Primer on the Year of Faith and the New Evangelization

(Last of a series)

27. Who is the Center of our proclamation?

What we proclaim is not a revealed book nor an ideology, not a doctrine nor a social cause, not some great human value nor an idea. The center of our proclamation is “before all else a person with the face and name of Jesus of Nazareth, the image of the invisible God” [John Paul II, Redemptoris Missio, 1990, no. 18; cf. CFC, nos. 216-17, 220-22, 464]. He is our Lord and our Savior. Through his passion, death, and resurrection – the Paschal Mystery – he saved us from sin. This is why the Cross is the symbol of our faith.

Unfortunately aggressive secularism ignores our faith in Jesus and puts it aside to the margins of public life, or even rejects the faith. That is why we have to tell the story of Jesus, proclaim him as the Lord and Savior. We have to “Live Christ, Share Christ.” [CBCP Pastoral Exhortation on the Era of New Evangelization, “Live Christ, Share Christ, July 23, 2012].

   

28. How should we proclaim our faith?

We proclaim our faith in many ways. We tell and teach others about our faith. Parents are the first teachers of the faith for their children. By teaching their children who God is, how to pray to God, what his commandments are, parents share their faith with them. Besides cooperating with God in giving and nourishing the physical life of their children, they also give and nourish their life of faith. We share our faith with others by providing material and moral support to those whose main task is to preach and teach the faith such as priests, religious, catechists, missionaries and other collaborators in the Church’s mission. But most of all we proclaim and share our faith with others by our life, by our witness of a good Christian life. In the Acts of the Apostles [Acts 2:42-47] many were daily attracted to the new faith by the faithful Christian life of the early followers of Christ. Ordinary day to day fidelity to the Lord’s law of love – ordinary holiness – is the most eloquent proclamation of our faith.

29. What kind of new evangelizers should we be?

In the words of Pope Benedict XVI, new evangelizers have to be: persons who have mature faith “because they have encountered Jesus Christ, who has become the fundamental reference of their life; persons who know Him because they love Him and they love Him because they have known Him; persons capable of giving solid and credible reasons of life.” [Papal Address to the 64^th General Assembly of the Italian Episcopal Conference, May 24, 2012].

30. Who are our models of faith?

In the first place is our Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God and our Mother, the Woman of Faith, always obedient to the will of the Father and the constant faithful disciple of Jesus her Son [See CFC, nos. 155-59]. Despite not fully understanding the profound mysteries of the Incarnation and the Paschal Mystery, she gave her obedience of faith to God. The “cloud of witnesses” of the faith is the multitude of Saints in heaven. Among them are recent men and women of holiness such as Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta, Blessed John Paul II, Padre Pio, our own San Lorenzo Ruiz and Blessed Pedro Calungsod.

31. What does the canonization of Blessed Pedro Calungsod mean for us?

Pope Benedict XVI will declare Blessed Pedro Calungsod as Saint in Rome on October 21, 2012 and will add yet another Filipino to our models of faith. Like San Lorenzo Ruiz, San Pedro Calungsod is a lay martyr who gave up his life in an ultimate witness of his faith in the Lord Jesus. As a young catechist he was a teacher of the faith. He is a model for all Filipinos, especially for our Filipino youth, to be faithful to Jesus with love and courage till death.

32. What event does the Year of Faith and the canonization recall to Filipinos?

San Pedro Calungsod was a Visayan youth martyred in far away Guam 151 years after the Spaniards first brought the Christian faith to people in the Visayas. The first Holy Mass was celebrated on the island of Limasawa on March 31, 1521. San Pedro Calungsod is canonized in the Year of Faith which is only nine years away from the 500^th anniversary of the faith of Filipino Christians. For this reason on the day of San Pedro Calungsod’s canonization on October 21, the Church in the Philippines “will embark on a nine year spiritual journey that will culminate with the great jubilee of 2021. It is a grace-filled event of blessings for the Church starting October 21, 2012 until March 16, 2021” [CBCP Pastoral Exhortation on the Era of New Evangelization, 2012].

33. How shall we prepare for this great event - the 500^th anniversary of our Filipino

      faith?

The Catholic Bishops of the Philippines exhorted us to prepare for the 5^th centenary of our Christian faith in the Philippines with a nine year “Era of New Evangelization.” The opening of the Year of Faith and the canonization of San Pedro Calungsod take place during the XIII Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Rome, October 7 to 28, 2012. The Synod of Bishops explores the theme of New Evangelization. In view of the weaknesses of our faith and the negative influences of secularism on our Filipino culture, a New Evangelization is necessary in the Philippines. In fact 21 years ago PCP-II already envisioned a “new evangelization” or “renewed integral evangelization” for the Philippines [see Message of the Council to the People of God in the Philippines, in PCP-II Acts and Decrees, 1991, p. xcviii; see esp. nos. 186 – 201].

34. What is the New Evangelization?

The term New Evangelization “designates pastoral outreach to those who no longer practice the Christian faith” [Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization, December 3, 2007, 12], a situation which is due to the secular and materialist spirit. Pope Benedict XVI said that this new cultural situation has signs of excluding God from peoples’ lives and tries to marginalize the faith from public life (Benedict the XVI, Address to the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, May 30, 2011). We have already noted that our faith has to be renewed. Our culture is now very much influenced by the secular and materialist spirit. Therefore, a New Evangelization is necessary, “new in its ardor, methods and expressions” [Pope John Paul II, Discourse to XIX Assembly of CELAM, Post au Prince, 1983]. Such will surely renew both our faith and the Church.

35. What is our general plan for the Era of New Evangelization?

We need to intensify our efforts to achieve the vision of renewal that PCP-II and the National Pastoral Consultation on Church Renewal (NPCCR, 2001) drew up. It is a vision of renewed integral evangelization towards a renewed Church. We may call it a vision of New Evangelization in the Philippines. It calls for a multifaceted renewal of faith, renewal of laity, clergy, religious, parishes, and renewal of mission. For this purpose, the NPCCR identified nine major pastoral priorities. These are: (1) Integral Faith Formation; (2) Renewal of the Laity; (3) Active Participation of the Poor; (4) The Family as the Focal Point of Evangelization; (5) The Parish as a Communion of Communities; (6) Renewal of the Clergy and Religious; (7) Youth as Evangelized and Evangelizers; (8) Ecumenism and Inter-Religious Dialogue; (9) Missio ad gentes.

36. How shall we address the Nine Major Pastoral Priorities of the Church in the

      Philippines during the Era of Evangelization?

For the nine-year era of New Evangelization to be fruitful, it is absolutely necessary to hold the Holy Eucharist as central so that the grace of the Eucharist would accompany all our evangelizing efforts. Prayer must accompany the New Evangelization. We need to realize that the journey of faith and discipleship begins with conversion, metanoia, a change of mind and heart. With these in mind, we shall dedicate each of the nine years of the Era of New Evangelization to one of the nine-major pastoral priorities. Thus:

2013 – Integral Faith Formation;

2014 – Renewal of the Laity;

2015 – Active participation of the Poor in Evangelization and

Social transformation;

2016 – The Eucharist and the Family – this year the International Eucharistic 

                        Congress will be held in Cebu;

2017 – Transforming the parish as a Communion and Communities;

2018 – Renewal of Clergy and Religious;

2019 – Active Participation of the Youth;

2020 – Ecumenism and Inter-Religious dialogue;

2021 -  Missio ad gentes.

37. What is the significance of Mission ad gentes for Filipino Catholics?

The final year, 2021, of the Era of New Evangelization will be the 5^th centenary of the Filipino Christian faith. The focus will be on the mission of the Church ad gentes or the mission to those who do not yet know Christ. Celebrating the 500^th anniversary of Christianity in the Philippines, we are reminded that our faith is missionary. Recent Popes have pointed out that the Church in the Philippines has a “special missionary vocation” and is called in a special way to be a missionary “to the nations” – ad gentes, particularly to Asia [Pope John Paul II, to the Philippine Bishops in 19981; at the World Youth Day in 1995; cited by the CBCP Pastoral Letter, Missions and the Church in the Philippines, July 5, 2000]. This is so because the Philippines is the biggest predominantly Catholic country in Asia. Pope Benedict XVI speaks of the necessity of sharing our faith::  

…faith in God is above all a gift and mystery to be received in the heart and in life and for which we are to be always grateful to the Lord. But faith is a gift that is given to us to be shared; it is a talent received so that it will bear fruit; it is a light that must not be kept hidden, but illumine the whole house. It is the most important gift that has been given to us in our lives and we cannot keep it for ourselves” [Benedict XVI, Message for World Mission Day to be celebrated on October 21, 2012].

38. Do the Year of Faith and the Era of New Evangelization address burning issues

      confronting our society today?

