[Readings:
Ez. 34: 11 – 16 (“I myself will look after and tend my sheep”).
2 Tm.: 1: 6 – 14 (“I remind you to stir into flame the gift of God that
you have through the imposition of my hands”).
Jn. 10: 11 – 18 (“I am the good shepherd. A good shepherd lays down
his life for the sheep”)].
Our beloved Papal Nuncio
Archbishop Edward Joseph Adams,
Our newly installed Bishop,
Bishop Romulo de la Cruz
Immediate Past Bishop of Kidapawan,
Archbishop Romulo Valles of Zamboanga
My Brother Bishops
Reverend Fathers, Brothers and Sisters
Beloved Lay Faithful
Brothers and Sisters in Christ:
Good Morning! What a joyful and historical event this is for the Diocese of Kidapawan! Truly this is a day that the Lord has made! After more than a year of waiting, a new bishop is finally installed -- and someone who is really from among you!
Bishop Romy de la Cruz is a Cotabateño and a Kidapawanon. He had three years of high school at Notre Dame of Kidapawan but graduated from Nuling Seminary in Cotabato. Kidapawan was his hometown. It was in Kidapawan where he was ordained a priest 36 years ago (1972) by Bishop Gerard Mongeau, O.M.I, when Kidapawan was still part of the Diocese of Cotabato. He spent ten years as a seminary formator at Nuling Seminary in Cotabato where all Cotabato and Kidapawan seminarians at that time had their seminary college studies. He was the parish priest of Tacurong for three years. In the mysterious way of God’s wisdom, he has finally returned to Kidapawan via Basilan and Antique. And now he is your fifth Bishop.
It is fitting that the Liturgy of the Word of God this morning speaks about the role of a shepherd.
Bishop Romy is your Shepherd, your leader. He is the head of the diocese, “the household of God.” With the priests as his closest collaborators, he teaches you the mysteries of faith. Through the sacraments he leads you to holiness. He provides direction for the diocese. He is the “visible source and foundation of unity” for clergy, religious, and lay faithful (Lumen Gentium [LG], no.23).
Bishop Romy is your Bishop, not through any merit of his own, not because of the many outstanding leadership qualities that he undoubtedly possesses. He is your bishop for only one essential reason -- God’s grace, God’s love. It is in the Holy Spirit that our Holy Father in Rome, Pope Benedict XVI, appointed him to be your Bishop, your Shepherd.
Therefore, always in communion with the Holy Father in Rome, Bishop Romy is “Christ’s vicar and ambassador” among you (LG, no. 27; see also John Paul II, Pastores Gregis, no. 43). God himself has given him that extraordinary grace and power to act in the name and in the person of Christ the Good Shepherd (LG, no. 21). God has given him the fullness of the priesthood (LG, loc. cit.), sharing fully in Christ’s own mission to teach, to sanctify, and to govern. By divine will and by virtue of his Episcopal ordination in Cotabato 20 years ago, he is a successor of the Apostles (LG, no. 20). To him applies the words of Jesus to his Apostles: “He who hears you hears me.” By virtue of their own priestly ordination, the priests of Kidapawan collaborate with him in this same office of teaching, sanctifying and shepherding the people (see Presbyterorum Ordinis, nos. 42 and 44) -- to build up the people of God (see 2 Cor. 10: 8).
Yet Bishop de la Cruz knows fully well that to be your bishop is not so much to be given a title of honor as to receive the grace to serve (see Rite of Ordination of a Bishop, Homily). Honor comes to him when he serves. The word of God to us this morning tells us that a bishop has to follow the way of God’s shepherding: seeking the lost or scattered sheep, uniting the sheep together, binding the injured, healing the sick, bringing them to green pastures, seeking to know them, and willing to lay down his life for them.
He has to do all this not to seek his own glory, his own comfort, his own security, but in order simply to serve -- to serve without self-interest and self-aggrandizement. That great bishop of the ancient Church, St. Augustine, said that the work of shepherding the Lord’s flock is a work of pure love (“Sit amoris officium pascere dominicum gregem,” quoted in John Paul II, Pastores Dabo Vobis, no. 24). Hence the Bishop has to exercise in an eminent way that special love of a shepherd for his flock called “pastoral charity.” It is the same compassionate love that Jesus had for the multitude that were like sheep without a shepherd (see Mt. 9: 36).
For this reason Bishop Romy has to remind himself frequently of the instruction that St. Paul gives to the young Bishop Timothy in today’s Liturgy of the Word: “Stir into flame the gift of God that you have through the imposition of my hands for God did not give us a spirit of cowardice but rather of power and love and self-control” (2 Tm. 1: 6-7). Having an office of leadership, the bishop possesses a “gift of power” that has to be exercised as a service of love.
To do this, Bishop de la Cruz will surely follow the example of Jesus the Good Shepherd who in today’s Gospel confidently says: “I know my sheep and my sheep know me” (Jn. 10: 14). This is why, my brothers and sisters, expect Bishop Romy to travel all over the diocese -- from Kidapawan all the way to Tulunan and Colombio in the south, to Kabacan and Pagalungan in the west, to the many barangays of Makilala in the east, and to the mountain parishes of Antipas and Arakan in the north. Hundreds of barangays to visit, thousands of people to meet! To him as a shepherd modeling himself after Jesus the Good Shepherd, the abstract statistics of this diocese have to become faces of concrete people, Christian, Muslim and Lumad, with joys and hopes as well as sorrows and anxieties.
For everyone in this diocese, he has to be Christ’s vicar and ambassador, remaining always in communion with the Holy Father in Rome. More than any one else, he has to be, as the Bishop, the living assurance of God’s goodness and loving presence among the people. And if need be, to the extent of a total donation of his life for the sake of the people! “A good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (Jn. 10: 11).
What a heavy responsibility this is for Bishop Romy! This is why, my brothers and sisters, Bishop Romy needs your total support, your continual encouragement, your fervent prayers and your love. He is your Shepherd, your Father. Together with him and under his leadership, God’s family in the Diocese of Kidapawan (clergy, religious, and lay faithful) will be a sign of unity, of justice, of peace and love.
Finally to you, my brother Bishop Romy, on behalf of all the Bishops here present I assure you of our prayers and best wishes. Your Episcopal motto, “crescere in plebem suam,” is taken from that classic religious hymn usually sung for Bishops, “Behold the great priest!” (Ecce sacerdos magnus! See Heb. 10:21). With this motto, crescere in plebem suam, you pray that you may grow in wisdom and love among your people.
But today at this Eucharistic sacrifice of Jesus the Good Shepherd, we pray “crescere tecum plebs tua” – may your people grow with you in God’s wisdom and grace through your Episcopal ministry today, tomorrow and always. God bless you, Bishop Romy! God bless the people of the Diocese of Kidapawan!
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato
Kidapawan Cathedral
June 19, 2008
Friday, June 20, 2008
Thursday, May 29, 2008
UNDERSTANDING THE ARCHDIOCESAN VISION – MISSION AND PASTORAL PRIORITIES
My purpose in this presentation is to reflect with you on the draft 2008 Archdiocesan Vision-Mission Statement in the light of the 2000 Archdiocesan Vision Mission Statement and on the priority areas indicated by 28 parishes.
My objectives are to show the continuity and the relationship between the two Statements; and to indicate how the priority areas pointed out by the parishes for APA 2008 may be considered and used.
A. The 2008 APA Theme: Isang Simbahan, Isang Pangarap
The 2000 APA envisioned that all the faithful in the Archdiocese of Cotabato (lay people, religious, and clergy) be genuine disciples of Jesus and a genuine community. This community of believers in Jesus has to be united as One Church, in communion with God, with one another, and with creation. This element of the 2000 Archdiocesan vision aspiring to be a united Church, Isang Simbahan, has been highlighted as the theme of VI APA, 2008.
Oneness is an apostolic mark of the true Church. It is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Oneness is our identity. It is the very nature of Church. In Christ, we are one Church. We have one mission – the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus, the Lord and the Savior of the world.
But there are many gifts given to the Church by the Spirit of Jesus for this one mission. Various sectors of the Church have their own gifts, roles, functions. Thus we have the laity and their own roles and responsibilities in the secular world, the religious with their vocations and roles in the Church for the sake of mission, the clergy with their own gifts of ordination and personal roles.
Because of the many gifts, roles, and responsibilities in the church, it is the role of bishops to coordinate the various gifts in the Church so that we may all be one and united for the mission of announcing the Gospel. This is another deeper meaning of “Isang Simbahan” – unity of diverse gifts within the Church, diverse gifts working as one towards the mission.
Although the Church is by nature One, sometimes the diversity of roles are not very well united and coordinated. They are divided, they are sometimes in conflict, they are often subject to self-interest or even vested interest, they are not effective in achieving the mission. It is in the light of this weakness that we at APA 2008 aspire to be what we claim to be -- One Church.
In addition, sometimes we have different purposes and goals that clash with one another. One group would want the whole Archdiocese to be built on PREX, another group would want one religious movement or organization to take over all the formation program, and perhaps the senior citizens of the clergy, including the archbishop, would want one half of all the financial support system of the Archdiocese to be set aside for retirement and sickness benefit of the clergy. This would not, of course, be right. That is why as One Church, we should have one united aspiration – Isang Pangarap.
This why we have the theme: Isang Simbahan, Isang Pangarap.
B. Revisiting the 2000 Archdiocesan Vision
Let us now revisit the 2000 Archdiocesan Vision-Mission Statement in the light our 2008 Vision-Mission. Thus:
Sino?
In the light of our pastoral situation and impelled by our hope in Christ, We [the entire faithful of the Archdiocese of Cotabato]
Ano?
… envision ourselves as genuine disciples of Jesus both in word and deed.
We envision ourselves as Church, in solidarity with the poor among us, living like Jesus in evangelical poverty, promoting justice and peace as Church of the Poor.
We envision ourselves as an inculturated Church, understandable and credible to all cultures in our archdiocese in its announcing of the Kingdom of God.
We envision ourselves a genuine community of disciples, striving together in communion with God, with one another, and with creation.
We shall be a participatory Church whose members activate their God-given gifts and charisms in full co-responsibility toward the mission and work of the Church according to their vocations and various ways of life.
Paano?
We are convinced that our vision and mission are best concretized through the Archdiocesan pastoral thrust of building Basic Ecclesial Communities that reflect at the level of parishes and chapels, our vision of Church and our mission of integral evangelization.
For this reason our central pastoral priority, the core focus of our evangelization efforts is the transformation of the Family into a renewed and renewing domestic Church.
In a special way, in view of our pastoral situation, we shall emphasize the task of faith formation, justice, development and peace and reconciliation, especially between Muslims and Christians. We shall give priority to the poorest of the poor among whom are our indigenous brothers and sisters. We shall ensure that all our pastoral programs, movements and organizations shall be oriented and work actively toward this vision and mission.
[Commitment and Prayer]
To this vision of Church renewed and renewing with a mission of integral evangelization, we commit ourselves. We entrust ourselves to the loving intercession and protection of our Blessed Mother of the Immaculate Conception, the Patroness of our Archdiocese, who with our Lord Jesus acts at all times as our guide to the Kingdom of God, which is now and forever.
Mission
On the other hand, we have just approved our 2008 Archdiocesan Vision-Mission Statement:
Sino? – Kaming mga mananampalataya ng Arkidiyoses ng Cotabato
Ano? – Ay naghahangad ng nagkakaisang simbahang [One Church]
nakaugat kay Kristo [Rooted in Christ],
totoong maka-Diyos [pro-God],
maka-maralita [pro-poor = Church of the Poor]
may matatag na pananalig at paninindigan [Authentic
Discipleship]
at may aktibong partisipasyong ang lahat [Participatory
Church].
Paano? – Isasakatuparan namin ito (sa aming patuloy na paglalakbay)
[a Pilgrim Church]
sa pamamagitan ng pagtataguyod ng
Mumunting Pamayanang (Kristiyano) [BEC]
buhay na sumasaksi [Witnessing]
sa pagbabago at pagkaaktibo sa bawat aspeto ng buhay
[Integral Renewal, Integral Evangelization]
sa pagkalinga sa kapwa [Care / Service for Neighbor]
sa pagpapahalaga sa iba’t ibang kultura at pananam-
palataya [Inculturated Church, Inter-Religious Dialogue],
sa pagmamahal sa kalikasan [Care for the Environment]
sa paggalang sa lahat ng nilikha [Concern for all Creation].
sa pakikipagdayalogo tungo sa kapayapan [Dialogue for
Peace]
at sa pag-aaral upang maunawaan ang mga tanda ng
ng panahon [Discerning the Signs of the Times]
The above 2008 Archdiocesan Vision-Mission Statement is a re-echo of PCP-II. Thus in English:
Vision:
We, the faithful [Lay, Religious, and Clergy]
in the Archdiocese of Cotabato envision ourselves
to be a truly united Church,
rooted in Christ,
pro-God and pro-poor,
a firmly committed disciple-community
that is participatory.
Mission:
We shall journey towards this vision
through the building of Basic Ecclesial Communities that credibly work for and witness to:
Integral renewal and integral evangelization;
Care for others [particularly the poor];
Respect for other cultures and religious beliefs;
Love [care] for the environment;
Respect for the rest of creation;
Dialogue for peace; and
On-going discernment of the signs of the times.
Some Observations: Continuity of Vision - Mission
- Similarities of Vision
· Church of the Poor
· Inculturated Church
· Participatory Church
· Authentic Discipleship
- Similarities of Mission:
· Building BEC
· Peace and Dialogue for Peace
- Dissimilarities of Vision-Mission:
· Integral Evangelization – 2000 Mission; 2008 Vision
· 2008 Vision - Rootedness in Christ, pro-God, concern for Environment (implied in 2000 Mission)
· 2000 Mission – Family as Focal Point of Evangelization, Faith Formation, Justice, Peace, Development, Reconciliation, Orienting all Pastoral Programs to Vision-Mission
· 2008 Mission – Respect/Service to Neighbor (implies justice, peace, development, reconciliation
· Emphasis in the 2008 Vision-Mission on the crucial element of discerning the signs of the times.
Comment: Do we have here a break from the 2000 Vision-Vision? Or do we consider the absence of the major emphasis on Family and Faith Formation in the 2008 Mission as implied and perhaps part of the Strategic Plan that is still to come? I think this is the case.
C. Our work at the Archdiocesan Pastoral Assembly:
· Proclaim and celebrate the final Archdiocesan Vision-Mission
· Priority and Goal Setting at the Archdiocesan level
D. Priority Areas:
A new process:
From what I observe the whole archdiocese was involved in discerning pastoral priorities in the light of the draft vision-mission of the archdiocese and in the light of their parish socio-economic, political, religious and cultural situation (environmental scanning). This took place in several community gatherings at the BEC level to the parish. The process of discernment is similar to that of 2000 prioritizing: from grassroots to the top. However for the 2000 vision, the grassroots participated only through their delegates to the APA. For the 2008 vision-mission prioritizing, the delegates brought with them the results of the prioritizing already done at the grassroots. This is a more reliable and more participatory. More reliable because at APA we are certain of the thinking of the grassroots regarding the priorities they desire.
The process consisted in answering a question which I understand to be the following: “Based on the draft vision-mission statement of the Archdiocese and on environmental scanning, what would your parish consider as the first pastoral priority?” The following are the collated answers:
Kaming mga mananampalataya sa Arkidiyoses ng Cotabato:
· ay naghahangad ng nagkakaisang Simbahan -- 5 parishes
· totoong maka-Diyos -- 5 parishes
· may aktibong partisipasyong ang lahat -- 5 parishes
· may matatag na pananalig at paninindigan -- 5 parishes
· pag-aaral upang maunawaan and mga
tanda ng panahon -- 4 parishes
· bukas sa pagbabago at aktibo sa bawat
aspeto ng buhay -- 3 parishes
· nakaugat kay Kristo -- 2 parishes
· nagpapahalaga sa iba’t ibang kultura
at pananampalataya -- 1 parish
· pagtataguyod ng Mumunting Pamayanan -- 1 parish
· nagmamahal sa kalikasan -- 1 parish
· nakikipagdayalogo tungo sa kapayapaan -- 1 parish
If we study the above, we see that priorities have been made by the parishes on various elements of the vision-mission statement. Some are priorities in the vision (those in bold); others are priorities in the mission (italicized).
On the other hand, pastoral prioritizing the 2000 APA was mainly on the elements of mission (e.g, Building BEC, faith formation, family as pastoral focal point, justice, peace, development work, inter-religious dialogue, orienting all pastoral programs toward the vision-mission statement, etc.
It also seems to me that the 2008 priorities both in the vision and mission elements indicate a picture more of the parish desire than of the desire of the Archdiocese. This has to be so because environmental scanning for the Archdiocese is necessarily different from particular parishes. For instance, Pikit with its Muslim-Christian population would have a different priority from that of Langgal-Gapok with its problems of environment. The Archdiocesan vision-mission would have to consider these two priorities in its over-all perspective but the priority given to these two elements might be different at the Archdiocesan level.
Therefore, an archdiocesan vision-mission statement does not intend to tell each parish what pastoral priority it should have. For instance the element, “Isasakatuparan namin ito sa pamagitan ng pagtataguyod ng Mumunting Pamayanan” - even if only one parish selected it as its first priority, it remains as a fundamental element of the Archdiocesan Vision-Mission. Other parishes have their own priorities. They tell more of the desire of individual parishes than of the Archdiocesan desire. That is the way I would understand the collated priorities.
In addition, even if only five parishes chose “kami’y naghahangad ng nagkaisang Simbahan” as their first priority, one can hardly use less than one fifth of the parishes as expressing the desire of all the 28 parishes of the Archdiocese. 23 parishes did not choose this as their first priority. And yet I am sure that the aspiration to be One Church is the general desire of all the parishes.
Further, one element of the Vision-Mission is “kami’y nakaugat kay Kristo.” We all know that the Church comes from Christ and has to be rooted in Christ. In another image, Christ said, “I am the Vine, you are the branches.” Cut off from the vine, the branch has no life. Therefore, rootedness in Christ is fundamental for the whole community, the Archdiocese, to be an authentic disciple of Christ. Yet only two parishes made this as their first pastoral priority. It means that at the moment it is their most felt-need.
E. Archdiocesan Priorities
At the Archdiocesan level, I suggest the first three priorities of the Archdiocese based on my pastoral visitation to different parishes:
1. the need for more active, more participatory, more evangelizing Basic Ecclesial Communities with more effective trained lay leaders (element no. 10 of the Vision-Mission Statement).
2. The need for more and better faith formation of members of Basic Ecclesial Communities as implied by element nos. 3 to 7 and 11 of the Vision-Mission Satement, naka-ugat kay Kristo, maka-Diyos, maka-maralita, may aktibong partisipasyon, may matatag na pananalig at paninindigan, bukas sa pagbabago at aktibo sa bawat aspeto ng buhay.
3. Need for better and more effective social services for farmers and indigenous peoples in so far as the Church could provide, networking with the government and non-government organizations (see elements nos. 5 and 12, maka-maralita, buhay na sumasaksi sa pagkalinga sa kapwa).
F. Recommendations on Handling Pastoral Priorities
Finally, what should we do with all the priorities identified?
Regarding how to handle them, these are my recommendations:
1. Let each parish use the priorities it has chosen or will choose for its pastoral strategic planning;
2. At the Archdiocesan level let all the Archdiocesan pastoral program and APT consider in their own pastoral strategic planning the main pastoral priorities that the parishes have expressed.
3. Let all the pastoral programs at the pastoral level be ready to serve the different parishes in meeting their own parish priorities.
4. The pastoral priorities at the level of the archdiocese are common objectives for all the parishes. Let all the parishes move as One Church towards meeting these priorities (e.g., the three priorities I have mentioned above). This would be one concrete meaning of Isang Simbahan, Isang Pangarap.
Conclusion
This is what I have done in this reflection:
1. I have provided a theological basis for the theme of APA, Isang Simbahan, Isang Pangarap.
2. I have shown a continuity as well as a dissimilarity between the 2000 Archdiocesan Vision-Mission Statement and the 2008 Statement. Continuity means that the environmental scanning done for both APA was valid. Dissimilarity means that there have been new insights from the process of discernment on the pastoral situation.
3. Finally I have recommended several ways by which the priorities may be handled, both at the parish level and also at the level of the Archdiocese, i.e., Parish priorities and Archdiocesan (common) priorities.
I thank you most deeply for your participation. Thank you.
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
VI Archdiocesan Pastoral AssemblyTamontaka
May 28, 2008
My objectives are to show the continuity and the relationship between the two Statements; and to indicate how the priority areas pointed out by the parishes for APA 2008 may be considered and used.
A. The 2008 APA Theme: Isang Simbahan, Isang Pangarap
The 2000 APA envisioned that all the faithful in the Archdiocese of Cotabato (lay people, religious, and clergy) be genuine disciples of Jesus and a genuine community. This community of believers in Jesus has to be united as One Church, in communion with God, with one another, and with creation. This element of the 2000 Archdiocesan vision aspiring to be a united Church, Isang Simbahan, has been highlighted as the theme of VI APA, 2008.
Oneness is an apostolic mark of the true Church. It is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Oneness is our identity. It is the very nature of Church. In Christ, we are one Church. We have one mission – the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus, the Lord and the Savior of the world.
But there are many gifts given to the Church by the Spirit of Jesus for this one mission. Various sectors of the Church have their own gifts, roles, functions. Thus we have the laity and their own roles and responsibilities in the secular world, the religious with their vocations and roles in the Church for the sake of mission, the clergy with their own gifts of ordination and personal roles.
Because of the many gifts, roles, and responsibilities in the church, it is the role of bishops to coordinate the various gifts in the Church so that we may all be one and united for the mission of announcing the Gospel. This is another deeper meaning of “Isang Simbahan” – unity of diverse gifts within the Church, diverse gifts working as one towards the mission.
Although the Church is by nature One, sometimes the diversity of roles are not very well united and coordinated. They are divided, they are sometimes in conflict, they are often subject to self-interest or even vested interest, they are not effective in achieving the mission. It is in the light of this weakness that we at APA 2008 aspire to be what we claim to be -- One Church.
In addition, sometimes we have different purposes and goals that clash with one another. One group would want the whole Archdiocese to be built on PREX, another group would want one religious movement or organization to take over all the formation program, and perhaps the senior citizens of the clergy, including the archbishop, would want one half of all the financial support system of the Archdiocese to be set aside for retirement and sickness benefit of the clergy. This would not, of course, be right. That is why as One Church, we should have one united aspiration – Isang Pangarap.
This why we have the theme: Isang Simbahan, Isang Pangarap.
B. Revisiting the 2000 Archdiocesan Vision
Let us now revisit the 2000 Archdiocesan Vision-Mission Statement in the light our 2008 Vision-Mission. Thus:
Sino?
In the light of our pastoral situation and impelled by our hope in Christ, We [the entire faithful of the Archdiocese of Cotabato]
Ano?
… envision ourselves as genuine disciples of Jesus both in word and deed.
We envision ourselves as Church, in solidarity with the poor among us, living like Jesus in evangelical poverty, promoting justice and peace as Church of the Poor.
We envision ourselves as an inculturated Church, understandable and credible to all cultures in our archdiocese in its announcing of the Kingdom of God.
We envision ourselves a genuine community of disciples, striving together in communion with God, with one another, and with creation.
We shall be a participatory Church whose members activate their God-given gifts and charisms in full co-responsibility toward the mission and work of the Church according to their vocations and various ways of life.
Paano?
We are convinced that our vision and mission are best concretized through the Archdiocesan pastoral thrust of building Basic Ecclesial Communities that reflect at the level of parishes and chapels, our vision of Church and our mission of integral evangelization.
For this reason our central pastoral priority, the core focus of our evangelization efforts is the transformation of the Family into a renewed and renewing domestic Church.
In a special way, in view of our pastoral situation, we shall emphasize the task of faith formation, justice, development and peace and reconciliation, especially between Muslims and Christians. We shall give priority to the poorest of the poor among whom are our indigenous brothers and sisters. We shall ensure that all our pastoral programs, movements and organizations shall be oriented and work actively toward this vision and mission.
[Commitment and Prayer]
To this vision of Church renewed and renewing with a mission of integral evangelization, we commit ourselves. We entrust ourselves to the loving intercession and protection of our Blessed Mother of the Immaculate Conception, the Patroness of our Archdiocese, who with our Lord Jesus acts at all times as our guide to the Kingdom of God, which is now and forever.
Mission
On the other hand, we have just approved our 2008 Archdiocesan Vision-Mission Statement:
Sino? – Kaming mga mananampalataya ng Arkidiyoses ng Cotabato
Ano? – Ay naghahangad ng nagkakaisang simbahang [One Church]
nakaugat kay Kristo [Rooted in Christ],
totoong maka-Diyos [pro-God],
maka-maralita [pro-poor = Church of the Poor]
may matatag na pananalig at paninindigan [Authentic
Discipleship]
at may aktibong partisipasyong ang lahat [Participatory
Church].
Paano? – Isasakatuparan namin ito (sa aming patuloy na paglalakbay)
[a Pilgrim Church]
sa pamamagitan ng pagtataguyod ng
Mumunting Pamayanang (Kristiyano) [BEC]
buhay na sumasaksi [Witnessing]
sa pagbabago at pagkaaktibo sa bawat aspeto ng buhay
[Integral Renewal, Integral Evangelization]
sa pagkalinga sa kapwa [Care / Service for Neighbor]
sa pagpapahalaga sa iba’t ibang kultura at pananam-
palataya [Inculturated Church, Inter-Religious Dialogue],
sa pagmamahal sa kalikasan [Care for the Environment]
sa paggalang sa lahat ng nilikha [Concern for all Creation].
sa pakikipagdayalogo tungo sa kapayapan [Dialogue for
Peace]
at sa pag-aaral upang maunawaan ang mga tanda ng
ng panahon [Discerning the Signs of the Times]
The above 2008 Archdiocesan Vision-Mission Statement is a re-echo of PCP-II. Thus in English:
Vision:
We, the faithful [Lay, Religious, and Clergy]
in the Archdiocese of Cotabato envision ourselves
to be a truly united Church,
rooted in Christ,
pro-God and pro-poor,
a firmly committed disciple-community
that is participatory.
Mission:
We shall journey towards this vision
through the building of Basic Ecclesial Communities that credibly work for and witness to:
Integral renewal and integral evangelization;
Care for others [particularly the poor];
Respect for other cultures and religious beliefs;
Love [care] for the environment;
Respect for the rest of creation;
Dialogue for peace; and
On-going discernment of the signs of the times.
Some Observations: Continuity of Vision - Mission
- Similarities of Vision
· Church of the Poor
· Inculturated Church
· Participatory Church
· Authentic Discipleship
- Similarities of Mission:
· Building BEC
· Peace and Dialogue for Peace
- Dissimilarities of Vision-Mission:
· Integral Evangelization – 2000 Mission; 2008 Vision
· 2008 Vision - Rootedness in Christ, pro-God, concern for Environment (implied in 2000 Mission)
· 2000 Mission – Family as Focal Point of Evangelization, Faith Formation, Justice, Peace, Development, Reconciliation, Orienting all Pastoral Programs to Vision-Mission
· 2008 Mission – Respect/Service to Neighbor (implies justice, peace, development, reconciliation
· Emphasis in the 2008 Vision-Mission on the crucial element of discerning the signs of the times.
Comment: Do we have here a break from the 2000 Vision-Vision? Or do we consider the absence of the major emphasis on Family and Faith Formation in the 2008 Mission as implied and perhaps part of the Strategic Plan that is still to come? I think this is the case.
C. Our work at the Archdiocesan Pastoral Assembly:
· Proclaim and celebrate the final Archdiocesan Vision-Mission
· Priority and Goal Setting at the Archdiocesan level
D. Priority Areas:
A new process:
From what I observe the whole archdiocese was involved in discerning pastoral priorities in the light of the draft vision-mission of the archdiocese and in the light of their parish socio-economic, political, religious and cultural situation (environmental scanning). This took place in several community gatherings at the BEC level to the parish. The process of discernment is similar to that of 2000 prioritizing: from grassroots to the top. However for the 2000 vision, the grassroots participated only through their delegates to the APA. For the 2008 vision-mission prioritizing, the delegates brought with them the results of the prioritizing already done at the grassroots. This is a more reliable and more participatory. More reliable because at APA we are certain of the thinking of the grassroots regarding the priorities they desire.
The process consisted in answering a question which I understand to be the following: “Based on the draft vision-mission statement of the Archdiocese and on environmental scanning, what would your parish consider as the first pastoral priority?” The following are the collated answers:
Kaming mga mananampalataya sa Arkidiyoses ng Cotabato:
· ay naghahangad ng nagkakaisang Simbahan -- 5 parishes
· totoong maka-Diyos -- 5 parishes
· may aktibong partisipasyong ang lahat -- 5 parishes
· may matatag na pananalig at paninindigan -- 5 parishes
· pag-aaral upang maunawaan and mga
tanda ng panahon -- 4 parishes
· bukas sa pagbabago at aktibo sa bawat
aspeto ng buhay -- 3 parishes
· nakaugat kay Kristo -- 2 parishes
· nagpapahalaga sa iba’t ibang kultura
at pananampalataya -- 1 parish
· pagtataguyod ng Mumunting Pamayanan -- 1 parish
· nagmamahal sa kalikasan -- 1 parish
· nakikipagdayalogo tungo sa kapayapaan -- 1 parish
If we study the above, we see that priorities have been made by the parishes on various elements of the vision-mission statement. Some are priorities in the vision (those in bold); others are priorities in the mission (italicized).
On the other hand, pastoral prioritizing the 2000 APA was mainly on the elements of mission (e.g, Building BEC, faith formation, family as pastoral focal point, justice, peace, development work, inter-religious dialogue, orienting all pastoral programs toward the vision-mission statement, etc.
It also seems to me that the 2008 priorities both in the vision and mission elements indicate a picture more of the parish desire than of the desire of the Archdiocese. This has to be so because environmental scanning for the Archdiocese is necessarily different from particular parishes. For instance, Pikit with its Muslim-Christian population would have a different priority from that of Langgal-Gapok with its problems of environment. The Archdiocesan vision-mission would have to consider these two priorities in its over-all perspective but the priority given to these two elements might be different at the Archdiocesan level.
Therefore, an archdiocesan vision-mission statement does not intend to tell each parish what pastoral priority it should have. For instance the element, “Isasakatuparan namin ito sa pamagitan ng pagtataguyod ng Mumunting Pamayanan” - even if only one parish selected it as its first priority, it remains as a fundamental element of the Archdiocesan Vision-Mission. Other parishes have their own priorities. They tell more of the desire of individual parishes than of the Archdiocesan desire. That is the way I would understand the collated priorities.
In addition, even if only five parishes chose “kami’y naghahangad ng nagkaisang Simbahan” as their first priority, one can hardly use less than one fifth of the parishes as expressing the desire of all the 28 parishes of the Archdiocese. 23 parishes did not choose this as their first priority. And yet I am sure that the aspiration to be One Church is the general desire of all the parishes.
Further, one element of the Vision-Mission is “kami’y nakaugat kay Kristo.” We all know that the Church comes from Christ and has to be rooted in Christ. In another image, Christ said, “I am the Vine, you are the branches.” Cut off from the vine, the branch has no life. Therefore, rootedness in Christ is fundamental for the whole community, the Archdiocese, to be an authentic disciple of Christ. Yet only two parishes made this as their first pastoral priority. It means that at the moment it is their most felt-need.
E. Archdiocesan Priorities
At the Archdiocesan level, I suggest the first three priorities of the Archdiocese based on my pastoral visitation to different parishes:
1. the need for more active, more participatory, more evangelizing Basic Ecclesial Communities with more effective trained lay leaders (element no. 10 of the Vision-Mission Statement).
2. The need for more and better faith formation of members of Basic Ecclesial Communities as implied by element nos. 3 to 7 and 11 of the Vision-Mission Satement, naka-ugat kay Kristo, maka-Diyos, maka-maralita, may aktibong partisipasyon, may matatag na pananalig at paninindigan, bukas sa pagbabago at aktibo sa bawat aspeto ng buhay.
3. Need for better and more effective social services for farmers and indigenous peoples in so far as the Church could provide, networking with the government and non-government organizations (see elements nos. 5 and 12, maka-maralita, buhay na sumasaksi sa pagkalinga sa kapwa).
F. Recommendations on Handling Pastoral Priorities
Finally, what should we do with all the priorities identified?
Regarding how to handle them, these are my recommendations:
1. Let each parish use the priorities it has chosen or will choose for its pastoral strategic planning;
2. At the Archdiocesan level let all the Archdiocesan pastoral program and APT consider in their own pastoral strategic planning the main pastoral priorities that the parishes have expressed.
3. Let all the pastoral programs at the pastoral level be ready to serve the different parishes in meeting their own parish priorities.
4. The pastoral priorities at the level of the archdiocese are common objectives for all the parishes. Let all the parishes move as One Church towards meeting these priorities (e.g., the three priorities I have mentioned above). This would be one concrete meaning of Isang Simbahan, Isang Pangarap.
Conclusion
This is what I have done in this reflection:
1. I have provided a theological basis for the theme of APA, Isang Simbahan, Isang Pangarap.
2. I have shown a continuity as well as a dissimilarity between the 2000 Archdiocesan Vision-Mission Statement and the 2008 Statement. Continuity means that the environmental scanning done for both APA was valid. Dissimilarity means that there have been new insights from the process of discernment on the pastoral situation.
3. Finally I have recommended several ways by which the priorities may be handled, both at the parish level and also at the level of the Archdiocese, i.e., Parish priorities and Archdiocesan (common) priorities.
I thank you most deeply for your participation. Thank you.
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
VI Archdiocesan Pastoral AssemblyTamontaka
May 28, 2008
Friday, May 16, 2008
Communion, Solidarity and Mission: Response to the Breakup of the Family of Migrants and Itinerant Peoples
Introduction
The phenomenon of migrants and itinerant peoples of various kinds from workers to refugees has been discussed thoroughly in the past few days at this seminar. Through various conferences we have become more aware of their social, political, cultural, religious, and economic situation. The litany of problems seems to be endless. The problems differ, sometimes in kind and sometimes in degree, from country to country. All these constitute the pastoral situation of migrant workers and itinerant peoples.
My subject matter is limited, namely, the issue of the breakup of the family of migrant workers and itinerant peoples. And the question is simple – what can we do to respond to family breakup?
May I attempt to develop a general pastoral response to this tragic situation.
The pastoral perspective that I shall assume is inspired by three decades of pastoral reflection on various pastoral challenges by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC). The Federation is composed of all the bishops in Central Asia, South Asia, East Asia, and Southeast Asia – from Kazakhstan to East Timor.
The themes that FABC uses to reflect on the pastoral situation include the following:
(1) in the light of the Asian pastoral situation the mission of announcing the Gospel of Jesus is by way of a triple dialogue – dialogue with the peoples of Asia especially the majority poor, dialogue with the various cultures of Asia, and dialogue with the different religions of Asia;
(2) for the common task of social transformation in the Asian situation of religious pluralism, a common basis for action is the universal Reign of God;
(3) the local church is the acting subject of mission;
(4) international collaboration is necessary to face the challenges in the common journey to God’s Reign;
(5) According to the 7th and 8th FABC Plenary Assemblies, the situation of itinerant and migrant workers is one of the major pastoral priorities in Asia.
The pastoral response I wish to present may be summarized in the following way: In the light of the universal mission of the Church to announce the Gospel of Jesus, relevant family ministry should be set up in every local church with the task of building communion and solidarity among members of families, among families and local churches. Such ministry should have a perspective of the Reign of God. It should respond to the needs of families in special situations, such as the families of migrants and itinerant peoples.
1. A Family Ministry in Dialogue with Migrants and Itinerant Peoples.
Without doubt the great majority migrants and itinerant peoples leave their homes and work in other countries without referring themselves to their local church. They go to recruiting agencies and work out their travel and immigration papers directly through them. In many cases they receive only a minimum of information about the receiving countries, the people and their cultures, the employers that hire them, conditions of work, the customs of the people among whom they will work. If they go to countries with a predominantly different religion, they have only little knowledge about the risks to their own faith, the problems of practicing their faith, the pressures on them because of differences of faith.
In general they are aware of the problems of living apart from their families for an extended period of time, the pressures on the brothers, sisters, and parents they leave behind, and particularly on their spouses and children. At the end as Ecclesia in Asia (1999) says, “In the countries to which they come, these people often find themselves friendless, culturally estranged, linguistically disadvantaged and economically vulnerable” (no. 34).
But all these they have decided to go through for the sake of a better future for their families. The future of their family is uppermost in their minds.
As migrants leave for work the temporary break-up of the family of migrants and itinerant peoples becomes actual. In the duration of their work contract, the separation of the members of the family will be keenly felt, even for those who have worked for several years away from their families with brief periods of vacation. Intermittent reunions will not completely assuage the loneliness of being separated from their families.
But it is not only loneliness or homesickness that is of concern to families. It is the negative impact that the absence of perhaps a key member of the family (e.g., a father or mother, an older brother or sister) would have on the family itself, on the natural growth and development of the children.
Moreover in the experience of many families, a permanent breakup is not only possible. It can be real, as when the migrant or itinerant worker falls into other relationships either casually with many persons or permanently with one person. These relationships can ruin the relationship that the migrant worker has with the family that is left behind.
Given the above situation of temporary and permanent family breakup, possible or actual, and the many other social, cultural, religious, economic and legal problems that have been mentioned at this seminar, the setting up of a family ministry at the churches of origin and destination is imperative. Among its tasks would be to help migrants and itinerants regarding legal cases and to be their advocates regarding their rights. But family ministry has to go beyond these tasks.
Family ministry has to be in dialogue with migrant workers and itinerant peoples. Pastoral workers have to know them, their life situations, their conditions of work. Dialogue with them will reveal their real pastoral situation, their priority needs, and the ways by which effective response can be given to their situation. Through such dialogue an effective family ministry with the proper social dimensions on behalf of migrants and itinerant peoples can be set up. Without such dialogue a pastoral response can be misdirected and irrelevant.
2. A Family Ministry that Cares and Serves
Family breakup contradicts the nature of marriage and family. The Lord of families calls the local churches to do the task of explaining in a credible and convincing manner the nature of marriage and of family as a communion of love and care.
This task also aims at educating members of families to reflect in their lives and relationships the communion that they are called to be. The family is a sanctuary within which the unity of husband, wife and children is fostered. It is God’s gift to them for the sake of salvation. In this way their natural desire for unity in love is consciously brought to the realm of the spirit and of the Reign of God. Such formation in faith given by the local church regarding marriage and family builds communion and solidarity within the family. It prepares them to live up to their family commitments while one or more members of the family depart for work in a foreign country.
The task of formation and education requires a family ministry that cares for and serves families of migrants and itinerant peoples.
When migrants and itinerants actually leave for their places of work, the local church of origin still has the task helping maintain and promote the communion and solidarity of the family. Through pastoral guidance and encouragement, the local church provides the spiritual resources that give them strength to bear and cope with separation.
On the other hand, in communion and solidarity with the local church of origin and with the migrant and itinerant worker, the church of arrival has to provide a similar ministry of care and service. It begins with a “ministry of welcome” (see Erga migrantes caritas Christi, no. 40). In this way the “stranger” will find a home away from home -- in the Lord’s household that is the Church. The local church of arrival is not only a place where migrants and itinerant peoples go for worship. It should be a place where they find “family” belongingness, friendship and fellowship in community. Simple celebrations of birthdays and other anniversaries take on greater meaning when celebrated within such fellowships.
Concretely, this means the active presence and ministry of chaplains and pastoral workers to whom migrant workers and itinerant peoples can refer their problems and find a listening ear and caring hand. Letters of introduction would also help. It is important for pastoral workers to know a little bit of the cultures of migrants and itinerant workers and be able to speak to speak to them in a language they understand. The lack of ability to communicate in a language that is understood is one of the most serious causes of loneliness and alienation. Associations of migrants and itinerant peoples will add to the spirit of common strength, belongingness and fellowship they find in the church.
Such pastoral care was envisioned by the FABC at its 8th Plenary Assembly held in Daejeon, Korea in 2004 on the topic: “The Asian Family towards a Culture of Integral Life.”
One of its pastoral recommendations is the setting up of family ministries in Asia that “form and empower,” “care and serve,” and “promote social transformation.” Among the special programs of a caring and serving family ministry, the Plenary Assembly recommended “setting up programs for families with migrant workers abroad and helping migrant workers before they leave and when they return” (Final Document, no. 119).
The FABC vision of family ministry in Asia calls for pastoral programs that should “make the inner resources of our faith (the sacraments, liturgy, prayer, day-to-day spirituality) available to couples and heir families in their striving toward a culture of integral life… and should empower families to become evangelizers, such that ministry is not only for families but by families” (no. 116).
3. A Family Ministry that Forms and Empowers
Beyond the simple idea of receiving pastoral care is the universal mission, valid also for migrants and itinerants, to evangelize others. For this reason, a family ministry should form and empower in the faith. In communion and solidarity both the church of origin and the church of destination have to work on empowering migrants and itinerant peoples to become evangelizers.
It is well known that by the dynamism of their religious faith migrant workers and itinerant peoples have impressed peoples with weakened faith or with hardly any practical faith. Domestic workers in many countries of Europe bring the children of their employers to church on Sundays, teach them how to pray and what the basic tenets of the Church are.
In the churches of origin faith formation and empowerment can be done through the regular catechetical and biblical programs at the parish level in collaboration with the family ministry of the parish. The local church should especially emphasize formation to a spirituality of communion in the family:
… at the heart of the family is Communion, communion with God, communion of the spouses, communion of young or elderly parents and their children, communion with grandparents and other members of the extended family…. It is a union of hearts and minds that in a human way reflects the communion of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – the Triune God from whom the family came to be…. Communion within the family, however, reaches out to the wider community and impels the family toward a mission of service for the sake of the Reign of God. This outward movement enables the family to share the Trinitarian communion that it is gifted with. A spirituality of communion infuses vigor and enthusiasm – life – into the dynamics of the family, the relationship between spouses, between parents and children, between members of the extended family (8th FABC Plenary Assembly, Daejeon, Korea, August 17-23, 2004, Final Document, nos. 105-106).
A spirituality of communion, unity, and solidarity will definitely help spouses and children cope better with the aches and pains of temporary separation. Kept alive through prayer and communication, it would also serve to overcome temptations to permanent separation.
In the churches of arrival, migrant workers and itinerant peoples could follow a designed program of catechesis and have on-going faith and biblical formation. For instance Filipino migrant workers who come together for Mass and socialization every Sunday could have on-going faith formation for an hour after the Mass and before their socialization and fellowship activities. [In Rome student priests at the Pontificio Collegio Filippino are assigned to various churches on Sundays where Filipino migrants and itinerants gather for Mass and fellowship. They act as chaplains providing religious services, giving spiritual conferences, helping organize them, and bringing them together for various events, social and religious. This is a practice that can not be replicated in other places, simply because of the lack of chaplains].
But on the issue of on-going formation and empowerment, an initiative in some countries like the Philippines is significant in the light of the concerns of migrants and itinerant people. This is the training of pastoral workers. A week-long course was started six years ago by the Scalabrini Migration Center in Manila in collaboration with the Philippine Bishops’ Commission on the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People. This was designed to train pastoral workers for migrants. Last January the course was attended by 46 pastoral workers from Korea, Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan, Indonesia and the Philippines. They went through learning modules covering the migrant situation in Asia, church teachings on migration, the mission with migrants in Asia, specific issues on the care of migrants, networking and planning future programs.
The more programs there are to train pastoral workers, the better for the mission of caring and serving migrants and their families.
My suggestion is for pastoral care and activities to go beyond worship, socialization and fellowship and into ongoing formation and empowerment for integral evangelization.
Evangelizing by migrants and itinerant peoples may seem to be idealistic but for many Filipino migrant workers this is already a lived experience. Already many Filipino migrants who belong to various lay religious movements such as El Shaddai, Couples for Christ, and other charismatic groups follow the faith formation sessions of their lay groups.
It is a matter simply of consciously bringing the missionary or evangelizing dimension into the on-going faith formation session and continuing what may already have been started at the local church of origin.
Here again we see the great need of collaboration – of communion and solidarity for mission among migrants and itinerant peoples, between them and the local churches of origin and arrival.
4. In Dialogue with Other Cultures and Religions
What has been said so far would seem to apply only in places where migrants and itinerant peoples can practice their own religion freely and where local churches of origin and destination play a great role.
But the great majority of Asian migrants and itinerant peoples live and work in countries where they cannot freely and safely practice a religion different from that of their host country. In such countries temporary separation from one’s own family becomes even more acute. They are deprived of the strength and consolation that religious faith and fellowship could provide even when a celebration is merely a birthday or anniversary.
It is in this situation that prior formation and empowerment in the local church of origin is important and imperative. Prior faith formation can help migrant workers and itinerant peoples cope with the pressures of work in a country of different religious persuasion and where religious conversion in order to have better work conditions and higher compensation is always a severe temptation.
Only a dialogue of life is possible in such situation. For domestic workers, more restricted to the home of employers perhaps not even this is possible. Friendship and fellowship with peoples of other faiths and cultures would certainly ease the aches of homesickness and being separated from families.
Moreover, dialogue – solidarity and collaboration (or diplomatic arrangemenst) -- between governments with peoples of predominantly different religions will go a long way to make migrants and itinerant peoples feel at home in their countries of work.
5. Solidarity and Collaboration at the International Level
Beyond decent and humane working conditions is a mutuality and reciprocity of rights, especially of the fundamental freedom of religion, based on the universal golden rule – “Do unto others what you want them do unto you.” Recent appeals by the Holy Father for such reciprocity of rights and freedom of religion have raised the consciousness of people around the world regarding this human rights issue. It has also raised the bar of inter-religious dialogue a bit higher.
To promote this reciprocity of rights and to ensure that peoples of different faiths practice their religion freely and safely everywhere would be a paramount responsibility of international decision makers. It needs dialogue, solidarity, and collaboration between States. It would also be necessary for the United Nations to act determinedly on this issue in accord with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Dialogue towards recognizing and practicing reciprocity of the freedom of religion is a task needing the utmost mutual respect, openness, persistence and determination. For if States do not recognize such freedom for their own citizen-minorities, how much more difficult it would be for States to recognize the same freedom to migrants and itinerant workers.
Dialogue, solidarity and collaboration at the international level should also address another burning issue – the issue of reuniting the families of migrants and of recognizing their rights as families, according them the same protection as other families (see the Holy See’s Charter of the Rights of the Family, 1983, Article 12).
Granted that there are many obstacles that prevent effective resolution, including concerns about internal security, economics and demography, the obstacles are not insurmountable. The pastoral care of migrants and itinerant peoples would call for local and international advocacy on these issues regarding family unification and family rights.
To be highly commended is the work of non-governmental organizations both at the local and international levels, such as the International Catholic Migration Commission, that pushes the advocacy of the Church and its dicasteries forward at various fora. Advocacy is part and parcel of pastoral care and strives to press forward ethical decisions on migrants and their families in accord with the teachings of the Church.
2. A Common Basis for Pastoral Work toward Communion and Solidarity -- the Reign of God
In a situation where peoples of different religious traditions and their governments are involved, the pastoral care of migrant workers and itinerant peoples would require a common perspective. We who believe in Jesus Christ are guided in our work by this belief in Jesus and by the mission of proclaiming him as the Lord and Savior of the world. This is our unique perspective. We need to keep this perspective in our consciousness. It should always motivate and energize our pastoral work.
But in the care of migrant workers and itinerants, collaboration and solidarity with other religious traditions and their governments would require a common perspective. This is provided by the perspective of God’s Reign. Brothers and sisters under the one God are on a journey together towards God’s Reign which comes definitively a the end of time. We are in the “now and not yet” dimension of God’s Reign. We are called to make this one globalized world a safe home for all, a home to be built on justice, truth, freedom, peace, and love. These are fundamental values of the Reign of God.
It is this perspective of God’s Reign, of God’s loving dominion over us, that pulls together efforts of various religions and ideologies to respond to the family breakup of migrant workers and itinerant peoples.
Conclusion
To the question how can we respond effectively to the breakup of the family of migrant workers and itinerant peoples, I have attempted to provide a pastoral response in the light of reflections of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences.
The response concretely calls for a triple dialogue – with the poor, with cultures, and religious traditions. It calls for the setting up of a family ministry that is in dialogue with migrants and itinerants, with their cultures and religious traditions.
It is a family ministry that cares and serves, forms and empowers for mission. Formation towards a spirituality of communion which is at the heart of marriage and the family is the key element of this pastoral response.
The response also calls for solidarity and collaboration between churches of origin and arrival, and between States at the international level. The crux of the matter is reciprocity and mutuality of rights, particularly of the freedom of religion. When migrant workers and itinerant peoples enjoy freedom of religion, they are able to avail themselves of the spiritual resources of their faith. They are better able to cope with pressures of temporary family breakup and the severe temptations to permanent family break-up.
The common basis of action for such solidarity and collaboration is the universal journey of all peoples towards the Reign of God, a journey towards justice and truth, peace, freedom and love.
A Recommendation to the Pontifical Council
In two full days we have listened to 22 conferences on the situation of various kinds of migrant workers and itinerant peoples. For us who are new to this ministry of pastoral care, the conferences have given us an excellent panoramic view of the pastoral situation. But due to time constraints we may not have been able to explore major issues in depth.
In a certain sense, migrant workers and itinerant peoples constitute a global “diocese” or even a number of global “dioceses.”
Therefore, for a better and more effective collaboration and solidarity, may I respectfully recommend that those responsible in regional and continental Episcopal assemblies come together every two or three years under the leadership of the Pontifical Council for the purpose of discussing in depth two or three burning issues affecting migrant workers, itinerant peoples and their families.
Thank you.
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato
FABC Secretary General
Rome, May 15, 2008
The phenomenon of migrants and itinerant peoples of various kinds from workers to refugees has been discussed thoroughly in the past few days at this seminar. Through various conferences we have become more aware of their social, political, cultural, religious, and economic situation. The litany of problems seems to be endless. The problems differ, sometimes in kind and sometimes in degree, from country to country. All these constitute the pastoral situation of migrant workers and itinerant peoples.
My subject matter is limited, namely, the issue of the breakup of the family of migrant workers and itinerant peoples. And the question is simple – what can we do to respond to family breakup?
May I attempt to develop a general pastoral response to this tragic situation.
The pastoral perspective that I shall assume is inspired by three decades of pastoral reflection on various pastoral challenges by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC). The Federation is composed of all the bishops in Central Asia, South Asia, East Asia, and Southeast Asia – from Kazakhstan to East Timor.
The themes that FABC uses to reflect on the pastoral situation include the following:
(1) in the light of the Asian pastoral situation the mission of announcing the Gospel of Jesus is by way of a triple dialogue – dialogue with the peoples of Asia especially the majority poor, dialogue with the various cultures of Asia, and dialogue with the different religions of Asia;
(2) for the common task of social transformation in the Asian situation of religious pluralism, a common basis for action is the universal Reign of God;
(3) the local church is the acting subject of mission;
(4) international collaboration is necessary to face the challenges in the common journey to God’s Reign;
(5) According to the 7th and 8th FABC Plenary Assemblies, the situation of itinerant and migrant workers is one of the major pastoral priorities in Asia.
The pastoral response I wish to present may be summarized in the following way: In the light of the universal mission of the Church to announce the Gospel of Jesus, relevant family ministry should be set up in every local church with the task of building communion and solidarity among members of families, among families and local churches. Such ministry should have a perspective of the Reign of God. It should respond to the needs of families in special situations, such as the families of migrants and itinerant peoples.
1. A Family Ministry in Dialogue with Migrants and Itinerant Peoples.
Without doubt the great majority migrants and itinerant peoples leave their homes and work in other countries without referring themselves to their local church. They go to recruiting agencies and work out their travel and immigration papers directly through them. In many cases they receive only a minimum of information about the receiving countries, the people and their cultures, the employers that hire them, conditions of work, the customs of the people among whom they will work. If they go to countries with a predominantly different religion, they have only little knowledge about the risks to their own faith, the problems of practicing their faith, the pressures on them because of differences of faith.
In general they are aware of the problems of living apart from their families for an extended period of time, the pressures on the brothers, sisters, and parents they leave behind, and particularly on their spouses and children. At the end as Ecclesia in Asia (1999) says, “In the countries to which they come, these people often find themselves friendless, culturally estranged, linguistically disadvantaged and economically vulnerable” (no. 34).
But all these they have decided to go through for the sake of a better future for their families. The future of their family is uppermost in their minds.
As migrants leave for work the temporary break-up of the family of migrants and itinerant peoples becomes actual. In the duration of their work contract, the separation of the members of the family will be keenly felt, even for those who have worked for several years away from their families with brief periods of vacation. Intermittent reunions will not completely assuage the loneliness of being separated from their families.
But it is not only loneliness or homesickness that is of concern to families. It is the negative impact that the absence of perhaps a key member of the family (e.g., a father or mother, an older brother or sister) would have on the family itself, on the natural growth and development of the children.
Moreover in the experience of many families, a permanent breakup is not only possible. It can be real, as when the migrant or itinerant worker falls into other relationships either casually with many persons or permanently with one person. These relationships can ruin the relationship that the migrant worker has with the family that is left behind.
Given the above situation of temporary and permanent family breakup, possible or actual, and the many other social, cultural, religious, economic and legal problems that have been mentioned at this seminar, the setting up of a family ministry at the churches of origin and destination is imperative. Among its tasks would be to help migrants and itinerants regarding legal cases and to be their advocates regarding their rights. But family ministry has to go beyond these tasks.
Family ministry has to be in dialogue with migrant workers and itinerant peoples. Pastoral workers have to know them, their life situations, their conditions of work. Dialogue with them will reveal their real pastoral situation, their priority needs, and the ways by which effective response can be given to their situation. Through such dialogue an effective family ministry with the proper social dimensions on behalf of migrants and itinerant peoples can be set up. Without such dialogue a pastoral response can be misdirected and irrelevant.
2. A Family Ministry that Cares and Serves
Family breakup contradicts the nature of marriage and family. The Lord of families calls the local churches to do the task of explaining in a credible and convincing manner the nature of marriage and of family as a communion of love and care.
This task also aims at educating members of families to reflect in their lives and relationships the communion that they are called to be. The family is a sanctuary within which the unity of husband, wife and children is fostered. It is God’s gift to them for the sake of salvation. In this way their natural desire for unity in love is consciously brought to the realm of the spirit and of the Reign of God. Such formation in faith given by the local church regarding marriage and family builds communion and solidarity within the family. It prepares them to live up to their family commitments while one or more members of the family depart for work in a foreign country.
The task of formation and education requires a family ministry that cares for and serves families of migrants and itinerant peoples.
When migrants and itinerants actually leave for their places of work, the local church of origin still has the task helping maintain and promote the communion and solidarity of the family. Through pastoral guidance and encouragement, the local church provides the spiritual resources that give them strength to bear and cope with separation.
On the other hand, in communion and solidarity with the local church of origin and with the migrant and itinerant worker, the church of arrival has to provide a similar ministry of care and service. It begins with a “ministry of welcome” (see Erga migrantes caritas Christi, no. 40). In this way the “stranger” will find a home away from home -- in the Lord’s household that is the Church. The local church of arrival is not only a place where migrants and itinerant peoples go for worship. It should be a place where they find “family” belongingness, friendship and fellowship in community. Simple celebrations of birthdays and other anniversaries take on greater meaning when celebrated within such fellowships.
Concretely, this means the active presence and ministry of chaplains and pastoral workers to whom migrant workers and itinerant peoples can refer their problems and find a listening ear and caring hand. Letters of introduction would also help. It is important for pastoral workers to know a little bit of the cultures of migrants and itinerant workers and be able to speak to speak to them in a language they understand. The lack of ability to communicate in a language that is understood is one of the most serious causes of loneliness and alienation. Associations of migrants and itinerant peoples will add to the spirit of common strength, belongingness and fellowship they find in the church.
Such pastoral care was envisioned by the FABC at its 8th Plenary Assembly held in Daejeon, Korea in 2004 on the topic: “The Asian Family towards a Culture of Integral Life.”
One of its pastoral recommendations is the setting up of family ministries in Asia that “form and empower,” “care and serve,” and “promote social transformation.” Among the special programs of a caring and serving family ministry, the Plenary Assembly recommended “setting up programs for families with migrant workers abroad and helping migrant workers before they leave and when they return” (Final Document, no. 119).
The FABC vision of family ministry in Asia calls for pastoral programs that should “make the inner resources of our faith (the sacraments, liturgy, prayer, day-to-day spirituality) available to couples and heir families in their striving toward a culture of integral life… and should empower families to become evangelizers, such that ministry is not only for families but by families” (no. 116).
3. A Family Ministry that Forms and Empowers
Beyond the simple idea of receiving pastoral care is the universal mission, valid also for migrants and itinerants, to evangelize others. For this reason, a family ministry should form and empower in the faith. In communion and solidarity both the church of origin and the church of destination have to work on empowering migrants and itinerant peoples to become evangelizers.
It is well known that by the dynamism of their religious faith migrant workers and itinerant peoples have impressed peoples with weakened faith or with hardly any practical faith. Domestic workers in many countries of Europe bring the children of their employers to church on Sundays, teach them how to pray and what the basic tenets of the Church are.
In the churches of origin faith formation and empowerment can be done through the regular catechetical and biblical programs at the parish level in collaboration with the family ministry of the parish. The local church should especially emphasize formation to a spirituality of communion in the family:
… at the heart of the family is Communion, communion with God, communion of the spouses, communion of young or elderly parents and their children, communion with grandparents and other members of the extended family…. It is a union of hearts and minds that in a human way reflects the communion of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – the Triune God from whom the family came to be…. Communion within the family, however, reaches out to the wider community and impels the family toward a mission of service for the sake of the Reign of God. This outward movement enables the family to share the Trinitarian communion that it is gifted with. A spirituality of communion infuses vigor and enthusiasm – life – into the dynamics of the family, the relationship between spouses, between parents and children, between members of the extended family (8th FABC Plenary Assembly, Daejeon, Korea, August 17-23, 2004, Final Document, nos. 105-106).
A spirituality of communion, unity, and solidarity will definitely help spouses and children cope better with the aches and pains of temporary separation. Kept alive through prayer and communication, it would also serve to overcome temptations to permanent separation.
In the churches of arrival, migrant workers and itinerant peoples could follow a designed program of catechesis and have on-going faith and biblical formation. For instance Filipino migrant workers who come together for Mass and socialization every Sunday could have on-going faith formation for an hour after the Mass and before their socialization and fellowship activities. [In Rome student priests at the Pontificio Collegio Filippino are assigned to various churches on Sundays where Filipino migrants and itinerants gather for Mass and fellowship. They act as chaplains providing religious services, giving spiritual conferences, helping organize them, and bringing them together for various events, social and religious. This is a practice that can not be replicated in other places, simply because of the lack of chaplains].
But on the issue of on-going formation and empowerment, an initiative in some countries like the Philippines is significant in the light of the concerns of migrants and itinerant people. This is the training of pastoral workers. A week-long course was started six years ago by the Scalabrini Migration Center in Manila in collaboration with the Philippine Bishops’ Commission on the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People. This was designed to train pastoral workers for migrants. Last January the course was attended by 46 pastoral workers from Korea, Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan, Indonesia and the Philippines. They went through learning modules covering the migrant situation in Asia, church teachings on migration, the mission with migrants in Asia, specific issues on the care of migrants, networking and planning future programs.
The more programs there are to train pastoral workers, the better for the mission of caring and serving migrants and their families.
My suggestion is for pastoral care and activities to go beyond worship, socialization and fellowship and into ongoing formation and empowerment for integral evangelization.
Evangelizing by migrants and itinerant peoples may seem to be idealistic but for many Filipino migrant workers this is already a lived experience. Already many Filipino migrants who belong to various lay religious movements such as El Shaddai, Couples for Christ, and other charismatic groups follow the faith formation sessions of their lay groups.
It is a matter simply of consciously bringing the missionary or evangelizing dimension into the on-going faith formation session and continuing what may already have been started at the local church of origin.
Here again we see the great need of collaboration – of communion and solidarity for mission among migrants and itinerant peoples, between them and the local churches of origin and arrival.
4. In Dialogue with Other Cultures and Religions
What has been said so far would seem to apply only in places where migrants and itinerant peoples can practice their own religion freely and where local churches of origin and destination play a great role.
But the great majority of Asian migrants and itinerant peoples live and work in countries where they cannot freely and safely practice a religion different from that of their host country. In such countries temporary separation from one’s own family becomes even more acute. They are deprived of the strength and consolation that religious faith and fellowship could provide even when a celebration is merely a birthday or anniversary.
It is in this situation that prior formation and empowerment in the local church of origin is important and imperative. Prior faith formation can help migrant workers and itinerant peoples cope with the pressures of work in a country of different religious persuasion and where religious conversion in order to have better work conditions and higher compensation is always a severe temptation.
Only a dialogue of life is possible in such situation. For domestic workers, more restricted to the home of employers perhaps not even this is possible. Friendship and fellowship with peoples of other faiths and cultures would certainly ease the aches of homesickness and being separated from families.
Moreover, dialogue – solidarity and collaboration (or diplomatic arrangemenst) -- between governments with peoples of predominantly different religions will go a long way to make migrants and itinerant peoples feel at home in their countries of work.
5. Solidarity and Collaboration at the International Level
Beyond decent and humane working conditions is a mutuality and reciprocity of rights, especially of the fundamental freedom of religion, based on the universal golden rule – “Do unto others what you want them do unto you.” Recent appeals by the Holy Father for such reciprocity of rights and freedom of religion have raised the consciousness of people around the world regarding this human rights issue. It has also raised the bar of inter-religious dialogue a bit higher.
To promote this reciprocity of rights and to ensure that peoples of different faiths practice their religion freely and safely everywhere would be a paramount responsibility of international decision makers. It needs dialogue, solidarity, and collaboration between States. It would also be necessary for the United Nations to act determinedly on this issue in accord with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Dialogue towards recognizing and practicing reciprocity of the freedom of religion is a task needing the utmost mutual respect, openness, persistence and determination. For if States do not recognize such freedom for their own citizen-minorities, how much more difficult it would be for States to recognize the same freedom to migrants and itinerant workers.
Dialogue, solidarity and collaboration at the international level should also address another burning issue – the issue of reuniting the families of migrants and of recognizing their rights as families, according them the same protection as other families (see the Holy See’s Charter of the Rights of the Family, 1983, Article 12).
Granted that there are many obstacles that prevent effective resolution, including concerns about internal security, economics and demography, the obstacles are not insurmountable. The pastoral care of migrants and itinerant peoples would call for local and international advocacy on these issues regarding family unification and family rights.
To be highly commended is the work of non-governmental organizations both at the local and international levels, such as the International Catholic Migration Commission, that pushes the advocacy of the Church and its dicasteries forward at various fora. Advocacy is part and parcel of pastoral care and strives to press forward ethical decisions on migrants and their families in accord with the teachings of the Church.
2. A Common Basis for Pastoral Work toward Communion and Solidarity -- the Reign of God
In a situation where peoples of different religious traditions and their governments are involved, the pastoral care of migrant workers and itinerant peoples would require a common perspective. We who believe in Jesus Christ are guided in our work by this belief in Jesus and by the mission of proclaiming him as the Lord and Savior of the world. This is our unique perspective. We need to keep this perspective in our consciousness. It should always motivate and energize our pastoral work.
But in the care of migrant workers and itinerants, collaboration and solidarity with other religious traditions and their governments would require a common perspective. This is provided by the perspective of God’s Reign. Brothers and sisters under the one God are on a journey together towards God’s Reign which comes definitively a the end of time. We are in the “now and not yet” dimension of God’s Reign. We are called to make this one globalized world a safe home for all, a home to be built on justice, truth, freedom, peace, and love. These are fundamental values of the Reign of God.
It is this perspective of God’s Reign, of God’s loving dominion over us, that pulls together efforts of various religions and ideologies to respond to the family breakup of migrant workers and itinerant peoples.
Conclusion
To the question how can we respond effectively to the breakup of the family of migrant workers and itinerant peoples, I have attempted to provide a pastoral response in the light of reflections of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences.
The response concretely calls for a triple dialogue – with the poor, with cultures, and religious traditions. It calls for the setting up of a family ministry that is in dialogue with migrants and itinerants, with their cultures and religious traditions.
It is a family ministry that cares and serves, forms and empowers for mission. Formation towards a spirituality of communion which is at the heart of marriage and the family is the key element of this pastoral response.
The response also calls for solidarity and collaboration between churches of origin and arrival, and between States at the international level. The crux of the matter is reciprocity and mutuality of rights, particularly of the freedom of religion. When migrant workers and itinerant peoples enjoy freedom of religion, they are able to avail themselves of the spiritual resources of their faith. They are better able to cope with pressures of temporary family breakup and the severe temptations to permanent family break-up.
The common basis of action for such solidarity and collaboration is the universal journey of all peoples towards the Reign of God, a journey towards justice and truth, peace, freedom and love.
A Recommendation to the Pontifical Council
In two full days we have listened to 22 conferences on the situation of various kinds of migrant workers and itinerant peoples. For us who are new to this ministry of pastoral care, the conferences have given us an excellent panoramic view of the pastoral situation. But due to time constraints we may not have been able to explore major issues in depth.
In a certain sense, migrant workers and itinerant peoples constitute a global “diocese” or even a number of global “dioceses.”
Therefore, for a better and more effective collaboration and solidarity, may I respectfully recommend that those responsible in regional and continental Episcopal assemblies come together every two or three years under the leadership of the Pontifical Council for the purpose of discussing in depth two or three burning issues affecting migrant workers, itinerant peoples and their families.
Thank you.
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato
FABC Secretary General
Rome, May 15, 2008
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
MYSTERY, COMMUNION AND MISSION FOR THE CHURCHES IN ASIA
Introduction
The topic, “Mystery, Communion and Mission for the Churches in Asia,” is assigned to our Workshop.
May I briefly and simply present the message I wish to develop:
In the context of tragic massive poverty in Asia and of its rich and varied cultures and religious traditions, the mystery of Divine Mercy resonates deeply with Asian peoples. Divine Mercy calls Asian Catholics to communion with God, with other Asian peoples, and with the rest of creation. It calls all disciples of the Lord to tell the story of Jesus to Asia: Jesus, the Compassion of God, is our Lord and Savior!
The Mystery of Divine Mercy – Asian Dimensions
We all know that God’s compassion, mercy and love embraces everyone with absolutely no exception.
But from the Scriptures we also know of a special category of people to whom God demonstrates an especially benevolent love – namely the poor (see for example Ps. 41: 1-2; 69: 32-34; 72: 12-14; 113: 7-9; Is. 25: 4). In the Old Testament, they were the widows, orphans, strangers (see for example Ps. 68: 5-6). How often God demanded of his chosen people to take care of widows, orphans, and strangers in their midst and meted reward or punishment accordingly (see Ex. 22: 20-24; Jb 29: 12-13; Is. 10: 1-2; Ez. 22: 6-8; Mal. 3: 5)! These represent all those who were poor and needy, those seemingly without any rights, those deprived of economic security and had less access to the goods of society.
In the New Testament, God sends not just prophets to call sinners to repentance and salvation. He sent his own beloved Son to live among us, to forgive sins and bring sinners back to God his Father. The characteristic saving way of Jesus with those who were considered sinners by others and deprived of God’s spiritual blessings is his reaching out to them, his presence among them, and his forgiving them (see for example Mk. 2: 15-17; Lk. 5: 29-32; 7: 32-35). Remember the three parables of God’s mercy in Lk. 15: the lost sheep, the lost drachma, and the prodigal son. The concluding words of the three parables describe the joy of the compassionate God over sinners who repent: Rejoice with me for what was lost is found! As God’s merciful love is directed in a special way to the poor, so a relationship of love with God depends very much on how one treats the poor, those without adequate food, clothes, health and shelter (see Mt. 25: 31-36; Jas. 1:27; 2: 5).
In the Asian situation of massive poverty and insecurity the mystery of Divine Mercy resonates greatly with Asians. We are a continent of the poor. Two thirds of the world’s poor live in Asia. They live in tragic deprivation of basic material goods. Many Asians die of ordinary illness because they do not have adequate food and access to medicines and medical treatment. They can hardly send their children to school. They spend the savings of a lifetime in order to be able to send a member of the family abroad to work for the sake of the family.
Without material resources and political power, Asia’s teeming millions place their trust in the Divine Mercy. Whatever the divine name might be for the many different Asian religious traditions, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Jews and indigenous peoples with their own natural religions Asians invoke divine mercy. They put their trust in Divine Mercy. In the midst of life’s tribulations and trials they have no one else to trust in but the Divine Mercy. They thirst and hunger for God.
Asians flock to various religious shrines in search of divine healing. There they take refuge and consolation in the serenity of God’s presence in the midst of daily hardship and suffering. They travel far and wide for advice and healing from priests, other holy people, gurus and sages who are reputed to be healers and instruments of grace. They tell stories of wonderful marvelous cases of Divine Mercy, and especially of liberation from sinfulness.
In the light of this tremendous thirst and hunger for Divine Mercy and in the context of massive poverty and deprivation as well as of varied cultures and religious traditions, Divine Mercy has caught the imagination of Asians. There is no doubt that in Asia the devotion to the Divine Mercy is the fastest growing devotion. Diocesan, regional, national Congresses on Divine Mercy have been held in various countries.
Divine Mercy Calls to Communion
The thirst and hunger for Divine Mercy as well as the experience of God’s compassion for the poor and needy impel us to communion, to be in solidarity with God, with other Asian peoples particularly the poor, and with all creation.
In the Gospel stories when Jesus heals people from their physical ailments he tells them to go and sin no more (see Mt. 9: 1-8; Mk. 2: 1-12; Lk. 5: 7-26; Jn 5: 1-17), to be just, and to rejoice in the wonderful work of Divine Mercy that they have been part of. They are called to reconciliation and solidarity with God and with their neighbor. They are called to give thanks and be true believers in word and deed.
For this reason Asian disciples of Jesus have to celebrate and live their blessings of mercy and compassion from God. How are we to do this? By building bridges of communion and solidarity with others.
How imperative this is for Asians! Asia has always been known as a land of ancient spirituality. Here the major ancient religions were born. Jesus himself was Asian. He was born in Asia. He suffered and died in Asia. He rose from the dead in Asia. Peoples from other continents flock to Asia to search for spiritual serenity, peace and harmony.
But how ironic it is that Asia has become the arena of conflict and war, of division and contestation due to culture, ethnicity, and religious radicalism! Economic and political power, minority and majority relationships apparently play a great role in such conflicts.
We are also deeply aware of the traditional closeness of Asian peoples, especially of the millions of indigenous and tribal peoples, to the environment and to all of God’s creation. Yet now we also observe the gradual but long-term destruction of the Asian environment for short term economic gains.
Such destruction, disharmony and unpeace, gravely offend the deep Asian sense of religiosity and spiritual harmony. The call of Divine Mercy to unity and solidarity – communion – is particularly poignant, powerful and peremptory.
Divine Mercy Calls Asians to Mission
Those blessed in the Gospels who have been touched by the compassion of God felt impelled by gratitude and love to tell others of their marvelous experience with Jesus.
Their stories are fundamentally about Jesus in the Gospels. They tell us so eloquently of the Father’s compassion for us through his Son, Jesus. Jesus had compassion of the “multitude” of the materially and spiritually poor. He lived among them, walked with them, healed them of their various afflictions, taught them the Good News of salvation, blessed them in the midst of their material and spiritual poverty, ennobled them, and called them to be his disciples. He not only had compassion. Jesus, “having emptied himself of his divinity” is the Compassion of God, the Divine Mercy in Jesus’ humanity.
