March 25, 2011 Pro-life Rally

Although the issue about the RH-Bill has temporarily subsided, in the past, there were lots of surveys and claims that most Filipinos wants the RH-Bill passed, and it is only the Catholic Church who opposses it out of many reasons that they could think off.

However, the Pro-life rally that that was held in March 2011, says otherwise.  

The people who attened this rally came, NOT because they expect something in return, but they came to express what they believe, and to make a stand against a bill which we think is anti-life and family.

To Jesus through Mary

Jov of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, OCDS

Prolife and Anti RH Bill Advocates won another TV Debate

Last night the Anti RH-Bill and Pro-lifers have again won another Televised  debate which was aired by TV5 'Kapatid' Network  in Hamon sa Pagbabago: RH-Bill, hosted by Atty. dong Puno and Luchie Cruz-Valdez and was uploaded in you-tube by Pinoy-ako.

The participants of the debate were divided in three groups: Pros, Antis and the undecided.

Although the pro RH People always claim that majority of the Catholic People wants the RH- Bill based on purported surveys, the result of the televised debate however, was different and went against them, since the previous undecided group have voted 100% against it after hearing the answers in all the presented questions and arguments.

 Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

The Pope and the College of Bishops - a reaction on Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago's Speech on The Reproductive Health Act

What generally caught my attention regarding the co-sponsorship speech that Sen. Miriam Santiago gave just recently (August 1, 2011) on the Reproductive Health Act which is currently scheduled for deliberation(?) at the Philippine Senate were the following:

"... The central issue of Vatican 2 was authority.  Before Vatican 2, the typical Catholic accepted the authoritarian structure of the Church “as a dictate of divine revelation.”[2] My generation were still children at that time.  We were taught that the Pope was a kind of superhuman potentate, whose every word was a command coming from a supernatural authority.  I recall that the autocratic procedures of the Church were positively medieval.

"But with Vatican 2, the seeds of a democratic revolution were sown.  It emphasized that the Church is primarily the whole people of God.  It called for dialogue between all members of the Church.  It asserted that the Pope and bishops are collegial.  And it called for the establishment of senates among the priests and of pastoral councils that include the laity ..."

Although I must admit that her speech would definitely be very attractive to most "typical Catholics" specially for those who keeps on insisting that they can remain Catholic while supporting a Bill which has already been denounced by our Bishops' conference, the speech already can speak for itself,  that its very contents were very carefully written, but very obviously "selective" in its entirety.

The writer simply presented the arguments in such a way that when read upon, it would seem that Vatican II have "purportedly" redefined the Catholic Church's Hierarchical authority, by making the chair of Peter co-equal with the college of Bishops, when in reality it never did. 

Since from the looks of it,  the writer had an amnesia and have totally forgotten to express what "Lumen Gentium", one of the document that came out of the Second Vatican Council really means when it comes to the Church's Hierarchy and Authority, allow me to humbly opine on the matter to the best of my limited knowledge.

The following statement which I found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) which can also be found in the Code of Canon Law (CAN), I believe, is what Sen Santiago were referring to:

     884 "The college of bishops exercises power over the universal Church in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council."[Canon 337]..." 

However, if this is indeed the statement that she was referring too, they have missed the continuing statement which says that 

"there never is an ecumenical council which is not confirmed or at least recognized as such by Peter's successor."[LG 22]'

When we simply read a specific part of the Catechism and deliberately disregard the other statements attached to it, it would simply mean that you we are ignoring the simple Truth.

So what is the Truth? Lets read CCC from 880 to 884 and see for our selves how  it Explains what "Lumen Gentium" expresses in regards to "Authority" which according to Sen Santiago, was the "Central Issue" of the Second Vatican Council.

