I have written on this before and it gives no pleasure to write again on this. But another son, brother, person, human being has been killed by a fraternity: Chris Mendez by Sigma Rho. Never mind that there is no official acknowledgement by Sigma Rho; its silence on this matter speaks more eloquently than any official confession.
I have been reading many of my students' blogs on this latest episode of fraternity violence, this time inflicted on one it would call their own, and almost all have asked the question, "why?" There is no answer there that can be found other than to say that it is perhaps a mindless adherence to an outdated tradition of compelling loyalty by means of blood-letting and blood sharing.
Yet, we live in times that we would consider civilized, how then explain the almost morbid fascination of fraternities (and I generalize here to include ALL Fraternities; it is their burden to prove me wrong) with exacting loyalty and commitment by means of physical violence?
I am not a frat man and I am not a barbarian, they are the barbarians, for how else explain the ritualistic blood-letting that must accompany every entry into these greek-lettered societies?
I have never considered physical violence to be a measure of anything other than the shallowness of a person's capacity to reason and the absence of a person's capacity to inspire. Commitment and true brotherhood may be exacted by reason and inspiration, blind loyalty by beatings. That is the difference between humans and horses; you can inspire a person to follow you into the gates of hell but you will have to beat that into a horse.
Yet, these fraternities pride themselves to be the best that there is to offer; Sigma Rho, in its posters extolling alumni (some of whom have publicly distanced themselves from the violence but without resigning), call themselves "gentlemen warriors." If you truly are the best, gentlemen, you do not need to beat commitment into your neophytes; if the gospel you preach is truly the good news, then the ultimate act of hate has no place in it.
I am not a frat man but I am part of a brotherhood--a brotherhood that preaches the good news that, yes, everyone is entitled to respect. My brothers are committed to me and I, to them, not because we were beaten up but because we share the same principles, the same way of living, the same faith and the same experience of love and being loved. So, even if I am not a frat man, I do know of whence I speak when I speak of being a brother to another.
In Genesis 4:9, ". . .the Lord said to Cain, 'Where is Abel, your brother?' He said, 'I do not know, am I my brother's keeper?'"
Cris Mendez was hazed so that he could be a brother; ultimately, his blood was spilled by those who would call him, yet not keep him, as brother. The greater tragedy is not that he was killed in the name of brotherhood, but that the brotherhood to which he aspired would even wash his blood off their hands by simply asking, "am I (Cris's) keeper?"
To those who killed Cris Mendez, let me say this:
Yes, you are your brother's keeper and his blood is on your hands--not only by you who lifted your hand against him to beat him, to maul him, to spill his blood, but also by you who would stand mute and lift no voice of condemnation for those among your brothers who killed Cris.
Yes, you are your brother's keeper and, if you would cherish his memory, you would not stand mute in the face of the grief and bereavement of his family and his friends but rather break your silence to let the truth out.
Yes, you are your brother's keeper for, ultimately, as Donne puts it "any man's death diminishes me because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee."
September 10, 2007
Ang mamatay nang dahil sa 'yo, ang pinatay nang dahil sa wala
Note to the faint of heart: I am angry; no, I am enraged. The words that will follow are angry words. If you are looking for nice, peaceful and sweet-sounding words, skip this one. But if you are as enraged as I am, read on and participate.
Note to those who will take the other side: I welcome constructive debate from people who are willing to put their names where their thoughts are. For masked thugs trolling the blogs of those who oppose you, you have no place in this debate. Go, make yourself scarce; if possible, for all time.
Ang mamatay nang dahil sa 'yo (to die for you) -- the last line from the Lupang Hinirang, our national anthem, speaks of the nobility of a death that is achieved for a purpose bigger than one's self and one's life. It is--or should be--the ultimate goal of any person who loves--be it country, principle, faith, fellowmen or God.
Certainly not for a fraternity. And most certainly, not for a fraternity that holds itself out to be gentlemen warriors but does not have the integrity to own up to killing one of they would claim as their own nor the courage to name the ones responsible.
Ang pinatay nang dahil sa wala (to be killed for nothing) best describes Cris Mendez and other nameless, faceless victims of this system of barbarism that is the hallmark of fraternity initiations. Indeed, it is as if Cris Mendez's death was for nothing as even the very fraternity he aspired to join would not even come forward to offer a mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
There is a rule in Evidence that speaks of Character--which is who or what you are, when no one is looking. It is very easy to look noble when you are being watched; it is very easy to look dignified when you are on a stage. But when you can exercise that nobility and possess that dignity even when no one's watching, that is character.
To those who killed Cris Mendez, no one was watching as you beat him to a pulp; no one was watching as you reduced a life to nothing but a carcass; no one was watching when you inflicted blow upon blow in the name of a "brotherhood" that deserves no glory other than that which is associated with that other organization that practices omerta.
There is no nobility in beating up someone who cannot fight back, there is only cowardice. A warrior with honor never raises his fist or his sword against a defenseless foe, only a thug does. Sigma Rhoan Juan Ponce Enrile described you best: not gentlemen warriors but-a bunch of "thugs" with no character, with no honor, and as the Romulans would say, with no name.
Until the day when you surrender those among you who killed Cris Mendez, until the day when your current leaders have the honor, the character, the courage and, if you will pardon the sexist term, the balls to fall on your sword and come forward to be held accountable, you do not exist, in my contemplation.
And for those in law school, you had better pray that you never enroll in any of my classes, ever--and that includes the OLA program, which is mandatory for a UP degree--because I cannot give a grade to someone who does not exist.
And for the alumni of this collection of thugs that killed Cris Mendez, stop basking in romanticized glory and do the right thing--withdraw ALL support from these thugs and let the law take its course.
Note to those who will take the other side: I welcome constructive debate from people who are willing to put their names where their thoughts are. For masked thugs trolling the blogs of those who oppose you, you have no place in this debate. Go, make yourself scarce; if possible, for all time.
Ang mamatay nang dahil sa 'yo (to die for you) -- the last line from the Lupang Hinirang, our national anthem, speaks of the nobility of a death that is achieved for a purpose bigger than one's self and one's life. It is--or should be--the ultimate goal of any person who loves--be it country, principle, faith, fellowmen or God.
Certainly not for a fraternity. And most certainly, not for a fraternity that holds itself out to be gentlemen warriors but does not have the integrity to own up to killing one of they would claim as their own nor the courage to name the ones responsible.
Ang pinatay nang dahil sa wala (to be killed for nothing) best describes Cris Mendez and other nameless, faceless victims of this system of barbarism that is the hallmark of fraternity initiations. Indeed, it is as if Cris Mendez's death was for nothing as even the very fraternity he aspired to join would not even come forward to offer a mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
There is a rule in Evidence that speaks of Character--which is who or what you are, when no one is looking. It is very easy to look noble when you are being watched; it is very easy to look dignified when you are on a stage. But when you can exercise that nobility and possess that dignity even when no one's watching, that is character.
To those who killed Cris Mendez, no one was watching as you beat him to a pulp; no one was watching as you reduced a life to nothing but a carcass; no one was watching when you inflicted blow upon blow in the name of a "brotherhood" that deserves no glory other than that which is associated with that other organization that practices omerta.
There is no nobility in beating up someone who cannot fight back, there is only cowardice. A warrior with honor never raises his fist or his sword against a defenseless foe, only a thug does. Sigma Rhoan Juan Ponce Enrile described you best: not gentlemen warriors but-a bunch of "thugs" with no character, with no honor, and as the Romulans would say, with no name.
Until the day when you surrender those among you who killed Cris Mendez, until the day when your current leaders have the honor, the character, the courage and, if you will pardon the sexist term, the balls to fall on your sword and come forward to be held accountable, you do not exist, in my contemplation.
And for those in law school, you had better pray that you never enroll in any of my classes, ever--and that includes the OLA program, which is mandatory for a UP degree--because I cannot give a grade to someone who does not exist.
And for the alumni of this collection of thugs that killed Cris Mendez, stop basking in romanticized glory and do the right thing--withdraw ALL support from these thugs and let the law take its course.
August 10, 2007
From the greatest book of all time ---
When you've given all that you feel you're capable of giving and you feel it's still not enough or not appreciated enough or the times you feel you're at the end of your rope and you need that extra push to put one foot in front of the other (and no amount of Red Bull or extra Joss can help), these lines from the greatest Book of all time help a great deal.
1 Timothy 6:11-16 (ESV)
"(11) But as for you, O man of God, flee these things. Pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. (12) Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called and about which you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. (13) I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, (14) to keep the commandment unstained and free from reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, (15) which he will display at the proper time--he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, (16) who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen."
And when the words of the world get you down, these verses from Psalm 56 (ESV) lift you up:
"(3) When I am afraid, I put my trust in you.
(4) In God, whose word I praise, in God I trust; I shall not be afraid.
What can flesh do to me?
(5) All day long they injure my cause; all their thoughts are against me
for evil.
(6) They stir up strife, they lurk; they watch my steps, as they have waited for my life. . .
(8) You have kept count of my tossings; put my tears in your bottle.
Are they not in your book?
(9) Then my enemies will turn back in the day when I call.
This I know, that God is for me.
(10) In God, whose word I praise, in the Lord, whose word I praise,
(11) in God I trust, I shall not be afraid.
What can man do to me?"
Indeed. What can man do to me?
Lord, thank you for the way you have kept me strong in the face of many things that would cause me weakness; for the way you have reminded me to just cling to Your Word, Your promise, Your truth. Thank You for the way you have kept my foot from slipping and made sure my steps (Ps. 37). Most of all, for the way you have shown your amazing love for me in the most concrete of ways.
1 Timothy 6:11-16 (ESV)
"(11) But as for you, O man of God, flee these things. Pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. (12) Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called and about which you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. (13) I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, (14) to keep the commandment unstained and free from reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, (15) which he will display at the proper time--he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, (16) who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen."
And when the words of the world get you down, these verses from Psalm 56 (ESV) lift you up:
"(3) When I am afraid, I put my trust in you.
(4) In God, whose word I praise, in God I trust; I shall not be afraid.
What can flesh do to me?
(5) All day long they injure my cause; all their thoughts are against me
for evil.
(6) They stir up strife, they lurk; they watch my steps, as they have waited for my life. . .
(8) You have kept count of my tossings; put my tears in your bottle.
Are they not in your book?
(9) Then my enemies will turn back in the day when I call.
This I know, that God is for me.
(10) In God, whose word I praise, in the Lord, whose word I praise,
(11) in God I trust, I shall not be afraid.
What can man do to me?"
Indeed. What can man do to me?
Lord, thank you for the way you have kept me strong in the face of many things that would cause me weakness; for the way you have reminded me to just cling to Your Word, Your promise, Your truth. Thank You for the way you have kept my foot from slipping and made sure my steps (Ps. 37). Most of all, for the way you have shown your amazing love for me in the most concrete of ways.
July 24, 2007
Pottermania
HP AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: ENDING WELL.
After six books and practically allowing Harry Potter to grow up before readers' eyes, it almost became anti-climactic that the books would end; of course, everyone knew, from the start, that there would only be 7 books but knowing it and realizing that you were holding the last book in your hands were two different things altogether.