We have all been recipients in one way or another of Divine Mercy in Jesus. Trace your own life back to the very beginning. How innumerable have been the ways and occasions of mercy that the Father, Son and Spirit have blessed each one of us throughout our lives, in riches or in poverty, in sickness or in health! Most of all, Divine Mercy has led us through our own Easter journey from sin to grace, from darkness to light, from death to life.
In our day we are likewise called to tell the story of Jesus, the compassion of God, to all our Asian brothers and sisters. His Asian face is the face of one in solidarity with the poor, at home with the poor, a refuge of the sick and needy, healer of bodies and liberator of souls, a guru, bearer of Good News, the one who dares to call himself not only one with God but God himself and the Savior of the world through his Passion, Death, and Resurrection.
We are called to be humble in our conviction and belief in Jesus and to be respectful of the beliefs of others. But the mystery of Divine Mercy in our own lives, in the lives of so many other Asians, calls us to be fearless, generous, zealous, and loving in our proclamation of Divine Mercy to all the peoples of Asia.
We can do this mission most eloquently through the silent witness of an authentic disciple-life, a Christian witness that would make our own lives a pointer to Christ, a letter of Christ to others.
May you and I be authentic proclaimers and witnesses of Divine Mercy! Thank you and God bless!
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato,
PhilippinesWorld Apostolic Congress on Divine MercyRome
Workshop - April 3, 2008
[Some notes for the introduction: Archbishop Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I., was ordained a priest of the Missionary Congregation of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate in 1964. He has been a priest for 44 years, including 28 years as a Bishop. More than one half of his life as priest and Bishop has been spent among Christians and Muslims in Southern Philippines. The Archdiocese of Cotabato is his 2nd Archdiocese. It is located on the island of Mindanao with a population of 1.5 million people, 47% are Catholics and 46% are Muslims. Economically underdeveloped, more than 60% of its families are below the poverty line. His interests are: Building Basic Ecclesial Communities, Church Renewal, and Issues of Justice and Peace.]
The topic, “Mystery, Communion and Mission for the Churches in Asia,” is assigned to our Workshop.
May I briefly and simply present the message I wish to develop:
In the context of tragic massive poverty in Asia and of its rich and varied cultures and religious traditions, the mystery of Divine Mercy resonates deeply with Asian peoples. Divine Mercy calls Asian Catholics to communion with God, with other Asian peoples, and with the rest of creation. It calls all disciples of the Lord to tell the story of Jesus to Asia: Jesus, the Compassion of God, is our Lord and Savior!
The Mystery of Divine Mercy – Asian Dimensions
We all know that God’s compassion, mercy and love embraces everyone with absolutely no exception.
But from the Scriptures we also know of a special category of people to whom God demonstrates an especially benevolent love – namely the poor (see for example Ps. 41: 1-2; 69: 32-34; 72: 12-14; 113: 7-9; Is. 25: 4). In the Old Testament, they were the widows, orphans, strangers (see for example Ps. 68: 5-6). How often God demanded of his chosen people to take care of widows, orphans, and strangers in their midst and meted reward or punishment accordingly (see Ex. 22: 20-24; Jb 29: 12-13; Is. 10: 1-2; Ez. 22: 6-8; Mal. 3: 5)! These represent all those who were poor and needy, those seemingly without any rights, those deprived of economic security and had less access to the goods of society.
In the New Testament, God sends not just prophets to call sinners to repentance and salvation. He sent his own beloved Son to live among us, to forgive sins and bring sinners back to God his Father. The characteristic saving way of Jesus with those who were considered sinners by others and deprived of God’s spiritual blessings is his reaching out to them, his presence among them, and his forgiving them (see for example Mk. 2: 15-17; Lk. 5: 29-32; 7: 32-35). Remember the three parables of God’s mercy in Lk. 15: the lost sheep, the lost drachma, and the prodigal son. The concluding words of the three parables describe the joy of the compassionate God over sinners who repent: Rejoice with me for what was lost is found! As God’s merciful love is directed in a special way to the poor, so a relationship of love with God depends very much on how one treats the poor, those without adequate food, clothes, health and shelter (see Mt. 25: 31-36; Jas. 1:27; 2: 5).
In the Asian situation of massive poverty and insecurity the mystery of Divine Mercy resonates greatly with Asians. We are a continent of the poor. Two thirds of the world’s poor live in Asia. They live in tragic deprivation of basic material goods. Many Asians die of ordinary illness because they do not have adequate food and access to medicines and medical treatment. They can hardly send their children to school. They spend the savings of a lifetime in order to be able to send a member of the family abroad to work for the sake of the family.
Without material resources and political power, Asia’s teeming millions place their trust in the Divine Mercy. Whatever the divine name might be for the many different Asian religious traditions, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Jews and indigenous peoples with their own natural religions Asians invoke divine mercy. They put their trust in Divine Mercy. In the midst of life’s tribulations and trials they have no one else to trust in but the Divine Mercy. They thirst and hunger for God.
Asians flock to various religious shrines in search of divine healing. There they take refuge and consolation in the serenity of God’s presence in the midst of daily hardship and suffering. They travel far and wide for advice and healing from priests, other holy people, gurus and sages who are reputed to be healers and instruments of grace. They tell stories of wonderful marvelous cases of Divine Mercy, and especially of liberation from sinfulness.
In the light of this tremendous thirst and hunger for Divine Mercy and in the context of massive poverty and deprivation as well as of varied cultures and religious traditions, Divine Mercy has caught the imagination of Asians. There is no doubt that in Asia the devotion to the Divine Mercy is the fastest growing devotion. Diocesan, regional, national Congresses on Divine Mercy have been held in various countries.
Divine Mercy Calls to Communion
The thirst and hunger for Divine Mercy as well as the experience of God’s compassion for the poor and needy impel us to communion, to be in solidarity with God, with other Asian peoples particularly the poor, and with all creation.
In the Gospel stories when Jesus heals people from their physical ailments he tells them to go and sin no more (see Mt. 9: 1-8; Mk. 2: 1-12; Lk. 5: 7-26; Jn 5: 1-17), to be just, and to rejoice in the wonderful work of Divine Mercy that they have been part of. They are called to reconciliation and solidarity with God and with their neighbor. They are called to give thanks and be true believers in word and deed.
For this reason Asian disciples of Jesus have to celebrate and live their blessings of mercy and compassion from God. How are we to do this? By building bridges of communion and solidarity with others.
How imperative this is for Asians! Asia has always been known as a land of ancient spirituality. Here the major ancient religions were born. Jesus himself was Asian. He was born in Asia. He suffered and died in Asia. He rose from the dead in Asia. Peoples from other continents flock to Asia to search for spiritual serenity, peace and harmony.
But how ironic it is that Asia has become the arena of conflict and war, of division and contestation due to culture, ethnicity, and religious radicalism! Economic and political power, minority and majority relationships apparently play a great role in such conflicts.
We are also deeply aware of the traditional closeness of Asian peoples, especially of the millions of indigenous and tribal peoples, to the environment and to all of God’s creation. Yet now we also observe the gradual but long-term destruction of the Asian environment for short term economic gains.
Such destruction, disharmony and unpeace, gravely offend the deep Asian sense of religiosity and spiritual harmony. The call of Divine Mercy to unity and solidarity – communion – is particularly poignant, powerful and peremptory.
Divine Mercy Calls Asians to Mission
Those blessed in the Gospels who have been touched by the compassion of God felt impelled by gratitude and love to tell others of their marvelous experience with Jesus.
Their stories are fundamentally about Jesus in the Gospels. They tell us so eloquently of the Father’s compassion for us through his Son, Jesus. Jesus had compassion of the “multitude” of the materially and spiritually poor. He lived among them, walked with them, healed them of their various afflictions, taught them the Good News of salvation, blessed them in the midst of their material and spiritual poverty, ennobled them, and called them to be his disciples. He not only had compassion. Jesus, “having emptied himself of his divinity” is the Compassion of God, the Divine Mercy in Jesus’ humanity.
We have all been recipients in one way or another of Divine Mercy in Jesus. Trace your own life back to the very beginning. How innumerable have been the ways and occasions of mercy that the Father, Son and Spirit have blessed each one of us throughout our lives, in riches or in poverty, in sickness or in health! Most of all, Divine Mercy has led us through our own Easter journey from sin to grace, from darkness to light, from death to life.
In our day we are likewise called to tell the story of Jesus, the compassion of God, to all our Asian brothers and sisters. His Asian face is the face of one in solidarity with the poor, at home with the poor, a refuge of the sick and needy, healer of bodies and liberator of souls, a guru, bearer of Good News, the one who dares to call himself not only one with God but God himself and the Savior of the world through his Passion, Death, and Resurrection.
We are called to be humble in our conviction and belief in Jesus and to be respectful of the beliefs of others. But the mystery of Divine Mercy in our own lives, in the lives of so many other Asians, calls us to be fearless, generous, zealous, and loving in our proclamation of Divine Mercy to all the peoples of Asia.
We can do this mission most eloquently through the silent witness of an authentic disciple-life, a Christian witness that would make our own lives a pointer to Christ, a letter of Christ to others.
May you and I be authentic proclaimers and witnesses of Divine Mercy! Thank you and God bless!
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato,
PhilippinesWorld Apostolic Congress on Divine MercyRome
Workshop - April 3, 2008
[Some notes for the introduction: Archbishop Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I., was ordained a priest of the Missionary Congregation of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate in 1964. He has been a priest for 44 years, including 28 years as a Bishop. More than one half of his life as priest and Bishop has been spent among Christians and Muslims in Southern Philippines. The Archdiocese of Cotabato is his 2nd Archdiocese. It is located on the island of Mindanao with a population of 1.5 million people, 47% are Catholics and 46% are Muslims. Economically underdeveloped, more than 60% of its families are below the poverty line. His interests are: Building Basic Ecclesial Communities, Church Renewal, and Issues of Justice and Peace.]
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Commentary on the CBCP Statement: Seeking the Truth, Restoring Integrity
May I provide some personal thoughts toward a better and more accurate understanding of the CBCP statement of February 26, 2008. These are my personal thoughts and do not necessarily reflect the thought of CBCP.
1. Emergency meeting? Special Meeting?
The background of the meeting: The CBCP Permanent Council was going to meet in order to decide on the present situation. Wisely the CBCP President wanted to consult the Bishops so that the Permanent Council decision would reflect the mind of the “college of bishops.” When the Bishops finally met, they discussed the nature of the meeting. Would it be a consultation or would it be a regular CBCP meeting? At the end the Bishops decided: Let the assembly be a meeting of the CBCP rather than simply a consultative meeting.
2. Is it true that it was the Mindanao Bishops who “saved” GMA?
Absolutely false. There were 55 Bishops present at the meeting of February 26, 2008. Four of the 55 were non-voting. Of the voting Bishops, 29 were from Luzon, 17 from Mindanao (among those absent from Mindanao was Bishop Pueblos), 6 from Visayas. From the numbers alone one can readily see how evidently false it would be for anyone to claim that the Mindanao Bishops “saved” GMA. In fact, the Bishops’ statement was approved unanimously. Even the handful known to favour Gloria’s resignation approved the statement.
3. It is often said that the Bishops are divided. Is this true?
The oft-mentioned “divided hierarchy” is false. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines is made up of 115 Bishops. Of these, 100 are active voting members. Less than 10 of the Bishops are “pro-resign.” Such numbers do not make a “divided” CBCP. The unity of the Bishops has always been there even when they issued their statement on July 10, 2005 that they were not demanding the resignation of the President.
The image of a divided hierarchy could be a media creation. Four or five Bishops with a contrary opinion receive a lot of disproportionate media exposure and mileage. If one studies newspaper reports and interviews, their names appear again and again. Yet Bishops with this contrary opinion constitute less than 10% of the whole hierarchy.
4. This time why did not the Bishops demand GMA to resign?
Choose from the following:
a) They are blind and cannot see reality;
b) They do not listen to the people and specially to the poor;
c) Many of them have received money from the President.
d) They have no spine.
e) All of the above.
Are these charges true? No they are not. Bishops do visit people in the barrios and listen to them. They know what the poor are saying. In the provinces people have problems quite different from those in Manila and are not as much affected by issues that the national media and various groups in Metro Manila project. Mindanao-based groups, for instance, try to project these issues unto the public but for various reasons, particularly ideological, the public does not favourably respond. Some groups in Manila might speak of massive rallies nation-wide, but the Bishops do not see this happening in their own dioceses. And so the Bishops see the difference between Manila and their own provincial dioceses. Their people generally see things differently. Maybe, just maybe, it also takes a bit of courage for Bishops to go against the current “popular” political opinion and public clamor?
How about gifts and money from the President? My answer is quite simple. For how much could a Bishop sell his soul or conscience to someone else? 10,000 pesos? 20,000 pesos? 100,000 pesos? 500,000 pesos? One million pesos? Five or 10 million pesos? That gifts or money would blind the eyes of Bishops and seal their lips to gross corruption when solidly proven would be a tragic contradiction to their experience as pastors at EDSA I and EDSA II.
5. If the claims are only hearsay passed on from one to another, why then did the Bishops not go along with the “growing clamor for resignation”?
What I sense from the Bishops is this. Very many believe that the present process of arriving at the truth is seriously flawed for several reasons, some of which are the following:
(a) The Senate has become a partisan venue for the opposition to pile up charges upon charges, proven or not, for their own political interests;
(b) Although many developments have taken place since the Garci tapes, these developments beg for proof, the truth, closure.
(c) Senate work on the ZTE-NBN issue is “in aid of legislation.” By its very nature the process – which is sometimes without the benefit of the other side being heard or witnesses being interpellated by “defense” - is not ultimately meant to determine responsibility and guilt. In fact some of the Senators are saying, “Enough. We already have enough facts to aid us in legislation.” Hence, the Senate may not really the proper venue for seeking the truth;
(d) All of the above.
6. But does not the Lozano testimony in the Senate establish once and for all that GMA is guilty of the highest type of corruption? Isn’t the testimony of Lozada similar to the testimonies against former President Erap leading to EDSA II?
On these issues many Bishops would believe the following: In the case of EDSA II, there were Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearings. But the final stage of investigation was a formal impeachment process, with lawyers presenting and rebutting, etc. and with the Supreme Court Chief Justice presiding. Both sides were heard fairly. We saw on TV Governor Singson’s ledger, a money trail right up to Clarissa Ocampo’s riveting story of signature-writing by the former President – all irrefutable testimonies despite efforts by defense lawyers. The stage for EDSA II was set. The verdict of guilty was a foregone conclusion based on real evidences and not simply on stories. The non-opening of an infamous envelope was simply the trigger. There is, therefore, a great difference between the Lozano testimony and the testimonies leading to EDSA II. Today, lawyers would most likely dispute the truth of the Lozano testimony. Some people who are for the resignation of Gloria in fact have some reservations about it.
Considering today’s political polarization it is unfortunate that the veracity of witnesses would also depend to some extent on the mind set of the observer. If I am anti-Gloria I would be very inclined to say that Lozada is truthful. But even in the anti-Gloria group we find many who would rather go through a legal process of finding the truth. The pro-Gloria camp would say that no solid evidence has been presented. As a result of these divergent perspectives many Bishops believe that the truth is far from settled and that we must continue to seek the truth.
7. Why do the Bishops say that the President and all the branches of government should lead in combating corruption from top to bottom?
The Bishops’ suggestion may not be as bizarre or as weird as it seems. Even today people, including some of our present senators, keep telling the President to do something about corruption in the different branches of government. The President should do this or do that, they say. In other words, she should take the lead. And yet many of these would say that the President is Ali Baba herself.
But should we not also wonder who should clean up corruption regarding the use of Pork Barrel given to the Senators and Congressmen. Should it be the Senate? The House? Strangely, it seems that the Senate Ethics Committee has made some inquiries into allegations regarding certain alleged corrupt practices within their ranks but we have not seen any reports on these inquiries. So who should take the lead? Or maybe there is no corruption regarding the Pork Barrel?
In their statement the Bishops go on official record that the President and all the branches of government must take the lead. If nothing is done, there would really be no one else to blame.
Perhaps when all is said and done, despite the weirdness of the suggestion, the Bishops and ordinary people could be right. The President does have some role - other than herself being investigated, and every government official should be when charged - in rooting out corruption (if at all possible) in government. If not she, then who? Civil society? The Church? A junta? The military? The people? All of us together?
8. Is the Bishops’ statement political or moral?
From the very beginning, we all knew that we had to take a stand from the moral point of view. The reasoning for our stand must be on moral grounds. That is why we insisted on the Gospel moral values of truth and integrity. But we also knew that from one united moral stand, varying political options could flow.
Let me present, for instance, a rhetorical moral argument. Corruption at the highest level is to be unequivocally morally condemned. But there is, indeed, corruption at the highest level. Therefore, it is to be unequivocally morally condemned. Let us also presume that the second premise is solidly supported.
The conclusion is a moral statement that is dependent on the usual circumstances (who, what, when, where, why, how, etc). It has political implications. Some will demand resignation. Others will demand impeachment. Still others will require the legal processes to proceed. Some will wait for 2010 to give their political response. Etc., etc. It is quite clear that one moral statement does not peremptorily demand only one political option. This reality flows both from the nature of the given moral statement and from the contingent, relative nature of political decisions. This is why continuing discernment is necessary to arrive at the truth. From a dialogue both of thought and action one united political stand might prudentially emerge.
9. Why did the Bishops “strongly recommend” the abolition of EO 464?
The abolition of EO 464 will greatly help the process of seeking the truth. Many questions can be answered by Cabinet Secretaries and they can provide a lot of information related to the present controversies. Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J., informed the Bishops that even if EO 464 were to be abolished, “Executive Privilege” would still remain. To a Bishop’s question Fr. Bernas answered that the President cannot waive Executive Privilege since it is not given to her personally but is granted to the Office itself. (Many people think that “the President can waive this privilege if she has nothing to hide. If she does not waive it, she must be hiding something.”). But there are specific parameters, he said, to Executive Privilege. Therefore, without EO 464 a Cabinet Secretary can answer many questions and provide many kinds of information about alleged corruption cases as long as the questions are not about specific areas covered by executive privilege.
