Boletin Eclesiastico de Filipinas

Media

Part of Boletin Eclesiastico de Filipinas

Title: Boletin Eclesiastico de Filipinas
Description: Boletin Eclesiastico de Filipinas Official Interdiocesan Organ is published monthly by the University of Santo Tomas and is printed at U.S.T. Press, Manila, Philippines.
Issue Date: Volume XLIII (Issue No. 482) May-June 1969
Publisher: University of Santo Tomas
Year: 1969
Language: English; Spanish
Subject: Catholic Church--Philippines--Periodicals.; Philippines -- Religion -- Periodicals.
Rights
Place of publication: Manila
extracted text: IJOLETIN I7CLESIASTIC0 DE ^PILIPINAS OFFICIAL INTERDIOCESAN ORGAN • THE PHILIPPINE ECCLESIASTICAL REVIEW • THE CHURCH — AGENCY OF SOCIAL OR SPIRITUAL REFORM? • APPROV ED BIBLES • “FORGOTTEN” 400 GER MAN DOCTORS’ MEMORANDUM OF 1965 • THE PRIEST AND THE GOVERN MENT EMPLOYEE • DEMONSTRA TIONS AGAINST THE CHURCH • LOS SEMINARIOS DIOCESANOS DE FILIPINAS EN EL SIGLO XIX. Vol. XLIII o No. 482 Moy-June 1969 OLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE piLIPINAS EDITORIAL STAFF EDITOR LEONARDO 7. LEGASPI. O P ASSISTANT EDITOR I IDEL \'il I.AROEL. O.P. ASSOCIATE EDITORS EH \NGISO DEL RIO. O.P QUINTIN M. GARCIA. O P IESUS MERINO. O.P EFREN RIVERA. O.P PEDRO V. SALGADO. O.P POMPEYO DF. MESA. O.P. BUSINESS MANAGER FLORENC IO TESTERA. O.P. BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO Dl fILIPINAS Official Interdiocesan Organ is published mcntnly by me Uiiiv-ji my of Santo lomas ano is printed at U.S.i. Press, Manila, Philippines. Entered as Second Class Mail Matter at tne Manila Post Office on Jane zt, 1946 Subscription Rates; Yearly subsciiption in the Philippines. P15.00; Iwo Years, P26 00; Three Years, P-'IO.OO. Abroad, $5.00 a year. Price per copy, 1’1.59 Subscriptions air. paid in ad.arice. Communications of an editorial nature concerning articles, cases and reviews should be addressed to the Editor. Advertising and subscription enquiries shc'ild be addressed to lite Business Manager. Ordeis for renewals or changes of address should in elude both old and new address, and will go ’nto effect fifteen days after notification. Address all communications to BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE 11! IPiNAS Fathers’ Residence Un-.'-arsity cf Santo Tomas Manila DM03 Philippines Vol. XLIII • No. 482 May June 1969 TABLE OF CONTENTS EDITORIAL 368 THE POPE SPEAKS "Be in the World, But not of It" 371 DOCUMENTATION The New Prefaces 379 Approved Bibles A Report on the Episcopal Conferences and Priestly Formation 393 DOCTRINAL SECTION Present Day Relevance of the "Forgotten" 400 German Doctors’ Memorandum of 1965 • F. DEL RIO, O.P. 397 PASTORAL SECTION Homiletics —Trinity Sunday, Corpus Christi, Third, Fourth, Sundays after Pentecost, Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Sundays after Pentecost • DAVID TITHER, C-SS.R. 410 THE LAYMAN'S VIEW The Priest and the Government Employee • ROBERT LAZARO 421 CASES AND QUERIES On the Demonstration Against ihe Church • QUINTIN M. GARCIA, O.P. 426 HISTORICAL SECTION Los Seminarios de Filipinas en el Siglo XIX (Continuacion) • JOSE MARIA LUENGO Y SALUTAN, PH.D. 437 OPEN WINDOWS 446 THE CHURCH HERE AND THERE 449 SPECIAL REVIEW 458 EDITORIAL The Church - Agencq of Social or Spiritual Reform? This time they came to demonstrate not within the college or university campus nor against a school administrator, but In front of an episcopal palace and against a high ranking Church adminis trator. From where we stand, the whole affair seems to bring to focus a basic question: Is the Church an agency of social reform, or of spiritual reform? When the demonstrators demanded more bread, clothing and shelter and less Eucharist, more employment and less preaching of the Word of God, they assumed that the hands of the Church were fashioned and hallowed by the chrism to distribute earthly good ness and not goodness of divine grace; to clothe human bodies instead of raising them to the dignity of the sons of God. And the strange thing is, all this was being done in the name of the "spirit" of Vatican II! Shades of Vatican II! To unduly emphasize the social service of Christianity, and to minimize the vertical dimension of the love of God, of prayer, of worship—is this the spirit of Vatican II? To empty Christianity of its supernatural and eschatological dimension and reducing it to an instrument of social transformation—is this also according to the spirit of Vatican II? No amount of research will bring out a single conciliar text to support this contention. On the contrary, the whole array of eccle siastical traditions summed up in the conciliar texts repeats with boring consistency the doctrine that the immediate and proper purpose of the Church is clearly not institutional reform and the EDITORIAL advancement of the material standard of living. This is the job of the State and not of the Church. The Church is to procure the sanctification of men through the teaching of the truths of religion and the administration of the sacraments. In his address of Oct. 11, 1962, inaugurating the Second Vatican Council, Pope John XXIII stated that while the "Church desires to show herself as the loving mother of all, she does not offer modern man riches nor promises them mere earthly happiness. Rather she distributes to them good ness of divine grace." And Gaudium et Spes, the Church-World document par excellence, states: "Christ, to be sure, gave His Church no proper mission in the political, economic, or social order. The purpose which He set before her is a religious one." (n. 42). The Church then must lead men to God, in order that they may be given over to Him without reserve. She cannot afford to lose sight of this strictly religious and supernatuial goal, for the meaning of all her activities down to the last canon of her Code, can only cooperate directly or indirectly in this goal. The norm of conduct affirmed heie is a faithful understanding of the meaning of the apostolic teching: "It would not be right for us to neglect the Word of God so as to give out food; you, brothers must select from among yourselves seven men of good reputation, filled with the Spirit and with wisdom; we will hand over this duty to them, and continue to devote ourselves to prayer and to the service of the word." (Acts 6:2) Christ did not refuse to give bread to the famished multitude and to restore health to the sick. Always, however, when He did this, He gave at the same time the reminder that it was not for this that he had come and that "the true bread is that which comes down from above." The danger against which Christ Himself was always on guard was that of seeing Himself used for a temporal end, while the essence of His message was to reveal to man the transcendent dimension of his vocation. The Church is heir to the same mission. Do we then refuse to see her commitment to the temporal order? Definitely not. The purpose of the Church is essentially religious, not to be an agency of social reform. But since in this life man's 370 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS spiritual soul operates through the medium of his material body, the Church does however, take a deep interest in the physical wel fare not only of her members but of all mankind. She must exhort and inspire—and if need be—even look for practical remedies. This is a theological imperative in line with the very nature of the Church. She is wholly a mystery of the supernatural order, her essential mission is a supernatural one. But, since she cannot ac complish it without being "incamational", in a manner analogous to the Incarnation of Christ, her head, her influence penetrates deeply into the temporal order. But we should avoid confusion here. The Church should not be expected to involve herself in the temporal order in the same way and degree as the State. The State is the direct and proper agency of social reform, of economic upliftment, but not the Church. The Church contribution is quite other than a recasting of temporal society; it is divine life, an interior principle of personal renovation. And the effect of this personal renovation redounds to the whole social life. This is how.'the religious mission of the Church, while remaining essentially spiritual and supernatural, reaches and in fluences the temporal and material order. Out of her religious mis sion of sanctifying . men, comes an energy which structures and consolidates the human community according to the divine law. Thus the virtue of faith, hope and charity for example, bring light of a higher order to bear on the whole moral life of man; and the whole of life—religious, social, economic—becomes thereby capa ble of being raised to the supernatural level. It is altogether clear then that while it is unfortunate to posit a de-emphasis of the spiritual mission of the Church in order to see Her involved in the material advancement of the standard of living, it is however, a gross distortion of the Vatican II to impute to it this very same thing which it repudiates. THE POPE SPEAKS “BE IN THE WORLD, BUT NOT OF IT” On Monday February 17th, the Holy Father received in the Sistine Chapel the parish priests of Rome and the Lenten preachers. Represen tatives of the assistant parish priests and of the pupils of the Major Roman Pontifical Seminary were present for the first time. The Pope delivered the following address: Venerated Confreres: This annual meeting with the Lenten preachers and with our priests of Rome, with the parish priests and the Coadjutors especially engaged in the pastoral ministry, with the ecclesiastics of the Vicariate of Our diocese and with those of the diocesan clergy and the religious families who devote their spiritual service to it, and with representatives of our seminaries, is very precious for Us. We see you with Our dear and reverend Cardinal to whom Wc are extremely grateful for the care of souls to which he devotes him self with such wisdom in this beloved City of ours. We see you atten tive and eager to hear a word from Us; We see you religiously cons cious of the charity which unites us at this moment in the same love for God, Christ the Church, and in the same ardent prayer for the coming of the kingdom of heaven and for our common salvation. Let us fix the happy moment in our minds. We can see reflected in it the splendid words of the early Christian community, which was “one heart and souls” (Acts 4, 32). Let us live again for a momeir this miracle of charity. We wish you were all here; and we consider vou all present, dear Roman priests, even if many, detained by the duties of your ministry, are not present physically. We wish to embrace you 372 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS all, thank you all, comfort you all, bless you all. This is an hour of spiritual plenitude for Us; Our apostolic office would like to enrich it with that mysterious presence that the Lord has promised those who are gathered in His name (cfr. Mt. 18, 20) : would like to prolong it in holy conversation, like Paul at Troas (cfr. Acts 20, 7); and We would have so many things to say and perhaps so many to hear from you. But the mere fact of this meeting makes up for our talk which, instead of being long and deep, is simple and short. A homely talk, indeed; and this year, too, rather than be concerned with the great topics characteristic of Lenten preaching, it will deal with some aspects of our ecclesiastical life, now the object of many, grave discussions. We will just touch them. In any case, these problems are present and being debated in everyone’s mind. The priest in contemporary society In the first place we myjt recall some dynamic ideas, which are travel ling through the whole Chuch today, and which are upsetting ecclesiastics particularly. The first of these ideas concerns the figure of the priest. He is nearly always considered from the outside, in his sociological position, in the framework of contemporary society, which, as everyone knows, is completely in movement, completely in transformation. The priest, remaining in his place, has seen himself abandoned by his traditional community; in many places there is emptiness around him; in others the pastoral clientele has changed; it is difficult to ap proach them, difficult to understand them, difficult to reassemble them in a friendly, faithful, praying community. The priest, then, has begun to ask himself what he is doing in a world so different from the world he used to assist. Who is listening to him? And how can he make himself what he was a strange social phenomenon, anachronistic, helpless, useless, even ridiculous. And then the new, dynamic idea came to him: he must do something, he must go all out to draw near to the people again, to understand them, evangelize them. The idea, in itself, is an excellent one; and we have seen it germinate from the charity in the desolate heart of the priest, who felt THE POPE SPEAKS 373 excluded from the historical, social and human world in which he should have been the central figure, the teacher and pastor; and in which, on the contrary, he has become an outsider, lonely, superfluous and mocked. The incongruity and the suffering of this fate have become intoler able. The priest has sought inspiration and energy in the depths and essence of his vocation. We must move, he said, and take up the cele bration of divine worship and the normal administration of the Sacra ments. The idea, We say, is excellent and the sign of a noble priestly conscience. The priest is not for himself, he is for others; the priest must go in pursuit of men to turn them into faithful, and not just wait for men to come to him; if his church is empty, he will have to “go out into the streets and lanes of the city” in search of poor people, and again “into the highways and the hedge-rows”, and induce these guests, picked up at random, to come in (fr. Luke 14, 21-23). This apostolic urgency is weighing on the hearts of many priests, whose churches have become deserted. And when it is so, how can we fail to admire them? how can we fail to support them? Perfect the traditional forms of apostolate But let us be careful, keeping in mind the experimental and positive character of the apostolate. In the first place: it is not always like this. There are still communities of faithful overflowing with people and eager for normal observance: why should we leave them? why change the method of ministry for them, when the latter is still authen tic, valid and magnificently fruitful? Would we not be wronging the fidelity of so many good Christians to embark on adventures the outcome of which is uncertain? And, in the second place, when it is sufficient to open a new church and welcome with loving care the people who flock there of their own accord eager for the divine Word and for sacramental grace, why should we think up strange new forms of apostolate the success of 374 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS which is doubtful and perhaps shortlived? Would it not be better to perfect the traditional forms and make them bloom again, as the Council teaches us, with pastoral realism, new beauty and new effectiveness, before trying out others, which are often arbitrary and of doubtful out come, or restricted to particular groups, separated from the communion of the faithful? Oh! we will not forget the words of Jesus, who bids us leave the ninety-nine sheep that are in safety to go in search of the one lost sheep (cfr. Luke 15, 4); and especially if the proportion, as happens in cer tain situations today, were reversed, that is, one sheep in the fold and ninety-nine lost. But the principle of unity and of the completeness of our flock, the principle of pastoral love and of our responsibility towards souls and their inestimable value, will always give us guidance. We must be careful. The need, nay the duty, of an efficacious mission inserted in the reality of social life, may produce other draw backs, such as that depreciating the sacramental and liturgical ministry, as if it were a curb and ah obstacle as regards the direct evangelization of the modem world; or the attempt, rather widespread today, to make the priest a man like any other, in dress, in secular profession, in going to places of entertainment, in social and political commitment, in the formation of a family of his own with renunciation of holy celibacy. People say this is an attempt to integrate the priest into society. Is this the way to understand the masterly words of Jesus, who wants us in the world, but not of the world? Did He not call and choose his disciples, those who were to extend and continue the announcement of the kingdom of God, distinguishing them, in fact separating them from the ordinary wav of life, and asking them to leave everything to follow Him alone? The whole Gospel speaks of this qualification, this “specialization” of the disciples who were afterwards to act as apostles. Jesus took them away, not without their radical sacrifice, from their everyday occupations, from their legitimate and normal interests, from their assimilation in the social setting, from their sacrosanct affections; and He wished them to be dedicated to himself, with the complete gift of themselves, committing THE POPE SPEAKS 375 themselves forever, and although this response was to be a free and spontaneous one, He expected it to be one of total renunciation, and heroic immolation. Let us listen again to the list of what we must relinquish from the lips of Jesus himself: “Omnis, qui reliquerit domum, vel fratres aut sorores, aut patrem aut matrem, aut uxorem, aut filios, a tit agros propter nomen meum ...” (Mt. 19, 29). And the disciples were aware of this personal and paradoxical condition of theirs; Peter says: “Ecce nos reliquimus omnia, et secuti sumus Te” (ib. 27). Can the disciple, the apostle, the priest, the authentic minister of the Gospel be a man socially like other men? He can be poor, like others, a brother, for others; a servant, of others; a victim, for others; but at the same time he is en dowed with a lofty and a very special function: “Vos estis sal terrae ... Vos estis lux mundi!” And it is clear, if we have the concept of the organic composition of the body of the Church; St. Paul could not be more explicit in this connection: “Corpus meum non est unum membrum, sed multa ... Quod si essent omnia unum membrum, ubi corpus? Nunc autem multa quidem membra unum atilem corpus ...” (1 Cor. 12, 14-21 The diversity of functions is a constitutional principle in the Church of God; and it concerns firstly the ministerial priesthood: let us take care not to lose this specific function out of a mistaken intention of assimilation, of “democratization,” as is said today, in the society around us: “If salt loses its taste, what is there left it out of doors for men to tread it under foot” (M. 5, 13). These are words of the Lord, which must make us reflect on the discernment necessary in the application of the formula quoted: to be in the world, but not of the world. The lack of this discernment, of which ecclesiastical education, ascetic tradition, canon law have spoken to us so much, may lead to just the opposite effect from the one we had hoped to obtain when we imprudently abandoned it: effectiveness, renewal, modernity. In this way, in fact, the efficacy of the priest’s presence and action in the world may be wiped out; that every efficacy which we hoped to obtain when we imprudently reacted to the separation of the priest from the rest of society. Wiped out: in the esteem and confidence of the people, and by the practical necessity of dedicating to secular occupations and hu 376 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS man affections: time, heart, freedom, superiority of spirit (cfr. 1 Cor. 2, 15), which the priestly ministry alone wished to keep for itself. Generous intentions and mistaken promptings We repeat, venerated and beloved brothers, we must be careful. This desire to insert the priest in the social setting in which his life and his ministry take place, is good in itself, but from being a generous intention to emerge from the shell of a crystallized and privileged con dition, it may become a very grave error which may paralyze the priestly vocation in its most intimate, its most charismatic, its most fruitful as pects; and it may suddenly demolish the edifice of pastoral functional ity. As it may also expose good priests, young ones particularly, to the influences of the most questionable and dangerous movements of thought fashionable in the world, it may therefore make them vulnerable from the outside and expose them to supine acceptance of other people’s ideas at their face value. .Ideological and practical gregariousness has become contagious. Authority in the Church We must be careful. Another dynamic idea, which is also basically praiseworthy, but often intemperate in its formulation and explosive in its application to problems is that of the so-called “structures.” It is not very clear what meaning this term is given in ecclesiastical language, especially when one wishes to have some due regard for the work of Christ, for the Church as she is, in her constitutional plan, her doctrinal heritage, her traditional formulation, the instrument and sacrament of salvation. But a formula prevails: the structures must be changed. Is this possible? Is it permissible? Is it useful? It seems to Us that sometimes the unrealistic dream of an invisible Church, or the crazy hope of being able to eliminate the difficulties and the materiality of the Church-as-institution, to preserve a pure Christ ianity, of vague and free conception, or the rash utopia of conjuring up a Church of one’s own invention, prevent people from reflecting on the superficiality of this ambition, particularly if it is proposed to begin THE POPE SPEAKS 377 the change of structures with the destruction, not the reform, of those that exist, and if the initiative lacks the authority and experience for such a grave operation. Under the transparent veil of an abstract nominalism, destructive novelties are sometimes put forward, without taking into account two things that wisdom and prudence should recommend to us: one, that the modernization of the structures, or let us rather say, of ecclesiastical legislation is already underway; but for it to be healthy and vital and promoted by the joint responsibility of those who have the knowledge and those who have the authority, calls for study and patience, which We Ourself are the first to try to promote, especially with the revision of the Code of Canon Law; two, that the structures, now contested, are often far from being contrary to the effects that people aim at obtaining by changing them. Anyone who knows the Church from inside, is aware of this; and while regretting certain undeniable defects, sees that love, obedience, confidence, zeal may very well breathe new life into the trunk, like that of a gnarled olive-tree, gnarled of the old structures, causing it to burst into a new vegetation of genuine Christian vitality. But no matter: people would like to change the structures, and many of them, when they say this, are thinking of the vexation of author ity in the Church. They wish to abolish it, and they cannot; they wish to trace its source to the community; and they are violating the constitutional character of the Church, which Christ willed to be apostolic; they wish it to be service, and this is all right provided it is the right ful service of the pastoral authority; they wish to ignore it but how can a Christianity remain authentic without a magisteriuin, without a minis try, without the unity and authority derived from Christ? (cfr. Gal. 1. 