest" said: that certain bishops regularly receive "donations" from Malacañang, and they are the ones who would not want to say anything perceived as adversarial to their benefactor. Then I asked each of my friends if they thought what Father Robert said was true. Each of them, without exception, immediately stopped their protestations. Just like that. Interesting.

On a less controversial note, Father Albert Alejo. S.J.
proposes that this Lent, Church people reflect on integrity and corruption especially within the Church.Father Alejo's proposed Lenten reflection this year is both timely and on the right track. We may argue about the prudence of washing our dirty linens in public, especially at this time. Then again, who says this isn't the proper time for the Church to "reform ourselves and make good our belief in the Gospel"?

This NBN-ZTE scam has the makings of a cleansing fire for many of our institutions, including the Church. For one, it brings to the fore how much we in the Church "practice what we preach" and also how much we "avoid to preach what we fail to practice".

.......

NBN-ZTE scandal creates mixed emotions by Al Jeratso


Mixed emotions have taken their toll on the role players, immediate family members and critics after the anomalous NBN-ZTE scandal erupted in the country's political atmosphere.


Not to be outfaced is the involvement of the Catholic Church in the scandal, that eventually resulted in the exchange of ginger shots between a popular running priest and a bishop in Nueva Ecija over ABS-CBN's early Friday morning program hosted by Mr. Anthony Taberna.

.......

Similarly, running priest Father Robert Reyes has accused the Catholic Church hierarchy of receiving donations from the previous and present presidents of the Philippines. Reyes admitted to Anthony Taberna during the ABS-CBN early morning program that the president is donating huge sums of money to some of the Catholic congregations, which he did not elaborate. Reyes also said that he even received an offer during the time of President Cory Aquino for P100,000 but he declined to receive it.

As a result, Reyes' declaration had infuriated Nueva Ecija bishop Villena, thinking that he was the one being referred to by Father Reyes because he was on the other line during the early morning program. What Reyes said was that the hands of some Catholic Church officials are tied because some of them are receiving donations from top government officials.

According to Reyes, he wouldn't be surprised that until now the Catholic Church hierarchy has kept itself mum on where to stand on the corruption scandal, except the Catholic Bishop Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) which issued a call for communal action on the scandal to resolve the matter peacefully without any bloodshed. Reyes was reminded of the late Cardinal Sin who receives donations from government officials but get back at them when they did wrong to the hapless people. "This is not the case nowadays," Reyes said.


19 February 2008

Candle-lighting and Rally for Truth and Accountability in Legazpi City

While thousands gathered in Makati last Friday, 15 February, to stand up for the truth and call to accountability the present administration, a smaller crowd gathered at Peñaranda Park in Legazpi City for the same causes and to express local support to a fellow Albayano, whistleblower Jun Lozada himself, who hails from Ligao City. His brother, Samson Lozada, joined the event. Before the afternoon activities at Peñaranda Park, the new movement which calls itself "Krusada para sa Katotoohan asin Katanosan", (Crusade for Truth and Righteousness), held a press conference in the morning where the statement below was released. A follow-up activity is slated on 25 February, Monday, EDSA 1 Anniversary.

KRUSADA PARA SA KATOTOOHAN ASIN KATANOSAN
c/o 644 g/f Encarnacion Bldg., Rizal St., Old Albay, Leg. City

DEKLARASYON NG PAGKAKAISA
Mamamayang Bikolano, Magkaisa at Kumilos,
Kamtin ang Katotohanan at Hustisya!

Kaming mga mamamayang Bicolano mula sa iba’t ibang sektor ay nagkakaisa at buong lakas na sumusuporta kay G. Rodolfo Noel ’Jun’ Lozada sa kanyang katapangan, katapatan at lakas ng loob na ilantad ang lahat ng kanyang nalalaman kaugnay sa overprcing at kickbacks sa $329.5 milyong kontrata sa Zhong Xing Telecommunications Equipment Limited (ZTE) National Broadband Network Deal na pinasok ng gobyerno.

Buo ang aming paniniwala na ang kanyang binitawang mga pahayag at ng iba pang testigo sa kontrobersyang ito ay nagpapatunay lamang na talamak at malaganap ang kurapsyon, anomalya at isakandalo ng kasalukuyang gobyerno ni Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Gobyernong tumutugon at tumatangkilik sa mga personal na interes, kapamilya o ng maliit na grupo ng sindikato sa loob at labas ng burukrasya habang nakasadlak sa kumunoy ng kahirapan ang karamihan ng mamamayan.


Ilan sa mga anomalyang ito na sangkot si Gloria at kapamilya nito ay ang $14M kickback sa Industrias Metalurgicas Pescarmona Sociedad Anonima (IMPSA), P321M election money laundering na nasa Jose Pidal Bank Account, $7.1M nakatagong kayamanan ng mga Arroyo sa San Francisco USA, mga imported na pangarerang kabayo ni Mikey Arroyo na nagkakahalaga ng milyun-milyon, P536M overpricing sa President Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard, $100M kickback sa maanomalyang kontrata sa NAIA 3/ PIATCo, P728 M pundo na tinaguriang fertilizer fund scam at marami pang iba.

Kinokondena rin namin ang mga hakbangin sa ngayon ng rehimeng GMA na busalan ang bibig, takutin at o tuluyang patahimikin ang sinumang mamamayang nagsasabi ng katotohanan. Ang ganitong mga hakbangin ang kumikitil sa karapatan ng mamamayan sa pagpapahayag ng katotohan at unti-unti pumamatay sa demokrasya ng ating bayan.

Naninindigan at naniniwala kami na ang ating bansa ay magkakaroon lamang ng tunay na pag-unlad at makakamit ang tunay na kapayapaan at hustisya kapag ang mga namumuno ay may moralidad at integridad.

Dahil dito, nananawagan kami sa buong mamamayang Bikolano na huwag hayaang maglaho at mapunta sa wala ang nasimulang paglalantad ng katotohanan ni Jun Lozada. Totoong masakit ang katotohanan subalit kung ito ang tanging pararaan upang lumaya ang ating bansa mula sa mga mapagasamantala kailangang igiit at ipaglaban ito.

Magsuri at makialam sa mga kaganapan sa ating bayan!

Magkaisa at kumilos, kamtin ang katotohanan at hustisya ng buong bayan!

15 February 2008

What is Neri afraid to say and Why?

Speaking hypothetically...

Here's another widely-circulated e-mail, this time from man of the hour Jun Lozada himself, who incidentally calls himself a "probinsyanong intsik" from Ligao, Albay.

If this were really written by Jun Lozano and ssuming this were true, then CHED Chair Neri is faced, not only
with a political but even more so, with an existential predicament - in so many levels.

Of special interest to me is the part that says: "
He is afraid that even if the Church knows the truth about Arroyo's direct involvement in the ZTE-NBN deal, the Church will still not call for her resignation due to the closeness of Arroyo's trusted lady liason to the Cardinal of Manila who was very effective during the "Hello Garci" crisis. That Arroyo's Religious Affairs Operators have the Bishops firmly in their "donation" graces, as again manifested by the quick rebuttal of the Mindanao Bishops' of the call of their fellow bishops in Luzon who where calling for the resignation of Arroyo just after Arroyo gave them a visit in Mindanao."

If this were really Lozada's words and Neri's thoughts, and containing the truth, what does it make of the Church? True or not, credible or not, the call to examination of conscience and to change of heart rings true to all indeed, to laity and clergy alike, especially to those in the hierarchy.