JK Rowling has grown immensely as a writer; the first three books were superior children's books but the fifth book (Phoenix) and sixth book (half-blood prince) were superior exercises in whetting people's appetites for the climax. And, the seventh book (Hallows) has not disappointed.
Off the bat, there is no quidditch--hooray for that! Off the bat also, as the blurbs have already announced, there is death all around--this won't be a spoiler for those who haven't read the book yet but I must say that Rowling handles the deaths (yes, several) very, very well indeed.
Rowling demonstrates a deft touch at tying up all the loose ends she purposedly put out in the fourth (goblet of fire), fifth and sixth books even as she dredges up our memories of the first three (sorcerer's stone, chamber of secrets, prisoner of azkaban) with characters and images from all the six books. At times, the connections are seamless, in others, however, there is a stretch;however, she may be forgiven that as there is a large backlog of memories to account for.
What Rowling does not do, and this she must be commended for, is to write the last book as if she were writing it for the inevitable screen adaptation. Unlike other franchise writers who, after having their books adapted for film, write with the lead actors in mind,. Rowling sticks to what she knows--writing about this boy's life;and bollocks to the film. It would have been easy in the final book to write cinematically, especially during the obligatory final fight scene (imagine Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort and Daniel Radcliffe as HP duelling in a large hall with hundreds of onlookers, with all the lush visuals that cgi can conjure up and you can appreciate the restraint that Rowling has put into the seventh book.); instead, what we have is a book written as a feast of the printed word.
The narrative is fueled and moved by the words, not by fancy images. And the pace is quick; while the chapters are moderately long, it is not fanciful to say that as you end one, you lose the struggle to resist continuing another. I am a fast reader and I consumed the seventh book in one hour and a half, the first time, and a more sedately 3 hours the second time; all in a span of one day and a half.
Finally, Rowling goes all out--all the characters are fully developed and they are all there (even Viktor Krum, in a pivotal non-quidditch role)--Luna Lovegood, Neville Longbottom, all the Weasleys, the Order of the Phoenix and of course, the Malfoys and even the house elves. There are kissing scenes (!), and now fully-developed love angles. It is the last book after all and it is fitting that the saga of The Boy who lived is given a good ending. And, it is a good ending.
Harry is in every chapter, except one; I liked all the chapters, except one--even the obligatory wrapping up chapter (reading the book, I forget that it is supposed to be for children, so storylines need to be wrapped up and explained.) There are many surprises, very few disappointments and a lot of satisfaction at the way Rowling brings down the curtains on this boy's life.
All in all, a very good read and certainly worth the wait. The movie should be fascinating. But, until the movie, bravo, bravo!
NB. And just in case, Rowling leaves room for more. . . in the future. Read the book and you'll understand why.
HP AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX: DARK HARRY, NOT FOR THOSE WHO LIKE HIM LIGHT AND FLUFFY
Those who know me well will know me well enough to know that I would love Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix for one reason: it is dark. And yes, I did love HP and the Order of the Phoenix for that reason.
No longer is the franchise a kids' franchise, it has now taken on an identity all its own by simply taking on the dark hues that match Harry's descent into Voldemort's clutches.
Those who are looking for the bright and cheery hues of all the previous Harrys (before Azkaban, which I loved also because of its dark and grim tone) will be disappointed. There are no cutesy scenes, there are no magic scenes for the sake of showing them and, best of all, there is NO QUIDDITCH! For this last reason alone, the movie soars!
From the start, you know it is NOT the book that was adapted for the screen but simply the plot and some situations and that is why the movie works. JK Rowling has given us a rich vein to tap into but she writes like a children's book writer. This movie is not a children's movie and so, no JK Rowling scenes, please.
And the movie does not disappoint. Harry is grouchy and moody the entire time and Radcliffe captures the growing despair Harry feels at being left out, being kept in the dark and being uncertain; the fight scenes are great and are given just the right amount of exposure; the scenes showing the DA in training are great too. Dolores Umbridge is perfect--the quintessential schoolmarm who insists on the book and will not hesitate to throw it at you, literally.
My only complaint is that there is very little development given to the reason for the Order of the Phoenix and very little development given to the plot line involving Snape's history with James Potter,who turns out to be a creep and a bully along the same lines as Draco Malfoy. A minor complaint is that there is very little time given to a now very beautiful Emma Watson as Hermione and very little development of the chemistry between Hermione and Ron (except for one scene involving the giant which is sublty and very deftly handled).
The movie ends without a pat and happy ending, but just the right amount of suspense to keep us whetted for HP and the Half-Blood Prince.
It is a dark Harry Potter we get and I love it. Definitely notfor those who like him light and fluffy.
After six books and practically allowing Harry Potter to grow up before readers' eyes, it almost became anti-climactic that the books would end; of course, everyone knew, from the start, that there would only be 7 books but knowing it and realizing that you were holding the last book in your hands were two different things altogether.
JK Rowling has grown immensely as a writer; the first three books were superior children's books but the fifth book (Phoenix) and sixth book (half-blood prince) were superior exercises in whetting people's appetites for the climax. And, the seventh book (Hallows) has not disappointed.
Off the bat, there is no quidditch--hooray for that! Off the bat also, as the blurbs have already announced, there is death all around--this won't be a spoiler for those who haven't read the book yet but I must say that Rowling handles the deaths (yes, several) very, very well indeed.
Rowling demonstrates a deft touch at tying up all the loose ends she purposedly put out in the fourth (goblet of fire), fifth and sixth books even as she dredges up our memories of the first three (sorcerer's stone, chamber of secrets, prisoner of azkaban) with characters and images from all the six books. At times, the connections are seamless, in others, however, there is a stretch;however, she may be forgiven that as there is a large backlog of memories to account for.
What Rowling does not do, and this she must be commended for, is to write the last book as if she were writing it for the inevitable screen adaptation. Unlike other franchise writers who, after having their books adapted for film, write with the lead actors in mind,. Rowling sticks to what she knows--writing about this boy's life;and bollocks to the film. It would have been easy in the final book to write cinematically, especially during the obligatory final fight scene (imagine Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort and Daniel Radcliffe as HP duelling in a large hall with hundreds of onlookers, with all the lush visuals that cgi can conjure up and you can appreciate the restraint that Rowling has put into the seventh book.); instead, what we have is a book written as a feast of the printed word.
The narrative is fueled and moved by the words, not by fancy images. And the pace is quick; while the chapters are moderately long, it is not fanciful to say that as you end one, you lose the struggle to resist continuing another. I am a fast reader and I consumed the seventh book in one hour and a half, the first time, and a more sedately 3 hours the second time; all in a span of one day and a half.
Finally, Rowling goes all out--all the characters are fully developed and they are all there (even Viktor Krum, in a pivotal non-quidditch role)--Luna Lovegood, Neville Longbottom, all the Weasleys, the Order of the Phoenix and of course, the Malfoys and even the house elves. There are kissing scenes (!), and now fully-developed love angles. It is the last book after all and it is fitting that the saga of The Boy who lived is given a good ending. And, it is a good ending.
Harry is in every chapter, except one; I liked all the chapters, except one--even the obligatory wrapping up chapter (reading the book, I forget that it is supposed to be for children, so storylines need to be wrapped up and explained.) There are many surprises, very few disappointments and a lot of satisfaction at the way Rowling brings down the curtains on this boy's life.
All in all, a very good read and certainly worth the wait. The movie should be fascinating. But, until the movie, bravo, bravo!
NB. And just in case, Rowling leaves room for more. . . in the future. Read the book and you'll understand why.
HP AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX: DARK HARRY, NOT FOR THOSE WHO LIKE HIM LIGHT AND FLUFFY
Those who know me well will know me well enough to know that I would love Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix for one reason: it is dark. And yes, I did love HP and the Order of the Phoenix for that reason.
No longer is the franchise a kids' franchise, it has now taken on an identity all its own by simply taking on the dark hues that match Harry's descent into Voldemort's clutches.
Those who are looking for the bright and cheery hues of all the previous Harrys (before Azkaban, which I loved also because of its dark and grim tone) will be disappointed. There are no cutesy scenes, there are no magic scenes for the sake of showing them and, best of all, there is NO QUIDDITCH! For this last reason alone, the movie soars!
From the start, you know it is NOT the book that was adapted for the screen but simply the plot and some situations and that is why the movie works. JK Rowling has given us a rich vein to tap into but she writes like a children's book writer. This movie is not a children's movie and so, no JK Rowling scenes, please.
And the movie does not disappoint. Harry is grouchy and moody the entire time and Radcliffe captures the growing despair Harry feels at being left out, being kept in the dark and being uncertain; the fight scenes are great and are given just the right amount of exposure; the scenes showing the DA in training are great too. Dolores Umbridge is perfect--the quintessential schoolmarm who insists on the book and will not hesitate to throw it at you, literally.
My only complaint is that there is very little development given to the reason for the Order of the Phoenix and very little development given to the plot line involving Snape's history with James Potter,who turns out to be a creep and a bully along the same lines as Draco Malfoy. A minor complaint is that there is very little time given to a now very beautiful Emma Watson as Hermione and very little development of the chemistry between Hermione and Ron (except for one scene involving the giant which is sublty and very deftly handled).
The movie ends without a pat and happy ending, but just the right amount of suspense to keep us whetted for HP and the Half-Blood Prince.
It is a dark Harry Potter we get and I love it. Definitely notfor those who like him light and fluffy.
July 07, 2007
Einstein and the Environment
Let's take it from Einstein and do our bit to stop climate change. From Greenpeace:
July 02, 2007
Luke 10:25-37 (ESV): "You go, and do likewise."
One of the many things associated with being a trial lawyer is questions. Lawyers are trained to question, to think in questions, to ask questions; in one of the classes I teach, I stress this over and over again -- that the essence of a good trial lawyer is being able to ask good questions.
In Luke 10:25-37, Jesus is confronted by a lawyer with two questions: first, "what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" and second, ". . . who is my neighbor?" These two questions are significant because they are telling as to the nature of lawyers as well as of the character of Jesus.
The passages in Luke are more commonly known as referring to "The Parable of the Good Samaritan" and frequently, the narrative is taken up starting from verse 30; for me, however, the context of what Jesus says to the lawyer is best captured and the parable is best understood if it is read starting from verse 25.
The Parable of the Good Samaritan
25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How do you read it?” 27 And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live.”
29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. 34 He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii [1] and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ 36 Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.”
In his first question, the lawyer asks about the rule--"what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" (v. 25)--and Jesus gives the answer to him in what law students know as the Socratic method, i.e., by another question--"“What is written in the Law? How do you read it?” (v. 26). Indeed, how best do you answer a lawyer's question but to ask him to interpret the law? And so, the lawyer, in his element now, answers as best he can--"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself." (v. 27) Jesus says, "You have answered correctly" but also gives him an instruction--"do this, and you will live." (v. 28)
In answering this way, Jesus does not answer the lawyer's question because he wanted to know about living forever--"eternal life"--whereas Jesus tells him that he "will live" referring to the here and now. In John 10:10 (ESV), Jesus describes his mission in the here and now--"I came that they may have life and have it abundantly." That they may have life now, not later, and life that is abundant.
This point is not lost on the lawyer because Jesus has managed to point out to him that while he understood the law perfectly, he failed to truly understand that the law meant for us to live abundantly here and now, not later.
And so, embarrassed and "desiring to justify himself" (v. 29), he asks the second question--perhaps in a desire not so much to get out of the hole he dug for himself but also to catch Jesus in a contradiction--"And who is my neighbor?" (v. 29) [The "and" at the start of the question is significant because it demonstrates the context of the question as related to the first question and the answer he himself gave. By engaging in a Socratic dialogue of sorts, Jesus actually allowed the lawyer to have a measure of self-examination as it were.)
This is where Jesus comes in with the narrative of the "Good Samaritan."
30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. 34 He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii [1] and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’"
The parable is intended only to demonstrate just how it is to truly live according to God's ways, to follow the commandments. The choice of a priest and a Levite as the first two who pass by the hapless victim on the road is deliberate and significant because these are two types of people in Jesus's time who know the rules and in fact pride themselves on living according to the rules; yet, it is a Samaritan, who knows not the rules and lives not according to them, who "had compassion." (v.33) And so the parable goes that the Samaritan "went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him." More than these, he then insisted that should the money he left not be enough, he would repay the innkeeper when he came back. (vv. 34-35)
After setting forth the parable in this way, Jesus then goes back to the lawyer with yet another question to answer the lawyer's second question--"Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" (v. 36)
And the lawyer again answered correctly, "The one who showed him mercy." (v.37) To this, Jesus then said to the lawyer--"You go, and do likewise."
Jesus's question leaves no room for doubt. The great commandment of loving God with all our being and loving our neighbors as we love ourselves is to be done by lives lived not and not simply by words spoken. Jesus asked, "which of these three . . . PROVED to be a neighbor. . .?" The Samaritan, who by no means, could be counted on as a neighbor to the jew, PROVED by his actions to be a neighbor to the jew by his compassion. And thus, Jesus sums it all up to the lawyer: "You go, and do likewise." Be like the Samaritan, who threw away the rules and simply did as his heart dictated--be compassionate, be merciful, be loving not only in words but in living.
At the heart of the Parable and the lawyer's two questions to Jesus is the nature of God's heart: it is a heart of compassion that acts with mercy. God feels for His people; many times over, Scripture tells us of God relating to His people with compassion and then acting with mercy. In Genesis 18:16-33, Abraham intercedes with God to spare the righteous in Sodom and Gomorrhah and God, feeling compassion for those righteous, acts with mercy in agreeing to spare them.
And so, Jesus's two instructions to the lawyer are equally instructions to us--"do this, and you will live" (v. 28) and "you go, and do likewise" (v. 37) Jesus tells us that in living out Godly lives, we must be neighbors to those who need us--the ones who suffer, the ones who are hurt, the ones who are in pain, the ones who are facing adversity and challenges--as well as those we feel we do not need--those we cannot understand, those we cannot relate to, those we dislike, those who "rub us the wrong way", those we conveniently label "unloveable."
Jesus tells us ". . . go and do likewise": to be like the Samaritan who threw out the conventions and the rules and did the only thing that was appropriate at the time, be a neighbor to one who needed him to be one. He did as Jesus's heart would do: show compassion and act with mercy.
May we, who wish to follow Jesus, truly follow Him as he commands us, ". . . go and do likewise" and may we, despite ourselves, do as His heart would do: show compassion and act with mercy.
June 26, 2007
"From strength to strength"
Recent post in Newsbreak on the Chief Justice's public pronouncements. Read here.
June 15, 2007
He reigns!
There are some songs that just blow you away. When I heard this one sometime back, it did.
The Newsboys, He Reigns.
The Newsboys, He Reigns.
June 11, 2007
Mad World, Redux
Two versions of the same song. The same message though.
Mad World
(Roland Orzabal)
All around me are familiar faces
Worn out places, worn out faces
Bright and early for their daily races
Going nowhere, going nowhere
And their tears are filling up their glasses
No expression, no expression
Hide my head I want to drown my sorrow
No tomorrow, no tomorrow
And I find it kind of funny
I find it kind of sad
The dreams in which I'm dying
Are the best I've ever had
I find it hard to tell you
'Cos I find it hard to take
When people run in circles
It's a very, very
Mad World
Children waiting for the day they feel good
Happy Birthday, Happy Birthday
Made to feel the way that every child should
Sit and listen, sit and listen
Went to school and I was very nervous
No one knew me, no one knew me
Hello teacher tell me what's my lesson
Look right through me, look right through me
Tears for Fears
Gary Jules
Still and all, in a mad, mad world, there is this promise that remains true: "I have come that they may have life, and have it abundantly." (John 10:10) It is a promise of hope, of restoration, of abundance and of true joy. It is a promise I take comfort in, for it comes from the only one who is important and the only who should matter.
Mad World
(Roland Orzabal)
All around me are familiar faces
Worn out places, worn out faces
Bright and early for their daily races
Going nowhere, going nowhere
And their tears are filling up their glasses
No expression, no expression
Hide my head I want to drown my sorrow
No tomorrow, no tomorrow
And I find it kind of funny
I find it kind of sad
The dreams in which I'm dying
Are the best I've ever had
I find it hard to tell you
'Cos I find it hard to take
When people run in circles
It's a very, very
Mad World
Children waiting for the day they feel good
Happy Birthday, Happy Birthday
Made to feel the way that every child should
Sit and listen, sit and listen
Went to school and I was very nervous
No one knew me, no one knew me
Hello teacher tell me what's my lesson
Look right through me, look right through me
Tears for Fears
Gary Jules
Still and all, in a mad, mad world, there is this promise that remains true: "I have come that they may have life, and have it abundantly." (John 10:10) It is a promise of hope, of restoration, of abundance and of true joy. It is a promise I take comfort in, for it comes from the only one who is important and the only who should matter.
That Hah-vahd thing
Apparently, I have friends from abroad and also from the country who read my blog and also know the subject of my previous post and also HLS. Suffice it to say, I've gotten my fair share of ribbing and also a lot of information (from my students, current and previous) about the background leading to the commencement address. Suffice it to say that, instead of res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself), it is apparently a case of "there is more than meets the eye" in this Oscar Tan thing.
I cannot reveal though what has been sent to me because a lot of them, even if true, would be defamatory. Apparently, Oscar elicits the same reaction everywhere he is--either you like him or you don't. But the hidden story behind the Harvard commencement address of 2007 is apparently more interesting and funnier than the actual fact that Oscar Tan was "selected" to give it.
I cannot reveal though what has been sent to me because a lot of them, even if true, would be defamatory. Apparently, Oscar elicits the same reaction everywhere he is--either you like him or you don't. But the hidden story behind the Harvard commencement address of 2007 is apparently more interesting and funnier than the actual fact that Oscar Tan was "selected" to give it.
June 10, 2007
Oscar at Hah-Vahd
Since the "advanced" copy of his speech came out--wonder how it got leaked and who leaked it--and started to make the rounds of the email groups, those who know him and know me have been asking me what I thought of it. It, being Oscar Tan addressing his Hah-vahd graduating class.
My honest answer: I'm happy for him and I'm happy for his family.
Oscar Tan is a gifted writer, not so gifted in social or relational skills, but definitely a gifted writer--and it shows in his speech, which is so Oscar (if you've ever read what he has written, you know what I mean).
Congratulations Oscar, sincerely.
Hopefully, those nameless peasants and farmers who bore our legal education can start being paid back though by us, with undersubsidized U.P. and overpriced Hah-Vahd degrees*, through quality legal service rendered free and willingly. A first step perhaps would be to leave the current firm you're in right now and perhaps start treading the ground trod by those nameless peasants and farmers who bore our legal education? Practicing the law from the ground up or at ground level. Now, that would be putting an overpriced Hah-Vahd degree to good use and that would be practicing law in the grand (whatever that means)** manner.
* Disclaimer: I do not have a Hah-Vahd degree; I don't intend to get one. I do have a UP degree, which I am extremely proud of and which, pound for pound, I sincerely believe, despite everything, is worth more than an overpriced Hah-Vahd degree not only for what it gave me in terms of legal education but for what it did not give me but allowed me to look for, in terms of learning about law and lawyering for the people--lawyering from the ground up.
** The U.P. College of Law quite pompously advertises in granite in its lobby that "The purpose of a Law school is not sufficiently described by saying it is to teach law and to make lawyers but it is to teach law in the grand manner and to make great lawyers." It is a quote attributed to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, of the U.S. Supreme Court (the same Justice who advocated eugenics in Buck v. Bell); it fails to sufficiently define what "grand" manner means, thereby leading to a surfeit of interpretations.
My honest answer: I'm happy for him and I'm happy for his family.
Oscar Tan is a gifted writer, not so gifted in social or relational skills, but definitely a gifted writer--and it shows in his speech, which is so Oscar (if you've ever read what he has written, you know what I mean).
Congratulations Oscar, sincerely.
Hopefully, those nameless peasants and farmers who bore our legal education can start being paid back though by us, with undersubsidized U.P. and overpriced Hah-Vahd degrees*, through quality legal service rendered free and willingly. A first step perhaps would be to leave the current firm you're in right now and perhaps start treading the ground trod by those nameless peasants and farmers who bore our legal education? Practicing the law from the ground up or at ground level. Now, that would be putting an overpriced Hah-Vahd degree to good use and that would be practicing law in the grand (whatever that means)** manner.
* Disclaimer: I do not have a Hah-Vahd degree; I don't intend to get one. I do have a UP degree, which I am extremely proud of and which, pound for pound, I sincerely believe, despite everything, is worth more than an overpriced Hah-Vahd degree not only for what it gave me in terms of legal education but for what it did not give me but allowed me to look for, in terms of learning about law and lawyering for the people--lawyering from the ground up.
** The U.P. College of Law quite pompously advertises in granite in its lobby that "The purpose of a Law school is not sufficiently described by saying it is to teach law and to make lawyers but it is to teach law in the grand manner and to make great lawyers." It is a quote attributed to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, of the U.S. Supreme Court (the same Justice who advocated eugenics in Buck v. Bell); it fails to sufficiently define what "grand" manner means, thereby leading to a surfeit of interpretations.
June 04, 2007
One of those sing-along songs
When I first heard this song, I sang along (got a lot of the lyrics wrong at first; but eventually when I did get the lyrics right, they proved to be pretty good). This is one of those feel-good songs where you don't need a context but just an excuse to sing along.
Brighter than Sunshine (Live) by Aqualung
I never understood before
I never knew what love was for
My heart was broke, my head was sore
What a feeling
Tied up in ancient history
I didn't believe in destiny
I look up you're standing next to me
What a feeling
What a feeling in my soul
Love burns brighter than sunshine
Brighter than sunshine
Let the rain fall, I don't care
I'm yours and suddenly you're mine
Suddenly you're mine
And it's brighter than sunshine
I never saw it happening
I'd given up and given in
I just couldn't take the hurt again
What a feeling
I didn't have the strength to fight
Suddenly you seemed so right
Me and you
What a feeling
What a feeling in my soul
Love burns brighter than sunshine
It's brighter than sunshine
Let the rain fall, I don't care
I'm yours and suddenly you're mine
Suddenly you're mine
It's brighter than the sun
It's brighter than the sun
It's brighter than the sun, sun, shine.
Love will remain a mystery
But give me your hand and you will see
Your heart is keeping time with me
What a feeling in my soul
Love burns brighter than sunshine
It's brighter than sunshine
Let the rain fall, I don't care
I'm yours and suddenly you're mine
Suddenly you're mine
I got a feeling in my soul ... [repeat chorus to end]
Brighter than Sunshine (Live) by Aqualung
I never understood before
I never knew what love was for
My heart was broke, my head was sore
What a feeling
Tied up in ancient history
I didn't believe in destiny
I look up you're standing next to me
What a feeling
What a feeling in my soul
Love burns brighter than sunshine
Brighter than sunshine
Let the rain fall, I don't care
I'm yours and suddenly you're mine
Suddenly you're mine
And it's brighter than sunshine
I never saw it happening
I'd given up and given in
I just couldn't take the hurt again
What a feeling
I didn't have the strength to fight
Suddenly you seemed so right
Me and you
What a feeling
What a feeling in my soul
Love burns brighter than sunshine
It's brighter than sunshine
Let the rain fall, I don't care
I'm yours and suddenly you're mine
Suddenly you're mine
It's brighter than the sun
It's brighter than the sun
It's brighter than the sun, sun, shine.
Love will remain a mystery
But give me your hand and you will see
Your heart is keeping time with me
What a feeling in my soul
Love burns brighter than sunshine
It's brighter than sunshine
Let the rain fall, I don't care
I'm yours and suddenly you're mine
Suddenly you're mine
I got a feeling in my soul ... [repeat chorus to end]
May 31, 2007
Proven wrong
I did not expect it from him but I do know how to appreciate a decent gesture and I do recognize when I've been proven wrong.
Gloria Arroyo's obvious favorite candidate/cabinet secretary/all-around gopher* Michael Defensor conceded defeat in the Senatorial elections even before the COMELEC could finish its canvassing. Now, that is a decent gesture and certainly worth another post on him (I did say in a previous post I would not waste any more time and space blogging about Mike Defensor).
Of all the candidates running, he was the last one I would have expected to concede. That makes his concession even more significant.
As far as concession speeches went, Mike's didn't set off any fire alarms; this one (see below) did.
Now, that's a great concession speech.
* (1) To be fair to the mammal of the same name. the reference is to the american slang "go pher this, go pher that" which indicates that the human "gopher" is servile and/or in servitude. (2) For those who were born and were around in the late 70's to the early 80's, you may also remember that this was the name of the purser on "The Love Boat."
As far as concession speeches went, Mike's didn't set off any fire alarms; this one (see below) did.
Now, that's a great concession speech.
* (1) To be fair to the mammal of the same name. the reference is to the american slang "go pher this, go pher that" which indicates that the human "gopher" is servile and/or in servitude. (2) For those who were born and were around in the late 70's to the early 80's, you may also remember that this was the name of the purser on "The Love Boat."
May 23, 2007
Living out of my suitcase
Was recently in Hong Kong for four days; just got in and am flying out early to Cagayan de Oro. Will try to update when I get to CDO. As they say in CDO, kapoy.
God, strength and grace, please. In Jesus's Name, Amen.
God, strength and grace, please. In Jesus's Name, Amen.
May 18, 2007
usapang lalaki 'tol
The third time around we're doing this since we launched this unique single men's retreat last year.Usapang Lalaki 'Tol.*
Men coming together to play, pray, and praise.
Sports, hanging out, spending time out from the world with other men--listening to God never sounded this good.
If you're interested (and you must, of course, be a man and single) in this mid-year retreat, leave a comment or email me at tedte(underscore)esq(at)yahoo(dot)com.
Update: Usapang Lalaki 'Tol has been RESET from June 2-3, 2007 to July 21-22, 2007, still at Maryhill, Antipolo, Rizal. Registration Fee is P650.00; it starts at 8 in the morning of Saturday, July 21, and ends at noontime of Sunday, July 22.
* literally but loosely translated as "Men's Talk"
May 17, 2007
Nellie Banaag. Leticia Ramos.
Remember those two names: Nellie Banaag. Leticia Ramos.
They died because some coward out there considers life so cheap that he/she would hire equally cowardly goons (show your face, why hide behind bonnets) to deliberately put gas in a school building and burn down the place including Banaag and Ramos.
They died because people like Abalos of COMELEC--yes, he who is famous for looking the other way and blaming everyone else but himself--have absolutely no control over these elections and those who are armed and are out there.
They died so that trapos like Loren Legarda, MIke Defensor, Joker Arroyo and everyone else in GO and TU and even some independents like Gringo and Kiko could have their fifteen minutes of fame.
Let the sacrifice of Nellie Banaag, school teacher, and Leticia Ramos, volunteer pollwatcher, not be in vain.
Remember these two names: Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos.
Remember them, pray for them and those they have left behind--that they may find some measure of peace at this time.
Remember them but let us also do right by them.
To those who ordered the murder of Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos--there are no words to describe the evil of this act that you have done, none at all. When your time comes, may there be words to describe you and how you lived your life because right now, there are none. "Cowardly" and "Evil" are too kind.
To those who murdered Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos by burning them--may God, the merciful and the just, be precisely that: merciful but just.
To those who sit silent in the face of your knowledge of who murdered Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos--may God give you the grace to do what is right, not what is easy; what is just, not what is convenient.
Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos: you will not be forgotten. The hearts of a grateful nation go out to you and your families; may God's angels sing you to your deserved rest in Heaven.
They died because some coward out there considers life so cheap that he/she would hire equally cowardly goons (show your face, why hide behind bonnets) to deliberately put gas in a school building and burn down the place including Banaag and Ramos.
They died because people like Abalos of COMELEC--yes, he who is famous for looking the other way and blaming everyone else but himself--have absolutely no control over these elections and those who are armed and are out there.
They died so that trapos like Loren Legarda, MIke Defensor, Joker Arroyo and everyone else in GO and TU and even some independents like Gringo and Kiko could have their fifteen minutes of fame.
Let the sacrifice of Nellie Banaag, school teacher, and Leticia Ramos, volunteer pollwatcher, not be in vain.
Remember these two names: Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos.
Remember them, pray for them and those they have left behind--that they may find some measure of peace at this time.
Remember them but let us also do right by them.
To those who ordered the murder of Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos--there are no words to describe the evil of this act that you have done, none at all. When your time comes, may there be words to describe you and how you lived your life because right now, there are none. "Cowardly" and "Evil" are too kind.
To those who murdered Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos by burning them--may God, the merciful and the just, be precisely that: merciful but just.
To those who sit silent in the face of your knowledge of who murdered Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos--may God give you the grace to do what is right, not what is easy; what is just, not what is convenient.
Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos: you will not be forgotten. The hearts of a grateful nation go out to you and your families; may God's angels sing you to your deserved rest in Heaven.
May 14, 2007
Why was this never a message in the Elections?
U2 and Pearl Jam asking us to "Make Poverty History!"
May 10, 2007
Desaparecidos
"They Dance Alone" (Gueca Solo)
(Sting,* 1987; from "Nothing Like the Sun")
Why are these women here, dancing on their own?
Why is there this sadness in their eyes?
Why are the soldiers here, their faces fixed like stone?
I can't see what it is that they despise.
They're dancing with the missing.
They're dancing with the dead.
They dance with the invisible ones.
Their anguish is unsaid.
They're dancing with their fathers.
They're dancing with their sons.
They're dancing with their husbands.
They dance alone; they dance alone.
It's the only form of protest they're allowed.
I've seen their silent faces scream so loud.
If they were to speak these words, they'd go missing too.
Another woman on a torture table, what else can they do?
They're dancing with the missing.
They're dancing with the dead.
They dance with the invisible ones.
Their anguish is unsaid.
They're dancing with their fathers.
They're dancing with their sons.
They're dancing with their husbands.
They dance alone; they dance alone.
One day we'll dance on their graves;
One day we'll sing our freedom.
One day we'll laugh in our joy;
And we'll dance.
One day we'll dance on their graves;
One day we'll sing our freedom.
One day we'll laugh in our joy;
And we'll dance.
Ellas danzan con los desaparecidos;
Ellas danzan con los muertos;
Ellas danzan con amores invisibles;
Ellas danzan con silenciosa angustia;
Danzan con sus padres;
Danzan con sus hijos;
Danzan con sus esposos;
Ellas danzan solas; danzan solas.
Hey Mr. Pinochet, you've sown a bitter crop.
It's foreign money that supports you;
One day the money's going to stop.
No wages for your torturers;
No budget for your guns.
Can you think of your own mother,
dancin' with her invisible son?
They're dancing with the missing.
They're dancing with the dead.
They dance with the invisible ones.
Their anguish is unsaid.
They're dancing with their fathers.
They're dancing with their sons.
They're dancing with their husbands.
They dance alone; they dance alone.
This is one of those songs that don't chart or don't become hits but nonetheless stir up in you rage, passion, compassion, empathy, and anger--all at the same time.
Sting wrote this in 1987 but he might as well have written this last week when Edith Burgos, tragically, brought to the country's attention to those who are involuntarily disappeared.
When Sting wrote and performed this in 1987, people had been disappearing long before that in many dictatorships around the world--Pinochet's Chile and Marcos's Philippines among them; now, in 2007, in this country, people are disappearing again and Jay Jay Burgos is just the most recent and perhaps the "most famous" in recent memory because he carries Joe Burgos's name. Yet, there are so many nameless and faceless desaparecidos.
To those who have made Jay Jay and many like him (like SherlynCadapan and Karen Empeno) disappear, "can you think of your own mother, dancin' with her invisible son?"
To Edith Burgos and the mothers of Sherlyn Cadapan and Karen Empeno and many others who have been made to disappear, I have no words at my disposal to give you comfort save those that I now lift up in prayer to God who is merciful and just.
---------------------------
*Sting wrote this after he saw a brief news story about women dancing in the streets of Chile torn apart by the Pinochet regime. The women were dancing in the streets with pictures of their husbands, fathers, brothers or sons pinned to their clothes or they were holding the pictures and dancing with them.
The Cause for and the Costs of Remembering
Indeed. How many times must the Burgos family pay the price so that we may be able to remain free? (picture lifted from Malaya online)
___________________________________________
I reprint a Statement I drafted for FLAG three (3) years ago on Human Rights Day, December 10, 2004; this became the guest Editorial of the late, lamented Today newspaper on December 10, 2004.
He was one among many people I admired back then because he had principles and stood by them--at the great personal prejudice. When freedom came in February 1986, he remained, to my delight and great admiration, consistent and true to his principles---unlike many of his contemporaries during that time, whom I also looked up to then, who turned out to have feet of clay (one of them is running as Senator under Gloria's party, guess who? Sorry, bad ako.)
