Thursday, May 26, 2011

The Risen Lord Lives on in the Church

An Exegetical Reflection on the Gospel of the Sixth Sunday of Easter A, John 14:1521, May 29, 2011

When the late Abp Antonio Franco, Apostolic Nuncio to the Philippines, visited the Diocese of Borongan, the people were too happy and enthusiastic to meet him. Indeed, all the barangays and towns that dot the around 200-kilometer stretch on Eastern Samar welcomed him with arches, streamers, and standing parade, with men and women, old and young alike, waving their improvised papal flags as the Nuncios convoy passed by. When he visited the northern town of Dolores, for instance, the long queue of people wishing him well was tremendous. One, of course, wonders why such a honor is accorded to him. But the people of God in Eastern Samar had one answerthey know the Nuncio is the representative of the Pope. Most of them have not seen the Pope in person, but the Nuncio was his representative. As the priest who welcomed him at the Borongan Cathedral said, Our people are eager and happy to see you. We know that you come here not only as an Ambassador of the Vatican State to the Philippines, but also as the representative of the Vicar of Christ But now, we are even more joyful, because we are able to see you who represent him. Through you, we wish to reiterate our expression of affection and loyalty to him.

The central message of Easter is that Jesus is alive! But if he cannot be found among the dead, where is he? Where do we encounter him? In todays Gospel, Jesus speaks of the Paraclete. It may be noted that John uses the term another Paraclete to indicate that Jesus is the first Paraclete. Literally, the word means called-toones-side or helper, and has reference to the Holy Spirit that the Father sent as a response to the prayer of his Son. As Paraclete, Jesus revealed the Truth about God the Father to his disciples until his death; but after his Ascension, the Spirit now reveals the Truth about Jesus. Thus, as Paraclete, the Holy Spirit continues the work of Jesus. This is what is meant when Jesus says that I will ask the Father and he will give you another Paracleteto be with you always: the Spirit of Truth (John 14:17a). As Helper, the Spirit will be the source of Truth; and will act as Paraclete, as the disciples suffer hostility from the world. For John, the coming of the Paraclete is the return of Jesus to the community of disciples. That is why Jesus says that, even with his departure, he will not leave them orphaned, because through the Holy Spirit, he will continue to abide with his community. In fact, they will share his life, even as Jesus shares the life of his Father. Thus, the Holy Spirit appears to be the spiritual presence of Jesus in the community. In other words, if we ask the question, where do we meet Jesus? Johns answer is: we encounter him in the Holy Spirit, who is present in the community.

Because Jesus abides in the Church through the Holy Spirit, we are therefore given a very rich understanding of what being Church means. First of all, since, as the First Reading (Acts 8:5-8, 14-17) tells us, the Church in Jerusalem sent Peter and John to confer the Spirit on the developing Christian community to incorporate them fully into the fellowship, this implies that local churches cannot be isolated from

Rome, even as the expanding church in Judea and Samaria cannot severe itself from the Church in Jerusalem. The Holy Spirit that is at work in the mother Church in Jerusalem is shared in the community at Samaria and Judaea. The spiritual presence of Jesus is thus shared and expanded. Until his death, Jesus was physically present only in the community of disciples, but with the coming of the Holy Spirit, he becomes present in all the communities that profess his name, and are at the same time linked to the mother Church in Jerusalem. How do we say this in our time? Perhaps this means that all communities must form a unity with the mother Church in Rome.

Secondly, because the Holy Spirit dwells in the Church, the community is in communion with the Risen Lord. The Risen Lord lives in the Church because the Holy Spirit is there. But quite apart from being present, the community shares the life of the Risen Lord, who shares the life of the Father. For this reason, the Church experiences the continuing action of God among men. The Father is revealed by Jesus and his saving-presence is shared through the Holy Spirit. That is why the Church is an icon of the Trinity: the saving work of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is shared in the Christian community. In other words, being Church is an experience of Trinitarian life.

And finally, this Trinitarian life is lived in love. He who obeys the commandments he has from me is the man who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my Father. I too will love him and reveal himself to him (John 14:21). The fact that the Spirit lives in the Churchthis signifies that the Church is a charismatic Church. There never was a time that the Church was not charismatic, or it is not a Church at all. But this should not be taken to mean that ecstatic experience is always a necessary element of being Church. There was and there will be ecstatic experience; miracles of healing and driving of spirits might be present, but what being charismatic necessarily implies is the observance of the commandment of love, which is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. In fact, in todays Gospel, the presence of the Father is linked with the commandment of love: If you love me and obey the commands I give you, I will ask the Father and he will give you another Paraclete to be with you always: the Spirit of Truth (John 14:15-16).

In contemporary theological reflection, the Church is viewed as a Church of Communion, and there is no doubt that todays Gospel provides a solid basis for such a theology. In the Church, the members are in communion with the Trinitarian God and with one another. In practice, this implies that the love of God dwells in the community and is shared among the members. On the other hand, the members are assured of the presence of the Trinity by their observance of the lovecommandment. Their love for one another is a sign that the Trinity dwells in the Church. Which means that it is not enough to view the Church simply as an institution. Of course, to see the Church as a structured visible society has it own merits, but to look at the Church as a Communion is to emphasize the work of grace that unites all members in Christ and draws them into the communion with the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. Posted by Msgr. Lope C. Robredillo at 6:40 AM 0 comments Saturday, May 21, 2011 Jesus the Risen Lord--The Way to the Father

An Exegetical Reflection on the Gospel of the Fifth Sunday of Easter A, John 14:1-12, May 22, 2011

One of the recurring themes of the late (now Blessed) John Paul IIs visit to Ukraine on June 23-27, 2001 was unity. In his Mass at the hippodrome of Lviv for the beatification of Bp Josef Bilczewski and Fr Zygmunt Gorazdowski, he said, for instance: Let us feel ourselves gently nudged to recognize the infidelities to the Gospel of not a few Christians of both Polish and Ukrainian origin living in these parts. It is time to leave behind the sorrowful past. The Christians of two nations must walk together in the name of one Christ May the purification of historical memories lead everyone to work for the triumph of what unities over what divides, in order to build together a future of mutual respect, fraternal cooperation and true solidarity. At the Lviv airport before leaving for Rome, he said that unity is the secret of peace and the condition for a true and stable social progress.

This means not only that nations should not quarrel, but also that a nation may isolate herself. Like America. As Michael Hirsh puts it in his article The Death of the Founding Myth Newsweek (Special Davos Edition), like it or notand clearly large numbers of Americans dontwe Americans are now part of an organic whole with the world that George Washington wanted to keep distant. The international community consists of nations that have different characters but are sinewed together through deeper markets than have ever existed and a historic level consensus on the general shape of societies, politics, human rights and international law. For a Christian, however, there is a deeper rationale behind human solidarity. There is something that engulfs all of us, draws us together, and to which our earthly pilgrimage leads us. That something is our origin in God, and we will be at peace with ourselves and with others only when we have become united not only with mankind but with God himself. Thus, St Augustine can say that our heart has been made for God, and it will remain restless until it rests on him.

Which is why Jesus, in todays Gospel, speaks of preparing a place for us so that where he is we may also be: In my Fathers house there are many dwelling places I am indeed going to prepare a place for you and then I shall come back to take you with me, that where I am you also may be (John 14:2-3). But how can one dwell in the mansion of God? How can he be united with the Father? Jewish conventional wisdom teaches that it is achieved through the observance of the law: Who shall sojourn in your tent? Who shall dwell in your holy mountain? He who walks blamelessly and does justice (Ps 15:1-2). Literally of course, the text is about ones being worthy to enter Gods sanctuary, but the substance is there. Thus Prophet Baruch: Had you walked in the way of the Lord, you would have dwelt in enduring peace (Bar 3:13). For a Christian, however, it would not be enough to follow the law. Keeping the law may bring some form of peace to a person or to a community, but it would never bring one to an experience of Gods life. It is not insignificant that Matthew makes Jesus declare: Unless your holiness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of God (Matt 5:20).

The unity with God is given to a Christian not so much by following the law, as by being in communion with Jesus, for no one comes to the Father but through me (John 14:6b). To bring home the point, John has Jesus say: I am the way, the truth and the life (John 14:6a). These three terms used to describe Jesus has to be explained. The term way depicts the mediatorial role of Jesus between the community of men and God the Father. It is unfortunately that, for some people, religion is about theories or laws that should regulate relationships. Of course, these are important, but these do not belong to the heart of Christianity. It is not even about duplicating the crucifixion, as some people are inclined to think. Christianity is first of all about the person of Jesus. It is Jesus who is the way to God, not a formula to be observed or magic words to be uttered. If we wish to be united with the Father, then we have to be united with Jesus, we have to be committed to him, and follow his way of life. That is why Paul can say: Continue to live in Christ the Lord in the spirit which you receive him (Col 2:6). The way of life that he lived, which is that of a loving obedience to the Fathers will, is what is of importance. Hence, Paul says: Follow the way of love, even as Christ loved you. He gave himself for us as an offering to God, a gift of pleasing fragrance (Eph 5:2).

The claim that he is the truth underlines his mediation of the Fathers revelation. He is the way precisely because he is the truth. This recalls what the Matthean Jesus affirms: No one knows the Son but the Father, and no one knows the Father but the Sonand anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him (Matt 11:27). It is strange that some people are anxious to hear about new revelation from God, when God has already fully revealed himself in Jesus. The life of Jesus, that is the life of God; what Jesus taught, that is the teaching of God. In the words of a New Testament writer, in this the final age, [God] has spoken to us through his Son (Heb 1:1). John himself makes a similar affirmation: No one has ever seen God. It is God, the only Son, ever at the Fathers side, who has revealed him (John 1:18). Hence, if we wish to know the goal of our existence, and the way how to reach it, we only have to hear it from Jesus himself.

The reason for this is that he is the life. If the term way depicts his mediatorial role between God and men, and if truth expresses his mediation of revelation, the term life used to describe Jesus emphasizes his mediation of salvation, which is none other then life with God, unity with him. As we noted earlier, it is only in being in communion with Jesus that one can be in communion with the Father. It is for this unity and life that he came: I came that they may have life, and have it to the full (John 10:10). So long as we do not have life, our heart will remain restless, because it was for the experience of this life that we were created. In fact, the present realization that all mankind is just one family, the experience that after all the world is one global villagethis is to be taken as sign that finally the world is becoming aware that we are moving to a certain goal, which for a Christian is none other than union with God, but made possible through union with the risen Lord. Posted by Msgr. Lope C. Robredillo at 5:36 PM 0 comments Saturday, May 14, 2011 What Leadership Is Really All About An Exegetical Reflection on the Gospel of the Fourth Sunday of Easter, Year A, John 10:1-10

In a collection of essays assessing the Estrada years entitled, Between Fires, edited by Amando Doronilla, Katrina Constantino-David, in Surviving Erap, said of Eraps leadership: There was no shred of professionalism and decency in his government. Here was a president who did not have any capacity to govern and did not care. Here was an administration where Cabinet members were routinely denied the courtesy of trust and where cronies and relatives treated the state as their own private playground. Here was a government that had squandered all the goodwill and hope that the masses had placed in it. At that moment, I became convinced beyond any doubt that this was an administration I could no longer be part of, and that this was a president who would only bring the entire nation down. Probably, no one challenged Davids right to criticize Eraps government. After all, she was an insider, and knew where she spoke. But listen to this: We stand by the moral conviction, said the Presbyteral Council of the Archdiocese of Manila, that [Estrada] has lost the moral ascendancy to govern. This was said in the last days of the Estrada regime. Some quarters viewed this statement as a form of interference of the Church in what they perceived as an exclusive domain of the State. They thought that Christ never bequeathed to the Church a mission to proclaim a message of such nature.

Nothing, of course, could be farther from the truth. The Church has a prophetic function, and in the Old Testament, the prophets could not, on Gods instruction, remain silent in the face of injustice committed against his people. Prophet Ezekiel accused the political and religious leaders of his time of various offenses which have a very contemporary ring: instead of taking care of the people, they took care of themselves; they enriched themselves in office while the people wallowed in poverty; they failed to look after the sick, the poor and the oppressed; they ruled them harshly and cruelly; and instead of uniting them, they scattered them. If the people suffered in their exile in Babylon, it was the fault of the political and religious leaders who never concerned themselves with the welfare of the people. They were only after their own interest which they identified with the interest of the nation (Ezek 34:1-6).

Himself a prophet, Jesus followed the prophetic tradition. According to John, the leaders misgoverned the nation, as evidenced by the way they treated the man born blind (John 9:1-42). They themselves were blind to the needs of the poor and the disadvantaged, because they chose to see only their advantages and privileges. The fact that John tells us the parable of the good shepherd (John 10:1-6) immediately after the story of the man born blind indicates that, for him, these leaders were blind guides because they failed to recognize Gods work in Jesus who cares for people, even as he cared for the man born blind. Not surprisingly, in todays Gospel, Jesus carries on the prophetic critique against the political and religious leaders of his time. For him, these leaders of Israel had no claim to real leadership. He calls them thieves and bandits: Whoever does not enter the sheepfold through the gate but climbs in some other way is a thief and a marauder (John 10:2). Here it is most likely that Jesus has in mind the Sadducees and the Pharisees, and is probably comparing them with the high priests, the religio-political leaders, at the time of the Maccabees. Of course, the Sadducees controlled the Temple complex, and it is curious as well as instructive that in Marks Gospel, Jesus refers to the Temple as a den of thieves (Mark 11:17-18). One wonders whether in Mark, the thieves have reference to the priestly aristocracy that dominated it.

There is something positive, of course, in todays Gospel. In sharp contrast with them, Jesus presents himself as the shepherd of the sheep (John 10:2b). In depicting Jesus under the image of a shepherd, it is most likely that John is teaching that Jesus fulfills Gods promise that he will send a shepherd after the figure of David. As the true shepherd of Israel, Jesus lays down his life for his people, unlike a thief who seeks their death. Rather than taking advantage of them, he willingly sacrifices his life for them. He takes so much care of them that he knows each by name: The sheep hear his voice and he calls his own by name, and he leads them out (John 10:3). But if he is intimately close to his flock, if he wholeheartedly gives up his life for his people, it is because all he wants is to give them life, life in abundance: I came that they might have life, and have it to the full (John 10:10). By life John, of course, means the life that a disciple shares with God, which implies love and unity that prevail in the community of disciples. It is divine life shared among community members.

That is what leadership is all about. It is not about having more (in terms of wealth, power and prestige), but about giving up. This is what biblical language describes as good shepherding. Shepherding applies not only in the Church but also in the secular worldin business and economy, culture and politics. What this means in politics, in the present circumstances, the Bishops of the Philippines put it this way: We need a President whom the people can look up to, who can inspire confidence and motivate them to unite and conspire towards the common good. Leadership is not the same as popularity or prowess in oratory. Neither is it the capacity to manipulate people towards self-serving ends. Leadership is rather a way of serving that draws people together and draws the best from them so that they dare to forge a better future despite all obstacles (CBCP, Pastoral Exhortation on the 1998 Elections). In business, to shepherd could, for instance, mean to attract, retain, and motivate individualsrecognizing their intrinsic differences and lifestylesand to assist and make possible in every way the achievement of their personal objectives in the accomplishment of our corporate goals. Posted by Msgr. Lope C. Robredillo at 12:48 AM 0 comments Older Posts Home

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

From Tower of Babel to Church of Communion
An Exegetical Reflection on the Gospel of Pentecost Sunday, Year A, John 20:19-23, June 11, 2011. Since all political parties in the Philippines are expected to offer platforms through which they can help solve national problems, would it be a sound idea to bring them together to discuss the ills of the country? One could not agree more. It might recalled that, a decade or so ago, an All Parties Conference summit was organized to bring together 12 national parties, 8 regional

parties and 12 party-list groups, to address problems of our political system. But amid the disclosure of the result of a UP survey indicating that Filipinos were becoming disenchanted with our kind of democracy and system of government, the summit, which has Modernizing the Political Institutions of a Democratic and Prosperous National Community for its theme, opened on sour note, as one daily headlined it. The LDP (Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino), the PDP-Laban and the Reporma-Lapiang Manggagawa boycotted it. The party-list groups Bayan Muna, Bagong Alyansang Makabayan and Sanlakas refused to join it. Each opposition party. of course, had its own agenda for not coming to it, but nationalism, reconciliation and communion could hardly be invoked. If anything, all this shows how fractious and fragmented we could get a dubious distinction that could be duplicated in many attempts to forge national unity.. If this event had any indication, it is that we are still far removed from being a people of reconciliation and communion. This brings to mind the famous story of the tower of Babel (Gen 11:1-9) in the First Reading of Pentecost Vigil. According to the narrative, the people of Shinar wanted to build a city with a tower, but God punished them. As can be inferred from v 4 (to make a name for themselves, lest we be scattered), it seems that they sinned not only for trying to make a name for themselves on their own initiative and quite independent of God, but also for refusing the command of God to fill the earth (1:28). Of course, others think that their sin consists in trying to build a tower with its top in the sky (11:4) as a sign of pride and rebellion against God, but there seems to be no basis for this conclusion. At any rate, as used in the narrative, the story is meant to teach us about the ongoing sin of man and, when read together with the next chapter, which focuses on Abraham, about true greatness whose origin is God (12:2), and about the birth of Israel through whom all nations will be blest. Originally, however, the story was an aetiological legend about the origin of the diversity of languages and nations. In v 7, the Yahwist writer uses the word balal, which means to mix, to confuse: Come, let us go down and confuse the language. The city, with its tower, was left unfinished because Yahweh confounded the speech of the builders; hence, its name became Babel, or confusion. In English, the word babble means confused or incoherent speech. Because of the confusion of language, people could no longer understand each other; on the contrary, unable to reach agreement, they could not be united. Hence, the quarrel among nations, and their lack of communion and reconciliation. Because they could not get through their head, they were fractious and fragmented. Today, we celebrate the feast of Pentecost. For Christians, it is not simply the 50th day after the Lords resurrection; rather, it is also the time when the Church, through the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, received its mission to bring all people to God. Thus, in the Gospel, Jesus gives the Holy Spirit to the early Church: As the Father has sent me, so I send you. Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive mens sins, they are forgiven them. If you hold them bound, they are held bound (John 20:21.23). Pentecost signifies that the risen Lord is active in the world, reconciling all men to God and to one another. Thus, one of the theological meanings of the event is that Pentecost is a time of reconciliation and communion. Indeed, from linguistic evidence, there is no doubt that the account in the First Reading (Acts 2:1-11) is meant to reverse the experience of Babel. Luke says that the Jews who came from every nation under heaven and were staying in Jerusalem witnessed the outpouring of the Spirit on the apostles, they were much confused because each one heard these men speaking his own language. The whole occurrence astonished them (Acts 2:6). If in the story of the tower of Babel, people were confused because of their different languages, here the Jews who came from every nation on earth were confused because each one heard the apostles speaking in his own particular language. Thus, Pentecost overcomes the division of men at Babel. That is why Luke uses tongues as of fire (v 3) to convey this signification. This means that through the tongue of the Spirit, which is ultimately charity, all men will be reconciled. Pentecost is thus a time of reconciliation and fraternal communion. It might be difficult to expect our political parties to be reconciled to one another and establish fraternal communion so that the country could move toward achieving the kind of society that our constitution envisages. But a Christian always expects that the Church be a community of reconciliation and communion. And precisely because the Spirit that was poured out at Pentecost is active in the Church, such a community could be promoted if Christians are to be informed

with a spirituality of communion. According to John Paul II in his Tertio Millennio Adveniente, this spirituality means that we are able to think of our brothers and sisters in the faith within the profound unity of the mystical body; it means sharing their joys and sufferings; it implies the ability to see what is positive in others; it means knowing how to make room for others, bearing their burdens, and resisting temptations that constantly beset us and provoke competition, careerism, distrust and jealous; and above all, it means our contemplation of the Trinity dwelling in us. If people can see this spirituality shining on our faces, they will certainly recognize the miracle of Pentecost working in the Church and, who knows, our political structure and system could be affected in the long run. And the Babel among our political parties will be transformed into reconciliation and communion. Posted by Msgr. Lope C. Robredillo at 10:55 AM 0 comments

Friday, June 3, 2011

Are All Religions and Sects the Same and Equal?
An Exegetical Reflection on the Gospel of the Feast of Ascension, Year A, Matt 28:16-20, June 5, 2011 One time, I happened to meet a man in his 50s who has gone to various Christian denominations and sects. In the end, he settled for a born-again community that he felt answered his affective needs. I recalled that he believed all religions were the same, and so it did not matter to him which religion was true. What was important for him was that the particular sect he had chosen assured him that he was saved. This line of thought that all religions are the samethis is rather common even among the educated. Of course, when one scans the spectrum of religions, he may observe that they appear to be all the samethey teach about God (under different names) and good behavior, they observe certain rites, and call everyone to conversion. No wonder, some people would advocate pluralism in religion. They would tell us that all religions are of equal value, and are ways to salvation, and what is decisive is that one follows the religion he professes. Indeed, others go even as far as saying that what one believes does not matter; what is decisive is what he does. It would seem, however, that todays Gospel does not accept that line of thinking. From a Christian point of view, the most decisive act of God in history is his revelation in Jesus. As we noted in the previous Sundays, that revelation was unfortunately rejected. Jesus preaching of the Kingdom of God and his demand of conversion fell on deaf ears; in fact, his enemies crucified him, and they thought that was he end of him. But God was with him. The Father raised him from the dead. His causethe Kingdom of Godwas entirely correct, and the resurrection vindicated him. Hence, the mission he began must be continued. That is why, in todays Gospel, Jesus gives his disciples the so-called Great Commission: Full authority has been given to me both in heaven and on earth; go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations. Baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Teach them to carry out everything I have commanded you (Matt 28:18b-20a). Since Jesus could no longer personally continue his mission, because he has already ascended to the Father, the Christian community where his Spirit lives on must carry on the cause. The disciples must proclaim the Gospel, and those who accepted it have to be brought to the community through faith and baptism. That is why the Church continues to send missionaries to bring people to the fold. Does this mean that we will have to reject other religions? There is no question about ittoday we are in the age of inter-religious dialogue. We can no longer go back to the time when Christians had almost nothing good to say of other religions. Nowadays, we seek dialogue, trying as we do to explore areas where we can agree with believers of other faiths, mindful as we are that God can speak, too, through other religions. Of course, in the practical level alone, dialogue is important. For us, Filipinos, dialogue with our Muslim brothers is of paramount significance. In the words of the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines (PCP-II), (1) our history as a Christian people has pitted us against them in a long series of religious conflicts, and lowland

Filipinos still suffer today from its psychological and cultural effects. And (2) we are part of the Asian region and Asia contains the bulk of the worlds Islamic countries. We need, therefore, to take a closer look at inter-religious dialogue as an imperative of mission. Part of this dialogue that has to be encouraged is the dialogue of life. The PCP II was happy to note that in the areas of Mindanao and Sulu where Muslims and Christians live and work together, a dialogue of life is taking place. In daily life they witness to each other to their own religious values and both contribute to the building of a just society. But inter-religious dialogue cannot mean a compromise of the Christian uniqueness and the command of Jesus to carry on his work. As the Declaration of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Dominus Iesus (On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church) says, it would be contrary to the faith to consider the Church as one way of salvation alongside those constituted by the other religions, seen as complementary to the Church or substantially equivalent to her, even if these are said to be converging with the Church toward the eschatological kingdom of God. x x x With the coming of the Savior Jesus Christ, God has willed that the Church founded by him to be the instrument for the salvation of all humanity (cf Acts 17:30-31). This truth of faith does not lessen the sincere respect which the Church has for the religions of the world, but at the same time, it rules out, in a radical way, that mentality of indifferentism characterized by a religious relativism which leads to the belief that one religion is as good as another If it is true that the followers of other religions can receive divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking, they are in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the Church, have the fullness of the means of salvation. Therefore, even as the Church advocates inter-religious dialogue, she cannot surrender the mandate that Jesus gave to the Church in todays Gospel. She must preach the Gospel to all nations, and those who accept it must be baptized and admitted to the historical embodiment of the Kingdom of God. Following the Lords command (cf Matt 28:19-20) and as a requirement of her love for all people, the Church proclaims and is in duty bound to proclaim without faith Christ who is the way, the truth and the lie (John 14:6). In him, in whom God reconciled all things to himself (cf 2 Cor 5:18-19), men find the fullness of their religious life. Says the Declaration: Indeed, the Church, guided by charity and respect for freedom, must be primarily committed to proclaiming to all people the truth definitively revealed by the Lord, and to announcing the necessity of conversion to Jesus Christ and of adherence to the Church through Baptism and the other sacraments, in order to participate fully in communion with God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Thus, the certainty of the universal salvific will of God does not diminish but rather increases the duty and urgency of the proclamation of salvation and of conversion to the Lord Jesus Christ.* Posted by Msgr. Lope C. Robredillo at 7:24 PM 0 comments