For Immediate Release
Contact: Vicente R. Romano III, 0920.9615610
Leah Navarro, 0917.898.1957

Dear Friends,

Here's a short write-up that Jun Lozada wrote sometime in October. He wanted me to disseminate it without attribution. I believe he was motivated both by his genuine concern for a beleaguered friend who was being maligned no end, and his desire, even then, for the truth to somehow surface. He left it up to me as to how and when to disseminate it.

I did not find any compelling reason to get it out then. But now that Jun has told it all, and Neri is being invited back to testify, I believe the public deserves to know what was (and maybe still is) in the mind of Neri – at least from the point of view of a friend. I'm sure Jun will not mind.

Let's get this out in the open.
God bless,
Enteng


What is Neri afraid to say and Why?

Many speculations have been made as to what Neri knows about the ZTE-NBN most particularly the direct involvement of Pres. Gloria Arroyo in this abominable affair. After his damaging "Sec. May 200 ka dito" demolition of Abalos, the discredited former Comelec Chairman, many were left disappointed when Neri suddenly clamped up when the Senators started asking him about the nature of his conversation with Arroyo, no amount of coaxing, cajoling and threats was enough to break his Code of Omerta. The question on many people's mind was, What was Neri trying to protect when he repeatedly invoked "Executive Priviledge" during that gruelling 12 hour Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing on live television?

We have known the Truth all along as one of the few people that Neri confided his predicament during those fateful days of April 2006, and how he wanted to resign his post of NEDA Director General and Secretary for Socio-Economic Planning over this incident where he lost all his moral respect for Pres. Gloria Arroyo.

We are doing this document to give the public an understanding of this predicament.

What is Neri afraid to tell the public? He is afraid to tell the public that after he reported the Abalos P200 million peso bribe offer, Arroyo casually told him to ignore it and work for its recommendation for approval anyway. That when he protested that it is too controversial and may attract the wrong kind of attention from media, Arroyo retorted back "Pakulo lang ni Joey yan and his father". When he tried to reason that it may not be accommodated in the Chinese ODA package because it has been filled up with a list of projects already,

Arroyo again ordered him to remove the low cost housing project and some water project to accommodate the ZTE-NBN deal in the ODA loan. That when he attempted to reason that it may not be approved in time for the Boao Forum which was only two days to go from that fateful April day, Arroyo with raised voice told him to include the ZTE-NBN project in the agenda of the following day's meeting of a combined NEDA Board and Cabinet Committee, who as expected promptly approved the project paving the way for the contract signing between ZTE and DOTC in China the next day. Neri is afraid to tell the public that this conversation took place between him and Arroyo because it might spark another impeachment complaint against Arroyo.

Why is Neri afraid to tell the public about this conversation with Arroyo? He is afraid that another impeachment will simply result to more expenses of public funds similar to the Hyatt 10 impeachment crisis, because as DBM Secretary who replaced Boncodin, he was entrusted with the large scale DBM payola operation of Arroyo to Congressmen, Senators and Governors not quite similar to the crude Panlilio incident that the public is witnessing now. He is afraid with a more partisan Andaya at the helm of DBM, more public funds will be spent to buy the silence and favour of these greedy legislators and local executives.

He is afraid that with Arroyo's firm control of public funds she can buy all the necessary support from most sectors of society to keep her in power.

He is afraid that even if the opposition knows about this conversation with Arroyo, he is afraid that the opposition will not pursue a serious impeachment proceedings against Arroyo, because it is not to their political interest that Noli de Castro becomes President in case Arroyo is impeached and becomes a more formidable political opponent in 2010. This insincere and unpatriotic goal of the opposition is already being manifested by the malicious speed that the Erap pardon is being cooked by Ronnie Puno together with the Erap camp to hastily put a united front of "Birds of the same corrupt feather" coalition against the emerging JDV led political opposition.

He is afraid that even if the Church knows the truth about Arroyo's direct involvement in the ZTE-NBN deal, the Church will still not call for her resignation due to the closeness of Arroyo's trusted lady liason to the Cardinal of Manila who was very effective during the "Hello Garci" crisis. That Arroyo's Religious Affairs Operators have the Bishops firmly in their "donation" graces, as again manifested by the quick rebuttal of the Mindanao Bishops' of the call of their fellow bishops in Luzon who where calling for the resignation of Arroyo just after Arroyo gave them a visit in Mindanao.

He is afraid that even if the military knows the truth about Arroyo's direct involvement in the fraudulent ZTE-NBN deal, the AFP brass is much to indebted to Arroyo for their position and the perks that goes with their position, that they have demonstrated this twisted loyalty with their willingness to detain, remove from the service and even shoot their own men for voicing out their legitimate concerns regarding the corruption and moral authority of their Commander in Chief. It is a sad spectacle to see the respected warriors of the Marines & Special Forces rot in jail with their ideals, while their men are dying even without receiving the measly P150 per day combat pay that was promised to them by Arroyo due to lack of funds & generals gets a gift bag similar to those given to the governors and congressmen just for having dinner with Arroyo the day after that infamous breakfast & lunch meeting where bribe money flowed scandalously free.

He is afraid that even if the Media knows the truth about Arroyo's direct involvement in the ZTE-NBN scam, Media will simply wither in the torrents of cash and favors similar to how the Hyatt 10, Hello Garci crisis were killed in the media headlines and Radio& TV coverages. Although he believes in the integrity of a handful of Journalist, he believes that a handful of these mavericks cannot withstand the hordes of paid lackeys of Malacanang. Especially that the Arroyo crisis team is now being handled by the best mercenary money can buy, from Ramos Sulo Operation, Erap's DILG and now Arroyo's troubleshooter, Ronnie Puno. Ably supported by the Media and PR money from PAGCOR being handled by Cerge Remonte to buy positive airtime, headlines and editorials.

He is afraid that even if the Business Sector knows about the truth of Arroyo's direct involvement to defraud the coffers of the taxes they are paying, the businessmen will be reluctant to rock the boat of the current economic uptrend, especially with the very close personal and business relationship of the so called leaders of the big business like Ricky Razon of ICTSI, Donald Dee of PCCI and Francis Chua of the Filipino-Chinese Federation to Arroyo herself. He is afraid that the hard earned remittances of Filipino OFWs that is keeping the economy booming and that can keep the economy afloat even under any administration is being wasted under this unholy alliance of Arroyo and her favoured businessmen.

He is afraid that even if the Civil Society knows the truth about Arroyo's direct involvement in the ZTE-NBN deal, that the Civil Society is now tired of mass actions after witnessing two failed EDSA revolutions, that Civil Society is now afflicted with a "Rally Fatigue" and cannot muster enough public outrage to denounce Arroyo's "corruption with impunity". He is afraid that the middle class is now indifferent to the corruption that goes around them, not realising that the middle class are the ones mainly carrying the burden of the loan payments for these corrupt deals. He is afraid that the middle class are more interested to become an OFW & to leave this country leaving their family and children behind, and may not care anymore about the crimes being committed against their country by its own President.

He is afraid that even if the Masa, the students, the workers knows the truth about Arroyo's direct involvement in the ZTE-NBN deal to steal precious resources from public funds, that they are now too poor and impoverished to be able to afford the time to join mass actions against the abuses of the Arroyo administration, that these former vanguards of mass actions in the country are now completely dependent on financial resources of professional organizers and have turned themselves into a "Rally for hire" groups rather than a true and genuine political gathering shouting for reforms.