8-9; 2 Cor. 1, 24; 2 Cor. 10, 5; St. Ignatius of A., to the Magnesii, c. IV). Authority in the Church! For him who feels its heavy weight, and does not covet the honor, it is not easy to make its apologia! Let it be enough now for Us to have made this modest defense of it. Unity of faith, charity, discipline Our discourse is becoming long without Our having spoken to you of what We are most anxious to speak: the renewal. of the tissue of the relationships within our Church. We would like the diocese of 378 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS Rome to excel, once more, in charity (cfr. St. Ign. of A., ad Rom., Pro logue) ; and We praise and encourage those of you who are working to give solidity to our Roman community, to give it an impulse of friend ship, goodness, concord, mutual esteem and confidence, willing collabor ation. We wish there to be no divisions among you (I Cor. 1, 10); there may be difference of practical views, diversity of free opinions, variety of scientific research, multiplicity of pastoral initiatives, novelty of good institutions, and so on; but at the same time and above all there must prevail among us unity of faith, of charity, of discipline. Notice, please, dear friends, how the style of Our ecclesiastical government aims at being pastoral, that is, aims at being guided by duty and charity, open to understanding and indulgence, demanding in sincerity and in zeal, but fatherly and brotherly and humble in senti ment and in its forms. From this point of view, if the Lord helps Us, We would like to be loved. Thus you recognize Us and help Us. And likewise you, old priest or priests holding some responsible office, try to understand your confreres, those whose duty it is to work for you, young priests particularly. And the latter, our dear young priests, let them know that they are loved and esteemed; and let them by all means use the dialogue to establish sincere and trusting relations with their Superiors, without, however, taking away from him who rules the responsibility and the freedom of making decisions, and without depriv ing themselves of the merit of obedience. It is in a study of common obedience that the redeeming mystery of Christ’s obedience is fulfilled and celebrated among us. Let us set up the new Church institutions that the Council prescribed: the Priests’ Council and the Pastoral Commission; let us give diocesan problems our joint interest and renewed and generous activity; and in order that we may all be able to celebrate and live again the paschal mystery with fullness of faith and gladness, let our Lent programme be, in a word, charity, in its inward charism of grace and love, and its outward prac tice of service for every need of our brothers and of society, for the necessities of the poor particularly, for the problems of workers and students, in a word, for the cause of Christ. May Our Apostolic Blessing support you in doing so. NATIONAL LITURGICAL COMMISSION OF THE PHILIPPINES THE NEW PREFACES Copyright c 1968, International Committee on English in the Liturgy, Inc. All right reserved. The translation of the eight new prefaces has been thoroughly revised in the light of comments from bishops, liturgical commissions, and ICEL consultants on the draft version sent to the Episcopal Conferences in July 1968. No explanatory notes have been given, but the biblical passages from which the Latin texts were constructed or to which allusion is made have been listed. These eight prefaces, like the existing prefaces of the Roman Missal, are for use with Eucharistic Prayers I (the Roman Canon) and III; they may be used with Eucharistic Prayer II. The common form of the introductory section of these prefaces and tin two forms of the concluding section have also been translated. Since these texts are not said by the people, the fact that they are not uniform with the various versions of the other prefaces now in official use is of no consequence. The Philippine Hierarchy have received from the S. Congregation of Rites (Prot. A 477/68) the permission of using the English translation of the New Prefaces and of the 4 Eucharistic Prayers, as confirmed by the Consilium. Feb ruary 15 was the official date of their use in the Philippines, while from May 1, 1969, the new English translation of the Roman Canon will be the official text allowed, (cfr. Decree: On the Use of English Translation of the New Prefaces and Eucharistic Prayers (Jan 31, 1969), BOLETIN ECCLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS, vol. XLIII, n. 480, March, 1969, p. 194). BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS Introduction Father, all-powerful and ever-living God, we do well always and everywhere to give you thanks through Jesus Christ our Lord. Conclusion (Et ideo) And so, with all the multitude of angels in the heavenly courts, we proclaim your glory as we join in their unending hymn: (Per quem) Through him the multitude of angels and all the powers of heaven praise and worship the greatness of your glory. May out voices blend with theirs as we join in their unending hymn. Advent I ... through Jesus Christ our Lord. When he humbled himself to come among us as a man, he fulfilled the plan you formed long ago and opened for us the way to salvation. Now we watch for the day hoping that the salvation promised us will be ours when Christ our Lord will come again in his glory. And so, . . . Advent II ... through Jesus Christ our Lord. His future coming was proclaimed by all the prophets. The Virgin Mother bore him in her womb with love beyond all telling. John the Baptist was his herald and made him known when at last he came. In his love he has filled us with joy as we prepare to celebrate his birth, so that when he comes he may find us watching in prayer, our hearts filled with wonder and praise. And so, . .. Sundays in Lent . . . through Jesus Christ our Lord. You bid your faithful people cleanse their hearts and prepare with joy for the paschal feast. THE NEW PREFACES 381 More fervent in prayer, more generous in works of charity, more eager in celebrating the mysteries by which we are reborn may we come to the fullness of grace that belongs to the sons of God. And so, ... Sundays of the Year I ... through Jesus Christ our Lord. Through his cross and resurrection he freed us from sin and death and called us to the glory that has made us a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people set apart, Everywhere we proclaim your mighty works for you have called us out of darkness into your own wonderful light. And so, .. . Sundays of the Year II . . . through Jesus Christ our Lord. Out of love for sinful man, he humbled himself to be born of the Virgin. By suffering on the cross he freed us from unending death, and by rising from the dead he gave us eternal life. And so, . . . Eucharist . . . through Jesus Christ our Lord. He is the true and eternal priest who established this unending sacrifice. 382 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS He offered himself as victim for our deliverance and taught us to make this offering in his memory, so that by eating the bread of life in a holy meal we might proclaim his death until he comes. And so, .. . Common I ... through Jesus Christ our Lord. In him you have renewed all things and you have given us all a share in his riches. Though his nature was divine, he stripped himself of glory and by shedding his blood on the cross he brought his peace to the world. Therefore he was exalted above all creation and became the source of eternal life to all who serve him. And so, .. . Common II . .. through Jesus Christ our Lord. In love you created man, in justice you condemned him, but in mercy you redeemed him, Through Christ the multitude of angels . .. SOURCES OF THE PREFACES Advent I Liturgical source: Leonine Sacramentary 184, 179. See: Philipp. 2:6-9; Rom. 8:3; Coloss. 1:26; Ephes. 3:9; etc. For Christ’s return in glory, see: I Tim. 6:14-15; Tit. 2:13; Ephes. 1:8-10; Hebr. 8:28; cf. Matt. 24:30; Acts 1:11; Thess. 4:14; Coloss. 3:3-4. THE NEW PREFACES 383 Advent II Liturgical source: Leonine 1241. See: Hebr. 1:1-4; John 1:29, 36; Matt. 3:11. Sundays in Lent Liturgical source: Gelasian Sacramentary 513. See: Ephes. 3:14-19; Rom. 8:21. Sundays of the Year I Liturgical source: Leonine 589. See: I Pet. 2:9; I Thess. 2:12; Rom. 5:17. Sundays of the Year II Liturgical source: Gelasian 549. See: John 10:28; Rom. 6:9. Eucharist Liturgical source: Bergom. 1210, 489. See: Hebr. 5:6 (7:17); Ephes. 5:2; I Cor. 11:23-26. Common I Source: Pauline epistles. See: Ephes. 1:9-10; John 1:16; Philipp. 2:6-7, 9; Coloss. 1:20; Hebr. 5:9. Common II Liturgical Source: Bergom. 410. See: Ephes. 2:3-5; Rom. 9:22-23.. EUCHARISTIC PRAYER 1 THE ROMAN CANON 1 We come to you, Father, PRAISE TO THE FATHER with praise and thanksgiving, through Jesus Christ your Son. Though him we ask you to accept and bless 5 these gifts we offer you in sacrifice. MISSING PAGE/PAGES 386 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS 70 75 80 85 90 95 THE MEMORIAL PRAYER Father, we celebrate the memory of Christ, your Son. We, your people and your ministers, recall his passion, his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into glory; and from the many gifts you have given us we offer to you, God of glory and majesty, this holy and perfect sacrifice; the bread of life and the cup of eternal salvation. Look with favor on these offerings and accept them as once you accepted the gifts of your servant Abel, the sacrifice of Abraham, our father in faith, and the bread and wine offered by your priest Melchisedech. Almighty God, we pray that your angel may take this sacrifice to your altar in heaven. Then, as we receive from this altar the sacred body and blood of your Son, let us be filled with every grace and blessing. Through Christ our Lord. Amen. FOR THE DEAD Remember, Lord, those who have died and have gone before us marked with the sign of faith, especially those for whom we now pray. May these, and all who sleep in Christ, find in your presence Light, happiness, and peace. Through Christ our Lord. Amen. EUCHARISTIC PRAYER I 387 100 105 110 115 120 For ourselves, too, we ask some share in the fellowship of your apostles and martyrs, with John the Baptist, Stephen, Matthias, Barnabas, Ignatius, Alexander, Marcellinus, Peter, Felicity, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucy, Agnes, Cecilia, Anastasia, and all the saints. Though we are sinners, we trust in your mercy and love. Do not consider what we truly deserve, but grant us your forgiveness, through Christ our Lord. Through him you give us all these gifts. You fill them with life and goodness, you bless them and make them holy. Through him, CONCLUDING DOXOLOGY with him, in him, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, all glory and honor is yours, almighty Father, for ever and ever. All reply: Amen. Christmas In union with the whole Church (COMMUNICANTES) we celebrate that day (night) when Mary without loss of her virginity gave this world its savior. We honor her. . . . 388 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS 2. Epiphany In union with the whole Church (COMMUNIC ANTES) we celebrate that day when your only Son, sharing your eternal glory, showed himself in a human body. We honor Mary......... 3. Holy Thursday (COMMUNICANTES) In union with the whole Church we celebrate that day when Jesus Christ our Lord, was betrayed for us. We honor Mary.... Father accept this offering (HANC IGITUR) from your whole family in memory of that day when Jesus Christ, our Lord, gave the mysteries of his body and blood for his disciples to celebrate. Grant us your peace in this life.... He, on this very day before he suffered (QI7/ PRIDIE) to save us and all men, took bread.... 4. Easter In union with the whole Church (COMMUNICANTES) we celebrate that day (night) when Jesus Christ, our Lord, rose from the dead in his human body. We honor Mary.... Father accept this offering from your whole family and from those bom into the new life of water and the Holy Spirit, with all their sins forgiven. Grant us your peace in this life.... (HANC IGITUR) EUCHARISTIC PRAYER I 389 5. Ascension In union with the whole Church (COMMUNICANTES) we celebrate that day when your only Son, our Lord, took his place with you and raised our frail human nature to glory. We honor Mary.... 6. Pentecost In union with the whole Church (COMMUNICANTES) we celebrate the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit appeared to the apostles in the form of countless tongues. We honor Mary.... (HANC IGITUR >15 FOR EASTER) 7. Episcopal consecration Father, accept this offering (HANC IGITUR) from your whole family and from me, chosen for the order of bishop. Protect the gifts you have given me, and let them yield a harvest worthy of you. Episcopal consecration—Easter and Pentecost Father, accept this offering (HANC IGITUR) from your whole family and from those bom into the new life of water and the Holy Spirit, with all their sins forgiven. And accept this offering from me, chosen for the order of bishop. Protect the gifts you have given me, and let them yield a harvest worthy of you. AD CHRISTIANORUM UNITATEM FOVENDAM CITTA DEL VATICANO APPROVED BIBLES To the President of the Episcopal Conference 439/69 The Cardinals and Bishops who are the members of the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, assembled in Plenary Session, Novem ber, 1968, voted that information be circulated by the Secretariat among the Episcopal Conferences about approval given by various hierarchies for the use of editions of the Scriptures prepared and produced under auspices of the United Bible Societies, in order that Bishops in various parts of the world may know what Scriptures are available for immigrant workers, seamen, travellers and others speaking languages not native to an area where they happen to be. With this letter we enclose a copy of a report containing that in formation together with information about other developments in rela tions between the Catholic Church and the Bible Societies. These deve lopments are connected with the Second Vatican Council’s call for “easy access to sacred Scripture for all” (Dei Verbum, 22). For the sake of convenience, we summarize here the information about Bible So cieties’ editions of the Scriptures approved by Catholic Bishops and some other editions produced under joint Catholic-Protestant auspices or with Protestant collaboration that have been similarly approved: Afrikaans: Bible (ed. of Bible Society with deuterocanonical Books added) (Episcopal Conference of South Africa) Danish : Bible (Bible Society) (notes from Jerusalem Bible published in a separate booklet) (Bishop of Copenhagen) Efik: Bible (Bible Society) (Episcopal Conference of Nigeria) APPROVED BIBLES 391 English: Fiji: Bible, Revised Standard Version (original ed., National Council of Churches of USA) (Bishops of Kenya and Tanzania); (original ed. with added annotations by various Protestant scholars: Oxford Annotated Bible, Oxford Uni versity Press, revised at a dozen places by Catholics (Arch bishop of Boston, Mass., USA); (Catholic ed., Thomas Nelson and Catholic Truth Society) (Archbishop of St. Andrews and Edinburgh, Scotland) Bible (Bible Society) (Archbishop of Suva) French: New Testament, Revised Segond (Archbishop of Kinshasa, Congo) Frisian: Bible (Bible Society) (Archbishop of Utrecht) Italian: Bible (La Biblia Concordata, Mondadori) (Archbishops of Ravenna) Kurukh: Bible (Bible Society) (Archbishop of Ranchi, India) Mundari: Bible (Archbishop of Ranchi, India) (Bible Society) Samoan: Bible (Bible Society) (Archbishop of Samoa) Spanish: New Testament, Version Popular (Bible Society) (Bishop of San Felipe, Chile; Bishop of Santa Cruz, Bolivia; Bishop of Juli, Peru, et al.) Swahili: Bible (Bible Society) (Bishops of Kenya and Tanzania) Thai: Old Testament, Revised (Bible Society) (Episcopal Con ference of Thailand) Yoruba: Bible (Bible Society) (Episcopal Conference of Nigeria) A Spanish translation of the New Testament produced by a small mixed group of Catholic and Protestant scholars under the auspices of the Herder Publishing Company and the Taize Brotherhood has been apptoved by the Episcopal Conference of Latin America (CELAM) and a similar project in Portuguese is in progress. In a few areas (Hong Kong, Katanga in the Congo) the Bishops of the region have given ap proval for the use of all editions in all languages available in the Bible Society bookstores of those regions. 392 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS The Cardinals and Bishops assembled in the same Plenary Ses sion of the Secretariat also voted that this letter accompanying the foregoing information should state the following two points: (1) in general, there is no difficulty in cooperating with other Christians such as the members of a Bible Society in securing use of an accurate translation of the Scriptures in schools and among the Catholic faithful provided there is “in some way or other” (quovis modo) a study of the Bible, and provided the edition is a faithful and integral one which does not at tack dogmas of Catholic faith in introductions and annota tions (cf. CIC, c. 1400); and (2) since Vatican II stressed that the Bible should be easily ac cessible to all, Bishops may endorse for general Catholic use editions of the Scriptures without annotations produced under auspices of other Christian groups, such as a Bible Society, when there is no Catholic edition with annotations at a price the people can pay (ptovided the Bishops are satisfied that the translation is good enough) until such time as it becomes pos sible to fulfil more adequately the pastoral use of the Bible legislated in Dei Verbum, Chapter 6, i.e., until there is a com plete Bible with annotations or helps for readers in an edi tion that makes such a book easily accessible to all and avail able at all times. These two points had already been made in responses to inquiries from several Episcopal Conferences (e.g., Kenya, Nigeria, Peru). They are now communicated to all as a result of the latest Plenary Session cf this Secretariat. Respectfully in Our Lord, t J. G. M. Willebrands The Secretary A REPORT ON THE EPISCOPAL CONFERENCES AND PRIESTLY FORMATION Last March 25, 1969 the Sacred Congregation for Catholic Education called a meeting of delegates of Episcopal Conferences to discuss a program on Priestly Formation. The Conference of Bishops of the Philippines sent the Most Rev. Teotimo C. Pads, C.M., Bishop of Palo as its delegate. Bishop Pads sent the following report which might be of interest to the Bishops and Clergy of the Philippines-. At the call and under the auspices of the Sacred Congregation for Catholic Education, delegates representing 28 Episcopal Conferences met in Rome on March 25-28 to go over, examine and discuss a SCHEMA on priestly formation. All the delegates, except two, were Bishops and Archbishops in their capacity as chairman or as members of the Episcopal Commission on Seminaries in their respective countries. Also present at the meeting were: a) five staff-members of the Secretariate of the Sacred Congregation for Catholic Education; b) three observers representing the Sacred Congregation for Oriental Churches for Religious and Secular Institutes, and for the Evangeli zation of the People of God; c) and four others in the category of the theologians and experts, brought in by some Bishops. The moving spirit was His Eminence Gabriel Maria Cardinal Garrone. The delegates were divided into four working groups: I. French — France, Canada, Germany, Belgium, Holland, Italy, Yugoslavia, Switzerland, Portugal, Spain. II. English — United States, Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales. 394 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS III. Spanish 1 — Central America: Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Puerto Rico and Santo Domingo. IV. Spanish 2 — South America: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil Chile, Columbia, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela. The Philippines remained unclassified. She was like a star apart. It was not possible to form an Asian group, for I was the only delegate from Asia. All the other Asian Episcopal Conferences were not directly involved in the Schema that was to be discussed. The first day (March 25) there was only one group for all Spanish speaking delegates, including the one from Spain. I joined this group. I felt united with them by bonds of history and cultural heritage. My Spanish was inferior to theirs, but we did understand one another. I did understand their problems and anxieties as regards priestly vocation and priestly formation. The Spanish speaking * was found to be too big to work. So, on the second day (March 26), at the suggestion of Cardinal Garrone, the Bishops of Central America formed one group and those of South America another. With this last group I sat down for exchange of views. The delegate from Spain was shifted to Group I, so he could share views and experiences with countries in the context of Europe. On the third day (March 27), I joined the English-speaking delegates. I thought it would be helpful to get their views, since our educational system and the mentality of the present generation of Filipinos are deep ly influenced by Anglo-American culture. Each group worked separately morning and afternoon to end in a plenary session every evening from six to seven thirty, presided over by Cardinal Garrone. The whole three-day meeting was brought to a close at the fourth day at 12:30, Friday, March 28. When at the opening session comments on the Schema were asked from each delegate, I felt quite at a loss, for while others submitted written comments prepared by their respective Episcopal Commissions, I had none REPORT: PRIESTLY FORMATION 395 but the “Norms” as approved by the Hierarchy on July 12, 1968 and the “Resolutions” by the CEAP Department of Seminaries, as approved during the Bishops’ annual meeting last January in Baguio City. Both documents, to the credit of our Seminary experts, are in substantial agreement with the Ratio as per Schema. The discussions and exchange of views were held in an atmosphere of complete freedom. There was awareness of the seriousness and supreme importance of the task at hand. Dialogue was at its best. The Sacred Congregation was open and responsive to the criticisms, observations and proposals for changes in the structure of some sections and in the phrasing of some articles. As a whole the SCHEMA, covering all the aspects of priestly fonnation (doctrinal, disciplinary, spiritual and pastoral) is, to my mind, a magnificent document, notwithstanding the unfavorable criticism of some delegates. Structured along lines traced out by Vatican II, especially by OPTATAM TOTIUS, it moves forward by taking in new ideas, new means and ways to standardize, revitalize and update priestly training in keeping with the demands of today’s world. It provides general norms according to which the Episcopal Conferences can work out and frame their own Ratio. Many other points are left to further development by each Episcopal Conference in accordance with local conditions. Hence, unity is preserved in a gamut of regional or national variations. A sense of urgency was felt. Urgency to have a Ratio Institutionis Sacerdotalis, as envisioned by OPTATAM TOTIUS and as postulated by the Synod of Bishops in October of 1967. , Urgency in the face of the crisis of vocations in some countries, specially in Europe and in America. Urgency too, in the face of wanton experimentations and innovations that have confused the minds of many as regards priestly training in to day’s world. This same urgency was reflected in the address that PAUL VI delivered to us in a special audience on Thursday noon, March 27. It is not within the scope of this report to come down to details con tained in the Schema and discussed at the meeting. It would seem pre mature to bring them out since the RATIO, as reviewed and dissected by the delegates, will undergo a revision. Many proposals were presented and approved by consensus for possible incorporation into the final draft. 396 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS With the help of Fr. Jesus Cavanna, C.M., I submitted some five pro posals in behalf of the Philippine Episcopal Conference; proposals which I was sure our Bishops would gladly endorse in toto. Copies of the revised draft of the Ratio will be forwarded to the Epis copal Conferences concerned not later than May 20 ... for further study and comment. The Episcopal Conferences are given seven weeks to re view the draft and are expected to submit their observations and recom mendations to the Sacred Congregation before the deadline: July 10. The Sacred Congregation will then rewrite or redraft the Ratio for the last time, taking into account the responses from the Episcopal Confer ences. When the ratio comes out in its final form, it can be said to be the seasoned fruit of a sincere, open and long dialogue between Rome and the Episcopal Conferences. And the Philippines has had her part in that dialogue. The concluding act wi]L be the submission of the Ratio to the Com mission of Cardinals for their approval when they meet in Rome before the Synod of Bishops open on October 10. Then, it will be promulgated by Paul VI. And a new era shall dawn upon the Seminarians and the formation of priests in this post-conciliar world. DOCTRINAL SECTION PRESENT DAY RELEVANCE OF THE “FORGOTTEN” 400 GERMAN DOCTORS1 MEMORANDUM OF 1965. 