880 'When Christ instituted the Twelve, " he constituted them in the form of college or permanent assembly, at the head of which is placed Peter, chosen among them" [LG 19] Just as "by the Lord's institution, St. Peter and the rest of the apostles constitute a single apostolic college, so in the like fashion the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, and the bishops, the successor of the apostles, are related with and united to one another."[LG 22]' (Emphasis mine)

881 " The Lord made Simon alone, whom He named Peter, the "rock" of his Church. He gave him the keys of his Church and instituted him shepherd of the whole flock. "The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of apostles united to its head."[LG 22] This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the Church's very foundation and is continued by the bishops under the primacy of the Pope." (Emphasis mine)

882 'The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful."[LG 23] "For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered."[LG 22]'(emphasis mine)

883 '"The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, as its head." As such, this college has "supreme and full authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff."[LG 22]' (Emphasis mine)

884 '"The college of bishops exercises power over the universal Church in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council."[Canon 337] But "there never is an ecumenical council which is not confirmed or at least recognized as such by Peter's successor."[LG 22]'

Moving out from the CCC, lets now refer to the Code of Canon Law,  CAN 337 also states that "The college of bishops exercises power [over] the universal Church in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council.." as used in the CCC, it is worth noting that CAN 337 also has the following statements when read in full:

 "§2. It exercises the same power through the united action of the bishops dispersed in the world, which the Roman Pontiff has publicly declared or freely accepted as such so that it becomes a true collegial act." (Emphasis mine)

 "§3. It is for the Roman Pontiff, according to the needs of the Church, to select and promote the ways by which the college of bishops is to exercise its function collegially regarding the universal Church." (Emphasis mine)

Also in  CAN 338 

  

"§2. It is for the Roman Pontiff to determine the matters to be treated in a council and establish the order to be observed in a council. To the questions proposed by the Roman Pontiff, the council fathers can add others which are to be approved by the Roman Pontiff." (Emphasis mine)

and lastly in CAN 341 

 "§1. The decrees of an ecumenical council do not have obligatory force unless they have been approved by the Roman Pontiff together with the council fathers, confirmed by him, and promulgated at his order." (Emphasis mine)

In summary, what are the facts and the Truth in regards to the Church's Hierarchal Structure and Authority? Was it really change by Vatican 2?

I believe the document can speak for itself, it remains that the Supreme Authority in the Catholic Church is the Roman Pontiff. [LG 22, LG 23]; and although the College of Bishops can Exercise the same power (as the Roman Pontiff) when acting as an Ecumenical Council, "this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff, "[Lg 22] which just happen to be the one that Catholics often referred to as the Pope. (I guess we're still in the medieval age.)

The following cited explanations are very important when it comes to understanding what Vatican II was all about and in truly understanding what Humana Vitae is, which I will try to cover in my succeeding blogs.

References:

Catechism of the Catholic Church Second Edition on-line - Retrieved on Aug 18, 2011- http://old.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt3art9p4.shtml

Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, "Lumen Gentium" on-line. Retrieved on Aug 18, 2011 - http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

Code of Canon Law on-line. Retrived on Aug. 18, 2011 - http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P17.HTM

The reproductive Health Act, part 1: The Primacy of Conscience in Catholic Theology. Retrived on Aug 18, 2011 - http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/?p=388

Presenting PRI's POP 101 series, A four (4) part short videos  that takes a fresh, humorous approach to the demographic issues facing the world today. 

The Population Research Institute (PRI) is a non-profit research group whose goals are to expose the myth of overpopulation, to expose human rights abuses committed in population control programs, and to make the case that people are the world’s greatest resource.With a growing, global network of pro-life groups that spans over 30 countries. (Source)

For more information you can visit their website at : (http://www.pop.org)

Part 1

Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth

 Part 2

2.1 Kids: Stable Population 

 Part 3

Food: There's Lots Of It

 Part 4

Poverty: Where We All Started

 

 

 

Full Episode of "RH-Bill: The Grand Debate" (GMA News and Public Affairs)

The following videos is the full episode of "RH-Bill: The Grand Debate" Produced by GMA News and Public Affairs, Hosted by: Ms. Mel Tiangco.