Hence despite its obvious limitations the recommendation to abolish EO 464 is a priority recommendation of the Bishops to help seek the truth.
10. What is the most important recommendation in the Bishops statement?
I believe it is a recommendation that unfortunately has been hardly mentioned by the media, although it was emphasized at the press conference. The Bishops recommend the formation of circles of prayer, discernment and action in parishes, religious organizations and movements, colleges and universities, and Basic Ecclesial Communities. This communal process/action focuses on the issues of truth and integrity facing us today, including their causes and remedies. The Bishops believe that from such circles of prayer, discernment and action at the grassroots a culture of truth and integrity will emerge and spread. It is people power at and from the grassroots. Concretely it would require of each diocese a pastoral program of moral conscientization. From reports in the media, it seems that the prayer rally in Zamboanga calls for action along this line.
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato
February 29, 2008
1. Emergency meeting? Special Meeting?
The background of the meeting: The CBCP Permanent Council was going to meet in order to decide on the present situation. Wisely the CBCP President wanted to consult the Bishops so that the Permanent Council decision would reflect the mind of the “college of bishops.” When the Bishops finally met, they discussed the nature of the meeting. Would it be a consultation or would it be a regular CBCP meeting? At the end the Bishops decided: Let the assembly be a meeting of the CBCP rather than simply a consultative meeting.
2. Is it true that it was the Mindanao Bishops who “saved” GMA?
Absolutely false. There were 55 Bishops present at the meeting of February 26, 2008. Four of the 55 were non-voting. Of the voting Bishops, 29 were from Luzon, 17 from Mindanao (among those absent from Mindanao was Bishop Pueblos), 6 from Visayas. From the numbers alone one can readily see how evidently false it would be for anyone to claim that the Mindanao Bishops “saved” GMA. In fact, the Bishops’ statement was approved unanimously. Even the handful known to favour Gloria’s resignation approved the statement.
3. It is often said that the Bishops are divided. Is this true?
The oft-mentioned “divided hierarchy” is false. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines is made up of 115 Bishops. Of these, 100 are active voting members. Less than 10 of the Bishops are “pro-resign.” Such numbers do not make a “divided” CBCP. The unity of the Bishops has always been there even when they issued their statement on July 10, 2005 that they were not demanding the resignation of the President.
The image of a divided hierarchy could be a media creation. Four or five Bishops with a contrary opinion receive a lot of disproportionate media exposure and mileage. If one studies newspaper reports and interviews, their names appear again and again. Yet Bishops with this contrary opinion constitute less than 10% of the whole hierarchy.
4. This time why did not the Bishops demand GMA to resign?
Choose from the following:
a) They are blind and cannot see reality;
b) They do not listen to the people and specially to the poor;
c) Many of them have received money from the President.
d) They have no spine.
e) All of the above.
Are these charges true? No they are not. Bishops do visit people in the barrios and listen to them. They know what the poor are saying. In the provinces people have problems quite different from those in Manila and are not as much affected by issues that the national media and various groups in Metro Manila project. Mindanao-based groups, for instance, try to project these issues unto the public but for various reasons, particularly ideological, the public does not favourably respond. Some groups in Manila might speak of massive rallies nation-wide, but the Bishops do not see this happening in their own dioceses. And so the Bishops see the difference between Manila and their own provincial dioceses. Their people generally see things differently. Maybe, just maybe, it also takes a bit of courage for Bishops to go against the current “popular” political opinion and public clamor?
How about gifts and money from the President? My answer is quite simple. For how much could a Bishop sell his soul or conscience to someone else? 10,000 pesos? 20,000 pesos? 100,000 pesos? 500,000 pesos? One million pesos? Five or 10 million pesos? That gifts or money would blind the eyes of Bishops and seal their lips to gross corruption when solidly proven would be a tragic contradiction to their experience as pastors at EDSA I and EDSA II.
5. If the claims are only hearsay passed on from one to another, why then did the Bishops not go along with the “growing clamor for resignation”?
What I sense from the Bishops is this. Very many believe that the present process of arriving at the truth is seriously flawed for several reasons, some of which are the following:
(a) The Senate has become a partisan venue for the opposition to pile up charges upon charges, proven or not, for their own political interests;
(b) Although many developments have taken place since the Garci tapes, these developments beg for proof, the truth, closure.
(c) Senate work on the ZTE-NBN issue is “in aid of legislation.” By its very nature the process – which is sometimes without the benefit of the other side being heard or witnesses being interpellated by “defense” - is not ultimately meant to determine responsibility and guilt. In fact some of the Senators are saying, “Enough. We already have enough facts to aid us in legislation.” Hence, the Senate may not really the proper venue for seeking the truth;
(d) All of the above.
6. But does not the Lozano testimony in the Senate establish once and for all that GMA is guilty of the highest type of corruption? Isn’t the testimony of Lozada similar to the testimonies against former President Erap leading to EDSA II?
On these issues many Bishops would believe the following: In the case of EDSA II, there were Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearings. But the final stage of investigation was a formal impeachment process, with lawyers presenting and rebutting, etc. and with the Supreme Court Chief Justice presiding. Both sides were heard fairly. We saw on TV Governor Singson’s ledger, a money trail right up to Clarissa Ocampo’s riveting story of signature-writing by the former President – all irrefutable testimonies despite efforts by defense lawyers. The stage for EDSA II was set. The verdict of guilty was a foregone conclusion based on real evidences and not simply on stories. The non-opening of an infamous envelope was simply the trigger. There is, therefore, a great difference between the Lozano testimony and the testimonies leading to EDSA II. Today, lawyers would most likely dispute the truth of the Lozano testimony. Some people who are for the resignation of Gloria in fact have some reservations about it.
Considering today’s political polarization it is unfortunate that the veracity of witnesses would also depend to some extent on the mind set of the observer. If I am anti-Gloria I would be very inclined to say that Lozada is truthful. But even in the anti-Gloria group we find many who would rather go through a legal process of finding the truth. The pro-Gloria camp would say that no solid evidence has been presented. As a result of these divergent perspectives many Bishops believe that the truth is far from settled and that we must continue to seek the truth.
7. Why do the Bishops say that the President and all the branches of government should lead in combating corruption from top to bottom?
The Bishops’ suggestion may not be as bizarre or as weird as it seems. Even today people, including some of our present senators, keep telling the President to do something about corruption in the different branches of government. The President should do this or do that, they say. In other words, she should take the lead. And yet many of these would say that the President is Ali Baba herself.
But should we not also wonder who should clean up corruption regarding the use of Pork Barrel given to the Senators and Congressmen. Should it be the Senate? The House? Strangely, it seems that the Senate Ethics Committee has made some inquiries into allegations regarding certain alleged corrupt practices within their ranks but we have not seen any reports on these inquiries. So who should take the lead? Or maybe there is no corruption regarding the Pork Barrel?
In their statement the Bishops go on official record that the President and all the branches of government must take the lead. If nothing is done, there would really be no one else to blame.
Perhaps when all is said and done, despite the weirdness of the suggestion, the Bishops and ordinary people could be right. The President does have some role - other than herself being investigated, and every government official should be when charged - in rooting out corruption (if at all possible) in government. If not she, then who? Civil society? The Church? A junta? The military? The people? All of us together?
8. Is the Bishops’ statement political or moral?
From the very beginning, we all knew that we had to take a stand from the moral point of view. The reasoning for our stand must be on moral grounds. That is why we insisted on the Gospel moral values of truth and integrity. But we also knew that from one united moral stand, varying political options could flow.
Let me present, for instance, a rhetorical moral argument. Corruption at the highest level is to be unequivocally morally condemned. But there is, indeed, corruption at the highest level. Therefore, it is to be unequivocally morally condemned. Let us also presume that the second premise is solidly supported.
The conclusion is a moral statement that is dependent on the usual circumstances (who, what, when, where, why, how, etc). It has political implications. Some will demand resignation. Others will demand impeachment. Still others will require the legal processes to proceed. Some will wait for 2010 to give their political response. Etc., etc. It is quite clear that one moral statement does not peremptorily demand only one political option. This reality flows both from the nature of the given moral statement and from the contingent, relative nature of political decisions. This is why continuing discernment is necessary to arrive at the truth. From a dialogue both of thought and action one united political stand might prudentially emerge.
9. Why did the Bishops “strongly recommend” the abolition of EO 464?
The abolition of EO 464 will greatly help the process of seeking the truth. Many questions can be answered by Cabinet Secretaries and they can provide a lot of information related to the present controversies. Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J., informed the Bishops that even if EO 464 were to be abolished, “Executive Privilege” would still remain. To a Bishop’s question Fr. Bernas answered that the President cannot waive Executive Privilege since it is not given to her personally but is granted to the Office itself. (Many people think that “the President can waive this privilege if she has nothing to hide. If she does not waive it, she must be hiding something.”). But there are specific parameters, he said, to Executive Privilege. Therefore, without EO 464 a Cabinet Secretary can answer many questions and provide many kinds of information about alleged corruption cases as long as the questions are not about specific areas covered by executive privilege.
Hence despite its obvious limitations the recommendation to abolish EO 464 is a priority recommendation of the Bishops to help seek the truth.
10. What is the most important recommendation in the Bishops statement?
I believe it is a recommendation that unfortunately has been hardly mentioned by the media, although it was emphasized at the press conference. The Bishops recommend the formation of circles of prayer, discernment and action in parishes, religious organizations and movements, colleges and universities, and Basic Ecclesial Communities. This communal process/action focuses on the issues of truth and integrity facing us today, including their causes and remedies. The Bishops believe that from such circles of prayer, discernment and action at the grassroots a culture of truth and integrity will emerge and spread. It is people power at and from the grassroots. Concretely it would require of each diocese a pastoral program of moral conscientization. From reports in the media, it seems that the prayer rally in Zamboanga calls for action along this line.
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato
February 29, 2008
Monday, January 01, 2007
New Year's Message
Beloved People of the Archdiocese:
Greetings of peace and joy in the Lord our God! May I especially greet our Muslim brothers and sisters as they celebrate a very special day in their religious life. May God’s spiritual blessings through Eid’l Adha abound for their benefit and for our whole region!
I have three hopes for the New Year. The first hope is this: that all the families in the Archdiocese of Cotabato may witness in 2007 the coming of definitive peace in our region. There are still many obstacles to the signing of a long-desired peace agreement between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. But with mutual sacrifices and the prevailing good intentions of both parties including the efforts and encouragement of all other stakeholders in Mindanao, we pray that a peace agreement will be a gift from the Lord to the people of Mindanao in 2007.
My second hope for the New Year is this: that all major political divisions and conflicts at the national level will end in 2007. These conflicts have been a major cause of a lack of rapid progress and development in our country. We know that the economy has grown but the benefits are still to reach the ordinary people. Unity and stability in 2007 would make it more possible for economic benefits to reach the grassroots.
My final hope is this: that political governance in 2007 from top to bottom will be significantly less burdened with graft and corruption. In this way the delivery of social and economic services to the people would substantially improve. The quality of life among our average citizens and especially the poor would also be greatly uplifted.
May I urge you to pray with me for these hopes to come true. Once again a blessed and prosperous New Year for you and your families!
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato
Greetings of peace and joy in the Lord our God! May I especially greet our Muslim brothers and sisters as they celebrate a very special day in their religious life. May God’s spiritual blessings through Eid’l Adha abound for their benefit and for our whole region!
I have three hopes for the New Year. The first hope is this: that all the families in the Archdiocese of Cotabato may witness in 2007 the coming of definitive peace in our region. There are still many obstacles to the signing of a long-desired peace agreement between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. But with mutual sacrifices and the prevailing good intentions of both parties including the efforts and encouragement of all other stakeholders in Mindanao, we pray that a peace agreement will be a gift from the Lord to the people of Mindanao in 2007.
My second hope for the New Year is this: that all major political divisions and conflicts at the national level will end in 2007. These conflicts have been a major cause of a lack of rapid progress and development in our country. We know that the economy has grown but the benefits are still to reach the ordinary people. Unity and stability in 2007 would make it more possible for economic benefits to reach the grassroots.
My final hope is this: that political governance in 2007 from top to bottom will be significantly less burdened with graft and corruption. In this way the delivery of social and economic services to the people would substantially improve. The quality of life among our average citizens and especially the poor would also be greatly uplifted.
May I urge you to pray with me for these hopes to come true. Once again a blessed and prosperous New Year for you and your families!
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
Archbishop of Cotabato
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
NOTES: WHAT BISHOPS EXPECT OF JOURNALISTS
Introduction
May I thank Archbishop Lawrence of Lahore, Pakistan and Fr. Josef-Franz Eilers, SVD, his executive secretary in the FABC-OSC, for inviting me to share my thoughts at this seminar.
What I wish to share with you comes from almost 30 years of experience with journalists in my various roles as President of a Philippines Catholic University in Southern Philippines, as a bishop, as a lead person in press conferences given by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines or by the Synod of Bishops in Rome, and recently by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences.
A Word to Bishops
If one is interviewed as an individual bishop speaking in his own name, there does not seem to be much of a problem. But when one is interviewed as representing a Bishops’ Conference, or a Synod of Bishops, or a Federation of Episcopal Conferences, one would have to be extremely careful about what to say.
The interviews I dread most are “ambush interviews” especially when a Manila radio or television station would call me up in Cotabato, 500 miles away, and say, “Bishop, in about 10 minutes may we interview you on such and such issues.” In many cases the radio/TV station would tell you to comment about what one bishop or the President of the country has said. In most of these cases I decline to comment on the ground that I have not read nor verified the comment. But the other reason is to avoid being part of the game that some Philippine media seem inclined to play, i.e., to pit one person against another or to show a division of opinion or even conflict in the hierarchy, or between bishops and the government. But the real risk in “ambush interviews” is when there are no written press releases and no time to prepare one’s thoughts about some burning issues. Then I really dread what one or two reporters out of 15 will write for the next day’s papers.
A classic case for me was in 1997 when the Philippine Bishops appointed me to draft a pastoral exhortation on the ethical aspects of the Philippine economy. I was then interviewed by several reporters after the Bishops’ Plenary Assembly. One question was: “Do the Bishops think there are more poor people now than in the last ten years?” I gave a two part answer: “The Bishops do not have the data. Therefore, we do not know. But we will examine the available economic indicators to prepare the CBCP document. The answer could be one of three: yes, no or there is no difference.” The following day all the newspapers reported correctly. But one newspaper the banner headline that trumpeted the idea that: Bishops Say - More Poor Now Under President Ramos. It was simply a case of an erroneous headline that did not reflect the actual content of the report. But naturally the headline was more important than the write-up and this created a political war of words. The political opposition naturally supported the headline. The President requested to see me. At the presidential palace, he and his economic advisers treated me and two other bishops to a power point presentation of the pro-poor achievements and agenda of his government. I clarified the erroneous report. We shook hands, had a good lunch, and became close friends.
In another case five years ago, a newspaper reporter quoted me and after the quote he added what he thought was a logical conclusion. It changed the meaning of the quote. Our CBCP press office (we had a functioning media office at that time) sent a correction to the editor. Instead of simply publishing the correction, the newspaper decided to write a short article with the title, “CBCP flip-flops.” A double whammy on the Bishops!
Through the years I have learned that in any interview, a bishop cannot simply come out with whatever comes to his mind. Things said cannot be erased. When you read the next day’s paper, you might regret what you have said uncritically, even if only as obiter dicta and off the cuff.
In relation to media and media practitioners a Bishop has to consistently reflect the following values:
truth and charity;
clarity and conciseness;
an occasional felicitous quotable phrase;
a sense of humor and a lot of patience.
Beyond gimmicks to have good public relations, these values are most important.
A Word to Journalists
On the other hand, I likewise have some observations and suggestions for journalists who write about the Church.
The basic attitude of the Church towards media and journalists is positive. Media are instruments for the communication of truth, justice, peace and love – the Gospel or Kingdom values that serve as the pillars of society. God is truth. Everything that is true reflects the nature of God.
Media practitioners have more than a profession by which they earn their livelihood. They have a vocation – a vocation that is God given. The communication of deep human values that are values of God’s reign is their vocation. In this they also have a task to help inform and educate, to help form individuals and human society in accordance with these values.
This vocation reflects a God-given dignity, the dignity of sharing in and reflecting the very nature of God, who is Truth, communicating himself to us in space and time through the eternal Word, his own Son Jesus, in the Spirit of Wisdom and Truth. Every communication of truth is an act that is a seed of the Divine.
But media are “human-made” and are utilized by human beings. They, therefore, share likewise – and sadly - - in the evil and weakness that we are all heir to – pride, arrogance, selfishness, inability to see the whole truth, biases and prejudices, one-sidedness, lack of objectivity and perspective.
Therefore, the Church’s attitude to the tools and practitioners of social communication is both positive and also mixed with caution.
With the above presuppositions, these are some suggestions:
It is necessary for journalists to understand the Church from its own perspective. That perspective is fundamentally religious, spiritual and ethical. This dimension is its very nature and mission in the world. Although it may be seen by secular society as a political force, the Church does not engage society in terms of a political agenda or political motivation. Therefore, to interpret the Church from a political angle and to speculate on possible political motivations for its various positions on burning issues of the day is to grossly misinterpret the Church. For instance, a close reading of the CBCP statements of July 2005, January 2006 and July 2006 on the issues of presidential resignation and impeachment would provide discerning readers the moral reasons for their stand. But it is unfortunate that media in general only presented the CBCP stand without really delving into the moral reasons for it. Instead the possible political motivations were discussed by many journalists. I believe this is because many fail to interpret the Church from its own perspective as a moral and religious force.
Armed with the proper perspective regarding the Church, journalists can be better equipped to follow their vocation – to communicate Truth. Truth requires fairness, accuracy, and objectivity.