1 The sex problem in the mddern world. An anthology edited by J. F. McDermott, U.S.A., 1931. — The Conquest of Happiness by Bertrand Russell Why wait till marriage? — Evelyn Millis Duval, N.Y., 1965. • F. del Rio It is only too obvious that the abuse of sexuality has never been so great in the world as it is today1 and never has defeatism approached so near to despair within the Church. It is not my purpose here to enter into an analysis of the various factors which account for this tegrettable attitude of many called Catholics, yet let me express in passing the dis approval of this pessimism prevailing in the matter of masculine self discipline. We admit the fact that the world today oozes sex from all its pores, and that, as stated before, the world as a whole is impregnated with this kind of pessimism — the priests to begin with, the spouse, and the husband, and that the great majority of men feel they ate face to face with a hard imperative, but in no way with an “impossible’’ moral ity, a morality for giants only! .. . “Our experiences in this matter, writes Dr. Ch. Rendu, have led us to the very opposite conclusion, viz., that man is much more capable of self-mastery in the area of complete sexual pleasure than the world believes and understands. Even in tropical coun tries, such as the Island of Reunion, or Maurice Island, the testimonies and facts evincing masculine self-mastery, were sufficiently frequent to pleasantly surprise the priests in our company, in our tours cf series of conferences and who therefore know only too well the real facts ... Of BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS course and in general, this apprenticeship of masculine self-mastery re quires a period of progressive training”.2 3 4 2 NRT, N. 6, Juin, 1965 “La Regulation des naissances dans Ie cadre familial et chretien” par Charles Rendu, M. D. 3 See “Freedom and Responsibility” by Arthur Twining Hadley. Oxford University Press, 1921. Preface. 4 MAN THE UNKNOWN, London 1939, PP. 152-3. 6 Id. it. p. 129. Id. it. p. 129. The present day moral crisis is not something that has popped up suddenly, unexpectedly. In the late thirties, a well known scientist, non believer Alexis Carrel, left this description of the moral panorama of his days, when he wrote: “Civilization has not succeeded in creating an environment suitable to mental, and much less to moral activities ... The intellectual classes have been debased by the immense spread of news paper, cheap literature, radios, cinema and TV. Unintelligence is be coming more and more general, in spite of the excellence of the courses given in schools, colleges and universities.. . Moral sense is almost com pletely ignored by modern society. All are imbued with irresponsibility.’' Those who discern good and evil, who are industrious and provident, remain poor and are looked upon as morons. The woman who has several children, who devotes herself to their education, instead of to her career, is considered as weak-minded ... Sexual morals have been cast aside. Psychoanalysts supervise men and women in their conjugal relations. .. Ministers have rationalized religion. They have destroyed their mystical basis. But they do not succeed in attracting modern man. In their half-empty churches, they vainly preach a weak morality.. or like politicians, they flatter the appetites of the crowd.”*.. . Modern man has rejected all discipline of his appetites. However, biological and industrial morals have no practical value, because they are artificial, and take into consideration only one aspect of the human being15... Intel ligence, will power, and morality are very closely related. But moral sense is more important than intelligence. When it disappears from a nation, the whole social structure slowly commences to crumble away.” In the words of Paul VI — “Everything in the modem media of social communications which leads to sex excitation and unbridled cusGERMAN DOCTORS’ MEMORANDUM 1965 toms, as well as every form of pornography and licentious performances, must arouse the frank and unanimous reaction of those who are solici tous for the progress of civilization and the defence of the supreme good of the human spirit. Vainly would one seek to justify such depravation with the pretext of artistic or scientific exigencies, or to deduce an ar gument from the freedom allowed in this sector by the public author ities.”7 The Sovereign Pontiff “draws the attention of educators, and of all who perform duties of responsibility in regard to the common good of human society to the need of creating an atmosphere favour able to education in chastity, that is, to the triumph of healthy liberty over license, by means of respect for the moral order.” It is true that efforts are being made to bring the knowledge of the divine moral law, on the licit means of “family planning’ and the “regulation of births” to Catholics in all walks of life, in particular to educators and medical men; these efforts are certainly praiseworthy. This knowledge can serve to refresh the minds of many of the sanctity of marriage, and to stimulate them to conform their lives to the exigencies of the moral order established by the Creator, for the well-being of the human race and of man — as a person. But that’s not enough. One needs be as objective and as realistic as possible. One thing is to know the moral law, and quite another to submit generouslv “o its rea sonable demands. Against the present day ever more morailv polluted environment, the words of St. Paul come to our mind with compelling strength: “It is not the good my will prefers, but the evil my will dis approves, that I find myself doing” (Rom. 7:14, 19), and in rhe words of Vatican II: “as a weak and sinful being, he often does what he would not, and fails to do what he would do. Hence he suffers from internal divisions, and from this flow so many and such grear discords in society”. Moral sanitation of the various milieus, environments, i.e. the aggregate of social and cultural conditions which influence at all levels the life of the individual, is desperately needed. It is impera tive that greater concerted effort and action be exerted by all, each one, according to his own ability and resources, with the ultimate objective to achieve better structures and above all HEALTHIER ENVIRON' Humanae Vitae, No. 22. N “Humanae Vitae”, n. 22. ” The Church Today, n. 10. 400 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS MENTAL CONDITIONS — social and moral — in order to help weak-willed persons to stand up to the difficulties they encounter in the fulfillment of the divine moral law. Indeed we must do far more than heretofore, in the home, in the schools and in the churches, to restore the normal moral health of the young and the old generation. The home should stop turning over to the school, its educational mission which is the very reason accounting for its existence; the schools ought to be more than cheap information centers, confusing or substituting etiquette for moral-religious education ; the churches must show wisdom and sanity. The theology of “love and do as you like” propounded to young and old today could hardly have said anything more dangerous. Too many crimes are being committed daily in the name of “love”. What is love, after all? The churches in the name of the “six blessed monosyllables” and some other adoles cent slogans have become “incredibly premissive” in our down to earth daily existence, references aplenty to the Word of God notwithstanding. “The man who loves me is the man who keeps the commandments he has from me” (John 14:21). Over-simplified Christianity is no Chris tianity at all. The German doctors’ Memorandum states and rightly so that “the systematic destruction of our moral and spiritual substance must be countered by controlling and fighting the very sources of infection". Most textbooks of psychology state that our personality, our be haviour is determined by two factors, viz.: heredity and environment, — what we receive at birth and what education and other social influences do to us. This statement is incomplete; nevertheless, we readily accept the fact and truth that “heredity and environment have a great share in moulding personality.”'0. * La crisi della scuola nel mondo. — F. Trossarelli S.J. La civilta cattolica, 2 Nov., 1968. p. 262 ff. 10 “There are two more factors, which are equally, if not more important: the will and God’s grace. The way a person adapts himself to his environment depends to a great extent, on his own free volition. Thus, he may consciously and voluntarily inhibit certain drives; he may, to a certain extent, hold in check his emotions, or at least their expression; he may even within narrow limits, act upon his physique, for instance, by dieting. Finally, he is capable GERMAN DOCTORS’ MEMORANDUM 1965 401 Once more may I quote A. Carell: “The formation of the moral esthetic and religious personality is very difficult. The influence of en vironment on these aspects of consciousness is much more subtle. No one can team to distinguish right from wrong and beauty from vulgarity by taking a course of lectures. Morality, art and religion are not taught like grammar, mathematics and history. To feel and to know are two profoundly different mental states. Formal teaching reaches intelligence alone. Moral sense, beauty, and mysticity are learned only when pre sent in our surroundings, and part of our daily life.”11 Moral educa tion is “atmospheric”; it depends less in ready-made formulae than on the intense radiation of vital moral values. In our view the time has irrevocably come when this environmental situation can no longer be passively put up; we must act, and clear measures are needed, and all decent men ought to cooperate. In the decree on the “Apostolate of the Laity” of Vatican Coun cil II, we read: “Our times require of the laity much more zeal than in the past. Modern conditions demand that their apostolate be thoroughly broadened and intensified. The constant expansion of popu lation, scientific and technical progress, and the tightening of bonds be tween men, have not only immensely widened the field of the lay apos tolate, a field which is for the most part accessible only to them. . . This apostolate becomes more imperative in view of the fact that many areas of human life have become autonomus. This is as it should be, but it sometimes involves a withdrawal from ethical and religious influences and a serious danger to Christian life.” It is obvious that in the context of human conditions — mainly so cial, cultural and moral as we experience their influence upon men toof influencing his environment, either by modifying it, or at least by moving out of it. ‘Divine grace’ also has a great influence upon man’s life. That influence primarily affects his spiritual faculties, in the form of light for his intellect and strength for his will. But it extends also to his actions and attitudes, his emotions and drives, even to die unconscious strivings of his mind.” Philosophical Psychology by J. F. Donceel, s.j. Sheed and Ward, N.Y. 1955, p. 279. 11 Op. cit., p. 151. 402 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS day, the quoted injunction of Vatican Council II takes on the nature oj an urgently binding imperative for all good, honest men. About four years ago, almost three years ahead of the “Humanae Vitae” encyclical of Paul VI, of July 25, 1968P2 400 German doctors issued a Memorandum against contraception and abortion. It was reprinted in full in the “Medical Forum”* 13 and “Sto. Tomas Nursing Journal”.14 15 I do believe it is extremely relevant to bring to the know ledge of the readers of “Boletin Eclesiastico” this document which re veals the truly scientific, ethically sound, socially conscious of its signa tories. Our readers will find it, to say the least, enlightening and sti mulating. It is in this spirit we offer it here to our readers. Space limi tations allow no lengthy comments, if any, except in brief footnotes. ‘-’“Herder Correspondence” (English ed.), April, 1965, pp. 110-112. 13 Catholic Physicians Guild of the Philippines, April-June, 1965, pp. 107-111: H. Auerhofer, M.D. 14 September, 1965, pp. 147-150. 15 Following on an initiative taken by two doctors ii ULM, 400 German Phyisicians signed a memorandum to the Federal Ministry of Health dealing with the sexualisation of public life, propaganda for contraception, and over population in many countries. Among the signatories were nearly a hunderd gynaecologists practicing in the Federal State of Baden-Wurttemberg (all those in the State but for three) and 45 professors, including 25 professors of gy naecology among them the heads of the university gynaecological clinics of Tubingen, Freiburg (Breisgau), Heidelberg, Kiel. Apart from the gynaecologists> the best-known signatories are the internal specialists Professors Ludwig Heilmeyer of Freiburg, who treated Cardinal Stepinac, and Arthur Jores of Ham burg. Professor Hermann Knauss of Vienna, co-discoverer with the Japanese Professor Ogino of the method of birth regulation known by their names. The signatories begin by expressing their concern over the growing wave of public propaganda for contraception and abortion. ’ Protesting against dealing with so complex a problem in such a fashion — which runs counter to the medical and ethical norms of the medical profes sion, the motion addressed * to the Federal Ministry of Health, requests that all the many aspects of the problem be examined, with the aid of responsible experts, in order to arrive at common views and policies. The demands of the signatories may be summed up thus: (i) The Federal Ministry of Health should investigate suitable means of combating the real sources of the abortion GERMAN DOCTORS’ MEMORANDUM 1965 403 plague, which are to be found in an unbridled public and pri vate sexualization and the disintegration of the moral substance of the people. (ii) The prohibition of public advertising of contracep tives should be continued. (iii) Care should especially be taken to ensure that the indirect manner in which mass publications openly violate this ban, be stopped. (iv) The strict requirement that contraceptive pills be sold only on prescription, must be upheld, in order to prevent their misuse. (v) The Federal Ministry of Health should energetically do everything it can to ensure that ‘operative’ sterilization with out compelling medical reasons, remains forbidden. What is very significant and relevant is the way in which these demands are factually and uncompromisingly substantiated in this docu ment, viz.: (a) The strongest powers and greatest possibilities for the creation, development, and preservation of the personality and the culture lie in the creative forces and energies of man. The rise and fall of every culture has depended upon the “disciplined” and “undiscipline” appli cation of these forces. b) While we increasingly ignore these fundamental laws of life and allow our Christian Western inheritance to be destroyed, their im portance determining factors of history is more and more recognized in the Soviet Union and Red China, and they are being deliberately in corporated into the ideological and political planning of world revolu tion. c) The view that the meaning of human life is to be found in “prosperity and pleasure-seeking” has become the guiding idea for the majority of the people. This attitude ignores the fact that our debt to our own parents and to the community means first and foremost the inescapable obligation to assume responsibility for the life of coming generations. 4) The essence of human sexuality is the total union of two human beings in a physical, spiritual and intellectual life-partnership, whose visi 404 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS ble expression is the child. Its meaning therefore lies in the preserva tion of the human race and the formation of the community. One sided and selfish misuse degrades and destroys the human personality and the community. e) Most of the forms of “modern sexuality” are diseased artifi cial products of civilization. The now common degradation of the crea tive forces of man in the pursuit of private pleasure and for the phy sical exploitation of one’s fellow-man is thus by no means anything that is “conditioned by nature.” f) A decisive role in this is played by the sexualization of public life which is so common today.™ This includes in particular: 1. The unrestrained propagandistic exploitation of the female body and of sexual allurements for advertising purposes and for all kinds of unscrupulous profit-making in business, the theatre, films, television, illus trated magazines, books, etc. 2. The open propaganda for nudism and the systematic destruc tion of the natural sense of modesty at the beaches, beauty contests, etc.10 11 * * * * * 17 3. The kind of “scientific”, “morally neutral” sex education pre vailing today, which deals only with superficial processes in the genera tion of human life, as if there could be no mysteries here.18 This type 10 This positive, objective, clear presentation and evaluation of human sexuality in paragraphs a) b) c) d) e) is in striking contrast with the negative, or at best vaque, ill-defined, subjective picture propounded by some of the so-called “dissenting” theologians. It may well happen, in the near future, that married couples will have to see “doctors” rather than Theologians, for enlightenment on the specific problems of their state of life!. . . cfr. “Modern man in search of a soul” by C.G. Jung, pp. 221-244. 17 A recent visitor of Manila remarked that whereas some of the streets of Manila are dirty, and that seems to point to a lack of civic spirit, the mo desty in dress of our young women was almost a vision! May your feminine youth value herself, as it does, he added. 18 It is very often stated that the only difference between the Catholic attitude and present scientific position concerning population control, through “contraceptives”, is just a matter of means to a common good. I doubt if th: average well informed Catholic is ready to accept this view. In GERMAN DOCTORS MEMORANDUM 1965 405 of sex education leads to irreverence and cynicism and destroys the last remaining inhibitions and barriers in this sphere. 4. The public propaganda for contraceptives which is now spreading is part of this “neutral” kind of sex education. 5. Statements by doctors, politicians, and even clergymen who declare “pathological” sexual behaviour of the individual and in society “to be permissible” only because the behaviour of so many people has become pathological. 6. Destruction of the family by an erroneous policy on taxes x x x 7. Public ridicule of chastity in most of the so-called cultural pro ducts of the theatre, press, and television. Making light of pre-marital and extra-marital sexual intercourse. 8. All of these phenomena contribute to perverting normal sen sibilities and behaviour, frequently cause women to fear having children, and lead to the loss of mutual respect between married couples. 9. A further consequence is the loss of respect for the nascent life. Herein lies the real reason for the epidemic of abortions — this conthe words of E. F. Diamond, H. D., we are separated from the modernist mentality by many meaningful attitudes. “First of all, we arc separated by a reverence for life which prevents us from accepting their views on abortion, therapeutic or otherwise. Secondly w« are separated by reverence for the human body, which prevents our accepting their views on sterilization, voluntary or otherwise. Thirdly, we are separated by a rcs'crcnce for sex, which makes their tasteless mechanistic method of sex education unacceptable and repugnant. “Finally, we are separated by a reverence for God, which makes us entirely unable to accept their “new morality”, woven out of the fabric of the old immorality and made relevant in what they call the post-Christian era. “We have seen a breakdown in value systems. We have seen a deva luation of the child and an over-valuation of education, humanistic, scienti fic and technological, but without ethical orientation and religious inspiration. We have lost the sense of the ch'dd, as a reward for sex. in favour of the child as a penalty for sex. “We are anxious about the population explosion, but unconcerned about copulation explosion at all levels of immaturity.” Cfr. “Oral progestines and the Catholic Physician” in “Linacre Quarterly”, Mav. 1966, pp. 195-196. 406 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS tinuous mass murder of human life, for which, in most cases, in view of the present prosperity, social, financial, or ethical reasons can no longer be held responsible. 10. The idea of fighting the abortions plague through public pro paganda for “anti-baby pills", or even through sex education on televi sion or in the schools confuses cause and effect. For as already indi cated, this propaganda is itself a part of the public sexualization.'0 11. The indiscriminate distribution of pills would, moreover, in the case of many more women and girls, remove the last brakes on the modem trend towards sexualization. CONCLUSIONS: The problem of “public sexualization" and the “contagion of abor tions represents a matter of life or death for our nation as well as for the whole world. We must do far more than heretofore — in the home, in the schools, and in the churches — to restore the moral health of the young and the old generation. The systematic destruction of our moral and spiritual substance must be countered by controlling and fighting the sources of infection. In the field of medicine and biology, the State is, througn its board of health, responsible for the disinfection, immunization, and strict qua19 A popular reason for the propagation of contraceptives is that con traceptives serve to avoid abortion, and it is a Lesser evil, for prevention is bet ter than abortion. However, detailed research has incontrovertibly established that the spread of artificial birth control by means of the methods known to man down to a few years ago, has as a matter of facts and statistics led tc an enormous increase in abortions! What is likely to happen now that birth control methods 100% effective are known to us, remains to be seen in the near future. In all likelihood, and we do not mean to prophecy, “sexual pro miscuity” and venereal diseases are going to increase alarmingly! Cfr. Saint-Luc Medical, 1961, No. 4, pp. 319-339 “Les techniques con traceptives son-elles prophylactiques de 1’avortement?” pas Le R. P. S. de Lestapis, s. i.; Marriage in the Modern World by Bernard Haring, c.ss.r., The Mercier Press, 1964, pp. 325-332. On “Oral Contraceptives”, see Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 11, n. 3.—“Oral Contraception” edited by C.-R. Garcia, M.D., September, 1968. GERMAN DOCTORS’ MEMORANDUM 1965 407 rantine and radical isolation of the infected person. But wh^re is a com parable responsibility on the part of the State for the spiritual and moral health of our own people or of those nations which are not yet fully developed? Are our “cultural” exports to these non-immunized peoples not just as dangerous as shipments of typhus bacilli would be? Would it not be necessary to apply the same moral criteria to our film exports countries that we do to publications and films which are harmful to youth? In our view, the time has irrevocably come where this development can no longer be passively put up with; clear measures are needed. THE PROBLEM OF OVER-POPULATION The current attempt to solve this problem by public propagation of contraceptive pills, sterilization, or even abortion could have an even more catastrophic spiritual, biological, and moral impact in those coun tries than in the West. An aid programme which leads to hygienicmedical and material progress, and not to the development of persons who act responsibly, will of necessity create more problems than it solves and will turn into a boomerang. 