Replying a Pro RH Advocate [Estanislao Albano] concerning the article in Manila Standard Today Part I

– Aran Cabreros

source: [paki-click]

[First paragraph: No comment sa ngayon. ]

sagot: sa ngayon? sige na nga pagbibigyan kita

[Second paragraph: Ang sinabi ko sa iyo e kung bigyang pagkakataon ang mga Pilipino na mamili kung saan manirahan sa Italya o sa Pilipinas, may aayaw bang papunta sa Italya? Granting na may setbacks ang RH, mas matindi hamak ang epekto ng malaking populasyon na di kayang suportahyan ng ekonomya, gobyerno at lipunan. Tungkol naman doon sa sinabi mong advantage ng laborforce na majority ay kabataan, makikita ba natin yon sa mga kabataan natin na walang pinag-aralan dahil sa kahirapan na ang ugat e ang pag-anak ng kanilang magulang ng mas marami sa kaya nilang tustusan?]

sagot: nakalimutan mo ang kurapsyon, walang pagbabatayan na ang populasyon ang may kasalanan bakit tayo naghihirap, ang sinasabi mo lamang na lumulobo ang populasyon, ang tanong, ano ba ang dahilan bakit naghihirap ang ating bayan? dahil ba sa populasiyon? kitang kita kasi na pinipilit mo ang propaganda ng RH para lamang maipasa iyang kagustuhan mo. Walang kinalaman ang pagkakaroon ng maraming anak kung bakit tayo naghihirap kung hindi dahil sa matinding kurapsyon at hindi pag-iimplement ng tama sa mga eksistidong batas na nakikita natin sa gobyerno. Bakit nga ba sila nagkaroon ng maraming anak? dahil hindi maayos at hindi ginamit ng maayos ang mga resources na binigay ng gobyerno para sa mga health centers under DOH, ilang milyon ba ang ginastos ng gobyerno para sa tamang edukasyon patungkol sa reproductive health? tanungin mo bakit feeling ng gobyerno kulang ito kahit actually malaking halaga na ang naipundar ng gobyerno para sa Kalusugan?

[Third paragraph: Wala akong nasabi tungkol sa koneksyon ng kabawasan sa numero ng tao at korapsyon. Ang dalawang huling pangungusapmo a gusto kong sagutin. May dalawang pamilya na parehas ang resources and are equal on all other things beside resources like the values of the parents, etc. Ang isang pamilya may sampong anak. Ang isa naman may tatlo. Sino a mas magandang buhay? Sino ang mas mahirap?]

sagot: ano ano ba ang factors bakit naghihirap ang isang pamilya? dahil ba sa dami ng anak? hindi! dahil walang sapat na resources ang binigay ng mga LGUs para sa mga pamilya. Marami sa mga Pilipino ang naka-ahon sa kahirapan kahit marami ang kanilang anak. alam mo ba kung bakit nakaahon sila? DISKARTE! papaano sila magkakaroon ng diskarte? TAMANG EDUKASYON. ngayon, wala bang EDUKASYON ang ating existing na batas para sa PAMILYA? meron. bakit hindi ito EPEKTIBO? pakisagot po kung bakit.

[Tungkol naman sa Article II Section 13 and 1986 Constitution, walang parameters na nabanggit si Atty. Abbas kung hangngang saan yang uniting iyan at kung hanggang saan ang pagprotekta sa moral at spiritual well-being ng kabataan. Could it mean that the church will dictate which laws the government will pass? I do not think so dahil maski si Abbas naman seguro e nabasa ang SEKSYON 6., Article 2 of the same Constitution which states ” Hindi dapat labagin ang pagkakahiwalay ng Simbahan at ng Estado.”]

sagot: ano ba ang SPIRITUAL AT MORAL? ang gobyerno ba ang magtuturo nito sa SAMBAYANAN? hindi dinidikta ng simbahan kung ano ang dapat na gawin ng gobyerno. Ang sinasabi diyan ay MAGTULUNGAN. tama si Atty. Abas diyan, na dapat magkaisa na magtulungan ang dalawang sektory para sa ikakaunlad ng MORAL, ESPIRITUWAL at PISIKAL na well being ng isang tao. Sinu-sino ba ang nagcocompose ng tao sa gobyerno? Sinu-sino din ba ang nagluklok ng mga tao na uupo sa gobyerno? ang gobyerno ba mismo? o ang taong nasa Simbahan mismo? yan hindi mo kasi iniintindi ang kontekto. Ang interpretasyon mo kasi ay ganito:

                             ang simbahan ay walang role sa estado habang ang estado ay walang role sa simbahan.

isang kahabagan iyan. dahil nga sabi ng ating konstitusyon, ang simbahan at estado ay MAGTUTULUNGAN para sa ikakabuti ng TAO.

Sa RH BILL, tinatapakan ng GOBYERNO ang role ng SIMBAHAN para sa LIPUNAN kaya nito KINUKUNDENA ang proposal ng GOBYERNO. gets?

[Pope Clement XIV:
Ver. 21. Render therefore to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s. He neither directly decided the question, nor offended the Herodians. They admired his wisdom, were quite disappointed, and retired with confusion. (Witham) — The reasoning of Christ appears to be this: As you are the subjects of Cæsar, which you plainly acknowledge by admitting his coin, upon which he inscribes himself lord of Asia, Syria, and Judæa, &c. it is but just you pay him the tribute due from subjects to their sovereign; nor have you any reason to object on the plea of religion, since he demands of you for the exigencies of the public service only temporal things, and such as are in some respects already his own, by being stamped with his own image and superscription.]

