Category: WM Special

PREDA has been addressing poverty’s root causes in rural areas. Its Fair Trade project, headed by Mabelle Facturanan and Resty Arellano, has 26 handicraft development groups all over the country – working from Mindanao to Baguio, Kalinga and Bontoc – that help the producers develop and export their products such as bamboo baskets, wood carvings, pumice stone figures (from lahar), recycled bags (from waste materials) and sandals (from used rubber tires). Unfortunately, due to the global economic downturn, the orders have decreased in the last two years, affecting the income of producers. PREDA, which gives the producers interest-free production loans, returns a share of any earnings to them.  PREDA has been campaigning for environmental protection and organic farming. Its own organic farm is a training model for farmers and students. It is using vermiculture to change compost into natural fertilizer and producing hectares of healthy food for its children’s homes. This is led by Agriculturist José Donardo Angeles who oversees the Vocational Training Center at Bukang Liwayway in welding, carpentry, organic farming and other skills training for the boys rescued from jails. Donardo Angeles says: “Here, at Bukang Liwayway, the farmers, students and boys connect with God’s Creation and learn to care for it, to enjoy and love the beauty and importance of the environment and natural farming. We are being poisoned with too much toxic chemicals poured into the earth, rivers and oceans, so we are doing our share to change that.” PREDA Fair Trade has been exporting dried mangos for years. Sometime ago, with its partner in ethical trading, Profood – headed by Justin and Debbie Uy – it offered the best fair trade prices to farmers that challenged the unfair low price fixing cartel. As sales of dried mangos increased around the world, PREDA Fair Trade and Profood increased the volume of fresh mangos purchased and cornered the supply. They created a shortage and the price fixing cartel had to compete and pay higher prices to the farmers. Soon after, the cartel collapsed – to the benefit of all Filipino small farmers! Alex Hermoso, who is an advisor to the Fair Trade department, says: “This volume buying has helped small farmers all over the country. Like in a rising tide the boats get lifted up, so, too, are the small farmers ‘lifted up’ by the higher prices. PREDA wants to keep it like that because our export sales of dried mangos help the PREDA projects as well as the farmers.”  In partnership with local communities, especially with the Indigenous People of Zambales, PREDA has been planting thousands of mango trees every year with the help of volunteers. PREDA agriculturists Roger Hermogino and Aris Alantico travel to remote villages and cooperatives to encourage and train farmers to go organic, especially for mango production, as there is a huge market waiting to pay very high prices for organic produce. Aris Alantico says: “Filipino farmers have been made dependent on spraying chemical inducer to get a big harvest, but in

Marilyn C. was repeatedly raped by her stepfather when she was only 12. After months of abuse and threats to keep silent, Marilyn disclosed it to her mother who refused to believe her. She felt abandoned and unwanted and left her home in Mindoro, an Island south of Manila. She found a job peddling cosmetics door to door and was brought to Boracay where there are many night clubs and bars. There, she was commercially sexually exploited at 13. She was approached by an employee of one of the bars who introduced her to Bernard, a French bar operator. He gave her a job, but a few days later, he raped her. Then she was given to his friends, other foreigners, and told that it was the only way to get ahead in life. She felt trapped: “I was helpless and had no resistance left. I was like a powerless slave to them. Outside, I showed submission, but inside I was full of anger and hatred. I couldn’t escape from the island and I endured such life. I could see no other alternative for myself. I had lost my dignity and self-respect and felt I was worthless and had nothing to lose because no one respected me and I had nowhere to go.”  One day, a sex tourist liked her, hired her out and brought her to Manila. After a few days, he got tired of her. Like a child, he became frustrated and angry. Marilyn was so scared that he would hurt her, but instead he went out and bought another street girl. Marilyn was on her own. She met another pimp, a Filipino woman, who offered her a job to escort tourists. She had with her a younger girl, 9-year-old Pia. Marilyn was introduced to a Dutch man, Lennard Van E. Pia was brought to Room 406 where a German, Thomas B., got in and abused her. The two girls stayed together with the two sex tourists in Manila and the abuse continued, watched over by the pimp nicknamed Lani, who was getting the money.  At the beginning of 1997, the two sex tourists brought the girls to Boracay. They rented two cottages near the beach. Thomas set up a video camera and video taped himself sexually abusing Pia with her hands and arms tied. He had a computer business in Iserlohn, Germany, and presumably he was interested in selling or swapping child pornography over the internet. On the third day, the wife of the local mayor, alerted by the campaign about sex tourism, became suspicious of the two minors with the foreigners and called the police to investigate. They arrested Pia and Marilyn; Thomas and Lennard were allowed to go to their rooms giving them an opportunity to destroy all the incriminating evidence of their crimes by throwing the video tapes into the sea. On January 11, the National Bureau of Investigation filed charges against Thomas and Lennard and they were jailed. The girls were placed in

Once I was just walking on a street. A guy came up, thinking that I was a tourist – I was wearing casual clothes – and said: ‘Hi, Joe! Do you wanna a girl? Do you wanna girl, Joe?’ ‘No, no.’ ‘Wow! How about little girls? I have two of them here.’ There were two little 12-year olds in the doorway looking miserable. It was so shocking! I threatened the guy that I would call the police. He started laughing as if he was one. Policemen were standing on the road also laughing. They were making business selling girls to thousands of US sailors. I felt so frustrated but I could do nothing.” This iconic episode that occurred in the first years of his priestly ministry was a wake up call for Fr. Shay Cullen. The Irish Columban missionary, who after his ordination in 1969 had been assigned to the Philippines, was working as assistant priest in the Parish of St. Joseph in Olongapo, a city almost 200 kilometers northwest of Manila. There were many schools in the Parish and he started giving attention to the young people. Many had drug abuse problems and formed gangs to find emotional support and security. He realized that many of them hailed from broken families. One of the reasons was the city’s thriving sex industry. There were hundreds of sex bars and clubs that catered to American servicemen. Thousands of young women and children were being commercially sexually abused and exploited. Meanwhile, visiting the jail, the intrepid missionary was surprised to find so many young kids as young as 9/10 years old behind bars. He was asking himself what those emaciated, starving and ragged kids were doing in jail. “I felt like I wanted to get out of the Rectory, of the church compound and meet these young people. Eventually that’s what mission became for me – helping people who were in very bad circumstances,” confesses the missionary who asserts to have always been inspired by Jesus’ declaration of his mission in the Synagogue of Nazareth. Using a text from Isaiah, Jesus says that He had come to preach the Good News – to free the captives. Fr. Shay explains: “Of course, there are all sorts of captives, not only to be freed from evil, but also from oppression, poverty, humiliation, human suffering of all kinds… Even physically getting kids out of prison was a mission I took.” Such experiences became the turning point of his brief pastoral work. Because of his passion to help the youth, especially the drug addicts, he was persuaded to leave the traditional Church work. First, he joined an existing program – called DARE – to rescue victims of drug abuse and get some training; then, he founded the PREDA Social Development Foundation. He looked for a place and assistance. Alex Corpus Hermoso, a 17-year old sociology student from San Marcelino, Zambales, who had just started college in Manila was invited by Fr. Shay to join PREDA. He

It is a sad story. Four hundred years of Christian-Muslim interaction in the Philippines have often been centuries of suspicion, prejudice, and aggression. Yet, despite past hostilities, Catholics are urged by the Church today to promote a spirit of reconciliation with their Muslim neighbors. In the Virgin Mary, they can find one bridge to harmonious existence. Another story is not a sad one. It took place in Manila while I was waiting in an office before formal business hours. I found myself in a fascinating conversation with a charming young lady. Although presently employed in Manila, she originates from Jolo, southern Philippines. In the course of our friendly chat, she proudly told me how her name “Mary Ann” reflects her family which is part Muslim and part Christian. She narrated her background: “When my parents were choosing my name, it was my Muslim grandfather who insisted on ‘Mary’ because of his admiration for Mary, the mother of Jesus (‘Is) the prophet. Furthermore, he urged that my second name be ‘Ann’ in honor of Mary’s mother. Thus, while acceding to my parents’ decision that I would be baptized a Christian, he believed that my Muslim heritage would not be lost because of the name he had chosen for me.” She concluded her story: “I’m very happy that my own name symbolizes who I am – both Christian and Muslim.”   