Light A Fire II

3
LIGHT A FIRE II
Confessions of a Jesuit Terrorist-Son
by
Eduardo B. Olaguer
EDOLAGUER Family Publishing House

1045 Aurora Blvd., Loyola Heights
Quezon City, Philippines 1108
Philippine Copyright © 2005 by Eduardo B. Olaguer
Book Cover Design & Art by Aia Santos Halili with Gabriel Halili
All rights reserved.

No portion of this book may be reproduced
or transmitted in any form, by any means,
i.e. electronic photocopying, recording,
or by any similar mode, if without the prior
written permission of the publisher.
Direct quotations are allowed, however, provided a
complete citation and acknowledgment is made
by written reference to this book and its author.
First Edition, July 2005
Published by: EDOLAGUER Family Publishing House

Aurora Milestone Tower
(632) 913-6382 • 913-6383 • Fax 913-6385
[email protected]
homepage.mac.com/dolaguer/lightafire
This work is one of a kind, in terms of contemporary

Philippine History circa 1941 to 2005. It is replete
with political, moral, and theological events and issues
particularly during the martial law period and
the subsequent EDSA-inspired political crises,
involving Jesuit-educated elite such as the author
and his Jesuit mentors and so-called neo-Jesuits.
ISBN Number 971-93313-0-5

Printed in the Philippines
LIGHT A FIRE II
by Eduardo B. Olaguer
TABLE OF CONTENTS
AUTHOR’S FOREWORD ..............................................................................3
SECTION I ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM AND IGNATIAN JESUITRY

1 Papa and The Jesuits ....................................................15
2 The Gift of Faith and True-Blue Nuns .......................32
3 Jesuits of A Generation Gone .....................................42
4 Our High School Class of 1952 ...................................59
5 College and John P. Delaney S.J. ................................67
SECTION II PURSUED BY THE HOUND OF HEAVEN

6 Cherchez Le Femme .........................................................87
7 Pride and S.A.Tan.......................................................104
8 Heaven’s Hound and The Legion of Mary .............115
9 My IBM and Harvard Years .....................................120
SECTION III LIGHT A FIRE I (TO TOPPLE A DICTATORSHIP)

10 The Ambassador & His Terrorist Connections ......149
11 The Story of The Captives Free ................................166
12 Wonder and Irony .....................................................194
13 Friends and Heroes ...................................................205
SECTION IV STRUGGLES FOR JUSTICE

14 Déjà Vu! ........................................................................217
15 The 18-Storey Tall Cross ............................................238
16 Truth in Lending and Borrowing ............................257
17 On GAD & SSS: Grave Abuse
of Discretion on a Contract? ..............................272
SECTION V LIGHT A FIRE II (EXPOSÉ ON NEO-JESUITRY)
18 Seeds of Jesuit Modernism ........................................285
19 Poisoned Fruits of Neo-Jesuitry ...............................305
20 Neo-Jesuitry in the Philippines ................................326
21 Lux Ex Mundo? ............................................................346
22 Neo-Jesuit Censors ....................................................370
SECTION VI HAIL HOLY QUEEN!

23 The Otto Point of View ..............................................419
24 Apologia Pro Fide Catolica............................................440
25 Epilogue: The Luminous Cross of Grace ................468
GLOSSARY ............................................................................................ 481
AUTHOR’S ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...........................................................486
APPENDIX .............................................................................................487
PHOTO SECTION ................................................... between pages 282-283

AUTHOR’S FOREWORD
The choice of the title for this book and its subject matter
will probably raise a lot of eyebrows, especially among the
Catholic religious communities. A full explanation is therefore
necessary.
As early as 1979 when I was in my first full year of an eventual
six years and 22 days of detention in various prisons, charged
for rebellion and other crimes by the military authorities under
the Marcos dictatorship, my co-accused and I were frequently
subjected to a lot of controversy and disappointment. For in
addition to the heavy moral and psychological stresses and
strains imposed by the authorities on us political detainees,
we often wondered whether we had been misled, perhaps
unwittingly, by some of our supposed Catholic and Christian
allies and recruiters in relation to the primary motive of our
common enterprise that led us to prison.
At the outset of that enterprise, it was crystal-clear parti-
cularly to me and to Otto Jimenez, my co-accused, that the
Jesuits, led and initiated by former Jesuit Father Provincial of
the Philippines and later Assistant to the Father General (in
Rome) Horacio de la Costa S.J., had organized a “Christian
Third Force” sometime in 1976. Its mission was to organize
and help our citizens install a freely and democratically elected
Philippine government and state leadership that would be
truly just and strictly accountable to our people. We would do
so by peaceful means or by legitimate force if necessary, and if
morally justified! In which case, with utmost deliberate care
“not to cause injury to human life and limb.”
3
Thus it would be clearly a legitimate use of “force,” in
explicit contra-distinction to violence, following the precepts of
St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica. It was the “Grand
Old Man” himself, six-time Senator Lorenzo M. Tañada Sr., who
researched on these distinctions at the Dominicans’ University
of Sto. Tomas library! Thus was born the Light A Fire Movement
(a name it was later tagged with by media).
This Christian Third Force with its idealistic mission was
a direct offshoot of the Jesuits’ 32nd General Congregation
(December 1974 through March 1975). Its Decree on Promotion
of Justice stated that their mission was “the service of faith . . . and
promotion of justice (as) an absolute requirement.” Such a
Jesuit refocusing of efforts was to be “total, corporate, rooted
in faith and experience, and multiform.”
We saw nothing wrong with this declaration. For one thing,
we assumed that the Jesuits still recognized the leadership
of Peter’s Successor in true Ignatian mold. But it would turn
out that our assumption was quite presumptuous! In fact un-
known to us, this particular decree had already caused the
Jesuits a worldwide controversy, continuing to this present
day and supplying the “motive” to this author for writing
these memoirs.
Where have some old Jesuits Gone?
Considering that our mission’s organizational pedigree
was Christian and Catholic, we all eventually agreed, after
prolonged debate and deliberation, that ours would also be
irrevocably against any dictatorship: whether from the “Extreme
Right,” the corrupt and illegitimate Marcos’ government, or
the “Extreme Left.” The last referred to the Marxist-Leninist
National Democratic Front (NDF), the Communist Party of the
Philippines (CPP), and its New People’s Army (NPA).
“Democratic” left-of-center or socialist groupings, however,
were in fact welcome to join us. Thus we avidly sought their
alliances, especially the Kapulungang Sandigang Pilipinas (KASAPI)
4 LIGHT A FIRE II
organized and trained by Jose “Derps” Blanco S.J., the Partido
Demokratiko Sosyalista (PDSP) of Romeo “Archie” Intengan S.J.,
and the Christian Social Democrats founded by the late former
Senator Raul Manglapus. The non-Marxist ideological groups
at that time therefore were predominantly led by Jesuits or by
Jesuit-educated alumni!
It was disconcerting to us therefore, to say the least, that not
too long after we were immobilized in prison, a very distinct
pro-Marxist tone and focus in anti-Marcos propaganda
emerged from many of our erstwhile allies, especially among
Catholic nuns and priests. The so called Liberation Theology
had caught them in its clutches! Thus they were using or
“instrumentalizing” even our most sacred Catholic acts of
worship, such as the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Holy
Eucharist, for the obvious propaganda purposes of the Extreme
Left. In the process, they were debasing the sacred liturgies to
the point of outright sacrilege, right in front of our very eyes
in prison. Their “Mass” celebrants were using nutribuns and
tea for “consecration” instead of the mandated hosts and
wine. After the “consecration,” the buns were distributed as
if in Holy Communion, but indiscriminately to anybody who
was in the vicinity or wanted a whole bun or a piece of it. The
unconsumed “consecrated” pieces were treated worse than the
usual leftover food—simply abandoned or given to dogs!
We were always outnumbered by detainees affiliated
with the NDF and the CPP/NPA. When we complained to
Church and civil authorities that such a public desecration was
extremely offensive to our religious beliefs and sensibilities,
we were forthwith subjected to attacks in media and even in
the venerable pages of the Jesuits’ Ateneo de Manila’s student
publication, The Guidon. Even a prominent Jesuit newspaper
columnist joined in the condemnation. He considered us as
plain vandals and would-be murderers unworthy of our Jesuit
heritage. Smothered by both Marcos loyalists and the ever-
growing numbers of pro-NDF practitioners in media were
Author’s Foreword 5
the precious few among our friends in the Catholic religious
community, but their refutation of previous media attacks
against us seldom, if ever, found public print or ventilation on
television or radio.
These condemnations of our defense of our Faith uniformly
foreshadowed the 1995 Jesuits’ 34th General Congregation’s re-
affirmation of an old sophistry, which seemingly justified such
condemnations. And it was re-confirmed by the present Father
General Peter-Hans Kolvenbach S.J. in October 2000 at the
Santa Clara University, in their campus at the equally famous
Silicon Valley in California. Fr. Kolvenbach definitively said:
From our origins in 1540, the Society has been
officially and solemnly charged with the defense and
the propagation of the faith. (But) in 1995 the (General)
Congregation re-affirmed that, for us Jesuits, the defense
and propagation of the faith is a matter of to be or not
to be, even if the words themselves can change. Faithful to
the Vatican Council [sic!], the Congregation wanted our
preaching and teaching not to proselytize, not to impose
our religion on others, but rather to propose Jesus and his
message of God’s Kingdom in a spirit of love to everyone.
[emphasis supplied]
Thus some 25 years ago, our defense of our Faith was

supposedly an “imposition” of our religion on others. In May
of 2002 during the so-called EDSA Tres uprising, future Bishop
Socrates “Soc” Villegas would himself be publicly accused in
the Philippine media of similar violation. For Bishop Soc had
vehemently protested against the desecration of the EDSA
Shrine grounds by hordes of partisans of EDSA Dos-expelled
President Joseph Estrada.
Where have some old Jesuits gone? Thus our hearts cried
out in prison while vainly waiting for moral and theological
reinforcement from our other Jesuit friends, “faithful” or
otherwise. Help had already come, though, and did come
from a handful of our old and still orthodox Jesuit mentors and
6 LIGHT A FIRE II
confessors, such as James B. Reuter S.J. and William L. Hayes
S.J., who regularly visited us and consoled us with their still and
always orthodox celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass
and Sacraments. And from His Eminence, Jaime Cardinal Sin
too! Cardinal Sin had immediately requested and convinced
then Deputy Minister of Defense Carmelo Z. Barbero and his
assistant, Col. Eduardo Ermita (future congressman and exe-
cutive secretary of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo), to visit
me regularly in prison to stop or prevent any torture practices,
a few days after my arrest.
But the wave effects, sans any official Jesuit restraints, of
Marxist-leaning and popular Jesuit-priest authors of Liberation
Theology books such as Gustavo Gutierrez S.J., Juan Luis
Segundo S.J., and James Francis Carney S.J. had a far more wide-
spread and chilling effect even here in the Philippines. In fact,
in 1982, I was shocked while reading my children’s Theology
of Liberation textbooks at the Ateneo de Manila University.
They were literally synopses or even large-scale verbatim re-
writes of the Gutierrez-Segundo-Carney books and views. The
“rootedness” in the Catholic and Christian Faith of enterprises
for the “promotion of justice” had been transmogrified, or at
best reduced to lip service.
And so somehow the idea was born in my heart that our
Light A Fire story had to be re-told with the same original
motive, together with the related mistakes and lessons we had
learned since then, in pain but in Truth.
There were at least four serious attempts towards this end.
The real obstacle however, apart from the unique circumstances
involving each of those failures, was actually our lack of real
enthusiasm in producing a story that might look like we were
out merely to justify or even glorify ourselves. Nevertheless,
in December of 2003, during an intimate reunion initiated by
local taipan Al Yuchengco among the main surviving Light A
Fire personalities, including former Senate President Jovito
Salonga, it was enthusiastically, albeit informally agreed that
such recording for posterity should be done as soon as possible.
Still, nothing much materialized, until the original motivation
for writing my book was overridden by other developments.
Two such events finally made me decide to record these
memoirs myself, in full and fast. These would subsume the
original Light A Fire story, and be the means to reach a set of
“Jesuitical” objectives. The first was the Jesuits’ condemnation
of Fr. Antonio “Toti” Olaguer’s orthodox Mariology, and the
second was a similar debasement of our gift of faith by former
Jesuit Provincial, Joaquin Bernas, by his widely advertised
radical re-definition of Jesuit/Ateneo education.
On the 10th of December 2004, the Philippine Daily Inquirer
ran a four-page supplement paid for by the Jesuits’ Ateneo
de Manila University in celebration of its 145th anniversary.
The full-page opening narrative had the byline of Joaquin G.
Bernas S.J. It contained Bernas’ radically new concept of what
today constitutes Ateneo education. Both developments were
evidently a continuation of equally radical revisions in official
Jesuit teachings on the Catholic Faith. It is, however, a mere tip
of a huge and dangerous iceberg, which must be taken with
utmost concern.
This book’s main objective therefore is to light a fire of protest
against these radical changes in Jesuit teachings, and how they
deviate from the official position of the Church Magisterium.
We will also look into the cleverly worded decrees and
principal instructions of the Jesuits’ own supreme council, or
General Congregation, particularly the 32nd, in addition to the
previously mentioned Santa Clara address by Father General
Kolvenbach.
With these official statements from high-ranking Jesuits
as backdrop, the Philippine Jesuit leadership has actually
confirmed that there is an on-going and deliberately designed
Jesuit rebellion against the Catholic Hierarchy! Thus this radical
shift in the Jesuit credo must, as early as possible, be pointed out
to all loyal Catholics, especially to unsuspecting parents who
8 LIGHT A FIRE II
think their children enrolled in Jesuit educational institutions
are still getting an A-1 and orthodox Catholic education.
My main thesis is to establish solid proof of such a rebellion,
and a logical as well as theological refutation of its underlying
neo-Jesuit notions. Suffice to it say in this introduction that had
my brother, Fr. Antonio B. Olaguer S.J., been alive today, he
would have joined Otto Jimenez and me in respectfully but
vehemently disagreeing, as we do now, with the neo-Jesuits’
seemingly scholarly-crafted new definition of Jesuit education
appearing in their public advertisement.
We have no quarrel with the modern technology content
of the various advertised Ateneo curricula. Our disagreement
is fundamental and stems from our own Jesuit education
received from many outstanding faithful Jesuits and life’s
actual experience, including our Light A Fire adventures with
its shortcomings. For Otto Jimenez and I sincerely believe
that Joaquin Bernas’ radically new definition is certainly un-
Ignatian, non-Christian, and even more so, is non-Catholic!
Through these my memoirs, I also hope to convince you,
dear kind readers, that it is not true, as alleged by the previous
Jesuit Father General Pedro Arrupe, in Valencia, Spain in 1973
and apparently concurred with by present-day Jesuit leaders
Joaquin G. Bernas, Bienvenido Nebres, et al., that up till then
the Jesuits had not educated its alumni “for justice.” And yet
Arrupe, Bernas, and Nebres, all Catholic ordained priests,
have never explained at all as to what was explicitly lacking or
wrong with Catholic Jesuit education up till then.
Thus it is the corollary objective of this book to convince its
readers that among Jesuit-educated alumni like me, the “fault”
is in the fact that we have not fully understood nor kept faith
with St. Ignatius’ and the Gospel’s teachings, particularly that
on “seeking first the Kingdom of God.” This is about lessons we
learned in the quest for reform and social justice. I am therefore
placing the blame squarely where it belongs: on us the alumni
involved, and not our teachers, nor their teachings.
The reader will see in this book that my views on current
Jesuit leanings are not merely my personal opinion. Three
popes, including the recently departed John Paul the Great,
and a number of reputable Jesuits have preceded me in the
assessment that the Society of Jesus today is no longer the
defender of the papacy that it was originally meant to be.
Its modernist approach to theology disguises many subtle
but crucial deviations from papal teachings and those of the
Catholic Magisterium.
This book therefore is NOT intended for the casual reader
who is merely looking for an easy-to-read but interesting
story. The book is meant to deliver a message and to appeal
to all those who value our Roman Catholic Faith on matters of
faith and morals, as it is ultimately interpreted by the Catholic
Magisterium and the Papacy. My appeal is for constancy in
our loyalty to that Faith.
I have used my sin-filled life’s experience to drive home
the point that sinners may fall many times and thus fail in
that loyalty test. But God’s “amazing” grace when humbly
accepted and properly understood as such, is an all-powerful
and redeeming gift of His infinite Love and perfect Justice.
Once again, to emphasize, these memoirs have been
written in order to light a fire of protest against the neo-Jesuits’
insubordination to the Papacy and the rank injustice being
done to St. Ignatius of Loyola and to the tens of thousands of
Jesuits and Jesuit-educated alumni who have faithfully lived
and already died, or still continue to live according to the
original Ignatian Jesuits’ Marian intensified Christ-centered way
of life.
This Light A Fire sequel is also dedicated to the memory of
all the outstanding teachers I have been privileged to encounter
by virtue of God’s Providence. They were the genuine Ignatian
Jesuit priests and Scholastics at the Ateneo de Manila, the
Ateneo de Naga, and the University of the Philippines (U.P.);
the true Benedictine nuns at St. Scholastica’s in Manila and
10 LIGHT A FIRE II
St. Agnes in Legazpi City; and even my favorite public school
teachers in Guinobatan, Albay—all loyal Catholics.
And also, these memoirs are intended for the loving memory
of Papa, Lino S. Olaguer, and his ultimately favorite son, my
brother, mentor, and Marian confrere, Antonio B. Olaguer S.J.
12
SECTION ONE
ROOTS IN
TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM
AND IGNATIAN JESUITRY
CHAPTER 1 Papa and the Jesuits

CHAPTER 2 The Gift of Faith
and True-Blue Nuns
CHAPTER 3 Jesuits of a Generation Gone
CHAPTER 4 Ateneo de Naga High School
Class of 1952
CHAPTER 5 College & John P. Delaney S.J.
13
14 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY
Chapter 1
PAPA AND THE JESUITS
I was 5 years and 4 months old when Papa, Lino S. Olaguer,

and I bade our last “goodbye and thank you” to Mother Gracia
at St. Scholastica’s. I was soon to be entrusted to the Jesuits of
the Ateneo de Manila, at its old Intramuros campus sometime
in July of 1941. Father Luis Pacquing S.J., the Grade School
Headmaster, personally brought me to Mr. Villanueva, the
Grade One-Section “A” head teacher. My three elder brothers,
Alberto “Tito,” Antonio “Toti,” and Valdemar “Manoy Demar,”
were in Grade 4, 2nd year, and 3rd year high school respectively,
while my three sisters were all at St. Scholastica’s. Gavina
“Gavs” was in Kindergarten, Rosario “Nena” in Grade 2, and
Celine “Nene” in Grade 3.
For them, regular classes had started a week earlier. But I
was a late enrollee, because of the even more regular typhoons
scouring the Bicol Peninsula from June to December then and
even now. The funds for the best Catholic and intellectual
education of the Olaguer brood of seven children available
in Manila were more or less dependent on the modest rice,
coconut and abaca plantations we inherited pari passu with
four other uncles and aunts. This agricultural windfall came
directly from our maternal grandmother, Rosario Pardiñas
Buenaventura of Guinobatan, a typical town in Bicolandia’s
Albay province, some 400 kilometers southeast of Manila.
My own mother GLORIA had passed away several years earlier
due to ectopic complications following her eighth pregnancy.
She died at the height of the typhoon season on July 2 in 1937.
I was then barely 17 months old and our youngest, Gavs,
now Sister Joseph Olaguer of the Good Shepherd Religious
Papa and the Jesuits 15

Order, was born only 5 months earlier in February. Typhoons
in Bicolandia would continue to play a significant role in my
early life with the Jesuits of the Ateneo de Manila in 1941.
The Ratio Studiorum
As a late enrollee, I was assigned the last seat of the last row
at the back of the classroom. The class was already divided into
two competing teams. I was claimed by the “Blues” on the right
side of the aisle facing the teacher, with the “Whites” on the left
side. Blue and White were also the official colors of the National
Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) champion Ateneo de
Manila basketball team whose sharpshooting captain then was
the famous Simon Lao. Mr. Lao would eventually become the
mutual brother-in-law of Raul Manglapus and Geny Lopez Jr.,
my two future Light A Fire associates some 37 years later. All
of them were Toti’s and Manoy Demar’s contemporaries at the
Ateneo.
Depending on our oral recitation, quizzes, and grades in
the monthly Report Cards, some of us in Grade 1 would be
promoted or demoted by being re-seated nearer or farther away
from the front row of the classroom. The two students with
the best grades in the academic subjects, and with excellent
“Conduct” or overall behavior, were designated “Captains”
of their respective “Blue” and “White” teams. The two rival
captains were always seated nearest the teacher adjacent to the
middle aisle, thus across each other on the very first front row.
And the daily oral and written examinations of each student
would determine his rank in the class and in the team. A few
weeks before the end of the school year, the team Captain with
the higher average grade would be declared the Emperor of the
whole class!
Such was my introduction to the dynamics of the classic
Jesuit system of “pursuit of excellence” and the compulsive
competitiveness it oftentimes bred. The entire system was
basically the same as the Spanish Jesuits’ ratio studiorum during

our national hero Jose Rizal’s earliest student days at the old
Ateneo Municipal in that same Intramuros location. Unlike
my memories at St. Theresa’s and the 4-year-long Ateneo de
Naga experience some seven years later, I could not however
recall any synthesis or connection between our secular pursuit
of knowledge and our Catholic religious instruction under Mr.
Villanueva at the Ateneo de Manila in 1941.
Nevertheless, thanks to Papa’s innate authoritarian orien-
tation combined with my maternal grandmother’s Spanish-
influenced disciplinary rigor in her extended family and
matriarchy, the American Jesuit standards of obedience to
their rules for attaining academic excellence were nothing
new to me. Lola, for example, required Papa shortly before he
became her son-in-law, to write to her regularly. In Spanish!
Her prompt replies included magisterial corrections for
any mistakes in Papa’s grammar and idiomatic expressions,
especially for the usual pitfalls in the use of Spanish irregular
verbs, their subjunctives, and gerundives.
She also prevailed in her conviction about the importance
of music to children, as in the case of Mama, who had
turned out to be the most accomplished pianist among the
Buenaventuras. Mama was taught by Sister Baptista Battig, the
famous Benedictine nun-founder of St. Scholastica’s College
of Music. Thus we, Gloria Buenaventura’s children, all had to
have the best available piano teachers too! That took budgetary
precedence even vis-à-vis our formal grade school education,
regardless of the prevailing prices of abaca and coconuts or
their unscheduled destruction by typhoons.
Playing While Working
I never heard Papa play a single note on any musical
instrument. Nevertheless, until the time we became adults and
had scattered ourselves all over the globe, Papa loved to listen
to each of us play our favorite piano pieces, especially during
town fiestas or big social occasions which we all dreaded

even more than Hirohito’s hordes! Yet we always dutifully
entertained his special friends and relatives with our music.
Oftentimes we giggled through our cuatro manos or even seis
manos, while Manoy Demar would be playing the violin with
Pocholo, yours truly, reciting a poem that Manoy had composed.
From behind the nearest door or curtain, Toti would provide
his whispered and mano-mano critiques with many horrid
“faces.” His earthy humor from behind the scenes was always
in keeping with our latest mutual and self deprecatory jokes.
No wonder we siblings then seldom, if ever, took ourselves
seriously, especially when we were among ourselves.
In Manila at our 711 Vito Cruz, Singalong address, Papa
would come home from his work as Chief Pharmacist of the
Philippine General Hospital along Taft Avenue, an hour or so
after our usual arrival from school. It was Toti’s idea always to
assign Ngula, our deaf-mute lavandera, and/or her son Regulo,
to be the acrobatic look-outs in our improvised watchtower, a
tall but frail and always swaying-in-the-wind guava tree. Thus
we wanted to have at least 5 minutes to prepare ourselves and
the house before Papa arrived at the doorsteps and started his
immediate, minute inspection routine. Going up the staircase,
we all knew that he would insert his smallest fingers inside our
barandilla, the ornate woodcarvings of the balustrade, to check
on any accumulated dust.
Woe unto me and Gavs too, whose assignment it was
to assist me in keeping those carvings immaculately dust-
free, if Papa’s standards were not met. Next for inspection
were our beds and cabinets, for any out-of-line pillows and
bedspreads, or dirty helter-skelter clothes outside the ropero.
“Nena” Rosario and “Nene” Celine would bear the brunt of
unexpurgated earthy Spanish expletives, if Papa found any
of these not up to par. “Tito” Alberto, “Toti” Antonio and
“Manoy” Valdemar were jointly responsible for our downstairs
library, guests’ and utility rooms, plus the garden, particularly
its orchids, masiteras and vegetable patch. Tito and Toti also

had the feeding and cleaning responsibility for our pet cats
and dogs. Manoy Demar was in charge of supervising the
household help, unless Papa’s favorite elder sister, Tia Masa,
and her daughter our most favorite cousin, Manay Tita, were
at home for an extended visit. Papa trusted their supervisory
and culinary skills, especially for adobo, pina-ngat and gulay na
amargoso, a hundred times more than Manoy Demar’s way of
shepherding and coaching the girls in the kitchen. Years later,
Gavs as “Sister Joseph” and Rosario as “Sister Aimee” would
be even more exacting culinary experts and disciplinarians in
their own Good Shepherd Sisters’ communities.
By 1942, our farmland tenants from Guinobatan were
already extremely reluctant to spend even a few months to
help us as cleaners and cooks in Manila, out of sheer fear of
the Japanese. And so Toti took liberties with the Benedictine
mantra of ora et labora, praying while working. Instead, Toti
taught us, to the constant consternation of Manoy Demar, to
enjoy ourselves while laboring. It sounded so logical and even
praiseworthy to us then. Thus we played as we worked! And
at the end of the day, particularly upon hearing Ngula’s pre-
arranged hysterical warnings, we all stopped playing in order
to “perfect” our work and to please Papa.
We would scramble away in time to be seen by him upon his
arrival, seemingly working or doing our assignments! There
would be Valdemar typing yet another poem; Antonio drilling
and grilling Rosario on her multiplication tables; Alberto, our
pet lover, bathing the dog; Celine, our most accomplished
musician, playing the piano; or the Pocholo and Gavs cleaning
the barandillas. Sometimes, Toti would instruct us to change our
zarzuela’s script, especially if we needed more time to cover up
or later absolve ourselves vis-à-vis a nasty accident. Then Gavs
and I would use the chinelas and mano po script-scenario. Our
script called for the Pocholo to take off Papa’s shoes while Gavs
handed over his chinelas, and everybody else available would
embellish and thus prolong the age-old custom of taking Papa’s

hand for placement on our foreheads—our mano po custom!
Thus hopefully there would be enough time for the household
help to make last minute repairs of any damage, or to hide any
incriminating evidence. Unless somebody squealed!
The tattletale’s throwaway of the script would usually be
in retaliation for any still unforgiven and unusual insult or
injury. Typical of such casus belli was Toti’s tying up Gavs’
mangy and half-blind but still favorite pet cat in a sack, and
disposing it off from the roof down to the kangkong-and-water-
filled ditch below. Or the Pocholo suddenly yanking out the
piano stool from under Celine, resulting in a sprained finger
for our “Nene,” and a slightly damaged Kolski piano.
Papa’s Unsparing Rod
Ironically it was the future Jesuit among us, “Toti” Antonio,
Mama’s first-born and far and away the favorite of my
grandmother and uncles and aunts, who was seldom if ever
tamed by Papa’s iron-handed discipline. Despite the fact that
compared to us, his other siblings, “Toti” absorbed more than
twice the frequency and intensity of Papa’s application on
him of the old maxim, “Spare the rod and spoil the child!”
Incidentally, yours truly being the youngest boy, pocholo
in Spanish or nonoy in our dialect, I became quite adept at
deflecting Papa’s brand of penology.
I expertly did so, but sometimes at the expense of either
Gavs or the other girls. I dared not cross my much bigger elder
brothers, especially Toti! In fact, all of us younger ones usually
tried to cover up for him and him alone, even at the expense
of being severely punished (and how!), for obvious attempts
to twist the truth. At one time the Pocholo unwisely tried to
explain the rapid depletion of Papa’s hidden store of Lucky
Strike cigarettes, by attempting to divert Papa’s investigation
away from the primary suspect Toti, towards the obviously
innocent Ngula! For I thought that a deafmute couldn’t possibly
defend herself.

Wrong! She shrieked and howled but somehow made Papa
understand that the “Lucky Strike” ringleader and smoker was
Toti, assisted by Regulo her own son, and Alberto! And by the
rest of the younger ones, once in a while. She even pointed out
where the corpus delicti butts were thrown from the swaying
guava tree, and now floating “Luckily” with the kangkong in
the ditch outside! At that point I wished I could hide in that
ditch, deep under the kangkong . . .
As cigarette butts made me relatively wiser in the ways of
minimizing future occasions of Papa’s intrusions upon my own
butt, the Jesuits never had any canonically justifiable chance
to lay their pastoral hands on me at the Ateneo de Manila.
However, several times during that short stint of mine at their
Grade School in 1941, I did not escape the ignominy of the
Father Headmaster suddenly appearing in class and sternly
calling out my name.
I would be pulled away from the classroom, usually in the
middle of academic combat with my rivals, to be forthwith
exiled to the library by Fr. Luis Pacquing himself, for reasons
publicly undisclosed. But I knew these were obvious to 99%
of my whispering classmates anyway. My 4th grade brother,
Tito, would always be there in the library, exiled ahead of me
but extremely worried and solicitous for his Nonoy sibling.
Our offense? We were again late in paying our monthly tuition
installment fees! Our perennial excuse, a recent typhoon’s
unscheduled shellacking of our rice-coconut-abaca harvests,
even if true, had been heard more than once too often.
“Class Struggle” in Different Ways
And so Papa was probably no longer credible to Fr. Pacquing,
though he always listened with a lot of Jesuit empathy if not
sympathy. But Jesuit rules were Jesuit rules. Dura lex, sed lex!
Ignoring these public embarrassments especially vis-à-vis my
rivals in class, I made good use of the extra study-time in the
library. While waiting there for the Bicol train to deliver our

delayed harvests’ proceeds so that I could be allowed to return
to the classroom, I learned more and faster by myself. I did
so in the absence of distraction caused by excessive classroom
competition. I didn’t have to repeat reading what I already
knew, just to let slowpokes catch up.
Looking back, the dread of embarrassment arising from
social-financial disadvantages must somehow have left some
of its chips on my childhood shoulders, such as my lifelong
insufferable impatience with the feeble-minded and slow on
the uptake. Nevertheless, Grade 1 at the Ateneo was all in all a
lot more of intellectual fun and excitement. While it lasted!
Early on, however, I sensed that one’s social-financial
standing were at times even more useful than guts or talent.
And I learned it well. Thus relatively soon I was the captain
of the “Blue Team,” but still not spared from one or two more
occasions of public embarrassment for subsequent late re-
mittances of my tuition fees. I even vainly thought that perhaps
Fr. Pacquing would make an exception for me if I became the
Grade 1 Emperor. For the year-end prize was already in sight!
Unfortunately, the real Emperor, the one from the Land of the
Rising Sun, shattered my scheme, vain and speculative as it
was. As I said, it was real fun while it lasted.
That Day of Infamy
December 8, 1941 in Manila was a class holiday at the
Ateneo. It was the Feast of Our Lady’s Immaculate Conception,
and thus a holy day of obligation to hear Mass on the part of
all Catholic school students. And so I still vividly remember
Papa’s shocking surprise arrival at home at 711 Vito Cruz
in Singalong at the singularly unexpected hour of around 8
o’clock that Monday morning. Eighteen time zones away to
the west of Greenwich, it was still 2 P.M. of December 7, Sunday
in Hawaii.
We had all presumed that Papa would be safely far away at
his PGH laboratory office. I happened to be in our sala near the

top of the stairs fiddling with a set of “jackstones” borrowed
from Scholastican neighbors, and playing with these on the
floor with Gavs and Nena. For a while I thought that Papa’s
incoherent shrieks were somehow caused by the jackstones. If
not for this early morning diversion by “stones” with Rosario,
Gavs and I should have already finished wiping off the staircase
barandillas’ weekend deposit of grime and dust.
Soon enough, however, we learned in successive shock
moments from Papa and the radio about the Japanese Emperor’s
cohorts’ treacherous and devastating bombing attacks against
Pearl Harbor some eight hours earlier. The Pacific War’s orgy
of death and destruction had begun on that early morning of
Sunday, December 7, 1941 in Hawaii.
Paradise Lost
Thereafter, life was never of the same placid and almost
predictable pattern that it was before. All schools were shut
down for the rest of the school year of 1941–1942. But school
or no school, Papa was adamant that we should continue with
our piano and academic exercises at home. And so my budding
poet-brother, Valdemar, Papa’s only child from his deceased
first wife, Margarita Roa, was our enthusiastic tutor in English.
Toti was our best resource for Physics, Latin, Arithmetic,
and Geography—unless he was again living in exile with his
favorite bachelor-uncle, U.P. ROTC cadet-officer and secret
guerilla member, Augusto “Tio Agot” Buenaventura, while
Papa’s wrath against Antonio’s latest shenanigans cooled
off. Our modest library was usually sufficient to offset Toti’s
unreliable tutorial availability, especially for History, Religion
and the classics. Our neighbors’ treasured books were also
available once in a while, especially if it were Manoy Demar
who did the borrowing.
Toti was the neighborhood “toughie,” but Manoy was
undoubtedly the peacemaker-poet at Vito Cruz. And Manoy
adored books as if they were made of gold and live beings

as well! When he died in December 1970, he left at least a
thousand of his favorite books, many of them dating back to
his early childhood.
The Tentacles of Jesuitry
I was free from direct Jesuit influence from 1942 until 1948.
The war had ended in September of 1945. We had evacuated
away from Manila in April of 1944 for the safer and healthier
environs of Bicolandia. But sometime in July of 1947, the
tentacles of Jesuitry reached us even in our far away and
virtually unknown town of Guinobatan.
Coming home from my Grade 5 class at the Guinobatan
Elementary School, I found Papa for the first and last time
in my life crying inconsolably like a child. There in our botica
or mini drugstore, he had draped his wailing head over the
escritorio, refusing all efforts of my stepmother to console him.
(In 1944 Papa had married a Nurse-graduate of La Consolacion
College in Manila, Olivia Garcia Palencia, for his third nuptial.
Like Margarita Roa and Mama, Ima Olivia was also a native
beauty of Guinobatan.)
The root causes of Papa’s acute lachrymosity in our botica
were Toti and the Jesuits! The prodigal son had not returned
home nor communicated with anyone in the family for more
than a year. Toti’s total disappearance was immediately after
he mysteriously failed, despite prior repeated promises and
solemn reassurances, to appear on the pre-designated day
and hour in May of 1946 at the Pier 7 passenger terminal in
Manila.
Papa, Manoy Demar, and a large delegation of admiring
friends, relatives and Jesuits vainly waited for Toti for hours!
Finally, the ship bound for the United States left with Manoy
but without Master Antonio B. Olaguer on board. The ship also
left behind, so to speak, Toti’s full-scholarship grant with free
room and board at the Jesuits’ prestigious Fordham University
in New York. The extremely generous and rare opportunity had

been awarded to him ex gratia et amore by the wealthy parents
of an American Jesuit high school teacher whom Toti had
charmed with his bellicose precocity in sports and academe.
And so after more than a year of total silence and absence,
an unexpected and explosive letter from Toti was delivered by
Tiong Jose, the Guinobatan cartero. Papa cried continuously in
our botica well into the night. But the long awaited explanation
for Toti’s “unexplainable” 15-month-long disappearance
wasn’t really in that surat. Toti was merely begging for Papa’s
forgiveness for his “unforgivable” offense with no explanations
whatsoever. The prodigal son had returned, not to Papa, but
to the Jesuits! Accordingly, he was now the greenest horned
Jesuit novice at the Sacred Heart Novitiate at Novaliches,
Rizal. I was able to read Toti’s surat furtively with a flashlight,
when eventually Papa went up to his bedroom to sleep. He had
forgotten to lock the escritorio when he put the letter aside.
Such was my amazement though about the potent powers of
Jesuitry when in a few months’ time, Toti’s subsequent letters
to Papa (back then, Jesuit novices were required to write home
frequently and regularly) had completely changed in tone
and substance. From the abject humility of the first one which
became soggy with Papa’s tears, the succeeding letters were
even more respectful, but full of self-assured advice for Papa
and for all of us! Toti the supposed black sheep was now freely
and confidently giving all sorts of practical and spiritual advice
to us and to Papa too! And obviously Papa happily approved of
it all, for he proudly handed over each of the subsequent letters
directly to me immediately after reading them. Undoubtedly,
it was given for me to digest and to learn from the recently
acquired wisdom of our very own, albeit putative, Jesuit in the
family!
Incidentally, up to then I thought I had become Papa’s
favorite son. Even if only by default! For I was the only one left
in Guinobatan in 1946 and 1947. But from then on however,
Papa would no longer use the formal name or refer to his ex-

prodigal son as “Antonio.” From then on it would be always
as “Toti”! Thus I knew that once more Toti was Papa’s true
favorite son. If he had come home then to Guinobatan to visit
us clothed in his white Jesuit soutana, I’m sure Papa would
have slaughtered our best cow, pigs and chickens too, to
celebrate the prodigal son’s return as extravagantly as in St.
Luke’s Gospel version of a similar return of a repentant son to
a grieving father.
Papa died in October 1957 when Toti had already left for the
United States for his theology and tertianship courses at the
Jesuits’ famous Woodstock College in Maryland. And so the
first time I was able to relate these lugubrious incidents in full
to my Jesuit brother was some 54 years later. It was in August
of 2001, near the eve of the August 15 feast of the Assumption
of Our Lady, the town-fiesta day of Guinobatan, after dinner
in a hotel in faraway Zamboanga City. There I disclosed my
revelation of Toti’s swiftly restored relationship with Papa in
the presence of his closest friends and “disciples” in the Marian
Movement of Priests. Toti had become this group’s National
Director in the Philippines, to the chagrin and consternation of
many of his Jesuit colleagues and erstwhile fellow-travelling
“modernists/activists”! But that’s a long and complicated twist
in the Olaguer siblings’ story.
When I finished telling, nay, re-enacting my stories of Papa
and Toti there in faraway Zamboanga, it was Toti’s turn to
cry. A bit . . . for the old irreverent, hardboiled, and bellicose
Bicolano Jesuit had belatedly become as lachrymose as a baby.
His leak-prone tear ducts, further complicated by unjesuitical
tender-heartedness, first began to be highly and surprisingly
noticeable in October of 1987 while on a pilgrimage to
Medjugorje, in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
“She cometh forth as the morning rising . . .”
I had promised Our Lady to visit her there in thanksgiving
for my Marian-inspired and permanent release as a political

jailbird of the Marcos regime. Toti was a reluctant last-minute,
nay, Providence-inspired recruit of mine for that Marian
pilgrimage.
As soon as we arrived at around 4 P.M. in the churchyard
of Medjugorje, all 27 of us Pinoy pilgrims were exclusively
privileged for almost one whole hour with the spectacle of a
revolving and plunging sun. It was exactly the way it had often
been described in Fatima in 1917. But everybody else outside
our exclusively Pinoy group all seemed to be unaware of the
prodigious celestial display.
Three days later on our way home, immediately after
celebrating Sunday Mass in Dubrovnik, Toti stunned all of us
into tearful silence for almost an hour. Twenty seven Pinoy
pilgrims, almost as tearful as Toti already was, were all ears
listening to him make a vivid public confession. It was a no-
holds-barred sharing of faith and grace about his latest and
most poignant encounter with the Hound of Heaven!
Through buckets of tears, sobs, and other sticky outpourings
into a box of tissues, he described why, how long, from where,
and how far away he had strayed. Now he was happily re-
united most intimately with the Lord through Mama Mary!
There at the foothills of Medjugorje, he was once again Christ’s
and His Papal Vicar’s loyal Catholic Jesuit priest, and His
Mother’s obedient son. Thereafter and up to the last remaining
14 years and days of Toti’s life, he radically re-directed all his
efforts and his main mission as a Jesuit and as a priest. His
single-minded mission, from then on, was to bring about the
same love-filled reunion with Jesus Christ through the Blessed
Virgin Mary and His Vicar on earth, Pope John Paul II, to all his
friends, relatives, and associates, including his fellow Jesuits—
if at all possible!
Soon after our return from Medjugorje, my former Ateneo
de Naga teacher in my 4th year Religion class, Fr. Lorenzo Ma.
Guerrero S.J., accosted me just before an extended liturgical
celebration of members of the Marian Movement of Priests.

Father Guerrero was its National Director then and Toti’s
“Superior” as the Rector of the La Ignaciana Jesuit community
where Toti had been “permanently” assigned after his
ordination and return to the Philippines.
“Ed, what did you do to your brother?” was all he could
whisper to me in awed surprise just before the Mass started. It
sounded and I reacted to the question as if I were being asked
how Attila The Hun had been converted by Pope Gregory the
Great.
“God’s grace, Father! God’s grace . . . ” was all I could mutter
while we embraced each other in thanksgiving. Soon after,
Toti approached us to repeat the same warm abrazos with us
both. Right then and there, I knew beyond any doubt that it
was really God’s grace that brought it all about through Mama
Mary’s intercession, because until then, the two Jesuits had not
been on speaking terms for several years.
All throughout the succeeding 14 years after his re-conversion,
Fr. Antonio B. Olaguer S.J. never again spoke in critical
terms about the Papacy’s supposedly rigid conservatism and
“medieval” traditional beliefs and practices, despite then Jesuit
Father General Arrupe and his avant garde Jesuit theologians’
public and frequent dissent against Humanae Vitae, priestly
celibacy, Our Lady’s perpetual virginity, and even the Real
Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, etc. In all his homilies
thereafter, he never failed to inject the role of the Blessed Virgin
Mary in the spiritual process of nurturing our gift of faith and
sense of justice, but firmly rooted in the Catholic Faith! His
unswerving approach to his various apostolates for the poor
and needy was straightforwardly Ad Jesum per Mariam, first and
foremost through LOVE and demonstrated by love-motivated
justice. Even I myself would blush sometimes when I listened
to his homilies . . .
My wife, Daisie, recalls that during one of Toti’s frequent
spiritual recollection sessions with his group of Marian-
inspired couples, widowed matrons, and other disciples, he

tearfully confessed that his main failure as a priest was his
lack of Christian love. Moreover, while I was still at it as usual,
participating in street demonstrations against then President
Joseph Estrada, he politely refused to join us because according
to him, there was really no Christian love motivating the
organizers of the protest movement.
In contrast some 30 years earlier, he was always a blunt
and fiery public and private speaker, in the Mass and outside
the Mass, even there in the Fort Bonifacio prison cell of Ninoy
Aquino, his intimate friend. Toti was always lambasting the
injustices of Marcos et al. In 1971 just before the martial law
period, Toti also lost his best friend since Grade School, the
former ambassador Jose “Pepe” Oledan. It was all because
during Pepe’s birthday, Toti outrageously confronted one of
the guests thusly: “Mrs. Marcos, is it true that you still have
all those expensive jewels that filled up a bandejado which Mrs.
Velayo showed you?” Pepe Oledan could have shot Toti dead,
pronto!
Except for one occasion though, Fr. Toti never disclosed to
me any theological disagreements he had with his erstwhile co-
modernists among his Jesuit colleagues. He almost reluctantly
recounted to me a rare conference with his fellow Rectors of
different Jesuit communities. After Fr. Guerrero got sick, he
had finally become a “Rector” there at La Ignaciana, the 200-
plus-year-old original Jesuit community in Manila. He was
very sad in telling me how they had met to discuss how they
could improve on their respective communities’ spirituality
and camaraderie as Jesuit brothers in Christ. Almost everybody
else had given scholarly diagnostic analyses of what was
wrong strictly on the secular, financial, or sociological plane.
When it was Toti’s turn to speak out, all he said plaintively
and with head bowed was: “How many of us are still praying the
Rosary?” There was silence for far too long until someone said:
“At least we should congratulate Toti for having asked such an
embarrassing question.” End of story.

Until he died, Antonio B. Olaguer S.J. remained the same
unconventional, irreverent, frequently teasing, and raucous
laughter-prone Toti I knew since childhood. In contrast, he was
always solemn whenever delivering his patented Ad Jesum Per
Mariam talks and homilies, and particularly if the topics were
his fellow Marian devotee, Pope John Paul II and His Holiness’
Apostolic Letter, Novo Millennio Ineunte, and its companion
book he wrote, Waiting for the Lord.
Unknown to all of us of course in August of 2001 in far away
Zamboanga, was the fact that my impromptu revelation then
to Toti and his Marian friends about that July 1947 surat of his
to Papa, together with his belated filial feelings for Papa and
its spiritual impact on him, would precede by barely 35 days,
Toti’s own irrevocable return to Papa. It was for their own
private father-and-son reunion!
On a Saturday, September 15, 2001, surviving siblings
Celine, Rosario, Gavs, and the erstwhile Pocholo with his
wife Daisie visited emphysema-stricken Toti at the Ateneo’s
Lucas Infirmary. Twice he whispered, in earthy Guinobatan
Bicol: “Cholo, ruri na ako! Tapos na su piga-guibo ko.” (“Cholo,
I’m exhausted! My work is over.”) And referring to the recent
four-day-old 9-11 catastrophe in New York City, he continued:
“If after that they still won’t listen to Mama Mary and the Lord,
there’s nothing more I can do.”
We were still able to attend the anticipated Mass for Sunday
that Saturday evening together with Toti himself. Fr. Clarke,
the Jesuit Provincial when Toti entered the novitiate in 1947,
was the celebrant. To our surprise and great joy, Fr. Clarke
clearly showed his Marian stripe, for his gospel-related homily
was all about the Blessed Virgin Mary in the old but orthodox
and filial terms. That day, September 15, was the feast of Our
Lady of Peñafrancia of Bicolandia.
The next day, September 16 at around noon, Toti Olaguer
bade his final farewell to this world and to his Marian friends
and relatives. He was homeward-bound to meet Our Father,

to be free at last with Christ his King, in the eternal embrace of
the Holy Spirit! Surely or eventually, he will be, if not already,
in the eternal love and presence of Papa and Mama, with the
Queen of Heaven herself. Hallelujah!
But we, his relatives, friends, and disciples, are still out here
in the cold, and in the dark . . .

Chapter 2
THE GIFT OF FAITH AND TRUE-BLUE NUNS
The first real nun came into my life at age four in June or
July of 1940. She was a German. Papa had enrolled me into
the Kindergarten class of the Benedictines of St. Scholastica’s
College along Pennsylvania Street (now Leon Guinto), some
500 meters or less from our Vito Cruz residence.
Pennsylvania Street began at its southern end side by side
with St. Scholastica’s campus, where it started perpendicular
to Vito Cruz just a few meters away from Taft Avenue. Across
Taft towards Manila Bay was the Christian Brothers’ De La
Salle College. De La Salle was to Ateneo, as Carthage was to
Rome. La Salle delenda est! Thus we Ateneans shouted during
Ateneo-La Salle basketball games before the war in 1941 at the
Rizal Memorial Coliseum near the corner of Vito Cruz and Taft
Avenue.
But it was the little kindergarten teacher, Mother Gracia
of the Order of St. Benedict, who must have been the most
revered and remembered physical and spiritual icon associated
with that Catholic school-belt section bordered by Vito Cruz,
Pennsylvania, and Taft Avenue. That is, if you were to ask
me and the hundreds of boys and girls and their siblings and
parents whose lives Mother Gracia had touched angelically
and forever within those seemingly ordinary “kindergarten”
surroundings. Incidentally, I still wonder why we addressed
each of our nun-teachers as “Mother,” before and during the
war. Thereafter, they became our “Sisters.”
At the age of four years, I learned, or to be more precise, I
started to be conscious of my growing belief and acceptance
of an Almighty and Eternal God who personally loved me

as “Pocholo” Olaguer. This gift of faith was nurtured at that
early age, principally because of Mother Gracia. It was done
simply through her daily kindergarten lessons in obeying,
believing, and understanding, through the medium of reciting,
reading, and writing down the basics of English, Arithmetic,
and Religion. As a 4-year-old, I understood most of what
she lovingly and patiently taught us. Whatever I could not
completely comprehend, I still believed because it was she
who said so. It never crossed my mind that she was capable of
lying or misleading me. For so I believed. And so somehow I
began to understand.
Soon, I believed and understood even more and more of
such a personal, infinitely loving and All-mighty God. Some 40
years later, so-called “modernists” including Catholic priests
would propagate a contrary and seemingly scholarly theory,
that complete knowledge or understanding must precede
any beliefs, even in matters of our Catholic Faith. If so, infant
baptism and early First Communion must be postponed until
one is knowledgeable enough to be in College! And further,
if so, faith is not a gift of God but a self-acquired intellectual
skill . . .
It was also Mother Gracia who led me to my childhood
devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mother, by first keeping
alive in my heart the hunger and yearning for the lost love
of my own dear departed but never explicitly remembered
Mama. Several times during my Kindergarten year, I clearly
remember that Mother Gracia would tearfully but proudly
point me out to other parents or other nuns during our recess
periods as “pobrecito hijo de Gloria Buenaventura, esposa del viudo
Lino Olaguer.” They must have all been dear friends of Mama
because almost always they would leave behind with Mother
Gracia some goodies or money for goodies such as Magnolia
chocolate milk and cookies, enough to last for many other
recess periods.
The Gift of Faith and True-Blue Nuns 33

Somehow I was instinctively uncomfortable, nay even
embarrassed, with being the object of pity and charity. So
much so, that I would hide my usual baon, pandesal with mar-
garine and sugar. That made me miss Mama even more, and
led to my loving acceptance of Mother Gracia and later to an
infinitely better surrogate mother and advocate, the Virgin-
Lady herself!
Subsequently, as a first grader at the Ateneo, there wasn’t
any warm relationship between the teacher and us pupils. I do
not even remember any religious activities associated with the
school, except for the Christmas Package Drive which had to
be abandoned after December 8. All my memories of Grade 1,
fond or not so fond, centered around our academic activities.
To this day I remember only one classmate’s name, Manuel
Recto, who was seated next to my middle aisle seat at my right
and thus as a lower-ranking lieutenant, on the first front row.
He was very thin and always had his pockets full of 5 and 10
centavo coins, which he kept transferring to and from his left
and right hands, perhaps to show off to me. Incidentally the
most I ever had was two centavos a day. Nevertheless, I was
his Captain in the class!
I also fondly remember a certain Victor Badillo, who was the
best friend and classmate of my elder brother Alberto “Tito”
in Grade 4. Victor was our Vito Cruz area neighbor and had
a black Oldsmobile sedan and personal chauffeur to bring him
to and from the Ateneo. After the war we referred to them as
tsuper, but now they are “drivers”! Very often, Victor gave Tito
and me a free ride, together with handfuls of santol, Victor’s
favorite fruit!
Victor later on became a full-fledged Jesuit scientist and the
Rector at the Manila Observatory at the Ateneo University
campus in Quezon City. During the 2002 wake of our mutual
friend and mentor, Fr. William L. Hayes S.J., Fr. Victor and I
recalled with much regret those innocent days of ours at the
old pre-war Vito Cruz and Ateneo. In May of 2005, Fr. Badillo

was awarded a great honor by the International Astronomers
Union (IAU), by registering an asteroid with his name—
Badillo!
From Germans to Belgians
The American Jesuit-run Ateneo was not allowed by the
Japanese to re-open its school doors in June of 1942. I ended up
in Grade 2 at St. Theresa’s College in San Marcelino, Manila. It
was nearer to our house in Vito Cruz than the Ateneo Grade
School at Intramuros, and directly accessible by street-car from
the Pennsylvania Station in front of St. Scholastica’s, all the
way two station stops later, down to the San Luis corner station
along San Marcelino. From there it was a mere 20 meters away
from the main doors of the Belgian Sisters’ school.
The girls vastly outnumbered us boys at St. Theresa’s. But
having already three assertive and extroverted sisters at home
at that time, the many older girls in school didn’t bother me
at all. In fact, Mother Felici, my Grade 2 class teacher made
me feel at home in her class immediately. She was the second
nun in my life. Like Benedictine Mother Gracia, Mother Felici
chiseled her way deeply into my boyhood psyche. She did so,
not only as my all-around academic teacher, but more so as
the Directress in charge of the 3-month-long preparation for
our December 11 First Confession and First Communion Mass
on December 13, 1942. She truly did a great job on us boys for
our first real encounter with Our Lord Jesus Christ! We really
all believed and behaved consistently with our belief and
understanding that Jesus Christ was “truly God and truly a
human person and was truly and entirely in the Sacred Host,
in His Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity”!
A few weeks later, quite a number of us, all boys and my
Grade 2 friends as well, were invited to become members of
the Benjamin Society. As “Benjamins” we were supposed to
be model students, and as devoted to Christ in the Blessed
Sacrament as Saint Tarcisius. Tarcisius was a saintly boy of

the early Christian period who sacrificed his life to defend the
Sacred Host from a sacrilegious mob. We “Benjamins” were
constantly and lovingly motivated by Mother Felici to be as
obedient to our parents, teachers, and God as the Biblical
Benjamin was to his brother Joseph, his father Jacob, and God
Himself.
The earliest close friendship I remember having developed
in school was with a fellow Benjamin at St. Theresa’s. His name
was Joseph Gutierrez. Our conversations were seldom if ever
about toys, jokes, games, or girls. Ours were mostly about the
books we had read. We had an ongoing exchange deal with
our respective home library treasures. In exchange for our
dog-eared Modern Times and the Living Past, the classic stories
of Roland, Beowulf, King Arthur, Lancelot, Siegfried, Ulysses,
Achilles, Grimm’s Fairy Tales and the like, I was able to borrow
and to read the Gutierrez library’s Story of a Soul of St. Therese,
Tom Playfair, Pinocchio, and many others.
Probably because of the war, friends like Joseph Gutierrez,
and teachers such as those Belgian nuns, I matured quickly at
St. Theresa’s. Manoy Demar even assigned me to make last
minute purchases at the Paco market, some 30 minutes by foot
from Vito Cruz, all by my lonesome.
Mother Felici continued to be my spiritual guide up to the
end of my 3rd grade. She also saw to it that I received a gold
medal for Excellence in Religion from the Archbishop of Manila
himself during the graduation rites of the Grade 6 students in
March of 1944. I treasured that first gold medal of mine. Some
25 years later in 1969, I gave it as a parting keepsake to my
former boss and General Manager at IBM Philippines, John
Hooks, for John was like a father to me.
The Japanese
By April of 1944, people in Manila were on the verge of
starving. The Japanese invaders were confiscating most of the
rice and food supplies coming from the provinces for their own

troops. Rumors were thick that liberation would come soon.
And so we the children decided by ourselves, while Papa was
still on his honeymoon in Guinobatan with his new wife, to
evacuate our Vito Cruz residence at once. Fortunately it was
still marginally possible for us little kids not to be trampled on
by the mob-like hordes of passengers engulfing the Paco and
Tutuban train stations day and night, fighting fiercely over the
far from adequate train seats.
Our 16-year-old Toti was somehow equal to the almost
impossible job of transporting 23 big pieces of luggage and
five children ranging in ages from 7-year-old Gavina, 8-year-
old Eduardo, 10-year-old Rosario, 12-year-old Celine, and 13-
year-old Alberto. We made it all the way to Guinobatan, and
through a continuing gauntlet of smelly and desperately angry
and hungry mob of passengers fighting over train space. With
all our food and water already consumed the night before,
or lost in the constant grappling and shoving punctuated by
sudden train stops during air-raid warnings, we could not
have survived 48 hours and more of such a long, desperate
journey—unless Providence intervened! For we even had to
disembark and transfer to another train around midnight,
carrying all our luggage while groping in the dark on foot,
atop railway-ties spanning wind-blown rivers and precipices
in the town of Pamplona in Camarines Sur. It must have been
our Mama Gloria who helped us safely through, we told
ourselves in whispers, when we all got home safe and sound
in Guinobatan some three days later.
Mama and Providence must have helped her Pocholo, yours
truly and particularly, especially at the start of the pell-mell
rush in the dark by the boarding passengers in Paco very early
that morning. Only Providence could have helped me to melt
the heart of a complete stranger who could have easily justified
killing me then and there. That stranger was ensconced at the
tail end of a train section filled with sacks of rice and other
personal effects. It was around 4 A.M. when the chaotic rush

to board the trains started at the Paco station. In desperation,
my brother Toti just lifted me into the half-opened windows of
a dark bagon, or freight car. We had lined up there very early
the previous evening thinking that early birds would get their
seats for sure. Not in April 1944 in Manila! In the dark, I landed
and scrambled through the legs of somebody who smelled
and grunted like a Japanese. A Japanese it was, and a military
officer at that! My heart sank at the sight of his white-gloved
hand about to pull out his sword.
The Japanese officer must have thought I was a big rat when
I slithered through the sacks of rice pyramided on the floor. I
was trembling with fright when he turned on a flashlight to find
a runt-looking intruder staring and violating the privacy of his
train accommodation. It was Mother Felici’s and later Mother
Florencia’s endless and intense Nippongo drills for the last two
school years at St. Theresa’s that helped save me from a quick
fatal sword thrust. For I made good use of my rudimentary
Japanese learned from those Belgian nuns to disarm and to
make a friend out of Major Tanaka. More so when I sang him
several Japanese patriotic songs. These were the songs required
to be taught in all schools!
An hour or two later, I introduced my ashen-faced brother
to the Major. Toti had finally located me, sipping green tea
and eating sushi! Toti’s much better oral Japanese skills
cemented our relationships with more tea and sushi. My
brother’s knowledge of Nippongo had already marked him for
an obligatory stint with the first batch of Filipino trainees to be
sent to Japan. Fortunately, the Allied forces intensified their
bombing attacks on Japanese war and transport ships. They
thus torpedoed Toti’s chances of being brainwashed in Tokyo.
But for that moment at least, the kind Japanese officer in that
rickety-old and overcrowded train to Bicol circa April 1944,
graciously consented that all of the four other Olaguer siblings
could be relocated on top of his sacks of rice. That is, as soon as
Toti would be able to extricate them from scattered locations

all over the train. And so we had green tea the whole day and
night, but at the cost of having to speak and sing in Japanese as
best we could. And may Major Tanaka be blessed and his soul
rest in peace, however or wherever he may now be.
Bucolic Bicolandia
It took no more than a day for me and my siblings to forget
the rigors and horrors of war amidst the bucolic greenery of
Guinobatan. The new set of students, friends, and Benedictine
nuns and teachers at St. Agnes Academy in Legazpi City made
life in the Bicol countryside even more exciting. St. Agnes
was a good 15 kilometers away from Guinobatan. As public
transportation had long been confiscated by the Japanese
authorities, we Olaguers had to study and live as internos and
internas at the Benedictine nuns’ dormitory facilities, minus
Demar and Toti who were in Manila.
A number of the nuns still remembered my mother who had
studied there throughout grade school and high school, prior
to transferring to St. Scholastica’s for her Bachelor’s degree in
Music and eventual marriage to Papa. And so a whole bevy of
surrogate mother-nuns descended on me and my siblings at
St. Agnes.
There was Mother Hedwig, who was our very strict and
compulsively neat dormitory prefect. Mother Xaveria was an
old German perfectionist and Mama’s earliest piano teacher.
She made me practice my musical scales and arpeggios often
and sometimes on a bare table! There I had to practice for hours,
without sound nor music! But unfortunately, I didn’t have the
motivation, much less, the skills to persevere beyond Kohler,
Czerny, Bertini, Velocity, and El Mejor Musica del Mundo! with
its El Choclo and Rondo Capricioso, my favorite pieces!
It was however Mother Irmburgh, my 4th grade head
teacher, who won my immediate filial devotion. She was also
the youngest, prettiest, kindest, and motherliest of them all!
Some forty years later in December of 1984, she visited me in

prison inside the military camp in Bicutan. She had read the
newspaper accounts of her “Eduardo” being convicted by a
military tribunal and sentenced to death by electrocution.
Those idyllic days at St. Agnes lasted only for a few months
in 1944. At around 10 in the morning of September 12, 1944
when everybody in school was happily celebrating the annual
“Sisters Day” for all the Benedictine nuns, several squadrons
of P-38 fighter planes came out of the blue. For the next thirty
minutes or so, the American pilots severely damaged the
Japanese military airfield a few hundred meters away from
our dormitory. Despite the obvious dangers, we were lustily
cheering every time a fighter pilot successfully strafed or
bombed the Japanese anti-aircraft gun emplacements in the
surrounding hills.
A week later we were all advised to go home. By the time it
was safe to return to St. Agnes, a whole year had passed. And
so it was in September of 1945, when World War II had already
ended on VJ Day in August, that I saw for myself that the old
St. Agnes I first knew was gone forever. Except for a small
wooden building, St. Agnes had been reduced to smithereens
by U.S. incendiary and high-explosive bombs brought on
by local guerilla “Intelligence.” Such “stupid intelligence”
had mistakenly reported that Japanese troops were hiding
all over the school premises. During the bombings, several
nuns including the German-born Superior herself, Mother
Clodisindis, died as martyrs for “intelligent” stupidity.
A few weeks later, Toti’s messenger from Manila informed
us that our 711 Vito Cruz house, which was south of the Pasig
River, had also been razed to the ground by retreating Japanese
soldiers being clobbered by American guns entrenched on the
northern banks of the Pasig. Fortunately for Toti who was left
all alone since Manoy Demar had already left for Guinobatan,
Tio Agot our favorite uncle and surrogate father, promoted to
Captain in the Fil-American liberation forces, quickly found
him among the desperate survivors from Vito Cruz.

The nuns had to re-start St. Agnes from bare scratch. Our
hastily improvised classrooms were also our sleeping quarters
at night. Every morning we boys washed ourselves at a fire
hydrant near the school. At night, we wandered around the
dark, abandoned rice fields to search for the safe nooks where
we could relieve ourselves.
I had to bid Sr. Irmburgh goodbye after I finished my war-
interrupted Grade 4 term in March of 1946. Papa wanted me
to finish my remaining two years of grade school right there in
Guinobatan. He planned to train me in taking care of our modest
farmlands, or mga daga. All the other boys in the family were
by then studying far away and had no inclination whatsoever
to be gentlemen farmers. I didn’t have the heart to tell Papa
that I was not enthusiastic about staying in Guinobatan longer
than necessary, for I had read too many books about too many
far more enchanting and challenging towns and cities, schools
and universities.
Fortunately for me, Papa relented in June of 1948 and
surrendered custody over my body and soul once more to the
Jesuits. This time, at the Ateneo de Naga.

Chapter 3
JESUITS OF A GENERATION GONE
Looking back to my formative years, I do believe with a

certain amount of objective confidence that my virtue, if any,
as a 12-year-old boy and high school freshman at the Ateneo de
Naga, was my consistent obedience to my parents, elders, and
teachers—especially to my best teachers, because I hungered
for “knowledge” ever since I thought I knew!
My obedience however, was not so much a virtue as it
was a result of my childhood upbringing. It was then for me
a matter of moral imperative and day-to-day necessity. For
example, had I refused to wake up on time for the 6:30 A.M.
family breakfast, to sit straight up, and to consume everything
on my plate to the last moo-moo, I would have had no sympathy
whatsoever from anybody in our family, and no breakfast to
boot, at the very least!
In the case of my brother Toti, such a necessity to obey was
often mitigated by a doting uncle. But I could never dare run
away from home to seek sympathy and shelter elsewhere. Even
Toti’s doting Tio Agot was a harder taskmaster and martinet
in other things where Papa was lenient, such as requiring his
children (Ging, Oyette, Ton, Tess, and Jun) to speak to him and
to Tia Betty in the 19th century Spanish of middle-class insulares.
Incidentally, Oyette and her husband Ariel Adiao had to flee to
the safety of Yel’s parent doctors in the Fiji Islands, just before
Col. Abadilla swooped down on their house in Quezon City.
Poor Yel and Oyette were also Light A Fire suspects . . .
“How green was my valley!”
My last two years in Guinobatan as the only son and eldest
child left at home was a finishing school for me in obedience

training, not just with Papa and my stepmother who treated
me like her real son until the day she died, but also with my
public school teachers, particularly Mr. Jose Vasquez and Mr.
Lucila. Mr. Vasquez was a veritable clone of Papa especially
in punctuality for finishing assignments and proficiency in
Language and Arithmetic. Mr. Lucila was our revered and
feared Scout Master.
Thus I grew up with the original Boy Scouts of America
standards of obedience, discipline, and a dozen other virtues
and skills for which our faded copy of Baden Powell’s fabled
Boy Scout Training Manual was exacted on us to the letter.
Public schools at that time were still almost as good as the
private Catholic schools, except that “Good Manners and Right
Conduct” were taught instead of our Catholic religion. Besides,
Papa’s disciplinary standards were even stricter and more
comprehensive than those of Baden Powell and my teachers.
And so at home and in school, I was thoroughly predisposed to
be obedient in maintaining respect for my elders, punctuality,
studying my lessons, doing house chores, and even taking care
of my baby half sisters when no yayas were available.
Manoy Demar was then at Notre Dame in South Bend,
Indiana; Toti was in a Jesuit novitiate; Tito had run away from
home in the summer of 1946 out of fear of Papa’s retribution
for having sold sub-rosa several sacks of rice for his pocket
money; and Nene, Nena, and Gavs were at St. Agnes in
Legazpi. Therefore the Pocholo was by necessity and custom
commissioned to be in charge of the lampaso with green banana
leaves to keep our wooden floors spick and span, and watering
the orchids and masiteras. Add to these the supervision of the
helpers and tenants during rice planting and harvest time, and
in the much more difficult and messy chore of sun-drying the
palay in the public plaza during summer time.
For me, summertime in Guinobatan with no classes to enjoy
was always like going back to the salt mines, starting as early
as 4 in the morning. After a month or so of palay drying, then
Jesuits of a Generation Gone 43

would follow its milling. In between, there were the copra
cakes and abaca bandala to be carted off from our bodega to
the Chinese comprador for sorting, grading, and weighing;
the accounting of previous emergency vales given to Papa;
assisting my stepmother in carrying her purchases from the
saran very early in the morning twice a week on market days;
accompanying Papa during his twice-a-month recorridas of the
farm properties in the steep mountains and endless valleys of
Guinobatan for two whole days on weekends; and going back
to St. Agnes every other Saturday for my piano lessons. Those
were my own Two years Before the Mast.
Even the most free-spirited among my elders, Tio Guimo
Buenaventura, contributed to my obedience training. In our
frequent chess games at the Guinobatan Municipio, I would
patiently have to endure his much prolonged and deliberate
style of play—especially whenever he was losing though much
fortified with Ginebra San Miguel! Incidentally, Tio Guimo’s
crowning achievement was undoubtedly his most patient
and caring nurse-wife Tia Sophie, and my now far-flung first
cousins Cielo, Acias, Susan, Jimmy, and Chit.
By the time I got to the Ateneo de Naga, obedience to Jesuit
rules and practices was a joy-ride. As our home in Guinobatan
was some 100 kilometers away, Papa decided I would be an
“intern” or dormitoriano at the Jesuit-run Students Dormitory
right next to the Jesuits’ residence. I was entrusted by Papa
once more to the Jesuits, but this time, body and soul complete,
with board and lodging to boot.
Heretofore I had been a shy little boy whom Papa
affectionately called “Nonoy,” little boy in Bicol. My Spanish-
loving maternal aunts and uncles preferred to use the Spanish
version; they called me “Pocholo.” When we returned to
Guinobatan in 1944, the whole town however had the last say.
I became known simply as “Cholo.”
A few years later, whenever I would come home to
Guinobatan, a self-identity crisis would recur. The Jesuits

in Naga had casually re-named me “Eddie.” And it stuck!
Gradually I became embarrassed whenever anybody called
me by my old nickname of Cholo. Eddie somehow sounded
more “modern” and Americanized. Therefore it seemed to
have more “class” and “respectability.” That was what my
colonial and impressionable kid’s mind led me to believe, for I
was even beginning to be embarrassed about my “small town”
roots in Guinobatan, Albay.
Boyhood Ecstasy
Indeed just a few minutes after Papa left me at the Ateneo
de Naga that day in July 1948 in the possession of giant-sized
but avuncular Fr. John Hennessey S.J., the Prefect of Boarders,
I was near to ecstasy. Due to a lack of communication brought
about by a typhoon a week earlier which delayed the opening of
classes, Papa had brought me to Naga a week too early. Urged
on by Fr. Francis D. Burns S.J., the Rector, and Papa himself
not willing to subject our second-hand and rickety 10-year-old
Pontiac sedan to another round-trip through a thousand more
potholes from Guinobatan to Naga and back, Papa decided to
leave the little boy with his baol and tejeras con mosquitero right
then and there!
Thus for almost a week, practically all the Jesuits of Naga
vied with one another to know and take good care of that
scrawny little boy from Guinobatan. Thanks to my entire
family’s love for books and newspapers, to Manoy Demar and
all my previous “Language” teachers, they found out that there
wasn’t any American English they used on me that I could not
fully understand or approximately guess. They were even more
pleasantly surprised that the grammar and pronunciation of
a runt from the boondocks were sufficiently at par with the
standard Ateneo Jesuit tongue. They certainly didn’t know
that out of necessity I had thoroughly learned Ateneo English
from Toti’s penchant for endless ridicule of any mistakes in the
speech of his younger siblings.

Thanks to my Tio Guimo, Tio Agot’s younger brother
Guillermo Buenaventura, who was my ahedrez-playing partner
in Guinobatan for the last 2 years, that very first night the Jesuits
discovered to their chagrin that I could beat all of them easily
in the Game of Kings. Including their best chess player, Fr.
Agustine Bello, and their next best one, Bro. Sergio Adriatico!
Everybody else feared “small-but-terrible” Fr. Bello, but not
me. He nurtured my chess skills until I became Ateneo de
Naga’s chess champion soon after, and also of the University
of the Philippines some six years later!
But above all, I was the brother of Toti, their recent Jesuit
recruit. Very soon, I could sense that I was considered worthy
to be “part of the Jesuit family.” During my entire 4 years
there, I was never called or even reminded, embarrassingly or
even gently, to pay my monthly tuition fee of P10 and board
and lodging cost of P30, despite Papa’s usual frequent delay in
remitting the money. On the other hand, my other classmates
would be gently but still embarrassingly sent home by Fr.
Burns to “remind your parents.” Wow, what a change from
my Grade 1 experience with Fr. Pacquing!
It was Fr. Hennessey who introduced me to Fr. Antonio
Camins, who knew Toti personally and who forthwith re-
baptized me as “Eddie.” Fr. Camins also elevated me to the
next level of boyhood ecstasy, there at the school’s Recreation
Hall, with its ping-pong and pool and basketballs for the
asking. In Guinobatan, I could barely touch, much less shoot
the basketball once every 10 minutes while trying to get to a
stray rebound ahead of ten other much bigger and stronger
guys with exactly the same idea. Until then, I had never yet
played the game as part of a team. And there was only one
single decent ping-pong table in our town. Furthermore, unless
you knew the Mayor, Tirso delos Reyes, the table’s owner and
best ping-pong player in town, you couldn’t play a decent
game. Nor had I seen any pool facilities till then.

