8 REASONS WHY CATHOLICS SUPPORT RH by Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago

by RH Bill Portal on Saturday, September 15, 2012 at 10:58pm ·

 (Keynote speech at the program sponsored by the Catholics for Reproductive Health, on15 September 2012, at the UP College of Social Work and Development)

 REASON ONE
The Catholic Church Does Not Consider Anti-RH Teaching as Infallible

Theology consists of critical reflection on faith. St. Anselm of Canterbury gave to us the classic definition of theology as: “Faith seeking understanding.” But theology is the result not only of faith, but also of certain normative rules which fall into two categories: doctrines and dogmas. Doctrines consist of beliefs or teachings which receive the official approval of the Church.

But by contrast, dogmas, which literally mean “what is right,” are doctrines that are taught definitively and promulgated with the highest solemnity. In other words, dogmas are the definitive rules of faith. If you reject a dogma, you become a heretic. Parenthetically, it is very strange that our Church has failed to enumerate what are the Catholic dogmas.

A teaching which is dogma is infallible; but a teaching which is mere doctrine is not infallible. A doctrine can change over time. Thus, the 1973 Mysterium Ecclesiae, a declaration issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith states: “The expressions of revelation are historically conditioned, and therefore the meaning is not always self-evident to those in some other historical setting. The meaning in dogmatic language may change from one historical period to another. The truth itself may be expressed incompletely.”

In his classic bestseller, the 1994 revised edition of the book entitled Catholicism, Richard P. McBrien of the University of Notre Dame, said: “The Church has never explicitly claimed to such infallibility on a moral question.” The RH issue is a moral question. The Catholic Church has never claimed that any pronouncement on the RH issue is infallible.

And in the 1996 book Christ Among Us, Anthony Wilhelm said that on the question of contraception: “The large majority of theologians agree that no question of infallibility is involved.”

REASON TWO
The Catholic Enjoys Freedom of Conscience

Every Catholic, like any citizen, enjoys freedom of conscience. In fact, modern theology now recognizes the primacy of conscience over mere doctrines formulated by certain clerics. In 1965, Pope Paul 6 issued an encyclical letter entitled Dignitatis Humanae, also known as Declaration on Religious Freedom. The Pope wrote: “Man perceives and acknowledges the imperatives of the divine law through the mediation of conscience. In all his activity, a man is bound to follow his conscience in order that he may come to God, the end and purpose of living. It follows that he is not to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his conscience.”

In 1967, the same Pope Paul 6 issued another encyclical entitled Populorum Progreso, also known as “On the Development of Peoples.” The Pope said: “It is for the parish to decide, with full knowledge of the matter, on the number of their children . . . in all these they must follow the demands of their own conscience.”

The 1971 statement by the US Sacred Congregation for the Clergy states: “Conscience is invulnerable and no person is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his (or her) conscience.”

Years later, in 1993, Pope John Paul 23 issued his encyclical entitled Veritatis Splendor, also known as Splendor of Truth. The Pope said: “The authority of the Church, when she pronounces on moral questions, in no way undermines the freedom of conscience of Christians. The Church puts herself always and only in the service of conscience.”

And in 1996, in the book Christ Among Us, which I have already cited, Anthony Wilhelm wrote that some “500 American theologians, in concert with many theologians throughout the world, asserted that for grave reasons Catholics may follow their conscience this matter even though the Pope has spoken.”

Quoting Andrew Greeley, both a priest and socialist, Wilhelm reached the following conclusion: “It is a clear teaching that, while erroneous decisions might be made in following one’s conscience, one who has tried to inform one’s conscience must then follow it.”

REASON THREE
RH Observes the “Preferential Option for the Poor,” Under Liberation Theology

Liberation theology is the theory which interprets liberation from social, political, and economic oppression as an anticipation of eschatological or post-death salvation. The following are the basic principles of liberation theology:

• It is the Church and not merely the Catholic hierarchy, which is a sacrament.
• By Church, we mean the whole People of God, not just the hierarchy.
• The whole People of God participates in the mission of Christ, and not just in the mission of the Catholic hierarchy.
• The mission of the Church includes service to those in need, and, parenthetically, service to the women of the poor. The mission of the Church is not limited to the preaching of the gospel or the celebration of the sacraments.

In his 1988 book, A Theory of Liberation, Gustavo Gutierrez wrote that the preferential option for the poor is central in liberation theology. He advocated giving “preference to the poorest and most needy sectors.” He reminded Catholics of the statement made by Pope John Paul 23 just before the opening of Vatican 2 that the Church is called upon to be a church of the poor. Gutierrez said: “Let me say only that we have here two aspects of the church’s life that are both demanding and inseparable: universality and preference for the poor.”

REASON FOUR
RH is Part of Today’s Sense of the Faithful, Also Known as Sensus Fidelium

Literally, sensus fidelium means “the sense of the faithful.” It refers to doctrinal truth recognized by the whole body of the faithful. In theology, the sense of the faithful belongs to the individual believer within the community of the faithful. In other words, God teaches us not only through the priests and the bishops, but also through the laity, to whom God gives understanding of the faith.

In opposing the RH bill, certain members of the Catholic religious fail to listen effectively to the sense of the faithful. The Catholic clergy have a moral duty to take into consideration the experiences and consciousness of the laity. The religious should descend from the pulpit and consult with parishioners on RH. Today we find some of the male religious issuing their orders and directives from the pulpit, or in other words using the bully pulpit. Some of them manage only to appeal to blind faith, instead of participating in a consultative process with the Catholic laity, particularly the poor and the underprivileged.

sotto on rh bill is the laughing stock of social media, he victimized himself – patricia evangelista

The lightning rod

 By Patricia Evangelista Philippine Daily Inquirer

Tito Sotto is a victim, or so Tito Sotto claims. He believes he is the focus of a concerted effort by the heavily funded supporters of the Reproductive Health bill, all of whom are desperate to demonize him and weaken his resolve. He suspects he is the first senator to be made victim of cyberbullying. He has been insulted, criticized and threatened with lawsuits. His history has been exploited. It is a hatchet job, he says, a demolition job.

The senator is correct when he says that plagiarism has become the issue, instead of the nuances of the bill itself. He is also correct when he talks about the online response to his speeches. He is the laughingstock of cyberspace. “Sinotto” is a trending hashtag for plagiarized lines. The face that once decorated blockbuster movie billboards is a Facebook meme. When the senator used translated-into-Filipino chunks of Robert F. Kennedy’s 1966 Affirmation speech in his latest privilege speech, the online community responded with a slew of translated song lyrics and movie lines from Lady Gaga to Cherie Gil, all attributed to Tito Sotto.

He also finds it odd that none of his opponents, not a single one of his critics, has attempted to rebut the ideas he has put forward in his privilege speeches.

“I have not heard a response to any of the criticisms I have thrown against the RH bill.”

The senator is not correct. It is true that the plagiarism issue has made him less believable, far less credible, but advocates of the Reproductive Health bill have refuted his ideas point by point, in columns and blogs and television interviews, establishing his sources as outdated, his claims misrepresentations, and his statistics misinterpreted, while pointing out the fundamental factual error in his emotional claim that his child died in 1975 because his wife had ingested birth control pills. The pill he specified, Diane, was yet to be distributed the year he lost his son.

fr. bernas answers bishop reyes & the CBCP : points out where the bishop erred on rh bill

we have been waiting for the answer of fr. bernas on the 3/4 print ad released by the CBCP and bishop reyes of antipolo. we have marked the important points made by fr. bernas. (click to read: CBCP answers fr joaquin bernas on rh bill via print ad at philippine daily inquirer)

we have a few more:

• fr. bernas is incorrect when he said this: “Third, the Church teaching on contraception is based not only on Faith or revelation but also on natural law.”  in fact the bishop admits its opposition to the rh bill is NOT based on faith or revelation, ” It is also good to point out that the church teaching regarding contraceptives is not based on Faith or revelation, although it is confirmed by our Faith.”
• fr. bernas being a catholic priest is anti rhbill but he is also a professor of law, a constitutionalist, a pinoy and a human being. he answers the bishop being all of those, each one on 20/20 vision.
• every time fr. bernas writes about the rh bill, he makes us think and reflect on our positions on the rh bill and from which we either confirm or change our positions. the point is fr. bernas always makes us think and reflect no matter what our position is on the rh bill.

CONVERSATION WITH A BISHOP
Fr. Joaquin Bernas S.J.

A couple of days ago Bishop Gabriel Reyes of Antipolo diocese, writing under the stationary of the Catholic Bishops Conference, published an ad in the Inquirer and Philippine Star, expressing his disagreement with the views of an unnamed columnist on the merits and demerits of the RH Bill.  The regular readers of my columns in the Inquirer immediately recognized that the Bishop was referring to me. I too recognized it immediately as referring to me.

Not that I object to the reference to me nor to being quoted.  In fact I welcome the bishop’s ad and take it as an invitation to dialogue.  Dialogue among Christians, high and low, is highly encouraged by the Church today.  “In the modern world, the scandal is not that Vatican officials would engage scientists who disagree with church teaching, but rather that such engagement is regarded as taboo.”

The Bishop takes exception to my statement that “the state should not prevent people from practicing responsible parenthood according to their religious beliefs nor may churchmen compel President Aquino, by whatever means, to prevent people from acting according to their religious beliefs.”  The Bishop says that he “would be happy if the (non-abortifacient contraceptives) were banned” but that the Church is only against the state promoting contraceptives and providing free contraceptives to people.

From the bishop’s ad, I gather three points for dialogue. First, the bishop says that now “anyone can buy contraceptives from drugstores or even from ‘convenient stores.’”  Second, (but this is implicit) the state should not use public money to make contraceptives freely available.  Third, the Church teaching on contraception is based not only on Faith or revelation but also on natural law.

Let’s converse about these.

First, on easy availability of contraceptives in drugstores.  The clear implication is that the world is free and anyone can buy these.  This is simply not true.  Only those who have the money can buy them.  Legislators, however, are thinking of the vast majority of poor people who need help to be able to practice responsible parenthood.

president noynoy aquino makes history – net satisfaction rating beats all presidents since cory aquino

the SWS through businessworld released the latest presidential public satisfaction survey results, the Third Quarter 2012 Social Weather Report. the survey was conducted on august 24 to 27, 2012 which is period 9 of aquino’s presidency.

we did an analysis of the survey results and one of the headlines from the survey results which has not been mentioned in news reports is that president aquino’s period 9 rating compared to similar period 9 net satisfaction ratings of other presidents before him is the highest among all of them (chart below).

• cory aquino : +32% points
• fidel ramos : +49% points
• erap estrada : +19% points
• gloria macapagal arroyo : +28% points
• noynoy aquino : +67% points

comparing aquino’s latest net satisfaction rating to the same period 9 of the other presidents is the proper way to compare these ratings. comparing it to the same period of the administration of the presidents remove the “seasonality effect” of the ratings. removing that makes the ratings comparable and “of the same kind”.

satisfaction ratings of presidents normally drop the longer the presidents sits in office. this happens as people remove more and more of the honeymoon feeling with the new president and as the president performs his duties on a regular basis. it is normal to see more people getting disappointed as the people see that the president is unable to fulfill his election promises and as the president fumbles on day to day performance.

the chart above shows the cory, ramos and erap saw their net satisfaction ratings drop from the high at the start of their administration to period 9. only arroyo enjoyed a slight increase. it is interesting that aquino was able to beat the performance of his mother, cory who undoubtedly was one of the country’s most popular presidents.

to see president aquino’s ratings rise at this level and beating all the other presidents is a testament to the huge popularity of the sitting president among the people.

in a previous post in this blog (click to read : ABC socio eco class gives aquino satisfaction ratings rebound, hits highest level in his presidency) we also said that aquino’s latest satisfaction ratings got a boost from the rich or the ABC socio-eco class (chart below).

aquino getting a boost on his over-all net satisfaction rating because of the rich or the ABC socio-eco class is more significant as the lowest net satisfaction rating he got in the last period (period 8) was caused by the rich or the ABC socio-eco class abandoning aquino together with urban areas and ncr. (read blog post here: the rich from NCR & urban areas abandons aquino, grossly dissatisfied with president’s performance – SWS survey). the latest satisfaction rating of aquino marks the return of the rich or the ABC socio-eco class in supporting aquino.

~~~mindscape landmark~~~
carlo p arvisu

the copy empire of google senator tito sotto

life on twitter has not been this interesting since google senator tito sotto revealed himself at the senate floor a few weeks ago. aside from the continuing drama that sotto has been doing, a few other things have evolved that we should all know about.

we are putting here for your “dagdag kaalaman”.

we saw this on twitter from @isupportRHBill

we do not know the location of the above and we also do not know if that is where all the sottohan happens.

read more about google senator tito sotto and his achievements in the senate:

• Google Senator Tito Sotto plagiarizes AGAIN in his september 5 speech, this time robert f. kennedy #rhbill
• senator sotto’s legacy- sotto makes it to New York Times on the rh bill

ABC socio eco class gives aquino satisfaction ratings rebound, hits highest level in his presidency

the rich or the ABC socio-eco class has come back big for president noynoy aquino – his over-all satisfaction rating went up on the exceptional ratings given by the them. satisfaction rating by the ABC jumped from 54% to 84%, dissatisfaction dropped to just 6% from 29% and consequently the net satisfaction rating increased to +78%.

the increases  in the satisfaction ratings and decreases on the dissatisfaction ratings favored aquino across the board but it was the ABC socio eco class that gave the biggest movements.

Record rating for Aquino

BY NOEMI M. GONZALES, Reporter

PUBLIC SATISFACTION with President Benigno S.C. Aquino III has rebounded to the highest so far for his administration after falling to a personal low in May, the Social Weather Stations (SWS) said in a new report.

Mr. Aquino’s net satisfaction score rose 25 points to a “very good” +67 in an August poll from the “good” +42 three months earlier, with 77% of respondents saying they were satisfied with his performance, up from 63% in May. Those who said otherwise accounted for 10%, an improvement from the 21% previously.

The Aug. 24-27 survey, the results of which were made exclusive to BusinessWorld, showed Mr. Aquino’s best marks yet since he took office in mid-2010. His previous high was a “very good” +64 in November 2010.

His latest score compares to the personal bests of former presidents Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (+30, March 2004), Joseph Ejercito Estrada (+67, March 1999), Fidel V. Ramos (+69 , July 1993) and Corazon C. Aquino’s all-time high of +72 in October 1986.

The SWS classifies net satisfaction scores of +70 and above as excellent; +50 to +69, very good; +30 to +49, good; +10 to +29, moderate, +9 to -9, neutral; -10 to -29, poor; -30 to -49, bad; -50 to -69, very bad; -70 and below, execrable.

read in full here: http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=TopStory&title=Record-rating-for-Aquino&id=58089

serial plagiarist Senator Tito Sotto plagiarizes AGAIN in his september 5 speech, this time robert f. kennedy #rhbill

this just exploded once again on twitter just a few hours after senator sotto delivered his 4th and last privilege speech at the senate floor just today. apparently senator sotto, the hero plagiarist of the anti rh bill advocates and the serial plagiarist in the philippine senate  did it AGAIN today. this time he plagiarized the last part of his speech from a speech by the great Robert F. Kennedy, “Day of Affirmation Address” speech delivered on june 6, 1966.

abs-cbn’s TV Patrol reported tonight that senator said the english parts were just “texted to him by a friend”. also of interest was his answer to senator jinggoy estrada’s question to him if there was any part of his speech was plagiarized. sotto replied there was none and the way he made sure of that was he delivered the speech in filipino.

of course he lied. his speech did contain plagiarized parts.

sotto also probably thinks translating it to filipino is not plagiarim.

here is the side by side comparison of the speeches we got from here : https://twitter.com/ChiliMedley/status/243281155581935618

the above pic was posted by Michel Eldiy (@ChiliMedley)

senator sotto’s speech today: http://anc.abs-cbnnews.com/articles/605/sen-sottos-turno-en-contra-speech-on-rh-bill-parts-3-4-as-prepared-for-delivery/

speech of robert f kennedy here : http://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Ready-Reference/RFK-Speeches/Day-of-Affirmation-Address-news-release-text-version.aspx

the plagiarized parts of the kennedy speech is on paragraph #34 (at around the last 1/4 of the speech; the paragraph starts with:  “Give me a place to stand,” said Archimedes….” ) of the kennedy speech while sotto said them on the second to the last paragraph of his speech (last paragraph is “Maraming salamat po.”)

PDI article, september 6:

Sotto does it again, channels Robert F. Kennedy in Filipino

 By Norman Bordadora
Philippine Daily Inquirer

Did Robert F. Kennedy know how to speak Filipino?

This appears to be the gist of Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III’s defense amid new allegations of plagiarism after he delivered the fourth and last part of his “turno en contra” speech against the reproductive health bill.

It took bloggers less than two hours to find out that Sotto did it again.

A tweet from a certain Michel Eldiy at 5:30 p.m., more than an hour after the Sotto speech, triggered online discussions on the supposed intellectual dishonesty of the senator.

“Not true that last part of Sotto’s speech is original. See Day of Affirmation speech of Robert Kennedy in 1966 in South Africa,” said Eldiy, who goes by the Twitter handle, “ChiliMedley.”

She then tweeted a link to the Kennedy speech and later compared it with the speech of Sotto.

Sought for comment, the senator said: “It was texted to me by a friend.

“I found the idea good. I translated it into Tagalog [Filipino]. So what’s the problem?” Sotto told the Philippine Daily Inquirer when asked about his reaction to the fresh accusations.

“Ano? Marunong nang mag-Tagalog si Kennedy? (What now? Does Kennedy now know how to speak in Tagalog)?” he added.

In a separate text message, the senator lamented that proponents of the RH bill were nitpicking

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/264818/oops-sotto-did-it-again

news article from abs-cbn, september 5.

Sotto’s last speech copied from Kennedy?

by Jojo Malig, ABS-CBNnews.com

Posted at 09/05/2012 6:57 PM | Updated as of 09/05/2012 6:59 PM

MANILA, Philippines –  Did Senator Tito Sotto, who has been accused of plagiarism, copy yet again from someone else in the last part of his “turno en contra” privilege speech against the reproductive health (RH) bill on Wednesday?

Social media users called out Sotto anew, accusing him of only translating parts of a speech originally delivered by the late US Senator Robert F. Kennedy.

UNA senatoriables 2013 election

mitos magsaysay

migs zubiri

loren legarda

jv ejercito

joey de venecia

jack enrile

gwen garcia

gregorio honasan

 

these are the candidates for UNA (united nationalist alliance), the party of vice president jejomar binay and former president erap estrada:

1. Joseph Victor “JV” Ejercito,
2. Juan Miguel Zubiri
3. Jack Enrile
4. Mitos Magsaysay
5. Gwen Garcia,
6. Joey de Venecia
7. Gregorio Honasan
8. Loren Legarda
9. TBD
10. TBD
11. TBD
12. TBD

de la salle university professors support the rh bill – “rh bill is pro-life”

THE RH BILL IS PRO-LIFE — Statement of DLSU Individual Faculty Members

by RH Bill Portal on Friday, August 31, 2012 at 8:20pm ·

We, the undersigned Faculty Members of the De La Salle University, acting individually, and with reasoned conviction, cognizant of our role in society as champions of enlightenment and in pursuit of our mission to create a haven for critical Christian thinkers committed to serve society, particularly the poor, assert that:

• The right to life is a fundamental Christian tenet that finds full meaning when combined with the inherent rights of humans to a decent, safe, and productive existence as well as to an all-round development. Thus, beyond protecting the very important right of the unborn, it must extend to a recognition that a life that is weighed down by poverty, sickness, and social inequality – now compounded by environmental stresses – deprives humans of agency to transform themselves and the world for the common good.

• A key dimension of the democratic ideal at the core of our community and country is the promotion of pluralism and diversity. In a society marred by great imbalances of power and wealth, the freedom that comes with choice has become a privilege. Empowering the poor and the marginalized, women in particular, requires opening up opportunities for their self-actualization. In this modern day, it is alarming that death from childbirth continues to claim 4,500 women every year or about 12 every day. Lack of access to quality and affordable reproductive health services and timely information as much as poverty has kept many women from finding their own voice, exercising their basic rights, and taking their place as full members of society.

• The current population level, ranged against the level of our physical, environmental, and natural resources, is only one – albeit important – factor to the worsening quality of life of Filipinos. While our population growth rate has declined somewhat below the two percent threshold, it is still higher relative to the increase in the incomes of families in the 7th to the 10th decile groups – the segment of the population with the highest proportion of those living in absolute poverty as well. Here, among these groups, the quality of life is severely compromised due to an increase in population.

• Part of a meaningful celebration of life itself is the affirmation of the inherent moral standing of every human being, who has the capacity to make reasoned decisions, guided both by moral and ethical considerations, as well as by scientific truths and conventions. The ability to make moral judgments, however, requires knowledge and information, and for those living in materially constrained circumstances, requires further support from the society. The capacity to provide that support now rests with the State and its instrumentalities.

Our belief in the above mentioned premises leads us to express support for the Reproductive Health Bill in both houses of Congress as a much needed step toward the attainment of a just and democratic society which celebrates life at its fullest range and quality. Our support to the RH Bill is grounded on the following convictions:

• Enacting the RH Bill into law would strengthen the capacity of the State to assist women and their partners to make informed choices, thereby helping them to become healthy and responsible parents and attain a life of quality for themselves and their families. This is achieved by providing women and their partners, particularly the poor, with information and other forms of reproductive health support, including safe and affordable methods that do not violate the Constitutional provision declaring as illegal abortion and, by implication, the sale and promotion of abortifacient birth control technologies.