Videos can be found at "The official YouTube Channel of GMA News and Public Affairs." -  [Click here]

Part 1 of 8

 

Part 2 of 8

 

 Part 3 of 8

Part 4 of 8

Part 5 of 8

Part 6 of 8

 

 Part 7 of 8

 

Part 8 of 8

On RH Bill

For the very first time in my life I have to beg for your indulgence for the words that I will be writing afterwards, and also for the very first time I also need to rate one of my post and start with a WARNING!

"Be warned that the following text that you will be reading is rated PG"

Now for the brass tack.

I grew up without my father besides me, and the only one that gave me advise during my teenage years was my mother.

During my time of puberty, I remember my mother always telling me, not to be too obsessive on my impulse and to do my best to make sure that before I decide to do delve on them, I'm already in the right state of mind to support and raise a family. 

Because only in that way could I ever repay her of debts in raising me, is when I have raised a family of my own that I could support.

(Might as well repeat my warning before I continue)

WARNING! RATED PG!

Thus, during my teenage time to make my words more precise on my topic, the tag line is this.

"Think twice before you engage in sex!"

With the advancement of technology and the promotion of contraceptives in the present time, the tag line has eventually changed.

"Think twice before you engage in sex! At least protect yourself and buy a "condom".

When the RH Bill is passed and approved by congress, again the tag line will definitely change, this time...

"you no longer have to think twice, you not even need buy a condom. 

Just go to the nearest health center, for the government has already bought some for you. 

If they refuse, report them to the nearest office of the proponent of the RH Bill and file the necessary charges, and then you can have your condom and have sex anytime you want!"

I will no longer ask why, if most teenagers would say that it is right to pass the RH Bill.

So saddening that when most rich countries are now having problems in regards to their age population gap, some congressman would still want to pursue a course that most probably,  most rich countries are now regretting to have even entered with.

Just imagine creating a law that would force the Government to buy contraceptives that is to be given for free even to minors without the necessary parental consent, so long that they asked for it, and worst of all including within the same law a resulting punishment of jail time to any health workers who refuses to do so.

What kind of people are we electing in government positions now a days?

And yet we ask and blame our Government, why our country is in this kind of situation?

Why not start first at home, and start looking in front of a mirror? And this time be honest and start asking and blaming yourself instead...

Congressional Debate on RH-Bill

Videos below were taken during the Congressional Hearing of  the Reproductive Health Bill (RH-Bill) at the House of Representatives, uploaded by veritasdipolog on youtube.

On the floor were Hon. Rep. Roilo Golez representing the anti RH-Bill and Hon. Rep.  Edcel Lagman for the pro RH-Bill.

Eventually, Representative Edcel Lagman was surprise when Congressman Roilo Golez ask the following question " ... who among them should not have been born..." while presenting a picture of happy young children possing in front of a still camera.

Congressman Lagman, surprised with the question simply said, "... I will not give an answer..." ( Filipino and English Languages were used during the debate)

I have already mentioned this words in the anti RH-Bill Group of ours in facebook.  Might as well repeat it here.

"... That's precisely the problem with numbers, for it can only represent facts, but never the intention of the person/s who uses them.

But even if it is represented as facts, it can can also be manipulated, for they are numbers.

This is the problem when using numbers to represent reality. For it can be true in one of its side but false on the other.

In my point of view, there is nothing wrong when the intension is to manage population. But the moment management ask for a complete control that requires manipulation and misrepresentation its a different matter.

I'm opposing the RH-Bill not because I don't believe in population management. But I oppose it because within its provision are hidden agenda[s] that not only points to population management."

Hon. Congresman Roilo Golez was right, it is indeed easier to represent people using numbers but very hard to justify when reality seeks in.