He is afraid that the public may not know the extent of corruption in this country and may wrongly believe that they can cure corruption by simply replacing Arroyo with another person. He is afraid that the public may overlook the systemic and institutionalized nature of the source of corruption in this country, he is afraid that the people will again opt for a regime change without concern or a plan to correct the root causes of corruption in the country. He is afraid that people may not realize that it is not bringing Arroyo down that is difficult, it is establishing a new order that is the difficult task.

This is the predicament of Neri which I want people to realize especially to those who are asking Neri to tell the truth.

14 February 2008

Communal Action

Here's a recent widely circulated email. "Communal action", great expectations pin on two words. Is it just me? Why do these two words evoke an image of a C-section being performed on a pot-bellied guy in the vain hope that a newborn might come of it?


Communal Action
Doy Cinco / IPD
http://doycinco.blogspot.com/2008/02/communal-action.html
Monday, February 11, 2008

Walang dudang muli na namang nalagay sa survival mode si Ate Glo. May nagsasabing "baka ito na ang simula at katapusan ng masasayang araw ng Malakanayang." Kaya lang, "maaring sabihing na sa rurok na, hinog na o hindi pa kumpleto ang ingredient para sa isang pagbabalikwas tungo sa pagbabago. Ang nakabitin at ang balik na tanong, nasaan at naabot na ba ang pampinaleng tipping point na inaabangan ng marami?"

Kung maisusustina't lalala pa sa darating na linggo ang bulkang Mayong krisis na bumabalot sa ZTE-Broadband scam, meaning may ilang bilang sa hanay ng CBCP ang categorically mananawagan ng pagbibitiw sa tungkulin ni Ate Glo at ipalaganap ito sa pamamagitan ng isang PASTORAL LETTER (karaniwang ginawa nuong panahon ni Marcos at Erap Estrada), ilang section ng business elite at panggitnang pwersa ang lalahok sa pagkilos, sasabayan pa ng pagbibitiw ng ilang Gabinete ni Ate Glo, withdrawal of support ng ilang General sa AFP, 'di man magsabay-sabay, di man kompleto, ano man ang maunang sangkap, walang dudang tigbak at 'di na aabot si Ate Glo sa 2010. Sa ngayon, maaaring “naka-antabay lang sa ano mang eventuality at wait and see ang halos lahat ng grupong pulitikal sa bansa."

Alam na nating lahat ang talamak na pangungurakot sa bansa, alam natin na isang malaking kalokohan ang sinasabing “strong republic.” Alam din natin lahat ang ala-MAPIAng pamumuno ng burukrasya't Malakanyang, na ayon sa CBCP ay pinaghaharian ng MALALAKI at MAKAPANGYARIHANG ANGKAN, dinastiya, CASIQUE at OLIGARKIYA. Alam nating lahat na sila lamang ang nakikinabang at nagtatamasa sa sinasabing 6-7.0% GDP eco
nomic growth rate ng ating bansa. Alam din natin lahat kung paano sinalaula ang mga demokratikong institusyon ng bansa at sa pamamagitan ng kinang ng salapi, ng pamumudmud, makailan beses na itong nalusutan ni Ate Glo. Sa harap ng kalunus-lunos na kalagayan, ang karaniwang reaksyon ng marami, EH ANO NGAYON?
Bilang mga aktibo at responsableng mamamayan, ang inaantabayanan, ang hinahanap ng mamamayan, ANO NA ANG GAGAWIN? Ang sagot ng CBCP, "COMMUNAL ACTION".


Hindi natin minamaliit ang panawagang “communal action” ng CBCP. Maaring ito na ang pinakamataas na anyo ng panawagang kayang ibato ng simbahan sa harap ng lumalalalang krisis ng paggugubyerno sa bansa. Maaaring ang kahulugan ng “communal action ay isang klase ng pagkilos na communal, sama-samang pagkilos para sa pagbabago, commune, parang Diliman Commune, ika nga, kahit paano, isa itong political action.” In fairness sa CBCP, sa layuning maibalik ang pagtitiwala, good governance at higit pang palakasin ang tinatawag na responsableng mamamayan. Sa panimula, maaaring “communal prayer at soul searching, pray together, magdecide o mag-act together.” Sakyan man o kstiguhin ng Malakanyang ang panawagan, walang ibang tinutukoy ang CBCP kundi ang imoralidad, kabulukan ng Malakanyang at paraan kung paano ito mareresolba sa pamamagitan ng "communal action." (Photo below: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/)

Bagamat ang arena ng labanan ay nananatiling na sa Senado, walang nakaka-alam kung ito'y bubulwak, dadami't lalawak ang partisipasyon ng mamamayan o maaari rin namang madepuse ang tensyon, makabig ng palasyo ang timbangan at “maglet'smove on na naman ang lahat.” Habang ang diin sa Senado ay puntiryahin ang ugat, ang pinanggagalingan ng iskandalo (Mike Arroyo at GMA), sa part ng Malakanyang, ang "taktika'y total denial, iwas pusoy, idamage control, pahupain ang sitwasyon at idemolished ang kredibilidad ni Eng Jun Lozada."

Hanggat may lusot at kung makakayanan ay ilimita ang exposue ng mga salarin, panatilihing nasa peripiral ang subject ng Senate hearing. Meaning itago sa Senado ang mga vulnerable, ang Unang Ginoo at tanging Esposong si Mike Arroyo, Abalos o si Sec Neri, ang may alam sa iskandalong bumabalot sa maanomalyang kontrata ng ZTE-NBN. Pangalawa, sirain ang kredibilidad at kalakasang testimoniya ni Eng Jun Lozada (witness) at panghuli, kung 'di kayang kunin sa santong paspasan, takutin muli ang mamamayan, bigyang katwiran ang pagdidiklara ng “emergency rule o martial law.”


Maliban sa Simbahan, sinong grupo ang mapagkakatiwalaang titimon sa kumpas ng labanan at kung may ispasyo pa ba ang mamamayan sa malayang pamamahayag at mapayapang pagkilos, maliban sa Senado, ang mapayapang pakikibaka, ang legal at constitutional (avenues) na paraan ng pagkilos para sa pagbabago? Bukud sa hanay ng simbahan, sino sa mga progresibong hanay ang may kredibilidad na maaring magfacilitate, manguna sa pagkilos para sa pagbabago?

Nagstrike sa akin ang matinding feedback, reaksyon, kritisismo o mungkahi ng isang ordinaryong mamamayan na aking kapitbahay, sa kung paano paiigtingin ang pakikibaka laban sa katiwalian at pang-aabuso ng kasalukuyang administrasyon. Ayon sa kanya, "sa mga demokratikong mobilisasyon ikakasa sa hinaharap, kasabay sa umiinit na inbestigasyon sa Senado, kung pupwede lang sana," aniya, "sa simula, iwasan sanang mahaluan ng mga pulitiko, wala munang mga streamers at placard, wala munang mga pulang nakabalagbag na banderang wawagay-wagayway. Ang kanyang simpleng katwiran, "baka raw maunsyami ang labanan, baka mag-atrasan, masira ang kredibilidad, mag-alangan ang marami partikular ang hanay ng middle class, imbis na makadagdag,
makabawas at mabulilyaso ang mabuting hangarin ng "communal action."

SOS: Calling Cardinal Sin

Bishop Claver, S.J., wants us to focus our attention to what he considers the main thesis of the latest CBCP Pastoral Statement: most, if not all, of our country's social problems today have one common cause, i.e., "the subordination of the good of the many to that of the few. Which subordination, the bishops said, is our besetting sin as a people."