This statement refers as how politics in this world is only temporary and has nothing to do with the Spiritual things in this world, it is supported in the Philippine Constitution that since politics is temporary, the Church is needed for the people to guide the Spiritual and Moral aspects for the Filipinos..and that is eternal. As what I pointed you out, Atty. Abas stated relevant provisions in the constitution on the importance of the Church in politics particularly in the order of Moral and Spiritual Aspects of its people.

[But spiritual things, which belong to God alone, as your souls, stamped with his image, divine worship, religious homage, &c. God, not Cæsar, demands of you. “Give therefore to Cæsar what belongeth to Cæsar, and to God what belongeth to God.” (Tirinus) — What our Saviour here commands us to give to God, is nothing else but our heart and affections. Here our divine Lord likewise shews us, how we are to steer the middle course between the two extremes, into which some persons fall. Some say that all must be given to God, and nothing to Cæsar, i.e. all our time must be given to the care of our soul, and none to the care of the body; but Christ teaches that some must be given to the one, and part to the other. (Origen) — Although Christ clearly establishes here the strict obligation of paying to Cæsar what belongs to Cæsar, yet he is afterwards accused, as we have mentioned above, (see note on ver. 17) as if he forbade tribute to be paid to Cæsar. ]

if you have only the common sense to understand the context, Pope Clement XIV cleary points out on the obligation of the people to understand the church and also obey the rules that the government implemented as long as it abides on the Moral, Physical and Spiritual needs of the person. You see, the Philippine Constitution according to Atty. Miguel Abas pointed out that on the three words stated in the law, Two words are swiftly connected on the role of the church to maintain this such for the betterment of the people.

[In like manner, in spite of the most explicit declarations of the Catholic Church, respecting her loyalty and subjection to temporal powers, her enemies fail not to calumniate her doctrine as inimical to the state, and subversive of due subordination. But let our opponents attend to the following authority and public declaration of Pope Clement XIV.]

you see in the words, it says temporal, meaning what their powers have now is just temporary and has nothing to deal with the meddling of the spiritual and moral aspects of the person. You might be thinking as on why Pro RH atheists never and do not deal with morality because their morality is intrinsically evil as what they wanted to insert in our society the culture of Contraception. What happened to the role of the church in the spiritual and moral aspects of a person? Are we to reject what the constitution says or not?

[ addressed to all Catholic bishops in the Christian world. “Be careful,” says he, “that those whose instruction in the law of the gospel is committed to your charge, be made sensible from their very infancy of their sacred obligation of loyalty to their kings, of respect to their authority, and of submission to their laws, not only for wrath, but for conscience sake.” — But princes should not exact, and subjects should not affect to give them ecclesiastical jurisdiction.]

see? You are trying to connect that since the church opposed the RH Bill will they are asking for any ecclesiastical jurisdiction to the bishops. This kind of role is the subjection of the clergies on what the government had implemented with regards to the sustainable policies that are related and needed for the people. So since the RH Bill is not needed and is immoral to our society, the church suggests and strongly opposed any law that will stamp on the morality that the Filipino people had kept for so long.

[St. Athanasius quotes the following strong words from an epistle of the famous confessor Hosius, to Constantius, the Arian emperor: “Cease, I beseech thee, and remember that thou art mortal. Fear the day of judgment, and meddle not with ecclesiastical matters; neither do thou command us in this kind, but rather learn them of us. To thee God hath committed the empire; to us he hath committed what belongs to the Church. And as he who, with a malicious eye, hath designs upon thine empire, opposeth the ordinance of God; so do thou also beware lest, by an improper interference in ecclesiastical matters, thou be made guilty of a great crime. For it is written, Give to Cæsar, &c. Therefore, neither is it lawful for us on earth to hold the empire, neither hast thou, O emperor, power over incense and sacred things.” (St. Athansius, ep. ad solit. vitam agentes.) — And St. Ambrose to Valentinian, the emperor, (who by the ill counsel of his mother Justina, an Arian, required of St. Ambrose to have one church in Milan made over to the Arian heretics) saith: “We pay that which is Cæsar’s to Cæsar, and that which is God’s to God. Tribute is Cæsar’s; it is not denied. The Church is God’s; it cannot verily be yielded to Cæsar; because the temple of God cannot be Cæsar’s right. Be it said, as all must allow to the honour of the emperor, for what is more honourable than that the emperor be said to be the son of the Church? A good emperor is within the Church, but not above the Church.” (St. Ambrose, lib. v. epist. Orat. de Basil, trad]

see? This statement shows how the church reacts on the meddling of the government to the affairs of the church in the moral teachings that they taught for so long. So we can relate it to the RH Bill since this kind of bill welcomes opposing ideas on the church’s stand of Contraception. We have to accept the fact that the Philippines is dominantly Catholic by population, so since the RH Bill is introducing methods that were only favorable to the immoral minorities in our society, you have to deal with the majority of which our country belongst. If you only have the knowledge in reading On the Development of Peoples of Pope Paul VI(1967), and John Paul II in his On the Social Concerns of the Church (1987) , you see how the church responds to any measures that a government will do to defy the church in their society.

Do you know anything about these encyclicals? I think you are not aware in these.



, ,

  1. Replying a Pro RH Advocate [Estanislao Albano] concerning his article in Manila Standard Today Part II « Apocalypsis Jesu Christi

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: