Featured Post
MEDITATION
ON MEDITATION There are a few well meaning Christian friends who ask me about my leaning towards eastern philosophy and meditation. I w...
Saturday, August 24, 2019
The Keeper of Spring: ECONOMY OF MOTION
The Keeper of Spring: ECONOMY OF MOTION: Even the most mundane tasks should be done with a calm and harmonious spirit that exhibits tranquility, quiet joy, and economy of ...
ECONOMY OF MOTION
Even
the most mundane tasks should be done with a calm and harmonious spirit that
exhibits tranquility, quiet joy, and economy of motion. Meditation should be
practiced as an integral part of life, not as an escape from life. Meditation
is reflective thinking or contemplation, usually on a specific subject to
discern its meaning or significance or a plan of action. Where there is
stillness and rest there is one movement of maximum force. “In quietness and
trust is your strength.” (Isaiah 33:15)
The
work of righteousness will be peace; the service of righteousness will be quiet
confidence forever. (Isaiah 32:17)
The Keeper of Spring: REGALO
The Keeper of Spring: REGALO: Here is one worrisome public statement of the President which created a great deal of criticism when he said in his speech policemen may...
REGALO
Here is one worrisome public
statement of the President which created a great deal of criticism when he said
in his speech policemen may receive gifts from generous and thankful
benefactors. Speaking before police
officers at the 118th anniversary of the police service in the country, Duterte
said he did not consider gift-giving bribery.
“Kung bigyan kayo tanggapin
n’yo. It is not bribery... What I mean is if there is generosity in them. Sabi ng
anti-graft you cannot accept gifts. Kalokohan,” Duterte said in his speech
before officials and members of the Philippine National Police.
He said he found no problem
with police receiving gifts especially if from people expressing their
gratitude.
In the culture of the
Filipino which is “utang na loob” some if not many practice giving gifts or favor for service
rendered, which in reality is prevalent in government. The problem really is it
is the stepping stone to corruption, or the first bite of the apple regardless
of whether we justify it as nothing
harmless or wrong in receiving it, when done in the spirit of generosity
or appreciation. The bent of human
nature attaches strings to the gift, no matter how one may affirm that it would
not ever affect his discretion or judgment in matters relating to his work or
authority as a government functionary. Let’s face it it. There is really magic
in a gift or favor. If gifts are
offered, receiving them would either bring us under obligation to the givers, or
bring us under their spell, it is just that simple. It is sometimes a dry run
to the practice of bribery. A temptation hard to resist and if one should come
out clean he should nip it in the bud by refusing it outright. Justifying it or
rationalizing it or willing yourself to believe that there’s nothing wrong in
accepting a favor or gift from someone who is very appreciative of a job well
done is a dangerous pit. In the first place civil servants are supposed to be
paid, to do their job exactly that, do to it well. promptly, honestly, no need
of greasing the hands.
It stands to reason that our
Civil Service Laws prescribed the NO GIFT POLICY which all civil servants know
fully well. And it is seriously lamentable for the highest official of the land
to a call this policy “kalokohan” because he is standing on the platform
against corruption in government, and many of us perceive him to be doing a
good job in weeding out the corrupt in government.
We are receiving mixed
signals here. The President’s ambivalence seems to be confusing. His
Presidential Spokesman does not help, any, in divining what is in the mind of the President when he simply
echoed the controversial statement. Perhaps the President may have uttered it in jest, we do not know.
The President could ramble on and sometimes lapse in Freudian slip.
The NO GIFT POLICY is
provided in Section 27, Article II of the 1987 Constitution states that: “The
State shall maintain honesty and integrity
in the public
service and take
positive and effective measures against graft and
corruption.” Sec. 1, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution states that: “Public
office is a public trust and all public
officers and employees
must at all
times be accountable
to the people, serve
them with utmost
responsibility, integrity, loyalty,
and efficiency, act with patriotism and lead modest lives.”
Republic Act
No. 3019, Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act provides
that: “It is the policy of
the Philippine Government,
in line with
the principle that a public
office is a
public trust, to
repress certain acts
of public officers
and private persons alike which constitute graft or corrupt practices or
which may lead thereto.”
Republic Act
No, 6713, Code of Ethical
Standards for Public
Officials and Employees provides
that: “It is
the policy of
the State to
promote a high standard of ethics in public service.”
Republic Act 6713 Section 7
(d) Solicitation or
acceptance of gifts.
— Public officials
and employees shall
not solicit or accept,
directly or indirectly,
any gift, gratuity,
favor, entertainment, loan
or anything of monetary
value from any
person in the
course of their
official duties or in
connection with any
operation being regulated
by, or any
transaction which may be
affected by the functions of their office
Former CSC Chairman
Francisco Duque III said, “Gifts may be construed as a bribe or reward in
exchange for a favor or better treatment. Serving the public is our duty and we
must give the best possible service without expecting anything in return.”
In reaction Senator Panfilo
Lacson a former Police General himself, and a perceived Presidential ally,
tweeted, “Mr President, insatiable greed starts with simple, petty graft. It
could be more addicting than drugs. There is no detox, nor is there rehab
facility available for addiction to money.”
Tuesday, August 6, 2019
The Keeper of Spring: PACQUIAO'S FLAWED HERMENEUTICS
The Keeper of Spring: PACQUIAO'S FLAWED HERMENEUTICS: SENATOR MANUEL PACQUIAO’S FLAWED HERMENEUTICS When Senator Manny Pacquiao was reported to have addressed the hallowed Halls of the S...
The Keeper of Spring:
THE PRESIDENT’S HELL SPEECH
Part of the speech which is
somehow staggering, in President Rodrigo Duterte’s State Of The Nation Address was his Theological
assertion that he could not believe in a God who sends people to Hell. This
time the President treads on unfamiliar ground. With all due respect, may I respectfully
disagree with his Theological assumption. I am glad though that he quoted or
paraphrased from the Book of Ecclesiastes which means he is familiar with the
Bible.
The President is not the
only one who oppose the notion of Hell. Hell has fallen on hard times and it
seems that belief in its reality or existence is fast diminishing. In most of
our Churches the subject of Hell is hardly preached or taught. People would
rather prefer to hear sermons or preaching on grace, goodness, love, salvation,
redemption, but warnings about Hell, seem even too hot a topic to touch, even
among the clergy.
I would like to offer a few
basic arguments why I believe a God of love has prepared a place called Hell,
to those who deserve to be there.
First God’s Justice demands
a Hell. The Justice of God requires the existence of Hell, because God is Just.
God is so pure and untainted that He cannot even look upon Sin. God is no
respecter of persons. As Abraham declared, “Will not the Judge of all the earth
do right?” (Genesis 18:25) Not all Justice is accomplished in this life. Thus,
the existence of a place of punishment for the wicked after this life is
necessary to maintain the Justice of God.
A good analogy is a Court of
Law with a Judge and a law breaker. A just Judge will convict and sentence the
person whom he finds guilty. If that Judge did not pursue justice for the crime
he would not be a just Judge. Surely there would be no justice for the acts
wickedness and evil committed in this world which remain unpunished if there
were no place of punishment for the demented souls who commit merciless
atrocities and cruelty in this fallen world.
Second. God’s love demands a
Hell. The Bible proclaims that, “God is love”(1 John 4:16) But love cannot act
coercively. A God of love cannot force man to love Him. Forced love is not
love. A loving God has given us free will, and He does not force Himself upon
us to love Him. Hence, those who do not choose to love God must be allowed not
to love Him. Those who do not wish to be with Him must be allowed to be
separated from Him. Hell allows separation from God.
Third. Human dignity demands
Hell. Since God does not force people to be with Him in Heaven, against their
will, human free choice demands a Hell. The great Christian Apologist and
Oxford Professor CS Lewis said, “There are only two kinds of people in the end:
those who say to God, “Thy will be done: and those to whom God says, in the
end, “Thy will be done.”
Fourth. God’s Sovereignty
demands a Hell. Unless there is a Hell, there is no final victory over evil.
For what frustrates good is evil. As the
Bible graphically illustrates, the wheat and the tares cannot grow together
forever. There must be an ultimate separation or else good will not triumph
over evil. If it does not then God would not be in ultimate control. God’s
Sovereignty demands a Hell, otherwise He would not be the ultimate Victor over evil
that the Bible declares Him to be.
As Christians let us
continue to pray for our country and people, especially the President for the
Word of God commands us to pray for those in authority.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)