ateneo upholding academic freedom : “The university has its own purposes which cannot be subordinated to other objectives”

 

Understanding Catholic universities

by: fr joaquin bernas sj

Philippine Daily InquirerIn discussing Catholic universities one must  begin with Canon 808 of the Code of Canon Law which says: “Even if it really be Catholic, no university may bear the title or name Catholic university without the consent of the competent ecclesiastical authority.” In that technical juridical sense, the Ateneo and almost all other institutions in the Philippines, save one perhaps, which are publicly regarded as Catholic, are not in juridical terms Catholic. But are they Catholic in any other sense?

Even Canon 808 suggests that institutions which do not have the ecclesiastical title of Catholic can in fact be “really Catholic.” The appellation of Catholic can come from various sources. It can come, for instance, from its origins as founded by various religious orders of men and women. That in fact is how most Catholic institutions in the Philippines started. The appellation also comes from what in fact they do. For this reason these institutions are recognized as affiliated with the Church even if not “canonically Catholic.”

It must also be said that a canonical title is not the litmus test for being truly Catholic. Pope John Paul II in fact looks for more in a Catholic university. In a speech before Catholic universities in the United States, both canonically recognized and not, he said:

“A Catholic university or college must make a specific contribution to the Church and to society through high-quality scientific research, in-depth study of problems, and a just sense of history, together with the concern to show the full meaning of the human person regenerated in Christ, thus favoring the complete development of the person. Furthermore, the Catholic university or college must train young men and women of outstanding knowledge who, having made a personal synthesis of faith and culture, are both capable and willing to assume tasks in the service of the community and of society in general, and to bear witness to their faith before the world. And finally, to be what it ought to be, a Catholic college or university must set up, among its faculty and students, a real community which bears witness to a living and operative Christianity, a community where sincere commitment to scientific research and study goes together with a deep commitment to authentic Christian living.

“This is your identity. This is your vocation. . . .  The term ‘Catholic’ will never be a mere label, either added or dropped according to the pressures of varying factors.”

Briefly, a Catholic university is not just an institute for teaching catechism.

Further, in the same speech, John Paul II emphasized the importance of academic freedom:  “As one who for long years have been a university professor, I will never tire of insisting on the eminent role of the university, which is to instruct but also to be a place of scientific research. In both these fields, its activity is deeply related to the deepest and noblest aspiration of the human person: the desire to come to the knowledge of truth. No university can rightfully deserve the esteem of the world of higher learning unless it applies the highest standards of scientific research, constantly updating the methods and working instruments, and unless it excels in seriousness, and therefore in freedom of investigation.”

It is in this context that Fr. Jose “Jett” Villarin has defended what the Ateneo professors have been doing. At the same time, this is the measuring rod according to which Ateneo professors, and other professors of Catholic universities, must examine their individual consciences. Similarly, those who criticize them must meet them in the context of the field of expertise from which they write and not only in the limited context of the Baltimore Catechism.

One might also ask, is Father Jett being faithful to the teachings of the Society of Jesus? We Jesuits tend to disagree among ourselves about almost everything. As an Italian saying goes, Tre Jesuiti, quattro opinioni. Perhaps cinque or even more. But I think if we surveyed the opinion of Jesuits in school work we will find them overwhelmingly in agreement with the words of the superior general of the Jesuits, Fr. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach in an address titled “The Jesuit University in the Light of Ignatian Charism.” He said: “Far be it from us to try to convert the university into a mere instrument of evangelization or, worse still, for proselytizing. The university has its own purposes which cannot be subordinated to other objectives. It is important to respect institutional autonomy, academic freedom, and to safeguard personal and community rights.” Father Kolvenbach goes on to insist that there is no inherent schizophrenia in the identity of a Jesuit college or university. “In a Catholic university, or one of Christian inspiration, under the responsibility of the Society of Jesus, there does not exist—nor can there exist—incompatibility between the goals proper to the university and the Christian and Ignatian inspiration that should characterize any apostolic institution of the Society of Jesus.”

Father Jett told me at supper that Archbishop Chito Tagle, at the wake for Jesse Robredo, condoled and commiserated with him (probably with a wink!) as he parries the slings and arrows coming his way from “loyal Catholic catechists.”  Jett can take it. He is young and was valedictorian of the same Ateneo college batch as Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.