2. It is therefore not our task to impose upon the non-white peoples, for purely superficial and technical consideration, solutions which nin counter to their best traditions and models. It is the responsibility of their elites to develop themselves the right way of mastering this pro blem. In this connection, it is interesting to note that Ghandi called for pre-marital abstinence, late marriages, and occasional abstinence on the part of married couples, as the best way of practising birth control in India. Though such demands may sound utopian to European ears, there have been numerous individual cases in Asia and Europe which prove that such demands can indeed be realized.20 The ability to subli 20 Cfr Population: explosion or control? by A. Nevett, s. j., Geoffrey Chapman. London 1964, ch. VI: “The Indian Woman and Marriage", pp. 109 ff. Ghandi’s view of marriage. Whilst going through the series of hrs writings, one is struck with the Mahatma’s insistence on spiritual values, spiri tual outlook and spiritual energy. Most particularly, he is unique among national leaders in his advocacy of personal continence, as a spring of force, and a source of national strength. On occasion he even appears somewhat 408 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS mate sexual forces for the sake of a higher goal represents a basic possi bility in the nature of man and an essential attribute distinguishing him from the animal.21 22 puritanical in his views and never feels shy of calling his people to heroic standards. With him there was no defeatism or pessimism, but alwavs an appeal to ideals and an optimism which aroused his people to unsuspected heroism and which was the secret of his success. “If a reference to my Own married life is not considered irrelevant, 1 may say that my wife and I tasted the real bliss of marriage when we renounced sexual contract and that in the helday of youth. It was then that our companionship blossomed and both of us were enabled to render real serv ice to India and humanity in general. I have written about this in my Ex periments with Truth. Indeed, this self-denial was bom out of our great desire for service.” (Harijan, 7-7-1946) Cfr. Saint-Luc Medical, 1935, No 5, p. 475-476; The Medical Mis sionary, April 1935, n. 2., p. 61. 21 In most cases the avoidance of contraception is a matter not of heroism, but of a great deal of annoying inconvenience and painful struggles for self control. Embarrassina as it is to admit that self-control is what we need to solve our problems—because this is an admission of the weakness of which we arc ashamed—this remains the truth for most of us. For others, those whose situations are difficult, something more than an ordinary effort is needed. Cfr "Contraception and the Natural Law” by Germain G. Grisez, Ph.D., 1964. p. 198 ff.: 209-214; “Nature and Grace” by K. Rahner, s.j. Sheed and Ward, London, pp 102-4. 22 Vatican Council II: The Church Today, n. 15 says: “Our era needs such wisdom more than bygone ages if the discoveries made by man are to be further humanized. For the future of the world stands in peril unless wiser men are forthcoming. It should also be pointed out many nations, poor in economic goods, are quite rich in wisdom and can offer worthv advantages to others.” 3. Mankind is developing technically but man must also develop morally, if he is to escape self-destruction. This would demand a cor responding cultural policy on the part of the "developed” peoples to wards the "underdeveloped” nations, a policy closely tied to the best tra ditions of these nations and helps them along. In reality, however, we are pursuing — with our films, our books, our “scientific” rex educa tion, our magazines, and the example we set at our universities and schools where the coloured intelligentsia are being trained a cultural po licy which is just the reverse. GERMAN DOCTORS’ MEMORANDUM 1965 409 “Steeped in wisdom, says Vatican Council II,23 man passes thru visible realities, to those which are unseen. Our era needs such wisdom more than begone ages, i£ the discoveries made by man are further to be humanized. For the future of the world stands in peril unless wiser men are forthcoming.” In our case I am grateful indeed to these gen tlemen of the medical profession, for their truly scientific attitude, and superior wisdom in analyzing a problem so complex and so vital to the physical, mental and moral well-being and health of mankind. Priests should greet with thanksgiving these honorable members of the medical profession, Their attitude is truly strengthening, stimulating, inspiring. We can no longer remain passive; we must act. Clear, definite measures are needed. All decent, honest men ought to cooperate. - ' The Church To-day. a. 14. PASTORAL SECTION HOMILETICS • David Tither, C.SS.R. Trinity Sunday (June 1) “Remeber, I am with you always, even to the end of the world.” (Gospel) In the beginning, God made us in His own image and likeness. The first book of the Bible describes the Persons of the Trinity deciding: “Let us make man in our own image and likeness.” The Adorable Trinity, Whom we honor today, is the model on which our sharing in God’s life is based. Let us never think of Qod as living in loneliness. God’s deepest revela tion about Himself is that He is a community—a Father Who eternally generates a living Image of Himself. His Son, and a Holy Spirit, the bond of love between the two of them so strong as to be Himself a Person. God is a living, loving Community in perfect unity. In our Christian life we are caught up into the life of the Trinity. We became sons and daughters of God die Father at baptism, precisely by being taken up into the life of the Son. “We became sons in th.e Son”. And the bond that holds us together, that makes us one, is none other than the Holy Spirit. As Our Lord promised us: “If anyone love Me, my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make Our abode with him.” The very life of the Trinity goes on in us: “I live, now not I, but Christ lives in So, when the Father sees us, it is actually His Son that He sees. We arc all, by baptism, one in Christ. When we pray, it is not our feeble voice that He hears, but the voice of His own Son, Who prays in us. But above all, it is by our union with one another that we keep alive and increase this Trinitarian life that we share. God’s image of unity in diver sity is reflected in His Family. If we strive to be open to one another, to be responsive to one another, to live as would brothers and sisters in an ideal family, God will see and love His Son in us, and the Holy Spirit, the source of unity, will be poured into our hearts. HOMILETICS 411 Let no one be so wrapped up in himself and his own little interests as to ignore others. Realizing that w.s’ve been baptized into the likeness of Christ, sons in the Son, one in Christ, a real concern for all the members of His Family. To exist means to co-exist. An egotistic, self-centered life is a destroy ing, deadening thing. The only difference between a rut and a grave is the dimensions. We are children of God, members of His Family, intimately related to one another. Our gathering at Mass here, is a reminder of this, that we, as a family, along with Christ our Brother, bound together by the Holy Spirit, are on our way back to our Father’s Home. Christ called on each one of us to be a fisher of men—to catch others and bring them into Christ’s net. The best fisherman that ever was could not catch fish by remote control; none of us will ever catch a fish just by talking about fishing. We have to go where the fish are, get to work, get in volved, be concerned about our brothers. Make the Trinity a way of life, united as a family, on our way Home to the our Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit. Corpus Christi (June 8) “Just as the Father who has life has sent me and 1 have life because of the Father, so the man who feeds on Me will have life because of Me.” As the saying goes: “Everyone loves a lover.” Why is this so? It is true because love, if it is sincere and holy, brings joy and happiness into our lives. Sometimes we forget that God is the greatest lover that the world will ev.er hear about. So sincere and genuine is the love of God for us, that as die Bible says: “He gave His only begotten Son, so that everyone who believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” (Jo. 3.16) When a young man falls in love, he is not content to keep his love to himself. He will tell his sweetheart about his love. He will express it in various way. Especially, he will wish to gist: presents as a sign and pledge of his love. Likewise, God is not content to keep His love to Himself. He has told us about His love on many occasions and in many ways, but es pecially through the gift of His Son Jesus Christ. God wishes to share with us His most precious possession — His own life. That is precisely why He sent His Son to become one of us, sharing our life. “I am come” said Jesus Christ, “that they may have life and have it more abundantly.” (Jo. 10.10) It was for this precise purpose that He gave us the Eucharist — to nourish, and strengthen and increase the Divine Life we got at baptism. The 412 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS chief channel of Divine Life is the Eucharist. “My flesh is meat indeed. He that eats this bread abides in Me and I in him and I will raise him up on the last day.” And lest any of us become indifferent or neglectful, He added a grim warning: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, you shall not have life in you.” (Jo.6) Increasing the Divine Life in us means making us, more and more, all one in Himself. It is the reverse of the food that we assimilate into ourselves. “I will not be changed into you, you will be changed into Me!” (St. Aug.) And who is “Me”? “Saul, Saul why are you persecuting Me? “Christ and His disciples are one, members of His body, branches abiding in the Vine. Communion means achieving and deepening our union with the whole Christ, with our Elder Brother and with one another in His brotherhood. That is precisely why we have community singing as we go to achieve Communion. Anyone who would disassociate himself from others at the Eucharist does not understand the full meaning of Communion; rather than communicating, he could be described as excommunicating himself! Concern for others, intense unselfish concern is the precise result of Communion, even as it is the one necessary preparation on which Christ Our Lord existed. Thank God the number of communicants at each Mass is constantly in creasing. When all of us, * without a single exception, are at communion every Sunday and fully realize the implications of Communion, that will be the day. Then we’ll be sure that we’ll gather again as a group, as a family sitting down with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob in the everlasting banquet. “He that eats this bread shall live forever.” Third Sunday After Pentecost (June 15) “Cast upon Him all your anxiety, because He it is Who takes care of you.” There is a saying: “Love finds a way.” This is true above all, of the infinite love of God our Father for us. How could we, finite limited creatures, ever know or love the Infinite God? How could God carry out His desire to have us his children know and love Him? The way He chose was the way that true love always chooses, the way of self-giving. He wanted us to share His life. Very well, He would first share our life. None less than God can know God as He is. No one but himself could love Him as He deserves. When He created the first people, the Holy Trinity was the model. “Let us make man to our own image and likeness”. But, we lost that divine life through sinful pride. And what did God do? He became a man. He united one Person, Christ, divinity and humanity, bringing divinity down to man, He lifted humanity up to God. “God be came man, in order that man might become divine.” (St. Aug.) HOMILETICS 413 Christ’s actions were those of a man—working, eating, sleeping, think ing, suffering, yet everyone of these was divine, even the most simple and seemingly insignificant. A divine Person made them His own. And at bap tism, he previously incorporated us into Himself, so that all our actions can become divine. If we unite our lives to His this happens. “I am the vine”, He said, “you are the branches. He that abides in Me, the same bears much fruit. “He is the vine that grows between heaven and earth. He is the link between humanity and divinity, and we also in Him, have as it were a foot in heaven. We are become, as St. Peter says: “sharers in the divine nature.” The encouragement that this should give us is immeasurable. God having given us His own Son; what good thing is there that we might fear He could deny us? Has He not with Him given us all good things? We should have unbounded courage and confidence, unlimited trust. Every single thing we do is an action of Christ. He lives in us, acts in us, prays in us, if only we allow him to do so. Dramatic events form a tiny part of our lives, its mostly humdrum, trite things we do. But done in Christ and really by Christ, they are not trite things, they have a divine value. And how we should be encouraged in our efforts for the betterment of our brothers and sisters in Christ! We are not alone, He is with us. Think like Christ, not in terms of our own little world, our own individual needs, but in terms of the big wide world, of all our brothers and sisters in Christ. Pray for all, without exception, especially anyone whom we naturally dis like. Go out to all. Don’t expect them to come to us. The days of a ghetto mentality are over. None of us may think of salvation as something that concerns us privately—we just have to go out as the Scriptures describes it into the highways and lanes. At least give witness to the joy of Christian living, to the confidence we feel in him Who spaned His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all. He urged us to go out to the whole world> and launch us into the deep, but to the assurance that He is with us all days. Fourth Sunday After Pentecost (June 22) Restoration of everything in Christ Creation awaits with eager expectation the revelation of the Son or God. (Epistle) Needless to say, creation considered in itself is good. God made every thing and “saw that it was all good”. There is a danger in our becoming too engrossed, too preoccupied with acquiring wealth for its own sake, or seek 414 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS ing power or pleasure regardless of God, but these things in themselves are not bad. Provided we don’t let money or status or pleasure dominate our lives, they are good. Why? Because God made them. And because the coming of Christ, God’s emptying of Himself to become one of us, gave back meaning and sense to creation, disrupted and shattered by Adam’s rebellion. God’s plan, “to restore all things in Christ” is being carried out now. Obviously, God’s work is not yet completed. We deceive ourselves, and deny reality, if we said that the world is perfect. Until each one of us is completely given over to Christ, there will be cruelty, injustice, unhappiness. But, if each of us strives with all his might to make the world a better place, will do what God wants, putting order where there was chaos, bringing in love to take the place of hatred and selfishness. Remember w.e will not do this alone. No one, not even the President could do such a task alone. The Vatican Council reminds us: “It has pleased God to make men holy and save them, not as individuals without any mu tual bonds, but by making them into a single people.” A single hair of a broom, taken by itself is quite useless for sweeping. But, put many such hairs together, and you will produce results. Or, a single strand of rope material —you could break it between your fingers. But many strands together, and vou have a rope that can hold a ship. As today’s Epistle reminds us, we are to look forward with eager expec tation to the perfection of creation, and spurred on by this hope realizing that we are the children of a common Father, to work in union, so that peo ple, our brothers and sisters, destined for a family life in our ultimate home, will agree to love and help one another, to be concerned about one another’s well-being and salvation. While it is true that we are condemned to frustration here and now if this were a completely perfect world, there would be no need to work for a better one. We have begun to reap our spiritual harvest, we have the Holy Spirit now, a guarantee of our inheritance and we eagerly await the second coming of Christ, when, with creation perfectly completed and fulfilled, He Our Brother will hand us all over to the Father, and God the Father will be all in all. Meanwhile, with unbounded courage and confidence, let us, in spite of every reverse, keep striving might ana main to further Chrises cause that all my be one, to remove the scandal of disunity, selfishness, cruelty and hatred from the face of the earth. HOMILETICS 415 Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul (June 29) “The Lord has sent his Angel and rescued me from the power of Herod.” (Epistle) Today, the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, we are reminded of the Pro vidence of God our Father, Who knows the number of hairs on our head, and without whose knowledge, not even a sparrow dies. His care of us reaches into every moment of our lives. “Lord, You have brought me and you know me—You know where I sit and where I stand” (Ps. 138,1-2) God our Father knows more about us than we know about ourselves. If only we had faith in this, our surrender to Him would be complete. Let’s ask ourselves: “Am I ready to write my name at the bottom of a blank sheet of paper and let God fill it up, trusting that no matter how great the task, or its difficulties or burdens, he will sustain me? Dag Hamerskjold used to pray: “For what has happened Lord, thanks and for whatever is coming up, yes.” We’ve just heard the account of Peter’s delivery from prison and chains and his being restored to freedom. God’s dealing with us is no less amazing, even if less spectacular. In His redeeming love, in sending His Son, He broke our chains, and gave us the liberty of sons. The Church over which Christ placed Peter as His visible representative and which he promised would never be subdued by the forces of Hell (Gos pel), is sometimes accused of being out of touch with the realities of life. Seeing bitter wars and poverty and seemingly senseless sufferings, people without faith become gloomy pessimists. No Christian can be caught up in this tide of despair and bitter frustration. The world is not like cigar-ash, tossed away indifferently without a thought of where it will fall or what will happen to it. God has intervened in the world and is still acting “Until now my Father works and I work,” said Jesus. God’s providence is as active on our lives is it was in St. Pe ter’s and St. Paul’s To be joyfully confident is a challenge. It’s so easy to be discouraged. Sure, none of us had done as much for Christ as he could have, all of us have well-founded regrets that we could have been better Christians, much more concerned about others. But, this must never paralyze us into despair. It’s never too late to start—the whole of a Christian’s life is a continued conversion. Like a child learning to walk, stumbling, falling sometimes, but always picking itself up to keep on trying, that’s how we go home to God. Wringing your hands is a waste of valuable time. Forgetting the things that are behind, as St. Paul says, we press forward for the things that are 416 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS ahead! God draw Christ alive and glorious from the apparent failure of death, and He will draw new life out of our past defeats. May God grant, through the intercession of Sts. Peter and Paul, that we’ll have a Christian confidence, a Christian joy, a Christian awareness of the loving Providence of God, our Father. Sixth Sunday After Pentecost (July 6) Mass—a Family Reunion “Taking the leaves, He gave thanks, broke them and gave them to His disciples to distribute. ** The description of this miracle, using the very words that described the first Eucharist, calls to mind the central event of our Christian lives, our gathering here for Mass, our family reunion, our weekly get-together. At the end of the last week and the beginning of this, we gather around this altar-table, to recall what God has done for us, listening to the story of His sending His Son, and the account of that Son’s life, death and resur rection. Not that we stay stranded 20 centuries away from this Event. At the Consecration, it becomes • present here and now—It happens now and we, the members of His Family are drawn into this great Happening, specially if the round of the celebration (as we should) be communicating. This as the Church recently reminded us (Ins. on the Eucharist, 3-a) an anticipation, a looking forward to, a “toasting” of the first Banquet in the Kingdom of our Father. It was to family reunion, the Jewish Paschal meal, for which everyone who could went home, that Jesus chose as the setting for the first Mass—the Sacrificial meal that would be our weekly get-together as God’s family. We gather to be reminded of our oneness in Christ. But we don’t just call it to mind. We make it actually present here and now and look forward to its culmination in Heaven. Our union with one another reaches its peak in the Mass. All we are one body, all who partake of one bread. When we answer “Amen” to the words “The Body of Christ”, we mean a lot more than just a belief that Christ’s Body is there in the last under the appearance of bread. We mean that we are attaining union with the whole Christ, head, members, with every one united with Him in love, with all who are identified with Him, with His Mother and His Saints, with the souls in Purgatory, with every sincere Christian on earth, and therefore with one another. HOMILETICS 417 “Because the bread is one,” says St. Paul, “we though many individuals, are one body, all who partake of one bread.” We’re not to join in this family reunion without first striving to have a union of spirit. Not only that it’s meant to be a source of a deepening of this union, an increasing aware ness of our need to live lives of unselfish service of our brethren. This is what the Mass fl all about—every week we come to contact Him, to let him reach out to us, be presented to us as a model of Service. With His life-giving power, we go from Mass with a new meaning given to our existence, we start afresh to live a Christian life, loving and serving our bre thren. We must do this, this is Christianity. It’s on this that we’ll be judged. It’s not easy, in fact it’s beyond our unaided individual strength. But, we have the source in our unity as a family, recalled and brought about by this, our weekly reunion as the Family of God. It’s not the final Banquet, but a preparation for the Eternal Reunion in Heaven. Tire union of the crowd who ate the miraculous bread in today’s Gospel was a foreshadowing of the Mass. The Mass in turn is a foreshadow ing of the final triumphant hour when all are gathered at the Eternal Homecoming. Seventh Sunday After Pentecost (July 13) Sunday Christmas “It is not the man who say to me. “Lord, Lord” who will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does my heavenly Father's well.” Religion is the service of a son, not the burden of a slave. It should be a joyful thing, a proof of our love for Christ. To see people fulfilling a bare minimum of obligations—daily prayers, Mass each Sunday, Sacraments occasionally—and that because they have to, is extremely sad. It is heart breaking, because there is no joy, no eagerness, no enthusiasm. And religion is much more than outward observances. These are means to an end—and the end is that we intensify our efforts to bring Christ to men. He has told us that just saying “Lord, Lord” to Him will not secure sal vation for us. If we just drag ourselves to Mass, recite a few prayers me chanically, w.e deserve His rebuke: “These people honor me widi their lips but their heart is far from Me.” And even if our prayer is sincerely said, it must not be just be for our own private delectation, our personal spiritual flattering. Doing die will of God, being witnesses and workers to “bring die world to Christ, these must be the intention and the result of our devotions. 