Yes, they do. Our goal is a renewed faith and a renewed Church. This is a vision of a faith and Church engaged in the mission of integral evangelization. This mission includes the task of social transformation. As a renewed Church we have to be actively involved, through a renewed integral faith, in helping resolve the burning social issues of today such as corruption, poverty, the destruction of the environment, threats against human life and dignity, and other burning issues of our day. Most of our problems are due to the dichotomy between faith and life. A renewed faith, that includes the social implications of the Gospel, would certainly address the problems directly.  

39. Prayer for the Year of Faith

According to Pope Benedict XVI “Christians in the early centuries were required to learn the creed from memory. It served them as a daily prayer not to forget the commitment they had undertaken in Baptism” [PF, no. 9]. Therefore, following the example of the early Christians we should recite everyday the Niceno-Constantinopolitan profession of faith:

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of Heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven,

(At the words, up to and including “and became man,” all bow)

and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Reciting often the short traditional Act of Faith will also deepen our faith:

O my God, I firmly believe that you are one God in three divine Persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I believe that your divine Son became man, and died for our sins and that He will come again to judge the living and the dead. I believe these and all the truths which the Holy Catholic Church teaches because you have revealed them, who can neither deceive nor be deceived. Amen.

+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.

Archbishop of Cotabato

October 1, 2012

Primer on the Year of Faith and the New Evangelization

(Second of a Series)

14. In what way is the secular spirit at work in the proposed Reproductive Health Bill?

The promoters of the Reproductive Health Bill assert that the bill has nothing to do with religion or morality. According to them the use of artificial contraceptive means to prevent conception or to terminate implantation is simply a matter of safeguarding the health of women. They say that preventing unwanted pregnancy through contraceptives and choosing the number of children parents want is responsible parenthood. Preventing pregnancy through artificial means also alleviates the burden of the poor in raising too many children. In addition, the secular and materialist argument allows the distribution of contraceptive means to young people and to the unmarried in order to prevent unwanted pregnancy. The promoters of Reproductive health consider all these acts as necessary and useful. These acts are allowed because of the freedom of choice. Sex outside marriage is also fine as long as it is “safe sex.” Moreover, some proponents say that no religion or church can impose its teaching on how a woman should take care of her body. What she does with her body is her “freedom of choice.” These arguments are the influence of secularism that rejects faith and morality as norms of action.

15.  What is the official Catholic position on the Reproductive Health bill?

As teachers of faith the Bishops of the Philippines point out that the distribution and use of artificial contraceptive means to prevent conception and the implantation of the fertilized egg in the womb are not morally neutral. Based on official Catholic moral teaching, they are in fact morally evil. Moreover, the Bishops point out that aside from purely Catholic moral teachings, there is a universal moral law, the natural law, which serves as a moral guide for all [see Pope Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Law, Rome, February 12, 2007; see also Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (CSDC), 2004, nos. 138-41]. Furthermore, the freedom to choose cannot be contrary to the law of God who gave that freedom. Briefly and simply, the freedom to choose is not absolute. It is necessarily limited by the moral law, as taught authoritatively by the magisterium or teaching authority of the Church [Cf. CSDC, nos. 137, 139].

16. What is to be said about members of Catholic educational institutions who 

dissent against teachings of the Church?

Invoking the principle of academic freedom, some members of Catholic educational institutions publicly dissent against official Catholic teachings regarding the Reproductive Health bill. This may be another example of the influence of the secular and materialist spirit in our midst. A Catholic institution of higher learning, whether pontifical or not, has to be faithful to its identity, nature, and role as a Catholic institution. One of the distinctive marks essential for Catholic identity is fidelity to the Christian message in conformity with the magisterium of the Church [see Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution on Catholic Universities, Ex corde Ecclesiae (ECE), August 15, 1990, I, no. 13; see also United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Ex Corde Ecclesiae, An Application to the United States, 2001, Part I, V and Part II, art. 2]. This is also to adhere to the special charisms of the religious community that founded the institution. In fact the Catholic identity of the educational institution is usually expressed explicitly in its vision-mission statement. Moreover the Catholic identity of Philippine Catholic Universities is confirmed by membership in the International Federation of Catholic Universities (IFCU) whose statutes were approved by the Holy See in 1949. Therefore, by its very nature and identity a Catholic educational institution adheres to the truths that are contained in the deposit of faith, Scripture and Tradition, as interpreted authoritatively by the Church.  Faculty members share in the responsibility of preserving and promoting the Catholic identity of the institution. Pope Benedict XVI has pointed out the confusion created among the faithful “by instances of apparent dissidence between some representatives of Catholic institutions and the Church’s pastoral leadership” [see Pope Benedict XVI, Address to U.S. Bishops on ad limina visit, Rome, May 5, 2012]. In brief, academic freedom is not a right for faculty members of a Catholic educational institution to betray its Catholic identity and nature and cannot be a reason for dissenting against the official Catholic position as on the Reproductive Health Bill [On academic freedom see Code of Canon Law, 1983, c 218; likewise relevant are cc 806 and 810].

17. What kind of faith do we, Filipino Catholics, have?

The Second Plenary Council of the Philippines characterized our Filipino Catholic faith in several ways [see PCP-II, Acts and Decrees, 1991, nos. 8-17]. Our faith is deep and simple. We express our Christian faith publicly without embarrassment. We are often faithful in attending Holy Mass and in praying novenas to different saints. We outwardly celebrate the Sacraments, such as going to Mass, being baptized, receiving confirmation, getting married. We are aware that God has an influence on our life. We have a sense of God’s own time. Even when abroad when it is difficult to express our faith, we try to be faithful to our religious duties and devotions.

18. What are the weaknesses of our faith?

While we are outwardly devoted to the practices of our faith such as going to Mass, celebrating the sacraments, praying the Rosary, etc., we often do not understand their meaning. Much less do we put into practice what they really mean. Our faith is not lived in the public sphere. It is separated from life. Hence, “we are sacramentalized but not evangelized.” Our faith is ritualistic and devotional, i.e., centered on externals and non-essentials. We see this kind of ritualistic faith in our veneration of the saints, in our processions and fiestas. Our faith is also sometimes fatalistic, attributing almost everything to God without our own responsibility. Thus we say bahala na ang Diyos when we take unnecessary risks (as in riding overloaded buses or boats), when prudence and wisdom should tell us not to take the risks [For the weaknesses of our faith see PCP-II, no. 13 and CFC nos. 116-18]. Because we really do not know our faith well, we are often easily persuaded by religious teachers who interpret the Sacred Scriptures different from our own interpretation. In other words, to a great extent we are Catholics only in name, but are very much uninformed and focused on externals.

19. Because of the inadequacies of our faith, what should we do during the Year of Faith?

The Year of Faith is a privileged occasion for us to know our faith, deepen our faith, live our faith, celebrate our faith, and share our faith. Pope Benedict XVI urges us “to profess the faith in fullness and with renewed conviction…. to intensify the celebration of the faith in the liturgy, especially in the Eucharist....” The Pope prays “that believers’ witness of life may grow in credibility” [PF, no. 9].

20. What can we do to know our faith?

We need to study our catechism, especially the most essential elements of our faith. We have to understand their meaning for our life. The essential elements of our faith are contained in the Apostles’ Creed that we recite during Sunday Mass. It is called the Apostles’ Creed, because it is a faithful summary of the faith of the Apostles and was the ancient profession of faith of the Church of Rome, the “See of Peter, the first of the Apostles.” The Apostles’ Creed is elaborated by the Niceno-Constantinopolitan, which originated from the first two ecumenical councils of the Church (in the years 325 and 381). This creed is common to the churches of both East and West.

21. What does the Apostles’ Creed contain?

The Creed contains the 12 Articles of our Christian Faith, namely:

Article 1 – I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth.

Article 2 – I believe in Jesus Christ the Only Son of God.

Article 3 -  He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, and was born of the Virgin Mary.

Article 4 – Jesus Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried.

Article 5 – He descended to the dead. On the third day He rose again.

Article 6 – He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

Article 7 – From thence he will come again to judge the living and the dead.

Article 8 – I believe in the Holy Spirit.

Article 9 – I believe in the Holy Catholic Church.

Article 10 – I believe in the forgiveness of sins.

Article 11 – I believe in the Resurrection of the Body.

Article 12 – I believe in life everlasting.

These are the fundamental elements of our faith. We should know and understand them with our minds and hearts. When we recite with faith the Apostles’ Creed we unite ourselves with God and with the whole Church which transmits the faith to us. Our “Amen” at the end of the Apostles’ Creed expresses our firm conviction that God is trustworthy and that we absolutely trust in him.

22. How do we celebrate our faith?

We celebrate our faith in God by adoring, praising, and thanking God. This is our response to God and for his blessings to us. We give this response of faith through prayer especially through the liturgy.

23. What is the Liturgy?

The liturgy is the prayer of the Church and consists principally of the celebration of the Paschal Mystery which is the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Christ, the event by which Jesus our Lord saved us from sin. When we celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we celebrate the Paschal Mystery of Jesus. We believe that in the Mass, Christ is present and active. It is He who offers his own sacrifice. The ordained priest acts in his name because he shares in the priestly power of Christ because of priestly ordination.

