Pope Benedict---the last Catholic Pope?

Are we seeing the end of days? Many Catholics were shocked when Pope Benedict announced his untimely resignation. Usually, the patriarch of the world's biggest religion stays in his post up to the moment of death. Resignations are possible yet highly  discouraged.

Pope Benedict's' announcement of his resignation followed a string of highly charged "prophesies" online. Many see this as an omen, a definitive sign of the following Apocalypse or the "end of days". Some religious scholars say, his term was cut short as predicted by a 12th century monk. Meaning, Pope Benedict did not complete his Papal apostolate-ship, leading to many saying that St. Malachy's prophesies about the last ten popes have already came true.

What is the meaning of all these? If we follow what these doomsday sayers are saying, this resignation will follow tribulation as if this is not happening right now. Tribulation will happen shortly after the reign of the ten popes and afterwards, a war that would affect the entire world and justify the coming of Jesus Christ.

This comes at a time when the United States just passed a law that would prevent their economic system from collapsing further due to the global recession. Are we seeing the end of capitalism as we know it and the ushering of a new economic system that is more encompassing than the first?

Or, we are heading towards a global disaster that would disrupt the international peace that we have so achieved and taken cared of for the past sixty or seventy years?

No one knows.

Yet, the omens continue to happen. Hours after the pronouncement of his resignation, a lightning bolt struck the Vatican--twice. Was this just a coincidence or heaven speaking?

Divorce bill in the offing? You wish, says Philippine Catholic Church

After the contentious Reproductive Health bill, here comes another suggestion---the Divorce bill. House speaker Sonny Belmonte and Senator Pia Cayetano are leading the charge, while Malacanang clarified that the divorce bill is simply "out of their radar".

Why the two? Belmonte is a widower, and continues to be very loyal to his deceased partner while Cayetano is a "divorcee" or in our parlance, " a beneficiary of an annulment." These two probably have their own reasons why they favor a divorce law, and I hope it is not because of religious belief. Belmonte and Cayetano must have realized that divorce is a solution to the ever-growing social phenomenon that is "living in" or "conjugal living" or the ever increasing incidence of un-happy marriages.

Should these two pursue such a bill, then, it would be the beginning of the end of Catholic influence in this country. With the passage of the RH bill, it countermanded a pillar of Catholic dogma which is respect and protection of the unborn. Now, with the divorce bill, the sanctity of marriage according to Roman Catholic religious dogma would be put at risk.

And to think that Bishop Tagle is purportedly a very strong contender to replace Pope Pius and the Philippines as one of the staunchest defenders of the Catholic faith. Outside of Rome, the Philippines stands as the only country with majority of their population as Catholic believers. How would these civil laws be interpreted by the Church?

In some Latin American countries, the Catholic church is considered a strong political force. Sometimes, the Church took part in destabilizing moves against governments which diametrically oppose Catholic doctrine. In countries such as Argentina, Venezuela, Brazil and Ecuador, the Church even went so far as supporting coups and in some instances, supporting dictators.

The CBCP call for its believers not to follow the RH bill is a veritable insurrectionist call. Had it been that a political group issued such a statement, it would have been interpreted as "destabilizing" and "revolutionary".

Church won anti-RH fight--substitute bill totally dilutes original one, says legislative source

President Aquino has given the marching orders for the passage of the Reproductive Health bill. This bill, which has been languishing in the halls of Congress for more than a decade already, is now headed towards an event-ful victory. Aquino met with several bishops and pro-life advocates to seek a compromise on the contentious issue. At least four Bishops---Bishops Iniguez, Gabby Reyes, Tony Ledesma and Ted Bacani have already given their thoughts. Reyes, according to some, was even identified as the one who wrote or dictated the workings of a diluted version of the bill.

Congressman Edcel Lagman, the main proponent of the bill, allowed the deletion of some provisions and the insertion of several "words' in the original bill to accommodate the desire of anti-RH bill advocates. The so-called "substitute bill" pales in comparison with the earlier version of the bill which Lagman wrote and were co-sponsored by several other people. It was said that this "substitute bill" was written with the presence of a Bishop. Fact is, several says the bill was written by this bishop, whom others identified as Reyes.

It is interesting to see the wordings and tone used in this bill, and how this "final substitute bill" would eventually impact on the government's desire to control population. What is evident is the fact that, in this fight, the Church clearly won in this.

If you will analyze, the Church stand on this issue is more consistent with the Constitutional provision on the duty of the state to protect the welfare of women and the "unborn child". Section 12, Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution reads that the state has the duty to protect the life of the mother and the unborn child. Senate Bill no. 2635 authored by Senator Bong Revilla defines the term "unborn child" as a "child in any stage of existence, from conception to birth." Conception, in this bill refers to the moment when the sperm cell meets the egg cell, thereupon "fertilization" occurs.

It is thus deemed unconstitutional, a measure which will encourage the use of any artificial methods of preventing the meeting of the egg cell with that of the sperm cell, meaning, use of contraceptives. What is constitutional though, is the stated duty of the State to adequately inform citizens of the Philippines in child rearing, not population control. Population control, as defined, means managing population figures through human intervention. Human intervention, whether artificial or natural, harms the conception of both sperm and egg, thus, unconstitutional.

Are We to Blame for Graft and Corruption?

In Europe, hundreds of Catholic churches have been abandoned and left to ruins. Why? People have grown tired of the homilies which, instead of liberating, Europeans find nauseating. Icons have been smashed to smithereens because Europeans found Catholicism preaching a quite contrary doctrine than what is written in the holy scriptures. There are a few places in Europe where you could find a sizeable Catholic population, which I found to be quite sad since Europe once served as the bastion of Christianity in olden times. In fact, many missionaries who spread Christianity came from that part of the world.

In the United States, hundreds have abandoned their churches. Americans have outgrown their fancy of this religion. People are flocking to other Christian sects, despite campaigns by the church to invigorate the faith of the laity. Priests have been arrested by the state because of sexual harassment or embezzlement of funds.

Of course in Asia, Catholicism is also on the wane. Only two countries remain locked in the tight grip of Catholicism--the Philippines and a former Indonesian territory (I forgot the name). Catholicism remain strong in this country because this religion still exerts quite a strong hold over government and property. Yes, the Catholic Church remains the second biggest haciendero in this country, second of course to the state. They also own several corporations and stocks in major Philippine corporations. That's why they are still so influential here.

Since 2001, the Catholic Church has been looking for ways to increase their relevance in the lives of the Filipino. However, despite their efforts, thousands of Filipinos change religion everyday because whatever the Church does, the people don't seem to care about them anymore.

The Philippines is an important and strategic country for Catholicism because it is the only country in Asia where they can say, for certainty, that they still exert a majority hold in its population. Many Filipinos remain slaves of this religion. However, I do believe that in a few years time, the number of Catholics will slowly dwindle here. Why?

The Catholic church here is beginning to be like the Padre Damasos of Jose Rizal's novels. Look at what the CBCP said today--they are maintaining a critical collaboration stance with the Arroyo administration. What's worst, they even blamed the people for the rampant graft and corruption happening in this country. Imagine, the prelators of the Faith blaming their own flock for the increasing moral destruction of Filipino society? I thought that they are the exemplars of the moral code? I thought that it is their responsibility to preach and lead us to the right direction?

How things have changed since the death of Cardinal Jaime Sin. If the good cardinal is alive today, he definitely would not allow the Church to go to bed with the devil. These bishops should be ashamed of this. They have allowed themselves to be prostituted for a few gold and silver coins of the temptress of power.