There are interesting readers’ remarks about the Reds in some Filipino websites that need further clarification. The observation that goes “dagitay Komunista isut’ pudno a "maka-Dios!” (The Communists are the true Christians.) is a hasty conclusion sans meticulously scrutinizing the quiddity of Communism and practical theology. Here, we mean the Judeo-Christian God. There are also remarks about Frs. Conrado Balweg and Zacarias Agatep, regular and diocesan priests, who left their ministry and joined the ranks of the New People’s Army, the armed wing of the Communist Party of the Philippines.
Although I disagree with their expressed idea, I respect their say. François-Marie Arouet’s (a.k.a. Voltaire) says “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.”
Communism as a whole pie of ideology is too complex to zero-in here from its infancy to its quantum development up to the 21st century. Karl Marx, a German political theorist and father of Communism says that "Die Religion ist das Opium des Volkes" (Religion is the opiate of the masses.) Since the invention of Communism, history books and archives are replete with stories --- not myths --- of bloody human annihilation in the name of revolution and “isms” that disregard human dignity. True peace is not known to exist in places where hammer and sickle thrives. The prophet Isaiah says that peace resides in Christ (c.f.: 9:6). This suggests that in conflict-ravaged places, “Christ is not there”. In denouncing Communism, nothing is more explicit than the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In full, the statement reads:
“The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with "communism" or "socialism." She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of "capitalism," individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor. Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for "there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market." Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.” (2425)
The catch-word is “atheistic” from the Greek “atheos” meaning [G]odless. It is inconceivable therefore to construe the Reds as the real “maka-Dios” (Christian) for a maka-Dios is one who loves a neighbor as s/he loves him/herself. That neighbor is not just a relative or a stranger across the street or next door but those who are called blessed in the Beatitudes and other victims of social injustice.
Frs. Balweg and Agatep went underground not simply because they wanted to but because of circumstances and disenchantment in a cruel and barbaric regime. Something pushed them to go literally to the boondocks and lived a life of a bandit and not a monastic life.
As priests, they preached John’s words that “There is no greater love than to lay down one’s life for one’s friend.” (c.f.: 15:13). However, I really don’t understand why resorting into violence is their option when Christ, the role-model of Christians did not opt violence even at the point of a horrible crucifixion. A priest or anyone who slings an Armalite or AK-47 to defend the oppressed takes for granted the Decalogue and Christ’s admonition that those who kill by the sword will be killed by the sword. (c.f.: Mt. 26:52) Christ is correct. The two defrocked priests were felled by a bullet.
Christ came to give us life and not death. “I came so that they might have life and have it more abundantly.” (c.f.: Jn. 10:10)
We know the sanctity of human life. No one has the capability to create life except God. Further, as theologians, Frs. Balweg and Agatep fully know that only God has also the sole power and authority to end life. He is the Alpha and the Omega. (c.f.: Rev. 22:13)
In fairness to them, their intention to side and defend the oppressed and terrified victims of a regime not far from the savagery of Godless despots is noble but NOT the means. The end justifies the means and not the mean justifies the end.
In the case of the legendary Robin Hood, his escapades can be dissected into two. He is a thief and a lover of the poor. As a thief, his actions are condemned but his affection to the poor is appreciated. Simply said, the priests’ one-moment-in-time decision to identify themselves with the oppressed is commendable but their resorting into violence must be strongly condemned sans ifs and buts. I believe that there were possible peaceful avenues for them to disentangle the people’s suffering and disenfranchisement which they failed to see or not bothered to consider.
In the Gospel, Christ identifies Himself with the poor. For this reason, the Church developed a theology called “preferential option for the poor”. Christ said “The poor you will always have with you; but you will not always have me”. (c.f.: Mt. 26:11) The poor are always struggling in our midst since the start of civilization.
Contemplating that line and the “greatest” love one has to give to a friend, some clergy in Latin America after Vatican II put into pieces the foundation of the so-called Liberation Theology that has shades of Marxism.
Some countries in Latin America and the Philippines share a striking common history and reality. Both were under the Spanish colonial rule. They are a third-world country and last but not least, they were sledge-hammered by ruthless dictators.
Wikipedia defines in part:
“Liberation theology is a school of theology within Christianity, particularly in the Roman Catholic Church. It emphasizes the Christian mission to bring justice to the poor and oppressed, particularly through political activism. Its theologians consider sin the root source of poverty, recognizing sin as exploitative capitalism and class war by the rich against the poor.”
Dom Hélder Pessoa Câmara, a Brazilian former Archbishop of Olinda and Recife famously said "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist."
What makes the Archbishop contentious is his interest in asking why the poor have no food. He was referring to the people devastated with unbelievable poverty in South and Central America.