The liturgy also consists of the other Sacraments. By his power, Jesus acts in the other sacraments such that when we celebrate the Sacrament of Baptism, it is Jesus himself through the hands of the priests who baptizes us. We also celebrate our faith when we read the Scriptures and when we pray. In all these, Christ is present and active.

24. How should we live our faith?

We live our faith by living a truly moral life, a life that is faithful to the commandments of God. Jesus himself said: “Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me” [Jn. 14:21]. The commandments are summarized in the law of love taught by Jesus: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, with all your mind and with all your strength…. You shall love your neighbor as yourself” [Mk. 12:30-31; see also Dt. 6:5]. The law of love is elaborated in the Ten Commandments. The first three commandments express love of God and the next seven commandments express love of neighbor. The truly moral life, therefore, is a life of genuine charity. Pope Benedict states: “Faith without charity bears no fruit, while charity without faith would be a sentiment constantly at the mercy of doubt. Faith and charity each require the other” [PF, no. 14]. Charity is faith in action. If charity, then also justice, because justice and charity are inseparable. To love God and our neighbor, to avoid offending God and neighbor through sin are actually the promises we made when we received Baptism, the sacrament of faith. At our baptism we promise to believe in God. This also means to love God and reject sin. The baptismal promise is a promise to live a truly moral life. We are Christians not only in name but also in deed by living our faith in private and public life.   

25. How else should we live our faith?

When God gave us the gift of faith at Baptism, he incorporated us into his own family of faith, the Church. The Church has a mandate to safeguard and teach what God has revealed. She is our Mother and Teacher. We live our faith when we are faithful not only to what the Church declares solemnly as divinely revealed but also to the doctrinal and moral teachings that the Church has consistently and ordinarily taught through time.

26. Do we have a duty to proclaim our faith?

Yes, we have. The obligation is included in the mandate that Jesus gave his Apostles: “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always until the close of the age” [Mt. 28:19-20]. To proclaim our faith is to proclaim the good news of Jesus our Lord and Savior. This is our mission from the very moment we were baptized and became members of the Church. The whole Church exists in order to proclaim Jesus as the Lord and Savior. St. Paul expresses the duty of every member of the Church: “Woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel!” [1 Cor. 9:16].

Primer on the Year of Faith and the New Evangelization

(First of a Series)


 1.  What is the Year of Faith?

On 11 October 2011 Pope Benedict XVI issued his Apostolic Letter, Porta Fidei, Door of Faith (PF), and declared a Year of Faith from 11 October 2012 to 24 November 2013. The Year of Faith would be “a good opportunity to usher the whole Church into a time of particular reflection and rediscovery of the faith” [PF, no 4]. It would be a year “to rediscover the joy of believing and the enthusiasm for communicating the faith” [PF, no. 6]. The Year of Faith is a “summons to an authentic and renewed conversion to the Lord, the one Savior of the world,” a year to intensify the renewal of the Church [ibid.].

2. What is the significance of the starting and ending dates of the Year of Faith?

The starting date, October 11, 2012, is the 50^th anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council, Vatican II (1962-1964). This Council led to the deepening and greater understanding of our faith and to the comprehensive renewal of the Church as it confronted the many changes of our times. The same date is the 20^th anniversary of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) which is the summary of our Christian faith. The ending date, November 24, 2013, is the Feast of Christ the King who is the center of our profession of faith.

 

3. What is faith?

“Faith is first of all a personal adherence of man to God. At the same time… it is an assent to the whole truth that God has revealed” [CCC, no. 150; CBCP-ECCE, Catechecism for Filipino Catholics (CFC), 1997, nos. 114-15]. Faith, therefore, is a personal acceptance of God as the source of everything that we are and have. It also means to obey God. To obey comes from the Latin word ob-audire, to hear or to listen. Faith means to “submit freely to the word” of God [CCC, no. 144] who in many ways speaks to us, such as in the Sacred Scriptures, in the Church, in the celebration of the Liturgy, in prayer, or in ordinary situations of life.

4. When do we receive faith?

At the beginning of the rite of Baptism the priest asks: “What do you request of the Church?” The godparents of the child to be baptized answer: “Faith.” It is through Baptism, the “sacrament of faith” that God gives us the gift of faith. Through Baptism we are born into new life and become adopted children of God and heirs of heaven. We are incorporated into the family of faith, the Church.

5. Is faith necessary?

Yes, faith is necessary for salvation. The CCC, no. 161, teaches us: “Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for our salvation” [cf. Mk. 16:16; Jn 3:36; 6:40 ff]. Without faith it is impossible to please God. Without faith no one will ever attain eternal life [see Mt. 10:22; 24:13; Heb 11:6]. 

6. Why is the Year of Faith necessary?

Pope Benedict observes that today we can no longer presume that a person has faith [see PF, 2]. Faith is sometimes openly denied and rejected. It is no longer a norm for everyday life. There is now a crisis of faith. Many developed countries that were once Christian no longer practice the faith. Our own Filipino faith has many weaknesses. Because of this situation, the Year of Faith is necessary. It is a special year for us to know our faith, deepen the understanding of our faith, live our faith and share our faith.

7. Should our faith keep up with changing times?

Yes, our faith should keep up with changing situations. Like the Church that began a period of renewal with Vatican II and opened its windows to the modern world, faith should be immersed into our modern situation. However, the Church has “to transmit the doctrine pure and integral,” in a new way, “according to what is required by our times,” without weakening or distorting it [see Pope John XIII, Address at the Solemn Opening of Vatican II, October 11, 1962, cited by Pope Benedict XVI, Address to the 64^th General Assembly of the Italian Episcopal Conference, May 24, 2012]. Therefore, our faith must remain fundamentally unchanged in content, while its expression may change so as to be understood by modern man. Our faith must dialogue with the modern spirit, adopt what is authentically of the Gospel, reject or purify what is not. As always we have to heed the prayer of Christ to the Father for his disciples after the Last Supper: “…they are in the world…Holy Father, keep them in your name….they do not belong to the world any more than I belong to the world. Consecrate them in the truth. Your word is truth” [Jn. 17: 11-17].

8. What is the secular and materialist spirit?

We may distinguish between moderate secularism and radical secularism. Moderate secularism accepts the mutual relationship between secular and the spiritual and religious. Vatican II states that the demand for the autonomy of secular affairs is proper only when it is not in conflict with the moral law or claim independence from God [see Vatican II, Gaudium et spes, no. 36]. This primer focuses on what Pope Benedict XVI has called “radical,”  “aggressive,”or “reductive” secularism [see, e.g., Benedict XVI, Address to U.S. Bishops on Ad limina visit, January 19, 2012]. Henceforth in this primer the term secularism refers to radical or reductive secularism.  This kind of secularism does not respect the spiritual and religious sphere of life. It is sometimes called the “modern spirit.” It emerged from the Age of Enlightenment or Age of Reason (from about 1650 to 1805) and asserted that reason and science are above faith. It also taught that universal truth comes only from reason and science. This philosophical idea gradually displaced faith and became the prevailing attitude in economically developed countries in the West. In the second half of the 20^th century, new secular teachings challenged the “modern spirit” and changed it into an even more radical form. It is called “the post-modern spirit.” As a result of these secular and materialist philosophies for many countries of the West faith no longer has any major role in human behavior and official government policies. Faith is reduced to the private sphere and is not allowed to play any role in the public sphere. Religious symbols and prayer are even banned in public places in some countries.

9. What does secularism as understood above in this Primer say about truth?

Whereas the modern spirit asserted that reason and science can establish universal truths, the post-modern spirit states that there are no universal truths, either from reason and science or from faith. The post-modern spirit asserts that all truth is relative. Truth, whether doctrinal or moral, depends on the individual, on the opinion of people, on culture, etc. This is called “relativism.” The post-modern spirit teaches that truth does not depend on the word of God or on the authority of the Church. Sadly the culture of secularism is now the emerging global culture that has even influenced predominantly Christian countries such as the Philippines.

10. What does secularism positively contribute to society?

The secular, materialist, and relativist spirit promotes individual freedom and democracy. It upholds human equality and dignity. It promotes the empowerment of women. It rejects discrimination based on religion, gender, culture, and social status. It respects religious pluralism and fosters religious tolerance. It has promoted the immense advances and possibilities of science and technology, such as in medical treatment.

  

11. What is the negative impact of secularism?

Because of the secular, materialist and relativist spirit, the world is experiencing a loss of a sense of the sacred and a loss of faith as well as a loss of the sense of sin. The secular spirit ignores God. It makes faith irrelevant to public life and policy and makes it only a private affair. It has resulted in a severe weakening of divine and church authority and a rejection of enduring and permanent moral values, such as in marriage. Moreover, it advocates the error of utilitarianism. This philosophy states that what is useful, practical and convenient is the right thing to do, and not what is morally right. The language of morality which was once a language of goodness and evil has been substituted by the language of “political correctness.”