For the very first time, I played to my heart’s content, real
honest-to-goodness ping-pong and pool and basketball for
more than three hours until lunchtime. Poor Tony Laurora, the
student-assistant in charge of the Recreation Hall and a fellow
boarder, endured humiliation at the hands of the Pocholo!
Tony was in the Honors Section of 3rd year, the classmate of
future Jesuits Joaquin Bernas and Walter Isaac and future
Bishop Benjamin Almoneda.
After a short siesta (hooray, it was NOT even obligatory!)
sleeping off the joys of having a basketball to shoot for hours
and the ping-pong tables to show off my skills, I found my
way to the library. Soon I was gasping with sheer excitement,
for I had found an old and long lost friend. I chanced upon
Tom Playfair, the hero of the book my Grade 2 friend Joseph
Gutierrez had introduced to me 5 years earlier at St. Theresa’s
in 1943. The complete Tom Playfair series of books by Francis
Finn S.J. was there for me!
I barely sat down for the next three or four hours until library
closing time. I remember speed-reading and finishing off once
again the first Tom Playfair book, and then its sequel His First
and Last Appearance, then Lad: A Dog, all the while standing
behind the bookcases. Out of sheer joy, I didn’t even bother to
register the books with the librarian to be able to sit down.
Facing the Music Like Men
During that first year at the Ateneo de Naga, my classmates
Mulry Mendez and Arlington Betts used to keep track of our
trio’s record of books borrowed courtesy of student librarians
Oscar Arcilla and Romeo Papica. Each of us averaged almost
one book a day! These ranged from Tom Playfair to the Rover
Boys, followed by Dick Prescott, then we jumped to Zane Grey,
Charles Dickens, Herman Melville, and other classics we knew
from reading comic books.
Not even my naughty consciousness of the female presence,
with pretty faces from nearby Sta. Isabel in Naga City, could

dampen my ever growing attachment to the rediscovered
jewels of Jesuitry. Even their punishments and penalties
were a breeze—at least to me. Our first year English teacher,
Scholastic (then not yet ordained but a future martyr-priest!)
Godofredo Alingal S.J., once caught me and my co-beadle
Mulry P. Mendez (now an RTC Judge in Iriga City in Bicol)
during his class reading something else. We covered up for
each other in hiding Zane Grey and Horatio Alger in between
our butts and notebooks. For that offense, Mulry and I had to
report the following Saturday morning to the Father Principal
and “POST” Master, martinet extraordinaire William L. Hayes S.J.
himself, together with scores of others with “post” penalties
to be served. All of us had to pay a price for having violated a
particular school rule, such as not having your Rosary beads
during the daily check up by Fr. Bello!
Twenty years later, Fr. Hayes and his sidekick Fr. Vincent
Towers alternated every Saturday to visit me and to celebrate
a morning Marian Mass for us in prison in the Bicutan military
camp. It was Fr. Towers who first gave me real social “status”
at the Ateneo de Naga by making the Pocholo the mascot of the
Varsity Basketball team in 1948! He also gave me his own special
and mostly dog-eared book, my first formal introduction to sex
education for Catholics . . .
Driving rain or scorching sun notwithstanding, ”post”
penalties were meted out by Fr. Hayes to us recalcitrant boys
in minimum tranches of 30 minutes and up to a maximum of
three hours of heavy physical exercise or manual labor. I had
a belated sense of guilt for not thanking Papa at all for those
endless hours it took for me and our household help to finish
the much heavier and messier work of drying ten to twenty
cavans of palay at any one time at the Guinobatan town plaza,
sometimes even everyday during the summer months starting
as early as 4 o’clock in the morning. Our Jesuit “post” work-out
began delightfully at 8:30 A.M. on a Saturday, thus I would have
more than enough sleep the night before. Fr. Hayes’ work-out

for my first and only “post” penalty ever was not any real kind
of work at all. And it lasted for only 30 minutes!
Saturdays at the Ateneo de Naga were glorious days
for me. I was free as a bird to enjoy chess, ping-pong, pool
and basketball for all the daylight and early evening hours.
Thereafter, I could read myself to sleep for as long as the lights
were on. Hallelujah!
High School Ratio Studiorum
Later on, Fr. Alingal and my subsequent English and Latin
teachers, his co-Jesuit scholastics Expedito Ma. Jimenez S.J.,
Joseph P. del Tufo S.J., Gerald O’ Rourke S.J. and Vincent
Towers S.J., found other and better ways of re-channeling my
insatiable appetite for reading. They themselves chose books
for me! What they picked were not just for the pleasure of
reading, but for intellectual and spiritual development, books
that were already for adults such as the Imitation of Christ,
treatises by the early Church Fathers, Charles Dickens’ thick
novels, advanced Latin textbooks on Cicero and Virgil, O.
Henry, Fr. Brown and G.K. Chesterton, Hillaire Belloc, Victor
Hugo, St. Augustine, Avery Dulles S.J., and of course, William
Shakespeare. They included Time and Newsweek magazines
and the daily newspapers as well!
I was the frequent choice as altar boy for the earliest Mass
everyday, courtesy of Fr. Agustin Sagrado S.J. who replaced Fr.
Hennessey as Prefect of Boarders. It was simply because it took
him only a few seconds of whispering outside my mosquitero
(Jesuit Scholastics were then absolutely prohibited to touch
us boys—even innocently!) to wake me up for the 4:15 A.M.
daily Mass scheduled at their private miniature St. Joseph’s
or St. John Berchman’s chapels at the Jesuits’ Residence. After
the Mass, I had the privilege of having all to myself, all those
airplane-delivered-from-Manila newspapers and Time and
Newsweek magazines. They were immediately available “only
to altar boys” there at the Jesuit Fathers Recreation Hall, until

breakfast would be served at 7 A.M. Everybody else among the
800 or more other students could read them only after a couple
of weeks later at the students’ library.
“Father” Expedito Maria Jimenez was my first real Jesuit
buddy-buddy. He saw to it that I was also allowed to bring
his recommended reading material and any number of my
own choice of library books home to Guinobatan during the
summer vacations. Early on I was fascinated by the wonders
of history and literature, PLUS the intricacies of faith and reason
behind the great and often debated issues on Grace and Free
Will; God’s perfect foreknowledge of the future; His absolute
respect for our Free Will mitigated by His Infinite Mercy but
with Perfect Justice; Hell and predestination; the Trinitarian
God; and the Blessed Virgin Mother of the true God but true
man as well!
But, being buddy-buddy to Expedito Jimenez required an
oath upon my honor that I would strictly observe the school’s
most difficult and most violated rule: speaking English ALL THE
TIME! Even if I was already inside my mosquitero ready to sleep.
Also, I had to behave in his 2nd year English class as if I were in
front of God—and be his assistant in the daily assignment of
timekeepers and referees and the scheduling of the high school
intramural basketball games. He even kept track of my practice
hours at the keyboard when I was still going to the nearby Sta.
Isabel College to continue my piano studies.
In fact, one of the music pieces I still remember how to play
to this very day was his favorite kundiman, Lawiswis Kawayan.
He laboriously and personally copied the music by hand
(no xerox machines at that time!) for me to learn. Some 17
years later, his younger brother Otto Jimenez would be just
as much of a perfectionist as our IBM Philippines instructor
in computer-based technology. Fortunately or unfortunately,
my buddy-buddy was transferred away from Naga after my
second year. Some 30 years later, ex-Jesuit Expedito Jimenez
and his younger sibling and Jesuit priest, Renato, would visit

their younger brother Otto in prison. Poor Otto had been
criminally charged for arson and rebellion together with the
“mastermind” Ed Olaguer, the erstwhile Pocholo.
Pader Reyooter
ENTER: James B. Reuter S.J.! He arrived in Naga in August
of 1948, rejuvenated and ordained as a priest, back from the
United States. He had survived the cruel World War ordeal
of starving for three years in Japanese concentration camps.
By Divine Providence, I suppose, he was the first one of two
eminent Jesuits who thoroughly influenced me on militancy
and advocacy, and thus unknowingly sent the erstwhile
Pocholo on the way to 22 days and six years of prison life
under the Marcos dictatorship. Coincidentally, Reuter was also
Otto Jimenez’ professor in English Literature at the Ateneo de
Manila College when Fr. Jim was transferred away from Naga
in 1952.
Reuter was not going to be my classroom teacher until my
4 year in high school, and for our English class only. But
th
the moment he interrupted Fr. Alingal’s lecture that day in

1948 to introduce himself as “ROYTER” and not “REYOOTER,” I
was awestruck with admiration. From then on, it was Fr. Jim
most of all who helped me realize that being “Catholic” was
consistent with being tough and manly even on the basketball
courts. That religious piety was for real “stouthearted men”
and not merely for old men or tender-hearted women only.
That the pursuit of knowledge was not merely an end in itself,
which according to Joaquin Bernas S.J. 56 years later, if at all,
“can lead to an appreciation of mystery.”
On the contrary, Fr. Reuter and all my other Jesuit mentors
some 56 years ago stressed both in and out of the classroom
that knowledge and appreciation of such divine “mysteries”
are Catholic Christian education’s very subject, object, and
means of “educating” through prayer and the Sacraments. And
that its IMMEDIATE and ULTIMATE purpose was that of continually

knowing, loving, and serving Christ and our neighbors in
Christ, and through Christ, and permanent union in bliss with
Him in the hereafter. In short, Primum Regnum Dei! It was also
Ateneo de Naga’s battle cry in our school songs and in our
public oratory.
Some 4 years later, the second Jesuit who sent me to prison,
Fr. John Patrick Delaney, would drive that home with deeper
and wider social implications, not just in me but in my fellow
UP Students Catholic Action confreres such as Gasti Ortigas
and Noel Soriano. All these, as part of and in conjunction with
daily participation and living IN THE HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.
Most of us at the old Ateneo de Naga, with its four majestic
Corinthian Pillars gracing the main entrance, probably signifying
the four Jesuit vows of poverty, chastity, obedience and loyalty
to the Pope, gradually realized that the Roman Catholic Faith
had a logical and intellectual basis. It was sufficient and good
enough even for villains and convicts at the point of death,
like “Dutch” Shultz in Chicago (Reuter’s favorite example)
and national hero Jose Rizal himself, and more so for stellar
intellectuals such as Henry Cardinal Newman, Hillaire Belloc,
and especially Gilbert Keith Chesterton. Most of all, to be
Catholic or to be a Jesuit was to be a happy person, with a deep
and heartfelt personal relationship with Christ and His Blessed
Mother, whether in praying, singing, playing, studying, and
working.
Heaven knows my happiest days ever were those I spent as
a student-boarder at the Ateneo de Naga, though frequently
stumbling while learning and practicing Primum Regnum Dei
and Ad Jesus per Mariam. To this day, our high school class of
1952 led by our patriarchal organizers Alex Guevarra, Jess Sto.
Domingo, and Greg Buenagua have still been regularly meeting
for Mass and Communion at the EDSA Shrine, ending with an
extended lunch period, every First Saturday of the month in
honor of Our Lady for the last 17 years since 1987.

During my happy four years in Naga, I would often start my
day at 4:15 A.M. as sacristan for Fr. Reuter’s private Mass (just
the two of us!) usually at the miniature St. Joseph’s Chapel a
few doors away from his cubicle-room. High school Glee Club
practice with him would follow after morning classes were
over, from 11:00 A.M. until lunchtime. For yet another hour or
so in the afternoon, he would be our basketball coach practicing
for our Night League team, the Hawks, or rehearsing for his
unending series of dramatic plays to be played over Vero
Perfecto’s DZRB radio, or staged in school and in the major
towns of Bicol on Sundays and long holidays. Sometimes, he
would even call for me after “supper” for another couple of
hours up to 11 P.M. to play the piano—but single note by single
note only, while teaching a new song to the College Glee Club.
Add sacramental confessions weekly, or whenever a pretty face
from Sta. Isabel would have induced naughty thoughts from a
Pocholo’s febrile imagination. Thus when our Glee Club sang
Sigmund Romberg’s “One Alone” or Cole Porter’s “Night and
Day,” I sang as First or Second Tenor with real deep emotion!
I was at the edge of violent rebellion during my senior year,
when almost at the last minute, Simon Legree a.k.a. Reyooter
discharged the mestizo and almost beautiful David Wakefield
(brother of Naga’s beauty Bessie Wakefield and Honors
classmate of future Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Francis
Garchitorena) from the lead female role in Cyrano de Bergerac.
Girls from outside were then prohibited from joining us in our
school’s annual plays, but not when we were performing in
public town plazas! And so poor, dark, scrawny, but heavily
wigged and powdered yet almost ugly Ed Olaguer had to be
Cyrano’s Roxanne with just some ten days of day and night
rehearsals before the first public presentation. I would have
stabbed Reyooter in the dark behind the stage during the
frequent and frenetic costume changes if I were not afraid of
Hollywood actor Stephen McNally’s sibling, Father Principal
Vincent McNally, and his expectedly sure and swift retribution.

If any of his predecessors, my friends Fr. Paul V. Hugendobler
or Fr. William L. Hayes, were still the high school principal, I
could have gone to prison some 27 years earlier!
A Question of Justice
A couple of months later, almost our entire graduating class
was decimated by a “strike.” According to what we learned
through Fr. Gerald O’Rourke S.J. from the papal encyclicals
Rerum Novarum and Quadragesimo Anno at the start of our
senior year, a strike for legitimate reasons was a human and
natural right of aggrieved people, especially workers. And
thus of students too!
Unwilling to accept an arbitrary decision of Fr. McNally
to penalize all of us seniors for the frequent and noticeable
violation of the rule of “Absolute Silence” by a few of us during
our annual 3-day Ignatian Retreat, a few daring friends and
classmates of ours led by the crony group (to this very day!) of
Alex Guevarra, Antonio Gerona, Carlos del Castillo, and Tony
Factora, begged off from attending the extra Saturday class
as penalty. Being influential among their peers, practically
everybody else, except the boarders like me, spontaneously
joined them. A few claimed, as their defense, that they were
intimidated into going home.
As a result of Fr. Reuter’s adamant intercession, only a few of
the impenitent ringleaders were expelled from the school. The
rest were given severe “POST” penalties and “JUG” assignments
while exiled to the library for a couple of weeks doing repeated
and kilometric written work. In addition, poor Alex Guevarra
and Tony Gerona were demoted from being top dog PMT
Regimental and Company Commanders, respectively, to the
lowliest buck privates. Carlos “Lut” del Castillo was expelled
but later re-admitted to College. Incidentally, he became Naga
City’s Mayor some 30 years later, while his crony Tony Gerona
became a consistently rated “Outstanding Judge” of the Naga
City Regional Trial Court. Niongan Factora inveigled his way,

as usual—probably with the help of elder brother Jess and their
crony Ben Lorenzo, into a mere slap-on-the-wrist hibernating
in the library.
Fortunately or unfortunately, I was completely unaware
of it all during the day of the strike, being sick and resting
at the dormitory. It was a seemingly adequate alibi for non-
involvement! Otherwise, I would also have been expelled, for
my friends and classmates were fighting for justice, as we had
been recently taught.
By hindsight however, I had failed to come to the defense of
my friends and classmates and to “do justice” to their legitimate
grievance against the arbitrary punishment of all—for the sins
of a few and unidentified “sinners,” without due process. And
worse, with excessive penalties! My sin of omission in failing
to help in doing justice would be repeated many times in the
future by me, by Ateneo alumni, and by our citizenry.
Belatedly, Fr. Reuter and I tried to do some “justice,” at least
for poor Alex Guevarra. While editing, extensively as I still
recall, my valedictory speech for our April 5, 1952 graduation,
we inserted a paragraph as recognition and in tribute to the
humility, unselfishness, and continuing generosity of Alex to
the school and his classmates even after the gross injustice and
humiliation he suffered. For the rest of my Class ’52 friends
whom I failed to help in their hour of need, these memoirs will
be late and still insufficient tribute, albeit contritely offered.
Ignatian Jesuit Spirituality
Nevertheless, the standards of St. Ignatius of Loyola’s famous
“Prayer for Generosity” was being applied on us by our Jesuit
mentors, even if not perfectly or consistently. Indeed, they led
and motivated us “to give and not to count the cost, to fight
and not to heed the wounds, to toil and not to seek for rest, to
labor and not to ask for any reward.”
Fr. Lorenzo Ma. Guerrero S.J. particularly was there to
remind us constantly in our Sodality of Mary meetings that

all these were not for any self-centered motive of being more
knowledgeable and better than others, or for merely secular
or even patriotic ends to do “justice.” The real motive, as so
succinctly and all encompassingly put by St. Ignatius’ Prayer,
was in order “to love Thee and to serve Thee as Thou deservest,”
and the reward of “knowing that I am doing Thy Will”! It
is a far, far cry from Joaquin Bernas’ expensively advertised
“service of the Lord and of the universe” some half-century
later . . .
We repeated St. Ignatius’ prayer every day from Monday to
Friday at the beginning of the last period in the morning. It was
reinforced at the beginning of the last period in the afternoon
by the “Consecration to the Sacred Heart” which ends thus:
Take every faculty of my soul and of my body! Only
draw me day by day, Lord, nearer and nearer to Thy
Sacred Heart. And there, as I can bear the lesson, teach
me Thy Blessed Ways.
In short, this was Primum Regnum Dei! Similarly and in

addition, at the start of the first period in the morning, we recited
the Morning Offering of “all our works, joys and sufferings
through the Immaculate Heart of Mary to the Sacred Heart of
Jesus” for the intentions of the various members of Christ’s
Mystical Body and of the Holy Father the Pope. Likewise, at
the start of the afternoon’s first period, we recited St. Bernard’s
800-year-old Consecration to Our Lady and at the end of the
day, the Memorare. Both of these prayers to Our Lady are even
now being used before every Mass or every Wednesday in
many Quezon City parishes surrounding the Ateneo, including
my former parish at La Vista’s Santa Maria della Strada.
Revisionism
Ironically, our generation of alumni from these old Jesuit
institutions have been accused of not having been educated in
the promotion of justice. The accusers are Jesuits themselves,
starting from their late Father General Pedro Arrupe and his

disciples such as Joaquin Bernas, Ateneo de Manila’s pre-
eminent secular guru today, in its newspaper advertisement
on December 10, 2004.
Bernas as a boy knew and recited those same prayers as we
all did, and was witness to its striving and living by himself,
too, and many of his classmates in their famous (in Naga)
“golden class” of 1950, and by Jesuits like Reuter we knew
and obeyed during our four years in high school at the Ateneo
de Naga. We had gone through the same school curriculum,
the same ratio studiorum. That was how and why he became a
Jesuit! And so he ought to have known, or at least know now,
that such Christian love and generosity taught by St. Ignatius
and Jesuits loyal to him up to now, go much beyond the mere
call of simple or even social, economic, and political justice. For
true Christian love is by God’s grace, super-justice!
It is not that our Jesuit mentors of old collectively failed to
educate us properly on justice, though certainly some of them
did fail as individuals. But ultimately and truly, it is we who
failed to learn enough, or conveniently forgot what we learned
from them in the face of the world, the flesh, S.A. Tan, and our
own excessively egoistic pride.
Or worse, we betrayed them including St. Ignatius of
Loyola, St. Thomas More, and others. In fact, Jesuit Saints
Francis Xavier, Robert Bellarmine, the Mexican Fr. Miguel Pro,
and St. Vincent Ferrer were all our revered icons. Their lives
and works of love and justice were authentic exegesis of Sacred
Scriptures, enduring examples of Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam and
Lux in Domino, and what “preferential option for the poor” and
“being Christ-like priests” truly mean.
Sad to say, it is currently fashionable for modernist priests
today to write about and to exhort the public to “do justice,” to
be “men and women for others,” to be “like (atheist) Michael
Harrington, to challenge and change the system which
oppresses them.” All these rhetorics are bandied around as if
strictly human logic and intellectual skills versus “the world,

the flesh, and the devil” are sufficient to restore justice to society
without resorting to God’s gifts of grace and wisdom through
prayer, Sacred Scriptures, and the Sacraments. For if so,
then there was no need for Christ’s supreme self-sacrifice on
Calvary, and Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam including Lux in Domino
are mere sloganeering piosities.

Chapter 4
OUR HIGH SCHOOL CLASS OF 1952
Some 53 years ago on a Saturday in April, which surely

nobody else remembers except some three-score survivors
among us graduates, all we really thought of then was the
intimidating unknown but surely exciting life ahead.
But one of us was not on stage to receive the usual hand-
claps and congratulations so important to parents, relatives
and friends. For after four years of scrimping and hoping
that their son, or nephew, or brother would be able to get
his Ateneo diploma as their passport to a better future, they
were there to congratulate themselves as well. They were also
surely intimidated by thoughts of the heavier financial loads
forthcoming from their sons’ college education.
The parents of Pabling Maravilla of the Honors Section
decided not to attend the ceremonies, as they could not afford
to gift their son with even the cheapest tailor-fitted white
Americana suit.
Poor Pabling spent a week scouring the whole of Naga and
nearby towns to look for a suit to rent or to borrow for free.
The very few that he found were either of a bizarre color, or
impossibly too tight, or incongruously three-sizes too large for
him, for Pabling’s physical size and contours were unusually
extraordinary. Yet he was willing to go on stage for as long as
he had a reasonably fit white Americana, even if he wore his
own pants of a different color and his two-year-old Marcelo
rubber shoes. Besides, he could always stay at the farthest back
row on stage, and later exchange shoes and/or pants somehow
with some one in front, and thus be in time and in fashion to go
front and center for his diploma and public applause. But there
Our High School Class of 1952 59

was simply no spare available and suitable white Americana to
be found!
And so from the farthest row of the audience, there in the
shadows, Pabling watched and listened to the guest speaker,
William L. Hayes S.J., and to all of our graduation proceedings,
with moist eyes and a lumpy throat. Defiantly, out there in the
dark, he vowed that none of his future children would ever
suffer a similar humiliation.
Almost exactly fifty years later, I was privileged to be one
of the ninongs sponsoring the wedding of the prettiest girl
sired by any father among all of us co-graduates of 1952. Miss
Mignon Maravilla was the stunning-looking bride of Carlos
Rivilla III of Bacolod City. The two lovebirds were classmates
who had just graduated from the Ateneo de Manila College of
Law. In that evening wedding, Attorney Pablo B. Maravilla,
with his radiant wife Hilda—a look-alike of the bride, was
clothed in the most expensive tailored suit for all to admire,
beaming and smoking Camels with undisguised pride and
pleasure. There at the Sanctuario de San Antonio at Forbes
Park in Makati City, the ritziest and most expensive enclave in
the Philippines, Atty. Maravilla most eloquently extolled the
virtues of Mignon, with the verve and polish of an outstanding
graduation guest speaker. Pabling’s perennial critic since high
school days, Niongan Factora, had he been there, would have
been overwhelmed. And even Fr. Reuter would have been
impressed, somewhat.
Isaac de Leon Jr., the favorite son of a most doting widow of
a World War II soldier-hero, could certainly afford and in fact
had the most elegant white sharkskin suit made by the best
tailor in Naga, as early as a month before graduation. I knew
because his bed in the Ateneo dormitory was next to mine. But
Jun de Leon, our best basketball player and “Most Valuable”
member of our champion varsity team, almost did not wear his
sharkskin suit on that memorable evening. A couple of days
earlier, he discovered that his name had been inexplicably

omitted in the “Graduation Programme.” Quickly however,
his basketball coach, who else but James B. Reuter S.J., teamed
up with Father Rector Eusebio Salvador S.J. and jack-of-all-
trades Brother Sergio Adriatico S.J., to have Jun’s full name
and honor citations somehow but still elegantly included at the
very last minute in a new set of program invitations. Until he
died of emphysema in November of 2003, Jun de Leon would
have willingly given up his life, anytime, for good old Pader
Reyooter!
A particular classmate of ours had one of the lowest, if not
the lowest profile, and humblest behavior among us all. Yet
he was a consistent member of the Honors Section. It was he
alone who honored us and our school best of all, by becoming
the only ordained Catholic priest from our graduating class.
He is now well-known in the Bicol Region and briefly, at the
Greenmeadows parish of Christ the King in Quezon City, as
Monsignor Pedro Espedido.
For the last 18 years since 1987, starting at the chapel of the
Development Bank of the Philippines with the late Fr. Lorenzo
Ma. Guerrero S.J. as our first chaplain, and now regularly at
the historic Mary, Queen of Peace Shrine (EDSA Shrine) in
Quezon City, the survivors of our class living in Metro Manila
have been attending a monthly mini-reunion with Our Lord
and Our Lady. Led almost always by Alex Guevarra, Jess
Sto. Domingo, and Greg Buenagua, we do this every First
Saturday of the month, almost without fail. After the Mass and
Confessions, the lunch that follows ends at 3 P.M. at the earliest.
We do not seem to tire of our endless reminiscences on our
old times together over the last 57 years since our high school
freshman days.
Recently, however, most of our conversations are
lamentations over the sad state of our nation. Sometimes we
end up with optimism when planning for and dreaming about
our grand 75th Anniversary Reunion. Somewhere out there, we
surely expect Jun de Leon, Arlington Betts, Fernando Achaval,

Ciriaco Divinagracia, Ramon Jimenez, Demetrio Perez, Melito
Rebusi, Felicisimo Serrano, Quintin Federis, Robert Deauna,
and our other deceased classmates to be in attendance, in
aeterno. We have already secured the commitment of the Pader
Reyooter to be our main guest speaker again, together with
Godofredo Alingal, William L. Hayes, Vincent Towers, Sergio
Adriatico, Francis D. Burns, Eusebio Salvador, Agustin Sagrado,
Agustine Bello, Lorenzo Maria Guerrero, Ambrose MacManus,
John Hennessey, Gerald O’ Rourke, Antonio Martinez, Paul V.
Hugendobler, Joseph P. del Tufo, and Expedito Ma. Jimenez,
the brother of Otto Jimenez.
A specific item in our reunion agenda for the year 2027 is the
liquidation of old unpaid debts, to the last iota or centavo. We
are all gravely though somewhat mischievously aware that a
perfect accounting of all of our financial and moral debits and
credits will have been recorded at that time for all to see and
settle.
And so Perfecto “Perfing” Palacio, the son of a judge of the
old school of integrity, and still the most physically fit among
us due to his not having sired any child with his ever hopeful
wife May Rodriguez Palacio, looks forward to a huge payment
with interest from retired Judge Antonio Gerona and the late
Eduardo Sto. Domingo. Incidentally, it was Perfing who almost
balked in his assigned task of returning all my old Ateneo de
Naga medals to the incumbent President, Joel Tabora S.J. Until
I threatened to throw them all away into the Bicol River . . .
But in 1948, Perfing, then a recent migrant from his native
Lucena City in Quezon province, had no friends yet as a
freshman. He was about to make his first bite on a big delicious
siopao during recess time when along came tall and burly Ed
Sto. Domingo who stared menacingly at him and his siopao.
Poor intimidated Perfing handed over his merienda. Nearby
was Ed’s sidekick, the young Tony Gerona, who was munching
on butong pakwan, a poor boy’s hunger-stopper but ruinous to
one’s teeth. Ed knew that Tony had never tasted a siopao ever.

Our Robin Hood thus handed over the loot to his friend who
forthwith consumed everything, and in his hurry, Tony Gerona
ingested the thick paper moulding of his first siopao!
Incidentally, Tony Gerona is the proud father of his eldest
daughter, Atty. Maria Leonor G. Robredo, the equally proud
wife of Year 2000 Ramon Magsaysay Asian Awardee for Public
Service, Naga City’s thrice Outstanding Mayor, Jessie M.
Robredo! I was ninong, though in absentia and by proxy, when
they were married in June 1988 at the same time my eldest
son Jay was getting married in Boston to Christina Fortin of
Maine.
Mulry Mendez ought NOT to have graduated with us at
all, or become the Regional Trial Court judge at Iriga City in
Camarines Sur, on the strength of his Ateneo diploma. He
should have been expelled like Lut del Castillo for having
joined the Lut-led campus “strike” or more precisely, rebellion
against the Jesuits. According to Mulry, he merely “overslept”
beyond the stipulated deadline to return to our classrooms. By
stealth and his legendary IQ, Mulry managed with the help
of future U.S. Surgeon and Iriga City town mate Cosme Uy
Barreta to sneak back in unnoticed. Surely Judge Mendez
and Dr. Cosme Barreta will have quite a few “debits” to settle
during our next grand reunion, even without considering that
like Salem in Massachusetts, Iriga City in Camarines Sur is
notorious for its many covens of aswangs.
Antonio “Niongan” Factora is our incorrigibly perfumed
ladies’ man. He dreads and avoids any discussion or thought
of our reunion in aeterno because among many other fears,
Niongan knows that his crony and usual partner-in-crime, ex-
Mayor of Naga City Carlos “Lut” del Castillo and he will have
to face up to Agustine Bello and Expedito Ma. Jimenez for the
many times they grossly exaggerated the number of stray dogs
Fr. Bello fatally shot while the animals were scrounging in
the garbage dumps of the low-lying school campus still being
filled-in. Even more shamelessly embellished were their many

re-enactments of the celebrated Jimenez vs. Bello basketbrawl
incident.
The least afraid of eternity among us are Antonio Borja, Mike
Bichara, Crispin Cabanos, Romeo Lirio, Romeo Nacion, Romeo
Rigoroso, Mauro Victa, Florencio Rafael and Fred Estrada.
Tony B., Mike, Crispin, and the three Romeos (surprisingly!)
Mau, Flor and Fred, are by nature kind and pious gentlemen
fathers.
On the other hand, there are those with their saintly life-
long partners surely available to pray for them! Such as Tony
Macandog who has the former Eden Castro, sister of Class ’51
international business magnate Mariano “Mano” Castro, as a
living martyr-saint and wife; and Jose “Peping” Ayo, the only
one among us who has an ordained Catholic priest for a son.
They are both still thrice more cocky and impetuous as Simon
Peter was, before the cock crowed once! Godofredo “Godo”
dela Rosa wants to have a priest in his family, any priest, even as
a secret son-in-law, and thus Godo is a different case altogether.
And Pros Rivera, now an American citizen, is banking on my
old teacher-friend in Baguio, his sainted mother Emily, as his
soul saver. For his own eternal Brownie Points, Pros banks on
his brief combat experience in Vietnam. For Noel and Bing
Bolinas, however, not only do they have their dear departed
mother and father, they also have as supernatural Bondsman,
their own elder brother, the late Fr. Andres Bolinas Jr. S.J. for
their eternal insurance.
Levity aside, Fr. Reuter is definitely our most sympathetic
redeemer, mediator, and advocate, here, and surely later in
the hereafter. Here are excerpts of what he wrote as his super-
generous comments on our class reunion for his Philippine Star
Saturday column, ”At 3 A.M.” on May 4 of 2002:
FRIENDS
The High School class of 1952, at the Ateneo de Naga,
celebrated its golden jubilee on April 19 and 20. Out of

124 graduates, about 35 have gone home to God. Of the
remaining 89, many are abroad, struggling to earn money
for their families, in the United States. But 42 members
of that class gathered together, hugging each other,
laughing, singing, remembering those beautiful days in
high school.
Listening to them singing in rich harmony, with their
arms around one another’s shoulder, and their heads
together, I noted that the songs had grown more beautiful
with the years. It was a joyous evening. And the glory of
it was a very simple thing—friendship.
Those boys have stayed close to each other through
the long years—through the lights and shadows, the
mountains and valleys, the laughter and tears. The Ateneo
de Naga, from 1948 to 1952, was all boys. Almost all of them
had brought their wives to this jubilee celebrations, but
the women were quiet. All the anecdotes, the adventures,
the bursts of laughter, came from men. They went back to
the days when they were 12 to 16 years old.
All of the boys were wearing blue T-shirts with the
word “Strikers” in big bold letters, across the chest.
This was because they had staged a strike against the
administration, and almost did not graduate. I remember
fighting for them, in meeting after meeting, in 1952. As
moderator of the school magazine the Blue and Gold, I had
prepared an issue on the strike. The Jesuit Superiors would
not let me print it. So I helped to reconcile everybody by
sacking the story of the strike, and printing a beautiful
picture of the Rector on the front cover.
I think that I understood these boys a little better
than most of the faculty, for two reasons: first, my own
experience in high school; and second, I was coaching the
basketball team, directing the Glee Club, producing the
plays, traveling with the actors in the troupe we called
“The Cathedral Players,” and living with them at very
close range.
It is amazing how the extra-curricular activities unite
people! In 1948, Eddie Olaguer played the son of Milagros

Bichara, in a play that we took all over the Bicol Region.
As soon as we reached Naga, Eddie went like a homing
pigeon to the Carmelite Convent, where Milagros is now
the Mother Superior. When she saw Eddie, Milagros lit
up like a neon sign, smiling, reaching out for him. And
Eddie embraced her as if she was his real mother! And
that play was 54 years ago!
They speak of the pure, chaste love of husband and
wife. And this is true. Love in its purity is found in
every mother. If a mother has a beautiful boy, four years
old, and he runs into the street, is hit by a car, dragged
and mangled; if he is now in the hospital, not beautiful
anymore, does his mother stop loving him? She loves him
more!
So it is with friendship. It is pure, generous, selfless,
permanent. It is a beautiful gift of God.
When I left Manila for Naga, early in the morning of
Friday, April 19, I could not walk. I knew that something
was radically wrong, but the alumni had worked so hard
on this golden jubilee, I thought that I should go. So I
went on to the plane in a wheel chair. But by Friday night
it was getting a little serious. Tony Macandog, who was
captain of the basketball team in 1952; and Isaac de Leon,
who was always the high scorer; and Eddie Olaguer, who
served my Mass at 4 A.M. when he was a boarder; took me
to the Jesuit Residence at the Ateneo de Naga. Worried,
they called Doctora Salve Badiola Claros. She took one
look at me, and said: “Hospital!” So I wound up in the
ICU. Doctor Nerva, the cardiologist, frowned, and said:
“Your heart is down to 30 beats a minute, irregularly
irregular. This is serious.”
As you grow older, you come to realize: the treasure
of any man is not the beautiful house, or the cars in the
garage, or the money in the bank. The most precious thing
that any man has is . . . a friend.

Chapter 5
COLLEGE AND JOHN P. DELANEY S.J.
Classes and examinations were over for us graduating high

school seniors during one of those last days of March in 1952.
We the student boarders spent our days catching up on our
sleep after the frenetic preparations for our final exams, and
renewing our rivalries on the basketball court while waiting
for our graduation on April 5. Or going to our tailors to have
our new all-white suits with black bow tie fit and ready for “D-
Day.” Mine was coming all the way from Isong Ocampo, our
family’s kind but expert tailor in Guinobatan, to whom Papa
had rented out the shop facilities adjacent to our Botica. He
had all my body measurements memorized and was an expert
in re-cycling the Olaguers’ left-over habiliments for the benefit
of the Pocholo.
This time it was Papa’s old de hilo suit he used in 1944 to wed
my stepmother, which Isong transformed artistically for the first
Guinobateño graduating as balidiktoryan at the Ateneo de Naga.
Papa saw to it that the whole town knew about it, especially
all my former teachers at the town’s Elementary School and
at St. Agnes, and that his Pocholo was to be awarded six gold
medals for academic excellence, and a silver medal to boot for
consenting to be the whore-looking Roxanne for Cyrano de
Bergerac, which Papa considered not worth bragging about.
If only they knew that I would angrily return all those medals
and almost as many more from the earlier medals given to me,
back to the Ateneo de Naga President, Fr. Joel Tabora S.J. some
50 years later . . .
Late that evening in March of 1952, I was an obviously
disturbed person wrestling with a nagging problem while
College and John P. Delaney S.J. 67

walking around the vicinity of the school’s famous four
Corinthian pillars. Initially I had gone there to memorize and
to polish my valedictory address. At that time nobody but
nobody dared to read or even to resort occasionally to any piece
of paper while delivering a formal talk or even a homily. My
unusual presence there past midnight must have been reported
by my chess-crony Bro. Adriatico, for just before I was ready
to go back to the dorm, Father Principal Vincent McNally S.J.
came to ask me why I was up so late. Bro. Adriatico knew that
something was wrong. Otherwise I would have been with him
playing chess in his living quarters-storage room-combined,
while drinking Mompo left-over in several old bottles cluttering
his bedside.
Soon enough I blurted my problem to Fr. McNally. Cherchez
le femme! Somebody of the same gender as Eve, a close relative
of one of my intimate Ateneo schoolmates, was the problem.
She was studying at my old school at St. Theresa’s in Manila
and had been corresponding regularly, every week without
fail, ever since we met once and for the first time when I was in
third year during the Peñafrancia celebrations. After my final
exams, her endearing letters made it even clearer and more
emphatic that she looked forward to see me once more and
regularly, once I got to Manila for college.
Studying at the University of the Philippines to be a
lawyer was also what Papa expected me to do! But without
any distractions. However as early as October during our
controversial Annual Retreat, I had also already committed
to Fr. Reuter, Fr. Vincent Kennally (the Jesuit Vice Provincial),
and Fr. Dennis Lynch S.J. (the Master of Novices at the Jesuits’
Sacred Heart Novitiate in Novaliches, Rizal), quite solemnly
and emphatically too, that I would present myself as a Jesuit
novice there at Novaliches come the following May.
“Eddie, I had exactly the same problem some 20 years ago!”
whispered Fr. McNally under the twinkling stars. “I asked
myself, how I could be truly sacrificing milk if I had never

tasted milk till then. So I went to college first, and now I am a
full-fledged Jesuit!”
Susmariosep! I had a seemingly logical and happy solution
to my problem. Papa was overjoyed because Toti was already
a Jesuit, and Manoy Demar had similarly disappointed him by
suddenly writing home from Chicago that he had become a
Dominican novice. So the following May I was in Manila, and
not in Novaliches, but with Manay Tita and sometimes with
Tio Agot whose apartment was nearer to St. Theresa’s and the
house of my friend of the same gender as Eve.
But I still had to tell Fr. Reuter about the change of plans,
for I did not relish the thought of personally informing Fr.
Lynch, the Master of Novices. As usual I could do no wrong
from the Reyooter’s point of view. But in order to preserve the
prospects of a “late vocation” like Fr. McNally’s, Fr. Reuter
recommended me to his friend the President of the Ateneo de
Manila, Fr. James McMahon S.J., to be a “subsidized scholar”
for my A.B. (Arts and Sciences), the Jesuits’ specialty education
at the Ateneo de Manila. The subsidy would hopefully placate
Papa who wanted me to enroll at U.P.’s College of Law.
For two weeks I was happily attending classes at the Ateneo
in their brand new campus at Loyola Heights, even if I had
to walk some three kilometers every morning, or take two
circuitous bus rides from the U.P. campus, where Papa had
brought me to be a boarder with the Luz family. They were
recommended by his old classmate, Patrocinio Valenzuela, the
Dean of the U.P. College of Pharmacy. Commuting or walking
from U.P. was no big deal for me while I was looking for another
lodging place nearer the Ateneo, for I had been reunited with
my old buddies from Ateneo de Naga’s previous class of 1951,
such as Ben Lorenzo and Tony Gomez, the relative of my friend
of the same gender as Adam’s Eve. Moreover, the curriculum
seemed to be a mere continuation of the Latin, English, Science,
and the Humanities I was already attuned to in high school.

And Fr. Reuter would be one of my Professors because he had
also been transferred there from the Ateneo de Naga.
A terse telegram from Papa in Guinobatan shattered
everything. “Transfer to the University of the Philippines imme-
diately!” was all that it said. Still being nominally obedient,
albeit most reluctantly and sorrowfully, the erstwhile Pocholo
did transfer and enroll at U.P., but it was at the College of
Engineering and not at the College of Law where future Senator
Edgardo Angara, future Ombudsman Aniano Desierto, and
the “future ex-future” Ambassador to Geneva—the always
still beautiful yet intellectually daunting and outspoken Josie
Trinidad Lichauco, would all have been his classmates.
Instead, the latter two would teach the late-blooming and
gambling Pocholo many pocket and ego-shattering lessons in
supposedly “friendly” poker games. But that would be some
40 years later, and only after Judge Advocate General’s Office
(JAGO) Colonel Desierto would have cleverly helped vindicate
the erstwhile Pocholo-turned terrorist through the Supreme
Court, by wittingly or unwittingly botching his job to send me
to the electric chair as the Prosecutor of Military Commission
No. 34. Otherwise, Guinobatan in Albay would have had its
first example of a wayward son to be deep-fried in an electric
chair.
My filial disobedience had its negative karma soon after. I had
absolutely no problems with the U.P. Engineering curriculum
especially with its first year’s content of English, Accounting,
Math, and the Sciences. When it came to Technical Drawing
under Professor Miguel Escoto, I would have flunked had I not
been fortunately seated beside the future exemplar of Filipino
architects, the young Jose “Pinggoy” Mañosa. For the first time
in my life, I went through the personal humiliation of cheating
in class, by surreptitiously and frequently borrowing Pinggoy’s
drawing plates to copy or to consult. Worse, during the 3-hour
final exam, I was constantly leaning over in order to peer at
his “cross-section” and “vanishing point.” In so doing, I tipped

over my half-consumed bottle of San Miguel Tru Orange and
almost ruined his work as well as mine.
Fortunately, Professor Escoto charitably gave me the
minimum passing grade of “3,” but I knew I deserved to fail igno-
miniously with the grade of “5.” I just didn’t have the aptitude
nor the minimum skills for block-letter calligraphy, visualizing
front, left, right, and top views of intricately shaped machine
parts and objects. Papa was somewhat mollified because I still
obtained, but barely, the minimum average grade of “1.2”—
enough to maintain my University Scholarship and thus be
exempt from paying the next semester’s tuition fee of P120. At
the nearby Ateneo it was P360! Today it is at least a hundred
times much more . . .
For almost two years I was a regular weekly visitor at my
Theresian friend’s Taft Avenue residence near St. Scholastica’s.
Novaliches and the Jesuits were farthest from my mind. I also
entertained the proud thoughts that I had had more than
enough of Religion and the Sacraments to keep me spiritually
safe for the rest of my life. And so other than Sunday Mass
at the St. Scholastica’s chapel with my Theresian friend and
occasionally at the U.P. chapel, I had become almost a nominal
Catholic.
My other main obsession was chess. I played it night and day
with my crony and future neighbor/business partner Romeo J.
Jorge, and my Guinobatan townmate, fellow lodger, and future
Regional Trial Court Judge Emmanuel Flores. We played in
the cramped “quonset hut” of the Luz family beside that of my
Chemistry professor Augusto Tenmatay. Those huts were at
the old Area 5 near the College of Law. It was Political Science
Professor and future World Chess Federation (FIDE) President
Florencio Campomanes himself who honored me with a small
trophy when I became U.P. chess champion in 1954, but at
great loss of pride and academic cost to me eventually.
In 1954, the debilitating and traumatic effects of my endless
chess-playing coupled with my break-up with my friend near

St. Scholastica’s, all combined simultaneously with a family
crisis involving my sisters on one side and my stepmother and
Papa on the other. All these burdens resulted in reducing me to
a nervous wreck beset with migraine, poor eyesight, an acidic
stomach fast developing into peptic ulcers, and insomnia to
boot.
However, most emotionally painful was the result of our
respective confessors’ threats that unless my Theresian friend
and I stopped seeing each other, they would not absolve us
anymore even of “venial” trespasses, because we would surely
end up in the “state of mortal sin.” Although compared to what
is usually happening now to mutually intimate friends, we
were extraordinarily chaste and prudent. We even recited the
Memorare to Our Lady together during my visits. But spiritual
danger and occasions of potential sin were still a “no-no!” to
both our rigid confessors. Eventually I had to console myself
with reciting the long but memorable stanzas of Edgar Allan
Poe’s “Annabel Lee” while tearfully walking around near her
house on Sunday afternoons. I may have thought that “We
loved with a love that was more than love, I and my Annabel
Lee!”
The ending was similarly unhappy. During our supposedly
short and pre-arranged break-up, she fell “in love” though
briefly with another classmate of her relative at the Ateneo de
Manila. For proud me, that was the end of it all, and of the
whole world as well.
Back in Guinobatan, I thought that I had to side with my
sisters against Papa and our stepmother. At the insistence of
my maternal aunts and uncles, especially Tio Agot, we decided
to “go to Court” to claim and take possession of our direct
inheritance coming from our maternal grandmother. With
nobody else willing or able to assume leadership, I had to be
“it.” I got as our lawyer the brand new U.P. College of Law
graduate, Atty. Domingo Duran Sison, whose wife Consuelo
Dancel Sison was my aunties’ intimate friend of many years.

“Doming” would later become a partner in the law office that
served and still serves the Tuason/Arroyo family, the future
in-laws of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (GMA).
While the case was going on, with Papa’s subsidy completely
stopped and Tio Agot’s endless charity becoming too much of
an imposition on him and Tia Betty, I had to look for work to be
able to support myself and Nena and Gavs who were enrolled
at St. Theresa’s. Celine had already joined the Benedictines as
a “postulant” at St. Scholastica’s. Who else could I run to for
help? Of course nobody else but Fr. Reuter!
Soon enough the Reyooter found the ideal student’s part-
time job for me: tutoring two Ateneo students, the sons of his
friends Mr. and Mrs. Sandejas dela Concepcion—one in grade
school and the other in high school—in Latin, English, and
Algebra. Perfect! I was paid P30 a month for each boy, tutoring
them individually twice a week in their home somewhere in
Kamuning in Quezon City.
But P60 a month was not even enough for me at U.P. And
so I permanently took off my expensive watch (a birthday gift
from you-know-who), wore my most threadbare shirt, and
proceeded to plead my case with the future Carmelite nun
Ms. Josefina D. Constantino. Professor “JD” was the Executive
Secretary of U.P. President Vidal Tan, the uncle of one of my
future early recruits among the nuns for our Light A Fire
enterprise—the future Good Shepherd Sister, Christine Tan,
who also became President of the Association of Major Women
Religious Superiors during the martial law period. In a week’s
time, JD saw to it (God bless her soul forever!) that I was
appointed as Student Assistant at the U.P. Math Department
with the substantial compensation of “P0.50 per hour not
exceeding 80 hours per month” or at most P40 per month.
Later on, Professors Favila and Bendaña, my friends and
professors in Calculus and Advanced Algebra, heard my sad
story once more. My total earnings from the Sandejas family

and U.P. was at most P100 a month, not enough for my sisters
Nena and Gavs, and me. And so they saw to it, again with
the help of JD, that I was soon promoted to the next rank of
Student Assistant with an effective 50% increase in take-home
pay. I was in charge not only of “proctoring” Departmental
Examinations, but also correcting the Math professors‘ student
test papers, including those of my classmates who had failed
earlier in Differential and Integral Calculus! I was authorized
and trusted to do so at anytime I could spare, and even in my
dormitory room, at sixty centavos per hour, not to exceed 100
hours a month. Of course, Math Department Head Ricardo
Favila always saw to it that my time card would invariably
show exactly 100 hours to be paid every month. He was that
good in Mathematics and Economics too!
Professor Jose Bendaña, may his soul rest in peace, went even
further in helping relieve my financial problems. He convinced
his obviously rich but Math allergic students to engage me as
their private tutors. I charged each of them at the monopolistic
rate of P2 an hour or a minimum of P60 per month, whichever
came up higher. I could have out-earned even President Vidal
Tan had I accepted the offer of private tutoring for many more
of the other materially rich but mathematically poor students.
But only if I were to give up playing chess and/or flunk my
own Engineering subjects. Thus I even brazenly confessed to
Mrs. Sandejas dela Concepcion that I no longer had any time
left to teach her sons. The truth was, I was earning much more
per hour teaching Math to U.P. College students than to her
sons, and without having to spend two hours of travel time
going to her house and back to U.P. I learned to be efficient but
opportunistic, I now belatedly realize.
Besides, I had also applied to be a government pensionado
with the Bureau of Lands, where I would be paid P120 a month
plus reimbursement of my U.P. tuition fees, provided I would
pass their competitive examinations in Mathematics and
English, and thereafter take up the 4-year Bachelor of Science

in Geodetic Engineering course at the same University of the
Philippines. I easily passed the exams with flying colors, then
forthwith dropped some of my Civil Engineering subjects
and substituted them with those required by the Geodetic
Engineering curriculum, even if I had not or ever had the
slightest inclination towards the profession of Surveyor/
Geodetic Engineer!
My deepest apologies, dear departed Professors Ildefonso
Tronqued and Norberto Vila! But I got P120 a month more,
12 months a year even during the long summer vacations,
plus reimbursements of tuition and cost of books. Wow! Even
without the P60 from the Sandejas dela Concepcion family, I
was still earning at least P400 to as much as P600 a month in
1954 until 1956 as a “working” U.P. student. It was then much
more than enough, for Nena, Gavs, and me. Shades of Horatio
Alger’s poor boy stories! Soon enough I learned to smoke
expensive cigarettes and to cut my class attendance every
payday to shop around at the Escolta. Oh, the cheap thrills and
follies of the noveau riche!
All these had a terrible cost, albeit with an eventual blessing,
in the disguise of abject humiliation and deep suffering. My
Waterloo was the “Mechanics” class under Professor Angel
Alejandrino, where my classmates were the future congressman
and father-in-law of Hall of Fame bowler “Paeng” Nepomuceno,
and also my future supplier and generous creditor for world-
class AMF-Puyat bowling equipment, namely Jose “Popit”
Puyat, and the future Philippine Cenacle Sisters’ Superior
Angelina “Angie” Villanueva. I could have been exempted
from the Final Examination had Mr. Alejandrino rounded
off my monthly Quizzes’ average grade of 79.8%, the highest
average in the class, to 80% which was the exemption hurdle
grade. But rules were rules then in U.P. aside from the fact that
Mr. Alejandrino knew that I had been absent from class too
many times.

I was obliged to take the final exams where the absolutely
required passing grade was 50%. It was going to be a cinch, I
thought. The night before the exam I had another bout with
migraine and insomnia. I slept fitfully for barely an hour. Thus
I also barely failed to pass. My final examination grade was
49%. Factored by my many absences, Mr. Alejandrino saw to
it that I flunked a subject in school for the first time ever! I
cried inside the Men’s Room for almost an hour, humiliated so
ignominiously among my U.P. friends and peers.
Fortunately, humiliation led to the painful realization of
the pride or self-idolatry that I had allowed to gradually bloat
my ego since my high school graduation. My sufferings led
me to self-pity, via my thoughts and longings for my long
deceased mother, Gloria Buenaventura Olaguer. From there
it was an easy jump over to contrition and a filial return to
the Blessed Virgin, and thereby to her Son, through her tireless
and timeless apostle and servant of the Christ at the University
of the Philippines office of the Catholic Chaplain. Enter: John
Patrick Delaney S.J.!
I wrote the following piece for my regular column in The
Journal newspaper on January 11 of 1987 for the 31st anniversary
of Father JP’s death on January 12, 1956. Aside from being a
columnist, I was also the Chairman of the Board of Directors
of this PCGG-sequestered chain of newspapers. It was also re-
published on page 98 in the book The Father Delaney We Knew
in June of 2002 by the Fr. J.P. Delaney Memorial Committee
which I had helped organize. Here it is:
A ‘DELANEY BOY’ SPEAKS OUT

I was privileged to be one of the many “Delaney
Boys” among the U.P. Student Catholic Action (UPSCA)
partisans during the early fifties. Ironically I fell under the
powerful spell of John Delaney’s intellectual and spiritual
brand of activism because my own father (may his soul
rest in peace!) insisted I should “go to U.P.” He wanted

me to be removed from further “Jesuitic influence”
coming from the likes of my High School mentors such
as James B. Reuter, Godofredo Alingal, William L. Hayes,
Agustin Bello, Lorenzo Ma. Guerrero, Vincent P. Towers,
et al. Poor Papa never suspected that the U.P. Catholic
Chaplain waiting for the 1952 Freshman class would be
another Jesuit and more—John Delaney himself! With
Horacio de la Costa, James Reuter, and Pacifico Ortiz to
boot, from time to time or later.
My early school experience was under nuns . . . After
the war I was exiled to the public elementary school
in Guinobatan, Albay, where most of my friends and
classmates thought that convent school values and
practices were strictly for sissies. All these led me to
the impression that Catholicism, or for that matter our
Christian faith was something associated mainly with
feminine piosity with little or no intellectual basis.
Subsequent daily encounters at the Ateneo de Naga in
the classrooms, basketball courts, on stage, and thru the
liturgy with the likes of Reuter, Alingal, Bello, and Hayes
et al., who were in their physical and intellectual prime
driven by intense Ignatian spirituality, erased all those
namby-pamby notions of what the Christian faith is all
about. It was clear to us young boys then that our faith
heritage and our individual dreams of physical machismo
and intellectual excellence could go hand in hand. It was
a lot of fun and excitement while growing up. But those
were all within the safe confines of a restricted Jesuit
campus, with no real opposition or sets of strong contrary
ideas to contend with or to test one’s convictions.
The U.P. campus of the early fifties was something
else. The positivist point of view of John Dewey and the
rugged albeit elitist individualism favored by the early
American educational system were still fashionable.
Vatican II was still at least a decade away. The notion of
Faith as something very private and reserved for Sundays
with little relevance to the community or to the national
socio-political issues, was still the prevailing conventional

wisdom. Hence there was a strongly hostile resistance to
John Delaney’s brand of action-oriented but explicitly
faith-based spirituality, for and with the community,
and centered around the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. I
remember one of his angry tirades against his U.P. critics,
referring to their sensibilities as “pachydermic” . . .
But to me the most enduring memory of John Delaney
was his incessant withering assault against what he
called “namby-pamby piosities.” Goody-goodiness, to be
picayune, or to be good because it is good to be good,
were his other picturesque descriptions for his pet moral
peeve.
To drive home his point, he used as a constant theme
for his eloquent pleas for moral excellence, the related
values of magnanimity, heroic virtue, moral courage
in the confrontation of evil, rendering of community
service, emptying one’s self for others, militancy in the
faith, and above all—frequent, even daily participation
and actually “living” in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
And he practiced what he preached. For John Delaney
physically emptied himself with utmost generosity while
serving the U.P. community. Thus he died an early death,
from sheer exhaustion . . .
Heaven knows I wouldn’t be sure I could look Father
John Delaney straight into his eyes with those thick
eyebrows, if today he were alive once more and came
to visit me. But just the same I cannot help but wince as
Father JPD would surely do likewise, whenever I read
or hear mention of once solid and still valid Catholic-
Christian ideas and values now frequently mangled by
“namby-pamby piosities” . . .
—Excerpt from an article by Ed Olaguer,
“On John Delaney and Namby-Pamby Piosity”
in his regular column, To Light A Fire, THE JOURNAL,
Vol. I, No. 333, January 11, 1989
My column’s article did not do justice enough to Father J.P.

And so here is another remembrance excerpted from the same

memorial book and written by JD who gave me my first job at
the University of the Philippines:
I REMEMBER FATHER JP
Any sensitive soul could have easily noted Father’s
sense of detachment. To me, personally, this was an ideal I
singled out prayerfully for cultivation. He was unfailingly
generous, sincerely solicitous, broadly charitable to all.
No one would find him too busy—not the janitor, not
a Little Quiapo maid, not the weary professor, not the
confused freshie, not even a spoiled brat in the U.P.
Elementary. He had time and attention for every single
soul who sought him out. He was always being used; he
was always serving others. He would allow himself to
be used even by the U.P. elementary and kindergarten
kids who loved to pin him down on a soft chair, muss up
his hair, look into his ear drums, curl, twist and untwist
his bushy eyebrows, climb all over him until, his cassock
all dirtied by their inky hands and feet, he’d get up and
allow them to play ball with him. Eager to have him get
his much needed rest, knowing how he’d be up by 4:30 in
the morning from his 12:00 o’ clock night rest, we’d say:
“Father, you must have a little rest” (before the afternoon
talks and benediction); and he’d say, playing wildly with
the kids, “This is as holy as taking a siesta or reading
my Office.” Of course, he did not really enjoy all that
clowning and playing; but, as a psychologist, he knew
that if the kids could love him that much, they could grow
up loving what he painstakingly taught them of God. For
Father JP was always teaching, was always being Christ
whatever it was he was doing.
Avant-garde in all ways, as only a fiercely growing,
dynamic, A-1 intellect could be, he led us to see so
forcefully the very matters that dear Pope John XXIII
later said in Mater et Magistra. He was brutal in his
denunciations of the hard-hearted, unjust rich who did
not know how to treat their laborers or employees fairly.

He constantly exhorted people to be clear-eyed about
their sense of values.
He was also constantly for making the UPSCAns and
the Faculty see that the perfection of their respective
vocations was to be the best student and the best teacher
each one possibly could be: that this was all they had to
offer to God, and therefore they could not be less than
pure and generous in offering their powers to God. Father
JP could greatly teach what consecration was, for this was
his very mode of living: a constant Offertory.
This was the burning passion of this man of God: the
intensity of his love for Christ.
No wonder the heart of the Faith to him is the Holy
Sacrifice of the Mass. This is the permanent, most
beautifully enduring, priceless heritage all Delaney-
taught UPSCAns cannot betray without being miserably
untrue to themselves. For Father JP lived the Mass every
day and every single moment of his blessed life. As he
said the Mass daily, how very truthfully, how very Christ-
like-ly he must have lived his “passion”—his Calvary:
from the agony in the garden of Gethsemane (prayers at
the foot of the altar) to the Offertory (“Accept, O Holy
Father!”) to the Mystery of Transubstantiation (“This is
My Body”) to the Ite Missa Est that truly finally came on
January 12, 1956, and to which the angels must have so
joyously chanted Deo gratias, as they winged his soul to
the Father. How so very faithfully, purely and generously
he lived his vocation as Alter Christus.”
—Josefina D. Constantino
When J.D. wrote her piece in February of 1958, I am sure it

never crossed her mind that less than 50 years later, the Jesuits’
leadership abroad and in the Philippines would have already
mangled the core articles of faith behind the saintly Jesuit John
Delaney’s faithfulness to the Ignatian Catholic traditions. It
was a faithfulness shown to all by his very life’s living and
authentic exegesis of how and why Catholic education should

be lived and taught as an alter Christus. But now we have the
namby-pamby piosities replete in the Bernas-Nebres concocted
advertisement that “Ateneo education seeks to instill in the
minds of students an insatiable hunger for knowledge” merely
because knowledge “can lead to an appreciation of mystery
and to a sense of wonder” [sic!]. Of course it was thinly but
grandiosely coated with a religious varnishing at the end, by
stating that such knowledge can also find “ultimate fulfillment
in worship and service of the Lord and of the universe.” Res
ipsa loquitur!
If there is some doubt as to the radically contradictory
changes made by our latter-day neo-Jesuits on St. Ignatius
of Loyola’s Catholic roots underlying the original Jesuit
institutions, excerpts of the homily given by the late Fr.
Raymond V. Gough S.J. at the University of the Philippines’
Chapel of the Holy Sacrifice on Sunday, March 16, 1983 on the
occasion of Fr. Delaney’s 77th birth anniversary should dispel
those doubts. Fr. Gough was the alter ego and best friend of Fr.
J.P. Several times he was also my Retreat Master in the classic
Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius.
A BIRTHDAY GIFT TO JOHN

A man came, sent by God. His name was John. He
came as a witness, as witness to speak for the light,
so that everyone might believe through him.
—John 1:6-7
[NOTE: Certainly not an imposition
but a proclamation of the Faith!]
People have often asked: What was Fr. Delaney’s

secret? How was he able to effect such a lasting influence
on so many? I think the name of this Chapel gives us a
clue. The CHAPEL OF THE HOLY SACRIFICE! For Fr. Delaney
that meant not just the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, but also
the Holy Sacrifice of Marriage! How eloquently he spoke
on both sacrifices, the Mass and Marriage! How he could
pack them in, semester after semester, in the old sawali

chapel as he spoke to standing-room-only audiences of
students and faculty members, UPSCAns, and fraternity
and sorority members alike, on the Mass, and on Love,
Courtship and Marriage.
It is easy enough to understand his infectious
enthusiasm for the Mass. For he took to heart the words
of St. Paul to the Philippians: “In your minds you must be
the same as Christ Jesus” (2:5), and so he could identify
as few others with Christ, the Priest, and with Christ the
Victim. To Fr. Delaney, the Mass was the ultimate kenosis,
the pouring out of the divinity and the humanity of the
Son of God; the Mass was the Last Supper—Calvary—
Christ Risen; it was the constant, conclusive, daily
reminder of God’s love for each of us in Christ Jesus. To
Fr. Delaney was given the grace that we all prayed for
on the First Sunday of Lent: “to understand the meaning
of Our Lord’s death and resurrection, and to reflect it in
our lives.” Fr. Delaney reflected it, he lived the kenosis, he
poured himself out for others without counting the cost.
In Fr. Delaney we caught a glimpse of the beauty and joy
of sacrifice, and in turn we tried to learn—love—live the
Mass ourselves.
And you, my dear friends, are that harvest, a birthday
gift to John. And so, whether he approves or not, whether
he likes it or not, we wish him a HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!”
—Fr. Raymond V. Gough, S.J.
That we were properly educated in our faith, love, and

promotion of justice even at the non-sectarian University of
the Philippines, courtesy of Jesuits Delaney, Gough, et al.,
should not be debatable at all. Whether we learned enough
and practiced it AFTER listening to these genuine Jesuits for
many a year, is a different matter. If we failed to be faithful to
their teachings and exegetic explanations of the full range of
our Catholic beliefs and practices, it is certainly no longer their
fault, but ours exclusively.

Ironically and sadly indeed to say the least, after he left the
University, the erstwhile Pocholo did not always keep faith
with the Faith that Father JP so unceasingly and so eloquently
proclaimed and so untiringly demonstrated by his very own
life. Fortunately for that erstwhile Pocholo, the Hound of Heaven
never gave up, never gives up.

84
SECTION TWO
PURSUED
BY THE
HOUND OF HEAVEN
CHAPTER 6 Cherchez Le Femme

CHAPTER 7 Pride and S.A.Tan
CHAPTER 8 Heaven’s Hound
and Mary’s Legion
CHAPTER 9 IBM and Harvard
85
86 PURSUED BY THE HOUND OF HEAVEN
Chapter 6
CHERCHEZ LE FEMME
It all started with the Baguio Apaches, a team of promdi (from

the province) adolescent basketball game addicts who named
themselves after the Hollywood movies’ fiercest American
Indian tribe. The Baguio promdis proudly identified themselves
with Cochise, Geronimo, et al., being fiercely loyal Ilocano
or Igorot natives themselves, despite seeing their heroes on
celluloid films forever fighting but always losing against the
superior resources and firepower of invading settlers and
soldiers.
Like their role models, the promdi Apaches cemented their
manhood’s friendships by observing a strict taboo in not com-
peting with one another for the affections of any girl already
publicly declared by another unmarried Apache brother as the
object of his serious pursuit. Until that fellow subsequently
declared to all of them that he had given up courting the girl,
nobody else could so much as visit her unless with purely
platonic intentions.
The whole gang was expected to help the fellow in love to
win the heart of his declared choice. And all these, always in
the midst of “food, fun and fellowship”! Old folks in Baguio
proclaim that their Apaches’ courtship rules have been proven
successful . . .
During the second World War, most of the adult and even
still adolescent Apaches volunteered to fight the Japanese
alongside one another as regular soldiers. They served in the
same battalion with brother Apache Francisco “Ping” Paraan
as their highest ranking officer. Thus the Paraans, Buenos,
Dimalantas, Romeros, Yabuts, Aquinos, Florescas, Cariños,
Cherchez La Femme 87
Zaguirres, Lopezes, Zumels, Manalos, Barengs, Bautistas, San–
tos, Fuenteses, Runezes, and Sarmientos wielded themselves
into Baguio‘s most enduring clans of friendships and inter-
marriages for more than 50 years, all because of their shared
Apache ties.
Injuns and Jesuits
In June of 1956 I joined Romy Jorge and Rod Romea, both
my U.P. fellow pensionados and Bureau of Lands geodetic
engineers, in their boarding house at 12 Assumption Road,
across the street to the St. Louis University campus. A year
later, a real Indian, Rugnath Sarda came. Runy was taking up
Law, for reasons of the heart, at the nearby Baguio Colleges.
At P60 per month for each boarder’s food and lodging, the
four of us were assigned to the same room, all to ourselves,
by Mr. Teodoro Almonia, our “landlord.” His wife “Ebeng”
was the auntie of the girl Runy had been desperately but still
unsuccessfully courting. The girl’s father also happened to
own Baguio Colleges.
Despite being non-entities and non-Ilocano promdis our-
selves, all four of us were nominated and invited to join the
Apaches in November 1957 at the instance and in a moment of
recklessness of our co-boarder and fellow mahjong and chess
addict, Ricardo “Carding” Paraan. Carding was the strong,
silent, and widely respected brother of ex-guerilla leader and
USAFFE (U.S. Armed Forces, Far East) Major Francisco “Ping”
Paraan.
During the “Death March” from Bataan and the subsequent
atrocious prison conditions in Capas, Tarlac, it was Carding
who saved his Manong Ping from an early death. Major
Ping survived to become the Chief of Police of Baguio and
eventually the City’s Mayor. And so we liked the adventurous
idea of being de facto deputy policemen of Session Road like
other Apaches, ganging up on occasional drunks and trouble
makers from Metro Manila. The latter came in droves during

the summer months and in December. In addition, possibly
we could become icons in due time of Baguio’s “middle class
high-society.”
We were to be inducted as Apache peons on their traditional
homecoming day on December 30, the national holiday for our
greatest Philippine hero, Jose Rizal. From early morning until
the “Big Bonfire” ceremonies that evening, we would start our
“peonage” as the lowliest of neophytes—for one whole calendar
year. Final acceptance and lifetime membership in the Baguio
Apache tribe had to be with the unanimous consent of all
tribe members. Thus just one and only one thumbs-down vote
would be enough to waste one whole year of being obedient to
every senior Apache who was around. Incidentally, the son of
Baguio’s most influential Congressman, and himself a future
Speaker of the House of Representatives, thought innocently
that his pedigree would serve as further insurance against
rejection. Instead, Ramon Mitra Jr. was rejected no less than
three times! Thus he paid the one-year-long insurance premium
for three successive years! And that December, Monching was
again a lowly peon like me. But this time he made it through a
year later together with me.
Still vying with the Baguio Apaches for my loyalty however,
was another tribe, a far bigger, incomparably richer, and a true
international tribe! It also had a sprinkling of a few Ilocanos
and Bicolanos: the Jesuit Tribe! They were there in Baguio,
proudly in their perch at their high and scenic Mirador Hill
reservation.
And there, too, was my old friend and sometime piano tutor
and most fatherly High School Principal at the Ateneo de Naga,
Fr. Paul V. Hugendobler himself! He was apparently familiar
with my life’s story up to my U.P. days, perhaps because of
inputs from other Jesuits associated with U.P. and who knew
me well such as Fr. Delaney himself, Fr. Gough, and Fr. Pacifico
Ortiz. The latter succeeded John Delaney as U.P. Chaplain.
Back to Square One
Soon enough Fr. Paul agreed to be my spiritual Counsellor.
Right after, I brought him up to date with my life’s zigs and
zags, and confessed that my life in Baguio was becoming
meaningless and oftentimes a bore. I was getting tired of our
endless chess, bowling, and mahjong while playing hookey
from my Bureau of Lands job. Baguio’s frequent rain gave us
the excuse for playing more chess and mahjong.
Once in a while, I still went to a weekday Mass. Occasionally
I also gave my pro bono services to Fr. Overbeke and the Belgian
Fathers at the University of St. Louis by helping motivate and
train their troop of Boy Scouts. Other than Carding Paraan
and his wife “Chabeng,” the Baguio Apaches were still mostly
a myth to me then. Thus I felt I was at the wrong place,
particularly whenever I read the letters I regularly received
from my second special friend of the same gender as Eve, after
losing my first one two years earlier. She was still studying
Chemistry at the University of the Philippines.
Fr. Paul was his usual avuncular self in the old Ignatian
Jesuit tradition. Inevitably, the idea came up of re-starting my
third such process of prayerful discernment with his spiritual
guidance towards a possible Jesuit vocation for me. Once again
I was at a crossroad, confused as to where to go, when, and
why. But there was one thing of which I was sure: I was drifting
towards mediocrity in spirit with no meaningful purpose for
my life.
A few days before Christmas of that year, I used the long
holidays ahead to go down to Manila to spend the Yuletide
with my siblings and relatives. And of course, to visit a doctor’s
daughter—the special friend who was still finishing her U.P.
Chemistry course.
Fin de Siècle
Now looking back some 50 years later, that period of time
starting with my arrival in Baguio coincided with great historic

world events such as the rise and fall of Egyptian strongman
and ultra-nationalist Mohammad Nasser, the resulting tri-
nation conspiracy and invasion of Egypt and the Suez Canal
by the Israelis, French and British, triggering the rise of 3rd
World Nationalism and eventual terrorism. It must also have
been the start of the Philippines’ gradual slide into a nation of
pessimism and mediocrity, and eventually as it is now, into
rank corruption and near despair. For John Delaney’s demise in
January 1956 was followed 14 months later by that of President
Ramon Magsaysay.
Feeling sorry for ourselves and our country, we in Baguio
mourned in tears as soon as we learned of Magsaysay’s sudden
death from an airplane crash on a mountain side in Cebu. I was
despondent for weeks, even if I had not met RM personally,
other than to see him a mere five feet away from me at our
UPSCA protest rally in 1955. We UPSCAns had brought our
placards of protest all the way to the Malacañang presidential
palace. We were there in defense of Fr. Delaney against his
persecutors in the U.P. Board of Regents and their allies among
the leaders of the U.P. fraternities and sororities.
After Magsaysay’s tragic death, I was briefly consoled
when Papa came to visit me for a few days that summer—
unmistakably signaling that he had completely forgiven me,
and that once again I was his beloved Pocholo. It was the last
time I saw Papa alive.
A few months later that October, he died in Guinobatan of
a sudden heart attack. I was once again disconsolate, more so
when my boyhood friend at St. Agnes, the Ateneo de Naga,
and later my dormitory roommate at U.P., Noel Bolinas, came
all the way from Legazpi to console me.
Noel reminded me so much of the good old days. Irene Los
Baños Bolinas, his mother, together with Mama and a third
classmate, the future Mrs. Morelos, were the best of friends in
high school at St. Agnes around the time of the First World
War. Coincidentally or providentially designed, as all three
women prayed for it, all their first-born became priests. Toti
Olaguer S.J., Andres Tito Bolinas Jr. S.J., and former Catholic
Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) President Bishop
Carmelo Morelos, were the first-born children of their mothers
who were a close-knit trio at St. Agnes!
The death of the great Claro M. Recto a few years later
would drive home to us the seriousness of that continuing loss
in the nation’s treasury of patrons and prophets of truth and
justice. Abroad, Pope Pius XII would soon join their march to
eternity, thus loosening the legacy of orthodoxy and discip-
line in the Church, starting with a growing recalcitrance and
incursions of modernism among the Jesuits. That creeping
transmogrification I would know about only much later.
Providentially for the Catholic world and for me in particular,
Eugenio Pacelli died barely after he had given his quick verbal
imprimatur to the private revelations and visions on the whole
life of the Blessed Virgin and her Son, painstaking written
down over a period of more than ten years by a bedridden
ascetic. Maria Valtorta’s Poem of the Man-God for many years
thereafter, had been suppressed by modernists within the
Vatican. One of its five volumes first came into my brother
Toti’s hands in 1989. I badgered him no end until he finished it
quickly. Since then, I must have read all those five volumes, at
least 20 times over. Many in the Church refer to it now as the
“Fifth Gospel according to Maria Valtorta.”
“Just one more, please . . .”
When I arrived in a well-known doctor’s house at the
suburban town of San Juan in Metro Manila on that late
December evening in 1957, the Gospel of whatever source
was farthest from my mind. I was there to collect my first kiss,
reluctantly promised to me months earlier by the doctor’s
daughter. She was a most fair lady, steeped in theoretical and
physical chemistry. And in illo tempore, after that first kiss
was chastely collected within seemingly micro-seconds only,

the four original Gospels and Maria Valtorta herself were
downright irrelevant to me. The adrenalin and other latent
chemical compounds in my corpus delicti wanted one more kiss!
Fortunately or unfortunately, John Delaney’s dictum that
“one more could be one too many,” must have had a catalytic
reaction in obedience to the Periodic Table of moral values my
fair lady kept. And so Fr. John’s repeated warnings for such
situations which he never tired of repeating to the girls during
his most popular Love-Courtship-and-Marriage lectures to us
UPSCAns, were surely like blasts of intervening and sobering
Arctic winds.
Today, however, our modernist adolescent student sons and
daughters, especially those owning air-conditioned cars with
darkly tinted windows, would ridicule us no end for our “silly
prudery and medieval pre-Vatican II morality.” Nevertheless,
“frustrated me” was then still too immature. Like a spoiled
brat, my bleeping pride took over once again.
I cut my visit short just when dinner was about to be served,
and left her sobbing. My obviously outlandish and sudden
excuses to her brother, sisters, and parents, that I had to go back
to Baguio immediately, made matters worse. Unexplainably
and sadly, I never ever went back to that most kind and
hospitable San Juan home of a fatherly doctor and a motherly
Nanay at a Roman house address. I did not return, even for
the Christmas Eve Mass and their family’s Noche Buena, even
if I had long promised it to her and her entire clan, including
Romy Jorge, my usual escort for those occasions.
Even the most persevering mediation efforts of my
Engineering and UPSCA chess analyst-buddy, Johnny Viado,
who traveled all the way to Baguio from Manila, somehow all
came to naught. Incidentally, Johnny’s one and only, own true
love, courtship, and marriage to co-UPSCAn and pharmacist
Connie del Rosario, has been a model success story for all of us
Delaney disciples!
In Vino Veritas
But I kept my December 30 bonfire date with the Baguio
Apaches. That night, throughout the hugely well-attended
reunion of the tribe and their respective clans and friends, I
was the most obedient yet sorriest looking Apache peon. I did
everything as instructed or even merely suggested. I chewed
or swallowed and imbibed every liquid concoction, piece of
meat, or solid they ordered or even mildly requested me to take.
Dog meat with raw pepper mashed and washed with tabasco,
beer, gin, coke, rum and whisky, I ingested it all! I succeeded
in drowning my pride and sorrow, a little after midnight of the
following day, New Year’s Eve, when sobbing like a child, I
passed out in somebody else’s bed.
According to Romy Jorge, I curled up to sleep and forthwith
dirtied up Runy Sarda’s immaculate bedsheets, while still
crying like a kid for my deceased Papa and Mama, among
others. But only after having tearfully but chastely kissed
every man, woman, and child within sight and reach on
Session Road and at our boarding house at 12 Assumption
Road, including Ebeng Almonia to whom Romy and I owed
a couple of months’ worth of unpaid board and lodging fees,
and unliquidated mahjong chips. Indeed it was the first time
I ever got drunk, and hopefully the last for such self-inflicted
sentimental reasons.
From January until the middle of February of 1958, all my
spare time was spent on getting to know and to obey all the
resident Baguio Apaches, who were relatively much easier
to know and to please and to like. We peons dreaded the
forthcoming summer months when the many U.P. Upsilonians
who were also Baguio Apaches would come home for vacation
and possibly apply the “modern but barbaric” U.P fraternity
standards of initiation on us, and especially on me, a diehard
UPSCAn and their former rival in campus politics at the
university. Such names as “Akong Lopez” and “Teddy Yabut”

sounded frightening to us even by their mere mention. I could
not have known then that the Hound would use me much
later on for His own dragnet purposes for these two Apache
warriors.
My Florence Nightingale
It was the 1958 graduating Class of the U.P. College of
Nursing that brought springtime back to my life in Baguio. The
University of the Philippines had recently made arrangements
with the Baguio General Hospital for assistance in the “rural
health” clinical training of U.P.’s graduating nurses with a
4-year College Degree. Every second semester, starting in
October, a batch of College of Nursing students from U.P.
would arrive in Baguio for some five weeks of “rural” field
training. The Baguio Apaches being the best known rural [sic!],
civic-social, and professional organization, whose leaders were
invariably also the leaders or managers of other civic groups
and institutions in Baguio such as the Jaycees, Rotary and
Lions Club, it was but natural that the visiting U.P. nurses were
assigned to us Apaches as their “rural hosts.” To entertain, to
help, and to protect!
At that time, Baguio was still the cleanest and safest city
in the Philippines. Its thick clumps of pine trees everywhere
made everyone feel and smell cool and refreshed, especially
during the cold months of December until February. The cold
also would facilitate warmth as a reaction from the U.P. nurses
to us as their entertainers, helpers, and protectors. Enter: my
Florence Nightingale!
She arrived like an extra-terrestial vision in a light blue
dress, simple but elegant and statuesque, in a Benguet Auto
Line (BAL) bus with a bevy of other beauties. It was Saturday
evening on February 22, 1958. Romy Jorge, Runy Sarda, and
I had been waiting at the BAL Station for several hours as
the Apache peons assigned as porters for the ladies’ luggage.
Attorney Conrado “Condring” Bueno was our self-appointed
Senior Apache Task Master and chief entertainer, assisted by
his sidekick and much better singer Bert Nievera!
As soon as the bus stopped and we had made sure the U.P.
Nurses were all there, we serenaded them forthwith with
our usual favorite songs. Starting with “In the Evening By
the Moonlight” (Rag-a-dooh-dah version!), followed by “In a
Little Spanish Town, ”plus a few more, and ending with “The
Big Black Bull Came Down from the Mountain” and always
lastly, “Gaudeamus Igitur.”
February 22, the day they arrived, was already a week
after Valentine’s Day. But Condring Bueno unashamedly
flattered the naïve lowland arrivals highly, by announcing that
the whole of Baguio had deliberately postponed its annual
Valentine’s Ball just so to accommodate our U.P. lady guests.
The Ball would be held the next day, Sunday evening, at the
world famous Pines Hotel!
All two dozen or more of us young Apache braves and
bachelors among the “welcoming committee” accompanied
the new batch of ten student nurses to their boarding house at
No. 10 Rimando Road at Aurora Hill, belonging to the Luceros.
It was there that I learned her full name, and that she was from
Concepcion, Tarlac, hence a town mate of Carding Paraan’s
recent bride Chabeng, and that of our future national hero,
Ninoy Aquino. The erstwhile Pocholo was immediately and
completely smitten, for Cupid was on the prowl!
Shy as I still was at the age of 22, I knew I desperately needed
help, for I could hear her name being frequently mentioned in
awed whispers by several other senior Apaches. They too were
thinking of her as their possible choice for public declaration to
be “reserved” for them. As a result, I would never again visit
Fr. Paul Hugendobler at Mirador Hill, nor even remember to
bid him goodbye. Years later I would weep in delayed shame
when informed that Father Paul had already died somewhere
else far away.