418 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS Today’s Gospel tells us clearly that those who do nothing for the spread of God’s Kingdom cannot expect to live in it. If we follow Christ merely because He offers contentment in this life and eternal happiness in the next, or just because He has shown how not to be crushed by the trials of this world, or because of favors hope from Him, we’re falling far short of the mark. We must, as far as we are able, cooperate in His work, Christ ianizing our world. We must each of us, do all we can to create a Christian social order, a Christian attitude to marriage and the family, to politics, to work, to recreation. Otherwise, our religion is a shell, an empty thing, it will not please God and will get us nowhere. The fact that so many who go through the motions of religious prac tices on Sunday are selfish, lazy, unjust for the rest of the week is a scan dal. How many use them as an alibi for their own lack of interest, and their cynical skepticism. God grant that these people will realize the harm they do, letting Christ down in the eyes of others. Our religion must be much more than a prop or programme for Sundays, it must be a way of life. And then, it is automatically an apostolate. “So let your light shine before men that they see your good works and glorify your Father who is in HeaVen.” Every Catholic is a public relations officer for the Church. A genuine Catholic, aware of what being a son of God means and showing true con cern for the progress of Gods family advertizes the beauty of the faith, at tracting others to it. The pagans among whom the early Christmas lived found themselves forced to exclaim: “See how these Christians love one an other.” In fact, this concern will be for our times no less than for them a sign, a proof, of what religion has to offer. Remember the prayer at the first Mass. “That they may be one, even as we are that the world may know, that you hav.e sent Me.” (Jo. 17) Eight Sunday After Pentecost (July 20) The Sacraments—Signs of Holiness “All who are led by the spirit of God are sons of God.” (Epistle) We are all aware that we contact Christ in His Church, specially in the Sacraments. Since His Ascension, he is no longer visible; we can’t offer Him a drink as the Samaritan woman did, or climb a tree to see Him, like Zacheus did, or physically touch Him like Mary Magdalene did. We can and do talk to Him in prayer, but not face to face like the thief on the cross. We all know the amazing effect of these meetings, these contacts with Christ. But, we need not envy those people of 2,000 years ago. Our contact with Christ in the Sacraments is no les real, no less personal, no less effective. It is through the Sacraments that He is with us all days. HOMILETICS 419 I wonder, do we realize that it is through the Holy Spirit that we have the Sacraments? That it is in water and the Holy Spirit that we reborn to the divine life on the day of our Baptism? That it was the Holy Spirit’s action that brought that life to maturity when we were confirmed? That the power to forgive sins was given when the Holy Spirit was breathed into the Apostles by the Risen Lord? And so on for every Sacrament, each is an action of the Holy Spirit. Before He died, Jesus promised that He would not leave us orphans, that He would send the Holy Spirit. Remember He had said it was neces sary for Him to be glorified before the Holy Spirit could be sent of this earthly life it was recorded: The Holy Spirit was not yet given: because Jesus was not yet glorified. “Unless I go,” He said, “the Holy Spirit can not come. But if 1 go, 1 will send Him to you.” Maybe you’ll wonder why Pentecost is the pivotal day in the Church’s year. Today, for instance is the 8th Sunday after Pentecost, is what, through the coming of the Holy Spirit we are given Christ as our Brother and God as our Father. And the Holy Spirit, the ever-flowing love between them both is what makes the Divine Life of the Adorable Trinity lived right within This is beyond our understanding—in fact, if we fully realize it, we would die of wonder. Through the Holy Spirit, we love the Father with the very love with which Christ loves the Father. And the Father in turn loves us, identified with Christ as we are, with die very love with which He love; Christ. It is in the Sacraments that we receive the Holy Spirit and His gifts. They are the signs of the activity of die Spirit of the Son whom the Father has sent into our hearts. When we see a sign, we realize that it represents some reality. You see a sign on the road “Men at work" and you slow down your car to avoid injuring die workers, the reality pointed out by the sign. When you see a Sacrament administered, your faith should tell you that the Holy Spirit is at work, giving or increasing the Christian life in someone. Then wc will call on Him, constantly and fervently: Come, Holy Spi rit, fill the hearts of your faithful and enkindle in them the fire of your love.” Ninth Sunday Aiter Pentecost (July 27) Don’t Fear Failure “God is my helper, the Lord sustains my life.” (Epistle) We arc urgently invited, specially since the Council, to be Apostles of our faith and bring Christ’s love and life to our fellowmen In fact, the Coun 420 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS cil took us back to the Gospel, reminding us that Christianity is an unselfish sowing of Christ in others. It is hard to see Christ in one who does not ap peal to us, to s’e underneath the appearances to search for the spark of good ness in an unattractive person. But there is something that is harder. Many of us never start because we never overcome our fear of failure. We fear we would just waste our rims, getting nowhere, even being disheartened when our efforts are ignored, or rejected altogether. The task seems so enormous, such a mountain of abuses, so terribly much selfishness, apathy, lack of interest in God that we feel at times: what can I do? We forget that we are not alone, that He is with us, and that in Christ’s service, there is no such thing as final failure. Look at Christ Himself. He did not succeed with Judas, or with the many others who rejected His words, who turned away and did not walk with Him anymore. (Jo. 6) His life ended an outward failure. As He like a criminal on a cross, defied by His enemies, abandoned by all except His mother and a very few friends, by all human standards, He had failed miserably. .. But then came Resurrection and after the Resurrection, Pentecost. And after Pentecost, the spread of His Church to every part of the world. So, do not fear failure. Fear not, little flock,” He said, “it has pleased your Father to prepare for you a Kingdom.” Keep sowing the seed, even though some of it fall the wayside, some among thorns, some on a rock, some of it will fall on good ground, and bear fruit a hundred fold. No one is promising us 100% success. Only a child expects to see 100% on his test papers. We will meet with rejection, and the rebuffs will make us smart. But to stop trying, to say: “Never again” just because we’ve been hurt, because our unselfishness was misinterpreted or rejected, this would be a terrible tragedy for ourselves, and for those whose very salvation may, in God’s Providence, depend on us. Let’s be realistic. Living a Christian life, loving all, even our enemies without exception, doing good to those who hate us, is not easy. It was never meant to be. “Take up your cross daily.. .” “Unless the grain of wheat falling into the ground dies, it remains by itself alone, but if it dies, it bears much fruit.” ■ Effort, possible frustration and disappointment, death of self are involved. By ourselves we could not endure such life. Jesus knew this. That’s why He sent His Holy Spirit: “Don’t let your hearts be troubled and afraid. When the Spirit comes, He will guide you in all truth.” Christ is with us, the Holy Spirit is working through us. Be convinced of this and never will we be “overcomed by that noon—day devil—“ningas cogon.” THE LAYMAN'S VIEW THE PRIEST AND THE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE • Roberto Lazaro The question of morality in the Philippine public service is one issue that has, time and again, been raised either as a political issue of aspiring politicians against an incumbent administration, or by certain quarters of our society with an honest concern for the future of this country. It is evident from the clamors for changes that everybody is aware of what is wrong with the system: graft and corruption perpe trated by people in the government at a very alarming rate. Predictions have been voiced out that if nothing is done about the situation, drastic developments can be expected—a dominating infusion of a new ideology from outside or a take-over by a new and emergent leadership in some sort perhaps of a coup d’etat. In either case, it will mean violence and bloodshed. Since the future of this country hinges on how we lay the ground work for it at present, and since the kind of groundwork that we lay depends on the kind of people we are now, it is of primary importance that we take stock of ourselves and determine how well we fit into the scheme of the future we want for our national society. Are we capable, or are we misfits? 422 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS Many controls and instruments of accountability have been set up in our Constitution, our laws, our administrative issuances, to direct offi cial and public behavior both of government people and the common citizens. We have a convenient system of mass communications sup ported by assurances of freedom of expression under democratic pro cesses and guarantees. To top it all, we have the power to seat and un seat public officials by the power of the ballot. And yet we see that public officials whose sense of moral values stink of the gutters persist in public office, and the citizens who in the final analysis are the bearers of the ignominy sit in resigned com placency unable to do anything about the situation. The more matured and responsible members of the country’s framework do act to go after graft and corruption. Others have taken the role of barkers. Both types succeed for a while to create a ripple of scare. But the crooks are back in their trade when the scare is over, multiplying in number and increasing in activities. Evidently, the present approach to the moral problems in govern ment is taking a wrong direction. As controls, the means being applied •to resolve the problems may be objective and good in themselves, but they are premature under the circumstances. They presume the pre paredness of the individual and the society as a whole. The problem is more basic than symptomatic manifestations. Cur ing the symptoms can give temporary relief at most. Until we learn to probe deeper and hit the problem at the root, the vicious cycle in the perpetration of graft and corruption will continue turning and swirl ing every bit of the country’s fiber into an entangled mess from which we may never recover. We have a sick society: a sick government and a sick citizenry. Democratic processes are working towards the wrong direction, not because democracy is ineffective in itself but because our society has failed to grasp the real essence of democracy and to make it work for our advancement. Government administrators are too deeply engrossed in partisan politics and small group loyalties. The public apa thy on the other hand and the selfish competition for survival work in conflict with the common good and turn the Filipino social and cultural values into instruments of abetting corruptive practices in government. THE PRIEST AND THE GOV’T. EMPLOYEE 423 The Basic Problem At the root of all the problems is the man himself. No amount of penal or corrective measures will prove effective unless the individual is receptive and prepared for the change. The Philippine public serv ice is infested with morally corrupt officials and employees because envi ronment has created them so, moulding their conscience in the pattern of situational values both in public office and in their private life. Tra ditional morality based on the objective precepts of the natural law has given way to the pressures and thinking of what is called modernity and the liberal concept of self assertion. And as the indivi dual is thus formed, the community is similarly developed by mutual influence and togetherness in a common sanction of moral laxity. The consequent rampancy of immoral practices are mere manifestations of the basic corruption—the corruption of the individual conscience. There is a need to redefine the role of reason and conscience in the life of the individual. There is a need to reappraise the concept of moral ity which now has been obscured by the attraction of materialistic con venience that goes with situationalism. The idea of God has become a fiction, or at best, a cultural antic preserved as a part of tradition rather than a way of life. It is true that God can only be understood within the experiential limits of the human mind. So is morality understandable only within the limits of what is known by reason as right and grasped by conscience as good. But this does not mean that what is right and what is good are a matter of a purely individual and subjective judgment. Reason and conscience, by their very nature, search for standards higher than man’s experience. To limit reason and conscience within the realm of experience would limit them to level of sensible faculties and thus des troy their dignity as the highest and most sublime faculties of man. The ordinary' government employee is capable of grasping this truth. Yet the failure to do just that is the basic cause of moral corruption in this country. For when the government employee starts believing that the law of the situation is the guiding factor in his life, he similarly starts trekking the road towards dissension with his fellow human beings. 424 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS The needs of different groups are different. Even the needs within one group alone vary with the times. Generally, the norm is what is convenient cr expedient, that the situational standard is an excuse pre cisely for violating morality which it professes to uphold. The Pastoral Role In the program of enchancement in the government service, the parish priest is a central figure. It must be remembered that everv government employee is first a member of his community. Catholic government employees are therefore also members of their respective parishes. And as there is no distinction between the individual as a government employee and the individual as a parishioner (except a logical and positional one), the parish priest can actually mould official behavior in government by developing the employee as an individual member as his parish. It only needs positive action geared towards cons tructive development of the individual. The government employee behaves in his government office according to how he is formed in his community. He brings to his office the morality of his community. And his community is identified with his parish. The problem these days is the utter lack of pastoral care. Com munities are influenced by almost all factors except the personal guidance of the parish priest. How many parishioners in this country, especially in the urban areas, know who their parish priest is. The/ come in personal contacts with their political leaders, their doctors, their lawyers, their teachers, their bill collectors and even the hoodlums in the area. But the parish priest keeps his distance within the sanctuary of the church and the rectory. There are a few, perhaps in small and remote parishes, where the priests can take some time out to see how their parishioners are faring. It is of course to be recognized that the Philippines is suffering from lack of priests to do pastoral work. There is a shortage of voca tions to the priesthood, and among those who pursue the vocation, only a small percentage finally get ordained. Consequently, the increase in number of priests is very much below the increase in parish populations. So that as community life becomes more complex and the things of THE PRIEST AND THE GOV’T. EMPLOYEE 425 modernity distract people more and more from their spiritual growth, there are less and less priests by proportion to counteract the oncoming pressure of materialism by their pastoral ministry. And similarly, as the pastoral ministry becomes unable to cope with the situation, the people are more and more alienated from the parish priests and the ministry is rendered still less effective. The cycle goes on towards creating a growing distance between the people and their pastors. When the flock is too big for the shepherd to watch, ravening wolves feast on the flock. The government employee whose homebase is the parish has the most wolves going after his blood. The situation is therefore one of lack of mutual understanding, lack of rapport between the parishioner-employees and the priest. As the parishioner-employees are not well grounded in their own spiritual homebase, they can hardly find spiritual growth elsewhere. This ac counts, to a great extent, for the moral debasement in the public service. Against the environs of moral laxity and positive influence of immoral conduct, a government employee who is spiritually abandoned in his own parish can hardly have a moral foundation to stand on. Experience has shown that the government’s moral programs are ineffective. A government employee needs a foundation stronger than the onslaughts of immoralities which government programs aim to curb. Striking the moral evils at their symptoms is futile. The changes must be radical. The parish priest must enter the picture and work on the man, his basic nature as a human individual with a natural yearning for what is noble and dignified. The primary responsibility of exploiting this basic potential is incumbent on the parish priest. If the parish priest fails in this, it is hardly possible for others to succeed. Extra parochial measure may work to a certain degree and within a certain limit. An over all success on a continuing basis is possible only where the parish priest takes the initiative. CASES AND QUERIES ON THE DEMONSTRATIONS AGAINST THE CHURCH I am a young priest and I was ordained barely six months ago. During the past days, we have been reading and hearing so much about the demonstrations against the Cardinal of Manila and the Hierarchy of the Philippines. Now, last time, in the meeting of the Legion of Mary in our parish, among those present, were two young men who were among the demonstrators. There was a discussion among the boys.. .'Out boys objected to the demonstrations, but the two participants defended their position. They soon approach me and asked for by opinion. I too ob jected to and even condemned the demonstrations. But the two parti cipants wished to hear nothing of my opinion. They said that 1 was too fresh from the Seminary and therefore I was not qualified to know of these matters. They were very sure of their stand because they also had priests to advise them and that these priests knew well their business. I wish that the BOLETIN would comment on these questions: 1. Can you say that these demonstrations are inspired by the spirit of the II Vatican Council? 2. Or are these demonstrators to be considered as public sinners? 3. In any case, how should I treat them if, perchance, anyone of them approaches me for confession? OBSERVATIONS Our interrogator asks for some comments on events that have occured for many days, and, if the demonstrators make good their promise, the demonstrations are to be continued, for they have promised to go on with their picketing until Cardinal Santos resigns and until they, the demonstrators, are provided with all the detailed accounts of all Church’s DEMONSTRATIONS AGAINST THE CHURCH 427 properties in the Archdiocese of Manila, and, of course, until the demons trators themselves have passed judgement on His Eminence’s administra tion and have prescribed for him the right manner of administering and distributing such properties for the benefit of the poor according to their idea of Christian and social development. These are the “demands" of those demonstrating under the banner of the so-called Christian Social Movement. But, if we consider the claims of the group demanding the implementation of all things pres cribed or suggested by the Second Vatican Council, we may be sure of more picketing for the next few months and the next few years. For this reason our comments must be restricted to some observations that the matter of fact in these demonstrations may be placed in focus for our young priest. 1. Young and fresh from the seminary as our priest may be, he, in opposing, even in condemning, the demonstrations is, of course, in line with the most elementary prudence required in the matter. In fact, even the parish boys of the Legion of Mary who, in their spontaneous objection to the demonstrators proved to possess a greater sense of faith and Church’s belonging than the demonstrators and much greater spirit of religiosity than the priests behind all this sad business. Notwith standing the name appropriated by the movement, we consider these demonstrations and this picketing to be neither Christian nor social. a. Not Christian. Because, by their nature, such acts as these demonstrations are directly against the very constitution of the Church which is a divine institution hierarchically instituted by Christ and not a human institution that depends on the will or rights of the individuals as is the case with nations or other human institutions. These acts moreover, are directly against the legitimate authority of Cardinal Santos and other members of the Philippine Hierarchy, who are constituted according to a divine right and appointed to their respective diocese by the Pope, who is the Vicar of Christ himself. These acts are too and, to the extent of their influence on Fellow-Catholics, are effective means of destroying the filial trust and confidence of the ordinary Catho lics towards their bishop, a condition sine qua non that the faithful render in love and obedience to the fathers of his soul. It is self-evident that in matters spiritual, without the faith and confidence of the people of 428 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS God in the ability and honesty of their Shepherds, no spiritual good at all can be expected from their ministry. Once the pastors are discredited, no other means remain in the Church for the bishops are the very ones appointed by God and by the Vicar of Christ for the task of sanctifying the members of the Church. This preeminent duty of bishops applies also to their authority over the priests whom the bishops have ordained and have called to their aid and whom they have trained at great pains in Seminaries for long period of years and at no mean cost. It is equally evident that the faithful who have been accustomed to think of their Cardinal and of their bishops with reverence and respect and even with affection and pride, especially now that almost to a man they are chosen from among the very families of our Catholic Philippines, after having witnessed the imprudent challenge of these young men di rected and backed by their own priests, will never be the same in their attitude towards their Bishops and shepherds. Thus the activities taken under the name Christian destroy a most needed element in our religion, the affectionate confidence of the faithful in his Father in the faith. b. Anti-Social. Neither will these demonstrations do any good for the social advancement of our Catholic poor, be it in matters of land reform, or in the myriad other projects without which no land reform can be of any great avail. Such projects will require the knowledge, as well as the means and equipment in forms of capital, and few a thousand other things without which all dreams of rural and social developments become sheer utopia. It is to be noted that all revolutions, especially the experience of the social upheavals in the last two generations — in Russia, China, Cuba, and Vietnam — have proved that utopic mentality and procedures, instead of bringing real beneficial reforms to society at large, became the instruments of a minority that cash on the social evils of former generations in order to impose, after untold strife and destruction, the rule of a minority relentlessly subjugating millions of other citizens in a society where God is banned and liberties are mercilessly suppressed. We have a vivid example of this in the daily reports of our newspapers on Czechoslovakia for the last sixteen months. For these reasons there can be no doubt that the activities of these demonstrators, if social in name, are the most anti-social devise one can imagine at the present moment. DEMONSTRATIONS AGAINST THE CHURCH 429 Even in their regard for social amelioration the demonstrations are detrimental to the very work that the bishops have envisioned for the Church, because the action which should be demanded from the Church requires mutual trust and confidence between the