12. What are other negative influences of secularism?

The secularist, materialist and relativist spirit has resulted in the legal approval of artificial contraception, abortion, euthanasia, and eugenics (selection of only normal offspring). The spirit has likewise resulted in excessive individual freedom even at the expense of the common good. For example, on the basis of unconditioned freedom of speech and expression, disrespect of revered religious persons, symbols and doctrines has generated protests and violence in different parts of the world. The secular spirit has also resulted in sexual freedom, such as in the approval of pre-marital sex, various forms of sexual unions, divorce, and even the approval of prostitution in some countries. From these negative influences comes the breakdown of family life.

13. What does secularism say about the Church?

We now see the influences of the secular and materialist spirit in some opinions ventilated in public. These opinions state that the Church is outdated. The Church, they say, is still living in the “dark ages” and has not been enlightened by the light of reason. It is not in touch with the changing times. Instead the Church is responding to modern ways of thinking and valuing by asserting old doctrines and outdated moral values. Those who are faithful to Church teachings are labeled “conservatives” and those who dissent are “progressives” or “liberals.”  An example of the secular and materialist view may be found in the present debate between pro-life and pro-choice, between opponents and promoters of the Reproductive Health Bill now being discussed in the Philippine Congress. 

(To be continued)

Mindanao Week of Peace: United for Peace

“Common word between you and us: Love of God and Love of Neighbor” – the theme of this year’s Mindanao Week of Peace originated from a famous letter written by 138 Muslim religious leaders and scholars from all over the world on October 13, 2007. They addressed the letter to Pope Benedict XVI and other leaders of the Christian faith. It was a call for peace and harmony through inter-religious dialogue. They quoted the Prophet Muhammad who had addressed the “people of the Scripture” concerning a “common word between us and you.” That common word consisted of faith in the One true God, Love of God and love of neighbor.

The reaction by Christians to the 2007 letter was unprecedented. “Common Word” discussions, conferences, dialogues sprouted in many parts of the world. Pope Benedict XVI invited Muslim leaders to a gathering at the Vatican. On November 4-6, 2008 the 1st Catholic-Muslim Forum was held in Rome on the “common word”: “Love of God and Love of Neighbor.” The forum is now held every two years and it involves inter-religious dialogue at the highest level between Catholic and Muslim leaders.

I was invited by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace to represent the Asian Bishops at the 25th anniversary of the World Day of Prayer for Peace in Assisi, Italy on 27 October 2011 For 25 years this gathering of Christian and Muslim Religious leaders from different parts of the world organized by the Pope has been a significant collaboration of different religions to contribute to world peace on the basis of their own religious traditions.

I believe that one can truly say that “Common Word” and the Assisi event express a common conviction that faith is at the service of peace and harmony.

Let me cite only a few examples of the declarations towards peace articulated by various representatives of different beliefs:

From the President of the Lutheran World Federation: “We commit ourselves to proclaiming our firm conviction that violence and terrorism are incompatible with the authentic spirit of religions.”

From the Metropolitan Patriarch of Moscow: “We commit ourselves to fostering the culture of dialogue.”

From the President of the Muslim Ulama and Mashaik Council of Pakistan: “We commit ourselves to frank and patient dialogue, refusing to consider our differences as an insurmountable barrier.”

From the Vice Supreme Patriarch of Teravada Buddhism in Thailand: “We commit ourselves to taking up the cry of those who refuse to be resigned to violence and evil.”

From an Atheist Representative: “We will make every effort to ensure that believers and non-believers in reciprocal trust can live out the shared quest for truth, justice and peace.”

Pope Benedict XVI summed up the many declarations by echoing the words of Pope John Paul II: “Violence never again! War never again! Terrorism never again! In the name of God, may every religion bring upon the earth Justice and Peace, Forgiveness and Life, Love!

A common quest, a common commitment, and a foundational common word for peace – that is the meaning of the Mindanao Week of Peace.


+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato

Martyr for Justice and Peace

I HAVE no hesitation to call Fr. Fausto Tentorio, PIME, as a martyr for justice and peace. He is a worthy member of that noble line of martyrs in the Church in Mindanao who in their lives advocated causes that would help create a more just, a more peaceful, a more loving society. Such causes are for the poor like the indigenous peoples as well as for the integrity of creation.

That line of martyrs includes Fr. Alingal, S.J., and Fr. Satur (diocesan priest) in the Diocese of Malaybalay, Fr. Tullio Favali, PIME, in the Diocese of Kidapawan, Fr. Carzedda PIME in the Archdiocese of Zamboanga, Bp. Ben de Jesus, OMI, Fr. Benjie Inocencio, OMI, and Fr. Rey Roday, OMI, all three from the Apostolic Vicariate of Jolo.

Fr. Fausto was a young missionary priest when he was assigned to the Diocese of Kidapawan which I led as its Bishop. He learned Ilonggo quickly and spoke it almost all the time. Like all the PIME in the Diocese of Kidapawan, he was very close to the people, and his convento in Arakan or in Columbio was open to the people. It was always a great joy for me to see him at the Bishop's Residence in Kidapawan taking his day off and watching a VHS movie or two after a long week of trekking up the mountains of Arakan or visiting the villages of Columbio. Like Fr. Tullio he had a soft easy smile and a voice that invited conversation. The only enemies he could make are those who wanted to silence his voice appealing for justice and peace for the indigenous peoples and for God's creation.
I cannot fathom the minds of people who would be so evil as to plot the killing of a justice and peace loving missionary like Fr. Fausto. His assasination creates profound sadness and brings tears to the people who know of his kindness as well as his courage in the face of hazards to his life.

His death is pure murder. I totally condemn it as a crime that cries out to heaven. If the perpetrators think that his murder would silence priests, religious sisters and brothers, and bishops from proclaiming the justice of God's kingdom, they are wrong. The blood of martyrs like Fr. Fausto fans the daring and courage of those who care about peace and justice enough to sacrifice themselves while travelling the road of active non-violence. I strongly appeal to the authorities to search for the perpetrators and bring them to justice.

My prayers to the loving Lord for my friend, Fr. Fausto, PIME.

+ORLANDO B. QUEVEDO, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato

Questions to PCSO on its So-Called Expose: The Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth?

1. What happened to the first expose that 7 bishops received Pajeros from President Arroyo through PCSO for their personal use? It is quite simple to put a closure to this issue – just look into your records and reveal the names of the Bishops involved. Perhaps leaving the so called expose open ended would serve your motives better? And what really are your motives? To tell the truth? But why do you keep people guessing as to the truth of these Pajeros and the Bishops who were supposed to have received them?

2. Now that the Pajero issue remains a black mark on suspected Bishops, who one after the other categorically denied that they had solicited or received any Pajero for personal use, what do you wish to gain by redirecting your attack – that some bishops, indeed, received SUVs? If so, why did you not mention that PCSO donated each of the vehicles to Bishops or dioceses for purposes of social action, promotion of health, poverty alleviation, human development – all for the sake of the poor? After all that is their explicit request for help and is contained in the Memorandum of Agreement that both PCSO and beneficiary sign.

3. Why do you say that the donations to the Bishops were anomalous and unconstitutional? Does not the typical PCSO MOA with the beneficiary say that it is the mandate of the PCSO to provide assistance for health programs, health services, other services and charitable purposes? And therefore that the grant is not only meant for medical and health services? Do you think that Bishops and religious institutions use such grants for their own self-interests and not for the poor? Do you think that the cooperation of the Church in your work violates the principle of separation of Church and State? Do you think that by such donation you are establishing one religion as the State religion considering that your grants are given to different religious denominations for the sake of the poor?

4. Why do you single out some bishops in your so called expose when by simply looking into your records from the time of President Cory Aquino up to President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, you will find donations to hundreds of religious groups of different denominations through the years for purposes of helping the poor? Would you have us believe that a thorough 2008 and 2009 audit on PCSO donations revealed only Bishops as beneficiaries and not other religious groups? And why do you claim that some three or four years after the “Garci tapes these grants were given to buy Bishops’ support against moves to oust President Arroyo? Do you think that all past Presidents, acting through PCSO, were unwise in having different religious denominations help in alleviating poverty, providing medical and health services, and doing development work for the poor? Did Presidents from the time of President Cory to the time of President Arroyo, acting through PCSO, violate the Constitution?

5. In brief, all the above questions beg the question of motives. What are your real motives in selectively targeting some bishops to whom PCSO gave grants for the sake of the poor?
6. Are you telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Or are you giving disinformation to discredit the Bishops for motives of your own?


+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato
July 3, 2011

Statement

I wish to reiterate my declaration that I have never requested or received from PCSO any vehicle for my personal use, whether a Pajero or SUV or any other vehicle. This declaration refers to the PCSO allegation that 7 Bishops received Pajeros from PCSO for their personal use.

Yesterday the attack on Bishops changed course: from 7 Pajeros for personal use to vehicles for other purposes. The PCSO revealed that some Bishops, myself included, received SUVs for purposes related to the social action apostolate. In 2008 I, indeed, wrote a request to the PCSO for a vehicle to be used by our Social Action program, especially for our Community Based Health Program. We also wanted to use the vehicle for our training team to give seminars for community organizing at the grassroots, capacity building, training of Indigenous Peoples' leaders, as well as to bring sick people to hospitals when necessary. The request was granted.

This practice of asking for PCSO assistance for social action is not unusual. Since the time of President Cory Aquino up to the present, hundreds of church-related organizations have been granted assistance by PCSO to do social service, human development, poverty alleviation in line with the objectives both of the PCSO and also of social action in general. It is well known that such assistance crossed religious barriers and differences and was not limited to organizations within the Catholic Church. Dioceses, church-related educational institutions, religious congregations of men and women did not hesitate to ask for help to do medical missions, initiate livelihood projects, form and promote cooperatives, do capacity building of people at the grassroots. Cardinal Sin himself in defense of PCSO assistance given to him for his projects for the poor reportedly stated that he would even accept money from the devil in order to help the poor. I myself would not hesitate to ask for PCSO assistance for a very poor individual who needs a costly medical operation but cannot afford it.

Some ten years ago the Bishops in plenary assembly made a collective decision not to solicit or accept donations from legal and illegal gambling. Such a decision was not universally followed. The needs of the poor in the minds of many people in the Church, Bishops included, simply transcended such a decision. After all, the Bishops also knew that gambling is not immoral per se. It becomes immoral because of circumstances. This is why no Episcopal Conference outside the Philippines has addressed the issue of gambling as a pastoral problem in the way Philippine Bishops did. One of the reasons that Philippine Bishops cited regarding the immorality of gambling arose out of the cultural situation. To solicit and accept donations from legal and illegal gambling would be tantamount to promoting a cultural tendency to gamble.

Therefore, in the light of the above situation, to selectively bash the Bishops for soliciting and accepting donations from the PCSO for activities designed to help the poor is clearly unfair and unjust. From the time of President Cory Aquino to that of President Macapagal Arroyo PCSO has approved donations for social action for hundreds of church groups as consonant with PCSO objectives as well as a necessity to help meet the enormous needs of the poor.

+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato
July 1, 2011

Message

Dear Muslim Friends:

As you celebrate Eid al-Fitr ending your month-long holy fasting of Ramadan, I greet you on behalf of the Archdiocese of Cotabato, “Eid mubarak!”

We share in your joy as you visit your relatives, friends and neighbors. We share in your sentiments of charity as you give alms and help the needy and the poor. We, Christians, have similar values in our traditions that stem from the message and example of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I learned that the al-Azhar Permanent Committee for Dialogue among Monotheistic Religions in Cairo is reflecting on the theme: “Together in overcoming violence among followers of different religions.” The Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue in Rome is doing the same. How imperative this topic has been for us in the past several decades in our beloved Mindanao, especially as the search for peace hopefully resumes.

The month of Ramadan and Eid al-Fitr stir in your hearts deep religious sentiments of joy, of fellowship, and of charity. On our part we shall soon celebrate the season of Advent, a season for us of physical and spiritual sacrifice, a special time to combat our inner passions and act for the good of others. May we seize the moment of these spiritual experiences to pray and act together for peace. With the Almighty and most beneficent God, we can surely prevail over all obstacles and finally come to that just and lasting peace we all desire.

Once again, Eid mubarak!


+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato

On Bishop Francisco "Cisco" Claver, S.J.

(Funeral Mass, Loyola School of Theology, July 7, 2010)

Pre-Note:
I write this sharing two days after the Funeral Mass on Wednesday evening, 7 July 2010. I had spoken without notes and with only a general outline in my mind. Here and there this written piece might be embellishing a bit. But to the best of my memory, it is how I said what I wanted to say about Bishop Cisco Claver, S.J.

My brothers and sisters in Christ,

The Jesuit provincial, Fr. Jojo Magadia, asked me before the Mass if I, as a friend of Bishop Cisco, could speak briefly after Communion. At the chapel sacristy, Cardinal Dency Rosales also asked me if I could speak on behalf of the Bishops.

I am here not out of obedience to Fr. Jojo or to Cardinal Dency but I am here out of fear. I am afraid that Bp. Cisco might visit me tonight and complain, “Orly, my friend, you did not visit me while I was sick.”

But most importantly I am here because of love. At the Wake Mass for Bp. Cisco last Friday evening, I approached Fr. Catalino Arevalo, S.J. and before I could react he hugged me and said with a break in his voice,” How Cisco loved you!” I broke down in tears and held on to Fr. “Rev.” So I am here because of love.

My brothers and sisters, what does Bishop Cisco Claver mean to the Church in the Philippines and beyond?

During the Martial Law period, someone collected his homilies and essays together into one book with the title, “Even the Stones Will Cry Out.” During those very dark years in Philippine history, Bp. Cisco consistently, passionately and courageously denounced the injustices and contradictions of Martial Law. So great were the injustices especially against “the little people” (the “poor, deprived and oppressed”) that if he were silent, “even the stones will cry out!”

I think of Bishop Cisco’s significance to the Church in the Philippines in terms of those biblical stones. He expressed his mind and heart in his pastoral work and theological-pastoral reflections. These are like stones built upon one another that speak of who Bishop Cisco was as a person and as a bishop-shepherd, not unlike the stone rip-rapping and bridge that he built with his Bontoc hands along the creek on this university campus.

His pastoral work and reflections indeed are stones that speak out loud and clear about what lay deep in his mind and heart about the Church. Communion, Co-Responsibility, Participation, Discernment were his constant themes – heady theological themes that came alive concretely in the Basic Ecclesial Communities, particularly in the Diocese of Malaybalay and the Apostolic Vicariate of Bontoc-Lagawe.

He applied these themes in his treatment of social issues – people empowerment, politics, human rights, justice and peace, development, indigenous peoples, environment, land reform, the relationship between ideology and faith, the impact of culture on life, etc. etc.

In the turbulent years of the 1980’s when ideology effectively influenced the minds of many pastoral workers in Mindanao, I am convinced that it was he who turned the tide in the life and death struggle between ideology and faith.

He changed the Marxist structural analysis that was popular in those days by factoring in the reality of culture both in the causes of social problems as well as in the processes of social change. This insight from the anthropologist Bishop Cisco on cultural analysis made us aware of the abundant resources of our deep culture of religious faith.

I believe then that his seminal work on cultural analysis placed religious faith once more at the center of the Church’s response to the politically and ideologically laden field of Mindanao. For the Mindanao dioceses religious faith, untainted by ideology, became once more the measure of ideology itself as well as the dynamic motivation for pastoral workers towards social change.

One can discern the stones built by Bp. Cisco in the major pastoral letters and statements of the Philippine Bishops on social issues, in the writing of which he collaborated or was the principal writer.

These stones are especially discernible in the Acts and Text of the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines, held five years after that stunning and transforming People Power I Revolution at EDSA. Communion, Co-Responsibility, Participation, Discernment, Dialogue, Basic Ecclesial Communities, people empowerment – these are interweaving themes in PCP-II. As the final redactor of the PCP-II texts, I was more than delighted to retain verbatim most of the things that Bishop Cisco contributed in his easy but elegant and cadenced inimitable prose.

So what does Bishop Cisco mean to the Church in the Philippines? The stones will cry out.

May I now speak of Bishop Cisco as a friend.

In the past 30 years Cisco and I collaborated in possibly more than a hundred projects of reflecting, writing, speaking, in various parts of the Philippines, Asia, and Europe. We relished being in the same discussion panels, interviews, conferences and writing group. We shared our thoughts and brought them to the floor of the CBCP. We agreed on most issues, disagreed on a few, but were united on the issues that counted most.

It was my great misfortune that when the CBCP writing group was about to draft the famous Statement of the Bishops after the 1986 Snap Elections I was in bed at the Heart Center of the Philippines. Cardinal Ricardo Vidal, the CBCP President, had asked me to moderate the Bishops’ session to evaluate the conduct of the Snap Elections. The results were a clear consensus. Widespread fraud in the elections everywhere except in one or two dioceses. What then must we say about the government that assumed power through indubitable rampant fraud? The moral principle was clear. Cardinal Vidal requested me to help write the Statement. I informed him that I had to go to the Heart Center. I gave him my notes for the content of the Statement. While reading the Final Statement at the Heart Center, I consoled myself in believing that Bp. Cisco and the other members of the writing team had indeed read my notes. [At today’s CBCP Plenary Assembly, 10 July 2010, Cardinal Vidal told me that upon receiving my notes, Cisco had remarked, “Good, now I do not have to think too much!” Cisco with his usual dry humor!]

But the basic response of the Statement to the government’s lack of moral authority was classic Claver: “Let us pray together, reason together, and act together” – a mantra on Communion, Co-Responsibility, Participation, Discernment that many subsequent CBCP statements would echo.

It was the anthropologist-Bishop Cisco who understood the 1986 People Power Revolution in terms of the converging values of Lakas and Awa. The People Power Revolution was the explosive irruption of Lakas-Awa, the power of compassion, of love shared, of love expressed in sacrificial, unselfish and generous service of solidarity for the sake of the common good, of a love based on deep religious faith that transcends religious denominations, becoming a massive force for social transformation.

After 1986 we both shared the idea that it was time for the Bishops to withdraw from the public arena and let the people activate their God-given charisms in political leadership.
But after a year of EDSA I, euphoria turned into dismay. The Bishops wrote their first letter on Corruption. Bp. Cisco gave it the title, “Thou Shalt Not Steal.” We also wrote a statement on Land Reform in response to the watering down of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP).

Only two or three years ago the CBCP wrote another letter on corruption, the second of its kind and during the term of a second lady president. This time it was my turn to give it a title. I chose, “Let Justice Flow Like a River.”

It is difficult for me to express what Cisco means to me. (Many have remarked that Cisco and I think uncannily alike. Perhaps.). We both want to stay in the back rows of the Bishops’ Conference. We exchange notes, share ideas, evaluate them, and either write them down or act on them. He was my social conscience. We lined up some collaborative writing projects regarding the Church in Mindanao in the 1980’s and regarding EDSA I, to “correct history” as he said. He asked me to begin the writing. Somehow I did not. But we did push each other into writing things down. I came out with outlines. He came out with books. God gave him immense talents. He shared them in service to the Church, ad maiorem Dei gloriam.

In one of our CBCP Pastoral Letters, we quoted Sacred Scriptures about a messianic time of grace when over the land and over the people Justice and Mercy shall embrace and kiss. At the passing away of Bishop Cisco, God’s justice and loving mercy have embraced and kissed – for him. He is with the Father. He is with Jesus whom he proclaimed in the Spirit with eloquent words, spoken and written, in all arena of human life.

I express the collective grief and deep condolences of the Bishops of the Philippines to the Claver family. You have lost a great brother. We have all lost a Filipino prophet without peer, truest priest, innovative humble shepherd, a very dear friend. Who can take his place?

As for me...farewell, Cisco, my dearest friend. Please don’t visit me tonight. Even now the rain continues to fall, the tears of nature flow…my tears flow….

+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato

“KUNG WALANG CORRUPT, WALANG MAHIRAP”

President-Elect Noynoy Aquino ran his campaign with this catchy slogan. Like all slogans, it has both an element of truth and an element of oversimplification.

Corruption indeed is a cause of poverty. But it is not true that if there is no corruption, there would be no poverty. Poverty may also be due to misguided economic philosophies and development programs. Poverty may also be due to some extent to some cultural factors. Imbalances in the political sphere can also cause poverty. Destruction of the environment causes poverty.

Thus the campaign slogan is only partly true. As such it is unrealistic. It offers false hopes for a long suffering people.

Why is corruption so difficult to eradicate?

Corruption is a sinful attitude of the heart. It is the surrender of the heart to the temptation of power and wealth. Once the heart succumbs to a first temptation and gains access to some amount of money without being punished, it is easier to surrender to the next temptation. This is even more so when the gains in wealth and power are incredibly huge. The repeated acts of sin become an attitude of the heart. God is sacrificed on the altar of mammon.

But corruption is also embedded in social, economic, political structures. It is a social sin, a structural injustice, built up by repeated personal sins. The many personal sins of corruption build a structure within the economic, social, and political structures, embed corruption in it, and facilitate continuing corruption. The structure of corruption is also built up by imbalances in economic and political power. While powerless people can be easily convicted and jailed, this is not true for the powerful. Bribery, threats to life, and extortion are bedfellows in the structure of corruption.

Because it is both a sinful attitude of the heart as well as an unjust social structure, corruption in the Philippines, as elsewhere in many Asian countries, is firmly entrenched. It is also endemic in private and public life. It infects the whole social ladder, from top to bottom or from bottom to the top. Even elections for kabataang barangay positions are now afflicted by extravagant spending because of the promise of more money gained through one’s position.

No Philippine President has ever made a serious dent on corruption. Each presidential regime has its own anecdotal illustrations of corruption incidence, even if only two suffered legal consequences, sequestration of alleged ill-gotten wealth for one and conviction of plunder for the other. For others, various alleged scams were subjected to grandstanding investigations “in aid of legislation” but for this very reason there has been no conviction.

We are a society that in fact turns a blind eye to past grievous lapses of corruption. A quick scan of election winners will reveal how short our memories are and how easily we put aside moral judgments.

Given the nature of corruption as a personal sin and as a structure of sin and given our own propensity to disregard moral judgments, it is clear that corruption is not going to go away easily.

The President-elect needs all the help he can get to make good on his slogan. He would need a miracle to get rid of corruption in his six years of office. Good intention and good example are not enough. We have the example of the Cory Aquino regime to demonstrate this. Will her son have the same experience? He should have people around him who are incorrupt and who can personify his slogan: Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap. The first question then is: who will serve as his cabinet members, his closest advisers? Do they pass the test of integrity?

Of course we believe that with God everything is possible. That is our faith. In Church language, we need contemplation and solidarity, prayer and cooperation.

Solidarity would dictate that in the battle against corruption, all of us have to be united, striving to be persons of integrity in our areas of responsibility and refusing to connive with others in acts of corruption. In solidarity we need to denounce what we see are corrupt systems in public and private life that ensnare and trap people into corruption. In solidarity we need to work with our leaders who want to establish structures of integrity and justice.

If we believe that with God all things are possible, then prayer for wisdom, guidance, and courage and integrity would be necessary. Through solidarity and prayer miracles do happen.

+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato
May 30, 2010

Peace in Southern Mindanao: Beyond the Rhetoric, Hope

Christian politicians generally have a skewed view of the peace process between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. Their view reflects that of the great majority of Christians all over the country. It consists of the following:

(1) The ill-fated MOA-AD sacrificed national sovereignty and territorial integrity for the sake of peace;
(2) The present peace negotiation between the GRP panel and the MILF is a repeat of the same;
(3) Like the previous peace talks, the present attempt is characterized by lack of consultation and transparency;
(4) Any “midnight” signing must be forestalled;
(5) The fundamental solution to the conflict in southern Mindanao is not a peace agreement, but a comprehensive no-nonsense economic development program.

Such a view, no matter how skewed and incorrect, has been used in the election campaign by politicians at the local and national level as an issue to gain votes from Christians in Mindanao. At the national level among the more prominent were Senators Noynoy Aquino and Mar Roxas. The rhetoric was strident and shrill. No Christian politician dared to go on a limb to defend the present peace talks for fear of losing Christian votes. The rhetoric has successfully glossed over the truth, despite some clear presentation of the government position by the GRP group.

Under the Noynoy Aquino regime, will the peace process progress despite the election campaign rhetoric? There are signs of hope:

(1) Instead of biding his time and even before he takes his oath of office, the president-elect has chosen his primary peace negotiator;
(2) Ging Deles, a person-oriented but hardworking technocrat basically known for her peace advocacy, is familiar with the peace-conflict terrain in southern Mindanao.

These are signs of good will and good intention on the part of the incoming chief executive.

On the part of the MILF, that it has reportedly established a common ground with the MNLF is promising. I also hope that the wisdom of the late Chairman Hashim Salamat who wanted, I believe, to establish peace within the parameters of what he realized as irreversible historical and geographical developments would continue to influence the Bangsa Moro leaders who carry on his legacy.

But the pitfalls regarding the peace process are legion. The incoming Congress (Senate and House) is filled with personalities that generally opposed the MOA-AD. The temptation is strong for the incoming administration to start from zero and not to follow in the footsteps of a peace negotiation that it perceives not only as a “failure” but also a “betrayal” of the Constitution. The primary government negotiator might want to hew closely to the bidding of principals who have expressed mistrust regarding previous peace talks and even tried to discredit them in favor of economic development. It would seem that there is a wall of negative perceptions and feelings that the primary negotiator might have to break through. Her courage to stand up for her convictions is a great asset.

My unsolicited advice to the next GRP peace panel would be the following:

(1) Be open to the positive gains of previous negotiations and do not start from ground zero;
(2) Internalize the results of the wide consultations that have been conducted and be guided by them;
(3) Be open to the principle of self-determination and probe how such a guiding principle could be implemented in fidelity to the spirit of the Constitution while transcending or amending its letter;
(4) Consult the people and political decision makers whenever necessary and always be transparent;
(5) In the face of possible provocations, be persevering, patient and resolute until a fair and just final peace agreement is done;
(6) Both groups in the peace process are believers in the one true God of Peace; while working for peace, do not forget to pray for peace.

+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato

Called to bring Hope, Missioned to Renewal

Introduction

May I express my deep gratitude to the organizers for inviting me to speak at your Catholic Education Week. I am deeply honored and privileged to speak before you, realizing that I come from a country that is economically “down under.”

I wish to bring an Asian perspective to the theme of Catholic Education Week, “Called to Bring Hope.” The theme flows, I understand, from the message of the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, at the 24th World Youth Day in Australia. He encouraged young people all over the world, saying: “If Jesus has become your hope, communicate this to others with your joy and your spiritual, apostolic and social engagement…. spread this hope around you.”

I believe that it is this hope in Jesus that Pope Benedict XVI would refer to in his seminal social encyclical, Caritas in Veritate (June 29, 2009). There he speaks to us of hope in taking on a particular social mission, saying:

… we must adopt a realistic attitude as we take up with confidence and hope the new responsibilities to which we are called by the prospects of a world in need of profound cultural renewal, a world that needs to rediscover fundamental values on which to build a better future (no. 21).

Hope in Jesus towards a profound cultural renewal – might this not be the mission of education for our times? I ask this because obviously Australia is a multicultural society and cultures different from ours can sometimes be, unfortunately, the object of discrimination and bias, even of exclusion and alienation, as we so experience in the Philippines with regard to Muslim Moros and indigenous peoples.

Today one Australian newspaper brings this reality of culture to its readers with three news reports on racial abuse, on traditional lands, and on population and migration policies.

Allow me then to reflect with you about this educational mission of cultural renewal from the perspective of an Asian. I take this perspective of Asia not only because it is what I know best, but also because in the past three days I have seen a considerable number of Asians in Melbourne.

The Cultural Situation

In this reflection I take “culture” to mean generally and simply “a way of life”, a set of beliefs, values, attitudes, customs and traditions that are shared by a group and distinguish it from another. It is transmitted from one generation to another through language, rituals, institutions (e.g., family, and schools), laws, art, and tools of social communication. Thus we have Thai culture, Filipino culture, Chinese culture, Australian culture, American culture, an indigenous people’s culture, a culture of the poor, a culture of the young, culture of a dominant group, etc. In my own experience I find the culture of the poor one of simplicity. Even their prayers are direct, concrete, and specific. I remember one Bible Service in a Basic Ecclesial Community in one of the villages of my diocese during the long years of Martial Law. Civilian militias of the Marcos dictatorship had raided a village because of the suspected presence of armed subversives. Not finding them, the raiders took away chickens and pigs from the village people. In their Prayer of Intercession during the Bible Service, one lady prayed, “Let my pig which have been taken away from me die of sickness before the raiders eat it, let us pray to the Lord.” I did not know whether it was a curse or a prayer. Then I recalled the Magnificat of Mary, who declared that the Lord “has filled the hungry with good things and the rich he sent empty away.” With this thought, I responded “Lord, grant our prayer.”

Asia is known to be a rich mosaic of ancient cultures and languages. When I was a theology student in the 1960s many American classmates used to say that we Asians all “look the same.” We really don’t, even though appearances often mislead. Languages separate us. National costumes differ. Even the way we Asian Catholics worship differs from culture to culture. Thais, Vietnamese, Chinese, Koreans and Japanese celebrate Mass or relate to the sacred with more awe, silence and solemnity. Filipinos, Malaysians, and Indonesians seem to have more joyful Masses and have a sense of more carefree fellowship with the sacred. (I wonder if the Filipino, Vietnamese, and Indian priests in the St. Patrick’s Cathedral presbytery would agree with me). The way we think and value things also differ. Some observers say, for instance, that Westerners think in a linear way from point A to point B. But Asians think in a circular way arriving at the same point B.

We Asians despite our cultural differences do share some common values, very different from non-Asians. Using a relatively recent study of values held by certain cultures, it is possible to make the following observations regarding Asians:

1. Asian peoples and societies generally accept a structure of inequality as a given social and political reality.

2. Asians are generally low on an individualism index, tending more towards community and clan and are usually not inclined to be individualistic. Nuclear families, extended Asian families, and close family kinship are the general rule for cohesive harmony and security and even for the family’s social advancement.

3. Women in Asian societies are expected to play roles that are more home and children oriented and less career or profession oriented Men are expected to be more competitive, assertive and even aggressive and women to be more caring, gentle, and compassionate.

4. Asians have a high desire for certainty, have less tolerance for ambiguity and unstructured situations. We look for strict rules and believe in absolute religious truths.

5. Saving “face” or the avoidance of shame is one of the major dynamic inner forces that drive the typical Asian toward self development.

The many cases of suicide in some Asian countries are not due to despair or depression but due to lose of face – school children who because of failure in school are ashamed to face their parents, a husband who has lost considerable amount of money feeling too ashamed to face his wife, a young unmarried lady who learns she is pregnant and is ashamed to tell the truth to her parents. Examples abound.

From another perspective Pope John Paul II summed up the observations of Asian Bishops at the 1998 Synod of Bishops for Asia in the following way:

The people of Asia take pride in their religious and cultural values, such as love of silence and contemplation, simplicity, harmony, detachment, non-violence, the spirit of hard work, discipline, frugal living, the thirst for learning and philosophical enquiry. They hold dear the values of respect for life, compassion for all beings, closeness to nature, filial piety towards parents, elders and ancestors, and a highly developed sense of community. In particular they hold the family to be a vital source of strength, a closely knit community with a powerful sense of solidarity….

All of this indicates an innate spiritual insight and moral wisdom in the Asian soul, and it is the core around which a growing sense of “being Asian” is built. This “being Asian” is best discovered and affirmed not in confrontation and opposition, but in the spirit of complementarity and harmony (Ecclesia in Asia, 19986, no. 6)

One outstanding aspect of Asian cultures is our sense of the Transcendent:

A deep sense of the sacred still prevails among Asian peoples. We point to the finger of God in the significant events of our lives. (Natural disasters, floods, drought, earthquakes are due somehow to God’s inscrutable will. Asians can only say, “Leave it to God” - in Pilipino, Bahala na sa Dyos. We are not afraid to speak openly of God and his mysterious ways. We often go to holy places, visit churches, masjids (mosques), and temples for worship or for temporary refuge, silence, solitude from the busyness of life. We are deeply appreciative of men and women of God-experience. The sense of the divine is deeply ingrained in our Asian cultural psyche (Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I, “Today’s Culture and Consecrated Life,” FABC-OCL Seminar, Hua Hin, Thailand, November 17, 2009)

I might ask if the values I have mentioned resonate well with mainstream Australian culture. Perhaps the answer is yes and no, to lesser or greater degree.

The same value study previously cited has the following value description of Australians:

You have a very high level of individuality with the individualism index at 90%, the highest score of any country behind the United States at 91%. You also have greater equality between societal levels, gender, and within families. Further your desire for certainty is much lesser than the world’s average. This would mean that Australians are comfortable with less law, less structure, and less absolute truth, more individual freedom.

Is this true?

Moreover an information sheet by the Australian Foreign Affairs is rather noteworthy. It observes that Australians have commonly shared values, particularly respect for individual dignity and rights regardless of culture, religion, or gender. It has also been said that egalitarianism has become, in the era of multiculturalism, a lived Australian value – a fact that contrasts starkly with the glaring social, economic, and political inequalities in many Asian societies.

The Need for Cultural Renewal

The Asian cultural map is truly striking in its rich kaleidoscope of varying ancient cultures. It is from this cultural reality that the Church in Asia underscores inculturation and the solidarity of diverse cultures as a vision of the Church.

Surely the desired ideal of cultural unity in diversity is an objective as well for a multicultural society like Australia.

But in all cultures there are values that, in the light of our Catholic religious faith, are ambivalent or at worst negative. Take, for instance, the Asian value of strong family-centeredness. How a mother of father or one of the children would sacrifice by venturing abroad at great risk and work for three to five years sometimes under dehumanizing conditions in certain foreign countries! And the reason for this sacrifice is the family. So that with money earned abroad the family might have a better future or that other members of the family could go to school. I remember a Filipina in Italy. Armed with a chemistry degree, she taught for several years at a university in the Philippines. But she wanted to send her children to the best schools in Manila and she could not do that on her teacher’s salary. She applied to be a domestic helper in Italy and she got a job. From university teacher to domestic helper, all for the sake of her family.

But the same value becomes negative when the good of the family comes first before the public good and becomes the cause of corruption in public and private life. Certainly a purification of values would be necessary.

In certain Asian cultures, the renewal of values might require the rooting out of exclusive ethnocentrism and caste-ism that generate biases, discrimination and oppression. Or the dismantling of traditional structures of patriarchy and other forms of social injustice that keep large sectors of society subservient, marginalized, and oppressed.

Social analysis and faith discernment would be needed to judge what values have to be purified and renewed. Surely this is also necessary for Australia in the task of cultural renewal.

A Globalizing Post-Modern Culture – Secularism and Relativism

There is yet another major dimension, not intra-cultural but intercultural. The call to cultural renewal sounded by the Pope Benedict XVI concerns emerging global values.