Happy Conspiracy
Fortunately for me that February of 1958, I had an excellent
and willing, too willing in fact, I later found out, surrogate and
precursor in the person of my sidekick Romy Jorge. Romy first
convinced Carding Paraan that I was the most deserving suitor
to try my luck with Chabeng’s town mate from Concepcion.
Other than the Bueno brothers, there were no other more
influential pair of sibling Apaches as Carding Paraan and his
brother Ping. Soon enough (I learned much later), Philippine
Air Force (PAF) dare-devil “Blue Diamond” pilot and future
PAF Commanding General, Capt. Ernesto “Ernie” Bueno,
confabulated with Carding Paraan and Romy Jorge in order
“to help Edong!” Edong or Edongski was my moniker as an
Apache peon and chess addict.
After Sunday Mass the next morning, I was called by an
unusually giggling Ebeng Almonia to the telephone just when
I was biting into a luscious morsel of pandesal with tomatoes
and Baguio longganisa. A lady was calling! Unbelievable, but
apparently it was the newly arrived U.P. student nurse where
Cupid’s arrow had sprung from that previous evening. She was
haltingly but clearly asking me if it were all right if I could be
her partner-escort that evening for the Ball at the Pines Hotel.
I still recall that I was too surprised and excited, and thus
repeatedly blurted “yes, yes, yes, thank you, thank you” as
my only response to the caller. Thereupon I rushed out of
our boarding house, forgetting my hunger and my favorite
pandesal with longganisa, and went straight to our informal
Baguio Apache Clubhouse at Jimmy Tong’s Session Café along
Session Road.
The gang was there including Romy Jorge, surprisingly up
and early taking coffee nonchalantly, for on Sundays, Romy
seldom woke up earlier than just before lunchtime. Others
were playing chess and the usual dice games. I swept the
dice and the chess pieces from the tables, scattering them all
over the floor, climbed up to one of the tables and shouted
in my primitive Ilocano: “Naalakon! Naalakon! (I succeeded!
I succeeded!) She asked me to be her partner tonight!” I was
indeed on Cloud Twenty Nine, oblivious to everything else
other than my seemingly easy conquest . . .
Inexplicably to me at that time, that evening at the ballroom
started in agony for me, but ended again in my seeming triumph.
I even thought of quitting as an Apache peon in protest against
everybody else getting ahead of me on the dance floor with
the girl of my dreams and recently declared as a “personal
reservation.” I also blamed myself repeatedly for not having
engaged her in a decent conversation over the telephone that
morning during her surprise call. I also regretted the fact that
other than the barest rudiments of “waltz” and “slow drag,”
I did not know any other dance. But darn it, the Apaches
were even getting ahead of me when the band played “The
Tennessee Waltz.” And the girl of my choice did not seem to
recognize me or to treat me the way she sounded to me over
the telephone.
Captain Ernesto Bueno’s booming and rasping voice over
the public address system stopped me from slinking away to
lick my wounds back there at 12 Assumption Road. Ernie was
calling for the other members of the panel of judges to tally
up the votes for “King and Queen Valentine” of the ball. Dr.
Montemayor, the 60-year-old bachelor and Honorary Apache
was the Chairman, with Apaches Ernie Bueno and Chief of
Police Francisco “Ping” Paraan as the other two judges. By
hindsight, I should have known that rigging of elections was a
national pastime but with serious consequences!
Nevertheless, I was profuse and teary with thanks to Ernie
Bueno, Dr. Montemayor, and Ping Paraan even after way past
midnight of February 23, 1958. For “Edong” Olaguer and the
girl of his dreams were UNANIMOUSLY elected as “King and
Queen Valentine” by everybody, including the band members
and of course, all the Apaches.

Finally, I had my lady Nightingale in my lonely arms doing
“The Tennessee Waltz” and the popularized version of Chopin’s
Etude, “No Other Love” sung by my boyhood’s favorite
female vocalist, Jo Stafford. All the Apaches then surrounded
us in a tight ring, loudly cheering, with some jeering while we
were dancing. So, she could not hear, much less understand,
when I asked her why she chose me and called me over the
telephone . . .
The Sacrament of Matrimony
The rest of the story is my karma and history. On June 28, 1958
at 7 A.M. on a Saturday at the St. Rita Parish Church, Philamlife
Homes in Quezon City, which was a few meters away from
Tio Agot’s residence at No. 7 Dansalan Road, I kissed “my love
and my bride” for the very first time! Tio Agot and Tia Betty
had given me over to be the dark blushing groom of the fair
radiant bride, with Romy Jorge still guarding me as Best Man,
Fr. William L. Hayes S.J. as our official church witness to and
minister of the Sacrament of Matrimony, while Fr. James B.
Reuter S.J. was the Mass celebrant.
Incidentally, our wedding reception was held at the nearby
and popular D & E Restaurant owned by my friend and fellow
UPSCAn, Linda Enriquez and her mom. They were the future
owners of the Sulu Hotel in Quezon City that would be
unintentionally eaten up by the flames of our secret Light A
Fire “Public Justice” operation, some 20 years later.
Thirty minutes before the Mass started, my Jesuit chess
crony, Fr. Pacifico Ortiz, who succeeded Delaney as UPSCA’s
Chaplain, startled me when he suddenly appeared with the
doctor’s daughter from F. Roman street in San Juan in tow.
They came to congratulate me personally and to offer their
prayers, and immediately afterwards, they left.
I truly woke up from my 4-month-long trance and courtship
moments after Fr. Ortiz and his ward, a most fair lady, left! I
realized only then and there the full meaning of the sacramental
vows to which I was being asked to give my solemn pledges
before the Lord of Heaven and Earth, and in the presence of
old Jesuit friends Fr. Reuter and Fr. Hayes. Fortunately my
full will, heart, and intellect were sure and ready to say “YES”
aloud, when Fr. Hayes asked me that morning of June 28, 1958,
in his usual slow, crisp, and solemn manner: “Do you Eduardo
B. Olaguer, take Daisie R. Pantig to be your lawfully wedded
wife from this day forward, for better or worse, in sickness or
in health . . . until death do you part?”
Behind my momentary delay in uttering and truly saying
“Yes Father!” with the full and sincerest assent of my will and
my heart, was the most urgent last minute prayer I ever made.
Following a quick procession of my life’s most important
events, I heard and felt most clearly, the compelling truth of
Fr. John Delaney’s lectures on the sacramental integrity and
the soon-to-come suffering behind even every true love story
and marriage which I was now entering into so innocently. At
that moment, I pledged to the Lord that I would consecrate
back to Him every son Daisie and I would be given to be His
priest or priests. But a priest-son we would never have, though
hopefully a grandson will redeem my ardent pledge given
some 48 years ago . . .
The enthralling drama and romance behind our brief
courtship period with its unusual chasteness would be
continued. For I never even so much as kissed Daisie until that
traditional time on the marriage altar itself, despite the Baguio
Apache nation’s collective efforts on my behalf to woo and
to wed her. There would in due time, however, be no more
Clouds Nine or Twenty Nine, or namby-pamby feelings for
moonlight sonatas masquerading as love.
Love would be sacrifice and pain, and the truth of our real
selves, and would become truly the love of a married couple
with one shared body, if and only if Christ and the Blessed
Mother were intimate and unending partners and intercessors
in that relationship. Love would be reading together the Gospel

of the Poem of the Man God by Maria Valtorta, more than 20
times combined between the two of us. For we have read Maria
Valtorta’s inspiring direct-witness accounts of Our Lord and
Our Lady’s lives of truest love and deepest sufferings, usually
just before we go to sleep or whenever we wake up in the
middle of the night, beset by our own problems and worries.
Revelation and Reality
Just a few minutes after the brand new Mrs. Daisie P.
Olaguer and I arrived in our Baguio apartment at Aurora
Hills sometime early in July of 1958, after spending our brief
honeymoon at the Manila Hotel, Romy Jorge and a horde of
Baguio Apaches suddenly descended on us. They all quickly
entered our bedroom uninvited, and started jumping and/or
sitting up and down on our brand new matrimonial bed.
Romy Jorge then introduced a certain Miss Remy Villa
Abrille to me and Daisie. Only then did Romy and all the
Apaches divulge their hitherto closely guarded secret. It was
not Daisie but Chabeng Paraan’s student, Remy Villa Abrille,
who had called me up barely 4 months earlier that Sunday
morning on February 23, nervously pretending she was Daisie,
and haltingly asking me to be her escort at the Valentine Ball.
The erstwhile Pocholo had swallowed it all, hook, line, and
sinker. Super stupid me! But Hallelujah, just the same, for
friends like Romy Jorge!
Heaven knows that John Delaney must have gone through
many anxious moments in heaven while keeping track of our
love, courtship, and marriage, followed by numerous prayers
of intercession to the Blessed Trinity, to Jesus Christ and His
Blessed Mother, St. Joseph, Our Lady’s parents St. Joaquim
and St. Anne, St. Michael the Archangel, and many others. All
of them, at one time or another, have been invoked by Daisie
and me to shore up our love and relationship whenever the
going got very rough.

As of this writing, our 50th wedding anniversary is barely
three years away. So please dear Father John, do keep on
praying and interceding for Daisie R. Pantig and me and for
our five children and ten grandchildren, and for our Baguio
Apache brothers and sisters too. For without the latter,
especially Romy Jorge and Runy Sarda, and our Apache-
UPSILONIAN friends Teddy Yabut and Akong Lopez, I would not
have won the girl of my dreams. Nor ended up in prison some
20 years later . . .
“From Here to Eternity”
I am confident that despite ourselves, our supernatural
intercessors will not fail us. For in 1989 or thereabouts, Teddy
Yabut was dying! Akong Lopez had already left his beloved
Nena Zumel Lopez and us all a few years earlier. Aside from
Romy Jorge and Runy Sarda who were not directly involved in
the Light A Fire enterprise, Teddy and Akong had become my
other two closest Baguio Apache cronies. I knew that the latter
two fellow Ilocanos of Marcos consented to join me as a rebel,
mostly because of our mutual friendship.
However, earlier in 1979, Teddy had escaped the Marcos
dragnet by entering the United Sates through our Mindanao
and Sulu back doors, just like Gasti Ortigas did a few months
ahead of him. Runy Sarda generously got Teddy a good job
with American Express where Runy was its Senior Executive
Vice President. But Teddy’s long physical separation from
wife, Cota, took its toll on an already frayed relationship.
Despite Romy’s and my own efforts together with other Baguio
Apaches to heal their rift, Cota was still far away when Teddy
was already dying.
Romy and I were among Teddy’s first hospital visitors. As
soon as I saw him I knew he was nearing death, and so I took off
my Brown Scapular cum Rosary, and placed it around Teddy’s
neck. Haltingly he whispered that he had long been fasting on

“bread and water” every Wednesday to atone for his sins, soon
after I had asked him to do so a year earlier.
Teddy was referring to one Saturday afternoon when he
and I were waiting for Paul Aquino (Ninoy Aquino’s brother)
and Aniano “Ani” Desierto (a former UPSCAn) for our usual
weekend poker game. Paul, by the way, was my earliest
Light A Fire associate while Ani Desierto was the JAGO
military prosecutor of Marcos during our trial before Military
Commission No. 34. While waiting, Teddy and I had talked
about my “Wednesday routine” while in prison, fasting on
bread-and-water, in obedience to Our Lady’s wishes given at
Medjugorje. That was how the Hound caught up with Teddy
Yabut, too—through His Mother!
Back at the hospital, Teddy asked me to call for his favorite
TV producer-director during the boob-tube’s pioneer years.
Teddy was also, by coincidence or by the Hound’s design, a
Reyooter Baby. Within hours, Fr. James B. Reuter S.J. came to
hear Teddy’s sacramental Confession and to administer two
other Sacraments—the Anointing of the Sick and lastly, the
most important, the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist!
A day later, a weeping, tender-hearted Cota Yabut arrived.
And so just before Teddy died, Cota with her half-dozen
children, and Teddy’s “other loved one” who had matched
Cota’s fertility and progeny, were all embracing and kissing one
another. Truly and most timely, The Hound and Our Lady saw
to it that the two Yabut families of Teddy had sincerely forgiven
one another! And thus Teddy and Cota were reconciled, not
just with each other, but with Our Lord above all.
Truly, Cherchez Le Femme is relevant here on earth, and even
better, in Heaven above!

Chapter 7
PRIDE AND S.A.TAN
“Idolatry of one’s own real or imagined excellence,

constantly fed by an inordinate desire for even more and more
for its own sake and for love of self” is in my own words and
experience the main sin I have fallen into again and again. Yes
it is PRIDE, or bleeping self-conceit. That is why I should never
forget the many immortal lines of an unwitting victim of drug
addiction and would-be priest, Francis Thompson, in his poem
The Hound of Heaven.
“I said to Dawn: be sudden, to Eve: be soon . . .
heap me over from this Tremendous Lover”
I was never anything more than superficially conscious of
my self-idolatry, until the first series of times I had fallen flat
on my face in my business enterprises as a married man two
years after college. My ordeal was long enough and humbling
enough for the Hound of Heaven to catch up once again with
the erstwhile pocholo momentarily.
The Hound came in the guise of another name and in the form
of a book first published in 1947. It was written and finished
on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, on December 8,
1945, by a Cistercian priest, Dom Eugene Boylan O.C.S.O. Its
title: This Tremendous Lover. I bought it from the S.V.D. Fathers’
Catholic Trade School store at 1916 Oroquieta Street, Manila
sometime in 1963. I was then in the depths of financial and
emotional despair. I am not sure whether it was recommended
by an American S.V.D. priest, Fr. Donald Mulrenan, who is now
assigned in Boston. But I surely still vividly remember that soon
after making our first acquaintance, he unsolicitedly lent me,
most kindly and insistently, more than a thousand U.S. dollars

in cold cash on a pay-when-able basis! He had befriended me
after frequently noticing my early evening visits to the Blessed
Sacrament at their Christ the King Church along the old España
Extension, now E. Rodriguez Sr. Boulevard in Quezon City. I
still have the same hardbound copy of that book, even after
lending it to many of my friends and relatives.
This Tremendous Lover did not really say anything radically
new that I hadn’t heard earlier in separate dollops and snatches
from the Benedictines, the Belgian Sisters, and the Jesuits, or
read in my first religious book in Grade 2 at St. Theresa’s, the
autobiographic Story of a Soul written by the Little Flower Saint,
or studied in the New Testament, the Baltimore, and Cassily’s
Catechisms. The last three were our high school religion
textbooks at the Ateneo de Naga. Basically the same principles
were mentioned in the Imitation of Christ and the treatises from
the early Church Fathers which my Jesuit Scholastic teacher
Expedito Ma. Jimenez introduced to me in 1948.
But Dom Boylan’s work was a whole theological masterpiece
that was simply gripping in its clarity, logic, and 20th century
practicality. It squared off accurately with my experiences with
sin, especially pride and its consequences. I cannot possibly
improve on its wisdom and presentation, and so I shall
quote excerpts of what to me is its most important chapter,
the seventh, entitled “Seeking Christ Through Humility and
Obedience”:
If God the source and strength of our supernatural
life, and its first mover and its last end—if the divine
Omnipotence that can do all things, and the divine
Goodness that will do all things necessary for God’s glory,
are so intimately at work in our souls—why is it that we
are not all saints? Why is it on the contrary, that—even
in the best of us—there is much of the pagan left? One
possible answer to that question could be drawn from
our discussion of fraternal charity in the last chapter, and
indeed St. John’s words could be quoted to show that lack
Pride and S.A. Tan 105

of love for our neighbor interferes with God’s action in
our souls. But that is a symptom rather than the disease.
The real trouble lies deeper. To get to the roots of it, let us
go back to the beginning of wrongdoing.
We have seen that the first sin was that of the angels,
and that it was a sin of pride, manifesting itself through
disobedience. We have seen that the original sin on earth
was that of our first parents, and that it also was a sin of
pride manifesting itself by disobedience. We have seen,
too, that when the new Adam and the new Eve, Jesus and
Mary, set about their work of restoring the ruin caused by
these sins, the way they followed was the way of humility
manifesting itself by obedience in direct opposition to
the source of the evils they were combating. And since
they were models for us, their personal example lends
cogency to the lesson of the original fall. The pride and
disobedience of Adam and Eve still have their roots in
us, and they are the chief obstacles to God’s work of re-
establishing all things in Christ.
Now whatever is the root-cause of our tendency to
refuse to abandon and deny ourselves and to put on
Christ, is also the source of our failure to live fully the life
of Christ. But even this self-love would not be an obstacle
to God’s all powerful grace unless there were some reason
why God should not use His power to move our hearts.
Unfortunately, there is one such obstacle which is our
pride. If we examine the nature of pride we shall see why
it prevents God’s grace from working in our souls.
Pride is an inordinate desire of one’s own excellence.
That is its classical definition . . . Pride, then, makes us
attribute the good that we find in ourselves to our own
efforts, or, if we see that it does come from God, to
attribute it to our own merits. It leads us to exaggerate
the good we possess or have done, to imagine that we
are what we are not, and to despise others in order all the
more to exalt ourselves. Pride goes even further: it makes
us consider our own selves as our last end; the proud
man lives “his own life,” for his own sake. In the Mystical

Body of Christ, the supernatural life of each member
with all his virtues and all his works, come from God, are
operated by God’s power, and are directed towards God
for the sake of God. By pride we consider our good to
have come from ourselves, to be done by ourselves, to be
directed towards ourselves, for the sake of ourselves. The
opposition is manifest.
But there is an even more fundamental opposition.
God’s primary motive in all His works—in creation, in
redemption, and in every single act—must not be less
than Himself. That is a law of His Being; He cannot
cease to be God—to be supreme; He cannot subordinate
Himself, in His divine nature, to a creature, without self-
contradiction. It is true that His goodness has led Him to
seek His glory by making us happy—by His mercy, in
fact. But the glory of His mercy is His own. I am the Lord,
this is my name. I will not give my glory to another (Isaias
42:8). Pride, which makes us appropriate the glory of all
the good we have or do, is directly opposed to this law of
God’s action, and therefore puts a limit to it. God cannot
pour out His gifts to the proud without self-contradiction
as long as they are obstinate in their attitude. As God
Himself tells us by the pen of St. James: God resisteth the
proud and giveth grace to the humble (James 4:6). . . .
It is only when God withdraws His help and leaves the
proud man to his own devices, that it becomes evident
what a man is worth without God. God sometimes does
withdraw His usual help in order to make a man humble
enough to allow His grace to sanctify him. Otherwise his
pride would avert God’s mercy . . . .
There is a special deformity in pride when we consider
it in a member of Christ’s Mystical Body. Pride makes a
man live by himself for himself; but as a member of Christ,
a man must live by Christ and for Christ. The proud man,
then, opposes the life of the Mystical Body of Christ; he
is like a cancer in that Body, and in fact, we can properly
designate him as anti-Christ. For other sins evade God, so
to speak, but pride opposes Him.

“I tempted all His servitors,
but to find my own betrayal in their constancy”
Nevertheless, even while I was writing this particular
chapter, a most embarrassing question hounded me. Why is it,
I had to ask myself, that despite having read This Tremendous
Lover several times, I was and still am a proud man? And still
quick on the draw in anger and slow to forgive and forget . . .
Even as early as January of 1980, while Otto Jimenez and
I together spent our first sleepless “dark night,” literally and
figuratively, at Col. Rolando Abadilla’s Camp Crame gulag,
we pondered over the same embarrassing question. Why is it,
we asked ourselves near the wee hours of dawn, that despite
all the Masses, Holy Communions, Spiritual Retreats, and the
excellent Jesuit teachers we had the privilege and grace to have
expounded on our Faith and all these, we were still basically
what we were? We were still insufferable men with obvious
feet of dirty clay!
Recently during my hospital visit at Room 762 of the Makati
Medical Center where my boyhood friend Francis Garchitorena
passed away, we both asked ourselves the same basic question
in relation to our benighted nation, some Jesuits, and ourselves
included.
Those embarrassing questions continued to hound me for
the next six years in prison and until recently. Reviewing
This Tremendous Lover after my lifetime partner Daisie finally
finished absorbing it over the past year, I re-discovered
sufficiently adequate (at least to me) answers and explanations
to our dilemma:
“To all swift things for swiftness did I sue”
The key to the explanation comes from the same Chapter
7 of Dom Boylan’s book. I realized that it was pride itself that
was insistently seeking such an answer which had already
been given by the Hound of Heaven masquerading as This
Tremendous Lover.

Our overweening self-esteem had always presumed we were
already “humble enough” and that our spiritual “excellence”
should have manifested itself swiftly to us and to all and
sundry without any delay whatsoever, simply because we had
already drunk from the books of wisdom from the ages. We
had thus glossed over the depth and breadth of the negative
consequences of our past sins, the further darkening of our
reasoning, and weakening of our wills on top of the original
sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve, and thus utterly
underestimated the length of time and perseverance required
for healing!
More importantly, we forgot that humility and contriteness
of heart, of which we are reminded in the beginning of every
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, had to be in us day in and day out!
It is like food and medicine for old people like me, and even
for young ones, to be taken day in and day out. If I stopped
eating for one day, I shall necessarily be debilitated for many
days. I’ll surely die, if I did it for weeks on end! By analogy,
our presumptuousness would be like our amateur basketball
players who are out of shape, take drugs, and have been
seriously injured, and yet expect to excel against Kobe Bryant
et al. in the NBA’s professional ranks, SWIFTLY!
Secondly, though less culpably, we had ignored the similar
but collective effects of sin on the men and women like us and
on all human institutions—the Jesuits and our fellow Christians
and non-Christians included.
In short, the cumulative effect of sinfulness in the world
is utterly overwhelming in relation to our own unassisted
individual puny selves. The battle between good and evil,
within and outside ourselves has to be therefore, a long and
painful process all the way to our death beds. For even the
Little Flower and many other saints were not spared this until-
death process of spiritual battle for their own purification or
even survival.

“They clanged His chariot thwart a heaven . . .
with flying lightnings round the spurn o’ their feet”
Thirdly, there is S.A.Tan himself, and myriads of legions of
his demonic cohorts and collaborators among men and women
enslaved by him. It is thus still pride that misleads us to ignore
or, at least to underestimate these enemies, as explained by St.
Paul in his letter to the Ephesians:
Finally, draw your strength from the Lord and his
mighty powers. Put on the armor of God so that you may
be able to stand firm against the tactics of the devil.
Our battle is not against human forces, but against
the principalities and powers, the rulers of this world
of darkness, the evil spirits in regions above . . . Take the
helmet of salvation and the sword of the spirit, the word
of God.
– Ephesians 6:10-16
“Naught shelters thee, who will not shelter Me”

I have related all the foregoing, to attest to the relevance of
This Tremendous Lover, at least as far as my own life’s experiences
are concerned. In the case of our Light A Fire enterprise, it was
when we were crushed and humiliated in seemingly utter
defeat, languishing in prison, that Grace came to our rescue.
And ironically, it was there where we were humbled and
helpless, lonely and in silence, that we gained the respect of
our captors and jailors, including the sympathy and kindness
from chief martial-law architects and enforcers, such as Juan
Ponce Enrile and even Ferdinand Marcos himself! It was there
too where we realized that we ought to have kept faith with
our Faith and according to the teachings and examples of our
genuine Catholic and Christian mentors, Jesuits or otherwise,
for “without Christ we can do nothing.” And without humility
and suffering too, Christ will not come to us, in us.
In hindsight, when we proudly thought that we were
practicing our Christian Family Movement (CFM) motto,

circa 1963, of “bringing Christ to the marketplace,” we were
in fact oftentimes bringing only our dirty proud selves!
Albeit as “activists,” but bereft of the necessary spiritual
nourishment . . .
Our Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, has reiterated essentially
the same message of This Tremendous Lover in his Novo Millennio
Ineunte’s marching orders for the next millennium, where he
says [underscoring added]:
The life of faith (NMI, II-20) How had Peter come to this
faith? And what is asked of us, if we wish to follow in
his footsteps with ever greater conviction? Matthew
gives us an enlightening insight in the words with which
Jesus accepts Peter’s confession: “Flesh and blood has not
revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven”
(16:17). The expression “flesh and blood” is a reference to
man and the common way of understanding things. In
the case of Jesus, this common way is not enough. A grace
of “revelation” is needed, which comes from the Father
(cf. ibid.).
Starting Afresh From Christ (NMI, III-29) It is prayer
which roots us in this truth. It constantly reminds us
of the primacy of Christ and, in union with him, the
primacy of the interior life and holiness. When this
principle is not respected, is it any wonder that pastoral
plans come to nothing and leave us with a disheartening
sense of frustration? We then share the experience of the
disciples in the Gospel story of the miraculous catch of
fish: “We have toiled all night and caught nothing” (Lk
5:5). This is the moment of faith, of prayer, of conversation
with God, in order to open our hearts to the tide of grace
and allow the word of Christ to pass through us in all
its power: Duc in altum! On that occasion, it was Peter
who spoke the word of faith: “At your word I will let
down the nets” (ibid.). As this millennium begins, allow
the Successor of Peter to invite the whole Church to
make this act of faith, which expresses itself in a renewed
commitment to prayer.

In contrast to the words of This Tremendous Lover and His
Holiness Pope John Paul II, let us go back to Jesuits Arrupe,
Kolvenbach, Bernas, Nebres et al., and their denigration of our
past Jesuit education, and in effect, of ALL Catholic schools,
on the basis of their supposed lack of training and emphasis
on justice. Thus Jesuit Father Joaquin Bernas’ subsequent re-
definition, surely as part of his pastoral role as a Catholic
priest at the Ateneo University, of Catholic and Christian
education that gives primary emphasis to the “insatiable hunger
for knowledge (because knowledge can lead to an appreciation
of mystery and to a sense of wonder),” is necessarily, albeit
implicitly meant to correct such a lack of emphasis on justice.
But there is a great divide between talking and preaching
about the promotion of justice through the acquisition of
knowledge, as against being in the state of virtuous Justice!
The obligations and strictures of secular and economic justice
especially its superior supernatural version, the virtue of Justice,
cannot simply be obtained by the acquisition of knowledge.
In fact our entire experience as a people incontrovertibly
proves the opposite to be more applicable. It is the few most
knowledgeable among us who become the most wealthy
and powerful, and yet the most culpable beneficiaries and
perpetrators of political, economic, and social injustice in our
land!
By their supposedly new but essentially secular and elitist
human system, will therefore their individual and corporate
Jesuit efforts yet still be consistent with their primary vocation
as CATHOLIC PRIESTS? Neo-Jesuits are supposedly paragons as
promoters of justice, and will have soon transformed them-
selves and their students to be unselfish “men and women for
others.”
But without the condition-precedent of sine qua non conscious,
persevering, and HUMBLE cultivation of love for Christ in the
Trinity, for His Mother in her virginity, and the Sacraments
in their efficacy, while being obedient to the teachings of the

Catholic Magisterium, will their human efforts not be anything
less than futile? Without those ENABLING FACTORS, would not
their educational efforts produce merely SELFISH men and
women albeit supposedly dedicated “for others”? Can we
have genuine love for others, WITHOUT a prior love for God? For
without genuine love, true justice will not prevail.
And if not, surely S.A. Tan will be flying and gloating, horns
over tail, in satanic glee! I wish I were wrong . . .
While it is true that there can be no real charity or love
without true justice, neither can there be real justice as a virtue
without true Faith and Love. For Justice is a mere derivative of
Love. As St. Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 13, “If I speak with
human tongues and angelic as well, but do not have love, I am
a noisy gong, a clashing cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy
and with full knowledge, comprehend all mysteries, (or) if I
have faith great enough to move mountains, but have NOT love,
I am nothing. If I give everything I have to feed the poor and
hand over my body to be burned, but have NOT love, I gain
nothing!”
The 99.999% Distribution
I have heard or read that same well-known passage from St.
Paul’s Epistle hundreds of times over the years. Heaven knows
that I myself need to be reminded sternly of it more often than
my old pride will admit its necessity.
Hence in prison, I coined the applicable phrase: “The
99.999% Distribution.” I used it during the in-prison seminar
Otto Jimenez and I gave to ourselves and our Light A Fire
prison mates on the subject of Faith, Reason, and Ideology.
From 1 Colossians 24, we deduced that Christ as Redeemer
merited so to speak, 99.999% credit for the full salvation of
mankind, deliberately leaving 0.001% for His people in the
Church or Mystical Body to complete that which “is lacking in
the sufferings of Christ for the sake of his (mystical body), the
Church.” But to fulfill our full individual share of that 0.001%

of what is “lacking,” it will require a similar 99.999% of our
own individual goodwill and efforts.
And so Heaven knows too that even now, for me to reach
the safety of the entrance to the “Narrow Gate,” my friends,
relatives, and favorite Saints here on earth, in Purgatory,
or in Heaven already, will have to supplement my own
actual contribution. That is the beauty and consolation of
participating in such “communion of Saints”! For the whole
Church is not just the militant church here on earth with all
its living members’ faults and weaknesses. There are the two
other and more powerful and more charitable sections of the
whole Church, the Church Suffering, the Church Triumphant,
plus the Head, Christ Himself.
We re-learned those articles of our Faith quite well in prison.
But I believe we still need to remember and re-learn the same
and more so, outside the small but spiritually less dangerous
prison walls of Camp Crame, Muntinlupa, and Bicutan. It is
inside the larger surroundings of the whole world that is far
more dangerous, with its many hard-to-notice quicksands of
pride and disobedience. S.A. Tan clearly lurks around those
traps to suffocate its unwary but proud victims.

Chapter 8
HEAVEN’S HOUND
AND THE LEGION OF MARY
The bloom of Society of the Divine Word (S.V.D.) Fr. Donald

Mulrenan’s thousand dollars and Cistercian Dom Eugene
Boylan’s Tremendous Lover led me sometime in June of 1963 to
the small Bicol town of Camalig in Albay, where the Franciscan
parish priest was conducting one of the earliest Cursillo de
Cristianidad experiments in the Philippines. It was my elder
brother Tito, whom the Hound had also caught, who brought
me to Camalig! He was found by accident some years earlier
working as the alalay, or gofer, and seeing-eye of a half blind
Iglesia ni Cristo pastor in Tondo, Manila. Tito came all the way
from Guinobatan to Manila to plead with me to “spend three
whole days in Camalig.”
My usual pride in my supposedly superior knowledgeability
in Faith matters almost prevailed once more. But seeing him
bubbling with a new joy in his rediscovered Catholicism
intrigued me enough to consent, despite pressing appointments
related to my financial problems. Besides, Daisie didn’t mind,
being used to my frequent absences from home “on business
trips.”
Short Courses in Christianity
As with Boylan’s book, again there was really nothing
new in the Cursillo Rollos. My blasé attitude started to tone
down, however, when the Rector read and explained some
of the unusually creative and difficult palancas, or sacrifices
and spiritual offerings on our behalf. I softened up even
more during the surprise early dawn serenading, or mañanita,
especially when I recognized Tito and my old friends from
Heaven’s Hound and the Legion of Mary 115

nearby Legazpi City among the solemn and angelic-like choir
at 3 o’ clock in the morning, with guitars or candles in hand,
raining flowers on us.
But the Hound really broke me down after the Rollo on the
priesthood. It was graphically centered on the life and role of
priests as alter Christi. I suddenly realized then that it was my
cowardice and lack of generosity in being intimidated, through
lack of faith, by the prospects of such “emptying” of one’s self
while laboring in the vineyard with its consequent loneliness.
I then truly regretted my missed opportunities at the Jesuits’
Sacred Heart Novitiate in Novaliches. I flew back to Metro
Manila determined to make amends. The Hound had scored
again. And Tito was in a rapture!
My first recruit to Camalig was Fr. Gerhard Prinz, a Dutch
missionary who was the parish priest of the Holy Redeemer
Church near Sta. Mesa Heights in Quezon City. He came
back to thank me profusely, with his synthetic glass-eye
almost popping out of its socket in appreciation and joy while
recounting his 3-day-long encounter with Bicolanos filled with
the Spirit.
I also wrote to His Eminence Rufino Cardinal Santos, then
Archbishop of Metro Manila, describing my recent experience
in Camalig, and to ask him to lift his prohibition on the entry of
the Cursillo into his archdiocese. After the 30 minute audience
he graciously granted to me, hitherto a complete stranger to
him, he was still a little ambivalent. He promised to “study
the matter.” Nevertheless, my De Colores friends such as old
widower Eugene Lola, who later won the hand of Ambassador
Sebastian’s daughter Linda (our former neighbors in Vito
Cruz, Singalong before the war), were even more prayerfully
hopeful than me. In a few months the first Cursillo in Metro
Manila was allowed to be held at the old Casa del Clero in
Mandaluyong. His Eminence had relented!
From then on there seemed to be no way to stop its progress.
Like many of my De Colores colleagues, even before the Casa

del Clero was won over, I must have brought in directly
and indirectly at least a hundred friends, including casual
acquaintances, to Cursillos as far away as Albay, Sorsogon,
Laguna, Lipa, and Tagaytay. The whole of Metro Manila was
soon ringing with shouts and songs of De Colores!
But S.A. Tan was even then in counter-attack. We were
oblivious of it except perhaps His Eminence Cardinal Santos.
The Demon must have been salivating early enough, because
many of us were congratulating and giving credit to ourselves,
almost exclusively, for having “converted” our sinner friends.
The poor Hound’s eyes must have been pitiful to behold at
those times. Even the Church authorities were getting edgy
about the many deviations and short-cuts made by half-baked
Cursillo lay-Rectors and Rollo speakers.
The Legacy of Frank Duff of Dublin in Ireland
Fortunately, a fellow Cursillista, the late fellow Bicolano Jose
“Joe” Erestain Sr., then recently retired as Chief Auditor of
the City of Manila, recruited me and several other De Colores
cronies/recruits of mine, into the Legion of Mary. The Legion’s
Senatus even allowed us to form immediately a new Praesidium,
entitled Mother of the Church. It was just a few weeks after Our
Lady was officially bestowed this newest title by Vatican II.
The Legion, with its low-key, sober, strictly detailed
methodology, and Marian-oriented spirituality was the ideal
counter-balance to the emotion-prone deviations from and
in disobedience to the original Cursillo Manual. And these
were fast getting out of hand. S.A. Tan’s counter-attack was
gathering steam, with most of us ignoring the obvious whys-
and-wherefores.
The weekly Saturday afternoon meetings of our Praesidium
were held in the still unfinished basement of the Carmel Shrine
in the old Broadway street in New Manila, under the personal
auspices of the Shrine’s Rector, Carmelite Fr. Mark Horan.
Fr. Mark was also a Cursillista and a former associate of Dom

Eugene Boylan. We immediately struck it well with him as our
Spiritual Director. By then most of my co-legionaires in the
Praesidium had read my copy of This Tremendous Lover, and
Fr. Mark also joined us in our monthly Cursillo Ultreyas, where
we all looked forward to its allotted time for sharing our most
recent instances of having felt the presence of “Christ in us.”
The Hound had vastly enlarged his turf, there with Fr. Mark at
Our Lady’s Carmel shrine.
We were visiting, consoling, counseling, and assisting our
most unfortunate brothers and sisters in hospitals, squatters’
hovels, and anywhere we found them. But other than to look
for jobs for them or to refer them to other charitable institutions,
we refrained from giving direct material aid except in dire
emergencies. We were also strictly obeying the policy of going
out on our weekly apostolic trips at least in pairs, and starting
with a joint prayer, preferably before the Blessed Sacrament.
Seeing and communicating with victims of the sorriest
misfortunes among our poorest brothers and sisters all but
erased my own self pity for my business misfortunes, at least
in my worried mind. Compared to theirs, mine was a trifle. I
began to enjoy thoroughly my Cursillo and Legion of Mary
work, often times even at the expense of my business enterprise
and the “quality time” I owed “in justice” to Daisie and my
children.
Instead I spent much more time with my favorite Legion-
partner and eventual compadre, Ben “Nonoy” Lim. Nonoy was
married to Inez Paredes, daughter of the late former Senate
President Quintin Paredes. If only we knew then, that Nonoy
was “destined” to be arrested as a Light A Fire suspect even
earlier than Otto Jimenez and me, some 15 years later . . .
When Atty. Leopoldo “Pol” Repotente, another Cursillo/
Legion recruit and side kick of mine, and yours truly returned
to visit our old Praesidium some 30 years later, we were
astounded to learn that Mother of the Church had become a
great-grandmother many times over! More than ten other

Praesidia had been generated, as fruits and gifts to the Hound
and Our Lady, by those whom we had left behind and proudly
but mistakenly thought would not survive without us.
By hindsight, December of 1964 at the height of my Legion
and Cursillo involvement was easily the happiest Christmas
season I ever experienced as an adult. Despite the worsening
situation of my business ventures, I still felt I was on Cloud
Nine. I distinctly remember hearing for the first time the
Christmas carol “The Little Drummer Boy” at the Cartimar
market in Pasay City. Its music and its lyrics somehow left me
then and for the rest of the season, moist-eyed but lighthearted
as when I was a true Pocholo. Like the little boy in the lyrics, I
too had nothing to offer the Child and His Mother, nothing but
“me and my drum.”
To paraphrase St. John of the Cross, the Hound was feeding
me with milk and honey, but it would not last for very long.
Dry bread and water would soon be my frequent repast. Then
material success and my pride would take over again, and
I would rebel to gorge myself with scraps of desirable but
despicable and sickening flesh, or revel in Mammon’s lucre
with its poisoned fruits of high living and forever keeping up
with my wealthier neighbors.
But Frank Duff’s legacy was certainly not wasted. Again and
again over the next forty years, the spirit of his Legion of Our
Lord and Our Lady’s warriors, most of whom must now be
enjoying their reward in Heaven, have somehow pricked my
conscience at the most timely occasions. And in my humble
opinion, it is this Legion of Mary and others of kindred spirits
such as the Marian Movement of Priests, especially here in the
Philippines, which will lead our country and the whole world
into the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the
Reign of the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

Chapter 9
MY IBM AND HARVARD YEARS
My continuing education for business was as an “Authorized

Dealer” of DMG, Inc. for Volkswagen “Beetle” cars, Henschel
trucks, and David Brown farm tractors. I was simultaneously
also a dealer of Universal Motors Corporation (UMC) for
Mercedes Benz cars, trucks, and UNIMOG multi-purpose vehicles.
The business venture came to a screeching halt soon after the
New Year of 1965.
School of Hard Knocks

It was just like my previous failure in 1961 where my partners
in the trucking and selling of Baguio Mountain Province
vegetables were future Senator/Congressman Agapito “Butz”
Aquino, Ninoy Aquino’s younger brother, and Butz’ pal
Bobby Hernandez. Bobby was the son of former Secretary of
Education Gregorio Hernandez who died in the same plane
crash as President Magsaysay. Our marketing Manager then
was UPSCA President Emanuel “Noel” Soriano. Noel would
later become President Cory Aquino’s National Security
Adviser. By hindsight 44 years later, our management was too
top heavy!
Actually, it was I who was again too much of a naively
accommodating salesman, too lax or even ignorant on credit
and collection matters. I piled up some P500,000 worth of
uncollectible “bouncing checks” made and postdated by third
parties unknown to me, and installment payments given on
tenuous credit terms to disappearing farmers and truckers
in the provinces. I had also indiscriminately accepted their
Promissory Notes, despite the negative “With Recourse” caveat

of the financing company, First Acceptance and Investment
Corporation, owned by the then famous del Rosario brothers,
and later by Alfonso Yuchengco.
I got back something valuable from all of the painful
experience though, when I used it as material for a term paper
at Harvard, entitled: “How NOT to run a Business!”
My Tuition Fees
At the end of the day, my Surety Bond was called in favor of
DMG, Inc. Its real estate collateral, consisting of my share and
those of my brothers and sisters in our herencia from Mama
and Lola, was taken by the bonding company Manila Surety.
I had used my personal funds earlier in 1962 to redeem those
properties, including the conjugal properties of Papa and our
stepmother, at the very last day of their allowable redemption
period from the Philippine National Bank (PNB). The bank had
already foreclosed on the various mortgages after Papa died
in 1957. I had paid the long overdue interest and principal,
and subsequently used the titles as clean collateral for the
Surety Bonds. Our dealership also owed UMC some hundred
thousand pesos more!
I chose NOT to declare and claim the benefits of a legal and
honest corporate bankruptcy, but naively decided to “take the
punishment like a man” as Fr. William L. Hayes S.J. used to
tell his “POST” constituency at the Ateneo de Naga. Eventually,
UMC threatened to sue me in court in 1969 just when the
Harvard Business School notified me of their acceptance.
The Tañada Father and Son
There was no way I could pay more than a hundred thou-
sand pesos plus its huge accumulated interest and penalties,
though I was already a Sales Manager in IBM. Without any
legal assistance which I could not afford, I struck an amicable
settlement with UMC sometime in 1969 through their legal
counsel, the Tañada Law Office. That was when I met the
My IBM and Harvard Years 121

Tañada advocates for the first time albeit under unpleasant
circumstances. If not for the fact that Atty. Wigberto “Bobby”
Tañada, himself destined to be a Senator after the EDSA revolution,
took pity on me and advised his father, then Senator Lorenzo
M. Tañada, to convince their client UMC to grant me the most
lenient terms of settlement, I would not have been able to go to
Harvard due to the legal and embarrassing complications of a
court case that would surely have followed.
Thanks to the pater et filius, I was allowed to pay only the
minimal installment of P400 a month and without any interest
charges on the principal due! I finished paying it off some 20
years later in 1986, just a few months after I was released from
prison in January . . .
While writing these very lines, I realized for the first time
that even when the “grand old man” was already visiting
me regularly in prison and had developed a father-and-son
relationship between his client and himself as “the” unknown
(to Marcos and the military prosecutors) co-accused, being the
biggest “John Doe” among several others, he never mentioned
nor even hinted that he had been a benefactor to me, a foolish
stranger in distress some eleven years earlier. Oh may his soul
have rested already in the PEACE that lasts forever and which
I’m sure he surely deserves!
The Big Blue
In the meantime in 1965, there was my youngest sister
Gavs, who knew all about my business venture that was fast
going down the drain. She was staying with us in our rented
house at 22 Dr. Lazcano Street in Diliman, Quezon City. Gavs,
providentially, had a very timely idea. She suggested that I
apply for the job of Data Processing Salesman-Trainee at IBM
Philippines where she was the Executive Secretary of the Sales
Manager, Ruperto K. Capistrano.
Again my usual pride immediately rose up to object! Why
should I drop myself as President and General Manager of

a modest-size company, down to the lowest rung of Sales
Trainee? And in an industry peddling complicated equipment
I knew nothing about! But then I had no choice but to swallow
my pride at least for a while. Otherwise, my kids—Daisie and
I had already four of an eventual brood of five—might even go
hungry and drop out from their schools.
I soon submitted to the humiliation of being interviewed by
an array of skeptical executives, some of them much younger
than I was and with less than half of my management and
selling experience, plus a psychological test and a series of 3-
hour examinations in English, Math, and practical problem
solving. It was the usual IQ test.
I was later told that I obtained one of the highest grades ever,
and that my starting pay as Trainee, in the handsome amount
then of P900 per month with two extra months’ pay every year-
end, was a shocking “rate-buster”! True enough, there it was
in the records of the Data Processing Sales Department when
I became its Manager in barely three years by 1968. Indeed,
my entry pay level in 1965 was almost double that of other
managers and instructors who were my trainors, including a
certain Otto Jimenez, our best Instructor at the IBM Education
Center.
Fortunately I could not and would not disappoint my IBM
bosses, particularly Jose “Pempot” Arguelles, the General
Manager; Jim Doyle, Pempot’s soon-to-take over successor;
Rupert Capistrano, then our Sales Manager; and Oscar Anson,
my fellow Bicolano from Guinobatan’s next-door neighbor
town of Camalig. Mr. Anson is also the father of Boots Anson
Roa, a very talented former actress, TV host, and broadcaster
who was an unsuccessful candidate for Senator last May 2004.
My sister Gavs above all was even happier, not only for
me and IBM, but also because she had been accepted to be a
postulant by the Religious of the Good Shepherd nuns. Gavs
too had been willingly seduced by the Hound after reading my
copy of This Tremendous Lover . . .

D-Day: April Fool’s Day
On April 1, 1965, I reported for work, nay for schooling,
at IBM Philippines’ Education Center at the second floor of
the SGV building along Ayala Avenue in Makati. Weeks
beforehand, I had fortunately sold off most of my company’s
assets to Felix Q. Chua, a Chinese businessman from Batac,
Ilocos Norte. Mr. Chua had become a very good friend,
despite knowing I was always in financial distress. Felix was
also my personal banker, lending sums sans any interest for a
few days or weeks, by exchanging his personal checks with
my corporation’s post-dated equivalent. He was also a close
personal friend and main fund raiser of his Congressman—
town mate Ferdinand E. Marcos!
Three years earlier in April of 1962 when I was desperately
in need of a real big amount, he asked that I first stay overnight
in his palatial house in Batac to pray, while he consulted his
Treasurer and wife, Batac’s well-known beauty and brains
and relative of Ferdinand Marcos, the former Miss Carmen
Daguio! The next morning was Monday of Holy Week. Felix
was grinning from ear-to-ear when I came out for breakfast at
their ornate dining room. Mrs. Carmen Daguio Chua turned
out to be a most gracious and engaging host. I then knew that
my immediate problem was solved.
The Chuas bought, cold cash in advance, a diesel-powered
Model 990 Henschel truck, the biggest and most expensive
10-tonner I had available, even if they had already more than
enough trucks for their tobacco trading operations. He also
convinced his elder brother, the late Judge Julian Q. Chua, to
buy our long unsold second-hand, but souped up with bells-
and-whistles thus terribly gas-guzzling, Buick sedan.
Three years later that summer in 1965, Felix came to my
aid once again, for the nth time, thus enabling me to join IBM.
And so I had more than enough “bread” from the Chuas’
buy-out of all our Carry-All Marketing Corporation’s dying

dealership’s assets to pay all of my smaller creditors, to leave
Daisie a generous kitty for our children’s school fees, and to
buy a few nice suits and matching ties for myself. Back then
it was de rigueur in all of IBM worldwide, that their salesmen
always wore dark suits over white shirts and striped neckties
with black shoes, whenever and wherever they made customer
calls.
To this day, everyday whenever I pray to or for the Holy
Souls or to San Lorenzo Ruiz our Chinese-Filipino and first
local saint, I always remember my generous friends, the Felix
Chua family of Batac, Ilocos Norte. And so too for my many
other ethnic Chinese friends, deceased, or still around, who
have been my generous customers, suppliers, friends, and
benefactors all these years.
Back to School
An IBM salesman’s full training course was then normally
set for at least one whole year to as long as 18 months. Each
one also had to pass the graded oral and written exams on
all of IBM’s Electronic Data Processing (EDP) Systems and
their myriad business and scientific applications, and the
corresponding field-test assignments. By the way, to hire sales
people of the same gender as Eve was verboten at that time.
After completing such a long and arduous training period but
with full regular pay, then and only then would a sales trainee
be promoted to regular status as a full-fledged salesman, with
stiff yearly sales and installation quotas. The corporate culture’s
year-round pressure at IBM was almost unbearable! Especially
for neophytes who could not meet their sales quotas and install
and operate, without bugs, previously ordered equipment on
the scheduled dates and to the satisfaction of the customer.
As added motivation, a one-week all-expenses-paid junket
abroad was always given, on top of a substantial increase in
“total compensation,” if a salesman sold and installed 100%
of his previous year’s assigned quota. The catch was, an

increase in compensation also meant a substantial increase in
the salesman’s assigned quota! Nevertheless, membership in
that “100% Club” was the highest accolade given to Field Sales
personnel.
Very much in need of these hoped-for regular increases in
total compensation, and unwilling to be humiliated by my
younger peers from rival universities, I forced myself to excel
during those first three-months of my introduction to EDP.
Our initial training class was on Unit Record equipment, or
what was commonly known as IBM Punch Card accounting
machine systems. Otto Jimenez was our instructor!
During the one month break before the next segment, my
direct boss, Cesar Anson, assigned me to the unattended
sales territory left by Danny Carreon, a 100% Club member
for 5 straight years. Years later in 1976, Danny, an older co-
alumnus from the U.P. College of Engineering, would be my
choice as my successor as President of the Philippines’ biggest
transportation company, Pantranco North. But early in 1965,
Danny had quit IBM and joined Mobil Oil to be relieved from
IBM’s pressure-packed EDP sales milieu.
The IBM users and prospects Danny left in his sales territory
were now “in shambles,” with millions of pesos in long overdue
and unpaid rental fees, with no new sales prospects. And the
competition, such as NCR and Burroughs, were at the brink of
replacing our equipment at our biggest and most prestigious
customer, the Manila Electric Company, MERALCO. Under those
parlous circumstances, Danny Carreon’s former sales territory
was assigned to me as my training ground, with the terse
instruction to “do what you can as soon as possible!”
A Hungry and Ambitious IBM Salesman
Surprise! I was able to collect all the huge and long overdue
receivables from the Armed Forces of the Philippines’ (AFP)
OTAG-Finance Center; from the AFP Logistics Center whose
head was General Francisco Licuanan, the father of President

Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s wonder manager “Kiko” Licuanan;
and from the National Waterworks & Sewerage Authority
(NAWASA).
With the Hound’s help and my Legion of Mary skills in
dealing with ordinary people, and my Carry-All Marketing
field sales experience on motor vehicles, I was able to sell full-
blown but soon to be obsolete IBM Unit Record Systems, to
three new accounts! Yutivo Motors was the national distributor/
manufacturer for General Motors’ Chevrolet cars and trucks.
Delta Motors was the fast-rising distributor of Toyota cars. My
third customer was the Firearms and Explosives (my karma!)
Division of the Philippine Constabulary, now the Philippine
National Police. All in one month’s time! Without any help
from anybody in IBM.
My boss Cesar Anson was on Cloud Ten. He would get ALL
the hugely generous sales commissions for all three accounts,
myself being just a Trainee and strictly prohibited from being
paid or to share in any sales commission. Once again, dura lex,
sed lex!
I comforted myself with the thought that at least I would get
a modest salary raise by the end of the year at the earliest, or at
least by the next April upon completion of one whole year as an
IBM’er. Wrong! In a week’s time, Cesar Anson ceremoniously
handed me my new paycheck. I got a hefty 33 1/3% increase in
my monthly pay! Plus Cesar’s prolonged embraces and further
congratulations from Pempot Arguelles, Jim Doyle, Rupert
Capistrano, and even from the most feared executive in IBM
Philippines, Conrad Hernandez, the Comptroller and Chief
Finance Officer. Conrad was so pleased to have my Receivables
Collection feat available as proof of the overriding importance
of his perennial complaint and battle cry against his peer, Sales
Manager Rupert Capistrano, that “a sale is no sale unless the
cash register rings!”
Ironically, my behavioral reactions to my initial success
as an IBM’er and salesman, surely obtained with the help of

Heaven’s Hound, merely sowed the early seeds of my eventual
spiritual decline. For my tickled-pink amor propio had once
again received a big boost from Mammon: inflated flatteries
from well meaning testimonials, ladled with IBM’s generous
pay increases; easy-to-justify expense account money for
spending or bragging about; and recognition from my peers
and neighbor “Joneses” to boot.
Food, Fun and Fellowship
Compared to my previous sales and collection forays
as a greenhorn entrepreneur, this time I had behind me the
overwhelming prestige and business clout of IBM which then
controlled 80% of the electronic data processing market in the
Philippines as well as worldwide. I could invite anybody for
lunch, dinner, or snacks and charge it to my expense account.
Moreover, I kept the IBM Philippines top brass, including
IBM Comptroller Conrad Hernandez, happy with my strict
adherence to Thomas Watson Sr.’s “no bribe” policy and
corporate culture of “pursuit of excellence,” plus the thrifty
level of my “gross marketing expense-to-revenue ratio”!
With Conrad Hernandez’ advice to use a credit card receipt
with the barest description of “Food and Drinks,” I also got
around IBM’s “No (Hard) Liquor” policy. Besides and in truth,
ordinary beer could not be “hard liquor.” I had learned from
experience that the most efficient and effective cost-benefit for
expense accounts, was when you used it most discriminately,
and on the lowest ranking but most dependable “inside sales
helpers” within the customer’s organization. My Legion
of Mary training and experience in quickly establishing a
genuine “footing of friendship” with common folks came in
most handily.
And so the real powers behind the thrones of generals and
big bosses were the first ones I identified and befriended. They
were usually the personal secretaries and drivers, or the aides-
de-camp, the lowly Master Sergeants or at most Captains, or

the young professionals who were the real workhorses and
thinkers of general managers, military generals, and the like.
Instead of bringing them to expensive restaurants where they
would become shy and self-conscious in front of the top brass,
I brought the food over to their offices—lunch or merienda with
lots of beer and pulutan (hors d’ oeuvres!), in imitation of our
great Baguio Apache tradition of “food, fun and fellowship!”
But my most effective tool was IBM’s motto of Think and
Education! I rewarded my best inside sales helpers with an
IBM Punch Card signed by my IBM boss or later by myself
alone, that entitled the bearer to free IBM Philippines training.
Actually, it was hitherto supposed to be strictly reserved
for customers and serious sales prospects. I dispensed these
extremely valuable freebies in favor of my customers’ relatives
who were prospective migrants to the U.S. From Keypunch
Training all the way to Computer Programming, these free
but best-in-the-world education on technology would enable
many of them to migrate abroad and land cushy jobs with
IBM customers especially in the U.S. of A! I was quickly consi-
dered by their relatives, office mates, and parent-generals
as “one of them” with no chance whatsoever for anybody
from NCR or Burroughs, our main competitors, even to be
politely entertained, especially in the military establishment,
where many of my “inside sales assistants” were Ilocanos or
Bicolanos.
My Baguio Apache and Guinobatan roots, coupled with my
Legion of Mary experience, indeed had made me a five-star
IBM Salesman in combination with the fact that the erstwhile
Pocholo was a real “hungry fighter” in a desperate hurry to
pay back his debts to others, to himself, and to his family above
all.
‘Workaholicking’
Since childhood, high school, and college, I was used to hard
work and sleepless nights. In my entrepreneurial business

ventures, I had made a habit of working 16 hours daily Monday
to Saturday, except when Cursillo and Legion of Mary work
prevented me. As a rookie IBM Salesman, truth to tell, it was no
big deal that I worked practically and regularly for 16 hours a
day, thinking and doing IBM work, seven days a week! During
that particularly frenzied one month period where I sold three
new accounts beginning from the first customer call to contract
signing, I barely slept for more than 5 hours at night except on
weekends. For if I could play chess and/or mahjong and/or
drink “Virgin Coke” (beer with gin and coca-cola!) with my
Baguio Apache cronies while playing chess or mahjong up to
the wee hours of dawn, and do it again the following day with
just a few hours break to sleep and to bathe, while squandering
hard-earned money doing so, I could just as easily and more
willingly spend the same amount of emotional and physical
energy trying to earn honest money for Daisie and my children.
That’s what I told myself.
But the real truth was something else! It was the thrill of
competition among and against the country’s cream of the
crop, feeding off my bleeping pride and hunger for recognition.
These were my real motivations for my workaholic tendency.
My IBM work was just another intellectual activity but far more
rewarding, in psychic and financial terms, than my previous
academic studies, chess, or mahjong. In short, my pride and
S.A. Tan had cleverly lured me into a most subtle idolatry—
for material success and advancement in IBM. In sum, self-
idolatry . . .
An IBM sales proposal for a New Name account would
normally take at least three whole weeks to finish, if one were
lucky and IBM’s typing pool personnel (no PC’s then yet) were
sufficiently available. Luckily, I had made friends with the
lowly typists and secretaries in other departments. Thus, in
addition to the regular typing pool, I always had an available
typist to work on my sales proposals—simultaneously, without
any distractions, especially on Saturdays and Sundays, with

or without overtime pay. I was therefore unconsciously using
the computer-based techniques of “multi-tasking and multi-
programming”!
A sales proposal also used to be at least several inches thick
with a lot of systems flow-charts and sample report formats.
I got away with the barest minimum, on the basis of my
customer’s trust in my competence, and that I knew what I was
doing and recommending for them to buy or rent, even when a
lot of money was involved.
“I fled Him down in labyrinthine ways . . .”
All these successes went mostly to my already bloated head.
I wanted more, and more. This time, not just one more kiss
from somebody of the same gender as Eve, but one more major
technical and financial accomplishment. Also, my erstwhile
beer-lined wallet was forever trying to keep in step with a
newly acquired wine or cognac-with-cheese taste. Again, but
this time more expensively maintained, these were the thrills
and follies of a noveau-riche.
Fortunately or unfortunately, during that first year of
selling for IBM in 1966, with barely five months of the required
one-year formal classroom training, I still met my stiff sales-
and-installation quota with more than flying colors, despite a
midyear increase of almost 50% more in my NET quota. For I was
routinely slapped, without realizing it at all, a very stiff DEBIT
penalty for the loss to NCR of my installed Meralco customer
account. Everybody who knew of its circumstances assured
me the Meralco loss should definitely not have been blamed
on me. I came into the picture when it was already practically
lost. But those were the rules of the IBM sales game. Again,
dura lex, sed lex!
In compensation and later restitution however, IBM
proclaimed me as Rookie of the Year within the entire Asia-
Pacific area covering Japan, Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, the
Philippines, Hongkong, Indonesia, Taipei, Singapore, and

Burma! Coming home from the 100% Club convention held in
Taipei, I was also immediately sent to Los Angeles, Denver,
Pittsburgh, Detroit, Ann Arbor, Chicago, and New York to
their various special advanced “IBM Sales and Computer
Application” schools, to compensate for my truncated training
in IBM Philippines, and as part of my Rookie of the Year prize.
Plus, another hefty increase in pay!
On my return from abroad where I topped my Sales School
class in Denver, Colorado and was thus given the honor of
giving the valedictory talk, I was immediately promoted to the
rank of management, in charge of a quintet of Sales Trainees
and Junior Salesmen as their Section Manager. Among them
was Roberto R. “Bobby” Romulo, the future Philippine
Foreign Secretary and son of the famous Pulitzer Prize Winner
and Foreign Minister of Dictator-President Ferdinand Marcos,
Carlos P. Romulo. It was also “CPR” himself through Bobby’s
suggestion who later provided me with a most flattering letter-
recommendation for my acceptance at the Harvard Business
School. That he eventually became my Fallen Idol during the
Martial Law period, is part of another story altogether.
Climbing Up Was Going Down!
I did even better on my second year of sales in 1967. After
only six months as Section Manager, I was given a second
promotion, this time as Industry Marketing Manager for all
government accounts, public utilities, schools and universities,
and the automotive and manufacturing industries. The
Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) and the Social
Security System (SSS), Meralco, the Philippine Long Distance
Telephone Company (PLDT), International Harvester, Procter
and Gamble, Ford Philippines, Nestlé, the Armed Forces of
the Philippines, and all local governments were all part of my
team’s enlarged territory.
The one-week long 100% Club convention for us Asia
Pacific 1967 awardees was held, to our chagrin, in Manila

starting on March 25, 1968, which coincided with the solemn
Feast of Our Lady’s Annunciation! Unfortunately I couldn’t, or
more precisely, I would not accompany Daisie and my 3-year-
old daughter Ditas to Cabra, a godforsaken islet in Mindoro
province. Cabra was where Our Lady appeared on that day
to a group of poor, little girls in the midst of Fatima-like
manifestations in the surrounding skies.
I spent most of our convention time at the old Manila Hilton
Hotel playing poker or drinking the deliberately unused gin
taken from dozens of Baked Alaska cakes. We ordered and
charged these to my expense account, in order to get around
IBM’s “No Hard Liquor” policy!
That year of 1968 was still another banner period for me and
IBM. But as far as the Hound was concerned, I was already
deep in high-living and IDOLATRY, and a “drop-out” from the
Cursillo’s Ultreyas, the Christian Family Movement, and the
Legion of Mary. I was just “too busy” and too ambitious to
boot.
Thus in August of 1968 I was again promoted, a quick
successive third time, as the overall Sales and Systems
Engineering Manager for the Philippines. At the end of the
year, I was singled out from the entire EDP Sales organization
of IBM outside of the continental U.S., to be given the Top
Performer Award for 1968, over and above my 100% Club prize.
The award was given in New York City in May of 1969 after
which I could go anywhere in the whole wide world on a 3-
week (including the usual one week as 100% Club awardee)
all-expense paid vacation and travel bonanza for anywhere
and everywhere.
I chose to wander around in Europe where I could vicariously
re-live in dolce vita circumstances, the joys and fears associated
with the heroes and villains of the many old classic books and
World War II battle stories I had read, with Europe as their
setting.

Goodbye Mr. Chips
Throughout those years of achievement, the erstwhile
pocholo had also become the obvious niño bonito and friend of
IBM Philippines’ big boss, its General Manager John B. Hooks.
I gained his admiration early during my rookie year as an IBM
Salesman in March of 1966. He had come to help out with our
Meralco customer account problems and later to relieve Jim
Doyle who had command responsibility for that impending
loss. We were then in great danger of losing millions of pesos
in annual rental fees for our largest installed Unit Record and
IBM 1401 System, if replaced by competitor’s equipment. It was
the most intractable problem account left by Danny Carreon.
During that whole week, including the declared “non-
working holidays” from Holy Wednesday to Easter Sunday,
John Hooks saw me several times at the office working up to
very late in the evenings, desperately trying to complete a last
minute technical proposal for a modernized system specifically
designed for Meralco. It was due for submission on Tuesday of
Easter Week. We were proposing to convert our IBM 1401 Card
System to our newest DOS Tape and Disk IBM System 360. I
had barely finished a one-week crash course on the System 360
which nobody in the Philippines had actually seen except John
Hooks. Besides, I did not know a single soul at Meralco, except
soon after when I won the respect and confidence of its popular
Customer Billing and EDP Manager, Gene Guillermo. I had to
start making friends and allies from bare scratch within the
customer’s premises.
Despite Gene Guillermo’s preference for IBM, our naturally
friendly and charming John Hooks soon learned from the
scuttlebutt and unguarded comments of top Meralco executives
and their SGV consultants who were introduced to John at
the Manila Polo Club’s rarefied social gatherings, that “IBM
and Ed Olaguer in particular were like madmen, hopelessly
trying to prevent the impossible.” SGV was then and now the

top rated firm for auditing and management consulting in the
country. True enough, Meralco’s Executive Vice President and
General Manager, Mr. Vicente T. Paterno, a future Cabinet
member of President Marcos and Senator of the Republic, in
due time invited Mr. Hooks and me for lunch at the stylish
Round Table restaurant in Intramuros. But only to inform us
that he and Gene Guillermo had been outvoted. Their other
top executives and consultants’ recommendation against IBM
was approved by the Chairman and Chief Executive himself,
Eugenio Lopez Sr. NCR’s new 315 System with its CRAM (Card
Random Access Machine) and its usual paper-tape generating
auxiliary machines were set to replace our twenty-year-long
established IBM punchcard-based customer billing systems at
Meralco.
Back in the office at Isaac Peral (now U.N. Avenue), I was
teary-eyed but still pugnacious when I looked John Hooks
straight in his face and mumbled: “Sir, Mr. Hooks, I’ll get back
that account, I promise you! The CRAM and paper-tape won’t
work.”
His reply: “I hope so Ed. But if you want me to believe you,
you better start learning to call me by my name. My name is
John!” For in IBM we were expected to call EVERYBODY including
the Founder’s sons, IBM Chairman Thomas Watson Jr. and
IBM World Trade President Arthur K. Watson, by their first
names. But that was in 1966 . . .
John Hooks from then on treated me like he was the usual
strict but most amiable father, which he was. I was among the
few IBM’ers however whom he singled out by inviting me to
his office or to his house for some intimate tete-a-tete about our
jobs and ourselves. But still I never would be comfortable in
addressing him other than as “Mr. Hooks,” or at best as “John
Hooks.” But when he was in a very happy mood on vino veritas
occasions spent with him and IBM Customers’ executives, to
impress them, “John” was his name!

In 1969 he was replaced by another John, Mr. Backman. It
was Hooks’ turn to be teary-eyed with his wife Kathy at his
side, when I bade him goodbye at his IBM-provided house at
Urdaneta Village in Makati. Shyly I gave him a memento in
a gift box inscribed with: “Goodbye Mr. Chips!” My parting
keepsake was my first gold medal earned at St. Theresa’s in
1943. For like Arthur Chips in James Hilton’s old novel, John
Hooks was loved as a teacher, friend, and as a father, by many
of us in IBM Philippines. I had not yet however fulfilled my
promise to him to get the Meralco account back into the IBM
fold. It would take a few more months to dislodge the NCR 315
with our IBM 360 Model 40, the same system I had sold in 1966
to the University of the Philippines. True enough, NCR’s paper-
tape based CRAM system never worked as promised, even
after two years of constant debugging and re-programming!
The Scheming Pocholo’s Ploy
John Hooks left for the United States only after he had fulfilled
an earlier assurance that he would see to it that IBM would
send me to Harvard University’s famous Business School, for
my “management training with all expenses paid.” But only
if I continued with my solid sales and excellent management
performance. He gave that solemn promise to me in June of
1968, in order to dissuade me from my plan (actually a scheme)
to ask IBM for a sabbatical, or be allowed to “resign in good
standing” so that I could pursue my MBA course on a full-time
basis at U.P. or at Harvard if that were possible.
I had already finished a few first-year MBA subjects at U.P.
in 1967. From our previous tete-a-tetes, John had known about
the deeply embedded chip-on-my-shoulder for not having
finished a course in College suitable to my personality and
inclinations. For as far as I was concerned, my shift to a Geodetic
Engineering degree at U.P. was due to financial necessity. And
geodetic surveying, even if astronomy were involved, certainly
was not my vocation!