bishops and the natio nal authorities and between the bishops and the members of the commu nity, especially those who should be the recipients of the benefits, the farmers, the poor and all have-nots. 2. From the foregoing it is clear that these demonstrations should be considered as a scandal of the first magnitude, with the consequent silencing of the good and the emboldenning of the discontented. Thus, we may see the original demonstrators joined by others, the addition of more “demands”, the turnover of some demands as if for fear of face losing, the “demand” for the resignation of still another bishop besides Cardinal Santos, and the prostitution of the word dialogue — a noble thing — by people who started vociferating from the first moment. And all these, by people self-appointed in matters that in no way concern anyone of them. Neither can we pass in silence over the columnists who help the demonstrators with pious advise for Cardinal Santos and, in some instance, with the most irreverent expressions against the Pope, and gross blas phemies against Christ. On the other hand, we cannot but lament the silence of those whose braveness is taken for granted such as the cursillistas and others. Yet, two honorable exceptions should be recorded here. First, is the letter of Dr. Aleli R. Guzman Quirino (Sitio Alto, San Juan, Rizal) in the column We the people of The Manila Times, April 2,1969, after she had read about “the students carrying placards demanding to know so many things from Cardinal Santos". This letter mentioned some acti vities of the Archdiocese which would credit any civic-minded organ ization. Apparently the mentors of these students either ignored such activities in favour of the poor or forgot to tell them to their mouth pieces. The other example is the following letter which appeared in the same section of The Sunday Times, April 6, signed by Romeo Melendres of 140 Ching Kiang st., Pasay City. We consider this letter a 430 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS sort of encouraging document and, certainly, one to offer comfort and satisfaction to the reader regarding this unfortunate affair: PICKETS AT SAN MIGUEL SIR: Last Holy Thursday afternoon, when I went with my family to the San Miguel Church, I saw the pickets with Dean Jeremias Monte mayor of the Ateneo de Manila. I am an admirer of Dean Montemayor and his equally gifted colleague in the Christian Social Movement, Sen. Raul Manglapus, but I wonder what is so Christian or honest or intel ligent about the placards Dean Montemayor was carrying that afternoon. Many placards demanded in rather vulgar terms the resignation of Cardinal Santos. Does this mean that Bishop Lopez was lying when he was quoted by the Manila Times as saying that Cardinal Santos had asked the Holy Father several times to allow him to retire? Besides, when, where and how did Messrs. Montemayor, Manglapus, and company hold the “fair hearing” that led to the judgment that Cardinal Santos should be ousted? What authority did they have— even assuming that they are the “outstanding Catholics” of the Phi lippines—to review and reverse the decision of the Holy Father on this point? Other placards denounced bishops who have cars. Since when did this become a crime? Dean Montemayor himself has a nice car; Senator Manglapus has several car; including a flashy sports car; and the Jesuits who employ Dean Montemayor have more than enough cars. When Messrs. Montemayor and Manglapus give up their cars for the poorest free farmer they head, then their picket will cease to be hy pocritical; when they force their Jesuit employers to give up their cars, then their picket will be less dishonest. But even if all these were to come to pass, their puerile and inane demands simply do not measure up to the supposedly intelligent guidance and direction of the Christian Social Movement. The arguments in the second part of this letter are ad hominem, but they are evidently cogent. However, the arguments about who is DEMONSTRATION AGAINST THE CHURCH 431 who in the Church, the Pope or these demonstrators, holds a virtuality as apodictic as any dogma of faith as our questioner will find below in the very words of the Second Vatican Council. We should not omit here to point another lethal effect of this unfortunate scandal, that of creating a false image of the Church, both as an institution and as to her economic possibilities, in the Archdiocese of Manila in particular. The Church, being the spiritual society ins tituted by Christ for the essential and primary purpose of the salvation of souls may have of course a preponderant part towards the accom plishment of any project of a social or charitable character. Yet in this matter the Church’s parts must be conceived as emanating from her role of Mater et Magistra insisting on the rule of love and justice in very social and economic project. But this role of the Church in no way alters her essential characteristic of a spiritual society with the pri mary aim of the spiritual welfare of men. Neither does this role of the Church detract from the civic authorities of nations of procuring the social, economic, and temporal welfare of the citizens according to the multifarious means at its disposal and according to the no less mul tifarious needs of the people. To demand from the Church the many things that these demonstrators are demanding from the Church is to per vert the order of society and to create confusion about the distinction of roles to be played by the temporal and the spiritual authorities. One need not be an economist to see how ridiculous such demands are as far as the riches of the Church in the Philippines are concerned. The im mense riches of the Church and those of our Archdiocese are great only in the imagination of these young men. Bpt anyone with a grain of knowledge in economic matter knows that if all the possessions of the Church would be sold and distributed to the poor, they would remain just as poor tomorrow. And who would care for them the day after? Perhaps it would not be out of place when dealing with this enor mous scandal to recall here the fact that, at different times, the op ponents of one particular entity in the Church have accused her members of holding to the principle so strongly repudiated by St. Paul, “Do evil as a means to good” (Rom. 3:8). We are far from joining in the accusation; yet, in the case of these demonstrations evil is used as a means to a greater evil. 432 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS A last consideration of this scandal points to the Christian training that these young men who are used for the purpose of demonstrating arc supposed to receive. As it is, their Catholic training becomes for ever jeopardized by the philosophy behind this movement. Given the noble commitment of all young men and the spontaneous attachment of stu dent to teacher, especially if the teacher is a priest, the natural effect of these activities shall be a sort of mesmerization, pardon the word, of each one of the individuals and that of the group, who will have commit ted themselves to a continuous fault-finding of others — in this case the bishops — who might happen to think differently. The loyalty to Church and authority they should have received at school will inevitably turn into a blind obedience to their mentors and leaders. For, though the boys arrogantly appropriate for themselves the name leader, they are just tools. The true leaders remain behind scenes enjoying the perfor mance, with God knows what saintly gusto. ANSWERS The previous observations, we hope, will help our young interrogator that he may see these events placed into focus. Thus, the answers to his specific queries would easily flow from what we have stated above. 1. No. In all honesty, the demonstrations cannot be a genuine manifestation of the spirit of Vatican II. The trick of calling it the spirit of the council is already well known abroad, and the organizers of these demonstrations do try to introduce them into the Philippines as a healthy, they say, sign of Church’s vitality in the spirit of Vatican II. It seems only that when these demonstrations are the very reversal Council’s texts, the hands behind the movement should appeal to the spirit of the Council. They know well that such absurdities cannot be supported by the conciliar documents. In fact, we ourselves have come across the case of one demonstrator who, interrogated, candidly admitted that he had read no document and that he did not know what the Vatican II really was. As for the spirit invoked here, the history of the Church tells us that all dissenters against her from the beginning have claimed for them self a spirit. Now they call it charism, though we wonder what they do DEMONSTRATION AGAINST THE CHURCH 433 understand by this word. In itself a charism, if it be true, is a precious gift, a way of God’s acting within men for something that serve some salvation’s purpose. But, according to St. Paul even the spirit, even the charism, if it be true, is subject to the judgment of the Church’s author ities, the bishops and the presbyters whom “the Holy Spirit has made the overseers to feed the Church of God which he bought with his blood” (Acts, 20:28). As far back as St. Jchn the warning had been sounded: “It is not every spirit, my dear people, that you can trust; test them, to see if they come from God” (1 Io. 4:). But let us come to the very words of Vatican II, that exclude the right of anybody in the Church towards any such “demands” against the bishops of any nation’s hierarchy in communion with the Holy Father: a. Hence this sacred Council teaches that bishops, by divine ins titution, have succeeded to the place of the Apostles, as pastors of the Church. He who hears them, hears Christ; he who rejects them, rejects Christ and Him who sent Christ (cf. Lk 10, 16) Thus, through the bishops who are assisted by the priests, our Lord Jesus Christ is present in the midst of those who believe”. Dogmatic Const, on the Church, nn. 20, 21. This touches on a matter of faith and, as a point of doctrine, cannot be challenged without being guilty of heresy. Yet, in practise, the de monstrators behave as if they are directly subject to Christ and not to their bishops whom they submit to such humiliations and such indig nities. b. The individual bishops, to each of whom the care of a particular church has been entrusted, are, under the authority of the Supreme Pontiff, the proper, ordinary and immediate pastors of these churches. They feed their sheep in the name of the Lord, and exercise in their regard the office of teaching, sanctifying and governing”. Decree on the Pastoral Office of Bishops , in the Church, n. 11. This is a matter of Church’s government. In theory it cannot be chal lenged without schism. In practice, however, the demonstrators’ pro 434 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS cedure is schismatic in mind and in effect, though they may brag their being more catholic-minded than their bishops. c. The lay people have the right to form organizations, manage them, and join them, PROVIDED THEY MAINTAIN THE PROPER RELATIONSHIP TO ECCLESIASTICAL AU THORITY. ... Regarding institutions and programs directed to the secular order, the duty of the Church’s hierarchy to teach and provide an authentic explanation of the moral principle to be applied in the secular order. They also have the right, after enlisting the help of experts and weighing the matter carefully, to make judg ments on whether such programs and institutions conform to moral principles, and to decide what is required to protect and promote supernatural values. The Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity, nn. 19, 24. This is a matter of action a'nd discipline. It cannot be challenged without rebellion. The foregoing considers only the Council’s doctrine on the exclusive competence of our Cardinal and our bishops towards anything that can be called lay apostolate. Now, in regard to the administration of Church’s properties, the demonstrators and their mentors, be they priests or lay citizens who consider themselves the exemplary Catholics, are equally wrong in their sinful demands. The Church has a sacred law on the matter. Both in the right and procedure of acquiring property and its administration, this sacred law binds all ecclesiastical administrators from the Secretary of State of the Vatican, through all bishops of the world, to the lowest cleric and clerk, in a way similar to those who administer the properties of nations. Now, a great part of Church’s properties in all countries has been accepted from donors for some special purposes of charity and justice, that should be discharged either within a period of time or in perpetuity, either in favour of the living or for the souls of the faithful departed. On account of this intention of donors, these funds are called pious foundations or “obras pias”, for instance San Juan de Dios Hospital and Hospicio de San Jose to mention only two. In DEMONSTRATION AGAINST THE CHURCH 435 administering Church’s properties especially in matters concerning the funds of the pious foundations or that of the “obras pias”, Cardinal Santos and the bishops, far from being free, are obliged in justice to observe, perhaps in perpetuity, the conditions accepted by themselves or by their predecessors in the original contract with the original donors. Moreover, the Cardinal and the Bishops are responsible to the Holy See for their proper administration. Only the Holy See is not judged by anybody. (Can. 1556). And here are we have a bunch of boys who are still at school, ably managed by teachers, politicians, and priests demand ing “To know so many things” from Cardinal Santos. Can any absur dity be conceived greater than this? Thus, our young priest may have reasons enough to convince anyone who is not mesmerized as we said, that the spirit of Vatican II is just a ghost living in the attic of the demonstrators’ imagination. 2. — Yes, because of their insistence in their sinful demands, as well as the publicity they have aroused, the demonstrators should be considered as public sinners. And in virtue of the reasons given above, the demonstrators are greater public sinners than those referred on in the moral books of the past. They are however, less responsible than their mentors and those priests behind them. Perhaps the words of Our Lord to Pilate will give an exact evaluation of responsibility in this case: “The one who handed me over to you has a greater guilt.” (Io. 19:11). 3. The answer to the last question is very easy. If anyone of the demonstrators approaches the young priest for confession, this young priest, and any other priest for that matter, should receive him with utmost benevolence and treat him with the greatest understanding. The case of the demonstrators approaching any priest at random and telling their activities on the matter, is not easily supposed to occur because of that thing we have called mesmerization which easily produces in young men a sort of information for the priests of their dreams. No doubt they would consider themselves the model catholics. Instead of acknowl edging any guilt they think they are doing “a holy duty to God” (Io. 16:2), to use the prophetic, if ominous words of Our Lord. When for confession and guidance, they approach these priests, they naturally become more confonned in their opinion. 436 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS But, if any one of the demonstrators approaches a priest for con fession, the priests must received him kindly and help him to understand his plight. However, before he absolves the penitent, the boy should promise seriously to separate himself from such activities, if he is still engaged in them and to offer an apology to Cardinal Santos. This last will be extremely easy, even by letter, and the boy can be sure of only a paternal reception from his Eminence. In fact, the rejoicing over the one sheep for the good shepherd will exceed his joy over the ninety-nine others who did not demonstrate against him. Another condition for the grace of absolution is that the boy pro mises seriously to undo towards the public, in general the evil to the re putation of Cardinal Santos and the bishops. This obligation goes in proportion to the influence each demonstrator has had towards the des troying of the good reputation of the pastors. The amount of responsibility will be different for different individuals. All will have a measure of influence for the mutual influence of each one towards the mesmerization of the group. A public apology, even in the press should be required as much as possible. If for material damage material restitution is re quired in the words of St. Augustine, “non dimittitur peccatum nisi restituatur ablatum”, how much greater is the obligation of restitution by these demonstrators, the active cause of so much discredit of their shep herds, and so much evil to the church and society! Quintin M. Garcia, O.P. HISTORICAL SECTION Los Estudios Eclesiasticos En LOS SEMINARIOS DIOCESANOS DE FILIPINAS EN EL SIGLO XIX (Continuacion) • JosS Maria Luengo y Salutan, Ph.D. E. Practicas Misionales NO adecuadas: Otro factor en el problema que nos ocupa — el quinto! — fue la influencia que ejercieron en FI LIPINAS ciertas practicas misionales trasplantadas alii de la Ame rica Espanola, no obstante que las condiciones sociales de FILIPINAS eran muy distintas a las que prevalecian en las Diocesis y los Virreinatos del Nuevo Mundo. Me refiero, muy especialmente, al hecho innegable de que, cn Ame rica, con relativa facilidad se podia formar un Clero Nativo con los criollos y los mestizos, major que con los indigenas del pais; micntras que, en FILIPINAS, se deberia haber procedido de un modo totalmente contrario, dada la escasisima inmigracioh Espanola. F. La Visita PASTORAL de las Parroquias ■. Finalmente, el sexto factor en esta cuestion tan espinosa fue la Visita Pastoral de las Parroquias cuya administracion habia sido encomendada, canonicamente, a Comunidades de Religiosos, con los previsiblcs conflictos que fueron, luego, surgiendo entre algunos de estos ultimos y los Sehores Obispos. Dicha situacion, a veces sumamente sonada y lastimosa, por necesidad habia de contribuir aun mas en obstaculizar la rapida y limpia formacion del Clero Nativo Filipino. 438 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS Y, luego, debido a la iinprudencia y precipitacion de uno de los Prelados, que creyo poder cottar por lo sano y arreglar de un solemne manotazo aquel enconado embrollo..., llegaron a producirse desdichadas y fatales consecuencias, que cedieron en gran descredito del Clero Nativo y agudizaron aun mas la problematica de su formacion... (El Arzobispo de MANILA, Basilio SANCHO de Santos Justa y Rufina: sus famosas Visitas a las Parroquias de Dominicos, y el fracasado CONCILIO PLENARIO de Filipinas: 1767-1771.) Breve RESUMBN Historico: Asi y todo, los hechos historicos, tai como aparecen en las fuentes primarias y en Documentos contemporaneos, prueban palmariamente que: “en vez de haber existido una oposicion sistematica a la formacion del Clero Nativo en FILIPINAS, bien fuera por parte de los Misioneros o ya por parte de la Corona de ESPAnA, desde los mismos comienzos del Regimen Colonial, y aun bastante antes que en muchas otras Regiones o Naciones del Orbe Cato" lico, se hicieron ya en FILIPINAS numerosos planes y se intentaron diversos esfuerzos practicos, para fonnar alii, cuanto antes!, el Clero Nativo”. Esto se lo que demostramos, con suficiente amplitud, en el Capitulo III. Apenas fue erigida la Primera Diocesis de Filipinas, MA NILA (1579) y tan pronto como tomo posesion de su Sede el gran Obispo Fray Domingo de SALAZAR, O, P. (1581) parece como si le faltara el tiempo para anunciar, publicamente, que “su proposito era fundar un SEMINARIO, y que “otorgaria los Beneficios Eclesiasticos a los Sacerdotes INDIGENAS, con preferencia sobre los Espanoles, tan pronto como los mismos mostrasen estar capacitados para desempenarlos cumplidamente!”... Las promesas del ejemplarisimo Obispo SALAZAR no habian de quedar en meras “promesas”, o PALABRAS!... Y, como lo rcsultara completamente imposible agenciarse del Rey FELIPE I y del Gobierno los recursos para la construccion de “su” Seminario...— un SEMINA RIO CONCILIAR o Tridentino, que MANILA habria inaugurado an tes de 1600!...— el Obispo, junto con su Cabildo Catedralicio y el mismo Gobemador General de las Islas, Don Diego de RONQUILLO, apoyaron calurosamente los planes y las solicitudes de los Padres JesuiLOS SEMINARIOS DIOCESANOS DE FILIPINAS 439 tas ante el Gobiemo de la Metropolis, para la fundacion del Colegio— Seminario de San Jose. Inicialmente, esta fundacion se efectuo y comenzo a funcionar tan pronto como los fundadores pudieron contar con los medios mas precisos: en 1595. (Por lo comun, los historiadores retrasan la fecha de fun dacion del “Colegio de San JOSE” al ano 1603.) A traves de muchas vicisitudes, se fueron formando en el, durante los siglos XVII y XVIII (hasta la expulsion de los Jesuitas de FILIPI NAS: ya en 1768) un Arzobispo, OCHO Obispos, CUARENTA Sacerdotes Diocesanos y hasta SETENTA y NUEVE Sacerdotes Religiosos. Varios ahos despues de la fundacion de “San JOSE” (1611) los PP. Dominicos, con el legado que habia dejado para ese fin Fray Mi guel de BENAVIDES, Obispo Dimisionario de la Nueva Segovia, fundaron tambien, muy humildemente, el Colegio — Seminario de Santo TOMAS. Que, anos mas tarde (1627?) se convertiria en Universidad Civil y Official; y, posterionnente (1645) en Universidad PONTIFICIA. A los Dominicos se debe tambien la fundacion del Colegio Semi nario de San JUAN de LETRAN (1620); si bien, en los comienzos, figuro con otro nombre y apenas era mas que una Escuelita—Hospicio. Estos tres Colegios—Scminarios, fundado-, tan pronto en MA NILA, fueron los Centros Docentes Mejor equipados para la preparacion y formacion del Clero Nativo — y aun “Indigena” — a lo largo de los dos siglo XII, durante el Regimen Espanol en FILIPINAS. Seminarios propianiente DIOCESANOS: Sin embargo: tales Instituciones no eran, estrictamente, “Seminarios TRIDENTINOS”. Eran Colegios-Seminarios; o sea, “Centros docentes, donde sc cducaban, mezclados, los aspirantes al Sacerdocio con los que cursaban Carreras Civi’ les”; en algunas ocasiones, se mezclaban tambien con los Estudiantes Dominicos o Jesuitas. Y la cxperiencia de siglos ha comprobado que no es este el “sistema IDEAL” para la adecuada formacion de un Clero digno y ejemplar. 440 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS Dada la pobreza en que se hallo, por mucho tiempo, la Iglesia en aquella lejana “colonia” Espanola en el Extremo Oriente, los Obispos. a pesar de sus mejores intensiones y planes, se encontraron siempre con la dificultad insuperable de fundar su Seminario Conciliar. Si era tan ordinario que ellos mismos tuvieron que vivir meramente de las prestaciones y de las “limosnitas” de los fieles, ya que las asignaciones que los habia senalado el Gobierno, por el Regio Patronato, solian llegarles muy tarde, v aun “mermadas”, cuando les llegaban!. Por lo cual, en FILIPINAS — lo mismo que en otras muchas Diocesis de la Antigua CRISTIANIDAD, donde quiza no se pcd'a alegar esa razon de pobreza en les medios economicos. . .