The good bishop also dispenses one good dose of reality check to those looking for another Cardinal Sin among the ranks of the CBCP, and lamenting the situation wherein there seems to be none to fill-in his shoes. Cardinal Sin is not the key element for another people power revolution to happen, it is the people. And the people today have things to worry and get busy about other than toppling the present dispensation.

Apparently, much as some sectors are raring for yet another EDSA or EDSA-like event, majority of the bishops today thinks the time has not yet come for it. And they don't want to provide the shortcut to jump-start such a movement.

Instead, they propose to lay the groundwork for such a movement. "Circles of discernment", reflecting and praying groups, that is what they want to call this not-so-original suggestion. It will be like the sit-ins of the Marcos era.

Once again, the bishops have spoken as from a fount of wisdom and propriety. An inspired, not necessarily stirring, sermon.

Then again, the question has to be asked: it has been several weeks now since the bishop's letter. So much has happened in this brief span of time, e.g., de Venecia's fall from grace and Lozano's (and opposition senators') moment of glory. Has any substantial number of bishops and priests been practicing already what they so wisely preach? How many bishops and priests have already initiated the formation of these "circles of discernment" in their dioceses, parishes and communities?

And no, the quick retort that existing religious organizations and communities may already be considered the embodiment of such circles of discernment, just won't do.

We have to practice what we preach. Otherwise, the pastoral directions the latest CBCP letter propose simply becomes a convenient excuse not to get involved. Apathy, couched in words holy and wise, is apathy still.



















SOS: Calling Cardinal Sin


By Bishop Francisco F. Claver, S.J.

Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 00:21:00 02/13/2008


Cardinal Sin, where art thou?

Exasperation, now and again, is expressed at the Catholic bishops by interest groups who want them to come out strongly against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. They have been deeply disappointed that there is no Jaime Cardinal Sin among the bishops today to lead a “people power” movement to boot her out.

The exasperation, I’m afraid, is badly misplaced. We actually have had no lack of would-be Cardinal Sins in the past few years since the “Hello, Garci” tapes started the political pot boiling over crazily. There have been at least four or five such bishops; one in fact explicitly called for the people to join a rebellion in one of those strange hotel capers, others supported impeachment moves in Congress, and still others contributed their names to statements and manifestos calling for the President to step down. But nothing has happened. And amazingly, nobody is asking why.

Most simply, the reason is that the people did not respond. Period. Hardly anyone took to the streets in answer to their calls. And I don’t think the reason was that those bishops were not cardinals of Manila.

A closer look at our experience of people power in the past -- and the fast-approaching 22nd anniversary of EDSA People Power I is an opportune time to do so -- brings out this little fact: On the surface it looks like it was Cardinal Sin who was responsible for EDSA I. Likewise for EDSA II. I would say he helped -- and helped tremendously. But he wasn’t the real decision-maker for their occurrence. The people were -- a fact which supports what I pointed out in an earlier column: that the real king-makers (or -un-makers) are not the bishops but the people.

Thus, in the first EDSA, the snap elections that preceded it made clear what the people wanted. The bishops supported their will and Cardinal Sin followed the lead of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines. At EDSA II, it was the texting students gathered at the EDSA Shrine who asked for his support, and he gave it. In both instances, it was clear where the people stood. In 1986 they voted for change in a real electoral exercise. And in 2001, they voted with their feet. Only after they clearly expressed their will did the cardinal come in. If people power succeeded both times, it was because the people wanted it to.

All this is to point out that the exasperation of those who are worked up uselessly about the bishops’ failure to assume the kind of leadership being urged on them for another people-power overthrow of a sitting President should be directed at the non-responding people. And they should be asking seriously: Where are they? And why don’t they come out to answer their calls?

Indeed, where are they? They are out there, watching, waiting, going about the hard business of daily living. And thinking. Their concerns are not those of would-be revolutionaries. The bishops equivalently said as much in their reading of the national situation in their last pastoral statement.

Commentators on that statement zeroed in critically on what they saw to be the bishops’ faulty reading of the differences between Manila’s perceptions and the provinces’ regarding the current political problems of the nation. Not much was said about the statement’s more substantive conclusion that those problems, though diversely perceived, had one common cause: the subordination of the good of the many to that of the few. Which subordination, the bishops said, is our besetting sin as a people.

And they asked that this Lenten season we do something serious about it. They asked for a very simple thing: that at every level of the Catholic Church we form “circles of discernment,” reflecting and praying groups of the faithful coming together to see how we can by ourselves attain a form of self-conversion, not just of ourselves as individuals but as whole communities.

It hasn’t occurred to anyone of our commentators yet, it seems, but those discerning groups, if they take place in sufficient numbers all over the country, may well in effect be a massive teach-in regarding our unyielding culture of corruption and a veritable referendum on our present crop of politicians and the most recent scandals. What happens after they have conscientized themselves?

It strikes me that one of the worst things about our national practice of corruption is that hardly anybody ever admits culpability and says “mea culpa” as Rodolfo Noel Lozada Jr. did in his Senate testimony last week. Yet admission of wrong-doing and being sorry for it is the first step to the self-reform that the bishops are asking of all of us. There is a great need for more Lozadas. That is why the bishops requested that the kind of discerning they are pushing for should be done also by Malacañang, Congress, and provincial, municipal and “barangay” [village] governments.

A quixotic quest? It most probably is, but it shows how desperate things are and how there is all the more need for all of us to work our own hope out, as the bishops insistently ask, together, everyone doing his/her own little share.

That’s what people power is all about.


13 February 2008

Witticisms - Are we becoming lesser by the day?

Do 21st century conveniences make you feel like becoming a lesser person by the day? Consider the things we have today...

Our communication - wireless
Our telephone - cordless
Our cooking - fireless
Our food - fatless
Our labor - effortless
Our education - valueless
Our politics - shameless
Our youth - jobless
Our dress - topless
Our attitude - careless
Our conduct - worthless
Our feelings - heartless
Our relation - loveless
Our follies - countless
Our arguments - baseless
Our job - thankless
Our salary - very less

Corruption and Communion

Fr. Albert Alejo, S.J., EHEM Anti-Corruption Movement initiator and moving spirit, came up with a Lenten reflection that aims at fighting corruption within the Church. His advocacy is anything but unimportant, for we who read the Word of God must "believe what we read; preach what we believe, and practice what we preach."

Though done independently and planned well ahead, the timing of its launching was made more providential after the release of the latest CBCP statement. This is the kind of "rejoinder" that we would like to see after each CBCP Pastoral Statement.

May those who have ears, listen. Ehem!


CORRUPTION AND COMMUNION
Struggling for Integrity in Philippine Church and Society


“I propose that we seriously examine ourselves: Do I use God to get money, or, do I use money to get towards God? The gap between the rich and the poor among our people will not be bridged if among us priests, who are configured to Jesus Christ and preach love and sharing, have rich and poor among us.” ---Bishop Broderick S. Pabillo. History and Grace (2004)

“God is personal, but never private. And the Bible reveals a very public God. But in an age of private spiritualities, the voice of a public God can scarcely be heard. Private religion avoids the public consequences of faith. In particular, affluent countries and churches breed private disciples, perhaps because the applications of faith to public life could become quickly challenging and troubling.” --–Jim Wallis, God’s Politics (2005)

Ours is a crippled nation, a wounded Church, because we are crippled and wounded individuals. If we hope to restore trust and credibility in the authorities we must know what is in our power to control. We cannot control another human being, but we can be in command of ourselves…It starts with restoring our broken relationship with God, a return to the Word.” ---Teresa Tunay. Alay Kapwa Lenten Reflection (2006)


UNEASY INTRODUCTION

In their protest against “Charter Change,” Filipino bishops quickly called for “Character Change” among the government leaders. It’s not the Constitution of the Philippines that needed renovation, the prelates said, but the heart and soul of the politicians that required radical transformation.[1] Equally brisk, however, were ordinary citizens who sent letters to national dailies, challenging the Church leaders to cast the same prophetic critique upon themselves: “They should first address the ‘character change’ message to themselves before they preach it to others.” (e.g. Vitor 2006).

Little did the letter senders know that this sense of exasperation was actually the focal theme of no less than the Alay Kapwa Lenten Reflection promoted by the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) that same year. At the heart of the reflection was the topic, “Restoring Trust and Credibility in the Church and Political Authorities.” For Teresa Tunay, who was asked to write this section for Alay Kapwa, the choice of this topic itself implied that “the reputation of two institutions, Church and State, has been soiled and damaged.” She elaborated this general feeling of frustration by taking the cue from the common taxi drivers’ socio-cultural and political analysis:

“With no holds barred [taxi drivers] will tell you what they think is wrong with the government, the politicians, the economy, the labor situation, the educational system, the rising of hospitalization and of burying the dead. And because the bishops and priests have figured in the news lately, they will also tell you what is wrong with the Church, the men of the cloth, the entire country…This is the picture forming in their minds, and which they transmit to their passengers: our politicians are a corrupt lot---liars, thieves, schemers, cheaters, scoundrels all. Our bishops and priests are a disunited bunch---confused, self-righteous, hypocritical. Our political authorities cannot be trusted; our spiritual leaders have lost their credibility. Therefore, Filipinos are a bad people; the country is going to the dogs, there is no hope for the future… (Tunay 2006, 33-34)

It was audacious for Teresa Tunay and the CBCP to have printed such a self-critical description of our communal sentiment. Teresa Tunay, however, exhorted the readers that “rather than harangue and harass our authorities in the hope of straightening them out, we should remember that we are the Church, we are the State.” If the nation is crippled and the Church is wounded, it is not without relation to our own woundedness as a people and as individuals. We must also do our homework, and our homework starts with “restoring our broken relationship with God, a return to the Word.” (Tunay 2006, 36)

This woundedness hits me both as a citizen and as a man of the cloth. I offer the following reflection as my own way of participating in the Church’s socio-cultural and political soul searching. I will try to focus on the social dimension of the central religious worship of the Catholic Church---the Eucharist. And since I have been in Ehem! Anticorruption Movement[2], I will zoom in my presentation on the connection between the Eucharist and injustice, between communion and corruption.

I believe---no, I can clearly see---that some of the problems that we are fighting against in society are also found within the Church. And among these problems, perhaps the most sensitive to discuss, is corruption. I suggest that the profound and authentic renewal of our society requires a corresponding renewal precisely from within our Philippine Church institutions and communities.

I guess the best statement on this theme has already been said by the Eleventh Synod of Bishops, which adopted the title “The Eucharist, Source and Summit of the Life and Mission of the Church” (October 3 - 23, 2005). In Proposition No. 48, the Synod describes the “social dimension of the Eucharist” in this powerful paragraph:

"Christ's sacrifice is a mystery of liberation that calls out to us. It is in the commitment to transform unjust structures and to re-establish the dignity of man, created in the likeness and image of God, that the Eucharist assumes in life the significance it has in celebration. This dynamic movement opens up to the world: it questions the process of globalization which not infrequently increases the gap between rich countries and poor countries, it denounces the political and economic forces that dilapidate the earth's resources, it reiterates the grave requirements of distributive justice in the face of inequalities that cry out to heaven, it encourages Christians to commit themselves and to work in political life and social activity…Those who share in the Eucharist must commit themselves to creating peace in our world, which is marked by violence, war and, especially today, by terrorism, economic corruption and sexual exploitation. The conditions for building true peace are the restoration of justice, reconciliation and forgiveness."

From the long and heavy list of concerns that call for committed action, I highlight “corruption.” It is identified as one of the new and special problems that confront those who would take the spirit of the Eucharist seriously in contemporary society.

The scandal that rocks the Church today is probably not so much the sexual misconduct of the clergy, but the disconcerting fact that those who lead the faithful are as economically and politically divided as the society it wants to convert. The Christians who cheat in public service as well as the victims of their cheating are probably seatmates in the same parish Church and supposedly receiving the same Eucharist.

There at the back of the Church, a mother is crying to the Lord, because she cannot buy the overpriced medicines for her dying child. Here in the front pew, a regular churchgoer praises the Lord in jubilation for a good pharmaceutical business. Somebody is making a living by literally making a killing! What would St. Paul say to this kind of Church? Probably the same sad and angry words he said to the Corinthians.

But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. When you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not… Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.” (1 Corinthians 11:17-29, English Standard Version)

I hear from St. Paul that receiving the Eucharist has very serious social and spiritual implications. The social divisions in society (‘those who have their own meal’ and ‘those who have nothing’) are very much reflected in the church and thereby “despise” it. In no uncertain terms, St. Paul exhorts the believers to examine the serious implications of this juxtaposition of social and spiritual disgrace.

Taking cue from St. Paul, I divide the rest of my presentation into two. The first section is the social context of the Eucharist from the perspective of the problem of corruption in the Philippines. The second portion is an attempt at a theological reflection on the issue. (Please take these reflections as coming from an anthropologist, and not from a professional theologian.) Towards the end, I will offer some prospects for pastoral action in living out the meaning of our Eucharistic communion amidst a society and a Church that are both challenged by corruption.



[1] The Editorial of Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines newspaper did not mince words when it ascribed this “national predicament” to the Arroyo administration. “Graft and corruption in the government and its agencies are so endemic and extensive that socio-political integrity in governance has seemingly become a moral impossibility to achieve during the remaining three-year tenure of the present national leadership” (CBCP Monitor June 25-Jul8 2007, p. A4).

[2] Ehem! is the popular name of the Jesuit Anticorruption Program. The program offers seminars to government and private sector personnel, using the Ehem! A Self-Check Manual for Combating Corruption. The program has been adopted by the Office of the Ombudsman as its corruption prevention strategy, and the seminars have been accredited by the Civil Service Commission for officer’s development. Recently, Ehem! also produced the Aha! A Citizen’s Primer on Whistleblowing, the product of long partnership with the Ombudsman’s Office.

.......

The Church as Part of the Problem

For most of the ordinary faithful, the Eucharist---or the Mass---is not simply a liturgical practice. It is also a social and even an economic event. Many things happen during mass. People enter the church and “find their place”: some instinctively stay at the back, while some prominent personalities would insist on occupying the front row even if they come late. And people see this. Parents teach their kids to be silent. People look at what other people wear. The homilist tries to connect the readings to contemporary issues, calls for prayer for victims of disasters, announces leadership training, denounces anomalies in elections, or at times blesses controversial projects. For some, the mass is a simple opportunity to learn how to use the microphone or try their singing skills. The church then becomes a culture bearer, aside from being a sacrament dispenser.

On top of this, there is the circulation of money. Parishioners hear the sound of the coins and see who is donating the bigger amount into the collection pouch. Sometimes, there is even a second collection for a construction project or in support of a missionary abroad. A disturbing silence, though, is the rarity of financial report coming from the church officials.[1] The inclusion of money, among other things besides, places the Eucharist and the Church in general, within the context of the brewing interrogation of poverty and corruption in the wider society: Where does the money go?

This question is raised in a recent television special. Very respectable TV journalist Howie Severino aims his lenses and his analysis on the use of the faithful’s contribution to the Church. The video-documentary originally entitled “Banal na Barya” or Holy Money is the first of GMA7’s 6th anniversary month-long series of hard-hitting, investigative documentaries, and was aired on April 4, 2005. The blurb on this episode describes the problem: “Few parishioners ask where their money goes. I-Witness asks the questions for them. From collections at church masses, I-Witness dares to follow the church money trail and learns that while priests are sources of spiritual comfort, they do not always inspire confidence in their financial management. Sometimes, they are accused of - gasp! - stealing. Bishops frequently denounce government corruption and social inequalities. But some priests are starting to look in the church's own backyard and do not like what they see. Several thousand priests surveyed recently said that material extravagance was the number one problem of the church. Sex scandals only came in second.”

Perhaps the more controversial segment in this I-Witness episode is the case of the Archdiocese of Manila who owns commercial buildings, rents out its land to banks, and even runs a hotel -- all of them generating profits, but for the past several years, has refused to pay tax. Howie Severino openly reveals that his source for this observation is Aries Rufo’s article “The Untaxable Church” (Newsbreak October 27, 2004). Rufo exposes many details about the expansion of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Manila (RCAM) commercial properties which, according to government officials should have been paying several millions of local and national taxes.[2] But apparently, the hotel does not even have a proper building permit. For the record, both Bishop Oscar Cruz and Archbishop Gaudencio Rosales admit that some of Church’s commercial properties must be taxed, and that they have been doing that in their own dioceses. But when we look at the trend in print and internet opinions, this will continue to haunt the Church. While church tax may be small compared to that of huge corporations, the stigma of being a “tax evader” certainly weakens the Church’s prophetic role in social transformation.

One obvious conclusion here is that the Church, in its social existence, is also very much part of the problem. According to a familiar columnist, Conrad de Quiros, “There’s a whole history to show that the Church, though part of the solution, is also part of the problem. As with the society itself, the pocket of wealth and opulence at the top is matched by breathtaking deprivation below, a spectacular divide that doesn’t suggest it holds on to values conducive to honesty, or indeed Christianity.”

What does the Church say to this?

The Catholic bishops very well know the ‘evil of corruption’. In 1989, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines condemned it in a pastoral letter appropriately entitled, “Thou shalt not steal!” This was followed in 1997 with CBCP’s comprehensive social treatise called “Pastoral Exhortation on Philippine Politics.” In these and other documents, the bishops decry the foulness of corruption that “plucks food from the mouth of the starving” and “weakens the moral and spiritual fiber of the people.” The Pastoral Letter on Graft and Corruption in 2003, poetically entitled “Let Integrity Flow Like a Stream” continues the same condemnation, but this time with a totally different tone, one which is both confident in its condemnation of corruption as well as repentant of its own collusion to the problem. On its third paragraph, the bishops make a public confession:

“Today we once more point an accusing finger at ourselves. The entire Church in the Philippines is suffering in great anguish as its integrity is raked over the coals with cases as actual or alleged sexual misconduct of some of its shepherds. We are aware, too, that in other areas of Church life as in parish financial management, some Church members and leaders, through loose and dishonest stewardship, stray from the path of righteousness and integrity and we all suffer from the pain when one part of the body of Christ, that is the Church, does wrong.” (CBCP, “Let Integrity Flow like a Stream.” Pastoral Exhortation on Graft and Corruption, 2003)

This confession is matched by empirical data. In 2004, as a response to the sex scandals that hit the Philippine clergy and hierarchy two years previously, the National Congress of the Clergy was convened. Some four thousand priests and bishops gathered together in one roof. It was a very touching and very moving experience of renewal of commitment to the life and mission proper to “men of the Eucharist.” Part of the program was the conduct of a survey on the “Traits and Behaviors Incompatible with Priestly Ministry and Spirituality”. Out of the 2,911 respondents coming from 85 dioceses of the country, 76 were bishops.

On the question of “indecent lifestyles” of the clergy, 1363 or 46% of the respondents identify “material attachment and extravagance” as the number one lifestyle that mars the image of the Filipino clergy today. Such materialism, according to the interpretation of Msgr. Manny Gabriel, breeds “arrogance” and “inconsiderateness,” with no sense of sacrifice” and “discipline.” Far second is sexual relations with women or homosexual liaisons and activities” at 25.9%, third is “habitual recourse to worldly good time” at 10.6%, and fourth is “closeness to the rich and powerful” at 9.1%.

As to the question on the “factors that weaken the Institutional Church,” the results are equally disturbing. The delegates gave a very high 52.2% on “lack of transparency and honesty in the management of Church resources.” This “problem from within” is felt as “more disturbing.” Again, according to the somber reading of Msgr. Gabriel:

“The clergy’s inability to manage the Church resources due to plain and simple dishonesty militates against very basic human and Gospel values. It brings to the fore the Gospel’s battle cry against sin and corruption, the moral imperative of honesty and truthfulness in the presence of the Lord and His people, the demand for responsible stewardship in the governance of the earth’s resources. And in a country where corruption is woven into every fiber of its societal institution, people expect the Church to lead the moral crusade, to witness to responsible governance and pastoral care. Should this Church be found wanting in this transparent, Gospel-inspired stewardship of resources, because the leaders themselves have failed to practice what it preaches, the institutional Church weakens its moral foundation and credible leadership?”[3]

“Clerical intrigues and politics” comes second at 33.3% and “arrogance and abuse of power” third at 13.9%. The survey was conducted by the social research office of the Pontifical University of Santo Tomas, and published as part of the book called History and Grace, also published in 2005 by the University of Santo Tomas Press. The book contains the speeches and the activities as well as the proposals for a renewed clergy for a renewed Church in a renewed Philippine society.


CALL TO SOCIO-SPIRITUAL LIBERATION

I heard that among the many speeches and homilies delivered during the National Congress of the Clergy, probably the most moving was the sharing of Father (now Bishop) Broderick S. Pabillo, who spoke from his experience of being a poor priest living with the poor. One of his paragraphs, I think, can really take us from the sociological observation and statistical computation to spiritual reflection:

“I propose that we seriously examine ourselves: Do I use God to get money, or, do I use money to get towards God? We who so preach to others to share, even to give tithes ... do we also share? Do we tithe ourselves? The early Christian community in Jerusalem had no one in need among them because those who have would sell whatever they have and give them to those who have none (cf. Acts 4:34). Therefore many were added to the number of believers. Their life of sharing was a great factor to this increase. Is this also so among us, even at least among us brothers in the priesthood? I dream of the time that there would be no priest in need because we share with each other. Whether one is in the city or in the provinces, whether one is in a big or a small parish, we all share among us. The gap between the rich and the poor among our people will not be bridged if among us priests, who are configured to Jesus Christ and preach love and sharing, have rich and poor among us.”

Fr. Pabillo is echoing Conrad de Quiros’ indictment of the Church, but Fr. Pabillo transforms the social condition into a prophetic call for conversion. Anyone who wants to be enriched spiritually by listening to an account of ministry to the poor would better read the rest of his sharing. What I notice in Fr. Pabillo’s sharing is that scripture passages seem to naturally bubble from experience and then flow very gently into new insights. The rich young man of Mark suddenly leads to Moses of Exodus. Matthew 6:34 “Tomorrow will take care of itself” blends easily with the anecdote on “may awa ang Diyos” (God will show mercy). The issue of some people being “mukhang pera” (literally ‘money-faced’) becomes a jumping board for understanding the Eucharistic sharing in Acts 4:34.