I deliberately dropped on poor John Hooks what I knew
would be a bombshell. For I had learned earlier in confidence,
that a group of seven of our best and brightest Programmers
and Systems Engineers, the technical support staff without
whom most of our salesmen would be lost at sea so to speak,
would be resigning en masse. The “disgruntled magnificent
seven” was headed by Augusto “Gus” Lagman, who would
eventually be a recruit of mine for Light A Fire purposes!
They had incorporated themselves while Hooks was on home
leave under COMPASS, an all ex-IBM team of Computer
Programming and Systems trainors, teachers, and consultants.
In effect, their mass resignation would severely compromise
IBM’s marketing predominance in the Philippines, and put
their respective bosses’ (including John Hooks!) personnel
motivation skills and management competence under a
heavy cloud. Fortunately, I was not the boss of anyone of the
resignees. But I was the first to inform John Hooks ahead of all
of the seven, about my own “tentative” intention of resigning.
The “magnificent seven” and their irrevocable resignations
were viewed in a completely different light compared to my
own putative intention to follow suit. I would not be competing
with IBM but would seek educational advancement, while the
seven were going to compete head-on against IBM and thus
considered as “disloyalty of the disgruntled.”
All these also coincided with a nationwide ferment among
Filipino executives of multinational companies. The ferment
was triggered, call it by coincidence or karma, by my own
surrogate father and maternal uncle, Augusto Buenaventura.
Tio Agot was the Vice President and most pugnacious officer
of the Caltex Supervisors and Employees Association, which
had taken the hitherto unheard of remedy of going on strike in
protest against the gasoline company’s “expatriate executive”
salaries which were “more than ten times theirs.” For doing
essentially the same or even less difficult work than the natives!
And supporting Tio Agot and his band of pioneer nationalist

executives was no other than Senator Lorenzo Tañada, in the
halls of Congress as well as in the streets of Manila.
I presumed that against such circumstantial background
triggered by Tio Agot and other Pinoy executives at Caltex, John
Hooks’ recommendation for the erstwhile Pocholo to be sent at
IBM’s exclusive expense to the Harvard Business School for
its full two-year MBA program, would be quickly approved.
Correct! Albeit with certain conditions. And so in July 1968,
John Hooks returned to Manila after extended consultations
with his bosses in Tokyo and New York. He wasted no time
in giving me the good news. Harvard was promised to me
provided I stayed and performed well in my new job—that of
IBM Philippines’ Manager for all EDP Salesmen and Systems
Engineers!
The resignation of the seven IBM Systems Engineers and
Computer Programmers, plus my own scheming ploy, were
obviously the main reasons for my unprecedented promotion
and IBM Scholarship grant at the Harvard Business School. The
Caltex executives’ continued picketing and strike led by Tio
Agot, and the resulting investigations in Congress on alleged
discriminations against Filipino executives in multinational
companies, were also very timely.
Harvard University was definitely in sight! The fact that
NBA Professional Basketball stars such as Shaquille O’Neil,
Kobe Bryant, and Vince Carter have resorted to similar schemes
and ploys like mine, will not however convince the Hound
that I did not take advantage of the kindness of my friend and
patron, John Hooks. It was, however, the first and last time
IBM ever gave anybody a Harvard MBA scholarship.
IBM versus the Harvard Business School
Truth to tell, I learned and profited more from IBM than
from the Business School, especially in terms of using and
understanding practical management tools and techniques,
more so if you added to the equation Thomas Watson’s legacy

of excellence and enlightened corporate culture which I
thoroughly absorbed in IBM from 1965 to 1970. Harvard, how-
ever, supplied a complete array for the “whys and wherefores”
of whatever I had already learned from IBM—and even more,
my self-confidence!
In fact my two years in Cambridge and Boston were more
of a vacation for me and my family, especially during the last
year. It was because after the first few weeks of a mild culture
shock at the intensity and diversity of the HBS work and study
load, I soon realized that with a little creative adjustment and
brinkmanship, it was not much different from that of IBM.
This time I didn’t have to compete like mad nor did I care to
gain recognition, other than to have an above-average grade
performance. Neither did I have to excel in all five or more daily
Case Study discussions in class. It was impossible anyway. So
to be able to stand out, once in a while, was good enough!
Considering that my wife and five children were all with
me in our all-expenses paid-for ‘vacation,’ it was too good an
opportunity for all of us to waste. Furthermore, my children
similarly found the Boston and Cambridge area’s standards of
learning far less demanding than those at the Ateneo. There
were no homework assignments, just a few simple books to be
read, and the teachers practically allowed everybody “to do
their own thing.” Nonetheless Jay, Eduardo Jr. our eldest, was
head-and-shoulders on top of his Grade 7 classmates. Such
was the easy-going nature of pedagogical ultra-liberalism in
the New England area during the early 1970s!
During my last year in Boston-Cambridge, I spent much more
time before, during, and after classes, enjoying and working to
expand my social network of students and immigrants from
the Philippines, than for my MBA degree. I had been elected as
President of the Filipino Association of Greater Boston (FAGB).
It was also a time when my sense of Filipino nationalism soared
to white-heat intensity, especially after reading in Harvard’s
libraries the accounts of the Philippine-American war circa

1900 from the American public’s point of view, including and
especially from those who vehemently disagreed with U.S.
President Calvin Coolidge’s decision to subdue and colonize
our ancestors.
In the spring of 1971, President Ferdinand Marcos declared
a state of national emergency and suspended the effectivity
of court-issued writs of habeas corpus. It was in angry reaction
to the gory bombing incident at Manila’s Plaza Miranda,
amid the prevailing suspicion that he was its mastermind.
Senator Jovito Salonga, my future Light A Fire associate and
Daisie’s successful counsel at the Marcos-dominated Supreme
Court, almost died from multiple wounds from the blast. The
widespread street demonstrations which Marcos’ perceived
corruption and insatiable thirst for power had spawned, incited
me too, even there in far away Massachusetts, to jump into the
gathering Philippine political maelstrom. As FAGB President, I
participated in a public demonstration against Marcos in front
of the Philippine Consulate in New York City’s most upscale
area in Manhattan along 5th Avenue. As a result, then Consul
General Ernesto Pineda refused to renew my passport, so I had
to go all the way to Chicago to have it done.
The resurgent nationalism and sudden political involvement
of the erstwhile Pocholo would soon have its radical reper-
cussions when he returned to IBM Philippines in June of 1972.
Tours and Games Galore
In the meantime, I had my brief foray in the streets of
Manhattan, where we staged a sidewalk theater lampooning
the “Marcos conjugal dictatorship” and where the New York
City police, mostly on horseback, outnumbered us Filipino
student-demonstrators. Thereafter I brought my whole family
on an extended joyride-vacation from Cambridge-Boston to
New York City, New Jersey, Indianapolis, Cleveland, Chicago,
Syracuse, Niagara Falls, upstate New York, and Vermont. We
came home via Maine and New Hampshire. Daisie and I drove

our Dodge Coronet 440, oftentimes sleeping along the way in
our relatives and friends’ homes, or in campsites where we
pitched our family-size tent whenever the need arose. It was a
grand summer vacation and educational tour for the kids.
Talking to our relatives and friends we visited resulted
only in reinforcing my conviction that I would never be an
immigrant like them, despite their glowing tales of material
success as against the deepening crisis in the Philippines.
Back in Cambridge and Boston, I intensified the pleasure
of my many free days and hours, even if mostly vicariously,
with Carl Yaztrzemski and the Red Sox, Bobby Orr and the
Bruins, Jim Plunkett and the Patriots, and above all with John
Havlicek, Dave Cowens, and Jojo White of the Boston Celtics.
So too with Muhammad Ali in his 1971 loss to Joe Frazier
at New York City which was on closed-circuit TV at the old
Boston Garden. Exam or no exam, I had to be out there in any
kind of weather, to cheer or jeer my sports heroes and villains
especially if the Yankees, the Rangers, the Jets, or the Knicks
and the L.A. Lakers were in town. For I had also acquired the
appetite for non-vicarious thrills and derring-do required for
leveraging the cheapest admission tickets into the best vacant
seats available, particularly when familiar ushers and snack-
vendors were on duty.
Competitive Megalomania
With Gasti Ortigas, Noel Soriano, Rufo Colayco, Delfin
Lazaro, and Jesus Dualan as my contemporaries at the B-
School and also my neighbors at the Peabody Terrace high-rise
complex for married students, we had endless bull sessions
extending to the wee hours even during winter, discussing
what we would do when we returned home. We also indulged
our common thirst for competition and one-upmanship in
ruthless games of poker, chess, basketball, and Risk.
Like Monopoly, Risk was a zero-sum game requiring
pragmatic self-interest, perfidious alliances, and ruses of

realpolitik, involving as many as all six of us. We liked it so
much that we spent many of our winter weekends playing
the game from early evening to early morning. Thus my 3-
bedroom apartment would be crowded with Cheche Lazaro
and Tess Colayco and their babies waiting for us, while we
used every vacant bathroom and hallway as mini-conference
rooms to plot our perfidious tactics against other equally ad
hoc and amoral alliances. For each one of us wanted control of
the whole world as his ultimate objective, even if it was only
a game.
I also found out that the second and last year of our B-School
curriculum, other than my special courses in International
Finance and Economics, was designed for those with am-
bitions to be supreme commanders like General Dwight D.
Eisenhower, or as chief executives of large multinational
companies with diversified enterprises all over the world. I
was also ambitious, but not that global nor that stratospheric.
Our weekend games of Risk were more than enough to satisfy
my ambitions to become another Napoleon or Alexander the
Great. And so I whiled away my bored hours in those classes
to plan for my own return to the Philippines, or to compute
the magic numbers needed by the various Boston sports teams,
especially the Celtics, to qualify for the championship play-
offs.
“Risk” in Real Life
Nevertheless I imbibed enough of the classroom debates
and my cursory readings of the case studies and printed hand-
outs on large diversified companies to be adequately prepared
some two years later at the Ayala Corporation. After I left IBM
in 1972, I was handpicked barely a year later by the late Don
Enrique Zobel (EZ, Ninoy Aquino’s friend and closet anti-
Marcos tycoon) to take charge of the Ayalas’ own business
diversification program. It was Ramon Diaz and Eddie
Lichauco who recommended me to EZ. Thus I was involved

in Mantrade (automotive), Makati Machineries (heavy
equipment), the Makati Tuscany (high-rise condominium
building development), Ayala Alabang (real estate
subdivision), Beta Electric (manufacture of electrical products),
Erectors (construction), Legazpi Oil (coconut oil production
and international trading through Baker Commodities in Los
Angeles, plus two subsidiary logging companies in Palawan),
and Pantranco North and South (bus companies that covered
the whole of Luzon).
Those couple of years with Ayala Corporation must have
been the most hectic in my whole life for EZ trusted me to
oversee all these companies prior to or after their acquisition,
one after the other or even simultaneously. In fact he also
entrusted me to look after his personal agri-business venture
in Darong, a town near Davao City. It was in Davao where
Legazpi Oil had one of its five nationwide network of coconut
oil mills. Thus I was for a while the envy of old timers at Ayala
particularly when EZ allowed me to have his personal airplane
and pilot at my disposal, in order for me to move easily from
Manila to Legazpi, to Davao City and from there to Palawan
and back. But the fear of flying in a small plane was too much
for me, even if such a perquisite tickled my pride a blushing
pink once more.
Incidentally, I also tried unsuccessfully to recruit EZ in 1978
to join us in our Light A Fire venture. Though he sounded
encouraging enough, at the end he was non-committal. And
that was the last time I had the opportunity to speak to him.
I bade goodbye to EZ and Ayala, soon after top executives
Wakatsuki-san of Tokyo’s Marubeni Corporation and John
Graves of Citibank of New York pleaded with me to concen-
trate exclusively on Pantranco North as its President and
officer in-charge of their creditors syndicate. I was originally
representing the Ayala Corporation in their syndicate in
order to hasten Marubeni’s collection of some P60 Million of
Pantranco and Mantrade’s P100 Million debt to the members

of the syndicate. My decision was of course hastened by the
Wakatsuki-Graves salary offer of 300% more than my Ayala
pay.
Somehow while bidding goodbye to EZ et al., I couldn’t
help but remember Fr. Reuter’s friend, Mrs. Sandejas dela
Concepcion, when in 1954 I abandoned her two boys as
their tutors in Latin and Math, in order to concentrate on the
more highly rewarding tutoring jobs at the University of the
Philippines. Self-interest is indeed oftentimes a euphemism for
selfishness, or even for greed . . .
But while still in Cambridge-Boston, I had never seriously
entertained the idea of not being an IBM’er until the day of my
compulsory retirement. But fate, or most probably The Hound,
had set me up for my comeuppance behind prison bars, less
than seven years after I left Boston with the highest of hopes.
After I successfully liquidated, as its full time President,
Pantranco North’s aggregate obligations to banks and
suppliers, represented concurrently by me as the President
of the Creditor’s Syndicate, I grew bolder and came to the
conclusion that I could hack it alone as an entrepreneur once
again. For part of my achievement was in borrowing for
Pantranco, a financially distressed company, $12 million from
Manufacturers Hanover Trust, with a full-guarantee from the
government’s Philippine National Bank. Coincidentally or
providentially, my Baguio-Apache sidekick Rughnath Sarda
was then the Senior Vice President of Money Honey.
Naturally, Runy had a super-glowing report on my ability
to have the bank loan repaid, not knowing that I would resign
from Pantranco soon after the loan was released. Neither did I
know that soon after, Runy himself would also be transferring
his corporate allegiance from Manufacturers Hanover to
American Express at a higher position and with substantially
more pay and better perquisites. It was of such pragmatic,
acrobatic, and self-serving decisions that my friends and I
routinely made against one another at my Peabody Terrace

apartment in Cambridge during our games of “Risk!” At any
rate, eventually the $12 Million loan was repaid on time, but
only because the government-owned PNB assumed the loan in
exchange for stockholders equity at Pantranco North. All’s well
that ended well in our modern and multinational corporate
culture?
“No,” said the Hound!

146
SECTION THREE
LIGHT A FIRE I
(TO TOPPLE A DICTATORSHIP)
Chapter 10 The Ambassador and

His Terrorist Connections
Chapter 11 The Story of the Captives Free
Chapter 12 Wonder and Irony
Chapter 13 Friends and Heroes
147
148 LIGHT A FIRE I (TO TOPPLE A DICTATORSHIP)
Chapter 10
THE AMBASSADOR
AND HIS TERRORIST CONNECTIONS
Sometime in September of 2004, I was invited to lunch by

Alfonso Yuchengco, the former Philippine Ambassador to
Japan, China and later at the United Nations. He was and still is
one of a handful of our most eminent Filipino-Chinese business
tycoons. He has lately been subjected to controversy because of
the financial distress of one of his companies, Pacific Plans Inc.
(PPI), which guaranteed the open-ended schooling expenses of
some 50,000 families in the face of galloping tuition fees.
Al, or “A.Y.” to his business empire’s underlings, was feeling
the burdens of aging and inevitability of his entry to eternity
even before the PPI imbroglio, and a recent quintuple heart-
by-pass operation. And so he wanted to have someone help
him provide some of the material for his autobiography.
Except for the delectable white wine from his private
collection, we practically wasted the sumptuous menu laid
out just for the two of us by his own private 5-star chef in the
dining room next to his mammoth office on the 48th floor of his
flagship Rizal Commercial Bank (RCBC) building in Makati
City. We hadn’t had such a mutually enervating tete-a-tete since
our last anti-Erap Estrada strategy meeting of some four years
earlier, when President Joseph Estrada still seemed politically
invincible.
This time however, we were more focused in reminiscing
about the good “BAD old days” of some 26 years earlier, when
together with our mutual friend and former Senator Francisco
“Soc” Rodrigo, Al had been recruited into the “subversive”
Light A Fire Movement. The three of us usually met in Al’s
The Ambassador and His Terrorist Connections 149

secret suite at the Mandarin Hotel in Makati. And so for a while
Titang, Al’s wife and love of his life, redux, bitterly suspected
that Al was up to something else. But Soc would never have
allowed that to happen . . . Recounting all of that to ourselves
even if for the nth time already over the past 18 years since
martial law was dismantled, Al almost forgot why he had
asked me over for lunch. Until the wine bottle was empty.
Some six months earlier I had already been interviewed
by our late National Artist/Author Nick Joaquin for more
than six hours, to provide the facts and circumstances of Al’s
participation in toppling down the dictatorship of President
Ferdinand Marcos, as material to be included in his putative
autobiography. Unfortunately Nick Joaquin died without
finishing the book, so Al asked me to put on paper whatever I
thought was appropriate as material while he was still looking
for another eminent writer to finish his autobiography. My
piece was never published, however.
And so here it is, together with the cover letters I prepared
to accompany the draft-papers I sent to him, to His Eminence
Jaime Cardinal Sin, and to Fr. James B. Reuter S.J., who were
both unavoidably part of the story of Al Yuchengco and his
Light A Fire connections. I wrote those letters to establish
the fact that the origins of our enterprise for the promotion
of democracy and justice in the Philippines were the Jesuits
themselves, with critical advice sought from other Church
leaders. For if that were not true, they would have registered
their objections to what I had written.
Al’s ‘Terrorist’ Connections
It was a glitterati affair in February of 1987 when practically

all of Metro Manila’s social and political elite, together with
Al Yuchengco’s foreign ambassador-friends had come to
congratulate him on his 64th birthday and for his recent
appointment by President Cory Aquino as the Philippine
Ambassador to Canada.

Pre-dinner cocktails were still being served, a time when
the host should usually go around to greet or quaff a toast
with as many as possible among some 300 VIP guests. This
time however, Al was seen holding court with a small huddled
group of guests animatedly whispering to one another. Among
them were former Senator Francisco “Soc” Rodrigo who was
conspicuously still holding his wine glass while his arms were
draped around the shoulders of then chairman Ramon Diaz of
the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) on
his left side, and Al Yuchengco on his right. Intertwined with
these three cronies was the Grecian-god-like Steve Psinakis
and Raul Manglapus, who would soon be elected once more
as Senator and a few years later as Secretary of Foreign Affairs.
The sixth and last person completing the circled huddle like a
basketball team coach, was a relatively unknown personality,
except for a brief period about two years before then in
December of 1984. It was when the man was convicted on
rebellion charges and as master-mind of the anti-Marcos Light
A Fire Movement. A death-sentence via the electric chair had
been promulgated by a Military Commission appointed by
dictator-President Ferdinand Marcos himself.
The nationwide interest and international publicity generated
was as much due to the gruesomeness of the Dictator-dictated
summa electrica sentence imposed, as by the spontaneous
triumphal shouts of “Hallelujah!” from the convicted rebel
and his co-accused. These included Reynaldo Maclang
and his veritable ninang and ninong, then a 60 plus-year old
grandmother/wife Ester Misa Jimenez and her husband, Otto
Jimenez. The mastermind convict’s name and sixth man in the
huddle 3 years later, was Otto’s former IBM associate, 51-year-
old Eduardo B. Olaguer, or Ed Olaguer to his friends.
Also convicted with Ed and Otto, but in absentia, were Raul
Manglapus, Steve Psinakis, and Gaston “Gasti” Ortigas. Gasti,
like Ed Olaguer, was a Harvard Business School graduate but
with a PhD to boot. He was the Dean of Faculty of the Asian

Institute of Management (A.I.M.) at the time the rebellion case
was filed. Gasti however had already successfully spirited
himself out to the United States via his local and Malaysian
friends through the Mindanao “back door,” to help Raul and
Steve fight the dictatorship through media and the lobbying
halls of the U.S. Congress. Gasti was also a contemporary of Ed
Olaguer at the University of the Philippines (U.P.) College of
Engineering, where they fell under the spell of the legendary
and militantly Catholic chaplain Fr. John Delaney, a brilliant
Irish-American Jesuit. Thus as U.P. Catholic Action (UPSCA)
officers, Gasti and Ed were in the forefront battling against
violent campus fraternity-initiation rites.
Otto Jimenez had similar 5-star credentials. With his Ateneo
University Master’s Degree in Psychology and impeccable
oral and written Ateneo-Jesuit English, he soon distinguished
himself in IBM Philippines as its cracker-jack Trainor for all
local and Southeast Asian IBM recruits on every computer
programming and systems engineering course required. In
a few years time he rose up to be the overall IBM Education
Manager for the Philippines and the whole of South East Asia.
One of his prized trainee-students in IBM, who became Otto’s
future quondam leader in rebellion against Marcos, was Ed
Olaguer himself!
As further proof of Otto’s teaching ability, Ed also soon rose
up from raw trainee in April 1965 to become IBM Philippines’
Sales and Systems Engineering Manager by September 1968.
Ed Olaguer was dead serious as Sales and Systems boss but
rambunctiously fun-loving after office hours among his friends—
such as “painting the town red” until the wee hours of dawn
with cronies and future big-shots, i.e. Foreign Affairs Secretary
Roberto “Bobby” Romulo, Central Bank Governor Jose “Joey”
Cuisia, and perennial man-about-town and until recently the
CEO of the government’s giant Fort Bonifacio development
project, Ed’s Harvard Business School contemporary Rufo C.
Colayco! Like Jaycee Senator Al Yuchengco 12 years earlier, Ed

was a typical Manila Jaycee character during those tumultuous
late 60’s.
That period was some sort of fin de siècle setting up the stage
for the beginning of the so-called New Society and Martial Law
in September of 1972. Ed was also a Harvard Business School
graduate by May of 1972, financed 100% by IBM Philippines.
All paid for by IBM without any pay-back obligation were the
round trip plane fares, a 3-bedroom Cambridge apartelle, the
household and education expenses of his wife and family of 5
kids, maid, car and furniture, PLUS his Sales Manager’s regular
salary, for the whole 2-year period of Ed’s MBA course.
This generous package of perks was given as reward for his
outstanding performances as Data Processing Salesman and
later as Sales Manager. But it was also in “great expectation” that
Ed would return to become its next local General Manager.
And so in the huddle that particular February evening
in 1987, just one year after the collapse of the 14-year-long
dictatorship, Ed Olaguer was presiding with Al over that
small group of Al’s guests, more like a priest after a successful
crusade. Or conquest by “fire-and-sword for the cross.” In fact
he was addressing the others, who were 15 to 20 years older,
not by their usual nicknames such as Al, Moning, Soc, Steve
or Raul. Instead, names like Brother Orchid, Brother Dahlia,
Brother Abel, Brother Dionysius, and Brother MacDonald
were being whispered with suppressed giggles once in a while,
resulting in drips of Al’s vintage Polifuisse on shoulders and on
the floor.
Unnoticed however by this giggling and whispering cohort,
was another group of VIP guests who had slowly formed around
a table adjacent to the whispering bunch. This neighboring
group was noticeably not at all interested in the cocktails
nor conversing with one another. Instead they were single-
mindedly leaning over and inching closer and closer to the six
whisperers. They were obviously eavesdropping on Al and his

secretive friends. Most conspicuous among the eavesdroppers
were the incumbent U.S. Ambassador, Stephen Bosworth;
incumbent Vice President of the Philippines Arsenio “Doy”
Laurel; former Senator and Vice President of the Philippines
Emmanuel Pelaez, who in 1964 lost the Nacionalista Party’s
nomination for Presidential standard-bearer to Ferdinand
Marcos; Judy Araneta Roxas, widow of former Senator and
Liberal Party President Jerry Roxas; and Cesar Virata, former
whiz-kid of the SGV auditing firm, and later on the martial-
law Prime Minister of President Marcos.
ENTER: The still very pretty Teresa Yuchengco! Somehow,
Titang prevailed on husband Al to break-up the six-man
whispering huddle so that dinner could start. That was
when Ambassador Bosworth, Manny Pelaez, and Judy Roxas
spontaneously rushed forward, all exclaiming in various
tones and words of shock, or perhaps even admiration: “Al,
Soc . . . Raul . . . you were terrorists?”
And so dinner was served much later than usual because
the host, throwing all caution and diplomatic euphemisms to
the wind, recounted with vim, vigor, and in vino veritas, all that
his huddled “ex-terrorist friends” were whispering about, and
even much more! Thus it must have been the piéce d’ occasion
during the sit-down dinner. It ended with the usual host’s
privileged but unusual after-dinner remarks. Al began his talk
with a brief re-affirmation of his earlier in vino veritas assisted
acknowledgment of his “terrorist connections,” and ended
with a tongue-in-cheek acknowledgment of Ed Olaguer as
“my former terrorist boss.”
Some 16 years later, in December of 2003, 80-year-old Al
Yuchengco initiated a more private reunion with Ed Olaguer
and his Light A Fire associates, sympathizers, and former
anti-martial law “aboveground and underground” activists,
on the 48th and topmost floor of his business-empire’s state-
of-the-art flagship edifice. Among those who were able to
attend that intimate early Christmas party, were former Senate

President Jovito “Jovy” Salonga; former Executive Secretary
of President Cory Aquino and now Senator Joker P. Arroyo;
former Senator Heherson “Sonny” Alvarez and wife Cecile;
Steve Psinakis now acknowledged as our version of the 1776
American Revolution’s Marquis de Lafayette; and Presy Lopez
Psinakis, Steve’s wife (also Geny Lopez’ sister). According to
Presy’s birds of the same fearless-feathered friends like Good
Shepherd Sister Christine Tan RGS (deceased) and equally
feisty Maring Feria of the multi-talented Feria clan of Bacolod
City, Presy Psinakis is a re-incarnation of the biblical Jewish
heroine, Judith!
There too was national hero Ninoy Aquino’s most loyal
chronicler, the multi-awarded columnist-journalist Teddy
Benigno; wheelchair-bound Noel Soriano, the former University
of the Philippines (U.P.) President, UPSCA President, and
National Security Adviser to President Cory Aquino; Angela
“Angge” Soriano, Metro Manila’s epitomé of marital loyalty
and Noel’s U.P. campus sweetheart, fellow UPSCAn turned
lifelong angelic partner. Seated with the Sorianos were Ed’s
sister Celine Olaguer Sarte, valedictorian-friend of salutatorian
Cory Cojuangco at St. Scholastica, and later President Cory
Cojuangco Aquino’s major-doma at Malacañang; and Celine’s
younger sibling, Good Shepherd Sr. Mary Joseph Olaguer.
Together with her Good Shepherd superiors such as Sr.
Guada Bautista and Sr. Christine Tan, Sr. Joseph was the “Light
A Fire” leaflets’ chief editor and typist for Ed and Otto, hide-
out and meeting place providers, and warehouse-keepers of
the Light A Fire Movement. Sr. Joseph was also the getaway-car
driver for April 6 Liberation Movement (A6LM) fugitive Karen
Tañada. Hiding in the convent in Quezon City disguised as a
Good Shepherd nun, she was desperately fleeing from several
chase cars of government agents all the way from Quezon City
to Baguio. But prior to becoming a nun as Sr. Joseph, Gabby
Olaguer was IBM Philippines’ executive secretary to the Sales
Manager before Ed took over the latter’s job.

And so some 23 years later, our disguised nun-escapee
Karen Tañada (granddaughter of the grand old man and 6-
term Senator Lorenzo Tañada Sr.), was primly enjoying the
reunion with her former comrades-in-arms and “C-5 experts”
Philip Suzara and Jovy Labajo. Later, mini-skirted Doris Nuval
Baffrey would coquettishly saunter in to sit with Karen. Ipe
Suzara was also representing his uncle and Fr. Toti’s Light A
Fire alter ego, the late Jose “Totoy” Avellana, and Totoy’s absent
but pretty daughters Malu and Chiqui. The two siblings were
ingenious and unflappable international couriers in 1978 and
1979 for Ninoy Aquino, Raul Manglapus, and Steve Psinakis.
Philip also represented the April 6 Liberation Movement
(A6LM) originally headed by Nats Tañada, deceased father of
Karen.
It was A6LM operative Doris Nuval Baffrey who finally
brought world-wide attention to these anti-martial law mili-
tants when she was arrested as primary suspect for the mini-
bomb explosion during an international convention of Travel
and Tourism top executives in Manila. President Marcos was
seated only a few meters away! Despite the FBI’S participation
in the investigation, Doris was eventually released. But not
necessarily because she was the daughter of then Commodore
Nuval of the Philippine Navy! For it was the A6LM who took
over field operations from the Light A Fire group soon after Ed
and Otto’s arrest, adopting Ed and Otto’s Public Justice plan
“lock stock-and-barrel”! For that was the precise message of
Ninoy to Ed Olaguer in prison, relayed through his brother,
Fr. Toti.
The A6LM lady survivors were seated together with Nena
Zumel Lopez, widow of Ed’s fellow Baguio-Apache Atty.
Ciriaco “Akong” Lopez, with relatives of ex-ITT President
Enrique “Ike” Joaquin, and relatives of two other departed
Baguio Apaches—former Manila Bank chairman Vicente
“Teng” Puyat, and Teng’s brother-in-law Ben Hur Balboa. The
Apaches, incidentally, were Baguio’s sports and social elite after

WW II. Interestingly, Baguio Apache “Akong” Lopez’ widow
squaw, nee Nena Zumel, is the sister of both General Jaime
Zumel, a Marcos loyalist and chief martial law liaison officer
and aide to Imelda Marcos, and the late Antonio Zumel, former
President of the National Press Club and later a top ranking
underground leader of the Communist New People’s Army.
For such were and still are, the contradictions in Philippine
families and society.
Otto Jimenez, Augusto “Gus” Lagman, and Reynaldo
“Rey” Maclang formed their own trio at table during that
December 2003 reunion with Al et al. Gus was never arrested
nor suspected because only Ed, Otto, and Gasti knew that Gus
was involved and who he was.
And if Otto was IBM Philippines’ cracker-jack teacher-
trainor, Gus Lagman was its intrepid albeit unsuccessful labor-
union organizer. He survived in absolutely union-less IBM and
even got promoted because he was a born leader and wizard
in programming business and technology-related computer
applications. Gus had also distinguished himself nationwide
for many years as race-car driver and NAMFREL (National
Movement for Free Elections) QUICK-COUNT’s computer expert.
Recently Gus and his Information Technology experts-
colleagues successfully challenged the legality and feasibility
of the COMELEC’s exorbitant purchase of computer-based
election registration and ballot counting systems and equipment
before the Supreme Court itself! Fortunately or unfortunately
however, the back-to-the-primitive manual vote-counting and
canvassing resulted in the controversy-ridden proclamation of
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
Gus Lagman’s entry into the Movement was his enthusiastic
consent to help Ed, Otto, and Gasti implement Al Yuchengco’s
prime obsession of rescuing Ninoy Aquino a la Geny Lopez
and Serge Osmeña’s dramatic escape from prison. That Fort
Bonifacio jailbreak was masterminded by Jake Almeda Lopez
and Steve Psinakis, complete with a private plane that quickly

touched down in a small airfield in Lingayen, Pangasinan, flew
back to Hongkong to pick up their forged passports and visas,
and finally to San Francisco in California!
Unlike Gus, Rey Maclang, on the other hand, was most
fortunate for being in jail! For he obtained more than the
equivalent substance, depth, and breadth of the usual College
and Masteral requirements in English, Political Science,
Computer Technology, Catholic Theology, Logic, and
managerial executive manners, under the direct day-and-night
private tutelage of Otto Jimenez during the 22 days and six years
they were together in jail! But in large measure this education
was made possible by Al Yuchengco’s direct assistance, for Al
regularly sent them a substantial amount of “terrorist funds”
EVERY MONTH WITHOUT FAIL!
Al gave the cold cash first to Ramon Diaz, who would
give it in turn to his brother, Fr. Jesus Diaz S.J., thence to Fr.
Reuter. Fr. Jim “Camote,” Reuter’s nickname given by his
Ateneo de Manila Glee Club members, was for four years the
English teacher, basketball coach, Glee Club and Dramatics
Moderator, as well as the spiritual adviser of Ed Olaguer at
the Ateneo de Naga High School, and later for Otto as well, at
the Ateneo de Manila University. From Fr. Reuter, the money
would somehow get stacked beneath the pillow of Fr. Antonio
“Toti” Olaguer, Fr. Reuter’s neighbor at the Jesuit House at La
Ignaciana; thence to his sister-in-law Daisie, thence to Daisie’s
husband Ed Olaguer, and finally to Rey Maclang.
And so for six years Rey thoroughly absorbed through
body and soul, Professor Otto Jimenez’ in-jail training and
education a la Professor Henry Higgins’ My Fair Lady protegé.
Rey was released from prison right after the February 1986
EDSA Revolution. By the year 1993 he had metamorphosed
into Deputy Secretary General of the ruling Lakas-NUCD
political party of President Fidel Ramos. As Deputy Secretary
General, Rey was next only in rank to Speaker of the House
and Secretary General Jose de Venecia! And so it’s not only in

fictional Broadway plays like My Fair Lady that these wonders
come to pass . . .
It was Jesuit Fr. Antonio B. Olaguer who recruited Ed
Olaguer into the Movement. Senior to sibling Ed by nine years,
Fr. Toti was initially the chaplain to fellow Jesuit but younger
Fr. Archie Intengan and co-party-founder Norberto Gonzales
and their fledgling Partido Demokratikong Sosyalista ng Pilipinas
(PDSP). Fr. Toti’s and Archie’s assignment must have been with
the full knowledge and consent of their Jesuit superior, Father
Provincial Joaquin Bernas, for Toti and Archie were involved
in the militant Movement on a full-time basis. Incidentally, Fr.
Bernas was an older contemporary of Ed Olaguer by two years
at the Ateneo de Naga. And Fr. Reuter was their “common”
English teacher in their respective classes during the 4th year
of high school.
Conspicuously absent however like Fr. Toti, due to
unavoidable supernatural circumstances beyond their control
during that December 2003 reunion, were Ninoy Aquino,
Lorenzo Tañada Sr., and Fr. Horacio de la Costa of the
Society of Jesus. Horacio de la Costa was the real founder of
the anti-Marcos and anti-Communist “Third Force,” which
led to the Light A Fire Movement’s “fire-and-sword for the
cross” orientation. Absent for the same reasons were Soc
Rodrigo, Raul Manglapus, Eugenio “Geny” Lopez Jr., former
U.N. Undersecretary Rafael “Paeng” Salas, Ramon Diaz,
Jimmy Ferrer (chairman of the once prestigious and reliable
COMELEC), former Speaker Ramon “Monching” Mitra,
twin Baguio Apache and U.P Upsilonians Teodoro “Teddy”
Yabut and outstanding trial lawyer Atty. Ciriaco “Akong”
Lopez, former Congressman and Army Intelligence Officer
Bonnie Gillego, Bootie Jose (Raul Manglapus’ co-founder
of the Philippine Christian Democratic party), Ben Lim, Ben
Hur Balboa, Nats Tañada, Chino Roces (the inimitable Ramon
Magsaysay awardee as outstanding newspaper Publisher),
Sr. Christine Tan RGS, U.P. UPSCAN Louie Beltran (Ninoy

Aquino’s fellow detainee and famous journalist-columnist critic
of Marcos prior to martial law), U.P. UPSCAN Gasti Ortigas,
Enrique “Ike” Joaquin, and Ed Olaguer’s Business Day partner
Raul Locsin, among others.
According to Ed Olaguer, it was Fr. de la Costa who
recruited Fr. Toti, Soc Rodrigo, and Fr. Intengan. Soc in turn
recruited Lorenzo “Tanny” Tañada Sr. and Al Yuchengco,
with the latter recruiting Ramon Diaz soon after. Ed Olaguer
accepted Soc’s guarantee for Al’s reliability despite the latter’s
seeming pro-Marcos big business transactions. That was
after Soc confided to Ed that despite its obvious business and
political disadvantages, it was only Al who kept Soc’s body
and soul together. Al kept Soc as unofficial legal counsel for
Malayan Insurance, with an ultra generous monthly retainer
fee to boot. But with no legal cases to handle, other than to plot
the eventual downfall of President Marcos!
Thus when Ed Olaguer attended a coordination meeting
of leaders of anti-Marcos groups in San Francisco, California
sometime in 1978, he was shocked to learn that Al Yuchengco
was considered by some of them as a dangerous Marcos crony.
Ed was even more shocked to learn that a plan was being
hatched against Al for the dual purpose of applying “public
justice” against him, and to force him to contribute a large sum
of money to the Movement for a Free Philippines. It was Ed
together with some other more sober leaders in the U.S. who
vetoed the plan against “Bro. Orchid.” But until that December
2003 reunion with Al, “Bro. Orchid” thought that it was Ed
Olaguer who first brought up the wild idea!
For mundane reasons this time around, Vice President
Teofisto “Tito” Guingona, Senator Serge Osmeña, Charito
Planas (our incomparably feisty lady warrior), Paul Aquino
(younger brother of Ninoy Aquino), Jake Almeda Lopez (the
Jonathan-of-David to Geny Lopez), Maring Feria (the former
executive assistant of Raul Manglapus), PDSP ideologues

Norberto “Bert” Gonzales and his side-kick Fr. Archie Intengan
S.J. (both the current close confidants of President GMA),
Samar Governor Raul Daza, and Victor Lovely, were all too
busy on the campaign trail for or against Gloria Macapagal
Arroyo (GMA) or Fernando Poe Jr. (FPJ) for President in the
May 2004 election.
Victor Lovely’s indescribable physical and moral sufferings
while severely wounded and being interrogated for months by
military agents here in Manila and by a grand jury in the U.S.,
deserve separate treatment altogether . . . hopefully, someday.
For at the risk of his sanity and life, Jun Lovely stuck to the bitter
end in refusing to implicate Ninoy Aquino and Jovy Salonga.
In the process, one of his arms was needlessly amputated and
his left-eye was gouged out . . .
Neither could Ed Olaguer’s only non-Filipino recruit
make it to that reunion. He was Ryosuke “Ricky” Ohtake,
the President of a modest-sized Import-Export and Trading
company in Tokyo, Japan. Ricky took care of bringing in
and out of Manila, Ed Olaguer’s own secret “imports and
exports.” Thus when Ed was given a 24-hour pass from jail
for his 25th wedding anniversary on June 28, 1983 (courtesy
of Johnny Ponce Enrile, husband of Cristina Enrile whose
spiritual confessor and marriage counsellor was voila, Fr. James
Reuter!), Ed promptly called up Ricky Ohtake in Tokyo by
phone as soon as he reached home. Except for a few seconds of
“hellos” and “how are you’s,” Ricky was incoherent with tears
and loud groans of deep emotion during the entire overseas
call. Meanwhile a platoon of Ed’s escort soldier-guards were
listening and scribbling notes. Who ever said that the Japanese
are notoriously unemotional?
Such were the strange and extraordinary bedfellows of Al
Yuchengco circa 1978 until the first EDSA Revolution erupted
in February of 1986.
And so during that December 2003 reunion, almost 24
years to-the-day after Ed Olaguer and Otto Jimenez were

arrested sans any official warrant of arrest, at one o’clock in
the morning of December 24, 1979 and a simultaneous Arrest,
Search and Seizure Order (ASSO) was issued on the persons
of Al Yuchengco and Ramon Diaz, pictures were for the first
and only time, voluntarily and enthusiastically posed for and
taken of the old network of militant advocates of Philippine
democracy.
In hindsight perspective, Al Yuchengco’s friends must have
finally realized that they all had reason to be proud of their
once-in-a-lifetime collective endeavors of more than a quarter-
century ago. And so the long-simmering idea of writing down
for posterity and for their progeny, a modest but truthful ac-
count of what really happened, was even more enthusiastically
approved. For these extraordinary advocates for the rule of law
under even more extraordinary circumstances, now wanted
their countrymen to know what in conscience they believed
they had to do, but always in keeping with their Christian faith
and morals.
They decided so, despite the fact that National Artist,
eminent playwright and author Nick Joaquin (elder brother of
Ike Joaquin), had recently died while mightily exerting efforts
to finish an autobiographical account of Alfonso Yuchengco’s
hitherto unknown and unselfish efforts in toppling down the
dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos.
Thus the unexpurgated account of the particular episodes
in Al Yuchengco’s life involving the Light A Fire Movement
of Horacio de la Costa S.J., Ninoy Aquino, Soc Rodrigo,
Lorenzo Tañada, Jovito Salonga, Raul Manglapus, Antonio
B. Olaguer S.J., Ed Olaguer, Otto Jimenez, Al Yuchengco et
al., will now be revealed by the still trustworthy memory,
authentic memorabilia and collective prose of Otto Jimenez
and Ed Olaguer themselves. It is presented here hopefully and
perhaps presumptuously, for history’s consideration. And for
friends and adversaries alike, to judge whether Al Yuchengco’s

“terrorist connections,” were indeed rank terrorists, adventurist
fools or truly genuine patriots.

October 6, 2004
Ambassador Alfonso Yuchengco
Yuchengco Towers
RCBC Plaza, Makati City
Dear Al,
I am sending you two (2) copies of “The Terrorist
Connections of Ambassador Alfonso Yuchengco” and
the story of the “Captives Free” (2 chapters) which I have
“composed.” Both compositions may still need some
minor polishing and re-editing.
In both “stories,” there are no inventions nor
exaggerations, except perhaps a minor portion in the first
one where I included Raul Manglapus and Steve Psinakis
as among your guests “in the huddle” even if I am not so
sure they were there.
You can certainly fit the first one, your supposed
“Terrorist Connections,” into your autobiography.
You may also use the “Story of the Captives Free” and
“The Wonder and Irony of it All,” because you are so
much a part of it as you will see after reading it.
I must however talk to the writer or author of your
autobiography, because these “stories” have been lifted-
out, and re-arranged (like a musical piece!) for your
autobiography’s particular point of view, from my own
self-authored Book of Memoirs which will take another
six months perhaps to be finished.
And so early on let’s clear up the possible problem of
copyrights and acknowledgments to be required by our
respective publishers, considering that your book will
most probably be published ahead of mine.
Nevertheless we should be able to work out something
acceptable to all concerned. And more importantly, I am

sure you will enjoy reading this little magnum opus of
mine. For you were truly a great friend and genuine
patriot during those dark years of martial law and more
so thereafter, and thus I have written it up, in truth and
in love . . .
Best regards dear Bro. Orchid, and do keep in mind
the Grand Reunion “up there” with our dear departed
friends Tanny, Soc, Bro. Ramon “Dahlia” et al., and with
your Titang of course. You will still be a taipan “up there”
for sure, with at least one whole galaxy to develop and
“commercialize,” but, with a lot of competition from
yours truly! And this time again, Soc will be your angelic
Counsel, albeit without any Retainer Fees anymore.
Definitely you will still need his advice for at least the
first million years of Eternity.
And surely that is NOT an Impossible Dream!
Very truly yours,
ED OLAGUER

October 6, 2004
Rev. Father James B. Reuter
Xavier House, Pedro Gil Avenue
Sta. Ana, Manila
Dear Father Jim,

I am sure you have some time devoted to convalescing
after that prolonged scare you gave us all again!
Thus you should be able to correct and to grade the
enclosed “composition” I am submitting to complete the
unfinished assignment you gave us some 52 years ago in
our 4th year high school English and Religion class at the
Ateneo de Naga.
Since you can no longer flunk me nor impose “jug,
post, or whack-whack on the butt,” I have “dropped” your
name “in vain” a number of times in this “composition,”
and obviously without your permission.

Levity aside, please “do” some serious resting and
convalescing. I have a very selfish reason for such a
request. I can think of no other priest to replace you dear
Father Reuter, in finishing your predestined assignment
of teaching, inspiring, administering the Sacraments
of Matrimony (a second time if morally legitimate and
physically necessary!) and Anointing of the Sick. Most of
all, in burying yours truly. . .
Apres mois, dear Father Reuter! Memento Pater, quia non
pulvis es . . .
With love and prayers,
ED OLAGUER
P.S. Attached is a copy of my letter to Al Yuchengco,

which will explain why my composition was
made. Incidentally, Al has already “forgiven” you
for submitting Sister Eva as your nominee who
eventually won as Magsaysay awardee, and not
Al. For he knows Sr. Eva was the better choice.

Chapter 11
THE STORY OF THE CAPTIVES FREE
[AUTHOR’S NOTE: The following is the middle continuation

of the “3rd person account” I wrote about ourselves for
Alfonso Yuchengco’s putative autobiography after the death
of Nick Joaquin.]
When arrested, Otto Jimenez had just left his top marketing
position in Business Day, the leading business newspaper at
the time, which was controlled by the trio of Raul Locsin, Ed
Olaguer, and Ike Joaquin. Otto transferred to the Yuchengco
Group of Companies (YGC) as Senior Vice President for
Pacific Memorial Plans. He was able to do so, sight unseen by
Al, merely on the recommendation of his jesuitic friends Ed
Olaguer and Ramon Diaz. Besides, Ramon Diaz’ Manoy Jess
was a Jesuit priest; Ed’s eldest brother, Antonio “Toti,” was
also a Jesuit priest, and so too with Otto’s kuya Renato.
Otto was also a poetic wordsmith. Soon after he was
arrested and detained and his brand new executive car from Al
promptly sequestered by the military never to be seen again, he
composed The Story of the Captives Free furtively and quickly in
free verse form, while deep in the recesses of Colonel Rolando
Abadilla’s prison gulag in Camp Crame. The following are
excerpts from its opening stanzas:
Sit down.
Take time out from whatever you are doing.
Hear me.
I will tell you a story.
I am no orator, as Brutus is
But, as you know me all, a plain blunt man . . .
This is my story.
Hear me.

What do you want?
The right to worship our God, is it not?
And the right to think,
And to say what we think
(Freely, though not unjustly or irresponsibly)
Without fear of unjust reprisal.
As he composed those lines, Otto could have been thinking

about his former IBM colleague Ed Olaguer’s parallel story,
for Ed had composed a letter of complaint seven years earlier
in September 1972 addressed to IBM’s multinational boss,
Frenchman Jacques Maisonrouge.
It was about the Filipino albeit “green card” stateside-
residing General Manager’s oppressive treatment of Ed after
his return from the Harvard Business School. Our balikbayan
scholar claimed that this General Manager had reacted per-
sonally against his deep-seated outrage against the recent
declaration of martial law, in contrast to his boss’ unreserved
welcome for the dictatorship. Ed’s nationalistic convictions
had grown to fever pitch while studying at Harvard in Boston
together with the likes of Gasti Ortigas, Noel Soriano, Delfin
Lazaro and Rufo Colayco.
Despite the supposed sacredness of IBM’s Open Door
Policy, which guaranteed no reprisals against complaining
employees, Ed Olaguer was immediately sacked by IBM.
His supposed transgression according to Maisonrouge and
the local green card-privileged Boss, was Ed’s “apparent
lack of faith and confidence in the general management of
IBM Philippines and implicitly in IBM.” Thus it was decided
that it was “unhealthy for (Olaguer’s) relationship with IBM
Philippines to continue.”
It can be said therefore, that martial law and IBM had
triggered the story of “CAPTIVES FREE” Otto Jimenez and Ed
Olaguer. Reproduced below are some of the “psy-war leaflets”
composed by the duo of Jesuitic ex-IBM’ers and Fr. Toti Olaguer,
The Story of the Captives Free 167

copied from public records or their original carbon copies and
handwritten drafts.
a) From Fr. Toti Olaguer’s handwritten draft
Dear fellow citizen,

Good news! We have found it at last. How to fight the
Marcos dictatorship. With a fair chance of succeeding.
LIGHT A FIRE!
To illumine and enlighten people. To give them
courage. To right wrongs.
Simple! A small boy or girl can do it. Little danger of
being caught and punished.
Look at what happened to X, Y, and Z (names to be
supplied and changed from time to time).
Our intention is not to harm nor kill. But we will
remove Marcos or force him to quit. By depriving him of
the ability to govern. Without this ability, no dictator can
remain in power.
You want to join? Choose 3 or 4 who agree with you.
Trusted ones who’ll not betray you. Then we’ll show
you—how to Light A Fire! According to a good program
of action which has reached the provinces and arrived
abroad.
We are ordinary citizens like you. No politics. We just
want to rid our country of a power-mad couple. So that
our people will not suffer so much for so long.
ANG TAONG BAYAN
b) From Otto Jimenez’ typewritten draft
Dear Fellow Freedom Lover:

The hour has come!
The hour that you and I have been waiting for. The
hour when you and I can no longer swallow this farce
that is being thrust upon us. When even the patient and
long-suffering must rise in righteous anger and move.

For the people have already spoken in overwhelming
numbers and in ringing and unmistakable terms. As
you well know, that historic declaration was made in
loudest and clearest manner on the eve of April 7, in 1978
when you and I and practically all of us were out on the
streets registering our anger and rejection of the Marcos-
Romualdez criminal partnership.
And yet the very next day, the crooked couple
unleashed the most blatant cheating ever known in the
history of any country’s electoral process.
They have repeatedly raped the sacredness of our
ballot, the national treasury, our courts of law, our free
press. In the process, Marcos-Romualdez have enriched
themselves beyond anybody’s wildest dreams. And they
have shackled us with fear. It is time now for us to throw
back fear at them. Fear of us. Fear of the people’s justice.
PUBLIC JUSTICE!
They must answer to us for these dastardly offenses.
They must be made to pay their debt to society. They must
be deposed and duly tried in the highest courts of the
land and, if found guilty, be convicted and sentenced. We
pledge this on the memory and blood of all our freedom
loving heroes of the past.
The hour has come! The hour for a united and heroic
effort to throw off these hateful chains that they have the
gall to call public service.
At this very moment, countless men and women of
kindred spirit, in this very city, in our hills and barrios, and
even abroad, are moving in orchestrated purposiveness,
to put an end to this deceitful smiling but vindictive
tyranny.
From among the students, workers, and farmers, the
religious sector, and even from the ranks of business men
and office workers, our long suffering countrymen now
move to join us. So, too, from the military, where there
are still a great number of patriotic Filipinos who do not
believe that Mr. Marcos and Madame Imelda should own

this nation as a personal fiefdom. They are on the move,
for they have heard the signal sounded.
We too must do our part in this noble task of self-
liberation. Let us each light our own little candle or LIGHT
A FIRE! Let us each carry our share of this load, as the spirit
of Bayanihan inherent in us dictates. Do something big,
do something small, it does not matter, but DO SOMETHING.
Here are a few other things you can do:
1. Pass this letter around. Here and abroad. And as
many copies of it as you can safely make. To all
your freedom loving friends. So that they too may
hear this call to action.
2. Refuse to pay taxes. Or reduce the amount you pay.
Or at least delay any payment.
3. Send warning letters to known supporters of
the Marcos-Romualdez regime, especially to the
corrupt and greedy ones in establishments owned
by the Marcos cronies, such as Herdis’ Disiniland,
Benedicto’s empire, Kokoy Romualdez’ money-
making enterprises (which he “bought” with
pure laway lamang—Meralco, PCIB, Shell, Benguet
Consolidated, Times Journal, Daily Express, etc.,
and to relatives and friends of infamous torturers
such as Major Abadilla, and to each and every tuta
that you know among the government officials.
Tell them to repent, or resign. Or leave the country,
before Public Justice is meted out to them.
4. Slow down anything that you do in your company,
public or private, that could in any way affect the
known supporters, and ONLY the known supporters of
Marcos-Romualdez and their evil cohorts.
5. Give the silent treatment in schools, restaurants,
and in all public places to the obstinate supporters
among the known friends, direct relatives, and
lackeys of Marcos-Romualdez and their corrupt
coterie.
6. Boycott all controlled newspapers and TV stations.

7. Boycott Rustan’s, Philippine Plaza, Silahis, Philip-
pine Village Hotel, which belongs to or are
controlled by Madame Marcos and her hussies.
8. Send your own anonymous letters of warning to
any known supporters of Marcos-Romualdez, that
they may know that the day of public justice is at
hand.
9. Participate—safely but concretely—in various
kinds of rallies and mass demonstrations that your
freedom loving friends will in due time initiate.
These will serve to arouse the righteous anger of
the long-suffering Filipino. It will serve notice to
the oppressors and their vassals that the hour has
come for them to quake in their expensive suits and
shoes. Their days of tyranny are numbered.
10. Pray. Pray to your God, our God. That we may
succeed. As quickly as possible. And as bloodlessly
as possible.
The day is fast approaching when we will once again
be free men and women. Free to speak our minds. Free to
demand our rights. Free to elect our rulers. Free to depose
public officials who have become corrupt and have
become unworthy of their position of trust. The more you
do, the faster this glorious day will come.
Magbayanihan tayo!
Mabuhay ang malayang Pilipinas!
ANG TAONG BAYAN
c) From Ed Olaguer’s version as typewritten

by Sr. Mary Joseph Olaguer
Dear Kababayang Pilipino:
We know that you sincerely reject this illegitimate and
corrupt dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos and his equally
power-mad MADam. Rejoice and be brave! The day of
deliverance from Marcos and his MADam will soon be
here.

Right now, many Filipino freedom fighters have al-
ready sprung throughout Metro Manila and the provinces
to manifest public demand for justice and freedom. They
are immobilizing and will continue to immobilize all
government and private structures which Marcos and
his MADam and their cronies and their relatives have bla-
tantly usurped. Marcos and his MADam have usurped
these structures and institutions in order to dominate,
oppress, deceive, and rob the public.
These freedom fighters have lighted the fires of Public
Justice and Civil Disobedience. These are ordinary Fili-
pinos like you. And they share your conviction that the
only way now to get rid of our two-bit dictators, Marcos
and his MADam, is to force them out! Just like the Iranians
who have sent the arrogant Shah and Empress of Iran on
an enforced permanent vacation. Like the Pakistanis who
have booted out soon-to-be-hanged ex-dictator Zulfikar
Ali Bhutto. And like the Nicaraguans, who are about
to give Somoza and family the inevitable sipa sa puwet.
Which all corrupt dictators so richly deserve. And a more
poetic justice it will be for Marcos and his MADam.
Like you perhaps, these ordinary Filipinos, who are
now actively seeking and meting out Public Justice on
Marcos, MADam, and their ilk, were reluctantly led to
hope some seven years ago in 1972 that perhaps Marcos
and his MADam had reformed themselves.
After a previous seven years (before martial law) of
fattening the Marcos-Romualdez clan (of cows) since
1965. Now you know, we all know that Marcos, MADam
et al., are worse than ever. And they will cling to power
by all means fair and foul.
Remember the plebiscite by secret-ballot scheduled
last January 18, 1973. Remember that Marcos arbitrarily
cancelled it because he was obviously going to lose.
Remember the absolutely farcical barangay referendum
the following February in 1973. When all that we were
allowed to do by Marcos and his MADam’s goons was to
raise our hands. And they themselves criminally falsified

the results so that 98% were counted as “YES” votes. And
so our people were made to appear to have accepted the
Marcos-rigged Constitution. Remember that even the
Marcos-dominated Supreme Court ruled that this so-
called New Constitution of 1973 was not validly ratified.
And it is by virtue of this invalidly ratified Constitution
that Marcos claims he can dominate us for as long as
he likes. Remember the last Batasang Pambansa election
last April 7. When even Carlos P. Romulo supposedly
won for the first time and was proclaimed at midnight
with the other benighted Metro Manila KBL candidates.
They were proclaimed by that notorious Commissioner
Nardong Putik Perez!
Remember Marcos’ many major unfulfilled promises.
Promises made on worldwide TV. Before international
audiences. Promises to hold free elections. To fire Baltazar
Aquino. To get rid of corrupt relatives. To allow a free
press. To investigate Disini’s Westinghouse gold mine.
To release Ninoy Aquino.
And for seven years we thought we were powerless.
But not anymore! Know that you can LIGHT A FIRE. A
fire to burn down the Marcos/MADam dictatorship. To
illumine and enlighten our people. To give them courage.
To right wrongs.
Look at what happened to (you may supply . . . )
And to ( . . . your choice of names) And many more of
them to come.
Join us NOW in the fight against Marcos and his MADam.
Now! Through the fires of Public Justice. Or through the
crucible of Civil Disobedience. It will be simple. Especially
Civil Disobedience. Do something big. Or something
small. It does not matter. But DO SOMETHING. Here are a
few other things you can do:
1 to 10 (see letter addressed to Fellow Freedom Lovers)
The people have been patient. Too patient with Marcos
and his MADam. But the time of reckoning will come soon.
As it has come in Iran, India, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Greece,
and Ceylon. As it did come for Nero and Caligula. For

Hitler and Mussolini. For Shah Pahlavi and Empress
Farah. As it will come for Marcos and his MADam.
With your help, and your friends’ help, and their
friends’ help, this day of harsh reckoning for Marcos and
his MADam will come sooner then expected. We say to
them:
MARCOS, NO! MADam, NO! Tama na. Tama na sa pagnanakaw.
Alis na diyan. Mabuhay ang malayang Pilipinas!
ANG TAONG BAYAN
d) From Ed Olaguer’s old files
Dear Marcos-Romualdez Collaborator:

If you are an active supporter of Ferdinand Marcos
and Imelda Romualdez, for your own sake, take heed of
this message:
IN THE NAME OF ALL DECENT AND FREEDOM LOVING FILIPINOS,
WE HEREBY DECLARE WAR ON THE VICIOUSLY CORRUPT CONJUGAL
TEAM OF USURPERS AND DICTATORS, FERDINAND MARCOS AND
IMELDA ROMUALDEZ.
This solemn declaration of a fight to the finish against
the evil Marcos regime applies to all his notorious
collaborators. They who are greedy carpetbaggers in the
guise of businessmen. Fabricators of lies and Marcosist
propaganda in the newspapers and TV. Perpetrators of
electoral fraud. Prison torturers of our fellow freedom
lovers. Government officials who have willfully, and for
their own selfish purposes, abetted the perpetuation of
this fiendish and ravenous conjugal dictatorship.
It may well be that you have been unwittingly misled
into supporting Marcos through all these years. It may
be that fate has thrown your paths together. It may be
that the career you chose to pursue has set you up before
martial law to assist the rightfully elected leaders of our
land.
But is it not high time that you re-evaluate your
position? Is the present regime one that you would want to
abet and perpetuate? Is it not high time that you seriously

consider a parting of ways? With the overwhelming
evidence on hand against their unmitigated crookedness,
the most recent example being that of their prostitution of
last year’s so-called elections, you can no longer continue
to deny your own willing (or unwilling, but culpable none
the less) complicity in Ferdimelda’s numerous crimes
against our people.
And you may be among the few still decent men in the
highest councils of government. Such as, perhaps, Cesar
Virata, Vicente Paterno, Juan Ponce Enrile, and certain
officers in the military like Fidel V. Ramos. We know that
you have had a crisis of conscience. And if you are the
great men of conscience that you think you are, then you
should know and find the strength to do what you must.
The day may be near at hand when the blood of free-
dom-loving Filipinos may flow freely on our streets. But
this will be red blood, rich blood, proud blood, preferring
to flow in freedom than to pulse in captivity.
Unless you shake off the evil and corrupting Marcos
influence and mend your ways, and support this
declaration of war, then this blood will be on your
hands.
And when the blood of tyrants and despoilers of our
land and that of their vassals at last flow in the gutters,
will your blood discolor there with theirs?
We appeal to you to reach deep into yourself and
tap the wellsprings of legitimate pride, honor, love for
freedom, and hatred for oppressors that are our heritage.
Stand up and be counted on the side of freedom or face
the consequences.
Long Live a Free Philippines!
ANG TAONG BAYAN
Otto Jimenez must have had all those leaflets still in mind
when he composed the following last stanzas of Captives Free:
We struck in the cause of
Freedom and justice.

And of the long range good of you
Whom we love.
Hold your head up high,
As high as we do ours,
As high as our flags
Which still bravely fly.
They have our bodies
But our spirits are free
For we can say to ourselves,

And to those whom we love
And whose respect we value
(And to heck with the rest),
That we were faced with the call of duty
A challenge to our courage,
And an obligation of honor.
Gasti Ortigas died in early August of 1990, a day after Ed

Olaguer was released from St. Luke’s Hospital following a
successful “double bypass” on his heart performed by a team
of doctors led by his fellow UPSCAn, friend, and cardiologist
Dr. Yolando Q. Sulit. Dr. Yolo’s lovely wife, Susan, was also
Gasti’s one and only recruit into the LAF movement. Here is
what Otto Jimenez had to say to Gasti’s family and friends
after Gasti’s funeral:
I have been asked to say a few words about the “Light
A Fire,” a part of Gasti’s life and activities of which so little
is known. Many of you probably heard much, during the
Marcos regime, about the Light A Fire, mainly from the
Marcos controlled press, and, therefore, mostly wrong.
You only heard what he wanted you to hear—that this
was a ruthless band of urban terrorists. You must have
heard also that, in connection with this, Gasti had flown
the coop and had sought political asylum in the States,
together with the other “steak commandos.” Gasti? Urban
terrorist? Who can believe this? Least of all, Lita!

And why has so little been said about the Light A Fire?
Arrested in December of 1979 . . . sentenced to death in
December of 1984 . . . why do we talk about this now, as 1990
draws to a close, as we remember Gasti? Maybe because
we intuitively know that to know about the Light A Fire is
to know a little more about Gasti, and, to know about Gasti,
is to be sure also, of the character of the Light A Fire.
Now let me sketch the backdrop. The year 1978, with
its farcical elections where LABAN fielded its candidates,
where Ninoy Aquino was allowed to run and conduct his
campaign from his prison cell in Fort Bonifacio. Do you
remember?
Who was that inspired genius who dreamed up the
noise rally? I don’t know, and you probably don’t, either.
I do know that the plan was not too well publicized since
the opposition couldn’t use the Marcos controlled press. I
only heard about it late in the afternoon of the appointed
day. The plan was that at 8:00 P.M., everybody was to
express his protest against the 12-year-old dictatorship.
Wherever he was, he was to honk his car horn, or beat
a pan, or a rusty can, whatever. Nothing much. And
nobody expected much.
But at 8:00 P.M., at the appointed hour, a few timid souls
honked their horns a couple of tentative times. And a few
ragamuffins, looking nervously around, started beating
on rusty cans. And in a few minutes, the noise raged into
a torrent. And what was supposed to be at most a 15
minute noise barrage, spread over the city and continued
well into midnight.
Voices that had been silent for 12 years suddenly were
raised in protest. True, they needed numbers and anony-
mity. But the action chosen gave them that. Suddenly they
found their indignation and anger. Suddenly they were
united with a few million other souls that were giving
expression to their long suppressed rage in a frenzied
beating of pans and cans. So widespread was this protest,
so helpless was the administration, that Imelda, who had
planned to rig the elections to allow some opposition

candidates to win a couple of Batasan seats, rigged it so
that the administration ticket won by a clean sweep.
Most of you have probably forgotten about this event.
In the course of time, and beside more spectacular events,
such as the yellow confetti rallies in Makati, this four-
hour beating of pans was pushed back into the limbo
of historical trivia. But it was this event that inspired
the start of what was later to be tagged as the Light A
Fire Movement. For could not this four-hour protest be
revived and extended? Could not the smoldering embers
of courage and righteous indignation be nursed into the
raging fire of widespread protest through continuously
escalating civil disobedience that might eventually topple
the dictatorship? Talk about an amorous ant dreaming of
sweeping an elephant off her feet! Of such ambition were
the Light A Fire founders made!
A name was not the only thing this organization did
not have. It did not have an ideology. It did not have a
platform. It did not have a political party. It sought to
put no candidates into place. It had only one dream—the
dismantling of the dictatorship and a return to free and
honest elections.
For, in 1978, aside from those four glorious hours
when people were surprised at their new found courage,
albeit so brief, that they poured out into the streets in
front of their residences to express their protest in noise,
aside from this one isolated incident, we had shamefully
accepted the yoke that Marcos had pressed upon us. And
the Light A Fire founders asked:
Hindi ba matapang ang Pilipino?
Nasaan na ‘yong tapang ng mga ninuno natin,
na doon daw sa Bataan at Corregidor,
nang maubusan ng bala ang kanilang riple,
ay pumulot daw ng gulok at sumugod pa rin?
Nawala na ba sa mga ugat natin ‘yong magiting
na dugong ‘yon?
Bakit tinatanggap natin itong mag-asawang
aswang ito?

[Isn’t the Filipino brave?
Where is the legacy of bravery of our soldiers
in Bataan and Corregidor,
Who whenever they ran out of bullets,
picked the nearest knife,
and ran after the enemy?
Have our veins run out of such intrepid blood?
So why do we supinely submit
to this conjugal dictatorship?]
And what does the whole world think of us? That we
accept them? That we approve of them? That we believe
the stupid platitudes of this simpering woman who dared
to say that seeing her diamonds put smiles on the faces of
our people?
This, then, was the purpose, and the message, of the
Light A Fire Movement. To try to awaken the drugged
indignation of the Filipino. To ask them to rise and take
courage and give voice to their protest. To tell Marcos,
and the whole world, that we were no longer accepting
its tyranny; that we wanted our democracy and our
freedom back; that we wanted him to step down and give
way to free and honest elections. We wanted to say to our
American friends that their government was supporting a
dictatorship, and to pressure their representatives in their
halls of Congress to pressure their leaders to withdraw
their support.
There is no point, tonight, in telling how the military
got on to us. No need to tell of how a handful of us
were arrested. As you know, the Filipino does not lose
his humor, even in the worst of times. And typically,
we laughed that Marcos did not know that in arresting
this handful, virtually the entire movement had been
physically neutralized. But only physically! Morally and
spiritually we would grow stronger in prison . . .
In Bicutan, our small band was the only non-Left
organization. The Extreme Left had better logistics,
better financing, better propaganda. As the days turned
into months and years, we only had our Faith . . . and the

consolation that in taking up the seemingly hopeless
struggle against ridiculous odds, we had not shamed
the bright red blood of our forebears . . . and our sense of
humor.
But you cannot kill an idea. You cannot put freedom
behind bars. We were only the start. A few necessary
casualties. Casualties our families had difficulty accepting.
The Movement survived. The torch was taken up by the
April 6 Liberation Movement (A6LM). Until many of
them too, were behind bars. But Ninoy helped. From
his prison cell in Fort Bonifacio, he had known about us,
and agreed. But in his death, he accomplished what he
could not accomplish in his life—he set the slumbering
embers of courage and indignation aflame. And the rest
is history.
One small footnote: Arsonists, and urban terrorists,
they branded us. And yet in all of the activities of the
Light A Fire, until we were arrested for those “activities,”
and I’ll spare you the details, NOT A SINGLE HAIR ON A SINGLE
PERSON’S HEAD WAS LOST! Even among our adversaries.
Much less among innocent bystanders.
And so we come back to Gasti. Knowing him, I said,
we should know something about the Light A Fire. Not
a single hair on a single person’s head was lost. Doesn’t
that sound Gasti or tigas? And knowing about the Light A
Fire, knowing how the handful dreamt about toppling the
dictatorship by writing letters, and setting a few SYMBOLIC
fires of protest, knowing how this group of financially
comfortable businessmen who were NOT POLITICIANS,
staked everything in this fight for freedom and justice,
you will know about Gasti. Talk about being simon-pure.
That was Gasti indeed.
After the dismantling of the dictatorship, he looked to
the next step—social justice, the dismantling of systemic
poverty. But what is the use of remembering him tonight,
if not to know what he laid his life down for? And what
is the use of knowing what he was fighting for, if not to
take up the cause?

A poem learned long ago in high school now comes
to mind . . . I cannot remember the name of the poet,
but maybe that is not too important. Maybe, like Gasti,
the poem’s author wouldn’t mind his name not being
remembered, as long as his message is not forgotten. . .
The time is during the First World War, and the words are
supposed to be from one fallen in battle, and the location
is a military cemetery named Flanders Field . . . which is
also the title of the poem . . .
In Flanders Field the poppies grow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place. And in the sky,
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders Field.
Take up our quarrel with the foe.
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch. Be yours to hold it high.
If you break faith with us who die,
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow,
In Flanders Field.
For Ed Olaguer however, though still alive and kicking,

and already FREE, his own Flanders Field was still a nightmare.
In June of 1997, Philippine Daily Inquirer columnist Ramon
Tulfo zeroed-in on his former nemesis by pointing to Ed in
several consecutive issues of his column, as the main suspect
in the murder of another columnist-writer. In addition, Tulfo
repeatedly referred to Ed as a terrorist. A helpless novice in
being so publicly maligned, Ed Olaguer wrote to his Jesuit
friends and alumni at the Ateneo de Naga where he finished
his High School with six gold medals on graduation day.
Apparently seeking moral support, Ed bared his heart. Here
are excerpts of that self-explanatory letter he wrote on July 12,

1997 to his friend and 4-decade-long surviving Rector of the
Ateneo de Naga and icon of the excellence of Jesuit education
in Bicolandia.
To: Rev. Fr. John Phelan S.J.

and the Ateneo de Naga Community
From: Eduardo B. Olaguer, ADN HS ’52
Carissime Pater et fratres! And thank you Father Jack for
your letter which I found at my bedside last night. It kept
me awake for several hours more, in silent thanksgiving
and thinking of how to respond. As the Spanish say, Amor
con amor se paga! Thus this letter and the soul-baring that
goes with it.
Indeed, Divine Providence works in mysterious ways.
His sacred Scriptures remind me that all things work out for
the good eventually, if one keeps the Faith. For He allows
evil so that a greater good may arise. So perhaps one good
thing that has immediately surfaced is that I have started
writing my memoirs as a result of my tussle with Tulfo
and the pleadings of my family, relatives, and friends, to
tell the world the entire and true “Light A Fire” odyssey.
Most of my principal eye witnesses and colleagues in that
enterprise such as former Senator and 1986 Constitutional
Commissioner Francisco “Soc” Rodrigo, and my own
flesh-and-blood brother, your fellow Jesuit Fr. Toti
Olaguer, are supporting and encouraging me to write
the book, especially in the light of Tulfo’s recent public
accusation that we were “murderers and terrorists.”
Providentially too, many of the principal participants,
organizers, contributors or consultants on the legal
and moral/theological aspects of our anti-martial law
activities, are still very much alive. A good number of
them now occupy high places in government and private
industry.
“Soc” Rodrigo and Fr. Toti, for example, are my
only witnesses to the fact that the late and former Jesuit
Provincial Fr. Horacio de la Costa was in a manner of

speaking (to say the least) the spiritual Founder of the
Christian Third Force, which after he died spawned
the Light A Fire operations. Soon after he arrived in
the Philippines from his Jesuit Generalate assignment
in Rome, and shortly before his death, he organized a
small group of well-known oppositionists to the Marcos
dictatorship, which at that time had unmistakably become
illegitimate, dictatorial, oppressive, corrupt, and prone to
widespread violations of human rights, with little hope
for freedom and justice for the Filipino people. It was a
very small and secret group composed mostly of well-
known personages of kindred spirit, who were selected
for their moral and intellectual probity.
Their main goal was to organize a comprehensive yet
practical over-all plan for the restoration of freedom and
justice in the Philippines, in accordance with the moral
and theological teachings of the Church. A corollary
objective was also to reduce the then heavy migration
of Church people, especially students, nuns, and priests
to the active ranks of, or ideological sympathy with the
Communist Party and its New People’s Army. Jesuit
Father Archie Intengan can vouch for this.
A tentative part of the plan would be, if necessary and
morally justified, the actual taking up of arms against the
Marcos dictatorship’s most blatantly oppressive covens
among his military and civilian minions and cronies.
In short, the armed struggle option was not a priori
written off! But it would have to be thoroughly studied
especially in terms of practicality and the teachings of the
Church . . . (Enter: Ed Olaguer!)
I had been implacably opposed to Marcos’ Martial
Law-imposed dictatorship, from the very day one of its
announcement. I still clearly recall its first few weeks,
particularly the horror generated by the grapevine news
that Ninoy Aquino was jailed with a slew of his kindred
spirits in government and private industry. Together with
my IBM Philippines colleague former Foreign Secretary
Roberto R. “Bobby” Romulo, and his brother Atty.

Ricardo “Dick” Romulo, IBM’s then legal counsel, we
were gathering news clippings and data to support their
personal appeal to their father, then Secretary of Foreign
Affairs, who was traveling in New York. The objective
was to convince Secretary Carlos P. Romulo NOT to
support the martial law dispensation. We were hurrying
to complete it in time for the departure of their sister-in-
law and intended courier, Mariles Cacho Romulo, the
private secretary of CPR himself!
Worse was yet to come. Dick and Bobby’s father chose
not to rock the boat of the martial law administration.
And so I was left alone to continue the fight in IBM
Philippines where the top management had quickly and
enthusiastically endorsed the new order. I was supposed
to be promoted soon as General Manager. And yet as
a result of my political convictions, I lost my job soon
after. For earlier I had written a dangerous letter, with
the encouragement of Dick and Bobby, to IBM’s top
management in New York. It was a formal complaint
against IBM Philippines’ General Manager Reinerio Reyes
whom I was being groomed to replace (hence my recent
Harvard Business School IBM scholarship). My complaint
was his inappropriate, imprudent, precipitate, and anti-
Filipino justification of the martial law declaration during
a business meeting of the company’s top executives,
and his ostracism of me for my anti-Marcos political
views. Rey, the “defendant,” was judged “NOT GUILTY.”
But surprisingly, I, the complainant, who was not at all
accused of anything, was found GUILTY of “disloyalty” to
Rey Reyes and IBM itself.
Leaving IBM led me further on to my eventual six-year
sabbatical in prison. Together with the late Lorenzo M.
Tañada, former Quezon City Vice Mayor Charito Planas,
Sr. Christine Tan RGS (Con-con colleague of “Soc”
Rodrigo), President Manuel L. Quezon’s daughter Nini
Quezon Avanceña, and Marietta Primicias Goco (current
NUCD stalwart and wife of former SOLGEN Raul Goco), we
quickly put up the National Organization of Concerned

Citizens (NOCC) to campaign openly against the proposed
“New Society” Constitution of Mr. Marcos. As head of the
Speakers Bureau, I only had Senator Tañada, Soc Rodrigo,
the late Justice Oscar Barrera, and Juan T. David and a
few others to handle the hundreds of urgent requests for
public speakers on the “NO!” side of the plebiscite. The rest
is history. Seeing that the “NO!” side was overwhelmingly
endorsed by the public, so obviously apparent during our
brief campaign, Marcos cancelled the plebiscite .
Thus when the “call to arms” from our elders and
leaders came six years later in 1978, there were very few of
us original conscientious objectors left, who were neither
politicians persecuted by Marcos, nor big businessmen
robbed by his cronies, or NPAs brave and hardy enough
to be up in the hills fighting a numerically superior force.
(Enter: Fr. Antonio “Toti” Olaguer S.J. and Paul Aquino,
Ninoy’s kid brother!)
My assignment was to establish a logistical and
communications link with our kindred spirits in the U.S.
such as the Lopezes and Osmeñas (who had just escaped
from prison), Steve and Presy Psinakis, Raul Manglapus,
now Senators Heherson “Sonny” Alvarez and Serge
Osmeña, now Congressmen Raul Daza and Bonny Gillego
(U.N. Undersecretary General Rafael “Paeng” Salas came
into the most secret picture later).
Yes, they are all my witnesses as to the truthfulness
of these and of many more revelations in my book. I was
the ideal and only choice, self-financed and with gilt-
edged loyalty credentials. Furthermore, I was Fr. Toti
Olaguer’s kid brother with an absolute guarantee of my
loyalty given by my poker-crony Paul Aquino. I had
never previously met our U.S. confreres except for Jake
Almeda Lopez whom I had briefly known in Baguio some
20 years earlier. Thus Jovy Salonga and Fr. Toti had to
sign their code names across a piece of paper, a uniquely
cut portion of which was given to me to be presented to
Geny Lopez. The rest of the cloak & dagger I.D. paper
was given to his brother, Manolo Lopez (now Meralco

president), as a security measure to be presented to his
brother after my arrival.
My involvement quickly metamorphosed into evalu-
ating and coordinating Philippine and U.S.-based plans
and ideas, raising funds, and reviewing where and
how previous financial contributions to allied groups
were spent. Shortly after, I was asked to do the actual
planning.
An allied group had temporarily dismembered itself
through the inevitable disagreements within their top
leadership ranks. And so I was also tasked “to finalize,
demonstrate, and implement our plans by ourselves.”
(Enter: IBM Southeast Asia’s Manager for Training &
Education, Otto Jimenez!)
It also included setting up printing facilities for our
underground newspaper. (Enter: My Business-Day news-
paper colleagues, and fellow major stockholders, the late
Enrique “Ike” Joaquin, Court of Appeals Justice Hector
Hofileña, and Raul Locsin, the publisher himself). I recall
Senator Tañada was ecstatic when I presented the dummy
of the proposed newspaper Ang Taong Bayan courtesy of
Businessday and Raul Locsin.
Lastly I had to prepare for the almost inevitable day
when I would be apprehended or our core group had to
be dispersed. Thus I had to establish regional counterparts
led by people of similar moral and intellectual probity.
(Enter: Bicol’s and Ateneo de Naga’s own eventual
NBI Director Antonio Carpio; Manila Bank President
Teng Puyat; Palawan’s Congressman & future Speaker
Ramon Mitra Jr.; Butch Aquino and his Fiberglass
company’s G.M. May Hernandez; Fr. Reuter’s TV and
stage protégé Teddy Yabut and his Upsilonian fraternity
brothers; Augusto “Gus” Lagman, my former IBM
colleague and STI computer school founder; the late
Straight-from-the-Shoulder columnist Louie Beltran; and
Seattle, Washington’s Mr. and Mrs. Ben Z. Lim, my old
Legion of Mary buddy and son-in-law of Abra’s Senator
Quintin Paredes. Ben Lim eventually died in prison when

his captors withheld his medicine for his heart, because
he would not testify against me.)
It is ironic that Tulfo calls me a “terrorist” when
precisely it was my adamant conviction and persistent
recommendation, supported by Soc Rodrigo, Jovy
Salonga, my brother, and the grand old man Tañada,
to scrap previous plans as being too much a copy of the
IRA in Ireland and Yasser Arafat’s PLO. That also led to
my change of role from internal critic/evaluator to chief
planner and orchestrator. (Enter: Harvard Ph.D. and
Asian Institute of Management Dean of Faculty Gasti
Ortigas, who with Steve Psinakis and Raul Manglapus
were eventually sentenced to death in absentia, together
with me, Otto & Ester Jimenez, and Rey Maclang.)
Thus, our plans and operations were explicitly
designed and implemented to avoid the usual “terroristic”
methods. It was mostly symbolic in the use of “reasonable
force” along psy-war lines. Carefully selected (by a
unanimous vote of the entire leadership!) targets were the
most important physical structures used by Marcos and
his minions to oppress the Filipino people. Hence “public
justice” and “public approbation” were the hallmarks
of our plan. I personally coined those two key phrases.
These were echoed in several speeches of Raul Manglapus
and Ninoy Aquino in the U.S. In fact our code name for
the whole set of plans was CDPJ, which stood for Civil
Disobedience, our ultimate weapon, and Public Justice,
our moral plumb line.
Thus no limbs nor lives were wasted, innocent or not,
during my watch. What Tulfo exaggeratedly refers to
as “many lives lost and limbs broken” occurred in 1980,
when I was already in prison as of Dec. 24, 1979. A new
allied group of kindred spirits, but much younger, had
replaced us. They were orchestrated all the way from the
United States. (Enter: the April 6 Liberation Movement
and Ninoy Aquino! And may his soul rest in peace!)
But even then, only one, repeat, only one (but still most
regrettably!), one life was lost. That of an American lady

(though it was one too many), not by deliberate design,
but an accidental result of the establishment’s failure
to heed the warning telephoned earlier. My conscience
later told me however, that regardless of the fact that I
was already in prison when it happened, I still bear some
responsibility for that death . . .
And so I am not shirking from any moral responsibility
for my (anonymous) comrades-in-arms’ actions. For
Ninoy’s message to me in prison was that they had
adopted and taken over our CDPJ plans, “lock, stock and
barrel” . . .
Looking back in sober perspective, how many lives
were lost due to police brutality during the anti-martial
law demonstrations? How many during the RAM coup
attempts in 1987 and 1989? And yet nobody explicitly
calls Gringo Honasan openly as a “terrorist,” whether
before or after his election as Senator.
If some morally authoritative institution or personage
will say that I was terribly wrong in accepting respon-
sibility and conceptualizing our CDPJ plan of action
despite more than a year of intensive deliberation, advice
and consent given by the best Catholic and Christian
legal minds and moral consciences available at that time,
even at the risk of our lives, then I will plead guilty before
them and the Almighty and Merciful God! I will even
voluntarily go back to prison.
In fact one of my purposes in writing my memoirs in
book form, is to allow anybody to sue me, and only me, in
the proper court of law. That is, if they honestly believe I
was guilty of a crime. For I believed then and now that:
Surely it is no crime to rise up in arms against the
dictatorship’s legal and political monstrosity. No, not a
crime, but a fulfillment and a consummation – a fulfillment
of a sacred duty, and the consummation of one’s love for
his country. Yes, gentlemen of this Military Tribunal,
I have taken up arms – purposely to overthrow the real
subversive, the real enemy of the people, the corrupt and
unconstitutional regime of Ferdinand E. Marcos. And in

this vocation, in this enterprise, I know I am not alone. I
therefore plead NOT GUILTY.
—Excerpts from my plea of “Not Guilty”
before the Military Tribunal
Truth to tell, when as chief architect of our CDPJ plans,
I used to meditate, especially in prison and even to this
day, I tried to draw inspiration and lessons from similar
situations in history. Rizal and Bonifacio. The “Sons of
Freedom” of Boston where I studied and where the
American revolution was born. Joan of Arc. The Biblical
Judith who seduced and then with a sword cut off the
head of the Assyrian General Holofernes! King David,
Joshua and Moses. I thought of them all, including Peter
and the Zealot Apostle whom Christ allowed to bring two
swords to Gethsemani which resulted in a temporarily
earless Malchus, one of Judas’ fellow mercenaries.
That was the model we eventually selected with a local
variation of course. Pardon me then dear St. Peter and
St. Simon, if I now invoke your names and example. For
indeed my lifelong Catholic (to be more precise Jesuit,
or “Jesuitic?”) education and involvement in its many
mandated organizations such as Jesuit John Delaney’s
U.P. Student Catholic Action, the Legion of Mary, and the
Christian Family Movement, implanted in me for keeps
the Church’s teaching on the infinite and sacred value of
just one soulful human person, whether sinful or sinless.
And yet we also learned to accord the highest value
to freedom and the right to defend ourselves and others
against extreme lawlessness, as a last recourse albeit even
at the cost of our own lives and (unintended or accidental
loss of the innocent lives of) others.
That was the great dilemma which took us more than
a year to resolve. Outright violence and terrorism were
explicitly rejected. PACIFICISM of the “Better Red than Dead”
Bertrand-Russell variety we could not accept in the face
of the growing righteous, and explosive anger of many of
our people against the dictatorship. And DOING NOTHING
would be a cowardly cop-out!

Thus the resulting consensus for us to use a thin
veneer of force against Marcos’ dictatorship which was
basically symbolic, but disguised in order to be credible
to the enemy. Our chosen main course of action was still
explicitly non-violent, the CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE phase.
Pardon me too, dear Fr. Jack, for burdening you with
this kilometric letter. But I must confess that one of the
heaviest emotional burdens I have carried in silence these
past 20 years is the fact that my critics and enemies have
consistently pictured me as a solitary “wild-eyed terrorist”
or even “murderer” and thus a disgrace to my Alma
Mater and my many friends who do not know the true
story. My friends and (former) comrades-in-arms who
knew the real score couldn’t defend me before EDSA and
were too busy thereafter. Even my intimate friends who
playfully teased me every now and then by introducing
me as “Meet Ed Olaguer, you know, the Light A Fire
mastermind and ex-terrorist” in combination with those
of Tulfo, have had a cumulative debilitating effect on my
morale. Call it wounded pride for perhaps it is.
My meditations remind me that although Christ did
keep silent on the Cross in Calvary, he also publicly
defended himself when able and appropriate, without
mincing his words. He referred to the Pharisees as a brood
of vipers and whitened sepulchers. He also overturned the
tables of the money changers in the Temple and whipped
them with a cord. For me therefore to call an out-and-out
slanderer as a MIPS, a “Moral Intellectual PipSqueak,”
must be quite acceptable in Christian moral terms.
I am aware that my many Ateneo de Naga alumni
friends and acquaintances are divided as to how to
respond to the public attacks by Tulfo against me. Perhaps
this letter will help disabuse the minds of some of them
that I am a “disgrace” to the alumni or that the Light a
Fire Movement was truly a “terrorist” group. And so you
may want to publish this letter in the school paper and in
Bulletin Boards. Thus the enclosed diskette. I leave that to
your good discretion.

Again thank you for your kind letter and the 11-
year-old news clipping enclosed. I am also enclosing
my complete 2nd letter to the Philippine Daily Inquirer,
which they belatedly published but heavily truncated. It
addresses the issue of “corruption,” which would have
made this letter unbearably longer if I included that
issue.
As to the murder of the columnist Danny Hernandez
incredulously ascribed to me by Tulfo, the police have
recently arrested the real suspect. Hallelujah, Carissime
Pater!
Very truly yours,
EDUARDO B. OLAGUER
P.S. One of our earliest assignments that I particularly

relished [Enter: Today’s Ambassador to Japan
Alfonso Yuchengco (AY) and former PCGG
Chairman Ramon Diaz] was AY’s obsession and
favorite project to rescue Ninoy Aquino a la Geny
Lopez and Serge Osmeña’s dramatic escape from
prison.
AY and Tito Moning Diaz would buy or rent
a house very near Ninoy’s Times St. residence
in Quezon City. From there, Otto Jimenez, Gasti
Ortigas, Gus Lagman, and yours truly would
ourselves do the actual physical work of digging a
tunnel to Ninoy’s bedroom or toilet.
Steve Psinakis was to help supply the noiseless
earth-drilling equipment from the United States.
The Aquinos would then fake a death or near-death
in the family, so that Marcos would allow Ninoy a
brief home visit.
When presented with the finished plan for
immediate implementation thru his brother Paul,
Ninoy thumbed it down. It was too dangerous for
his other family members and loved ones, who
would have to be left behind to the mercies of Mr.
Marcos.

In his novel The Bridge at San Luis Rey, the author Thornton
Wilder used the different personal histories and circumstances
of his main characters to suggest that their collective misfor-
tune at the San Luis Rey bridge was all but inevitable.
Among Ninoy Aquino, Lorenzo Tañada, Jovy Salonga,
Raul Manglapus, Serge Osmeña, Raul Daza, Sonny Alvarez,
Soc Rodrigo, Ed Olaguer, Otto Jimenez, Gasti Ortigas, Geny
Lopez, Al Yuchengco et al., the main connecting threads
between them which pulled them together in challenging so
powerful a dictator, with practically nothing more than their
honest convictions, are not too difficult to see.
For Ninoy Aquino, Lorenzo Tañada, Jovy Salonga, and Soc
Rodrigo, their common thread was a lifelong abiding concern
for the nation’s good governance, and to be done mainly
through the political arena. Business tycoons Al Yuchengco
and Geny Lopez with his buddy and jail mate Serge Osmeña,
shared the same intense concern, but through a different but
related arena—the arena of job creation and organizational
development. It was therefore all but inevitable that Ninoy
Aquino was the common best hope for a return to a democratic
political order, from the point of view of these elder leaders of
the Movement.
Though Ed Olaguer and Otto Jimenez had never personally
met Ninoy Aquino, they and Gasti Ortigas shared their elders’
admiration for Ninoy, but for a different reason. The three
were Jesuit products through and through. Even if Gasti
never obtained any formal Ateneo education, he and Ed
Olaguer had some six years of intimate association with and
tutelage from Fr. John Delaney. That legendary and extremely
charismatic Jesuit was Gaston Z. Ortigas’ and Ed Olaguer’s
icon, at the start and throughout Gasti’s early adulthood. And
it is a fact that the Jesuits at that time, except for a few, were
overwhelmingly against the martial rule of Ferdinand Marcos.
Consequently, together with Jesuitic products and friends like
Ed, Otto, Gasti, and Raul Manglapus, they were unwaveringly

sympathetic to Ninoy Aquino. Fathers de la Costa and Olaguer
were unabashed “Ninoy-lovers” together with Al Yuchengco,
Raul Daza, Sonny Alvarez, and Soc Rodrigo. Jovy Salonga
was Ninoy’s lawyer early during Jovy’s brilliant legal career.
And “the grand old man” Lorenzo Tañada was undoubtedly
Ninoy’s father-figure!
It was however the person of Ed Olaguer who tied up most
if not all of the connecting threads and personalities together.
The complete trust of Tañada, Soc Rodrigo, and Jovy Salonga
in Ed’s single-minded and spontaneous opposition to martial
rule, coupled with his closeness to the Aquino clan, except
Ninoy, his extensive network of former associates in IBM,
Harvard, AIM, Ateneo, U.P., Businessday, Ayala Corporation,
Pantranco, the Church hierarchy, the nuns, priests, military, and
a wide circle of friends throughout Luzon, Visayas, and even in
the U.S., was a rich source of talented recruits of kindred spirit
for the Movement. To cap it all, Otto Jimenez and Ed Olaguer
brought into the Movement the pre-war Jesuits’ Ateneo sub-
culture of ratio studiorum, ad Jesum per Mariam, and above all,
PRIMUM REGNUM DEI!
Despite all these however, these idealists were bound to fail,
in a manner of speaking. But as the following and last section
of this account will show, it was during this period of seeming
defeat, in prison as “Captives Free,” that they truly succeeded.
And from their hindsight point of view, they owed this success
to their strongest common bond: their unwavering faith in the
Infinite Mercy and Perfect Justice of God’s DIVINE PROVIDENCE.

Chapter 12
WONDER AND IRONY
[AUTHOR’S NOTE: This is the last section of the “3rd person

account” I wrote about the original Light A Fire story
intended for Al Yuchengco’s autobiography]
Al Yuchengco’s two friends and comrades-in-arms, Otto

Jimenez and Ed Olaguer, were TEMPORARILY supposedly, set
free and released from their Bicutan detention quarters, but
actually NEVERMORE to return, a little past midnight on January
17, 1986. It was exactly 22 days and six years after they were
separately arrested within minutes of each other around 1 A.M.
on December 24, 1979. It was also barely 43 days and one year
after December 4, 1984 when Ed and Otto were sentenced to
death. And so they were STILL UNDER that Damocles’ Sword of
DEATH BY ELECTROCUTION while coming home to their loved
ones that chilly early morning. Ed and Otto could not have
imagined then, that exactly 40 days later, Marcos would be
ousted as President and forcibly shipped out to Hawaii. And
likewise, NEVERMORE to return!
The inseparable duo’s gift of freedom came after more
than six months of unceasing phone calls and letters from His
Eminence Jaime Cardinal Sin, interceding for Ed Olaguer’s
release from jail. President Marcos finally relented on New
Year’s Eve. On December 31, 1985 he ordered General Fabian
Ver to release Ed Olaguer immediately from prison. But only
Ed Olaguer! His Eminence must have thanked the Almighty
God profusely, for it was His Eminence whose final comments
and advice were sought by Fr. Toti Olaguer on Ed and Otto’s
typewritten and extensively explained “Civil Disobedience
and Public Justice” (CDPJ) plan of action. It was sought after all

the Movement’s lay and clergy leaders had already approved
everything to its last detail. Jaime Cardinal Sin’s terse verbal
imprimatur on CDPJ, directly addressed to Fr. Toti Olaguer,
was simply this: “Let the lay people do it!” And now CDPJ’s
chief author and implementor was being set free as a gift to His
Eminence . . .
It was in Ferdinand Marcos’ own words, personally
repeated several times to His Eminence and to his ever present
assistant, Monsignor now Bishop Soc Villegas, that Ed Olaguer
was the President’s “New Year’s gift to Your Eminence!” This
took place right there in the ceremonial hall of Malacañang,
immediately after the Cardinal had celebrated the New Year’s
Eve Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, with the President and all the
top government officials in attendance.
The order of release was finally implemented after two
weeks of stubborn refusal by General Ver to obey Marcos
and deliver the President’s New Year’s gift to His Eminence.
It had to be Philippine Army Commanding General Josephus
Ramas to get it done. He sent Colonel (later General) Emiliano
“Mitch” Templo to supervise the actual release of Ed Olaguer.
Inexplicably, to this very day, the wonder of wonders was that
Otto Jimenez was simultaneously released with Ed!
That is a separate story altogether, considering that six
months earlier, all the Light A Fire (LAF) detainees were as-
sured by Alice Uggadan, a woman-seer, and her associate
Cecilio Cruz Jr. (my wife Daisie’s paternal first cousin),
purportedly on the direct orders of the Blessed Virgin Mary
during the seer’s periodic trances, that whoever believed Our
Lady and followed her detailed instructions, such as reciting
the Novena to the Wounds of Christ, praying the Rosary with
outstretched arms everyday, and above all, sincere forgiving of
their worst enemies, WOULD BE RELEASED AT THE END OF THE YEAR!
Nobody believed in this incredible prophecy nor followed the
separate and different instructions for each of them. EXCEPT
Wonder and Irony 195

Ed Olaguer, Otto Jimenez, Fr. James B. Reuter S.J. and Jaime
Cardinal Sin!
After Ed and Otto’s release, the seer announced an even
more incredible prophecy. That there would soon be dancing
in the streets for Cory Aquino! Again Fr. Reuter was there at Ed’s
La Vista, Quezon City house at 22 Maranaw, to receive and
relay the message to Cory Aquino, mid-February of 1986. True
enough, on February 25, 1986, forty days after Ed’s and Otto’s
release from prison, Ferdinand Marcos was spirited out by a
U.S. helicopter, not to Paoay, Ilocos Norte, but to Hawaii. And
so immediately there was nationwide, day and night, dancing
in the streets . . .
The irony was that Ed Olaguer and Otto Jimenez et
al. eventually earned, even before the two were released,
the genuine respect and even admiration of the martial
law administrators—despite the vitriolic rhetoric and
psychologically-designed fearful threats of their chain letters.
The dictatorship obviously believed those threats, because
some 4,000 fire-fighting trucks had already been ordered for
quick delivery as of the day the two were arrested. That was the
boastful remark of Metrocom Chief General Prospero Olivas to
Ed himself, when Olivas came to interrogate Ed immediately
after his arrest on December 24, 1979.
A week after that boastful remark of General Olivas, Ed
Olaguer was visited by then (now deceased) Undersecretary
Carmelo Z. Barbero on New Year’s Day, accompanied by
his executive assistant Colonel Eduardo Ermita. The latter is
now the Secretary of Defense under President GMA. Barbero
had come, he said, upon the request of His Eminence Jaime
Cardinal Sin, to prevent Ed from being tortured by Major
Abadilla and his infamous MISG cohorts. The conversation
between Ed and Barbero soon became friendly, to the extent
that the latter revealed something which Ed had not known till
then. Barbero revealed that a few years before, when Ed was
President of Pantranco, Ed had been strongly recommended

by Cabinet members Cesar Virata and Vicente “Ting” Paterno,
both Harvard Business School alumni, to be the new Minister
of Transportation and Communications. However, it was Ed’s
friend Jose “Totoy” Dans who was selected, because Ed was
strongly suspected by Kokoy Romualdez to be adamantly
against the martial law regime.
From then on, Col. Ermita visited his tocayo every once in a
while to check on prison conditions. It was during one of such
visits that Ed Olaguer complimented Col. Ermita this way:
“Colonel, now I know that two Eds are better than one!” [NOTE:
Ermita is now President GMA’s Executive Secretary]
A week later it was Barbero’s boss, Minister of Defense Juan
Ponce Enrile, who came to the rescue of Ed Olaguer. Major
Abadilla and his MISG Executive Officer, Captain Panfilo
Lacson, were on their way to an out-of-town safe house to
“interrogate” Ed Olaguer. Manacled and trembling with fright
at the backseat of the vehicle, Ed endured some 45 harrowing
minutes until the car’s 2-way radio crackled. They were
being sent back by somebody high-up. Abadilla and Lacson
started cursing that “somebody” repeatedly. “Pakialamero.
buwisit . . . etc, etc.” That “busybody” turned out to be Juan
Ponce Enrile, whose office was just across on the other side of
EDSA, a mere two minutes away from the MISG headquarters
where they came from earlier.
It was in Enrile’s office where Ed for the second time after
his arrest, shed more than just a few tears, for Minister Juan
Ponce Enrile treated Ed Olaguer not like a criminal, but as an
honorable man. Nay, a patriot! To the consternation of the
fidgeting and future victim of NPA assassins Colonel A. and
the future Senator L. who were listening-in just a few feet away
from Ed and Johnny Enrile. As a result, Abadilla was ordered
to allow Ed to be visited by his first of many lawyers, Sedfrey
Ordoñez, later to become Secretary of Justice under President
Cory Aquino.

Soon after Ed was returned to his jail quarters, a very
pretty Newsweek magazine lady reporter, Belinda Liu, came
to interview Ed Olaguer. “What is between you and Johnny
Enrile?” was the first question thrust even before she had
introduced herself. Before Ed could answer, another question
followed, “Why is he all praises for you?”
Ed has already forgotten his answers to the Newsweek
reporter. But he remembers what he did NOT reveal. For Ed
was certain that it must have been then UN Undersecretary
Rafael “Paeng” Salas and/or Fr. James B. Reuter, who had put
in not just a few good words in favor of “Captive Free” Ed
Olaguer. Ed had known after several extended CDPJ-related
meetings cruising along the streets of Manhattan in New York,
alone with Paeng himself driving his UN-furnished Cadillac
limousine on Saturday winter mornings in February of 1978,
that Paeng Salas and Johnny Enrile were David-and-Jonathan
to each other. And that it was Fr. Reuter to whom Ed had
confessed all about CDPJ in the presence of Sr. Christine Tan
and Teddy Yabut in the San Lorenzo, Makati safe house of
Maring Feria, JUST TWO DAYS before Ed’s arrest. Fr. Reuter was
also the marriage counsellor of Cristina and Juan Ponce Enrile,
and Maring Feria was an Executive Assistant of Senator Raul
Manglapus!
Some six years later, and a couple of months before Ed
and Otto’s release, Ed Olaguer was visited in his Bicutan
jail quarters by a squad of officers assigned to the dreaded
Metrocom Intelligence Service Group (MISG). It was sometime
in December of 1985, and most probably, their unannounced
visit was unknown to their big boss, the even more dreaded and
newly promoted “Full Colonel” Rolando Abadilla. Ed thought
for a while that he was going to be taken out again to some
place for another round of cruel interrogation with the usual
application of torture or threats of torture. Lo and behold, all
the officers were most courteous and friendly! Especially their
highest ranking one, Major Magtanggol Gatdula, the future

head of the Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Task Force
or PAOCTF, during Joseph Estrada’s presidency, succeeding
General (now Senator) Panfilo Lacson.
They had come on their own volition, to thank and
congratulate Ed Olaguer for his Light A Fire activities! All
of them had been given spot promotions of two ranks up, as
reward for Ed and Otto et al.’s arrest! But after six years of
investigating the case, they finally saw through and understood
the Movement’s real methods, motives, and objectives. So they
all saluted Ed Olaguer in unison. Ed shed a few reluctant tears
out of shock and awe and joy. Vindication and even admiration
had come from the most unexpected personalities! By
hindsight, the loyalty of the military towards the dictatorship
must have already deteriorated two months before the first
EDSA revolution.
A day after his release, and immediately after the
Thanksgiving Mass presided over by His Eminence Jaime
Cardinal Sin, Ed went over to his friend and next-door neighbor,
Pedro “Pete” Nisperos at 20 Maranaw Street in La Vista. Ed
asked Pete to deliver his “thank you” note, handwritten on a
folded piece of ordinary bond paper, addressed to President
Marcos. Pete Nisperos had direct access to the President, having
sheltered the latter for several months in their ancestral house
in Pangasinan when Marcos was hiding from the Japanese in
1943, two years before the end of World War II.
According to Pete, after President Marcos had read Ed’s
“thank you” note while leaning over outside his car in
Urdaneta, Pangasinan during a lull in the last few days of the
election campaign late in January 1986, the President “shed a
few tears” and mumbled, “I wish Ed Olaguer were my friend!”
True enough, a few weeks later on February 9, 1986, Ed’s
courageous and indefatigable wife Daisie, together with the
seer Alice Uggadan and Daisie’s first cousin Cecilio “Sonny”
Cruz Jr., approached the President at the Manila Hotel to seek
help for Ed. It was immediately after Marcos had just delivered

a campaign speech before leaders of the business community,
and was about to step down from the stage.
Daisie could not get nearer than ten meters away because of
the crowd and solid phalanx of security personnel surrounding
the President. She was forced to shout repeatedly, “Mr.
President, I am Daisie, Ed Olaguer’s wife!”
Less than a minute later, the President shouted back: “How
is Ed?” Daisie nervously came nearer and replied, “He is very
sick, Mr. President, and according to Dr. Yolo Sulit, Ed needs
to go to the U.S. for treatment of his heart condition. But we
have no passports!”
Cardiologist Dr. Yolando “Yolo” Q. Sulit, whose wife Susan
was a secret LAF recruit, were both Ed’s fellow UPSCAns.
The President needed no further explanation. Dr. Yolo was
also one of his trusted cardiologists for himself and his crony
Danding Cojuangco. Without any further ado he called out to
his aide: “Aruiza! See to it that Ed and Daisie Olaguer are given
passports immediately!”
Wonder of wonders, coming from Quezon City early the
following day, it took Daisie more than seven hours to reach the
Department of Foreign Affairs office along Roxas Boulevard,
thus arriving just a few minutes before 5 P.M. Many detours and
security checkpoints clogged the way, plus the huge crowd of
KBL partisans gathering for that evening’s Miting de Avance
for presidential candidate Marcos. But in less than 30 minutes
after reaching the DFA office, she obtained new passports for
herself and husband Ed, straight from the hands of Acting
Foreign Minister Pacifico de Castro. The Foreign Minister had
been waiting for Daisie the whole day!
Finally, in May of 1987, the Supreme Court released its long
awaited verdict. It must be noted that while in jail, Ed Olaguer
had contemptuously lambasted the entire Supreme Court
several times. He did it through letters attached as Exhibits to
his Counsel Lorenzo Tañada’s official Motions and Pleadings
before the Court, in connection with Ed’s on-going trial before

Military Commission No. 34. And yet wonder of wonders, the
Supreme Court voted unanimously to declare NULL and VOID,
the conviction and death sentence imposed by the tribunal on
Ed Olaguer, Otto Jimenez, Ester Jimenez, and Rey Maclang.
There was an unusual twist to the Decision. The Court
piggy-backed on the instant case of Olaguer et al. vs. Military
Commission No. 34, by means of the surprising and hitherto
unorthodox move of including Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino
among those to be acquitted with Ed, Otto, et al. Despite the
fact that Ninoy’s conviction and sentence of death by firing squad
was meted out by Military Commission No. 2, an altogether
different tribunal! And Ninoy’s name was not even included in
the Petition filed by the Tañada Law Office and other lawyers
of Ed and Otto et al. i.e. Joker Arroyo, Sabino Padilla Jr., Joaquin
Misa (Ester’s brother), Rene Saguisag, Jojo Binay etc.
And so the Supreme Court must have accorded “judicial
notice” or recognition of the little known fact that Olaguer,
Jimenez et al., and Ninoy Aquino were all of the same band of
freedom fighters and advocates. Thus Ed and Otto et al. were
ultimately and officially vindicated together with National
Hero Ninoy Aquino himself!
Here are excerpts of Chief Justice Claudio Teehankee’s
separate concurring decision which addressed not just the
legal technicalities involved, but even more lengthily and
eloquently, the merits of the petitioners’ rebellion against the
dictatorship:
March 22, 1987
GR No. L-54558
Eduardo B. Olaguer vs. Military Commission No. 34
SEPARATE OPINION
TEEHANKEE, C. J., concurring:
I hail the Court’s unanimous judgment 1/ vacating
and setting aside the penalty of death by electrocution
summarily imposed by respondent military commission

on December 4, 1984 upon the principal petitioners
Eduardo Olaguer, Othoniel Jimenez, Reynaldo Maclang,
and Ester Misa Jimenez for lack of jurisdiction of military
commissions over civilians, and expressly overturning
and rejecting the contrary 1975 ruling in Benigno S.
Aquino Jr. vs. Military Commission No. 2 and subsequent
cases, issued during the darkest chapter of our history
when time-tested doctrines guaranteeing a person’s right
to due process in preservation of his life and liberty,
“shriveled in the effulgence of the overpowering rays of
martial rule.” We uphold once again the supremacy of
the Constitution and of the Rule of Law and of civilian
authority over the military . . . .
12/ It was a long and horrible nightmare when our
people’s rights, freedoms, and liberties were sacrificed
at the altar of “national security” even though it
involved nothing more than the President-dictator’s
perpetuation in office and the security of his relatives
and some officials in high positions and their protection
from public accountability of their acts of venality and
deception in government, many of which were of public
knowledge.
Draconian decrees were issued whereby many were
locked up indefinitely for “rumor-mongering,” “unlawful
use of means of publication and unlawful utterances, and
alarms and scandals.” While the people for the most part
suffered in silence and waited, others never gave up the
struggle for truth, freedom, justice, and democracy, a
common commitment which is what makes a people a
nation instead of a gathering of self-seeking individuals.
The national will was systematically undermined to the
point of national mockery, (so) that the day of imposition
of martial law was proclaimed as “National Thanksgiving
Day” . . . .
6. The greatest threat to freedom is the shortness of
human memory. We must note here the unforgettable
and noble sacrifices of the countless brave and patriotic
men and women who fell as martyrs and victims during

the long dark years of the deposed regime. In vacating
the death sentence imposed on the petitioners who
survived the holocaust, we render them simple justice
and we redeem and honor the memory of those who
selflessly offered their lives for the restoration of truth,
decency, justice and freedom in our beloved land.
[emphasis supplied]
CLAUDIO TEEHANKEE
—
Chief Justice
Supreme Court of the Philippines
Let us flash back to that December 2003 reunion, hosted by

Al Yuchengco for Ed Olaguer and his Light A Fire associates,
sympathizers, and other anti-martial law aboveground and
underground activists, on the 48th floor of his business-empire’s
flagship edifice. When it was close to midnight, there were
only a handful of the staunchest “terrorists” remaining. They
were fortunate. They discovered something that hitherto none
of them had ever imagined. Al Yuchengco loved to sing! And
so, glasses were raised high, and the group started belting out
an assortment of the Gaudeamus Igitur type of drinking songs.
Lighthearted they all were, but deep down they knew that
they were held together by the strongest of bonds. These were
those who had fought through the darkest and most fearsome
years of Marcos’ terrible and heavyhanded dictatorship. For
brave men are not those who know not fear—those are only
foolhardy and unthinking men. Brave men are those who,
in spite of fear, carry on with what their convictions have
committed them to do.
And, the evening ended, as you might have guessed, with
Al’s hearty voice a few decibels above those of the rest. Al sang
an in vino veritas rendition of, they also found out, his favorite
song, “The Impossible Dream,” from Quixote’s Man from La
Mancha!

Oh yes, for Al, affluent and influential, who could easily
have lived through Marcos’ martial rule with no discomfort,
and who among all of them had nothing to gain but the most
to lose, risked it all by daring, with other freedom fighters, to
dream the impossible dream. That dream was to put an end to
the conjugal dictatorship, and similar monstrosities. Forever!
Al Yuchengco and they, “terrorists” all, dreamed the
impossible dream, reached for the unreachable star, and
somehow made it happen. Deo gratias! And ironically today,
that dream lingers on . . .

Chapter 13
FRIENDS AND HEROES
Looking back from a distance of more than 25 years, it is

clear to me that our greatest fault and basic source of mistakes
as organizers of a rebellion and as its operatives, was the sin of
presumptuousness. It was a sin born of intellectual pride, and
made worse by over-confidence in ourselves!
We presumed too much that our “good intentions” and even
“noble motives” were sufficient and permanent, regardless of
the absence of any real prayer-filled hours or even just minutes
in our day-to-day life, EXCEPT when we were already at the
brink of arrest.
We presumed that all those we had directly recruited and
thereafter their own recruits, were equally motivated and
therefore trustworthy in everything—in their competence and
in their constancy.
Thus we presumed that we were good enough and brave
enough to take on Ferdinand Marcos the dictator, with all his
military, police, and civilian minions ranged against us.
Above all, we proudly presumed that even without Christ
constantly in our minds and hearts, we could and would defeat
Marcos et al., and the FAR MORE ASTUTE and POWERFUL ENEMY
ALLIANCE consisting of the world with all its allurements, the
sin-weakened flesh in us, and the ex-Lucifer, S.A. Tan himself.
We forgot, or considered as superstition, the latter and his
myriads and myriads of fanatic super-intelligent minions,
who would surely be hate-filled while gloatingly plotting their
sure victory against our lone puny selves. Naturally! Because
among others, we were piously claiming but merely paying
Friends and Heroes 205

lip service to their primordial nemesis, Jesus Christ and His
commandments.
The paradox of it all, however, in the face of all our faults and
mistakes, is that when and after we had seemingly been beaten,
crushed in our egos, and languishing in jail, The Hound came
to the rescue of His headstrong but now humiliated quarries.
Like the phoenix I dare say, some of us rose to the occasion,
from the depths of despair in prison or in hiding, to achieve
heroic constancy in the fight against a dictatorship gone wild
in its pursuit of illicit political power and ill-gotten wealth.
Philip Suzara, Jovito Labajo, and Rey Maclang are the first
names that come to my mind among my prison-mates, for I
saw with my own eyes and heard with my own ears for more
than six years, the anguish and humiliation they went through
day after day, for seemingly having sacrificed everything for
nothing. They did not even have any of the wide recognition
and sympathy that I and others had for our moral support. Yet,
like bamboo trees, they merely swayed and bent with the gale
force winds that battered them endlessly. By the grace of God
they did not break, and became even better men thereafter!
I wonder if in the world’s annals of national liberation
movements, there can be cited a Pater et Filia team better than
Renato “Nats” Tañada and his daughter Karen. I doubt very
much. And if you add to the family team the name of Nats’
father, the grand old man himself, Lorenzo M. Tañada Sr.,
his other sons Bobby and Lorenzo, Jr., then they would be a
matchless family team of patriots!
I loved the grand old man like a son would, and I wished I
had told him so. There were many intimate and lesson-filled
incidents that crowd my memory even if they occurred some
30 years ago.
I had never met the six-time (5 times re-elected!) Senator
personally, until after martial law had been declared, and I was
one of its immediate casualties at IBM Philippines. But when

he first saw me one day in November of 1972, his righteous
temper was quickly aroused.
It was during a secret meeting between him and the original
anti-martial law legal luminaries such as former Senate
President Jovito Salonga, Joker Arroyo, the future Justice
Secretary Sedfrey Ordoñez, future Senator Rene Saguisag,
my future lawyer and Cabinet member Atty. Rene Sarmiento
representing Senator Diokno, Chino Roces the great publisher
of The Manila Times, the late Justice Francis Garchitorena, Jojo
Binay (now the perennial Mayor of Makati City), Charito
Planas (the only woman there but with real “balls”), and a few
others.
Former Senator Soc Rodrigo came late, very late. He came
in, in the midst of heated discussions among the punctual
participants, about when and how to proceed with the habeas
corpus case of their leader Ninoy Aquino and Senator Diokno.
The two had been arrested by Marcos minions on the first day of
martial law on September 17 of 1972 and held incommunicado
in parts unknown. Worse, Soc had brought me in tow, wanting
to introduce me to everybody as his newest recruit in the fight
against the dictatorship. Except for my boyhood friend at the
Ateneo de Naga, Francis Garchitorena, everybody else knew
little or nothing about me. Senator Tañada quickly rose up
when I had barely seated myself nearest the door, looked at me
for a few seconds and blurted, “I wish to excuse myself from
this meeting at once, because there is somebody present who
should not be here and about whom I do not know anything!”
Instinctively, I slunk out like a discovered interloper and went
directly home to lick my psychic wounds.
Two days later, Soc Rodrigo again invited me, this time
to accompany him to the Supreme Court where the habeas
corpus case of Ninoy Aquino was to be heard. There were
just a few of us other than the soldier-guards who practically
filled the entire courtroom, obviously to dissuade martial law
oppositionists from coming in. At the end of the first session just

before lunchtime, Senator Tañada went straight to my seat and
without further ado hugged me, and incoherently mumbled
his apologies while almost in tears. It was I who broke into
tears instead, for such spontaneous yet humble display of
gallantry by the great man. From then on, he and all the rest of
the political stalwarts opposing Marcos trusted me completely.
But just the same, Marcos won, and the Supreme Court would
not “produce the body” of Ninoy Aquino until much later.
A second incident was when he came for the first time, and
thenceforth made it a regular weekly occasion, to visit me in
February of 1980, at Marcos’ gulag complex at Camp Crame
in Quezon City. He asked me to lead a prayer even before we
started with the traditional amenities of greeting and wishing
each other well. I started with the usual “Hail Mary” and the
standard prayer to the Holy Spirit. Immediately after, he asked
me to repeat and dictate the latter prayer more slowly, while he
wrote it down on a piece of paper. Oh I could have embraced
him there and then, if it did not seem inappropriate to him and
to the jail guards who were all around watching us!
But the best incident that highlighted Lorenzo M. Tañada’s
nobility of character was Christmas time in 1982. He brought
a whole lechon de leche for us political detainees at the Bicutan
“Rehabilitation Center,” where Amnesty International had
succeeded in having us transferred from the National Peniten-
tiary in Muntinlupa for reasons of safety and its better jail
facilities. Because Daisie and many other relatives and friends
had come earlier and filled my small cubicle at the ground
floor, he was not able to see me at once, and so he just left
instructions to Satur Ocampo who occupied the second floor.
Satur is now a party list representative in Congress. He was
supposed to give half of the lechon to me for our Light A Fire
group.
But at around 1 P.M., Senator Tañada barged in while my
visitors and I were still having lunch. He was profusely

perspiring, and even more profusely apologetic, and hungry,
not having taken lunch at all.
“Ed, please forgive this old man for being so forgetful!
Although I know that Satur and you respect each other very
highly, I should have remembered that your group is very
sensitive about keeping your distance from his CPP-NPA
prison mates. I remembered it only when I got home. And so
I rushed back. Here is the lechon. Which one do you want for
your group, the portion with the head or the tail-end?”
This time around I finally embraced him like he was my
father indeed. But all that tongue-tied me could say was,
“Merry Christmas, Senator. And thank you very much!”
As with my IBM patron John Hooks, I never called him by
his nickname of “Tanny.” Until now, I always remember him
in my prayers, either praying for his soul or asking for his
intercession from Heaven.
Aside from Karen Tañada, there were three other women
whose heroism I can never forget: Ester Misa Jimenez, Otto
Jimenez’ wife who passed away some seven years ago; Doris
Nuval Baffrey, the daughter of Commodore Nuval, Marcos’
Navy Commander; and of course and certainly not the least,
Presy Lopez Psinakis, the lovely wife of Steve Psinakis and
only sister of Eugenio “Geny” Lopez Jr. It would take another
book to give justice to all three of them. And it would put me
and many other self-proclaimed machos to shame.
I have referred to Steve Psinakis earlier in another chapter,
as the local equivalent of the Marquis de Lafayette. But
even better, I think, than that French hero of the American
Revolution, American citizen Steve never asked nor was paid
any Filipino taxpayers’ single cent, ever, for his many long
years of devotion to our national cause of freedom and the
relentless sacrifices it entailed.
Instead, he almost drove his own family into penury while
trying to keep alive the flames of resistance to the Marcoses

from San Francisco and the whole United States, including the
halls of its State Department and Legislature.
His reward? A stint in jail, there in San Francisco, complete
with prisoners’ humiliating outfit, with manacles and leg-irons
to boot. Oh Steve, how much we Filipinos owe you our debt of
honor!
We owe similar debts to Steve’s colleagues in their Movement
for a Free Philippines. They are former Senator Heherson
“Sonny” Alvarez and his incomparable wife and brilliant artist
Cecil Guidote Alvarez; the late Raul Manglapus; Raul Daza,
now a governor in Samar province; Jake Almeda Lopez, who
engineered the dramatic escape of Geny Lopez and Serge
Osmeña from prison; the incumbent Senator Sergio Osmeña III
and his best friend Geny Lopez. Yes, we all owe them and many
others whose names I myself do not remember, our lasting
national gratitude! But only Steve though, was ever manacled
and shackled with leg irons as if he were a criminal . . .
Like Steve who was born in Greece, Jun Lovely was an
American citizen but born in the Philippines. In helping us
Filipinos to regain our freedom, he lost one eye and practically
his entire left arm as well! Yet very few people knew the extent
and the depth of physical and moral suffering Jun Lovely
voluntarily endured, just so as not to turn traitor and be used
as a sacrificial pawn to supply false information and ascribe
criminal acts against Jovito Salonga and Ninoy Aquino.
It was a different kind of suffering Otto Jimenez went
through. But among all of us in our group who were arrested
and jailed here in the Philippines, Otto’s burdens were the
heaviest and the most prolonged. And yet he suffered it all IN
SILENCE, then and even thereafter until now. Not even I could
make him talk, nor National Artist and author Nick Joaquin,
except if needed to improve the accuracy of my recollections.
Let me quote once again the last two stanzas of his wonderful
composition written in jail, Captive Free, which described
himself best of all:

We struck in the cause of freedom and justice,
And of the long range good of you whom we love.
Hold your head up high, as high as we do ours,
As high as our flags which still bravely fly.
They have our bodies, but our spirits are free.
For we can say to ourselves,
And to those whom we love
And whose respect we value
(And to heck with the rest),
That we were faced with the call of duty,
A challenge to our courage
And an obligation of honor!
And now I come to Benigno S. Aquino, Jr., the man I never

personally met. Here is what we wrote to his widow, Corazon
Aquino, about Ninoy immediately after he was assassinated.
I also never knew whether its original and the Spiritual Bou-
quet with it ever came to the possession of Cory Aquino to
whom we sent it, for I have never heard her mention it to me.
It could have been lost in the shuffle of hundreds of thousands
of similar prayers and accolades for Ninoy given to her during
that tragic period of our history circa August 21, 1983.
A TRIBUTE TO THE MARTYRDOM

OF BENIGNO “NINOY” AQUINO JR.
(Dedicated to his beloved wife, mother, children, brothers,
and sisters, in-laws, and his truly loyal friends)
We who have been privileged to share with Ninoy
a similar though less significant stint in jail as political
detainees for the same noble cause, wish to address
ourselves to you, the most beloved in the heart of our
present-day martyr.
We rejoice and we thank God for the immortal and
heroic soul of Benigno Aquino Jr., though we profoundly
grieve for you, for ourselves, and for our whole nation.
For truly, no greater love for friends and countrymen

there is than his, when he laid down his life for us all last
Sunday, the 21st of August, 1983.
We accept his call for national reconciliation—in TRUTH
and in FREEDOM! For without the eternal light of Truth and
the God-given right to Freedom, Ninoy and all authentic
heroes and martyrs will turn in their graves. Because
without Truth and Freedom, we would not be truly
reconciled with one another, but merely defiled again by
cowardice and hypocrisy for the nth time.
We add our own humble and continuing prayers
to the already massive and worldwide outpouring of
supplications for the eternal repose of Ninoy’s immortal
soul. Yet we believe that God, in His infinite Mercy and
Justice, has already taken cognizance of Ninoy’s supreme
sacrifice.
Therefore, we pray to the Almighty Father more that
the grace of strength in Christ and enlightenment by the
Holy Spirit, with the Blessed Mother’s intercession, be
infused among you, his beloved, and in us, too, and in all
our fellow countrymen of good will, in order that we may
survive in Faith and in Justice the hard and trying days to
come for this nation of ours.
May your profound grief and sacrifices through
all these dark years and the last few days above all, be
transformed by your prayers and ours into an everlasting
tribute and vindication of Benigno Aquino, Jr., in the very
bosom of Truth Incarnate and Freedom in God.
And, we repeat, we grieve for you, for ourselves, and
for our whole nation, but we give thanks and praise to the
Lord for the eternal homecoming of the immortal soul of
Benigno Aquino, Jr., the patriot, hero, and martyr.
Mabuhay sa langit si Ninoy Aquino!
OTHONIEL “OTTO” JIMENEZ
JOVITO “ALEX” LABAJO
ESTER “TITANG” JIMENEZ
EDUARDO “ED” OLAGUER
REYNALDO “REY” MACLANG
FELIPE “PHILIP” SUZARA

His Eminence Jaime Cardinal Sin
Just before the manuscript for this book was sent to its
printer, Otto Jimenez, Henry Ocier, and I were privileged to be
allowed to visit the “Cardinal Sin”—right there in his bedroom,
converted to an intensive-care hospital room!
Weak as he already and obviously was, His Eminence was
being regularly subjected five times a week to a strength-
sapping ordeal of dialysis. But his eyes were as bright and
happy as ever upon seeing us, and his legendary humor
was still unimpaired. We spent some thirty minutes briefly
discussing this book and reminiscing about episodes of our
struggles for justice gone by. He was then our indefatigable
champion against the dictatorship and the top level corruption
in a previous administration. It was Mama Mary, he said,
who was his constant mediatrix for the wisdom and courage
required of an alter Christus and shepherd of his flock.
If it is God’s Will to bring him Home soon, I know I shall feel
as disconsolate for myself but most happy for him, as when
John Delaney and John Paul II received their own Everlasting
Welcome.
Addendum
On the Tuesday morning of June 21, 2005, I received the
news that His Eminence Jaime Cardinal Sin passed away to
the other Life. Indeed, his death is a great personal sorrow for
me, but my faith whispers that I should shout “Hallelujah!” for
the everlasting welcome awaiting the soul of my friend and
patron, JAIME SIN . . .

214
SECTION FOUR
STRUGGLES FOR JUSTICE
Chapter 14 Déjà Vu
Chapter 15 The 18-Storey Tall Cross
Chapter 16 Truth in Lending
and Borrowing
Chapter 17 On GAD and SSS:
Grave Abuse of Discretion
on a Contract?
215
216 STRUGGLES FOR JUSTICE
Chapter 14
DÉJÀ VU!
Eight months after Corazon C. Aquino became President

of the EDSA revolution-installed government, I was still
hibernating at our La Vista, Quezon City residence, waiting
for the U.S. Embassy to call me. My visitor’s visa application
had been sent to Washington D.C., purportedly because their
embassy records showed that I had “advocated the overthrow
of organized government,” moreover, against one that was
friendly to their own President. The Marcos dictatorship was
indeed so friendly to the Senior Bush administration!
A Persona Non Grata
The U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act, Section 212(a)
(28) (F) was invoked by U.S. Consul Lynn Curtain and thus,
my visa application was rejected. Upon the representations of
the Office of President Aquino, they were told that their appeal
for reconsideration on my behalf had to have special handling
all the way to the U.S. State Department.
The appeal was never acknowledged officially, much less
approved. Despite additional assistance and recommendation
from Juan Ponce Enrile, who had retained his Cabinet position
as Minister of National Defense, and from the new President
herself, I was apparently a persona non grata to the U.S.
government.
Thus my son Eduardo Jr. who was graduating with a Ph.D
at M.I.T, my daughter Deanna Marie who was angling for her
own doctorate in Environmental Science at the University of
Massachusetts, and my old friends in Boston/Cambridge, all
waited in vain for me in 1986.
Déjà Vu! 217

The Joker was sore
When I lifted the ringing phone that day in November, I heard
the angry voice of President Aquino’s Executive Secretary. The
direct caller was my former lawyer during our trial before the
Marcos-appointed military tribunal. It was the inimitable Joker
P. Arroyo, exasperated and sarcastic.
“How come you still want to go on an extended vacation
in the U.S. when there are so many urgent things to be done
here?” And lapsing into our Bicol dialect, he compared U.S.
visa applicants to the mob of job seekers he had to turn down
everyday. “With all your experience and Ivy League degree,
you have not even shown your face to us since you were
released from prison last January! What’s bothering you?” The
Joker was almost angry and scolding in tone.
I ended up being apologetic yet thankful to him for calling
me directly and personally despite his 14 to 16 hour days in
his job. I promised to forget about going to the United States
and thus spare him and the Office of the President anymore
diplomatic hassles or even embarrassment, and accepted his
offer for me to assume a seat in the Board of Governors of the
Development Bank of the Philippines. Had I known however
what was in store for me in that job, I should have been the
one to scold him. Mr. Arroyo is now a towering member of the
Senate of the Philippines—already beyond protocol and my
inclination to scold.
However, he and I suffered and ended up in similar déjà vu,
that is, eventually and somewhat bitterly, outside the official
good graces of the Corazon Aquino administration. Joker
had angered the military and various bigwig-nincompoops,
because too many of their proposals quickly ended up in
Joker’s wastebasket or paper shredder. Thus he had to resign
as Executive Secretary! In my case, here is what happened
when I rejoined government service as one of nine Governors
of the Development Bank of the Philippines, DBP for short.

Workaholicking Again
With 22 days and six years behind me as some sort of
sabbatical, albeit behind prison bars, I thought that I was fully
or at least adequately charged with spiritual and physical
energy as I never had been, enough to tackle any job. I was
made a “full-time Governor” with a large office, a private
bedroom, and access to a restricted private elevator reserved
only for us Governors and our Chairman.
As a result of my frequent examinations of conscience in
prison, I promised the Hound that I would make up for the
hundreds of hours I played hookey some thirty years earlier
at my Bureau of Lands job in Baguio City, fiddling with piles
of rectangular ivory pieces engraved with Chinese characters,
bamboo sticks, balls, and flowers. The many cold and rainy days
in the Summer Capital of the Philippines had at that time made
me addicted to the amusements of petty gambling at mahjong.
This time around however, I literally worked day and night.
Joker Arroyo was right. There was immensely much to do in
the Aquino revolutionary government particularly in terms
of undoing our sins of the past, especially those perpetrated
during the dictatorship.
DBP’s most immediate problem then, was its huge overlay
of “Non-Performing Assets,” consisting of Marcos-behest loans
to business and personal cronies of the Marcos family and to
other corrupt bigwigs in commerce and industry. There was
also a big number of loans given to legitimate borrowers whose
original loan interest rates were unilaterally and frequently
increased by DBP from 14% to as much as 40% per annum!
These atrocious rates were imposed on the excuse that the
“cost of money” then benchmarked on JOBO Treasury Bills
(named after Jose “Jobo” Fernandez, the Governor of the
Central Bank of the Philippines), had also increased to sky-high
proportions in step with the plunging value of the Philippine
peso currency. Our paper money had steadily depreciated by
Déjà Vu! 219

more than 300% in relation to the U.S. dollar after martial law
was declared in 1972!
The DBP Board appointed me as a one-man committee to
negotiate with the Central Bank of the Philippines for any
concessions I could get for DBP’s own gargantuan overdue
payments on its many emergency cash advances. My hardnosed
reputation must have preceded me, compounded by the fact
that the Aquino administration had announced itself as a
“Revolutionary Government” installed by the February 1986
EDSA rebellion. Thus, no Constitution was in effect until a
new one could be ratified a few months later. Even some of the
Supreme Court justices were unceremoniously fired or allowed
to retire but immediately. And so it took me only a mere two
weeks to thresh out my negotiations for and in behalf of DBP.
My counterpart at the Central Bank was more than equally
decisive and quick-acting. Armand Fabella was a career
executive and member of the Monetary Board previously
appointed by Marcos, but retained by President Aquino. I still
remember that Fabella’s office walls were filled with unusual
graffiti—complex mathematical formulae and computations
galore! He appreciated the fact that I understood most of them
and asked sensible questions on those with which I was not
familiar.
We quickly agreed that:
1) all penalties and surcharges previously imposed on DBP
would be condoned;
2) the remaining obligation, some P10 Billion or more,
would be offset against Mortgage Loan Contracts from
the Non-Performing Assets, but to be selected by DBP
and to be valued at its FULL DBP Book Value.
These were to be assigned to the Central Bank but
with an option for DBP to buyback these Notes at a
concessionary rate of imputed interest within a certain
number of years.

President Aquino quickly approved the results of our
negotiations and created the Committee on Privatization. This
Committee, COP for short, was empowered to purchase the
DBP Notes which were to be transferred first to the Central
Bank, and to re-sell these at substantial discounts to the local
private sector or to foreign investors, as quickly as possible in
order to generate urgently needed funds for the government.
The other government-owned financial institution, the
Philippine National Bank, which was similarly plundered by
its Marcos-appointed officers but in worse financial shape than
DBP, quickly asked for the same treatment. With their vastly
improved balance sheets and liquidity, both banks dramatically
resumed their normal lending operations in short order.
Back in DBP, I convinced my colleagues in the Board to
adopt a radically new policy that would give the same lenient
treatment DBP received from the government, in favor of its
own legitimate borrowers who had lapsed into default and
whose mortgaged assets were already scheduled for judicial or
extrajudicial foreclosure. We quickly approved what was soon
widely known as the “Direct Debt Buy-Out” (DDBO) policy,
to benefit specific “honest and qualified” borrowers who were
already in DEFAULT.
Under the new policy, they could redeem their entire
mortgage at a ceiling price equal to the latest appraisal value of
their mortgaged assets, regardless of the amount of their total
indebtedness. Thus in theory and for exceptional cases only,
those with obsolescent machinery and aging factories could
pay as low as 10% of their total indebtedness and be freed of
all liens and encumbrances, provided that the latest appraisal
could show that such was the maximum value of their assets.
The rationale behind my original idea was that if we proceeded
with the foreclosure, we would recover at most only as much
as the “as is-where is” residual value of those obsolescent
facilities, but at a much later date, and at great administrative
cost to the bank and damage to the national economy.
Déjà Vu! 221

The Devil Reigns in the Details!
But as usual, S.A. Tan was soon sowing and reaping infernal
yields in the DDBO’s implementation. DDBO was an apt
acronym, as it became “Deviled Details But Official!”
S.A. Tan’s manipulations were invariably in the selection of
“honest and qualified borrowers in default.” DBP had earlier
defined these to cover only those who had not mismanaged
their companies and had not diverted the proceeds of their
borrowings to other projects not included in the Supervised
Loan Agreement. Supposedly, only the original borrowers/
mortgagors could avail of the privilege.
But because the qualifications of Johnny-come-lately carpet
bagging “successors-in-interest” were not explicitly prohibited
or defined in the DBP Board Resolution, practically the whole
work force of the bank was soon concentrated on evaluating
DDBO proposals from every Tom, Dick, and Harry. Moreover,
what was implied in the Board’s policy and considered to be rare
exceptional cases where the appraised value of the mortgaged
assets would be miniscule compared to the total indebtedness,
turned out to be the rule rather than the exception—courtesy
of, but no thanks to, stinking S.A. Tan and his collaborators . . .
Until April of 1987 or thereabouts, I was able to hold the fort
to my conscience despite hordes of my rediscovered relatives,
friends, and their own friends and relatives who endlessly
sought favors, 90% of which I could not in conscience grant.
I could also see that I was getting on the nerves of some of
my Board colleagues. For example, the Minutes of our regular
Weekly Meetings and deliberations were usually several inches
thick because of the voluminous attachments and records of
those applying for debt relief and/or DDBO treatment; we
were supposed to read, understand, and approve them DURING
those meetings. I insisted that these Minutes should be divided
into two sections: one section with all the necessary details and
boiler plating, and a second one condensing into a few pages

only the approved Resolutions passed together with their short
summaries. We then would have reasonably enough time
during lulls to read and absorb the latter section of the Minutes,
before we affixed our signatures. More importantly, discarding
the past pro-forma approval process of merely having us sign
our names on the last page of the multiple-inch thick Minutes,
would no longer allow unscrupulous officers of the bank to
insert or even FALSIFY any number of corrections, deletions and
ADDITIONS to the Minutes without any explicit authority from
the Board.
A month or so before the national election for Senators,
Congressmen, Governors, and Mayors scheduled for May
1987, the political and financial pressures became rife and
almost overwhelming. I still remember the Board Meeting held
by a small private commercial bank that was heavily in debt to
DBP and almost bankrupt, and where three of us Governors
represented DBP in their Board of Directors. For several
previous meetings, I had insisted that their latest audited as well
as unaudited Financial Statements should be presented to the
Board. I thought that finally during that meeting, the President
of the Bank would comply with the Board’s “request.” But
just before the Meeting started, we were told that he could not
attend for some reason or another. The Board Secretary asked
for a postponement considering that nobody else was around
except us. There was obviously NO QUORUM, and by hindsight,
it was pre-arranged.
While the bank’s Secretary was lamely explaining to us, his
Assistant Corporate Secretary was placing piles of other minor
but thick report papers, PLUS a small red envelope in front of
each of us DBP Directors. My colleagues quickly recognized
these as the usual ampaw or gift or bribe as the case may be.
From the left corner of my eye, I could see that a DBP colleague
of mine who was running for Senator nonchalantly placed
the ampaw into his coat pocket without even opening it, then
quickly stood up and grunted “APPROVED!”
Déjà Vu! 223

The meeting was quickly adjourned for lack of a quorum. I
sheepishly bowed my head, covered the ampaw with the papers
in front of me, and slowly placed them inside my attaché case.
But I could feel myself blushing and sweating with guilt and
shame written all over my face.
When I opened the red envelope while the lid of my attaché
case could still shield my hands and part of my head from
view, I saw what was obviously their bank’s Manager’s Check.
I then approached the Board Secretary, a known confidant and
top officer of the bank’s president and his affiliated business
enterprises, with the ampaw in hand. Before I could open my
mouth, he announced to all my DBP Board colleagues while
still looking at me, “That is our small contribution to the
candidates of this administration, and we know we can trust
you as to whom to help!”
Since no one among my two other colleagues said anything,
I too kept silent and in a cowardly fashion, walked away. My
check was payable to “CASH or Bearer” in the amount of
P200,000 so that anybody could encash it and thus shield the
intended beneficiary from any incriminating evidence. What
the amounts were for the checks given to my colleagues, I have
absolutely no idea. But certainly P200,000 would be too little
for someone running for Senator. I eventually gave most of
my share, if not all of it, to my friends who were candidates
for Mayor or Congress, including my own half-sister who was
vying for a seat representing the 3rd District of Albay. She lost!
But in my conscience, I was the biggest loser . . . and so was the
Hound . . .
The private bank’s Board of Directors never again held
another meeting while we, the DBP nominees, were still its
members. The issue of their missing Financial Statements was
forever forgotten. A few weeks after the elections, we received
notices from DBP that we were no longer members of that
Board because DBP’s mortgage had already been transferred
to the Committee on Privatization. Since then, that bank has

been renamed twice over and is now under the full control
of foreigners. Incidentally, it is also the same bank which
was the respondent in a court petition filed by my company
J.O.S. Managing Builders Inc., for the annulment of the bank’s
extrajudicial foreclosure of the mortgage on our high-rise
condominium building project. Thus the following chapter on
our “18-storey Tall Cross.” Plain coincidence or KARMA?
Team Play vs. Whistle Blowing
I continued with my role as an independent watchdog for
the DBP Board of Governors. But soon I was getting feedback
from my friends at the Office of the President of the Philippines,
that DBP’s top officers considered me as “not a team-player.”
I nonchalantly shrugged it off by giving my standard retort:
“How can I be a team-player in a small team that is playing to
lose games, or to shave its winning margins deliberately? My
real and bigger team I owe loyalty to, is this government and
our taxpayers!”
For I knew that I caught the ire of some of my DBP
colleagues when I was chairman of the DBP Board Committee
which handled the disposal of the DBP-owned shares of stock
in another bank, the Philippine Commercial and Investment
Bank (PCIB). The family holding corporation of Eugenio
“Geny” Lopez Jr., who was reinstated to the top management
of PCIB soon after Marcos was deposed, wanted to buy back the
shares. These had been purchased by DBP during the Marcos
administration, supposedly as part of the latter’s investment
portfolio, but in reality, it was to bail out the Marcos cronies
who controlled PCIB at that time. I was the most knowledgeable
and experienced in the Board as far as valuation of shares of
stock and other securities were concerned, due to my earlier
experience with the Ayala Investment and Development
company and my graduate studies abroad.
The trouble was, astute businessman Geny wanted to buy
the shares WITHOUT PUBLIC BIDDING, and at a price that was based
Déjà Vu! 225

only on the latest transactions at the stock market which was still
in its doldrums. Furthermore, the basic book value per share
given by the management of PCIB, whose Board Chairman
was Geny Lopez himself, was already almost double that of
the latest stock market price. And so I insisted that DBP ought
to have a reputable External Auditor submit their own set of
detailed Financial Statements.
Despite a lot of subtle political pressures and personal
entreaties from Geny who was a dear friend and a key
associate in our Light A Fire enterprise, our consciences and
our friendship did prevail. And lo and behold, the external
auditor’s report from Joaquin Cunanan, a Price Waterhouse
affiliate at that time, showed that the book value per share was
approximately 260% more than the stock market price! But
still my experience at Ayala and advanced studies had taught
me that the book value was just a STARTING POINT for purposes
of stock/securities valuation. The “income-stream” method
would further show that the market price should have been in
the vicinity of at least FIVE TIMES the stock market price.
Thus I convinced the DBP Board that we should have the
shares publicly bidded out. Geny Lopez and his PCIB group
eventually won the public bidding at a price roughly FOUR TIMES
more than their last negotiating offer, and FIVE TIMES over the
stock market quotations during its doldrums. Thus DBP saved
the Filipino taxpayers roughly about a billion pesos . . .
“Win Some, Lose Some”
Certainly some of the official business proposals I received
from others, including my close friends engaged in commerce
and industry, were clearly legitimate and mutually beneficial
to them, to our government, and for the Filipino people above
all. Such were the two and only two business proposals coming
from my old Baguio Apache friend who had bloomed from his
Yale Law School training to become a top level international
banker.

Even before martial law was dismantled, Runy Sarda had
visited me in my Bicutan prison cell to whisper, among many
others, that he was already Senior Executive Vice President
of American Express International Bank. I was impressed,
especially when he further whispered that he could already
easily give or else arrange a job in other companies for some
of our Light A Fire escapees hiding in the United States. So
that was exactly how Teddy Yabut and Gasti Ortigas avoided
starvation abroad.
Thus I enthusiastically endorsed and helped Baguio Apache
Runy Sarda shepherd American Express’ bid to acquire
management control of a sequestered and near-bankrupt local
bank. The fact that veteran businessman and Catholic Laity
icon Jose “Joe” Concepcion was the government’s Cabinet
member and top watchdog over the transaction, made it
doubly sure that there would be no hanky-panky involved.
That bank is now one of the most progressive and profitable in
the Philippines today, namely Union Bank of the Philippines,
and former Interbank, from which American Express sold their
shares at a modest profit.
On the other hand, Runy Sarda’s other business proposal
which I approved in 1988 as President of the Philippine
National Construction Company (PNCC), was not profitable
for him at all, even after sixteen years to this very day. In that
particular case, I had to be even more hardnosed because
Runy himself, in his personal capacity, wanted to acquire from
PNCC, a government-controlled company, its 60% equity-share
of Filipinas Dravo, an engineering company servicing PNCC.
To this day therefore, Runy claims that I drove and imposed
a very hard bargain on him, so much so that he had to pay
through the nose after having acquired the parent Dravo’s 40%
share at a much lower price. And even up to now! Because,
Fildravo is now a condominium tenant-owner at the Aurora
Milestone Tower—our own 18-storey Tall Cross . . .
Déjà Vu! 227

Century Canning Corporation, with its well-known “555”
brand of canned tuna and sardines, was my best exhibit for a
genuine DDBO-revived company. It is now our local market
leader and exporter of an extended line of consumer food and
beverage quality products!
The DBP “Intelligence Fund”
At about the same time as Runy Sarda’s Fildravo acquisition,
my knowledge of Financial Accounting and my instinctive
nosiness got me into real trouble.
Every month, each DBP Governor was furnished with
an inch-thick copy of the bank’s latest Financial Statements.
I noticed that nobody even bothered to glance at any of its
pages. Neither did I, because there was just no time to absorb
it. After one particular Board Meeting which finished early,
I went to my office and started to read the latest Statements
from beginning to end. I detected something while still on the
first few pages of the “Balance Sheet,” which is the standard
accounting summary and consolidation of all major groups of
assets and liabilities, whose totals should balance with each
other to the last centavo. Thus its title of “Balance Sheet.”
I had already acquired the skill and nose for quickly detect-
ing suspicious asset or liability accounts. These were usually
placed under “Other Assets” and “Other Liabilities” as their
caption. And so after spotting a Balance Sheet entry of some
P100 Million under “Other Liabilities” with a footnote refer-
ring to “Special Disbursements,” my nosiness was aroused.
Earlier that day I had called for the DBP Chief Accountant for
some other matter where I needed her assistance. She came at
just about the same time the Special Disbursements footnote
caught my attention.
From her body language in knee-jerk reaction to my initial
query, I sensed that I should ask her even more and deeper
penetrating questions. From thereon, there was no honest
nor convincing way for her to stop me from getting the full

story behind that seemingly above-board accounting entry.
She quickly came to the conclusion that she could not mislead
me by resorting to accounting jargon which non-accountants
wouldn’t understand, and so accept such double-speak on
faith as gospel truth. Thus she had to disclose that her P100
Million-plus entry as a liability of DBP was actually a Reserve
Fund, or more precisely, a pseudo-liability to unidentified
DBP officers who were handling the bank’s fund for “extra-
special disbursements” which could not be legally spent unless
properly “laundered”!
These funds came from DBP’s 33 1/3 percent share or
commission from the insurance premiums paid by DBP
borrowers on their chattel and real estate mortgages for
collateral pledged to DBP, such as machinery, equipment,
houses, ships, etc. These payments of commission or REBATES
to DBP, were spelled out in detail in a copy of a contract I got
from the Chief Accountant. It was between DBP and a cartel
of “accredited insurance companies.” Ah so desu ka! Internally,
the rebates arrangement was whisperingly referred to as the
DBP Intelligence Fund.
But instead of first entering these rebates into the
Accounting Journal as “Revenue Income” or “Discounts,”
and if still uncollected, as “Accounts Receivable” in favor of
DBP, these were cleverly disguised, accounting-wise, as an
immediate liability of DBP! In fairness, it was a “laundering”
practice started during the martial law period, but self-
servingly continued by the new set of DBP officers installed
by the revolutionary government, in order to hide hundreds of
millions of questionable disbursements. For the 33 1/3 percent
premium rebates to DBP were growing by leaps and bounds.
Perhaps, even up to now!
I compounded my “mistake” by not going first to my
colleagues in the Board, to seek ways and means of correcting
the malpractice. But because I strongly suspected that some
of my friends and former colleagues running for election had
Déjà Vu! 229

already become unwitting beneficiaries of those secret funds—
they were ostentatiously given send-off envelopes after their
last Board Meeting and resignation from the Board—I chose
what I thought was a more discrete and safe approach.
I went to see the President of the Philippines to consult her
on what to do. In fairness to former President Corazon Aquino,
I believe that she did not completely understand the technical
accounting ruse that I briefly described to her, considering that
many other callers were waiting in line for me to finish my
allotted time of 15 minutes with her. In fact, she told me, “Do
your duty Ed! And I will talk to Jess Estanislao (DBP’s Chief
Executive and Chairman of the Board) about your findings.”
By hindsight I should have known that the lady Chief
Accountant had already briefed the DBP management about
my nosiness and the resulting confessions she had to make.
A few weeks later, it was a shock to me when I received
an official letter from the Office of the President signed by
President Aquino herself, generously complimenting me for
my performance as DBP Governor, but effectively removing me
from its Board. The letter stated that my services were “needed
on a full time basis at the Philippine National Construction
Corporation” (PNCC), where I was already the President
concurrent with my DBP job as Governor . . .
Similar disappointments were later in store for me at PNCC,
where our new Legal Department Head, former judge Jose T.
Apolo, assisted by the Central Bank and the National Bureau
of Investigation (NBI), discovered a P14 Billion boondoggle!
The huge losses were mostly a result of mismanagement and
corruption.
We also similarly documented graft cases at the Philippine
Journalists Inc., a government-sequestered newspaper pub-
lishing company, where I represented DBP as a major creditor,
and the Philippine Commission on Good Government (PCGG)
as fiscal agent and Board Chairman. These are too long and

bitter for me to describe further in these memoirs. Barely within
three years, I resigned from these companies.
I was summoned through a Senate subpoena and thus had
to testify against my Marcos-appointed PNCC predecessor,
who was being grilled by the Commission on Appointments.
He was the President’s nominee to a very important Cabinet
position. The pro-Administration Senators and Congressmen
in the Commission on Appointments denigrated my testimony
and its fully documented findings against the nominee which
were validated by their own fact-finding sub-committee. Yet
the nominee’s official appointment was confirmed!
Then I knew that it was time for me to go. President Aquino
quickly accepted my resignation, because as she later told
Fr. Reuter who had volunteered to intercede, “Ed Olaguer’s
resignation was irrevocable!”
Fortunately, poor Runy Sarda’s generosity made that
“irrevocable resignation” financially feasible for me. Runy
extended a personal loan of $75,000 to me, on a “no interest
and pay-when-able” basis! In fact, I even paid a small part of
the loan through direct deductions equivalent to his habitual
losses to me at my poker table, and at the fixed rate of P20 only,
to one U.S. dollar . . . And a few months after I left government
service, another businessman friend I had helped as a DBP
Governor (who wishes to remain unidentified), footed half
of my medical bills when I had to undergo a “double by-
pass” heart operation at St. Luke’s Hospital. Humiliating, but
heartwarming!
Worse Had Yet to Come . . .
Since then a lot of water has passed under our bridges, so
to speak, particularly some political developments that look
like replications of the period immediately before martial law
was declared by Marcos in 1972. The common observation of
those who see these onrushing waters, is that our bridges that
Déjà Vu! 231

constitute a network for national stability are increasingly in
danger of being flooded and destroyed.
For surely every day that passes, especially here in Metro
Manila, there are at least a hundred different meetings among
elements and officers of the military or businessmen, or the
intelligentsia, media moguls and opinion-makers, politicians,
the clergy including nuns, top police officers, retired generals
in the police and military, leaders of mass movements, and lay
but religious-related organizations, or combinations of these
groups. The common thread in all these highly confidential
meetings is the nationwide distress expressed in different ways
and degrees of outrage, such as:
What do we do now in the face of a continuing economic
meltdown aggravated by worsening endemic graft and
corruption in government and private industry, utter lack
of credibility of all the major political parties and Catholic
or Christian churches as well, lawlessness in the streets and
everywhere else, amidst a general breakdown in our society’s
morality?
It is an all-encompassing question to which nobody but

nobody has given any answers that are acceptable, much less
known, to more than just a few segments of our society. But
certainly, the poorest and most marginalized sectors which
comprise at least 60% of our population do not even bother
to listen to any of such answers. They have been misled
and betrayed too many times in the past by our politicians,
reformists, and technocrats who come and go and then are
heard no more.
In 2004, during the period before and after the May
presidential elections, I was discretely involved in one top-
level grouping that regularly met to dissect the same generic
question and dilemma. “What should we do or be doing for our
poor nation and with whom and why and when?” Inevitably
the anticipated direction of where and how to get these answers

and its solutions pointed to ideas which were dangerously near
or even beyond the legal bounds of the present Constitution of
the Philippines.
My confreres were certainly “much older and wiser” than
myself or Otto Jimenez, Gasti Ortigas, and my other Light A
Fire associates, when we were similarly deliberating on the
same basic question at the time martial law was declared in
1972. Even former Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Senator
Raul Manglapus, or former Executive Secretary Rafael Salas
who was then the Undersecretary for Development at the
United Nations, were not involved in our prior discussions in
1978. Gasti Ortigas, Otto Jimenez, and I eventually crafted our
plans, without our elders’ prior participation, but still obtained
their subsequent approval! But this time 26 years later in 2004,
my much more experienced and older confreres never got
around to a consensus of any sort.
In contrast, the politicians in our eventual leadership
structure in 1978 who had the most knowledge and experience
in government, such as Lorenzo Tañada, Ninoy Aquino, Soc
Rodrigo, and Jovito Salonga, had arrived at a consensus of
their own which also jived with ours.
Thus some 26 years later, the original members of the group
that invited me in April of 2004 to listen in and contribute
to their deliberations, were all seasoned top notch former
government officials of past administrations and/or the
present one of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Because
of that, I was always wary of the possible lapses in security
and confidentiality arising from differences in loyalty and
motivation. Thus I played mostly the role of a devil’s advocate.
But my honest opinions would still always become obvious,
for I could never forget the fundamental mistake we made some
26 years earlier.
Early on I tried as subtly as I could, to inject the factor of
Christian spirituality as a solid basis for a common motivation.
For I knew that mere though extreme dissatisfaction with the
Déjà Vu! 233

present administration and state of the nation was utterly
inadequate. I was not sure of the depth of loyalty to Catholic
principles among my ad hoc confreres. To be safe and
diplomatic, I used the very popular spiritual book that was
then sweeping the whole of Metro Manila. It was very popular
for a few months during that year, so much so that I received
unsolicited copies of the same book from different friends,
faster than I could re-gift them to others. I am referring to
Rick Warren’s The Purpose Driven Life. Warren, a non-Catholic
Christian, was therefore exclusively Scriptural in his approach.
I would supplement it later, I told myself, with my own
“proselytization” for and in behalf of our Catholic Sacraments
as a source of grace and wisdom.
I never did get around to that degree of warmth in my
relationship with any of my confreres, enough to allow me
even to start the post-Warren stage of my “proselytization”—
to use the words of Jesuit Father General Kolvenbach.
For in the first meeting I attended, it was in a large room full
of eager participants. Within a few months, we had reduced
ourselves to less than a dozen. At the last meeting I attended,
there were less than a handful of us. We were not able even to
arrive at the barest consensus as to who else should be invited
to replace those who had earlier deserted us.
I hope however that I had left with at least a few of my
erstwhile confreres, a clear memory of my main and constantly
repeated opinion—that in such an enterprise aimed at saving
our nation, the highest echelon of its leadership should have
a motivation and conviction underlying their cause that are
intense and deep-seated enough for them to be willing and able
to sacrifice their material comforts and fortunes, continuously
and consistently. And if necessary, their very own lives!
For that is where the leadership of the Communist Party
of the Philippines, past and present, clearly excel over
their military and civilian foes in our government. I for one
vehemently reject their Marxist ideology. But certainly many

of their leaders have gained my respect for their consistency
and perseverance, as have been clearly demonstrated by their
private and public behavior, within a lifestyle of sacrifice and
hard work.
I close this chapter with excerpts from the May 16, 2005
Philippine Daily Inquirer column, PASSION FOR REASON, written by
a recent acquaintance. He is the University of the Philippines
Professor and Dean of the College of Law. I say he will be a sure
nominee, one of these days, to our Supreme Court, namely—
Raul C. Pangalangan. His piece is most appropriate, timely,
well-crafted, and evenly balanced:
COUPS AND KARMIC JUSTICE

Coups hurt us when they fail. They unsettle our lives,
put business plans on hold, and distress the economy.
But listen. Coups hurt us even when they triumph
in a blaze of good intentions. They short-circuit our
democracy, weaken our institutions, and retard our
political maturity as a people.
I am concerned less about the Machiavellian politicking
amongst power bidders, and there are many of them,
including those who came out with full-page ads a few
days ago and those who speak of potential plotters in the
military. I cannot blame them. We are beset by a sense of
drift, a malaise that has made the authoritarian temptation
tempting once again, and the May 2004 elections have not
erased the stain of illegitimacy as many had hoped. The
on-going jueteng and corruption exposés are building to
a crescendo and counteract every step forward to raise
tax revenues needed for welfare programs.
Never mind the nightmare that began on September
21, 1972, when martial law was declared. It was effectively
a coup by the executive branch against the other branches
of government. President Ferdinand Marcos padlocked
Congress, and nobody took up the cudgels for the newly
unemployed legislators. Unmourned and unlamented,
many had lost credibility, their pork barrel was a
Déjà Vu! 235

drain on the meager treasury, and their antics, a test of
forbearance.
Today we see these signs of the times anew, but
this experience merely presents the classic argument
against coups: that they are merely the first step toward
despotism and its myriad evils like human rights abuses
and the plunder of the public wealth. That much we know
already.
Today the real argument against another extra-
constitutional foray into Malacañang is that democratic
governance requires respect for institutions. We will
never learn if, each time we err, we jettison the mistake
out of Malacañang.
But there is a weak underbelly to this learn-from-your
mistakes argument against coups. One, our crises are too
severe to be kept at bay and they call for rapid democratic
experiments, too rapid to be kept waiting as we learn our
lessons. This is the “crash course” counter-argument,
which says that it is not exactly a good time to lecture on
safety measures when the Titanic is already sinking.
Finally, perhaps the extra-constitutional oath is in fact
part of the lesson and, the one lesson we students learn
best. Pedagogically speaking, different students learn
their lessons in different ways. Perhaps we as a people
know the world viscerally, not intellectually, and the two
EDSA People Power exercises taught us the meaning of
“political accountability” better than a hundred boring
lectures.
Some people learn about fire by reading or by watching. We
learn about fire by burning.
I say, AMEN!
Gloria in a crisis!
Days before this book went into print in June of 2005,
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo had been buffeted by
a series of explosive revelations of allegedly despicable
criminal corruption involving her top level political associates,

relatives, and herself. Most lurid and damaging were the
widely broadcasted contents of a telephone-wiretap of a series
of conversations in which her own easily and unmistakably
identifiable voice was heard. Her conversations were with a
member of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), Virgilio
Garcillano.
If it was truly our President and Garcillano who were
wiretapped and heard plotting and discussing ways and
means of cheating (including possible kidnapping) during the
May 2004 canvassing of Presidential elections where she was
the supposed winner by a small margin, such would certainly
constitute high crimes and downright misdemeanor in any
language!
Our President forthwith claimed however, that the
wiretapping was illegal, as it should be. But only if she herself
admitted it was truly her voice and was recorded without her
consent! She promptly hid behind that still unestablished legal
technicality, and yet she adamantly refused categorically to
confirm or deny that it was her voice and Garcillano’s in the
wiretaps. Under Philippine law, private wiretapped communi-
cations obtained without the wiretapped subjects’ consent or
an explicit Court Order, may not be the subject of any official
inquiry or investigation. Thus it was premature for the President
to hide behind such technicality, when she herself had not yet
established the fact that it was she who was eavesdropped on
without her consent, on a strictly private matter!
Indeed, it is a Catch 22 situation for the President. And “Déjà
Vu” for us all over again!
[NOTE: Some 3 weeks later, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo

issued a public apology for “lapses in judgment” in having talked
to a COMELEC official, but self-servingly insisted she did nothing
illegal. The “apology” thus provoked even more widespread public
anger . . . ]
Déjà Vu! 237

Chapter 15
THE 18-STOREY TALL CROSS
March 19 of 1994, a solemn Memorial Day for St. Joseph

the spouse of Our Lady, was also the feast day of my sister
Gavs, her name as a nun being Sr. Mary Joseph. She had spent
the weekend with us at our former residence at 22 Maranaw
Street in La Vista, Quezon City, prior to reporting to her
new assignment at the Maryridge community of the Good
Shepherd Sisters in Tagaytay City. And so on that blessed day
of St. Joseph, my wife Daisie brought her to Maryridge, some
60 kilometers south of Metro Manila. Upon arriving, they were
greeted by the Sister Provincial, Mary Joan Salamanca RGS,
who happened to be there for a visit. Soon enough Sr. Joan
requested Daisie to relay her request for me to see her as soon
as possible at her Provincialate Head Office in Quezon City.
That started it all!
About a year earlier, after her election as the congregation’s
Superior for the Philippines, Sr. Joan had also requested me
for advice on a particular problem. It was about their heavy
and still growing problem of funding the huge medical costs of
their sick and sickly retired nuns. They were desperate enough
then to consider renting out one of their rarely used buildings.
Just like many religious congregations throughout the world,
especially in the United States, the lack of new vocations and
the old age of most of the surviving nuns had compounded the
problem of funding burgeoning expenses and operating costs
for extensive but under-utilized facilities.
I had advised Sr. Joan and her Council of Advisers not to rent
out the building at the back of the Provincialate headquarters,
because it was not appropriate for business nor for residential

purposes of lay people, considering the great inconvenience
for everybody. Due to the lack of easy and secure access from
the main road, it would have been quite messy for both lessor
and lessees to come in and out of the rented-out building.
Instead, I suggested that they should consider leasing out
or even selling a small portion of the very large vacant area
in front of their main building, consisting of some 10,000
square meters. It was then being used merely as a garden and
driveway. Being directly along the main boulevard of Quezon
City and with a 100 meter-long frontage, it would be very
attractive to lessors or even buyers.
And so the following day, the 20th of March, Sr. Joan informed
me in confidence that their Mother General at Angers in France
had approved my suggestion. Now Sr. Joan requested me to
help them sell about a thousand square meters of their garden
area fronting Aurora Boulevard.
Remembering that my two sisters were received by the
Good Shepherd sisters some forty years earlier without any
dowry from our family, I insisted that I would not accept any
sales commission, to the chagrin of Daisie. Quickly I was able
to convince two of my closest friends, businessmen Romeo
J. Jorge and Rughnath M. Sarda, to buy the property at the
asking price of the Sisters. Romy and Runy also happened to
be my Baguio Apache tribe mates and cronies since 1956. Over
the years we had been an informal triumvirate of sorts to the
extent of successfully helping one another court and marry
our respective wives some thirty five years earlier. At that time
Romy and I were also neighbors two houses away from each
other at La Vista in Quezon City on the same side of Maranaw
street.
Even before the sale was finalized, Romy and Runy were
ecstatic over the ideal location of the property for commercial
purposes, particularly for a high-rise building. It would be
fronting a major highway, Aurora Boulevard, and would be
adjacent to an underground station of the Metro Manila Light
The 18-Storey Tall Cross 239

Rail Transit. Instead of just a 2-storey building to house their
respective business enterprises at one floor each, they proposed
to build a 4-storey edifice where the 3rd floor would be assigned
to me and the 4th floor to be sold, provided I would join them as
an “industrial partner” and take charge of the construction.
They knew that I was already semi-retired after resigning
from all my briefly held positions in government. I had become
a part-time business consultant, spending more of my time
traveling all over the Philippines to help my brother Fr. Toti
spread the messages of Our Lady through his nationwide network
in the Marian Movement of Priests. Runy and Romy also knew
that I did not have the personal funds required to be a regular
partner, thus their offer of industrial partnership, where my
equity contribution in the project would come mostly from my
salary as Chief Executive and General Manager of the project.
I was briefly, too briefly, hesitant in accepting the offer, for
I would have to abandon Fr. Toti and his Marian Movement
of Priests in their apostolic sorties throughout the Philippines
and occasionally, even abroad.
But once again the lure of Mammon, the thoughts of public
recognition, plus pride in my supposed all-around managerial
expertise silenced my scruples all too quickly, with the idea
that I would not just be charitably giving a “cup of water” or a
bite of food to a poor neighbor. I thought I would be providing
permanent jobs for hundreds of them.
Honestly however, it was the foretaste of huge profits that
made me decide to accept my friends’ offer. At that time the
real estate market was booming, seemingly for a long, long
time to come. Quickly I formed a corporation whose original
incorporators, naturally, were our “triumvirate” and our
respective wives, with a modest authorized capital of P60
million. Only 20% was subscribed for and 25% of that was
initially paid-in, as the law allowed, and supplied mostly by
Runy Sarda and Romy Jorge.

We named the company J.O.S. Managing Builders Inc.,
the “J” for Romy and Nini Jorge, the “O” for Ed and Daisie
Olaguer, and the “S” for Runy and Linda Sarda
In a month’s time, other mutual friends pleaded to be
included in the venture. Thus Ben and Lita San Diego, Manolo
and Fely Santos, Greg and Cory Abreu, Dr. Emil Pantig and his
wife Dra. Zenaida Pantig, and Gerry and Lulu Hernandez were
drawn into our net. But I rejected the suggestion to rename the
company as JOSSSAPH Managing Builders Inc.
More than ten years later, here is what eventually
transpired. It is based on our real estate company’s files and
the public records of several related court cases. For having
purchased the land from the Good Shepherd nuns in haste,
and the construction jacked up from four to eight storeys, then
to twelve and so on, the commercial condominium building
project eventually metamorphosed itself into an 18-storey Tall
Cross for us investors. Since then, it has been borne on the
shoulders of Romy and Runy and the rest of our other business
associates and mutual friends. It has also been especially heavy
on those of yours truly for some ten years already.
None of the nuns understood the contract they signed!
February 13, 1995

Mr. Eduardo B. Olaguer
President
J.O.S. Managing Builders Inc.
22 Maranaw, La Vista
Quezon City
Dear Mr. Olaguer:
We have carefully studied our position and the position
of J.O.S. Managing Builders Inc. regarding the “negative
easement” provided for in the Contract to Sell. We have
also consulted lawyers to assist us in this difficult problem,
and we have come to the following conclusions:

1. Definitely we did not understand at the time we
were negotiating the sale of our property and at the time
we executed the Contract to Sell that in addition to the
specific lot we were selling, we were in effect selling to
you the subsurface of our land to the extent of ten meters
all around the lot we sold to you.
Of what use would those ten meters be to us, if we
could not build on them or dispose of them, because six
feet below would be your basement? What we understood
was that you would have the right to use the area of the
“negative easement” for the 180 days you need to excavate
and put in place the foundations and other structures of
your building. It was never our understanding that your
building would occupy the 1,375 square meters we sold to
you plus another 625 square meters inside our property,
but below the ground.
2. We are informed that in view of this fundamental
misunderstanding between us, there was really no
meeting of minds and therefore no contract.
3. We are also informed that this obvious
misunderstanding as to the “negative easement” should
be construed against the party that drafted the contract,
and therefore the parties can proceed with the contract,
but under our interpretation of the “negative easement.”
If this is not possible, we might as well call the whole
thing off.
4. In all good faith, we signed the applications for
building permits which you asked us to sign. At that time,
we had not yet seen your plans for the building showing
that you would occupy, six feet below the surface, a strip
of ten meters of our land all around the lot we sold to you.
If this had been shown to us, we would not have signed
the applications you asked us to sign.
Please give these matters your preferential attention
and let us know your position as soon as possible.
Sincerely yours,
SR. MARY JOAN SALAMANCA, R.G.S.

Lawyers and appraisers get involved
2 May 1995
J.O.S. MANAGING BUILDERS INC.
1043 Aurora Boulevard
Quezon City
Attn: MR. EDUARDO B. OLAGUER
President
Re: Agreement with the Religious of the Good Shepherd
Mr. Olaguer:
We write in behalf of our client, the Religious of the
Good Shepherd, which referred to us your letter of April
20, 1995.
We understand that your differences with our client
arose from the interpretation of the provisions of a
Contract to Sell between your company and our client.
We were informed that mutual and honest moves have
been taken to settle these matters without resorting to
judicial action, and we praise the parties for this.
It appears, however, that the compromisory agreement,
the details thereof, and the mechanics therefore, have to
be threshed out, this time, with clarity and caution, lest the
parties end up having the same problem on interpretation
of provisions. In this connection, we would like to
request for a conference with you and your lawyers for
us to discuss the agreement so that we can intelligently
prepare and draft the formal agreement between you
and our client. In said meeting, kindly provide your
representative with the necessary board resolution to
negotiate and enter into a contract with our client. Please
let us know if you and your counsel are available on May
5, 1995 at 4:00 P.M. at the Good Shepherd Convent, Aurora
Blvd., Quezon City.
In the meantime, we also request that you defer
construction and/or excavation in the disputed areas.

Otherwise, we will be compelled to secure an injunction
from the proper courts.
We trust we will be able to resolve your dispute with
our client without court intervention.
Very truly yours,
GABRIEL T. ROBENIOL
For the Firm

July 28, 1995

Mr. Abelardo S. Garcia, Jr.
Manager, Business Development Group
Cuervo Appraisers, Inc.
4th Floor, Padilla Bldg.
Emerald Avenue
Pasig City
Dear Mr. Garcia:

We wish to confirm the agreement that we arrived at
with respect to the methodology and other parameters to
be used in appraising the Economic Value and its sharing,
of the extra 705 square meters of underground easement
rights of the property which is the subject of a Deed of
Sale between J.O.S. Managing Builders Inc. and Good
Shepherd Convent, Inc.
These are:
1. The appraiser (Cuervo Appraisers, Inc.) will use the
net income approach, that is gross income whether rent
or sale, minus the cost of construction of the space to be
rented out or sold, including maintenance, if any.
2. To use 40 years as the economic life of the project,
renewable under such terms and conditions as may be
agreed upon by the parties.
3. In order to compare apples with apples, the present
value of the income stream will have to be used, based on
the cost of money or discount factor at 18% per annum.

4. Thirty percent (30%) of the NET PRESENT VALUE
arrived at by the above Net Income approach will be the
approximate one-time rent to be paid by J.O.S. Managing
Builders Inc. to the Good Shepherd Convent, Inc.
5. The net results of this methodology shall be the
main basis for the final negotiations of the 705 sq.m.
UNDERGROUND EASEMENT area to be rented by J.O.S. Managing
Builders Inc. subject to final acceptance of Good Shepherd
Convent, Inc. superiors or principal decision makers.
Kindly affix your conformé signature on the space
provided below.
Very truly yours,
GOOD SHEPHERD CONVENT, INC
By: SR. CARMELITA CRUZ R.G.S.
J.O.S. MANAGING BUILDERS INC.
By: EDUARDO B. OLAGUER
President
ATTESTED BY:
CUERVO APPRAISERS, INC.
By: ABELARDO S. GARCIA, JR.
Manager
Business Development Group
From the nuns: non-acceptance of appraiser’s report!

October 3, 1995
Mr. Eduardo Olaguer
President
Dear Mr. Olaguer:
We acknowledge and thank you for the report of
Cuervo Appraisers, Inc.
The appraised amount arrived at by Cuervo and
Associates is not acceptable to the Provincial Council.
Considering your interest and our desire to put this
matter to a close, we are proposing the amount of PESOS
EIGHT MILLION (P8M) to be paid in lump sum, covering a

period of 25 years and open to re-negotiations at the end
of said period.
With every good wish.
Sincerely,
The Provincial Council
SR. MARY JOAN SALAMANCA
SR. MARY CARMELITA CRUZ
SR. CHRISTINE TAN
SR. LYDIA EBORA
SR. MARION F. CHIPECO

J.T APOLO LAW OFFICE

October 12, 1995
Sister Christine Tan, R.G.S.
Leveriza Community
2172 Fidel Reyes St.
Malate, Manila
Dear Sister Christine:

Earlier, I sent you a copy of the letter of Ed Olaguer
regarding the “J.O.S. problem.”
I am writing you this personal appeal because of my
concern regarding what might ensue if their problem is
not settled amicably. In my case, as Legal Counsel for
the J.O.S. organization, I have the obligation to protect
the interest of the company. On the other hand, as a
Catholic lay leader I have also an obligation to protect
the Church and the Good Shepherd Congregation. And I
am especially concerned because the parties involved are
all prominent lay and religious leaders. Allow me to give
you a full background of the problem:
Daisie and Ed Olaguer, at the request of the sisters,
were able to convince a group of their friends to purchase
the lot now subject of the controversy. (They even shelled
out also a substantial amount to become part of the group.)
After the full payment of the agreed price, and when

J.O.S. started to dig in preparation for the construction of
the “Aurora Milestone,” Sister Mary Joan and company
objected to the digging on the easement portion of the
property, saying that they did not fully understand the
underground easement provision of the Contract to Sell.
In the spirit of cooperation and conciliation, Ed Olaguer
offered to pay an additional amount even though the
underground easement right grant was already part of
the contract. Please note that the above-ground easement
rights of J.O.S., that is, the self-prohibition by RGS not to
build anything within 10 meters all around, was never in
dispute. Hence that above-ground easement was not part
of the appraisal considerations.
After so much delay and protracted negotiations,
Sister Mary Joan sometime in June this year, agreed to
release the title (for she has withheld it up to now) on
condition that J.O.S. pay an additional amount of P25,000
per square meter for the underground easement rights or
a total of P17,625,000.00 for a total underground area of
705 sq.m. (Consider however that the OUTRIGHT sale price
was only P22,000 per square meter).
Since the parties could not agree on the RGS valuation
of P25,000 per sq.m. on the underground easement,
the matter, by mutual agreement, was referred to a pro-
fessional appraiser (Cuervo Appraisers. Inc.) chosen by
Good Shepherd. For this purpose, an agreement on the
methodology of appraisal was duly signed by Ed and
Sister Carmelita Cruz, copy attached. Sadly, however, the
Appraisal Report was totally rejected for no stated reason
whatsoever. Instead, a price was offered by your Provincial
Council which translates to P11,348.00 per square meter
for 25 years’ rent only, but payable immediately, or 51% of
the outright sale price of P22,000 per sq.m.
If you were in my shoes as Counsel for J.O.S., what
would you do?
This is the reason for this special personal appeal . . .
Sincerely,
JOSE T. APOLO

We meekly surrendered to the nuns
BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 97-2

WHEREAS, the Corporation needed additional capital
investment (Equity) to finish its 18-storey Aurora
Milestone Project;
WHEREAS, to meet this financial requirements, the
stockholders of record with the concurrence of the Board
of Directors, resolved on August 1, 1996, to increase
its authorized capital stock from P150,000,000.00 to
P250,000,000.00, at P1,000.00 par value per share;
WHEREAS, none of the original principal stockholders
of the corporation were able to further contribute to the
needed additional capital investment (equity), since their
personal resources were committed in other projects/
business ventures or elsewhere;
WHEREAS, in order not to further delay the completion
of the project and to forestall any further delay of
the construction activities and not to jeopardize the
completion of the Aurora Milestone, Mr. Eduardo B.
Olaguer volunteered to raise the amount of P50M to pay
for the P50M subscription, thru his available personal
resources, credit line/loans using his own collaterals and
credit worthiness;
WHEREAS, in recognizing the value of the efforts of said
Mr. Olaguer, the corporation will reimburse Mr. Olaguer
for all the expenses, interest, and other cost-of-money
and related expenses incurred by him and applicable to
P35M of the aforesaid P50M paid subscription. The said
reimbursement to continue until the amount of P35M
loan from Allied Bank is paid by Mr. Olaguer or up to
year 2000, whichever comes first.
Unanimously carried.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
RUGHNATH M. SARDA, Chairman
EDUARDO B. OLAGUER, Member
ROMEO J. JORGE, Member

GERARDO C. HERNANDEZ, Member
BENJAMIN S. SAN DIEGO, Member
MANOLO A. SANTOS, Member
GREGORIO B. ABREU, Member
Attested:
JOSE T. APOLO
Corporate Secretary
Yet another problem: our “failure” to deliver buyer’s title
EXCERPTS FROM THE OFFICIAL RECORDS

OF THE HOUSING AND LAND USE
REGULATORY BOARD (HLURB)
A. SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE . . . .

3.2 Apparently however, herein Complainants
have subsequently attempted to cure this
fatal forum-shopping mistake, by filing 27
days thereafter, an Affidavit of Desistance
on 9 September 2004 before the Quezon
City Regional Trial Court, as evidenced by
attached Annex “2” (Affidavit of Desistance
of Spouses “X”). . . .
3.4 A careful reading as well of herein Annex
“2” (Complainants’ Affidavit of Desistance)
also clearly shows that it has NOW been
incontrovertibly admitted under oath
therein by herein Complainants that ALL
their previous allegations and causes of
action against Olaguer as President of J.O.S.
Managing Builders Inc. in said criminal case,
were all caused by “misunderstanding and
misappreciation of the facts” . . . Who is to
blame?
4. In the same Answer/Counter-Affidavit, herein
respondent J.O.S. further bolstered its thesis/
allegation of J.O.S.’ non-culpability on the matter,
based NOT ONLY on the Complainants’ Affidavit of

Desistance and Forum Shopping consequences,
but ADDITIONALLY and EVEN MORE SO, based on
detailed and fully documented affirmative
defenses, which all together and beyond
reasonable doubt established the fact that J.O.S.
fully and promptly performed and discharged
its own corporate portion of the statutory
responsibility shared with co-respondent (Y-
Bank), to deliver a clean title to Complainant.
These same J.O.S. affirmative defenses have
shown that the circumstances behind the
eventual failure to do so, laid the obvious finger
of blame and deliberate culpability with prior
full knowledge, EXCLUSIVELY on the doors and
shoulders of the co-respondent (Y-Bank). Thus
the same affirmative defenses also furnished the
factual and legal basis for J.O.S.’ accompanying
CROSS-CLAIM, where the following paragraphs of
the aforementioned Answer/Counter-Affidavit
with CROSS-CLAIM are quoted in full, and the
CROSS-CLAIM is repleaded herein, to wit: (pp 6-15,
ibid) . . .
5.8 And so the clever yet evil ploy behind the
abovecited felonious rejection of the P220
Million in immediate cash payment from
and by J.O.S., was clearly resorted to by co-
respondent in order to force an excuse for
foreclosure! The plot was confirmed, when
herein co-respondent secretly attempted
to “legalize” the questionable acquisition
of J.O.S.’ entire Aurora Milestone condo-
minium property easily worth at least P800
Million, net of the bank obligation, by means
of a public auction through extra-judicial
foreclosure, at the BARGAIN BASEMENT PRICE
of approximately P300 Million only. How?
By secretly initiating on February 22, 1999
(only 3 days after receiving J.O.S.’ 3rd urgent

Letter/Annex “8”) suddenly without any
publicity, such extra-judicial foreclosure,
and public auction. The FOUL DEED was done
through their own Notary Public, (Attorney
“Z”), for the price of only P366.5 Million
covering a total floor area of 24,750 square
meters. Note: The auction price was jacked
up to J.O.S.’ distinct disadvantage, by charg-
ing attorney’s fees for a non-existent court
case in the amount of P60 Million plus, and
an astronomically high Notary Public Fee
of almost P3 Million for Atty. “Z.”
5.10 Providentially however, this evil plot soon
unraveled, when J.O.S. was able to secure
Annex “14,” a copy of the PHIC President’s
letter to Malacañang as part of his Counter-
Affidavit before the Ombudsman. And so
to complete this incredible HORROR STORY,
and according to the PHIC President
himself, after the secret foreclosure was
accomplished, the bank (unwittingly self-
destructively!) attempted an OVERKILL. By
secretly, directly, and treacherously agree-
ing with PHIC, (per Annex “14” hereof)
to replace albeit illegally, herein winning
Bidder Respondent J.O.S. as vendor/seller
to PHIC as the same buyer, of exactly
the same 6,000 plus square meters of
Aurora Milestone office space within the
same subject mortgaged property, at the
seemingly lower price of P320 Million. But
their agreed price was stipulated to be ALL
NET to the bank after all taxes and expenses.
This meant that the entire P320 Million
would go to the bank alone, and thus the
costs of at least P35 Million worth of PHIC-
required improvements PLUS P30 Million
more for the 10% VAT and other taxes

payable, would be charged to and paid by
PHIC! . . .
5.11 Furthermore, J.O.S. also discovered
very recently, that during the three-year
period 1996 to 1998, herein co-respondent
as Trustee-Depository Bank of Respon-
dent J.O.S., and by its UNSOUND, nay,
UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES, could have
misappropriated some P53.9 Million of
Respondent/ Cross-Claimant J.O.S.’ current
account deposit funds, by withdrawing
such an aggregate total from J.O.S.’ deposits
without sufficient explanation to this very
day. These unilateral withdrawals were
made by means of its purported Debit
Memos for supposed interest and penalty
charges but without having issued any
clarificatory statement nor OFFICIAL RECEIPTS
up to this day, particularly on P34.7 Million
out of the aforecited P53.9 Million . . .
C. DISCUSSION ON CENTRAL CHAIN OF ISSUES
9.1.2 In fact (Y-Bank) also knows that, one
of the necessary HLURB requirements
imposed on both the Developer/
Mortgagor and the Mortgagee Bank be-
fore a mortgage of a condominium/
subdivision project to the bank is
approved by this Honorable Office, are
the following conditions, among others:
(please refer to Annex “29”)
i. Prior to the registration of the mortgage
contract with the Register of Deeds,
the HLURB Mortgage Clearance to be
issued by this Honorable Office strictly
prescribes an Affidavit of Undertaking
(Annex “29”) to be accomplished by the
Mortgagee-Bank. As prescribed by the
HLURB, such Affidavit of Undertaking

must be annotated on the title to be
mortgaged! These prescribed affidavit-
covered undertakings include, among
others the following:
a) “that the bank shall accept direct pay-
ments made by the lot/unit buyers
to be applied to the mortgaged
indebtedness of the corresponding
lot/unit, and upon full payment
thereof, to release the individual
titles thereat”;
b) to partially release/cancel the
mortgage of fully paid lot(s) and/
or unit(s) in said subdivision/
condominium/townhouse projects,
notwithstanding the non-payment
yet of the total mortgage loan
incurred by the mortgagor.” Quod
erat demonstrandum!
9.1.3 Similarly and again as veteran bankers,
respondent bank knew, and still knows
that an extrajudicial foreclosure per
se is not a sufficiently valid reason to
prevent a debtor or mortgagor from
exercising its right of redeeming a
piece of foreclosed property, if such
exercise of such right is done within
the applicable statutory redemption
period of one year as was the case in
March 1999 up to April 2000. Much less
was it sufficient nor valid to prevent
the owner/developer/mortgagor and
the Register of Deeds from performing
the prompt administrative duty of
physical production of the CCTs. For
such production and issuance of CCTs
are absolutely necessary preparatory
steps to such redemption and release of

mortgage over specific units and areas of
any mortgaged condominium property.
For if the bank as claimed can legally
prevent those necessary preparatory
steps, then in effect it could also legally
prevent all such legitimate redemptions
within the allowable redemption period.
Reductio ad absurdum!
9.2 The centrality of the abovecited “chain of
issues” is capped by the related and even
more malicious and unjustified refusal
of same co-respondent to accept or even
to acknowledge the repeated “firm and
secured offer of P220 Million as payment to
co-respondent, which offer of payment was
in an amount MUCH LARGER than the required
Loan Release Value corresponding to the
Unit fully paid for by (herein) Complainants
“X,” (including) ALL other units already sold
and paid for by other Tenants-Buyers, and
to be sold to others such as the Philippine
Health Insurance Corporation (PHIC). . . . ”
9.4 But the malice aforethought behind such
an unjustified refusal and consequential
failure of delivery of title to various
clients of respondent J.O.S. particularly for
herein Complainant “X,” and the resulting
penalties and compensatory damages due,
must be trebled at the very least, if it can be
shown that
a) there was even no default of
payment at all! And thus there
would be no legal nor factual basis
behind the extrajudicial foreclosure
of the mortgage; and
b) there would necessarily be attendant
fraud, unsound banking practices
and other violations of the law

behind the extrajudicial process of
foreclosure, (thus RTC Branch 98
of the Quezon City RTC has issued
a Writ of Preliminary Injunction
pending completion of Trial on
the Merits of J.O.S.’ Petition for
Annulment of Foreclosure) and
other loan related transactions of
respondent “Y-Bank” with J.O.S. as
its innocent and repeated victim. . . .
14. NO PAYMENT ON PRINCIPAL WAS DUE, AND FRAUDU-
LENTLY OVERCHARGED/OVER-COLLECTED P13,045,206
FROM J.O.S. AS OF 24 JUNE 1998!
15. And so it should be obvious as to why it has taken
more than EIGHT YEARS ALREADY for respondent
to issue acknowledgment receipts, in dribs and
drabs, with the huge residual sum of P34.7 Mil-
lion still remaining unaccounted for! The “jig is
up” and the jilter is unmasked! And therefore
there can be no doubt now as to the veracity
of J.O.S.’ October 27, 2004 letter-complaint to
the PDIC on the matter of Y-Bank’s “unsafe,
unsound” and certainly in the light of the above,
grossly fraudulent banking practices.
PRAYER
Wherefore, considering all the foregoing averments,
manifestations and premises, it is most respectfully
prayed that judgment be rendered in favor of Respondent
J.O.S. Managing Builders Inc. as follows . . . .
19. As a necessary consequence of the abovecited
prior Decision on REM-A-011025-0249 and logical
result of hereinabove confirming declaration of
NULLITY of the mortgage, as well as for culpable
and repeated violations of PD 957 and other
blatantly unsound and fraudulent banking
practices, particularly the gross misrepresenta-
tion on its allegations of J.O.S. default, or at

the very least, due to the bank’s habitual non-
issuance of official receipts, thus the obvious lack
of basis for any extrajudicial foreclosure, plus
its refusal to accept any unit-by-unit release of
mortgage, and consistent also with this Board’s
previous decision on abovecited HLURB Case
No. REM-A-011025-0249, the Extrajudicial Fore-
closure by the bank executed on 22 March 1999
on the mortgaged condominium property of
J.O.S. Managing Builders Inc., should also be
hereby declared as completely NULL and VOID ab
initio.
Respondent J.O.S. prays for such other and further
relief as this Honorable Board may deem just and
equitable under the premises and circumstances.
President
Res ipsa loquitur!

Nevertheless, I doubt very much if I will ever see the day
when the above case, and several other related cases my
company and I have filed as Complainants against the same
respondent bank, will have been judicially resolved with
finality. For I expect that either party will most probably appeal
if it loses, all the way to the Supreme Court. At my age of 69,
that could take another ten years to be resolved.
But win or lose here on earth, I know for sure that perfect
justice will be rendered eventually, no matter how long it takes,
here and/or the Hereafter . . .

Chapter 16
TRUTH IN LENDING AND BORROWING
It is now part of the public records of the Philippine judiciary

that one of the principal counter-allegations I raised in the
pleadings I submitted at the Housing and Land Use Regulatory
Board (HLURB) and referred to in the previous chapter, was
that our company, J.O.S. Managing Builders Inc. was not in
default of payment of interest with respect to a certain foreign-
owned commercial bank. Prescinding from the merits of that
case, thus without arguing further beyond the case records
whether we were in default or not, I shall discuss here what all
mathematicians teach in schools here and abroad. It is the not-
so-simple matter of computing simple interest.
I do so in order to light a fire on the darkened memories of
those bankers and lenders who may have already forgotten
the simple mathematical principles involved, and thus still use
approximation methods in their lending practices that result in
grossly higher interest charges to be paid unwittingly by their
borrowers.
Let me start with a simple analogy which should be under-
standable to most, if not to any reasonably intelligent high
school graduate. Let us assume that you have promised to
pay an obligation and correspondingly executed a contract
promising to deliver 10,000 YARDS of a specific cloth to a trusted
client every three months. It is therefore presumed that both
parties know what one yard means exactly, even if there were
no written definition of a yard’s length in your contract. But
it is also stipulated in the contract that delivery of the cloth
can be in bolts of either 10-yard and/or 10-meter segments, but
again without any definition as to what “one meter” exactly
Truth in Lending and Borrowing 257

means. Both parties however are engaged in a business and
profession where the exact definition of yards and meters are
of common knowledge and a basic element in their respective
business operations.
Furthermore, let us suppose that you happen to have
already deposited your large sales inventory of that particular
cloth, which are mostly in 10-meter segments, in the bonded
warehouse belonging to your trusted client.
Being a licensed and bonded warehouse proprietor, your
trusted client was authorized to pick up and deliver to himself all
the cloth materials, directly from your inventory in his bonded
warehouse, and at the times and quantities specified in the
contract—subject of course to complete proper documentation
and your future audit and verification.
More than a year later, you wake up suddenly one morning
only to find out that your trusted client has laid claim on your
mortgaged house and lot which guaranteed your deliveries
of cloth. Your client now alleges that you failed to fulfill your
obligations!
Upon investigation, you discover that your erstwhile trusted
client had been collecting and delivering to himself, bolts of
10-meter segments but computed them as equal to the 10-yard
bolts. You quickly run to your nearest dictionary and find out
that one yard is 0.9144 meter. Thus the approximation of one
yard being equal to one meter that was used by your trusted
and knowledgeable client, cost you an over delivery of 0.0856
meter (1 meter less 0.9144) for every yard you owed your client.
It is a very small amount if only one meter were involved. But
your exhausted inventory of 10-meter segments at the bonded
warehouse was at least one million meters all in all! Thus you
believe that you have been short-changed by at least 85,600
meters of cloth, which is one million multiplied by 0.0856 . . .
I submit that very few people know about that particularly
exact 0.0856 mathematical difference between one yard and
one meter, much less its whys and wherefores.

I further submit that less than ten percent of all people,
throughout the world, know the exact meaning of Simple
Annual Interest, which is the only universal and legal standard of
measurement for interest rates on borrowed money throughout
the whole world. But surely there is even much less among
them who know the exact meaning of other methods of
stipulating interest rates which are different from “simple
annual interest,” and which are thus classified and referred to
as NOMINAL RATES.
Stated in another way, a simple annual rate is the universal
standard of measurement, and everything else is classified as
NON-STANDARD or NOMINAL rates. And yet without their knowing
it, 99% of all these people are significantly affected in their daily
lives by such little known but highly important mathematical
distinctions. Especially the borrowers-clients of commercial
banks and other lending institutions!
Thus several years ago, I prepared and submitted to various
judicial venues and government institutions concerned with
banks and lending institutions, detailed technical and legal
presentations. These were designed to prove my point, that
millions of our people have been continuously short-changed,
because of their lack of knowledge and awareness of the
crucial differences between the standard Simple Annual Rate or
“effective rate,” from hundreds of frequently used but even
more rarely understood NOMINAL rates.
And what if in our earlier analogy and example here, that
in addition to having been deliberately short-changed by your
erstwhile trusted bonded warehouse operator, you were never
issued Official Receipts nor correct statements of account
during the whole time that he was withdrawing hundreds of
thousands of meters of your cloth from his bonded warehouse?
And unknown to you, he was doing so, not on the pre-agreed 3-
month intervals, but at anytime convenient to him! And by the
way, a bonded warehouse, like a commercial depository bank,

is a publicly licensed undertaking where public trusteeship
and therefore public interest and public trust, are involved . . .
Here are the mini-treatises I presented to various courts, to
our Central Bank, to our House of Representatives, and Senate
Committees on Banks and Financial Institutions:
THE MATHEMATICAL TRUTH AND BASIS

BEHIND R.A. NO. 3765:
THE “TRUTH IN LENDING ACT” (TILA)
The TILA was made into law some 40 years ago
precisely because it would compel lenders and creditors
to convert and express their various and seldom fully
understood NOMINAL interest rates to be charged to their
borrowers whether monthly, quarterly, or discounted in
advance, etc., into ONE UNIVERSALLY AND MATHEMATICALLY
DEFINED AND UNDERSTOOD INTEREST RATE, as a standard
measuring stick so to speak. Why?
Precisely so that borrowers will be able to determine,
without any confusion or misunderstanding, exactly
what are the interest rates they are actually obliged to
pay, and thus be able to compare various nominal rates
offered by lenders against the standard measuring stick.
And that standard measuring stick imposed by TILA is
the effective simple Annual Rate, which is universally
expressed or indicated as the percentage rate of interest
PER ANNUM. Section 2 of TILA states as a Declaration of
Policy, that:
It is hereby declared to be the policy of the State
to protect its citizens from a lack of awareness of
the true cost of credit to the user by assuring a full
disclosure of such cost with a view of preventing
the uninformed use of credit to the detriment of the
national economy.
From High School Arithmetic to Graduate School
Applied Mathematics, this Effective Simple Annual
Interest Rate, or Interest Rate Per Annum, is uniformly
and universally defined thusly:

The amount of interest accrued on a principal
amount borrowed and used for one whole year
and paid in full at the end of that one whole year
expressed as a percentage of the entire principal
amount borrowed, is the Interest Rate Per Annum.
It is also the effective Simple Annual Rate mandated
by the TILA. Thus Section 4, sub-section (7) of the TILA
prescribes that any creditor must furnish, among others,
the percentage that the finance charge bears to the total amount
to be financed expressed as a simple annual rate on the
outstanding unpaid balance of the obligation. [underscoring
added]
Therefore, there must have been known to them, a
fixed, universal, unarguable, and precise mathematical
relationship between any NOMINAL interest rate and our
TILA-mandated Effective Simple Annual Rate or Per
Annum Rate, as indeed there has always been. Otherwise,
the Truth in Lending Act would be meaningless, if
Lenders/Creditors can logically argue that there are
more than one or several ways of converting NOMINAL
RATES to Effective Simple Annual Rates. For if so, the poor
Borrower would remain just as confused and prone to
being bilked by their Creditors/Lenders, considering that
at the time TILA was approved as a law on June 22, 1963,
the Anti-Usury Law was still in effect.
Thus it is, that in all leading Math and Quantitative
Finance textbooks, that precise mathematical relationship
is expressed thusly:
Where:
i is any Nominal Rate of Interest
n is the number of periods of time within one
(1) year during which the Nominal Rate of
Interest is being charged or accrued;
R is the resulting Effective Simple Annual Rate,
or Interest Rate per annum, on an apples-to-
apples comparison basis, equivalent to the
Nominal Interest Rate i.

Then:
The Effective Simple Annual Rate is
R = (1+i )n – 1 per annum
For example, if a bank charges and collects 1% every
month on ANY amount of Principal, i is .01 and n is 12
because there are 12 one-month periods in one year.
Therefore per our formula, R =(1+i)n – 1 per annum:
R = (1+.01)12 – 1
= (1.01) multiplied 12 times by itself, minus 1
= 1.1268 -1
= 0.1268
R= 12.68% or 68 Basis Points more than 12% per annum
Thus it is shown in the computation above, that 1%
per month IS NOT EQUAL to 12% per annum, but is actually
equivalent to 12.68% per annum, which therefore actually
gives 5.6% (12.68% minus 12% equals 0.68%; dividing
the latter difference by 12% will obtain 5.66%) more in
interest earnings to the Lender compared to what he
would have collected on 12% per annum only. That is,
for every million pesos lent out, the borrower effectively
pays P126,800 in interest, instead of P120,000 only. The
same is true with 2% per month not being equal to 24%
per annum, and so on and so forth, all of which can be
easily proven by the above formula.
Obviously for small amounts of borrowed principal,
the differences are small. But when the principal is in the
millions, the extra but fraudulent earnings of the Lender
become very significant and hence unconscionable.
And so, if the agreed rate per a formal Bank Promissory
Note and Disclosure Statement required under the Truth
in Lending Act between Borrower and Lender is clearly
stipulated to be 12% per annum, or any other annual
interest rate as the case may be, therefore that same
precise mathematical relationship of R=(1+i)n – 1, must
prevail, especially if the bank will collect interest at any
time before the end of one year.

Regardless therefore of the time and frequency of
collection of the interest charges, and to be logically
consistent with the Truth in Lending Act, the agreed-
on interest rate must be respected. By analogy, if the
formula to convert square feet to square meters is as it
is, a fixed mathematical formula, therefore it must be
the same formula to be used at any time to convert (or
vice-versa) square meters to square feet. Or Fahrenheit to
Centigrade, kilograms to pounds.
Any approximation formula therefore that is
surreptitiously used by one party to a Promissory Note
with pre-agreed and contractually stipulated effective
annual interest rates, with damaging results at the expense
of and without the consent of the other party, must be
fraudulent and illegal.
Considering that the entire BSP-supervised banking
industry, but excluding the even larger but unsupervised
quasi-lending sub-industry, is lending out at any one time
at least P2 Trillion pesos in bank loans, and assuming that
the average lending rate is only 12% per annum, their
combined annual interest earnings would be at least 12%
of P2 Trillion or P240 Billion.
But if through such fraudulent means as described
above, they actually charge without the borrowers’
knowledge and consent a fraudulent and thus illegal
5.66% more, this fraudulently obtained amount will be at
least 5.66% of P240 Billion, or the astronomical amount of
P13.58 Billion, or Thirteen Billion Five Hundred Eighty
Million Pesos! EVERY YEAR, year after year . . .
That is why our Legislature and Courts of Law must
intervene as soon as possible on this monumental and
widespread Grand Larceny.


LEGAL FUNDAMENTALS OF THE
MATHEMATICAL TRUTH BEHIND TILA
When a Commercial Bank-Lender accepts and
validates a Promissory Note as Lender/Obligee and it is
similarly accepted and validated by a Borrower/Obligor,
the terms, conditions, and legal definitions provided
for in such a Promissory Note become binding on both
parties. And per our Civil Code, these are backed up by
the full force of existing laws. Thus a Promissory Note is
a Contract which has the force of law between the Lender
and Borrower.
It is also elementary in law, particularly in the field of
Obligations and Contracts, that the object of a contract is
required to be “determinate,” and mutually understood
in its entirety, otherwise the contract is void because there
would have been no “meeting of minds.”
Thus in the lending and borrowing of money, where
money is the “object of the contract,” not only should
it be DETERMINATE but also FUNGIBLE (interchangeable for
exchange and debt discharging purposes) in nature both
as to quantity (number of pesos) AND as to its increase/
decrease in VALUE OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. Both values are
expressed as mandated by law (Truth in Lending Act and
Article 2209 of the Civil Code) in effective simple interest
or discount rates “per annum.”
The “prestations” (from the Latin prestatio: payment
of money, toll or duty, or rendering of service) involving
the principal and simple effective per annum interest
rates, are indicated in the Promissory Note and/or the
Disclosure Statements. The latter is similarly mandated
by law (Truth in Lending Act) as a PUBLIC STATEMENT to
be declared in writing and under oath by the Lender,
particularly by financial institutions and commercial
banks, to the effect that all interest rates inclusive of all
financing charges being agreed to by the Borrower, have
been so translated into simple annual rates!
Thus, being determinate and fungible, a simple annual
rate of say 12% per annum appearing in a Promissory

Note as the interest rate to be paid by a Borrower, just
like a cavan, Fahrenheit, hectares or miles per hour, MAY
NOT be approximated WITHOUT THE EXPLICIT CONSENT of both
Lender and Borrower, as equal to 1% per month, or ½%
per 15 days or 1/30th % per day. Why not? Because just like
miles per hour, hectares, cavans etc., there is a universally
standard mathematical formula to be followed and taught
from High School to College all over the world, for the
last hundreds of years.
That formula is: (1 + i)n = 1 + R, where i is the
intermediate compound rate* and R is the given or
resulting (as the case may be) simple Annual Rate!
Thus the favorite Approximation Formula of lender-
bankers in computing i by dividing the contractually
stipulated Simple Annual Rate by 360 days (a self-serving
approximation of the 365 days in one year) and again
approximating the true formula by multiplying the result
against the number of days within the interest period, is
consistently and significantly favorable to the lenders and
to its substantial advantage, at the exclusive expense of
the Borrowers.
It is therefore to the latter’s unwarranted disadvantage
if such approximation was applied without the latter’s
explicit consent. This favorite formula of bankers/lenders
is mathematically valid and applicable, ONLY IF AND WHEN
the interest period for which the simple annual interest
rate is to be applied, is for EXACT NUMBERS OF YEARS. Or,
if the nominal rate is similarly applied to exact numbers
of stipulated periods which are the same unit of period
expressed in the nominal rate.
For example, if the stipulated rate is 2% per month,
then their formula is valid for a period of exactly one (1)
month. Similarly, if the stipulated rate is stated as 12%
per annum, their formula will be mathematically valid,
only if the interest period is exactly one (1) year.
*NOTE
1. A “compound” rate of interest means that
interest that is due will earn its own interest

charges if still unpaid at its due date. The variable
i described as the “intermediate compound rate”
in the specifically cited and applicable formula
above, stands for any number or versions of
NOMINAL RATES of Interest, i.e. 1% per month, 4%
per quarter, 8% per semester, ½% per day etc.,
payable in “arrears” (end of the period) OR in
advance (start of the period), each of which have
their own specific and non-equal equivalent
Simple Annual Rates.
2. Thus by definition, NOMINAL RATES of
Interest are interest rates which are NOT
expressed and/or stipulated and/or treated as
SIMPLE (and/or Effective) ANNUAL RATES.
3. That inherent multiplicity and indeterminateness
of Nominal Rates for purposes of knowing
the exact and effective amounts of interest to
be paid, is PRECISELY WHY the Truth in Lending
Act was passed, and Article 2209 of the New
Civil Code similarly mandates that whatever
interest rates stipulated in all Promissory Notes
or their equivalent, MUST BE re-expressed and/
or translated in the corresponding DISCLOSURE
STATEMENTS accompanying every Promissory
Note, in terms of SIMPLE or EFFECTIVE Annual Rates.
Otherwise, without this DETERMINATELY PRECISE
benchmark or standard measuring stick, there
cannot be a valid contract per se.
4. By definition, Simple Annual Rates are
compounded every year, if the interest due at the
end of the year remains unpaid.
5. Similarly by definition, nominal rates are
compounded at the end of the applicable nominal
period (i.e. one month, two months, etc.).
Re-edited as of April 2005

HOW THE FORMULA WAS DERIVED!
For those interested in the detailed truth and logic
n
behind the Formula R=(1+i) – 1
To compare apples-to-apples, the value of one (1) peso
at the end of one year, after earning R in annual interest,
is mathematically expressed as 1+R. Let’s say 1+R is
Apple #1.
Similarly, the value of one (1) peso of principal, after
any shorter period of time (n) and earning interest (i)
during that period (n), must also be (1 + i) after one (1)
period of time n.
Let’s also assume that, after that 1st period n, the entire
amount of the original principal of P1, plus its 1st interest
earnings of i, whose total is (1+i), are rolled over or
compounded as the new (2nd) principal amount. It will thus
earn interest equal to the quantity of the new principal,
(1 + i) multiplied by i again, over a second and equal
period of time n. Therefore the value of (1+i) after that
second period (n), will be that rolled-over 2nd principal in
the amount of (1+i), plus the interest it will have earned.
That second interest earned will be in the amount of the
new (2nd) principal (1+i), multiplied by the same interest
rate i.
To summarize,
1st period n:
(1+i) = value of P1 after one (1) period n
2nd period n:
(1+i) + i(1+i) = value of P1 after two (2) periods n
Thus: (new principal) plus (new interest earned) =
next new value of principal. And when simplified or
rearranged by a process called factoring, (1+i)+ i(1+i)
becomes (1+i) x (1+i), or (1+i)2 !
Continuing the process once more for a 3rd period also
equal to n, it will (take it on faith in Mathematics!) result
in a value of (1+i)3 ; and (1+i)4 for a 4th period; etc.

Thus the generalized formula suggests itself that if P1
earns i interest, compounded over any number of n equal
periods of time, the value of that P1 grows to (1+i)n. And
so, for Apple #1 to be equal to Apple #2, the equation
therefore is simply:
Apple #1 = 1+R= Apple #2 = (1+i)n
So: 1+R = (1+i)n; which means that the value after one
year of P1 earning an annual SIMPLE interest rate of R,
which is Apple #1, should equal the value of Apple #2
which is P1 earning interest i during the same one whole
year but compounded every n intermediate periods of
time within that year.
And so per above comparison of apples vs. apples
of equal value, we have arrived at the basic equation
expressing the mathematical relationship between a
simple annual rate R and an intermediate compound
interest rate i, which is, to repeat: 1+ R = (1+i)n.
The last step in our formula derivation process is the
easiest. For if 1+R=(1+i)n, subtracting the digit 1 from each
side of the equation, we arrive at:
R=(1+i)n –1 and voila, there it is!
EDUARDO B. OLAGUER
Aurora Milestone Building
1045 Aurora Blvd., Q.C. 1108
Win some, lose some!

There still are GOOD BANKERS and LENDERS!
In 1996, I borrowed in my name, P50 Million from another
local commercial bank to finish our 18-storey Tall Cross.
After having paid back some P8 Million of the principal and
all the corresponding interest charges due, I realized that our
company J.O.S. and I no longer had the financial resources to
pay the bank religiously every month!
I went to the owner of the bank to confess my sudden
inability to meet the monthly amortizations on my loan due to
the mortgage foreclosure on our building. He was very kind and

understanding and thus he repeatedly offered to re-structure
the entire loan over a much longer period of repayment with a
substantial reduction in interest rates.
It was at the height of the Asian financial crisis sweeping
the whole country and seriously affecting the whole economy,
including his own conglomerate of related companies and my
own small one. He also knew that I had invested their P50
Million loan in our condominium building project—our 18-
storey Tall Cross, whose mortgage had just been suddenly
foreclosed by another bank.
I had to decline his sincere offer of loan re-structuring and
reduction of interest because I would still have no way of
paying the interest, no matter how much it would be reduced,
much less the huge principal amount. In short, I was broke!
And with no prospects of recovery in the foreseeable future.
He reluctantly agreed to my counter-offer of dacion en pago,
which meant giving his bank the collateral property consisting
of my then 30-year-old house and lot at 22 Maranaw in La Vista,
Quezon City worth at most P30 Million. The dacion would be
done through a “friendly foreclosure” process that would spare
me from any public embarrassment. It was the same house and
lot I bought for P600,000 only in May of 1974, with the help of
a P550,000 loan granted by John Graves, the Senior Officer of
Citibank while I was Pantranco’s president.
For almost two years thereafter however, the bank stopped
sending me any collection letters nor statements of account. I
suspected that the majority owner and Chairman of the Board,
for whom I had done a small favor many years earlier when
he was gravely ill and beset with enormous legal and business
problems, was returning that small favor he may still have
owed me. But it was with far too much generosity on his part,
which I had not deserved nor could ever repay.
And so I barged into his office one day with all the keys and
letters of authorization to occupy our La Vista house. He still
would not withdraw his most generous offer and insisted that

I could stay there for as long as I wanted. He further quipped:
I have too many houses already but few real friends. Suma total, he
graciously but reluctantly acceded to my wishes.
Dr. Lucio Tan is the Chairman of the Board of Allied Bank,
and my friend for all seasons . . .
Peter F. Drucker and the Gospel
I have read many of the books of Peter Drucker and other
authors of business management texts. In my opinion, none can
surpass Drucker’s 50-plus-year-old The Practice of Management.
This world-renowned “high priest” of business management
education blazed the pioneering trail for enlightenment in the
commercial world when he defined a business enterprise, in
that early masterpiece, as the means to serve the Customer.
More importantly and controversially at that time, he went to
greater lengths to define and to argue clearly and compellingly,
that PROFITS should NOT be the motive for any business. Profits
according to Drucker are merely a NECESSARY INGREDIENT to be
able to serve the Customer on a long-term basis!
I realized much later, that such a non-financial objective
coming from Drucker’s book of business wisdom, was perfectly
consistent with practical reality and the Gospel!
Thus it is the element of MOTIVE, which is most crucial to any
“good” act or enterprise, business or otherwise, in determining
its ultimate ethical, moral, and supernatural values.
Many false interpreters of Matthew 25 insist that for as long
as we give or do something or anything “good” for the poor,
we deserve Christ’s promised reward according to the Gospel
of Matthew.
If that were so, unrepentant pedophiles, political
demagogues, predatory businessmen, and bankers and others
of similar bent, would all be entitled ipso facto, to that same
reward. For these characters can always claim before St. Peter’s
door, that they indeed had given not just one, but thousands

of cups of water and bites of food to their hungry and poor
victims, albeit with evil or at best pecuniary selfish motives.
We businessmen, especially bankers-lenders therefore, are
wasting thousands of gilt-edged eternal opportunities if we
fail to heed Drucker’s advice. For didn’t Christ say to those
who performed “good deeds” but with the world’s applause
as their motive, “You have had your reward already!”

Chapter 17
ON GAD AND SSS:

GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION ON A CONTRACT?
Like most of my major problems and conflicts with others,

I would have avoided them completely and not created
additional and more powerful enemies, had I only minded my
own business, even if my friends needed help.
My new and recent problem began when my friend from
way back at the Ateneo de Naga, who is the only Bureau of
Census–certified “honest general” in the Philippines and
probably in the whole world, had his usual Monday column
published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer’s issue of January 12,
2004. This friend and columnist’s name is Honesto “Oning”
General! And his piece was entitled, “SSS: The Single Biggest
Money Loss Ever!”
His younger brother, Eusebio “Bio” General, was the Light
A Fire recruit of former NBI Director Antonio Carpio, my own
friend and direct LAF recruit. Their youngest brother Rodolfo
General was the classmate of the future Jesuit Joaquin Bernas
for four years at the same school, and arguably “Rudy” was
the brightest among the General siblings!
Buying “HIGH,” Selling “LOW”
Going back to our “honest” General, he was referring to an
impending P8 Billion loss (per his computation) to the Social
Security System (SSS), arising from its secret Letter Agreement
with an investors group headed by local taipan Henry Sy’s
Banco de Oro. SSS President Corazon dela Paz had agreed
without any due diligence preparatory work, to sell SSS’
29% holdings of Equitable PCI Bank, at the effective price of
only P43.50 per share, covering some 188 million common

shares. The deal was made quickly and secretively, during
the Christmas and New Year Holidays! And just before the
Presidential elections . . .
Consider that these were purchased barely three years earlier
at the top price of around P96 per share. Therefore the alleged
but huge impending P8 Billion loss figured out by Mr. General,
had not even included the additional opportunity loss of at least
some P3 Billion more, in unearned “yields” or zero interest
income for 3 years on SSS’ original P16 Billion investment on
those shares. Thus the General revelation was a shocker to us
SSS members and retirees.
By the way, that SSS original investment in PCI Bank, a
much bigger bank, was so designed and orchestrated that it
led to its being gobbled up soon after, by the smaller Equitable
Bank during the administration of former President Joseph
“Erap” Estrada! Their subsequent merger resulted in the new
Equitable PCI Bank.
I happened to be familiar with the original PCI Bank shares’
valuation in 1987 when I was a Governor at the Development
Bank of the Philippines (DBP) and the ad hoc Chairman of its
committee overseeing the sale of those same shares then owned
by DBP. These were eventually bought back by PCI Bank itself
through a public bidding under terms and conditions I had
designed.
I also knew Henry Sy quite well, having helped him gratis et
amore, to win a case in court against the government. The court
case was on the matter of his legal rights as the complying
highest bidder for a property sold through me as President of
the Philippine National Construction Company (PNCC). I had
bidded off PNCC’s residual rights to the vast reclaimed lands
along Manila Bay. And so without my testimony as his only
witness, he could not have won the case against the government
which wanted the public bid results to be nullified.
The “honest general” considered Henry Sy in his initial
column on the subject as the great white knight come to save
On GAD and SSS: Grave Abuse of Discretion on a Contract? 273

the maiden fair from a castle dark. In short, “King Henry Sy”!
Incidentally, Oning’s great command of the King’s English
was honed even more sharply by his Ignatian Jesuit teachers
at the Ateneo de Naga high school from 1946 to 1948. Oning
is a pioneer insurance broker, and also the founder and
incumbent President of the Philippine Association of Retired
Persons (PARP), of which I was once, though briefly, a Director
representing Quezon City.
The fun with SSS and “King” Henry Sy began when skeptical
me wouldn’t take the word of the “honest general” without
a grain of mathematical curiosity. Thus upon reading his
column, I called some parties for additional information on the
SSS-Banco de Oro transaction. I was even more shocked after
grinding my pocket calculator through the quantitative terms
and conditions of the SSS-BDO secret letter agreement faxed to
me in confidence. Unless I had muffed simple arithmetic and
basic algebra I learned from Juan “Mucho Malo” Bernardo at
the Ateneo de Naga in 1948, I could not escape the conclusion
that U.S. dollar billionaire “King” Henry Sy and his bankers
had gotten themselves, perhaps unwittingly [sic!], an envy-
inducing amorous but anomalous Sweethearts’ Deal of the
Decade.
Firstly, the actual cash loss and “opportunity” loss for SSS
would be at least a total of P13 Billion and not just P8 Billion.
Secondly, 85% of the total purchase price would be paid
only after 6 ½ years, in one lump sum or balloon payment! And
its imputed interest rate to be paid by Henry Sy’s Banco de
Oro was even much lower than prevailing rates given to the
government’s Treasury Bills. And so the purported reason of
SSS for selling the shares, repeatedly made by President dela
Paz during the hearings, that SSS badly needed CASH, was
obviously rendered untenable by the 6 ½ year long period for
actual receipt of the 85% cash proceeds.
Thirdly, the supposedly gilt-edged government securities
given as collateral for the 6 ½ year term balloon payment of

some P13 Billion, was ILLUSORY! Because the buyer, Banco de
Oro et al., had been given the right to substitute any component of
the collateral (securities) with other inferior collateral including
any other mutually acceptable securities.
Fourthly, and worst of all, the Buyer-BDO would immediately
be able to re-sell the shares to anybody, having become by then,
the lawful and beneficial Owner of the still-unpaid-for EPCIB
shares, with its ownership extending also to the usufruct for
dividends and voting rights! INCLUDING those for ALL other
securities to be pledged to SSS.
Had all these happened in Japan, the U.S., Western Europe,
or even in Korea, a whole slew of SSS top executives and
Trustees would soon have been indicted, or led to commit
hara-kiri! But NOT here in the Philippines, yet . . .
The rest of this “sweethearts’ story” is now also part of
the official and public records in the Philippine Senate and
Supreme Court, including the hitherto secret BDO-SSS Letter
Agreement. For the “honest general” and I along with PARP
co-founder Amado Cabaero, a certified Public Accountant and
retired banker, were summoned as witnesses and resource
persons by the Senate Committee on Banks, through its chair-
man, Senator Sergio Osmeña III. Part of that story therefore
is my explosive letter-complaint against that letter-contract. It
was co-signed by hundreds of PARP members, and addressed
to the Senate Committee. I gave further trenchant comments
and clarifications during my related testimony at the Senate
hearings, which riled my erstwhile lawyer at Pantranco North,
Senate President Franklin Drilon. He was obviously not in
agreement with me.
Eventually, it all led to a celebrated court case filed against
SSS and Banco de Oro by Senator Osmeña and other Senators
including my friends, Senators Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. and
Alfredo Lim. That case is now pending at the Supreme Court.
Here is that explosive letter:

February 18, 2004
The Senate Committee on Banks
Thru The Honorable Chairman, Senator Sergio Osmeña III
Your Honors:
As taxpayers and SSS members and/or retirees, we
are presenting to your Honorable Committee these
recommendations and its reasons, on the matter of the
pending sale by the SSS of some 187,847,891 common
shares of stock in Equitable PCI Bank (EPCIB) at the
effective present value price of P43.50 per share, to a
certain Nestor V. Tan of Banco de Oro, purportedly
for and in behalf of Banco de Oro and/or certain other
unidentified related parties.
1. These assets/equity securities to be sold were
originally purchased in 1999 by the SSS manage-
ment for some P14 Billion, as government-
appointed Trustees in behalf of the 25 Million
members and retirees of the System. Therefore
these shares do not belong to SSS per se nor to the
government, but are collective private property
or a Trust Fund asset belonging to the 25 Million
Trustors-Members of the SSS.
2. We accept the fact however, that the original terms
and conditions of purchase in 1999, particularly
the P96 top price and the eventual average price
of approximately P76 per share, were out-and-out
BAD DECISIONS born of a pierde-gana (play-to-lose)
type of graft and corruption at the highest levels of
a previous SSS and Malacañang management.
In fact, Mr. Arellano, the former Administrator
of SSS, has categorically admitted to Mr. Honesto
General and other top officers of PARP that there
was no “due diligence” work done by SSS on the
books of PCIB and Equitable prior to the purchase-
cum-merger decision. But that is an altogether
different issue to be addressed separately, albeit

a necessary premise or starting point for the
subsequent decision of the SSS management at
present, to liquidate such a prior BAD INVESTMENT.
3. We also agree in principle with the present SSS
management’s intention to liquidate these EPCIB
equity shares, PROVIDED HOWEVER that the manner
of doing so is TRANSPARENT and the basic terms and
conditions to be set by SSS particularly for the
selling price per share, are technically correct and
objectively realistic, and not again a PIERDE-GANA
sweetheart deal. Otherwise these shares are better
left unsold to wait for better times.
4. Among others, the minimum basic terms, conditions
and RATIONALE behind the divestment process MUST
BE the following:
4.1 It should be done through a public bidding

process or an equivalent version of such, where
multiple firm offers from qualified, UNRELATED,
and COMPETING parties are transparently sub-
mitted.
Assuming for the sake of argument that the
laws may possibly allow a dispensation from
such a public bidding, we nevertheless submit
that what may NOT be illegal will still be
FOOLHARDY business-wise, and gravely injurious
in the instant case to the interests of our 25
million co-members, considering that it has been
universally established that multiple public
tenders of this nature usually generate the best
possible price results.
4.2 MOST IMPORTANTLY, the minimum bid price
acceptable should START FROM the latest available
EPCIB audited Balance Sheet’s aggregate book
value of P41.22 Billion as of December 31, 2002.
We should then ADD the already known FY 2003
net profit of at least P1.2 Billion (based on the
transcript-testimony of EPCIB President Rene

Buenaventura), PLUS the conservatively expected
FY 2004 profit of P1.6 Billion, or a total of P44
Billion at least! Dividing that by 727 million shares,
we should have a basic per share Balance Sheet
book value of P60.52 per share or thereabout.
That should be the starting book value bid price,
which does not yet even include a premium on
other valuable intangible assets, which may be
revealed when the December 31, 2003 audited
Financial Report of EPCIB is published.
4.3 Why is it that our figures are substantially higher
than those of Nestor V. Tan/BDO, the UBS invest-
ment advisers, and SSS itself?
4.3.1 Please note carefully that the above
P60.52 per share valuation is already 37%
lower than the P96 per share top price
recommended by in-house SSS technical
investment experts, and the same top price
actually paid by SSS for basically the same
EPCIB shares in 1999. This was still during
the height of the Asian financial crisis.
Furthermore since then, whatever negative
economic factors affecting the value of
EPCIB’s shares of stock have already been
adequately discounted and reflected in
their adjusted Balance Sheets over the
last three (3) years! And these adjustments
have also been certified to as correct and
adequate by the bank’s external auditors,
SGV, and approved by the Bangko Sentral
with respect to the Provisions for Losses
on Non-Performing Loans and other over-
valued assets. And the BIR has accepted
the corresponding paper losses as expenses
and income tax deductible, as well as the
annual amortizations for the statutory tax
obligations!

And so unless SGV, the BSP, the BIR, and
the SSS technical experts can prove that they
made significant mistakes in their respective
evaluations, sufficient to downgrade the
Book Value per share lower than P60.52, the
latter figure must prevail.
4.3.2 As to the UBS figures, it should be noted
that these were made primarily in order to
show the adequacy of the share values as
equity COLLATERAL for borrowing purposes,
so as to make attractive to prospective
underwriters, EPCIB’s international borrow-
ing via a US Dollar-based Bond Offer. Thus
the UBS book value per share figures are
similar to banks’ (conservative) appraisal
values of borrowers’ collateral. For the
purpose of SELLING EPCIB shares, therefore,
these UBS figures are certainly INAPPLICABLE
and at least 20% lower than the marketable
Book Value!
4.3.3 The corollary issue of SSS and UBS “experts”
wrongly agreeing to the discounting or
subtracting the Balance Sheet values of so-
called “intangible” assets including “Good-
will,” is adequately refuted as follows.
These Balance Sheet “contra-accounts”
arose from the differential between the
value of “tangible” assets only, as against
the aggregate value of all assets (including
“intangibles”) which were booked as a
result of the PCIB-Equitable merger in
1999. But this price differential has ALREADY
been reviewed thoroughly and approved
by the SGV external auditors, Bangko
Sentral, and the BIR. These were all found
to be in accordance with local (SFAS/36)
and international Accounting Standards

(IAS/36), BECAUSE the sound economic
monetary values of these “intangible” assets
have already been adequately established
by EPCIB management through several
reputable appraisal firms!
Why should SSS again play a PIERDE-GANA
game on these solidly verified accounts—and
pretend ignorance of the basic accounting
concept that “intangibles” do have economic
value? Are they not aware of McDonald and
Jollibee franchises’ high-priced “intangible”
values, and of Tiger Woods, Lebron James,
and Yao Ming’s stratospheric $100 million
level of “intangible” values paid for their
advertised product-endorsements?
4.3.4 As to Nestor V. Tan/BDO’s basis for their
price offer and acceptance of P43.50 per
share, we all should and do know that
shrewd and competent BUYERS will always
seemingly justify a much lower price.
Would that Nestor Tan were the big boss of
the SSS Investment Committee in 1999! He
would not have bought those PCIB shares
at P96 per . . .
Thus we publicly appeal to Mr. Nestor V. Tan to
withdraw gracefully and unconditionally consent to the
mutual recission of their December 30, 2003 Letter of
Intent to purchase these shares from SSS. The transcript
of the testimonies during these Committee hearings
categorically prove anyway that there was no adequate
“meeting of minds” legally necessary for a binding
agreement, and that both parties are on record to be
willing to renegotiate the terms.
And so for the sake of our 25 million co-members
in the System, and for the sake too of the professional
reputations of BDO and SSS management, which will
suffer in the event that a court case is filed to challenge

that one-sided agreement, we urge all concerned to agree
UNCONDITIONALLY to a completely new process of bidding
out and valuing of the shares consistent with the above
recommendations.
EDUARDO B. OLAGUER
1045 Aurora Blvd., Q.C.
A few days after my letter was received by the Senate,

EPCIB’s net profit increase by 69% amounting to P1.23 Billion
was announced in all the local newspapers. And while this
particular chapter was still being written, a Philippine Star
business story under the by-line of a certain Ted P. Torres
reported that Equitable PCI Bank recorded a hefty 110 percent
growth in net income in the first three months of 2005, to P567
Million, from P270 Million in the same period last year. In other
words, on an extrapolated basis for 12 months, its annual net
income for the year 2005 should easily reach approximately 4
times P567 Million or P2.2 Billion at least.
This latest estimate of EPCIB’s annual net income is already
83% higher than their declared net income at the time of the
BDO-SSS secret agreement. Thus my own computed per share
value of P60.52 in February 2004 was, by today’s hindsight, still
too conservative! In fact, we sold DBP’s shares of PCI Bank at
public auction in 1987 at about the same price of P60 per share!
It should now be somewhere around P100 per share based not
just on book-value, but more on the “income-stream” approach,
which is universally de rigueur for professional investors and
bankers.
Despite having created a few more powerful enemies, Oning
General and I console ourselves that at least we have saved
our SSS co-retirees some P13 Billion. Thus Banco de Oro has
recently announced that it has backed out of the deal, making
the Supreme Court case already academic. Instead, “King”
Henry Sy purchased the entire 160-plus branch network of the

very same foreign-owned bank involved in our “18-storey Tall
Cross.” And one of those branches purchased is located on the
ground floor of that “Tall Cross,” the Aurora Milestone Tower!
I therefore anticipate that King Henry Sy’s path and mine will
cross each other once again.
Fortuitously, Supreme Court Justice Artemio V. Panganiban
delivered a very timely speech on 21 April 2004 to the 25th
National Conference of Employers at the Westin Philippine
Plaza. He truly enlightened our bankers and businessmen on
GAD—referring to grave abuse of discretion, on “gravely abusive
contracts.”
282
∆ Fr. Antonio B. Olaguer S.J.
after his ordination
∆ Lino S. Olaguer
and his bride,
Gloria P. Buenaventura
∆
Olaguer family portrait

after the death of
their mother, Gloria
Left to right:
Standing – Tito,
Demar, and Toti
Seated – Nene, Lino,
Gavs, and Nena
On the floor – Pocholo
∆ With Reuter, Towers, Guerrero,
Jimenez, and Alingal, I am mascot
behind basketball
∆
U.P. Chess Champion

in 1954
∆
as Roxanne
in Cyrano de Bergerac
circa 1951
∆
William L. Hayes S.J.
“tying the knot”
Daisie and I walk

down the aisle,
at last!
Wedding Party: Tio Agot,

my father-in-law Genaro Pantig, ∆
and Romy Jorge to my left!
∆ Mr. & Mrs. Eduardo B. Olaguer in 1958 . . . and forty years later ∆
∆ 25th wedding anniversary on June 28, 1983

Left to right: Eduardo Jr., Ditas, Eduardo Sr., Daisie, Deanna, Edgar, Eric
∆ IBM Training Class of 1965
∆ With John Hooks and IBM 360 in 1966

∆
At Harvard,
HBS Class
of 1972
“Can Group”
∆ Reunion at Perfing Palacio’s
palatial house circa 1989
∆
Far left: Pros Rivera

of Southern California
Left: Dr. Cosme Uy Barreta
of St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands
∆ Class ’52 with Francis

Garchitorena of Class ’54
∆
The Strikers with Fr. Reuter, April 19, 2002
∆ Posing for Bayantel ad
circa 1996
∆ With Rufo Colayco, Francis Garchitorena,
Alan Silberstein (my Harvard classmate),
and Paul Aquino circa December 2000
At the Penthouse of the 18-storey Tall Cross with the Baguio Apaches:
Standing left to right: Romy Jorge, Deo Manalo, Mon Balboa, Dr. Joven,
Manolo Santos, Ed Olaguer, Earl Tesoro,
Peping Romero, Condring Bueno, Runy Sarda.
Seated left to right: Ben Hur Balboa, Eddie Fuentes, Kit Mariano,
∆ Sonny San Pedro.
∆
To hide us from Pope John Paul II in 1980,

the government moved us to Muntinglupa
With Otto & Ester Jimenez, and ∆

Fr. Reuter in Bicutan prison (1982)
∆ 25th Wedding Anniversary Mass
with Fr. O’Brien, Fr. Reuter,
Fr. Olaguer, Cardinal Sin, Fr. Hayes
∆
Against the bars of the Carmelite

nuns’ cloister: Francisco “Soc” Rodrigo
and Lorenzo “Tanny” Tañada during
our Silver Wedding Anniversary
∆
Atty. Ciriaco
“Akong”
Lopez,
Emanuel
Soriano,
Romy Jorge,
Paul Aquino,
Gen Pantig
(Daisie’s
brother)
∆ The Bicutan jailbirds sing at
a 1982 Christmas program.
From left to right: Ed Olaguer,
Philip Suzara, Jovy Labajo, Mac
Aceron, Otto Jimenez, Rey Maclang
∆
Cory Aquino visits

Bicutan in 1983
DBP oath-taking
∆ with President Cory Aquino
in November 1986
December 2002 faxed letter from Fr. James Reuter S.J.
encouraging me to take action regarding the Jesuit “problem”
SECTION FIVE
LIGHT A FIRE II
(EXPOSÉ ON NEO-JESUITRY)
Chapter 18 Seeds of Jesuit Modernism

Chapter 19 Poisoned Fruits of Neo-Jesuitry
Chapter 20 Neo-Jesuitry in the Philippines
Chapter 21 Lux Ex Mundo
Chapter 22 Neo-Jesuit Censors
283
284 LIGHT A FIRE II (EXPOSÉ ON NEO-JESUITRY)
Chapter 18
SEEDS OF JESUIT MODERNISM
Whatever continuing decadence there is in the Philippine

government and in our society, is certainly being replicated, in
lesser or even greater degree, in other countries throughout the
world! For indeed, the salt of the Christian world for the past
400 years—the Jesuits, among others—are being continuously
blown away every year since the early 1960s, not just in sheer
numbers, but much worse, in the degradation of their purity as
Christ’s light and salt of the earth!
Degraded Salt
The Society of Jesus has been led by the nose for the last forty
years or so, in its single-minded efforts to become “modern”
in theology and spirituality, by a relatively few but most
influential “modernist” Jesuit theologians and their non-Jesuit
kindred spirits and adherents within the Catholic Church.
These modern theologians, led or influenced by some Jesuits
since the 19th century, have latched on to the core and seemingly
“scientific” proposition that the continuing “discoveries of
science,” especially in archeology, linguistics, historical re-
search, and anthropology, must always take precedence over
the canonical Gospels, traditional dogmas, and beliefs in the
Christian revelation. It is based on the mistaken theory that
such modern discoveries have been proven “scientifically,”
and thus cannot logically be in error, incomplete, or open to
exceptions.
In short, a priori, modernists including and particularly
some so-called avant garde Jesuits, insist that Catholic dogmas
and beliefs are periodically subject to change, depending on
future “scientific revelation” or discoveries. And if so, we
Seeds of Jesuit Modernism 285

Catholics would have to accept the consequently unavoidable
conclusion that the Catholic faith and its dogmas are either
transient, illusory, or even in error. So, to be a Catholic Christian
is neither better nor worse than being a Muslim, Buddhist, or
even a Communist! Thus too it is, that modernist theologians’
disciples easily and uncritically accept as gospel truth whatever
Dan Brown, author of the pseudo-historical novel The Da Vinci
Code, wrote in that book, including Jesus Christ’s purported
marriage to Mary Magdalene and the children supposedly
resulting from that marriage. Sick!
Perhaps at this particular page and paragraph, my own
friends who have studied or worked or taught with me at
the University of the Philippines, IBM, or Asian Institute of
Management, or in graduate schools abroad, will wince even
more in sharp disagreement with what I still have to say to
point out the flaw in the reasoning of our modernist Catholic
theologians. Nevertheless, I could also be wrong, but only if
Jesus Christ was an impostor; or that there is no one Prime
Divine Being who is exclusively Almighty, eternal, omniscient,
and all-good; or that in short, God is dead and we ought all to be
agnostics or even atheists.
Physical Science discoveries NOT absolutely complete!
And so let me remind our modernist friends who worship
at the altar of science, that since the early 1930s and up to now,
Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle is still universally accepted
in the scientific research community. That principle is still
unfailingly operative in the physical sciences, particularly at the
nuclear or sub-atomic level. In layman’s terms, Heisenberg’s
principle has proven that the process of physical observation
in physics unavoidably disturbs the objects to be measured
or observed, so that, particularly in quantum mechanics, it is
impossible up to now, to measure simultaneously and exactly
two related quantities or characteristics of an object, such as

the mass and speed of an electron. And if so, how can we now
all rely on the permanence and exactness of science?
In 1955 at the University of the Philippines, the professor
in our Physics 110 class, Franco Mendiola, who is now a
Franciscan priest, dazzled us despite his then recently acquired
Pinoy-Australian accent, with the latest laboratory discoveries
in the nuclear field. I still remember the day it took him almost
one whole hour and all the blackboards available in the lecture
room to explain and mathematically derive Einstein’s famous
formula E = mc2, starting from the most basic Newtonian
formulae all of us knew.
We were gasping for breath and in awe at the end of it.
Our professor had just returned from abroad with his Ph.D.
in nuclear physics. And so he enthralled us with Einstein’s
phenomenal insights and reasoning which ultimately led to
the half-dozen or so newly discovered sub-atomic particles,
which till then we had never heard about or read, such as
mesons, bosons, and positrons. At that time, the world’s largest
telescope, a 200-inch behemoth at Mt. Palomar in the U.S., had
identified at most a few thousand galaxies, each of which like
our own local galaxy the Milky Way, was estimated to have
merely tens of millions of stars.
Today however, if you read the latest scientific journals
and compare them to what was known or discovered in
1955, or if you are a fan of cosmologist-physicist Stephen
Hawking, you would laugh at the simplistic and obviously
still incomplete scientific discoveries and explanations we
learned about and believed some 50 years ago. The orbiting
500-inch Hubble telescope, for example, in combination with
miniaturized computers, radio wave, and infrared technology,
have increased the number of identified galaxies to at least 100
billion already. Each of these encompass hundreds of millions
of stars, dwarfing our own relatively miniscule Milky Way.
And the cosmos is now known to be physically expanding at a
faster or accelerating rate!

Just 5 years from now, we will surely again laugh at what we
thought today to have been the final “scientific” limits of cosmic
phenomena, electronic-computers and their miniaturization, of
cosmic “black holes,” “strings,” and “super strings,” and “dark
matter” spreading throughout the distant edges of the known
universe. Our own earth’s oceans, and even the cloning of our
human bodies are also still barely tapped in their mysteries.
Even at the physical and material level where measurements
and theories are empirical or mathematically precise, in contrast
to the vastly more imprecise sciences such as anthropology,
archeology, history, psychology, and sociology, what is known
to be “scientifically true” today will surely turn out to be at
the very least, incomplete or inexact, or even false, any time
tomorrow or later.
The Natural Sciences are even more inexact!
In anthropology and archeology for example, we are
periodically regaled with new discoveries of more skulls
and bones and detritus of our long gone ancestors, and of
prehistoric homo sapiens and the earlier homo erectus. That these
earliest prehistoric bones are PHYSICALLY and MATERIALLY alike or
similar to, or of the same family or genus as modern man, may
perhaps be undebatable, especially among us lay people.
But who among our best anthropologists, archeologists,
medical doctors, etc. living or already dead, could have assured
us or can prove even today, scientifically and logically, that
these old “dry bones” had immortal souls like ours when they
were alive? No one but no one! And yet many of us have been
led to believe by these “dry bones” to conclude “scientifically”
that Adam and Eve were mere symbolic names or legends
purportedly invented by other legends such as Abraham and
Moses or by their ancestors.
I have heard prominent Jesuits from the Ateneo de Manila
habitually referring to the prophet Abraham in their homilies
at my former Santa Maria della Strada parish church at

La Vista in Quezon City, as a “legend.” And if so, Christ’s
repeated reference to Abraham in the New Testament, as well
as Catholic theology’s reference to Christ as the “New Adam”
and His Mother as the “New Eve,” must also be considered as
all based on mere “legend.”
And so in 1948 modernists would have in effect wanted
us to extrapolate and to believe that we should have quickly
accepted Thomas Dewey’s election victory over Harry Truman,
just because a few statistically bellwether regions’ votes had
been tabulated and verified already. In terms of percentage
and reliability for statistical purposes, Dewey’s eager beaver
extrapolators had even much more and better data to work on,
compared to the discoveries of ancient artifacts, bones, records,
and the like, in relation to the sum total of those pieces of buried
evidence throughout the history of man and civilization. All
of the former will not amount to even one-billionth of one-
billionth of one percent of the latter total. More so with the
cosmos!
Thus the experts handling our best available telescopes,
especially the “Hubble” with the aid of the most recent advances
in optics, computers, radio, and infra-red astronomy, have
barely identified but not explored some 100 billion galaxies.
There are far more out there in the universe’s outer reaches
expanding faster every second and in every direction! It isn’t
slowing down at all, but still accelerating in speed of expansion
way beyond our boggled minds’ comprehension. Yet our $100
million space-travelling robotic Exploration Rovers haven’t even
gone beyond our own solar system and no farther than Mars,
which is less than one-billionth of one-billionth of our home-
galaxy’s (the Milky Way) breadth and depth. And every year, a
hundred more such galactic regions larger than the Milky Way
are being discovered and added to some one hundred billion
registered and indexed galaxies.
Coincidentally, or rather, providentially, while editing this
chapter, I relocated a book I had read but lost a few years ago.

It was taken from the vast pile of science publications my
daughter, Deanna (Didi), brought home from Boston in 1987.
She must have used it on the way to her PhD (sans her doctoral
dissertation) in Environmental Science at the University of
Massachusetts in Boston. Entitled The New Story of Science, it
was written by scientists Robert M. Augros and George N.
Stanciu, with a preface from Sir John Eccles.
The book was first published in 1984, some nine years after
the Jesuit leadership’s shift to modernism, circa their 32nd
General Congregation of 1975. Its main thesis was to show that
modern science if properly interpreted, contradicts the fashionable
opinions of modernists and materialists. The authors got
a lot of their factual premises and scientific analyses from
other brilliant scientists such as Stephen Hawking, Richard
Feynman, and James Watson. The Wall Street Journal described
it as “provocative, far-reaching . . . with fairness and balance
in its examination of a possible change in the philosophy of
science.” America Magazine was even more lyrical in its praise—
“Rare clarity and simplicity . . . persuades the reader that
contemporary science harmonizes with perennial wisdom.”
The authors also had rediscovered that the old Ignatian Jesuit
scholastics’ preferred models for insight into the world, the
great Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas, were consistent in
their philosophical views with the most recent findings of
modern science.
And yet our “neo-Jesuits” today have practically junked
Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophy as ante-diluvian. I certainly
recommend The New Story of Science for immediate reading, to
Fathers Kolvenbach, Bernas, Nebres, Intengan, Carroll, et al.!
Behavioral science ‘experts’ claim equal billing
Moreover, their allies among ultra-liberal theologians have
added another parameter. Now they also insist that the Catholic
Church should modify its doctrines and dogmas, in response
to the insistent clamor of segments of the Church. They say that

it is but part of a “democratization process” the Church should
also accept. On that basis they are demanding that Catholic
restrictions on abortion, contraception, homosexuality, same-
sex marriage, non-celibacy for priests, ordination of women
priests, and so on, should be relaxed. Logically therefore, we
should expect feminist nuns next to clamor for non-celibacy
and same-sex marriage for themselves!
Thus our local priest-sociologist Ruben M. Tanseco S.J., a
militant advocate of all the above changes, claims that Church
renewal and reform, continuity and change should be according to
the needs of the times, the needs of God’s people. It is based on their
own interpretations, and not those of the Church Magisterium,
of God’s love, justice, and peace. Never mind that his preferred
interpreters are sexually problematic priests, homosexuals,
diehard feminists, recalcitrant bishops and nuns, ultra-liberal
and modernist theologians, and a few ordinary but still
selectively biased lay people. More on Tanseco later . . .
In comparison therefore to the unfathomable creativity,
wisdom, and might of the sovereign Lord and Author of all
creation, of history and mankind, oh how stupidly proud
and presumptuous are these so-called modernist theologians.
For with their puny minds and meager “scientific” data, they
proudly and presumptuously insist that faith in and obedience
to that sovereign Creator of mankind and the unreachable
complexity and limitlessness of the cosmos, should be subject
to the speck-size brains and findings of a few of our agnostic
and unbelieving scientists, anthropologists, sociologists,
psychologists, feminists, and the like. Thus they refuse to
submit themselves in obedience to His specific commandments
and teachings given through the revelation of Himself in Jesus
Christ, as had been handed down to Peter and the Apostles.
Even more ironic is the fact that more and more of the men
and women at the forefront of the new frontiers of the physical
sciences, the real day-to-day professionals, are convinced that
there is a conscious rational Prime Being responsible for the

creation and continuance of the cosmos, mankind included. In
fact, just a few days after these lines were written sometime
before the Ides of March 2005, the following news item appeared
in the Philippine Star daily newspaper, with the caption:
AMERICAN CO-INVENTOR OF THE LASER WINS $1.5M

NEW YORK (AP) – Charles Townes, co-inventor
of the laser and a Nobel Prize-winner in physics, was
named Wednesday as the recipient of a religion award
billed as the world’s richest annual prize. Townes, 89, a
professor at the University of California, Berkeley, won
the Templeton Prize for Progress Toward Research and
Discoveries about Spiritual Realities. The award is worth
£795,000—more than $1.5 million (Euro 1.1 million).
Townes was honored for talks and writings about the
importance of relating science and religion.
He first addressed that topic in 1964, the same year
he shared the Nobel with two Russians for research on
principles underlying the laser (light amplification by
stimulated emission of radiation). Townes said in remarks
prepared for the announcement, that his first talk about
religion to the men’s Bible class of New York City’s
Riverside Church, was later published in IBM’s Think
magazine and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
alumni magazine. After the second article, a prominent
alumnus threatened to cease all involvement with MIT if
anything like it were ever published again, Townes said.
He also recalled that, years before, his doctoral adviser
at California Institute of Technology “jumped on me for
being religiously oriented.”
“Many people don’t realize that science basically
involves assumptions and faith. But nothing is absolutely
proved,” Townes said. “Wonderful things in both science
and religion come from our efforts based on observations,
thoughtful assumptions, faith, and logic.”
He has compared his flash 1951 discovery of maser
principles, while sitting on a park bench in Washington,
D.C., with the revelations depicted in the Bible.

Townes said that, with findings of modern physics, it
“seems extremely unlikely” that the existence of life and
humanity are “just accidental,” which inevitably raises
religious questions about whether the universe was
planned.
A native of Greenville, South Carolina, Townes
graduated from local Furman University before earning
graduate degrees at Duke University and Caltech. He
was a Bell Labs radar researcher during World War II and
taught at Columbia University and MIT.
Incidentally, my eldest child Jay earned his Bachelor’s

in Physics and Ph.D. in Meteorology at MIT where Townes
taught, right after he graduated from high school at the Ateneo
de Manila. Ironically, he became much more of a Catholic after
his Ph.D., to the extent of authoring several books in scholarly
yet orthodox exegesis of the Book of Genesis and the Gospel of
St. John.
In contrast and ironically too, all of these so-called Jesuit
intelligentia were sent by their religious Society, at “great
expectations” and cost, to the best available schools of science,
law, and technology, for the explicit purpose of learning more
about each of these separate worlds of secular knowledge
and research, in order to be able to preach the true Gospel more
effectively! And to do so, in all the many different ways of
approaching, understanding, and expressing the same but CONSTANT
TRUTH about man, the triune God, and man’s eternal destiny in
and through his Redeemer Jesus Christ, the only true God and
true Man.
In short, the evangelization through inculturation of the world,
through Christ, in Christ, and with Christ, was the Jesuits’ and
all other Christians and Catholics main purpose for all religious
as well as secular education and pursuit of knowledge. This
primordial priestly witnessing and discipleship for the Lord,
was but in keeping with Christ’s last instructions to the College
of Bishops/Apostles before He ascended to Heaven:

Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the
Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to carry out
everything I have commanded you.
-Matthew 28:19-20
Neo-Jesuit Opposition and Deception

And yet, according to “Black Pope” Kolvenbach in his Octo-
ber 6, 2000 Santa Clara University speech, such a witnessing
and discipleship is equivalent to unwarranted and undesirable
“proselytization” and “imposition” of our beliefs on others.
And thus he and his fellow neo-Jesuits would contradict Christ
Himself!
The continuing irony lies also in the fact that more often than
not with these Jesuit intelligentsia, reverse inculturation has been
the result of their secular studies. They also have unwittingly
but clearly demonstrated that intelligence is far different from
WISDOM! For many of these Jesuits have been the ones converted
to the modernist views coming from their secular and even
religious professors. These converts/students in turn have
misled many more of their own students and seminarians
studying in their own Jesuit schools and seminaries.
And so Satan’s lure through the most dangerous and
subtle booby traps, intellectual and spiritual pride, have been
effectively and infernally employed over and over again. Indeed
St. Paul’s dire warning in 1 Corinthians 9:16 is noteworthy:
“Woe unto me if I do not preach the Gospel!”
Nevertheless we can still recognize these cleverly disguised
infernal traps, but still with their tell-tale tracks left by the tail
of the Snake and his modernist-allies. These are embedded
in the highest councils of Jesuitry as early as its 32nd General
Congregation! That Jesuit “legislative congress” closed on
March 7, 1975.
Its Decree Number 4 is most notable with its modernist-
inspired booby traps cloaked in seemingly orthodox phrase-

ology mixed with jargon or “double speak.” Such jargon and
“double speak” could only have been deliberate, and officially
sanctioned with full knowledge by a majority, or at least by an
influential minority among the leaders of more than 220 official
delegates of the Society in 1975.
Starting from the initial screening of the thousands of postulata
(written proposals from the rank and file), their assignment
to the various Commissions for study, committee, and floor
deliberations, and final approval at the plenary sessions, this
particular Decree could not have escaped the minute review
process of their canonists, text writers, theologians, and experts
galore in every field of knowledge!
The tail of the snake
Let us now examine the sections of the official English
version of the Decree on Promotion of Justice. [emphasis added]
2. The mission of the Society of Jesus today is the service
of faith of which the promotion of justice is an absolute
requirement. For reconciliation with God demands the
reconciliation of people with one another . . . .
7. Our response to these new challenges will be
unavailing unless it is total, corporate, rooted in faith and
experience, and multiform . . . .
-total: While relying on prayer, and acting
on the conviction that God alone can change the
human heart, we must throw into this enterprise
all that we are and have, our whole persons, our
communities, institutions, ministries, resources.
-corporate: Each one of us must contribute to the
total mission according to his talents and functions
which, in collaboration with the efforts of others,
give life to the whole body. This collaborative
mission is exercised under the leadership of Peter’s
Successor who presides over the Universal Church

and over all those whom the Spirit of God has
appointed Pastors over the churches.
- rooted in faith and experience: It is from faith
and experience combined that we will learn how
to respond most appropriately to new needs arising
from new situations.
-multiform: Since these situations are different in
different parts of the world, we must cultivate a
great adaptability and flexibility within the single,
steady aim of the service of faith and promotion of
justice.
66. Solidarity with the Society is primary. It ought
to take precedence over loyalties to any other sort of
institutions, Jesuit or non-Jesuit. It ought to stamp any
other commitment which is thereby transformed into
“mission.” The “mission” as such is bestowed by the
Society and is subject to her review. She can conform or
modify it as the greater service of God may require.
Thus with respect to the Decree’s article 2 above, the neo-

Jesuit’s mission is tied up to a generally described service of faith,
and not explicitly with respect to the Catholic nor Christian Faith,
nor as Vatican II in Gaudium et Spes prescribes for Catholics,
that such service should be in accordance with the canonical
Gospels as interpreted by the Catholic Magisterium united to the
Pope. Moreover, even if their “promotion of justice” were
truly just in all instances and thus could qualify as an absolute
requirement of the true Faith, the Christian Virtue of Justice
(not the neo-Jesuit notion of promotion of a secular brand of
justice) is only one of several other more important absolute
requirements such as the Christian Virtues of Charity, Prudence
and Obedience!
Take for example a published commentary of John J. Carroll
S.J., a frequent contributor of articles for the Philippine Daily
Inquirer’s Opinion Page. Carroll’s views apparently represent

the official opinion of the Institute on Church and Social Issues
of the Philippine Jesuits. Last January 7, 2005, Jesuit priest
Carroll held up to his readers for emulation and inspiration
the late Michael Harrington, a former Catholic who abjured his
Faith and died as an atheist.
Harrington had studied at a Jesuit high school in St. Louis,
and for college at the prestigious Boston College of the Jesuits
too. Fr. Carroll tried to explain and thereafter mitigate or
even justify Harrington’s abjuration, which was purportedly
triggered by the poverty and neglect that Harrington saw as
the prime causes of the shocking degradation of people. The
Carrollian explanation was that God allows such suffering and
degradation in order that other men may acquire God’s virtue
of compassion such as Harrington’s supposed concern for the
poor and degraded. Wow!
Carroll seems to have rejected, or at least forgotten, the
Christian explanation that all evil such as poverty, neglect,
and degradation of the human person are caused by human
persons’ disobedience of God’s laws and commandments.
God does not prevent these persons’ sinful acts out of absolute
respect for their free will, and knowing that a greater good will
result through other persons’ virtuous acts supported by His
grace, and by the voluntary offering of these sufferings by the
victims themselves, in love and faith, in union with Christ’s
own suffering on the cross (1 Colossians).
In his unique way of strictly secular or non-Christian
thinking, Carroll wrote that he believed that “when Harrington
died he went straight to Heaven and met the very same God
whose existence he had denied.” Not even Purgatory for him! And
so the Carollian way to Heaven via Express, is for anyone to go
to Smokey Mountain or to the Payatas garbage dumps, abjure
his Christian Faith in indignation at the utter degradation of
human life he will be witness to, and then commit suicide in
dramatic protest!

Pre-empting their “Plausible Deniability”
Article 7 of Decree No. 4 of the 32nd General Congregation
indicates even more, that another non-Christian cart has been
cleverly inserted before the neo-Jesuit horse. Article 7 ties up
their neo-Jesuit “faith” to their neo-Jesuit “experience” as the
“root” of their mission. The Decree piously refers to reliance on
“prayer,” but without any specific reference to the Sacraments
especially the Eucharist in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which
is the central prayer and act of worship of the Catholic Faith. It
is from Christ’s real body and blood, soul and divinity that God
gives us the spiritual energy even more absolutely required for
“doing and being in justice.”
For us Catholics, the Eucharist must come as a sine qua non
condition for true spiritual life and apostolic energy. It is also as
if the Jesuits who drafted that particular Article of the Decree,
had never read John 15: 4-6, or heard the Latin dictum, nemo
dat quod non habet. For certainly no one can give of anything, if
he himself does not have it!
Article 7 also cleverly mentions “Peter’s Successor,” the
Roman Catholic Papacy, as the “leadership” recognized by the
neo-Jesuit’s Mission, but obviously and disloyally, such leader-
ship has been diluted by limiting the Pope’s role to that of
one who merely “presides over the Universal Church.” In
short, neo-Jesuits maintain that the Pope should merely reign
and NOT rule over the Catholic Church! No wonder Fr. Rodger
Charles S.J. (in the next chapter) came to the conclusion that
the general view among present day Jesuits is that Kolvenbach
and his neo-Jesuits believe themselves to be “an autonomous
organization in the Church and should be allowed to proceed as we
think fit.”
That deliberate dilution of the leadership function of the
Roman Catholic Papacy becomes starkly clear under the
Decree’s Article 66, where solidarity with and loyalty to the
neo-Jesuit Society are mandated as “primary,” and taking

“precedence over loyalties to any other sort of institutions,
Jesuit or non-Jesuit!”
Seemingly in its last sentence, Article 66 highlights the
“greater service of God” as the plumb line of the neo-Jesuit
mission. But obviously, in its textual meaning, it is they
themselves and only themselves, who will decide as to when such
“greater service of God” is deemed to be required. Now we
know the roots of Kolvenbach’s waffling in his to be or not to be
description of Jesuits’ role in the propagation of the Catholic
Faith, which he made in his Santa Clara University policy
speech. For it is now understandably in keeping with Articles
7 and 66.
Clever, clever, clever! And oh, so deceptively. But effectively,
this Decree does make official the neo-Jesuit renunciation of the
original Ignatian Jesuits’ 400-plus-year-old vows of obedience
and fealty to the Roman Papacy. Moreover, the 32nd General
Congregation thereby declared neo-Jesuitry’s complete
doctrinal and dogmatic autonomy from the official teachings
of the Roman Catholic Church Magisterium. So sad and almost
beyond belief, but unfortunately it is true, despite the fact that
99% of the delegates to the 32nd General Congregation were
Catholic priests of long standing who had solemnly vowed
during their ordination as Catholic priests to “firmly embrace
and accept all and everything concerning the doctrine of faith
and morals” of the Roman Catholic Church.
Now we see the accuracy of the observations of Peter
McDonough and Eugene Bianchi, joint authors of the recent
book Passionate Uncertainty (details in the next chapter),
that neo-Jesuits have the penchant and expertise to provide
“semantic lines of retreat” in order to have recourse to
PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY, whenever confronted or criticized for
their doctrinal deviations from the Catholic Faith.
But the backlash against current religious modernism is
gathering steam. Below is a reproduction of such a backlash:

HOW MUCH LONGER?
An open letter to His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI,
the Cardinals and Bishops of the Holy Roman Catholic Church
April 2005
Your Holiness, Your Eminences and Your Excellencies,
With profound humility and deep anguish I write this
letter to ask how much longer the Catholic Faithful who
desire the assistance of the Church to grow in knowledge
and love for Christ and in living a life worthy of our
calling as children of God must suffer from heterodox and
heretical opinions being openly taught in our Catholic
schools, retreat centers, seminaries, and universities?
I am a cleric pursuing an Ecclesiastical Degree in a
Pontifical University where the pure teachings of Holy
Mother Church are often and openly contradicted and
casually trampled underfoot with utter impunity and out-
right arrogance. I write this letter anonymously because
I am fully aware of the very serious detrimental impact it
would have on my goal of completing my studies so that
I might eventually be able to teach in Catholic seminaries
and universities.
It is not the majority of professors, perhaps even less
than one-third. Yet the ones who are teaching error are
rabid and dictatorial ideologues who, in their classroom
discussions, assignments and tests, tolerate no deviation
from their heterodox positions. They openly mock
the professors who adhere to faith and right reason as
‘dinosaurs’ who obey only because of simple-mindedness
or senility. How much longer will this tyranny of the
heretical minority go unchallenged?
How many young seminarians are influenced by
such teaching? Perhaps this is a reason why so few are
ultimately ordained, for if there is no such thing as Truth
or if we are incapable of knowing such Truth even if there
were—as these “philosophers” and “theologians” argue
in many and varied ways—why would a young man
make such a commitment in the first place? It is also not

unreasonable to infer that such an attitude causes great
harm to the moral life and discipline of the young men
who are ordained.
I just finished a course for current and future seminary
professors in which I was shocked and dismayed at
the number of formators who openly hold and boast of
teaching doctrines opposed to those of the Church. One
of the priest-professors even mirthfully explained, while
discussing Michel Foucault, how “we” have learned that
a direct confrontation with the Vatican is fruitless and
what is now called for is guerilla warfare whereby we
create “spaces of freedom” (dissent and disobedience)
for the students in our schools and the people in our
confessionals and pews!
As if to underscore the seriousness of the problem, one
of my dear friends shared with me this morning how his
mother was advised by a distinguished priest-theologian
during a recent retreat that her practices of visiting the
Most Blessed Sacrament and frequent confession are
merely stepping stones that should be discontinued once
she matures and comes to understand that spirituality
and morality are to be found within herself. And this
during the Year of the Eucharist!
How much longer will this cancer be allowed to spread
through Christ’s Mystical Body?
An erroneous notion of academic freedom has been
enshrined as an idol in our “Catholic” institutions! We are
sacrificing our youth at its altar even as many religious
orders grow fat from exorbitant tuitions! The Magisterium
remains deafeningly silent as this large-scale abortion of
the life of grace in Christian souls goes on in our midst!
An erroneous idea of dialogue has been advanced such
that we are expected to tolerate the subversive activities
of heretics as though their dissent against the Church, to
which they freely and publicly vowed their obedience
and from which they continue to receive material
sustenance, is entitled to the same respect as the sincerely

held beliefs of those who adhere to the teachings of other
communions, faiths, or philosophies.
How much longer will we remain unable to realize
the teachings of the Council, so beautifully interpreted
by John Paul the Great and articulated in his vision for a
culture of life and civilization of love, because the Church
has been emasculated from within?
How hard, really, would it be to send out men and
women incognito and on a random basis to our schools,
retreat centers, seminaries, and universities to hear
first-hand and report what is being taught? How hard
would it be for the local Ordinaries or for the Roman
Congregations to privately interview, either in person
or through anonymous questionnaires, students in
Catholic institutions? How hard would it be to conduct
standardized tests, such as the SAT or ACT, for students
of “Catholic” schools to determine if knowledge of the
Faith is being taught? How hard would it be for the
Vatican to invite grievances to be conveyed directly via
the internet? How hard would it be to DEMAND annual
professions of Faith and Fidelity by all members of every
Catholic Faculty? How much longer before such simple
and obvious steps are taken?
We keep hearing the chorus of violins playing for
the poor theologians whose rights are supposedly being
trampled upon by Rome. WHAT ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF
STUDENTS AND THE RIGHTS OF PARENTS? All of the baptized
are entitled to receive from the Church, through her
ministers, the authentic and pure teachings of the Faith!
Many sacrifices are made by so many to study, or send
children to study, at Catholic schools, seminaries, and
universities. The institutions that tolerate heterodox
teachings are committing fraud of the most despicable
and nauseating kind!
How much longer will these institutions be allowed to
hide behind the name Catholic? How much longer will
heretics be allowed to hide behind a collar or under a habit
and allowed to pervert our youth and warp our future

priests? Will it come to the point that no Catholic parent
can in good conscience send their children to Catholic
school, seminary, or university? How much longer before
action is taken?
Don’t get me wrong. I am not recommending blanket
excommunications. Yet I do not think it is too much
to ask for the Bishops or the Vatican to implement
policies that really have teeth. We are after all speaking
of the education and formation of the next generation
of Catholics. It shouldn’t be too difficult to issue stern
warnings, followed by a removal of permission to teach
in Catholic institutions should they persist. Furthermore,
perhaps students and parents at Catholic institutions need
regularly to be advised of their canonical rights as well as
channels of recourse for grievances. Perhaps this could be
done within the context of an annual orientation at which
the professors can also make or renew a mandatory
Profession of Faith and Oath of Fidelity. How hard can
that really be?
How much longer? I know that we will not wait
forever. The word of God directed to the shepherds of
Israel through Ezekiel sheds clear light on the Lord’s
thoughts about these matters and indicate that He Himself
will intervene if and when necessary:
As I live, says the Lord God, because my sheep have
been given over to pillage, and because my sheep have
become food for every wild beast, for lack of a shepherd;
because my shepherds did not look after my sheep, but
pastured themselves and did not pasture my sheep;
because of this, shepherds, hear the word of the Lord:
Thus says the Lord God: I swear I am coming against
these shepherds.
—Ezekiel 34:8-10
How much longer?
—Catholic Reflections & Reports TCRNews
at www.tcrnews2.com/feature2N.html

Heterodoxy
That passionately written letter was originally circulated
in the many “weblogs” of the Internet. The author repeatedly
lamented over the aggressively flaunted “heterodox teachings”
he personally encountered in that well-known “Catholic
university.”
Heterodoxy is like falsehood as orthodoxy is to the Truth.
Thus, falsehood in the teaching of faith matters is usually
cleverly disguised as in business, politics, and judicial litigations
by resorting to half truths! Or by just deliberately NOT mentioning
or glossing over principal aspects of the whole truth.
I therefore second the lamenting writer’s recommendation
for the Catholic Magisterium to intervene, even if only to
review but more thoroughly, the textbooks being used by these
so-called “Catholic” schools, especially at the grade school and
high school levels! Their choice of textbooks is usually most
revealing.
For example, in a first year high school religion textbook I
came across just before this book of mine had to be submitted
for final printing, the omissions and glossing over by the
authors of specific central tenets of the Catholic Faith, must have
been deliberate. These were the articles of our faith explicitly
incorporated in the Catholic Apostles Creed or the more explicit
Nicene Creed. The Blessed Trinity, the immaculate conception
of Jesus Christ in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, Hell, and
belief in “the one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church,” were
unmentioned or at best casually glossed over, in favor of much
more detailed discussions of common, thus uncontroversial,
Christian articles of faith.
Indeed S.A. Tan is far more clever than we are, in disguising
the weeds he has sown among the wheat . . .

Chapter 19
POISONED FRUITS OF NEO-JESUITRY
October 25 is the feast day of the famous English Jesuit

martyr, Edmund Campion. His last and defiantly Catholic
defense of his loyalty to the Roman Papacy cost him his life
in December of 1581 when the previously beheaded Anne
Boleyn’s daughter, Elizabeth, was queen of “perfidious Albion.”
Back in the good old days at the Ateneo de Naga, we often
used, including myself, Campion’s soul-stirring pre-execution
testimony for our elocution contests. Often it was delivered in
competition with another frequent contestant’s choice, a Jesuit
composition too, Fr. Horacio de la Costa’s placid but equally
stirring “Jewels of a Pauper.”
It was on Campion’s feast day in October of 2001 that the
following “open letter” was addressed to Father General
Kolvenbach. It was written by a conscience-stricken fellow
Jesuit, an old but admirable Catholic priest. It can also be found
on the internet:
Dear Fr. Kolvenbach,
Thank you for your letter of 3rd September. I apologize
for not replying sooner. These last few weeks have
been traumatic, culminating in a collapse and my
hospitalization at the end of October for four days. It was
not life-threatening, just the result of the tensions of the
last 30 years, as a result of which I will be retiring in the
next few months.
In confirming your decision to refuse me permission
to publish my book, Pope’s Men: The Jesuits Yesterday
and Today, you say that you have no objection to my
manifesting conscience on this matter; only to the manner
in which I have made it, i.e., by a book of this nature. I
Poisoned Fruits of Neo-Jesuitry 305

accept this. My concerns can be briefly stated in this open
letter. This will enable me to manifest that conscience
most directly and ease the pressure on it.
That conscience has been under strain since 1968 when
the Society as a whole, despite Fr. Arrupe’s exhortations
on the matter, refused to support Paul VI on Humanae
Vitae. Since Ignatius founded the Society to campaign for
God in faithful obedience to the Papacy, and to put aside
all judgment of our own to obey in all things our Holy
Mother, the hierarchical Church, our duty here was clear
and our refusal to do it was scandalous.
Since 1965 four General Congregations have accepted
that some of us have been remiss in our duty of obedience
to the popes and the hierarchical Church and promised
we would change our policies, but we have not. Too
many Jesuits are still giving the opposite impression
and going unchallenged. I was not so long ago told by a
distinguished Catholic academic that he admired Jesuits
because they “can say and do what they like in the Church
and get away with it.” I pointed out to him that we are not
all tarred with the same brush. He was more than a little
surprised.
Fr. Arrupe warned that if three popes have called us to
account, then it is Christ the Lord who expects something
better of us. He also warned us that to fail in fidelity to
the Papacy is to sign our own death sentence. Far from
resenting John Paul II’s intervention in 1981, he saw
it as an occasion for demonstrating that wholehearted
obedience to the Holy See to which we are vowed. Our
response generally has been quite different, doing the
minimum necessary to ensure no further action was
taken against us and feeling aggrieved that we have been
wrongly treated.
You yourself have reminded us that fidelity to the
Holy See is of the essence of our vocation, and when the
33rd General Congregation asked you to look again at
the rules for thinking with the Church in the light of the
Council you said that they are as valid today as ever. My

experience of the Society tells me that that is not the way
Jesuits on the whole think. The general view is that we are
an autonomous organization in the Church and should
be allowed to proceed as we think fit.
Far from superiors generally giving us a lead in faithful
obedience to the Pope and the Magisterium, too many (of
these superiors) regard anyone who insists these are the
essence of the Jesuit vocation, as stupid or malicious. I
on many occasions have had to resist pressure from such
men to abandon these ideals; this is a complete perversion
of Jesuit obedience; to have been subject to such pressure
is a form of spiritual and mental torture, a scandal that
should not be allowed to pass unchallenged.
I write this letter on our patronal feast day, and I cannot
help reflecting on Campion’s words, when on his capture
he was taken before the Queen. His fidelity to the Papacy
being challenged, he told his questioners that that was
“my greatest glory.” Such is the tradition of the English
Province. Not till we return to it will our work flourish.
My prayers will continue to be that the day will come.
Yours in Christ,
Rodger Charles S.J.
There are at least three glaring errors, so “unjesuitlike” of

Jesuit leadership, in these Charles and Kolvenbach incidents.
Firstly, Kolvenbach and the Jesuit leadership are obviously
deliberately suppressing Fr. Charles’ book-manuscript simply
because it is so openly pro-Papacy. Thus the book unavoidably
highlights the Jesuits of yesterday as quintessentially “Pope’s
Men” as against the prevailing anti-Papal attitudes of the Jesuit
leaders of today.
These neo-Jesuits have not only NOT supported our popes but
have repeatedly disobeyed and attacked them personally and
theologically, particularly among others, in the case of Paul VI
and his encyclical Humanae Vitae. For the Jesuits NOT to have
defended and supported Paul VI on a most fundamental, though

widely controversial doctrinal matter is already bad enough in the
first-degree, in the light of the Jesuits’ 400-plus-year-old vow of
obedience and St. Ignatius’ letter on that virtue to the Jesuits in
Portugal. It is like a favorite son refusing to defend or even to
wish his father well, while the Pater is viciously being attacked
by people outside the family on a matter that would destroy a
2,000-year-old sacred tradition of the clan.
Secondly, and doubly worse: it is indeed a sign of rank
betrayal and insolent disobedience for that son (Kolvenbach),
who, having refused to defend his father (the Pope), subse-
quently even allows and encourages his younger brethren
(other Jesuits) and their own children (Jesuit alumni) to
themselves PUBLICLY ATTACK their father on the same and other
equally weighty sacred traditions, beliefs, and practices of the
clan. These traditions, beliefs, and practices, the Pater and his
forbears have steadfastly upheld for nigh 2000 years, such
as priestly celibacy, the inherent evil of homosexuality and
contraception, and even the Real Presence of Christ in the
Eucharist.
Is it not trebly worse that not only has that son, the most
influential and powerful in the family, refused to defend Pater
but he also goes even further by punishing a brave younger
brother (Fr. Charles) for having defended their father?
Perhaps some of my co-alumni among the various Ateneo
schools and colleges and other uninformed neo-Jesuit admirers
will claim that these incidents are minor and isolated cases
which can be attributed to black propaganda or to the “lack
of communications resulting in misunderstanding”—the
usual cop-out. Certainly not in the case of Kolvenbach and his
kindred neo-Jesuits (among them his local loyalists and former
Father Provincials such as Bernas, Nebres, and Intengan—
more on this in the next chapter).
Neo-Jesuitry or 20th century Jesuit modernism has been
consciously embraced probably by almost a third of present-
day Jesuits, much too big to be brushed off. And this one-third

of the cream of the crop among the most educated of Catholic
religious orders has captured the Society’s top leadership. This
is especially true in Jesuits schools and seminaries, such as the
Ateneo de Manila University, and in the Jesuits’ Rome GHQ,
starting most noticeably since Pedro Arrupe S.J. became Father
General.
Thus the publicly aired criticism coming from Fr. Charles
against such prevalent neo-Jesuitry is a typical reaction of those
brave and still Ignatian Jesuits stricken by a growing sense of
outrage. This crisis of conscience is shared by many among their
student alumni, especially the elderly, and is focused against
the neo-Jesuits’ un-Catholic views and practices. They sense
that something is terribly wrong with Kolvenbach, Bernas,
Nebres, Intengan, et al.
That growing outrage has long been fueled by the many
prominent disloyal dissenters and attackers of Pope Paul VI
and Pope John Paul II against their encyclicals, particularly
Humanae Vitae and Evangelium Vitae, and the Papacy’s steadfast
opposition to abortion/contraception and unwavering support
for priestly celibacy and other orthodox traditions and dogmas.
Well-known Jesuit dissident-priests such as the late German
Karl Rahner, South Americans Gustavo Gutierrez and Juan
Luis Segundo, American James Francis Carney, and Michael
Amaladoss (India’s fanatic advocate of “Hinduization” of
Catholics), among others, were not and have not been reined in
nor disciplined, neither by their Father General Pedro Arrupe
in the past, nor by Kolvenbach up to now. In fact, Amaladoss
was one of Kolvenbach’s first appointees as his own General
Assistant!
In contrast to the present “Black Pope’s” neo-Jesuit standard
of obedience and loyalty to the Papacy, St. Ignatius’ famous
letter on obedience written to the Jesuits in Portugal in 1553 was
categorical: members of the Society of Jesus must be second to
none among other religious congregations in their obedience
to Church superiors, especially to the Pope.

Heresy!
Roger Haight was an American Jesuit priest-professor of
theology in a Jesuit and supposedly Catholic school. Yet he
was routinely allowed by his superiors to publish an obviously
heretical book, Jesus: Symbol [sic!] of God. Like our own home-
grown Iglesia ni Kristo, the book posits that Jesus Christ is a
mere symbol of God and is not God Himself.
His superiors are perhaps still mulling their options on how
to react to the recently issued official Vatican condemnation
of Haight’s book as “replete with grave doctrinal errors” and
thus the Vatican has prohibited him from continuing to teach
Catholic theology. This prohibition-with-condemnation was
recently published in the February 7-8, 2005 Italian Edition of
L’Osservatore Romano.
What is again striking about this latest incident is that while
Kolvenbach did not allow the admirable Fr. Charles to publish
his book’s orthodox and pro-papal thesis, he and other superiors
allowed Roger Haight to publish his obviously heretical views
and cause great damage to the Church. Kolvenbach must have
truly meant what he snidely and disrespectfully said soon after
his 1983 election as Father General, that he would pursue the
Jesuits’ unorthodox manner of promoting justice “despite the
groaning complaints of the popes!”
Passionate Uncertainty
But the question still remains whether Ignatian Jesuit Father
Charles’ allegation is generally accurate, that “too many Jesuits
are still giving the opposite impression (disobedience to the
Popes and the hierarchical Church) and going unchallenged.”
To answer that question it should first be established
that the Jesuits as a whole underwent a radical transformation
during the decade following the Jesuits’ 31st and 32nd General
Congregations up until 1975. This was especially so in the
East Coast and the New England area of the United States,
where most of the Jesuits in the Philippines came from or were

ordained and qualified to become the teachers and superiors of
Filipino Jesuits. A recent two-volume work of Fr. Joseph Becker
S.J., The Reformed Jesuits, is an authoritative detailed history of
that radical internal transformation, which Kolvenbach himself
has unqualifiedly endorsed as follows: “I have read every line
of The Reformed Jesuits. It is a fine piece of Jesuit history.”
Indeed the book is almost entirely based on primary sources,
such as hundreds of interviews directly with people who were
involved in the drastic changes, and supported by minutes of
meetings, official Jesuit House histories, published documents,
and written correspondence among the principals. The book
covered that particular decade of so “rapid and radical”
changes, to an extent that the transmogrification shocked and
shook the Jesuits worldwide. “It changed the Society into what
it is today,” according to Fr. Kenneth Baker S.J., editor of a
Jesuit magazine.
In the year 2002 and on the same topic of Jesuit
transmogrification, a political scientist, Peter McDonough, and
Eugene Bianchi, a religion professor, co-authored another book,
Passionate Uncertainty: Inside the American Jesuits. Here are the
highlights of its book review taken from www.weeklystandard.
com (with my emphases and comments added), written by still
another Jesuit, Fr. Paul Shaughnessy S.J. Fr. Paul is a frequent
contributor to Catholic World Report and obviously still clings
to his Ignatian mold. His book review is entitled Are the Jesuits
Catholic?”
St. Ignatius of Loyola’s companions, given the sarcastic
name “Jesuits” by their opponents, organized themselves
on military lines with a military love for a clear chain of
command, as their founding document attests. The Jesuit
is to “serve as a soldier of God beneath the banner of the
Cross, and to serve the Lord alone and the Church, his
spouse, under the Roman pontiff, the vicar of Christ on
earth.” The Jesuit’s mission is “to strive especially for the
defense and propagation of the faith and for the progress
of souls in Christian life and doctrine.”

It’s a risky business. The seemingly impossible
(“blood-curdling”) vows by which the Jesuit binds
himself perpetually to poverty, chastity, and obedience
are typically made for the first time when the novice is
twenty or twenty-five years old—not at the conclusion
but at the outset of the ten years of training in which he
will learn what precisely he has committed himself to
defend. The more intelligent and idealistic the aspirant,
the more spiritually precarious his position, as he comes
to grips with the full power of the Church’s adversaries
and the all-too-human frailty of her defenders. Loyola’s
gamble was that, if a man’s own desire for God could
be made present to him, he would willingly endure the
required sacrifices until he saw the truth “from inside,”
and was motivated no longer by discipline but by love.
For four centuries the gamble worked.
No more. The recently published Passionate Uncertainty:
Inside the American Jesuits is a quirky yet convincing
depiction of the collapse of the renegade Society of Jesus:
papists who hate the pope, evangelists who have lost
the faith. Deprived of their reason for existence as Jesuits,
they respond either by putting an end to their existence
as Jesuits (deserters outnumber active members in the
United States) or by indulging a willed imbecility in which
the explosively divisive questions are never permitted to
surface.
The authors of Passionate Uncertainty, Peter
McDonough and Eugene Bianchi (a political scientist
and a professor of religion, respectively), portray the
Jesuit crack-up most vividly by quotation from the
interviews and written statements they took from more
than four hundred Jesuits and former Jesuits. Both the
spectrum of the speakers presented and the content of
their opinions accurately reflect the current situation. Not
that the speakers themselves are always balanced, fair, or
magnanimous—the resentments run too deep for that—
but taken as a whole the voices give us a true picture of
the quandary of America’s Jesuits: able yet aimless men,
hopelessly compromised by perjury.

The result was an institutional nightmare: confusion
and cowardice at the top; despair, rage, and disillusion-
ment in the ranks. American Jesuits went from 8,400
members in 1965 to 3,500 today. Entering novices
declined from a peak one-year total of 409 to a low of 38.
Worse, the number of priests who jump ship each year
roughly equals the number of entering novices; the
number of Jesuits who die annually is twice as high as
either. [AUTHOR’S NOTE: It is therefore an obviously doomed
institution in the United States, unless something, or SOMEBODY
drastically intervenes!]
Yet at its heart, the crisis is not one of size but of
allegiance. One of the signal services performed by
Passionate Uncertainty is that it lets us hear influential
Jesuits—those who shape policy—speak their minds frank-
ly, in words unsoftened by public relations personnel in
the fund-raising offices. “I am appalled by the direction
of the present papacy,” says a university administrator.
“I am scandalized by Rome’s intransigent refusal to re-
examine its doctrines regarding gender and sex . . . Frankly
I think the church is being governed by thugs.” . . . “The
church as we have known it is dying,” a retreat master
insists. “I hope and pray that the Society will help to
facilitate this death and resurrection.” [NOTE: The last three
quotes contain the height of irony unrecognized by those who
uttered them. It is they themselves as a renegade institution
who are being “governed by thugs,” and are also “dying and
being facilitated to this death” by themselves. The warning
given by Fr. Rodger Charles S.J. a year earlier in October 2001
that “to fail in fidelity to the Papacy is to sign our own death
sentence” seems to have been prophetic.]
An academic gloats, “The Society has not sold its soul
to the ‘Restoration’ of John Paul II.” Another Jesuit scholar,
a church historian, ranks John Paul II as “probably the
worst pope of all times”—adding, “He’s not one of the
worst popes; he’s the worst. Don’t misquote me.” The
respondents make it clear that their contempt for the
pope is based almost entirely on his intransigence, his

unwillingness to imitate their own adaptability in the
matter of doctrine.
As do all priests, the speakers above took a solemn oath
swearing that they “firmly embrace and accept all and
everything concerning the doctrine of faith and morals”
proposed by the Church. It must not be assumed that they
fail to see the discrepancy. Their willed imbecility derives
not from a lack of brainpower or ingenuity but from a
deliberate decision to ignore the clash of commitments
and to suppress insurgent attempts to throw light on
what, for tactical reasons, is better left in darkness.
Thus “PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY” is the motto of the new
Jesuit nomenklatura, and the men who made themselves
superiors in the 1970s understood clearly that you can
write or say pretty much anything you want, provided
you keep open your semantic lines of retreat. Thus the
German theologian Karl Rahner was able to exhort his
fellow Jesuits: “You must remain loyal to the papacy
in theology and in practice, because that is part of your
heritage to a special degree; but because the actual
form of the papacy remains subject, in the future too,
to an historical process of change, your theology and
ecclesiastical law have above all to serve the papacy
as it will be in the future.” See the move? Our current
Jesuits are all loyal to the papacy, but the future papacy—
that of Pope Chelsea XII, perhaps—and their support
for contraception, gay sex, and divorce proceeds from
humble obedience to this conveniently protean pontiff.
There was a price to pay, of course. Plausible deniability
allowed the Society of Jesus to emancipate itself from the
Holy See, but in the same stroke robbed Jesuit leadership
of its ability to lead, to articulate a lucid vision, and to
give unambiguous marching orders. Not surprisingly, in
the absence of a clear objective, the discipline traditionally
accepted as a means to the objective begins to chafe. As
the authors explain in their own jargon: “The incentive
structure of sainthood has changed. Ascetical practice
has undergone demystification and has taken on more

than a whiff of the pathological.” The result, quite
simply, is widespread infidelity to the vows: slackening
in poverty and obedience, but, most dramatically, failure
in chastity.
The cost is not negligible. As Neuhaus’s Law (pro-
pounded by First Things editor Richard John Neuhaus)
has it, “Where orthodoxy is optional, it will sooner or
later be proscribed.” In the Society of Jesus, this applies
to diversity of lifestyle as well as of doctrine. One man
observes: “Several of my former Jesuit friends would
mention the large number of gay Jesuits and the impact
that had on community life as being a big reason they
left. As a relatively young Jesuit who is heterosexual, I
believe I am in the minority, and that raises questions.” A
thirty-five-year-old Jesuit adds: “My novice master left to
marry, my formation director left for a relationship with
another man, et cetera. One cannot help but get the sense
that we of this generation of Jesuits may be the ‘last of the
Shakers.’”
IT WOULD BE an exaggeration to say there is no concern
among superiors at what Passionate Uncertainty calls—in
a memorable phrase—“the gaying and the graying of
the Jesuits.” But quite clearly they are willing to tolerate
the graying in order to expedite the gaying. The pro-
homosexual sympathies of men placed in the gatekeeping
positions make it especially difficult for heterosexual—
and doctrinally orthodox—candidates to survive the
selection process. Men of the type regarded as choice
Jesuit material in the 1950s are now frequently weeded
out before they enter the novitiate.
The social typology of the new leadership class is also
an important dimension of the current reality. Prestigious
positions, like university and theologate administrators,
are filled for the most part from a group informally known
as the “Gallery Owners”: discreet, well-spoken, well-
dressed gay priests in their 50s and early 60s. Where the
older Jesuits are notable for the heat of their anti-papal
passion, the Gallery Owners display a nearly complete

apathy toward religion in all its forms. Conventionally
liberal, they support condoms and women priests less
as a matter of faith than a fashion statement—rather like
wearing a baseball cap backwards. Last year eleven of
the twenty-seven American Jesuit universities hosted
productions of Eve Ensler’s “The Vagina Monologues,”
while more humbly employed Jesuits, often inclined to
puzzlement at these developments, were officially assured
by headquarters that “the Catholic identity of [Jesuit]
colleges and universities has never been stronger.”[NOTE:
The same play was to be staged at the Ateneo University until
parents and alumni vehemently complained!] The teachings
of the Church, being largely an irrelevance, has minimal
importance in shaping the opinions of the Gallery Owners,
who tend to regard orthodox Catholicism—like boxing or
heterosexuality—as one of the coarse amusements of the
working class.
In McDonough and Bianchi’s chapter on “Ministry
and the Meaning of Priesthood,” we hear another man
languidly dismiss the notion of sacerdotal duty as an in-
stance of emotional immaturity: “Formal sacramental
action is less central, as are religious ‘practices,’ than they
had been in earlier years—but frequently much more
engaging. To celebrate daily Mass, simply because it’s
there or expected, is no longer part of my way of thinking.
It would be like an every-night-is-sex approach to a
marital relationship.”
“NONE OF THE MEN I know cares about being a priest,”
reports a man in charge of theological training. “What
matters is being a Jesuit.” A spiritual director in his
fifties concurs, “If I could remain a Jesuit while joining the
Quakers, I could be tempted.” It should not be imagined
that these are the voices of passed-over malcontents; on
the contrary, this is fast-track Jesuit chic. Obviously such
forward-thinking men neither have nor wish any part
of the retrograde religious world of the Jesuit saints and
martyrs. Edmund Campion, Jean de Brebeuf, Miguel Pro,
and their company all died for convictions the new breed

finds adolescent and embarrassing. Of course, among
the 3,500 American Jesuits there are a few recusants:
men who are not interested in joining the Quakers, who
still feel bound by their vows, who celebrate Mass, who
wish, in their unimaginative way, some kinship with the
simplicity and zeal of St. Ignatius Loyola. They tend to
speak little and write less: keeping their heads down, for
the most part.
SO, IF THE SITUATION in the Society of Jesus is really
as McDonough and Bianchi describe it in Passionate
Uncertainty, why doesn’t the pope intervene and make
radical changes? Two reasons suggest themselves. On
the one hand, the attitude of Pope John Paul II towards
religious congregations, female as well as male, is
somewhat Darwinian. He is content to let the healthy
groups prosper—Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity
are a parade example—while letting the unhealthy
ones die out of their own accord, like sick caribou amid
the permafrost. On the other hand, recent popes have
judged the political cost of intervening to reform failing
congregations as excessive in view of the likely benefits
to be gained. A close analogy can be drawn with the
moles that surfaced in the British Secret Service in the
1950s. Their treachery was known long before action was
taken against them; bit by bit they were denied access
to sensitive material, simply so that they’d have less to
betray. In the same way, and for the same reasons, the
popes have declined a dramatic showdown with the new
Jesuits, preferring instead, without calling attention to
the fact, to give the really important business to more
dependable agents.
Kolvenbach at Santa Clara

Just about a year earlier than Fr. Rodger Charles’ letter-
protest, on October 6, 2000, the same Jesuit General Kolvenbach
startled the student and faculty community of the Jesuits’
Santa Clara University near the Silicon Valley in California

by his policy speech. The theme of his talk was “Commitment
to Justice in Jesuit Higher Education.” The “Black Pope”
unabashedly declared:
From our origins in 1540 the Society has been officially
and solemnly charged with the defense and the propagation
of the faith.” (But) in 1995, the Congregation re-affirmed
that, for us Jesuits, the defense and propagation of the faith
is a matter of to be or not to be [sic!], even if the words
themselves can change [sic again!]. Faithful to the Vatican
Council [sic even more!], the Congregation wanted our
preaching and teaching not to proselytize, not to impose
our religion on others, but rather to propose Jesus and his
message of God’s kingdom in a spirit of love to everyone.
[emphasis supplied]
If my former spiritual adviser and University of Philippines

icon John Delaney S.J. were alive right then and there at Santa
Clara, Father JP would have died of shock while protesting
and praying: “Oh, such namby-pamby piosity! But dear God
our Father, forgive him and spare him the ‘Dutch Treatment’
for he knows not how deeply and tragically he has brought all
of us Jesuits into trouble!”
Arrupe in Valencia: “Men for Others”
On July 31, 1973, the memorial feast day of St. Ignatius
of Loyola and on the occasion of the “Tenth International
Congress of Jesuit Alumni of Europe,” the Jesuit Father General
delivered the main address entitled, Education for Social Justice
and Social Action Today. It was a very controversial speech to an
audience of mostly male alumni, so that many of them angrily
walked out on Arrupe.
But a detailed analysis of that controversial Arrupe policy
statement on the Jesuits’ educational thrust, a complete copy
of which I obtained from their Creighton University internet
web site, there was hardly anything dogmatically new or
questionable in its doctrinal and Scripture-based arguments

and premises. There was nothing wrong in the notion of “Men
for Others.” But why just then, and how, are far different
matters!
It was the absolute rigidity and universality of Arrupe’s
accusatory conclusions for a mandatory behavioral and
attitudinal change and corresponding plan for everybody’s
personal action that caused the walkout. Worse, these were
premised on a categorical, thus shocking assertion, very early
in the speech, that the alumni were NOT or NEVER “educated for
justice.” It was an implied but clear accusation of negligence
against all their Jesuit friends and mentors, living or dead,
but still revered by these alumni. Few were mollified even
after Arrupe had included himself as part of such negligence
or ignorance by his later use of the pronoun “we” in his re-
emphasis, “We have not educated you for justice!”
Arrupe aggravated them even more, when later in the
speech he upgraded his earlier assertion of lack of education
and training in justice, as initially not their fault but that of their
Jesuit teachers—to a clear inference pointing to the alumni’s
own personal culpability. Arrupe raised the accusatory
rhetorical question: “How can you love someone and treat him or
her unjustly?” For earlier he had equated charity as identical
to justice “in practice” and thus, vice versa too! This second
inferred but worse accusation was: the alumni not having been
educated in justice, and justice in practice being identical to
charity, therefore these Jesuit-trained alumni in the audience
were being accused of lack of love and charity as well.
Moreover, the speech was also a sweeping indictment of
all structures of this world—the alumni’s own “customs,
social, economic and political systems; commercial relations
and institutions.” All of them if with built-in injustice were,
per Arrupe, “the concrete forms in which sin is objectified.” The
ineluctable conclusion was that the alumni themselves and
their whole world of commerce and industry were all in sin.

Today’s irony is that our local neo-Jesuits have glorified this
same Arrupe world of “structured and objectified” sinfulness,
by propagating the “modern” notion that this modern world
and their own “modernism” should now be their light and
inspiration or, Lux Ex Mundo! And thus no longer Lux in
Domino . . .
Thus these modernists insist on their own desired changes
in traditional Church teachings. Indeed S.A. Tan has succeeded
in leading many into blithely flip-flopping from one extreme
to its very opposite! And yet Arrupe himself, in the middle
portion of his speech on modern technologies and ideologies,
considered these “ologies” as “imperfect tools (derived from) a
mixture of good and evil,” although necessary as “instruments”
of analysis and action. The logical conclusion is inescapable!
An instrument, imperfect as it is (“objectified sin” per Arrupe!),
cannot therefore be the paramount light and plumb line for
moral and theological value judgments!
32nd General Congregation
Barely a year after Father General Arrupe shocked Jesuit
alumni in Valencia, Spain, he convened the 32nd General
Congregation (December 2, 1974—March 7, 1975). Let us revisit,
among others, some of its contradiction-filled instructions!
51. There is a new challenge to our apostolic mission
in that many of our contemporaries, dazzled and even
dominated by the achievements of the human mind,
forgetting or rejecting the mystery of man’s ultimate
meaning, have thus lost the sense of God.
53. Our response to these new challenges will be
unavailing unless it is total, corporate, rooted in faith and
experience, and multiform. [AUTHOR’S COMMENT: Please
note their choice of words “faith and experience” and not “the
Catholic Faith.” Thus the neo-Jesuit summary motto of “service
of faith and the promotion of justice” is widely open to a lot of
ambiguities, subjectivity, and contradictory interpretations.]

–total: While relying on prayer, and acting on the
conviction that God alone can change the human heart,
we must throw into this enterprise all that we are and
have, our whole persons, our communities, institutions,
ministries, resources.” [NOTE: And what about the
Sacraments?]
54.–corporate: Each one of us must contribute to the
total mission according to his talents and functions which,
in collaboration with the efforts of others, give life to the
whole body. This collaborative mission is exercised under
the leadership of Peter’s Successor who presides over the
universal Church and over all those whom the Spirit of
God has appointed Pastors over the churches.
[COMMENT: Please note the word “ presides,” which means
merely to reign and not to rule. They should have used the more
precise and all encompassing title and function of the Pope
as “Christ’s Vicar on earth.” The Second Vatican Council’s
“Dogmatic Constitution on the Church” states: “For the
Roman Pontiff, by reason of this office as Vicar of Christ,
namely and as pastor of the entire Church, has full, supreme
and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he
can always exercise unhindered.” The same paragraph states
that the college of bishops has supreme and full authority over
the universal Church (as teachers and pastors) only when
united with their head, the Pope, and cannot exercise their
power without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff. If this is
true of the entire college of bishops as the Church’s teaching
office, or Magisterium, how much more of a single religious
order like the Society of Jesus? Ref. Lumen Gentium, 22 cited
in Catechism of the Catholic Church, 882-883.]
60. In short, our mission today is to preach Jesus Christ
and to make Him known in such a way that all men and
women are able to recognize Him whose delight, from
the beginning, has been to be with the sons of men and to
take an active part in their history. [NOTE: A far, far cry from
Christ’s last instructions to the Apostles in Matthew 28:19-20:
“Go therefore and make disciples from all nations. Baptize them

in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
and teach them to fulfill all that I have commanded you. For I
am with you always until the end of this world.”]
66. Finally, the Apostolic Letters of Paul III (1540)
and Julius III (1550) recognize that the Society of Jesus
was found “chiefly for this purpose: to strive especially
for the defense and propagation of the faith, and for the
progress of souls in Christian life and doctrine, by means
of public preaching, lectures, and any other ministrations
whatsoever of the word of God, and further, by means
of the Spiritual Exercises, the education of children and
unlettered persons in Christianity, and the spiritual con-
solation of Christ’s faithful through hearing confessions
and administering the other sacraments,” as well as “in
reconciling the estranged, in holily assisting and serving
those who are found in prisons and hospitals, and indeed
in performing any other works of charity, according to
what will seem expedient for the glory of God and the
common good.” This primordial statement remains for
us a normative one. [NOTE: It was indeed a “normative” and
not a peremptory statement from the General Congress’ point
of view and sophistry thus open to a lot of exceptions, as was
qualified further in the next two General Congregations 33
and 34, and by Fr. Kolvenbach’s policy statements at the Santa
Clara University in October 2000.]
68. In his address of December 3, 1974, Pope Paul
VI confirmed “as a modern expression of your vow of
obedience to the Pope” that we offer resistance to the
many forms of contemporary atheism. This was the
mission he entrusted to us at the time of the 31st General
Congregation, and in recalling it he commended the way
in which the Society down the years has been present at the
heart of ideological battles and social conflicts, wherever
the crying needs of mankind encountered the perennial
message of the Gospel. Thus if we wish to continue to be
faithful to this special character of our vocation and to
the mission we have received from the Pope, we must

“contemplate” our world as Ignatius did his, that we
may hear anew the call of Christ dying and rising in
the anguish and aspirations of men and women. [NOTE:
Despite the seeming orthodoxy of the preamble, the conclusion
is in the SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD, thus wishy-washy! At the end of it
all, the Jesuits are instructed merely to contemplate as Ignatius
also contemplated on his world, but NOT necessarily to judge
and to re-act and preach the way St. Ignatius did! In fact they
deliberately omitted the much more significant fact that the very
same Pope Paul VI severely scolded Father General Arrupe and
all his Assistant Generals, including Father Horacio de la Costa,
at the last day of the 32nd General Congregation’s deliberation
for insubordination towards the Pope and for veering away
from Ignatian era rules and practices! More over, even when
Father Arrupe was already very sick and immobilized prior to
his death, Pope John Paul II instructed the Jesuits to replace
Arrupe as Father General.]
70. At the same time, people today are somehow aware
that their problems are not just social and technological,
but personal and spiritual. They have a feeling that what
is at stake here is the very meaning of man: his future
and his destiny. People are hungry: hungry not just for
bread, but for the Word of God (Deut. 8.3; Mt. 4.4). For this
reason the Gospel should be preached with a fresh vigor,
for it is in a position once again to make itself heard. At
first sight God seems to have no place in public life, nor
even in private awareness. Yet everywhere, if we only
knew how to look, we can see that people are groping
towards an experience of Christ and waiting in hope
for His Kingdom of love, of justice, and of peace. [NOTE:
Finally it sounds very thoroughly Christian and Catholic! But
the “proof of the pudding” is still in the eating i.e. the “Devil
remains” within the details! And Father General Kolvenbach
should have been told all these BEFORE he made that Santa Clara
policy-speech. For obviously Kolvenbach’s corporate policy for
all Jesuits is to continue the Arrupe era’s modernist approach to
theology with its many subtle but crucial deviations from Papal

teachings and those of the Catholic Magisterium loyal to and
united with the Pope.]
Fr. Arrupe himself had second thoughts about the sole

absolutism of the requirement for promotion of justice. In
the same controversial “Men for Others” speech in Valencia,
Spain he said: “Quite clearly, the mission of the Church is NOT
coextensive [emphasis added] with the furthering of justice on this
planet, though still, “the furthering of justice is a constitutive
element of the Jesuit mission.” Arrupe however should have
explicitly cited those other constitutive and even more necessary
elements of the Gospel and the Church’s mission. For these are
equally if not more relevant than “furthering (social) justice!”
Such as unselfishness, Christian holiness, love and obedience
to Church authority, its Pope and its Magisterium . . .
Thus I have not been as hard on Pedro Arrupe, considering
also that he has passed away. Plus the fact that after being
publicly humiliated on October 5, 1981 when John Paul II
unceremoniously replaced him and his second-in-command
Vincent O’ Keefe as Father General with Fr. Paolo Dezza, an old
Jesuit and the Pope’s own handpicked choice, the physically
sick 27th Black Pope is known to have meekly accepted the
Papal decision.
Nor did Arrupe himself make any subsequent public
protest. But his lieutenants and admirers did so in many snide
and scandalous ways. Fr. Rodger Charles himself testified in
his letter at the beginning of this chapter, that Pedro Arrupe
privately cautioned against such lack of loyalty and obedience
to the Pope, and warned them of its tragic consequences. We
should leave Fr. Pedro therefore to God’s infinitely more just
assessment, and merciful judgment.
In the meantime, some of the actual fruits or results of the
Arrupe and post-Arrupe era of Jesuitry are already available.
From the Fides News Service of March 31, 2005, here are some
stark details. Let’s keep in mind that when Pedro Arrupe took

over as Jesuit Father General some 42 years ago, the Jesuits
were some 70,000 strong!
ROME (Fides Service)—The Curia of the Society of

Jesus sent Fides a report on the numbers and presence
of its members in the world. On January 1, 2005 there
were 19,850 Jesuits and of these 13,966 are priests (minus
182 compared with 2004), 3,054 scholastics (plus 2), 1,921
brothers (minus 62) and 909 novices (minus 78). The
overall number compared to 2004 was 320 less. In the
past year there have been 512 new arrivals, 414 deaths
and 418 men have left the Society. [NOTE: It is parallel to
and confirms Bianchi and McDonough’s numerical analysis of
Jesuits in the U.S.] The Jesuit Curia said the information
confirms the tendency in the past 15 years. On January
1, 2005 the average age of Jesuits was 53.18 ; 59.83 for
priests; 28.84 for scholastics and 62.57 for Brothers.
[NOTE: Hence, most of the priests and Brothers are already OLD
and near RETIREMENT!]
Obviously therefore, the world’s supply of hitherto a

leading brand of Salt of the Earth, has been ruinously depleted!
And whatever is left today is a mixed bag of pure, impure, and
degraded sodium chloride. If a similar thing had happened with
IBM or Harvard, the entire clique of top officers and managers
under whose watch such an organizational catastrophe
developed would have been ignominiously sacked a long time
ago! Even if they, the failed leadership, would pathetically
protect themselves by claiming they were just being “modern
and avant garde” . . .

Chapter 20
NEO-JESUITRY IN THE PHILIPPINES
Jesuit dissenters against the pro-life papal encyclicals

have imitators in the Philippines such as newspaper column
writer Fr. Ruben Tanseco, aside from the immediate past
Jesuit Provincial Romeo Intengan. There also has been that
continued silent but still scandalous lack of support by the
Jesuit leadership for the Catholic Bishops of the Philippines,
especially at the Ateneo de Manila University and its Center
for Family Ministries (CEFAM) headed by Tanseco.
Our bishops are facing a lonely and uphill battle against
recent bills in Congress on population control disguised as
“reproductive health.” In fact, our local contraceptive and
abortifacient advocates have copied the neo-Jesuits’ clever use
of words in order to hoodwink the unwary by describing one of
their latest public health programs as Ligtas Buntis! (Safe from
Pregnancy). In the vernacular it sounds ambiguous and thus
cleverly masks the programs’s real purpose, which is to avoid
and evade pregnancy after intercourse, or Iwas Buntis!, which
should be the precise thus transparent vernacular slogan.
The root of their neo-Jesuit-like quibbling is the tendentious
contention that until the fertilized ovum has safely reached
and clung to a mother’s womb, it is allegedly not yet a person!
Therefore to prevent “it” from reaching the safe shores of the
womb, or even to destroy “it” before then, is not a crime nor a
sin of abortion.
But by common sense and by analogy, they ought to know
that when anyone overtly and deliberately prevents a blind
person or even a pet puppy from avoiding and evading an on-
rushing vehicle, he or she is guilty of a felony or even murder.

Thus the Catholic Church Magisterium teaches and maintains
that at the moment of impregnation or conception of the ovum,
it is the same instant it becomes a true person with an immortal
soul infused by God. Just like the Blessed Virgin Mary, she was
uniquely but immaculately conceived without original sin, at
that very same instant, albeit through parthenogenesis.
Incidentally, zoologists know that parthenogenesis is not
a myth, but a well-known biological phenomenon frequently
occurring especially among insects and algae. Neo-Jesuits
apparently have already junked the notion of the supernatural
value of one immortal soul being more than the material
value of the whole world. That belief was St. Ignatius’ classic
motivational challenge to Francis Xavier so that Francis soon
decided to become a Jesuit. Indeed, “What does it profit a man
to gain the whole world yet suffer the loss of his own soul?”
(Luke 9:25)
Jesuit Education Re-defined

On December 10, 2004, I happened to read the Philippine Daily
Inquirer’s four-page advertisement, paid for by the Jesuits and
the Ateneo de Manila in celebration of their 145th anniversary.
The opening narrative had the byline of Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas
S.J., and was entitled “A View from the Hill at 145.”
I have known Fr. Bernas quite well for the last 56 years. He
graduated from the Ateneo de Naga high school in April 1950,
just two years ahead of me. He is an outstanding lawyer and
expert on Constitutional Law and was also the overall head
as Father Provincial of all Philippine-based Jesuits for six
years, at the tail end of the martial law period; thereafter, he
was President of the University. In January of 2004, Bernas the
lawyer thrilled us all law-abiding citizens with his compelling
logic and citations of constitutional jurisprudence as amicus
curiae of the Supreme Court in the celebrated case of its Chief
Justice Hilario Davide’s attempted impeachment by Congress.
Neo-Jesuitry in the Philippines 327

That 145th anniversary of the Ateneo was also almost
exactly 20 years after the conviction and sentencing to death
by electrocution of Otto Jimenez, his wife Ester Jimenez,
their protégé Rey Maclang, and yours truly. The sentence
was handed down by President Ferdinand Marcos’ Military
Commission No. 34 on December 4, 1984. The accusation:
“arson and rebellion.”
Together with us, Gasti Ortigas, Steve Psinakis, and Raul
Manglapus were similarly convicted but in absentia.
All seven of us were undoubtedly Jesuit-educated for
many years and/or Jesuit-influenced in no small degree for
decades of years! In addition, as in my particular case, I was
directly recruited into the “rebellion” against the dictatorship
of Marcos by my own brother, Antonio B. Olaguer S.J.! And
thereafter I worked with Fr. Toti and another Jesuit on an
even more sub-rosa basis—the other Jesuit being Romeo
“Archie” Intengan, the immediate past Father Provincial of the
Philippine Jesuits. Fr. Archie, a certified doctor from the U.P.
College of Medicine, was co-founder of PDSP with Norberto
Gonzales, another Jesuit-trained graduate from the Ateneo de
Davao in Mindanao, the southernmost major landmass in the
Philippine island-chain. Bert has been a member of President
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s cabinet since the year 2001. PDSP
was, and still is a “democratic-socialist” political party headed
by Bert and Archie.
Since Toti and Archie were then practically working on a
full-time basis with the PDSP and the Light A Fire Movement,
their involvement must have been with the explicit know-
ledge and consent of their direct and highest-ranking Jesuit su-
perior, namely, Fr. Bernas. Considering that Fr. Toti submitted
the Movement’s entire plans, programs, and moral basis to
Jaime Cardinal Sin for His Eminence’s pastoral comments, it
is logical to presume that Fr. Bernas was similarly informed.
Thus at the very least, Bernas did NOT object to the activities of
our Movement!

Going back to the latest Bernas-inspired Jesuit advertisement
of what today constitutes an Ateneo education, it is evidently
a continuation of the radical changes in official Jesuit teachings
on the Catholic Faith. As I stated in the Foreword, this is merely
the tip of a dangerous iceberg, and worse, a rebel religious
conspiracy!
The cleverly worded decrees and principal instructions of the
Jesuits’ own supreme council, namely General Congregation
No. 32, and highlighted in the previous chapter, have been
euphemistically interpreted to fit the current philosophical,
theological, and pastoral views of Bernas, Nebres, et al. In
that December 10, 2004 newspaper advertisement, Fr. Bernas
described the Ateneo de Manila University’s objectives for its
studentry, thusly:
Ateneo education seeks to instill in the mind of students
an insatiable hunger for knowledge because knowledge can
lead to an appreciation of mystery and to a sense of wonder
that finds ultimate fulfillment in worship and service of the
Lord and of the universe. [emphasis added]
It is indeed a most dangerous formula towards pride and

vainglory!
But as usual, true to what authors McDonough and
Bianchi pointed out, it is also a statement that has provisions
for “semantic lines of retreat” in order to resort if needed,
to “PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY” of any intended agnostic or even
pantheistic notions in the common-sense meaning of his
statement. Note, for example, that Bernas deliberately did not
use the word will or should. And “appreciation of mystery” can
mean so many different things!
Quoting Cardinal Newman out of context, Fr. Bernas ended
up by cleverly yet falsely claiming that:
Here below to live is to change, and to be perfect is to
have changed often.

No fruits from a branch “apart from the vine”!
The central point and locus of our heartfelt disagreement with
Bernas et al. and their currently prevailing brand of Jesuitry,
is the fundamental theological point of view underlying their
latter-day definition of Jesuit education. Using the words of
the late great John P. Delaney S.J., its “namby-pamby piosities”
are at best contrived in its connection, if any, to the notion of
Primum Regnum Dei.
As will be shown later in this chapter, it rejects or at least
substantially muddles the “alpha and omega” totality in the
universal Christian acknowledgment of the supreme and
absolute sovereignty of the true God and true Man. For St.
Ignatius of Loyola and practically all Christians especially
Catholics, that Supreme Sovereign is our Lord Jesus Christ, the
Universal Potter over the puny clay of mankind. By virtue of
His timeless and infinite sacrifice on Calvary, Christ is also the
Redeemer-King over all creation and all history to the end of
time.
Coincidental as it may seem, Primum Regnum Dei has been
the original battle-cry of Ateneo de Naga and its Jesuit founders
long before 1946 when young Joaquin G. Bernas entered this
Catholic high school through its still existing and still revered
“Four Pillars” at the main-building entrance.
As stated in the Foreword, Otto Jimenez and I sincerely
believe that Joaquin Bernas’ definition is certainly un-Ignatian,
non-Christian, and even more so, it is non-Catholic! Or at best they
have become “nominal Catholics.” We believe so, even much
more than we believed in 1978 that it was morally correct for
us then to reject the dishonestly drafted and unconstitutionally
ratified Marcos “Constitution” of 1973. We did so then, even to
the point of taking up arms so to speak, and risking our lives.
If Jesuits Pedro Arrupe, Joaquin Bernas, et al. are accurately
quoted about their preferred raison d’ etre for Jesuit education,
then and therefore Fr. Toti Olaguer, Otto Jimenez, and I

were out-and-out dupes in 1978 for having been thoroughly
influenced in our rebellion against the Marcos dictatorship
surely by our Ignatian Jesuit education now discredited by
them.
And so we most vehemently disagree with the claim that
the Jesuits had not educated their students for justice. It was
exactly in the same year that Marcos was oppressing the
Filipino people by imposing his illegal “Constitution” that
Arrupe made his controversial speech in Valencia, Spain. He
confessed to all the world that hitherto the Jesuits had not
properly educated its alumni “for justice.” Neither Arrupe nor
Bernas nor Nebres, all Catholic ordained priests, has explained
at all what was explicitly or even impliedly wrong with Catholic
Jesuit education up until Arrupe made his pronouncement.
Nor have they provided any concrete illustrations as to how
such past ‘errors’ have been corrected by their new definition
and point of view.
Neither is it true, as Joaquin Bernas implies in their
advertisement (with its usual built-in “semantic lines of
retreat” for the purpose of plausible deniability!), that Cardinal
Newman would have endorsed the radical changes in Jesuit
education today. For certainly it is an utterly FALSE CLAIM that
on matters of our Christian and Catholic faith, any change,
whether for better or for worse, especially to have flip-flopped
or changed often . . . “is to be perfect” [sic!]. What Cardinal
Newman meant, being a staunch traditional Catholic stalwart
of the Magisterium from the time of his conversion from an
Anglican to a Catholic priest, was a change of heart, an interior
spiritual conversion for the better! He couldn’t have meant it
as changes in the Church’s age-old doctrines. Whereas Neo-
Jesuits have in fact changed and transmogrified the Catholic
and Christian reply to Jesuit Ignatius’ oft-repeated query to
then putative Jesuit Francis Xavier, the classic existential and
Scriptural question: “What does it profit a man to gain the
whole world yet suffer the loss of his own soul?”