In 2004 the Plenary Assembly of the Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences in Daejeon, Korea sounded out an alarm regarding the negative features of globalization:

Of even greater significance, economic globalization is also bringing cultural globalization in its wake. Since the middle of the 20th century Western secularism has been strongly influencing Asian societies. But at no time has the secularizing process, now with significant post-modern spirit of individualistic sense of freedom, been more rapid and effective in reshaping the value systems of Asian families than in the last two decades of the 20th century. The bearers of this change are economics… and the on-going revolution in mass global communications that has truly made the world a global village (Final Document, no.21).

We recall that the philosophies of the Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th centuries proclaimed the primacy of reason and rejected religious faith and authority. The emergence of Modernism, coincided with the era of scientific revolution. European intellectuals began to deny divine revelation or “God’s meta-narrative.” Armed with reason and science, Modernism rejected “traditional” religious beliefs and asserted a “meta-narrative of human scientific progress.”

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries came what might be called the post-modern philosophies of Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche which emphasized subjectivity rather than objectivity. As a consequence they rejected the universality of all meta-narratives whether that of human reason or of religious faith. Skepticism regarding social and moral norms was the order of the day.

The evolution of Western intellectual thought historically followed this trajectory. Today the emerging global technological culture exhibits the world view of the postmodern spirit. It rejects objective truth and gives primacy to personal subjectivity. It professes incredulity at all meta-narratives that claim absolute truth. It believes as true only what the self interprets and constructs in personal narratives. Having rejected all dogma, it ironically presented one universal dogma, namely, truth is relative. Hence pluralism regarding truth. Someone has called this type of pluralism as an ideology of “whateverism.” (On this issue of modernism and post-modernism as developed in terms of “the rise and fall of disbelief in the modern world,” Alister McGrath, The Twilight of Atheism, 2004, pp. 144-169, 217-237, is a highly readable scholarly presentation).

On the other hand from a positive point of view the post-modern spirit has highlighted individual human dignity, autonomy and human rights so characteristic of the West. It has also pointed out the importance and necessity of personal historicity, personal narratives and subjective experience, including feelings, in integral human growth towards maturity in Christ. Today these dimensions of the person are important in discerning the movement of the Holy Spirit in one’s life.

The Marginalization of Faith and of the Sacred

While recognizing some of the positive dimensions of the post-modern spirit, the origins and the emphases of western intellectual thought nevertheless gradually overhauled many cherished fundamental values related to God, the world, the human person and human relationships. Its notable effect is the marginalization of religious faith and the sense of the sacred. In brief, post-modernism represents a world view that in many ways contradicts the view of our own religious faith, anchored as it is in God’s meta-narrative found in Sacred Scriptures, interpreted and taught by the Church.

Admittedly this is a simplified way of considering the post-modern spirit. But it might be helpful towards understanding the emerging and globalizing culture of secularism, subjectivism and relativism that is now a matter of great anxiety for the cultures of Asia. It also helps us to understand why the Popes of the last five decades, particularly Pope John II and Benedict XVI, have inveighed so frequently and forcefully against subjectivism, relativism, individualism, nihilism, and consumerism. The clash of cultures is in fact between that of this world and that of the Gospel.

Here the prayer of Jesus to the Father for his disciples becomes profoundly relevant:

I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world anymore than I am of the world. My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into world. For them I sanctify myself, that they too may truly be sanctified (Jn. 17: 14-19).

Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, echoes the prayer of the Jesus as he exhorts the Christians in Rome:

I urge you to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God – this is your spiritual act of worship. Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is – his good, pleasing and perfect will (Rom. 17: 1-2).

Education as Bearer of Hope in a Crisis of Values

The clash of cultures expresses itself concretely in a crisis of values. Economic globalization and cultural globalization together with profound scientific and technological development, disseminated by the tools of social communication, have affected human life throughout the world. Economically and socially the gap between rich and poor has widened. Massive migration of workers from poor countries has put great pressure on their families in their countries of origin and on policy makers in countries of destination. While multiculturalism and ethnic as well as religious pluralism enrich different cultures, they also bring in new challenges. People also speak about the clash of civilizations. Indeed, we observe tensions of value both within cultures and also between cultures.

Clearly we discern here the relevance and necessity of the educational process. Education after all is not merely the imparting of knowledge but also the transmission of cultural values cherished by generations. It has also to sift the ephemeral from the fundamental, the merely temporal from the perennial. In the light of the crisis of values, we might ask what kind of cultural renewal is expected of the educational enterprise.

I believe that educators are called to bring hope:

• to young men and women who are searching for the fundamental meaning of their life;
• to those who find themselves in the periphery of a culture they are not fully at home with;
• to those who by reason of poverty are deprived of access to the wellsprings of cultural development and of scientific and technological knowledge;
• to those who thirst for more than security and stability and crave for the serenity that quenches the innate thirst of the human soul for ultimate truth;
• to those who long for authentic community and fellowship beyond their family circles and their small circle of friends;
• to those who aspire to read more deeply the signs of the times and to reach the answers to questions of human joy and suffering, of justice and peace, and of human destiny;
• to those who want to know lasting reasons for their own hope.

Love as the Driving Force for Cultural Renewal

Education then is called to bring hope, to assist, to guide, slowly, evocatively and gradually young men and women to the ultimate fulfillment of hope.

In fact, Canon Law says:

Since a true education must strive for the integral formation of the human person,
a formation which looks toward the person’s final end,
and at the same time toward the common good of societies,
children and young people are to be so reared that they can develop harmoniously their physical, moral and intellectual talents,
that they acquire a more perfect sense of responsibility and a correct use of freedom,
and that they may be educated for active participation in social life.

Succinctly, here we have the axiomatic fourfold description of Catholic education; holistic and integral, developmental, personal, and social.

However for a person of faith there is one key moral value of development and growth to human maturity that the educational process has to inculcate. This key moral value is authentic love.

Caritas in veritate, charity in truth – this is the resounding theme of Pope Benedict XVI”s social encyclical which begins thus:

Charity in truth, to which Jesus Christ bore witness by his earthly life and especially by his death and resurrection, is the principal driving force behind the authentic development of every person and of all humanity. Love – caritas – is an extraordinary force which leads people to opt for courageous and generous engagement in the field of justice and peace. It is a force hat has its origin in God. Eternal Love and Absolute Truth…. Charity is at the heart of the Church’s social doctrine (Caritas in Veritate, nos. 1-2).

Charity as “the principal driving force behind the authentic development of every person and of all humanity” -- how could the educational process make learners become deeply aware of the “interior pulse to love authentically” which, as the Pope states, is a “vocation planted by God in the heart of every human person”?

One has to realize that mere self-development through education is incomplete; love is not merely love of self. Beyond self-perfection is self transcendence; love is authentic (love in truth) to the extent that it reaches out to others, particularly to the poor and the needy, in the manner of Jesus, who is God’s compassion.

This is why the Spirit of Love, who is also the Spirit of Wisdom and Knowledge, of Understanding and Counsel, is really the principal educator, renewing, transforming, and guiding. His role in the educational process is an absolute requirement. In the renewal of the mind and heart, in the search for meaning, it is the Holy Spirit who reveals “the dearest freshness deep down things.” This of course entails faith, the eyes of faith.

Educational Implications

What then might be the implications of this mission to renew culture and its values in the face of a crisis of values?

Allow me to respond with a brief personal view of education towards cultural renewal in the light of our faith.

A vision of education as an evangelizing instrument in the renewal of culture is necessary. Without a vision, education would be myopic. We might recall a statement from the Old Testament that without a vision, a people will perish. I believe such of vision of education should include the following major dimensions:

• The work of education is a vocation and a mission;
• This vocation is to draw out from the human person his / her innate vocation to love in truth.
• Beyond simply actual professional training, education must teach perennial values about God, the world, the human person and human community;
• Its aim is to build community out of cultural and economic diversity;
• It assists in the liberation of the human person from the poverty of not having and not knowing to the richness of being more.
• It has to be a vehicle for ultimate meaning and for ultimate truth.

With this vision, education would indeed be a hope bearer resonating with the spirit of that valiant woman of Australia, Blessed Mary MacKillop, who expressed what it means to be a disciple of Christ: “Wherever we are, whoever we are, whatever we do, we are called to relieve suffering and bring hope.”

Conclusion

Deep down, the modern heart wants to hear the “good news.” Is this not the fundamental meaning of the Gospel, the evangelium?

Evangelization is after all the mission of announcing the Good News.

In sum, in its task of evangelization, Education has to announce and communicate the Good News, not words or ideas, not mere knowledgew or skills, not laws or structures, certainly not causes or ideologies.

The Good News is a Person who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life – the sum of all human values, a Person beyond all persons, totally extraordinary in the way he lived, died, and rose from the dead. He has a face. He has a name, Jesus of Nazareth.

He is the one about whom Augustine, that once great pagan sinner and philosopher and later the magnificent African truth-searcher, theologian, and profoundly holy man would exclaim, “My heart is restless until it rests in You.”

Thank you for your patient listening and endurance.


+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato, Philippines
Secretary General, Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences
Melbourne Catholic Education Week
March 16, 2010