However, the pursuit and communication of truth has to hurdle many obstacles. We all know that truth is not served:
by distorting information -- and truth is distorted by omitting essential information or disregarding context;
by using misleading and even erroneous headlines or illustrations;
by half-truths;
by not differentiating between advocacy and news reporting;
by oversimplifying;
by misrepresenting fact or context (all the above, from Society of Professional Journalists, “Code of Ethics,” 1996, Indianapolis);
by improper emphasis (see Philippine Press Institute and National Press Club, “Journalist’s Code of Ethics”);
by not verifying alleged facts (later corrections not being given proper space);
by mixing speculation with facts.
It is for the above reasons that in Philippine media one needs to be very careful about information “according to a reliable source.” The source might not at all be reliable.
For instance in one classic case, someone had interviewed an “anonymous bishop.” He allegedly told the reporter that the Bishops received a “tongue lashing” from the Papal Nuncio before they wrote their statement in July 2005 on the issue of presidential resignation. According to the newspaper report, the Nuncio had “scolded” the Bishops regarding their alleged past political “interference.” So, when the Bishops issued a statement that seemed like a “neutral position” to some in the face of the call by the political opposition for the President of the country to resign, the alleged “scolding” by the Papal Nuncio was considered a reason. Much of this was a fallacious argument, “post hoc, ergo propter hoc”, since the statement came after the scolding, then the kind of statement that the Bishops issued must have been because of the “scolding.”
I received many local and foreign inquiries about what really happened. Did the Nuncio really give us a “tongue lashing”? Did Rome really impose its will on us? I simply had to tell them that the main consensus points had been written out the night before the talk of the Papal Nuncio. His talk could in no way be called “tongue-lashing” nor even a mild “scolding.” It was simply a calm objective review of church teachings that all the bishops already knew. Hence, the Bishops did not make the slightest deviation from the general consensus points that they had already reached the night before. In fact the rest of the day was spent refining the consensus points and discussing how to write them in as clear a language as possible. This was especially so since many people regarded as simply “black and white” what, indeed, was a very complex political situation with many debatable legal issues. The bottom line – the reporter picked out the wrong bishop for his “reliable source” and as we say in the Philippines “nakuryente siya”; he got burned. But unfortunately the report also damaged the credibility of the Bishops as an independent body.
Or take the case of “improper emphasis” that distorts the truth. Here in the Philippines an example is the difference between “imperial Manila” and the provinces outside Metro Manila. Emphasis seems to be placed by media by what is happening in Manila. But what is true is the fact that the sentiments of many in Manila may not necessarily be the sentiments of the rest of the country. It is the sentiment of the rest of the country that the Bishops in the different dioceses carry with them to their plenary assemblies. At the peak of all the political opposition rallies in Manila, there was no similar general reaction in the provinces. The rest of the Philippines perceive things differently. Morally what may be simply black and white to some may be tinged with a lot of debatable grey to many others.
Finally, it is the moral perspective that impels the bishops to take seemingly contrary positions on some political issues: their position regarding the resignation and impeachment of the President may seem to be supportive of the President; but their position on constitutional change very clearly does not support the President’s own position.
Again, it is absolutely necessary to interpret the bishops’ positions on political issues from the moral perspective rather than from within a political framework.
Philippine journalism is a mixed bag of freedom and responsibility; fairness, accuracy, and objectivity. I sometimes think that the freewheeling type of news reporting and opinion-making in Philippine media is a reflection of the free-wheeling type of politics that we have. I have often wondered how two reporters at the same CBCP press conference could report the same event so differently. A veteran journalist explained to me that the two papers they write for represent two different political perspectives. As they say, “meron angulo na politika” – they have a political angle.
Conclusion
My own expectation then of journalists is quite simple:
Be true to your vocation as vehicles of truth. Tell the truth and do it charitably.
God through His Spirit of wisdom and Truth ceaselessly communicates his gift to humanity – God’s eternal Word -- who is Jesus the Truth.
When you tell the truth and do it charitably, you share in this divine communication.
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
FABC-OSC Communications Seminar
Bukal ng Tipan, Antipolo, Rizal (Philippines)
November 22, 2006
May I thank Archbishop Lawrence of Lahore, Pakistan and Fr. Josef-Franz Eilers, SVD, his executive secretary in the FABC-OSC, for inviting me to share my thoughts at this seminar.
What I wish to share with you comes from almost 30 years of experience with journalists in my various roles as President of a Philippines Catholic University in Southern Philippines, as a bishop, as a lead person in press conferences given by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines or by the Synod of Bishops in Rome, and recently by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences.
A Word to Bishops
If one is interviewed as an individual bishop speaking in his own name, there does not seem to be much of a problem. But when one is interviewed as representing a Bishops’ Conference, or a Synod of Bishops, or a Federation of Episcopal Conferences, one would have to be extremely careful about what to say.
The interviews I dread most are “ambush interviews” especially when a Manila radio or television station would call me up in Cotabato, 500 miles away, and say, “Bishop, in about 10 minutes may we interview you on such and such issues.” In many cases the radio/TV station would tell you to comment about what one bishop or the President of the country has said. In most of these cases I decline to comment on the ground that I have not read nor verified the comment. But the other reason is to avoid being part of the game that some Philippine media seem inclined to play, i.e., to pit one person against another or to show a division of opinion or even conflict in the hierarchy, or between bishops and the government. But the real risk in “ambush interviews” is when there are no written press releases and no time to prepare one’s thoughts about some burning issues. Then I really dread what one or two reporters out of 15 will write for the next day’s papers.
A classic case for me was in 1997 when the Philippine Bishops appointed me to draft a pastoral exhortation on the ethical aspects of the Philippine economy. I was then interviewed by several reporters after the Bishops’ Plenary Assembly. One question was: “Do the Bishops think there are more poor people now than in the last ten years?” I gave a two part answer: “The Bishops do not have the data. Therefore, we do not know. But we will examine the available economic indicators to prepare the CBCP document. The answer could be one of three: yes, no or there is no difference.” The following day all the newspapers reported correctly. But one newspaper the banner headline that trumpeted the idea that: Bishops Say - More Poor Now Under President Ramos. It was simply a case of an erroneous headline that did not reflect the actual content of the report. But naturally the headline was more important than the write-up and this created a political war of words. The political opposition naturally supported the headline. The President requested to see me. At the presidential palace, he and his economic advisers treated me and two other bishops to a power point presentation of the pro-poor achievements and agenda of his government. I clarified the erroneous report. We shook hands, had a good lunch, and became close friends.
In another case five years ago, a newspaper reporter quoted me and after the quote he added what he thought was a logical conclusion. It changed the meaning of the quote. Our CBCP press office (we had a functioning media office at that time) sent a correction to the editor. Instead of simply publishing the correction, the newspaper decided to write a short article with the title, “CBCP flip-flops.” A double whammy on the Bishops!
Through the years I have learned that in any interview, a bishop cannot simply come out with whatever comes to his mind. Things said cannot be erased. When you read the next day’s paper, you might regret what you have said uncritically, even if only as obiter dicta and off the cuff.
In relation to media and media practitioners a Bishop has to consistently reflect the following values:
truth and charity;
clarity and conciseness;
an occasional felicitous quotable phrase;
a sense of humor and a lot of patience.
Beyond gimmicks to have good public relations, these values are most important.
A Word to Journalists
On the other hand, I likewise have some observations and suggestions for journalists who write about the Church.
The basic attitude of the Church towards media and journalists is positive. Media are instruments for the communication of truth, justice, peace and love – the Gospel or Kingdom values that serve as the pillars of society. God is truth. Everything that is true reflects the nature of God.
Media practitioners have more than a profession by which they earn their livelihood. They have a vocation – a vocation that is God given. The communication of deep human values that are values of God’s reign is their vocation. In this they also have a task to help inform and educate, to help form individuals and human society in accordance with these values.
This vocation reflects a God-given dignity, the dignity of sharing in and reflecting the very nature of God, who is Truth, communicating himself to us in space and time through the eternal Word, his own Son Jesus, in the Spirit of Wisdom and Truth. Every communication of truth is an act that is a seed of the Divine.
But media are “human-made” and are utilized by human beings. They, therefore, share likewise – and sadly - - in the evil and weakness that we are all heir to – pride, arrogance, selfishness, inability to see the whole truth, biases and prejudices, one-sidedness, lack of objectivity and perspective.
Therefore, the Church’s attitude to the tools and practitioners of social communication is both positive and also mixed with caution.
With the above presuppositions, these are some suggestions:
It is necessary for journalists to understand the Church from its own perspective. That perspective is fundamentally religious, spiritual and ethical. This dimension is its very nature and mission in the world. Although it may be seen by secular society as a political force, the Church does not engage society in terms of a political agenda or political motivation. Therefore, to interpret the Church from a political angle and to speculate on possible political motivations for its various positions on burning issues of the day is to grossly misinterpret the Church. For instance, a close reading of the CBCP statements of July 2005, January 2006 and July 2006 on the issues of presidential resignation and impeachment would provide discerning readers the moral reasons for their stand. But it is unfortunate that media in general only presented the CBCP stand without really delving into the moral reasons for it. Instead the possible political motivations were discussed by many journalists. I believe this is because many fail to interpret the Church from its own perspective as a moral and religious force.
Armed with the proper perspective regarding the Church, journalists can be better equipped to follow their vocation – to communicate Truth. Truth requires fairness, accuracy, and objectivity.
However, the pursuit and communication of truth has to hurdle many obstacles. We all know that truth is not served:
by distorting information -- and truth is distorted by omitting essential information or disregarding context;
by using misleading and even erroneous headlines or illustrations;
by half-truths;
by not differentiating between advocacy and news reporting;
by oversimplifying;
by misrepresenting fact or context (all the above, from Society of Professional Journalists, “Code of Ethics,” 1996, Indianapolis);
by improper emphasis (see Philippine Press Institute and National Press Club, “Journalist’s Code of Ethics”);
by not verifying alleged facts (later corrections not being given proper space);
by mixing speculation with facts.
It is for the above reasons that in Philippine media one needs to be very careful about information “according to a reliable source.” The source might not at all be reliable.
For instance in one classic case, someone had interviewed an “anonymous bishop.” He allegedly told the reporter that the Bishops received a “tongue lashing” from the Papal Nuncio before they wrote their statement in July 2005 on the issue of presidential resignation. According to the newspaper report, the Nuncio had “scolded” the Bishops regarding their alleged past political “interference.” So, when the Bishops issued a statement that seemed like a “neutral position” to some in the face of the call by the political opposition for the President of the country to resign, the alleged “scolding” by the Papal Nuncio was considered a reason. Much of this was a fallacious argument, “post hoc, ergo propter hoc”, since the statement came after the scolding, then the kind of statement that the Bishops issued must have been because of the “scolding.”
I received many local and foreign inquiries about what really happened. Did the Nuncio really give us a “tongue lashing”? Did Rome really impose its will on us? I simply had to tell them that the main consensus points had been written out the night before the talk of the Papal Nuncio. His talk could in no way be called “tongue-lashing” nor even a mild “scolding.” It was simply a calm objective review of church teachings that all the bishops already knew. Hence, the Bishops did not make the slightest deviation from the general consensus points that they had already reached the night before. In fact the rest of the day was spent refining the consensus points and discussing how to write them in as clear a language as possible. This was especially so since many people regarded as simply “black and white” what, indeed, was a very complex political situation with many debatable legal issues. The bottom line – the reporter picked out the wrong bishop for his “reliable source” and as we say in the Philippines “nakuryente siya”; he got burned. But unfortunately the report also damaged the credibility of the Bishops as an independent body.
Or take the case of “improper emphasis” that distorts the truth. Here in the Philippines an example is the difference between “imperial Manila” and the provinces outside Metro Manila. Emphasis seems to be placed by media by what is happening in Manila. But what is true is the fact that the sentiments of many in Manila may not necessarily be the sentiments of the rest of the country. It is the sentiment of the rest of the country that the Bishops in the different dioceses carry with them to their plenary assemblies. At the peak of all the political opposition rallies in Manila, there was no similar general reaction in the provinces. The rest of the Philippines perceive things differently. Morally what may be simply black and white to some may be tinged with a lot of debatable grey to many others.
Finally, it is the moral perspective that impels the bishops to take seemingly contrary positions on some political issues: their position regarding the resignation and impeachment of the President may seem to be supportive of the President; but their position on constitutional change very clearly does not support the President’s own position.
Again, it is absolutely necessary to interpret the bishops’ positions on political issues from the moral perspective rather than from within a political framework.
Philippine journalism is a mixed bag of freedom and responsibility; fairness, accuracy, and objectivity. I sometimes think that the freewheeling type of news reporting and opinion-making in Philippine media is a reflection of the free-wheeling type of politics that we have. I have often wondered how two reporters at the same CBCP press conference could report the same event so differently. A veteran journalist explained to me that the two papers they write for represent two different political perspectives. As they say, “meron angulo na politika” – they have a political angle.
Conclusion
My own expectation then of journalists is quite simple:
Be true to your vocation as vehicles of truth. Tell the truth and do it charitably.
God through His Spirit of wisdom and Truth ceaselessly communicates his gift to humanity – God’s eternal Word -- who is Jesus the Truth.
When you tell the truth and do it charitably, you share in this divine communication.
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
FABC-OSC Communications Seminar
Bukal ng Tipan, Antipolo, Rizal (Philippines)
November 22, 2006
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
TOWARDS A NEW CATECHESIS OF THE FAMILY IN ASIA
Introduction
May I thank FABC-OESC, led by Bishop Aloysius Sudarsu of Indonesia and Fr. Vicente Cajilig, O.P., for the kind invitation that the Office has extended to me to speak at this important gathering.
I have listened attentively to the sub-regional reports. They have been very interesting and informative. The reports serve as a valuable background to my reflection. Here my purpose is to suggest certain directions for the catechesis and faith formation of the Family in Asia.
As indicated in your program, my present reflection will look into the catechetical implications of the 8th Plenary Assembly of the FABC in Korea in 2004. The theme of the Plenary Assembly was: “The Asian Family towards a Culture of integral Life.” This was also the title of its Final Document, which shall serve as the basic reference for the present reflection.
A. The Shape of Present Family Ministry – a Focus on the Culture of Life.
Before the 8th Plenary Assembly the FABC Office of the Laity, did an informal survey of the objectives and activities of the offices of Asian Episcopal Conferences that are in charge of Family ministry. The survey result indicated the common concerns of family ministry and family catechesis. These common concerns may be said to describe the general shape of family ministry in Asia.
Quite obviously, as seen in the activities of family ministry the general direction of family catechesis is to promote the “culture of life” and to evangelize the “culture of death” seeping insidiously and subtly into Asian cultures. Pope John Paul II’s document, Evangelium Vitae, has persuasively pressed this general concern into Catholic consciousness and to a certain extent into the consciousness of all humanity.
All over Asia is a concern for “pro-Life” catechesis and advocacy based on the Catholic belief of the seamless nature of life from conception to death. Thus family catechesis all over Asia is directed to raising awareness on the dignity and sacredness of human life, respect for and defense of human life. The major traditional threats to human life are seen to be contraception, abortion, and capital punishment. These threats take various forms. They are also at various levels, including international, as seen in the lobbying done by international groups on the policies of national governments in favor of population control through every means possible, including abortion.
In addition most family catechesis is focused on the faith-formation of man and woman in view of marriage, such as pre-matrimonial catechesis and marriage enrichment, and family responsibility with regard to the upbringing of children toward maturity. More recently there has been a renewed interest in Bible studies as part of the on-going faith-formation of couples.
With due consideration for other concerns that family catechesis in various countries might have, what I have just presented is, I believe, a general description of present family ministry in Asia.
B. A New Shape of Family Catechesis:
Let us now look at new directions for the catechesis of the family as suggested 8th FABC Plenary Assembly in 2004.
1. Implication of the methodological approach:
FABC’s discernment on the Family in Asia followed what is called “the Pastoral Spiral.” This method of discernment starts with an analysis of the situation and is followed by reflection-in-faith. In the light of both the situational analysis and the faith-reflection, certain pastoral recommendations or decisions are made. At the FABC Plenary Assembly, this third phase (decision-making) was the end of the discernment process. It was left to the Episcopal conferences and their Family Life Commissions to continue the pastoral spiral by going into the planning on how to implement the decisions. Action or implementation then follows. To conclude the pastoral spiral, evaluation is made not only of the result or impact of the action but also of the whole process of discernment. This is really an elaboration of the well known process of “see --- judge --- act.”
Thus:
Situation →→ Reflection in Faith →→ Decisions/Recommendations →→
Planning →→ Action →→ Evaluation.
The Pastoral Spiral ensures that faith reflection is situated in context – contextualized. Faith does not operate in a vacuum. This is so because the light of faith bears upon the situation and illumines it. Pastoral decision and action are likewise the fruit of the interaction between situation and faith.
Therefore, being a principal instrument for faith-formation, catechesis has to be contextualized. It may deal with doctrine but that doctrine has to be applied to the situation in order to be meaningful and relevant.
This has also to be true of family catechesis. The factors that impact family life positively or negatively are important for catechesis. The daily struggles that families experience or suffer through are part and parcel of family catechesis. Contextualization will prevent irrelevance and pure abstraction. On the other hand, faith-reflection on the situation in the light of Sacred Scriptures and the teachings of the Church will prevent merely secular or even ideological interpretation of family realities.
Obviously the method of discernment that the 8th FABC Plenary Assembly used would be extremely useful for family catechesis. It can more easily lead to the application of teaching to life, i.e., to orthopraxis. It is necessary for catechesis to go beyond orthodoxy to orthopraxis.
2. The Global and the Asian Context of the Family: Implications to Catechesis.
If family catechesis is to be contextualized, we need to realize that the family is influenced by various factors at three general levels: local, regional, and global.
At the local and regional levels are factors such as the social, political, and economic situation, the rural and agricultural character of most Asian families, the cultural and religious elements such as language, religious beliefs and traditions, customs, etc.
At the global level, one may sum up many of the factors that impact the family under the rubric of “globalization,” economic and cultural.