Although not so titled, this statement could very well have been written yesterday and could have been subtitled--For Joe Burgos.
THE CAUSE FOR AND COSTS OF REMEMBERING
One day every year, we remember.
We remember years of infamy and days of darkness: when law was perverted to suit the needs of one man, his family and his minions; when freedom was but a myth and a mantra; when human rights and social justice were but beautiful words that stared us in our faces and mocked us.
But we remember also very many shining moments of courage, of inspiration, of unity, of selflessness, of martyrdom: when freedom was no longer a myth but our muse—to spur on struggles for greater freedoms; when human rights and social justice became beautiful words that allowed courageous men and women to stand fast and mock the tormentors of freedom.
One day every year on December 10, International Human Rights Day, we remember for we have cause to remember. Yet we should stop not at just remembering one day every year for the cause for remembering brings with it costs of remembering.
Remembering our freedom and how we regained it carries with it the costs of keeping that freedom:
Vigilance. Constant learning.
Commitment to the cause of freedom, social justice and human rights and all that that commitment entails. Selflessness, courage, inspiration and a love for country that transcends the love for self.
The costs of remembering.
In the face of already grinding poverty, the reality of rising prices of water, fuel, electricity, food and transportation threaten to bring new days of darkness. A bankcrupt culture of corruption and patronage politics threatens to resurrect years of infamy. Every day, the news brings little comfort: more and more of the poor become poorer and more powerless even as more and more of the rich and powerful become richer and more powerful.
On its 30th year and on the occasion of Human Rights Day 2004, the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) renews its commitment to the Filipino people even as we remember the many causes for and the costs of our freedom.
30 years ago, FLAG committed itself to the cause of human rights in thePhilippines
On its 30th year and on the occasion of Human Rights Day 2004, the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) renews its commitment to the Filipino people even as we remember the many causes for and the costs of our freedom.
30 years ago, FLAG committed itself to the cause of human rights in the
Ka Joe.
I remember. I am grateful. I will not forget.
May 09, 2007
The Emperor and The Watchdog
The problem with politicizing the Ombudsman is that everything she does is suspect.
Mercy Gutierrez has labored under the large shadow of Mike Arroyo since her appointment as Ombudsman; whatever she does--short of sending Gloria, both Jose Pidals and the original Jose Pidals's first born, to jail--she will never convince people she is the independent watchdog that the Ombudsman is supposed to be.
And it doesn't help that she allows herself to be used. . . so obviously.
The preventive suspension slapped on Jejomar Binay, Emperor of Makati (have you noticed that the decal for Makati is a stylized "B", which obviously is not a letter found in "Makati" but in "Binay" or "Bayan ni Binay"--but I digress), is just the latest example of how the Ombudsman allows herself to be used, so obviously, by Gloria.
Not even those who will not vote for Binay will dispute that the suspension coming one week before the election is politically-motivated. Moreso, because the one serving it is the Undersecretary of Interior and Local Government and the one "suspending" the suspension's effectivity is Gloria herself. At the very least, the Ombudsman, the DILG and Gloria should be reading from the same script.
No subtlety, no finesse, no class.
The tragedy of this all is that Emperor Binay (and his successors in waiting: his wife, his son and his daughter; if Teddy Boy Locsin didn't still have one term left, Binay's other daughter might have run for the 2d congressional seat) now milks his "underdog" status for all that it is worth and any real issue of corruption against Binay is now swept under the rug, so to speak--waiting to be resurrected during the next election.
Mercy Gutierrez has labored under the large shadow of Mike Arroyo since her appointment as Ombudsman; whatever she does--short of sending Gloria, both Jose Pidals and the original Jose Pidals's first born, to jail--she will never convince people she is the independent watchdog that the Ombudsman is supposed to be.
And it doesn't help that she allows herself to be used. . . so obviously.
The preventive suspension slapped on Jejomar Binay, Emperor of Makati (have you noticed that the decal for Makati is a stylized "B", which obviously is not a letter found in "Makati" but in "Binay" or "Bayan ni Binay"--but I digress), is just the latest example of how the Ombudsman allows herself to be used, so obviously, by Gloria.
Not even those who will not vote for Binay will dispute that the suspension coming one week before the election is politically-motivated. Moreso, because the one serving it is the Undersecretary of Interior and Local Government and the one "suspending" the suspension's effectivity is Gloria herself. At the very least, the Ombudsman, the DILG and Gloria should be reading from the same script.
No subtlety, no finesse, no class.
The tragedy of this all is that Emperor Binay (and his successors in waiting: his wife, his son and his daughter; if Teddy Boy Locsin didn't still have one term left, Binay's other daughter might have run for the 2d congressional seat) now milks his "underdog" status for all that it is worth and any real issue of corruption against Binay is now swept under the rug, so to speak--waiting to be resurrected during the next election.
May 03, 2007
Much ado over nothing much
Is it just me? Or did Spiderman 3 suck a bit? 2 super villains, one quasi-villain, a love triangle, identity crisis and moral dilemmas plus Venom should have been enough. . . but truth to tell, I zoned out and even. . . horrors. . . dozed off for a few minutes especially during the preachy moments. So, yes, it might just be me, but Spiderman 3 did suck, a bit.
More on this . . . later.
More on this . . . later.
Why vote?
Quite a few have been asking me who I'll be voting for on May 14. My usual response to that would be a semi-facetious "that will depend on whether I decide to vote or not." That usually elicits a reaction of disbelief that I would even consider not voting.
My reply--"that will depend on whether I decide to vote or not"--- is not a facetious one; it was not intended to be so. It is a statement borne out of experiences of being hopeful and, time and time again, rendered hopeless.
For those old enough to remember how Marcos rendered voting a farce in every sense of that word, my reply would not be so incredible; for many--including myself--who remembered the boycott movement for the Interim Batasang Pambansa elections, that was a statement that Marcos's government would never be "of the people, by the people and for the people." A refusal to vote was the strongest weapon against a craven dictatorship that desired but one thing: legitimacy; and the hope brought about by one's vote was, ironically, that which involved denying a dictatorship that vote.
For those old enough to remember how one's vote truly became a symbol of hope in the snap elections between Marcos and Cory, my reply would not be so incredible; many--including myself--remember casting a vote for Cory, not because we were great fans of hers (I was not and still am not; I voted for her though because I wished to spit in the face of the dictator) but because we truly abhorred the dictator; many still remember how our vote became a statement in itself, a collective repudiation of all that Marcos was and a collective affirmation of the hope that an anti-Marcos symbol like Cory was (never mind if she couldn't govern, we just wanted Marcos out). The hope brought about by one's vote was, fitfully, that which involved casting that one precious vote.
For those old enough to remember how Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo managed to once again reduce the hope that one ballot brought to unfathomable depths of ignominy, my reply would not be so incredible; many of us--including myself--still remember hearing the dictator Gloria--that unmistakeable voice, that unmistakable nasal tone--directing her underlings Garci, Ebdane, Esperon and so many others to steal not only an election but the hope that that election symbolized. The hope brought about by one's vote was, maliciously, snuffed out in the most cynical of ways--"but will I still win by over a million votes?"
The power of one's vote--my vote and yours--is the power to hope; it is the power to dream; the power to say to the face of a dictator, like Gloria, "Your time is up. Be gone"; it is the power to stay what may be an inevitability--the clash of arms drowning out the rule of law--and say, "not yet, not just yet."
The power of one's vote--yours and mine--is the power to chain as well as liberate; it is more than a symbol of hope, it is hope for change itself. To paraphrase Diokno, for change will come, if not now, then inevitably.
The power of one's vote--yours and mine--spells the difference between light and darkness; the light that comes out of a realization that hope is not lost, that change will not tarry much longer, that our passions, our ideals, our dreams, and yes, our hopes, will one day bear fruit in a country that is truly Filipino, truly free, and truly beautiful.
But why vote, when the very ones who stole our hopes for change in 2004 still abound in the highest places?
But why vote, when the obscenity that is "Hello Garci" comes back in full flavor and in living color to inflict himself on our popular psyche and our electorate by means of his very own full-fledged candidacy?
But why vote, when the very cynicism that eats away at hope abounds in every nuisance candidate made to run, in every Manny Pacquiao fielded, in every dynasty created?
But why vote, when even now the dogs of war have been unleashed and the staccato of gunshots rings out louder than the tolling of the bells of peace?
Why vote indeed?
Because there must be hope. Because there is hope.
The hope that one vote and one's vote--yours and mine--brings.
One's vote and one vote makes the difference between light and darkness, the difference between being in chains once more and being truly free, the difference between whining in enforced silence and raising voices in just and righteous indignation, the difference between all that is good for this beautiful country and all that will lead us further on the road to perdition.
So to those who ask who I will vote for, allow me now to answer you this way: I will vote for those who will truly symbolize the hope that my vote brings.
And so, I will not vote for any member of Team Unity--most especially not Joker Arroyo.
And so, I will not vote for most members of the Genuine Opposition--most especially not Panfilo Lacson or Loren Legarda (I am still praying about voting for Chiz Escudero).
I will most probably vote for Kiko Pangilinan simply because he has chosen to stand on his own, not allying himself with all that Team Unity and Genuine Opposition represents; my reservation is that he might finally find the voice and the passion that has eluded him in his previous term in the Senate; my hope is that he might truly stand on his own and speak only for those that matter--the people who put their trust and hopes in him.
But I will vote for the three gallant souls who have decided to fight the good fight--the three members of Ang Kapatiran: Martin Bautista, Zosimo Paredes and Adrian Sison.
Fittingly, the hope that one vote and one's vote--yours and mine--carries is borne on the shoulders of these dreamers; for only those who hope dare dream.
These three will lose the election and not become Senators but they would not have lost the respect of a grateful electorate; these three will lose the election but your vote would not have been wasted; these three will lose the election but they will have run the race extremely well.
In these times of cynicism, the hope that these three dreamers and "losers" represent is more than enough. The words of George Bernard Shaw borrowed by a famous Kennedy* and spoken by his even more famous brother** are apt indeed, "Some people see things as they are and ask 'why', I dream things that never were and ask 'why not'?"
My one vote represents the power to dream, the grace to hope, the courage to ask "why not?"
Why vote? Why vote for them? This is why--the power to dream, the grace to hope, the courage to ask "why not?"
To these three dreamers, my hopes go with you.
* Robert Francis "Bobby" Kennedy, U.S. Senator, killed June 6, 1968;
** John Fitzgerald Kennedy, U.S. President, killed November 22, 1963;
My reply--"that will depend on whether I decide to vote or not"--- is not a facetious one; it was not intended to be so. It is a statement borne out of experiences of being hopeful and, time and time again, rendered hopeless.
For those old enough to remember how Marcos rendered voting a farce in every sense of that word, my reply would not be so incredible; for many--including myself--who remembered the boycott movement for the Interim Batasang Pambansa elections, that was a statement that Marcos's government would never be "of the people, by the people and for the people." A refusal to vote was the strongest weapon against a craven dictatorship that desired but one thing: legitimacy; and the hope brought about by one's vote was, ironically, that which involved denying a dictatorship that vote.