— los Seminarios DIO CESANOS no aparecen hasta entrado va el siglo XVIII. Mas no hay razon alguna para “escandalizarse” de que, en aquellas hermosas Islas “coloniales”, desparramadas y como “perdidas” en la inmensidad del Pa cifico, no se realizaran antes las disposiciones del SANTO Concilio de TRENTO, cuando los PRIMEROS Seminarios Conciliates hicicron su aparicion sistematica y “Oficial” en la Cristiana EUROPA, tambien en ese mismo siglo XVIII. Pcrque los fundados en tai o cual Nacion antes de 1700, funcionaron bastante esporadicamente y de una manera sobrado imperfecta. El Seminario CONCILIAR Archidiocesano de MANILA, despucs de diversas tentativas frustradas, fue fundado en 1707 (o en 1704?). En sus comienzos, se llamo “de San FELIPE”: en honor del Rey de ESPAnA FELIPE V, por mas que dicho Rey se hallara enzarzado en la dificil y dudcsa contienda de la Guerra de enccsion. En tiempos de CARLOS III (1760?, 1763) cambio el Seminario de “Titular”: San CARLOS BORROMEO, como se ha seguido llamando hasta ahora. El Seminario de CEBU, que lleva tambien el nombre de San Car los Borromeo, se fundo en el ano 1769, y en el Edificio del antiquisimo (1595) Colegio de San ILDEFONSO, “cerrado recientemente por la expulsion de sus Fundadores y Directores, los Padres Jesuitas. El de la Diocesis “de Caceras,” eh la Villa de NAGA o “La NUEVA Caceras,” fue fundado oficial y “canonicamente por el Obispo Fray Domingo COLLANTES, Dominico, en 1793. (Pero, hay muy LCS SEMINARIOS DIOCESANOS DE FILIPINAS 441 probables indicios de que, inclusive hacia mediados del siglo anterior: 1645-1670, funciono ya, en el “PADI-AN” de la misma NAGA, un Seminario “incipiente”?: que tai podria haber sido la “CASA de los Clerigos”, de que hablan muchas Cronicas.) El Obispo Fundador dio a su Seminario, como Titular y como Patrona Principal, a “Nuestra Senora del SANTISIMO ROSARIO”. Patronazgo que — “con todas las de la LEY”! — restablecio, en 1865, otro Obispo Domingo, Fray Francisco C. GAINZA. El Seminario Diocesano de “La Nueva Segovia”, bajo la advocacion y Patronazgo de “La Inmaculada Concepcion”, fue fundado el ano 1602 en VIGAN o La Ciudad Fernandina. Y el de la Diocesis de Santa ISABEL, en JARO, erigida en la Isla de PANAY el ano 1865, fue inaugurado oficial y solemnemente en 1869, por el Obispo Fray Mariano CUARTERO, O. P. Pero el mismo Senor Obispo, tan pronto como tomo posesion de su cargo, en 1867, habia comenzado a “dar clases” regularmente en la humilde residencia que compara. Todos estos Seminarios Conciliates, dedicados exclusivamente a la formacion del Clero Diocesano, Nativo o Indigena, encontraron muchas y series difficultades en su funcionamente y desarrollo. Las dos mas importantcs y de mas dificil solucion fueron: donde y como se podria hallar el personal docente y administrativo de tales Instituciones, personal que fuera suficiente y estuviera debidamente cualificado para su ministerio; y, tambien, asegurar los recursos economi cos necesarios para el mantenimiento, la mejora y ampliacion de los edificios, equipo de las clases, alimentacion de los Seminaristas. . . For lo que hace a los Superiores y Profesores, y tambien al REC TOR de los Seminarios, tanto los Prelados Diocesanos como el Supremo Gobiemo resolvieron que, en modo alguno convenia autorizar a los RE LIGIOSOS Misioneros haccrse cargo de dichos oficios... a no ser que se tratara de algun como verdaderamente excepcional. Con razones hasta cierto punto muy plausibles, pero con una total falta de comprension de Io que dcmandaban, v hasta imponian o “exigiin”, las espcciales cireunstancias del Pais, querian dichas Autoridades que la direccion, la ad442 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS ministracion de los Seminarios queran total y exclusivamente encomendadas a miembros del Clero Secular o Diocesano; nunca a los Religiosos. La natural consecuencia de esta corta o equivocada vision del asunto fue que los Seminarios estuvieran muy pobremente montados y escasa' mente a ten didos, hasta en lo que era mas urgente e imprescindible en Establecimientos de tai naturaleza. Y por ello, era muy natural que el resultado practico de los Seminarios DIOCESANOS quedar muy por debajo de lo que se esperaba: no formaron aquel Clero NATIVO, numeroso y eficaz que tanto se necesitaba para bien de la Iglesia en FIIIPINAS. Hubo, no obstante, en aquel largo periodo de tiempo hasta 12 o 14 Socerdotes FILIPINOS que lograron escalar induso la cima mas alta del Sacerdocio, y que fueron escogidos para regir este o la otra Dio cesis. Aunque todos ellos hubieran nacido en el Pais, o fueran NATITIVOS, no podemos asegutar que fueran tambien “Indigenas”, estrictamente hablando. I recibieron su formacion Sacerdotal, o bien en los Seminarios Conciliates Diocesanos, o en los mencionados mas arriba como no—Consiliaron: Santo TOMAS, San JOSE y San JUAN de LETRAN. Y hubo, tambien, bastantes Sacerdotes Filipinos al frente de sus Parroquias en diversas Diocesis, con el titulo de Curas Parrocos. En el ano 1854, por ejemplo, leemos en el “ESTADO General” — como a modo de CENSO Oficial — de aquellos tiempos que: los Sacerdotes FILIPINOS eran 700: y que regian o administraban 198 Parroquias Para equal ano, se calculaba la poblacion total de las Islas en 3,500.000 habitantes. Con el modo de pensar de nuestros dias, diriamos que “a cada uno de aquellos Sacerdotes FILIPINOS, le correspondian 5.000 almas”. Mientras que, actualmente (o en 1964) con el impresionante crecimiento demografico de las Islas, esa misma proporcion de 1.800.) Gran Mejord de los SEMINARIOS por los “PP. PAU LES”: A mediados del siglo pasado (1852) la Reina ISABEL II acerto a dar — por fin! — con la verdadera “cleve” para la solucion de aquel enmaranado problema, que habia diferido por tanto tiempo la formacion de LOS SEMINARIOS DIOCESANOS DE FILIPINAS 443 un Clero Nativo en FILIPINAS: que, ademas de piadoso, discipli nado y eficiente, fuera bastante numeroso como lo requerian las circunstancias de los tiempos. En el Real Decreto que firmo ISABEL II (el 18 de octubre de 1852) se ordinaba que “fueran a FILIPINAS los Sacerdotes “seculares” de la Congregacion de la MISION, de San VICENTE de PAUL — conocidos ya en Espana por “los Padres Paules” — para hacerse car go de la direccion de los Seminarios DIOCESANOS; y, asi, llenar debidamente las miras con que los establecio el Santo Concilio de TREN TO”. Con ello, por otra parte, la Reina quedaria descargada de la responsabilidad tremenda que pesaba por tanto tiempo sobre su condencia!... “Bastante TARDE!" — diran algunos — “se llego a dar con esa solucion!...; y, aun eso, con no pocas cortapisas y PEGAS!”... Es rierto!, lo reconocemos!. Pero, mas vale “tarde” que NUNCA!. Y esta actitud de la Reina de Espana y de todo su Gobierno prueba clarisimamente que la NACION, como tai, queria de todas veras enmendar en lo posible una situacion harto preterida y descuidada por mucho tiempo. El referido Decreto de ISABEL II prueba tambien que “la supuesta politica anti-indigenista de Espana en relacion a FILIPINAS es uno de tantos “Mitos Historicos” que deben ser arimbados definitivamente y descartados por cualquier investigador ecuanime y sereno!, libre de prejuicios e imparcial!”... A los DIEZ anos de la promulgacion del REAL Decreto en favor de los Seminarios DIOCESANOS de FILIPINAS, lograron Hegar a MANILA “los Paules” de ESPAnA (21 de Julio de 1862.) El 2 de Agosto de ese mismo ano, se hicieron cargo del Seminario Archidiocesano, a Metropolitano, de San CARLOS Borromeo; el 7 de Mayo de 1865, fueron instalados en el Diocesano del Santisimo Rosario, de la Diocesis de CACERES, en la Ciudad de NAGA; el 22 de Enero de 1867, en el de la Diocesis del Santisimo NOMBRE de JESUS, Ciu' dad de CEBU; el 1 de Septiembre de 1869, tomaron posesion oficial del Seminario de San Vicente FERRER, de la Diocesis de JARO; y, finalmente, a principios de 1872, del Seminario de “La Inmaculada CON CEPCION, Diocesis de La Nueva Segovia, en la Ciudad de VIGAN. 444 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS El aumento en el numero y en la calidad de los Sacerdotes Filipinos que se ordenaron en el ultimo tercio el siglo XIX fue evidente y muy notable. Esto es lo que explico y comeno en los capitulos IV y V de mi trabajito. A poco de haberse encargado los Padres Paules de la direccion y administracion de los Seminarios, los Ordinarios de las Diocesis sufraganeas se decidieron por abrir las clases del Seminario tambien a los jovenes que unicamente pretendian hacer sus estudios para carreras civiles. En cierto todo, esta decision de la Jerarquias fue como impuesta por las circumstancias: solamente en la Capital, MANILA, habia facilidad para los Estudios LJniversitarios y los de Segunda Ensenanza; pero, los viajes hasta alia, la estancia, las pensiones y la alimentacion las matriculas, etc., fueron cause de que las familias arreciaran en sus peticiones de que se atandiera a la educacion de sus hijos, al menos con los estudios correspondientes a la Segunda Ensenanza. Se hizo asi; y, desde 1881, esa especie de institutes cuasi Provinciales de Segunda Ensenanza adoptaron los Programas y los Textos de la Universidad de Santo Tomas, bajo cuya autoridad y resguardo se daban, luego, los titulos de Bachiller en Artes. Pero, los que habian comenzando siendo estricta y propiamente Se minarios Conciliates o Tridentinos, quedaron convertidos en SEMINA RIOS — Colegios o en COLEGIOS — Seminarios. Y, si bien es cierto que la mezcla de los seglares con los Clerigos y Eclesiasticos no se daba en tanto grado como en los Colegios Universitarios de otros siglos, no dejaba por es de tener sus inconvenientes y de parecer a muchos una verdadera remora para la promocion y formacion completa de las vocaciones. Las ordenaciones en este periodo de casi 40 anos (1862-1898) fue ron creciendo constantemente: algo mas en las Provincias y, especialmente, en la Region Bicolana que en la misma Metropoli, en MANILA. Crecio, sin duda, el numero de los Sacerdotes FILIPINOS; y mejoro tambien notablemente su calidad. Pero, dicho aumento en solos 25 o 30 anos en modo alguno podia hacer realidad que, al finalizar LOS SEMINARIOS DIOCESANOS DE FILIPINAS 445 el Regimen Espaiiol, los Sacerdotes Indigenas o Nativos reemplazaran a TODOS los Religiosos Espanoles en las Parroquias que estos administraban. En los Capitulos VI al X, inclusive, expongo con el mayor detalle la organizacion de los Estudios Eclesiasticos en los Seminarios, tanto en los Menores como en los Mayores; y tambien de los estudios que pudieramos considerar como de rango o nivel” Universitario. Me detengo, asimismo, en examiner y analizar el modo como se llevaba, por aquellos anos, la supervision y la administracion de nuestros Seminarios. Y, con los datos que he podido ir entrasacando, se comprueba que aquellos “escasos” (5) y humildes Seminarios DIOCESANOS de FILI PINAS nada tenian que envidiar a los mejores “Seminarios de Mision” en cualquier parte de la Cristiandad, y hasta hubieran podido compararse con los mismo Seminarios de Naciones Catolicas y Europeas, de por aque llos tiempos. Es clarisimo, desde luego, que no he pasado ni pasa pcf mis mientos establecer semejante comparacion de los Seminarios de MA' NILA, de CEBU de NAG A, de VIGAN y de JARO — de los ahos 1865-1900—con cualquier otro Seminario de los dias actuales, ni con lo que HOY son anos CINCO Seminarios Archidiocesanos: en sus planes de estudios o “curricula”, en sus metodos y elementos pedagogicos, en sus sistemas para la adminitracion y supervision, en sus Claustros Profesorales, sus CAPILLAS, Bibliotecas y Edificios, etc. Es tan imponente o inconcebible, ciertamente, el adelanto de la Ciencia Pedagogica en lo que ya llevamos del siglo XX!... Y con razon se dijo aquello de “distingue tempora, et concordats... FACTA Historical”... Concluyo mi trabajo, en el Capitulo XI, con una serie de datos, precisos y elocuentes, que comprueban el elevado grado de cultura alcanzado por el Clero FILIPINO, en general, durante la segunda mitad del siglo XIX. Aqui si que cabria decir: “Los Hechos CANTAN!”; y “contra la evidencia misma, NO hay argumentos de razon que VALGAN!”... OPEN WINDOWS Demonstration and the Boletin Eclesiastico The recent student demonstration against His Eminence, Rufino J. Car dinal Santos, poignantly lent credence to the popular opinion that there is indeed a “communication gap” bet ween the Philippine clergy and the laity. It can be said that Vatican II, which has made the faithful conscious of their role in the Church, has not been followed up in this country with enough ecclesiastical direction corollary to this point, thus inevitably creating an informational vacuum. It is therefore high time that ecclesiastical magazines like the Bole tin Eclesiastico de Filipinas take cognizance of this problem. It is im perative that they stretch their field of readership and establish a dialogue with the laity, thereby closing or at least narrowing the said gap before it transforms itself from merely a communication snag into a greater burden of credibility. The need here is not for less theological disserta tions and expositions or documenta tions of ecclesiastical articles but for more informative articles of laical interest. But the effort in this regard should not be limited to publication of more articles for general consumption. As in the Boletin, there is the lack of attractive appeal in its outward ap pearance. It has been dishing out important documentations and arti cles, including some which bear great relevance to a layman, but with such dearth of artistic or technical adorn ments that they hardly elicited a second glance from a lay reader. Here lies the initial setback in selling the right ideas to people, even to the clergy. To attract lay people and to help the clergy in their own role of establishing smooth dialogue with their flock, may I suggest that the Boletin be given a new overall for mat? A varied cover lay-out is a must. The type of prints can wel come variety from bold to light to bold, etc, to clearly separate or bring out ideas. It will also be of vast help to adorn its pages with appropriate pictures or drawings. How about employing an artist in your staff? It is hoped that the Boletin takes the lead in bridging the said “commu nication gap.” • Rev. Renato Y. Manansala Masantol, Pampanga Wide Range of Articles Your editorial on the violence in the universities (March 1969) was a very enlightening and interesting reading. It could not but be impres sed not only at your fine editorial writing on a very sensitive secular issue like student demonstrations, but more so at your having made it to the Boletin Eclesiastico. OPEN WINDOWS 447 It is without doubt that Boletin Eclesiastico has always been the first in bringing to the fore for the special information of priests and religious here in the Philippines and elsewhere the latest developments on doctrinal and pastoral matters. But I wish that your range of articles could be expan ded so as to include also regularly those on issues of national interest and concern that affect directly or indirectly the church, as a whole, in the Philippines, the hierarchy, liturgy, religious organizations, religious events etc. It will be an added inte rest for us readers if these articles would be written in the style of an analytic discussion or full-length fea ture writing (Herder Correspondence style, for example, or the style of Philippines Free Press’ articles of the week) such as to stimulate healthy dialogue within ecclesiastical circles. More power to the Boletin Ecle siastico. • Erno B. Diaz Ma-ayon, Capiz Espanol de Vez en Cuando La publicacion e insercion de vez en cuando de articulos en espanol en el BOLETIN es favorable tambien al espanol, y a los padres o sacerdotes nuevos que saben tambien espanol, los sacerdotes tambien de habia inglesa que saben tambien “spanish”, por lo menos para poder conocer la historia y los escritos antiguos del pais. Tambien seria aliciente algun para algunos para que estudiara tambien y se esfuercen en saber o estudiar el espanol. • P. Juto de los Reyes Bolbok Parish Lipa City More Power The Boletin Eclesiastico has done a laudable job for the guidance of the clergy in the past — both in mat ters of doctrine and liturgy. Today, the process of change in the whole Catholic world offers the same pub lication two great challenges: the challenge of the clergy and the chal lenge of the latiy. The challenge of the clergy de mands of it to live up to its name as a teacher and liturgist specially in this period of change and renewal. The challenge of the laity requires of it to broaden its spheres so as to include, not only the clergy, but also a greater number of the laity among its readers because ours is the begin ning of a new era of the lay aposto late. The first challenge asks for more up-to-date and more matter-of-fact pronouncements on doctrine and li turgy. The second challenge requires of it: firstly — to introduce itself to tlie laity, perhaps, through adver tisements; and secondly — to interest itself in the interest of the laity. It is, therefore, with deep hope for the success of the Boletin in meeting these challenges that I visualize its more glorious future. • W1LFREDO C. PAGUIO Rizal St., Pilar Bataan 448 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS If we scrutinizingly examine the contents of the Boletin Ecdesiastico we will see that this contains in its issues relevant topics concerning the church liturgy in the Philippines, decrees and church legislations parti cularly intended for the church in our Islands and theological as well as doctrinal views and opinions voiced out by eminent Filipino Catholic Churchmen. It also includes timely treatment of present contemporary vital issues of the church such as birth control and family planning in the light of the “Humanae Vitae.” Moreover the articles that appear in every issues of the “Boletin Ecle siastico” concern most particularly the ecclesiastics but also highly to be recommended to a well informed laity especially to those catholic'laymen and women who are interested to know more the functional and ad ministrative structure of the church. It goes out without saying that the different sections of the Boletin Eclesiastico provide homilies, doctri nal evaluations which serve as further development of our Christian faith and tenets. Also we cannot just forego the book reviews contained therein and the cases and queries which pro vide information on how to enlighten the ministers in the proper discharge of their sacerdotal functions. Lastly, more power to those who make possible the publication of this highly scholarly work. May it sail on continuously. • Godofhedo R. Palines Alitagtag, Ba tangas THE CHURCH HERE AND THERE POPE PAUL NAMES 2ND RP CARDINAL ‘A Sign of Affection for Filipino People’ His Holiness Pope Paul VI has named the second Filipino Cardinal in the person of Archbishop Julio S. Rosales of Cebu. Archbishop Rosales will receive the Red Hat, along with 34 other cardinalsdesignate during a consistory starting on April 28. The College of Cardinals will thus be raised to a record membership of 134. Commenting on the announcement of the new Filipino Cardinal, His Eminence Rufino J. Cardinal Santos said during a news conference last Saturday that the elevation of Cardinal-designate Rosales was another sign of the Holy Father’s affection and prediction for the Filipino people. It was, he added, an appreciation of the Philippines as the standard bearer of Christianity in Southeast Asia. Bom on Sept. 18, 1906 to Basilio Cinco Rosales and Aquieda SisonRas-Rosales, Archbishop Rosales is the third of the five children in the family. He entered the seminary at the age five and graduated from the ColegioSeminario de San Vicente de Paul in Calbayog City. He was the youngest member of the graduating class and he was given a 16-month dispensation since he was then only 22, and a priest in order to be ordained must at least be 24 years old. After his ordination on June 2, 1929, lie was assigned assistant priest of Catbalogan. Then he was transfered to Tacloban, Leyte where he was assis tant priest for 11 years. He became parish priest and after four years he was appointed the first bishop of Tagbilaran, Bohol on Sept. 27, 1946. As Bohol’s first bishop, he founded 12 schools; undertook the organiza tion of the K of C Center, Legion of Mary in all parishes and secular mis sionary priests that gave missions to all parts of Bohol. He left behind 39 parishes, 80 priests and 15 Catholic schools. He was elevated to the Archbishopric of Cebu on Feb. 19, 1950 at the 450 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS While in Cebu, he undertook the reconstruction of the Cebu Metropolitan Cathedral, erected 13 new parishes, took charge of the Marian Congress in 1954 and the Holy Family Crusade and organized the secular missionaries for the farthest barrios. Archbishop Rosales is also a holder of an honorary Doctor of Laws from the University of San Carlos and is a member of the exclusive Caballeros de Corpus Christi de Toledo, rank of Caballero Armado. Pope Appoints Two New Bishop His Holiness, Pope Paul VI has appointed the Very Rev. Felix Perez as bishop of the diocese of Imus (Cavite) and the Very Rev. Amado Paulino as auxiliary bishop of the archdiocese of Manila, according to the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines. Father Perez was bom on July 7, 1920, in Quiapo, Manila and was ordained priest on April 9, 1955 after his studies at San Jose Seminary. His past assignments were assistant pastor at the San Miguel Pro-Cathedral, chap lain of the De La Salle College, head chaplain of the University of the Philip pines, arid until the present) he holds office at the archdiocesan curia of Manila. Father Paulino belongs to the diocese of Malolos and was born on Sep tember 4, 1918 in Bustos, Bulacan. He studied at San Jose Seminary until his sacerdotal ordination on September 21, 1946. Formerly assigned succes sively as assistant parish priest of San Ildefonso, Bulacan, Tondo (Manila), and Baliwag, Bulacan, he was promoted parish priest of Baliwag, since 1962, and at present a Vicar Forane. The new bishop will be remembered for having founded a free clinic in his parish, likewise for having organized Catholic Action units and the giving of religious instruction in the public schools. Physician-Widower Is Ordained Priest A physician and widower was ordained to the priesthood by Bishop Al fredo Ma. Obviar at impressive rites held at the St. Ferdinand’s Cathedral in Lucena City last March 23. He is Rev. Dr. Guillermo Lavayna, 65, a graduate of Doctor of Medicine from the University of Santo Tomas in 1953. A native of Marinduque, Fr. Lavayna was bom in Balanacan, Mogpog of that province in 1904. Married to the late Victoria Lincallo, he has an only daughter, Carmelita Lavayna, who is at present a grantee of the Fullbright-Hays’ Scholarship at the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvaria. THE CHURCH HERE AND THERE 451 After the demise of his wife, Father Lavayna chose to study for the Priesthood. He took up Latin studies at the Divine Word Seminary in Quezon City. Then he enrolled in Philosophy and later in Sacred Theology at the UST Central Seminary. A former columnist of a local newspaper, Fr. Lavayna authored the “Diksyonaryong Medikal Lavayna” and the “Glosaryo ng Mga Katawagan PangAtomo” in 1963. Being an author and prolific writer in Pilipino, he was awarded a plaque of recognition by the Institute of National Language in August 1964. MAIN HIGHLIGHTS OF PAPAL TRIP Pope Paul will pray for peace for the Nigerian peoples, meet with African bishops, and preside over the consecration of an altar dedicated to the memory of African martyrs. These will be the highlights of his visit to Africa in July, according to his own announcement during a general audience last week. “In our heart we shall bear the spiritual and civil destiny of all Africa.” Pope Paul said. He said he was concerned for “the peace of the peoples of Africa, especially of Nigeria, whom we know and love so well, who are so tormented by die sorrowful events in their land.” A year before his election as Pontiff, Pope Paul had visited Nigeria in 1962. Since becoming Pope, he has made six trips outside of Italy. These include trips to the Middle East and India in 1964, the United Nations in New York in 1966, Portugal and Turkey in 1967 and Colombia in 1968. With his visit to Africa the only continent the Pope will not yet have visited will be Australia. Pope Paul VI is by far the most traveled Pope in history. His trip by air to Kampala will be more than 6,200 miles roundtrip. Birth Regulation Experts’ Visit Doctors John and Lyn Billings, experts in birth regulation from Australia, a husband and wife team gave several lectures in Hongkong on birth regulation. In collaboration with two world-famous scientists in Melbourne, Dr. John Billings has concentrated in oestrogem symptoms in the woman’s cycle. This is revealed through a mucus discharge from the vagina and women who are carefully instructed can determine accurately the day of ovulation from exam ination of the mucus. The fact of mucus discharge as a sign of approaching 452 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS ovulation has been known to doctors for some time but Dr. Billings and his research workers have been able to reduce this knowledge to a safe and prac tical application. The mucus identification method is often used in conjunction with the temperature method. Both are concerned with determining the day of ovulation, but the mucus symptom is related to the release of progesterone hormone. Perhaps Dr. Billings’ most thrilling encounter was with the poor people from the resettlement area. After that meeting the two Doctor Bil lings said, “Here are people who understand what we are talking about. ** The Catholic Marriage Advisory Council hopes to have Dr. Billings’ book The Ovulation Method translated into Chinese in the near future. Modem Birth Regulation (Interview with Dr. John and Dr. Lyn Billings) Information on Ovulation, a method of high regulation that appears to combine safety, simplicity, and fulfillment was given in Hong Kong last week by Drs. John and Lyn Billings, two specialists from Melbourne, Australia, where most Catholics are said to be welcoming it as a “happy solution.” This husband and wife medical team, invited here by the Catholic Mar riage Advisory Bureau, spent six days giving detailed lectures to the many differently concerned assemblies of physicians, medical students, nurses and clinicians, priests, and Sisters, married couples and other lay groups. Presenting the Ovulation method as a product of human wisdom coupled with Christian spirit, Dr. John and Dr. Lyn pointed out that: 1) It offers security lacking in the Rhythm method because it is a method of “recognition not prediction” of fertile and infertile days; whereas Rhythm is “irksome” to husbands and wives who lack confidence in its success. 