In Deum- Issue #21

In Deum Contents 2015

FROM THE DESK OF THE PRIOR

2 pg.

pg. 3 MASTER’S CORNER

“I will be King” in 1 King 1:5-10

4 pg.

pg.

8

Dynamism of Ideal Augustinian Common Living: Friendship to Community, Community to Frienship pg. 20 Sharing of Goods with the Poor in the life and Teaching of Saint Augustine A Brief History of San Agustin Center of Studies pg. 30 The Beginning and Development of In Deum

24 pg.

39 pg.

The Essenes: The First Monastic Community in Qumran pg. 43 Book Review: The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible. By James C. VanderKam. Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2012. ISBN-10:0802866794 pg. 44 Joseph Ratzinger on the Concept of Communion Some Elements of F. Sionil Jose’s Socio-Political Thought

39 pg.

pg.

58 San Agustin Ceter Studies Province of Sto. Niño de Cebu-Philippines SACS Mass Media Center Publications #3 Fisheries St., VASRA, Quezon City 1100, Philippines Tel. No.: +63 (02) 925-50-01 Fax No.: (02) 924-01-58 www.sacs-stvi.org sacsstvi@gmail.com

Editorial Staff

Ground Zero pg. 59 Bring Back our Families pg. 60 Everyone has a Sacred Space in the Community pg. 61 Dumadaloy ang Batis pg. 62 Koinonia: Our Religious Community pg. 63 Koinonia in the society and the world viewed from St. Augustine’s Sermon 356

pg. 64

Poetry

Fray Jamie Silvestre Parmisano, OSA Editor-in-Chief

Fray Christopher Rey Bajamonde, OSA Lay-out Artist

Fr. Nelson Zerda, OSA Fr. Jose Rene Delariarte, OSA Moderators

Fray Richard Bryan Mijares, OSA Associate Editor

Prof. Carmen Nietes English Consultant

Fray Rodel Magin, OSA Theology Consultant

EDITOR’S NOTE Dear readers, We are glad to present to you, a journal of journey of an Augustinian community. This journal encapsulates the reflections of the Augustinian friars of San Agustin Center of Studies (SACS) on an important Augustinian element—koinonia or communion. As SACS celebrates its three decades of existence as a formation house, the Augustinian friars recall the history of their home and reflect on their life as a community.

In this edition of In Deum, we can read some research papers that deal with koinonia. We can read the piece of Fray Magin in the Exegetical study section. Fray Magin, as he reflects on 1 Kings 1:510, believes that to be in communion with the other members of the community, we must be humble.

This journal also offers articles on the thoughts of Augustine regarding koinonia. Fray Cabahug insists on the importance of friendship in the community.

He believes that an Augustinian community is a community of friends in search for God. In another article, Fray Visda Jr., asserts that an Augustinian community is not limited only to its house. The Augustinian community is always in support of the bigger community, the Church. He says that what we have saved by living a simple life must be shared to our brothers and sisters who are in need of our help. As a commemoration for the 30th anniversary of SACS, Fr. Borre shares briefly the history of the house that became home to the Augustinian friars of the Province of Sto. Niño de Cebu. He cordially expresses that SACS continues “to strive for excellence and holiness to be a community proud of its history, humble of its achievements, and sincere in achieving its goal.” Fray Parmisano provides another perspective of the history of SACS

by recounting the beginning and development of one of SACS’s publications—In Deum.

Other simply professed friars also share their thoughts on koinonia. Fray Domasian and Fray Parmisano offer a short study on ecclesiology.

On one hand, Fray Domasian in his study on the Qumran community reminds us that the Qumran community somehow influences the NT authors’ interpretation of the ‘New Temple.’ This influence is carried out up to now and can be seen in our Catholic ecclesiology. On the other hand Fray Parmisano, using the ecclesiology of Joseph Ratzinger, claims that we should see the Church as the communion of believers. Furthermore, to have a social dimension in this journal, Fray Marinay offered a philosophical piece on the socio-political thought of F. Sionil. To lighten things, please also browse through the Insights section and be inspired with the short reflections of the Augustinian simply professed friars.

In the three decades of koinonia of SACS community, we can see not only a community that withstands the flow of time. SACS also is the witness of the “coming and going” of the Augustinian seminarians. It is the witness of their disappointments and aspirations, of their sadness and joy, of their ups and downs. More importantly, SACS is the witness of the communion of brothers on the way to God. SACS community indeed is the house that became a home to many Augustinian friars. This is what we offer in this journal. We would like to present to you the home of koinonia of the Augustinians.

Editorial Staff 2014-2015 In Deum 2015 | 1

FROM THE PRIOR’S DESK

Fr. Jose Rene Delariate, OSA

Like all facets of states of life, common life is an impossible enterprise from the ideal standpoint and can never escape the limitations of human capacity. Yet it is still possible and necessary. It is possible because of God’s grace. It is necessary because we can never take for granted that men and women are called to communion and service that is the Church.

This Formation Year (2014-2015) San Agustin Center of Studies celebrates three decades of communion (κοινωνία) in the spirit and ideals of the Acts of Apostles (4:32-35) and the way of life Augustine appropriated with his brethren (Regula, 1.3). It is an occurrence of celebration, service and fellowship, thanksgiving, of faith and hope, cooperation, experience, of responsible academic freedom and of God’s grace!

The life we live in San Agustin Center of Studies attempts to give witness and service. Therefore critical testing is constantly demanded. This needs some elaboration. a) Our life in fellowship centers in the Eucharist; in the Lord’s Supper (1Cor 10:16; 10:14-22). We do not only celebrate together but we partake in the Lord’s Supper. The OSA Constitutions of 2008 invites and encourages the brethren especially the clerics among us to celebrate the “daily sacrifice (#19), linked it with our religious consecration (#53), for the Eucharist is at the same time the center of all Christian life (#92) and our unity represented and brought about by it (#93). This demands of us despite and in spite of our weaknesses, we are called to serve and give witness to this communion. It is the foundation of Augustinian life (#6). b) The sharing of goods in the spirit of Acts 2:42. The disciples did not only share in “community of goods” but they “continued steadfastly in the teachings of the Apostles.” Number 32 of OSA Constitutions 2 | In Deum 2015

reiterates that it is in “our dedication” and the care of common goods that we are “measured” in the way “of perfection” that are indicative of our growth in the common life. Goods , besides our Spiritual goods, are not only material goods or wealth but our “initiatives” (#77), studies or intellectual life (#126), skills and expertise (#142), our cooperation in Apostolic works (#149) but even includes our faults, failures and forgiveness (#102). c) The most estimable expression of all of these is in charity. In the Sacred Scriptures, alms-giving encapsulates the idea of inward charity expressed outwardly in the love of Christ. We find this in Rom 12:13; 15:26; 1Tim 6:18; Heb 13:16 and in a manner how the gentile converts of Corinth “raised amount of money for (support of the brethren in) Jerusalem” (Rom 15:26; 2Cor 8:4; 9:13). The point here is the “willingness to share” (caritas) of the brethren for others. d) Communion as cooperation. Fellowship, until the time of Paul’s Philippi, means “for the Gospel” (Phil 1:5) and “sharing the Apostolic grace and work” that is, “by the laying of the hands as sign of fellowship and communion” (Gal 2:9). e) Our communion as a shared experience. The common experience is not only about enjoying the friendship within the community but enjoying the friendship and intimacy with the Father (Mt 11:2527; 1Jn 1:3). Furthermore, it is a communion within the “mystical union with Christ” as Church (Jn 14:6; 14:23). It is a communion “with one another” (1Jn 1:7), “of having one faith” (Phl 2:1), “fellowship of the Spirit” (Phil 2:1), and “communion in the Holy Spirit” (2Cor 13:14). f) Augustine elaborates in his Regula 1.3 the spirit of Acts 4:32-35. It is the same spirit that animates our celebrations.

As we are glad of the fortuitous and fruitful three decades; so we look forward from our Lord for more blessings to come. We remember the many Friars who passed through the portals of the Center of Studies. We remember our benefactors, friends, and Formatorsadministrators/Superiors. We have experienced their love, joy, reprimands, prayers and inspirations; most of which we are glad and grateful in the Lord. We pray for more good things to come!

MASTER’S CORNER “Let me know you”, the line that necessarily follows the famous Augustinian prayer, “let me know myself,” pertains to the prayer of remembering which provides the opportunity of experiencing God in the context of community life. In his book, The Trinity, Augustine describes such prayer of remembering saying, “May I remember you, understand you, and love you. Increase these gifts in me until you have reformed me completely.”1 Thus, community life is a life of constant conversion of reforming the self to Christian community—a community of faith and charity.

Fr. Nelson Zerda, OSA

Koinonia, this year’s theme, focuses on our life as a community of brothers living in one mind and one heart on the way to God. Translated in English as ‘fellowship”, Koinonia is the concrete expression of the Kingdom of God in the here and the now. Harvey Cox describes it as “hope being made visible”.

Thus, community is not only a way of life but also a challenge to all of us especially this year as the church celebrates the “Year of Consecrated Life.” In the context of the Church in the third world and its identity as “Church of the poor,” community life provides the venue and opportunity to reach out for fellowship, for greater understanding, and eventually to be in solidarity with our poor brethren.

As you proceed to your various pastoral areas of assignments, strive to “make visible” the Kingdom of God in the responsibilities given to you. “No person is a stranger to an Augustinian,” this line should guide us in living out the values that we have learned in the Augustinian community. Continue to know and discover God in the people we serve. Buen Camino!

1

The Trinity, 14.28.51

In Deum 2015 | 3

EXEGETICAL STUDY

“I will be king” in 1 King 1:5-10 Fray Rodel Magin, OSA

1 Kgs 1:5-10 may be considered as an independent unit.1 It introduces a different plot, characters, and scene. It opens with a clear change in time: Now Adonijah … in v.

5 (KJV: Then Adonijah . . .) and topography (vv. 1-4 most probably happen inside the palace while vv. 5-10 likely narrate the event in En-rogel).

Verses 1-4 narrate David, his servants, and Abishag, while vv. 5-10 introduce Adonijah and the various characters who support (Joab and Abiathar) and do not support (Zadok, Benaiah, Nathan, Shimei, and Rei, and David’s own warriors) him. There is also a shift of perspective: vv. 1-4 describe David’s physical condition and the need to get him warm (vv. 1-2) while vv. 5-10 illustrate how Adonijah exalts himself as a king.

Fokkelmann, Long, and Rice think that v. 10 is the end of the pericope and v. 11 is a beginning of a new episode: v. 11 introduces new characters (Nathan, David, and Bathsheba), a new rhythm, and a new plot (the court intrigue). Verse 11 and the succeeding verses contain various dialogues: a) Nathan to Bathsheba in vv. 11-14; b) Bathsheba to David in vv. 16-21; c) Nathan to David in vv. 24-27; etc.

Some formal elements in 1 Kgs 1:5-10 may help us determine the structure of the narrative. First, vv. 5-6 provide background information about the character, i.e., whose mother was Haggith, very handsome, and born next after Absalom. Second, vv. 7-8 seem to introduce a conflict. Finally, vv. 9-10 appear as the moment of highest tension.

Hence, 1 Kgs 1:5-10 may be arranged as follows: The first part consists of vv. 5-6 wherein the narrator introduces Adonijah and his character. The second part creates suspense in the story in vv. 7-8. The third part contains Adonijah’s feasting in vv. 9-10. In summary, the various moments of 1 Kgs 1:5-10 may be outlined as: 4 | In Deum 2015

Verses 5-6 may serve as an exposition. Here, the narrator introduces the main character, Adonijah - He is a very handsome son of Haggith, and is born after Absalom. His father has never interfered with his affairs.

He proclaims himself a king in v. 5.

Verses 7-8 may be considered as the inciting moment.

The narrator identifies those who support Adonijah as “king” in v. 7 and those who do not support him in v. 8.

Verses 9-10 may be considered the climax wherein a celebration of Adonijah’s kingship was held in the presence of all his brothers, and all the royal officials of Judah. Verse 10 identifies those who are not invited in the feasting: Nathan the prophet, Benaiah, the special guard, and Solomon.2 Analysis of the text Verse 5 ‫ ַואֲדֹנִ ָּי֧ה בֶן־ ַח ִּג֛ית מִתְ נַ ֵּ֥שׂא‬5a Now Adonijah son ‫ֵאמ ֹר ֲא ִנ֣י ֶאמ ְֹ֑לְך‬ ֖ ‫ל‬ of Haggith exalted himself, saying, “I will be king” ‫ׁשים‬ ִ ֔ ‫ּופ ָ֣ר‬ ָ ‫ַו ַּי֣עַׂש ֗לֹו ֚ ֶרכֶב‬ he prepared for himself ‫ ַו ֲח ִמ ִּ֥שׁים ִ ֖איׁש ָר ִצ֥ים ְלפָנָ ֽיו׃‬5b chariots and horsemen, and fifty men to run before him.

The narrator introduces Adonijah as the son of Haggith. Haggith is the fourth wife of David (2 Sam 3:25). The epithet ‫( בֶן־ ַח ִּג֛ית‬son of Haggith) appears three times in 1 Kgs (1:5; 11; 2:13). These occurrences inform the reader about the rivalry of Solomon/Bathseheba = Adonijah/Haggith.3 The hithpael passive ‫( מִתְ נַ ֵּ֥שׂא‬LXX: ἐπῄρετο) comes

EXEGETICAL STUDY from the verb ‫ נָׂשָא‬which means to lift or to carry. In this instance, ‫ מִתְ נַ ֵּ֥שׂא‬may more literally mean “lifting himself up.”4 The phrase has a nuance of arrogance and pride. By declaring ְ‫( ֲא ִנ֣י ֶאמ ְֹ֑לך‬I will be king), Adonijah breaks the Israelite tradition of God choosing the king through the confirmation of a prophet: e.g., 1 Sam 10:9-27; 16:1-13; etc.5 Verse 5b recalls Absalom in 2 Sam 15:1. Just like him, Adonijah is trying to win public approval by acting like a king before being made king.6 Thus he “exalts himself a king” (NAB: he displays his ambition to be king) and chooses fifty men to run before him (‫)ר ִצ֥ים ְלפָנָ ֽיו׃‬. ָ Many scholars consider the idiom ‫ ָר ִצ֥ים ְלפָנָ ֽיו׃‬as a presumptuous act of Adonijah (and Absalom) which indicates his lust for power.7 Verse 6 ‫ָאביו ִמּיָמָי ֙ו‬ His father had never at ֤ ִ ‫ְוֹלֽא־ ֲע ָצבֹ֙ו‬ 6a ָ‫ֵאמ ֹר מ ַּ֖דּו ַע ָ ּ֣ככָה ע ִ ָׂ֑שית‬ ֔ ‫ל‬ any time displeased him by asking, “Why have you done thus and so?” ‫ ְוגַם־ה֤ ּוא טֹֽוב־ּתַֹ֙א ֙ר מ ְ֔א ֹד‬6b He was also a very ‫ׁשלֹֽום׃‬ ָ ‫וְא ֹ֥תֹו יָל ָ ְ֖דה ַאח ֵ ֲ֥רי ַא ְב‬ handsome man, and he was born next after Absalom.

This verse continues to describe the character of Adonijah: In 6a, the qal verb perfect ‫ ֲע ָצבֹ֙ו‬comes from the root ‫ ָעצַב‬which means hurt, pain, grieve. It describes David’s relation to his son Adonijah: he has never pained him. Thus, Adonijah becomes a spoiled son to his father.8 The particle conjunction ‫ גַם‬in v. 6b places Adonijah in parallel with Absalom: e.g., both are handsome and appealing figures; they sought the kingship on their own without David’s support and both came to a violent end.9 Verse 7 ‫יֹואב ּבֶן־‬ ֣ ָ ‫ ַוּי ִ ְהיּ֣ו דְ ב ָָ֔ריו ֚ ִעם‬7a And he had conferred ‫צְרּו ָ֔יה ו ִ ְ֖עם ֶא ְבי ָ ָ֣תר הַּכ ֵ ֹ֑הן‬ with Joab the son of Zeruiah and with Abiathar the priest; ‫וּי ַ ְעז ְ֔רּו ַאח ֵ ֲ֖רי אֲדֹנִ ָּי ֽה׃‬ and following Adonijah 7b they helped him.

Adonijah is able to gain sympathy first, from Joab, his father’s nephew (1 Chron 2:16), and a commander of Israel’s army (2 Sam 8:16; 20:23), and second, from Abiathar, the priest. In the story of the conquest, Joab is considered as powerful ally and confidant of David (Cf. 2 Sam 5:17-25; 8:1-8; 10:6-19; etc.).10 Abiathar, on the other hand, serves as a private chaplain (1 Sam 23:6-11) and a chief priest of David (2 Sam 20-25). He gains such position as a reward for his loyalty to David.11 Leithart

thinks that these two allies, Abiathar and Joab, belong to the old regime, who at this time, do not have access to David nor to his bedroom.12 Verse 8 ‫ְוצ ָ֣דֹוק ֠ ַהּכֹהֵן ּו ְבנָיָ֙הּו בֶן־‬ But the priest Zadok, ‫ׁשמ ִ ְ֣עי‬ ִ ‫ י ְהֹוי ָדָ֜ ע ְונ ָ ָ֤תן ַהּנָבִי ֙א ְו‬8a and Benaiah son of ‫ו ְֵר ִ֔עי‬ Jehoiada, and the prophet Nathan, and Shimei, and Rei, ‫ֲׁשר לְדָ ִו֑ד ֹל֥ א הָי֖ ּו‬ ֣ ֶ ‫ִּבֹורים א‬ ֖ ִ ‫ ו ַהּג‬8b and David’s own war‫עִם־אֲדֹנִ ָּי ֽהּו׃‬ riors did not side with Adonijah.

Verese 8 enumerates those who do not side with Adonijah: (a) Zadok, Benaiah, Nathan, Shemie, Rei and (b) David’s own warriors.Zadok was appointed by David to be a custodian of the ark in 2 Sam 15:24-29 (with Abiathar).13 Benaiah is a mighty man of David (2 Sam 23:20-23; 1 Chron 27:6; etc.) who takes charge of the Cherethites and Pelethites (2 Sam 8:18).14 Nathan is the prophet in the court of David. His prominence in 2 Sam 7:1-17 (cf. 1 Chron 17:1-15), and 12:1-15 indicates his influence on David. His free access to the king in the succeeding episodes, shows how significant his role in choosing a king.15 Shimei and Rei may have been the counselors of David.

Verse 9 ‫ַוּיִז ַ ְּ֣בח אֲדֹנִ ָּ֗יהּו ֤צ ֹאן ּו ָב ָק ֙ר‬ Adonijah sacrificed 9a ‫ּומ ְִ֔ריא ֚ ִעם ֶ ֣אבֶן הַּז ֹ ֶ֔חלֶת‬ sheep, oxen, and fatted ‫ֶר־אצֶל ֵ ֣עין ר ֵֹג֑ל‬ ֖ ֵ ‫ֲאׁש‬ cattle by the stone Zoheleth, which is beside En-rogel, ‫ַוּיִק ְָ֗רא אֶת־ּכָל־ ֶאחָי ֙ו ּב ְֵנ֣י‬ and he invited all his ‫ְהּודה‬ ָ֖ ‫ ַה ֶּ֔מלְֶך ּו ְלכָל־ַאנ ֵ ְׁ֥שי י‬9b brothers, the king’s sons, ‫ַעב ְֵד֥י הַּמֶ ֽלְֶך׃‬ and all the royal officials of Judah, The celebration of Adonijah’s self-proclamation as “king” culminates in En-rogel where he sacrificed sheep, oxen, and fatted cattle in v. 9a. The word ‫ וַּיִז ַ ְּ֣בח‬in the qal imperfect does not necessarily imply a cultic event as is usually done in the installation of a king (cf. 1 Sam 11:15). The book of Deuteronomy permits the Israelites to slaughter animals and eat meat in their home towns (12:7; 21). Perhaps Adonijah’s act has same sense in 2 Chron 18:2 when Ahab slaughtered a large number of sheep and oxen to provide a sumptuous meal for Jehoshaphat and the people, or in 1 Kgs 19:21 when Elisha gave up farming to become Elijah’s associate, he killed a pair of oxen and shared the food with the people.

In this big event, Adonijah invited all his brothers (save In Deum 2015 | 5

EXEGETICAL STUDY Solomon) and all the Juhadite officials to take part on his self-proclamation as king.16 Verse 10 ‫ואֶת־נָתָ ֩ן ַהּנָ ִב֙יא ּו ְבנָ ָ֜יהּו‬

but he did not invite 10a the prophet Nathan or Benaiah ‫ְֹלמ ֹה‬ ‫ׁש‬ ‫ֶת־‬ ‫א‬ ‫ו‬ ְ ‫ים‬ ‫ִּבֹור‬ ִ ‫ּג‬ ‫ה‬ ַ ‫ֶת־‬ ‫א‬ ‫ו‬ ֥ ֛ 10b or the warriors or his ‫ָאחיו ֹל֥ א ק ָ ָֽרא׃‬ ִ֖ brother Solomon The narrator mentions for the second time Nathan and Benaiah in v. 10a who are not invited in the celebration of Adonijah’s coronation. For the first time, Solomon is mentioned in this episode (v. 10b). Rice notes that v. 10 introduces the readers the “Solomon party” who disfavors Adonijah’s coronation in En-rogel (v. 9).

They may be more liberal and cosmopolitan in outlook while “Adonijah’s party” may have been conservative and Juhadistic in orientation who believes in Adonijah’s legitimacy of the kingship as the eldest surviving son of David.17 Conclusion We have identified the various narrative elements in 1 Kgs 1:5-10: First is the exposition in vv. 5-6 wherein the narrator introduces the main character, Adonijah.

Second is the inciting moment in verses 7-8 in which the

1 The majority of scholars view this unit a part of the concluding episodes (1 Kgs 1-2) of the so-called succession narrative. As to its location, 1 Kings 1:5-10 belongs to the story of Solomon’s accession (1 Kgs 1:1-53) when David decides for the kingship. Cf. Mordechai Cogan, 1 Kings, ed. W. F. Albright and D. N Freedman, AB 10 (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 165. Unless otherwise specified, all biblical texts are taken from NRSV. 2 Narrative critics such as Ska and Amit maintain that the five elements of the plot: exposition, complications, climax, falling action, and resolution may not always be present in concrete narratives and their order is not always rigid.

Linda S. Schearing, “Haggith,”Anchor Bible, ed. D. N. Freedman, vol. 3 (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 23.

3

Paul R. House, “1, 2 Kings,” The New American Commentary, ed. E. Ray Clendenen, vol. 8 (Cambridge: Broadman and Holman, 1995), 88.

4

5

House, “1, 2 Kings,” NAC 8: 8.

Gene Rice, “1 Kings: Nations under God,” International Theological Commentary, ed. George Knight and Fredrick Holmgren (Grand Rapids: Eerdsman, 1990), 8.

6

7 Maiberger, “‫ ”רוץ‬in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament , ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, et al., vol. 13 (Grand Rapids: Eerdsmans,

6 | In Deum 2015

narrator identifies those who support and do not support Adonijah as “king.” Third is the climax in Verses 9-10 where Adonijah celebrates his coronation in En-rogel.

1 Kgs 1:5-10 also describes the character of Adonijah: by exalting himself a king in v. 5a, he shows his arrogance and disdain; by not being displeased by his father David in v. 6a, he becomes spoiled and petulant son; by inviting only the conservative and Judahistic party in v. 9b, he is unwilling to unite himself with the other “party”; and by placing himself in parallel with his brother Absalom in v. 6b, he identifies himself as a rebellious son of David.18 In conclusion, 1 Kgs 1:1-5 invites every reader to discern the character of Adonijah. In an effort to be in fellowship with other persons, in whatever community or organization one belongs, 1 Kgs 1:1-5 exhorts leaders and members not to be presumptuous and proud. The book of Proverbs has it: “Pride brings destruction, but humility brings honor” (18:12). Only a humble person can stay in “communion” with other members of the community or organization because he/she believes that to be humble is to be holy. When one becomes holy, R. Latourelle argues, the person possesses “a real sincerity; an authentic desire for truth and light; a minimum of humility that consists in not constituting the self as center of the world; a recognition and appreciation for moral values; above all certain magnanimity of soul which looks beyond human deficiencies of the [saint] person to his [her] true greatness.”19

2004), 416-422.

8

Rice, “1 Kings,” ITC: 10.

9

Duane Christensen, “Adonijah,” AB 1:75-6.

E. R. Dalglish, “Joab,” The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, ed. George Arthur Buttrick, vol. 2 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 907-8.

10

11 Paul Achtemeier, ed., The Harper Collins Bible Dictionary (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1996), 4.

12 Peter Leithart, “1 & 2 Kings” in Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2006), 30-1.

13

George Ramsey, “Zadok,” in ABD 6: 1034-6.

14

Achtemeier, The Harper Collins Bible Dictionary, 113.

15

David Howard, “Nathan,” in ABD 4: 1029-30.

16

Rice, “1 Kings,” in ITC, 9.

17

Ibid.

Ibid. Cf. J. P. Fokkelman, “King David,” in Narrative Art and Poetry in the books of Samuel, vol. 1 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1981), 34850.

18

19

R. Latorelle, “Sanctity, a Sign of Revelation,” TD 15 (1967): 45.

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES Dynamism of Ideal Augustinian Common Living: Friendship to Community, Community to Friendship -Fray Reo Cabahug, osa-

Sharing of Goods with the Poor in the life and Teaching of Saint Augustine -Fray Melitito Pocholo Visda jr., osa-

In Deum 2015 | 7

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES

Dynamism of Ideal Augustinian Common Living: Friendship to Community, Community to Friendship Fray Reo Cabahug, OSA

Friendship as a Necessity Every human person, no matter how aloof or indifferent he is, will always have an innate desire to love and be loved, to belong and be accepted in a group or among a circle of friends, to go home to a family which would really feel like “home,” and to enter or be involved in certain relationships with people that he wants to be with. Every person wants to have a good life. Yet every significant memory (may they be good or bad) and every aspired or feared dream are themselves void of meaning if they are not confided to significant individuals whom one hopes to find them meaningful and noteworthy too. Significant experiences or insights, whether they are good or bad, are empty if they are just kept to one’s self and not shared to someone else. Paradoxically, every human person wants to isolate himself from others to maintain a level of peace and security, yet it cannot be denied that a part of him would also try to reach out to others whom he trusts or wants to trust. Indeed, it is already embedded in the nature of every member of humanity to enter into a social life if they want to survive and to find happiness and contentment. As St. Augustine would say, that “necessities in this world amount to these two things: well-being and a friend . . . God made man to be and to live; that’s well-being; but so that he shouldn’t be alone, a system of friendship was worked out.”1 Following the mind of St. Augustine, Donald Burt, OSA points out that the human race possesses and requires a higher degree of sociability compared to other species in the animal kingdom. He observes that turtles, 8 | In Deum 2015

for example, could just live without any interaction and show no concern for others when they rash to the ocean after hatching and emerging from their incubating holes near the seashores. Human beings, however, cannot survive especially in its earliest years without the care and guidance of another human being. Human beings are the most delicate species because they do not have the capacity and still need to be taught on how to look after themselves for a long period of time.2 For that reason, some thinkers posit that the need to enter a society manifests the incapacities of the weak while the strong elates isolation but enters into a social life when they want to increase their power through combined efforts. Among these notable thinkers is Friedrich Nietzsche who maintained that an anti-social attitude exhibit the best characteristic of a human being and the ideal “Superman.”3 However, such view goes in contrast with the view of St. Augustine who finds social life as a part and a prerequisite for the perfection of human nature. St. Augustine points out that humanity’s common origin, by itself, teaches that it is designed to be united and to have an intimate family relationship among each other.

He says, “from that one individual [Adam] a multitude might be propagated that, and that this fact should teach mankind to preserve a harmonious unity in plurality.”4 This idea gives the theologian the conviction that the life of a wise man should be a social one.5 Nevertheless, Augustine recognizes that human freedom allows any individual not to choose what they should be over what they should be not. Such ability grants him the capacity

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES to live in an inappropriate way for a just society. Human beings may be designed to be sociable in nature but they can still opt to exhibit an indifferent and anti-social attitude.6 Social life and one’s relationship with another individual vary from person to person. Kinds of relationships differ depending on the kinds of people involved in it and according to the purpose of its formation. Generally, all types of relationships are established and developed due to either a degree of affection or practicality (or both) that the involved persons possess or want to achieve and maintain, respectively. But whatever the rationale may be for the foundation of a relationship, St. Augustine asserts that the kind of relationship that can lead to a happy life is that of friendship, the most intimate form of relationship. In fact, he insists that any form of happiness is incomplete if one has no friend. No human achievement or activity can ever be significant if one does not have a friend.7 St. Augustine also believes that friendship is broader and therefore surpasses the intimacy present in the family because the affection being shared among every ideal family member is brought about by the kind of friendship that each of them has for one another. In fact, the first thing that a baby is conscious about is his or her parents, and his or her life or journey begins from their friendship.8 These being said, one can then also conclude and assert what God has once stated before: “It is not good for the man to be alone (Gen 2:18, NAB).” Man must certainly live with other human beings. In this sense, living together must not only be understood as a mere conglomeration of individuals in the same building, bus or train without knowing or caring what is happening to the one next to them. The idea of not leaving man to be alone is not to arrange diverse human beings to travel through life merely as fellow travelers but as traveling fellows. For them to be in this state, they must establish a satisfactory level of friendship with one another that requires an amount of respect, benevolence and care.

In this sense, Augustine defines friendship as “the disinterested desire for good for that person whom one loves, together with a reciprocal desire on his part.”9 The definition implies that in order for individuals to become friends, they must first love each other and reciprocally wish and to do good to each other.

Bad Friendships, Good Friendships Aside from not traveling alone, St. Augustine also insists that the association and relationship of human beings must be brought in such a way that all its members are traveling in the right direction. Augustine is well aware how friendship can be helpful in one’s search for authentic happiness, yet he also knows very well how some kinds of friendships can lead one to detriment. He recalls and shares in his Confessions how thrilled he was

when he stole some pears not for consumption but for the fun of stealing and having some adventures with his friends10 and to share with one another the enjoyment of talking about sinful things.11 In fact, even thieves, pirates and other types of criminals form an alliance and a certain level of friendship among themselves to better achieve their evil goals.12 Such examples of friendship do not truly contribute to the development of a person but brings rather with it a finite and inauthentic kind of happiness.

St. Augustine describes the friendship mentioned above as an inauthentic one because it does not lead a person towards the true purpose of friendship: uniting and bringing people to God. It must be pointed out that St. Augustine does not conceive of friendship as an end for itself nor as a venue for the development of the social nature of men and merely as a means to attain a happy life on earth. Every kind of relationship, institution or association is dynamic and moves to a particular destination according to the disposition, interactions and activities of its members. For him, all our actions and dealings with one another may bring us back to God or away from Him. With that in mind, St. Augustine formulates another definition for friendship as the “agreement [of persons] on human and divine things.”13 Agreement on human things refers to the bond that linked different individuals due to their similar or common interests, views and goals. On the other hand, agreement on divine things denotes that genuine friendship is realized if friends do the will of God together and recognize that it is by his grace that their bond exists for the purpose of being united ultimately with Him in the future. For St. Augustine, “friendship is genuine only when God binds fast together people who cleave to Him through the charity poured abroad in their hearts by the Holy Spirit.”14 One must love his friend, not for himself but for God.15 The distinction that St. Augustine makes on friendship drives home a point that some types of relationships are to be encouraged while others must be avoided. Such notion, however, should not be misinterpreted as implying that one should avoid establishing any form of connection or association with ill-reputed people. In fact, St. Augustine contends, “One must not reject the friendship of anyone who offers himself for the association of friendship . . . not that he should be received immediately but he should be desired as one worthy of being received and he should be treated so that he can be received.”16 He even went further by exhorting that “whoever loves men should love them either because they are just or in order that they might be just.”17 He also says, Love all men, even your enemies, not because they are your brethren, but that they may be your brethren . . . Wheresoever ye love a brother, ye love a friend . . . If a man is not yet your brother, In Deum 2015 | 9

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES love him to this end, that he may be a brother.

Well then, all our love is a brotherly love, towards Christians, towards all his members.18 Truly, his idea on friendship is very inclusive and ideal that he encourages that, as much as possible, one should love and try to embrace everyone as friends here on earth as everyone will be in heaven. One, however, should be careful that one may not fall into becoming worse by associating with other people but must observe that one helps or is helped when dealing with them.

From Friendship to Community Aspiring for an ideal notion of friendship does not serve as a hindrance for St. Augustine to ground his teaching on the reality. He admits, “Everyone must be loved equally; but when you cannot give assistance to all, you must above all have regard for those who are bound to you more closely by some accident . . . of location, circumstances, or occasions of any kind.”19 We must all be united and help one another so that we can altogether achieve our salvation yet as much as one may want to be totally inclusive in his own friendliness, it is just impossible to accomplish such a task in our present state-of-being and present world. Dedicated human beings can do so much but the only thing that they can only do is to form one’s own circle of friends who love and re-learn to love one another daily to be able to grow in their love for God. “This ideal of friendship gave Augustine a special interest in the development of religious community; here more than anywhere he hoped that true Christian fellowship could be realized on earth.”20 It is then not surprising why St. Augustine has his closest family members, students and friends as the first members of his community in Cassiciacum where they intended to devote themselves to be with one another and together search for God, the Truth.

By forming one’s own circle of friends and establishing it to be a community, one may be more successful in addressing the barriers and issues that hinder people to be truly united and be intimate with one another. It is a reality that the universal ecclesial community, or the Church at large, finds it difficult to solve its problem on division yet the problem in its larger picture may be mitigated when smaller communities within the Church are formed to tackle the concerns under their jurisdiction. In doing so, unity is better promoted and the clashing of interests between individuals may be lessened in a smaller but more reachable scale. To sum it up, friendship or a just society that is difficult to establish in a bigger community may be created more easily in smaller communities. In this context, Augustine’s ideal of friendship is applied to the new context of Christian fellowship where all members of the Church are united by a common goal [to find and reach God] and need the assistance of one another to attain it.21 10 | In Deum 2015

Starting as a Community of Strangers It will be expected that a number of people will be enticed to form or join their own circle of communities when the ideals of community living is emphasized and promoted.

A new situation will then arise from such phenomenon.

New members will decide to join certain communities envisioned by St. Augustine. A community that initially began as a community of friends will be opened to other people who never knew each other as friends but as strangers. If it is inevitable for problems and conflicts to arise among friends who decided to live together in a community, the more shall it be when the community is composed of people who started as strangers and who never had an idea on who will they be mingling with in the brotherhood. This unfamiliarity may serve as a hindrance in achieving unity with each other. Even those who are attracted to live a holy life in the community also bring in with them their personal talents, issues, interests, struggles, weaknesses and concerns that may clash with each other. Moreover, it is possible that some of them may become friends in the future but to expect all of them to become friends later on is too ideal.

Nonetheless, though it is impossible for such reality to take place in our present world, it is still not unfeasible to aspire and work for it. To develop a disposition where they can possibly embrace everyone as friends must be the common aim of every Augustinian. It must be borne in mind that the rationale of every Christian community on earth is to serve as a preparation for the communion of saints in heaven where everyone is entirely true to each other and share the vision of God with one another.

It may be impossible to bring down on earth that kind of communion that may only exist in heaven, yet it is still feasible to imitate such bliss here on earth even if it cannot be exactly duplicated.

A Common Rule for Diverse People For that reason, St. Augustine wrote the Rule to serve as a guide for those who want to live his ideal of community living. The document contains the precepts that describe the purpose on why they are to live in the community and on how each member must live its ideals in certain situations and concerns. As Thomas Martin, OSA will also describe the Rule, “it was a way of continuing an authoritative presence and was not originally intended for publication but solely for the guidance of that little monastic community Augustine loved so dearly but now had to leave.”22 In the opening part of the Rule, St. Augustine explains that each of the community member’s purpose is and should be to live together in harmony (Ps. 67:7) in one mind and one heart (Acts 4:32) intent upon God (in Deum). St. Augustine cited the Scriptural value of living together in harmony in one mind and heart because it captures his own interest and thirst for unity

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES for the people around him and for the Church. He added the phrase “in Deum” because he also recognizes that, though inauthentic, human beings are capable of creating a bond with each other for selfish and evil purposes. In contrast to this, each person in the community must see to it that their union is not directed to collaboratively attain or reach any mundane goal but God Himself. As the Plan of Augustinian Formation elucidates “this Latin accusative, “in Deum”, deserves our special attention. It indicates dynamic movement: as a group we are striving for God. We are like travelers on the way to him.23 The phrase, “in Deum” also indicates that unity and harmony is not sought among individuals and friends for its own sake but ultimately for God. If one truly searches for happiness, he must not consider friendship or association with others as an end for itself.

Intimate relationships must be established in God and for God for it to become permanent. Outside God, all sorts of relationships become temporal due to distance, conflicts and death. In this statement, St. Augustine has encapsulated how every Christian community and relationship should be.

Love as the Magnet As to how oneness in minds and hearts can be achieved, St. Augustine reminds his members in the community to love God above all things and to love one’s neighbor, as oneself for this is the chief commandments that is given to all of us.24 Love is a requirement in order for a community to exist and in order for it to work. It is “by love [that] man will be drawn out to himself, beyond the boundaries of his little world that is called “I.”25 After his exhortation to follow the chief commandments of love, St. Augustine then lays down the other precepts that prescribe what every member must do in the community.

The precepts are written not to serve as a manual or guideline but to serve as expressions on how one’s love for God and for one’s neighbors may be expressed in the community. St. Augustine focuses on the primacy of love when he seeks to guide, through the Rule, those who will follow his ideal of community living.

What is most distinctive about Augustine’s Praeceptum [or the Rule]: its emphasis on love as the monastic ideal – not withdrawal, not asceticism, not obedience, not even prayer; it all comes down to love, and as will be seen, this love must be practical and neighborly.26 In such religious community, it is presupposed that one already and is always ready to love God through one’s neighbors in and through the community. The goal for entering such brotherhood should also not be limited in maintaining such kind of love but to make it grow and improve it with everybody’s help. St. Augustine also sees that association with others especially in a community can serve as a venue to develop one’s love for God and to develop the City of God.27 The saint explains that no

distinction exists between one’s love for God and one’s neighbor. In fact, the two commandments are identical and must never be separated from one another: “For how can you love God whom you do not see when you cannot love your neighbor whom you can see?”28 Love for God may be esteemed as the greatest commandment, yet it is love for one’s neighbor that determines its authenticity and validity. As T. J. Van Bavel also puts it, “love for one’s neighbor should take precedence, perhaps not in theory, but certainly in practice.”29 It is not surprising, then, why most precepts in the Rule concentrate on how to develop and show neighborly love while only few mention about prayer and liturgy.

Sharing of Goods as Initial Expression of Love In an Augustinian community, the first prerequisite that must be performed in order to express one’s love is to observe that material properties that each member has and the community possesses must be shared in common: “Call nothing your own but let everything be yours in common.”30 Food, clothing and any other material things are to be distributed to everyone according to each one’s needs.31 The inspiration for this precept is taken from Acts 4:32, which describes how the primitive Christian community in Jerusalem lived. Through the sharing of goods, none of them was needy.

St. Augustine’s meditations on the way of life practiced in that early church influences him to conceptualize that this is how the Church and the society should live so that no one should also be deprived of one’s own needs.

St. Augustine sees in his time the reality of the unjust allocation of material goods that caused the division between the rich and the poor. Hence, he structuralized an alternative way of living that may oppose and serve as a protest against such problem in the world. He envisioned and sought to found a community where the rich and the poor, the weak and the powerful may be able to relate with each other as equals. However, the sharing of material goods however must not be understood as minimizing the wealth of the rich to alleviate the poor. In fact, the spirit of the spirit is not to lessen the wealth of the rich but to entirely make everyone rich. As St. Augustine elaborates “If all things had remained private property, each person would have owned only what belonged to him or her individually; but when each person turned over his personal things to common ownership, he came to own what had belonged to others as well.”32 Nevertheless, the sharing of material goods in common does not distinctively mark the nature of an Augustinian community. It is a means to prepare the ground where spiritual goods may be better shared in common within the community. Tarcisius Van Bavel, OSA explains what spiritual goods are and its relevance as follows: The concept ‘spiritual goods’ is very broad and very difficult to describe. But it certainly In Deum 2015 | 11

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES comprises one’s own talents, character, temperament, thoughts and ideas, inspiration and faith. And even though the first chapter of the Rule does not explicitly mention it, the sharing of spiritual goods does indeed seem to be presupposed where Augustine says of religious that, in their dealings with one another, their hearts should seek nobler things, not vain earthly appearances.33 Sharing of spiritual goods takes place when people in certain communities give to others their gifts of selves.

When one readily gives to another his very self, sharing of one’s opinions, time, talents, ideas, hopes, aspirations, problems and enthusiasm will necessarily follow. At the same time, one also needs to participate in activities and occasions where such spiritual goods are shared to manifest and validate one’s desire to be united with one’s companions in the community. In this sense, it can be concluded that the sharing of spiritual goods are both prerequisites and results of an intimate relationship with others in the community.

Material goods do not last unlike spiritual goods such as joy, wisdom and the love for God. The former usually cause the division among many groups and sharing them equally according to one’s needs cannot guarantee the unity in the community. Only spiritual goods do. Certainly, It is only mental and spiritual riches – rejoicing with those who rejoice, sharing ideas and enthusiasms with one’s fellows – that really bind communities together. It is only when spiritual goods are treasured, and material goods put into second place, that fellowship free of envy and rivalry can develop.34 Each person only receives a fraction when material goods are divided among those who need them and the provision for each person lessens when the number of those who need them increases. However, unlike material goods, spiritual goods do not diminish when it is shared to others. It will even increase when shared to others. As St. Augustine will explicate, A man’s possession of goodness is, in no way, diminished by the arrival, or of the continuance of a sharer in it. Indeed, goodness is a possession enjoyed more widely if those who possess it are united in harmonious fellowship. In fact, anyone who refuses to share this possession with others will not enjoy it at all; and he will find that his possession of it will be in precise proportion to his readiness to love his partner in it.35 Nonetheless, the sharing of material goods is the preliminary consideration for the sharing of spiritual goods to take place. It must be the first expression of one’s love for his neighbor in the community. As Van 12 | In Deum 2015

Bavel also explains: Augustine’s reflection on love for one’s neighbor start from a very realistic standpoint: love begins from below, love begins with giving, with sharing what we possess. Sharing material goods in common belongs to the first phase of love.

This is a first realization of openness towards others, a first form of living together.36 Indeed, the mutual sharing of goods defines how Augustinians view poverty as a religious vow that they all profess to be incorporated in the Order. However, voluntary poverty expressed as a religious vow must not be confused with poverty that implies destitution or the lack of necessary material goods. The former mandates that material things are to be shared equally according to one’s needs to ensure equality, unity and simplicity of life among the members of a community. It serves as an expression of one’s love and respect for other people.

On the other hand, the latter is an evil that needs to be combatted and must not be taken as a value in itself.

Histories and Tendencies: Key to Sympathy and Understanding The rest of the precepts in the Rule prescribe how a brother must bring himself in the community to progress in love for God and his neighbor and how he ought to help others do the same. They elaborate how the community must advance in prayer life, in looking after the material and spiritual needs of one another and how superiors must lead and be obeyed.

The Rule dominantly emphasizes that everyone is responsible for the improvement or demise of one’s companion in the community. A careful analysis on the Rule shows that material and spiritual goods are not the only things that are shared in the community but the physical and spiritual weaknesses and struggles of the members as well. St. Augustine understands very well that all men vary in terms of physical strengths and weaknesses and he considers that their former ways of lives may have contributed to that.37 Hence, he exhorts the poor to be considerate and to offer aid when they find that those who are formerly rich are struggling to live austerely.38 He also urges that special attention and care must also be given for those who are sick and weak over those who are strong in the allocation of goods. The rich, for their part, must not exalt themselves for being able to surrender or contribute a considerable amount to the common fund and the poor must not take pride in being able to associate and mingle with those who were formerly rich and powerful in their society. They must also not run after those things that they were unable to enjoy before they became a part of the community. St. Augustine carefully expounds how one’s own past and present status may affect one’s struggles in the community not to prejudge nor to predetermine the tendencies that a particular kind of people is usually subjected

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES to, but to promote among the members the culture of being considerate, sympathy, and understanding to one another.

Building on Trust

rare happenings hence it is justifiable to be cautious in entering into relationship with others. In fact, it is very disturbing when friendship turns out to be treachery and malice.41 Nevertheless, trust and confidence must

Nor is it the intention of St. Augustine that everyone in the community should be suspicious of one another.

In fact, such attitude can only hamper the development of unity in the community. St. Augustine may be viewed and portrayed in most theological literatures as pessimistic to human nature and tendencies due to his insistence on the concept of original sin in his anti-Pelagian works. However, his approach to the Pelagian controversy must not be viewed as implying that his anthropological perspective is inclined to concentrate more on the weaknesses of men over their potential to do good. The purpose of his insistence on original sin is not to be cynical to human nature but to denote and emphasize man’s constant need for God’s grace. His perspectives on man’s ideal attitude when dealing and entering into relationship with others can attest to this. He strongly maintained that every relationship (especially friendship) and every community must be built on a high level of trust with one another.

He recognizes that human beings do not have the ability to penetrate the true intentions of the heart of another individual and their perception for them may be better or worse from their actual characteristics.39 Moreover, any process that may be undertaken to express one’s feelings, motives and actions may still be subject to misinterpretation and misunderstanding due to the limitations of human communication. If anyone is able to ascertain the true trait of another individual, there is no guarantee on what he or she can become tomorrow.40 The inability to pierce another person’s heart must not be exaggerated to become a reason not to trust because no one is even aware on what his or her own attitudes will be when confronted by certain situations in the future. Situations where a friend is confused as an enemy and an enemy confused as a friend are not

become one’s primary rule when a relationship is already established. Though a friend later shows himself unworthy of friendship, this is lesser evil than not to have confidence in him.42 If one does not want to live in complete solitude, he must learn to trust others at least at some level. To be able to trust others more readily, the saint advices that one must not worry on the reality of human weakness because in trusting, you actually put your trust on God who resides in every person.43 Despite his authority over them, St. Augustine, in his In Deum 2015 | 13

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES dealing with other individuals, make it a personal rule that his companions must feel that they are trusted. He says, I have such a good opinion of my brothers and believing the best of them, I have always refrained from making any inquiries because to make such . . . indicate I had a low opinion of them. I knew . . . and I still know that all who were living with me knew about our purpose, knew about the law governing our life together.44 Possidius, his contemporary biographer, also attest to this attitude: The administration of the house attached to the church and of all its possessions he used to delegate to the more capable among the clergy, letting each of them have the task in turn. He never kept the key or wore the ring. Instead, those in charge of the house kept a record of all income and expenditures and gave an account of it to him at the end of the year, so that he might know how much had been received and how much spent, and how much remained to be spent. In many matters, he simply took the word of the person in charge and did not require detailed and documented accounts.45 Nothing but the Truth For trust to take root among the members of the community, they must all be true and frank with one another in words and deeds. Truth must be spoken at all times. Everyone in the community must display their true selves by not romanticizing their individual life histories and backgrounds to be accepted or loved for whom they are not. A brother must be informed on the truth on what he is doing. Truth must never be comprised over one’s relationship with another because “no one can truly be a friend of another person unless he is first a friend of the truth.”46 This means that friendship can be described as imperfect when friends cannot be true to each other. However, being true to one’s friend is not easy and it requires courage.47 On the other hand, flattery or the exaggeration of positive truths must also be avoided. St. Augustine reminds that those who do so betray their friends and that it is better to have mortal enemies than to have this kind of friends.48 However, any admonishment being made to a friend or companion must be done in a way that it does not portray bitterness, insensitivity and hate. Such act must also serve as an expression of love and concern. It must be done in a way wherein a friend or a brother can truly feel one’s love and concern in the most possible way without undermining the truth.

Not only Common Goods but Common Bads as Well If in case a member(s) fall into committing a mistake, 14 | In Deum 2015

the Rule specifies the intricate procedures that those who noticed the act or behavior must undertake to point out, correct and convert an erring companion. Superiors, for their part, must also enforce such role among his members and must lead in an exemplary manner to his members. The intricacies of the procedures are not stipulated to develop a legalistic mentality in the community or to portray that an Augustinian community must be too rigorous and allergic to sin. The intricacies of the procedures must be understood to demonstrate how serious the community is in bringing back a member that is lost or to uplift a fallen member. The intricacies also demonstrate that the good name of an individual must be protected when his offense is pointed out and the matter should be brought out to other individuals or to the community if, at least, there really is a need.

Augustinian spirituality encourages that a brother and a friend ought to be helped and understood especially when he is weak physically and spiritually.

However, the saint never ignores any evident offense especially if it incites public scandal. In such cases, he sees to it that erring members ought to be disciplined and corrected for the good of that person and of the community.

Careful consideration must be pointed out “For trust to take root among the members of that disciplines the community, they must all be true and frank and corrections with one another in words and deeds.” must not be viewed as a punishment.

The first two terms imply a healing, formative and educative process while the latter denotes a degrading meaning. The former acknowledges that the offender commits something bad yet the procedure implies a sense of optimism for the conversion of the offender. The latter does not leave any room for change, it immediately takes action against an individual - an act of vengeance performed by a community or a legitimate body to avenge for the order that was disturbed or offended by the offender. It seeks to judge, impose and justify a certain demise inflicted to an individual according to what he presumably deserves for committing an offense. But is anyone really incapable of committing a mistake?

Also, a correction, when enacted or viewed as tantamount to punishment, is counter-productive.

To avoid mistreatment and shame, people who are actually incapable of not committing any mistake will tend to commit them in secret and in clever ways. A community that instills order through punishments may externally manifest a harmonious society but what it actually produces are apparently good people who are

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES only afraid of punishments but who are only waiting for opportunities to commit mistakes. This is the reason why never can we find any writing of St. Augustine where he specifies a particular punishment for a certain offense, only precepts that describe how to bring back a brother.

St. Augustine’s considerate approach to erring brothers is explained by his realistic perception that conversion is a life-long process and struggle. Hence, it is too myopic to expect that most people who reside in a religious community are holy ones. A religious community aspires and promotes holiness yet it must be pointed out that it is inhabited not by angels but by human beings. In here, sinners are still trying and struggling to become saints although others may also be pretending. It can also be a venue where saints turn into sinners. People in a religious community enter and remain in such way of life not because they are already certain that they are capable of living holy lives but because they want to know themselves more rigorously through others. In religious life, one still needs to constantly discover what one can become when they encounter, confront, or be exposed to certain situations or persons. Mindful of this reality, St. Augustine admits, For however vigilant may be the discipline of my monastery, I am human and I live with human beings. Nor do I dare to claim for myself that my monastery is better than the ark of Noah where among eight persons one was found to be rejected . . . Nor is my monastery better than the dwelling of the very Lord Christ in which eleven good men put up with the disloyal and thieving Judas.49 In this regard, St. Augustine sees the community as a microcosm of the pilgrim Church, which in itself is a large community of saints and sinners, of wheat and chaff.50 If one will examine the Rule further, one may find that St. Augustine gives no preference to any particular group within the community. Everybody is equal despite his previous or present position or work in the community.

Everyone has his own weaknesses and idiosyncrasies, and all needs to be looked after, understood and helped.

To sum it up, St. Augustine envisions that every brother or sister in the community must share and carry one another’s burden. An Augustinian community must not only be marked by the mutual sharing of common goods (material and spiritual) but also of the mutual sharing of common “bads.”

Grace and Love Being concern of the welfare of others denotes that, indeed, we are all our companions’ keeper. St. Augustine seems to press the matter as an obligation that must be fulfilled. A debt that one owes from another will later be accounted by God. But actually, it is something more

than that. To be concerned for the welfare of others is everyone’s duty yet it ceases to be a mere duty when one loves the people he cares for. In loving, the one loved is unconsciously assimilated to the lover that his needs, welfare, concerns and struggles become one’s own as well. Such level of interest may only be possible for those who truly love their companions and friends and may be difficult for individuals who decide to live in a community without any idea on who will they encounter in it.

Albeit, the burden of doing kindness to others can be lightened if one recognizes that serving others is tantamount to serving God as well. But the thing is, most people in the monastery made the decision to live together in a community not as a result of their love for one another but the other way around. They find themselves living in the same community, hence, they must learn to love one another.

Moreover, it is also another thing to remain in love with a person or a group of persons when love is already learned. It is also a reality that it is difficult to love in an inclusive manner just as it is difficult to learn and relearn how to love a single individual daily. Likewise, the human heart may be inflamed with love for a time for specific persons but it can never always remain as such.

Thus, it then must be recognized that man needs the assistance of God to be truly and constantly in love.

As with a lamp, man must rightly shine and enlighten others but it is God who supplies the fuel. This means that human beings need the grace of God to be able to love in a divine way—without preference, measure, condition and not limited by mood and time. From Romans 5:5, St. Augustine asserts that it is the Holy Spirit who causes an individual’s right-ordered love for another.51 Therefore, no one must ever find merit for being able to love others because such love is not his or her own. In reality, our love for others is actually God’s love for men communicated to them through us. Love, such as this, is the only thing that can motivate a sincere kind of care and service that characterizes a true friend and brother. Nonetheless, the absence of love does not dispense anyone from performing and showing one’s concern for the other because it is a responsibility that has to be fulfilled in the community. The only difference is that carrying it out would be lighter and more bearable if it is love that moves it.

Humility, Humility, Humility It is mentioned above that no one can ever take pride from being able to love perform good deeds for others.

Another cause for not taking pride for anything is that each individual has his own weaknesses and struggles that other members in the community has to make up as their own burdens. Moreover, becoming not proud is not just a logical consequence of one’s situation in the community. More than that, it is a vice that must be In Deum 2015 | 15

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES avoided because it can serve as a significant impediment to unity. Pride obstructs love because a person who has it “is [actually] interested only in himself and seeks to have everyone dance to the tune of his own ego.”52 Moreover, pride is the most destructive kind of vice because it “lurks in good works” unlike other vices which manifest themselves solely to palpable misdeeds (e.g., greed to stealing or hoarding, unchasteness to adultery, duplicity to lying, etc.). It corrupts good works and it makes every endeavour counter-productive. It drives one to consider oneself better than others and to look others with contempt.

It is a reality that, at times, good works can be performed in the community to extol one’s ego and to push one’s companions to the shadows. In such instance, acts of goodness can also serve as instruments to depict one’s superiority over others and can be a ground to subject others by making them owe something from you. Indeed, good works performed may serve as instruments to display one’s dominance over others due to the prevailing mentality that the donor will always be greater than the recipient. This is the reason why St. Augustine instructed that in doing good to others, one shall desire that others may be equal to you wherein there will be no more need to give.53 He also clarified that it is not true that receivers of works of mercy have lower status over the giver “nobody may say: I give, he receives . . . Perhaps your need is greater than his. He needs bread, you need integrity. He is in want of a roof, you are in want of heaven. His need is for money, yours for justice.”54 Sometimes, it happens that there are religious who have an insatiable need to be needed by others and by the community. They manipulate certain circumstances to make some activities incomplete or unsuccessful when they are not around or when they are not the ones handling them. In these instances, they want others to constantly learn from them. This is detrimental because it hinders the community, or at least some individuals, from developing a sense of self-sufficiency and autonomy that they can call their own. Such reality happens because there really are people who want to remain at the top and do not want others to become equal or greater than them.

The intentions of proud persons illustrate that they lack what is essential in performing good works: love.55 To combat this vice, one needs to have the virtue of humility. If authentic good actions cannot exist without love, love also cannot exist without humility. Humility is the virtue that identifies another person as important as one’s self and hence bridges the gap that separates the “I” and “the Other.” Thus, when asked on what should be the steps that must be taken to grow in Christian life, St. Augustine answers, “that first way, however is humility; the second way is humility, and the third way is humility and as often as you ask, I would say this . . . As often 16 | In Deum 2015

as you ask about the rules of Christian religion, I would answer only humility.”56 When love and humility is present, it becomes easier to think well of others and to work for their own good.

With these virtues, a religious may not only seek to express his concern to his brothers not in terms of their sustenance in their material needs, in the development of their skills, talents and potentials and in the growth of virtues but more importantly on attaining one’s salvation.

Indeed, there is no greater expression of benevolence than to wish and help one’s companion achieve salvation.

In doing this, they must not only seek to grow in love for one another but more importantly intensify their love for God in and through one another. Helping others love God better is an act where the helper expresses his love for God by helping another become like God. As to how one may become like God by loving Him, St. Augustine explains, “each one of you is what he loves. If you love the earth, you are earth. If you love God, shall I say you are God? I would not dare to say this myself, but Scripture says it.”57 This means that human beings become what they love. In connection to this, true love mandates that a lover must support the beloved realize the highest potential available to him without comprising his freedom.

Hence, the aspiration of a true companion and brother is characterized by a desire to wish that the other loves God above all things so that he may become like God. To wish that one’s friend would love God is actually what loving one’s neighbor as one’s self means. It instigates in a person the desire that both he and his beloved should reach their common final goal.58 Yet human beings can only do so much. They may do so many things for their friends but the most effective thing that they can do is to sincerely pray for them and entrust them to God who knows and will do what they need and are best for them.59 When friends and brothers truly love one another in God, they may be saddened when death and distance separates them from one another. At the same time, they are also consoled of the fact that their separation is only temporary because their friendship is permanent in God.60 In heaven, our friendship with those we have loved on earth will live forever.61 Possible Obstacles to the Development of Friendship in the Community Authority Authority may serve as a possible obstacle to the development of friendship in the community. It is because friendship presupposes that friends must be equal to each other, or at least, see themselves as equals.

Moreover, it has been the aim of every Augustinian community to promote equality among its members, yet it is unthinkable for St. Augustine to conceive a community

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES that has no authority. For St. Augustine, authority is a consequence of original sin that has to be maintained to preserve order: “This however is penal, and is appointed by that law which enjoins the preservation of the natural order and forbids it disturbance; for if nothing had been done in violation of that law, there would have nothing to restrain by penal servitude.”62 This implies that someone has to facilitate, lead and be in charge for every community to be in order. Someone has to be in authority to make it work. In a complex group of people, members who recognize themselves as equals may state their differing opinions and an authority must exist for the community to arrive at a decision. At the same time, it must be recognized that there are urgent situations that require immediate decisions, while on the other hand, consolidating the consensus of the body requires a period of time. Moreover, the validity of the decisions reached through consensus is itself limited because it presupposes that the majority of the members of the community are concerned for the common good, which actually is not always the case. Hence, “the socalled democratic principle of “one person = one vote” cannot be applied to the religious community.”63 The kind of authority exercised in a religious community must be what Van Bavel describes as a “representative democracy” which he describes as: Trust is placed in people who are more specialized in a certain area, in a charismatically gifted leader, or in a small group (if necessary, in minority group), of whom it can be seen that they represent important values . . . This form of democracy is not intended to be a dictatorship that requires blind obedience, but the communal living of partners who accept their limitations and base themselves on faith and trust.64 The presence of authority in the community does not undermine but, in fact, promotes equality if it serves its purpose: service and not domination. In fact, the Rule is very clear that superiors must serve with love and not by fear.65 With love, superiors are able to impose their commands gently and the burden and obedience expected from subordinates become light and almost negligible: Where charity is not present, the command of the authority is bitter. But where charity exists, the one who commands does so with sweetness and the charity makes the very work to be almost no work at all for the one who is commanded, even though in truth the subject is bound to some task.66 Authority elevates a superior over others in terms of office but not in dignity. St. Augustine points out that a superior’s position exposes him to more peril and burden than anyone in the community because he is responsible for both the spiritual and material needs

and the standing of his members, aside from his own.

He must also demonstrate himself as a good example to others more in deeds than in sermons and lectures.

Moreover, he must seek to be loved and respected than to be feared.67 The subordination of the rest of the members must not be viewed as a defect on the part of the subordinates.

They have to bear in mind that they are equal in dignity with their superiors and their subordination to lower roles is a means for every member of the community to fulfill tasks according to one’s gifts for the benefit of the entire body.

Two Extreme Forms of Community Van Bavel asserts that there are two extreme forms of community. These are the functional, goal-oriented community and the community of persons.68 The former stresses that the value and purpose of every community is determined by its activity and work. The latter solely emphasizes the value of common life itself. These two extremes are detrimental to the formation of friendship in the community because the former seeks to undermine friendship itself by viewing it in a utilitarian way and ceases to have any value when it can no longer contribute to the accomplishment of a task.

It views people merely as pieces in the chess board or a cog in the machine. The latter exaggerates the value of friendship to a point that it hampers friends to be concerned with those outside one’s own circle of friends and thereby promotes exclusivity.

Religious must check that they do not fall either to any of these extremes by observing a balance and equilibrium: “It is clear that an active community, to a certain extent, must also entail common living, and that a community, stressing personal relationships, unless it wants to degenerate to senseless inactivity, must work.”69 As St. Augustine will also say, “No one ought to be so leisured as to take no thought in that leisure for the interest of his neighbor, nor so active to as to feel no need for the contemplation of God.”70 Uniformity Unity is not tantamount to uniformity. Although the former can easily be manifested through the latter, In Deum 2015 | 17

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES there is actually no unity in the strict sense of the term if it is only based on uniformity. To live in one mind and one heart does not entail that members of a community must be similar in almost all things. The Augustinian way of community living never values any idea that may destroy a person’s uniqueness. It seeks to help a person become better by respecting its individuality at the same time. Indeed, “the person forms the community and the community forms the person.”71 At the same time, “neither may a community crush the person, nor may the individual aspects of the personality destroy a community. Each exists by the engagement of the other.”72 Moreover, even conflicts, which are a result of diversity, must seen as a gift to the community. Conflicts hamper predictability and stagnation in religious life.

It allows people to agree and disagree at some point, to learn and relearn new things, to accept or give in to another’s opinion and not to impose one’s own, to admit defeat and one’s mistakes (without feeling bad) while allowing others to commit them as well, and it provides a venue for conversation where people may speak and listen reciprocally. However, when conflicts between some companions in the community goes out of hand, one must not take any side but rather help that their relationship be restored.73 Diversity enables people to know that no one is in monopoly of the truth. These things will never be possible if people think in the same way. Indeed, “true contact with another person is possible only if I recognize him or her otherness, and if I am allowed to be completely myself.”74 Community Living in and for the Church Community living is not an essential characteristic for religious life given that there are individuals who lived and practiced it through isolation even before the time of St. Augustine.75 However, St. Augustine sees that it is better to seek God with the presence of others especially with one’s friends. Although he was not the first to introduce religious life in a community setting, he was the one who pioneered and promoted the idea of emphasizing intimacy and friendship among members of a religious community. While asceticism through cutting one’s connection and relationship was the prevailing characteristic in religious life (even in cenobitic communities) during St. Augustine’s time, he finds it unthinkable for himself to search for God detached from his friends from whom he can find solace and feel God’s love. St. Augustine was not the only one who feels that they do not need to be alone or be austere in intimacy and friendship if they have to live a religious way of life. For that reason, his religious ideal of community living has attracted and enticed many people to join his community even if they were outside his own circle of friends. Religious life through an intimate 18 | In Deum 2015

community living still finds relevance and continues to attract even centuries after St. Augustine’s times.

Even a good number of religious orders, institutes and associations that are founded for certain apostolates and ministries but do not originate from the Augustinian tradition finds Augustine’s view of community living very appealing that they adapted his Rule as the norm on how their members must relate with one another.

Whatever their respective charisms may be, all religious communities must see to it that they are able to maintain at least the minimum requirements to make it intimate and vibrant (or shall we say “Augustinian”). For Van Bavel, these are the four minimum requirements or manifestations of such community: there is a minimum physical presence, dialogue, communicativeness and responsiveness in daily life, and sharing of goods.76 These four are adjusted and stressed according to the charisms and objectives of the congregations. But as for the Augustinian Order itself, it has been a standard operating procedure to perform any relevant apostolates and ministries in and through the community.

Religious men and women who follow the ideals of St. Augustine must recognize that their communities are also a part of a larger community, that is, the Church. For that reason, Augustinians are always reminded not to be exclusive in their approach to community living but to constantly determine what their communities can do for a particular time, situation and location in the Church.

To this regard, the greatest thing that they can do with respect to their religious identity is to provide, through their communities, a model or witnessing to Christians that this is what the Church have been and should be – to be of one mind and one heart on the way to God. Augustinian communities may not be perfect just as the Church is, yet it is already a great thing when people can always be reminded that it is not impossible and senseless to help, uplift and be intimate and optimistic with one another in working for perfection. In this sense, people may see what every Christian communities should be, may it be a family, school, clubs, business institutions, etc. In looking at these communities, an individual may learn that most of the world is made up of strangers yet it is not pointless to make everyone his friends by starting to embrace the people closest to him.

Such is the reason why St. Augustine opted not to adapt the prevalent mindset of fuga mundi that is characteristic to religious life before and during his time. For that reason, Martin describes the communities inspired by St. Augustine as follows: Both lay and clerical monastic communities founded by Augustine of Hippo Regius were urban communities, visibly inserted into the social fabric of the city. While these servants of God were certainly distinctive in their lifestyle and form of life, they were, nonetheless,

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES closely bound not only to the wider Christian community but to the entire urban population . . . its community prays with the wider community and mingles in secret in street and shop with that same community, even going to public baths.77

enhance and guard itself.

While living in this paradigm, Augustinian spirituality constantly interacts and enters into dialogue with the world and the Church to determine what it can do for them while at the same time learning how it can better

Through St. Augustine’s teaching on friendship and community, everyone is encouraged to enter into fellowship with another to develop the bonds of mutual love and common hope, and thereby journey through life with somebody who may carry you and you may carry at the same time. Indeed, it is easier and more fun to travel in groups. It is exciting to meet fellow travelers along the way, but it is better to journey as traveling fellows.

Augustine, Sermon 299D, 1.

Donald Burt, OSA, Friendship and Society (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999), 56.

3 Burt, Friendship and Society, 56.

4 Augustine, City of God XII, 28.

5 Ibid. XIX, 5 6 Ibid. XII, 28.

7 Augustine, Letter 130, 4.

8 Augustine, Sermon 9, 7.

9 Augustine, Eighty-three different Questions 31, 3.

10 Augustine, Confessions 2, 16.

11 Ibid. 6, 26.

12 Augustine, City of God 4, 4.

13 Augustine, Against the Skeptics 3, 6, 13.

14 Augustine, Confessions 4, 4, 7.

15 Augustine, Christian Instruction, 1,22, 20-21.

16 Augustine, Eighty-three different Questions 71, 6.

17 Augustine, Trinity VIII, 10.

18 Augustine, Homilies on the First Epistle of John 10, 7.

19 Augustine, Christian Instruction 1, 28, 29.

20 Richard Price, Augustine, (London: Fount Christian Thinker, 1996), 79.

21 Ibid., 83.

22 Thomas Martin, OSA, Our Restless Heart, (London: Darton, Longman and Todd Ltd., 2003), 58.

23 Plan of Augustinian Formation, Ratio Institutionis Ordinis Sancti Augustini, Roma 1993.

24 Augustine, Regula 1.

25 Tarcisius Van Bavel, OSA, Christians in the World v. 2, (New York: Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1980), 59 26 Martin, Our Restless Heart, 61.

27 Augustine, City of God 19, 5.

28 Augustine, Homilies on the First Letter of John 9, 10.

29 Tarcisius Van Bavel, OSA, The Rule of Saint Augustine, translated by Raymond Canning, OSA, (New York: Image Books, 1986), 59.

30 Augustine, Regula 4. Emphasis mine.

31 Ibid. Emphasis mine.

32 Augustine, Exposition of the Psalms 131, 5.

33 Bavel, The Rule of Saint Augustine, 50.

34 Price, Augustine, 82.

35 Augustine, City of God 15, 5.

36 Bavel, The Rule of Saint Augustine, 51.

37 Augustine, Regula 6-8.

38 Augustine, Regula 17.

39 Augustine, Homilies on the Gospel of John 77, 4.

Augustine, City of God 19, 5 Ibid. 19, 8.

42 Sr. Marie Aquinas McNamara, OP, Friends and Friendship in Saint Augustine, (New York: Alba House, 1964), 224. De Fide Rerum II, 4 op. cit.

43 Augustine, Letter 73, 10.

44 Augustine, Sermon 355, 2.

45 Possidius, The Life of Sain Augustine, edited by John Rotelle, OSA, (Villanova, PA: Augustinian Press, 1988), 24, 1.

46 Augustine, Letter 155, 1.

47 Augustine, Sermon 87, 12.

48 Augustine, Letter 73, 4.

49 Ibid. 78, 8.

50 Theodore Tack, OSA, If Augustine Were Alive, (Makati: St. Paul Publications, 1990), 140 51 Augustine, Trinity 15, 31.

52 Bavel, The Rule of Saint Augustine, 56.

53 Augustine, Homilies on the First Epistle of John 8, 5.

54 Augustine, Sermon 239,4.

55 Bavel, The Rule of Saint Augustine, 56.

56 Augustine, Letter 118, 22.

57 Bavel, Christians in the World, 71. Homilies of the First Letter of John 2, 14. Op. cit.

58 Augustine, Christian Instruction 1,22,21.

59 Augustine, Exposition of the Psalms 54, 8.

60 McNamara, Friends and Friendship in Saint Augustine, 230.

61 Augustine, Confessions 4, 4.

62 Augustine, City of God 19, 15.

63 Augustine, Tarcisius Van Bavel, OSA, The Basic Inspiration of Religious Life, (Villanova, PA: Augustinian Press, 1996), 218.

64 Ibid., 219.

65 Augustine, Regula 46.

66 Burt, Friendship and Society, 74. Homilies on the First Letter of John 9, 1. Op. cit.

67 Augustine, Regula 44-47.

68 Bavel, The Basic Inspiration of Religious Life, 135.

69 Ibid., 136.

70 Augustine, City of God 19, 19.

71 Bavel, The Basic Inspiration of Religious Life, 147.

72 Ibid., 145.

73 Augustine, Sermon 49, 6.

74 Bavel, The Basic Inspiration of Religious Life, 144.

75 Ibid., 133.

76 Ibid., 141.

77 Martin, Our Restless Heart, 60.

1 2

40 41

In Deum 2015 | 19

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES

Sharing of Goods with the Poor in the life and Teaching of Saint Augustine Fray Melitito Pocholo Visda Jr., OSA

Introduction The evangelical counsels are professed for the service of God and His people. They are embraced for the glory of others. As Augustinians, Jesus Christ always wants us to promote the common good and not our own interest.

He says, “If you want to be perfect, go sell your own possession and give it to the poor” (Mt. 19:21, NAB).

From the modern perspective, the vows also serve as a critique to the existing society at large. In the midst of materialism, consumerism, hedonism and individualism, the evangelical counsels show the value of being poor, chaste and obedient to the will of God in our lives. This is to combat, what the Pope called as, “the human crisis”1 that present in the world. It is a crisis where people give more value to money than “the value of the human person,”2 Pope Francis added. Through the example of our way of as Augustinian religious, we can respond to the challenge of the world by living out a life of simplicity according to our needs. As Augustinians, we have a vital role to play in the present society through the monastic practice of sharing of goods as an expression of our evangelical poverty and communion to the members of the Body of Christ, especially the poor.

Common Life The experience of Augustine is not alien to the present Philippine economic context. Majority of people in Augustine’s time were poor and only a few people 20 | In Deum 2015

controlled the economy like that of today. In the same way, most of the Filipino people live in poverty since there are no solid programs to support specifically sustainable livelihood and even employment.

Augustine established communities in Tagaste and Hippo. In these communities, he showed great concern for the poor and the needy despite living inside the monastery. From the beginning of his monastic life, Augustine truly lived out the teaching of Jesus by caring the poor through the sharing of goods, both materially and spiritually.

There are three important values essential to Augustinian life. These are humility, love and unity.

Humility is essential in common life. A person who is humble opens himself to the movement of the Holy Spirit that leads him to become selfless. In his selflessness, God moves the person to actualize his love of God, of neighbor, and of his self unconditionally like Jesus Christ’s love towards humanity. In this love, the person will be in unity among the brothers in the community, having one mind and one heart intent upon God, because he recognizes God as the center of his life.

Firmly rooted in these values of common life— humility, love, and unity—leads the person to become other-centered in thinking of and promoting the common good and the needs of others through sharing goods in common.

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES Augustine clearly emphasizes to the brothers “to call nothing your own, but let everything be yours in common and be distributed according to one’s needs.”3 Goods pertain not only to material but also spiritual.

Every member of the community is called to renounce his personal possessions in order to be shared in common.

This is following the practice of the first Christian community in Jerusalem. Likewise, the members are also called to share their various talents, expertise, and gifts from God with the community since they are not meant to be kept for oneself alone.

The Rule of Saint Augustine In the Rule, Augustine emphasizes that the brothers in the community are to “call nothing your own, but let everything be yours in common. Each shall be distributed according to one’s needs.”4 Simplicity of life, for Augustinians, is practiced by way of sharing goods. This is living out the essentials in life based on one’s needs. In this kind of life, we express our concrete solidarity with the poor and the needy. This happens when brothers are faithful to their life in common through the sharing of goods. Poverty of one’s heart is essential in purifying one’s heart from any ulterior motives and to be faithful to the vows. This will make the brothers in the community to be contented with what they have since they think of the common good.

With this, we express our solidarity through sharing the surplus goods outside the monastery.

Sermon 355 of Saint Augustine In Sermon 355, Augustine clearly explains to the lay faithful and the clergy that the way of life that they live is patterned after the community found in the Acts of the Apostles. Januarius violated the way of life he professed by keeping for his own and later wanted the Church as his heir. This action of Januarius compromises the common good since the goods are kept for his own benefit rather than sharing them with the community and the poor. Augustine insistently did not accept the inheritance because “he detests his action and it is his policy.”5 Augustine also did not accept Boniface’s inheritance to avoid possible compensation. For him, “it’s not right for us to keep a reserve fund; it’s not the bishop’s business to save gold, and repulse the beggar’s outstretched hand.”6 Augustine finds it unacceptable to divert the funds for compensation for he does not want to resist the hand of the poor.

Sermon 356 of Saint Augustine In Sermon 356, Augustine continues to preach especially on the development of the practice of common life in his community after the scandal that was brought

by Januarius. In this sermon, members of Augustine’s community sincerely intend to be poor together with him and to have God as their common possession.

Augustine wants them to be faithful to their life in common in order to live a simple way of life. The reason is that the contentment of the brothers with their needs creates solidarity where the excess is given to the poor.

Augustine says: “if anyone gives me anything better, I will sell it. Yes, that’s what I am in the habit of doing, so that when a garment cannot be for common use, the price of the garment can be. I sell it, and distribute the proceeds to the ‘poor’.”7 Sermon 86 of Saint Augustine In Sermon 86, Augustine gives a discourse regarding the care for the poor and the value of sharing of goods through almsgiving. He interprets particularly Matthew 19:21 on the “Parable of the Rich Young Man.” Augustine elaborates that renunciation of one’s possession does not mean to lose everything. For him, Jesus clearly teaches to give up all the non-essentials in life and to live a life according to one’s own need. This is the same with the way of life in the monastery. Augustine teaches that the excess goods in the community are to be disposed for the sake of the poor who are deprived of their basic commodities. He teaches that “nobody should be afraid of spending money on the poor. Nobody should imagine that the one who receives it is the one whose outstretched hand he sees. The one who receives it is the one who ordered you to give it.”8 It is Christ who gives and receives for He dwells in each of us. Jesus says that “whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me” (Mt. 25:40, NAB). Sharing of goods with the poor is giving to Christ in the face of the poor. Augustine “is convinced that those who live the monastic life are called before others to cooperate in working for the perfection of the entire Body of Christ” where the poor and the needy are members.

This practice is to combat the two opposing characters that influence the person: avarice and extravagance. Augustine teaches that instead of saving oneself for the sake of one’s own future satisfaction, the person must save up in order to share it to the poor.

Furthermore, instead of living a life treating oneself well, In Deum 2015 | 21

AUGUSTINIAN STUDIES we are to live life well by treating others well especially the poor by being extravagant to them.

The call for the Augustinians of Today As Augustinians, it is important to be firmly rooted in humility and to be responsive to the challenge to become more selfless and open to others, especially the poor. In this way, they open themselves to the works of the Holy Spirit who guides and moves their hearts to love. By loving others, especially the poor, they radiate the love of God to their neighbors, which, in turn, lead them to unity especially in the community. This dynamic movement directs them to share everything they have in common. Equality is done according to the needs of each one. There is the need for a poverty of one’s heart and for contentment. In this way, one who has poverty of the heart has a pure intention of sharing of goods, both material and spiritual, and thinks of the common good.

On the one hand, a contented follower of Augustine will not crave for what is unnecessary but will look only for

Renunciation of goods in the community

what is essential. Consequently, the community can save up and be extravagant in disposing the goods outside the community, especially the poor.

In the community, it is crucial for the Augustinians to ground themselves in these values for them to become fruitful and faithful to their common life, especially in sharing their material and spiritual goods. They need to be more aware of the needs of others and, through this awareness, to be faithful to their sharing in the community and to their solidarity with the poor. The sharing of the goods with the poor leads to and is an expression of communion and solidarity among the members of the Body of Christ, inside and outside the community. This clearly shows that the goods of the world are not intended only for the few but for all and, therefore, must be shared with everyone, especially the poor and the needy.

In summary, the diagram below can best illustrate Augustine’s teaching on sharing of goods to the poor:

Hence, surplus goods are in the community since members are appropriated according to their needs This leads to and is also an expression of communion that embraces all the members of the Body of Christ, especially the poor.

Members live according to their needs in the monastery

These surplus goods are extended to the poor. This is an expression both materially and spiritually.

1 Pope Francis, “Address of pope to the Students of the Jesuit Schools of Italy and Albania,” The Holy See, June 7, 2013, accessed November 20, 2014, http://w2.vatican.va/francesco/en/ speeches/2013/june/documents/papa-francesco_20130607_scuolegesuiti.pdf.

2 Ibid.

3 Augustine, Rule I, 4.

22 | In Deum 2015

Ibid.

Augustine, Sermon 355, 4.

6 Ibid. 355, 5.

7 Augustine, Sermon 356, 13.

8 Augustine, Sermon 86, 2.

4 5

HISTORY SECTION

HISTORY SECTION A Brief History of San Agustin Center of Studies -Fr. Ericson Borre, osa-

The Beginning and Development of In Deum -Fray Jaime Silvestre Parmisano, osa-

In Deum 2015 | 23

HISTORY SECTION

A Brief History of San Agustin Center of Studies Fr. Ericson Borre, OSA

The Beginning San Agustin Center of Studies, the major seminary of the Augustinian Province of Sto. Niño de Cebu–Philippines, was established in 1984.

The establishment of a major seminary was conceived even before the Province of Sto. Niño de CebuPhilippines was founded in 1984. The establishment of the seminary, which would serve as the seedbed of the future Augustinians in the Philippines, will ensure the sustainability and growth of the newly founded province. This was made possible through the assistance of Fathers Eduardo Perez, OSA, and Jesus Encinas, OSA, of the Mother province, who wrote to His Eminence Jaime Cardinal Sin, DD, the then Archbishop of Manila, to seek approval for the establishment of the seminary.

On November 16, 1983, the cardinal, through his Vicar General and Chancellor, Msgr. Josefino Ramirez, approved the proposal.

Diliman, Quezon City was chosen as the site of the building(s). The seminary nestles along Fisheries st. in Visayas Avenue, barely a kilometer away from the famous Quezon City circle landmark. Rising on a slightly elevated two hectare area, it is bounded on the northwest by the Culiat River, opposite to Sanville Subdivision and the University of the Philippines Arboretum.

Following the ground breaking rites on December 1983, the plan was to complete the construction in June 1984. Architect Manuel Mañosa Jr. was contracted to 24 | In Deum 2015

formulate a building plan and additionally, a home for Philosophy students, including the construction of a church and related facilities for the general public.

On May 21, 1984, Fr. Martin Nolan, OSA, the Father General, officially approved the erection of the institution and more importantly, canonically declared it as a religious residence. The concept and the architectural design were patterned after colonial types, conveying the Augustinian’s respect for the past and their unwavering faith in the future.

It was sometime in July 1984 when the original members of the seminary community, together with the first Prior Provincial at the San Agustin Monastery in Intramuros, proposed the name San Agustin Center of Studies (SACS). It was widely received and the Provincial and his Council subsequently approved its adoption as the institution’s name.

In November 13, 1984, the seminary was finally dedicated with His eminence Jaime Cardinal Sin as the main celebrant. Among those who witnessed the occasion were Fr. Eusebio Berdon, OSA, Prior Provincial, Quezon City Mayor Adelina Rodriguez, friars of the Province, Augustinian sisters, friends, and benefactors.

Aside from being the Province’s main formation house, the San Agustin Center of Studies since its foundation also serve as the first Provincial House from 1984 until 1990 before the Provincial House was moved to the Basilica of Sto. Niño in Cebu City. Fr.

HISTORY SECTION

Berdon resided in SACS and held office in the present conference hall with his officials: Fr. Rogelio Objaan, OSA, as Provincial Treasurer and member of the council and Fr. Melchor Mirador, OSA, the Provincial Secretary. The Provincial and his secretary were housed in St. Monica Hall. Furthermore SACS also served as the Asia Pacific Augustinian Conference (APAC) Secretariat Office during the term of Fr. Berdon as APAC President.

SACS celebrated its 25 years last November 13, 2009. The theme of the celebration was “SACS at 25: We Remember . . . We Rejoice . . . We Renew.” An exhibit showcased the history and development of SACS as the formation house and as the seat of St. Thomas of Villanova Institute (STVI). Present during the celebration were Prior Provincial Fr. Eusebio B. Berdon, OSA; Fr. Mamerto Alfeche, OSA, the first prior of SACS (19841985); Fr. William Araña, OSA, Vicar of the Vacariate of the Orient; and friars from other communities.

The Friars From 1984 to 1995 On August 5, 1984, three months before the formal opening of the house, Fr. Arsenio Pioquinto, OSA, and Fr. Rosalio Paderog, OSA, arrived at SACS with six novices. Several weeks later, Fr. Rogelio Obja-an, OSA, and Fr. Melchor Mirador, OSA, joined the group.

After the blessing on November 13, 1984, the rest of the seminarians, accompanied by Fr. Mamerto Alfeche, OSA, and Fr. Eusebio Berdon, OSA, transferred from San Agustin Monastery in Intramuros, Manila.

SACS initially served as the formation house for all levels of formation, from aspirants to the simply professed friars. Thus, several friars were assigned at SACS. In 1984, the first community was composed by Fr. Mamerto Alfeche, OSA, as the first Rector of the House, and the Master of the simply professed friars; Fr. Rosalio Paderog, OSA, as the Vice Rector, Master of Novices and of the Late Vocation seminarians; and Fray Rodolfo Rodriguez, OSA, as the Treasurer and a member of Formation Team.

In April 1985, Fr. Gerardo Pechayco, OSA, and Fr.

Jollie Alson, OSA, arrived as members of the community.

However Fr. Alfeche, at the end of April, left and was assigned as president of the University of San AgustinIloilo and thus Fr. Paderog became the Rector. Later, Fr. Rodolfo Manaloto, OSA, and Fray Efren Obja-an, OSA, both on study-leave, also arrived at SACS. Subsequently, Fray Efren Obja-an became the procurator while Fr. Manaloto was assigned as member of the formation team.

Thus, on September 1985, a new set of house officials managed the seminary. Fr. Rogelio Paderog served as the Rector and Master of Aspirants of the Late Vocation Program, Novices and Professed; House Secretary, Sacristan and Archivist; Fr. Arsenio Pioquinto, OSA, as the Vice Rector, Spiritual Director, Confessor and House Counselor, and Asstistant Master; Fr. Rodolfo Rodriguez, OSA, as Treasurer and member of the Formation Team; and Fray Efren Obja-an, OSA, as the House Procurator.

To enhance the administration and formation of SACS community, Fr. Tito Soquiño, OSA, and Fray Efren Naño, OSA, were assigned to SACS. Fray Efren was still in his pastoral year. In August 1986, Fr. Ramon Pedrosa, OSA, who was on study-leave, was assigned at SACS as a professor and Fr. Marcelino Malana, OSA, also came in January 1987 as pastoral coordinator. At the start of the school year 1988, Fray Efren Naño, OSA, was transferred to Colegio San Agustin-Biñan and Rev. Napoleon Fuderanan, OSA, took his place.

During the second Ordinary Provincial Council in April 1988, the community was composed of the following: Fr. Rogelio Paderog, OSA, as the Rector, Master of the Novices and Professed, Secretary, Archivist and Professor; Fr. Rodolfo Manaloto, OSA, as the Vice Rector, Master of Aspirants and Postulants (Late Vocation Program), House Counselor, Treasurer, Sacristan; Fr. Tito Soquiño, OSA, as the Prefect of Discipline, Library Director, Professor; Fr. Arsenio Pioquinto, OSA, as the Spiritual Director, Confessor, House Counselor and Professor; Fray Efren Obja-an, OSA, as the Procurator and member of Formation Team; Fr. Marcelino Malana, OSA, as Pastoral Coordinator and Regional Director of Cofradia del Sto. Niño; Fr. Ramon Pedrosa, OSA, as In Deum 2015 | 25

HISTORY SECTION guest student priest; Rev. Napoleon Fuderanan, OSA, as Publication Coordinator and Professor.

However, by July 26, 1988, Fr. Paderog was appointed to oversee the construction of another formation house in Cebu, the Augustinian Novitiate and Prayer House.

Fr. Paderog’s request to be permanently freed from his responsibilities as House Prior of SACS was approved by the Council on December 22, 1988. Fr. Manaloto, the Sub-Prior, was appointed acting Prior until April 10, 1989 when he was a full-pledge Prior.

Under Fr. Manaloto’s term, another reshuffling happened. In 1990, Fr. Soquiño and Fray Obja-an were separately assigned to the Colegio San Agustin-Bacolod (CSA-Bacolod) and to the Augustinian Novitiate and Prayer House respectively. Fray Emeterio Lazo, OSA, and Fray Jonas Mejares, OSA, were assigned to SACS. Fr. Pioquinto left SACS in 1991 for the Basilica del Sto. Niño de Cebu.

During the third term in the Province’s existence, another set of friars came. Fr. Soquiño went back to SACS but Fr. Mejares, by that time already a priest, was assigned to the University of San Agustin in Iloilo. In 1993, Fr. Soquiño left for San Jose Parish in Iloilo and Fr. Mejares was reassigned to SACS. In 1993, SACS was manned by Fr. Manaloto, Fray Emeterio Lazo, and Fr. Mejares. Fr. Manaloto was the Prior until 1995. Fray Emeterio Lazo, was appointed for a year as Prior of SACS making him the first non-cleric friar who assumed the office of the Prior in SACS. From 1996 until the Present Time Fr. Rodolfo Bugna, OSA, assumed the office of the Prior of SACS in 1996. His term marked the significant opening of the College Seminary. Fr. Bugna also served as the Master of the College Students. Members of SACS community were Fr. Jerome Mesina, OSA, as the Master of the Simply Professed Friars; Fray Rommel Par, OSA, as the Director of Saint Thomas of Villanova Institute (STVI); Fr. Allan Otadoy, OSA; Fray Eduard Obrique, OSA, who was later transferred to CSA-Bacolod; Rev. Fernando Cleopas, OSA, and Rev. Achilles Secio, OSA. After his four-year term, Fr. Bugna was replaced by Fr. Donato Ellezar, OSA, in 2000. At this time separate formation houses for simply professed friars, for aspirants, and postulants were set up. The novices, who had already their own formation house in Talisay City, Cebu, moved out from SACS in 1989. The professionals were sent to their formation house, San Agustin Seminary, in Guadalupe Monastery, Makati City. SACS formation focused on the college seminarians and the simply professed friars more closely. The college seminarians had their intellectual formation in STVI while the simply professed friars had it in different prestigious schools and universities such as the University of Sto. Tomas, the Recoletos School of Theology, Loyola School of Theology, Maryhill School of 26 | In Deum 2015

HISTORY SECTION Theology, and the Institute of Consecrated Life in Asia, among others.

Fr. Jose Rene C. Delariarte, OSA, took over the office of the Prior in 2004. He was also appointed as STVI Director replacing Fr. Achilles Secio, OSA. With him were new members of the community namely: Fr. Arlon Vergara, OSA; Fr. Michael Belonio, OSA; Fr. Alan Otadoy, OSA; Fr. Ambrosio Galendez, OSA; Fr. Dante Juloc, OSA. Fr. Vergara was assigned to a new apostolate of the Augustinians in Gubat, Sorsogon in 2005. Fr. Pederito Aparece, OSA, and Fr. Arnel Antonio Dizon OSA, became members of the SACS community a year after and Fray Stephen Tan, OSA, replaced Fr. Michael Belonio, OSA, as procurator. Fr. Galindez was transferred to the Novitiate House in January 2007 for health reasons. Fr. Delariarte left SACS and vacated the office of the Prior in 2007 for his further studies in Canada. Fr. Otadoy replaced him in his post for one year. Fr. Danilo Carrido, OSA, stayed at SACS after he ariived from Australia and was transferred to CSA-Bacolod.

In 2008, SACS welcomed another set of members led

by Fr. Andrew Batayola, OSA. Other friars assigned during this term were Fr. Nicholas Echeveria, OSA, as Spiritual Director of the seminarians; Fr. Michael Sequio, OSA, as the Director of STVI; Fray Stephen Tan, OSA, who left for Rome a year after for studies, was replaced by Fr. Ericson Borre, OSA, as Procurator; Fr. Fernando Cleopas, OSA, the Master of the college seminarians, who left for Canada after two years for a mission. Fr. Joel Beronque, OSA, assumed the post of Master of the college students. Fray Wellener Jack Luna, OSA, who just professed his solemn vows, was added as a member of the community. Fr. Jose Seidel, OSA, came to SACS in 2010, and Fr. Emmanuel Czar Alvarez, OSA, arrived from Rome in the summer of the same year. In 2011, Fr. Pacifico Nohara, OSA, arrived after his term as a missionary in Korea. Noteworthy to mention were the presence of the two Augustinian friars from Indonesia, who came in December 2010 for further studies: Rev. Yohanis Sedik, OSA, and Rev. Adri Doringe, OSA. In 2012, newly assigned friars came, headed again

by Fr. Jose Rene Delariarte, OSA. His team consisted of Fr. Nelson Zerda, OSA, as Master of the simply professed friars; Fr. Fernando Cleopas, OSA, who just arrived from Canada; Fr. Jose Francisco Teves, OSA, who also came from Rome. Fr. Michael Sequio, OSA, the Master of the postulants; Fr. Ericson Borre, OSA, as procurator; Fr. Pacifico Nohara, OSA, as Master of the aspirants; Fr. Nicolas Echeveria, OSA, and Fray Harold Langahin, OSA. Fr. Yohanis Sedik, OSA, from Indonesia, and Fray Kim Chang Ho, OSA, from Korea joined the group.

The STVH and STVI In 1996, twelve years since the erection of SACS, the college seminary was realized and another edifice was added at the left of Saint Monica Hall, the St. Thomas of Villanova In Deum 2015 | 27

HISTORY SECTION Hall. The project of building a college seminary was initiated by the Prior Provincial, the late Fr. Benardino Ricafrente, OSA. He presented the project to the Intermediate General Chapter in Sao Paulo, Brazil and positive pledges of assistance poured in from different Provinces of the Order.

The groundbreaking was scheduled on February 23, 1994 and was graced

by Very Rev. Fr. Gonzalo Diaz, OSA, the General Econome of the Order at the time. The construction started in June of the same year and it was completed 1996. It was blessed on January 30, 1996 by Most Rev. Fr. Miguel Angel Orcasitas, OSA, the then Prior General of the Order.

The Saint Thomas of Villanova Institute of Philosophy, the academic branch of the College Seminary, is to be found in this building. STVI is the philosophy institute of the province affiliated with the University of San Agustin College of Arts and Science.

It trains college seminarians in philosophical studies as a preparatory course to theology. During its opening on June 6, 1996, STVI welcomed 24 students from all over the country. From then on the institute has continued to produce and helped in the development and formations of the college seminarians of the province.

In 2006, the STVI celebrated its ten years and opened its portals to extern students. The externs were from different religious congregations, such as the Sons of Divine Providence (FDP), Eucharistic Healers of Mary (EHM), and the Missionary of the Beatitudes (MB). Seminarians from the Vicariate of the Orient of the Mother province also enrolled in the institute. To date STVI has welcomed a total 423 students from both Augustinians and the externs since its opening The institute has an official publication, The Pelican. It features philosophical and social-related issues contributed by the Institute’s professors and speakers during philosophical symposia. The collegium community has its own journal called, The Phoenix. This journal contains personal and philosophical reflections of the seminarians on their day-to-day life in the seminary.

Since its establishments, STVI has had the following Directors: Fr. Rommel Par, OSA; Fr. Achilles Secio, OSA; Fr. Jose Rene Delariarte, OSA; Fr. Dante Juloc, OSA; Fr. Michael Alvin Sequio, OSA. The current Director is Fr. 28 | In Deum 2015

Jose Rene Delariarte, OSA. Seminary Structures and Features St. Monica Hall – Friars Residence Built in 1984, the new colonial-type seminary is composed of two edifices.

The main structure on the left is a three-story seminary while on the other threestory building which serves as the residence of the friars.

This building boasts of an open terrace protruding from the second floor. Behind them is a separate building housing the refectories and the kitchen. A covered path joins the latter to the residence. The friars’ residence is equipped with four bedrooms, a living room, library and conference room. It has a receiving room at the ground floor.

Other features include basketball and tennis/ volleyball courts which were completed in 1985 along with the first layer of the concrete fencing. In 1986 a bridge connecting Fisheries Street and the Seminary compound was added.

St. Nicholas of Tolentine Hall – Professorium The home of the simply professed friars is a threestory building. The hall is a square-like structure which encloses an inner garden at the center part. It has 48 individual rooms with individual shower rooms, study rooms, chapel and archives, among others. Today, SNTH has a mini-conference room and a reading room.

SNTH is also the home of the In Deum, the publication of the professorium community. The SACS Update, the official, the official newsletter of SACS, is also published by the friats from the same department.

St. Thomas of Villanova Hall – Collegium The college seminary is located in an elevated piece of lot. It has three levels and has a sort of a lower ground floor where the laundry rooms and the employee’s quarter are located. In the upper ground floor, which encloses also an inner garden, the classrooms, speech laboratory, and the faculty room of STVI are situated. The STVI Public Chapel is also on the same floor. In the second floor, the dormitories of the of the seminarians, four guest rooms, the Saint Thomas of Villanova Philosophy Library are located. The dormitories of the higher years, the common recreation room, the computer laboratory, the College Oratory, and the Father Master’s room are in the third floor.

HISTORY SECTION The Community Apostolate There has been a consensus to build a strong Augustinian Community as the first apostolate of the members. Being a formation community, this has been given the utmost care and attention by the members because of its implications on the formation of the students.

Considering that the main mission of the community is formation, the apostolic ministry has been limited.

This, however, has not hindered the community’s involvements in the following areas of outreached programs in depressed areas of Quezon City and at the home for the aged. In 1992 the friars participated in social movements meant to help alleviate the plight of the less fortunate, especially the victims of recent calamities such as fire, the Mt. Pinatubo eruption, and similar among others; holding of retreat and recollections for the different lay groups; assisting the neighboring parishes of Project 6, San Francisco del Monte and San Lorenzo Ruiz; organizing the youth of the area and holding daily masses where neighboring residents could attend.

At the present, the friars are also engaged in many forms of apostolate. Friar-priest are still helping the nearby parishes like Mt. Carmel in Project 6; San Isidro Parish in Tandang Sora; parish of the Immaculate Conception in Project 6; ASOLC – Motherhouse; OSA Contemplative Sisters in Bulacan and San Agustin Compound in Tandang Sora. With students from STVI, the fathers also celebrates Mass at the Baseco Compound.

Aside from the regular schedule of the Masses, the friars also facilitate requests from different Augustinian communities and schools in giving recollection and retreats.

part of the proceeds of the selling of the columbary vaults will be given to support the seminary financially.

The construction started with a ground-breaking ceremony attended by the then Quezon City Mayor, Sonny Belmonte, representatives of the developer (RDC), and some friars from the Province. It was in the year 2009 that the seminary started using the public chapel. This was due to the slow phase of the construction because of financial constraints of the developer.

SACS today . . .

The San Agustin Center of Studies Community continues to commit itself to fulfill its vision and mission, that is, to take care of the formation of the young men in this part of the globe, who would become the future Augustinians according to the teachings and ideals of St. Augustine.

Furthermore, what has been started by its forebears, SACS persevere to do: shaping the mind and heart of the formands with an integral and holistic formation program.

Inspired by what was laid down by its history, the young Augustinians today continue to strive for excellence and holiness to be a community proud of its history, humble of its achievements, and sincere in achieving its goal.

These ideals have given this community the right course toward the realization of its vision which is “a community of brothers and friends, living harmoniously with one mind and heart intent upon God and sharing goods in common for the service of God and His people.”

The simply professed friars are also assigned in many areas of apostolate. Some friars are assigned in V. Luna Hospital giving communion to the sick and in Tayuman, taking care of the house of the elderly together with the Sisters of Charity. Other areas of apostolate are TMMR in collaboration with the ASOLC sisters for the orphans; catechism with children in San Agustin Compound and BEC community in Project 6.

The Columbary Part of the master plan of the seminary was also to have a public chapel. This chapel will be used to cater to the pastoral needs of the public aside from the friars and the seminarians who both have their respective oratories in the seminary.

While setting up the plans on the construction of the public chapel, a specific proposal was raised by a developer who offered to build the chapel in exchange on creating a columbary. The plan was to make it a twostory structure with the chapel above and the columbary below. The Province accepted the proposal and in return, In Deum 2015 | 29

HISTORY SECTION

The Beginning and Development of

In Deum

Fray Jaime Silvestre Parmisano OSA

The San Agustin Center of Studies (SACS), since her establishment, became the home of hundreds of Augustinian seminarians. Some persevered and served the Church as Augustinian friars. Many chose to leave this home and lived their lives outside but without forgetting the warmth of the community they once enjoyed and shared with their fellow brothers. Now, that this home reached three decades of existence as a community, as a home for many of us, let us then touch the walls where memories were carved. Let us then listen to the laughter of the past reverberating along the galleries and look at the footprints left on the stairs of our home. Let us recall and appreciate the existence of a house where brothers live in one mind and one heart intent upon God. Many of the joys and laughter, from the formators and formandi of 1988 and to almost seventy formandi, both pre and post novitiate, and formators for this formation year (2014-2015) were written in the publications of SACS community. The official publications of the community preserved the memories and reflections of many seminarians, formators and employees who once stayed and became part of the history of SACS. As time passed by at SACS, its publications recorded its changes and developments. Perhaps, one way of looking and 30 | In Deum 2015

appreciating the history of SACS community is through looking at the changes of its recorder—its publications.

This short article then would like to show the humble beginnings and developments of SACS publications.

We hope that through exposing the history of SACS’s publications, we will see a particular view of the history of SACS and appreciate more the home that introduced us to a community of brothers on the way to God— SACS. As of now SACS community offers a number of publications. College seminarians of Saint Thomas of Villanova Hall (STVH) have The Phoenix as its official student publication. The Phoenix now has released its 8th issue last March 2014. The philosophy institute of SACS, Saint Thomas of Villanova Institute (STVI) also has The Pelican as its annual official journal and already published its 6th issue. Moreover, the SACS’s newsletter is already on its 15th volume. SACS Update, the official newsletter of SACS, is released trice a year. The simply professed friars of Saint Nicholas of Tolentine Hall (SNTH), too, have their annual publication, we call it In Deum and it is already on its 20th issue last April 2014. Not only that, the In Deum has a special edition—the Augustinian Initial Formation Congress (AIFC) document. As of now, the

HISTORY SECTION In Deum special edition is already on its 2nd issue. SACS has five annual publications.

March1988

First Semester 1988-1989

In this article, only one out of the five publications of SACS will be the particular interest of the writer.

The In Deum was chosen not because of any prejudice but because it was already around during the early age of SACS. It was the beginning of SACS’s publications. Many of the members of its editorial staff became solemnly professed friars and even superiors of SACS community and of other Augustinian communities. It surely has the right to be called the recorder of SACS’s history. Other limitation of this article is its sources—the publications themselves. To have enough data for this article, the writer gathered all available copies, from the oldest to the newest volumes of In Deum from the mini archive of SACS’s Mass Media Center (MMC).

The MMC is the main office of all publication related works of SACS. Every publication that SACS produced, through the help MMC, has a copy in MMC archives for reference.

Sadly, the MMC does not have a complete copy of all the publications of SACS especially those that were published before the establishment of MMC. Nevertheless, MMC archives provided enough information of the history of SACS’s publications.

SACS INSIGHTS – the beginning

1989-1990

Even before In Deum, a publication that can be considered the origin of the rest of SACS’s publications already existed. It was named SACS Insights.

The oldest copy of SACS Insights we can find predated the In Deum for three years. It was published in March 1988 and it is already the fourth issue of the first volume. It was the first official seminary publication of SACS but looking at its content, we can say that it served more than a recorder

of events. In its first volume, SACS Insights with a theme “Searching for God Together,” because of the ingenuity of its editor-in-chief, Novice Robin Alvarez Dumaguit, OSA, included the profiles of 1987-1988 Novices, some reflections and research papers.

A song was also included under the section Original Composition. This song entitled, “One Happy Family,” would later on be sung by all of us; it would become our Provincial Hymn.

There was a part of this volume, under the Major Insight section, for serious and academic reflections. Basing on the content, this volume focused on the novices of 1987 – 1988. Most of its content would be about their lives and reflections.

Looking at the first volume of SACS Insights we can see how skillful, talented, and hard working the seminarians of SACS were, especially the editorial staff. They needed to patiently type all the reflections using mechanical typewriters. For its pictures and illustrations, they had to rely on the skillful hands of their artist since all of them were drawn using pencils and coloring materials. They used a brownish, thin, special paper and had to Xerox copy it for mass production. Even with the limitations of the technology and other needed things, the editorial staff was able to make 36 pages of 11’ x 8.5’ publication for its fourth release of 1987 -1988.

For its second volume, SACS Insights, under the leadership of Fray Rommel Par, OSA, as its editorin-chief, followed the same format of the first issue, but with some developments. This year’s staff had an advantage compared to the previous staff. The second volume was typewritten using a computer. They also used photographs and computer graphics to depict more vividly the news and reflections of the brothers.

In Deum 2015 | 31

HISTORY SECTION The staff printed the front cover page in color while the pictures inside were in black. This time, it was not anymore a brownish special paper but a white bond paper. Like the first volume, it introduced the novices of 1988-1989.

This time the staff, as indicated in the header of the front cover page together with an Augustinian logo, specifically named SACS Insights as the official newsletter of SACS and so the content, as expected, would be more on the events and who’s who of the seminary. This volume also had an Augustiniana section, where the Augustine’s words on a particular topic (education and prayer) were quoted, as its special feature, and also a section for poetry.

Edwin Rivera Abayon, editorin-chief of the third volume, strictly followed the format of the previous volume. This volume, though, for unknown reason, was type-written using a mechanical typewriter. There were also pictures and cartoons inside this volume. For the cover page (both front and back), the staff printed photographs in black and white. This volume, interestingly, gave more space for the reflections of the seminarians. Unlike the previous SACS Insights, this one did not have a profile of the novices. The novices of 1989 – 1990 and their Master, Fr. Rosalio Paderog, OSA, moved to, the newly built formation house in Cebu, the Augustinian Novitiate and Prayer House (ANPH) during the early part of 1989. This caused a sudden absence of their names in the third volume.

We cannot definitely determine how many times SACS Insights was released in a year. We do not have the copies of the other released numbers.

The first volume, surely, was released four times. We have the copy of the fourth released number and it was released in March of 1988. We only 32 | In Deum 2015

have the first release of the second volume. It is safe to say though that the second volume was released twice a year. SACS Insights Volume II Number I was released during the first semester of 1988 -1989 and it reported news from June until half of November. The third issue was probably released only once. The front page of this issue indicated that it was released during the school year 1989 – 1990 and the staff wrote some events that happened from June of 1989 until March of the next year.

These variations of released numbers of SACS Insights and its contents simply show that the publication was still determining its official image and so the whole project had to rely on the creativity of the editorial staff and the support of the superiors. The ‘template,’ from which other publication staff of SACS would follow, is not yet conceived. Still, we should be thankful for the courage and creativity of the staffs of the early publications. What they have started became an annual practice and eventually a tradition that we, today, observe. Their desire to promote the Augustinian way of life through these publications influenced their young brothers in the community. These young brothers would eventually succeed the responsibility to pass the baton to the future. As the baton was passed annually, SACS Insights, as a publication, eventually developed into what we know now as its official image—In Deum.

1991

1994

In Deum—the development On 1991 of November, SACS released their official publication. This time, SACS Insights took a new name; one that would be recognized even by the SACS’s seminarians of the present time—In Deum. Fray Richard Pido, OSA, as the editor-in-chief of In Deum vol. 1 no. 1, initiated the change

1996

HISTORY SECTION of the name of SACS’s publication.

In the editorial, it is said that the new name, In Deum, “essentially a dynamic movement ‘towards God.’. . . [would] serve as a constant reminder for all of us to be always mindful of our vocation and charism.” This publication also clearly laid down its purpose that is “to share the spirit of Saint Augustine to all people thirsting to know him more. . . . and an eye-opener to those who are yet to discover him.”

1996-1997

1999

2002

As we can notice, there was, for a whole year, a gap between the third volume of SACS Insights and the first volume of In Deum. Could there be a SACS Insights vol. IV or simply SACS of 1990 – 1991 did not release any publication? We cannot answer. The first volume of In Deum did not say anything except of the change of name and MMC archive does not have a copy except for the third volume of SACS Insights.

The theme for this first bi-annual publication of SACS “Journeying Beyond Modernism” expressed the search of the seminarians of SACS of their relevance in the modern world. We can read in this volume the brothers’ reflections on their experience during a pastoral exposure and of their own vocation.

The editor also added a section that introduces the youngest brothers in the community, the aspirants of 1991–1992. This 12 page, 11.5’ x 8’ publication, in order for Augustine to be known to other readers, also presented a short article on Augustine’s concept of friendship. An interesting section of this volume was the interview with the former Prior General of the Order, Fr. Theodore Tack, OSA. The staff also shared in the cartoon section the cartoons of the friars that depicted life in the community. The same as the previous

publication, it was printed in black and white. The staff had computers to assist them and so the publication was type-written using a computer unit and had pictures and graphics.

Sadly, we lost the copies of the next two volumes, II and III. What we have now is the 16 page, 11’x 8.5’ In Deum vol. IV. I published on December 16, 1994. Another development that would be carried on to the future is the complete name of the bi-annual publication of SACS. It would become In Deum (and as a sub name) Journal of Journey of an Augustinian Community towards God. This added name clarified the very image of the publication. It would be about the life and reflections of a moving community, an Augustinian community, on the way to God—In Deum. Other interesting change was the news section. It was called SACS News Update. Perhaps this could considered as the starting point of a separate publication of SACS that later on in history would be realized.

Other noticeable change was the quality of the printed material.

Though it was computerized, like the previous publications, the pictures, computer graphics and the font style of this publication had a better quality. For the section, Aspirants’ Profile, a familiar face was included.

Fr. Nelson Zerda, OSA, the current Master of the simply professed friars, entered and became part of SACS community as an Aspirant in the year 1994. He was one of the layout artists of the editorial staff 1994-1995. Fray Edwin L. Jacalan, OSA, as the editorin-chief, together with his staff, led the publication to these developments.

For the next volume, we can only present the second release of vol. 5, the December – March issue.

Fray Jose Rene C. Delariarte, OSA, (yes, our very own Prior) with the In Deum 2015 | 33

HISTORY SECTION rest of the staff, again, refined the image of SACS publication. From the beginning, during the period of SACS Insights, up to the previous volume of In Deum (vol. 4), the staff used the Augustinian logo as part of the header.

Not this time! The 20 page 12’ x 9’ In Deum vol. 5 no. 2 had the official logo of SACS community as part of its front cover page header. This volume also expanded its horizon. It has not only pastoral and theological research and reflection papers but also philosophical reflections and discussions, and a short story. We have to note that Fr. Pacifico Nohara, OSA, the current master of the STVH aspirants, was one of the layout artists of this volume. Fr. Nohara drew the picture in the front cover page. It summarized ‘artistically’ the Augustinian way of life. Another event that would be the highlight of this particular period of SACS’s history was the opening of STVI in June of 1996. This would have significant impact on the coming developments of SACS’s publication.

Significant developments happened in the next three volumes of In Deum. The previous publications had soft special paper for their cover pages but the editorial staffs of In Deum vol. VI, VII, IX (we do not have a copy of vol. VIII) used colored book page papers for the cover page.

The 11’ x 7.5’ 36 pages In Deum vol.

VI no. 1 of 1996-1997, under the guidance of Brother Michael Belonio and Fray Arnel Antonio Dizon, OSA, the editors-in-chief, became a joint bi-annual publication of STVI and San Agustin Major Seminary. SACS, starting from this time and onwards, has two houses of formation in one community. One, the San Agustin Major Seminary, was for the ‘old’ seminarians. The other one, STVI, was for the ‘new’ ones. The former referred to the seminarians both 34 | In Deum 2015

professed and college seminarians, who were already under formation before the establishment of STVI. The latter referred to the pioneering seminarians of the new formation house for pre-novitiate seminarians.

We have to note that before STVI existed as formation house for the pre-novitiate seminarians of the Province, the SACS community sent their aspirants and postulants to University of Santo Tomas (UST) and other schools for their philosophy degree. Volume V also omitted the news and aspirants’ profile section.

In the year 1996 SACS released a new publication, SACS Update, a quarterly newsletter, embodying news and the profiles of the aspirants. Volume VI did not have a news section. SACS Update became a separate publication from In Deum and became the official newsletter of SACS. In Deum became a pure journal, full of reflections and other papers, of SACS. The next volume, VII of 19992000, In Deum became a bi-annual publication of the simply professed brothers of SACS. This was another development in the image of In Deum. It started on this year that, In Deum, officially became a sole responsibility of the simply professed friars. Since it became the publication of the professed friars who during this time were mostly theology students, naturally, the content would be more in the line of theology and spirituality.

Fray Dante Juloc, OSA, the editor-inchief, also noted, for the first time, a consultant. Dr. Elena Polo helped the editorial staff to make a 16 page 11’ x 8.5’ In Deum.

The next volume we have, IX, was published on March of 2002, Fray Michael Belonio et al, the editorial board, with the help of the consultant Dr. Polo, made a 20-page In Deum.

This time they published it as a

2004

2005

2006

HISTORY SECTION special annual publication. From this moment on, In Deum would become an annual publication.

2007

2008

2009

The next volumes of In Deum would again present a new image.

It became more of a magazine in its feature. In Deum, because of the availability of better technology, would have a colored and glossed cover page. A new section was also added for these volumes of In Deum.

With the help of Fray Ericson Borre, OSA, In Deum would have a historical trivia section. This time, the simply professed friars started to notice the rich history and tradition of the Order. Slowly, as it started through the trivia of history in the In Deum, the love for the history of the Order, of the Augustinians in the Philippines, of the Province, and even of SACS, would reach the heart of the simply professed friars of SACS. We could also notice the number of photographs in the following publications.

The volumes X to XVI had, except for glossy cover page and history trivia section, minor changes.

The staffs of these volumes tried to make the size of In Deum consistent.

For the next volumes, it would be 11’ x 8.5. The new proof reader, Ms. Pura Ordoña, helped the staffs of volumes X and XI. Volume X, under the leadership of Fray Lazaro Ervite, OSA, the editor-in-chief, include two interesting articles. One was a short exegetical study by the editor and the other one was an article on history of the Province by Fray Borre, OSA. The rest of articles and reflections focused on Augustinian spirituality.

The next volumes, XI, XII, and XIV added a section for original compositions. We can read in the previous news sections that the seminarians of SACS engaged in many musical activities and in the beginning (SACS Insights vol. I no.

IV), they even had an originally composed song. Many of them were composers. In Deum vol. XI, XII, and IV reminded us that SACS was also a place of songs. It also started from this volume up to the following volumes that the back cover page of In Deum was consistently reserved (In Deum vol. VI no. I printed their back cover page already with vocation promotion poster) for vocation promotion. The previous publications usually printed the community picture at the back cover page. This time the staff, with the aid of some computer layout techniques, added some “catchy” phrase and addresses of Augustinian communities for vocation promotion poster. Volumes XIII and XIV added a book review section. Most of the reviewed books were about Augustinian spirituality. Another help came. Prof. Carmen Nietes, English teacher of STVI, guided the editorial staff as editorial consultant of In Deum vol. XII and of the rest of volumes up to the present volume.

We have to note that the In Deum vol. XIV had a special edition published in March of 2009. The 60 page 10’ x 7’ In Deum vol. XIV no.

2, with the theme “Renewal within the Order begins with Formation” was published in “anticipation for the celebration of the 25th anniversary of the inauguration of SACS on November 13, 2009.” This publication emphasized the importance of formation. It also had an article on the history of the Province and historical trivia focusing on the history of SACS. It also had a book review and song composition sections. The staff of vol.

XIV also used the printer company, AM Cleofe Prints, and the lay-outing office, SACS MMC, who were a big help in improving the publication.

As part of SACS’ celebration for its 25 years of existence, the community opened and blessed a new office that In Deum 2015 | 35

HISTORY SECTION would boost the confidence of the publication staff and the quality of SACS’s publications—the Mass Media Center.

With the help of MMC, SACS’s publications moved up to their new and developed image. SACS Insights and In Deum started with thin and brown special paper and as time passed by its cover page developed into glossed thick book page papers.

In Deum vols. XVI to XX (vol. XV is missing), with the help of MMC, have glossed and colored, cover pages and pages inside. Not only the quality of papers used but also the quality of the printing materials changed. With the help of the computer units, videocameras, scanners, printers, internet access and other technologies, the staff was able to provide a venue where its members can dedicate their time in learning the ways of video, music, print editing and lay-outing.

These helped SACS to have a better quality of print publication. We also have to note that from volume XVII until the current publication, the publication staff asked the help of Pacifico F. Manalili Printing Press for mass copying of In Deum and other SACS’s publications.

As of the moment, the latest volume of In Deum (vol. XX), under the leadership of Fray Rodel Magin, OSA, as editor-in-chief, and the guidance of Prof. Carmen Nietes, the English consultant, was dedicated to the 30th founding anniversary of the Province of Sto. Niño de Cebu – Philippines. The theme was “Diakonia” The Augustinian Province of Sto. Niño de Cebu – Philippines: 30 years of Service to the Church.

This volume had Theological (also philosophical) Inquiries section. In this section, some simple professed friars, in a short research paper, shared their ideas. True to its purpose, 36 | In Deum 2015

it also developed a section dedicated only for Augustine’s thoughts, Augustinianism. This volume also dedicated a section for History, a treasure in our being Augustinians.

Of course, substantial part of the publication was for the reflections and poetry of the brothers. All of these sections were the refinements of the previous volumes. It has a history, a beginning, and development. The staff had something to base upon. With the help of the previous publications and its staffs, the staff of volume XX led us to the current image of In Deum.

What do all of these tell us?

We have seen how the In Deum started and developed. We have seen how its sizes, texture, quality, and even the number of pages changed and developed. We have noted how it was started from the responsible hands of the novices, passed on to seminarians of San Agustin Major Seminary, and for a while a joint responsibility of two houses of formation (San Agustin Major Seminary and STVI) until it became a sole responsibility of the simply professed friars of SNTH. We have noticed, as we can see in the development of the SACS’s publications, how the seminarians of SACS adapted and did their best out of what they had. We started from mechanical typewriter, into simple computer typewriting skills, and into more complicated computer editing and lay-outing. We have read how the contents of the publications started from simple seminarians’ profiles and recorder of events and songs, into reflections on life and vocation, and turned into articles on Augustine’s thought, and on history, and into short exegetical studies and research papers. We have seen how time refined the image of our publication.

We have realized all of these change and development. But, it must be

2010

2011

2012

HISTORY SECTION asked. What do these changes and developments tell us? Do these give us encouraging thought and inspiration?

Or do all of these just add weight as one of the responsibilities we have inherited and must be carried on?

2013

2014

In Deum

We have seen a glimpse of SACS history through the developments of its publication. The developments of In Deum actually reflected the changes in SACS. Without the support of the friars assigned in SACS probably there would only be minor developments in its publication. A concrete example is the establishment of MMC. It greatly influenced the quality of our publication. The establishment of MMC was an answer to the call of the time; media (not only print but also music and video) evangelization slowly crept into the consciousness of the friars and was considered as an important aspect in our evangelization.

Another thing to consider is the content of the publications. Through them, we can see how the culture of writing, researching, reflecting, and composing, developed in the history of SACS. The publication that produced research and other academic papers somehow showed the atmosphere of the period. SACS, as a center of studies, especially during the beginning, was deeply engaged in intellectual formation of its seminarians. It does not necessarily mean though that when the publication has minimal academic papers, studies and intellectual training become a minor concern of SACS. NO! It simply shows that the formation in SACS is starting also to put emphasis on other aspects (apostolate, social concerns, and many more)—aspects are an outlet, an actualization of what the seminarians learned not only in their intellectual formation but in their holistic formation.

Every section of the publications also shows the particular concerns and activities of the seminarians of SACS. We can notice how In Deum changed from purely a publication for Augustinian thought into other fields that friars ventured. There was a section on the history of the Order, of the Province and lately of SACS. We also started to have friars, who were interested on biblical, Marian, philosophy, and other theological studies. Of course we cannot set aside our Holy Father. We have to remember that at the beginning, the purpose of the publication was to let other people know Augustine.

Nevertheless, the publications proved that SACS, indeed, is a center of studies from the very beginning.

Reading through the works of the brothers, we can surmise that SACS can provide a place where one can study and reflect. These, study and reflect, are important to an Augustinian (or to any religious) under formation. We need a place where one is encouraged to learn the necessary ‘tools’ for their ministry. We also need a place where we can reflect on the call of God—our vocation.

All of these, the beginning, development, and influence must be seen not as burden but privileged responsibility. We are privileged to continue, develop, and pass to the future what was started. We become a reference point, stepping stone of the future, not only of the publication but also of SACS. All of these, the beginning, development, its influence should remind us that we are one. The past prepared the field as we prepare it for the future. We are brothers (not only of the present but also of the past and future) in communion (koinonia) with one another.

In Deum 2015 | 37

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRIES The Essenes: The First Monastic Community in Qumran -Fray Mark Domasian, osa-

Book Review: The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible

By James C. VanderKam. Cambridge: William B. Eerdamns Publishing, 2012. ISBN-10: 0802866794 -Fr. Nelson Zerda, osa-

Joseph Ratzinger on the Concept of Communion -Fray Jaime Silvestre Parmisano, osa-

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRIES

The Essenes: The First Monastic Community in Qumran Fray Mark Domasian, OSA

Introduction There are three religious groups in Israel that emerged during the Maccabean religious – political revolt in c. 165 B.C.E against the Seleucid. These three religious groups are the Sadducees who claimed to be conservatives by accepting only the authority of the Torah; the Pharisees who continued the tradition of the Hasidim of Maccabean days; and the Essenes who lived in expectation of a political and a spiritual Messiah. Among these three, the Essenes who withdrew in the face of the opposition from Jerusalem and from participation in the temple cult, probably towards the end of the 2nd Century B.C.E. took refuge in the wilderness of Judah. Though they were not mentioned in both the Old and the New Testaments, the Essenes’ connection with the Dead Sea Scrolls is spectacular because those scrolls inform us not only about Judaism and Christianity in the first century C.E. but also our new understanding of Monastic Life of that period.

Let us take two examples that stand out from the Dead Sea Scrolls that seemed to have an affinity in thought and language with the New Testament writings. First, in the Book of Hymns, the faithful declare that they stand in the eternal congregation of God, hold direct converse with him and share the lot of the Holy beings; compare with Ephesians 2:19, “so then you are no longer strangers

and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the holy ones and members of the household of God,” Second, in the Manual of Discipline, it is said that if the community abide by the prescribed rules, it will be a veritable Temple of God, a true holy of holies; compare with 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, “do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for the temple of God, which you are, is holy.”

The Qumran Community as a Monastic Community First and foremost, the Qumran community considered themselves as a monastic community being the “new temple” of God. There are actually a good number of sources form the Dead Sea Scrolls that describe the monastic community in Qumran as the new temple of God. Let it be known beforehand that the concept of community as the “New Temple” was strongly influenced by the members’ experience with the Jerusalem Temple’s hierarchy and the political upheaval of the time. Let us mention four important concepts that describe Qumran community as the “New Temple.”

First, the Qumran community is where the “Shekinah” is bound. In the temple of Jerusalem, every Jew believed that God’s presence is truly in the “Holy of Holies.” But since the Jerusalem Temple was desecrated and tainted, the community now believed that Yahweh’s presence In Deum 2015 | 39

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRES resided in the true and pure Israel represented by the community. The community traced their descent to the company of the temple priests and that certain of their number were priests. Before it was destroyed in 70 A.D., the Cultus and the Law were prominent in the temple.

After its destruction, the Jews started to spiritualize the worship of the temple and the Law. As the community of Qumran transferred the whole complex of ideas from the Jerusalem Temple to their community, temple worship was now performed through the community’s observance of the law and through its liturgy and cult.

Believing to be the true and pure Israel, the community should live a life of perfect obedience to the law. Just as in the old temple the Holy place and the Holy of Holies were important, the community as the “new temple” interpreted it in such a way that the men of the community shall separate themselves and become a “holy house” for Aaron, so that when they joined together, they became a “Holy of Holies” who walked in perfection. Thus here we see that in the Qumran community, the “Holy Place” is represented by the priests of the community who were Aaron’s descent, and the “Holy of Holies” is represented by the laymen being now the “New Israel.” Jews during festivals offered to Yahweh their burn offerings and sacrifices. In the “New Temple,” these offerings and sacrifices had been replaced by community prayers and perfect life according to the Law. Second, the community as the “New Temple” is eternal. This means that it cannot be corrupted by sin. Just as the old temple was once a meeting place of God and His angels, and that the man who entered it came before the face of God, the Qumran community as the “New Temple” is built up by a process of exclusiveness by their avoidance of the unclean and by their preservation of ritual within the community.

Third, the stones 40 | In Deum 2015

and sapphires that were used in building the old temple were represented by members of the community and priests respectively in the “New Temple.” They were the foundations of the said temple.

Fourth, in the old temple, the Jews rendered their own aboda according to their own status in the temple.

The Qumran community as the “New Temple” rendered its aboda through the study of the Law and the life of obedience to it. The community believed that it was through and in them that the vision of the temple and the reestablishment of the cultus are fulfilled.

Essenes’ affinity in the New Testament Writings After having presented a general background of the monastic life of the Essenes as the New Temple in the Dead Sea Scrolls, we are now in a better position to understand it from the perspective of the New Testament.

Paulinos Corpus For St. Paul the body of Christians is the Temple of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 3: 16-17; 2 Cor. 6:14-7:1). By “Body of Christians,” we understand it as an individual entity and as a collective reality. By individual entity, we refer it to each Christian believer and as a collective reality; we refer it to the church as an assembly. St. Paul emphasizes that the principle that makes the church a temple exists in each individual believer which also

Qumran Community

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRIES makes him/her also a temple. Significantly, the role of the Holy Spirit is that which not only inspires, brings life and movement to each Christian believer, but also builds up the interior life. As a collective reality, the community or the church is the Temple of God in as much as all Christians or believers are God’s temple. For St. Paul, where there is a believer, there is also a temple of God. Yet several believers are not several temples for One Person dwells in and sanctifies them all – Jesus Christ. With this theological foundation from St. Paul, we can infer four conclusions that deem important in the ecclesiology of the Roman Catholic Church. First, the Temple of God refers to the community and it is made up of its members. Second, God’s presence “Shekinah” now dwells in that church and its individual members after it was removed from the official Jerusalem temple.

Third, since God is now present in the church and to its members, it necessarily follows that the holiness of God exudes in them, and this makes them holy. Finally, by the fact that the “New Temple” is holy, it must avoid the snares of the evil one in the form of false doctrine and a life in conflict with the will of God.

Johannine Literature

The idea of the “New Temple” began with the result of the death of Christ on the cross (Eph. 2:18-22). Just as the Tempe of Israel was originally the property of the chosen people, through Jesus’ death and resurrection, Jews and Gentiles have been made into one new person in place of two. The group of people who made manifest the true people of God in the Church now has privileges being sons and daughters of God. In the olden times this privilege was restricted only to the Jews (Judaism) and to the community alone (Qumran).

After having clarified what the nature and meaning of the “New Temple” is according to these two sources, the next question should be: What significant insights can we derive from them?

Petrine Literature Peter gives us an explicit statement of the temple symbolism in 1 Peter 2:3-6. He actually spiritualizes the concept of the priests and of the sacrifices, and refers them to the Christians and their life. Christ and the faithful are the living stones of the “New Temple.” The only difference is that Jesus Christ exists in his own right while the faithful exists through him. The faithful can only be built up as living stones into the spiritual edifice of the church through a maturing began in baptism and a growth brought about by the Word of God. The work of the priests in the maturing of the faithful is indispensable and inevitable in which the personal spiritual life as a basis for the whole building process of the new temple can only be made possible.

In the Book of Revelation, John envisioned the journey of the “New Temple” here on earth. Since the spiritual temple is corporeal and concrete, it struggled bitterly against the reign of God’s adversary. The struggle of the “New Temple” on earth only manifests its historicity which is divided into great stages that marks its growing emergence as a militant church. When God will be all in all, the spiritual temple will celebrate its liturgy which is modeled after the temple of Jerusalem’s celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles whose priest and victim will be Christ Himself. Christ who is the victim for the sacrifice is alive again. This is what it means by “new heaven and new earth” that indicates the Easter of the New Temple and of the world wherein the New Temple is bound in order to save humanity. Salvation has been a fulfilled mission of Christ made possible on the cross that is visible yet secret. This is the very fulfillment of Jesus’ words in the gospel, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will build it again (John 2:19).”

Essenes and the Catholic Ecclesiology

For Christian Catholics, the new temple is the church for three reasons.

First, God receives in the Church the homage of a spiritual worship in which humanity itself, no other and no less, is truly united to God, no other and no less, by the spirit who makes the image conform to its model.

Second, the divine persons are given to us there and there they dwell, and their presence is the substantial and objective presence proper to grace.

Third, the Church, the Body of Christ, is in a mysterious way formed by the Eucharist which the Church celebrates and in which the Church preserves, sacramentally represented the reality of Jesus Christ and his Pasch, the true temple of the Messianic era.

The Church as the New Temple has its reference from Christ which is why we equate the Temple of God with the Body of Christ. This saved reality exists under three forms. It exists in the form of the body of Mary which was so like any other human body. The only difference is that the body of Jesus is united in its very In Deum 2015 | 41

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRES

being to the Person of the Son of God, and raised to a dignity that transcends all created things. Secondly, there is the body of Christ made sacramentally present by virtue of Transubstantiation. Finally, there is a Church, the Christian community which is made up of human beings, who live among other human beings and externally share their historical and earthly conditions.

Being now members of the Church, men and women have in them Christ’s Spirit as the source of life that makes them holy. Indeed, they are truly “holy” because in Incarnation and Easter, God has personally entered the external history of humanity, a prefiguration of another history which can only be written in heaven. It is in this thought that the whole symbols and signs in and done by the Church being the New Temple found their mystical and profound meanings. They are the first fruits of that time when our bodies, and with them the whole world, will be transformed into the image of the risen Body of Christ.

In a very special way, the Church honors Mary as the first temple of the present era. She carries with her the incarnate God in her womb signifying her as the supreme type of the Church where God dwells.

Conclusion At this point let us summarize what we have said so far.

First we have explained how the Monastic community of the Essenes at Qumran conceived themselves as the new temple because God disappeared from the Jerusalem temple due to the wickedness of the temple people. The Qumran community, by their strict monastic and ascetic lifestyle, considered themselves as the true and pure Israel and that they will never be defiled by sins. Second, the New Testament authors, and we mentioned Paul, Peter, and John, may have been influenced by the Essenes. The 42 | In Deum 2015

NT has provided us a Christian interpretation of the New Temple which we refer to the church and to its members.

And third, we have presented the development of this thought as it is understood now and that it brings an impact to our Christian life and faith.

Vatican II, in its Dogmatic Constitution of the Church, Lumen gentium, describes the Church as building of God which is built by the apostles from whom it receives its durability and consolidation. Furthermore, being the holy temple of God, the Church is compared to the Liturgy in the Holy City, the New Jerusalem.

Second, on the teaching of Vatican II on Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum concilium, Christ makes himself present especially in liturgical celebrations. Thus, he associates himself with the Church wherein God is perfectly glorified and humanity is sanctified. The earthly liturgy is a foretaste of the heavenly liturgy. And third, the Church continues to journey in the joys and hopes, the grief and anxieties of the modern world in order to recognize Christ effectively in words and in deeds in all aspects of human endeavors.

References Brown, Raymond. “Dead Sea Scrolls,” in The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Bangalore: Theological Publications in India, 2011.

Fitzmyer, Joseph. The Dead Sea Scrolls and Christian Origins. U.K: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000.

Leaney, Robert. The New Testament Library. USA: The Westminster Press, 1966.

Vernes, Geza, trans. The Dead Sea Scrolls in English. 4th ed. England: The Penguin Group, 1995.

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRIES

Book Review: The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible. By James C. VanderKam. Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2012.

ISBN-10: 0802866794.

Robert J. Karris, in his commentary on the gospel of Saint Luke regarded the phrase, “the Kingdom of God” as a kind of refrain comparing it to Martin Luther Jr.’s “I Have a Dream.” Karris asserted that “I Have a Dream” sweeps all that goes before and after it into its ‘interpretive train’ and becomes a meditative rallying point. In the gospel of Saint Luke one will easily notice the repetitive mention of “the Kingdom of God” to lure the reader from being fixated on the individual sayings and actions of Jesus.

The purpose of which is for them to meditate on the significance of Jesus the person who pronounces these individual sayings and performs these individual deeds.

Thus, in repeating such refrain, very clearly, Luke was able to draw upon the image of God’s kingdom in the Old Testament.

In his book The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible, James C. VanderKam presents the Dead Sea Scrolls as something like a refrain, that is, it sweeps all that goes before and after it—the Old and New Testament times respectively. In other words, in the Historical point of view, after the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Qumran community must be seen as a credible point of reference for the study of both the Old and New Testaments. As far as Biblical studies are concern, Dead Sea Scrolls must function as a refrain, and as such it should continuously be studied, repeatedly proclaimed, and reflected upon. So that in repeating and repeating

such a “refrain”, not only would we be able to draw a near perfect source and interpretations of the Scriptures, but also meditate on its significance in Biblical studies.

Thus, on one hand the Dead Sea Scrolls will continue to furnish new information regarding the Old Testament, and on the other hand, it enriches our understanding of the Christian teachings in the New Testament as it provides the Jewish context of Early Christianity. The chapters are arranged historically based on the role of the Dead Sea Scrolls from the ancient Jewish Writings of the Old Testament during the Second Temple Period to the beginnings of the First Christian communities of first century Palestine.

In the third chapter on the Authoritative Literature According to the Scroll, VanderKam tackles the issue of Canonicity of Scriptures and the role of the community in the process of its formation. First he admitted that the term “Canon” itself is problematic as it refers to an exclusive or a closed list of books in the Old Testament. Secondly, he resolves the issue by taking into consideration the “Life Situation” of a particular period in Biblical History. He asserted that a particular book would gain authority only if they are; first, esteemed by the community and second, it is functional to the community or communities.

Fr. Nelson Zerda, OSA In Deum 2015 | 43

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRES

Joseph Ratzinger on the Concept of Communion Fray Jaime Silvestre Parmisano, OSA Introduction The visit of the Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis, to the Philippines opened our eyes to a reality—a reality that some of us doubted until the day came where millions of Filipinos gathered just to see a glimpse of the Holy Father. The gathered Filipinos proved that many of us still claim to be members of the Catholic Church.

The rise of many and different kinds of ecclesial communities and of many news and events that contradict what the Catholic Church teaches questioned what we, Catholic faithful, proudly claim: that the Philippines is a Catholic nation. Our warm response (even though the weather drenched many of us and even the Pope) to the apostolic visit of Pope Francis clearly answered this rising doubt. Many of us still believe in the Catholic Church.

But what do we mean by the Church? How are we related to each member of the Church? What does membership of the Catholic Church entail? These questions, though they sound elementary, must be clear to each one of us. We, in the modern society, must know what it means to be members of the Church. There is a need for us to establish this “sense of membership” lest we will find no meaning in what the Church does.

Without this “sense of partnership” or rather the “sense 44 | In Deum 2015

of communion,” we will find ourselves mere spectators of what we only consider now a social obligation. The church slowly, in our eyes, becomes a social hall rather than a gathering of people who experience the presence of God. Definitely there is a need for all of us to ask, together with the questions above, what is my role in the Church? To answer these questions, the researcher will rely on a particular theologian.

Contemporary theologians and ecclesiologists would talk of the concept of communion as the synthesis of Catholic ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council.

The researcher believes that ecclesiology of communion could give us the preliminary answers to our questions.

The ecclesiology of communion, discovered as an important key in understanding the ecclesiology of Vatican II, attracted many theologians, ecclesiologists, and ecumenists. Communion ecclesiology became the center of reflection of today’s ecclesiology. Such enticement of many theologians brought variant versions, with different emphasis, of ecclesiology of communion.

Since there are a lot of works on communio-ecclesiology, we have to limit these literatures on a particular theologian—the German theologian Joseph Ratzinger who became Pope Benedict XVI. The majority of Ratzinger’s theological works dealt with ecclesiology.1 He wrote a dissertation, his

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRIES first major contribution to theological reflection, on the ecclesiology of Saint Augustine.2 He also played an important role in formulating Vatican II’s Constitution on the Church, Lumen gentium. With such credentials, we can say that Joseph Ratzinger is one of the major 20th century theologians who have academic authority in ecclesiology. As Ratzinger’s ecclesiology developed through time we can see a constant insistence on the importance of communion in his works. This will be the interest of this short paper. To begin, we have to ask: what is Ratzinger’s ecclesiology of communion?

Due to the purpose of this publication and this paper, the researcher cannot present a whole and in depth discussion of Ratzinger’s concept of communion. What we have here is dimension of Ratzinger’s communion and of his theology of the Church—Eucharistic ecclesiology.

Nevertheless, the researcher hopes that this paper can be of help to those interested in Joseph Ratzinger’s theology of the Church.

of God,” years after the synod of 1985, communion ecclesiology as the key in understanding the ecclesiology of Vatican II, as Ratzinger noted, lost its profound meaning. He said: One could not help but notice here an increasing emphasis on the horizontal dimension, the omission of the idea of God. ‘Communio’ ecclesiology began to be reduced to the theme of the relationship between local Church and the Church as a whole, and that in turn, more and more, decline into the question of the assignment of competent authority as between the one and the other.8 Ratzinger, in his other work, summarized what he called distorted ecclesiology of communion into two things: (1)

Ratzinger’s ecclesiology of communion For us to better grasp Ratzinger’s ecclesiology of communion, we need to set first the situation wherein Ratzinger’s concept of communion, though communion can already be found in the writings of the Fathers,3 emerged and was noticed. Through its context we can clearly differentiate Ratzinger’s ecclesiology of communion from other versions ecclesiology of communion.

Communion (Greek koinonia; Latin: communio) as a key concept for ecclesiology can already be found in Ratzinger’s work as early as 1962 in The Episcopate and the Primacy,4 a joint publication with another famous theologian, Karl Rahner5 and publicly endorsed by Ratzinger in his work Das neue Volk Gottes: Entwürfe zur Ekklesiologie (1969) but it hardly received any attention6 not even in the Second Vatican Council where Ratzinger, as a theologian, assisted Cardinal Josef Frings of Cologne (1887–1978).7 The concept of communion only gained its recognition during the extraordinary Synod of 1985, 20 years after Vatican II. During this time there was a need to have a concept that would synthesize the whole ecclesiology of Vatican II. Lumen gentium’s “people of God” was, according to Ratzinger, trivialized and was taken separately from its context that led to some misinterpretation of such an important concept. All of these opened a chance for communio-ecclesiology to be noticed.

Sadly, as what happened with the concept “people

an ecclesiology that contrasts a pluralist with a centralist conception of the Church, and (2) an ecclesiology that stresses on the local Churches.9 Here, we can read of a communio-ecclesiology that, for Ratzinger, focused only on a particular aspect of the Church. This can be called horizontal ecclesiology of communion. For Ratzinger, such discussions, though they have their own points to consider, lead us astray to what Vatican II intended.

What then was the intention of Vatican II? The Intention of Vatican II Vatican II continued what Vatican I failed to complete. Vatican I, because of Franco-Prussian War, had to end with some “not yet finished” teaching that Vatican II sought to clarify and to complete. The people of the time cried for an understanding of the nature of the Church. Vatican II responded to this, and, as Ratzinger noted, “intended to propound an ecclesiology that was theo-logical in the proper sense.”10 Vatican II In Deum 2015 | 45

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRES then, it is safe to say, provided the people with important ecclesiological teachings. This ecclesiology, Ratzinger emphasized, talked of God more than anything else. The need to talk about the Church comes from the need to talk about God, Ratzinger asserted.11 We can see this intention clearly, as Ratzinger explained, in how the documents of the Council were arranged. The Council offered first a document that talked about worship and adoration (Sacrosanctum concilium) before presenting the teaching on the Church (Lumen gentium). Ratzinger saw it as an indication that before anything else God must come first and the constitution on the Church must be seen under this perspective—that “the Church [Ratzinger wonderfully said] derives from adoration, from the task of glorifying God.”12 The Word of God, presented in the third document (Dei verbum), called this Church, that adores God, together.

The gathered Church then in order to fully glorify God must carry the Word out into the world as the fourth document (Gaudium et spes) showed.

Vatican II wanted to project a Church that glorifies God in everything she does. We can see that Vatican II, as Ratzinger noted, always emphasized God, something that many theologians missed in their horizontal ecclesiology of communion.

We can say that for Ratzinger, deviating from the intention of the Council fathers, that is an emphasis on God, would lead to misunderstanding of many of the teachings of Vatican II. An example was the known expression of Lumen gentium—people of God. Ratzinger explained that if the Council Fathers intention and its biblical meaning are disregarded, the expression “people of God,” can be easily conceived in a Marxist perspective. Using this perspective, “people of God” then can be seen as people in opposition to the ruling class—the hierarchy in the Church. This would lead to a discussion on the structure of the Church and how should it be changed or “democratized” (in consonance with Marxist understanding of “people”) to give people power. This perspective also suggested that everything in the Church must be determined by all, especially of the “people.”13 This discussion, though must be clarified, (and thus important) was devoid of any relation to God, 46 | In Deum 2015

an important aspect for the Council Fathers. Power and politics dominated the discussion making the Church a merely human institution, a “political party,” devoid of any divine aspect.14 Today, we have to deal with the tendency to see the Church merely as a social entity. Ratzinger reminded us of the danger of over-emphasizing the human face of the Church. The Church surely has human structure that surely, as time passes by, must be updated and the obsolete be disregarded. In this we have the duty, as the Catholic Church, to be in constant reform but not to the extent of setting aside, the Church’s essential character— that is her being the Church of God and not of Man. We have to bear in mind that the Church essentially is the Church of God and so her teachings came from God, thus inviolable. We cannot simply change anything in the Church because the majority says so.

The Church is of God and we cannot dare change anything Divine to suit our own desires.

Ratzinger commenting on the emphasis on the “politics” of the Church said that “the church is not there for her own sake but should be the instrument of God for gathering men to him, so as to prepare for the moment when God shall be ‘everything to everyone’ (1 Cor 15:28).”15 The world needs a Church that offers what she has received from God—God Himself.

We can see here that Ratzinger, true to the intention of Vatican II, intended to talk of communion in relation to God—a “vertical first before horizontal” ecclesiology of communion. In this ecclesiology of communion, our relation to God gave meaning, as a Church, to our relationship with each other. It is through a vertical perspective of ecclesiology that we can truly talk of a horizontal ecclesiology. What then is this vertical ecclesiology of communion and its relation to horizontal ecclesiology of communion? But before we can delve into Ratzinger’s ecclesiology of communion, we have to ask: what is communion for Ratzinger?

The roots of the term communion Ratzinger, before proposing the theological implication of communion, offered what he called the “profane” meaning of communion. He believed that behind the theology of communion that we could

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRIES abstract from the New Testament, communion, as a term, has meanings that reflect human experience.

Through its roots, we can have a better grasp of how the Christians of the New Testament understood and used the word communion to describe their experience.

then the communion of the divine and man took Ratzinger offered three roots of the term the center point of Greek communion in an article published as mentality. We have to note “Communion: Eucharist—fellowship— that the Greeks believed Mission” in Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith: The in gods, something in Church as Communion. contrast with Judaism’s monotheistic belief. In the mind of the Greeks, as Ratzinger quoted Plato’s Symposium, “the communion with the gods also brings Ratzinger offered three roots of the term communion about fellowship among men.”20 The gathering of the in an article published as “Communion: Eucharist— people in worship actually leads them in communion fellowship—Mission” in Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith: The with the divine. Ratzinger even believed the real goal Church as Communion.16 Ratzinger’s first example can here was not communion in its strict sense but more of be found in Luke 5:1–11, the day when the Lord called “union; the end, here, is, not relationship, but identity.”21 Peter together with his (koinonoi) “partners,” James and John. The three, Peter, James and John were business Gathering these three “profane” roots of the concept partners in their fishing trade. Ratzinger explained of communion, we could surmise that communion that communion (koinonia), as used by Luke, refers “to fundamentally speaks of relationship either among shared property, shared work, shared values.”17 Ratzinger, persons or between men and gods. These helped the as he reflected on the meaning of communion in this early Christians to better express their “new reality.” particular text, further explained that Simon Peter, the We could also say that the coming of this “new reality” head of the business partnership, would be called by the revealed the true meaning of the human experience Lord to be part of a new partnership—a partnership with expressed through the roots of the word communion. all of us, Christians. We will be sharing with Peter what This new reality is the coming of Christ. Jesus Christ he received. We will be sharing the same mission with reveals the true meaning of this relationship. him that is to catch man. We will be part of Peter’s small In the New Testament, the church is a communion boat, the Church. not simply of the chaburah of the Jews but, by “the medium After exposing that communion is sharing, Ratzinger of the death and Resurrection of Jesus, communion with proceeds to the Jewish root of communion. The Hebrew Christ, the Son who became man, and thus communion word that refers to Greek koinonia (communion) is with the eternal triune love of God.”22 Jesus Christ is the chaburah which, the same with the previous root, missing reality, as God did not yet uncover his face, in denotes partnership or cooperative. This word is applied the chaburah of the Old Testament. The impossible for to “the people assembled for the Passover meal.”18 Here the Jews became possible through Jesus Christ. Plato’s the emphasis is on the relationship between the members assertion, too, received new meaning through Jesus of the assembly. We have to note, as Ratzinger explained, Christ. It is not anymore between men and gods but of that “there is no ‘communion’ between God and man; one God in the person of Jesus Christ. The impossible for the Creator’s transcendence remains insuperable.”19 The the Greeks became possible in Jesus Christ. The union Old Testament, when talking of relationship between that Plato spoke of became perfect in the kenosis of God. God and man, would use the term covenant (berith) It is God who entered in communion with man through rather than communion (chaburah). We can only find in the incarnation of Jesus. the New Testament through the person of Jesus that our The Incarnation of Jesus Christ gave meaning and relationship with God becomes indeed a communion. even united what were seemed conflicting mentalities The root of communion is sharing or partnership of the Jews and the Gentiles. The incarnation of Christ and relationship among persons in the assembly. Here brought into reality the unique, yet deeply related to we can notice that the emphasis is on the relation among Jewish and Hellenistic thought, Christian perspective persons. Now the third root that Ratzinger considered of communion. This points us to an important aspect came from Greek philosophy. If the Hebraic mentality of Ratzinger’s ecclesiology of communion—that is the rejected the possibility of communion of God and Man, communion of God and man.

In Deum 2015 | 47

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRES Vertical and horizontal ecclesiology of communion Through the previous discussion we have established that the starting point of Ratzinger’s ecclesiology of communion is Jesus Christ. We can now proceed on the importance of vertical communion, which is a communion with Christ, to have a legitimate horizontal communion that is communion with fellowmen.

Ratzinger’s ecclesiology of communion heavily depended in his New Testament exegesis. In one of his works he offered two important New Testament passages in explaining the concept communion.23 First is 1 Corinthians 10:16–17 and second is 1 John 1: 3–4. Using these two important texts, we can see how Ratzinger relates the two, the vertical and the horizontal. We can say that Ratzinger believes that only in an established relationship between the vertical and horizontal communio-ecclesiology we can have an integrated understanding of the Church. i. Vertical ecclesiology of communion The first New Testament passage that Ratzinger used, says, “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation [communion] in the body of Christ? Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf ” (1 Cor 10: 16–17 NAB). This passage expressed the very core of Ratzinger’s communio-ecclesiology. It is through Christ that we become one. The body and blood of Christ that we eat and drink made us one in Christ. As the wine, his blood, his life, enters our body, we enter in communion with Christ. It is now the life of Christ that we live.

In addition the bread that we eat, Ratzinger said, using Augustine, makes us one in Christ. The bread, the body of Christ is not simply the body of Christ but Christ himself, as Ratzinger succinctly said, “Christ gives us himself—Christ, who in his Resurrection has continued to exist in a new kind of bodiliness.”24 The bread, the body of Christ, does not become part of our body like the other foods that we partake. This bread, the new manna from God, assimilates us into one body of Christ. We become the body of Christ. Through the Eucharistic celebration, we became one in Christ. It is in the celebration of the holy Eucharist then that we can see the Church of Christ—the mystical body of Christ.

The Eucharist is not simply about one person.

It is not only me who became one in Christ. All of us 48 | In Deum 2015

become one in Christ. Not in any sense that each one of us, separately, is the body of Christ as if there are many bodies of Christ. We, who are many, become one through the one body and blood of Jesus Christ.

Ratzinger said: The Eucharist is never an event involving just two, a dialogue between Christ and me. Eucharistic Communion is aimed at a complete reshaping of my own life. It breaks up man’s entire self and creates a new ‘we’. Communion with Christ is necessarily also communication with all who belong to him: therein I myself become a part of the new bread that he is creating by the resubstantiation of the whole of earthly reality.25 Communion with Christ must also be communion with our fellowman. The wine that we drink in the Eucharistic celebration is the blood of life of the Lord offered for us, his self-sacrifice. The blood of the Lord gives us life so much so that our lives too, like His, should be a life that is offered for others.26 The bread that we eat in the Eucharistic celebration is the body of Christ. We then became one in him.

Ratzinger wonderfully stated that we all ‘eat’ the same man, not only the same thing; in this way we all are wrested from our self-enclosed individuality and drawn into a greater one. We all are assimilated into Christ, and so through communion with Christ we are also identified with one another, identical and one in him, members of one another. To be in communion with Christ is by its very nature to be in communion with one another as well.27 Our communion with God necessarily leads to our communion with our fellowmen. Our communion with others is the result of our established communion with God. We are gathered because of God and in God we become one. Our love for God moves us to Him and he moves us to love our brothers and sisters. Our communion with Jesus Christ, thus communion with our fellowmen, does not end in a particular celebration of the Eucharist. We bring it with us as we live our lives.

Our communion with the Lord obliges us to be with our neighbors, to be one with them. Here, we can see that through the perspective of vertical communion ecclesiology we can now talk of horizontal communion ecclesiology.

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRIES ii. Horizontal ecclesiology of communion Ratzinger in explaining communion between men reflected on 1 John 1: 3–4 which says “what we have seen and heard we proclaim now to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; for our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. We are writing this so that our joy may be complete” (NAB). We can see here that the apostles offered first to the people what they had encountered—the experience with Jesus Christ—so that there would be fellowship (communion) among them.

The offered communion of the apostles started with Jesus and it is through Jesus Christ that we are also in communion with the Triune God. Ratzinger explains that the communion of God with man happened when man had an encounter with Jesus Christ—the GodMan—and only through this encounter that man can be truly in communion with his fellowman.28 As we have already noted above, our communion with God is the beginning and, as Ratzinger insisted, necessary for our communion with our fellowman. He said that receiving the Lord in the Eucharist, accordingly, means entering into a community of existence with Christ, entering into that state in which human existence is opened up to God and which is at the same time the necessary condition for the opening up the inner being of men for one another. The path toward the communion of men with one another goes by way of communion with God.29 This communion with God changes us to the core. We are not alone anymore. In God, we are with our brothers and sisters. The next passages of the text (1 John 1: 5-7) told us of God as light and those who are in communion with him are also in the light. Our communion with God must manifests in our lives. We now live, not any more in the darkness, but in the light. To live in the light is to see our neighbors with the eyes of God—that is to look at our brothers and sister full of love. Ratzinger succinctly said that “communion with the ‘Word of Life’ automatically becomes righteous living; it becomes love; furthermore it becomes communion with one another.”30 The Eucharistic celebration reminds us of the faith we professed and the life we ought to live. The bread and wine renews us to be one in Christ and one with our brothers and sisters.

relationship with our brothers and sisters anchored in our relationship with the triune God through Jesus Christ. It is a relationship where all who eat the Eucharist become the one body of Jesus Christ which also makes us one with our brothers and sisters. Our becoming one moves us to love them as the Lord love us all. This is not simply a relationship between individuals but more of, using Ratzinger’s very words, “fusion of existences.”31 Such is the Church of our Lord—a Church that is in communion with God and also a communion of brothers and sisters in Christ.

Conclusion: Communion key in understanding the Church With the discussion on the concept of communion, what then is the Church? The church is not simply a gathering of people. The Church is the gathered people of God. As the apostles gathered around Jesus, we, too, gathered around Jesus in the Eucharist. Jesus is the center, “the point of convergence.”32 The call of Jesus moves us to gather around Him. These gathered persons are not simply individuals but persons in communion with each other. This is made “possible because God, who unites us through Christ in the Holy Spirit so that communion becomes a community, a ‘Church’ in the genuine sense of the word.”33 Furthermore Ratzinger said that “the Church is of her nature a relationship, a relationship set up by the love of Christ, which in its turn likewise founds a new relationship of men with one another.”34 We are one with our brothers and sisters. Our being in the Church entails responsibilities toward our brothers and sisters. The Church, the gathered people, is not only drawn towards the elevated body of Christ, the Eucharist, but also called to tend to the needy, the sick, and the abandoned people of God. Ratzinger explained that “the communion with God cannot be lived without real care for the human community.” 35 We cannot dare eat and drink the body and blood of Christ without even considering our brothers and sisters.

Christ passed unto us through the Eucharist his being othercentered.

We can now picture out Ratzinger’s concept of communion. Communion basically talks about our In Deum 2015 | 49

THEOLOGICAL INQUIRES Ratzinger believes that the Church is communion.

He stated that “the Church is communion; she is the communion of the Word and Body of Christ and is thus communion among men, who by means of this communion that brings them together from above and from within are made one people, indeed, one Body.”36 This communion is achieved through the Eucharist, the center of our life. It is the Eucharist, the body and blood of Christ, that draws us and thus makes us a Church and it is only in the Church, the gathered

1

Most of Ratzinger’s reflections on ecclesiology can be found in his Das neue Volk Gottes: Entwürfe zur Ekklesiologie (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1969); Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today, trans. Adrian Walker (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1996); Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith: The Church as Communion, trans. Henry Taylor (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005).

2 Joseph Ratzinger, Volk und Haus Gottes in Augustins Lehre von der Kirche (Munich, 1954).

3 Gerard Mannion offered in chapter three of The Ratzinger Reader: Mapping a Theological Journey an introductory note of Joseph Ratzinger’s ecclesiology. Here he talked about the notion of communion and how Ratzinger used it in his ecclesiology.

See Gerard Marion, “Understanding the Church: Fundamental Ecclesiology” in The Ratzinger Reader: Mapping a Theological Journey, ed. Lieven Boeve and Gerard Mannion (London: T&T Clark International, 2010), 83.

4 Joseph Ratzinger and Karl Rahner, The Episcopate and the Primacy (New York, 1962).

5 Tracey Rowland, Ratzinger’s Faith: the Theology of Pope Benedict XVI (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 85.

6 Joseph Ratzinger, On the Way to Jesus Christ, trans. Michael J. Miller (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005), 114.

7 Emery d Ga’al, a professor of systematic theology, wrote an article that presented the influence of Joseph Ratzinger on the formulation of the documents of Vatican II. Cf. Emery de Gaal, “The Theologian Joseph Ratzinger at Vatican II: his Theological Vision and Role” Laterranum 78 no. 3 (2012): 515-548.

8 Joseph Ratzinger, “The Ecclesiology of the Constitution of Lumen Gentium” in Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith: The Church as Communion, trans. Henry Taylor (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005), 132.

9 Ratzinger, On the Way to Jesus Christ, 115.

10 Ratzinger, “The Ecclesiology of the Constitution of Lumen Gentium,” 125.

11 Ibid., 129.

12 Ibid., 126.

13 Joseph Ratzinger, “Communio: A Program” in The Unity of the Church (Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010), 123.

14 In connection, Ratzinger in his Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today, presented the major biblical interpretation of the century. He also discussed of Marxist-oriented biblical interpretation that presented a Christ that is anti-institution.

Christ, symbolized as the suffering people, in conflict with the

50 | In Deum 2015

people, that we can celebrate the Eucharist since it is the center of her life. The Eucharist then is important in our life. We manifest our being the Church through the Eucharist and it is the Eucharist that moves us to even manifest our being one, as a Church, through our concern for the good of the brethren. The Church then is communion—a communion with God through the Eucharist and communion with our fellowmen because of the Eucharist.

Church of his time, the ruling class, preached of the Kingdom, the classless society. Such presentation led to the distinction of the Institution—the official Church, and of the people—the popular church. See Ratzinger, Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today, trans. Adrian Walker (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1996), 18-19.

15 Ratzinger, “The Ecclesiology of the Constitution of Lumen Gentium,” 129.

16 Ratzinger, “Communion: Eucharist—fellowship—Mission” in Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith: The Church as Communion, 70-77.

For the same discussion also see Maximilian Heinrich Heim, Joseph Ratzinger: Life in the Church and Living Theology: Fundamentals of Ecclesiology with Reference to Lumen Gentium (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2007), 288-290.

17 Ratzinger, “Communion: Eucharist—fellowship—Mission,” 72.

18 Ibid., 73.

19 Ibid., 74.

20 Ibid., 75.

21 Ibid.

22 Ibid.

23 See Ratzinger, On the Way to Jesus Christ, 115-119.

24 Ratzinger, Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today, 36-37.

25 Ratzinger, “Communion: Eucharist—fellowship—Mission,” 75.

26 Ratzinger, On the Way to Jesus Christ, 116.

27 Ibid., 117.

28 Ratzinger, “The Ecclesiology of the Constitution of Lumen Gentium,” 130.

29 Ratzinger, “Communion: Eucharist—fellowship—Mission,” 79.

30 Ratzinger, On the Way to Jesus Christ, 119.

31 Ratzinger, Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today, 37.

32 Ibid., 23.

33 Ratzinger, “Communio: A Program,” 126.

34 Ratzinger, “Communion: Eucharist—fellowship—Mission,” 79.

35 Ratzinger, “Communio: A Program,” 126.

36 Ratzinger, Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today, 76.

PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY Some Elements of F. Sionil Jose’s Socio-Political Thought -Fray Wendell Allan Marinay, osa-

PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY

Some Elements of F. Sionil Jose’s Socio-Political Thought Fray Wendell Allan Marinay, OSA Francisco Sionil Jose (hereafter F.S. Jose) is a novelist, fictionist and writer known for his creativity in portraying stories in figurative language. And what is more, he is undoubtedly a thinker who penetrates into the real experiences of his fellow Filipinos. Having said this is tantamount to claiming that Jose is no less than a philosopher himself (although he himself humbly denies being called as such).

F.S. Jose’s recent novel entitled Viajero,1 for instance, depicts his thinking on the Filipino’s constant search for identity and dignity, as mainly depicted in the life of Salvador dela Raza (hereafter Salvador); on the Filipino’s history in the context of their being colonized, particularly by two imperial powers, namely Spain and the America. More than just a (hi)story expressed in an innovatively metaphorical way,2 Viajero presents the journey towards fulfillment, practically a search for nationalism, social justice and moral order – a kind of restlessness bound for home.3 Reading F.S. Jose’s writings - his novels and essays - is not simply following a story but reading through a history or narrative of Filipino people. As in the case of F. S. Jose’s other novels, the Viajero is filled with aphorisms denoting socio-political underpinnings. In this paper, I attempt to identify these underlying social and political themes of F.S. Jose’s “philosophy” in a manner that is, I believe, consonant with his personality. I have figured out three main characteristics that would generally capture F.S. Jose’s thought apparently showing him to be 52 | In Deum 2015

a Marxist, as someone frustrated, and a revolutionary.

Marxist F.S. Jose believes in Marxist analysis but not in its solution. Meaning, he doubts the conclusion offered by Karl Marx who believes that society will wither away.

For F.S. Jose, a withering society is a dubious contention due to the fact that even the most primitive society or state has a sense of order, and not of disintegration.4 As is known, Marxism posits the basic elements set out in modern social analysis: 1) people have an essential nature and predefined interests; 2) analysis of historical and contemporary society in terms of conflicts between different social groups with different interests; 3) link between the nature of ideas or ‘ideologies’ and the interests of those who develop and propagate them.5 Marxist interpretation of history is an ideology, and as such knowledge is a social product. Its tendency is to hold everything in economic terms and reduces any forms of human association into utilitarian, capitalistic, or economic functions. This materialist tendency appears to be a blind tendency of material development that lacks the spiritual guidance or direction in order to make sense of man’s social dimension.

For Marx, “society is not an aggregate of individuals but ‘the product of men’s reciprocal action,’ or is a name for individuals reciprocally connected by interaction.”6 The basic sociological assumption here is that society

PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY is an artificial creation, the we tend organize ourselves on outcome of human designs or the basis of ethnicity, of tribe, F.S. Jose looks back with frustration, social contract subjecting men of clan, and the likes. Mercado with anger. He speaks anxiously in to laws as in all other natural reechoes these reasons, citing 7 order not to repeat the same mistakes phenomena. Although society from F.S. Jose’s novel, The Feet to the next generation. is a product of man, man’s of Juan Bacnang: “They never nature is a product of society. transcended themselves, their Individuals are derivative of great egos—and, of course, their social life so that they are determined by social groups to familial and ethnic loyalties. This is the reason we are not which they belong, and by its own group’s relationships.8 a nation. There is always something for them, something Added to this, Marx conceives of man as a “social being tucked in fine print, in their subconscious.14 because he must work in order to live, and the production Under this condition, there is a real challenge to of the means of subsistence is always a collective, social unite as a nation, as a people who truly have the concern 9 activity.” This in turn makes man a “changing product for each other. I may say that this situation can also be of social evolution.”10 As a result, people’s lives are in the seen in the person of Salvador, the Badong who was more course of social conflict and doomed to wither. blind than Mayang, the physically blind daughter of Apo In this spirit, F.S. Jose sees the Philippine situation, Tale, and the same Badong who happened to be Buddy, now and then, in a state of crisis. From a Marxist who was given a complete name but still groping for his parlance, the social condition of the Filipino people real identity, knowing nothing from where they come has continued to experience the malady existing since from except a place known as Raza. Despite Salvador’s the time of colonization. Now, the Philippine crisis has educational background,15 he still remains to be someone assumed a new form, a new face of colonizers or aptly unknown to himself – a situation very much reflecting called, exploiters who are sadly very much its own: our culture that is experiencing an identity crisis.

Filipinos exploiting fellow Filipinos. For F.S. Jose, this F.S. Jose says that our bastard16 leaders wasted all the illustrates a state of frustration. opportunities for our country to grow. These leaders used and still use ideology and tactics to boost their Frustrated egos.17 In his article entitled “To the Filipino taipans, F.S. Jose looks back with frustration, with anger. He speaks the Iglesia Ni Cristo: What is patriotism?,”18 F.S. Jose anxiously in order not to repeat the same mistakes to the cites Jarius Bondoc, a fellow columnist, for saying next generation. In his article, “To the young writer,”11 F.S. about “traitor” Filipinos who are raping the land and Jose notes that his generation failed to unite and change conniving with other countries for their selfish gains. this fractured nation. His generation produced so many F.S. Jose adds to that statement a far larger truth which of the scoundrels who dirty the political landscape today. speaks of our own leaders’ disloyalty to our country. He Some of these mephitic hacks and politicians were his questions their patriotism. For instance, he questions colleagues, traumatized by World War II, by the three why these leaders, particularly in the business sector, years of brutal Japanese occupation which forced them send our money to other countries; why they “invest on to experience flight, hunger, fear. This malaise is very shopping malls, fancy condos or casinos - which are not much experienced up until today. Quoting from the F.S. productive industries – and not in agriculture for this is Jose’s novel, The Feet of Juan Bacnang, Mercado indicates our greatest need today: food security.” This to me seems this malaise which has its roots in history: “The elite, to be similar with Salvador’s desire (or illusion) to create conditioned by colonialism, collaborated all through for himself a father-figure even as fictitious character our history with the imperialists. Like most of us, they (Parbangon) of his stories just to satisfy his longing for imbibed the vices, not the virtues, of our rulers.”12 the unknown absence of his real father. This also sounds There is, for F.S. Jose, hardly a “class” in reality but like the inclination of our own devotees as witnessed in perhaps, the concept of “class” is there.13 With this, it is religious festivities in Cebu, Quiapo, and other parts of difficult to say of a class-consciousness of Filipinos. F.S. our country – a devotion, which is, for F.S. Jose, more of Jose mentions two reasons: firstly, on account of the ego a superstition. of leaders, their personal ego which brings in conflicts; In another article, “Why we do not learn,”19 F.S. Jose secondly, the strong tendency to be regionalistic, that is, mentions Rafael Alunan III, a social thinker, who sees In Deum 2015 | 53

PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY our capacity to act as one as depicted in EDSA I. Quite unfortunately, such a revolution “did not change the social and economic structure of our country.” Instead of starting to work hard after the revolution, it (revolution) was already betrayed before it succeeded. He says that an “oligarch like Cory Aquino restored the oligarchy emasculated by Marcos and the same monopolies and inclusiveness which President Ramos tried to dismantle.”

Mercado indicates that for F.S.Jose, “the greatest enemy of the nation is the oligarchs.”20 F.S. Jose further contends that “though our rate of growth is one of the highest in Asia now, poverty and hunger have increased because ‘these conglomerates (the oligarchy) have cornered the country’s choice opportunities and resources.’” F.S. Jose considers this unfortunate situation a manmade disaster brought by our irresponsible and corrupt leaders. At any rate, F.S. Jose contends that it is also our own fault because of our shallowness, docility, acquiescence, ignorance of the colonization by our own elites. Verily, as a people, so the leaders.21 No one is completely to blame. We are primarily the ones to blame for all this because we have not learned any better.

Likewise, F.S. Jose wants us to remember the rich ilustrados who betrayed the Revolution in 1896, and deserted Mabini; those who collaborated with the Americans and the Japanese in World War II who became rich. Today, we are confronted with a pork barrel scam involving with no less than our Senators themselves; the slow process in our justice system as in the case of the Ampatuan killers who until now, after four years, have not yet been convicted.22 By not losing our memory on these instances, he is optimistic that the Filipinos, as a people, can move towards a brighter future. In Viajero, Pepe Samson was very much alive. This is an indicator that the Filipino spirit can revive again from the mud where he/she is right now.

At any rate, the dream of a better Philippines would not come true unless and until there is a concrete plan of action to realize it. F.S. Jose finds in revolution a place for every Filipino to destroy the old order (of values) that exploits his own country and countrymen and women.

Revolutionary F.S. Jose admits of being disenchanted with communism but not Marxism. In fact, he is espousing a revolution from a Marxist perspective – a revolution that has something to do with the “transfer of power” (e.g., from oligarchy to the Filipino people.) In Viajero, we are reminded of a Filipino General, Artemio Ricarte, 54 | In Deum 2015

who fought against the oligarch who connived with the Spaniards, Americans, and Japanese. In this vein, F.S. Jose implies that patriotism is important in order to become nationalist leaders. He knows quite well of our own weakness – a weakness to betray ourselves as it is evident in the way oligarchs of this country are acting. In like manner, he is certain of our strength – our capability of heroism and sacrifice.23 We find in Viajero Salvador’s struggle to deprive himself of the rich lifestyle he has only to find himself later that he is again back to such a lifestyle. Salvador wants to experience the life of the masses but his attempt appears to be a tag of war which ends up realizing himself distant from them. Salvador cannot be like Marcelo H. del Pilar whose struggle and exile he admires so much. Salvador’s affection or identification with his fellow countrymen is also seen in paying his last respects to Telesforo San Agustin (Old Tele). Salvador flew from Spain to San Francisco because of this incident.

There is no better way to trace F.S. Jose’s contention on our weakness and strength except through our own history. We can trace back all these present instances from the past events which tell us both of the betrayals as well as of the bravery and selflessness of our fellow Filipinos.

F.S. Jose’s “philosophy” is against colonialism. As Mercado states: According to José, colonialism exists in subtle forms. “But is colonialism really over? We all know that it is not, that its more pernicious variety is domestic colonialism. McDonald’s, Toyota, Harry Potter—we may not be aware of them as such, but these are the cloying harbingers of domination and control. Listen, the logic of colonialism is exploitation, and therefore, no matter what guise it takes when it beguiles us—to spread Christianity, to make the world safe for democracy and civilization— forget these. Colonialism is immoral.”24 Perhaps we could situate this from that part of Viajero where Magellan and Lapu-Lapu fought in Mactan. It was a fight portraying the resistance of the natives (conquered) against the Spaniards (colonizers). To further illustrate our point on F.S. Jose’s anti-colonial “philosophy,” we can also take, as example, American imperialism. Side by side with colonialism, the logic behind every imperialist tendency is exploitation. Foreigner with vested interests “penetrate a territory with the intention of mapping it

PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY so that its resources — its mines, its gas potential — can be exploited. They may also come not so much to spy, but to spread ideas inimical to the well-being of a particular country — the jihadists who brought Islamic fundamentalism to Mindanao, the communists from the former Soviet empire and China who subverted Filipino nationalism. Some were American fellow travelers.

Then they may also promote inappropriate technology and its artifacts, which may be useful in highly developed countries but not in a tropical, agriculture-based society like the Philippines.”25 F.S. Jose asks, “Why are we poor?”

He replies his own question, “Many of the problems caused by poverty are moral at their very core.”

At present, the Philippines may not be directly colonized by an imperial state but sadly, is exploited by its own businessmen and taipans like the Ayalas, Tans, etc.

In “Foreign aid: Accept with caution,”26 F.S. Jose speaks of a “shameless colonization by our own elite.” Our elite shamelessly serve the interests of foreign countries at the expense of our own. F.S. Jose implicitly reminds us to be vigilant of this shamelessness, to hold on to our principles so that we can authentically be dignified, and not to follow such wicked designs of our own elite. His anticolonial advocacy is best articulated in the saying: “It is better to die on my feet than live on my knees.” Life may not have meaning. However, it is up for the individual to give meaning to his own life.27 In Viajero, we remember Salvador’s “rescue” by US Captain James Wack. Salvador found meaning in life through education as the key to get people out of ignorance and equips them to fight for the good of their own country. However, since Salvador was brought to San Francisco, USA by the seeming heroism of Captain Wack, there is always that temptation to get swayed by the seeming heroic deeds of other countries, most especially to him (Salvador) who was then in dire need of help. Who would not feel indebted to someone who made you complete, from Badong to Buddy or Salvador dela Raza?

F.S. Jose recognizes that our “nation needs foreign aid, foreign investments the way similarly impoverished countries do. But foreign aid is not the panacea for our poverty. On the negative side, it could lead to mendicancy, to the belief that a nation’s fate is realized by prayer rather than by harnessing a people’s industry and creativity.”28 In Viajero, a trace of this feeling blessed due to the help of others is found in the life of Salvador when he was brought to America. Assistance from others is welcome yet in the long run harmful to a developing nation like ours because it takes away some of the responsibility

of nation building from our own selves. There is that risk of alienating ourselves since we do not always do good no matter how sincerely or devotedly we work.

Help from others eventually promotes dependency and a government (or a people) that adopts mendicancy as normal, a condition to be encouraged even when that country could harness instead the strength, resources and initiative of its own people. One important point here is that for foreign aid to succeed, it must consider a people’s history and culture.

Otherwise that assistance may not be appreciated.29 F.S. Jose believes in the necessity of revolution.

Again, by “necessity of r e v o l u t i o n ,” he means a “righteous objective” for Filipinos.

In this light, he speaks of revolution not as an ontology or some kind of metaphysics with a flavor of something abstract; revolution is concrete, active, a call for response, and as he said, it is “destroying the old bad order.” This destruction, rather than a creation, of an order is akin to Friedrich Nietzsche’s social and political philosophy where Nietzsche also speaks about the madness of a philosopher whose noble act is to destroy the order to form new order of values. To be mad for change does not require inspiration. “It is passion — much of it anger and sadness… Memory, too.”30 Conclusion Doing philosophy involves real creativity, on the part of the writer-thinker, in order to effect real social and political change. It also necessitates a solid knowledge of history – the ability to realize historical circumstances from bottom up, not from up to down. In this regard, the thinking should have the level of the people In Deum 2015 | 55

PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY rather than simply leveling them to the thinker’s own rationalization. The three main features mentioned above deemed to be in F.S. Jose’s socio-political thought provide us a glimpse of his brand of “Philosophy” that is essentially Filipino. As Mercado contends on “Jose’s social philosophy in summary: The country has no sense of nationhood because the leaders have been concerned about themselves according to Machiavellian principles.

Because they have no loyalties but are led by their greed, they side with whoever has the power.”31 Aware of the negative impact of colonialism, F.S. Jose takes it as a duty for the writer to survive. In surviving, a writer, like a revolutionary thinker Salvador, can record his / her time and will leave a legacy behind. It should be realized that such a survival is instinctive like that of Vladimir Ilyich Acosta who is conditioned by lifesituation. F.S. Jose sees writing as a form of revolution that decolonizes the Filipino people. Unlike Vladimir

1 F. Sionil Jose, Viajero: A Filipino Novel (Manila: Solidaridad Publishing House, 2010).

2 Noticeably, F.S. Jose combines some real characters in Philippine setting: Enrile, Erap, Lacson, etc. into a fictitious one.

3 Viajero is a narration of our own history, our travels and travails. Depicted in the life of Salvador, our life as Filipinos is a looking at our family history and history as a people. It is seeking our past that plays a crucial role in our life as one nation.

4 The contention is taken from the March 15 small group discussion with F.S. Jose at the UST Graduate School, class of Fr. Leonardo Mercado, SVD. 5 See Ruth A. Wallace and Alison Wolf, Contemporary Sociological Theory (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1980), 78.

6 Z.A. Jordan, ed., Karl Marx: Economy, Class and Social Revolution (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1971), 11-12.

7 See Ibid., 12.

8 See Ibid., 13.

9 Ibid., 11.

10 Karl Marx: Economy, Class and Social Revolution, 13.

11 Hindsight section, “To the young writer,” Philippine Star, accessed November 3, 2013, http://www.philstar.com/sundaylife/2013/11/03/1252225/young-writer.

12 Leonardo N. Mercado, “F. Sionil José’s ‘Juan Bacnang’: The Filipino novelist as social Philosopher,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, June 24, 2013, http://lifestyle.inquirer.net/109993/fsionil-joses-juan-bacnang-the-filipino-novelist-as-socialphilosopher#ixzz2wVpIfPeY. 13 The contention is taken from the March 15 small group discussion with F.S. Jose at the UST Graduate School, class of Fr. Leonardo Mercado, SVD. 14 Mercado, “F. Sionil José’s ‘Juan Bacnang’ in Philippine Daily Inquirer.

15 Master’s and Doctoral degrees in History at Berkeley, USA and in Spain, respectively. So also, Fellowship from Japan and Hawaii.

56 | In Deum 2015

but like Salvador, F.S. Sionil shows reason here - a reason why he sees more hope in the young writers of today. F.S. Jose emphasizes the virtues of integrity and creativity for writers, having high hopes that the young are not blind. He wants them to communicate and in turn give meaning to people’s life – a life exemplified by Leo Mercado, Sr. in Viajero. He says, “You can’t have integrity for breakfast, but try and keep it because it is perhaps the single most important word that defines not just writers but all human beings.” He further says, “I told them to be alive — not just in their prose, but in themselves as persons. They must struggle to survive, to be the honest witnesses of their time. Be observant and activist if they can, particularly now as we sink deeper and deeper into this swamp of corruption and poverty.

‘What can they — all of us — do to drain this bog of its slime?’ is a fundamental question for any Filipino who truly cares.”32

16 This is F.S. Jose’s own words which is an obvious sign of his deep-seated frustration.

17 In Tagalog, Mayabang!

18 Hindsight section, “Filipino-taipans, Iglesia ni Cristo: What Patriotism,” Philippine Star, accessed January 20, 2014, http://www. philstar.com/business-life/2014/01/20/1280264/filipino-taipansiglesia-ni-cristo-what-patriotism.

19 Hindsight section, “Why we do not learn,” Philippine Star, accessed March 9, 2014, http://www.philstar.com/sundaylife/2014/03/09/1298578/why-we-do-not-learn.

20 Mercado, “F. Sionil José’s ‘Juan Bacnang’ in Philippine Daily Inquirer.

21 “To the young writer,” in Philippine Star.

22 “Why we do not learn,” in Philippine Star.

23 The contention is taken from the March 15 small group discussion with F.S. Jose at the UST Graduate School, class of Fr. Leonardo Mercado, SVD. 24 Mercado, “F. Sionil José’s ‘Juan Bacnang’ in Philippine Daily Inquirer.

25 Hindsight section, “Foreign aid: Accept with caution,” Philippine Star, accessed January 27, 2014, http://www.philstar.com/ business-life/2014/01/27/1282900/foreign-aid-accept-caution.

26 “Foreign aid: Accept with caution,” in Philippine Star.

27 An important theme of his novel Gagamba.

28 “Foreign aid: Accept with caution,” in Philippine Star.

29 Ibid.

30 “To the young writer,” in Philippine Star.

31 Mercado, “F. Sionil José’s ‘Juan Bacnang’ in Philippine Daily Inquirer. “Niccolò Machiavelli’s (1469-1527 AD, Florence, Italy) little book, “The Prince,” teaches that governing must be pragmatic—that all means (legal and illegal) are justified in order to obtain political power. A prince can attain political power in four ways: by his own abilities; by the use of fortunate circumstances; by political inheritance; and by crime or cruelty. Bacnang uses all of these.”

32 “To the young writer,” in Philippine Star.

INSIGHTS Ground Zero -Fray Richard Bryan Mijares, osa-

Bring Back our Families -Fray Richard Bryan Mijares, osa-

Everyone has a Sacred Space in the Community -Fray Randy Arca, osa-

Dumadaloy ang Batis -Fray Christopher Rey Bajamonde, osa-

Koinonia: Our Religious Community -Fray Peter Cantones, osa-

Koinonia in the Society and the World Viewed from St. Augustine’s Sermon 358 -Fray Wendell Allan Marinay, osa-

INSIGHTS

Ground Zero Fray Richard Bryan Mijares, OSA

T

he past year has been truly a blessing for me.

Returning to the seminary after my leave of absence was a great challenge but it also led me to new discoveries about religious life.

One of the reasons I joined the Augustinians is my fondness for history. I have read about the Augustinian missionaries’ role in shaping our history several times in high school and in elementary. It gave me so much pride to be one of those people that I have only encountered in our textbooks. Unbeknownst to me, the Augustinians are not just people in the past that we only read in our history books. They were not just the builders of these magnificent churches that we have today. They were first of all people of the community.

The question about “community� has been one of those very controversial subjects in the seminary.

Some would agree that there is strength in number.

Others would insist about individual identities and authenticities. But what is it that makes up a community, an Augustinian community in particular? When my superiors approved my return to the Order, this question immediately came to mind. Similarly, I was apprehensive about many things. What would others say about me?

Will they welcome me back? Will I be better this time? I have been given countless chances to think about my decision more seriously. I did not want to spoil this moment.

With nothing but anxieties and excitement felt at the same time, I courageously reentered the doors of religious life I was blessed to spend my reintegration at the Novitiate house.

But one of the most significant events is when my superiors assigned me to our

58 | In Deum 2015

parish in Mohon, Talisay City. I was not immediately sent back to SACS for my studies but had my first exposure at the parish while working in the Provincialate. It was during this time that I had really encountered an Augustinian community which is very different from the seminary setting. It was indeed the best way to start anew in this life. So what were my realizations during my exposure at the parish?

Living with our solemnly professed friars seemed difficult at first. I had no idea on how to start a conversation with them. But as time passed I easily adjusted because they were never hard to live with.

One of the things that encouraged me to continue this chosen journey is their way of treating their differences.

Truly, these differences among members may cause resentment and consequently, division within the community. Community is not about being uniform and doing what everyone does. If that is the case our purpose as an individual person ceases. Relationships are not easily established. It needs to be tested with time and trials. And to do this, we need to have a starting point, a ground zero where we could begin being a community.

Having individual and varied purposes and goals are not the keys to a better community. A community has a purpose and through that we identify how our individualities become a hindrance or strength in fulfilling that purpose.

We become one without losing our own authenticities. Each person can be a community builder. We just need to function as in our human bodies. This may seem so undeniably ideal but never far-fetched. As I age in this life, I realized how imperfect communities can be. How complicated it is to live a life in common! But let us always remember that ground we stand on, that purpose we believe and we live.

INSIGHTS

Bring Back our Families Fray Richard Bryan Mijares, OSA

O

ne time I overheard an elderly woman all these remain ideal and far-fetched if do not complaining about her experiences with live these in reality. A greater attention should the youth. It was disheartening be given to families where the Church but there was truth in her words. should become a significant factor Many would associate society’s in its development. A few years problems to the disintegration ago, while having an apostolate in of the basic cell of the society, one of the slums in Quezon City, the family. The world now I saw that great gap between what has gone beyond the organic we preach and what is in reality. I structure of family as saw how poverty challenged the composed of a husband, a instability of families and how it wife and their children. destroyed love and respect. We The ever changing cultures are now in time when preaching and societies have tirelessly “We are now in time when daily survival beats means nothing to those who have fought to redefine the empty stomachs. We are now in faith and religion.” concept of family, according time when daily survival beats faith to what they deem ‘right’ and ‘inclusive.’ But as they fight and religion. We are now in the world where families for this reformulation of families, basic problem has are slowly becoming insignificant, where children are passed their sight: the falling apart of families. The truth abandoned, where the aged die alone, and where power is families are struggling in an age where everything can means more than familial relationships. be answered by technology and development of sciences.

What I am saying here in this article is that we need Values are not anymore given much importance since to put our attention back to the families. Yes, we need the only goal is to survive in this changing world. These these developments but when they only benefit a few and values are out-dated, medieval, and obsolete, so they say. leave a great number of people famished, families also Christianity has always considered the family not fall victim to these. This unstoppable socio-economic just in its natural purpose which cycles on procreation growth has left the families in the shadows and struggling and parental responsibilities; it is beyond that. I to survive. There is a direct relationship between these remember when I was young I always see this saying on advances and the family. How many families have been television: “the family that prays together stays together,” torn apart simply because they could not provide for their which speaks so much about the importance of putting most basic needs? How many wives have been beaten by God within the family. But so many things have already their husbands because of money? How many children changed and talking about faith is so archaic and were given up for adoption because parents could not antiquated. What has happened now to this communion provide for their needs? of persons?

And yet we expect them to be mirrors of The family as an institution is the foundation of communion. We can never attain these ideals if families communion. In Christianity it is a reflection of the are continuously being threatened. True enough what communion between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit we are now is our own respective families but we need (CCC, §2205). It is, first and foremost, a community to bring back that importance to the consciousness of where relationships are nourished and enriched. But many.

In Deum 2015 | 59

INSIGHTS

Everyone has a Sacred Space in the Community Fray Randy Arca, OSA

The principle means of Augustinian formation is the living of our day-to-day common life in a fraternal, dedicated, and joyful manner. This includes engaging in concrete work of community.

—Ratio Institutionis, 101 Every society, community, institution, and group desires to have a spirit of unity and a sense of family. During times of upheavals, this spirit of unity and the sense of belongingness like a family can be their source of support, comfort, and love. Sadly, this spirit of unity can also be easily ruined without our full and conscious respect for each other.

There will be no communion in our community if we do not respect everyone’s space and diversity. There is, definitely, a need for us to know what could help and not help us in our relationship with everyone.

Certainly, fun, humor, encouragement, and fraternal support and dialogue help us in making our community

60 | In Deum 2015

more welcoming and lively.

Acknowledging the presence of the members of the community will also help in maintaining our harmonious relationships. The dynamics of the whole community depends on how every member relates with each other.

Each member of the community is a precious member. No one should be left behind even those who we think have lesser value. We are all different.

We have our own gifts and wisdom.

Of course, we also have our own faults and shortcomings. The role now of the community is to enrich whatever is good in each one of us and accept whatever is not quite good. We do not have the right to undervalue anyone.

Though there are many values and practices that will be beneficial for the community, dangerous ones are often the famous. One of them is the problem of familiarity. In a community striving to build a spirit of unity, we have the tendency to cross drastically the boundaries of others. Our sense of respect simply evaporates. When one is already familiar and in good terms with the other, he should go beyond what is familiar and maintain the sacred space of the other. The other way around is also possible— the problem of unfamiliarity. It happens when, because we are not familiar with our brothers or sisters, we tend to be with those we know, excluding those ‘not close to us.’ This makes the other feel aloof

and excluded. The space became a wall. This should not happen in a community. We have to establish a relationship that neither invades the sacred space nor builds walls.

The common life, especially that of an Augustinian, always comes with respect. This respect is an expression of charity. When charity abounds in a community, differences become a venue of openness and unity. In this community, fun, humor, and laughter become sensible not only to those close to each other but to the whole community.

Life in the community demands full participation, not only as a function but also as a brother.

Every member in the community is someone we are related to and not only someone who has a function in a community. We can realize our being ‘one in mind and heart’ when we start by caring and supporting our brothers as a brother. We must always bear in mind that each one of us has his way of coping and growing in the community. We, as brother, must become an encouragement to those who are still coping. Through this, we can establish sacred spaces of respect and love. It will create a solid, long-lasting, and realistic, koinonia. A community grounded in respect and love for differences creates bridges for each other, not walls. When bridges are established more values for the good of every one will blossom. It will create a fraternal community—a community that responds to the need of each other, acknowledges the potentialities of all. This will be a community that respects the sacred space of the other.

INSIGHTS

Dumadaloy ang Batis

Fray Christopher Rey Bajamonde, OSA

S

umasapanahon tayo katulad ng daloy ng batis mula sa kabundukan. Mayroong pinagmulan, mayroong patutunguhan. Gayun pa man, ‘di tulad ng tuloytuloy na daloy ng batis, iba-iba ang ritmo ng daloy ng buhay nating mga tao. Minsan mabilis, minsan mabagal; minsan baluktot, minsan tuwid; minsan paurong, minsan din ay tuloy-tuloy. Mag kagayun pa man patuloy pa rin tayong dumadaloy sa agos ng buhay. Sa katunayan, ang batis ay buhay—batis na dumadaloy mula sa kabundukan patungo sa kalawakan ng karagatan.

Tao tayong lahat na hindi makatatakas sa hangganan ng pamayanan o ng mundo. Batas ng pamayanan ang nabibigay hangganan sa ating pamumuhay. Ang agos din ng buhay natin ay nililimitahan nito. Kaya masasabi kong kasama tayo ng mundo. Hindi tayo naiiba rito. Parte tayo ng mundo na mayroong kapangyarihan na baguhin ang pangaraw-araw nating buhay. Tayo ang mayhawak kung ano ang gusto nating mangyari. Pero, misteryoso pa rin ang buhay. Kahit na hawak natin ang lahat, ang mundo pa rin ang humuhubog kung sino tayo.

Sumisimbolo sa buhay ang batis o sa pangkalahatan, ang tubig. Isa sa mga katangian nito ay ang umugnay sa kung saan man ito nailagay. Sa madaling salita, ang tubig ay hinuhubog ng mga pangyayari saan man ito nauugnay. Mapasaan man ito, madali itong umuugnay. Kaya nga naman ang dumadaloy na batis ay patuloy na umaagos dahil sa katapusan ng paglalakbay sa baba pa rin ng kabundukan ang kanyang patutunguhan. Kumbaga, likas ang pagdaloy nito. Sa kabilang dako naman, tayong mga tao katulad ng batis na nauugnay kung saan man tayo mapadpad. Ang kaibahan lang natin dito ay iba-iba ang ritmo ng buhay nating mga tao.

Ang kakayahan nating humawak ng ating buhay ay kasing taas ng antas ng paghawak ng mundo sa ating buhay. Marahil hindi sa limitado ang kakayahan nating mga tao. Umuugnay tayo sa mundo sa pamamagitan ng pamayanan kung saan masasabi nating nakapaloob ang piraso ng ating sarili.

Ang punto rito ay tayong lahat ay magkakaugnay.

Sama-sama ang lahat na nasa pamayanan na tuloy na pagagos ng buhay. Nagtutulungan. Nagdarasal. Umaasa.

Sabay-sabay na nangangarap patungo sa katapusan at muling magkikita-kita sa kabilang dako ng katapusan.

Hindi maitatangi na nabubuhay tayo sa isang pamayanan na humubog kung sino man tayo ngayon.

Kasam sa pamayanan na ito ang gating mga magulang, kaibigan, at ibang tao na nakasalamuhan natin—kilala man o hindi. Sa kalawakan naman ng mundo kung ating titingnan ang buhay ng tao ay isang pamayanan.

Samakatuwid, ang pamayanan ang bukirin na ating dinadaluyan. Ang pamayanan ang kasama natin nang tayo’y nagsimulang mabuhay at ang parehong pamayanan na makikita natin saan man tayo patungo.

Ang pamayanan na tinutukoy ko rito ay ang mismong bahay kung saan hinuhubog ang pagkatao sa pagiging Agostino. Ito ay pagmamay-ari ng bawat nakatira, nakitira, dumaan, o minsan ay naging parte ng pagiral ng pamayanang ito. Tama, ito ang puso o sentro ng masusunod na maglilingkod sa sambayanan ng Diyos. Ito ang bahay pagawaan ng mga Agustino. Ito ang pamayanan ng mga nangagarap at patuloy na umaasa na balang araw, sila rin ang magiging tagapagbantay ng pamayanang ito. Ito ang daanan ng batis patungo sa karagatan. Ito ang SACS. Ito ang batis, ang buhay nating mga Agustino—batis na dumadaloy mula sa kabundukan patungo sa kalawakan ng karagatan.

In Deum 2015 | 61

INSIGHTS

Koinonia:

Our Religious Community

Fray Peter Cantones Jr., OSA

C

ommunity is an interpersonal relationship.

This idea of community as an interpersonal relationship would boil down to the fact than man is a social being. He is bound with interconnectedness and relationship to his fellow human beings wherein it starts in the relationship being shared in the family and eventually becomes dynamic as he relates to other members in society. In the same manner, entering religious life is another form of man’s manifestation of being a relational being wherein the members share a common goal and purpose in living together especially for the service of the Church inasmuch consecrated life is “a splendid sign in the Church, as they foretell the heavenly glory” (Canon 573). The Rule of our Holy Father, Augustine, writes that “the purpose of coming together in the community is to live harmoniously and to have one mind and one heart intent upon God.” Hence, it challenges us how to live with one another in the midst of multi-cultural backgrounds and personalities that each member of the community has. With all our imperfections and weaknesses, we need to embrace and share each other’s burdens and faith experiences as we are living and sharing in common not only materially but also spiritually.

but the same God who works all in all” (1Cor 12: 4-6).

Each member in the community has his own talents, potentials, and gifts which are also spiritual goods being shared in the community for the good and mission of the Church. Indeed, we have different areas of apostolate like educational, pastoral, formation, and local and international missionary works according to the needs of the Church and her mission.

Community is indeed a gift inasmuch as each member receives the different gifts and graces from God so that these must be shared with one another in the community. St. Paul writes in his first letter to the Corinthians, “there are diversities of graces but the same Spirit; and there are diversities of ministries, but the same Lord; and there are diversities of operations

Finally, community is also a common search for the truth who is God. It means that we journey together as a community on the way to God or In Deum. Hence, it somehow becomes imperative for us especially as Augustinians to accept and embrace together each other’s differences and uniqueness as we build one and vibrant community towards our final goal.

62 | In Deum 2015

Moreover, community is a common service. Through the various gifts and talents shared within the community, the community is directed towards the common service to the Church inasmuch as “apostolate is an integral part of our religious life.” However, in an Augustinian context, the first apostolate is primarily the community so that the ad extra is the fruit of our living together in the community. Thus, there is no such thing as “my apostolate” because apostolate is a common service to the Church. In other words, we are always bringing our identity as Augustinians in doing our various apostolate so that it becomes “we or our.” Thus, in its bigger picture, we can say that we still participate in the kononia and Diakonia in the Church as we communally respond to her call, needs, and mission.

INSIGHTS

Koinonia in the society and the world viewed from St. Augustine’s Sermon 356 Fray Wendell Allan Marinay, OSA I see the relevance of Augustine’s teaching on community life for his own band of men, the society and the world, whereby the latter group serves as a microcosmic lifestyle-model for the macrocosmic affairs of society.

In Sermon 356, Augustine continues to remind his brothers about the life they are supposed to live—the community life which is more than necessary and never less than essential. In this Sermon, he clarifies about the things that were confronting the very nature of his community. In particular, he mentions about possessions as violation to the Rule he has established and the same Rule he wants to be observed by his brothers.

Well aware of the people who have criticized the lifestyle of some of his clergymen. Augustine, in this Sermon, addresses the problem by telling directly his brothers the repercussions if they continue to go against the very purpose of living together as stipulated in his Rule. In here, he appears to be dead serious about the practice of community life, especially in the attitude towards possession and sharing of goods. Speaking as a

bishop, he exhorts: ”My brothers, accept this warning: If you wish to give something to my priests bear in mind that it is your duty not to arouse their wicked inclinations against me. Offer to everyone what you want and offer it willingly. Everything which goes into the common fund will be shared with everyone according to his needs.

Consider it as the community’s treasure, all of us have a share of it.” As to his warnings, he frankly says: “if I find even one who, clothed in hypocrisy, possesses something of his own. I shall not allow him to get rid of it by making a will, but I shall remove him from my list of clergy. He can appeal against me to a thousand councils, he can cross whatever seas he likes to fight against me, he can go wherever he likes; I, with God’s help, am now telling him that he will not be able to carry out his priestly ministry within any region covered by my episcopal jurisdiction.

You have heard this as clearly as they have, but I trust in God and his mercy that they will keep the rule which they joyfully embraced with sincerity and loyalty.” Ultimately significant, it is the “being,” and not the “having,” that is shaken, confronted, and challenged.

Augustine’s strong words would surely hit hard the core of the listener, of the discerner, of the one struggling to live a life in common. Those words would not go to naught for someone who keeps his face for the sake of his brothers and/or fellow-others. True enough, such words can be realized in daily affairs, both by those living in a cloistered community and open society. The Rule which Saint Augustine exclusively intended for his ideal community can take an inclusive form applicable for the realities of our society and of the world. The creative option is left to us!

In Deum 2015 | 63

POETRY

O BIRHEN MARIA

I STARTED

Fray Christian Jhon Paspe, OSA

Fray Florentino Galo Revilla III, OSA

O Birhen Maria Ina ng mahal na awa Ikaw ang pinakamaganda Sa lahat ng nilalang Niya O Birhen Maria Ipanalangin mo kami sa t’wina Sa anak mong maawain Na sana’y dasal ay mapasaamin Sa buhay na puno ng pasakit Sa iyo kami ay lumalapit O Birhen Maria Ina ng mahal na Awa O Birhen Maria O Birhen Maria Sa oras-oras ng buhay Ikaw ay umaalalay Salamat sa lahat ng iyong gabay O Birhen Maria Ipanalangin mo kami sa t’wina

64 | In Deum 2015

I finally found someone Who touched my heart rested.

I finally found the ONE Who made my desires fulfilled.

I started everything with my ego.

I started everything with my selfishness.

And when I started to look back from where I started, I realized that what I started was evil.

As I started to walk and pray, I started to see the light that comes from within.

As I started to clean the mess of my heart, And then I started to find the ONE. I started to desire His Love.

Then, I started to change my priority.

As I started to embrace His feet, Then, I started to say…

I finally found someone Who touched my broken heart.

I finally found the ONE Who made myself complete.