THE SECOND CHANCE

OUR FRUIT SPEAKS FOR US

A story is told of a Teacher, who one fine day, was walking down a rugged road lined with many different trees, in deep contemplation, when he thought he heard the trees talking to each other. The Teacher stopped to listen to what the trees were saying. He heard the giant maple trees with their resplendent bright crimson leaves speak in unison across the cluster of apple trees, "Look at our leaves, they rustle in the wind which could be heard from afar.”

The apple trees replied, "We don't need all the fluttering and flapping  to draw attention to ourselves, our fruit speaks for us!"

In the Book of Luke, the Lord Jesus Christ, spoke of fruit bearing in one of His parables. He said:

“A man had a fig tree growing in his vineyard, and he went to look for fruit on it but did not find any. 7 So he said to the man who took care of the vineyard, ‘For three years now I’ve been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree and haven’t found any. Cut it down! Why should it use up the soil?’ “‘Sir,’ the man replied, ‘leave it alone for one more year, and I’ll dig around it and fertilize it. 9 If it bears fruit next year, fine! If not, then cut it down.’” (Luke 13:6-9, New International Version, ©2011)

Here we have a picture of a fig tree growing in a vineyard. As to how this tree happens to be in the vineyard is not explained, but perhaps the fig tree was already there before the land became a vineyard. The owner of the vineyard saw the unusual presence of this tree among the fruit bearing vine, in his land.  He has been visiting his vineyard but for three years he has never seen the fig tree bear any fruit. The tree was useless to him for it was only taking up space. So one day he called his Caretaker to cut down the tree. The Caretaker must have loved that tree, despite its fruitlessness. He pleaded to his Master if the tree could be spared at least for another year, because he would do something about it. He would dig around it and fertilize it. The Owner consented. If the tree still doesn’t bear fruit after a year then it has to go.  

As I reflect on this parable I cannot help but feel the harshness in the Owner’s feelings towards this unfruitful tree which serves no purpose or gives him no profit. But God’s message goes beyond this harshness for it really speaks of mercy.

I am  led to reflect on the major focus of the parable which is fruit bearing. The fig tree is symbolic of our lives in relation to God which is here represented by the vineyard Owner. I love the Caretaker here, because he interceded and pleaded to his Master to spare the tree and give it the chance to bear fruit. He asked the Master if he could dig around the tree and fertilize it. The Caretaker here no doubt is our Lord Jesus Christ.

The question is, “Are we like that barren fig tree?” The parable is like a pointed arrow piecing the heart.

A man’s life that does not bear fruit for the Glory of God, could not remain in the vineyard of the Lord, that is in God’s Kingdom.  

A man who only lives for himself, is selfish, unbearably self-centered, thankless, doesn’t giving anything, who only takes everything of God’s life giving nutrients, solely for his nourishment, and he couldn’t careless, is like that barren fig tree.  The large barren fig tree with its clusters of green leaves is perhaps symbolic of the pride and pomposity of man.  

The most inspiring thing, though, is the second chance given to this fruitless tree, upon the intercession of the Gardener, if only to bear fruit so it could be spared of the impending doom.

This is the lesson  in the story that speaks directly to me. It reveals the love and the grace of our Lord, who offers us that precious second chance if only we would allow Him to change us, to humble us, to dig deep, around our barren lives  that we might live to bear fruit, to God’s glory.     

JESUS AND THE TWO NAMELESS THIEVES: TWO SINNERS TWO REPONSES

JESUS AND THE TWO NAMELESS THIEVES: TWO SINNERS TWO REPONSES

"TODAY YOU WILL BE WITH ME IN PARADISE"
(Luke 23:43)

There are two types of persons portrayed in this human drama personified by the two nameless thieves. Scripture records that these two condemned criminals were on both sides of our Lord. They represented two different attitudes in how they responded to their personal suffering. 

One reproached and spoke bitterly  against God and said, "If you are such a great and powerful and loving God, why am I suffering like this ? Why couldn’t you do something?" The other said, “I  acknowledge that I am a sinner and don't deserve any good thing, have mercy on me and help me in this time of suffering” .

The world is personified by these two thieves. Those  who reject God in their self-righteousness and presume that the Creator of the universe owes them to make their life easy. Those who own up to the fact that God owes us nothing, and that any good to come our way will be due only because of his mercy, and compassion.

St. Luke was inspired to write this episode about the two thieves to teach us that we could either be one or the other.

Notice how similar they are. Both are suffering the pain of crucifixion. Both are guilty of crime ("We are receiving the due reward of our deeds," v.41). Both had heard and seen Jesus, both heard that He is the "King of the Jews," ; they heard Him when our Lord cried out,  "Father forgive them," v. 34). And both of them were terribly doomed.

But the similarities end here. They were totally different in the attitude of the heart. One was blinded and hardened by his sin, remorseless, a picture of worldly indifference and spiritual darkness, who couldn’t care less about his soul, but concerned only with his earthly existence. 

That's the way some people relate to God in suffering. The thief had no spirit of brokenness, or guilt or penitence or humility. He could only see Jesus as a possible means of escape, but belittled him when he saw Jesus hanging on the same Roman cross suffering like him. He did not see him as a King to be followed.

But notice the other thief. This is the one St. Luke wants us to be like. First, instead of blaming God for his desperate condition he acknowledged his sinfulness. He came to realize that he is sinner and the cause of his suffering was his own doing.  

He rebuked the other thief,  saying, 'Do you not fear God?"' This is the second thing about this penitent thief: he feared God.

Third, the penitent thief admitted that he had done wrong: "We are receiving the due reward of our deeds" (v. 41). He had no desire to put up excuses any more; He  opened up his heart before the Son of God admitting his guilt. There are people today  who are in trouble because of spiritual and moral bankruptcy but they could still be self-righteous in justifying themselves.  In contrast the penitent thief gave up justifying himself. Before an all-knowing God it’s a hopeless tack.

Fourth, not only did he admit to wrong and guilt, he accepted his punishment as deserved. "We are under the sentence of condemnation justly." This is the real test of humility before God.

Fifth, the thief acknowledged the righteousness of Jesus . "This man had done nothing wrong," he said. Little did the thief realize that his affirmation:  "This man has done nothing wrong" has far greater significance for this reveals the righteousness of Christ, the sinless One who bore the sin of mankind. This man only does what is good. This man only speaks the truth. This man is worthy of our faith.  

And then, sixth, the thief goes a step further and acknowledges that indeed, Jesus is a King. "Remember me when you come into your Kingdom." Even though he is suffering now, Jesus has the mark of a King. For those who have eyes to see, he has a power here on the cross -- a power of love that makes him King over all his tormentors. He is not only good, he is powerful, and one day will vindicate his great name, and every knee will bow and confess that Jesus is Lord -- to the glory of God, the Father.

And finally, the penitent thief  pleads for help. "Jesus, remember me when you come into your Kingdom." Both thieves wanted to be saved from death. But  how different they were in seeking their salvation: 1) "Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!" 2) "Jesus, remember when you come into your Kingdom!" .

The response of Jesus to the two thieves is equally dramatic. To the unrepentant thief there was only a pitiful silence. Not a word recorded. No promise, no hope. But to the penitent Jesus says: "Today you will be with me in Paradise." This was almost too good. There would not even be a delay. Today the Spirit of Jesus and the renewed Spirit of the thief would be in union in Paradise. The promise would be without delay.

Inner Strength

Inner Strength

If you can start the day without caffeine,

If you can always be cheerful, ignoring aches and pains,

If you can resist complaining and boring people with your troubles,

If you can eat the same food every day and be grateful for it,

If you can understand when your loved ones are too busy to give you any time,

If you can take criticism and blame without resentment,

If you can ignore a friend's limited education and never correct her/him,

If you can resist treating a rich friend better than a poor friend,

If you can conquer tension without medical help,

If you can relax without liquor,

If you can sleep without the aid of drugs,

    

...Then You Are Probably the family dog.

SOME THOUGHTS ON THE ANTI- PHOTO AND VIDEO VOYEURISM LAW

SOME THOUGHTS ON THE ANTI- PHOTO AND VIDEO VOYEURISM LAW

The Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act , Republic Act 9995, was passed by the Philippine Congress last year but little is known about the salient provisions of this law. So far, since the passage of this law, there are no available figures showing how many cases have been filed and successfully prosecuted when the law took effect. This is understandable for the law is fairly recent.

The reported sex scandals which featured well heeled celebrities, caught in sexually explicit acts, nakedness, or exposure of the very private  part of their human sexuality,  without their knowing it, through the use of  photo or video devices, uploaded in the internet,  led to the public and private outcry demanding for legislation  penalizing  voyeurism. The product of this advocacy is Republic Act 9995.   

What are the basic features of this law?

I would like first  to summarize the specific acts defined as  offenses under this law, and reserve my comments  later.

There are generally three (3)  specific acts, punishable under this law.

First, is the taking of photo or video coverage of a person or group of persons performing sexual act or any similar activity, or capturing an image of the private area of a person such as the naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks or female breast, without the consent of the person or persons  involved and under circumstances in which the person or persons has/have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Second, the copying or reproducing or causing the copying or reproducing of such photo or recording of the acts described in the first, with or without consideration, notwithstanding consent to record or take the photo or video given by the person or persons subject of the photo or video.

Third, the selling, distributing or causing the sale or distribution such photo or video recording of sexual act, whether it be the original copy or reproduction thereof, notwithstanding the consent to record or take the photo or video coverage given by the person or persons subject of the photo or video.

And Fourth,  the publishing, broadcasting or causing to publish or broadcast, whether in print or broadcast media, or the showing or exhibiting of the photo or video coverage or recording of such sexual act or any similar activity through VCD, DVD, Internet, cellular phones or other similar devices, notwithstanding the consent to record or take the photo or video coverage given by the person or persons subject of the photo or video coverage.

The law provides for  the same penalty for any of the acts defined as an offense under the law. The penalty is imprisonment of not less than 3 years but not more than 7 years and fine of not less than P100,000.00 but not more than P500,000.00.

If the offense is committed by   a juridical person (corporate entity),  its license or franchise will be automatically deemed revoked. To be held criminally liable  are the corporate officers, including the editor and reporter in the case of print media,  the station manager, editor and broadcaster in the case of a broadcast media.  If the offender is a public officer or employee,  he or she  will be further be administratively liable.  If the offender is an alien, he or she will be subject to deportation proceedings after serving his/her sentence and payment of fines.

Any photo or video, or any copy of such photo or video, illegally obtained,  cannot not be admissible in evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative or administrative hearing or investigation.

The law strictly provides that the use of  such photo or video or any copy of such photo or video as evidence in any civil, criminal investigation or trial of the crime of photo or video voyeurism, may be allowed  only when so authorized by a written order of the court.  Such written order will be issued only upon written application and the examination under oath or affirmation of the applicant and the witnesses he/she may produce, and upon showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that photo or video voyeurism has been committed or is about to be committed, and that the evidence to be obtained is essential to the conviction of any person for, or to the solution or prevention of such, crime.

A careful reading of this law raises a lot of interesting questions. May I offer the observation that the Anti-Voyeurism Law punishes  four (4) specific acts defined as offenses.

First, is the mere act of taking of photo or video filming or recording of person or persons  performing sexual act or any similar activity, or capturing an image of the private area of a person such as the naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks or female breast, without the consent of the person or persons  involved and under circumstances in which the person or persons has/have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

A reading of the law clearly implies that either persons of the opposite sex could be victims. In this particular type of offense consent of the subject involved in the photo or video could be a valid defense. This is unmistakably the implication, since the taking of photo or video should be without the consent of the subject who has a reasonable expectation of privacy. In other words if there is consent from the subject of the photo taking or video recording, then the subject consented to give up whatever privacy, decency, or modesty he or she may at least have. How to prove the defense of consent is another question. Notice that mere taking of photo or video recording or filming without the subject’s consent is already an offense.

Second is the copying or reproducing such voyeur photo or video or providing the means of copying or reproducing them. In this type of offense, observe that consent of the subject is immaterial, and not a valid defense. So even if the subject may have consented to the taking of the voyeur photo or video, and the perpetrator could possibly raise the defense of consent if charged under the first type of offense, once the perpetrator performs the act of copying or reproducing the voyeur photo or video, then he is liable under the second type of offense. As already noted consent of the subject is no longer a defense.

The third is the act of selling or distributing the voyeur photo or video or providing the means of selling or distributing them. As in the second, type, consent of the subject is not a valid defense, and mere selling or distributing is a consummated offense.

The fourth is publishing or broadcasting voyeur photo or video, or providing the means of publishing them, or exhibiting or showing them through any of the medium of publication,  broadcasting, or exhibition,  through VCD, DVD, Internet, cellular phones or other similar devices. As in the second and third type of offenses, consent to be photographed, filmed or videotaped, is immaterial and not a valid defense in the criminal prosecution.

Another interesting question that might arise is if it is possible for the defendant to be charged of all four separate offenses defined under this law if he committed all four types of offenses, from the photographing and filming, to copying, then selling, and publishing or exhibiting. I believe that he can be charged of all four separate offenses.

Finally since the mere act of taking of voyeur photo or video recording is punishable, where do I stand if let’s say I take pictures of bikini clad women frolicking and basking in the sun by the blue waters of the beach, which I would rather sincerely call an art work. Furthermore under the circumstances since these beauties had already publicly exposed themselves, isn’t it logical that by implication one is given the license capture them in their glorious beauty through the lens?

THE BOXES

THE BOXES

I have in my hands two boxes

Which God gave me to hold.

He said, "Put all your sorrows in the black,

And all your joys in the gold."

I heeded His words, and in the two boxes

Both my joys and sorrows I store,

But though the gold became heavier each day

The black was as light as before.

With curiosity, I opened the black

I wanted to find out why

And I saw, in the base of the box, a hole

Which my sorrows had fallen out by.

I showed the hole to God, and mused aloud,

"I wonder where my sorrows could be."

He smiled a gentle smile at me.

"My child, they're all here with me."

I asked, "God, why give me the boxes,

Why the gold, and the black with the hole?"

"My child, the gold is for you to count your blessings,

the black is for you to let go."

-- Author Unknown