2) Many experts in contraception have become “quite disillusioned about the pill” agreeing with them that “it has no future.” This means that ulti mately all people “will return to the built-in system of family planning God has provided for us.” 3) If the money spent on family planning was spent on raising the econo mic standards of people there would be no over-population problem.” 4) Humanae Vitae has not been properly understood for it asks nothing not attainable by everybody. The Pope provides enormous scope in what he presents as the “apostolate of life to life” with married people helping people they know within their own circle, in a generosity homed of true Christian char ity ... helping one another. THE CHURCH HERE AND THERE 453 Dr. and Mrs. Billings amplified their points as follows: “God made woman so that they are more frequently infertile than fer tile. The ovulation method makes it very easy to determine the infertile, less fertile and fertile days — and this is particularly vital where there are serious problems making it essential that a woman doesn’t become pregnant. “Moreover, our experience has been that periodic continence is absolutely appropriate to human nature. It is a normal part of life whether or not you ar.e married and for all sorts of reasons apart from family planning. “And it is important to realize that for a man to be in control of the situation makes him feel more of a man and adds to his self-respect. Much of sexual promiscuity springs from loneliness, the need to be loved. When a person is loved, periodic continence becomes easier. And a husband will restrain himself for a short period of time for the sake of his wife or family. “This viewpoint, we have found, is something people of all levels ol society respond to for it gets to the very root of love — generosity, giving, not taking. And this we believe, was in the Pope’s mind and that is why he is even now finding an echo in many people’s lives, shouts against his teachings notwithstanding. For he has called them to a deeper understanding of the true significance of life. Stating that those who argue that it is either the pill or overpopulation have abortion and sterilization in mind as a family control method, the Bil lings said: “You don’t get rid of poverty by killing the poor! That is the most absurd of propositions. What you do is raise the economic standard of the people. And although nobody has even been able to determine the causes, there is evidence that when incomes rise population falls. . . and not simply because it is planned that way. “In Melbourne, as elsewhere, many people had thought the teaching of the Church on birth regulation might be changed. They thought the Ovulation method might be impracticable. But because the Church’s teach ings were made clear in Humanae Vitae, in a surge of loyalty to the difference between the faidi of those who believe in die Church and the intellectuals who try to work out the problem themselves and cannot because they lack both sufficient scientific information and the humility to acknowledge this. “We hope that in Hong Kong there will be die family to family — the married couple to married couple movement — an apostolate of learning how to regulate one’s family in the framework of Christian charity.” 454 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS England Tightens Law Against Church Thieves LONDON (RNS) — Church thieves — a growing menace in recent years — face up to 10 years imprisonment under a new law, the Theft Act, which became effective Jan. 1. The act was not specifically designed solely to cover thefts from church buildings, but, as a Church of England announcement said here, it “has rele vance to the fabric and ornaments which are improperly removed from churches.” Churches, cathedrals, synagogues, and, places like art galleries and mu seums have been the victims of increasing thefts in recent months. The total value of looted goods runs into many thousands, and hardly a day goes by without some church or similar building being raided. On the advice of the Ecclesiastical Insurance Office, which insures the contents of some 20,000 Anglican church buildings, many precautions are al ready being taken. Her.e are some of the methods suggested by the churches’ main committee: “There is no substitute far-constant vigilance. Whenever possible a church should be kept locked at night. In the daytime doors inside, between the church and vestry, should be kept locked. “Keys should not be' left under a mat or on a ledge. Special precautions should be taken when there are workmen in or about the church doing repair work. “Communion plates and other valuables should be kept in a substantial safe. The altar ornaments should be secured to make theft more difficult; some churches substitute wooden ones during weekdays. “The access to the roof of a church should be made difficult to protect lead work or copper, and since any theft of lead or cooper, must be assisted by a truck, the gates leading to the churchyard should be kept locked at night. “The best precaution is to create a protected area within the church, such as the vestry, by installing a burglar alarm. The local police will welcome cooperation in preventing crime and their advice should always be sought.” All authorities admitted that church thefts are on the rise in England. Some say many stolen objects are believed destined for America, where there is a market for valuable silver and such antique items as armor, swords, and helmets. Some churches are like small museums. THE CHURCH HERE AND THERE 455 Poll Shows Most Americans Believe in God, Devil, Hell PRINCETON, N. J. (RNS) — More Americans say they believe in God, life after death, and hell than do persons living in all other nations sampled by the Gallup Poll. Ninety-eight percent of Americans believe in God, according to statistics released here by the public-opinion surveyor. The figure fell below 80 percent in the Netherlands, Great Britain, France Norway, and Sweden. The poll was conducted in 12 centuries between July and November 1968. Persons were asked: “Which of the following do you believe in: life after death? the devils? hell? God” In the United States 73 percent of respondents said they believe in an afterlife. This was up from 68 per cent in 1948. The Gallup organization concluded that in the past 20 years Americans have maintained religious be liefs strongly held two decades ago while a dramatic shift has taken place in European nations. More than 50 percent of respondents in eight European countries do not believe in the devil or in hell, Gallup said. More than 60 percent in the United States were found to hold such beliefs. The poll included responses from 12,000 adults. On life after death the Gallup table showed: Yes No No Opir Greece 57% 28% i5r; Finland 55 23 22 Norway 54 25 21 Netherlands 50 35 15 Switzerlands 50 41 15 Uruguay (cities) 42 36 22 West Germany 41 45 14 Great Britain 38 35 27 Austria 38 56 6 Sweden 38 47 15 France 35 53 12 456 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS On belief in God two percent of Americans gave a “no opinion” responses in the States to that question. Polls in other nations showed the following: Greece Uruguay (cities) Austria Switzerland Finland West Germany Netherlands Great Britain France Norway Sweden No_________ No Opinion 2% 2% 10 3 10 5 11 5 7 10 10 9 13 8 11 12 21 6 12 15 26 14 _Yes_ 96% 89 85 84 83 81 78 77 73 73 60 Percentages of belief in the existence of hell were: Yes No United States 65% 29% Greece 62 25 Uruguay (cities) 44 50 Norway 36 45 Finland 29 49 Netherlands 28 61 Austria 26 68 Switzerland 25 67 West Germany 25 62 Great Britain 23 58 France 22 70 Sweden 17 71 Percentages of belief in the existence of the devil were: No Opinion ”"~ * 6% 13 6 19 22 11 6 8 13 19 8 12 _____ Yes' Greece 67% United States 60 Uruguay (cities) 45 Norway 38 Netherlands 29 Finland 26 Switzerland 25 West Germany 25 Austria 23 Great Britain 21 Sweden 21 France 17 No No Opinio 21% *12% 35 5 50 5 44 18 57 14 57 17 69 6 62 13 71 6 60 19 68 11 76 7 SPECIAL REVIEW THE BIBLE OF MONSIGNOR J. C. ABRIOL, D.P. * * ANG BANAL NA BIBLIA, Salin ni Mons. J. C. Abriol D.P., IKAI.AWANG. St. Paul Publications: Pasay City: Pp. 1-414. The BIBLE, the greatest book ever written, the Word of God in words of men, must really be proclaimed to the four comers of the world. How often do we find ourselves struck with reverence and ad miration the way christians and non-christians alike regard and hold in high esteem the contents and history of salvation so emphatically yet more often mysteriously presented in the Bible. Yet to achieve this Christian noble end of having the Word of God reach and penetrate within the grasp of its countless readers, the Bible necessarily has to be translated suited to the general understanding and capacity of all. This has been the long and taxing task of biblical scholars and exegetes from the beginnings of Christianity. Fully aware of the significance of general understanding of the Bible and its vital role, they have con tinuously sought possible means to accomplish this. This is highly intended by them since Christian faith is nourished and streng thened by a sound reading and understanding of the Bible. No wonder then that many translations of the Sacred Scriptures have been written already up to the present. To cite them, they are first of all the ancient versions, viz., Aramaic Targums of the Old Testament, Latin Versions, Coptic Versions. These were made due to the difficulty of reading the original languages of the Old and New Testament. Then in the year 1382 the first complete Bible in English appeared. Later on the non-English medieval and modern versions gradually followed, viz., Dutch Versions, French, German, modem Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Portuguese, Scandinavian, Slavic and Spanish translations. Thus by the middle of the twentieth century, the Bible, or a significant portion of it, had been translated into more than one thousand different languages or dialects. 458 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS It is therefore with a feeling of pride, joy and appreciation that Filipino Christians should receive the fruitful result of the labors of Monsignor Abriol. The availability or the second edition of his Bible (1962, Daughters of St. Paul) is indeed a solution to that old problem of Bible-reading Filipinos. There is no more need to men tion the difficulties commonly encountered in reading a book. Suffice it to say that the translation of Mons. Abriol would certainly serve as an aid not only to the foreign missionaries in the Philippines but also to our Filipino youth for their understanding of things pertaining to God and man’s salvation. Another reason why we are encouraged to read many pages of the translation of Mons. Abriol was to prove to ourselves the words of praise for his translation dedicated by Paraluman Aspillera in her Tagalog Comer (Manila Times, dated December 15, 1968). She has really given Mons. Abriol his due. For it is even a general consensus of so-called authorities on our language that it would be inevitably dif ficult for Filipinos to translate a foreign book into our own national language. The employment of Tagalog words which could bring “con fusion” or misinterpretation, would be also difficult to avoid. It also holds true that the use of tongue-twisting and deep Tagalog words would be resorted to. In so far as the translation of the Bible by Mons. Abriol is concerned, it is undoubtedly an admirable venture and accom plishment to answer the needs of Filipinos. In like manner, we give due credit to his translation and more so to his ability as a translator. Upon reading his work, we were able to find only three words which we cannot quite fully understand the meaning: they are “SIKANG, BABAKAY, MAGHAHAPAK,” due mainly to the fact that we cannot find the real explanation on the foot notes below the pages. Moreover, it would not consist as a problem for the readers of this Bible to understand the Greek names and places frequently found because even in the “Florante at Laura” of Francisco Balagtas, there are also explanations below the pages. Before reading Mons. Abriol’s translation, we had the impression that this might be similar to the prayer books and Bibles we have al ready read. We even presumed that we could not fully understand his work. So that we thought another criticism could we bring out THE CHURCH HERE AND THERE 459 but we were mistaken. For in the simple words and sentences employed by Mons. J. C. Abriol, we could trace his intention that his transla tion be understood by the majority. Let us, therefore, cite once instance to prove our statement, e.g., as regards the answer made by Jesus Christ when He was accused by the Jews of breaking the Sabbath and of claim ing God as His Father and being equal with the Father: Winika ni Jesus sa kanila, “Tunay na tunay na sinasabi ko sa inyo na walang magagawa ang Anak sa kanyang sarili kundi yaong nakikita niyang ginagawa ng Ama, sapagka’t ang lahat ng ginagawa nito ay ginagawa rin ng Anak. Sapagka’t minamahal ng Ama ang Anak, at ipinakikita sa kanya ang lahat ng ginagawa niya, at may ipakikita pa sa kanya na lalong dakilang mga gawa kaysa rito upang mamangha kayo. Kung paanong pinababangon at binubuhay ng Ama ang mga patay, gayon din naman ang Anak ay nagbibigay ng buhay sa kan yang maibigan. Ang Ama ay walang hinahatulan, nguni’t ang lahat ng paghatol ay ipinagkaloob sa Anak, upang ang lahat ay gumalang sa Anak, katulad ng paggalang sa Ama. Ang hindi gumalang sa Anak, ay hindi gumagalang sa Ama na nagsugo sa kanya.” San Juan, v: 19-24 In these verses, we find no single word we consider as to hinder the readers from grasping what the Speaker intends to communicate. While reading these verses from St. John, we can picture vividly in our minds that Jesus is speaking our own language in a way intelligible to the readers. The simplicity noticeable in these verses, runs through out the whole book. And it is safe to say that we do not need to re course to reading the English Bible as in the case of many Filipinos. We are certain that we can understand to a greater extent our verna cular translation. If we praise the Filipino translation of Julius Caesar (Shakespeare) by Dr. Jose Villa Panganiban, we also give credit and admiration for the translation done by Mons. J. C. Abriol. Another point of interest that we wish to mention is this. We saw a movie about a character in the Bible “Solomon and Sheba”. We have read several books and Bibles but we always read the name Solo 460 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS mon. We wonder why in this book of Mons. Abriol, Salomon instead of Solomon is used. Which one is correct, or ought to be used? We can truthfully say that very rare we observe translations of foreign books into our own language which carry a true flow of our national language, distinctively our own. We are certain that the easy and simple words used by Mons. Abriol will render a beautiful exam ple to many others who intend to translate other foreign books, aside from the Bible. We are also certain that his translation of the Bible will serve as food and drink for Filipino minds hungry and thirsty for the knowledge of God. Once again, we extend our deep appreciation and congratulations for the initiative and executive ability of Mons. Abriol, D. P. May his tribe increase not only among the clergy but also among the laity. • Rev. Amadito V. Clenista, Jr ONE DIMENSIONAL MAN by Professor Herbert Marcuse. Boston: Beacon Press, 1968. Professor Marcuse in his book presents to us a rather unique posi tion of man in today’s world. He wrote that man is guided by a single pattern of living, both in the material order and in the intellectual order. This single pattern according to him is brought about by the progress in technology. Man seek to acquire those material objects that are con tinuously becoming the unending desire of man for comfort and to les sen his sufferings, like automobiles, television, electrical appliances, com fortable furnitures, stylish clothings, fashionable entertainment and ma ny others. In the intellectual life, opinions are formed through the media of communication and that these opinions are imposed upon the people. He nevertheless accept that still the concepts words that express the thought are of various number. Commenting on the philo sophy of the Anglo-Saxon countries which is predominantly positivist BOOK REVIEW 461 and empirical, he said that man in that philosophy is no longer treated as a universal concept but rather treated in its concrete form. So that if ever they treat man, man is seen in his particularity, this man in this particular situation and avoiding to mention the what he is not”, “but what might be? and “what should be.” Isolating man, therefore, as a prisoner of what the author called “fiat accompli”. Consequently, li berty is lost and man is dominated and subjected to various depressions. He affirmed that man of the olden times and man of today are always subjected to dominion. In the olden times there was the domi nion of the masters over their slaves, the dominion of the lords over the serfs, now, in our time today we are witnissing the dominion ol technology over man. A dominion much different to that of the an cient time. The difference lies in that, during the past, the masters and lords have the fear of rebellion of the subjects if unfavorable treat ment to the subjects were to be given, but in the dominion of technology, the reverse happens, the subjects themselves embrace such dominion whatever happens. The people finds comforts, dress better and suffer less and had the pleasure of life. Professor pointed out that today this technological civilization is at a moral, threathening and dangerous si tuation. Technology had produce objects that could vanish or better still annihilate man and all other things in just a twinkling of an eye, like for example the atomic bomb, the missies. So that given the sti mulus, man may use these weapons against another. But because of multiple production and possession of these objects, man fear to dare use these objects. However if such thing would happen, Professor Marcuse said that those who would survive this catastrophy, have to change systems or they would have the same fate. It is the system of the technological dominion that must be changed. A change that is of a great challenge to man. Who would deny himself of the technological progress com forts? However, Professor Marcuse was quick to point out that what should be changed was not to remove the technological progress but rather to keep its benefits doing away with the dominion. Professor Marcuse concluded that man would remain in the same condition because limits are set for the enjoyment of the earthly good 462 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS for the good of the community. Man would always be subjected to his passion if he does not hope for the better, if he does not believe in God the Father and Judge of all men, if he does not imitate or follow Christ. He would be the same old man and will never find content ment, freedom and peace. • Froilan A. Zalameda RENEWAL IN RELIGIOUS LIFE, by Elio Gambari, S.M.M. St. Paul Publications, Pasay City Philippines: 1967, 392 pags. In our fast-moving times, when almost all Religious families—not to find themselves grouping in the dark, in the midst of so many con flicting theories and practices, in search of an otherwise necessary rene wal, which may infuse new vitality into their Religious entities, the pre sent book comes very opportunely to lend them a helping hand in the accomplishment of such a difficult and transcendent task. Writing in plain and clear language, and without losing sight of his guiding star, the decrees and documents of Vatican Council II, spe cially that of “Perfectae caritates”, the author offers to the would-be Religious lawmaker a multiplicity of solutions in his effort to update the Constitutions and Religious life to the requirements of the Council and to the conditions of our day. “The aim of this work—we are told in the Foreword—is to contri bute to the intense, sustained efforts being made by individual insti tutes to give concrete expression to the rich heritage of Vatican II in their own set-up and in their own lives.” To achieve this aim, the author has gathered a good number of suggestions, which in part have been the result of encounters with other religious men and women in Rome as well as in other parts of the world, more especially in the United States. SPECIAL REVIEW 463 Through its 392 pages the book deals with such varied and inter persons and institutions involved; process of renewal through the spe cial General Chapters; criteria and directives for renewal and adaptation citing topics as the reason for the decree “Perfectae Caritatics”; to nature, principles, norms and extent of the ideas “adaptation and renewal”; of the Constitutions in the light of the decree “perfectae charitatis”; formation and adaptation of he Religious person throughout the Novitiate and the Religious life; preparation of the personnel responsible for the training of the young; program and plan of formation; current prob lems and experiments, etc. From all this it is easy to conclude how helpful the book will be not only to the very few on whose shoulders rests the responsibility of the adaptation and renewal of their. Institutions, but also to the reli gious men and women in particular, who have also to adapt themselves to the new trends and renew their religious lives, so as to become a living testimony of Christ and a sort of a spiritual mirror reflecting the life and spirit of their Fathers and Founders. • Fr. Pablo Fernandez, O.P. Republic of the Philippines Department of Public Works and Communication BUREAU OF POSTS Manila SWORN STATEMENT (Required by Act 2580) The undersigned, Fr. Leonardo Z. Legazpi, O.P. editor of Boletin Eclesiastico de Filipinas, published monthly except May-June, in English, Spanish and Latin at University of Santo Tomas, Manila, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby sub mits the following statement of ownership, management, circulation, etc., which is required by Act. 2580, as amended by Commonwealth Act No. 201. Editor: Fr. Leonardo Z. Legaspi, O.P.......................... U.S.T., Manila Manayiny Editor: Fr. Fidel Villaroel, O.P.................. —do— Business Manager: Fr. Florencio Testers, O.P.......... —do— Owner: University of Santo Tomas ............................. —do— Publisher: University of Santo Tomas......................... —do— Printer: Novel Publishing Co., Inc.................... P. Noval cor. Espana Office of Publication: University of Santo Tomas, UST, Manila In case of publication other than daily, total number of copies printed and circulated of the last issue dated April 1969: 1. Sent to paid subscribers ........................................... 1,800 2. Sent to others than paid subscribers........................ 200 Total................................... 2,000 (Sgrl.) FR. LEONARDO Z. LEGASPI. O.P. Editor SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 1st day of April, 1968, at Manila, the affiant exhibiting his Residence Certificate No. A-231516 issued at Manila on Jan. 26, 1969, (Sgd.) LUIS C. BASS1G Doc. No. 98 Page No. 75 .Votary Public Book No. XII, Series of 1969. Until December 31, 1969 VKRAUT art GLASS * neon 879 BILIBID VIEJO • MANILA • TEL 3-39-23