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 XLVI (Issue No. 513) March 1972
Publisher: University of Santo Tomas
Year: 1972
Language: English; Spanish
Subject: Catholic Church--Philippines--Periodicals.; Philippines -- Religion -- Periodicals.
Rights
Place of publication: Manila
extracted text: JtlOLETIN VCLESIASTICO DE HpiLIPINAS Vol. XLVI • 513 March 1972 SAN ALFONSO DE LIGUOR1 PATRON OF CONFESSORS Boletin ECLESIASTICO DE piLIPINAS THE OFFICIAL INTERDIOCESAN ORGAN EDITOR FR. JAIME BOQUIREN, OP. EDITORIAL CONSULTANTS FR. FRANCISCO DEL RIO, O.P. FR. QUINTIN M. GARCIA. O.P. FR. JESUS MERINO, O.P. FR. FIDEL V1LLARROEL. O.P. FR. LEONARDO LEGASPI. O.P. FR. EFREN RIVERA. O.P. BUSINESS MANAGER FR. FLORENCIO TESTERA, O.P. 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. Entered as Second Class Mail Matter at the Manila, Post Office on June 21, 1946. Subscription Rates. Yearly subscription in the Philippines, P20.00; Two Years, P36.00; Three Years, P54.00. Abroad, $5.00 a year. Price per copy, P2.00. Subscriptions are paid in advance Communications of an editorial nature concerning articles, cases and reviews should be addressed to the Editor. Advertising and subscription enquiries should be addressed to the Business Manager. Orders for renewals or changes of address should include both old and new address, and will go into effect fifteen days after notification. Address all communications to. BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS Fathers' Residence University of Santo Tomas Manila D-403 Philippines Vol. XLVI * 513 March 1972 TABLE OF CONTENTS Suggestions for Preachers .......................................................... 166 Rotarians' Four-Way Test......................................................... 168 Holy Father's Talk to the Clergy of Rome .......................... 170 Centenary of St. Alphonsus ................................................... 179 St. Alphonsus as Confessor........................................................ 187 Background of the 4th International Congress on Vocations ....................................................... 192 Report on the Philippine Program on Priestly Vocation ............................................................ 196 The Problem of Vocations and Some Practical Solutions................................................................ 202 What is Priestly Vocation? ............... 206 The Opera "Jesus Christ, Superstar" ...................................... 215 Priests and Filipino Religious Values..................................... 220 History of the Church in the Philippines, ch. 22 ............... 230 Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines.................... 237 CBCP Joint Statement on Drug Abuse ................................. 240 Diocesan Notices; Archdiocese of Manila ............................ 243 Diocese of Palo .......................................................................... 244 EDITORIALS SUGGESTIONS FOR PREACHERS WHO PREACH TO PRIESTS In the December 1971 issue of “The Priest”, the Rev. R. H. Lesser, himself a diocesan priest, has an article entitled “Preach ers H7/o Preach to Priests". He has some suggestions which should be brought to the attention of all priests, namely: 1. Ideally, retreats should be preached by those who are closest to the retreatants, who know them best, their problems, their difficulties, their capabilities. In other words, the ideal person to preach to diocesan priests is a diocesan priest. . . .So my first plea is to inspire and encourage diocesan priests to preach retreats to their.fellow-priests and then to advise and inspire Bishops to give them the opportunity to do so. 2. There is no doubt that much of modern theology is in a ferment, which means it is in a mess. My plea is that if you are not absolutely sure of yourself, please do not spread your con fusion to others. 3. Do not be negative. Do not attack what you cannot replace. Do not destroy anything which still has or can have value, even though it may need a certain amount of adaptation, aggiornamento, and perhaps purification. •1. Devotion to Our Lady has often been condemned as emotional. Now while it is true that exaggerations should be promptly, though carefully and tactfully corrected, I think that many people, not excluding priests, need ap emotional devotion. They have emotions and they have a right and a need to use their emotions in worship. The devotion to Our Lady, based as it is on a solid theological foundation, is a useful and necessary outlet for such emotions. (Lumen Gentium, 61) Surely, then, it is wrong to denigrate such a devotion, either by neglect or. still worst, by snide remarks and cynical allusions. 5. Do no be afraid to tell us about prayer. Surely, prayer is the key to life as a Christian. Is not the pendulum swinging too far, from concentration on the internal spiritEDITORIALS 167 ual life and neglect of others to concentration on others at the cost of spiritual life? In spiritual dimensions, the vertical is not and cannot be opposed to the horizontal; the horizontal can and, as we know, often does, exclude the vertical, and with tragic results. 6. Encourage us to go beyond mere meditation. Teach us something about “prayer of simplicity”, “prayer of quiet”. We need contemplation as much as anybody. The tragedy is that most diocesan priests have an inferiority complex about this, as about so many other things; they feel it is way above and beyond them. It is up to you. retreat preachers, and I beg you to show us that it is not. 7. May I refer to one particular form of prayer which has been and is being increasingly neglected — the Rosary. The rosary has always been the poor man’s prayer and even the poor priest’s prayer. Its attackers would call it a mean ingless repetition, and they would replace it with the “Jesus prayer.” which could also easily become a meaningless repeti tion. But I wonder how many of those who have discarded the rosary, have taken anything else? 8. Diocesan priests do tend to get narrow and parochialminded, especially if isolated in a lonely parish. So it would be good to emphasize the community aspect of the Church, specially through the wonderfully rich doctrine of the Mys tical Body. 9. In your talk on charity — and every retreat must in clude one — emphasize the necessity of loving and serving all God’s creatures, even and especially the poor, the neglected, and our enemies. You’d be surprised how few priests pray for the persecutors of the Church, not just that they stop perse cuting, but for their spiritual, mental and physical well-being. 10. One other very important topic which tends to be nega tively treated by preachers is that concerned with preaching of the Gospel by word as well as by deed. We are told, though on what authority we do not know, that this is not the time for direct preaching; that now we should bear silent witness and do social work. Some even want a moratorium on conver sions. It should hardly be necessary to remind you. Fathers, that the solid theological reasons for preaching remain as valid as ever. Of course, to preach the Gospel does not exclude, it necessarily includes, charitable and development work. But 168 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS let not the latter exclude the former. So please try to make us more enthusiastic about preaching the Word. 11. Without giving us a liturgical discourse, can you not make us love Mass? This is important for us and our people. By the same token you will help us immensely in our prayer life if you ease us into the new breviary. 12. This brings us to the Bible. The priest is, par ex cellence, the interpreter of the Word of God. To do this he must know the Bible fairly well, he must love it, he must want to serve it and the people through it. To do this he must, first of all, read the Bible. Do remind us of our obligation in this connection. 13. The conference, of which I feel that one day should be enough,would be germinal rather than explicit, rational rather than emotional, sowing seeds and inculcating habits ra ther than stirring feelings, offering strands of thought that can be left to the maturity of the listeners to develop. All this, of course, would not excilide its being interesting and even humorous and witty. While many of our brother priests in the Philippines read the Boletin Eclesiastico'de Filipinas, few of them may be receiv ing the American magazine “The Priest”. Through these pages, therefore, we pass the ideas to them for their own evaluation and application in their retreats. ROTARIANS’ FOUR-WAY TEST In His Sermon on the Mount Jesus Christ said: “So always treat others as you would like them to treat you.” (Matthew 7:12) This is the Golden Rule which should govern man’s relationship with other men. This is one of the practical ways of applying the Law of Charity. The Rotary Club has a beautiful way of teaching and reminding its members of the Law of Charity and the Golden Rule. It is the Four-Way Test. One can see big RC bill boards with this Test along highways so that it can be known and used not only by Rotarians but also by all passers by. Here is the text: EDITORIALS 169 Of the things we think, say or do 1. Is it the TRUTH? 2. Is it FAIR to all concerned? 3. Will it build GOOD WILL and BETTER FRIENDSHIPS? 4. Will it be BENEFICIAL to all concerned? Due to the rules of the RC, not all can be members of the Club. Only one from each profession can join a club. And it will be the task of that representative of the profession to pro pagate the ideals of the RC to his co-professionals. In other words, the ideals of the RC are for all actually We priests are urged to use a language understandable to the people. Perhaps the people will understand us better if we use the Four-Way Test to explain God’s I.aw of Charity and the Golden Rule. And by so doing, perhaps we. the priests, will also understand the Golden Rule better. EPISCOPAL ORDINATION ANNIVERSARIES Let us pray for our Bishops on the occasion of their ordination anniversaries. Most Rev. Rafael Lim, I).I). March 17. 1971 Most Rev. Jaime L. Sin. D.I). March 18. 1967 Most Rev. Bienvenido Tudtud. D.D. March 24, 1968 Most Rev. Manuel Mascarinas. D.D. March 25. 1938 Most Rev. Victorino Ligot. D.D. March 27. 1969 THE HOLY FATHER'S TALK TO THE CLERGY OF ROME * This yearly meeting at the beginning of Lent in capite ieiunii, as is the traditional expression in the Church’s liturgy and asceticism, places us straight away in a setting of con fidence. I hope that this confidence is mutual, even if this spiritual and family conversation gives me, your bishop, the role of sole speaker, with each one of you being called to reply to me in the silence of his soul. I perform that role with the simplicity and affection that mark the heart of a priest. The heart of a priest: I think that your hearts too are at times uneasy and disturbed by the many questions and prob lems that have arisen since the Council even in our ordinarily tranquil minds. What has happened? The exploration of the causes and the examination of the phenomena of this state of mind which is unusual for a priest precisely because of what he is and what he does, have given rise, as you know, to much study, writing, discussion, and certainly also to many personal reflections on your part. The aggressive tide brought by the critical period that we are going through has reached us too. From some points of view it is providential, from others it is dangerous and negative. It has obliged us to rethink our priesthood in all its elements: biblical, theological, canonical, ascetical, and operative. The fact that this rethinking has been taking place face to face with the challenges of the whirl wind of changes in modern life, both in the field of ideas and above all in the practical, active, and social field, has made us to ask whether the traditional life of the priest should not be studied in a new historical and spiritual context. The world is changing, and are we standing there motionless, as though we were canonically mummified in our crystallized outlook and in our traditional customs, the meaning and value of some of which are no longer understood by many, neither by the so’ This is the address given by the Podc at the beginning of Lent, 17 February 1972. TALK TO CLERGY OF ROME 171 ciety that surrounds us, nor at times by ourselves. Trust in a certain type of renewal is given us not only by this formidable pressure from outside but also by the Council, which was autho ritative and good, and which spoke to us of “aggiornamento”. Some have interpreted this “aggiornamento” as a justification, indeed as an apologia for an extremely delicate criterion, that of historical relativism, of adaptation to the times, to the famous “signs of the times” (as though these were capable of being interpreted intuitively by all) of conforming, in other words, to the world, that world in which we find ourselves and from which the Council urged the Church no longer to separate her self as a matter of principle, but to immerse herself in it in order to fulfill her mission. The onslaught of this thrust towards novelty has often given us ecclesiastics too a certain feeling of dizziness (cf. Is 19:14) a lack of confidence in tradition, a certain low estima tion of ourselves, a mania for change, a capricious need for “creative spontaneity”, and so on. Intentions which are with out doubt subjectively upright and generous have also found a place in this vast and complex attempt at transforming eccle siastical life. We shall point out two of them to show you how we follow these phenomena with loving attentiveness. First, there is the intention, deeply and painfully felt, of es caping from the state of what is now called frustration, that is, from a sense, experienced by some, of the uselessness of one’s being paralysed in the discipline of the ecclesiastical organiza tion. What is the use, they ask, of being a priest? It is a bitter and anguished question in places where the community to which these priests belonged has profoundly changed in num bers and life style and where the priest’s ministry, tied to a fixed place and fixed customs, seems to have become either superfluous or ineffective. The objection that one’s life is use less is, especially today, when we are so conscious of utilitarian efficiency, a very tormenting one. It deserves, at the least, loving understanding, even if an adequate remedy is not possible. The other intention, which is likewise certainly inspired by a good desire, is that of those who would like to remove every clerical or religious distinction of a sociological nature, of dress, pro fession, or state, in order to identify with the ordinary people and to conform to the life style of others — in short, to laicize themselves, in order thus to penetrate society more easily. This is, if you will, a missionary intention, but what a dangerous and injurious one it is if it ends up with the loss of that spe 172 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS cific power of reacting on society that is included in our defi nition of “the salt of the earth”, and if it reduces the priest to a uselessness worse than that to which we have already re ferred. This is what the Lord says: “What is the good of salt that has become tasteless?” (cf. Mt. 5:13). Dear brothers, read the introductory part of the document on the ministerial priesthood discussed in the recent Synod of Bishops. There, in a brief but comprehensive and vigorous syn thesis, is described the priest’s situation today, with all its problems. You will see with what an attentive eye, and with what an affectionate heart the Church is considering the pre sent condition of the clergy. Realism and lcve have shaped this serious, but at the same time considerate and optimistic, study. We now draw your attention to this important matter. Throughout this situation with its internal and external prob lems, one question concerning our priesthood stands out above the others.. .In a certain sense it sums them all up. It is that question which has become a common one in the complex dis cussion concerning us; the * question is about the so-called iden tity of the priest: who is he? Who is the priest? Is there really a priest in the Christian religion? And if there is a minister of the Gospel, what is.the role that he should assume? All the temptations of the early Protestant polemic have been revived. Perhaps even deeper temptations springing from a preternatural have come to life — this is a mystery, not fantasy — tempta tions of doubt, not as a method of research, but as a disheartened response proceeding from ungrasped truth and from uncertain ty to the point of blindness — a response which is assumed as a dramatic and condescending attitude by a person deprived of interior light. These temptations have been felt even at the very centre of the intimate self-awareness of the priest and have disturbed that blessed interior certitude about his role in the Church: Tu es sacerdos in aeternum; in its place there has been substituted a nagging question: Who am I? Does not the answer of the Church suffice — the answer that has always been given and that was taught to us from our years in the seminary, the answer that has burned as an everlasting flame in the centre of our hearts and has become part of our personal outlook? Indeed it is a question that at first sight seems as superfluous as it is dangerous; but the fact is that it has been shot as an arrow into the hearts of many priests, especially of some young men on the threshold of ordination, and of other brothers when they had arrived at the fullness of maturity. TALK TO CLERGY OF ROME 173 The tendency of our brothers, when they have found themselves in this difficult situation of doubt concerning themselves and the authority of the Church, a tendency per se hypothetically legitimate, but soon transformed into temptation and deviation because of the impossibility of finding a satisfying answer — the tendency has been to seek the definition of the priest’s identity in the wrong place, or outside the household of the faith, in the writings of sociology especially, or of psychology, or in the comparison with Christian Churches separated from Catholic roots, or finally in a humanism which has the axiom: the priest is above all a man, a whole man, like all others... We do not concentrate on this analysis, except to follow .spiritually and with sorrowful regret the priests who have left us: how could we not love them still? And in this we wish also to recall to you. beloved brothers, who — we would say with Jesus the Lord — “have remained with me in my trials” (Lk 22:28), how much teaching the Church has dedicated in 1 ecent times to her priests, and how much your own reading in the scriptural, theological, historical, spiritual and pastoral field has confirmed and spread this teaching. The reading of a good document on the Catholic priesthood will be a providential strengthening comfort not only of your learning, but also of your inner peace and fervour. We cite one as' an example: Sacerdoce et Celibat, by J. Coppens and other prominent authors, Lou vain, 1971. We limit ourselves here to a fundamental affirmation: we must search for the definition of the priest’s identity in the thought of Christ. Only faith can tell us who we are and what we should be. The rest — what history, experience, society, the needs of the times, etc. can tell us — we will look for after wards, with the responsible and wise assistance of the Church, as a logical derivation from an encounter in faith and from a commentary and application of it. Let then the Lord speak to us. This is the theme of our discourse, which each one of you can later develop on his own. in the inner sanctuary of the meet ing with God. And so let us humbly ask Jesus our Master: what are we? Should we not perhaps consider what he thinks of us and what he wishes us to be and what our identity is, in his eyes? We get a first reply immediately. We are men who have been called. Our Gospel begins with our vocation. It seems to us justifiable to see in the history of the Apostles the history 174 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS of us priests. As for the first men that Jesus chose to be his cwn. the Gospel story is very clear and very beautiful. The Lord’s intention is obvious, and it is very interesting in the messianic setting and, later, in the context of the economy of Christianity. It is Jesus who takes the initiative; he himself points this out: “You did not choose me, no, I chose you” (Jn. 15 ;16; 15 ;19; cf. Jn 6:70) ; and the simple and delightful scenes ■which portray for us the calling of each disciple show fixed choices being carried out with precision (cf. Lk. 6:13). It will be a pleasure for us to meditate on them. Whom does he call? He does not seem to take account of the social standing of those he chooses (cf. 1 Cor. 1:27) ; nor does he seem to want to make use of those who offer themselves with superficial enthusiasm (cf. Mt. 8:19-22). This design in the Gospels concerns us personally. I re peat: we are men who have been called. The familiar question of vocation concerns the personality and destiny of each one cf us. How our vocations developed and were formed is the most interesting factor in the personal history of our lives. It would be foolish to try to reduce a vocation to a complex of tri vial external circumstances. On the contrary, we should note the ever more assiduous and careful attention with which the Church nurtures, selects and assists priestly vocations. This is a factor providing certainty in confirmation of cur identity — an identity that is often today subjected to specious analysis with the aim of declaring it unauthentic. In fact today it is an extremely difficult thing for a vocation to the Church to be based upon internal and external motives that could be honest ly questioned. The saying of Pascal: “The most important thing life is the choice of a profession: chance decides it” (cf. Pensees, 97) does not hold good for us. It was not chance that decided for us. We ought rather to think about certain aspects of this voca tion which came to us. It marked the highest moment for the exercise of our freedom: we freely thought, reflected, will ed, and decided. It brought about the great choice of our life; like the words “I do” spoken by the person contracting mar riage, our response to it, in contrast to the wordiness of the man lacking ideals greater than himself, was a commitment of our life: a commitment of the form, the extent, and the dura tion of our self-offering. It is therefore the most beautiful and the most ideal historical page of our human existence. It would be tragic to underestimate it. Our response at once TALK TO CLERGY OF ROME 175 qualified our entire life with its awesome “yes”, making our life that of one who is set aside from the ordinary manner in which others lead their lives. St. Paul says it of himself: “Set apart for the Gospel of God”. It is a “yes” which in a moment tore us from everything that we had: “they left every thing and followed him” (Lk. 5:11); it is a “yes” which placed us in the ranks of the idealists, dreamers, madmen, even per haps of those who seemed like fools, but also, thank God, in the ranks of the strong, of those who know why they are liv ing and for whom they are living — “I know who it is that I have put my trust in” (1 Tim. 1:12) — of those who have set themselves the task of serving and giving their lives, their whole lives, for others. This is what we are called to. We are indeed set apart from the world, but we are not separated from that world for which we must be. with Christ and like Christ, ministers of salvation (cf. Ench. Cler., 104, 360, 1387, etc.). There is something else to sajr concerning our vocation. As we were saying, we are men who are called. We are called by Christ, called by God. That means that we are loved by Christ, loved by God. Do we think about this? “I know”, says the Lord, “the ones I have chosen” (Jn. 13:18). A divine plan con ceived beforehand rests firmly on each one of us, so that of us it can be said what the prophet Jeremiah says to Israel in the name of God: “I have loved you with an everlasting love, so I am constant in my affection for you” (31:3). An iden tity entered in heaven, “in the book of life” (cf. Rev. 3:5). We are called, therefore. But for what purpose? Our identity is enriched by another essential characteristic: we are disciples. We are, so to speak, the disciples. The term “dis ciple” necessarily involves another term: “master”. Who is our Master? It is absolutely essential to remember this: “You have only one Master, and you are all brothers. . . you have only one Teacher, Christ” (Mt. 23:8-10). Jesus wanted to be known bv this title of Master (cf. Jn. 13:13). After speaking to the crowd, after instructing everyone, Jesus taught the group of his special followers, the disciples, recognizing that they had a prerogative of supreme importance: “the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven are revealed to you. but they are not re vealed to them” (Mt. 13:11). Because those whom he called were disciples, they were raised to the position of teachers, not of their own doctrine, clearly, but. of the doctrine revealed to them by Christ. In spite of the infinite difference, this is analogous to what Christ said of himself: “My teaching is not BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS from myself; it comes from the one who sent me” (Jn. 7:16). Therefore, inasmuch as we are disciples, we can also say that our priestly identity carries with it a connotation of magisterium: we are disciples and we are teachers; we listen to the Word of Christ and we proclaim that same Word. This description of ourselves would involve a long and pa tient study of its meaning in the Gospel. It will be interest ing and essential for us all to make this study, in order both to know the Lord’s thought regarding ourselves and consequently to become conscious of our nature: as pupils who must act as teachers. The first characteristic, that of disciples, upon which we are now concentrating our attention, is a very important one. As you know, dear brothers, this characteristic involves a two fold duty for the life of the priest in search of authenticity. The first duty is that of studying Christ’s teaching. This study branches out in various directions, all of which are concerned with essential aims for our definition as priests. We hasten to say that this duty is that of listening, listening to the voice ol Christ’s Spirit, that is to the inspirations that have the mark of true supernatural origin (cf. Rev 2:6 ff.; Mt. 10:19; Jn. 14:26). We must listen therefore to the voice of the Church, when she speaks in the exercise of her magisterium, whether ordinary or extraordinary (cf. Lk. 10:16). We must listen to the echo of Christ’s voice in the words of those who speak to us in the name of the Lord, as do the bishop, the spiritual director or some good and wise friend. We must listen also the voice of the People of God, when it recalls us to our duties or occasionally asks from us some service which is in accordance with our ministry. But we must act with due prudence, which is so necessary in such circumstances, for here it is easy to suffer from excess, from the pressure of publicity or the pre sence of cutside interests or methods. We must listen through the study of the sacred sciences; often lay experts are better informed about their own subjects than we are about religious teachings (cf. Lk. 16:8). Finally we must listen through men tal prayer and meditation. We are well aware that this is meant for the nourishment of our personal spiritual life (cf. Jn. 8:31). We can truly say w-ith Jesus: “Blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it” (Lk. 11:28; cf. 8:21). The second duty, if we are to be true disciples, is to imitate. How much there is to say about this second consequence of the fact that we are members of Christ’s school, precisely at TALK TO CLERGY OF ROME 177 this time when we are asailed by secularization and the attempt to cause the clergy to lose its external marks, and, unfortunately, its interior ones too. So-called “human respect”, which caused even Peter to fall, could tempt us also to hide what we are and make us forget Saint Paul’s exhortation: “Do not model your selves on the behaviour of the world around you” (Rom. 12:2). In fact the “imitation of Christ” must be the practical study for our conduct. We will not say anything further on a sub ject which is so well-known and so closely connected with the intrinsic demands of the priestly identity. In the thought of Jesus there is still another essential characteristic needed for our identity. It is the fact that he has promoted us from dis ciples to apostles. As a synthesis of what we are saying, listen to the words of the Evangelist Saint Luke: Christ “summoned his disciples and picked out twelve of them: he called them apostles” (Lk. 6:13). Servatis servandis, it does not seem exag gerated to us that this supreme title of apostle should be applied to priests, and indeed that certain powers and functions proper to the priest of Christ should be looked for in his very title. Each one of us can say: “I am an apostle.” What does “apostle” mean? It means “sent”. Sent by whom? And sent to whom? Jesus himself gives us the answer to both these questions on the evening of his Resurrection: “As the Father sent me, so am I sending you” (Jn. 20:21). Think of it. Here is something that leaves us really amazed. Where does my priesthood come from and where does it lead? What else is it but the channel of the divine life, serving, by an extension of the saving mission of Christ, God and Man. to communicate the divine mysteries to mankind? Let people consider us, Saint Paul says, as “stewards entrusted with the mysteries of God" (1 Cor. 4:1). We are ministers of God (2 Cor. 6:4). We are friends of Christ. Ours is a mission which sets up a personal relationship with Christ, a relationship which is singular and different from that which he has with all others: “I call you friends, because I have made known to you everything I have learned from my Father You did not choose me, no, I chose you” (Jn. 15:15-16). This is a friendship which has its roots in the uncreated love of the Trinity itself: “As the Father has loved me, so I have loved you. Remain in my love” (Jn. 15:9). We are servants of the brethren; we will never succeed in giving this term enough fullness of meaning with regard both to our selves and even more to our mission. Christ wished thus to define his mission (cf. Mt. 20:28) and he wished ours to be similar, in deep humility and in perfect charity: “... and you 178 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS should wash each other’s feet!” (Jn. 13:14). But at the same time what dignity and what powers such service involves! It is the service of an ambassador! “We are ambassadors for Christ; it is as though God were appealing through us” (2 Cor. 5:20). In addition we have the sacramental powers that make us instruments of the very action of God in men’s hearts. It is no longer just our human activity that marks us, but the conferral of the divine power working through our ministry. Once the meaning and sacramental value of our ministry, that is, our apostolate, is understood, a whole set of other ele ments can give shape to the spiritual, ecclesial, and even the social figure of the Catholic priest, so as to identify him as unique among all, whether inside or outside the ecclesiastical society. The priest is not just a presbyter presiding over the community on religious occasions. He is truly the indispen sable and exclusive minister of official worship, performed in persona Christi (in the person of Christ) amd at the same time in nomine populi (in the name of the people); he is the man of prayer, the only one who brings about the Eucharistic Sacri fice. the man who gives" life to dead souls, the dispenser of grace, the man of blessings. The apostle-priest is the witness of the faith, the missionary of the Gospel, the prophet of hope, the centre of the community. From him it goes outwards and to him it returns. He builds up the Church of Christ, which is founded on Peter. And here we come to that title which is properly his, a title both lowly and sublime: he is the shepherd of God’s people. He is the worker of charity, the guardian of orphans and little ones, the advocate of the poor, the consoler of the suffering, the father of souls, the confidant, the coun sellor, the guide, the friend of all, the man for others, and, if need be, the willing and silent hero. If you look closely at the anonymous countenance of this solitary man with no home of his own, you will see one who can no longer love just humanly, because he has given all his heart, without withholding any portion of it, to that Christ who gave himself for him even to the Cross (cf. Gal 2:20) and to that neighbour whom he has resolved to love to the extent that Christ does (cf. Jn. 13:15). This is in fact the meaning of his intense, happy sacrifice in celibacy. To put it in a single phrase, he is another Christ. This in the final analysis is the priest’s identity: as we have so often heard repeated, he is another Christ. Well then, what ground is there for doubt or fear? CENTENARY OF ST. ALPHONSUS, DOCTOR OF THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH by Patrick Deans, C.Ss.R. On March 23. 1871 St. Alphonsus de Liecuri was proclaimed by Pope Pius IX a Doctor of the Universal Church. His writings had already spread throughout the world, and almost all the prelates of the whole catholic universe, the generals of religious orders, the theological faculties of the most celebrated univer sities petitioned the Holy Father that Saint Alphonsus Maria de Liironri be adorned with the title of Doctor of the Church. In tho Apostolic Brief of July 7, 1871 Pope Pius IX said: “One might truly say that there is no error in our time that has not been refuted, at least for the greater part, by St. Alphonsus.” The centenary celebrations to commemorate this historic event in the Holy Church and to do honor to our Saint began on March 23, 1971. They will end on the same day of this year, 1972. The nature and the importance of this event appear in the following texts. In the first document. Pope Paul VI expressed his good wishes for the celebrations in a letter of his Secretary of State, Cardinal J. Villot. The letter was sent on June 28. 1971 to the Superior General of the Redemptorists. Father Tarcisio A. Ama ral. C.SS.R. The second text is an extract from a letter of the Holy Father himself. It was addressed to a General Chapter of the Redemptorists that was held in Rome in 1967. In the passage ouoted, the Holy Father refers to the pastoral charity of St. Alphonsus. In the third text, extracts are given from a circular letter on the centenary from Father Amaral to the members of his Congregation. He discusses the relevance of the Saint’s mes sage and teaching for our times. 180 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS LETTER TO CARDINAL VILLOT * * This letter is addressed to the Most Reverend Father Amaral, Rector of the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer. Like shining stars, the Church’s Doctors shed light upon her. By the holiness of their lives, by their zeal to preserve the true faith untarnished, by the wealth of their teaching, to which their writings especially bear witness, they have advanced the cause of the Catholic Church. Among them, and the near est to our times, stands St. Alphonsus de Ligouri. He was the founder, the father and lawgiver of the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer, of which you are at present the Rector Major. Just a hundred years ago, this remarkable man was honored by the Supreme Pontiff, Pius IX, with the title of Doctor of the Church. It is fitting that his religious family is preparing to hold a solemn celebration of the centennial. As the Holy Father reflects upon the spiritual greatness of your Founder, he acknowledges that he shares in the joy that fills the religious family of Alphonsus and prays for the success of these solemn celebrations. St. Alphonsus is- indeed to be esteemed for those gifts of soul and these merits which as said above are characteristic of the Church’s Doctors, but the spotlight must be focused on the apostolic zeal with which he was inflamed in his teaching. A master of all the sacred sciences, he devoted himself especially to moral theology. In everything it was solely the interests of Christ that he sought; he exerted every effort to banish the darkness of error and to make Catholic truth thoroughly pene trate the minds of men. The soundness of his teaching deserves special recognition; while, most of all, praise must be given him for clinging with unwavering loyalty to the authority of the Church. It is well known, besides, how diligently St. Alphonsus, with his burning pastoral charity, strove to arouse the Christian people to holiness of life, to make them fervent and on all sides to promote true holiness. Hence he made a big contribution to that “renewal” of which the Church "always has need, in ST. ALPHONSUS 181 so far as she is an institution of men here on earth” (Vatican Council II, Unitatis Redintegratio, 6). While admittedly some forms of piety and some pious expressions he used do not appeal to the ears of men of today, still, the substance of what he so diligently taught is immune to the changes of fleeting time. In this connection, it is a pleasure to recall that he proclaimed the supreme importance of close friendship with Christ our Saviour, and that he insisted on the necessity of prayer — he summed it up in his own clear simple way: “He who prays is saved, he who does not pray is lost.” Again, everybody knows with what burning love St. Alphon sus honored the Virgin Mother of God. But his Marian devo tion is such that through Mary we come to Jesus; that is to say, its effect is that “while the Mother is honored, the Sen. . . is lightly known, loved, and glorified and His commandments are kept” (Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium, 66). Because of these many merits it has rightly come about that St. Alphonsus is well known to the People of God. During this solemn celebration, however, it seems that his attention is fixed especially on his own sons. It is for you as it were to perpetuate his spirit and to continue his work. The Supreme Pontiff earnestly desires that you do so. In a spirit of fatherly affection, he reminds you of the respect which as already men tioned, St. Alphonsus invariably showed for the Magisterium of the Church. So the members of his Congregation will not depart from this rule of their father, but will wholeheartedly put into- practice the directive of the Second Vatican Council: “Religious submission of mind and will must be shown ir>, a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra” (Constitution Lumen Gentium. 25). St. Alphonsus can be called “the master of prayer.” He urges you then to keep always in mind, in the midst of the many labors you undertake the importance and the necessity of prayer. For all priests, the General Council gave this wholesome advice: “In many ways, in particular through the approved practice of mental prayer and by the various vocal prayers which they freely choose, priests seek and earnestly beg of God that spirit of true adoration whereby they themselves, along with the people en trusted to them, may unite themselves intimately with Christ the Mediator of the New Testament” (Deer. Presbvterorum Ordinis, 18). If this advice is meant for all priests, much more will the sons of St. Alphonsus — the Master of prayer — take 182 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS it to heart and so strive to make their apostolate really fruitful. In this way certainly they will ward off the danger that threatens the religious life today, a danger expressed in St. Paul’s words of warning: “Do not model yourselves on the be haviour of the world around you” (Rom. 12:2); and so they will continue to be of great service to the Church. The Holy Father therefore earnestly prays that the cele brations to honor the centennial of the naming of St. Alphonsus as a Doctor of the Church may bring to his Congregation much spiritual profit. On you and on all the religious entrusted to your care the Holy Father lovingly bestows his Apostolic Bless ing. In virtue of my office I convey this message to you, and I declare myself most devotedly yours in the Lord. THE PASTORAL CHARITY OF ST. ALPHONSUS * The Holy Father addressed a Letter to the General Chapter of the Redemptorists meeting in Rome in 1967. In his letter, Pope Paul referred to the pastoral charity of St. Alphonsus. He asserted that it was pastoral charity “which more than any thing else moved your Father and Lawgiver to found your Con gregation . “St. Alphonsus, indeed, more than any other Doctor of the Church, may be said to belong to our times, because of his mar velous activities, because of the forms of the sacred apostolate which he introduced, and especially because of his splendid writings, which are still to be found in the hands of the faith ful to their great spiritual profit. In these writings the per sonality of this Saint in heaven still lives as it were and breathes, and his voice like that of one inspired from on high still re sounds, sweetly attracting, as it did while he was here on earth, those who hear it and powerfully inflaming their hearts with love for God. and at the .same time teaching us how the word of God is to be preached. “Though possessed of great learning, far from flaunting it in an ostentatious display of erudition, he loved rather the sim plicity of the language of the Gospel. His one and only concern This is a letter of the Pope to the General chapter of the Re demptorists. ST. ALPHONSUS 183 was to proclaim the message of the Gospel, so that all who heard him might understand; and the power and efficacy of his preach ing derived wholly and entirely from his very close union with God. Beloved sons, it is such an example that our own times need most of all. For it is especially by their own personal sanctity of life that heralds of the word of God must bear wit ness to the truth. Nor is there any other way by which priests and religious can truly become ‘the salt of the earth and the light of the world’” (AAS 59. 1967 p. 962). RELEVANCE OF THE TEACHING OF ST ALPHONSUS * In a circular letter of March 15, 1971 to all the members of his Congregation, Father Amaral explained the value of the works of St. Alphonsus, and his relevance in the Church today as a writer, moralist, and missionary. The following are ex tracts from the letter of Father Amaral: 1. LOVE OF JESUS CHRIST. To live a Christian life means to make Christ the center of one’s existence. St. Alphonsus makes Christ the center of his whole life and work. His one great concern is to induce all men to love the Saviour, as he so often repeats in his circular letters addressed to his spiritual sons. The love of St. Alphonsus for Jesus Christ is, above all, devotion to the Person of the Saviour, with whom he strives to live in a most intimate and true friendship, as is evident from his prayers and affections, coming forth from a heart all on fire with love. His love is a continuous contemplation of the Mystery of Christ in all its aspects. The natural result of this contemplation is imitation of Our Lord: but for St. Alphon sus imitation of Christ’s virtues was not principally a form of devotion or an ascetical method; rather it was the fruit of union with the Savior, a demand of love. Some of the ways in which St. Alphonsus expressed his love for Christ may no longer appear attractive to Christians ‘This is a letter by the Most Rev. Tarcisio Ariovaldo Amaral, C.SS.R., Superior General of the Congregation of ‘he Most Holy Redeemer ad dressed to all the members of his Congregation. 184 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS of today. But in what constitutes the essence of Christian living, namely, in union of friendship with the Savior, St. Alphon sus gives an example that ever remains true and authentic; this forms the enduring part of his teaching; on this score, his books are of real value today, especially his most charac teristic work entitled.: “Practice of the Love of Jesus Christ.” 2. TO JESUS THROUGH MARY. This aspect of the teaching of St Alphonsus is the one which perhaps has given rise to the greatest mistrust, in these days of ecumenism when everything is suspected that smacks of exaggerated devotion to the Blessed Virgin or of too enthu siastic praise of her privileges. St. Alphonsus is a passionate lover of Mary; but he is so because he finds in her arms Jesus Christ, because she is the Mother of God, the Mother of grace and salvation. 3. THE GREAT MEANS OF PRAYER. It seems that in these our days following the Vatican Coun cil men have rediscovered £he fundamental importance of prayer in the economy of salvation. On this point, St. Alphonsus will forever remain a practical teacher. He went to the sources; in the Gospel and in the rest of the New Testament he found the key to the problem of persevering in the love of God. That key is found in the precept of Christ and of the Apostles: Pray without ceasing! This led the Saint to coin the phrase which condenses his teaching on prayer and which will outlive all changes of tastes and systems of spirituality: “He who prays will be saved; he who does not pray will be lost.” 1. ST. ALPHONSUS, MORALIST. To help Christians know the obstacles they must overcome and the forces of evil they must struggle against to lead a Christian life; to teach them how to make the sacrament of Penance a meeting and reconciliation with Christ and the be ginning of a new life of grace; to put into the hands of con fessors a most useful instrument for guiding souls toward Christion perfection — were the purposes St. Alphonsus kept over in mind when writing his moral works. Twenty-one years have not yet passed since St. Alphonsus was officially proclaimed “Patron of confessors and moralists” (Brief: “Consueverunt omni tempore” April 26, 1950), and this precisely by reason of his moral works and the doctrine they ST. ALPHONSUS 185 contain. Have such works outgrown their usefulness? Has the doctrine become antiquated? We cannot demand more from the moral teaching of St. Alphonsus than what it was possible for him to give in his day; we must not judge it with the critical eyes of those who have been protagonists or witnesses of the magnificent renewal of moral theology in our days; nor can we pretend to find in the moral doctrine of St. Alphonsus an explicit solution for the problems proper to our modern civilization, problems which in his times did not exist, or if they did, they did not possess the serious and urgent character they now have. What we must look for in St. Alphonsus is above all the spirit of all men, his great pastoral charity. We should not separate our Saint’s moral works from his spiritual ones; in his times, moral theology was conceived and organized in a way different from today; but substantially, today’s moral theology and that of two cen turies ago have the same objective: to lead men to God by a life conformable to the Gospel. St. Alphonsus is not the austere and unattractive Saint that some people imagine; on the contrary, he has all the warmth of heart of a native of southern Italy and is at times exube rantly emotional. He was a prudent and well-balanced man, always avoiding extremes. In his teaching and in practice he takes into account the reality of the Incarnation: without dis figuring the divine life nor minimizing the Gospel precepts, he appeals to God’s condescension with human frailty. Therefore for him there is neither exaggerated rigorism nor convenient liberalism. St. Alphonsus does not wish to terrify sinners with constant threats of eternal punishment, nor d,oes he wish to offer them too soft, and comfortable a carpet (Daniel Rops). In practice, he tried with kind ways to obtain the triumph of grace; and thus he was able to glory in the fact that he had never sent away a penitent without absolution, that is, he had never barred to anyone access to holy Communion, the fountain of Christian life. In hearing confessions, the Saint was not chiefly concern ed with applying to some determined person an abstract law or a theoretical principle; rather with true charity, he considered the actual situation of the penitent, with a view to find a solu tion for a real, human problem. The so-called moral system of St. Alphonsus is based on these principles; its foundation is prudence, which is a Christian virtue and is the gift of the Holy Spirit. 186 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS 5. MISSIONARY PASTORAL MINISTRY The missionary zeal of St. Alphonsus was the fruit of his burning love for Christ and the way in which to show it effec tively; it is characterized by his searching for the practical and the essential as well as for the most adequate means for enabl ing all men, by preference the most poor and spiritually aban doned, to live a Christian life. Missions are to be considered from this point of view; as the most suitable means for help ing Christians, as individuals as well as a people or group, to live in accordance with the Gospel. And what else is the purpose of the pastoral ministry? Methods may change, missions, as a method, may not prove pro ductive of good in certain circumstances. But the purpose St. Alphonsus proposed to himself in his missionary activity can not change. Since his main concern was the conversion of the faithful and their perseverance in the love of God, St. Alphon sus tried to provide for them many efficacious helps to do so: such as, prayer, various devotions, frequent reception of the sacraments and pious associations. St. Alphonsus Liguori (1696-1787): Born near Naples, Italy; bishop of Agatha of the Goths (1762-1775); founder of (he Redemptorists; in addition to his principal work, “Theologiae Moralis, wrote on prayer, the spiritual life, ar.d doctrinal subjects in response to controversy; canonized, 1939; proclaimed Doctor of the Church, 1841; named patron of confessors and moralists, 1950. ST. ALPHONSUS AS CONFESSOR by P. J. Talty, C.Ss.R. The centenary of St. Alphonsus’ Doctorate recalls another honour which the Church conferred on the saint twenty years apo. when Pius XII issued a Brief declaring St. Alphonsus the official heavenly Patron of moralists and confessors. St. Joseph Cafasso, a moral professor and a noted confessor of St. John Bosco’s time, used to say to his students: “You need have no fear of judgment if you can tell God that you always followed St. Liguori.” The priest who follows St. Alphonsus makes no compromise with sin, but he has infinite compassion and under standing for every sinner. In the spiritual guidance of souls, he follows the saint’s golden mean between the laxity which never rouses the sinner from his vice, and the rigorism which drives him to despair. In this article, written principally for the benefit of priests, we shall touch on three aspects of St. Alphonsus as a confessor. THE SAINT’S ESTEEM FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFESSIONAL One day, when he was bishop, Alphonsus said to a young subdeacon: “Get yourself ready. I will soon make you a priest and confessor.” “Monsignore”, replied the young man, “I have not the least desire to be a confessor.” “Then why receive Holy Orders?” asked the bishop. “You have no desire to work for the salvation of souls: neither have I any desire to confer the priesthood on you.” He would allow no one to be presented for a benefice or a parish unless he was a competent confessor. For the sake of his priests he himself made a summary of his larger Moral Theology in three small volumes entitled the “Homo Apostolicus”, and a one volume compendium of the latter which he called “The Confessor of Country People”, as well as a still smaller book to which he gave the title “The Practical Con fessor”. Soon one or other of these books could be found in every rectory. Weekly moral conferences were held at the bishop’s house. But the saint would say to his priests: “Con BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS fessors must bear in mind that approbation of the bishop does not suffice. . . they must also have the approbation of Jesus Christ, who at the hour of death will examine whether they have fulfilled their duties well or ill. And if a confessor is to exercise his office aright, he must not cease to study moral theology, which is an extensive and difficult science.” For the training of confessors in his own Institute, he chose only professors who were mature in age, judgment and exper ience. Because, as he said, “they are training young men who are soon to be judges, whose decision will be beyond appeal.” This independent and responsible training of confessors was characteristic of the saint. Later, in making him one of her Doctors, the Church would pay him the unique compliment of saying that priests might safely follow his opinions without even examining his reasons; but he did not wish his own stu dents to be trained in this easy way. He wrote his Moral Theo logy principally for his own missioners and he said to them: “I have written this book with so much labour only for your sakes, that you may have a safe guide... I do not say that my opinions must be followed,"but I beg you at least to read what I have written.” Again he writes: I have embraced a number of opinions contrary to the opinions of Jesuit authors, as well as to those of Dominicans, Franciscans, Carmelites and Theatines. I follow only my conscience, and when reason convinces me, I pay little attention to moralists.” He was referring, of course, only to matters on which the Church had not spoken. For him, a decision of the Church closed the question. In the Rule of his Institute we find these words, going back to the saint’s day: “The members of the Congregation shall think nothing more important than the hearing of con fessions, for there is no work better calculated to promote the glory of God and the salvation of souls. The more each devotes himself to this work with great zeal, the more will he show himself to be an excellent missionary and a very faithful fol lower of Jesus Christ. . . Everyone, as a true son of this holy institute, driven as by a hunger for souls and burning with a great longing to aid them, shall make little account of any in convenience, hardship or toil.” And the saint, quoting St. Pius V, writes in his “Selva” for priests: “Give us fit confessors, and surely the whole of Christianity will be reformed.” In these days of Renewal, despite some divergent opinions, our zeal for the confessional will not diminish, if we listen to the voice of Vatican II. The Council stresses the importance of ST. ALPHONSUS 189 frequent confession; it reminds pastors “how much the sacra ment of penance contributes to developing the Christian life and they should therefore make themselves available to hear the confessions of the faithful’’. (Decree on Bishops, no 30, 2.) Priests are more than once reminded of the importance of this sacrament, especially in this passage: “They are joined with the intention and love of Christ when they administer the sacraments. Such is especially the case when they show them selves entirely and always ready to perform the office of the sacrament of penance as often as the faithful reasonably request it.” (Ministry and Life of Priests, no. 13.) THE SAINT’S MILDNESS AND CHARITY WITH HIS PENITENTS When the Redemptorists first began their work in France and Belgium, Jansenism was still rampant and priests were afraid to go into the confessionals. The Sons of St. Alphonsus gave the clergy many lectures on the principles of St. Alphonsus and soon priests were everywhere saying that now they could hear confessions with an easy conscience. Pope Leo XIII called St. Alphonsus “the most brilliant of moralists, and the mildest.” The saint was surely making a true estimate of himself when he said in one of his letters: “you know that my greatest fault has always been to be too easy.” Though educated in the rigid school, priestly experience quickly taught Alphonsus to abandon probabiliorism. He was :< lawyer, yet anything but a legalist. He acted more like a criminal lawyer who does his utmost to prove the accused “not guilty.” He would brand nothing as a mortal sin unless this was clear from scripture or from the teaching of the Church. Always souls were his first consideration. He agreed with the estimate of him made by a certain priest: “a man of sound doctrine, detached from all prejudices of schools and a friend of right reason.” His impartiality as well as his prudence can be seen in this quotation: “It is true that in my first edition I adopted, on the faith of a number of authors, opinions which are hardly well established: but on further examination I have rectracted or amended them. I have rejected a number of opinions held by Busembaum and other probabilist authors, so that I am con sidered as rather rigid. But I find no difficulty in approving of opinions, which seem to me to be sufficiently probable. I 190 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS believe with St. Antoninus, that to do otherwise would be to lead souls to eternal ruin.... I follow the counsel of St. John Chrysostom: ‘Be gentle with your neighbour, austere to your self.’ ” One example from his Theology shows how clearly he dis tinguished between the strong stand taken by the preacher and the more mild action of the confessor. He discusses the com mon practice of immodest dresses that revealed womens’ breasts. “Though I have often spoken strongly against such practices on the missions, now as a moral theologian I must speak secun dum veritatem and I cannot say that it is in itself a mortal sin.” He also proposes the case of a young man who comes to confess but who lacks necessary instruction. Should he be sent away till he is properly instructed? The saint answers that it is better to instruct him there and then and absolve him. With sinners he was always kindness and patience itself. He says: “The more heavily a soul is enslaved by vice, the more necessary it is to use gentleness to free it from its chains.” He understood well that basic principle of pastoral charity ex pressed admirably in these words of St. Jane de Chantal: “The longer I live, the more I realise how necessary it is to use mild ness to gain entrance into hearts and to persuade them to fulfill their duty to God.” He even suggests to confessors by many examples the very expressions to use in order to give the peni tent courage and confidence. Critics of St. Alphonsus have sometimes censured the im mense number of questions proposed in his theology. They for get that he was covering the whole field of possible moral action and that he was writing, often in summary form, for priests who were innocent of the very elements of theology. Far from intending that the confessor should plague his penitent with questions, he gives very clear directions that will rule such conduct out. For example, he warns of the danger of render ing the sacrament odious, of asking questions that may result in a wrong and sacrilegious answer, of suggesting evil where it does not exist. He knows the value of good faith, that the conscience of the penitent, if he is sincere, is the immediate index of his guilt; that only formal sin offends God etc. Expe rienced missioners trained in his theology have never had trouble in this matter of questioning. Indeed it is almost a tradition with us that the longest mission, confession, takes little more than five! minutes. ST. ALPHONSUS 191 The saint covers in charitable detail all classes of penitents: the ignorant, the conscienceless, relapsing and habitual sinners, those in occasions, the sick and the dying, prisoners and crimi nals condemned to death, those tormented by the devil, the scrupulous, the devout and the young. He counsels confessors to avoid invalid confessions by directing the sorrow of the devout to the sins of their past life, and the sorrow of the young to leal faults against their parents. For all he lays down this rule: “the gold of charity, the honey of mildness and the pru dence of the wise.” PRUDENT CARE IN PROTECTING THE PENITENT FROM FUTURE SIN The love of Jesus Christ, frequent Holy Communion, the practice of prayer and the protection of the Blessed Virgin. . . these were the means by which the saint strove to keep his peni tents in the grace and love of God. But he knew that this would easily come to nothing if he could not protect1 them against voluntary occasions of sin. On this point he was strict almost to the point of ruthlessness. “If you wish to avoid sin, you must avoid the occasion or at least render its danger remote.” Here he allowed no speculative opinions but only solidly prac tical ones. His penitents were not to be treated as “guinea pigs” for some academic theory; it was souls not bodies that were at stake. Commenting on this strictness of St. Alphonsus, St. Joseph Cafasso says: “This is a very slippery terrain. Opinions that look sound in theory are often disastrous in prac tice.” For those who sin through weakness, St. Alphonsus knew that the sacraments are the best remedy and he would not keep them away. But for those who sin through voluntary occa sions, the occasion must be attended to or there can only be chronic relapse. Here, he says, is where so many confessors fail in their duty to their penitents. It is true that the circumstances of our day render the safeguards of St. Alphonsus’ time virtually impossible in many instances, but the need for practical remedies is still the same, ’rhe perennial principles of St. Alphonsus are still valid to-day. Their application will vary according to circumstances. For this task we need the supernatural prudence of the Holy Spirit, which is what made St. Alphonsus the great moralist and con fessor he was. May he obtain this for tha priests of to-day. through the prayers of the Mother of Good Counsel. BACKGROUND OF THE 4TH INTER NATIONAL CONGRESS ON VOCATIONS * by Most Rev. Antonio F. Frondosa On May 10-14, 1971 in the historical City of Rome, dele gates from twenty-eight countries of the Catholic World aside from those of the “Department of Vocations” of CELAM, Sacred Congregation for the Oriental Churches, for the Clergy, for the Religious and Secular Institutes, and for the Evangelization cf Peoples, sat in assembly for the 4th International Congress cn Vocations. The Church; keenly observing and feeling the trends of the times, has become fully conscious that the great est and most effective instrument within her framework of saving souls is suffering more than ever before and probably in the future from the felt need of vocations to the priesthood and religious life. What was a stream of vocations before has turned into a trickle. It is very alarming. Something imme diate must be done; hence, the 4th International Congress on locations. The International Congress on Vocations was set with a background of eye-opening doctrines brought about by Vatican II. Vatican clearly defined the dynamic character of the doc trine of particular vocations (i.e. vocations to the priesthood and religious life). Particular vocations emanate from man’s baptismal vocation and those particular vocations, for their steady growth and strength, must seek the nourishment and environment of a Community of Faith. (A community of Faith is composed of good practical Catholic families, youth move ments, Catholic Action groups, etc.). But sad to say this doc trine of particular vocations has not really reached the full : This is an Address to the National Convention Of Diocesan and Re ligious Directors for vocations at Our Lady of Guadalupe Minor Seminary, Makati, Rizal on January 17, 1972. 4TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON VOCATIONS 193 comprehension and grasp of the People of God; it has not satu rated to the fullness, the mature thinking of the Faithful so much so I say that in the course of time, it was very easy for materialism to weaken if not totally detach its hold on the laity. People have never fully realized that in their baptism God begins to so * w the first seeds of vocation in the heart of man. This concept should be underscored in the thinking of men, especially of parents who should see to it that they nur ture and safeguard the burgeoning of the seeds of vocation in their children. The youth and adults, by the indefatigable dedi cation and committed interest of bishops, priests and religious, should be so enlightened with this doctrine of particular voca tion that they should have a deeper appreciation of their baptis mal vocation and discover through succesive impulses of grace an eventual call to the priesthood or the religious life. Cognizant of the existence in several countries of a not-toowell-developed exercise of cc-responsibility between the bishop and priest, between superior and religious, the Church, very much aware that this unhealthy relationship is seriously pre judicial to vocations in many instances a sure drawback in an effective vocation program, considers it that this exercise of co-responsibility be of great moment in the forum discussions of the 4th International Congress on Vocations. Unless there is a balanced and sufficiently developed understanding of responsible delegation, this will always shade an objectionable feature in any vocation program. The Church must be a pic ture of unity if she is to truly convince this sophisticated world that hers is the truth. The 4th International Congress on Vocations convened also to place under wise discussions the results of secularization, of technical society and of urban concentration. These results have created impersonal structures (specifically a non-religious involvement attitude) more frequent in our society. Drastic changes in our modern society have correspondingly produced a variety of human commitments which may counterpunch the commitments of priests. The man of today with his many faceted ways of thinking and living should be attended to satis factorily by the Church by means of her “pluriformitv of priest ly ministry”. Vocationally speaking, this pluriformitv of priestly ministry demands and locks back for a special prepara tion of candidates during their seminary life; otherwise, they will not be able to converge and channel in one path of salva tion the divergent and oftentimes confused thoughts and pin194 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS poses of men. With this in mind, the 4th International Con gress of Vocations came together and it was necessary that it should openly come out with a concrete declaration that the “Presbyterate represents as a ministry of unity.” The Priests and religious should unite the people; they should not disunite them. Painted in the background of the 4th International Con gress on Vocations was a striking scene of our society’s drift ing sense of values. The drift has lingered through every stratum of human life; even the lives of priests and religious have not been left unreached and untouched. The sudden change in the people’s sense of values has created a semi-monster of doubt on the value of celibacy. It- has brought into existence a state of emotional instability among priests and religious even to the extent of defection. This crisis of identity has registered not a positive but a negative reaction to the sacer dotal or religious life. To borrow the words of Cardinal Garrone “this malaise puts priests in a much less favor able mood and condition .for preparing priests, for discerning and directing vocations....” The preciousness and angelic beauty of the state of celibacy seem to lose its lustrous dignity iii the face of worldly affluence and pleasures. With this one thing among other things to solve, the 4th International Con gress on Vocations agreed to discuss in a body. The restlessness of our young people today is profoundly expressive of their lack of true principles and sound philosophy in life. It is indicative of their intense search for authenticity. Inspite of their less numerous number today in their readiness to serve the church, these young people show at the same time an intense need of values. The most evident of these values are a “sense of solidarity, their desire for liberation, their quest for authenticity, as well as their need, too, for silence and spiri tuality and for new values of Faith. To these must be added their interest in problems of justice and peace, and a spirit of creativity which is sometimes linked with a rejection of institutionalism.” The youth have been mixed up in and mis lead by the apparent truths of materialism. Even their in tentions and motives in entering the priestly or religious life are so propped on the micro nucleus of wrong philosophies that somewhere along the course of their seminary training they fall out. thinking that they will not reap happiness in such a life. But, can in truth, a truly dedicated priestly or religious life fall short of making a man happy? Of course not. In 4TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON VOCATIONS 195 one way or another, these activism and need of values of our youth can greatly influence motivations for seeking a priest ly or religious life. Because motivation is the springboard of one’s action, the Church then had to convoke a congress on vocations in order to acquire a deeper insight into the men tality and motivations of those who present themselves for the priesthood, the religiouu life and other types of service to the Church. Such knowledge will facilitate a better psychological approach to these candidates and a wiser use of the criteria for judging the value of their intentions. One of the discussion items on the floor of the 4th Inter national Congress on Vocations was the problem arising from “the restoration of the Diaconate and form new functions of ministerial type entrusted to lay people.” This restoration of the Diaconate has blurred “the specificity of the presbyterate and of certain forms of religious life.” Further studies are required on this point. Vocations, learning and interest in the priestly or religious life can be totally stripped of their substance and endowment by means of a poor adaptation of our language to different age-groups, mentalities and situations. The 4th International C ongress on Vocations had to tackle with this problem of language adaptation in order to- psychologically best pre serve and even to develop the original qualities of His call; to do otherwise can possibly spell as it is even felt now the gra dual depopulation of our seminaries and novitiates. A complete disregard for the problem of pedagogical method too can weaken or even divest a priestly or religious calling of its primordial zest. Because of its vital role in vocation training and develop ment, the problem of instructional method had received special attention also in the lengthy deliberations of the 4th Interna tional Congress on Vocations. This, in general, was the background of the 4th Interna tional Congress on Vocations when it met in the City of Rome last May 10-14, 1971. REPORT ON THE PHILIPPINE PROGRAM ON PRIESTLY VOCATION * by Most Rev. Jaime L. Sin Bishop Frondosa asked me to come and speak to you about the new Philippine Program of Priestly Formation. Actually I come as the chairman of the Commission on Seminaries; so I come as a “seminary” man, to give whatever help T can to your very important work. Of course we seminary men are very interested in what you do. Our very life depends on you. And I don’t have to point out to you the need for recruiting more vocations to the priesthopd. You know as well as I do that although the number of seminarians has not decreased in the Philippines (and I hope it will not decrease, as the sociologists predict it will), still we do not have enough seminarians even to keep up our very unsatisfactory ratio of priests to laity in this country. There is only one priest for every 5.900 Cath olics here; as compared to one for every 800 Catholics in the United States. Worse still, there is only one secular priest lor every 12,000 Catholics. And simply to keep up this poor ratio, we need 150 new priests every year, just to provide for our increase in population — and already supposing that no more priests will leave the ministry in the next ten years. Ac tually we are ordaining an average of only one hundred new priests a year. So the picture is bleak for the next ten years the number of priests will keep decreasing in proportion to our population growth. So that whatever you can do to help us will certainly be an easing of a desperate situation. But then we’re not supposed to be here to cry on each other’s shoulders. Our big question is: what do we do now? Yours is to figure out ways of recruiting young men for the priesthood. In this context, what would you want from us. ~ This is an Address to the National Convention of Diocesan and Re ligious Directors for vocations at Our Lady of Guadalupe Minor Seminary, Makati, Rizal on January 17, 1972. PRIESTLY VOCATIONS 197 seminary men? I guess the best thing we can give you is the reassurance that the boys you recruit will not be misled or mis educated by us. I guess you would want to know: what are the seminaries doing to make seminary training more effective for the modern apostolate of priests? So allow me to tell our story: As early as 1963 the admi nistrators and spiritual directors of seminaries throughout the Philippines have been meeting and discussing common prob lems. At first, these meetings were merely a sharing of expe riences and techniques. The only results of these meetings were the new insights gained by the participants themselves, the mutual encouragement given during the meetings, and a few mimeographed notes passed around for the participants’ use. Nothing was left in print for future reference. How ever, in 1966 the first Proceedings of the CEAP Seminaries Convention was published, recording not only the ten papers presented at the convention but also the discussions that fol lowed them. This first publication of the CEAP Seminaries Deparment is now a good source for suggestions on seminary formation as applicable to the Philippines. The same was done for the 1969 CEAP Seminaries Con vention. The 1969 Proceedings also published the Norms for Seminaries prepared by the Episcopal Commission on Seminaries under the chairmanship of Archbishop Juan Sison, approved by the CBCP. and finally approved by the Sacred Congregation for Catholic Education. These Norms for Seminaries have be come our first official program of priestly formation in the Philippines. In the same year Rome promulgated the first draft of the Ratio Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis or Basic Norms for Priestly Formation. And we Bishops were asked to study it and propose amendments. The Bishops of the Philippines in turn asked the seminary Rectors to discuss the document and send in their suggestions — these suggestions were forwarded to Rome. In January 1970, the final draft of the Ratio Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis was sent to us. and we were asked to adapt it to the Philippines. This has been our main task these past two years. I had been recently appointed chair man of the Commission on Seminaries, and at the advice of Bishop Gaviola. I formed the Committee of Consultants for the Commission on Seminaries. The majority are seminary men from all over the Philippines: but there are also palish 198 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS priests, laymen, seminarians, a Sister, and a woman lay-teacher among the consultants. These consultants are the advisers of the Bishops, so that we, the Bishops, can take proper action on the resolutions handed in to us, for example by the CEAP Seminaries Department, or by the seminary Rectors. The con sultants also help us to frame our own guidelines for the pro per running of seminaries. For two years now the main task of this committee of consultants has been to prepare the Philip pine adaptation of the Ratio Fundamentalis. They have been sounding out the seminaries in the Philippines, the administra tors, the professors, the seminarians; they have gathered sug gestions from the entire Philippine church; attended all the conventions on seminaries. Finally in October and November eight selected consultants gathered for a marathon session of five weeks in San Jose Seminary on Loyola Heights, to write out the first draft of the Philippine Program of Priestly For mation. This is the Philippine Program of Priestly Forma tion. We shall present this program to the Bishops for ap proval on, the 24th of this month; and then we shall send it on to Rome together with all the corrections proposed by the Bishops, as well as those proposed by the seminarians, the seminaries, and by you. It has been hard work, but well worth it. The consultants had to spend for their own transportation to and from meet ings. (One exception was the October-November marathon, when I reimbursed the transportation expenses of those who came from Visayas and Mindanao.) I have tried to help as much as I could. I financed their meetings and provided mate rials. This has cost me almost P8.000 these past two years (I hope the Board of Economy of the Jaro Dioceses does not accuse me of malversation of funds!). But then we can never pay for the tremendous labor these good men have contributed! This is really a small price to pay for what needs to be done. The United States has spent $500,000 so far for their Program of Priestly Formation. This, in short, is what we have been doing to update the Seminary structures. But the actual results will have to come from the seminaries themselves. Actually, the ideas we have incorporated into the Philippine Program have come from the seminaries too; from their experiences and their suggestions. The second portion of my report is a quick rundown on some important points brought out in the Philippine Program. Ac tually there are many important points discussed in the Pro PRIESTLY VOCATIONS 199 cram: such as the establishment of regional seminaries, the professional training of seminary personnel, the use of entrance tests, the special period of ascetical training for diocesan semi narians, and integration of philosophy and theology, the social concern of Filipino youth today, the type of leadership expect ed of the modern priest, the greater participation of semina rians in their own training. But I feel I must limit myself to only two ideas because of lack of time. So I shall speak only of two item: first, the modern streamlining of the semi nary structure itself; secondly, organizations for recruiting vocations. On the first point, the streamlining of the seminary struc tures: At present we have major and minor seminaries. The minor seminaries start from first year high school and go on to include the first year of college. Then the major seminary iakes over from second year of college and brings the semi narian on to ordination. The proposal of the Philippine Pro gram is to divide seminaries into (1) high school seminaries, (2) college seminaries (which include first year college and the entire A.B. program), and (3) the theologate, which may be four or five years, depending on the seminary. Each stage will have its own aims and structures. Only the theologate will be considered the major seminary: the place for strictly priestly training. At the beginning cf the theologate the seminarian will receive the sotar.a from his bishop as a sign of his embracing the clerical state of life. And the commitment demanded of seminarians at this point is rather strong. No. 20 of the Philippine Program, follow ing the words of the CEAP resolution of 1969, states: “En trance into the theologate.... should be made only after the candidate has demonstrated that, together with the necessary qualifications, he has an adequate grasp of the meaning of his priestly vocation, and with such knowledge fully commits him self to it for life. This commitment is at least subjective on the part of the seminarian: his personal resolution is firm al though he realizes that, for one reason or another, he might actually not reach his chosen goal.” And no. 44 of the Program states that “the formation in the theologate is strictly pasbral. aimed at forming ‘shepherds after the model of our Lord .Jesus Christ’ ”. The college seminary has a very special aim. “It helps the seminarian form and confirm the commitment that will be demanded of him upon entrance into the theologate. For this 200 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS purpose the college seminarian must have the sincere desire to dedicate himself to the priestly ministry and the deliberate decision to try his best to live according to this one life alter native. The college seminary is not the place for trying out all life alternatives.” We are merely being realistic. Psychologists tell us that an adolescent, especially before third year of college, is usually incapable of forming a real life commitment to an unselfish, priestly apostolate. If he is a normal boy, his adolescent emo tions will effectively prevent him from making such a commit ment. On the other hand, a commitment like this does not come like a bolt of lightning. It has to be formed and acquired. A semi narian cannot arrive at this decision by simply staying in the seminary where he can secure a good A.B. education, and hope that the influence of the others will somehow convince him to go on for the priesthood. And it certainly won’t be acquired by the seminarian who tests his vocation by trying to experi ence and taste the life of the ordinary college student, for exam ple by dancing and even making love to a girl, “to find out how it feels.” The commitment to a priestly apostolate is so distinct from the ordinary * natural commitment that one cannot simply arrive at it by following his natural instincts. This commitment has to be deliberately formed, “educated”, and guided. The college .seminarian should test himself through four years by actually trying to rule his life according to his idealistic convictions (i.e. according to a priestly dedication to service) even against the rebellious cravings of his own emo tions. If he is not willing to accept this challenge, or if he feels too weak to try it, then he should leave the seminary at least for a time, and live college life, until he finds himselfl mature enough and strong enough to try his best to live according to the life alternative of the priest. Finally, the high school seminary should be kept strictly high school. First year college students should not be held back and trained like high school boys. We realize this change will create difficulties for the college seminaries which begin with what is now called “first year philosophy”. But I think it is time for us to realize that Philippine education is struc tured differently from the European, and our seminarians should not be differentiated from their peers more than is necessary for proper priestly formation. On the second point, the organization for recruiting voca tions: the Ratio Fundamentalis from Rome devotes an entire PRIESTLY VOCATIONS 201 chapter to “The pastoral care of vocations.” It states very clearly that this endeavor is the serious duty of the entire Chris tian community under the leadership of the Bishop. When the seminary Rectors met in Baguio on February 17, 1971, the Apos tolic Nuncio, Archbishop Carmine Rocco, asked them to discuss two questions at length: (1) the recruitment of vocations, and (2) the training of seminary personnel. After a whole day’s discussion, the Rectors proposed a resolution concerning the Dio cesan Commission on Vocations were later proposed to the CBCP and approved by them. We have incorporated these resolu tions into the Philippine Program, and they will be resubmitted to the Bishops on January 24 for reconfirmation. I had reprints of the pertinent passages run off for you, so that you can study these proposals at your leisure. Remem ber, although these resolutions have been discussed for a whole day by the Rectors, and approved by the CBCP, you are the experts in this field; and in the final analysis you will have to implement the whole program. So please study it carefully and correct it according to your own insights, and especially accord ing to the principle laid down by the Ratio Fundamentalis it self : namely, “this activity should observe the laws of sound psychology and pedagogy.” In m.v own humble opinion, these resolutions will be a great help to Bishop Frondosa in his lonely fight for vocations. It may help to give him expert co-workers and in the end benefit all of us through an increase in the number and allow me to express my prayer that this convention may start a new year of vocations to the priesthood in the Philippines. “Depending on the age of each seminarian and his state of progress, careful inquiry should be made concerning the rightness of his intention and the freedom of his choice, his spiritual, moral, and intellectual fitness, the suitability of his bodily and mental health, and any tendencies he might have inherited from his family. His ability to bear priest ly burdens and exercise pastoral duties must also be weighed.” (Decree of Priestly Formation, no. 6) THE PROBLEM OF VOCATIONS AND SOME PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS * * This is the text of the address given by Archbishop Carmine Rocco, Apostolic Nuncio, at the close of the First National Convention on Voca tions held (Jan. 17-19) at Our Lady of Guadalupe Minor Seminary in Makati. Rizal. by Archbishop Carmine Rocco The biggest problem we have in the Church, not only in the Philippines but also in the whole world around us, is the prob lem of vocations. At this moment, we all know the crisis of vocations in the world. In the Philippines, we are in special situation. Until now the family — the Filipino family — is very good in general, above-average; and, from some studies made by Msgr. Frondosa and by the Apostolic Nunciature, we arrived at this conclusion: we may still increase the number of vocations in the Philippines. IMPROVING We are improving, but we must improve still more; other wise, in 10 years, we shall have here in the Philippines this proportion: 1 priest for 30,000 people. Now, at this very mo ment, we have about 1 priest for 15-16,000 persons, I mean the priests who are working directly on the care of souls. So, I am now speaking very candidly to you and to the Bishops about this situation. Today, we are in a very bad situation. Forgive me, but I have to speak to you very frankly at this moment: we are in a very bad situation; and we can foresee that in 10 years the situation will be much worse than today. So if we don’t work efficiently for having many more vocations, as we should, in the Philippines, the fault is ours, mine and yours. If we cannot now resolve this problem, afterwards it will be very late and the fault will certainly be ours. PROBLEMS OF VOCATIONS 203 I can perhaps say that I have already visited all the dio ceses in the Philippines. We have a population of about 38 million; and we scarcely have 4,000 priests many of whom are still working in schools with the Sisters and with their Bishops So the problem is very deep and it is very urgent that we find some solutions; and the first solution is to have more vocations and good vocations. You know that at this time we have many, many priests going out, and many are dying. Thanks to God, it is not so in the Philippines! And in the Church many are introducing changes with or without the authorization of the Holy Father and of their Bishops and major superiors. So what is the means that we can employ to give the Philip pines more priests and good priests? How can we avoid drop outs? NECESSARY Some are advocating the elimination of Minor Seminaries. I personally cannot accept that. I personally think that the Minor Seminaries are absolutely necessary at this moment in the Philippines. I know we have some parts of the Church where Minor Seminaries are no longer existing; but I can assure you this is absolutely another situation. In Italy, for example, the Minor Seminaries are now without students. The Bishops are very, very sad because they don’t have priests for tomorrow. They do not even have students for their Major Seminaries that in 4 or 5 years will also be empty. Now we need many more seminarians. As Msgr. Frondosa was saying, we have a 1-million population-increase in the Philip pines every year; and that the norrnal proportion between the priests and faithful is one priest for every 12,000 people. We need more than 1,000 priests more for the whole popula tion. Many religious priests are going out and many are dying so we have to take care of the Philippines. No more priests come from abroad because of the same crisis. In ten years we will lose about 500 priests more; we will need to replace them in proportion to our population increase and, if possible, to find some other solutions. So your work, my dear Fathers, is very fundamental for the whole Church. In my trips I observe our people: some go to Church; some others do not go to Church and, in my opinion. 204 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS it is because they have not had sufficient formation. What will happen after some years especially when the old generation has died Then the Filipino families will almost be completely lost especially in the rural areas. Your work is fundamental! Now what may we do to remedy such situation? Prayer and good example; for our young generations, for our seminarians and very deep spirituality: these are fundamental too in our semi naries ! GOOD SELECTION I think some of you are rectors of seminaries. You would better make a good selection both in Minor Seminaries and Ma jor Seminaries. We know that some of them are simply pushed by their families. If you have some good seminarians, especially Major Semi narians, who cannot pay their fees, you are authorized to write to me and I will try to pay for them. Furthermore, we should also always consider or distinguish quality from quantity. In other words, although we are in need of many priests, I think it is better to have less priests but very good ones, than many that are not so good. So quality is funda mental ! As I have told you, in the Philippines we have so many problems. Let us resolve all our problems: not only the mate rial ones but also the spiritual. Let us solve them with the help of our laymen. They will help our seminaries by their example of truly Christian life. Vocations come from such families and from such laymen: so I would recommend to you to have a special care for our good lay people. We also have to work in our schools. The schools today need our help; thej' need our direction; they need our support; and from the schools we may get the vocations for the clergy and for the religious life. Don’t forget our Catholic schools and not only Catholic schools but all schools; after all, in our schools whether private or public, we also have Catholic stu dents; and we must help them and teach them about vocation. The laymen will also help with their prayers; they will give good example in their families; and may be our Lord will also give them the seed of vocation in their souls. PROBLEMS OF VOCATIONS 205 I also wish to tell you to put up Association of Padres de Familias or Fathers of Families: many vocations come from the families of good fathers. TEACHERS’ ROLE The teachers in schools will also be of great help to get good vocations: they know their students better than we do! I feel that the Philippine Republic and the Church in the Philippines have a big mission to accomplish. We can even say that we have enough vocations in the Philippines; but we would all like to see a little more than that. In all other parts of Asia, they are mostly Buddhists, Shintoists, and Maoists: ours is the only Catholic nation here. Hence, the Filipino people have a big responsibility: we have the responsibility to make our Lord Jesus Christ known to the other nations of Asia. We cannot expect to get many priests today from Europe and from the United States. They no longer have so many priests there; and they really can no longer send us any, because there are no more vocations, no more new missionaries. We should pre pare good priests not only for our country, but to work as mis sionaries in foreign countries. So your work will be very big: and I will inform the Holy Father about the importance of the Filipino Church. Let us therefore consider it as our added responsibility to give or send Filipino priests that will work for the conversion of Asia. After this Convention, let us Start some other activities and means of promoting and recruiting vocations: let us work quietly but determinedly. Let us work for the increase, both in quantity and quality, of priestly vocations in this country. Let us make the proper selection under the guidance of our Bishops. Yours is a very important task; and right now you may be working only for your dioceses and religious congregations; but very soon you will be working, as you all should, for the whole of Asia. WHAT IS PRIESTLY VOCATION? * by Rufino J. Cardinal Santos We have been gathered here to prepare safe, effective and up-to-date guidelines for promoting, discerning, recruiting, safeguarding and financing Priestly Vocations. Obviously, the first step along this line is to have a clear, definite and theologically sound ideas about the nature of “Priestly Vocation”. If the “ministerial Priesthood” itself has been called to question in our days so as to become one of the main topics in the deliberations of the last Synod of Bishops in Rome; if the so-called “crises of identity” among the ranks of the clergy in many parts of the world has become the sad fashion in vogue among a noisy minority, and an ominous sign of our times: how much greater confusion may there be around the more intricate question of the “Priestly Vocation”! The discussions about the ministerial Priesthood have been stirred up after Vatican II; but the controversies about the “Priestly Vocation” have been agitated since the begin ning of our century. However, regarding this two vital issues, we have always had the sure voice and the beginnings of the Church Magisterium to guide us safely amidst the aberrations or misleading opinions scattered around us. In this exposition that I wish to offer for your considera tion, I will just glean from the papal documents and sum up the main issues, ideas and practical applications of the Church doctrine on the “Priestly Vocation”. As we discuss ‘'What is Priestly Vocation”, let us first see what it is not. “Vocation” is not God’s election, choice or design concern ing someone to become a priest; it is not a decree of Divine This is an Address to the National Convention of Diocesan and Re ligious Directors for Vocations at Our Lady of Guadalupe Minor Seminary, Makati, Rizal on January 17, 1972. WHAT IS PRIESTLY VOCATION 207 Providence by which someone is selected in preference to others and segregated for the priestly ministry. If such would be the case, the discernment of a vocation would be a hopeless case; because, as the Apostle says, “Who has ever understood the Lord’s thoughts, or been His counsellor? . . . How ins crutable are his judgements, how undiscoverable his ways! (Rom. 11, 34: 33). No, the lovable designs of God upon us cannot be called a “vocation”, because this word, even etymo logically, suggests a sort of a “calliny”, that is, a “manifesta tion of one’s will, not yet manifested to the person concerned.” Hence, God’s -will and providential desit/ns cannot constitute a vocation as long as they are not yet manifested in one way or another. They must rather be termed “source and origin of a vocation” or, as Pope Paul VI calls it, “the first fountain” of the priestly vocation.1 The priestly vocation, then, may be defined as “the mani festation of God’s will electing someone for the priesthood”. The manifestation of God’s will, and not precisely His election, is what really makes a “vocation”. As a matter of fact, God may elect for the priesthood some, nay, as many as needed in the Church; but actually, due to deficiencies of fallible human causes or circumstances, a good number, alas, happen to be not-called, that is. are found to be “without vocation”; in other words, the necessary signs to “manifest” God’s will or election are not found in them. This fact answers the intriguing question, more puzzling than ever in our days: “Why so few priests? Why so many “drop-outs” as the years go by, in our seminaries? Why so small the number of applicants that enter or are admitted into the seminaries? Why are seminaries nowadays in many places practically empty or closed, when ' there are so many towns and villages without a pastor, and so great “multitudes harried and abject, like sheep that have no shepherd” (Mt. 9,36) ? Has God forgotten His Church?” No! As the Angelic Doctor. St. Thomas, said long ago: “God never abandons His Church".He never fails to choose a number of possible aspirants to the priesthood that may be sufficient for the needs of His people. We are the ones who fail to cooperate with God’s loving de signs. As the Sower of the Gospel, God goes out to sow His seed (Lk. 8.5) of the priestly vocation in the hearts of many ' Paulus VI, Epist Apost. "SI M.MI DEI VERBUM”. 4 Nov. ‘C>3: As., 55. p. 98C>. - St. Thom. A<|. Sunniio Tlieol., Supplem., ap. 3fi. a. 4, ad 1”. 208 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS boys and young men; but, due to the conditions of our modern society and also to our own carelessness and neglect, many of these seeds “are trodden under foot, and the birds fly down and eat them; others wither as soon as they are up, because they have no moisture; others grow up among briers that smother them” (cf. Lk. 8,5-7), and even the seeds that fell on good soil, due to lack of generous human correspondence, yield only a thirtyfold harvest instead of a hundredfold as could have been expected (cf. Mt. 13,8). This is precisely one of the main aims of this National Convention: to forestall, as far as we can, this lack of neces sary cooperation with God’s work in the promotion of priestly vocations; to counteract the harmful influences of contempo rary society, and to wake up from our carelessness and neglect in the great cause that we have in our hands. We should remember here the words of Pope Paul VI: “In order that esteem and holy enthusiasm for the priestly life may take root and develop in the hearts of boys and young men, it is necessary to create a suitable atmosphere in the family and in the school. While modern civilization has spread among Christian people an esteem and greed for the good of this world, it has lessened in many hearts the appreciation of supernatural and eternal things. That is why as soon as boys and young men menifest clear signs of aspiring to the priest hood. and fitness for this state of life, they should be placed in a Seminary where the seed of the divine call may be properly safeguarded from the corruption of the world, and suitably cul tivated from the earliest years that, as time goes by, there may appear and become firmly rooted in them other qualities which are to be considered as essential to a solid and complete moral formation of candidates to the priesthood.”3 The Vicar of Christ points out lucidly the momentous im portance of truly Christian families and homes, as well as authentic Catholic schools and education; the ravaging in fluence of contemporary materialistic and hedonistic outlook of life in modern society; and the absolute need, even in spite of all odds and at the cost of most demanding sacrifices, to maintain true Seminaries worthy of that name where vocations may be property safeguarded, and suitably cultivated until they become firmly rooted and completely mature. These are guidelines for your deliberations. Paulus VI. op. fit WHAT IS PRIESTLY VOCATION 209 Coming back now to our definition of a “priestly vocation” as the manifestation of God’s Will”, the obvious question comes at once: “And how is that will of God manifested?” Pius XI in “that most important pronouncement” of his pontificate4 and in the Encyclical on the Catholic Priesthood5 gives us a clear answer: “A true priestly vocation, he says, is not established so much by some inner feeling or devout attraction, which may sometimes be absent or hardly perceptible; but rather by a right intention in the aspirant, together with a combination of physical, intellectual and moral qualities which make him fitted for such a state of life. He must look to the priesthood solely from the noble motive of consecrating himself to the service of God and salvation of souls; he must likewise have, or at least strive earnestly to acquire, urged on, perhaps by ill-advised parents, looks to this state as a means to temporal or earthly gains which he imagines and desires in the priesthood; who ever intractable, unruly or undisciplined, has small taste for piety, is not industrious, and shows little zeal for souls; who ever has special tendency to sensuality, and after long trial has not proved he can conquer it; whoever has no aptitude for study and who will be unable to follow the prescribed courses with due satisfaction: all such cases show that they are not in tended for the priesthood. By letting them go on almost to the threshold of the sanctuary, superiors make it only more diffi cult for them to draw back; and, perhaps even cause them to accent ordination through human respect, without vocation and without the priestly spirit. Let superiors of seminaries, to gether with the spiritual directors and confessors, reflect how weighty a responsibility they assume before God, before the Church, and before the youths themselves, if they do not take all means at their disposal to avoid a false step.”. . . The chief responsibility, however, rests with the Bishop, who according to the severe law of the Church, should not confer holy orders on anyone, unless from positive signs he is morally certain of canonical fitness . . . !”•' “It is not enough,” says the holy Bishop and Doctor, St. Alphonsus de Liguori, “that the Bishop know nothing evil of the ordained; he must have positive evi dence of his uprightness.”7 < Pius XI, Apost. Letter (posthumous), 18 Jan. 1939, to the Philippine Episcopate; ap. AAS, 34, 1942. PP. 252-264. •■Pius XI. Encvl. •'AD CAT1IOLICI SACERDOTI” 20 Dec. 1935: an. AAS 28. 1936. pp. 5-53. C I.C., can. 973. 3. ■ S. Alph. l.iu.. Tltool. Mor. d. Saeram. Ordin . n 803. 210 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS From this clear explanation of how the “manifestation of God’s Will electing someone for the priesthood” is achieved, we can say, borrowing the words of Pius XII, that this divine vocation’’ is made up of a twofold quasi-essential element’’3 or by two integral elements, one immediately divine, which con sists in the right intention of the candidate together with his fitness, and the other ecclesiastical or mediately divine, which consists in the canonical call of the ecclesiastical superiors free ly accepted by the candidate. These two mutually completing elements do not bring out the priestly vocation all at once, in a moment from the beginning of its manifestation; rather, as Paul VI explains0, the vocation is a gradual and ordinarily long process, from the first initial sign of the boys or young men admitted in the Seminary to the final judgement of the Bishop, rightfully and freely accepted by the candidates at Ordination. It is a slow and gradual development from the “seeds” or initial signs of a possible or probable vocation to the “full maturity”"’ or final blossoming of a certain finally complete and definitively approved and effective before the Church, as well as before-God according to the sentence of the Catechism of the Council of Trent: “Those are said to be cho sen by God who are lawfully called by the Church, legitimate ministers”". It is important to recall this doctrine in order to correct the widely spread error of those who think that admission or stay in a seminary is a sign of a sure and certain vocation. If that were the real case, then no Bishop would have the right to refuse or reject the ordination of any seminarian asking for it. St. Pius X has positively taught that “no one has any right for ordination previous to the free election of the Bishop”1'-’; and Paul VI has recently declared again that “the dreadful and most serious duty of taking the final judgement on the signs of divine election belongs to the Bishops, as well as the right to call the candidate for Priesthood, thus rendering their priestly divine vocation approved and effective before the Church”* 11 12 13. Consequently, any social pressure on the seminar ians or seminary-authorities that may affect or influence the -Pius XII. Const Apost. “SEDES SAPIENTIAE’’, 31 Maii 195G; ap. ASS n8, 1956, p. 357. 11 Paulus VI, op. cit„ p. 988. Ibid., p. 984. ” Catech. Cone. Trid., p. Ill, de Ordine. 3. 12 Cf. AAS. 15 Lulii 1912, p. 48. 13 Paulus VI. op. cit.. p. 988. WHAT IS PRIESTLY VOCATION 211 necessary freedom they should have in giving up in due time or desisting from that way of life as soon as they find out prudently that they are not called or fitted for it, is not only unfair and unjust and extremely damaging to the Church, but also a crime of fatal consequences for the youth themselves and for countless souls, in this life and perhaps even to the next. The history of a vocation is like this. It starts when a boy or a young man begins to show some signs of aptitude for the priestly office; and this increases when he openly signifies and shows that he desires the priesthood, although such desire may not spontaneously arise from himself, but from the care and work of parents, teachers, parish priests, confessor, etc. Until here, the vocation or “manifestation of God’s Will” is only partial since there is only one of its two integral or com pletive elements:'4 namely, the immediately divine factor which consists in graces, natural and supernatural gifts given by God to the soul and body of the one chosen. When, however, the youth finally enters the seminary, he is admitted by the Bishop, at least indirectly, through the superiors of the seminary, and thus the ecclesiastical or mediately divine element, that is, the canonical call begins to be present, and we can speak already of a vocation, but only for a possible or at most, probable voca tion which must be carefully tested in the course of time. This is the meaning of a candidate’s entrance in the Seminary. Since the priestly vocation is so high and sublime as to demand exceptionally sterling natural and supernatural quali ties, and inasmuch as the training and education of early adoles cence, pursued until the attainment of manhood, is admittedly according to psychopedagogy, of lasting effects in any human life, the Church has insisted for long centuries, at least from Trent down to our post-Vatican II days, upon the importance of Minor Seminaries. The scientific findings of modern Adolescent Psychology have just confirmed the profound in sights of the decrees on Seminaries issued by the Councils of Toledo in the 6th and 7th centuries, by the Council of Trent in the 16th century, and by Paul VI in our own days when he said "as soon as boys and young men manifest clear signs of aspiring to the priesthood and fitness for this state of life, they should be placed in a Seminary”. At the age of 20. the adolescent has already become a man, with his own personality "Oscar A. Aquino, I.C.D.. Vocation & Admission to Orders, Homa, Cath. Book Acency, 1967, pp. 61-81. 212 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS which cannot be “remanded or refashioned anymore in later years1'. What has not been done at that age, during the Minor Seminary, can hardly be repaired or supplied later in the Major Seminary. After the High School, in the College Seminary and still more in the Theology department, generally, it is too kite — mark well the word, too late, as a rule — to try to cor rect wrong habits or dispositions previously acquired, or to eradicate a deep-seated worldly mentality that has not been duly counteracted in the early adolescence,1'1 especially in our contemporary “permissive” society, and in our schools where injudicious coeducation and sex instruction prevail. Andrea Mageiali, Psicopedagoqia dei candidati al sacerdozio, Mila, no. 1965, p. 60. "’■Jesus Ma. Cavanna, CM., Importance of Minor Seminaries — Their Case in the Philippines: ms. Manila, 1971, pp. 48-49. 17 Paul VI to the TV International Congress for Promotion of eccle siastical vocations. Rome, 10-14 Mav, 1971: ap. Vida Religiosa revista C.M.F.. Madrid. 15 Oct 1971, pp. 258-259. >SS.C. for Catholic Education. ‘‘RATIO FUNDAMENTALIS INSTI TUTIONIS SACERDOTALIS", n. 11, footnote 60. I make these remarks to warn this National Convention against the trend prevailing in many sectors today of suppress ing Minor Seminaries, and working only for vocations in the College or University levels. These vocations may be indeed more promising; the rate of perseverance, at least until Ordina tion is much more encouraging than that of high school boys (although perhaps we could not say the same on the perse verance of such vocations, years after Ordination). But how ever the case may be. thd ■fact is that such College or University vocations, even with the best promotion works, will always be and remain to be an exception, rather than the rule. And although it is imperative that we should pay special attention to them, as Paul VI has recently recommended* 17 * * , it should never be to the neglect or detriment of Minor Seminaries, or just as a subterfuge for dodging the issue” of their relevance. “For the Church maintains — as it is apparent from her doc trines. experience, and practice — that certain signs of a divine vocation can be discerned right from boyhood, which demand careful and specialized attention.”1” When a Seminarian enters the Theological department or Major Seminary, his vocation should have reached a stage of maturity as to render it, not only possible or probable, but almost certain or practically, though not yet definitively sure. A doubtful or still wavering vocation at such an advanced stage WHAT IS PRIESTLY VOCATION 213 should be discouraged to continue or remain in the Seminary. During all the Seminary years, the right intention and fitness of the candidate should more and more clearly manifest, as time goes on, the Will of God electing him for the Priesthood; and this manifestation should appear gradually more evident, not only to the candidate himself but also to his superiors (Rector, Prefects, Professors, Spiritual Director and regular Confessor) qualified for their respective offices and appoved by the Bishop to represent him for such delicate task of discerning and fostering the genuine priestly vocation of the seminarians. Hence, if at any time, either the candidate himself with the advice of the superiors, or the superiors through their own prudent judgment come to the conclusion that a vocation does not exist that is, that the “manifestation of God’s Will” appa rently shows that God calls the candidate for another nay of life, then there should be no hesitation, as Pius XI says, to adminish to unsuited and unworthv, without any regard to human considerations, of their obligation to retire while yet there is time. Bishops and religious superiors should not be deterred from this needful severity by fear of diminishing the number of priests for the diocese or institute. The Angelic Doctor, St. Thomas, long ago proposed this difficulty, and answers it with his usual lucidity and wisdom: ‘‘God never abandons His Church; and so the number of priests will always be sufficient for the needs of the faithful, provided the worthy are advanced and the unworthy sent away.” The Doctor and Saint, basing himself upon the severe words of the Fourth Ecumenical Council of the Lateran,11' observes: “Should it ever become impossible to maintain the present number, it is better to have a few good priests than a multitude of bad ones. One well-trained priest is worth more than many trained badly or scarcely at all; for such would be not merely unreliable but a likely source of sorrow to the Church.”-’" ’’•Cone. J.at, IV aim Pius XI. op. <it. 21 Cf. AAS XXI.1.1. 1! At the time of the reception of Sacred Orders, the divine vocation must finally be completed. The candidate, having obtained the approval of all his superiors in the external ar.d internal forum, freely and spontaneously presents his petition for admission to the Sacred Orders, swearing under oath, and fully aware of all its implications, that “he experiences and feels that he is truly called by God”.2' The Bishop then at the * 2 121->, 214 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS Ordination invites him to make a final decision for life. If the candidate then freely and conscientiously accepts this final invi tation of the Church, then the Priestly Vocation is at last fully achieved, finally complete, and absolutely certain. The candidate’s free acceptance of the invitatory call made lawfully by the legitimate ministers of the Church is the ultimate mani festation of the Divine Will electing him to the priesthood. Such is the history of my authentic priestly Vocation. Now that we understand a little more the wonderful and mysterious days of God in "calling those whom it pleased Him to call” (cf. Mk. 3, 13; Jn. 15, 16), let us strive to study and look for means to let His Voice be heard amidst the mad bustle and din of our modern world, so as “to increase the ranks of strong and zealous workers in the vineyard of the Lord"; the more so, as the moral need of society are growing greater instead of less. Of all the means to this noble end, the easiest and most effective is prayer. This, moreover, is a means within the power of everyone. It should be assiduously used by all, as it was enjoined by Jesus Christ Himself: ‘The harvest indeed is abundant but the laborers are few. Pray therefore the Lord of the Harvest to send forth laborers into his harvest” (Mt. 9, 37, 38). “Ask and it shall be given you’ (Mt. 7, 7) ; ask for good and holy priests and Our Lord will not refuse to send them to His Church, as ever He has done throughout the cen turies.”22 -2 Pius XI, op. cit. “It is the bishop’s duty to make his people active in promoting vocations and see to it that all vocational re sources and activities are closely coordinated. As a father he should make every sacrifice to help those whom he judges to be called to the Lord’s service.” (Decree on Priest ly Formation, no. 2) THE OPERA "JESUS CHRIST, SUPERSTAR" by J. Ma. Cavanna, C.M. I wish to begin this critical study with the words of the Apostle of the Gentiles: “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel — not that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you and want to per vert the gospel of Christ. But even if we. or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be ac cursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed. Am I now seek ing the favour of men. or of God? Or am I trying to to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ. For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not man’s gospel. For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it. but it came through a revelation of .Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1. 6-12), ‘‘who is God over all, blessed for ever” (Rom. 9, 5), ‘‘who though lie was by nature God. . . emptied Him self, taking the nature of a slave, being made like unto men’’ (Phil. 2, 6-7), “one tried as we are in all things except sin” (Hebr. 4, 15): “Jesus Christ is the same yes terday and today and for ever" (Hebr. 13, 8) The readers will excuse me if mention is made here of •■anathemas", a word which does not please modern ears. As we say in the Liturgy of the Word, "this is the word of God", 1 cannot change it. 216 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS The above words make the best preamble to this study. I know that many will certainly disagree, at least at the be ginning, with my contentions. 1 wish to make it clear from the start, that I do not speak here with the authority of a doc tor of theology or of a biblical scholar. I do not have indeed any such titles. What I will say cannot have other values than the reasons supporting it. With those who might dissent I would welcome a friendly dialogue (no polemic, please!), unless they prefer to give a contemptuous brush-off to this study which could prove an easier though less worthy way to solve the problem. My purpose is to bring some light and offer some criteria to dispel the mess produced by the controversial opera of Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice. I know that for writing this article some people will classify me as a “narrow-minded conservative”. I care little for facile slogans or cheap labels. I am not seekiny the favour of men nor I am trying to please them, if that would hinder me to remain a servant of Christ, “my Lord and. my God” (Jn. 20, 28). So let us go at our subject. We read in an American weekly:' “The controversy over the 87-minute rock-opera Jesus Christ, Superstar continues unabated. During last Holy Week, St. Louis’ John Joseph Cardinal Carberry termed the rock-opera “distressing.” “Theologically they (the authors) place Our Blessed Lord in a purely humanis tic role.” Fr. Joseph M. O’Brien, however, vigorously defended the Archdiocese of St. Louis’ Radio and Tele vision Office’s judgment that the rock-opera was “not blasphemous” and was ever “uplifting”, quoting a Scrip ture scholar at the diocesan seminary who lauded the work as “a spiritual experience.” The Episcopal Bishop of the Western New York Episcopal Diocese included excerpts from the rock-opera during his Cathedral’s Three-Hour Good Friday Service. Episcopalian colum nist Rev. Lester Kinsolving, noted advocate of liberalized abortion reform, took full advantage of Jesus Christ, Superstar “being played on Vatican Radio — just as it was being played in churches throughout the United 'James Likoudis-Neil Stafford, The Gospel accordhm to Judas; ap. THE WANDERER, July 8, 1971, p. “JESUS CHRIST —SUPERSTAR” 217 States.” This was adequate proof to Rev. Kinsolving that: “It is not irreveremt. It is immensely moving... eloquently serious... thoroughly sincere and respect ful... a legitimate effort.” And it is well known that many Catholic educators are presenting this rock-opera in religion and music classes of Catholic institutions.2 Here in the Philippnes we know the case of the same opera being produced last Christmas by the Dramatic Guild of a renowned Catholic School of girls with the assistance of the Junior Schola Cantorum of the Diocesan College Seminary. And we have read in the papers enthusias tic articles of priests, diocesan and religious, commending “Superstar” because it “restores the dramatic art to its original mission, which is to plumb the depths of religious meaning”, and because “the Christ of this opera is not Christ the King, or Christ God, or the Christ preached by priests and minis ters .... but the Christ of the masses, etc.” This is what some Catholic priests write. I need not mention the enthu siasm of some — if not many ... — of our good religious Sisters . . . This amazing confusion is what prompted me to devote some time to decipher the puzzling enigma behind it. Because I cannot think that the root of such jumble among our good Catholics is any real loss of faith, and much less any ill inten tion “to pervert the gospel of Christ” as in the days of St. Paul. And so we are far from intending any curse or anathema, not even against the authors of the opera, since Webber him self openly declared: “We’re not trying to pull people’s belief airay”.'-' But I unhesitatingly do condemn and execrate the opera itself as a work that “perverts the gospel of Christ”; and this is what I intend to prove. The composer Webber frankly acknowledged: "I. per sonally, don’t think that Jesus i,s (iod.”1 Thus we should not wonder that his opera presents Christ “as just a man”. It is not exact to say “in Webber and Rice's defense that in writing this opera, they simply wished to remain within the bounds -cf. I.IGl’ORIAN, May 1971. p. 53; THE WANDERER, July 1, 1971. p. 5 -cf. HI-TIME-AWAKE. 3-12-71, p. 7 < Ibid.. l«e. rit. 218 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS of a vision of Christ as a man.”3 Here lies the roo of the confusion. The theme of the whole opera is centered on the line spoken there by Magdalen and Judas: “He is a man, he’s just a man.” The statement has two affirmations; the first is true; the second is a blasphemy. And yet the truth and the blasphemy are combined in one single sentence! That’s the sophistry that has deluded so many people. cf. Rev. Fr. Castor Fernandez, C.M., IVhat’s the bn-z at C1C; ap. THE FREEMAN, December 12, 1971, p. 6 6 Ibid., loc. cit. Still more; to make plain that sophistry we should exa mine the context. The very words put by the opera in the mouth of Magdalen and of Judas reveal that even the first part which, in itself, is true, “He is a man”, taken in its con text becomes false, because it is given the same meaning of the second blasphemous part: “He’s just a man”. Magdalen explains thus what she affirmed: “And. I’ve had so many men before; in many ways he is just one more," This is not only blasphemous, but profane, intolerably abusive, irreverent and contemptuous language which has given ground to the general impression of the public audience about what a Manila news paper called the Superstar’s "affair with Mary Magdalen”!!) Judas on his part explains the He’s a man” saying “He’s just a man. He’s not a king — he’s just the same as anyone I know ...” That is the real message of the opera, and that is indeed its blunder! It is not true that the “play gives an insight into Jesus’ humanity.”0 As a matter of fact, the opera stresses Christ’s humanity, but by denying His divinity. How can this Superstar Jesus be God — as our Christian gospel and faith presents Him—if he was just a man, “just one more”, “just the same as anyone" else; nay, if he is a quite poor and dubious character, psychically unbalanced, as a man, such as the opera presents Him? Obviously, the Superstar of the opera is not the Christ of the Gospel; the opera is a “new” adultered version of the Gospel; it is a different gospel, another gospel. The opera preaches a gospel contrary to that which we have received, and thus it fully deserves St. Paul’s in spired words of “anathema": let it be accursed! But here comes the baffling riddle: crowds of Catholic — not to mention, Protestant — laity and clergy who hold the * * 6 “JESUS CHRIST—SUPERSTAR” 219 divinity of Christ as the rock bottom of all their belief ap plaud frantically at this most glamorous denial of their faith! A music professor of St. John’s on Long Island, U.S.A, makes this witty remark:7 • cf. Catherine N. Dillon, Jesus Christ — Superichnt ?; ap. THE WANDERER, July 1, 1971, p. 10 s cf. Denzinger-Schonmetzer Enchiridion Syinbolonun, Herder, lf'G3, nn.3127-3438 .. For by His incarnation the Son of God has united Himself in some fashion with every man. He worked with human hands. He thought with a human mind, acted by hu man, choice, and loved with a human heart. Born of the Virgin Mary', He has truly been made one of us, like us in all things except sin.” (Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, no. 22) “ certainly don’t challenge the right of an atheist to to publish such an opera — just as I would have every right to compose lyrics like, ‘Let me ask you, Buddhaman — Who do- you think you’re gooder-than’. But I would be the most surprised person on Earth to learn that they wrere singing it in Buddhist monasteries! Or that my new rock opera, ‘Dammit, Mohammet!’ was be ing used to teach Mohammedanism to the youth of Moslem!” And this is the cause of our wonder and amazement. The Webber and Rice’s opera is used in our Catholic schools and even within the sacred precinct of Christian churches! . . . The less damaging explanation would be to attribute this ab surdity to the gross shallowness of contemporary religious education; or to the contaminating influence of certain “pro gressive” theological lucubrations resuscitating today long outdated and condemned errors of “modernism”*1; or finally, to the pervading spirit of secularization and desacralization that pollutes the very atmosphere of our society. PRIESTS AND FILIPINO RELIGIOUS VALUES • Wilfredo C. Paguio We have dealt on Filipino socio-politico-economic values. We have treated about our exterior principles which we have divided into three articles, namely, on our utany-na-loob norm, on our hiya norm and on our materialism. We have also dealt on our interior principles. We have given our suggestions on how these interior principles can prevail over our exterior principles. On this subject, we alotted four articles, namely, on priests and Filipino interior principles in general, on our Christian initiation, on Filipinos of the third world and, lastly, on the mass media through which we can work towards our goal of integrating the Filipino personality with a more diffussed and a more comprehensive effect. In the following pages, we shall discuss Filipino religious values. We shall talk about the babaylan, the anito, the asirany, the nnno .w punso, the tianak and so forth. In short, wc shall speak about Filipino beliefs on the sphere of the spirits, of the preternatural, of the supernatural — how Christianity replaced our native religion and how Christianity is and can be preserved in our people. We shall divide our article into three general divisions, namely, some considerations on Filipino psychology, process of Filipino Christianization and preservation of Filipino Chris tianity. SOME CONSIDERATIONS ON FILIPINO PSYCHOLOGY It was Fr. Angel de Blas O.P. who said that: “Every man thinks and wishes, experiences emotions, develops movement and carries out the functions both of external and internal sensa tions, but these phenomena, though substantially identical in all men, assume in individual persons inborn traits and charac RELIGIOUS VALUES 221 teristics that distinguish the conscious processes of everybody else. Such individual inborn differences taken as a whole and organized into system of permanent and constant psychical behaviour that the subject invariably refers to the self, consti tute what in modern terminology is known as psychological personality." Fr. Jesus Merino, O.P., commenting on this passage said that: “the constitution of that personality ... is so important in figuring out the psychology of big groups of men . . . ” He pointed out that it was also Fr. de Blas himself who said that: “Another defect common to many contemporary psycho logists consists in not distinguishing well between what we may call the native equipment of personality, that is, its inborn constituent traits, and the characteristics it acquires in its deve lopment along the line of the individual, ordinarily known as the education of personality. The development of personality presupposes personality substantially constituted, the acquisition of new habits and the adjustment to special situation as well as elimination of inadequate dispositions, all three being but modifications introduced in its fundamental traits and qualities.” From these observations, we can point out that in every group of people, there can be found constant psychological endowments which can characterize the group as a unique ag gregate of persons and distinguish it from other institutionally structured congregation of individuals. Among Filipinos, we observe three of these constants which we think relevant to our paper, namely, the predominance of sentiment, patterned normative propriety and attraction to the colorful. We divide this section of our paper among them. PREDOMINANCE OF SENTIMENT — Filipinos are sentimen tal people. In them, the will prevails over reason. This is why in spite of all dangers of bankcrupcy, a Filipino businessman will always employ his relatives in his business. His actions are controlled by his whims, his likes and dislikes. This is way he can easily transform his mood from an ecstatic state of elation into an extreme feeling of sadness. His dances range from the joyous tinikling to his sorrowful burial dances. His songs, from So Kabukiran to Kundiman. His theatrical performances, from So Pula. Sa Puti to Florante at Laura. His festal ceremonies varying according to his felt needs, from the happiness of birth and marriage to the oftenly tearful rites for the sick and the dead. 222 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS This is why Fr. Merino can say that: “The objectivity of the standards of value might suffer from this (consideration of affection in the Filipino psychology), ... yet at times it ac quires from this very fact some sort of intuitional approach that deserves some consideration.” Also, it must be noted that it is this elasticity of the Filipino sentiment that enables him to laugh at himself. PATTERNED NORMATIVE PROPRIETY — Our people have conventional norms for every aspect of social life — from the manner of dressing to the traditional rules for eating. Minutest details are observed. Prescribed manners of laughing, of walking and even of talking are strictly followed for dignity and respecta bility. Indeed, this is so deeply rooted in the Filipino that he has really learned how to live with them with such a natural ease that if he does otherwise, he is wont to feel discomfort and even certain qualms of conscience afterwards. To discard these norms of propriety wiJJ be, for a Filipino, to be artificial. This trait actually accounts for the conservatism of our people. This is what allows them to disregard being called “old-fashioned”. The reason behind this can be traced to the age-old answer: “That is what our ancestors told us:” or “We have to go on lest we draw all misfortunes upon us; lest we be sick and die.” ATTRACTION TO THE COLORFUL — Aside from the two foregoing character istics, we can also add the fact that Filipinos are naturally attracted to the colorful. The Filipino sense of avoiding the abstract and thinking in terms of the concrete makes him tend to love “spendour, pomp, color and mystery”. Thus, we see the exquisite paintings of his jeepneys delicately done without neglecting the smallest detail. His fiestas are not complete without colorful arches and banners. His altars are decorated with the most imaginative curvings even "bordering the sen suous.” His religious services are equally adorned with symbolic actions. His religious needs are only satisfied by “meaningful representations, images, songs ceremonies, religious insigna, po pular religious festivities, highly impressive elements, grand structures as temples” and similar other colorful celebrations like processions, cenaculo (passion play) and the flagellantes. RELIGIOUS VALUES 223 PROCESS OF FILIPINO CHRISTIANIZATION After having briefly discussed and placed the above Filipino characteristics in their proper perspective, let us now consider how, in history, these traits were used by the first missionaries to convert our ancestors. We divide this section of our paper into three, namely, substitution, exaggeration and compartmentalization. SUBSTITUTION — Working through the existing beliefs of the people, sociologists believe that the Spanish missionaries, through clarifications, were able to substitute certain concepts of pagan religion with those of Christianity. The Christian concept of the Spanish Dios (in Tagalog Diyos) substituted the pagan Bathala. The Christian priest took the place of their babaylan. The pagan lesser duties were dethroned by the Christian saints. This saint-concept had a greater appeal to the Filipino natives. First — because the saints are less abstract than the idea of God. Second — the intercessory powers of the saints arouse in the Filipino their malakas-mahina principle. And third — because this saint-concept fortifies and strengthens their family-loyalty-relationships. Thus, we see that novenas, processions, pilgrimages and other devotions to the saints are very popular among our people. Specialized intercessory powers of saints gain a great num ber of devotees to them. St. Isidore is invoked by farmers; St. Raphael, by fishermen; St. Jude, by those in despair. Enthronement of the Sacred Heart, taking the place of the household gods, also gained popularity since it enhances family solidarity. Rosaries, scapulars and medals are also said to have taken the place of the avting-avting (charms). These substitutes are easily accepted by the natives since they are “understood” by them. They served as linkages bet ween Christianity and paganism. Even in liturgical prayers, substitutions had been possible. Fr. Francis Lambrecht records a number of pagan prayers and their substitutes. Here is a Mavaoyao prayer before birth: “Thou, chicken, we sacrifice thee to the Bolev deities of the Skyworld and the Underworld, that this pregnant woman may live, that she may continue working in the fields here around, that may live both this household, and their pigs and their 224 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS chickens and their children.” The Christian substitute runs this way: “Lord God, Creator of all things, Thou who didst prepare the body and soul of the Blessed Virgin Mary, that she was worthy to be made the abode of Thy Son, accept the fervent prayer of this Thy servant, humbly beseeching Thee to preserve the child which Thou hast given her to conceive, and to protect it against all harm, so that it may favorably come to the light, may serve Thee always in all things and thus obtain life everlasting. Amen.” Other examples of substitutes to pagan prayers are the following. Here, for instance, is a blessing for seedlings: “We beseech and implore Thee, 0 Lord, that Thou deign to bless these seedlings; may gentle breezes blow upon them, may the dew of heaven make them bring forth shoots and give them growth, so that they may without hindrance reach full ma turity in due time, in behalf of the spiritual and bodily welfare of Thy faithful. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.” Also, here is a blessing after the harvest: “Almighty God, who dost not fail to award abundance of fruit through the dew of heaven and by ** making the earth productive, we thank Thee for Thy fatherly care which enables us to reap these crops; relying on Thy merciful bounty, we beseech Thee to bless these fruits, to. preserve them and ward off all that may be harmful to them; and grant also that those, whose prospects Thou didst anticipate with Thy benefits, may glorify Thee for Thy watchful protection, may always praise Thee for Thy mercy and may enjoy these temporal benefits with out neglecting those that are eternal. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.” In these examples, we can see the distinctive nobility of Christian prayer which the natives found irresistible. Compare with them, for example, the following Mayaoyao prayer: “I sway to you this rice, that, when shall rise the sun of Pangangapang Mountain, may multiply your stalks; may the rain from Mabiyokan Mountain fall on you, may your stalks be luxuriant, may you produce grains, may your worms, all of them, be shaken off, may the rats, all of them, be chased and moved to the rice fields of our enemies of Kadaklan, our enemies of Balangaw.” It is indeed obvious that through our Christians substitute, pagans can be converted. Add to this solemn dignity the color of our Catholic litur gy. the richness of our sacramental and sacrificial ceremonies. RELIGIOUS VALUES 225 our “devotional bounty”, the beauty of our sacerdotal vest ments and we can easily understand how the first missionaries were able to incite awe, belief, and that sense of mystery in our ancestors. EXAGGERATION — Although, however, we find the use of such splendour and color significantly helpful to the spread of Catholicism in our country, in the last analysis, we observe that an exaggerated use of these, as we have pointed out earlier, in our first article, is divisive. This gave rise to what we have termed as the Filipino sense of aristocracy which separates the elite (the burgis) from the poor (the common tao). Moreover, it is also true that prestige was enhanced by these awe-inspiring “new religion” which in a way, made the Christianization of our country easier for the missionaries. However, we can point out that exaggerations also did occur. Their evil consequences can be observed even in our religious practices today. Too much emphasis, for example, on mortifica tion still gives us those flagellantes during the Holy Week. We still hear people believe, or at least threaten, the younger genera tions of getting stuck on a tree if they climb it on a Good Friday. Also, there are still those who forbid taking showers on this “anniversary of the death of Our Lord” because “the water then is dead”. These are ridiculous. And all because of an exaggerated emphasis on fasting and modesty! An observation of the Filipino concept of charity will also reveal a certain degree of exaggeration. Consider, for exam ple. our town fiestas. Everybody is served — invited or not invited, known or not known. The hosts never really think of what they will eat the next day. And if the visitor happens to praise a precious item in the house, the hosts give it to them at once. Ang ganda. taio! (It’s beautiful, isn’t it?) Sige. sa ii/o aa! (Alright, you may take it.) Through these examples, we see that the exaggerations our people had in religion have their repercussions in their socio economic life. COMPARTMENTALIZATION — And these exaggerations as sume more serious social consequences if we extend our view on the matter a little farther. We spoke, for example, of the rise of aristocracy in our society. And this, we said, is divisive since it prepares 226 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS the ground for certain standards of normative propriety which separates those who can afford to follow them and those who simply cannot. Let us take, for instance, those western norms for eating. It is respectable, dignified and “class” to follow them — how to sit down; how to open your mouth; how to use the spoons, the big one and the small one; how to use the fork and the knife; how and when and to whom to speak with. But, sad to say, it is only the rich who can afford to have training in these matters. The poor cannot. As a consequence, a poor man will naturally feel out of place in a banquet where he has to eat with the rich. This fact also accounts for the gap and hence lack of dialogue between the authority, who is supposed to follow these norms, and the subject. And thus, arise the need for compartmentalization in our social re lationships. In one place, we act according to a set pattern and in another differently. Situations, like this, in most cases, generate in our people a hands off policy (tcalany pakialaman) which can even be paved by our innate amor propio. Thus, we have an exclusive family-loyaltv-relationship-circle, which is even strengthened by our baranyay background. In the religious sphere, this compartmentalization is also what we observe. Christians who do their duties as Christians also find themselves believing in the pagan deities deposed by the Christian God and saints. In passing before a mound of earth (the white ants’ hill) which is supposed to be the dwell ing place of the nuno sa punso (a local character of the spirit world about two feet and with serene white old man’s beard), many still apologetically recite this formula: “Lolo, ako’v gumagalang sa inyong kaharian huwag po sanang magagalit kung ako’v magdaan.” Or, the following is said: “Magandang araw sa in.vo, Tanda/Kung kayo’.v masaling di po sinasadya.” In fear of the manykukulam (witch) and of the aswanp (local vampire), a great number cannot remain alone at night spe cially if the moon is full. When one is lost in the fields or in the forests, many still believe that to find one’s way, he has to invert his clothes to fool the tianak (a local demon usually imagined as taking the form of a child) who has been mislead ing him. This is a kind of cultural fusion which must be corrected in the set of our basic cultural values, a kind of compartmental ized attitude in which oppositions and even contradictions are held at the same time. We ask help from the saints and at RELIGIOUS VALUES 227 the same time we offer propitiations to the leapte (a giant of the spirit world characterized by the smoking of cigar). We ask prayers from a priests for a sick person and at the same time we call a herbolario to cure the sickness of that person. We pray the rosary in a dark street and at the same time we instruct children not to point at anything (baka mamatanda). We are married in Church and at the same time we look for bad omens like earthquake, burnt house, breakage of glasses, dishes or spilling of soup. Indeed, it does appear that beneath the sophistication of our splendid Catholic ceremonies, the pagan still lives in the unconscious of our people. We believe that this is a kind of cultural resistance to change on the part of our pagan ancestors which Christianity, through the years, has not been able to overcome. PRESERVATION OF FILIPINO CHRISTIANITY Considering these situations, therefore, we see the great problem confronting our people which priests of today must be able to solve or help solve. Again, here are conflicts bet ween our interior principles and exterior principles. In this section of our paper, we shall try to offer sugges tions for solution. We shall divide this section into two, name ly, within the family and within the parish. WITHIN THE FAMILY— Religion, among Filipinos, is a family affair. The moment a new house is built, a priest is called to bless it. Enthronment of Christ the king follows. Marriage, which is often controlled by parents, is never considered as such if not done in the pre sence of the priest. New properties are also asked to be blessed like automobiles, tractors and so forth. An expectant mother also asks for a priest’s blessing. And a mother who has newly given birth together with her new born son are also expected to receive the same blessing from the priest. In all these situations, moreover, it must be pointed out that it is the Filipina, the mother of the family, who takes all the initiative. The role of the Filipina towards the religious training of the male members of her family can never be overlooked. Through her, therefore, a priest can greatly influence the formation of a Christian family. 228 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS The love the Filipino has for the dead, which can traced back to his pagan cult of ancestors and which is still shown through the celebration of the All Saints' Day, through the offering of masses, candles and flowers for and to them, can be a help to make him abstract from the Filipino tendency to think in terms of the concrete and the colorful through which the inner mysteries of our faith are neglected. The Filipino love for his patron saint is another step to wards this abstraction. Through this, we can proceed to a true love of God which is often too abstract for a Filipino to comprehend. WITHIN THE PARISH — It is the task of the parish priest to educate his people. To this end, our cultural liturgical practices can be of great help. We believe that, at this stage of our Filipino religious development, these customs properly explained, can be of great educative value. The yaba.sa during Holy Week, the dramatic cenaculo, the salubony, the soledad, the flores de Mayo and the kubol on Palm Sundays can be developed to our advantage. The Santacruzan of May (it is a pity the feast of the Holy Cross has been trans ferred) can also be properly oriented instead of just letting some politicans use them to enhance their political ambitions. It is lamentable that we have begun eliminating these even before they have truly served their purpose and even be fore they are understood by our people as actually not supers titious. We believe that if there is any period in our history when these practices can be fully used for the benefit of our people, it is today when we have already, at least to some extent, forgotten our ancestral superstitions. CONCLUSIONS After what we have discussed, we can say that there is a need for a greater emphasis on the true understanding of our faith. This can be done through our traditional religious practices. This can be done through the lessening of 'neo-leyalistic, requirements for the external expressions of Christian doc trine. Changes, for certainly change we have to, must be done gradually. Substitutes however, must be offered for practices which are decided upon to be eliminated. And these must be RELIGIOUS VALUES 229 formulated according to the psycho-cultural frame-work of our people, without, moreover, any prejudice to sound doctrine and Christian morality. REFERENCES BLAS, ANGEL, de, O.P., The Modern and Thomistic Views regarding the Constitution of Psychological Personality. Address in the Opening Exer cises of the Academic Year of 1941-42, (Manila: UST Press, 1941). GOWING, PETER, G. (cd.), Acculturation in the Philippines, (Quezon City: New Day Publishers, 1971). LAMBRECHT, FRANCIS, “Adoption of Ifugao Local Customs in Christian ity”, St. Louis Quarterly, 1:1, (March, 1963) pp. 5-30. L1CBAR, T1C1IARD, “Fatalism and Medicine in Cebuano Areas of the Philippines", Anthropological Quarterly, XXX1X:3, (July, 1966), pp. 171-179. MERINO, JESUS, M., O.P.. “Oriental Traits and the Psychology of the Filipinos”, Unitas, XXXVIII:4, (December, 1965), pp. 61-69. -----------------------------------. "Religiosity and Nationalism Among the Filiilipinos”, Unitas, XXXVIII:4, (December, 1965), pp. 12-21. PAL. AGATON, P., “The People’s Conception of the World”, A Philip pine Barrio: A Study of Social Organizations in Relation to Planned Cultural Change, chap. 7, (pp. 449-455). Published in the University of Manila Journal of East Asiatic Studies 5 (1956), pp. 33-486. I | “Popular devotions of the Christian people are warmly commended, provided they accord with the laws and norms j of the Church. Such is especially the case with devotions i called for by the Holy See. ; Devotions proper to individual churches also have a I special dignity if they are conducted by mandate of the bishops in accord with customs or books lawfully approved.” | (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, no. 13) Pablo Fernandez, OP THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH IN THE PHILIPPINES (Continued) CHAPTER 22 THE CHURCH DURING THE BRITISH INVASION The Family Compact, signed on 5 August 1761 by the Span ish, Italian and French Bourbons, upset the harmony that had existed for years between-Spain and England. In January of the next year, war broke out between them. But before notice of the outbreak of hostilities reached Manila, a squadron of three English ships, commanded by Admiral Samuel Cornish and carrying 3 or 4 thousand fighting troops on board, entered Manila Bay. Archbishop Manuel Antonio Rojo was interim governor of Manila, a person hardly capable of facing the difficult problems which the presence of the English squadron was going to oc casion the city. Hence, it is understandable why during the blockade, there was scarcely any unit of command, and every where there was consternation. The fort was ill prepared to face the invador. As a contemporary document says, “. .. to conquer it, [the English] did not need to employ the military tactics for a difficult encounter, nor risk their lives in bloody combat, nor swing the sword against an enemy equally strong; for they came knowing that the walls had been built to defend the city only against the assaults of the Chinese, and that there was no military commander, no trained army, nor were there more arms than what sufficed to terrify [people] by their boom, and there was no defense...”1 1 Andnimo, Respuesta conveniente al papel titulado “Justa satis faction de los jefes britanicos a las quejas de los espanoles de Manila,” MSS in AUST, “Becerros,” tomo 14, Documento 3, fol. lv. PHILIPPINE CHURCH HISTORY 231 During the siege, the religious orders and the secular clergy cooperated in various ways to defend Manila. In the first place, acts of reparation were performed in the churches and many more confessions were heard. The convents were places of refuge for many fugitives and the troops which the mis sionaries had raised in the provinces to defend the capital. Like wise, the religious orders undertook to distribute food to the troops from the provinces, to the needy, and to provide meat and rice for the royal warehouse, for which they brought to Manila as much rice and meat as they could from their ha ciendas. Some religious, like the Augustinians and the Dominicans, headed the auxiliary troops which they had recruited from the provinces for the defense of the part of the city fronting the sea. Others took hold of the shovel and the hoe to dig trenches and raise parapets. Some volunteered to man the canons, and most, more in keeping with their priestly character, gave moral support and cheer to the soldiers. In some sallies, the reli gious went out as leaders of the native fighters. In the defense of the foundry, the professor of mathematics in the Colegio de San Jose, distinguished himself by retrieving his artillery in time, with the support of the religious and thanks to the courage of the natives. On 5 October, the English succeeded in entering the city, thanks partly to the treachery of the Swiss Fallet,-’ and partly to the negligence and apathy of the Spanish defenders. Manila then went through 40 hours of horror, usual on similar occa sions: robberies, assassinations, rape. The conventos and churches were not exempt from pillaging by the soldiers. Let us describe an example of ■what happened during the assault and sack of the convento and church of Santo Domingo. Some fathers were saying mass when the British soldiers ap peared before the doors of the church demanding admission. Once inside, they killed two people, robbed the sacred vessels, broke the tabernacle door to take the ciboria, broke the glass that covered the miraculous image of our Lady of the Rosary, taking the crowns of the statues of the mother and of the son, after decapitating the former. After this, they went to the high altar where there was an image of Saint Dominic, denuding it of its vesture. They also grabbed the chalices from the hands - Respuesta conveniente etc., fol. 2v. 232 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS of some priests who at the moment were celebrating mass. En tering the sacristy, they took as many ornaments and sacred vessels they found there, breaking locks and pulling out shelves and drawers. From here, they passed to the convent where they completed the sack, leaving behind almost only the bare walls/ The San Francisco convent was saved from the general pil lage through an ingenious trick of the then guardian and, later, bishop of Nueva Caceres, Fray Antonio Luna. To save the valuables of the community and the money and precious objects deposited there by many residents of the city, he offered a banquet in honor of the British officials in the lower cloister, thus making them believe that he acknowledge vassallage to the British king. This won for him during the occupation of the city the applause and the support of the residents. But after the war. the same people who had praised him, accused him be fore the governor of turning traitor to the country, forcing him to take refuge in the mountains of Baler to avoid w'orse evils.'1 3 Huy, Juan, O.P., Relatio de perditione Manilae die ■'> mensis octobris, anno 1762, in quo gubeniabat dominus Emmanuel Antonins de Roxo et Vieyra, archiepiscopus Noeae Segoriae [sic], MSS, APSR, Seccion “HCF,” 1762. 4 Gomez Platero, Eusebio, O.F.M., Catalogo Biografico de los religiosos franciseanos, Manila, 1880, pag. 495. ••Ibid. " Fonseca, Joaquin, O.P., Historia de los PP. Dominicos en las Islas Filipinas, y en sus misiones de Japon, China, Tung-kin y Formosa, Vol. V, pags. 495. The nunneries (beaterios) did not suffer the soldiers’ ruth lessness, thanks to an order of General William Draper who posted guards at their doors. Santa Clara, in particular, received through Fray Luna’s mediation, permission for the nuns to transfer to Santa Ana, where they stayed until the end of the war, suffering no inconveniences. Besides, the conquerors dec lared the area neutral territory for their sake.3 4 5 But the col leges, especially Santa Rosa, were not saved from the ravages of the assault. During this time, while the college was still un der the administration of Mother Paula, an extraordinary event took place. A British soldier wanted to violate a student. When she resisted, he pulled out his sword to kill her. But the weapon miraculously twisted itself when he brandished it, so that the terrified Englishman threw it away and fled. The sword was still being kept in the College of Santa Rosa in 1941." PHILIPPINE CHURCH HISTORY 233 But it was with the Spanish ladies — widows, married women, unmarried girls — that the British soldiery satisfied their frivolity. In this way many of the former atoned for the scandals they had occasioned by their immodest dress. The mestizas and the native Filipino girls, with some exceptions, bahaved as their sex and religion demanded.7 7 Here is a description of an incident from a contemporary docu ment:" . and, as proof of the loyalty of the others, I shall cite what happened to an india or Spanish mestizo, very pretty, who was edu cated in the college of Santa Isabel. Admiral Cornish fell in love with her, went to visit her, made his proposition, offering her besides a dowry of 16.000 pesos. She replied. ‘If your Excellency is reconciled with the Church and gives proof of your conversion, and I am sure you are unmarried, I shall consent to your request.* He anwered, he would give it thought; but. in any case, she should cofne out and go home with him. To which she said, 'What is said, sir, I said. My faith comes first and I place my Christianity above all the riches of the world.’ He tried many times and with exquisite care, but all in vain. He finally went away while she stayed. Greatly held in honor, a respected Spanish gentleman of some means took her for his wife.” MSS. APSR, “HCF'.*' tomo 1, fol, 93v. ■*• Carta del Provincial de dominicos al Maestro General, LianaHermosa (Bataan), mayo 2 de 1763, MSS, APSR, Seccion “Documentos de Provinciales.'* tomo 1. documento 21, fols, 11v-15. !l "Not having agreed on the terms of the capitulation with the British officers on the day of the assault, they forced the Spaniards to sign others the next day, in which they obliged them to surrender the port of Cavite, all the Islands, and the sum of I million, two million to be paid immediately and the other two afterwards, but with the threat and timely condition of putting them all to the knife, if they did not fulfill these terms.” Respuesta conveniente, fols. 3v-4. Despite this, we must admit for the sake of truth, that once the capitulations were signed, by which the English pro mised to respect lives and property and promised to allow the free exercise of the Catholic religion, the English general for bade the continued commission of these excesses, and, for this reason, even ordered the execution of some Englishmen, Chinese and Sepoys. With regards to the religious living in Manila, the British made them take an oath of fidelity to the British crown, and did not permit them to leave the city limits without a passport, which they granted only with difficulty. They also wanted to oblige them to force the natives in the provinces to renounce their oath of allegiance to the Spanish crown and transfer their loyalty to Britain. But they failed. In virtue of the terms of surrender/ the Church, as her con tribution to the war, had to give a huge sum of money in order 234 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS to reach (an impossibility) the amount of P4 million demanded by the British conqueror. In order to do this, the administra tors of the obras pias of the Miter, of the Mesa de Misericordia and of the Third Orders, took from their funds the sum of P357,369. But since this did not suffice, the enemy took the wrought silver in the churches, which, when melted and weighed, was worth P71,000. On the other hand, before the fall of the city, the govern ment had sent to the provinces the public funds which amounted to hundreds of thousands and which the conqueror could not get, thanks to the ingenuity and the efforts of the Franciscan fa thers. The same fathers strove to put away in safety the subsidy which the galleon El Filipino had brought from Mexico, deposi ting it in Dupax, Nueva Vizcaya. Because of this money, Anda was able to maintain a resistance government outside Manila. Ill luck befell the galleon Santisima Trinidad which, after de parture from Acapulco, had to turn away from port, forced after a pitched battle, to'^urrender to the English. The latter got hold of a capital sum of around P2 million. As is known, the Chinese who did not enjoy the Spanish government’s friendship at this time, sided with the British, not precisely for love of them, but doubtless, out of hatred for the Spanish government which had decreed their expulsion years be fore. The churches were not free of this antipathy. Once in the streets, the Chinese robbed, sacked, desecrated and made some of the churches dumping places for filth and a spot for their abominations, not even sparing the Blessed Sacrament, as hap pened in the Quiapo church. Here they threw down in disrespect the sacred species.10 10 Informe del Provincial de dominicos a) Rey, escrito hacia enero de 1763, Manila, MSS, APSR, HCF, tomo 1, doc. 4, pp. 41v, 42. It is known that the British, in their efforts to force thendominion over the provinces surrounding Manila mainly in order to obtain food supplies which the city lacked because of Anda’s blockade, caused notable damage to the convents and parishes, especially in the provinces of Tondo, Bulacan, Laguna and Ca vite. There were few churches not destroyed by the invaders or by the government troops, or by townspeople themselves on PHILIPPINE CHURCH HISTORY 235 orders of Anda, so that, on occupation, the enemy might not transform them into fortresses. On 4 October, Don Simon de Anda y Salazar left Manila to organize resistance in the provinces. The bishops, several Span iards, the Franciscans and, especially, the Augustinians of Bulacan and Pampanga, immediately acknowledged him as governor and captain-general, despite the order of His Grace, Archbishop Manuel Antonio Rojo, who, on the fall of Manila on 5 October, had commanded the Spaniards in the provinces to accept the Bri tish government. The Dominicans in Bataan and Pangasinan followed the example of the Augustinians. In general, all the religious sided with Anda, promising him obedience, supplying him with resources and urging the people to fight for Spain, raising troops and appeasing the discontented." The religious orders had to pay a great price for opposing the invaders and supporting the flag of the mother country. The Augustinians, leaders in this attitude, suffered the sack of their convent of San Pablo twice, and eleven of their members were taken as prisoners to London by Draper. The Dominicans lost two coadjutor brothers assassinated by outlaws in their ha ciendas in Pandi (Bulacan) and Santa Cruz de Malabon (Cavite). The Recollect lay brother, Fray Agustin de San Antonio, died a hero’s death in the defense of the convento and church of Bulacan.'- The Jesuit fathers had to bear the loss of their beauti ful house of Ma.vsilo located in the present site of Caloocan City; the Dominicans lost their houses in Navotas and San Juan del Monte;11 12 13 and the Augustinians, their convento and church in Bu lacan. When the British, during a military foray against the town, occupied the church and convento badly defended by a 11 Memorial de los Procuradores de dominieos, franeiscanos, y recoletos al Gohernador, 1 de julio de 1761, MSS, APSR, HCF, Tomo 1, fol. S9. 12Zuhiga, Joaquin Martinez de, Estadismo de las Islas Filipinas, Madrid, 1897, pp. 331, 337-338. 13 “ . . we have suffered Tthe loss] of the church, and house of San Juan del Monte, which the enemy completely reduced to ashes, the fire having consumed the miraculous sacred image of Our Savior, which was venerated there and was the object of devotion of the whole region They apprehended the Vicar of that convent and took him to Manila, although they left him free the next day to go to the convent of Santo Domingo there.” (Carta del Provincial de dominieos al Maestri General, Samal, 16 de julio de 1763. MSS, APSR, "Documentos de Provinciales,” tomo 1, doc. 21, fol. 26v.) 236 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS combine of Filipinos and Spaniards, a religious joined them, who died, when the convento was taken, from a rifle shot fired by the British commanding officer, or at the hands of an infuriated Chinese mob, according to others.11 But the religious felt not so much these losses as the ca lumnies which some Spaniards spread about them during the war. Seeing that the people killed some of the latter who were in Manila, while the religious were respected and left untouched, they had no qualms in saying that the religious were in conni vance with the enemy.1' Anda’s later attitude, forgetful of the support receive from them, increased their suffering during the later years, occasioned by a memorial against them presented to the king in 1768 and the matter of diocesan visitation and royal patronage. In July 1763, an English man-of-war had already docked at the port of Manila bringing news of the signing of the peace on 10 February of this year. « * It was stipulated that Manila was to return to the Spaniards; but this was not effected at once be cause the British resolutely refused to acknowledge Anda as the legitimate governor, pretending besides that the vanquished had not yet paid the P4 million. Much later, in April 1764, after Archbishop Rojo had already died, the frigate Santa Rosa arrived with definite orders from England and Spain to hand over Manila to the Spaniards. On board ship came the new governor, Don Francisco de la Torre. Feigning sickness or really falling sick on entering the city of Manila, he paved the way to Anda’s triumphal entry into the city at the head of 2,000 people, well supplied with arms and equipment, amid the acclamations of the multitude."’ H Zuhiga, Op. cit., Vol. I. pp. 119-151. Gonzalez, Card. Ceferino. O.P., Historia de la Provincia del Santfsimo Rosario, Ahos 1738-1825, MSS, APSR, Seccion “Historia-Provincia,” tomo 11, fols. 48-49. Gonzalez, Op. cit., fol. 46v. CATHOLIC BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE OF THE PHILIPPINES OFFICERS 1972-1973 ADMINISTRATIVE COUNCIL Arhbishop Teopisto V. Alberto President Bishop Antonio Y. Fortich Vice-President Archbishop Jaime Sin Member Bishop Jose T. Sanchez Member Bishop Julio X. Labayen Member Bishop Jesus Varela Member Bishop Gerard Mongeau, OMI Member Bishop Mariano G. Gaviola Msgr. Benjamin L. Etruiste Bishop Hernando Y. Antiporda Treasurer Msgr. Florencio C. Yllana Asst. Secretary General EPISCOPAL COMMISSIONS OX DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH: This Commission is composed of all the Metropolitan ArcliOX EDI CATION & BEL 1NSTRVCTION Bishop Felix Perez Chairman Bishop Alberto van Overbeke. CICM Member Bishop Manuel Salvador Member Bishop Jose T. Sanchez. Member Bishop Arnulfo Arcilia Member OX SEMINARIES Archbishop Jaime Sin Bishop Teotimo Pacis, CM Member Bishop Ricardo Vidal Member 1. ON LAY APOSTOLATE Bishop Miguel Purugganan Chairman Bishop Carmelo Morelos Member Bishop Jose T Sanchez. Member Bishop Vicente Reves Ex-officio Member 238 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS ON SOCIAL ACTION Bishop Antonio Y. Fortich Chairman Bishop Vicente Ataviado Member Bishop Nicolas Mondejar Member Bishop Julio X. Labayen, OCD Ex-officio Member 6. ON MISSIONS Bishop Epifanio Surban Chairman Archbishop Federico Limon, SVD Member Bishop Odilo Etspueler, SVD Ex-officio Member 7 ON LIFE, DISTRIBUTION & REMUNERATION OF THE CLERGY Julio R. Cardinal Rosales Chairman Rufino J. Cardinal Santos Member Bishop Francisco Cruces Member 8. ON LITURGY Bishop William Brasseur, CICM Chairman Bishop Cipriano Urgel Member Bishop Nicolas Mondejar Member Bishop Artemio Casas Member Bishop William Duschak, SVD Member 9. FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN UNITY Bishop Cornelius de Wit, MHM Chairman Archbishop Juan C. Sison Member Msgr. Mario Baltazar, OP Member Bishop Mariano G. Gaviola Ex-officio Member 10. ON SOCIAL COMMUNICA TIONS & MASS MEDIA Bishop Jesus Sison Chairman Bishop Antonio Fortich Member Bishop Bienvenido Tudtud Member Bishop Gerard Mongeau, OMI Ex-officio Member Rev. James B. Reuter, SJ Office of Social Communica tions & Mass Media Msgr.Justino C. Ortiz National Director for Moving Pictures Rev. James B. Reuter, SJ National Director for Radio TV 11. ON EMIGRATION. IMMIGRATION & TOURISM Bishop Hernando Y. Antiporda Chairman Bishop Godofredo Pedernal Member Bishop Amado Paulino Member 12. ON THE APOSTOLATE OF THE SEA & AIR Bishop Porfirio Iligan Chairman Bishop Artemio Casas Member Bishop Amado Paulino Member 13. ON RELATIONS WITH UNBELIEVERS Bishop William Brasseur, CICM Chairman Bishop Felix Perez Member Bishop Francisco Claver, SJ Member 14. ON FAMILY LIFE Bishop Salvador Lazo Chairman Bishop Jesus Sison Member Bishop Jose T. Sanchez Member CATHOLIC BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE 239 15. ON COORDINATION WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF MAJOR RELIGIOUS SUPERIOR OF MEN ANI) WOMEN Archbishop Federico Limon, SVD Chairman Archbishop Patrick Cronin, SSC Member Bishop Francisco Claver, SJ Member 16.. ON GOVERNMENT OF THE COLLEGIO SEMINARIO FILIPINO IN ROME Rufino J. Cardinal Santos Chairman Julio R. Cardinal Rosales Member Bishop Carmelo Morelos Member Bishop Reginald Arliss, CP Member Bishop Mariano G. Gaviola Member Archbishop Antonio LI. Mabutas Member Bishop Miguel Puruganan Member 17. ON PRIESTLY VOCATIONS Bishop Ricardo Vidal Chairman Bishop Artemio Casas Member Bishop Antonio Frondosa Ex-officio Member “Bishops and, on a subordinate level, priests, by virtue of the Sacrament of Orders, which confers an anointing of the Holy Spirit and configures to Christ (cf. PO 2), become sharers in the functions of sanctifying, teaching and gov erning, and the exercise of these functions is determined more precisely by hierarchical communion (cf. LG 24-2728).” (The Synodal Document on the Ministerial Priesthood. Part I. Number 4) JOINT STATEMENT OF THE BISHOPS' CONFERENCE OF THE PHILIPPINES ON DRUG ABUSE So much hope has been placed on the youth of today. This hope found its expression in words when one year ago Pope Paul VI said to the youth of the Philippines: “Today is your hour. You are the advancing vanguard of your country. Your responsibility as intellectuals is supreme for the future of your nation. We under stand your aspiration to involve yourselves more active ly in the life of your people. We know that your dynam ism, hand in hand with your special sensitivity, has helped your elders to gain a better grasp of the prob lems that must be solved. The youth of the Philip pines, like that of all Asia, is on the march.” However, it is sad that such a hopeful picture of our youth is being dimmed by the alarming rise of drug abuse in this country. In the Greater Manila area, a recent report showed that already thousands of young people are drug addicts. And the plague is fast spreading in the provinces. What makes our young people take to drugs? Among the many reasons, we can mention the following: Ignorance. The innocent youth, not fully conscious of the pernicious effects of drugs abuse are being victimized by the greed and malice of dope pushers and syndicates, who are moti vated by filthy gain and the malicious design to destroy the moral fibre of our youth. This is aggravated by the fact that many of those who are in charge of the guidance of the youth, like parents, teachers and pasters are themselves not quite aware of the dangers of drug abuse. Idleness and Curiosity. Lack of creative activity among many of our young people can lead them to take to drugs for the thrill. CATHOLIC BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE 241 “Barkada”. This phenomenon oftentimes offers the cli mate for enticement to drug experimentations. Spirit of rebellion. For some this is a way of expressing their opposition to the “establishment”. It would seem however that all these causes are but symp toms of a. deeper malaise, namely, the disillusionment of our youth with society. The phenomenal advances achieved by science and technology in recent times have placed man on the threshold as it were of a better world. And yet, the very instru ments of progress are being used to frustrate the yearning for human liberation. There is still an undue imbalance of wealth. Justice is still compartmentalized. Violence still prevails. This feeling of discouragement is leading our youth to opt cut from what they think is the squalor of reality. Drugs pro vide them with this escape. So, what is wrong with escape through drugs? From the standpoint of Christian teaching, man is made to the image and likeness of God. Now. God is Love, and there fore Community — the Trinitarian Community: the Father pours Himself in Love to the Son, and the Son responds in total Love to the Father, this Love being the Holy Spirit. If man then is to be true to this image of God in himself, he must like wise give himself to community. He must give himself in love to his fellowmen, which he will hardly be able to do if his mind, the likeness of God in him, is weakened by drug abuse. Furthermore, the youth is a nation’s greatest wealth. They are the repository of our national hope. Sixty percent of our population is below 25. The development and future of this nation is obviously in their hands.- So, we can ill afford to allow this most vital sector of our society to be corrupted by the abuse of drugs. In the drive to stamp out drug abuse we should mobilize all sectors of society. We call upon parents to be ever more vigilant and to acquaint themselves with the perils of drugs as to better protect their chidren. We favor the inclusion of proper “drug education” in our schools. We support the move now initiated in Congress for more effective laws on narcotics and heavier penalties on drug traf fickers. 242 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS We appeal to the law-enforcing agencies, especially the Bureau of Customs and the NBI to intensify the drive against dope smugglers and pushers. On our part We pledge ourselves together with our brother priest and religious that in the proclamation of the Good News we shall lay more emphasis on those human and Christian values which will enhance in the eyes of our youth their dignity as sons of God. Finally, we invite our youth to build with us that just so ciety that they and we all are searching for. So we echo once more the questions posed by our Holy Father to the youth of our country: “Do you know in which direction to go? Have you a clear picture of the goals you are aiming at? Are you dedicated to the search for true values? Does your wish to serve your broth ers manifest itself in practical choices that prepare you to pro mote effectively the progress of the many? Are you convinced that one can only be truly free to the extent that one is res ponsible?” Given on this 28th day of January in the year of Our Lord 1972 in Baguio City. For the Catholic Bishop Conference of the Philippines: TEOPISTO V. ALBERTO, D.D. Archbishop of Caceres DIOCESAN NOTICES ARCHDIOCESE OF MANILA MANILA CLERGY AND FAITHFUL Be it known by our Beloved Clergy and Faithful in the Archdiocese of Manila that Rev. Francisco Tantoco, Jr. does not enjoy ministerial faculties in our archdiocese. lie was ordained priest al the Holy Redeemer Church, Quezon City on December 27, 1969 without the benefit of our dimissorial letter as required by Canon Law. Likewise he did not undergo the four-year course in Theology. After ordination Fr. Tantoco was asigned by his Ordinary in Borongan, but never stayed in his own diocese. Given in Manila, this 5th day of January 1972. Rufino J. Cardinal Santos, D.D. Archbishop of Manila DECREE OF ERECTION WE RUFINO J. CARDINAL SANTOS BY THE GRACE OF GOD AND Ok THE HOLY SEE ARCHBISHOP OF MANILA Since the spiritual needs of the people living in the Parishes of Sta. Teresita and San Pedro Bautista cannot be properly attended to because of the large territories of the parishes involved, with the advice of our Board of Consultors and consent of the Parish Priests concerned. We hereby establish the PARISH OF STO DOMINGO, QUEZON CITY with the following boundaries: North: Laonglaan and Maria Clara East: River South: Eulogio Rodriguez Avenue West: D. Tuason St. 244 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS The endowment of the New Church of the benefice of the Parish consists of the voluntary offerings of the faithful, in the stole fees accord ing to our diocesan statutes or Arancel and lawful custom. The New Church has the privilege to keep habitually the Blessed Sacrament under the usual conditions, to possess a baptismal font, to ad minister all sacraments and all other rights, which belong to a Parochial Church. We, therefore, urge all the faithful of the New Parish to help and support the Parochial Church with their generous offerings and by having their baptisms and marriages done in the Parish Church, and not else where Given in Manila, on this 23rd day of February, in the Year of Our Lord. 1972 Jose C. Abriol Chancellor 4" Rufino J- Cardinal Santos Archbishop DIOCESE OF PALO February 3, 1972 Rev. Fr. Manuel Gomez Tanawan, Leyte Dear Father Gomez: Because of your persistent disobedience and insubordination to your local Ordinary, inasmuch as you have insisted to remain as parish priest of Tanawan and to refuse to transfer to your new assignment, after having been duly admonished by the Apostolic Nuncio and the Bishop of Palo to comply with the agreement concluded at the Apos tolic Nunciature, on June 16, 1971, that you had to take possession of the new parish, on the 2nd of February, 1972, you are hereby suspended “a divinis”, in accordance with canons 2331 par. 1 and 2401. This suspension will immediately take effect upon your receipt. Please be guided accordingly for your own good and for the good ct the Church and the souls entrusted to our care. Francisco S. Santiago, D.P. Vicar General & Chancellor Sincerely yours in Christ, 4« Manuel S. Salvador, D.D. Bishop of Palo FERIA, FERIA, LUGTU & LA’O ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW PHILIPPINE TRUST BLDG.. PLAZA GOITI . P O BOX 1219 . MANILA JOAQUIN RAMIREZ FRANCISCO ORTIOA8, JR. RAFAEL ORTIGAS JOAQUIN RAMIREZ, JR. RAFAEL ORTIOAS, JR. Bamirez & ©riigas Ahogabns ISIS ROXAS BLVD. BUILDING. MANILA TEL. 47.9J.7? £et it le! 7 * 1.50 a copy Available at the Smo. Rosario Parish, C.S.T., k DOMINICAN TERTIARY AFIER VATICAN 11 is a response to the modern chal lenge as to whether the Third Order of St. Dominic (or of any one elso from the pre-Vatican ora. for that matter) should be abolished as out dated and obsolete Airhough thia booklet of some 80 pages is direct ed understandably to a particular group concerned. the principles which Er. Guillermo Tejon uses to defend the validity of tho Third Order today will be of general in terest to all Eor the principles ho uses are the very ones laid down hv Vatican II VKRAUT art GLASS'neon 879 BILIBID VIEJO • MANILA • TEL. 47-39-23