For those old enough to remember how one's vote truly became a symbol of hope in the snap elections between Marcos and Cory, my reply would not be so incredible; many--including myself--remember casting a vote for Cory, not because we were great fans of hers (I was not and still am not; I voted for her though because I wished to spit in the face of the dictator) but because we truly abhorred the dictator; many still remember how our vote became a statement in itself, a collective repudiation of all that Marcos was and a collective affirmation of the hope that an anti-Marcos symbol like Cory was (never mind if she couldn't govern, we just wanted Marcos out). The hope brought about by one's vote was, fitfully, that which involved casting that one precious vote.
For those old enough to remember how Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo managed to once again reduce the hope that one ballot brought to unfathomable depths of ignominy, my reply would not be so incredible; many of us--including myself--still remember hearing the dictator Gloria--that unmistakeable voice, that unmistakable nasal tone--directing her underlings Garci, Ebdane, Esperon and so many others to steal not only an election but the hope that that election symbolized. The hope brought about by one's vote was, maliciously, snuffed out in the most cynical of ways--"but will I still win by over a million votes?"
The power of one's vote--my vote and yours--is the power to hope; it is the power to dream; the power to say to the face of a dictator, like Gloria, "Your time is up. Be gone"; it is the power to stay what may be an inevitability--the clash of arms drowning out the rule of law--and say, "not yet, not just yet."
The power of one's vote--yours and mine--is the power to chain as well as liberate; it is more than a symbol of hope, it is hope for change itself. To paraphrase Diokno, for change will come, if not now, then inevitably.
The power of one's vote--yours and mine--spells the difference between light and darkness; the light that comes out of a realization that hope is not lost, that change will not tarry much longer, that our passions, our ideals, our dreams, and yes, our hopes, will one day bear fruit in a country that is truly Filipino, truly free, and truly beautiful.
But why vote, when the very ones who stole our hopes for change in 2004 still abound in the highest places?
But why vote, when the obscenity that is "Hello Garci" comes back in full flavor and in living color to inflict himself on our popular psyche and our electorate by means of his very own full-fledged candidacy?
But why vote, when the very cynicism that eats away at hope abounds in every nuisance candidate made to run, in every Manny Pacquiao fielded, in every dynasty created?
But why vote, when even now the dogs of war have been unleashed and the staccato of gunshots rings out louder than the tolling of the bells of peace?
Why vote indeed?
Because there must be hope. Because there is hope.
The hope that one vote and one's vote--yours and mine--brings.
One's vote and one vote makes the difference between light and darkness, the difference between being in chains once more and being truly free, the difference between whining in enforced silence and raising voices in just and righteous indignation, the difference between all that is good for this beautiful country and all that will lead us further on the road to perdition.
So to those who ask who I will vote for, allow me now to answer you this way: I will vote for those who will truly symbolize the hope that my vote brings.
And so, I will not vote for any member of Team Unity--most especially not Joker Arroyo.
And so, I will not vote for most members of the Genuine Opposition--most especially not Panfilo Lacson or Loren Legarda (I am still praying about voting for Chiz Escudero).
I will most probably vote for Kiko Pangilinan simply because he has chosen to stand on his own, not allying himself with all that Team Unity and Genuine Opposition represents; my reservation is that he might finally find the voice and the passion that has eluded him in his previous term in the Senate; my hope is that he might truly stand on his own and speak only for those that matter--the people who put their trust and hopes in him.
But I will vote for the three gallant souls who have decided to fight the good fight--the three members of Ang Kapatiran: Martin Bautista, Zosimo Paredes and Adrian Sison.
Fittingly, the hope that one vote and one's vote--yours and mine--carries is borne on the shoulders of these dreamers; for only those who hope dare dream.
These three will lose the election and not become Senators but they would not have lost the respect of a grateful electorate; these three will lose the election but your vote would not have been wasted; these three will lose the election but they will have run the race extremely well.
In these times of cynicism, the hope that these three dreamers and "losers" represent is more than enough. The words of George Bernard Shaw borrowed by a famous Kennedy* and spoken by his even more famous brother** are apt indeed, "Some people see things as they are and ask 'why', I dream things that never were and ask 'why not'?"
My one vote represents the power to dream, the grace to hope, the courage to ask "why not?"
Why vote? Why vote for them? This is why--the power to dream, the grace to hope, the courage to ask "why not?"
To these three dreamers, my hopes go with you.
* Robert Francis "Bobby" Kennedy, U.S. Senator, killed June 6, 1968;
** John Fitzgerald Kennedy, U.S. President, killed November 22, 1963;
April 30, 2007
And a child shall lead them . . .
Because in this world of Manny Pacquiao (who should not speak at all but does) and Joker Arroyo (who should speak more often but doesn't), who cause us to despair and be despondent about being Filipinos, there is a need for "bright spots" and daily doses of inspiration, I unreservedly post this speech from, literally, the mouth of a "child."
All of 16 years old but now armed with a summa cum laude (GWA of 1.099) from the University of the Philippines, she says many things that should stir up the quiet revolution in each of our hearts; may her words disturb each and every one of us enough that we might, as she invites, trample new paths. I know they disturbed me again, out of the stupor and complacency I have been content to rot.
Mikaela Irene "Mikki" Fudolig, a refreshing and courageous voice in the concrete wilderness. Indeed, a child shall lead them . . .
Mikaela Irene Fudolig
BS Physics Summa Cum Laude
Speech at the Commencement Exercises, UPD
April 22, 2007
One of the things that strike me as being very "UP
What do these paths say about us, UP students?
One could say that the UP student is enamored with Mathematics and Pythagoras, hence these triangles formed by the pavement and the path. Many among you would disagree.
One could say that the UP student is enamored with Mathematics and Pythagoras, hence these triangles formed by the pavement and the path. Many among you would disagree.
Easter and Desolation
. . ."as in a dry weary land where there is no water." (Psalm 63:1, ESV)
In the midst of Easter, that is how I find myself--dry, weary, desolate, unproductive, not bearing fruit. Far from being a "tree planted by water, that sends out its roots by the stream, and does not fear when heat comes for its leaves remain green, and is not anxious in the year of drought, for it does not cease to bear fruit," (Jeremiah 17:7-8, ESV) I find myself a "shrub in the desert . . . in the parched places of the wilderness, in an uninhabited land." (jeremiah 17:6, ESV)
A wise person once said, "when the water in the hole runs dry, keep digging." And so I do. . . keep digging, that is. Because the hope that Easter brings endures in me, for I know that my Redeemer lives again and that is--or should be--enough for me.
I pray for the grace to realize that, in very personal and real terms: that Christ's resurrection, and the hope of life anew, life eternal, should be enough for me.
In the midst of Easter, that is how I find myself--dry, weary, desolate, unproductive, not bearing fruit. Far from being a "tree planted by water, that sends out its roots by the stream, and does not fear when heat comes for its leaves remain green, and is not anxious in the year of drought, for it does not cease to bear fruit," (Jeremiah 17:7-8, ESV) I find myself a "shrub in the desert . . . in the parched places of the wilderness, in an uninhabited land." (jeremiah 17:6, ESV)
A wise person once said, "when the water in the hole runs dry, keep digging." And so I do. . . keep digging, that is. Because the hope that Easter brings endures in me, for I know that my Redeemer lives again and that is--or should be--enough for me.
I pray for the grace to realize that, in very personal and real terms: that Christ's resurrection, and the hope of life anew, life eternal, should be enough for me.
April 20, 2007
D.O.M., M.C.P.
What do you do with someone like Raul Gonzales?
Even as filipinos reeled from the realization that an American, who had come to love the country more than its own citizens, had been killed brutally and senselessly, this Raul Gonzales, desperate for a sound bite, blames Julia Campbell for allowing herself to get into a tight situation. He comes out in media saying that it was her fault for going to Batad alone; that's like saying that a woman who is raped asked for it--that's how bad his statement is, and coming from the Justice Secretary, it becomes much much worse.
Much as I believe in a God who is the perfect creator, the Raul Gonzaleses of this world make you want to ask God, "did you somehow miss a step here?"
But, there really is a rhyme to God's reason. The Raul Gonzaleses of this world are placed here to make us realize that we can--and should--be better persons than he; he is placed here to remind us that there are many other good people, in contrast to him; the likes of him are placed on this earth to remind us of that most difficult of commands, "love one another as I have loved you."
Indeed, if one can love a Raul Gonzales, then you would have taken on the Face of God already.
In the meantime, answering my question at the start of this post--first, make him apologize to Julia Campbells' family, all those poor people she worked with and for, all the women whom Raul Gonzales insulted by his callously chauvinistic remark, all the senior citizens of which he is one of the worst poster boys, all the filipinos, of which he is certainly among the worst examples; and then, after all these, FIRE HIM, now na!
Even as filipinos reeled from the realization that an American, who had come to love the country more than its own citizens, had been killed brutally and senselessly, this Raul Gonzales, desperate for a sound bite, blames Julia Campbell for allowing herself to get into a tight situation. He comes out in media saying that it was her fault for going to Batad alone; that's like saying that a woman who is raped asked for it--that's how bad his statement is, and coming from the Justice Secretary, it becomes much much worse.
Much as I believe in a God who is the perfect creator, the Raul Gonzaleses of this world make you want to ask God, "did you somehow miss a step here?"
But, there really is a rhyme to God's reason. The Raul Gonzaleses of this world are placed here to make us realize that we can--and should--be better persons than he; he is placed here to remind us that there are many other good people, in contrast to him; the likes of him are placed on this earth to remind us of that most difficult of commands, "love one another as I have loved you."
Indeed, if one can love a Raul Gonzales, then you would have taken on the Face of God already.
In the meantime, answering my question at the start of this post--first, make him apologize to Julia Campbells' family, all those poor people she worked with and for, all the women whom Raul Gonzales insulted by his callously chauvinistic remark, all the senior citizens of which he is one of the worst poster boys, all the filipinos, of which he is certainly among the worst examples; and then, after all these, FIRE HIM, now na!
April 13, 2007
MFN
After a brutal 40 days of lent, Easter, for me, is best summed up by Psalm 147:20 -- "He has not dealt thus with any other nation. . ." (ESV)
It speaks of undeserved but nonetheless abundantly given grace to a nation, a People, that deserves far, far less.
"When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him? Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings, and crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him dominion over the works of your hands; you have put all things under his feet. . ." (Psalm 8:3-6; ESV)
The Lord who is risen is He who "determines the number of the stars (and) gives to all of them their names" (147:4; ESV)--truly, the King, Creator, Owner of the Universe.
We are God's MFN (Most Favored Nation) and Easter serves to remind us--me--of that. "He has not dealt thus with any other nation." Indeed.
----------------------------------------------
Thank You Lord for not giving us what we deserve--for dealing with us, unlike any other nation, any other People; thank you for blessing us with everything within YOUR imagination with everything beyond OUR imagination. This Easter, may we live lives that reflect the healing, the restoration, the hope that Your resurrection brings.
It speaks of undeserved but nonetheless abundantly given grace to a nation, a People, that deserves far, far less.
"When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him? Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings, and crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him dominion over the works of your hands; you have put all things under his feet. . ." (Psalm 8:3-6; ESV)
The Lord who is risen is He who "determines the number of the stars (and) gives to all of them their names" (147:4; ESV)--truly, the King, Creator, Owner of the Universe.
We are God's MFN (Most Favored Nation) and Easter serves to remind us--me--of that. "He has not dealt thus with any other nation." Indeed.
----------------------------------------------
Thank You Lord for not giving us what we deserve--for dealing with us, unlike any other nation, any other People; thank you for blessing us with everything within YOUR imagination with everything beyond OUR imagination. This Easter, may we live lives that reflect the healing, the restoration, the hope that Your resurrection brings.
April 09, 2007
Easter (according to John Y.)
Jopeng (a lay missionary brother from The Servants of the Word) and I groaned (simultaneously, albeit separately) when John said that now that it's Easter, it doesn't mean that lent is over--the discipline of lent is still there but it's coupled with the joy of Easter.
Lent. isn't. over. ?! Huh?
Trust someone like John Yocum, an Elder from The Servants of the Word with a Ph.D in Theology and with faculty stints in Oxford and currently at Loyola School of Theology, to put Easter in its proper perspective with his usual really softly spoken erudition. (He did say it with a smile on his face, so we weren't really sure if he was kidding, at first; later, of course, we knew he wasn't kidding.)
But no matter my reaction to John's earlier statement, it was something that was thought-provoking, insightful and life-giving--and it was something that was, ultimately, so simple you start to ask yourself why you never thought of it in the first place.
Just because it is Easter already doesn't mean that we go back to our old wordly ways; that would negate everything about Easter! That, in a very poorly-worded sentence, is what John meant (I think) by lent continuing despite Easter. It wouldn't be Easter if we all went back to our old lives--pre-lent; it wouldn't be Easter if we all started doing everything we were doing before lent came in. Easter is the season of new-ness yet that new-ness would be absolutely meaningless if we went back to our old ways. And that, in John 's exhortation, is precisely why we celebrate Easter because the old man has died and the new man has been born.
So, after collecting my jaw off the floor, I rejoiced!
Happy 2nd day* of Easter!
* John quipped that if we found lent brutal because of its length (bad pun mine, not his)--40 days--then Easter should be much more interesting because it is 10 days longer--there are 50 days of the Easter season before Pentecost; so that means there are 50 days of rejoicing without letting go of the discipline of lent.
Lent. isn't. over. ?! Huh?
Trust someone like John Yocum, an Elder from The Servants of the Word with a Ph.D in Theology and with faculty stints in Oxford and currently at Loyola School of Theology, to put Easter in its proper perspective with his usual really softly spoken erudition. (He did say it with a smile on his face, so we weren't really sure if he was kidding, at first; later, of course, we knew he wasn't kidding.)
But no matter my reaction to John's earlier statement, it was something that was thought-provoking, insightful and life-giving--and it was something that was, ultimately, so simple you start to ask yourself why you never thought of it in the first place.
Just because it is Easter already doesn't mean that we go back to our old wordly ways; that would negate everything about Easter! That, in a very poorly-worded sentence, is what John meant (I think) by lent continuing despite Easter. It wouldn't be Easter if we all went back to our old lives--pre-lent; it wouldn't be Easter if we all started doing everything we were doing before lent came in. Easter is the season of new-ness yet that new-ness would be absolutely meaningless if we went back to our old ways. And that, in John 's exhortation, is precisely why we celebrate Easter because the old man has died and the new man has been born.
So, after collecting my jaw off the floor, I rejoiced!
Happy 2nd day* of Easter!
* John quipped that if we found lent brutal because of its length (bad pun mine, not his)--40 days--then Easter should be much more interesting because it is 10 days longer--there are 50 days of the Easter season before Pentecost; so that means there are 50 days of rejoicing without letting go of the discipline of lent.
April 07, 2007
China
Nothing makes you feel old-er than looking at old pictures.I filched this from my ihada's (God-daughter) blog (this was taken during her confirmation rites at Miriam college), which I chanced upon while browsing.
China, the daughter of a very good friend Susan, doesn't look like this anymore--she looks much more beautiful now (of course, I'm biased being the Godfather and all, but it's also true) and she's all of 19 years old. I cannot believe it!
Of course, I also don't look like this anymore--I look older (he he he).
One thing I know, she is going to break a lot of men's hearts.
April 06, 2007
Waiting for Easter
Have you ever listened to different people talking about their lives and suddenly realize that they could very well be talking about yours as well?
I got that feeling while listening to a Good Friday recollection earlier.
Every word hit home--from Tito Eddie's opening statements; to Rosanne Romero's gut-wrenching and inspiring sharing (I do not think there was a dry eye in the room after she was done; yes not even the men) about living 21 years with MS and still having so much faith in God; to Maya Jacoba's sharing; to Fr. Dave Concepcion's homily about Peter's fall and redemption. In the vernacular, there is a word for it: sapul. And yes, sapul it was earlier. Each. word. hit. home.
Thank you, Lord, for speaking very clearly; thank you, Lord, for allowing me to realize how much I desire to be healed; thank you, Lord, for allowing me to realize the hope that I have in You.
I cannot wait for Easter.
I got that feeling while listening to a Good Friday recollection earlier.
Every word hit home--from Tito Eddie's opening statements; to Rosanne Romero's gut-wrenching and inspiring sharing (I do not think there was a dry eye in the room after she was done; yes not even the men) about living 21 years with MS and still having so much faith in God; to Maya Jacoba's sharing; to Fr. Dave Concepcion's homily about Peter's fall and redemption. In the vernacular, there is a word for it: sapul. And yes, sapul it was earlier. Each. word. hit. home.
Thank you, Lord, for speaking very clearly; thank you, Lord, for allowing me to realize how much I desire to be healed; thank you, Lord, for allowing me to realize the hope that I have in You.
I cannot wait for Easter.
March 15, 2007
March 14, 2007
Early Returns 2
Two of my readers, seiji and incarnadine29, want to know what I think about Mike Defensor (look at that smile), particularly his new 'Tol personality (c/o Boy Abunda). My short (a little irony here) answer is: I try not to think about Mike Defensor at all, I find that my days are better that way.
But life's like that, we can't always get what we want. So, I am constantly bombarded by Mike Defensor's really fake smile and his really pink shirt (what's with that? Is that a way of letting female voters know he's in touch with his feminine side or something? Whatever, it looks bad and TH on him; makes me want to stop wearing my pink shirts for a while)--all courtesy of Boy Abunda. And what's with the 'Tol? It's from the vernacular for "brother", utol and it's also a play on his not being that tall. As far as platforms go, apparently, Mike is projecting himself as a short brother. Oh well, at least he's honest.
Seriously, Mike Defensor is someone I would not want to inflict on this country that I love for one minute more than I can help. So, pardon me if this is the last entry on him. He is known famously for being devoid of any real sense of principle, other than what is good for him (he's been known to be that way since college); he once stood up to denounce a famous tollway project by an equally famous family and when pressed for evidence, folded (at least Alan Cayetano didn't fold) in public. That's the type of person he is--the quick fix, the compromise. He is a JDV in the making and that's not a compliment in any way.
So, the sooner we erase Mike Defensor from our collective consciousness, the better. I'm not voting for him for any position ever.
March 07, 2007
No Joke.
Ang daming bad sa administration ngayon pero ba't di sila lagot kay Joker? Ang tahimik nga niya e. Baka naman joke lang yung kay Joker, na "pag bad ka, lagot ka."
Pero, ito hindi joke: pag di pa nagsalita si Joker tungkol sa militarisasyon at paggamit ng pondo ng gobyerno sa kampanya at di siya tumiwalag sa TU (make up your own meaning for this acronym), wala na siyang mukhang pwedeng iharap sa taong bayan.
Ako, di ko siya iboboto at hinihingi ko na huwag na rin ninyo siyang iboto. No joke.
Pero, ito hindi joke: pag di pa nagsalita si Joker tungkol sa militarisasyon at paggamit ng pondo ng gobyerno sa kampanya at di siya tumiwalag sa TU (make up your own meaning for this acronym), wala na siyang mukhang pwedeng iharap sa taong bayan.
Ako, di ko siya iboboto at hinihingi ko na huwag na rin ninyo siyang iboto. No joke.
March 05, 2007
Pichay and Posters
I never thought I'd find anything nice to say about Ben Abalos, the COMELEC Chair. As the last week ended, however, he had a sound bite that was funny; commenting on all the posters of Team Unity Senatorial wanna-be Butch Pichay that were sprouting everywhere, he said something about "pechay" being planted all over, even in cement. That merited a chuckle.
Predictably, Pichay denied any involvement either personally or by his staff; never mind that the posters looked identical to those he presumably knew about and authorized. Predictably, he cried "sabotage" and said that his opponents were trying to make it look like his staff did it so that he would be disqualified (Oh, happy day, should this happen!).
One suggestion perhaps: require all candidates to have ALL posters carry the COMELEC seal before any are posted. Similar to the cigarette packs that must contain the safety warning, all posters should have a COMELEC certification that is prominent and distinct; any poster that does not have those would clearly be unauthorized. So, posters bearing this certification that appear in a place where there should be none will then be directly attributed to the candidate whose mug appears on it.
Predictably, Pichay denied any involvement either personally or by his staff; never mind that the posters looked identical to those he presumably knew about and authorized. Predictably, he cried "sabotage" and said that his opponents were trying to make it look like his staff did it so that he would be disqualified (Oh, happy day, should this happen!).
One suggestion perhaps: require all candidates to have ALL posters carry the COMELEC seal before any are posted. Similar to the cigarette packs that must contain the safety warning, all posters should have a COMELEC certification that is prominent and distinct; any poster that does not have those would clearly be unauthorized. So, posters bearing this certification that appear in a place where there should be none will then be directly attributed to the candidate whose mug appears on it.
Waiting for the 3rd . . .
What are the odds that in my less than ten years of teaching law, I'd be able to say I taught law to two Bb. Pilipinas Universe winners?*
In the meantime, there's hope for beauty contests if a 22-year old who lists among her talents "case digest making" (and this I can attest to, as she practically wrote half a case book that's attributed to me) can win the top prize.
Congratulations Tere; for someone to whom the decision to join didn't come easily, this one looked easy for you because you worked extremely hard for it.
*And both were in my criminal procedure class.
After my Research Assistant won that major beauty title over the weekend, I now find myself unable to attract applications for a second RA apparently because interested parties think all my RAs should be beauty queen material; this would have been so funny except that those applications I’ve already gotten are from male law students. Come to think of it, that makes it even funnier.
In the meantime, there's hope for beauty contests if a 22-year old who lists among her talents "case digest making" (and this I can attest to, as she practically wrote half a case book that's attributed to me) can win the top prize.
Congratulations Tere; for someone to whom the decision to join didn't come easily, this one looked easy for you because you worked extremely hard for it.
*And both were in my criminal procedure class.
March 01, 2007
I don't get it #s 1-3
I don't get it #1:
When a married man tells his wife he's going for a facial and scrubs once every week or oftener, shouldn't that have given her warning signals, at the very least?
I don't get it #2:
Why do Kris Aquino's sordid affairs have to unravel on national television?
I don't get it #3:
Why am I even blogging about this? Perhaps for the same reason you can't take your eyes off a car crash or an execution.
When a married man tells his wife he's going for a facial and scrubs once every week or oftener, shouldn't that have given her warning signals, at the very least?
I don't get it #2:
Why do Kris Aquino's sordid affairs have to unravel on national television?
I don't get it #3:
Why am I even blogging about this? Perhaps for the same reason you can't take your eyes off a car crash or an execution.
Early returns
The circus is officially in town (some would say the zoo, but I love animals and I think it's a disservice to animals to compare politicians to them; at least animals can be loyal). Some thoughts on early political ads and taglines:
Itanim natin sa Senado - Pichay. The best reason not to be vegetarian. Bad pun, even worse pic.
My guy, Magsaysay. - Vic Magsaysay. Couldn't he be more original?
Pag bad ka, lagot ka. - Joker Arroyo. The worst part of this campaign tagline is that Joker doesn't have a sense of humor. Well, I'm bad and so too is his primary benefactor--the Arroyo woman and the Arroyo men. With apologies to all my Assumptionista friends and readers, will Joker make them and not only me lagot? I don't think so. (And what's with the absolutely lame analogy of being the dragon of the Senate? Where'd that come from? Sir, there are no dragons; at least not anymore. Is that the subliminal picture you're pushing? That you'll go the way of dragons?)
Ko-Recto sa Senado. - Ralph Recto. In the post-EDSA era, when Ralph's father used to lawyer for the Marcoses and was so successful at getting the goat of the powers that used to be (Joker was one of them, I remember), his detractors came up with a stinging tagline when Raffy Recto ran for the Senate--ang Recto na hindi Claro (a play on the name and reputation of the late Clayo Mayo Recto). I wouldn't go as far as saying Ralph is the Recto who's not Claro--in fact, he's very clear on where he stands on a lot of issues, particularly the VAT and that might spell doom for much of his chances of making it to the Senate. Of course, his being Mr. Vilma Santos will help.
The jury's still out on the other candidates.
Itanim natin sa Senado - Pichay. The best reason not to be vegetarian. Bad pun, even worse pic.
My guy, Magsaysay. - Vic Magsaysay. Couldn't he be more original?
Pag bad ka, lagot ka. - Joker Arroyo. The worst part of this campaign tagline is that Joker doesn't have a sense of humor. Well, I'm bad and so too is his primary benefactor--the Arroyo woman and the Arroyo men. With apologies to all my Assumptionista friends and readers, will Joker make them and not only me lagot? I don't think so. (And what's with the absolutely lame analogy of being the dragon of the Senate? Where'd that come from? Sir, there are no dragons; at least not anymore. Is that the subliminal picture you're pushing? That you'll go the way of dragons?)
Ko-Recto sa Senado. - Ralph Recto. In the post-EDSA era, when Ralph's father used to lawyer for the Marcoses and was so successful at getting the goat of the powers that used to be (Joker was one of them, I remember), his detractors came up with a stinging tagline when Raffy Recto ran for the Senate--ang Recto na hindi Claro (a play on the name and reputation of the late Clayo Mayo Recto). I wouldn't go as far as saying Ralph is the Recto who's not Claro--in fact, he's very clear on where he stands on a lot of issues, particularly the VAT and that might spell doom for much of his chances of making it to the Senate. Of course, his being Mr. Vilma Santos will help.
The jury's still out on the other candidates.
Healing and Hope in Him
Hosea 6: "[1] Come, let us return to the Lord;
for he has torn us, that he may heal us;
he has struck us down , and he will bind us up.
. . . [3] Let us know, let us press on to know the Lord;
his going out is sure as the dawn;
he will come to us as the showers,
as the spring rains that water the earth."
Healing and Hope from Him who is the source of both: my prayer this lent, not only for myself but for all those for whom I care.
for he has torn us, that he may heal us;
he has struck us down , and he will bind us up.
. . . [3] Let us know, let us press on to know the Lord;
his going out is sure as the dawn;
he will come to us as the showers,
as the spring rains that water the earth."
Healing and Hope from Him who is the source of both: my prayer this lent, not only for myself but for all those for whom I care.
February 14, 2007
YES!!!!!!
Opening the Grammy's yesterday and confirming a reunion tour this year, Sting, Stewart Copeland and Andy Summers, better known as The Police, finally played together after 4 years.
I am pretty sure that the tour won't reach my neck of the woods and should it, by a miracle, reach these shores, it will certainly cost both arms and legs. Well, there's always the CD.
February 13, 2007
You know we're really in trouble when. . .
1. You find yourself agreeing with Prospero Pichay about the need for principled politics.
2. You find yourself agreeing with Kit Tatad on the need for moral recovery.
3. The spectacle of Gloria Arroyo tonelessly and tastelessly "singing" (sic) Boom Tarat tarat is not enough to move people to revolt.
2. You find yourself agreeing with Kit Tatad on the need for moral recovery.
3. The spectacle of Gloria Arroyo tonelessly and tastelessly "singing" (sic) Boom Tarat tarat is not enough to move people to revolt.
How quickly we forget . . .
On December 7, 2000, a distinguished member of the House of Representatives stood up in the Halls of the Philippine Senate and declared that "we cannot have a country run by a thief." That member of the House was Joker Arroyo, who later rode his participation as a prosecutor in the impeachment trial of Joseph Ejercito Estrada to a Senate seat in the elections of 2001.
Yesterday, Joker P. Arroyo filed his certificate of candidacy as senator under the administration ticket of Gloria Arroyo, who is widely suspected of stealing, if not money directly, then at least the elections of 2004.
Sir, seven years ago, you said this: "We cannot have a country run by a thief."
How quickly we forget.
Yesterday, Joker P. Arroyo filed his certificate of candidacy as senator under the administration ticket of Gloria Arroyo, who is widely suspected of stealing, if not money directly, then at least the elections of 2004.
Sir, seven years ago, you said this: "We cannot have a country run by a thief."
How quickly we forget.
Poetic justice
This may be a bit old but just have to say this.
I am on record as not being a big fan of Alan Cayetano--I think he's too glib for his own good and he's a bit shallow on the issues--but after the House Ethics (sic) Committee decided to recommend a 45-day suspension on him for failing to prove the expose he made against the Arroyo men (Mike, Mikee, Iggy and Dato) and the Arroyo woman (who else?), I am pretty sure that he's going to place highly in the Senate race.
And he has the Arroyos to thank for that; how's that for poetic justice?
I am on record as not being a big fan of Alan Cayetano--I think he's too glib for his own good and he's a bit shallow on the issues--but after the House Ethics (sic) Committee decided to recommend a 45-day suspension on him for failing to prove the expose he made against the Arroyo men (Mike, Mikee, Iggy and Dato) and the Arroyo woman (who else?), I am pretty sure that he's going to place highly in the Senate race.
And he has the Arroyos to thank for that; how's that for poetic justice?
February 06, 2007
Why is MVP not smiling?
For possibly the same reason I'm ranting.
We waited for this?
What is going on?
After the so-called Basketball Association of the Philippines (BAP), through its self-proclaimed “leaders” Lim, Alentajan and Tan, manage to pull off one of the most cruel stunts anyone could ever think of in this basketball-crazy country—getting us suspended from international competition—the SBP led by Manny V. Pangilinan agree on “unity” with this group. And they’re happy about it?
I don’t know about you—but it’s no longer only in
Can the saner voices in Philippine basketball do something please?
February 03, 2007
No contest
I should be in Paris now for this (I attended the 2nd one in Montreal in 2004) but two very dear friends are getting married next week and had to choose between the two events - Paris in February (!) or Manila.
It's a no brainer and obviously no contest!
It's a no brainer and obviously no contest!
February 02, 2007
Requiem and Resurrection
Newsbreak, a news magazine I've read consistently since its very first issue six years ago, recently stopped publishing a hard-copy edition and decided to continue existing only in its online format. I've had the privilege of contributing a few pieces before to its hard-copy edition and am happy to say that I've been asked to contribute as well to its online edition in a more regular capacity.
I'm sad to see the hard-copy edition go because it represented a good way to encourage reading something where you needed to turn pages; Newsbreak became known very quickly for its excellent writing and comprehensive research as well as its integrity; the women and men behind Newsbreak were award-winners in their own right and putting them together, they formed a formidable team.
However, the realities of publishing a hard-copy edition in a very competitive market has taken its toll. Add to that Newsbreak's terminal propensity for telling the truth, as it is, and for offending the wrong persons--like Mike Arroyo and Gloria Arroyo--and you have a surefire combination for not attracting enough advertisers or business.
I'm happy for small blessings, however; and the continuation of Newsbreak as an online magazine is a blessing. In this world where truth is scarce and fearless reportage of the truth is even more scarce, the women and men of Newsbreak is a gust of wind that is welcome indeed.
I'm sad to see the hard-copy edition go because it represented a good way to encourage reading something where you needed to turn pages; Newsbreak became known very quickly for its excellent writing and comprehensive research as well as its integrity; the women and men behind Newsbreak were award-winners in their own right and putting them together, they formed a formidable team.
However, the realities of publishing a hard-copy edition in a very competitive market has taken its toll. Add to that Newsbreak's terminal propensity for telling the truth, as it is, and for offending the wrong persons--like Mike Arroyo and Gloria Arroyo--and you have a surefire combination for not attracting enough advertisers or business.
I'm happy for small blessings, however; and the continuation of Newsbreak as an online magazine is a blessing. In this world where truth is scarce and fearless reportage of the truth is even more scarce, the women and men of Newsbreak is a gust of wind that is welcome indeed.
February 01, 2007
The reasons
Someone asked me recently why I bother writing and getting angry about Gloria, when it appears that there is very little that can be done as she is well-entrenched in power and will do anything in her power and beyond to stay there forever. That same person also asked me why I bother to get angry about Gloria.
I told her that I bother to write because I am but:
a
drop
falling into
a stream
flowing
into
a
river
raging,
becoming
torrents, and
turning into a
flood.
I told her also that I bother getting angry because:
the
flood reduces
the rock
into
rubble
in
time
And finally, I told her I bother caring because many years ago, one man cared enough to stretch out His arms wide in an unrequited gesture of absolute love and those outstretched arms have given us the right to dare to hope, to care, to dream, to perserverse, to share and to love back.
I told her that I bother to write because I am but:
a
drop
falling into
a stream
flowing
into
a
river
raging,
becoming
torrents, and
turning into a
flood.
I told her also that I bother getting angry because:
the
flood reduces
the rock
into
rubble
in
time
And finally, I told her I bother caring because many years ago, one man cared enough to stretch out His arms wide in an unrequited gesture of absolute love and those outstretched arms have given us the right to dare to hope, to care, to dream, to perserverse, to share and to love back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)