Yours in Christ Jesus,

Jov of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, OCDS

‘Unchristian’ Arrest

Commentaries on the Article: Manila tour guide booked for 'offending religious feelings'

By Nestor Etolle (The Philippine Star)

... on the Honorable Congressman Edcel Laman's comments on the above mentioned article

... the filing of charges against Celdran “smacks of intolerance and unchristian conduct by the Catholic hierarchy.”

It is stretching too far the Church’s opposition to the Reproductive Health bill because the ejection of Celdran from the Manila Cathedral premises was sufficient and his incarceration at the time when prosecutory and judicial offices were closed was unnecessary and unwarranted,” - Hon. Edcel Lagman

Comment #1 - Just wondering what would they have done if someone from a pro-life group  starts barging into the house of representative's session hall while they are deliberating a "very important bill" such as the RH Bill.

... Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code on “offending the religious feelings” is “an archaic and colonial vestige.” - Hon. Edcel Lagman

Comment #2  -  The Hon. Gentleman is a lawmaker, he should know better what a law and adherence to the law means. If the Good Congressman really believes that Article  133 of the revised penal code "is an archaic and colonial vestige", as a lawmaker what does he intend to do about it?

“Celdran’s display of a placard on which was written the name ‘DAMASO’ is an apt reminder to Church officials of the abuses and inequities of the clergy during the Spanish colonial regime when the Church wantonly interfered in secular activities and dictated on civilian authorities,” - Hon. Edcel Lagman

“The message of Celdran is that ‘Father Damasos’ have survived the Spanish era and continue to bedevil government up to today,” - Hon. Edcel Lagman

Comment #3 -  as I have said in my previous post, if Mr. Celdran has done it outside of the Cathedral, the Church Hierarchy would simply have just disregarded it, or who knows, might have even listened to him.  But as the Clergy of the Arch Diocese of Manila has pointed out

“These actions cannot by any means be considered within the purview of freedom of expression. Instead they were malicious acts directed towards a faith, a religion that was represented by its leaders and the faithful gathered. It was desecrating a consecrated place, as every Catholic Church or chapel is consecrated by sacred rites” ...

“His right to protest in this manner ended after he entered the doors of the Manila Cathedral..."

To accuse the Filipino Catholic Clergy of abusing their authority simply because they are showing an opposition to a Bill that falls to what has been declared "illicit" since 1968 by an encyclical letter of Pope Paul VI is not even justifiable.

For the stand of the CBCP is not a stand that only the Local Conference of Bishops  has made, but was made from a stand point promulgated by the Vicar of Christ in the 60s and upheld by his successors.

In the words of one wikipedia writer on the topic Humanae Vitae

"18. It is to be anticipated that perhaps not everyone will easily accept this particular teaching.

There is too much clamorous outcry against the voice of the Church, and this is intensified by modern means of communication.

But it comes as no surprise to the Church that she, no less than her divine Founder, is destined to be a "sign of contradiction." ^[23] She does not, because of this, evade the duty imposed on her of proclaiming humbly but firmly the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical.
Since the Church did not make either of these laws, she cannot be their arbiter—only their guardian and interpreter. It could never be right for her to declare lawful what is in fact unlawful, since that, by its very nature, is always opposed to the true good of man.

In preserving intact the whole moral law of marriage, the Church is convinced that she is contributing to the creation of a truly human civilization. She urges man not to betray his personal responsibilities by putting all his faith in technical expedients.

In this way she defends the dignity of husband and wife. This course of action shows that the Church, loyal to the example and teaching of the divine Savior, is sincere and unselfish in her regard for men whom she strives to help even now during this earthly pilgrimage "to share God's life as sons of the living God, the Father of all men."

"...what was true yesterday is true also today." - Words of Pope Benedict XVI on May 12, 2008,  when he accepted an invitation to talk to participants in the International Congress organized by the Pontifical Lateran University on the 40th anniversary of Humanae Vitae.

If the Filipino Catholic Clergy in making a firm stand to a duty that was imposed to them by an encyclical promulgated by a Vicar of Christ is bedeviling a government, I don't think I will be able to make a distinction between good and evil anymore.

“The protest of Celdran is even of a lesser degree than the clergy’s using the pulpit to repeatedly lambast and defame RH advocates in lieu of a homily on the gospel for the day, which malicious tirades also offend the religious feelings of the faithful who go to Church to participate in a solemn Mass,”...

Comment #4 -  If the Honorable Congressman is not a Catholic I will understand why he would say these words.  But if he is a Catholic, he should know that the Homily is just a part of the Liturgy of the Word that can be used by the Clergy to convey a pastoral message/s issued by their Local Ordinaries and can also be used to address local social issues and concerns.

As an example, before the Presidential election of this year took place, some members of the clergy also used their homilies to inform the public of not voting for known corrupt officials, can this be considered to be lambasting and defaming corrupt officials?


Secondly, if telling the truth and the reasons why the Universal Church Opposes the Reproductive Health Bill can now be considered lambasting and defaming, I no longer know what these two words means...

" To be a member of the Catholic Church is easy, it's becoming one that makes it difficult"

Maybe our Parish Priest was right when he said "... the Spaniards were successful in converting us into Christianity, but has failed in evangelizing most of us..."


- Jov of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, OCDS


Related Links:

• Celdran's "Damaso Law"
• The Catholic Church's Interference in Politics 
• Are you a Prcticing Catholic?"

Celdran's "Damaso Law"

Last night as I was browsing the web, I happened to had received a forwarded text message from our OCDS Community President.

The message was originally sent by Bishop Rolando Trias Tirona, OCD, Prelate of Infanta Quezon to OCDS Philippines President Celia Timbol, which she forwarded to our Community President Ampy Zerudo, and then forwarded to all our community members which includes me (that's technology at work).

The message is centered to all members of the Secular Order of Discaled Carmelites (OCDS).  Calling us to react on some commentaries and news reports that tends to attack the Bishops of the Catholic Church for filling charges  against Mr. Carlos Celdran, as a response to his action of  disturbing the celebration of an ecumenical celebration last Thursday, September 30, at the Manila Cathedral, in violation of Article 133 of the revised penal code  . 

I haven't really gave much attention to this matter when it was reported last week since, since I never had a glimpse of what really did happen then.

But last night, after having received and read the forwarded message and doing some research on the matter, and reading an article in Philippine Star, where reactions from Hon. Edcel Lagman, comments by Mr. Carlos Celdran and an excerpt of the statement of the Catholic Clergy can be found.  I know within my self that I have to make my comments on the matter.

But before anything else a brief on the importance of the Holy Mass.

The Holy Mass

I cannot find a better way of describing what the Holy Mass means to the Catholic Church and the kind of feeling that I'm having at this moment oher than what Atty. Jose Sison wrote in his column A Law each day, that can also be found on the Philstar on-line edition.

In paragraph two, he wrote

'For Catholics “the Mass is the center of the Church. Nothing can compare to the Mass because it is the renewal of the Sacrifice on the Cross where Christ offers Himself up for all humanity. It is the moment when heaven and earth unite” Disrupting the Mass is therefore the most offensive act against the feelings of Catholic faithful'. - Atty. Jose C. Sison

Eventually the words that Atty. Sison used summarized the description of the Holy Mass as written in Article three of the Catechism of the Catholic Church  (CCC 1324 to 1327).

(I have already written a blog before on the importance of the Holy Mass, you can find it here)



My Commentaries:

‘Damaso’ law

Celdran, for his part, called Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code a “Damaso law.”

He said the law “is very alarming because of its power to curtail the people’s freedom of speech and put him in jail.”

“I couldn’t imagine the Catholic Church sending somebody to prison,” Celdran said.

- excerpt  from the article of Mr. Netor Etolle "Manila tour guide booked for 'offending religious feelings'". posted on Philippine Star on-line

• Comment # 1 - If Mr. Carlos Celdran has done his protest outside of the Church during the Celebration, the Catholic Church Hierarchy would have simply let it go.  
• Comment # 2 - When Mr. Celdran entered the Church and disrupted the Celebration, what he has offended was not only the Church as a whole as represented by the Cardinal, Papal Nuncio and the other Bishops, but "The King"  present in the Sacrifice of the Altar.
• Comment # 3 - The Manila Cathedral is the home of His Eminence Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, a member of the Papal Household.  Since the Cardinal was also present during the celebration, Celdran has not only offended Cardinal Rosales but the entire Papal Household whom the Cardinal belongs.
• Comment # 4 - Mr. Celdran was not charged because the Church Hierarchy wants to curtail  his freedom. As I have mentioned in Comment #1, if he has done it in front of the Cathedral, by all means he can always express it in anyway he wants. Mr. Celdran is not being charge for expressing his freedom, he is being charge because of his action of disturbing a "Sacred Celebration".

"His act (Mr. Celdran) can never be justified by his deep resentment against the prelates who oppose the RH bill. It is willfully, willingly and feloniously done during a rite most sacred to Catholics and therefore punishable under the RPC. Muslims and Buddhists would also feel offended if such disruption was committed against them. There is no reason why disruption of a Catholic ritual should be treated differently." - Atty. Jose Sison in his article "Reprehensible"

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

“The Catholic priests are always using their abusive powers to meddle in government affairs, now on our population control,” Celdran said.

He said Catholic priests had been using the issue to “hostage” the country’s leaders.

“They held hostage the mother and now the son, President Noynoy because of his support for the Reproductive Health Bill and artificial methods of birth control. They had held hostages all other presidents of this country to follow their policies,” said Celdran.

He said the bishops had been offended by his comparing them to Damaso. 

“That’s why I am now in jail,” he said. - excerpt  from the article of Mr. Netor Etolle "Manila tour guide booked for 'offending religious feelings'". posted on Philippine Star on-line

• Comment # 1 - The Catholic Church's stand "on the Regulation of Birth" has been the same from the time of Pope Paul VI's Encyclical Letter " Humae Vitae".  Which was promulgated on the 25th day of July, 1968. It Contains the "Magesterium's" answer to the question of Regulating Birth.
• Comment # 2 - The Church does not have the power to interfere regarding political affairs. If this is true, I doubt if abortion, death penalty and the like  would have been legalized in other countries, including the Philippines in regards to death penalty.
• Comment # 3 -  The Catholic Church cannot held hostage any leaders of this country, it never did. What the Church leader simply does is to remind our political leaders of their responsibility. If the involve person decides to change his/her position regarding matters of morality, it is a decision that the leader has made not by the Church.
• Comment # 4 -  Mr. Celdran was was not jailed because the Bishops were offended when he called them "Damaso".  He was jailed because he broke the law.

2. In another article that I have read that was  posted at GMA news.tv , Mr. Celdran had said that 

"I'm a born Catholic and it hasn't been taken away from me yet...I'm going to try and practice the Catholic trait of turning the other cheek"

• Comment # 1 - It will take more than turning the other cheek to prove of ones commitment to the Catholic Faith... there is a great difference in being "a born Catholic" and a "True Catholic".
• Comment # 2 -  Martin Luther was excommunicated for posting a "letter of protest " in a cathedral.  Whether Mr. Celdran suffers the same faith is a matter of debate for the Bishops.

Well, time really flies fast. In my next blog, I will be commenting on the words of Hon. Edcel Lagman from the same column in Philippine Star.  Till then, to Jesus through Mary.

- Jov of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, OCDS


Related Links:

• The Catholic Church's Interference in Politics 
• "Unchristian Arrest"
  
• Are you a Practicing Catholic?"