The same question can be re-phrased “Why do the Filipino poor have no food?” Better, “Why do the Filipinos in a very rich country have no food?”
There is no other viable explanation than to point an accusing finger to those who were/are in power who immensely contributed to the deterioration of the country. In the long run, Filipinos are to be blamed because of their stubborn refusal to move on. The first step could have been the world-famous 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution. That should have been the cue. Not only that, they had another EDSA. As a result, in vain were the authentic aspirations of the people to move forward not to mention the efforts and dangers they faced.
Some corners expect or rather believe that the influential Catholic Church of the Philippines has the capability to make things better. In my personal view, the Church is no longer interested as an asset to depose the sitting and incompetent government not because she cannot do it but the futility of such an act is almost certain because of strong recidivism of the Filipino psyche. Thanks but no thanks to “ningas kugon”.
Filipinos, as I just mentioned, had all the chance to do house cleaning and sanitation in 1986. In fairness to them, they started with a bang but somewhere, somehow, the enthusiasm wilted. Now, the country is back where it used to be.
There is no way for me to say if Frs. Balweg and Agatep were proponents of Liberation Theology or if the movement still flourishes in the country. They might have joined the underground movement just like that or in response to the flawed Latin American paradigm, they traded their convent to the wilderness. I am sure, however, that the Catholic clergy sees the suffering of the people. I am also sure that they see the face of Christ in these agonizing people. That does not stop the Church to work for their well-being.
But one might argue that there are some who are good Communists or even Christian Communists. In either way, that is a misnomer. Is it still a chess game if you move the bishop as if it were a horse?
Communism totally disregards the Christian teaching on what the greatest commandment is. Matthew 22:36-40 goes "Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments."
I am interested to read stories from Communist countries before the crumbing of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the USSR that narrate the practicing of the greatest and the second commandments. Obviously, there are but strictly limited to acts of charity in response to cruelty and atheism. During those forgettable times, Christians were persecuted. The same is true today. Mainland Chinese Christians especially the Catholics practice their faith in secret. They celebrate the Mass and other sacraments in the middle of the night or clandestine places. One is in the middle of the forest. Similar stories of persecution in Vietnam are also read.
After all, anyone interested in seeking for the truth can still be called “maka-Dios” for He is the “truth, the way and the life”. (c.f.: Jn. 14:6) I don’t mean to include seekers who use violence and other means contrary to Christian ethics as tools in searching for the truth as “maka-Dios”. Sincere truth-seekers who employ humility are “maka-Dios” even if what they find is flawed because of fault not their own like ignorance and acuteness of understanding.
Once the truth is found, it sets us free. That truth must be shared and proclaimed fearlessly.-30-
Although I disagree with their expressed idea, I respect their say. François-Marie Arouet’s (a.k.a. Voltaire) says “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.”
Communism as a whole pie of ideology is too complex to zero-in here from its infancy to its quantum development up to the 21st century. Karl Marx, a German political theorist and father of Communism says that "Die Religion ist das Opium des Volkes" (Religion is the opiate of the masses.) Since the invention of Communism, history books and archives are replete with stories --- not myths --- of bloody human annihilation in the name of revolution and “isms” that disregard human dignity. True peace is not known to exist in places where hammer and sickle thrives. The prophet Isaiah says that peace resides in Christ (c.f.: 9:6). This suggests that in conflict-ravaged places, “Christ is not there”. In denouncing Communism, nothing is more explicit than the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In full, the statement reads:
“The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with "communism" or "socialism." She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of "capitalism," individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor. Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for "there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market." Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.” (2425)
The catch-word is “atheistic” from the Greek “atheos” meaning [G]odless. It is inconceivable therefore to construe the Reds as the real “maka-Dios” (Christian) for a maka-Dios is one who loves a neighbor as s/he loves him/herself. That neighbor is not just a relative or a stranger across the street or next door but those who are called blessed in the Beatitudes and other victims of social injustice.
Frs. Balweg and Agatep went underground not simply because they wanted to but because of circumstances and disenchantment in a cruel and barbaric regime. Something pushed them to go literally to the boondocks and lived a life of a bandit and not a monastic life.
As priests, they preached John’s words that “There is no greater love than to lay down one’s life for one’s friend.” (c.f.: 15:13). However, I really don’t understand why resorting into violence is their option when Christ, the role-model of Christians did not opt violence even at the point of a horrible crucifixion. A priest or anyone who slings an Armalite or AK-47 to defend the oppressed takes for granted the Decalogue and Christ’s admonition that those who kill by the sword will be killed by the sword. (c.f.: Mt. 26:52) Christ is correct. The two defrocked priests were felled by a bullet.
Christ came to give us life and not death. “I came so that they might have life and have it more abundantly.” (c.f.: Jn. 10:10)
We know the sanctity of human life. No one has the capability to create life except God. Further, as theologians, Frs. Balweg and Agatep fully know that only God has also the sole power and authority to end life. He is the Alpha and the Omega. (c.f.: Rev. 22:13)
In fairness to them, their intention to side and defend the oppressed and terrified victims of a regime not far from the savagery of Godless despots is noble but NOT the means. The end justifies the means and not the mean justifies the end.
In the case of the legendary Robin Hood, his escapades can be dissected into two. He is a thief and a lover of the poor. As a thief, his actions are condemned but his affection to the poor is appreciated. Simply said, the priests’ one-moment-in-time decision to identify themselves with the oppressed is commendable but their resorting into violence must be strongly condemned sans ifs and buts. I believe that there were possible peaceful avenues for them to disentangle the people’s suffering and disenfranchisement which they failed to see or not bothered to consider.
In the Gospel, Christ identifies Himself with the poor. For this reason, the Church developed a theology called “preferential option for the poor”. Christ said “The poor you will always have with you; but you will not always have me”. (c.f.: Mt. 26:11) The poor are always struggling in our midst since the start of civilization.
Contemplating that line and the “greatest” love one has to give to a friend, some clergy in Latin America after Vatican II put into pieces the foundation of the so-called Liberation Theology that has shades of Marxism.
Some countries in Latin America and the Philippines share a striking common history and reality. Both were under the Spanish colonial rule. They are a third-world country and last but not least, they were sledge-hammered by ruthless dictators.
Wikipedia defines in part:
“Liberation theology is a school of theology within Christianity, particularly in the Roman Catholic Church. It emphasizes the Christian mission to bring justice to the poor and oppressed, particularly through political activism. Its theologians consider sin the root source of poverty, recognizing sin as exploitative capitalism and class war by the rich against the poor.”
Dom Hélder Pessoa Câmara, a Brazilian former Archbishop of Olinda and Recife famously said "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist."
What makes the Archbishop contentious is his interest in asking why the poor have no food. He was referring to the people devastated with unbelievable poverty in South and Central America.
The same question can be re-phrased “Why do the Filipino poor have no food?” Better, “Why do the Filipinos in a very rich country have no food?”
There is no other viable explanation than to point an accusing finger to those who were/are in power who immensely contributed to the deterioration of the country. In the long run, Filipinos are to be blamed because of their stubborn refusal to move on. The first step could have been the world-famous 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution. That should have been the cue. Not only that, they had another EDSA. As a result, in vain were the authentic aspirations of the people to move forward not to mention the efforts and dangers they faced.
Some corners expect or rather believe that the influential Catholic Church of the Philippines has the capability to make things better. In my personal view, the Church is no longer interested as an asset to depose the sitting and incompetent government not because she cannot do it but the futility of such an act is almost certain because of strong recidivism of the Filipino psyche. Thanks but no thanks to “ningas kugon”.
Filipinos, as I just mentioned, had all the chance to do house cleaning and sanitation in 1986. In fairness to them, they started with a bang but somewhere, somehow, the enthusiasm wilted. Now, the country is back where it used to be.
There is no way for me to say if Frs. Balweg and Agatep were proponents of Liberation Theology or if the movement still flourishes in the country. They might have joined the underground movement just like that or in response to the flawed Latin American paradigm, they traded their convent to the wilderness. I am sure, however, that the Catholic clergy sees the suffering of the people. I am also sure that they see the face of Christ in these agonizing people. That does not stop the Church to work for their well-being.
But one might argue that there are some who are good Communists or even Christian Communists. In either way, that is a misnomer. Is it still a chess game if you move the bishop as if it were a horse?
Communism totally disregards the Christian teaching on what the greatest commandment is. Matthew 22:36-40 goes "Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments."
I am interested to read stories from Communist countries before the crumbing of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the USSR that narrate the practicing of the greatest and the second commandments. Obviously, there are but strictly limited to acts of charity in response to cruelty and atheism. During those forgettable times, Christians were persecuted. The same is true today. Mainland Chinese Christians especially the Catholics practice their faith in secret. They celebrate the Mass and other sacraments in the middle of the night or clandestine places. One is in the middle of the forest. Similar stories of persecution in Vietnam are also read.
After all, anyone interested in seeking for the truth can still be called “maka-Dios” for He is the “truth, the way and the life”. (c.f.: Jn. 14:6) I don’t mean to include seekers who use violence and other means contrary to Christian ethics as tools in searching for the truth as “maka-Dios”. Sincere truth-seekers who employ humility are “maka-Dios” even if what they find is flawed because of fault not their own like ignorance and acuteness of understanding.
Once the truth is found, it sets us free. That truth must be shared and proclaimed fearlessly.-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment