There was one reason why I went into the journalism world: because I wanted to communicate to more people the stories that I felt didn't get enough attention in hopes that it would help them think differently. As Howie Severino put it in this speech, I felt a passion to "explain the world to ordinary people."
After just 14 months in the world of journalism, I moved to a different world--the academe--though my vision has remained the same. This was five years ago.
I'm happy where I am now. Nonetheless, there are two things I miss about the world of journalism: being at the grassroots (or at least, being able to visit the grassroots), and being able to reach such a large audience. The Ivory Tower really is so removed from the world.
I want to do something about it, but I'm not sure what.
Whatever that "something" is, is number one on my list of New Year's Resolutions for 2006.
One of the first carols I ever learned (which I was taught to sing to the tune of "Flow gently, sweet Afton" rather than the more common tune) was Away in a Manger.
Away in a manger, No crib for a bed, The little Lord Jesus Laid down His sweet head. The stars in the bright sky Looked down where He lay At the little Lord Jesus Asleep on the hay.
The cattle are lowing The poor Baby wakes But little Lord Jesus No crying He makes I love Thee, Lord Jesus Look down from the sky And stay by my bedside, 'Til morning is nigh.
Happy Christmas, everybody! May the paradox of the Incarnation--that our God emptied Himself to be a little baby in the manger--continue to bring us wonder, amazement, and joy!
One of my earliest philosophical questions was the mystery of suffering. Why do people suffer?
I have found my answer, but my great spiritual uncle in the search for that answer has been Saint John of the Cross, patron of contemplative mystics, who struggled with desolation and darkness throughout his life, and who forged from that suffering an incredible testament to God's love through his Dark Night. John of the Cross' Feast Day was yesterday. Reading him is entering a sea of wisdom and love for Christ so deep and wide that few other spiritual writings outside of Scripture can compare.
A dear, dear friend from college was here visiting the Philippines for WAY TOO SHORT A TIME but it was such a joy, joy, joy to see him and the rest of my college buddies.
Meanwhile, it has just struck me that Christmas is a week and a half away, and I've barely done any Christmas shopping! Blah.
_____
Quiz time:
Your Birthdate: October 30
You have the type of personality that people either love or hate. You're opinionated, dramatic, intense, and very outspoken. And some people can't get enough of you - they're totally addicted. Others, well, they wish you were a little more reserved.
(Note: "Barong" is pronounced "bah-RONG," and "sarong" is properly pronounced "SAH-rong" in Malaysia, where it is worn by both men and women.)
In the 1930s, President Quezon proclaimed the barong the National Dress for men. In the 1950s, President Magsaysay began wearing the barong at all official government functions. Today, many businessmen in the Philippines prefer wearing a barong rather than a suit to business and formal social functions.
Well, now it seems Malaysia is heading in the same direction as well. Although the sarong-and-batik shirt combination is often worn at social functions, parliamentarians still wear the coat and tie during the day. But not anymore, if the Ministry of Culture will have its way.
There are two bands whose music squeezes my heart and makes me want to cry from joy and longing and missing: Counting Crows (August and Everything After) and the Eraserheads (first four albums). Those five albums defined my high school and college years and every time I listen to the songs from those albums, I've overcome by wave after wave of emotion-laden memory.
Today, Mike and I bought a copy of ULTRAELECTROMAGNETIC JAM, a tribute album of sorts to the E-heads. Various artists--from Kitchie Nadal to Sugarfree (of course) to Rico J. Puno--sing (mostly) Eraserheads classics in their respective styles.
There really is just no way to describe how verklempt E-heads songs make me feel. The album notes say it best: "Para kina Buddy, Ely, Marcus at Raimund--Maraming salamat sa walang humpay na ligaya!!!" High school and college: those eight years were some of the best of our lives--when we laughed the most and cried the most--and the E-heads gave us the perfect soundtrack. Salamat mga 'tol!
(Tribute concert bukas, U.P. Theater, siyempre!)
--------
Salamat din kay Mr. Miyagi ... for making all of us want to be karate kids! :)
Anj alerted me a few days ago that Bagets, the classic Pinoy teen movie of the 80s, was showing on cable TV. I caught half of it, and it was a hilarious trip down memory lane to watch it again. Hahahahaha!!!!
Then today Mike and I watched The Breakfast Club again. I found it funny that I still remembered particular lines from the film! (Though I have watched it at least twice in the last ten years.) Mike and I were saying that it's high time that the movie be remade!
My absolute favorite Brat Pack movie of the 80s is St. Elmo's Fire, though that was a college movie rather than a high school movie. Among the true teenybopper films of that era, Some Kind of Wonderful was the one that made me swoon, and Ferris Bueller's Day Off was the one that I could watch again and again because it was so much fun. The "I can be loved by you" scene in Happy Together made me verklempt. And Karate Kid 2 (not the other ones!) made me want to live in Japan and learn the tea ceremony. Finally, though I didn't think Pretty in Pink was particularly brilliant, I did enjoy it because I found Andrew McCarthy cute.
I don't watch movies for teens now, so I don't know what the current crop of teen movies are like. But what I really loved about the 80s teen movies was that they gave kids a sense that, "Hey, at least someone understands me!"
Meanwhile ... would you believe ... The Breakfast Club is 20 years old?
Mike and I were enumerating the stars of those teen movies who are still big stars today. We thought of Nicolas Cage, John Cusack, Tom Cruise, and Demi Moore. Emilio Estevez to a certain degree. Matthew Broderick because of his theater career and because of his wife. I also thought of Sean Penn (one of my favorite actors since The Falcon and the Snowman; I always knew he'd win an Oscar someday). Can you guys think of any others from that bunch who are still big stars today?
I often find, belatedly, that a thought has been germinating in my head for a long time, without my noticing it. The thought springs out at me only after it has appeared and reappeared in different forms, each time becoming more and more developed, and then I suddenly realize that a question I didn't even know I had been asking has been answered.
The thought I am referring to right now is the idea of VIRTUES. Around three years ago I read an article about youth culture in the US; the author interviewed several typical American university students: driven, well-rounded, competent .... But one thing the author noted was how none of them had a strong sense of VIRTUE, neither a sense of what it was nor a commitment to the development of virtue in their lives.
About two years ago I bought a book about Gerard Manley Hopkins. One thing that struck me was how Hopkins, and most Christian writers before him, seemed to have been so single-mindedly concern, because of their love for Christ, with the development of their soul, with the constant struggle to becoming more loving, more faithful, more temperate, more prudent ....
A few months ago, I was sharing with a colleague of mine my love for the tradition of the Church. "It's a sea, so deep, so wide, that can embrace all of us, of different personalities and persuasions," is about as articulate as I got. I couldn't put a finger on it, exactly, but I did know that quite often, when I read a text from a Doctor of the Church, or lines from one of the mystical saints, I would be struck by an incredibly profundity that I often found absent in much of the pop Christian "inspirational" literature that is so popular today. I just could not identify what it was that made that difference.
A few weeks ago, a colleague of mine was explaining to me that, inspired by Joseph Pieper, he had structured his Philosophy of Religion class along the themes of the cardinal and theological virtues: prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude; faith, hope, and love.
Today I came across this post while blog-hopping. And that's when the Eureka moment hit.
That's it!!! Thomisticguy hit it right on the head!!! In much of contemporary pop inspirational literature, so little, it seems, is dedicated to the difficult, arduous task of exercising one's soul through the development of virtue.
And I know exactly it is that which I thought had been missing ....
One of the greatest gifts I've received from my formation in Ignatian Spirituality is knowing how to do the Consciousness Examen. St. Ignatius of Loyola's recommended noon and evening prayer was not a bunch of words strung together, but a patient examination of one's relationship to God. The Examen has five steps:
- First, the prayer of gratitude. I enumerate in my mind all the blessings I have received from God since my last Examen. - Second, the prayer for light. After thanking God for all these graces, I pray for one additional grace: the grace--the Holy Spirit--to see myself as God sees me. - Third, the review. In step-by-step, chronological order, I go through each moment, each hour I have experienced since my last Examen and examine whether I have been growing closer to or farther away from God. I try to examine the patterns of my behavior and disposition, including and especially the patterns which are sinful and which harm my relationship with the Lord. - Fourth, contrition. For these patterns of sinfulness, I sincerely and sorrowfully ask God for forgiveness. - Fifth, hopeful resolution. I pray for the grace that these sinful patterns may diminish, and I ask the Lord to help my soul grow into the soul he wishes it to be.
To be done twice a day everyday.
The Examen is a spiritual exercise unto itself, methinks. The exercise of (through the Spirit of course) growing in Christ, of stretching one's soul, expanding one's heart for Christ, out of love for Christ, out of a desire that nothing in me--none of my vices--shall separate myself from Christ.
The mystics and the Church Doctors, were constantly, constantly stretching their souls. And it floors me when I read their witness.
I've been brushing up on my knowledge of Thomas Aquinas in preparation for a unit I'll be teaching in the coming months.
And I have to say ... despite the fact that his writings have barely any poetry in them ... I really love Aquinas. I don't like reading him, but, wow, his thoughts!!! Everything just becomes so beautifully simple, so elegantly clear with Aquinas! Moreso when I see just how contemporary he actually is, just how relevant he is today!
I have to say, it was my first encounters with Aquinas back in high school, actually, that laid to rest any doubts I had about the Faith. Maybe, without my realizing it, it was actually the Dumb Ox himself who led me indirectly to Philosophy.
I can only wonder at how this quiz was put together, and I wasn't very sure how I would do, but I did tell myself I'd post it if I came out Roman Catholic and sure enough ....
My favorite movie this year is Millions. It was showing at the last European film festival, but if you weren't able to watch it you can catch it on DVD.
It's about two brothers in Britain who find about 230,000 pounds, and have just a few days to decide what to do with it before the UK begins using the Euro as its currency and all British pounds become demonitized. The elder brother Anthony (who's about twelve) wants to either invest it or spend it all, but young Damian (he looks seven in the film, though in the book he's about nine or ten) wants to give it to the poor, just like his heroes, the saints, did.
The film is witty, it's touching, it's bittersweet, it's feel-good without being sappy, it's intelligent (I always LOVE intelligent children's movies; and I love the way that British films portray children--always intelligent, never condescending). I loved the film immensely, and I just bought the book from Powerbooks. Both the book and screenplay were written by 24-Hour Party People screenwriter Frank Cottrell Boyce (the book was his first novel). The film was directed by the director of Trainspotting, Danny Boyle.
Because I'm teaching Philosophy of Religion this semester, I found the opening paragraphs of this post particularly amusing:
========
Bishop N. T. Wright tells how, when he was chaplain at Worcester College in Oxford, students would often come up to him and say, “Don’t expect to see much of me this term. I don’t believe in God.” Bishop Wright had a stock reply: “Oh, that’s interesting; which god is it you don’t believe in?”
This would usually lead into a few moments of conversation in which the student would talk about God and religion, after which Bishop Wright would reply, “Well, I’m not surprised you don’t believe in that god. I don’t believe in that god either.”
Brownpau posted a link to this article about how technology seems to have enslaved rather than liberated us.
If he hasn't read it yet, I'd like to send (if I had the money) the author of that article a copy of Josef Pieper's Leisure, the Basis of Culture. The most enlightening part of the book for me was when Pieper discussed acedia, translated into English as one of the seven deadly sins (which, my grade school CLE teacher told me, are sinful dispositions and not sins per se), sloth.
"Sloth" today connotes laziness. But Pieper points out that in Aquinas' time, acedia did not mean laziness but rather (and what follows is my interpretation, years after last having read the book), the inability to see the rightful relationship between work and leisure. Laziness was not the only manifestation of acedia, then. Working too much and only for its own sake was considered acedia as well. The inability to silently come in touch with one's inner self--one's spirit--is acedia also. When seen rightfully, work and leisure are meant to be directed towards the divine, such that authentic leisure is the celebration of the divine.
The Jesuit Volunteers Philippines are accepting applications for Batch 27! Details here. You have to between 18 and 35 years old (inclusive), single, a college graduate by April 2006, and physically, psychologically, and emotionally healthy.
I don't know anything about the guy being interviewed here, but I stumbled upon this webpage and some of the things he said resonate with some of the things I've been thinking about so I'll post some quotes here:
-------
Many people assume that spirituality is about becoming emotionally intimate with God.
That's a naïve view of spirituality. What we're talking about is the Christian life. It's following Jesus. Spirituality is no different from what we've been doing for two thousand years just by going to church and receiving the sacraments, being baptized, learning to pray, and reading Scriptures rightly. It's just ordinary stuff.
This promise of intimacy is both right and wrong. There is an intimacy with God, but it's like any other intimacy; it's part of the fabric of your life. In marriage you don't feel intimate most of the time. Nor with a friend. Intimacy isn't primarily a mystical emotion. It's a way of life, a life of openness, honesty, a certain transparency....
... The New Age stuff is old age. It's been around for a long time. It's a cheap shortcut to—I guess we have to use the word—spirituality. It avoids the ordinary, the everyday, the physical, the material. It's a form of Gnosticism, and it has a terrific appeal because it's a spirituality that doesn't have anything to do with doing the dishes or changing diapers or going to work. There's not much integration with work, people, sin, trouble, inconvenience....
When we advertise the gospel in terms of the world's values, we lie to people. We lie to them, because this is a new life. It involves following Jesus. It involves the Cross. It involves death, an acceptable sacrifice. We give up our lives.
The Gospel of Mark is so graphic this way. The first half of the Gospel is Jesus showing people how to live. He's healing everybody. Then right in the middle, he shifts. He starts showing people how to die: 'Now that you've got a life, I'm going to show you how to give it up.' That's the whole spiritual life. It's learning how to die. And as you learn how to die, you start losing all your illusions, and you start being capable now of true intimacy and love.
It involves a kind of learned passivity, so that our primary mode of relationship is receiving, submitting, instead of giving and getting and doing. We don't do that very well. We're trained to be assertive, to get, to apply, or to consume and to perform.
===========
Update:
Related: (I don't agree with her politics but ...) here's a beautiful reflection from the anchoress:
------
But offering oneself to be of use to the Lord should never be done lightly, for it is a grave offer. If you make the offer - if you, in gratitude or thanksgiving, or simply in fervent love - say “Lord, I love you, and yes, I want to serve you however you will use me....” be prepared to be taken up on it, and to be used, and used fully. To be fully used up. Yahweh is no God-of-half-measures, and if through the inspiration of the Spirit one feels inclined to make such an offering of oneself, one needs to understand - the Spirit is not inspiring you to make the gift, “just for today,” or “for as long as it is fun, or easy.”
We see this all the time - I think in some ways John Paul the Great is the perfect example of one who pledged himself to God and found himself used so thoroughly that by the time he died, there was truly nothing left for him to give. Ditto Billy Graham. Ditto Mother Theresa, and Teresa of Lisieux, and Cardinal John O’ Connor and so many others who, like the very first Chrisitians and Apostles, completely submitted to the Lord and allowed themselves to be used until they were used up. God CONSUMED them, body and soul, in a sort of terrible beauty. A “reverse Holy Communion” so to speak, wherein rather than Christ being consumed by them, they were consumed by him.
The idea of the consumer being consumed is not really so startling. Faith itself is a gift. The burning need to serve is also a gift, one the Spirit gives to you - one you give back to God in return. St. Paul tells us that a gift, once given by God, is irrevocable; it is always there. But sometimes we frail humans lose touch with it, or forget that our “gift” or wish to give to God came first, via a gift of faith. I think there can be perhaps nothing so difficult as believing and yet being weary, being called and yet feeling unworthy or unfit for the job. We forget that ministry in Christ (both ordained or lay) is never about worthiness, for none of us are worthy: it is wholly about WILLINGNESS....
I wonder how many of us are really willing to endure it - the consumption of Christ?
God gives the gift of faith, some folks give it back in service. God tells us “take and consume,” some give their lives back in return, saying, “Lord, take and consume,” it is an endless give-and-take, and a very great mystery of love.
So today, one of the last few days of the sembreak, I read some old favorite blogs that I haven't looked at in months, looked at some new ones, and finally decided to write a blog post of my own again. I'll have been a blogger for four years this month, and a blog reader for longer than that (back when people were still debating whether "blog" was an accurate term for an "online journal.")
Well, I came across this post from lia bulaong and it got me reflecting about my own changing relationship with my blog and how it's changed from spilling everything to spilling very little to long silences that coincide, as a matter of fact, with those times in my life when a lot is happening in my private life.
Wala lang, interesting lang. (More reflections about it here.)
We are the first generation of web-loggers. Years ago we freaked out about the possibility of our parents or siblings reading our blogs. And with sites like this, won't it be interesting when our children or grandchildren come up to us and say, "Lola, nahanap ko yung blog mo noong teenager ka pa!"
Ang sarap talaga sembreak, at ng extra-long weekend na sinundan ng isa pang long weekend!
So I've been bumming around and doing stuff I haven't been able to do during the regular sem ... like stay up late and sleep all day and finish an X-box game and catch up on friends' blogs (and now, actually post on my own blog)! Then last week I went to CDO to visit Angie and we went to Camiguin with a bunch of friends and friends of friends and friends of friends of friends.
And these are what I learned or relearned this week:
- Ang ganda talaga ng Pilipinas. I always say it when I take an out-of-Manila trip, but I never tire of saying it. Ang ganda talaga ng Pilipinas.
- I love Cebu Pacific! The plane to CDO was a brand new Airbus with incredibly spacious leg room. Saraaaap. - The world is very, very tiny. - Finally, Mike and I were saying that if we had to live in another city, we'd definitely consider Cagayan de Oro!
They knew about it. In July 2004, they practiced for it. In 2002, an LSU predicted the flooding and the numbers of people who would be unable to evacuate.
Read this Reuters story that I picked up from Wired.com:
===========
They Knew What to Expect Reuters
Story location: http://www.wired.com/news/planet/0,2782,68738,00.html
09:38 AM Sep. 02, 2005 PT
Virtually everything that has happened in New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina struck was predicted by experts and in computer models, so emergency management specialists wonder why authorities were so unprepared.
"The scenario of a major hurricane hitting New Orleans was well anticipated, predicted and drilled around," said Clare Rubin, an emergency management consultant who also teaches at the Institute for Crisis, Disaster and Risk Management at George Washington University.
Computer models developed at Louisiana State University and other institutions made detailed projections of what would happen if water flowed over the levees protecting the city or if they failed.
In July 2004, more than 40 federal, state, local and volunteer organizations practiced this very scenario in a five-day simulation code-named "Hurricane Pam," where they had to deal with an imaginary storm that destroyed over half a million buildings in New Orleans and forced the evacuation of a million residents.
At the end of the exercise Ron Castleman, regional director for the Federal Emergency Management Agency declared: "We made great progress this week in our preparedness efforts.
"Disaster response teams developed action plans in critical areas such as search and rescue, medical care, sheltering, temporary housing, school restoration and debris management. These plans are essential for quick response to a hurricane but will also help in other emergencies," he said.
In light of that, said disaster expert Bill Waugh of Georgia State University, "It's inexplicable how unprepared for the flooding they were." He said a slow decline over several years in funding for emergency management was partly to blame.
In comments on Thursday, President Bush said, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees."
But LSU engineer Joseph Suhayda and others have warned for years that defenses could fail. In 2002, the New Orleans Times Picayune published a five-part series on "The Big One," examining what might happen if they did.
It predicted that 200,000 people or more would be unwilling or unable to heed evacuation orders and thousands would die, that people would be housed in the Superdome, that aid workers would find it difficult to gain access to the city as roads became impassable, as well as many other of the consequences that actually unfolded after Katrina hit this week.
Craig Marks who runs Blue Horizons Consulting, an emergency management training company in North Carolina, said the authorities had mishandled the evacuation, neglecting to help those without transportation to leave the city.
"They could have packed people on trains or buses and gotten them out before the hurricane struck," he said. "They had enough time and access to federal funds. And now, we find we do not have a proper emergency communications infrastructure so aid workers get out into the field and they can't talk to one another."
Most of those trapped by the floods in the city of some 500,000 people are the poor who had little chance to leave.
Ernest Sternberg, a professor of urban and regional planning at the University of Buffalo, said law enforcement agencies were often more eager to invest in high tech "toys" than basic communications.
"It's well known that communications go down in disasters but people on the frontlines still don't invest in them. A lot of the investments that have been made in homeland security have been misspent," he said.
Several experts also believe the decision to make FEMA a part of the Department of Homeland Security, created after the Sept. 11 attacks, was a major mistake. Rubin said FEMA functioned well in the 1990s as a small, independent agency.
"Under DHS, it was downgraded, buried in a couple of layers of bureaucracy, and terrorism prevention got all the attention and most of the funds," she said.
Former FEMA director James Lee Witt testified to Congress in March 2004: "I am extremely concerned that the ability of our nation to prepare for and respond to disasters has been sharply eroded.
"I hear from emergency managers, local and state leaders, and first responders nearly every day that the FEMA they knew and worked well with has now disappeared. In fact one state emergency manager told me, 'It is like a stake has been driven into the heart of emergency management,"' he said.
Underlying the situation has been the general reluctance of government at any level to invest in infrastructure or emergency management, said David McEntire, who teaches emergency management at the University of North Texas.
"No one cares about disasters until they happen. That is a political fact of life," he said.
"Emergency management is woefully underfunded in this nation. That covers not only first responders but also warning, evacuation, damage assessment, volunteer management, donation management and recovery and mitigation issues."
=========
And more depressing news from CNN. Dr. Sanjay Gupta filed a report from Charity Hospital, the premier public hospital in the area, the patients of which have not yet been evacuated. Two patients have aleady died. The even more depressing part? At Tulane Hospital, the nearby PRIVATE hospital, the NONESSENTIAL DOCTORS AND NURSES were being evacuated yesterday.
The images from New Orleans continue to ENRAGE me.
It's just disgusting. I've been sickened by the federal government's response to this, since watching Bush's very first statement about New Orleans, when he promised that his father and Pres. Clinton would look for international aid for New Orleans: "INTERNATIONAL AID?!?!?! They don't need MONEY right now, for crying out loud!!! They need WATER and FOOD! Send your father and Clinton over there to give them WATER and FOOD! Because people are DYING!"
And then the decision yesterday to completely halt rescue operations for awhile because of a few violent incidents. FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!
And then the latest ... news that even poor, ill, elderly old women who approach police cars are responded to by GETTING GUNS POINTED AT THEM. Wha the f*ck!!!!!!
I'll say already what I hesitated to say earlier today, because other people are beginning to say it on the news. Is the reason why the aid is taking so long because most of the victims are poor? Or because most of the victims are black? I hope to God that that isn't the case.
But the test of a nation's character is how that nation treats its poorest and neediest. And based on what we're seeing on TV, right now, the US is faring very poorly on that measure. With all its money, with all its resources, with all its power. They can't send some bottles of water to the Astrodome in time to save a few lives.
The US rushed into Iraq more quickly than they rushed to New Orleans!!!
And speaking of Iraq. If this is the way they react to a disaster area IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY, I SHUDDER to imagine how they must react to disaster areas in the countries which they've invaded. I shudder to imagine how they handled Iraq.
Speaking of Iraq again. Bush's press statements in previous days (only today did his tone change) sounded like the press statements he makes when he's trying to defend the Iraq war in the face of critics. Absurdly, delusionally speaking as if everything is going fine. Well now we all know what his definition of "fine" is.
CNN just reported that SRI LANKA offered $25000 in aid to the American Red Cross. U.S.!!! MAHIYA NAMAN KAYO!
The U.S. is the richest, most powerful country on earth. Most of the time, they manage to do most things quite competently. But THIS, this is just a disaster. The natural disaster alone would've been bad enough. But the human error has multiplied the horror of this disaster so many times.
In a lighter moment, I was thinking to myself that the best aid the Philippines can give to the U.S. is to send ABS-CBN and GMA Network over. The U.S. government could learn a few things from the speed and orderliness with which these two MEDIA companies handle relief efforts.
Where is the RAGE?! People--BABIES--have died COMPLETELY UNNECESSARILY simply because it took the government TOO LONG to respond. ALL they needed was water, and they'd probably still be alive. WATER! And it took a few DAYS for the richest country in the world to bring it to them.
The following is the result of an interview I just conducted via cell phone with a New Orleans citizen stranded at the Convention Center. I don't know what you're hearing in the mainstream media or in the press conferences from the city and state officials, but here is the truth:
"Bigfoot" is a bar manager and DJ on Bourbon Street, and is a local personality and icon in the city. He is a lifelong resident of the city, born and raised. He rode out the storm itself in the Iberville Projects because he knew he would be above any flood waters. Here is his story as told to me moments ago. I took notes while he talked and then I asked some questions:
Three days ago, police and national guard troops told citizens to head toward the Crescent City Connection Bridge to await transportation out of the area. The citizens trekked over to the Convention Center and waited for the buses which they were told would take them to Houston or Alabama or somewhere else, out of this area.
It's been 3 days, and the buses have yet to appear.
Although obviously he has no exact count, he estimates more than 10,000 people are packed into and around and outside the convention center still waiting for the buses. They had no food, no water, and no medicine for the last three days, until today, when the National Guard drove over the bridge above them, and tossed out supplies over the side crashing down to the ground below. Much of the supplies were destroyed from the drop. Many people tried to catch the supplies to protect them before they hit the ground. Some offered to walk all the way around up the bridge and bring the supplies down, but any attempt to approach the police or national guard resulted in weapons being aimed at them.
There are many infants and elderly people among them, as well as many people who were injured jumping out of windows to escape flood water and the like -- all of them in dire straights.
Any attempt to flag down police results in being told to get away at gunpoint. Hour after hour they watch buses pass by filled with people from other areas. Tensions are very high, and there has been at least one murder and several fights. 8 or 9 dead people have been stored in a freezer in the area, and 2 of these dead people are kids.
The people are so desperate that they're doing anything they can think of to impress the authorities enough to bring some buses. These things include standing in single file lines with the eldery in front, women and children next; sweeping up the area and cleaning the windows and anything else that would show the people are not barbarians.
The buses never stop.
Before the supplies were pitched off the bridge today, people had to break into buildings in the area to try to find food and water for their families. There was not enough. This spurred many families to break into cars to try to escape the city. There was no police response to the auto thefts until the mob reached the rich area -- Saulet Condos -- once they tried to get cars from there... well then the whole swat teams began showing up with rifles pointed. Snipers got on the roof and told people to get back.
He reports that the conditions are horrendous. Heat, mosquitoes and utter misery. The smell, he says, is "horrific."
He says it's the slowest mandatory evacuation ever, and he wants to know why they were told to go to the Convention Center area in the first place; furthermore, he reports that many of them with cell phones have contacts willing to come rescue them, but people are not being allowed through to pick them up.
I have "Bigfoot"'s phone number and will gladly give it to any city or state official who would like to tell him how everything is under control.
I know a lot of people have said this, but I will say this too:
I am APPALLED at how long it's taking to bring aid, food and water to New Orleans. It's just crazy!!!! If reporters can get into there, why can't food and water!!!!! HELLO, WHAT'S TAKING SO LONG! People are dying!!!!!!!!!
And can US government officials please stop their insensitive insinuations that the refugees should be blamed because they didn't get out in time! To that, I have two reactions:
First: Not everyone who didn't evacuate did so because of carelessness. Some TRIED to evacuate and couldn't. Some simply were too sick or too poor. And the fact of the matter is, no matter how large your plans are to evacuate an entire city the fact of the matter is, some people will be left behind. The government should have FORESEEN that and PREPARED for it.
Secondly: Even if a lot of those people who were left behind were careless, stop crying over spilt milk, NOT WHEN PEOPLE ARE DYING!
And don't get me started on the DISGUSTING political grandstanding that's going on! SHUT UP AND GET MOVING! START SAVING LIVES!
(I wrote a much longer, angrier post about this awhile ago, but it disappeared from Blogger for some reason. But lemme just say it's HORRIFYING how long it's taking!)
The US is the richest, most powerful country and they normally do a lot of things right. But right now they look like they either can't or don't have the political will to respond to this crisis. (I have one tiny theory as to why the government seems to lack the sense of urgency to respond to this crisis, but I'll keep the theory to myself for now because if it were true, it would be horrible.)
To the people affected by Hurricane Katrina: Know that people around the world are praying for you.
Let's just say this whole political crisis has made me lose a lot faith in people I once thought better of. Nakakadiri pa yung mga iba, wala talagang mga konsensya. Note: Not that I have much regard for many of the opposition congressmen either. But right now many administration legislators I used to think more of are stinking just as much.
It's all happening pretty fast. With the latest statements from Cory Aquino and the Makati Business Club, asking the President to resign so as to prevent a stalemate, I wouldn't be surprised if Noli de Castro is sworn in by tomorrow.
Last purchased book(s): Nick Hornby's About A Boy.
Last re-read: If you count skimming through an online version as "re-reading a book," then Anselm's Proslogion, earlier today. Before that, I re-read a chapter of Paul Tillich's Dynamics of Faith.
Five books for a desert island: Bible. The Bathroom Book. Worst-Case Scenario. Origins of Totalitarianism (I'll finally have the time to finish it). And ... uh ... my iBook (hehehe!).
Book I'd thwack someone on the head with: OED.
Book I'd like to burn: I have no right because I haven't read it, but I'll say it anyway: The Da Vinci Code.
Book that is overrated: Paulo Coelho, anything. (Sorry to his fans! Just a personal opinion ....)
Fun classics:The Wind in the Willows.A Christmas Carol.
Last book read: Currently reading About a Boy.
Five people that I tag to answer these and (optionally) take a photo of their bookcase:Angie.Toni.Maan. Mike, if only his blog were still working.
Nothing like a friendly nudge from a good friend, to get me blogging again.
I know it's been ages ... but I have a good excuse! In case you haven't heard yet, M asked ... and I said "yes!" The where and when of the big question are simple: Caliraya at Sunset. With much laughter and some tears (of joy). :)
WE HAVE A POPE!!! WE HAVE A POPE!!! WE HAVE A POPE!!! WE HAVE A POPE!!! WE HAVE A POPE!!! WE HAVE A POPE!!! WE HAVE A POPE!!! WE HAVE A POPE!!!
__________
Update: So it's Pope Benedict XVI. Hmmm. Well I guess we won't be seeing any major changes from the top in the next 5 to 10 years. :-/ It's nice to see Ratzinger smiling, though; he always looked so serious in previous media appearances.
Insiders on TV say he is actually a very spiritual, very humble person.
God bless him and God bless the Church. I will be praying for him tonight.
Frankly? I was startled, on the day that the Pope died, how much coverage about him the foreign cable news networks were giving. Almost all other news was shoved to the side and the cable news networks discussed the Pope's death (and life) almost exclusively for the next few days. (An acquaintance of mine, a priest, said, "It's like CNN has become the Catholic News Network!")
I was startled, because I hadn't yet realized how much the Pope meant to non-Catholics. Of course, I expected a reaction like that from Catholics: our Head Pastor, our beloved Holy Father, had died, and we grieved deeply. I expected that kind of coverage from, say, EWTN, or--in this predominantly Catholic country--from any of the local television networks
But I didn't expect so much of the rest of the world to be moved so deeply.
Yet there it was, all over television, all over the Internet, all over the press.
Even Fox News--which some identify with certain non-Catholic Christian denominations in the United States, some of which (not all of course!) have publicly called the Pope the Anti-Christ--was not at all conservative in expressing its praise and reverence for the Pope.
And more significantly, in a Westernized culture accustomed to highlighting the secular and the profane, television news seemed, for a few days, to be riveted by the ancient rituals of the Church to which I belong, to its centuries-old prayers and traditions.
It was astounding, and it filled my heart with greater love for the Holy Mother Church.
The culmination, of course, was the funeral Mass for the Holy Father, probably the most widely broadcast worship event in the history of the world. Or more than that: it was probably the most widely broadcast live event of any type in the history of the world.
CNN flashed the feeds that were being aired on live television across the globe, including many countries where Christians were a tiny minority: East Asian countries, Middle Eastern countries. In South Korea, in Egypt, in Hong Kong (I think), people were watching the Pope's funeral Mass live and in full--all two and a half hours of it.
That same day, nations across the globe--including, again, countries which were not predominantly Catholic, like Jordan and Nepal--were flying the flags at half-mast.
I remarked to a friend of mine, "Even in his death, the Holy Father is a unifier and an evangelist." As his body lay in state, he was still unifying the world, bringing together leaders of nations hostile to one another sitting almost side by side at his funeral Mass; having people all across the entire globe--regardless of race or religion--watching the same event on television. And even in his death, he was an evangelist: opening the doors of the Catholic Church and the celebration of the Most Holy Eucharist to people of all religions (or of no religion).
It has been an incredible week. Truly, an Easter week. In the past seven days, I have been through a roller-coaster of emotions: grief, triumph, awe, inspiration. And most importantly, I feel that spiritually, I have been refreshed, rejuvenated, filled with a renewed desire for my God, to be united with Him and to humbly serve him, inspired and edified by the example of his good and faithful servant, the Holy Father, whose holiness shines as an example of the best to which we can aspire.
In his life, he went out into the world, even and especially the darkest, most forgotten places of the world. In his death, the world went to him.
________
Er ....
Understandably, there have been some moments where aspects of coverage and commentary about the Holy Father's death have for me (for whom the Pope's death is very personal), led to ambivalence, or at worst, disappointment.
Some TV anchors' comments have shown ignorance of certain aspects of Catholicism. In the CNN coverage, for example, one of the commentators--I think it was Paula Zahn--said something like, "Judging from the crowds' reactions, the Pope will surely be canonized," as if canonization were merely a popularity contest.
I've seen some slightly distasteful commentary. A local newspaper columnist chose the day after the Pope's death--a day when most Filipino Catholics were still shocked and in profound grief--to launch into a tirade against the Pope's proclamations on women's issues. (Not that such discussion is not valid; I, too, think these are important issues, but there is a time and a place for everything. One doesn't publicly criticize a person at a person's wake, the very day after he has died, in front of his entire family ... and that's exactly what it felt like she was doing.)
I've read some North American blogs by a few Christian bloggers who chose these days of mourning to begin launching into biting and sarcastic rants against the Pope and Catholicism which went beyond healthy theological debate and crossed over into hostile Catholic-bashing. (I have nothing against theological discussion when done reasonably and in a spirit of respect and love, but some of these posts were, well, not exactly loving.)
But c'est la vie. Despite all that, it's been an incredible, spiritual week.
I said earlier that what touched me most about the Pope was his holiness: his prayerfulness, love, and faith.
Weigel's memories of the Holy Father show that he was most moved, too, by those same qualities. Some excerpts:
"The rhythm of [Karol Wojtyla's] life was prayer. The best hour of his day was the hour of private devotion and meditation in his chapel before his morning mass. There visitors could hear him groaning in prayer, in a conversation with God that was, quite literally, beyond words. In addition to the mass and the Divine Office (the prescribed daily prayers that all priests and many Roman Catholic laypeople say), he could be heard in prayer walking back and forth to meetings, taking a stroll in the Vatican gardens or relaxing after lunch in the garden atop the Apostolic Palace in the Vatican where he lived.
". . . His table talk was often conducted in three or four languages simultaneously. He was the most intense listener I have ever met, a man far more interested in what you had to say than in telling you what he thought--or, still less, what to think. In the space of a half hour he could guide a conversation from world politics to the goings-on in a guest's parish church, from inquiries about intellectuals whose careers he followed to questions about a visitor's children. His memory for names was phenomenal, and he could startle you by recounting entire conversations you had had with him years before.
". . . In an age in which personalities are often assembled from bits and pieces of conviction (politics here, religion there; morals from here, artistic interests from there) Wojtyla could be startling. He was the most integrated personality I have ever met, and everything about him revolved around the conviction that Jesus Christ is the answer to the question that is every human life. . . .
"By the conventions of his time, the intensity of his Christian conviction should have made him a sectarian, even a dangerous man. To his mind, however, it was precisely his Christian faith and his discipleship that required him to be in dialogue with everyone. Everyone was of inestimable value, and everything was of interest, because God had entered history in Jesus of Nazareth, supercharging the world and humanity with a grandeur beyond imagining."
Lord, help me to grow in prayerfulness.
_____
Here are some more shared memories from people who have personally met the Pope. Maciej Zieba, Head of the Dominican Order in Poland, has a particular moving perspective, also about his prayerfulness:
"He taught me the power of prayer. When he prayed, it was physical. He sighed deeply and made grunting sounds like a lion. Some of us called him the old lion. This was a mark of respect, the way you respect the king of the realm.
"In the morning, he prayed for the entire world. He looked at the map of the world and with his eyes traveled all across it, praying country by country. This was in his apartment. Then in the chapel he prayed for all the members of the Curia around him, looking at sheets of paper with their names and photos as he did so, going from one to the other. The first two or three hours of his day were all prayers."
I don't really want to engage just yet in the ongoing discussion about how "successful" a Pope the Holy Father was. I feel that now is the time to mourn, to remember, to celebrate ... not to analyze nor criticize.
But there is one emerging line of criticism against the Holy Father that has been bothering me, and so I shall say something briefly about it.
I've read two articles (here and here) by pundits (one American who writes about American Catholics, and one British who largely discusses Irish Catholics) who've described the late Holy Father as the Pope "whom Catholics loved but didn't listen to."
The "loved" part needs no explanation: Catholics for the most part adored this Pope.
But what about "didn't listen to"? Both pundits explained that by first citing surveys or interviews with (American and Irish) Catholics who said they either disagreed with or simply did not follow the Church's teachings on certain issues, especially those relating to sexuality, such as the use of artificial contraception and engaging in homosexual acts. "[Catholics] no more took their theology from the words he spoke--many of them--than did the thousands who turned out for the Queen's Jubilee take theirs from her," said the British writer.
I do see the point that the pundits' were trying to make. I don't disagree with the observation that many Catholics do not strictly follow Church teachings on those issues, and in that respect I feel the pundits are pointing to a valid observation.
However, I also think that their descriptions were a little too simplistic. I disagree with the implied conclusion in both articles that Catholics' failure to follow those teachings meant that Catholics largely ignored the Pope's theology. I feel that both articles are not telling the whole story.
Why do I say that?
Because there is, at least, one vast area of the Pope's teaching which I believe most Catholics have followed and taken to heart: his social teaching, at least in the sense of the late Holy Father's deep love of the poor and the marginalized, his concern for the downtrodden, and his recognition of the destructive power of overmaterialistic cultures.
I can only speak from my own experiences and observations. But around me, the places where Catholicism scintillates the most brightly, where exemplars of Catholic life are most inspiring, are those places where Catholics--both lay and religious--have fed the hungry, given drink to the thirsty, clothed the naked ... given hope to the despairing, held the hands of those who are dying.
That of course, has always been part of the mission of the Church--to begin building God's Kingdom here on earth, especially among those who are in the darkest places on earth.
But I honestly do feel that this Pope, both in words and in deed, shone a particularly strong light on this aspect of Christianity and demonstrated the urgency of the need to "bring glad tidings to the poor, to proclaim liberty to captives, recovery of sight to the blind, and release to prisoners." Throughout his life, he expended so much of his energy doing that. And by his example, he taught us to do the same.
_____
Okay, enough analysis for the time being. Let's go back--at least for now--to simply remembering and honoring a truly holy man.
_____
If you're not doing anything else right now, you might want to read this.
There are so many, but here are two nice personal reflections on the Pope: one from a CNBC economics analyst (who is not writing about economics in this post), and another from an Episcopalian woman reflecting on the Holy Father and the meaning of Easter.
The pundits talk about how he changed the political map of the world; about the symbol he was for some of the most profound ideals of post-World War 20th century: social justice, human rights, the dignity of all people; about the revolution he created in ecumenism and in bringing together the three biggest of the world's faiths.
And he did all that.
But as a Catholic, what moved me most was his holiness.
Meanwhile, it seems like a small thing to gripe about at a time like this, but I was so disappointed that the celebrant at the Mass that I attended today didn't talk about the Holy Father in his homily.
Granted, he gave a very good homily about Thomas and the breath of Christ. It was well-prepared and thought-provoking.
But I think everyone at Church needed something: some consolation, some tribute, anything to help deal with today's news. The priest mentioned the Pope in the prayers of the faithful and in the eucharistic prayer, but that was it. I was disappointed, because today's Mass was the closest that we could get to going to his wake--the symbolism of an entire family coming together to attend their Patriarch's wake.
Perhaps he didn't have time to change his prepared homily, since the news of the Pope's passing reached the Philippines at 4 a.m. this morning.
But still, I was really looking forward to some kind of catharsis at Mass.
_____
On the other hand, I'm watching CNN's live broadcast of Cardinal McGarrick give an amazing homily about the Holy Father's holiness, in the Sunday Mass that he's celebrating in Washington D.C.
Sigh, we need more Filipino priests who can be as good preachers.
Busy, obvious ba? Haaay .... Run along first and check out my friends' sites. In time, I'll have stuff to post about the Funboard Cup and Lent, pero saka na. Maraming trabaho. And I won't comment on Abu Sayyaf anymore; basahin nyo na lang ang sinabi ng mga iba.
Comments by YACCS.