Thursday, May 26, 2011

The Risen Lord Lives on in the Church
An Exegetical Reflection on the Gospel of the Sixth Sunday of Easter A, John 14:15-21, May 29, 2011 When the late Abp Antonio Franco, Apostolic Nuncio to the Philippines, visited the Diocese of Borongan, the people were too happy and enthusiastic to meet him. Indeed, all the barangays and towns that dot the around 200-kilometer stretch on Eastern Samar welcomed him with arches, streamers, and standing parade, with men and women, old and young alike, waving their improvised papal flags as the Nuncios convoy passed by. When he visited the northern town of Dolores, for instance, the long queue of people wishing him well was tremendous. One, of course, wonders why such a honor is accorded to him. But the people of God in Eastern Samar had one answerthey know the Nuncio is the representative of the Pope. Most of them have not seen the Pope in person, but the Nuncio was his representative. As the priest who welcomed him at the Borongan Cathedral said, Our people are eager and happy to see you. We know that you

come here not only as an Ambassador of the Vatican State to the Philippines, but also as the representative of the Vicar of Christ But now, we are even more joyful, because we are able to see you who represent him. Through you, we wish to reiterate our expression of affection and loyalty to him. The central message of Easter is that Jesus is alive! But if he cannot be found among the dead, where is he? Where do we encounter him? In todays Gospel, Jesus speaks of the Paraclete. It may be noted that John uses the term another Paracleteto indicate that Jesus is the first Paraclete. Literally, the word means called-to-ones-side or helper, and has reference to the Holy Spirit that the Father sent as a response to the prayer of his Son. As Paraclete, Jesus revealed the Truth about God the Father to his disciples until his death; but after his Ascension, the Spirit now reveals the Truth about Jesus. Thus, as Paraclete, the Holy Spirit continues the work of Jesus. This is what is meant when Jesus says that I will ask the Father and he will give you another Paracleteto be with you always: the Spirit of Truth (John 14:17a). As Helper, the Spirit will be the source of Truth; and will act as Paraclete, as the disciples suffer hostility from the world. For John, the coming of the Paraclete is the return of Jesus to the community of disciples. That is why Jesus says that, even with his departure, he will not leave them orphaned, because through the Holy Spirit, he will continue to abide with his community. In fact, they will share his life, even as Jesus shares the life of his Father. Thus, the Holy Spirit appears to be the spiritual presence of Jesus in the community. In other words, if we ask the question, where do we meet Jesus? Johns answer is: we encounter him in the Holy Spirit, who is present in the community. Because Jesus abides in the Church through the Holy Spirit, we are therefore given a very rich understanding of what being Church means. First of all, since, as the First Reading (Acts 8:5-8, 14-17) tells us, the Church in Jerusalem sent Peter and John to confer the Spirit on the developing Christian community to incorporate them fully into the fellowship, this implies that local churches cannot be isolated from Rome, even as the expanding church in Judea and Samaria cannot severe itself from the Church in Jerusalem. The Holy Spirit that is at work in the mother Church in Jerusalem is shared in the community at Samaria and Judaea. The spiritual presence of Jesus is thus shared and expanded. Until his death, Jesus was physically present only in the community of disciples, but with the coming of the Holy Spirit, he becomes present in all the communities that profess his name, and are at the same time linked to the mother Church in Jerusalem. How do we say this in our time? Perhaps this means that all communities must form a unity with the mother Church in Rome. Secondly, because the Holy Spirit dwells in the Church, the community is in communion with the Risen Lord. The Risen Lord lives in the Church because the Holy Spirit is there. But quite apart from being present, the community shares the life of the Risen Lord, who shares the life of the Father. For this reason, the Church experiences the continuing action of God among men. The Father is revealed by Jesus and his saving-presence is shared through the Holy Spirit. That is why the Church is an icon of the Trinity: the saving work of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is shared in the Christian community. In other words, being Church is an experience of Trinitarian life. And finally, this Trinitarian life is lived in love. He who obeys the commandments he has from me is the man who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my Father. I too will love him and reveal himself to him (John 14:21). The fact that the Spirit lives in the Churchthis signifies that the Church is a charismatic Church. There never was a time that the Church was not charismatic, or it is not a Church at all. But this should not be taken to mean that ecstatic experience is always a necessary element of being Church. There was and there will be ecstatic experience; miracles of healing and driving of spirits might be present, but what being charismatic necessarily implies is the observance of the commandment of love, which is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. In fact, in todays Gospel, the presence of the Father is linked with the commandment of love: If you love me and obey the commands I give you, I will ask the Father and he will give you another Paraclete to be with you always: the Spirit of Truth (John 14:15-16).

In contemporary theological reflection, the Church is viewed as a Church of Communion, and there is no doubt that todays Gospel provides a solid basis for such a theology. In the Church, the members are in communion with the Trinitarian God and with one another. In practice, this implies that the love of God dwells in the community and is shared among the members. On the other hand, the members are assured of the presence of the Trinity by their observance of the love-commandment. Their love for one another is a sign that the Trinity dwells in the Church. Which means that it is not enough to view the Church simply as an institution. Of course, to see the Church as a structured visible society has its own merits, but to look at the Church as a Communion is to emphasize the work of grace that unites all members in Christ and draws them into the communion with the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. Posted by Msgr. Lope C. Robredillo at 6:40 AM

Wall Photos USE THE RIGHT WORDHOW DO YOU SAY TO WASH IN BINISAYA? Well, the Estehanon uses several verbs whose generally shared elements have to do with water and cleaning. Here are 28 ways: [1] To wash one's mouth to remove food particlesPAGLIMUGMOG <Nagpalimugmog hi Anastacio, kay nakatadi hiya hin sobra kapait>; [2] To wash the feetPAGPUSA <pinanmusaan han padi an mga apostol>; [3] To wash ones legsPAGHINSAW <naghinsaw hi Maria katima magbinakgtas>; [4] To wash clothesPAGBUNAK <ginbunakan ni Pedro an iya sarwal> (today, Estehanons more frequently use the word [5] PAGLABA, derived from the Spanish lavar, instead of pagbunak; but the latter is pre-Hispanic); [6] To wash ones privatesPAG-USAW <Inusaw hi Josefa san-o kumaturog>; but synonymous with "Pag-usaw" is [7] PAGNAGNAG, but often used colloquially <Nagsiring hi Procopia kay Onesima nga iya anak, "Sima, nagnag anay san-o ka humigda">. [8] To wash ones handsPAGHUNAW <paghunaw anay kamo san-o kumaon>; [9] To rinsePAGBULYAS <ginbulyasan ni Petra an sinabon nga panapton>; [10] To wash something, as a surfacePAGHUNAS <ginhunasan niya an lamesa>; [11] To wash something or a part of ones body with a cloth PAGPUNAS <Ginpunasan ni Marga an bayhon ni Andres>; [12] To wash or clean a surface usually with a cloth exclusively for cleaning PAGHINIS <Ginhinisan an salog nga inihian han bata>; [13] To wash fish, or something usually not thoroughly--PAGNAWNAW <Ginnawnawan an isda ha planggana>; [14] To wash or clean a wound, usually with a concoctionPAGDANGGAS <Gindanggasan ni Ofelia an iya kasamdan ha bitiis>; [15] To wash the entire body or to bathePAGPARIGO <Pinarigo an ak umankon ha uran>; [16] To wash or clean something, usually utensils or instrumentsPAGHUGAS <Pinanhugasan na ni Ibyang an mga baso ug plato>; [17] To wash ones facePAGHIRAM-OS <Naghiram-os hi Antonia kay nalamid-an an iya kahimo>; [18] To wash ones self after bathing in a pool or river/sea, or after rubbing ones self with soapPAGTALIMSAW <Tinalimsaw hi Segunda katima pumarigo ha dagat>; but pagtalimsaw can be used as a metaphor to mean to taste or experience something different in order to break the monotony <Tinalimsaw kami han salmon, kay permi na man la manok><Kinadto kami ha Manila, pagtalimsaw na man la tikang hit irayanhon nga kinabuhi> ; [19] Almost synonymous with "Pagtallimsaw" is PAGTAB-AS or [20] PAGTAYUB-AS, although it is generally used to describe bathing in fresh water after swimming in sea water, but it can be used metaphorically to mean taking a drink of lower alcohol content after consuming a drink of high alcohol content <Tinab-as kami han San Mig kay nag-ininom kami han Chivas Regal>. [21] To wash a surface (e.g., floor, deck) by flushing out the dirt with water from a pailPAGBALDIYO (from the

Spanish baldear) <Ginbaldiyohan ni Anita an salog katapus manimog an bagyo>; [22] To immerse the whole body in water, usually in a river, if briefly, for the purpose of cleaning/washing oneself and cooling oneself in a hot weatherPAGLUGOM <Linug-om hi Mario ha salug, dara han kamapaso hit adlaw>; [23] To wash or to rinse (anything)PAGWASWAS (derived from the English word to wash, dating back to the American period) <Ginwaswasan hi Jacinto an pedikab>; [24] To wash out or eliminate uselessly or destroy by waterPAGWASIWAS <Ginwasiwas ni Ondoy an mga balay ha ligid han salug> but pagwasiwas can be used metaphorically to mean to deplete <Ginwasiwas han taga-Mabini an pagkaon nira Gonding han patron>. [25] To wash the outer part of the upper orifice--PAGHIMGO <Ginhimgoan ni Maria an iya anak, kay buringot na> [26] To wash one's face or any part of the body with a face towel or a towelette--PAGLABAR ( from the Spanish, lavar) <Naglabar anay hi Manolito san-o lumakat ngadto ha singbahan>; and [27] To wash an object, usually a sea shell, by shaking it in water PAGLUSGOS < Miguel, paglusgosi an im' musikad >; [28] To wash clothes with wood or with one's feet-PAGYAKYAK <Ginyakyakan ni Golondrina an iya saya didto ha salog>. By: Eastern Samar History and Culture WEDNESDAY, JUNE 22, 2011 The Eucharist, Greed and the Poor in Our Midst Exegetical Reflection on the Gospel of the Solemnity of the Body and Blood of the Lord, Year A, John 6:51-58, June 26, 2011 Last Sunday (June 19), Federico Pascual raised a rhetorical question in his column Postcript, Why spend P400 million in rehabilitating Macabalan Port in Cagayan de Oro when a French contractor of modular ro-ro (roll-on, roll-off) ports has a standing offer to build a new wharf and passenger terminal for only P143 million? Palace watchers described this as patently disadvantageous to the government, while former Senator Nene Pimentel called in plain and simple highway robbery. And what motives people to do thisgreed? This calls to mind the twists and turns in the court battles among lawyers over the coconut levy in the Philippines. The levy, as Neal Cruz put it in simple terms, was imposed and collected by the government for public purposes to benefit coconut farmers. It is clear that it is a public fund. The clarity and simplicity of it is clear to laymen; it is only lawyers who make it confusing. It being an enormous sum, many want to take hold of it. In an earlier column, Cruz asserts: Greed is still the top sin of Filipinos. And ironically, the richer they are, the greedier they become. Hence, while there are billions of sequestered pesos and dollars still out there waiting there will always be commissioners who will try to negotiate a compromise for a piece of action. Treasure hunting is a popular endeavor in the Philippines. It is easier to dream of instant riches than to work hard for it. And the coco levy [is] like the fabled Yamashita treasure that continues to boggle the imagination and whet the appetite of scores of treasure hunter. Greed is the exact opposite of what todays feast of Corpus et Sanguis Christi implieswhich is sharing so others might live. But that is going ahead of what should be noted first. Todays Gospel is the second part of Jesus discourse on the bread of life (John 6:35-58). Whereas in the first part (vv 35-50), the nourishing heavenly bread is the teaching of Jesus, in this second one (vv 51-58), it is the Eucharist. Though both parts speak of giving life, they differ in that, while in the first part eternal life is given through belief, in the second it comes from feeding on the flesh and drinking the blood of Jesus. Thus, this section has a Eucharistic theme, and exclusive so. Raymond Brown notes two impressive indications that the Eucharist is in mind. First, the narrative stresses the eating of Jesus flesh and the drinking of his bloodwhich cannot be taken as a metaphor or symbolically. Rather, if Jesus words about eating his flesh and drinking his blood are to have any favorable meaning, they must refer to the Eucharist, reproducing the words of institution in the Synoptics. Second, what Jesus says in v 51 (The bread that I shall give is my flesh for the life of the world) resembles the Lucan form of the words of institution (This is my body which is given for you), and most likely preserves the Johannine form of the words of institution. Thus, for John, eternal life is given to those who communicate the body and blood of Jesus.

The objection at the beginning of this section, how can he give us his flesh to eat (v 52) probably reflects the Jewish criticism of the Johannine Christian community ritual, since Jews were forbidden to eat meat with blood (Lev 17:10-11). But as the whole section indicates, the eating of his body and drinking of his blood have nothing to do with cannibalism. Rather, they are about sacramental communion. After giving up himself in the sacrifice on the cross, he will give himself in the sacrament. And considering that in the Old Testament, the body and blood expresses human life, the Evangelist most likely implies that in the Eucharist the communicant receives the whole living Jesus. In other words, Jesus is totally present in the eucharistic bread and wine that the believer receives. In the sacramental communion, Jesus shares his very life with the communicating believer: The man who feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remain in me and I in him (v 56). No wonder, Paul declares to the Christians in Corinth, Is not the cup of blessing we bless, a sharing in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread we break, a sharing in the body of Christ? (1 Cor 10:16). For John, however, there is first of all a mutual indwelling in the Eucharist: Jesus remains in the Christian, and the Christian remains in Jesus. Moreover, just as the life of the Son and the Father is one (cf John 14:10), so the man who receives the Eucharist shares the very life of God himself. However, to receive the Eucharist is not only to be involved in the very life of God himself. If one shares in the life of the Son and the Father, he is joined to the whole body of believers. It is in this sense that Paul, in the second reading, speaks of the sharing in the body of Christ. Because the loaf of bread is one, we, many though we are, are one body, for we all partake of one loaf (1 Cor 10:17). In receiving the Eucharist, Christians are joined to Christ and to one another. They are established as one community in which Christ is a communal possession. Consequently, Christians who receive the Eucharist cannot be greedy or engaged in monopoly, still less take what do not belong to them. To the contrary, by the very act of sharing in it, they commit themselves to share their life and possession with other members in the Christian community. The rich, for example, cannot continue receiving the life of God without sharing their wealth with the poor, for that would be anomalous. In light of this, a Christian cannot but make a crusade for the writing off of foreign debts by poor countries; indeed, in the light of the meaning of the Eucharist, wealthy nations and institutions must right the wrong in the international economic order in which the poor get poorer, and the rich get richer. On a positive note, this teaching reminds us of a plan, made some time ago when Jojo Binay was still the mayor of Makati, of the rich barangays in Makati to support the poor barangays. We were told that the mayor came up with a new budget sharing, named Paluwagan sa Barangay. It was reported that under this scheme that responded to the appeal of the poorer barangays, each barangay in Makati would submit its list of priority projects to the city council. But it would be the engineering and public works department that would select the projects, and the size of the budget allocated for barangaybased projects would determine the number of projects to be approved. The cost of one project of a barangay was to be equally divided among the citys 32 barangays, including the rich ones. This was Makatis way of improving on the current practice in which the budget of each barangay is determined by its real property tax share and internal revenue allotment (IRA), the poor barangays receiving small budget allocation. Posted by Msgr. Lope C. Robredilloat 10:38 PM