Parallels in Faith. Catholics should be delighted to discover how much Christians and Muslims have in common. Reverence for Mary is a dominant element of Muslim-Christian mutuality, a possible source of unity and a key for superseding hostilities. Listen to the words of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) on the proper attitude of Catholics toward their Muslim neighbors: “Although in the course of the centuries many quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Muslims, this most sacred Synod urges all to forget the past and to strive sincerely for mutual understanding. On behalf of all humanity, let them make common cause of safeguarding and fostering social justice, moral values, peace and freedom” (Nostra Aetate, 3). Most Christians are unaware of the reverence that Muslims have for Mary. Her name Maryam appears explicitly in the Qur’an 34 times. In 24 of these references, she is identified as the mother of Jesus (‘Is). One chapter of the Qur’an (Sura 19) is entitled Maryam and narrates events of the Annunciation and Jesus’ birth. In addition, Muslims call Mary Sitti Maryam; Sitti is a term of endearment because of her privilege to be the mother of the prophet ‘Is. Muhammad’s attitude toward Mary was always reverent and respectful. He spoke of her as a sign (ayat) for all creation and a model (mathal) for all believers. As the Qur’an notes (66:12), “she put her trust in the words of her Lord and believed in His Scriptures.” The Prophet of Mecca saw Mary as a sign and model because she truly submitted (Islam) to the will of Allah/God. This same virtue of Mary is recorded

Given the prominent role of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the life of the Catholic Church, particularly in countries like the Philippines and Mexico, one might presume that a great amount of detail on her life is available to believers. However, the known historical data about the first-century Jewish woman, Miriam of Nazareth, is actually quite limited. Upon further reflection, one should not be overly surprised; recall that the New Testament is not intended to be a historical or biographical document. Mary’s life is primarily presented as intimately intertwined with the mystery of Jesus. Thus, the Gospels are written primarily as “faith summaries,” and the dominant portrait of Mary that emerges is that of a woman of faith, open to the Spirit, eager to do God’s will, living as a faithful disciple of her Son Jesus.  Several prominent Catholic biblical scholars confirm this point. “There is very little said about Mary in the New Testament” (A. Buono). “It is startling to find that Mary is never mentioned by Paul…. Actually, the only New Testament mentions of Mary are in the four Gospels, plus one reference in the Book of Acts (just before Pentecost)…. We know not a single New Testament detail about Mary in history after Pentecost; her role is in the lifetime of Jesus. It is even more sobering to find that, in the first three Gospels, she appears only once during the public ministry [of Jesus]” (R. Brown). And so, what can validly be noted about “the historical Mary”? What follows is a composite “historical” portrait drawn from respected Catholic scholars like A. Buono, R. Brown, E. Johnson, R. Maloney, and D. Senior.   Mary’s Origins. The name “Mary” derives from Miriam, sister of Moses; it was a very common name in Jesus’ day. According to the New Testament, Mary belonged to the tribe of Judah and to the house of David (Lk. 1:32, 69; 2:4). She was probably born in Nazareth, a small Galilean town, during the reign of Herod the Great. Nazareth was of little importance for most Jews: “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” (Jn. 1:46). Nazareth is not mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures or in the Talmud. The fullest treatment of Mary is found in the second-century Protoevangelium of James. This apocryphal work, judged to be heretical in the sixth century, heavily influenced early Christian teaching and literature. It is in this source that Mary’s parents are named Joachim and Anna. This same dubious source led to the growth of many legends about Mary’s early years (e.g. that the young Mary was presented in the Temple by her parents).   Daily Life. Mary spoke Aramaic, probably with a Galilean accent (cf. Mt. 26:73). She would have had contact with a multilingual world, hearing Latin from the Roman soldiers, Greek as the language of commerce, and Hebrew as the Torah was read in the synagogue. Mary belonged to the peasant class, which earned a simple living from agriculture or small commercial efforts; some had

Christmas, that singular feast of great joy, celebrates the revelation of God’s love. In Jesus, born of Mary, we recognize God’s tender compassion, not from a distance, but intimately united with all humanity. We are convinced, in the words of the Christmas liturgy, that because God has become one with humanity, we humans can once again become one with God. Indeed, no human eye could ever see the glory of God; yet, now He is seen as one like us, completely human, sharing our mortal nature. In Jesus, the invisible love of God is made visible – all done for us and for our salvation. What mystery! What beauty! What depths of love! And yet, Christmas is not the beginning of God’s great “love story” with humanity. Christmas (December 25) looks to a pivotal event that happened nine months earlier: the Annunciation (March 25). Without the marvelous fiat or “yes” of Mary to the invitation of the Angel Gabriel, there would be no Christmas to celebrate. During the Annunciation, Mary expresses her amazement, her fears, and her questions. The angel assures her: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you … nothing is impossible to God.” Mary responds: “Here am I, the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word” (Lk. 1:35-38).  The awareness of the centrality of the Annunciation in God’s plan of salvation struck this author most forcefully during a two-week pilgrimage to the Holy Land some years ago. Of all the many holy sites we visited during our prayer-filled journey, I had the most profound spiritual experience in Nazareth at the Basilica of the Annunciation. It was an experience of deep joy and gratitude. I praised God for Mary’s faith, her generosity, her fiat, and her openness to the Holy Spirit. A question kept returning, begging for an answer: What if Mary did not give her unconditional “yes” to God’s loving design of salvation? Oh, how radically different life would have been! Humanity would still be living in darkness and sin! What good would life have been without Mary’s self-gift to the Spirit and the consequent birth of Christ?  Scripture provides a wide variety of optics through which Christians can view the person of Mary. She may be validly understood as the Faithful Disciple of her Son Jesus, the Mother of the Redeemer, Virgin and Mother, Daughter of Zion, the New Eve, a Sign of Hope for God’s Pilgrim People. One could compose a lengthy reflection on each of these attributes of Mary. However, this particular presentation and meditation centers on viewing Mary as the docile instrument of the Holy Spirit. We will journey with Mary in the key events of her life where her active surrender to the Holy Spirit guides her faith and her actions.   Mary and the Spirit in God’s Design. Pope John Paul II (1920-2005), a deeply Marian pontiff, had profound insights into the person of Mary. He spoke often of her role in the life of the

The Director of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office, Manuel ‘Manoling’ Morató, in a letter to The Inquirer’s editor some time ago, classified you as “one of the most politicized persons in this country which is something so ugly for a nun to be.” He even considered you a persona non grata. What stirred such reaction?  I wrote to the paper’s editor while I was in Tanzania, East Africa (September 26, 2009), complaining about the Court of Appeals’ decision denying whistleblower Rodolfo “Jun” Lozada’s petition for the writ of amparo. I stated that the decision was unfair, because he had been kidnapped, but the Court was so politically compromised that it was “incapable of rendering justice to our people.” I was surprised to read Morató’s letter to the paper on October 15, 2008. I don’t know him and I don’t know what he had to do with the issue. He stated that I was causing “trouble in this country and added so much noise to the destabilization of our nation.” He called me “a rabble-rouser, a shame to the faithful who live up to the Christian values as taught us by Christ,” and suggested that I should stay in Tanzania for good and leave them alone. Concluding, he said that I was “far away from being beatified much less canonized.” (I am not dead yet so no reason to be beatified!) That was the occasion for the critique. The reason was my advocacy for our sanctuary program and the inclusion in it of Jun Lozada.    Did you get other “compliments” of this kind? I heard that even some bishops say that I am “too much!”   Did they mean “too political?” Perhaps. Not always do I agree with the bishops. For instance, recently I disputed the views of [Manila Archbishop Gaudencio] Cardinal Rosales when he said that the warnings of another people power uprising in case of widespread vote fraud were “crazy [and] irresponsible.” I said: “With due respect, I disagree vehemently. It’s more irresponsible if one does nothing, when one’s rights have been violated” I do believe in people power. The Cardinal said there’s the law… What law was he referring to? The law that arrested the Morong 43, the law that freed the Ampatuans, the law that denied the writ of amparo to Jun Lozada, the law that is used by the powerful for their own good? I quoted the former Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban when he said that, at that moment, all the institutions of government were severely compromised. So, one cannot go to them for justice, to redress grievances.   An old Church’s tradition What consists your sanctuary program?  To provide sanctuary is an old tradition of the Church since the Middle Ages. Sacred places were places of asylum where fugitives were immune from arrest. For us in the Association of Major Religious Superiors (AMRSP), it is different: we provide refuge to people whose lives are in danger because they have done something honest or

If we look back over the past election campaign, we may wonder how the many parties and politicians will match up in the future. For example, in the 2016 presidential race, who will be friends and who will be opponents? In politics, alliances have a very brief life – sometimes they don’t even last out the first campaign. There are few permanent friends, only issues and egos. Two bodies, however, in this political world are destined to stay together: the Church and the poor.  The poor echo the Gospel’s demands for life’s basic goods, namely, food, water, housing and security, which the Church has insisted upon over the centuries. The poor have these basic issues, which reflect the hopes of the majority of the country’s people, but they lack the means to get their candidates elected. The Church, on the other hand, is able to influence elections in a profound way. In a study made by the Ateneo de Manila, (The Vote of the Poor, 2005), it was found that, in rural areas especially, families and the Church (including other Churches and mosques) have the most influence on people’s choices of candidate, even more than that of the media. The Church, however, appears to many to have only one strongly held issue or demand, that is, opposition to the RH Bill. At the risk of oversimplifying matters, it can be said the Church has influence, but lacks issues.    Church and Poor Need Each Other. The Church (limited here to bishops, priests and religious) and the poor are a political tandem made in heaven. The poor have the numbers and primordial issues; the Church has the electoral influence. They are, however, more than political partners, who work together for political reasons. The Philippine Church decided, at its Second Plenary Synod in 1991, that it must become the Church of the poor if it is to fulfill God’s plans for it. On the other hand, the poor need the Church’s continuing support to survive economically and socially in an unequal society. There is nowhere else where the poor receive consistently a warm welcome. The poor need the Church for more than material matters, however. They need the spiritual strength of the Church: its understanding of mercy, love, forgiveness, self-denial, acceptance of others, solidarity, justice and peace. All the virtues that are needed to turn “hearts of stone” into “hearts of flesh,” as Pope Benedict XVI tells us in Caritas in Veritate, No. 79). The Poor, Reform and the Church. The likely success of a Church-poor political coalition is hinted at in a stickem that appeared during the campaign: “In democracies, reform comes from the ballots of the poor.” The stickem summarizes the experience of many countries that have seen their poor move from squalor to a decent level of comfort, once they have learned to vote in a disciplined, organized way. When the poor vote wisely and as one, the reform begins. Then there are programs of social security, protection of

On May 21 of this year, Pope Benedict XVI met the participants of the 24th Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Council for the Laity who were meeting in Rome to discuss on the theme: “Witnesses to Christ in the political community.” In his talk, he told them, among other things: “It is up to the lay faithful to show – in their personal and family life, in social, cultural and political life – that faith enables them to read reality in a new and profound way, and to transform it… It is also the duty of the laity to participate actively in political life, in a manner coherent with the teaching of the Church, bringing their well-founded reasoning and great ideals into the democratic debate, and into the search for a broad consensus among everyone who cares about the defense of life and freedom, the protection of truth and the good of the family, solidarity with the needy, and the vital search for the common good.” He also said that although the “technical formation of politicians” is not part of the Church’s mission, she reserves the right to “pass moral judgment in those matters which regard public order when the fundamental rights of the person or the salvation of souls require it.” What the Holy Father said remains a great challenge to the Philippine Church. We are challenged to have lay people who actively participate in political life. In a way, this is already being done. In the last elections of May 10, we have seen the fielding of church volunteers in the hundreds of thousands all over the country. They contributed in no small degree to the “success” of the elections in spite of the poor organization and limitations of the COMELEC. Church volunteers directed the people to their precincts, helped monitor the conduct of the elections, and even assisted and taught the members of the Board of Election Inspectors (BEIs) their duties. Without the Church volunteers we can just imagine the chaos that could have resulted. Our lay people are good in non-partisan election duties during elections. This is already good, but not yet enough. We also need non-partisan volunteers to monitor the performance of the elected officials after the elections. In general, this is not yet being done. Many fora were organized before elections during which the candidates were asked what their programs would be. Many covenant signings were inked with different groups to ensure that the candidates would keep their election promises to the people. But, after the elections, nobody follows these up. So the elected candidates are not exacted the accountabilities that they have promised. We need lay people who are as aggressive in asking for accountabilities as they were in monitoring the elections.   Poverty and manipulation Christians, as good citizens, are called not only for non-partisan duties though. Partisan politics is also a call of the faith. We need good Christians who bear witness to Christ as good politicians. There are already attempts

I remember being profoundly disturbed by Fr. Eddie T. Panlilio’s announcement of his candidacy for the governorship of Pampanga in the election of 2007. I had known this soft-spoken man as the parish priest of my hometown, and as the founding director of the Archdiocese of Pampanga’s Social Action Center (SACOP). He is not a politician. A priest is the last person I would push into the public square.  But I must concede that drafting a priest to challenge deeply entrenched traditional politicians was a brilliant political move. “Among Ed,” as he is fondly called, was the perfect alternative gubernatorial candidate in a province that had seen the excesses of corruption in public office and the immense clout of organized gambling in the political system. The reasons that made him an attractive political option, however, were the same ones that provoked my misgivings about the wisdom of this move. The principal drawback was his being a priest – a moral agent of established religion who was seeking to take on the functions of a political subject in the secular world of politics. What is at stake here is something that is central to what the philosopher Richard Rorty regarded as the goal of a liberal culture – that human beings be freed from their unexamined dependence on traditional figures of authority and strength, so that they may begin to chart their own lives. Rorty was not opposed to people having religious beliefs. Indeed he saw this as a right that is as important as the right “to write poems or paint pictures that nobody else can make any sense out of.” But he was very emphatic that, in a “democratic and pluralist society, our religion is our own business – something we need not even discuss with others, much less try to justify to them, unless we feel like doing so. Such a society tries to leave as much free space as possible for individuals to develop their own sense of who they are and what their lives are for, asking only that they obey Mill’s precept and extend to others the tolerance they themselves enjoy” (Philosophy as Cultural Politics, p. 25).   To avoid partisan roles I believe that Rorty’s insistence on keeping religion out of the public square was very much shaped by his horror over the fanatical violence that Islamic fundamentalism has unleashed over the years, as well as by the equally ferocious fanaticism of the Christian fundamentalists who once surrounded US President George W. Bush. But its philosophical value goes beyond the concern about rekindling religious wars. Rorty was aware that one cannot presume that there is a single universally valid way of resolving the issues thrown up by religion’s presence in the public square. “Issues like these,” he said, “require different resolutions in different countries and different centuries. It would be absurd to suggest that there are universally valid norms that might be invoked to settle them. But I would urge that debate over such