[1] This lack of transparency within the parish apparently flows from the temporal nature of the Church itself. Bishop Leonardo Y. Medroso, explains: “The Church is not a democratic institution. It is a hierarchical (Cf. Canons 204, §2; 336; 375; 753). In a democratic institution, the power of the official basically emanates from the people and is therefore accountable to the people. In a hierarchical Church, the power of the officials (the clergy) emanate from Christ who entrusted the government of the Church to them in a hierarchical order. In consonance with this order pastors are accountable to their bishops as the bishops are accountable to the Holy See or the Pope. Hence, just as no pastor should allow his parishioners or a ‘self-appointed group’ thereof to dictate that he submits to them the parish financial report, similarly neither the bishop should submit to the priests the diocesan financial report. It is, however, the responsibility of the pastors to submit the parish financial report to the Bishop (Can. 1287, §. 1) as the Bishop in turn has the responsibility to submit to the Supreme Pontiff all matters, including financial, of how he administers them in his diocese (cf. Can. 399).” “Transparency in the Church” Impact: Asian Magazine for Human Transformation. Vol 40: 13-14, 22.

[2] “Church sources disclose that the center has been operating the lodging inn for years and charges commercial rates. BIR officials say the inn, which is a commercial business, is taxable. They explain that tax exemption covers only the income derived from religious, charitable sources. They say that area on which the lodging inn stands should be imposed with realty tax. In 1999, the center opened a five-story, 74-room hotel at the back of its compound. Documents submitted to the BIR showed the center’s gross income for 1999, 2001, and 2002 reached P32 million, P46.24 million, and P44.718 million respectively. The center did not submit its income tax return (ITR) for 2000. For 2003, the center surprisingly declared zero income.” Aries Rufo, “The Untaxable Church” (Newsbreak October 27, 2004). On 17 April 2005, the banner headline of the Philippine Daily Inquirer read “BIR to Church: You’re next.” According to the article, “Church leaders, including priests and ministers, and religious organizations will not be spared in the government campaign against tax cheats.”

[3] More recently, TIME magazine (26 February 2007, pp. 34-35) created quite a stir when it published a disturbing article on what it termed as “Pilfering Priests”. The sinister looking prelate in the illustration is caught with money inserted into the pages of his prayer book. The statistics, however, is more disconcerting. Highlighted in the article is that 85% of the dioceses in one survey reported embezzlement cases; 11% had scandals of $500,000 or more. A number of readers reacted to the presentation, but it is inevitable that this kind of expose will be replicated soon in Philippine media. A casual monitoring of the national papers will reveal that this season has actually started.

.......

Corruption as betrayal of communion

Let me now go back to my main focus, that is the call for internal renewal within the Catholic Church and Philippine society. In this section, I would like to pursue a couple of biblical reflections based on my experience in Ehem! Anticorruption Movement. I would just like to share with you how I “discovered” some Biblical texts that, for me at least, have transformed my political action against corruption into a more pastoral ministry for communion.

When I was reading the account of the institution of the Eucharist in the Gospel of Matthew, it dawned on me that right at the very beginning, during the Last Supper, on the first Maundy Thursday, Jesus became the victim of bribery and extortion, as Judas secretly accepted the thirty pieces of silver paid by the religious authorities. Imagine the pain of Jesus, sharing bread and wine with somebody who will betray him?

I am sure that a trained scripture scholar or a biblical spirituality expert can expound on this angle in more detail and probably more poignantly. But to me, the impact of this vision of that dark night dinner came with the death of a whistleblower, Marlene Esperat of Tacurong, Sultan Kudarat.

Marlene was a chemist who turned journalist. While she was monitoring the Depart of Agriculture, she uncovered many anomalies. Her expose later on became the notorious Php 728 million fertilizer scam. She filed dozens of cases touching on overpricing of farm inputs, spending millions of government funds on ghost irrigation projects, and even smuggling of chicken wings. Marlene was aware that she was threatening powerful people, but she was fearless. All she was thinking of was the injustice that a handful of people were inflicting on the farmers and the government. Her family simply had accepted and respected her crusade for justice.

When Marlene died, her sister knew exactly what Psalm she would use for the paraliturgy---Psalm 17. They requested me to lead the prayer that her sister had prepared. I was astonished at the beauty and power of the song of the righteous person seeking protection from God, and yet ultimately expressing inner joy if in the end she can simply “behold your face in righteousness; I will be satisfied with your likeness when I awake.”

“Hear a just cause, O LORD, give heed to my cry;
Give ear to my prayer, which is not from deceitful lips…
Keep me as the apple of the eye;
Hide me in the shadow of Your wings

From the wicked who despoil me,
my deadly enemies who surround me…

They have now surrounded us in our steps;
they set their eyes to cast us down to the ground.
He is like a lion that is eager to tear,
And as a young lion lurking in hiding places.
Arise, O LORD, confront him, bring him low;
Deliver my soul from the wicked with your sword…
As for me, I shall behold your face in righteousness;
I will be satisfied with your likeness when I awake.”

Corruption is violence. Corruption kills. But what the Eucharistic passages in the Gospel seem to imply is that corruption, moreover, is a betrayal of trust, of divine trust. The person of integrity, however, clings to the friendship with truth---and therefore with God---even at the risk of one’s life.

Thank God, not all whistleblowers get killed, although they continue to be persecuted through harassment and continuous death threat. Ruben M. Manatad understands this perfectly well. He exposed the “rice-for-sawdust scam” in the National Food Authority, where somebody replaced four tracks of rice with sawdust, and threatened him when he refused to sign the delivery receipt. His continuing struggle has inspired him to write his own psalm, “A whistleblower’s prayer”:

“Dear God, please make me strong
In the midst of threats and enticements.
Powerful people are determined to break my will
and compel me to retract my statements.
If they fail, they will see to it that my reputation
is tarnished and my credibility demolished.
I am emotionally burdened.
People close to me may be involved in this wrongdoing.
I just exposed an anomaly that is detrimental to the nation.
But I am prepared to face the consequences of my action.
Please shield me against ill motives and retaliation.
My belief is powerful. My faith is formidable.
I cannot forsake Young people whom I am sworn
to serve faithfully. Help me. Amen.” [1]


Communion as liberation from corruption

During one of our Ehem! seminars for the regional office of the Land Transportation Office, I had a clearer hint on what Jesus did when he visited Zacchaeus, the notorious tax collector. The regional head had several corruption cases filed against him. But he still arranged the seminar. He invited the group to dinner in his house. Nobody came, except my brother Jesuit scholastic and myself. The amount of food indicated that he was expecting a lot of visitors. Apparently, people did not want to be seen dining with him because of his alleged anomalies. I don’t remember what happened next, but he admitted to having those cases looming over his head and promised to be better public servant.

I think there is need for pastoral care for those who have been involved in corrupt activities but are now, like Zacchaeus, craning their neck, as it were, to get a glimpse of Jesus. Jesus knew what was going on in Zacchaeus heart, and out of his wisdom and compassion, Jesus used the very human sacrament of dining together, as an approach to conversion. Zacchaeus burst into liberation from his attachment to his ill-gotten wealth that he promised to return more than what the law could have demanded on him to pay. Jesus declared after the meal, “Today, salvation has come to this house” (Luke 19:1-10).[2]

Secretly, a number of people come to me saying, “Father, I am not really a bad guy. It’s just that I was not strong enough to overcome the pressure of the office. I cannot go on with this admittedly corrupt behavior, but I am afraid of the consequences if I expose myself to the law.” I had another case of surprise revelation. I was walking in the Ateneo de Manila campus. A car stopped by me. The window opened and I heard a voice. “Excuse me, are you Father Alejo? Are you the one who gives Ehem seminars? Father, you should talk to me. I am attorney so and so, graduate of Ateneo Law School, and I’m corrupt. Right now, I have a murder case and it has just been dismissed, because we bought the judge. When you have time, let’s have dinner or coffee. I will gather a few others, and we will tell you how things are done.”

I wonder if can muster the courage and the creativity, like Jesus had, to explore talking with the alumni of our schools or parishioners of our churches, at that moment when they are at the brink of conversion. I suggested this to some sisters who were running good schools, but who they admit had alumni who have become corrupt. Why don’t you visit them? I said. “Nakakahiya!” (It’s shameful!) they answered. Why do we feel awkward approaching our alumni in their homes to remind them of the values that our schools stood for? And yet we are not ashamed of asking money for contributions back to the school? Come to think of it, Jesus, in the Zacchaeus liberation story, is probably teaching us a pastoral approach to societal change---and again, through the Eucharistic meal!

AN URGENT ADVOCACY

As the Church begins the all-important surgical self-criticism, there are positive signs that can give us energy to proceed with this “urgent advocacy.” In its most recent survey on corruption, the Social Weather Station included, for the first time, the category “local church leaders”.[3] The result is that local church leaders got the highest rating for sincerity in fighting corruption, scoring higher than the Supreme Court and Social Security System. This is not conclusive but it certainly signals both hope and responsibility. Hope in that many people still trust the Church as an important actor in social transformation. This also implies a great responsibility to go beyond being part of the problem to being part of the solution.

Some Church groups have actually been involved in the punitive as well as preventive aspects of anticorruption work. Bishop Dinualdo Gutierrez enumerated some of these initiatives during our participation in the symposium “The Fight against Corruption” convened by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace in the middle of 2006. The National Secretariat for Social Action for example has grass roots level lifestyle check and Internal Revenue Allocation (IRA) Watch Campaign. Along with the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC), the Office of the Ombudsman and civil society groups, NASSA signed a memorandum of understanding committing itself and the dioceses under the social action network to the campaign for good governance. Many devout Christians are in government and private agencies, trying to introduce reforms form within their sectors.

A seriously felt need is to root this political and governmental work onto a more solid spiritual foundation. The DILAAB movement, developed from Cebu, is a great move to fill this need. Dilaab, which literally means ‘flame’ or ‘on fire’ in Visayan, is a moral-spiritual renewal movement harnessing faith, igniting spaces of hope, and channeling the energies of love for a transformed Filipino nation through heroic Christian citizenship; Christ-centered leadership; and Christian (or God-centered) advocacy work.

Ehem! Movement starts from a cultural analysis of the endemic nature of corruption and offers a spirituality of integrity as it networks primarily with government, church and school action and energy centers.

Fighting corruption and working for good governance is emerging now as a top priority in our renewed social ministry of the Church. This issue, however, gains more urgency and sensitivity when we consider Mindanao. Studies have shown that controlling corruption in post-conflict countries usually looks like fighting another war. If these funds do not land on the proper beneficiary communities, then we may have to face another war. We know even now that corruption breeds violence. When a court cannot give justice to a person’s cause, then he might take the law into his hands. When clan conflicts are settled using public funds as blood money, then we realize that preventing corruption is actually working for peace and development.

What remains as a gaping lacuna is the articulation of the political and economic reforms to the sphere of spirituality that looks at the basic integrity and morality of every individual as a member of the political and economic systems. As the World Bank (2000) exhorts, there is a need for a spiritual and ethical-based initiatives to complement the political and economic reforms. Perhaps the turn to Eucharistic spirituality may prove enriching and enlivening, especially when we start (and rightly so) with the reform of our own personal and communal lives as Christians.

The National Congress of the Clergy is correct in focusing on the renewal of the clergy from the very beginning of formation of seminarians. Perhaps a corresponding articulation of the Eucharistic spirituality of integrity should also be developed among the laity whose divine mission is precisely to evangelize the secular sphere. Our discerned strategic response is to build up women and men of integrity, equipped with appropriate expertise and solid spirituality in the moral use of power and in the technical requirements of achieving good governance, both in public and private sectors, but also in the Church institutions. Fr. Louie Hechanova, however, insists that this strategy must go beyond personal conversion; it has to become a movement! “Unfortunately,” Fr. Hechanova sighs, “most of our religious movements are geared towards the conversion of individuals who have to go back into the same environment of corruption. What we need is a religious movement led by concerned lay people that would help reform an entire office or work group in such a way that honesty and transparency become the normal practice in their work environment and where there is a mechanism for enforcing these practices or penalizing violators” (Hechanova 2001, 86-87)

All this goes back to the call of the Synod of Bishops to live the spirit of sharing one bread, and to make sure that others, too, have some thing to eat, have peace of mind, and freedom from manipulation and deceit, as well enjoying good governance.

If we recall the Eucharistic miracle at Cana, Jesus, upon the urging of his Mother, transformed the scarcity of spirits into the celebration of abundance. (John 2, 1-11). Who knows, the Lord might come to the aid of our exasperated people, and offer us at least a taste of being a transformed community?



[1] Mr. Ruben M. Manatad’s prayer is later printed in the Aha! A Citizen’s Primer on Whistleblowing. Davao City: Ehem! Aha! Technical Working Group, Office of the Ombudsman and the Philippine Province of the Society of Jesus (2006).

[2] Interestingly, Zacchaeus’ name apparently comes from the Hebrew Zakkai, meaning “clean” or “innocent” or “just.” Thus Zacchaeus can mean “just man.” He was chief tax collector. He was an administrator who bid for and organized the collection and took a cut from the labor of his underlings. His wealth is probably related to his job and comes from the commission that such officials took from collecting taxes. (Personal communication with Fr. Manol Montesclaros, SJ.)

[3] “The managers give Local Church Leaders the highest rating for sincerity in fighting corruption: Net +71, which the study classifies as Very Good (over +50). Their ratings of the Supreme Court and the Social Security System are classified as Good (+31 to +50 range). Considered Moderate (+11 to +30 range) are: the Department of Health, the City/Municipal Government, and the Sandiganbayan or anti-graft court. Rated Mediocre (-11 to +11 range, indistinguishable from zero) are: Trial Courts, COA, the Ombudsman, the Government Service Insurance System, the Department of Education, and DBM. The negative categories are Poor (-11 to –30 range): PCGG, the Office of the President, the Senate, the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission, AFP, DOJ, Department of Transportation and Communications, and the Department of Agriculture; Bad (-31 to –50 range): DILG, PNP, LTO, DENR, the House of Representatives; and Very Bad (below –50): BIR, Commission on Elections, DPWH, and Bureau of Customs. The SSS (Net +38), GSIS (+5), DOTC (-22), DA (-24), Comelec (-59), and Local Church Leaders (+71) were included in the sincerity ratings for the first time in 2006.” The 2006 SWS Survey of Enterprises on Corruption: Mostly Good News On The Business Sector, Bad News About Government (6 July 2006).