The 8th FABC Plenary Assembly analyzed the impact of globalization on the family in the following terms:
- the weakening of cherished traditional family values, such as the sense of the sacred, respect for parents and the elderly, marriage as sacred life-time commitment, etc.;
- the rise of new family forms, different from is traditionally believed is the ideal, i.e., a family founded on the marriage between man and woman;
- the breaking up of the Asian “nuclear family” because of poverty, job opportunities, migration, new family values, emerging secular ideas;
The Plenary Assembly also realized that many traditional family values might actually be quite negative in terms of the message of the Gospel and of the teachings of the Church: e.g. values arising from caste-ism, from an extreme type of “patriarchal” framework where women are subordinate, subservient, and disposable.
Thus, one can immediately see that any genuine catechesis, particularly family catechesis, would have to discern the significance of globalization, its impact on the human person, families, on communities, on the beliefs and values of people, on the way they live their faith.
We can also see that catechesis is more than just religious doctrine. It is about the formation of individuals and communities that are impacted not only by religious and spiritual factors but, indeed, by all the other dimensions that make up human life. The faith that is to be formed through catechesis is more than devotional and spiritual. The faith to be formed is integral faith, faith that remains mature, can interface, and can engage with religious, cultural, political, economic, and social challenges.
3. Various Forms of the Asian Family: Implications to Catechesis.
May I elaborate a bit more on what I have briefly mentioned – the rise of “new” family forms in Asia.
Many of these forms have been with us for a long, long time. They seem to be new only because we never really paid pastoral attention to them. They are new because they have only recently come to our pastoral consciousness in the Church in Asia.
I am not referring to “same-sex unions.” I am referring to families consisting of single parents, divorced or separated parents, families where mothers and/or fathers are absent for a long time because of migrant work, inter-cultural and/or inter-religious parents and families.
It seems to me that family catechesis and family ministry in Asia have not given adequate attention to these various forms of family. I would be happy to be corrected. But I do know that in one Asian country where almost 70% of marriages are inter-faith marriages, the dioceses do not have pastoral guidelines or formation courses that would help the couples deal with serious issues regarding their practice of faith, the faith of their children, the worship that the family will give to God, etc.
Because Asia has a basically inter-cultural and inter-faith character, I would think that a sort of “paradigm shift” should take place with regard to the priorities of family catechesis and family ministry. What we face daily in most of Asia is not so much the so-called “ideal” family of a Catholic mother and a Catholic father of the same culture, but a husband and wife belonging to different cultures and different religions, etc.
4. The Theological Vision of Family in 8th FABC Plenary Assembly – Implications to Catechesis.
It is from the pastoral situation of the Asian family that the 8th Plenary Assembly draws up the key themes that are required for a theological vision of the family. Among these themes are:
- towards a culture of integral life – covenant love and life, communion and solidarity;
- towards the family as a sanctuary of love and life, covenant and communion;
- vocation and mission of the family in the church and in society;
- spirituality of communion, discipleship and “the way of the ordinary”;
- human relationships in the family;
- the family, the Reign of God, and social transformation.
Indeed, one can make a quick contrast between the above theological themes and a traditional theological framework for viewing marriage and the family.
If this is so, then new catechetical modules for family catechesis would be needed.
5. Evangelization and Social transformation in Asia – Implications to Family Catechesis.
The Lord has entrusted the whole Church with a mission of evangelization. This is so with the family, the domestic church. The catechetical formation of the Asian family’s missionary consciousness would require formators to be thoroughly familiar not only with the basic references – the Scriptures and the teachings of the Church, particularly Vatican II teachings and great papal documents.
But in a special way catechists in Asia should be also familiar with the main FABC documents which, in a certain sense, contextualize the teachings of Vatican II into the Asian situation, its peoples especially the poor, its cultures, and its religions. Here we see the great themes of mission and evangelization, inculturation, inter-religious dialogue, and integral human development.
In a particularly way, within the general consciousness of mission and considering Asia’s complex realities, the Church in Asia needs to needs to “accompany” families in faith-inspired social discernment. The Church has to form the religious faith of families so that they may be able to cope with their own social concerns. The formation of a social conscience in the family would be particularly imperative.
Beyond the family’s own social concerns are the wider challenges that confront Asian societies. The mission of evangelization urges the family to go out its own confines and into the neighborhood and even beyond. For the families to do this, the church needs to assist families through catechesis and other means to engage in concerns regarding poverty, injustice, development, peace, conflict, ecological issues, youth, exploitation of children and women, HIV/AIDS, etc.
Faith-formation would include enabling the Asian family to build communities of justice and harmony, to build bridges of solidarity with other families toward the work of social transformation.
6. Family and Basic Ecclesial Community – Implications on Catechesis.
This solidarity with other families brings us to consider the implication of the FABC Plenary Assembly’s treatment of the relationship between the family and the Basic Ecclesial Community.
BEC building is one of the major pastoral priorities of the Church in Asia. For most BEC’s the family is the building block. In fact in some approaches to BEC, a cluster of 10 to 20 families, called Family Groups, makes up one BEC. It is evident that the strength, the unity, and the life of the BEC depend very strongly on the quality of life and faith of each family in the BEC, as well as on their relationships with one another.
This is even more so when we consider the building of Basic Human Communities (BHC) which are composed of families of different faiths.
In a very true sense the faith formation of the family is not only for itself but also for he sake of the Basic Ecclesial / Human Community. Hence, faith-formation through catechesis will have to include relationships within the family, relationships with other families. Catechesis will have to include formation to a community of disciples, formation as well to leadership in community, formation to prayer and community prayer, formation finally in community building.
Summing up - A Contextualized Catechesis on the Family:
From the above observations one can see the far-reaching implications of the 8th FABC Plenary Assembly document, “The Asian Family towards a Culture of Integral Life.” Among these implications are the following needs that are, in effect, pastoral directives for catechesis:
- contextualizing family catechesis by way of a pastoral spiral of discernment that starts with the pastoral situation of the family and the social, political, economic, religious and cultural factors that impact the family;
- a new paradigm of family ministry that would go beyond the traditional concerns of a “pro-life” program to include also the new concerns that are required of a culture of “integral life”;
- faith formation in the family that would enable it to be a community of committed faith and to help build similar communities;
- family catechesis to look beyond internal needs of a family and empower it for the task of social transformation.
In the light of the above perspective, one can see the usefulness and validity of the vision and framework that the 8th Plenary Assembly suggested for family ministry in Asia and the corresponding catechesis that it requires:
- a Family Ministry that Forms and empowers;
- a Family Ministry that Cares and Serves;
- a Family Ministry that Promotes Social Transformation;
In fact, the Plenary Assembly has said: “May it not even be said that the focal point of evangelization should be the family as object and subject, to which all parish pastoral programs are geared?” (no. 100).
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
FABC-OESC Assembly on Catechesis
Assumption University, Bangkok
October 25, 2006
May I thank FABC-OESC, led by Bishop Aloysius Sudarsu of Indonesia and Fr. Vicente Cajilig, O.P., for the kind invitation that the Office has extended to me to speak at this important gathering.
I have listened attentively to the sub-regional reports. They have been very interesting and informative. The reports serve as a valuable background to my reflection. Here my purpose is to suggest certain directions for the catechesis and faith formation of the Family in Asia.
As indicated in your program, my present reflection will look into the catechetical implications of the 8th Plenary Assembly of the FABC in Korea in 2004. The theme of the Plenary Assembly was: “The Asian Family towards a Culture of integral Life.” This was also the title of its Final Document, which shall serve as the basic reference for the present reflection.
A. The Shape of Present Family Ministry – a Focus on the Culture of Life.
Before the 8th Plenary Assembly the FABC Office of the Laity, did an informal survey of the objectives and activities of the offices of Asian Episcopal Conferences that are in charge of Family ministry. The survey result indicated the common concerns of family ministry and family catechesis. These common concerns may be said to describe the general shape of family ministry in Asia.
Quite obviously, as seen in the activities of family ministry the general direction of family catechesis is to promote the “culture of life” and to evangelize the “culture of death” seeping insidiously and subtly into Asian cultures. Pope John Paul II’s document, Evangelium Vitae, has persuasively pressed this general concern into Catholic consciousness and to a certain extent into the consciousness of all humanity.
All over Asia is a concern for “pro-Life” catechesis and advocacy based on the Catholic belief of the seamless nature of life from conception to death. Thus family catechesis all over Asia is directed to raising awareness on the dignity and sacredness of human life, respect for and defense of human life. The major traditional threats to human life are seen to be contraception, abortion, and capital punishment. These threats take various forms. They are also at various levels, including international, as seen in the lobbying done by international groups on the policies of national governments in favor of population control through every means possible, including abortion.
In addition most family catechesis is focused on the faith-formation of man and woman in view of marriage, such as pre-matrimonial catechesis and marriage enrichment, and family responsibility with regard to the upbringing of children toward maturity. More recently there has been a renewed interest in Bible studies as part of the on-going faith-formation of couples.
With due consideration for other concerns that family catechesis in various countries might have, what I have just presented is, I believe, a general description of present family ministry in Asia.
B. A New Shape of Family Catechesis:
Let us now look at new directions for the catechesis of the family as suggested 8th FABC Plenary Assembly in 2004.
1. Implication of the methodological approach:
FABC’s discernment on the Family in Asia followed what is called “the Pastoral Spiral.” This method of discernment starts with an analysis of the situation and is followed by reflection-in-faith. In the light of both the situational analysis and the faith-reflection, certain pastoral recommendations or decisions are made. At the FABC Plenary Assembly, this third phase (decision-making) was the end of the discernment process. It was left to the Episcopal conferences and their Family Life Commissions to continue the pastoral spiral by going into the planning on how to implement the decisions. Action or implementation then follows. To conclude the pastoral spiral, evaluation is made not only of the result or impact of the action but also of the whole process of discernment. This is really an elaboration of the well known process of “see --- judge --- act.”
Thus:
Situation →→ Reflection in Faith →→ Decisions/Recommendations →→
Planning →→ Action →→ Evaluation.
The Pastoral Spiral ensures that faith reflection is situated in context – contextualized. Faith does not operate in a vacuum. This is so because the light of faith bears upon the situation and illumines it. Pastoral decision and action are likewise the fruit of the interaction between situation and faith.
Therefore, being a principal instrument for faith-formation, catechesis has to be contextualized. It may deal with doctrine but that doctrine has to be applied to the situation in order to be meaningful and relevant.
This has also to be true of family catechesis. The factors that impact family life positively or negatively are important for catechesis. The daily struggles that families experience or suffer through are part and parcel of family catechesis. Contextualization will prevent irrelevance and pure abstraction. On the other hand, faith-reflection on the situation in the light of Sacred Scriptures and the teachings of the Church will prevent merely secular or even ideological interpretation of family realities.
Obviously the method of discernment that the 8th FABC Plenary Assembly used would be extremely useful for family catechesis. It can more easily lead to the application of teaching to life, i.e., to orthopraxis. It is necessary for catechesis to go beyond orthodoxy to orthopraxis.
2. The Global and the Asian Context of the Family: Implications to Catechesis.
If family catechesis is to be contextualized, we need to realize that the family is influenced by various factors at three general levels: local, regional, and global.
At the local and regional levels are factors such as the social, political, and economic situation, the rural and agricultural character of most Asian families, the cultural and religious elements such as language, religious beliefs and traditions, customs, etc.
At the global level, one may sum up many of the factors that impact the family under the rubric of “globalization,” economic and cultural.
The 8th FABC Plenary Assembly analyzed the impact of globalization on the family in the following terms:
- the weakening of cherished traditional family values, such as the sense of the sacred, respect for parents and the elderly, marriage as sacred life-time commitment, etc.;
- the rise of new family forms, different from is traditionally believed is the ideal, i.e., a family founded on the marriage between man and woman;
- the breaking up of the Asian “nuclear family” because of poverty, job opportunities, migration, new family values, emerging secular ideas;
The Plenary Assembly also realized that many traditional family values might actually be quite negative in terms of the message of the Gospel and of the teachings of the Church: e.g. values arising from caste-ism, from an extreme type of “patriarchal” framework where women are subordinate, subservient, and disposable.
Thus, one can immediately see that any genuine catechesis, particularly family catechesis, would have to discern the significance of globalization, its impact on the human person, families, on communities, on the beliefs and values of people, on the way they live their faith.
We can also see that catechesis is more than just religious doctrine. It is about the formation of individuals and communities that are impacted not only by religious and spiritual factors but, indeed, by all the other dimensions that make up human life. The faith that is to be formed through catechesis is more than devotional and spiritual. The faith to be formed is integral faith, faith that remains mature, can interface, and can engage with religious, cultural, political, economic, and social challenges.
3. Various Forms of the Asian Family: Implications to Catechesis.
May I elaborate a bit more on what I have briefly mentioned – the rise of “new” family forms in Asia.
Many of these forms have been with us for a long, long time. They seem to be new only because we never really paid pastoral attention to them. They are new because they have only recently come to our pastoral consciousness in the Church in Asia.
I am not referring to “same-sex unions.” I am referring to families consisting of single parents, divorced or separated parents, families where mothers and/or fathers are absent for a long time because of migrant work, inter-cultural and/or inter-religious parents and families.
It seems to me that family catechesis and family ministry in Asia have not given adequate attention to these various forms of family. I would be happy to be corrected. But I do know that in one Asian country where almost 70% of marriages are inter-faith marriages, the dioceses do not have pastoral guidelines or formation courses that would help the couples deal with serious issues regarding their practice of faith, the faith of their children, the worship that the family will give to God, etc.
Because Asia has a basically inter-cultural and inter-faith character, I would think that a sort of “paradigm shift” should take place with regard to the priorities of family catechesis and family ministry. What we face daily in most of Asia is not so much the so-called “ideal” family of a Catholic mother and a Catholic father of the same culture, but a husband and wife belonging to different cultures and different religions, etc.
4. The Theological Vision of Family in 8th FABC Plenary Assembly – Implications to Catechesis.
It is from the pastoral situation of the Asian family that the 8th Plenary Assembly draws up the key themes that are required for a theological vision of the family. Among these themes are:
- towards a culture of integral life – covenant love and life, communion and solidarity;
- towards the family as a sanctuary of love and life, covenant and communion;
- vocation and mission of the family in the church and in society;
- spirituality of communion, discipleship and “the way of the ordinary”;
- human relationships in the family;
- the family, the Reign of God, and social transformation.
Indeed, one can make a quick contrast between the above theological themes and a traditional theological framework for viewing marriage and the family.
If this is so, then new catechetical modules for family catechesis would be needed.
5. Evangelization and Social transformation in Asia – Implications to Family Catechesis.
The Lord has entrusted the whole Church with a mission of evangelization. This is so with the family, the domestic church. The catechetical formation of the Asian family’s missionary consciousness would require formators to be thoroughly familiar not only with the basic references – the Scriptures and the teachings of the Church, particularly Vatican II teachings and great papal documents.
But in a special way catechists in Asia should be also familiar with the main FABC documents which, in a certain sense, contextualize the teachings of Vatican II into the Asian situation, its peoples especially the poor, its cultures, and its religions. Here we see the great themes of mission and evangelization, inculturation, inter-religious dialogue, and integral human development.
In a particularly way, within the general consciousness of mission and considering Asia’s complex realities, the Church in Asia needs to needs to “accompany” families in faith-inspired social discernment. The Church has to form the religious faith of families so that they may be able to cope with their own social concerns. The formation of a social conscience in the family would be particularly imperative.
Beyond the family’s own social concerns are the wider challenges that confront Asian societies. The mission of evangelization urges the family to go out its own confines and into the neighborhood and even beyond. For the families to do this, the church needs to assist families through catechesis and other means to engage in concerns regarding poverty, injustice, development, peace, conflict, ecological issues, youth, exploitation of children and women, HIV/AIDS, etc.
Faith-formation would include enabling the Asian family to build communities of justice and harmony, to build bridges of solidarity with other families toward the work of social transformation.
6. Family and Basic Ecclesial Community – Implications on Catechesis.
This solidarity with other families brings us to consider the implication of the FABC Plenary Assembly’s treatment of the relationship between the family and the Basic Ecclesial Community.
BEC building is one of the major pastoral priorities of the Church in Asia. For most BEC’s the family is the building block. In fact in some approaches to BEC, a cluster of 10 to 20 families, called Family Groups, makes up one BEC. It is evident that the strength, the unity, and the life of the BEC depend very strongly on the quality of life and faith of each family in the BEC, as well as on their relationships with one another.
This is even more so when we consider the building of Basic Human Communities (BHC) which are composed of families of different faiths.
In a very true sense the faith formation of the family is not only for itself but also for he sake of the Basic Ecclesial / Human Community. Hence, faith-formation through catechesis will have to include relationships within the family, relationships with other families. Catechesis will have to include formation to a community of disciples, formation as well to leadership in community, formation to prayer and community prayer, formation finally in community building.
Summing up - A Contextualized Catechesis on the Family:
From the above observations one can see the far-reaching implications of the 8th FABC Plenary Assembly document, “The Asian Family towards a Culture of Integral Life.” Among these implications are the following needs that are, in effect, pastoral directives for catechesis:
- contextualizing family catechesis by way of a pastoral spiral of discernment that starts with the pastoral situation of the family and the social, political, economic, religious and cultural factors that impact the family;
- a new paradigm of family ministry that would go beyond the traditional concerns of a “pro-life” program to include also the new concerns that are required of a culture of “integral life”;
- faith formation in the family that would enable it to be a community of committed faith and to help build similar communities;
- family catechesis to look beyond internal needs of a family and empower it for the task of social transformation.
In the light of the above perspective, one can see the usefulness and validity of the vision and framework that the 8th Plenary Assembly suggested for family ministry in Asia and the corresponding catechesis that it requires:
- a Family Ministry that Forms and empowers;
- a Family Ministry that Cares and Serves;
- a Family Ministry that Promotes Social Transformation;
In fact, the Plenary Assembly has said: “May it not even be said that the focal point of evangelization should be the family as object and subject, to which all parish pastoral programs are geared?” (no. 100).
+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I.
FABC-OESC Assembly on Catechesis
Assumption University, Bangkok
October 25, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)