Let us assume that Arrupe, Bernas, and Nebres et al. had
some basis for making radical changes to the Jesuits’ educational
priorities and content, so as to justify Arrupe’s astounding
Valencia speech in 1973. It appears however that the Bernas-
Nebres concept and implementation of “Jesuit education” is
its so-called “strong liberal humanistic and holistic” thrust.
It is thus plainly modernist and elitist in its sound-bytes and
lip service to “justice.” In fact their advertised formula is built
on rationalism, disobedience to the Church Magisterium,
disloyalty to the Papacy, all springing from intellectual pride,
and ultimately a road map to large-scale spiritual perdition.
For any fault, as in the case of the Light A Fire Movement’s
principals, was not with St. Ignatius and the Jesuits prior to
Arrupe’s leadership. The fault “dear Brutus,” was in OUR OWN
SELVES, precisely BECAUSE Jesuit-educated alumni like me had
failed to live up to Primum Regnum Dei. We had not kept faith
with St. Ignatius’ and the Gospel’s teaching on seeking “first
the Kingdom.”
LORD, bring back our Champions of Faith!
In our 4th year high school English class, Fr. Reuter (who
also was Bernas teacher!) led us to love and admire the 20th cen-
tury’s greatest Catholic literary and intellectual giant, Gilbert
Keith Chesterton. Many of us still can recite some stanzas of
“Lepanto,” his best poem ever. It was his tribute to the hero
of the great naval battle at the Gulf of Lepanto near Greece,
namely King John of Austria, and to the Pope and Our Lady for
their intercession for divine intervention that made Don John’s
victory possible. After the battle, Mohammed’s threatening
hegemony over Europe was forever stalled. And in his other
masterpiece, The Everlasting Man, presented in two parts—the
first “On the Creature Called Man,” and the second “On the
Man Called Christ”—Chesterton argued that Jesus Christ and
His teachings were undoubtedly the central and pivotal event
in all the history of mankind. He further argued that without

that supernatural and historical event being considered in its
Christian interpretation, there could not possibly be any logical
way to explain history and understand mankind itself.
A literary critic from the Times Literary Supplement wrote in
his book-review that Mr. Chesterton had “the unusual power
of seeing the obvious” and that on the other hand, there were
seemingly learned men (neo-Jesuits?) who embrace many modern
theories whose origins can be understood only on the hypothesis that
their authors had spent their whole lives in one room!
The Bernas article in the Inquirer ad supplement did also
include Chesterton’s central and “pivotal Person,” but on
the following vague, misleading and, well, namby-pamby
manner.
Per Bernas, another distinctive feature of Ateneo’s current
education program is centeredness in Christ the way Ignatius
centered his life in Christ . . . But the way he described such
centeredness was certainly NOT Ignatian at all! For to Bernas,
his Christ is encountered merely as “a Christ immersed in the
hurly-burly of history, often [sic!] out there where the battle-
lines are drawn.” At any rate, his words have some of the
usual provisions for “plausible deniability and semantic lines
of retreat!”
Yet according to standard Catholic teaching and repeated
by Chesterton, St. Ignatius, and John Delaney S.J., Jesus Christ
is and should be personally encountered throughout the day
if possible, firstly in obeying His commandments, particularly
by participating in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and receiving
Him in the Eucharist. By thus absorbing and living in His
grace, we are enabled to see Christ and to serve Christ in
every neighbor especially in the poor and downtrodden. In
short, obeying the First Commandment, to love Christ-God, is
absolutely necessary in order to be able to fulfill the Second
Commandment, to love our neighbors who are our brothers
and sisters in Christ. In contrast, Bernas and his kindred
modernists and their ideological first-cousins, the partisans of

Liberation Theology, would like to reverse the priority as well
as the order and necessity of these two basic commandments.
That is, according to them it is better to be intellectuals first, and
hopefully later on PERHAPS, “appreciate mystery” and thereafter
worship and serve the Lord and “the universe.”
A lot of knowledge is fine, but highly dangerous!
It is a well-known spiritual dynamic and a fact born of
the Saints’ experience, that being “insatiably hungry for
knowledge” for self-centered reasons, leads instead to pride,
and not only of the intellectual variety. It will not lead to
Christ nor to seeing Christ in our neighbor! That is why in His
last discourse at the Last Supper after the “First Communion”
of the Apostles, Christ said:
Live on in Me, as I do in you. No more than a branch
can bear a fruit of itself apart from the vine, can you bear
fruit apart from Me. He who lives in Me and I in him,
will produce abundantly. For apart from Me you can do
nothing. A man who does not live in Me is like a withered,
rejected branch, picked up to be thrown in the fire and
burnt!
—John 15: 4-6
Ignatian?
Sharing top billing in space and byline with Bernas in that
four-page advertisement was the president of the Ateneo,
Bienvenido F. Nebres S.J. Once again, true to McDonough and
Bianchi’s observations of neo-Jesuits, Nebres started off his
whole-page blurb under his byline thusly: “In the tradition of
Ignatius’ Contemplation on the Incarnation (is) our vision of the
Ateneo of the future . . . ”
Nebres must have been fully aware of the sacred central
theme of St. Ignatius’ famous Spiritual Exercises (Second
Week). But the subsequent text leads one to suspect strongly
that he deliberately chose it only in order to deceive his blurb’s
readers about his future [sic!] loyalty to St. Ignatius. Or else and

most unlikely, he was ignorant of the fundamental theology
behind the sacrificial motive and infinite love behind the Only
Begotten Son’s reducing Himself into a mere but true man of
flesh and blood. For it is fundamental in Christian thinking that
Christ’s Incarnation and subsequent Passion and Death was
volunteered out of love and ab aeterno, to save mankind from
eternal perdition, thus to satisfy the Father’s perfect justice, in
atonement for the sins and disobedience of every man, woman
and child.
For unlike Ignatius’ recommended contemplation, Nebres
capped all his boasting by casually mentioning “spirituality”
(of what kind only he knew) and “a deep love of God and
our people.” There was no mention whatsoever of any of St.
Ignatius’ contemplation themes of love and sacrifice, eternity,
Hell, Our Lady, the Trinity, redemption, Heaven, Divine Grace,
and lifelong imitation of Christ as an alter christus in terms of
humility, purity, and self-sacrifice.
Instead, the Nebres blurb repeatedly bragged about
continuing to measure ourselves against the best and prepare
our students to serve with excellence in an internationally
competitive world, by imitating NOT Christ, but the academe and
public officials of Singapore and Beijing!
If only he omitted mention of St. Ignatius’ “Contemplation,”
Nebres could not have been validly accused of deception,
through “plausible deniability and semantic lines of retreat.”
“No Room” for the Mother of God!
In four whole pages of that advertisement, the Blessed
Mother of Christ was deliberately and obviously snubbed by a
supposedly Catholic institution that used to proudly produce
“Hail Mary” priests and men.
There was not a single word or reference to Our Lady nor
to St. Joseph. Thus it was a “most unkindest,” deliberate, and
unjustified SNUB! Further proof was the fact that the selected
day for the ad to come out was Friday the 10th of December

2004—a nationally declared Marian and Eucharistic Year! And
yet Bernas, Nebres, et al. could have so easily scheduled its
publication a mere two days earlier on December 8. It would
have been a great fitting gesture for the Jesuits and the Ateneo
de Manila to honor Our Lady so, on the day of her world-
celebrated “Immaculate Conception”—a holy day of obligation
for all Catholics worldwide upon reaching the age of reason.
Since time immemorial!
Lacrimae Mater Dolorosa
At this stage, I can only sadly recall that old Negro Spiritual
we sang in Green Pastures, a play that Fr. Reuter adapted for
us at the Ateneo de Naga in 1950. One of its songs’ lyrics goes
like this:
Oh Mary doncher weep, doncher mourn . . . Christ our
Lord will rise again, O Mary doncher weep!”
It was a truly prophetic song. By many of her recent

manifestations through her statues where her face is dripping
with tears of blood, Our Lady says her tears are because of her
sons who are wayward priests.
Fr. Reuter is, by the way, one of a relatively few American-
born Jesuits in the Philippines who are still steadfast in their
Ignatian and Papal loyalties. The Philippine Congress has also
made him an honorary Filipino citizen. So too is the legendary
but low-profile Jesuit Fr. Pierre Tritz, the famous founder of
the ERDA Foundation for educating street children and aiding
poor families right in their own communities.
The Consequences of “Arrupeism”
It has been 32 years since Father Arrupe’s controversial 1973
claim that until then the Jesuits had not properly educated its
alumni for justice. The intervening time should be long enough
for an objective observer to determine, if compared to previous
Jesuit alumni generations, the neo-Jesuit system of education
has produced significantly better-educated alumni for the

cause of justice. And so let us examine the local neo-Jesuits’
claims of “best results” from their modernist educational
system coming from the public written testimony of Bernas and
Nebres themselves, in that same newspaper advertisement.
There was not one single achievement in the published list of
“best results” of neo-Jesuit education, that would even mildly
qualify under the 32nd General Congregation’s mandate for
“the promotion of justice rooted in faith” and supposedly as an
absolute requirement for everybody. All the achievements or fruits
mentioned were indeed noteworthy and desirable, but strictly
in their secular, or academic, and personal dimensions!
Indeed, “by their fruits, you shall know them!” (Matthew 7:20) . . .
From the point of view of neutral and objective observers,
it cannot be denied anymore, that today’s priestly character
of the Jesuits as a Catholic religious institution is far from its
apostolic and orthodox moorings a generation ago. But the
present neo-Jesuit leadership and their apologists adamantly
insist that these controversial changes in themselves, if any,
are for the better. Even more incredible is their accompanying
claim that these changes are consistent with the teachings of St.
Ignatius of Loyola and the Catholic Church.
The Paulinian Yearbook
In contrast to the Bernas-Nebres blurbs for their 145th school
anniversary, let us compare it with that of the St. Paul Sisters
(de Chartres) in their 100th Anniversary Yearbook’s statement,
The Paulinian Mission of Education.
St. Paul’s is Catholic—this is the chief characteristic
which distinguishes it from secular schools. We
believe that education is the complete and harmonious
development of the physical, mental, and moral faculties
of a person . . . that this life is only a preparation for the
next, and therefore, the most important thing is not how
one is judged by men, but how one is judged by God . . . .

Our object is not merely social efficiency. We train our
students for life—life in time and in eternity; paradoxically,
their training for life in eternity better prepares them for
the world . . . .
Secondly, the school is conducted by the Sisters of St.
Paul of Chartres. Our schools began in France; we were
founded by a parish priest: Fr. Louis Chauvet . . . to rescue
growing girls from poverty and ignorance.
Because of our private history, we could set down the
following as peculiar marks of Paulinian education: It is
warm—we lay greater stress on the love of God, rather
than fear of Him. Warmth characterizes the relationships
we build in school. It is active—our girls are exuberantly
active on all fronts: music, drama, oratory, journalism,
the Sodality. It is simple—focused on the essentials. We
put stress on the distinctive Filipino virtues of gentleness,
patience, tolerance, modesty, the ability to sacrifice, close
family ties. God, in his wisdom, has given unique gifts for
each country; we respect these. We train Filipino girls for
life in the Philippines. It is not our object to make French
women out of them. We do not transplant, we develop.
Permeating all our efforts, giving life and reason to our
untiring search for improvement, is the guiding principle of
our community, Caritas Christi Urget Nos! (Mother Gabriel de
Marie McGrath, Excerpts from her talk in St. Paul’s Manila, 1957).
The Virgin Mary is the Mother par excellence of docility to
the Spirit in her total YES to God. We continue to learn from her
to say Yes to the Lord, Who invites us to allow ourselves
to be loved by Him and sends us to reach out to the poor
and the little ones and to manifest his tenderness to them
(CA 1995, p. 12).
Mother General Myriam Kitcharoen reminds the
Sisters:
The entire mission of Mary is to give Christ to men, to
remain in their midst and lead them towards Christ. Such
was her vocation (Paulinian Echoes, Dec. 2000, page 1).
The Capitular Acts 2001, stresses that filial devotion
to the Virgin Mary is a source of inspiration and apostolic

dynamism. In the simplicity of humble tasks as well as
in her participation in her Son’s paschal mystery, Mary
teaches us abandonment to God’s will (CA 2001, p. 27).
With Mary as guide, we shall embark on a renewed
integral evangelization and witness to Jesus Christ’s
Gospel of salvation and liberation through words, deeds
and lives (PCP II).
The difference in the above quoted advertisement of St.

Paul’s, in its clarity and explicitness of declaring the school as
a Catholic institution with the traditional Ad Jesum Per Mariam
spirituality, is like pure white versus the dirty gray of Bernas,
Nebres, et al.
The Incredulous
A few weeks before this work could be brought to print, I
was already inviting my friends and former neighbors at La
Vista in Quezon City, all staunch Catholics, to attend my Book
Launching scheduled for July 31, 2005—St. Ignatius of Loyola’s
Memorial Day in all of Catholic Christendom.
A few of those to whom I explained what this book was
all about were noticeably incredulous. One of them, a retired
banker and an Ateneo de Manila alumnus, was even slightly
hostile in tone. How, he asked me, could the Jesuits with
their “4th Vow of Obedience” to the Pope, be disloyal to the
Papacy? But that’s the whole point at issue in the whole book,
I answered. Still, his incredulity persisted.
For one thing, I failed to inform him that for more than 25
years already, most Jesuits no longer have made that FORMAL and
SOLEMN “4th Vow” of obedience to the Pope. It occurred to me
later that the Jesuit reputation for loyalty to the Roman Papacy
had been so widely accepted as a permanent characteristic
of all Jesuits, that anything contrary to that notion would
immediately be considered as outright slander. Thus I added
the following section so as to present even more evidence to
prove my point at issue.

New Theology
At the Ateneo de Manila University, which is a stone’s
throw from my former neighbors at La Vista, any serious
researcher with access to the Internet can see the tell-tale marks
of modernism right in the web site of the Ateneo’s “New
Theology Core Curriculum,” and in its ten-page advertisement
of their Grade School and High School. All are replete with the
usual neo-Jesuit jargon, covering all of its course and mission
objectives, including that for the Grade School.
Their Jesuit and Ateneo alumni-authored textbooks plainly
smack of false ecumenism. Their contents are not contrary
to Catholic teachings nor to those of Protestant Christian
denominations as well. The tail of the snake, however, is in the
ABSENCE, or at best only a superficial mention of teachings that
are explicitly Catholic. These are the traps that our neo-Jesuit
educators are deliberately foisting on our Catholic children
and grandchildren.
The unavoidable conclusion for one who understands and
sees through the clever selection of topics treated in depth, as
against the shallow jargon on the rest which are most important
to Catholics, is that theological modernism is rife and being
taught to ALL Ateneo students, including children! For that
is what is “new” in their New Theology. But as John Paul the
Great stated in Novo Millennio Ineunte at the start of the Jubilee
Year 2000, “It is not a matter of inventing a new programme. The
programme already exists. It is the plan found in the Gospel
and in the living tradition, it is the same as ever.”
Comparing the Religion textbooks of my two granddaugh-
ters studying at the explicitly Catholic PAREF Rosehill School
with those of their brothers at the Ateneo Grade School and
High School, is clearly equivalent to witnessing to the “pure
white” of Pope John Paul the Great versus the “dirty gray”
of Jesuits “Black Pope” Kolvenbach and secular intellectuals
Bernas and Nebres! I dearly wish other Ateneo Catholic

parents, grandparents and the local Catholic Hierarchy would
do the same comparison . . .
The Internet-advertised blurbs for College-level students
assert “that its main objective (is) to develop in the students the
skills needed for theologizing through an intelligent use of the
primary sources of the faith . . . ” Neo-Jesuitry has thus reduced
faith into an intellectual skill! It further cites the “specific task of
theology (as) an explicit systematic and critical study in (the)
Filipino/Asian context,” thus laying the grounds for a priori
dissent against the Magisterium, situational morality and its
sibling, relativism.
Whatever happened at the Ateneo de Manila to the basic
theological mission of learning more about God’s gift of our
faith in order to know, love, and serve Him, is anybody’s
guess. Thus neo-Jesuitry and its “new theology” have directly
contradicted St. Matthew’s Gospel account of St. Peter’s
confession of Christ’s divinity:
Flesh and blood [intellectual skills] have not
revealed this to you, but my Father who is in
Heaven!
—Matthew 16:17
What else is “New”?

The advertised four core courses at the College level,
particularly “Marriage, Family Life, and Human Sexuality,”
though supposedly designed with a “Catholic Perspective,”
is premised on a “theological anthropology based on the
interdisciplinary dialogue of theology and other sciences such as
philosophy, psychology, and sociology.”
Whew! Sounds so scholarly and modern. But such are the
shibboleths in the modernists’ way of teaching their “New
Theology.” They give heavy weight to the world’s (“modern”)
psychology and sociology much more than is warranted.
They have even conveniently forgotten Father General Pedro
Arrupe’s warning in his 1973 speech in Valencia, that “Injustice

of one kind or another finds in them too (modern technologies)
a local habitation and a name.”
The Course therefore does not treat marriage from the pri-
mary point of view of the Sacrament of Matrimony. There is
no concrete reference to the sacramental aspects of matrimony,
nor to the Catholic Magisterium, nor to the Catechism of the
Catholic Church. Not even to the Papal encyclicals Humanae
Vitae and Evangelium Vitae! Their course description on
marriage and the family merely refers in passing to the “family
as domestic church” (and) “the law of the Church governing
marriage, more specifically the provisions on annulment”
[sic!].
To cap it all, the “New Theology” (shades of Marcos’ New
Society!), is supposedly based on “the integrative use of Scripture,
Church Teaching and Filipino human experience.” It presumes
therefore that the Catholic Church does NOT integrate its
teachings on marriage with Scripture and with human
experience, much less with that of Filipinos. And if so, there
would have to be different course syllabi for Italians, Eskimos,
Africans etc. No wonder none of these neo-Jesuits have come
out publicly to support the Catholic Hierarchy of the Philippines
in our bishops’ pro-life battles against contraceptives and
abortifacients.
Honesty should still be the best policy!
And how could there be any intellectual honesty behind
their claim of its “Catholic perspective” when the most
important, recent, and definitive Catholic teachings on the
subject of marriage and human sexuality, which are universal
in applicability and validity especially for all Catholics, have
not at all been mentioned? Hasn’t anyone in the Ateneo faculty
ever heard about Pope Paul VI and Humanae Vitae or John Paul
the Great’s Evangelium Vitae? They have, I am absolutely sure.
Thus it is a fact that modernist Jesuits from day one since
1968, have publicly and vehemently disagreed with these two

successive Papal affirmations of classic Catholic doctrines
on marriage and human sexuality. There should not be any
surprise at all, that these Catholic Magisterium sourced
teachings on the subject, have been deliberately ignored or at
best, glossed over by the Ateneo de Manila faculty in charge of
their “New Theology.”
Sowers of a Different Seed
But the most frightening ramifications of the Ateneo
de Manila Jesuits’ New Theology, whose President is still
Bienvenido Nebres S.J., will be gleaned from their advertised
mission statement for the Grade School. Let me quote it in full
with my emphasis added:
MISSION STATEMENT
ATENEO DE MANILA UNIVERSITY GRADE SCHOOL
The primary objective of the Ateneo de Manila Univer-
sity is the formation characterized by excellence of the person
as an individual in the totality and integrity of one’s
personhood, with a mission of service to one’s fellowmen,
particularly the disadvantaged, in the community of the
family, the nation, and the Church.
PURPOSES AND AIMS
As a Catholic University [sic!], the Ateneo de Manila
seeks to form persons who, following the teachings and
example of Christ, will devote their lives to the service
of their fellowmen, and through the promotion of justice,
serve especially those who are most in need of help, the
poor and the powerless. Loyal to the teachings of the
Catholic Church, the University seeks to serve the faith
and to interpret its teachings in modern Filipino society.
[NOTE: Its their modernistic interpretation that is truly
frightening! For are they really loyal to the teachings of the
Catholic Church in their modernists’ interpretation of its
teachings? Does the advertised Nebres blurb on the university’s
best achievements reflect such “promotion of justice” for the
poor? Judge for yourself!]

PRIMARY SCHOOL CURRICULUM
(PREP-SCHOOL, GRADE 1 TO GRADE 3)
Jesuit education has always stressed the full
development of human potentials, spiritual, moral,
intellectual, emotional, socio-cultural—in a coherent,
integrated manner so that the person evolves a Christian
and humanistic world-view. [NOTE: Thus not explicitly
Catholic, and more of the same.]
MIDDLE SCHOOL (GRADE 4 TO GRADE 7)
“Following the inspiration of St. Ignatius of
Loyola . . . [sic!] the ideal Ateneo product (is) a person for
others. Academic excellence and a search for meaning
through spiritual formation and social commitment
contextualize the students’ life in this phase of their
education. [NOTE: A Catholic “person for others” must
however be the right person with the right Catholic Christian
motives to serve others in truth and in faith!]
The academic subjects include the skill subjects,
Math and Languages, and the content subjects, Science,
Filipino, Social Studies, Christian Life Education and
special subjects. [NOTE: And yet as in their Christian Life
Education textbooks, there is no real mention nor direct
connection to St. Ignatius’ core principles of obedience to the
Magisterium, the primacy of prayer and divine grace, filial
devotion to Our Lady, the infinite value of a soul etc.]
Ubinam gentium sumus?

Please note that in all the above neo-Jesuit blurbs, their
common and generalized rhetorical thread is about pursuit of
excellence in order to become “persons for others” so as to serve
the “family, the Nation, and the Church.” Thus all it amounts
to is its deliberate rejection of the old core idea of a spirituality
based in Christ, Catholic education for the Catholic youth, such
as that expressed by the Sisters of St. Paul of Chartres. For then
and only then will the students be enabled truly to promote
authentic justice. Thus neo-Jesuitry and its “New Theology”

have placed their cart of secular justice before the horse of the
true Faith.
There is also no mention at all about the Catechism of the
Catholic Church, because there is no formal nor systematic
introduction of students to the specific core beliefs of the
Catholic Faith at the grade school level, nor even in High School
or in College. Many religious songs are in their textbooks, but
there is NONE for Our Lady! It is neither an accident nor an
oversight therefore that at the Primary School level, the same
generalized though lofty sounding goal of evolving a falsely
ecumenical “Christian and humanistic world-view” is already
being applied to kids who still do not know the basics of their
Catholic Faith.
It is the highest of irony that all the Catholic dioceses in the
Philippines spend a lot of time and effort to train and accredit
catechists in order to impart traditional Catholic doctrinal
truths to students in public schools and to Catholic adults
with no catechetical knowledge. Yet no such orthodox thus
truly Catholic training and teaching are part of the Ateneo de
Manila’s “Christian” education programme. For even many
Christian educational institutions have REJECTED the modernist
school of theology.
Where in the world are we? Cicero cried out in exasperation
against Catiline and his corrupted cohorts more than two
thousand years ago. Today, so do we . . .

Chapter 21
LUX EX MUNDO?
It was a Sunday. Staring at me early that morning and

thereby interrupting my breakfast was the picture of a smiling
face taken many years earlier. It was in the Opinion section
of a local newspaper with a wide circulation. The smiling
face and its accompanying article led me into writing this
chapter, just so to refute its many insidious falsehoods and
non-sequitur arguments. For ironically the opinion column was
presumptuously presented as the “Word of God” Himself.
In fairness to its author with the smiling face, Ruben M.
Tanseco, a Jesuit priest, it is shown here in its entirety. “God’s
Word Today” [sic!]. It was published in The Philippine Star on
April 24, 2005:
GOD’S WORD TODAY
By Ruben M. Tanseco S.J.
ECCLESIA SEMPER REFORMANDA

For all these past centuries, the above title of this
homily has been a main guiding-principle of our Church.
This means that our Church should be in a continuing
state of renewal and reform, continuity and change—
according to the needs of the times, the needs of God’s
people, in response to the one, fundamental law of God:
love, justice, and peace. This was how the historical
Christ lived his life. He was the ever-compassionate one,
for whom the spirit of the law was far more important
than the letter of the law.
This was the guiding spirit of our Vatican Council II. As
one of its leading theologians, the late Fr. John Courtney
Murray, said, we must continually respond to “the
gradual unfolding of human consciousness” throughout

history. This is not relativism. This is rather a seeking of
God’s will thru the inner movements of the spirit of love.
Discerning God’s will thru inner, affective freedom.
Today, there are critical contemporary issues within
the Church that need change. Our Church leaders need
to really come down to where the ordinary people are,
so that they can be-with, feel-with, and think-with the
people of God. This is the essence of empathy, which was
Christ’s way.
For the past weeks, responsible and knowledgeable
lay leaders, theologians, and spiritual leaders have been
focusing on needed changes within the Church—the very
same changes pointed out three years ago by a survey
of the National Catholic Reporter, whose respondents
were mostly lay leaders, women religious, and priests,
including at least one Cardinal and at least three bishops—
predominantly from Asia, Oceania, Africa, and Latin
America/Mexico. (NCR, May 3, 2002).
I had quoted parts of that survey then, but let me quote
them again, for they are as relevant today.
Governance. A monarchial form of Church governance,
with its accompanying style and trappings are no longer
relevant or defensible. The late Fr. Bernard Haring, an
eminent moral theologian of Vatican Council II, referred
to this as “spiritual authoritarianism.” This must yield
to a more collegial and democratic form of institutional
governance where the laity will have a real voice and
participation. A genuine empowerment of the laity in our
post-modern Church.
Priesthood. Mandatory celibacy for all diocesan
priests needs to be re-examined and discerned once
and for all. Married priests can be a major asset for the
Church of the future, says the survey. More sexually-and-
psychologically-normal males will be ordained priests,
and less and less cases of priestly sex abuse, pedophilia,
etc.
Ordination of Women. “This is not a panacea, but still
necessary as a matter of equity and empowerment of more
Lux Ex Mundo? 347

people to work for the mission of the Church.” Moreover,
the treatment of women as second-class members is an
issue of social injustice.
Human Sexuality. “The Church’s position on contra-
ception is untenable. Because the Church’s leaders lack a
true understanding of women and the struggles of family
life, its teachings are no longer challenging but simply
dismissed by most Catholics who have concluded that
the Church is wrong.”
Religious Pluralism. “The Church must face the
reality that religious pluralism is part of God’s plan for
humanity, and it is time to enter into more serious and
extensive dialogue with other religions, and to understand
Christianity as one of many. Jesus is the great reconciler.
He came to unite, to heal wounds of division.”
In today’s Gospel reading, Jesus keeps focusing on
his works—his works of compassion, love, and justice.
“Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in
me, or else, believe because of the works themselves.
Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes in me will do
the works that I do . . . ” (Jn. 14: 11-12).
This is our mission. Amen.
Tanseco’s Tenuous Thesis

Starting with its Latin caption (constant Church–reform),
Tanseco was immediately and deliberately misleading those
who may not be aware that the Church (Ecclesia), by St. Paul’s
definition and under Catholic theology (which Tanseco ought
to know full well!), is a human as well as a DIVINE institution, as
the Mystical Body of Christ. With Jesus Christ Himself as the
Head of this whole Church as a Mystical Body, are the Church
Triumphant who are already in Heaven, the Church Suffering
who are being perfectly purified in Purgatory, and the Church
Militant who are still struggling for purification here on earth.
It is this “Militant” part of the “one, holy, catholic and
apostolic Church” whose Head is Christ Himself and whose
Vicar here on earth is the Pope, composed of baptized yet still

sinful or sin-prone men, women, and children of weakened
Will and dulled reasoning minds, and thus including all the
clergy and its hierarchy, who require by necessity, and will
ALWAYS require from birth until death, semper reformanda! As
individual persons, and as a human institution.
But throughout Tanseco’s article, his message is selectively
focused so that ONLY our Church leaders need to really come down
to where the ordinary people are, in order to keep in step with his
principal notion of “a continuing state of renewal and reform,
continuity and change—according to the needs of the times (and) of
God’s people.” Tanseco is flattering us “ordinary people.”
But we too are sinful or at least sin-prone, as much if not
more so than the Catholic clergy and its Hierarchy. Semper
reformanda is just as applicable to us ordinary people, as to
Tanseco, to all priests, nuns, bishops and the Popes. Therefore,
why should “ordinary people,” amorphous as they are, even if
they are all being called to be “God’s people . . . in love, justice
and peace,” be the ultimate reformers and best judges for what
is truly right or wrong, eternally good or evil? In short, Tanseco
wants us to be the world’s arbiters for WISDOM!
Murray’s Mirror
Furthermore, his one and only recommended basic formula
to achieve Ecclesia semper reformanda, is to follow the late Jesuit
theologian Fr. John Courtney Murray’s speculative and rarely
accepted á la mode thesis for continual response to the gradual
unfolding of human consciousness throughout history.
To respond, yes! But to be ultimate arbiters on faith and
morals, certainly NOT! Tanseco also embellishes the thoughts
of Murray by claiming that such was not relativism, but rather
“a seeking of God’s will through the inner movements of the spirit of
love . . . (and) discerning God’s Will thru inner affective freedom!”
Surely these are the typical gobbledygook and shibboleths of
our latter-day modernist theologians! Tanseco also unwittingly
reinforces his Jesuit colleague Joaquin Bernas in his modernist
Lux Ex Mundo? 349

re-interpretation of the Ateneo de Manila’s pristine motto of Lux
in Domino. For by the textual details of their December 10, 2004
four-page advertisement, instead of Light in the LORD, the motto
is now understood to be “Light from the WORLD.” That is—Lux
Ex Mundo, which means to be á la mode or being fashionable in
faith and morals by following the light of supposed wisdom
coming FROM THE WORLD!
They have replaced the Lord with the world . . .
Tanseco’s Specific Agenda
Tanseco, supposedly a Catholic priest, is particularly
advocating a modernist agenda including religious pluralism
itself. It is a repeat of his impassioned plea in a similar article
he wrote three years earlier under the same column by-line, for
the complete acceptance by the Catholic Hierarchy of all the
controversial changes recommended by a very small group of
similarly minded ultra-liberals and modernists. Tanseco refers
to them as “lay leaders, women religious and priests including
at least one Cardinal and at least three bishops predominantly
from Asia, Oceania, Africa, and Latin America/Mexico.” For
Tanseco therefore, their per mundum recommendations have
the moral weight and theological authority surpassing even
those of the Vicar of Christ and the Church Magisterium united
with him.
These passionately desired changes of Tanseco and his
worldly one-of-a-kind fellow travelers, are notably the same
as those publicly advocated a week earlier by his fellow neo-
Jesuit, the former Father Provincial Romeo Intengan. These
are:
1. To discard the Church’s “monarchial form of gover-
nance,” it being now allegedly irrelevant and indefensible
(with) its accompanying style and trappings;
2. To scrap mandatory celibacy for all diocesan priests.
Tanseco thus deliberately excluded from such dispensa-
tion all other priests in the Religious Orders like the

Jesuits! It is his solution for “priestly sex abuse, pedophilia
etc.” In other words it is supposedly an omnibus cure-
all but only for diocesan priests’ sexual and other major
problems et cetera, but not for “Religious priests” like
him!
If marriage per se were truly an effective antidote for
those aberrations, I wonder why there are relatively
even more such instances and more scandalous at that,
among married lay people!
3. To ordain women as priests as “a necessity and a matter of
equity and social justice” vis-à-vis all women Catholics.
4. For the Catholic Hierarchy to admit that the Church is
wrong on the issue of human sexuality, specifically on
contraception and abortifacients, simply because and
allegedly, Church leaders lack a true understanding of
women and the struggles of family life. But Tanseco himself,
who should be presumed to be as chaste and thus as
innocent on sexual matters and family life as his co-
celibate Catholic bishops, is the founder and head of the
Jesuits’ own Center for Family Ministries (CEFAM), and
the Marriage Encounter movement!
5. To accept Religious Pluralism and to understand that
like any other religion Christianity (is just) one of many,
because it is God Himself who instituted such a desired
pluralism as “part of God’s plan for humanity!” In
short, whatever is WIDESPREAD in practice, is correct and
according to God’s plan? Yet Tanseco still celebrates
Holy Mass, where he has to recite the Credo which
affirms that the Catholic (universal) Church is the only
“one, holy, catholic and apostolic church!”
It is therefore the main thrust of this chapter to refute neo-
Jesuit Tanseco’s article which he presumptuously claims to
be “God’s Word Today” and forever. Otherwise the Catholic
Faith and Christianity itself are by inference a mind-boggling
Lux Ex Mundo? 351

bogus! And its 2,000-year-old CREDO including “God’s Word”
itself, would be sheer bombast. For according to our Jesuit and
presumably still a Catholic priest, Tanseco, this fundamental
Catholic doctrine and belief is just one of many similar claims. It
should therefore not be too difficult to establish henceforth, the
fact that Tanseco, just like Intengan et al., have already painted
themselves deliberately and with full knowledge, into a corner
that should rightly be called intellectual dishonesty and heresy of
the worst order!
Tanseco’s Consistent Infidelity to Catholic Church Teaching
In his much earlier column God’s Word Today [sic!] published
on August 4, 2004 in the Philippine Star opinion page, he argued
that any “official position” of the Catholic Church Hierarchy,
“though normative” but which is NOT yet explicitly defined
as an “infallible doctrine” or dogma, must be fair game to
modernists’ (his especially) so called “responsible, dissenting
opinion.” Thus he specifically placed the late great Pope John
Paul II’s encyclical Humanae Vitae in that questionable category
and for him to attack.
If we accept Tanseco’s premise and apparently former
Jesuit Provincial Romeo Intengan’s too, that not yet infallibly
declared though normative and official doctrines are fair game
for public dissent by Catholic priests such as they who are
solemnly sworn to obey such sacred official doctrines, therefore
the same principle should apply to everything and everywhere
else. Citizens, married couples, politicians, children and
students, or even government officials may publicly disagree
with non-infallible laws and rules and regulations they have
already sworn to uphold even as officers of their institutions.
Obviously however, it is of common sense that if so, such
dissenter and Tanseco in particular, should first resign as a
Catholic priest. And then he can fairly disagree privately and
publicly against anything he had previously vowed to obey
and uphold! And so Tanseco must now decide whether to

remain as a Catholic priest who has solemnly vowed during his
ordination as such a priest, to obey and to be faithful to ALL official
Catholic teachings. Or to resign and be laicized and even get
married . . .
Relativism or not?
If Tanseco still remembers his two years of study of
Philosophy as a Jesuit Scholastic, he ought to know that
relativism by definition is the theory in the field of ethics and
epistemology (study of knowledge) which claims that the basis
for any value judgment is always relative. If so, any so called
truth, especially those on matters of faith and morals, can
never be absolutely true. And as was inferred by Pontius Pilate
before he allowed the Jews to crucify our Lord, such so-called
truth will always vary or even radically change depending
upon circumstances, time, and the personalities involved. In
short, as far as mankind is concerned here in this world, there
can be no real nor absolute truth in faith and morals!
Applying that universal definition of relativism, its
purveyors must therefore be subject to exactly the same
definition. Therefore, the theory of relativism itself should
not be considered as an absolute truth! That is why Tanseco
had to, as he did self-servingly, claim that the Murray process
of continually responding to the gradual unfolding of human
consciousness is supposedly NOT relativism.
And yet immediately after his denial, he unwittingly
established his own relativist interpretation of the Murray
process, by taking it to mean as the “seeking . . . and discerning
(of) God’s Will . . . thru inner, affective freedom.” He hastened to
add that it is necessarily in “the spirit of love!” It sounded very
scholarly and even pious, but it all leads easily to absurdity.
For “affective freedom” is again, by definition, the exercise
of freedom on the basis of “affects” or feeling, passion, and
emotion, and thus not necessarily subject to good reasoning of
the intellect.
Lux Ex Mundo? 353

Poor John Courtney Murray S.J.! His latter-day disciple
has now translated his theory from linguistic elegance to an
absurdity and sophomoric affectation. For how can God’s Holy
Will, which is constant in Truth and in Love, be truly sought
and discerned by such a flim-flam and relativistic approach that
would certainly be utterly dependent on a person’s changing
moods and circumstances, and would geometrically increase
in their variety of results from one person to another, from one
culture to another, from one age to another?
Coincidentally but for sure providentially, the future
Benedict XVI, still as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger during the last
publicly celebrated Mass just before the Conclave, gave his own
refutation of Tanseco’s thesis. The future Papa Bene warned
all of us in his homily, about the dictatorship of relativism. His
message fitted exactly in clear opposition to the absurdity and
affectation of Tanseco’s thesis:
How many doctrinal winds we have known in these last
decades, how many ideological currents, how many styles of
thought . . . from Marxism to liberalism, to libertinism, from
collectivism to radical individualism, from atheism to religious
mysticism, from agnosticism to syncretism . . . and to have a
clear faith according to the Creed of the Church (is labeled as)
fundamentalism.
Thus the lamentation of the future Papa Bene!
Tanseco’s Inverted Pyramid of Leadership and Authority

As to Tanseco’s and his modernist colleagues’ own
lamentation against the 2,000-year-old form of Church
governance being “no longer relevant or defensible,” Pope
Benedict XVI, again by coincidence or by Divine Providence,
comes to our aid. He supplies a most appropriate refutation
(translated from the original Latin) which was given at the end
of his first Mass concelebrated as the new Pope with some 100

Cardinals. I have added emphasis to the text obtained from the
ZENIT news agency web site (www.zenit.org):
As Peter and the other apostles (were) constituted by the

will of the Lord (into) a unique Apostolic College, in the same
way the successor(s) of Peter and the bishops, successors
of the apostles, must be very closely united among themselves
as the Council (Vatican II) forcefully confirmed . . . This
collegial communion, though in the diversity of roles
and functions of the Roman Pontiff and of the bishops,
is (always) at the service of the Church and of unity in the
faith, from which depends in notable measure the efficacy of
the evangelizing action in the contemporary world . . . I wish to
continue on this path on which my venerated Predecessors
advanced, concerned only to proclaim to the whole world the
living presence of Christ!”
Poor Tanseco et al., they will just have to grind and gnash
their teeth in the midst of their own irrelevant, indefensible, and
now still-born hope of dismantling the 2,000-year-old system
of governance and leadership of God’s People instituted by
Christ Himself, in its basic structure and primacy of authority
given to St. Peter and his successors. For against that ROCK,
Tanseco et al. and even the gates of Hell will not prevail!
Marriage will not cleanse the weak and unchaste

To be blunt about it, Catholic priests who want to be allowed
to break away from celibacy, are those who have already been
breaking their solemn priestly vows, including and especially
the vows of chastity and obedience! The root cause of all that
inconstancy and lack of perseverance are the same basic root
causes for married Catholic lay people who are habitually
breaking their marital vows. It is the lack of prayer and sacrifice,
especially through neglect or trivialization of the Eucharist in
the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, that cause infidelity to solemn
pledges of love for God through love for our partners.
Lux Ex Mundo? 355

Thus it would be laughable for us Catholic or Christian
spouses whose marriages are already on the rocks due to a
partner’s infidelity, for the guilty spouse to claim that by being
allowed to marry somebody else, he or she would become a
more faithful husband or wife! Similarly, unchaste bachelors
and bachelorettes will not become suddenly chaste just because
they marry. It is the Sacraments and obedience to the Word of
God that enable people, priests and nuns as well, to be chaste
and remain chaste.
Modernists also falsely claim that during the early years of
Christianity, priests were allowed to marry. That is simply not
true. Exceptionally holy and qualified men who were already
married before they elected to become priests, were indeed
allowed to be ordained as exceptional cases and with special
conditions. That is the same practice with the Eastern and
Orthodox churches. But as far as I know, celibate ordained
priests and even deacons have never been allowed to break
their solemn vows by marrying through the Holy Sacrament of
Matrimony and still remain as priests or deacons.
And I can just imagine how feisty feminist Catholic nuns
will soon clamor for equal treatment of the sexes and thus
demand to be allowed to marry and stay as professed nuns, if
ever Catholic priests are allowed to break away from celibacy.
And pretty soon they will perhaps also claim the right to be
allowed to marry one another. Including those of the same sex!
Sick?
On the Ordination of Women
Feminist groups allied with Tanseco et al., insist that the
age-old exclusion of women from the full priestly ministry,
starting with Melchizedek to Aaron and his Jewish priest and
Levite successors, to the Twelve Apostles and up to now, could
only be due to the sexist and male chauvinist attitudes of men.
That would have to include Jesus Christ Himself! Would they

also approve of allowing men, or at least homosexual men, to
become Catholic nuns?
Levity aside, the best argument I can and should offer, is
for a limited audience of Christians and Catholics who are
sincerely faithful to the teachings of Christ in the Gospel. And
that argument comes from the late great John Paul II and his
book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope. It was extensively quoted
by a lady columnist of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, exactly
a week after the publication of Tanseco’s contrary opinions.
Thus I quote Ms. Maria Socorro G. Naguit, a former editor of
Parents Magazine, managing editor of the Philippines Free Press,
and associate editor of the old Daily Globe newspaper, and
presently a freelance writer and editor. Here are some of its
scintillating excerpts:
POPE BENEDICT XVI AND THE FEMINISTS

Common sense dictates that anyone who flagrantly
disobeys the rules and regulations of an organization
to which he or she belongs must be prepared for
expulsion . . . Those who go to Hell are those who, out of
intellectual pride and sheer stubbornness, reject God and
His gift of forgiveness and salvation. . . .
Mary Rousseau, professor emeritus from Marquette
University, in her Pope John Paul II’s Teaching on Women
notes:
For the Holy Father, sexuality is not just central
to what we are as persons. It is also central to the
sacramental life of the Church . . . The concepts of
male initiative and female receptivity are especially
important in the Eucharist, in which the priest re-
enacts the marital love of Christ the Bridegroom for
his Bride, the Church . . . Thus the accuracy of symbols
is all-important. . . .
Should we presume to know more than the Pope, even
one who so evidently had the piety, spiritual vision, depth
of intellect, extraordinary moral courage, the training,
Lux Ex Mundo? 357

education, and experience required by so demanding an
office? Both John Paul II and his successor, Pope Benedict
XVI, fit that bill.
In his book Crossing the Threshold of Hope, John Paul II
wrote:
Man cannot be forced to accept the truth. He can
be drawn toward the truth only by his own nature,
that is, by his own freedom, which commits him
to search sincerely for truth and, when he finds it
[Note this well, Fr. Tanseco!] to adhere to it both in his
convictions and his behavior.
Thank you very much dear Maria Socorro, in behalf of your

most pure name sake, for being of timely succor to this book in
more ways than your column piece.
On Tanseco’s Advocacy of Religious Pluralism
I shall follow the lead of Ms. Maria Socorro G. Naguit in
relying on the solid moral, intellectual and theological authority
of the late great John Paul II, in his encyclical Veritatis Splendor,
promulgated on August 6, 1993:
From the beginning the apostles were vigilant over the
right conduct of Christians. The first Christians differed
from others not only in their faith and liturgy, but also in
their moral conduct. Their rule of life was “faith working
through love” (Gal. 5:6). No damage should be done to the
harmony between faith and life. The unity of the church
is damaged not only by Christians who reject or distort
the truths of faith but also by those who disregard the
moral obligations to which they are called by the Gospel.
Preserving the unity of the Church, promoting and
preserving the faith and moral life, is the task entrusted
by Jesus to the Apostles and their successors.
And directly quoting Vatican II, Dei Verbum, 8, John Paul II

stated further:
The task of authentically interpreting the Word of God,
whether in its written form or in that of tradition, has been

entrusted only to those charged with the Church’s living
Magisterium, whose authority is exercised in the name of
Jesus Christ.
Being in this way the pillar and bulwark of Truth (1
Timothy 3:15), the Church senses the duty to offer its own
discernment and teaching with regard to new tendencies
and theories frequently debated in moral theology today.
—Pope John Paul II
From the encyclical, The Splendor of Truth
Chapter 1, Sections 26-27
“Freedom to believe” is God’s Plan

But I must address myself once more to Tanseco’s and his
ideological allies’ main premise, that “The Church must face
the reality that religious pluralism is part of God’s plan for
humanity.”
If God Himself has allowed religious pluralism to flourish
since time immemorial, therefore according to Tanseco albeit by
inference, all the different beliefs of such thousands of religious
sects, denominations, splinter and schismatic groups, must be
equally true and acceptable to God. And so Tanseco ends his
piece by re-interpreting John 14:11-12 as God’s command to
keep focusing “on works of compassion, love and justice,” and
again by inference, we should not give importance to any “one
of many” particular religion and its controversial beliefs.
Let me thus refute Jesuit and still professed Catholic priest
Tanseco through the words of John Paul II written in the same
Crossing the Threshold of Hope, which is in turn based on the
teachings of Vatican II itself:
The Second Vatican Council realized this difficulty.
This is why the document on the relations between the
Church and Hinduism and other religions of the Far East is
so important. We read: In Hinduism men explore the divine
mystery and express it through an endless bounty of myths and
through penetrating philosophical insight. They seek freedom
from the anguish of our human condition, either by way of the
Lux Ex Mundo? 359

ascetic life, profound meditation, or by taking refuge in God
with love and trust. The various schools of Buddhism recognize
the radical inadequacy of this malleable world and teach a way
by which men, with devout and trusting hearts, can become
capable either of reaching a state of perfect liberation, or of
attaining, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme
illumination (Nostra Aetate 2).
Further along, the Council remarks that, “The Catholic
church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these
religions. The Church has a high regard for their conduct
and way of life, for those precepts and doctrines which,
although differing on many points from that which the
Church believes and propounds, often reflect a ray of that
truth which enlightens all men. However, the Church
proclaims, and is bound to proclaim that Christ is ‘the
way and the truth and the life’ (Jn 14:6), in whom men must
find the fullness of religious life and in whom God has
reconciled everything to Himself” (Nostra Aetate 2).
John Paul II picks up the same thread once more in another

section of the book, thusly and more directly refuting Tanseco
et al.’s basic premise:
Here, before all else, we need to explain the Christian
doctrine of salvation and of the mediation of salvation,
which always originates in God. “For there is one God.
There is also one mediator between God and the human race,
Christ Jesus, himself human” (1 Timothy 2:5). “There is no
salvation through . . . any other name” (Acts 4:12).
It is therefore a revealed truth that there is salvation
only and exclusively in Christ. The Church, inasmuch
as it is the Body of Christ, is simply an instrument of
this salvation. In the first words of Lumen Gentium, the
Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of the Second
Vatican Council, we read: “The Church is in Christ as a
sacrament, or a sign and instrument, of intimate union
with God and of the unity of the entire human race”
(Lumen Gentium I). As the people of God the Church is
thus at the same time, the Body of Christ.

About a year earlier however, Pope John Paul II had already
expressed his official stand as “ex-cathedra” Head of the Church
on these same opinions. Later in 1994, he returned to these
same topics in his written answers to questions propounded in
an interview with Italian Radio and Television conducted by
journalist Vittorio Messori. Thus Crossing the Threshold of Hope
is a compilation in book form of Pope John Paul II’s answers
to a series of questions from journalist Messori. Some of those
issues were already addressed in greater detail in his previous
encyclicals, particularly on August 6, 1993 when Veritatis
Splendor (VS) was issued. Thus this particular encyclical picks
up the last piece of thread in the complete answer to the issue of
religious pluralism, in Sections 29 to 34 (inclusive). According
to excerpts of VS therefore, with emphasis supplied:
Nevertheless, (the Church) has the duty to state
that some trends in theological thinking and certain
philosophical affirmations are incompatible with revealed
truth.
In contemporary moral thinking, all discussions are
closely related to one crucial issue: “human freedom”...
but it is expressed sometimes in ways that diverge from
the truth about the human person as a creature in the
image of God, ways that need to be corrected and purified
in the light of faith.
Certain currents in modern thought made of freedom
something absolute, which then becomes the source of
values. In this way the sense of the transcendent is lost, or
one is explicitly atheistic. In this case it is the individual
conscience that decides categorically and infallibly what
is good and what is evil. To the affirmation that one
has to follow one’s conscience is added the affirmation
that a moral judgment is true because it has its origin in
conscience. The inescapable claims of truth disappear,
yielding their place to a criterion of self-alleged sincerity,
authenticity, and of “being at peace with oneself.” Once
the idea of a universal truth about the good, knowable by
Lux Ex Mundo? 361

human reason, is lost, the notion of conscience inevitably
also changes. One’s conscience is then no longer an act of
a person’s intelligence applying the universal knowledge
of good to a particular situation in a judgment about the
right conduct to be chosen here and now. Instead there is
the tendency to grant to the conscience of the individual the
prerogative to determine on its own and independently,
what is good and evil and to act accordingly. In the latter
way each individual is faced with his or her own truth
different from the truth of others. In the final instance it
can lead to a denial of the very idea of human nature.
The questions about freedom and morality cannot
be separated. Though each individual has the right to
be respected in his or her own journey, there remains
a prior moral obligation to seek the truth. As Cardinal
J.H. Newman put it: “Conscience has rights because it has
duties.”
Back to John Courtney Murray S.J.

He was unquestionably the most widely acknowledged
chief architect of the Second Vatican Council’s Declaration on
Religious Freedom (Dignitatis Humanae). In fact Time magazine
had his picture on the front cover in 1960 together with the
usual feature article centered on his being the “intellectual
bellwether (for the) new Catholic and American frontier.”
The accolade was due to Murray’s major contributions in the
special field of theology on public governance and civil laws,
with regards to the church, the state and society, where his
favorite theme was the compatibility of the U.S. Constitution
vis-à-vis Roman Catholicism. It also got him into some minor
trouble, eventually resolved in his favor with his ecclesiastic
superiors.
Tanseco and his pro-contraception crowd are however dead
wrong in using Murray’s significant contributions to Dignitatis
Humanae as Murray’s supposedly unavoidable opposition to
Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae. Tanseco thinks that

Murray, if still alive, would supposedly approve the use of
contraceptives by conscientious Catholics. But Murray was
specifically only against the promulgation of government laws
impinging on private conscience, such as the prohibition of
private contraceptive use, in the same manner that he was
against the Prohibition Law of the 1930s on drinking hard
liquor. Thus Murray made a clear distinction of the role of
government as against that of the Church, only on “matters of
conscience”!
Here is Murray’s famous statement on the choice and use of
contraception “as a matter involving religious freedom”:
First, (in accordance with religious freedom) a man
may not be coercively constrained (forced) to act against his
conscience as a general principle according to Vatican
II in Dignitatis Humanae. Second, a man may not be
coercively restrained (prevented) from acting according to
his conscience, unless the action involves a civil offense
i.e. against public peace and order, against public morality
(such as prostitution), or against the rights of others.
These Murray principles are all solid Catholic teachings with

Vatican II affirmation! And therefore Murray would also have
been critically against our local advocates of a recent Bill in the
Congress of the Philippines which publicly and aggressively
promotes with the expenditure of public funds, the use of
contraceptives and abortifacients. For the Bill also proposes
to penalize and consider as criminals even those doctors and
nurses who will refuse, due to conscience, to administer or to
recommend such drugs! Thus Murray continued:
Since the (private) practice of contraception involves
no such civil offense, therefore the principle of religious
freedom should obtain. And (public) laws in restraint of
the practice are in restraint of religious freedom! [NOTE:
And logically therefore, laws that will force doctors and nurses
to dispense such drugs, against their consciences, must be
UNCONSTITUTIONAL!]
Lux Ex Mundo? 363

But even more relevant to this refutation of Tanseco’s
thesis on sexuality and contraceptives, Murray also stated the
following:
Catholics [NOTE: more so with Catholic priests like Tanseco,
I presume!] must make publicly known the grounds of their
approval (not of the use of contraceptives, but approval
of public laws allowing such use) namely, that they, like all
citizens, are bound on the principles of law, jurisprudence,
and religious freedom . . . Catholics themselves must be made
to understand that, although contraception is not an issue
of public morality to be dealt with by civil law, it remains
for them a moral issue in their (own) families’ lives, to be
decided according to the teaching of the (Catholic) Church.
(Just) because contraception is made legal, it is NOT
(consequently) made moral, anymore than it should be
made illegal simply because it is immoral.
Catholics might well take this public occasion to
demonstrate that their moral position is truly moral, that
is, it is adopted freely, out of personal conviction and in
intelligent loyalty to their Church.
Quod erat demonstrandum!
On Bernard Haring
In brief, this now departed German Redemptorist priest,
prodigious author of some ninety books and a moral theologian
widely acclaimed by his admirers especially among the
modernist and ultra-liberal crowd, was some latter-day Gamaliel.
Gamaliel was a Pharisee in the ruling Sanhedrin who did not
yet believe that Christ was the Messiah and Son of God, but
did not consider Jesus as an enemy, nor deserving to be put to
death.
Early on as a theologian, Bernard Haring was orthodox, even
“conservative” in his theology, particularly in his first magnum
opus, Law of Christ written in 1954. Academic liberals even
criticized it because it was without the usual gobbledygook,

though seemingly scholarly arguments, of modernists. It was
plainly homiletic in a style of his own. Frequently sought as a
Retreat Master, even Pope Paul VI himself designated Haring
to conduct the annual retreat for him and the entire Vatican
Curia in 1964.
Supposedly a prayerful person of deep spirituality and
steeped in the Sacraments, it is almost incredible that in 1968,
Bernard Haring, the Catholic priest and moral theologian,
publicly and harshly criticized his erstwhile patron Paul VI
for having issued the controversial encyclical Humanae Vitae.
Haring’s reaction to John Paul II’s 1993 encyclical Veritatis
Splendor was even more vitriolic and ad hominem:
Let us ask our pope: Are you sure your confidence
in your supreme human, professional and religious
competence in matters of moral theology and particularly
sexual ethics is truly justified? We should let the pope
know that we are wounded by the many signs of his rooted
distrust and discouraged by the manifold structures of
distrust which he has allowed to be established.
Lord have mercy on the soul of Bernard Haring! And also on

all those who today similarly react against Pope Benedict XVI
and His Holiness’ staunch defense of our “one, holy, catholic
and apostolic Church!”
The Thriving Wheat among the Choking Weeds!
Sunday the 12th of June of 2005 was Philippine Independence
Day, commemorating our liberation from some 400 years of
subjugation under Spain. I was at the 5 A.M. Mass at our parish
church, the Archdiocesan Shrine of St. Joseph in Quezon City,
a half kilometer away from my residence at the “18 Storey Tall
Cross.” The Mass celebrant was apparently a new priest I had
never met before nor heard.
It was his well-prepared homily referring to the recent
explosive media revelations of lurid allegations of corruption
and electoral cheating, but vehemently denied by the adminis-
Lux Ex Mundo? 365

tration of President Macapagal Arroyo, that caught my rapt
attention. He was calling for a prayerful sobriety in the midst
of the intensified political and economic turmoil generated
among our citizenry. But with a John Delaney-like emphasis on
the Holy Mass as the centerpiece of prayerful discernment, the
priest asked for our unselfish yet militantly Christian personal
response to the gathering storm facing our nation.
Political action and search for social justice by people without a
prayer-life rooted in our Faith is mere and useless ACTIVISM. And such
a personal prayer-life and seeming piety without any involvement
in good works and promotion of justice, is the other extreme of the
pendulum swing which is FANATICISM! For it is far from adequate to
TALK incessantly about justice, nor even to WORK for justice, if you
yourself are not IN THE SPIRITUAL STATE OF JUSTICE AND LOVE above all!
That was the gist of his homily. Eagerly, I went to see him
immediately after the Mass to express my gratitude for his
most timely and relevant message.
Lo and behold, he was indeed newly assigned to our Parish,
and a scion of a well-known clan of the town of Bacacay in my
home province of Albay. Fr. Emmanuel “Noli” Alparce turned
out to be the son of my U.P. contemporary Attorney Orlando
“Orly” Alparce, and nephew of my Sta. Isabel colegiala friend
in Naga some 55 years ago—Bett Alparce, sister of Orly!
Compared to Bernard Haring and neo-Jesuits, his academic
and intellectual credentials could be much less. But to my
delight, his wisdom was outstanding! He ended up having
breakfast at home together with me and Daisie and exchanging
mutual promises to work together henceforth, in the vineyard
of the Lord.
From a most unlikely source and personality, very similar
to that of my late brother Toti, is a providential reminder for
everybody and myself in particular. It is from the voluminous
but still unpublished writings, nay, scribblings of my friend
and raconteur extraordinaire, Fr. Guido F. Arguelles S.J.! Guido
and Toti were also a frequent pair who were their own private

testing grounds for new outrageous jokes, hilarious stories,
and profound pro-poor ideas. Thus their friends and relatives,
upon hearing these, would either burst out in prolonged
raucous laughter, or bow down their heads in embarrassment.
It was these priests’ way of pricking our consciences. For we
had clung to our luxuries, yet still neglected the caring for and
seeing Christ among barely surviving neighbors.
THE WAY, THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE

You drift farther from the truth
if you cover your lies with more of the same.
Our nation is adrift because
our political, religious and economic leaders
cannot fathom the depth of their own lies.
Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life.
None of us are. Thus the need for all of us
To look deeply and honestly at our own hearts.
The history of the Holy Mother church is littered
with unholy deeds.
The history of politics is awashed with the blood
of millions.
The history of economics is darkened by its exploitation
of the powerless.
Has history changed? A resounding NO!
Let us all face up to our lies so that we can begin
Our unending and painful journey to the Truth.
—Guido F. Arguelles S.J.
From The Depths
And yet it seems that even with all these proofs, citations
and exhortations, our neo-Jesuit friends and their like-minded
theological allies have deliberately qualified themselves to be
admonished by Isaiah’s prophetic words which have just been
echoed by Father Guido:
Listen carefully, but you shall not understand! Look intently,
but you shall know nothing! The hearts of this people are
Lux Ex Mundo? 367

sluggish, their ears dull and their eyes closed. Otherwise their
eyes will see, their ears will hear, their hearts will understand,
and they will turn and be healed.
This prophecy condemning obstinate impenitence taken

from Isaiah 6:10 must be of greater significance today. For
Christ Himself repeated it and was recorded for posterity
three more times. In Matthew 13: 13-15, Mark 4: 11-12, and
even more clearly explained, in Luke 8: 10-15. For obstinacy in
sin and error among priests and intellectuals can only have its
deepest roots in pride and disobedience!
Papa Bene and the Constancy of Truth
A few hours after the first draft of this chapter was written
on the morning of April 19, 2005, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was
elected as the new Pope and Vicar of Christ! I could only say
humbly but ecstatically, Amen! Hosanna!! Halellujah!!! And
long live Pope Benedict XVI!
I hasten to add however that there will surely be those who
will be dismayed or even angry with the apparently quick and
decisive consensus arrived at by at least a two-thirds majority
of the 115 Cardinal-electors in choosing the staunch “Defender
and Enforcer” of Pope John Paul II. For Cardinal Ratzinger was
the latter’s head of the Vatican Congregation on The Doctrine
of the Faith, and thus the previous Pope’s chief theologian,
adviser, and disciplinarian on doctrinal matters.
I firmly believe however that His Holiness, the new Papa
Bene, is fully aware of and will emulate Jesus Christ as his
model for holy and wise steadfastness. For in the face of ob-
stinate unbelief even among His closest associates, the Truth
Personified did not buckle down nor compromise the constancy
of Truth. Even after many of his disciples withdrew and no
longer followed Him, out of disgust and in protest when
Christ repeatedly proclaimed: “Truly, I say to you, if you do
not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you
have no life in you . . . My flesh is really food and My blood is

drink . . . So whoever eats me will have life from Me.” (John 6: 53-
57) And Jesus then asked the Apostles, “Will you also go away?”
with Peter answering for all twelve, “Lord, to whom (else) shall
we go? You have the words of eternal life. We now believe and
know that you are the Holy One of God.” (John 6: 67-69)
May the 265th successor of St. Peter be even more staunch
and eternally rewarded as John Paul the Great, as I am sure he
will be, in defending and preserving the pristine Catholic Faith
of our forefathers!
A Timely Reminder
From among the priests and contemplative nuns of the
Franciscans whom I have been privileged to serve as a lay
Eucharist Minister at their monastery near our “18-storey Tall
Cross,” and whom I had asked to pray for me while I was
writing this book, I received the following friendly admonition
and reminder through my friend, Fr. Efren “EJ” Jimenez OFM:
Where there is charity and wisdom,
there is neither fear nor ignorance.
Where there is patience and humility,
there is neither anger nor disturbance.
Where there is poverty with joy,
there is neither cupidity nor avarice.
Where there is contemplation and meditation,
there is neither anxiousness nor restlessness.
Where there is fear of God to guard the house,
there the enemy cannot gain entrance.
—St. Francis of Assisi
Admonition # 27
Lux Ex Mundo? 369

Chapter 22
NEO-JESUIT CENSORS
A final and well-documented example of neo-Jesuitry in

this country, was an episode related to the death of my brother
Toti, Antonio B. Olaguer S.J. My brother had left his unedited
handwritten manuscript of the second volume of Waiting for
the Lord with instructions to have it published. It was the sequel
to an earlier book, which already had the imprimatur of our
two Filipino Cardinals, centered on the prophecies and related
messages of Our Lady. These messages were those given to the
children Lucia, Jacinta, and Francisco at Fatima in 1917, and to
the Reverend Fr. Stefano Gobbi over a period of some 25 years
since 1973.
Toti died as a Jesuit and so we submitted his manuscript to
the Jesuit Father Provincial with all the funds he had solicited
to cover the costs of publishing and distributing the books. The
manuscript was virulently condemned by the Jesuit Censor, as
“not in accordance with Jesuit doctrine and reputation!”
This shocked Toti’s many friends and relatives, considering
that Archbishops Jaime Cardinal Sin of Metro Manila and
Ricardo Cardinal Vidal of Cebu had already given their
imprimaturs, plus the fact that the Fatima and its related Gobbi
“messages” had already been widely circulated and accepted
in the highest Catholic circles including the Vatican, albeit not
as obligatory articles of faith.
My immediate point-by-point refutation of the official Jesuit
Censor’s Report was never acknowledged, much less replied to
by the Jesuit Provincial or his successor. I decided not to make
any further fuss other than to furnish copies of my written
arguments to several Bishops and the Apostolic Nuncio. Only

Cardinal Sin and Bishop Varela of Sorsogon in Bicolandia
replied with their consoling advice and comments.
The main points raised by the Jesuit Censor against the
book had to do with the usual questions raised about too much
emphasis given on Mary, to the point of diminishing the role
of Jesus as Savior and sole Mediator between God and man. To
Marian devotees, however, the very people accused or at least
suspected of elevating the Virgin Mary to unwarranted status,
there was no confusion of roles, no taking away in whatever
manner from Jesus as Lord and Savior. The context of the
Marian messages, such as those recorded by Fr. Stefano Gobbi
from which Father Toti’s manuscript drew heavily, had always
been clear to these devotees.
As for those who were less acquainted with the Marian
messages, there was no problem or ambiguity that a short
explanation or editorial note, or even some passages from
the Gobbi messages themselves, could not have remedied.
Proscribing the book on the say-so of the Jesuit superior was
an extreme, unwarranted move.
Here are some key documents and excerpts covering
that episode, and taken from their duplicate originals or
subsequent machine copies with subsequent minor re-editing
and reformatting:
December 3, 2002
The Feast of St. Francis Xavier S.J.
UT UNUM SINT
THAT WE CATHOLIC FILIPINOS MAY BE UNITED
THROUGH MARY IN OUR CATHOLIC FAITH
BACKGROUND
The late Rev. Fr. Antonio B. Olaguer of the Society of
Jesus, a Bicolano by birth, died on the weekend of the Bicol
Feast of Our Lady of Peñafrancia on September 16, 2001.
Sometime in October of 1987, he went through a radical
conversion and transformation into a Marian Jesuit priest
Neo-Jesuit Censors 371

while on a pilgrimage with relatives and friends to Our
Lady’s world famous apparition site at Medjugorje.
Though still not officially approved by Holy Mother
Church authorities, we are hopeful that eventually She
will give her approval, considering that “by their fruits
you shall know them” at Medjugorje.
Thereafter Fr. Toti’s constant theme and take-off for
his homilies, writings, and priestly activities was Ad
Jesum per Mariam, towards a Catholic Church of the Poor.
Subsequently, for a few years he also became the National
Director of the Marian Movement of Priests in the footsteps
of his predecessor, the late Lorenzo Ma. Guerrero, a
fellow Jesuit who died some seven years ago. As National
Director he constantly traveled throughout the world, but
especially in his native land, propagating and explaining
Our Lady’s Messages given through Fr. Stefano Gobbi, the
Founder of the Movement, as these were being received
and published in the Blue Book (originally entitled: Our
Lady Speaks to Her Beloved Priests) since 1973.
Just before Fr. Toti Olaguer died, he had just about
finished, albeit unpolished and still unedited, an
integrated compilation of his Marian and Blue Book-
inspired homilies, Mindanao radio-broadcasts, religious
seminar materials, and writings, intended for publishing
into a modest book to be entitled Waiting for the Lord.
In the hope of continuing the propagation of Fr. Toti’s
priestly endeavors, a few of his friends and relatives
representing many more and larger groups throughout
the Philippines, decided to submit the manuscripts
together with its still unedited and hastily printed dummy
in book form to his Jesuit Superiors for comments, review,
and hopefully to obtain their Imprimatur. Originally, this
group had wanted to submit it instead for such a review
to well-known kindred Marian spirits among Church
authorities who had already consistently supported Fr.
Toti’s endeavors even among their own diocesan clergy
and mandated lay organizations, such as their Eminences
Cardinals Sin and Vidal, among others.

But in the spirit of loyalty and obedience to the Society
of Jesus, to which Fr. Toti professed allegiance as a Jesuit
until the day he died, the group was prevailed upon by a
close relative to submit this for review to the Philippine
Jesuit Provincial Superiors sometime in October of 2001.
Incidentally, earlier on, Fr. Toti’s relatives had already
surrendered every single Philippine peso and U.S. dollar
of the sizeable funds his friends had earlier raised and
donated to Fr. Toti for his Marian-inspired projects.
The Jesuit Superiors may have assigned the Censor’s
detailed review work to others, hence perhaps their
present anonymity. Some 13 months later however on
November 25 this year, the group (none of whom are
former Jesuits, by the way) received the sought-for but
unsigned (hence anonymous) Censor’s Report supposedly
based on the “Practical Compendium of the Law of
the Society of Jesus,” and which is serially reproduced
verbatim hereunder.
And so in the hope of rendering justice and sharing
charity with all concerned, that same close relative who
advised the original group of Fr. Toti’s friends and
relatives to put their complete trust in Fr. Toti’s brother
Jesuits, has prepared the following Rebuttal of these
totally negative and even sarcastic Censor’s comments.
The full responsibility for this rebuttal is thus hereby
accepted by that close relative, Fr. Toti’s younger brother,
namely I, Eduardo B. Olaguer.
I wish to share this information with the whole world,
if possible or if necessary, in the hope that by these means
other Jesuits, particularly in the Philippines, will realize
the terrible injustice and/or harm being done to Holy
Mother Church, the Pope, the Jesuits, and their Ateneo
alumni who are still loyal to the Pope, and to the memory
of Fr. Toti himself and his mother, our mother, Mama
Mary herself, by anti-Catholic doctrinal interpretations
coming from the highest levels of the Society of Jesus in
the Philippines.

My rebuttal for and in behalf of Jesuit Fr. Toti Olaguer
is not really mine, because my arguments and citations
come principally and explicitly from:
a) the Catechism of the Catholic Church, from the English
translation for the Philippines copyright 1994, Episcopal
Commission on Catechesis, and Catholic Education of the
Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, Libreria
Editrice Vaticana;
b) the Holy Bible;
c) Pope John Paul II, particularly among others,
his Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis and his latest
Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte; and
d) To Seek and To Find The Will of God: The Spiritual
Exercises of St. Ignatius in Everyday Life, published by the
Philippine Province of the Society of Jesus in 1988.
And so unless the quotations and citations from
these magisterial sources are inappropriate to the issues
involved, hopefully these rebuttals will swing the
preponderance of the Magisterium’s credibility not so
much on the side of Fr. Toti Olaguer’s manuscript on
Waiting for the Lord, as on the side of the efficacious truth
behind Our Lady’s real motherhood, albeit “in the order
of Grace,” over the People of God, and the absolutely
unerring love and loyalty of Mary to her Son Jesus Christ,
as true Man and true God.
For a better and more convenient reading and
understanding, I have inserted each specific rebuttal
after every corresponding comment of the unknown
Censor(s). The latter ostensibly with the official support
of the Society of Jesus and being totally negative and even
personally pejorative (ad hominem!), to the point of caustic
sarcasm, very clear and complete rebuttal–arguments
have therefore become necessary.
EDUARDO B. OLAGUER
1045 Aurora Blvd., Quezon City


CENSOR’S REPORT
[Confer Practical Compendium of the Law
of the Society of Jesus, Appendix Two, pages 292-304]
The manuscript entitled Waiting For The Lord, Volume 2
(Antonio B. Olaguer, S.J.) has been submitted to me for
censorship, and after careful study, my view is that:
A. It is in accord with faith and morals, but vitiated by
excessive rhetoric and shallow theology with misleading
insinuations.
B. It is NOT consonant with the Society’s doctrine and
reputation.
C. It is not offensive to any person or any group of
persons, to the detriment of the Church or the
Society.
Therefore, I submit the following judgment:
C. The manuscript should NOT be published. My reasons
are given below.

SUMMARY OF CENSOR’S OBJECTIONS

AND CORRESPONDING REBUTTALS
IN BEHALF OF THE LATE FR. TOTI OLAGUER, S.J.
page 1, paragraph 2: “Faith in itself, apart from

what it does for us, is the act of taking the word of some
person to be the truth. That person in the Christian faith is
Jesus Christ. By word and deed, he has revealed the truth,
recorded in Scripture, particularly in his Gospel. In fact,
he has revealed himself to be the Truth. “
Censor(s) Objection: The understanding of ‘faith’

presented here is very narrow, and distorts a very rich
concept. [underscoring supplied for Rebuttal’s reference]

REBUTTAL
Our Catechism (here and hereinafter referring to the

Catechism of the Catholic Church as previously noted)
describes “faith” as follows:
To obey in faith is to submit freely to the word
that has been heard because its truth is guaranteed
by God, who is Truth itself. Abraham is the model of
such obedience offered us by Sacred Scriptures. The
Virgin Mary is its most perfect embodiment. (page 45,
paragraph 144)
Thus if the Censor is to be consistent, he will find our

Catholic Catechism’s definition to be even more “narrow”
and a greater “distortion”!
II
page 1, paragraph 3: “For our present purpose,

however, the persons whose word we take to be true are
our Blessed Mother Mary and our Holy Father, Pope John
Paul II. If we believe them, the word they speak to us leads
us to Christ Jesus.”
Censor’s Objection: It is odd to begin with Mary
and the Pope as practically the objects of faith. Normal
Catholic teaching would see Scripture and Tradition
as more fundamental channels of revelation that feeds
Catholic faith.
REBUTTAL
And so, if it is ‘odd’ for Fr. Toti Olaguer to begin his

definition of Faith with Jesus Christ the Truth Himself
similar to our Catechism‘s above quoted definition,
and following it with “Blessed Mother Mary” (but still
mentioning the Gospel afterwards), for his “present
purpose” of explaining his book, which is on a relatively
very limited subject, it must be a thousand times more
‘odd’ for the Censor to see that our Catechism compiled
by the Catholic Magisterium on the whole Catholic Faith

itself, similarly starts its Faith definition with Christ
who is God, followed by citing Abraham as a model
and lastly the same Blessed Virgin Mary as the “most
perfect [sic] embodiment” of faith in God. Whom should
we then “believe” as to what is doctrinally “odd,” the
Censor/Accuser of Fr. Toti Olaguer S.J., or our Catholic
Magisterium?
And of course Scripture and Tradition are the more
fundamental channels of revelation, which need not be
explicitly repeated every time, unless it is a dissertation on
the supernatural virtue of faith. And the Pope, especially
the present one, would be the last person to be suspected
of speaking out publicly and contrary to Scriptures and
Tradition.
III
page 1, paragraph 6: “The word from our Blessed

Mother which we take to be true is in the messages
which she has given us through Fr. Stefano Gobbi and
are compiled in what we refer to as the Blue Book. For
25 years these messages have been regularly scrutinized
and approved by proper Church authority. Since nothing
has been found in these messages that’s contrary to the
Church’s teachings, we’ve taken Mother Mary’s word to
be true and able to lead us to the Truth.”
Censor’s Objection: To what extent is a private
revelation to be held up as a basis for faith? That the
Church has not condemned does not necessarily indicate
positive approval.
REBUTTAL
Our answer to the first question, a well-known issue

discussed in First Year College Theology classes in most
Catholic schools and seminaries, is that of the post-Vatican
II Catholic Catechism which says on page 30, paragraph
67:
Throughout the ages, there have been so-called
private revelations, some of which have been

recognized by the authority of the Church. They
do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith.
It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s
definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by
it in a certain period of history. [bold type supplied]
Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus
fidelium know how to discern and welcome in these
revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of
Christ or his saints to the Church.”
From the tone and substance of the Censor’s question
and following comment above, it is obvious that:
1) the Censor(s) is not aware or perhaps has forgotten
the above-quoted Catechetical instruction; and
2) neither is he/she/they (to be gender sensitive for
once!) sufficiently knowledgeable about Fr. Stefano
Gobbi’s Blue Book entitled To the Priests: Our Lady’s Beloved
Sons which has obtained the unqualified Imprimatur of
some 200 different Cardinals, Archbishops and Bishops
throughout the world, and the enthusiastic and spiritually
fruitful and documented acceptance by over 70,000
Diocesan and Religious priests, plus at least a million
lay advocates similar to our group, all of them under the
spiritual umbrella of the Marian Movement of Priests,
for more than 25 years! Furthermore, aside from his
Imprimatur on an earlier Blue Book edition, His Eminence
Jaime Cardinal Sin has even allowed the distribution of
these to his priests as reading material during or after
their Spiritual Retreats as far back as some 10 years ago.
What better and more authentic “discernment” and
spiritually fruitful acceptance, than this worldwide 25-
year-long “sensus fidelium” with prior guidance by the
Church Magisterium, could our incredulous Censor(s)
ask for, so that he/she/they will at least NOT presume or
expect that these particular private revelations through
Fr. Gobbi may someday be “condemned” by the Church?
Especially considering that there is absolutely no basis
over the last 25 years or so, for such a “condemnation” to
be forthcoming!

The devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, for example,
all stemmed from the “private revelations” given through
St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, and became widespread
throughout the Church because of the support of her Jesuit
friends and believers. And yet these private revelations
have never been officially approved by the Church till
today!
IV
page 2, paragraph 2: “God did not create man for

life in isolation, but for the formation of social unity. So
also it has pleased God to make men holy and save them
not merely as individuals without any mutual bonds,
but by making them into a single people, a people which
acknowledges Him in truth and serves Him in holiness.
So from the beginning of salvation history He has chosen
men not just as individuals but as members of a certain
community. Revealing his mind to them, God called these
chosen ones his people (Ex 3:7-12) and, furthermore, made
a covenant with them on Sinai.”
Censor’s Objection: It might help to be more gender

sensitive, here and throughout the book.
REBUTTAL
Now the reader will understand why our own “gender

sensitivity” has been tickled pink somewhat, in our
previous Rebuttal statements . . .
Levity aside, if the word of God as expressed in
the overwhelming majority of translations of Sacred
Scripture, in the Official Catechism of the Church which
Catholics are using throughout the world, our Catholic
Liturgy especially in the Mass, or the Roman Catholic
Pontiffs’ encyclicals and Apostolic Letters, and even the
Jesuit Generals’ official communications to the entire
Jesuit congregation, invariably have used and STILL use
the usual masculine gender for God, the Holy Spirit, the

Christian brethren, and mankind (referring to both man
and woman), why should Fr. Toti be sarcastically chided
for having used the same level of “gender sensitivity” for
his book?
It is therefore NOT a case of Fr. Toti’s lack of gender
sensitivity. It is a clear case of inappropriate flaunting by
the Censor(s) of his/her modernistic albeit dubious views
and support for so-called avant-garde feminist groups’
accusations against the supposed male chauvinism of the
Catholic Church.
At the very least, it is also a case of pettiness and
misplaced sarcasm. And pray tell, would the Censor(s) use
the pronoun “IT” when referring to the Holy Spirit, Who
is Love divinely personified? Reductio ad absurdum . . .
page 2, paragraph 4: “As the first born of many

brethren and through the gift of His Spirit, He founded
after his death and resurrection a new brotherly community
composed of all those who receive Him in faith and in
love. This He did through His body, which is the Church.
There everyone, as members one of the other, would render
mutual service according to the different gifts bestowed
on each.”
Censor(s) Objection: Easter faith is what grounds
the Church, but Jesus certainly initiated the process
of gathering “a new brotherly community” during his
ministry.
REBUTTAL
Now, the Censor is plainly nitpicking again by finding

fault with the precise moment when the Catholic Church
(“a new brotherly community”) was officially born which
was after the Resurrection, just because Fr. Toti did not
mention the fact that Christ’s preparatory work was
started 3 years earlier, nay, even 30 years earlier when
He was born. The Catholic Catechism in fact says (page

199, para. 816): “The sole Church of Christ [is that] which
our Savior, after his Resurrection, entrusted to Peter’s
pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles
to extend and rule it.”
VI
page 3, paragraph 1: “In her messages given

through Fr. Stefano Gobbi, compiled in what we call the
Blue Book, Mother Mary tells us that she has been sent to
us by the Lord God on a Mission (373e). The object of her
Mission is threefold: to bring us our salvation in Jesus;
to announce his victory over Satan and the forces of evil;
and to prepare the way for his glorious return. In several
messages, Mother Mary also tells us that she has a plan for
accomplishing her Mission. In (chapter) 126, for instance,
an important component of her plan is that it can be carried
out only through us. We refer to the accomplishment of
her Mission as the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of
Mary.”
Censor(s) Objection: To say “only through us” may
be excessive, and misleading, rhetoric for making the
point that we do have an important role to play in the
work of salvation.
Mary’s mission as the “Triumph of the Immaculate
Heart of Mary” edges towards Mariolatry in expression,
if not in intent.
REBUTTAL
Wow! Again this particular comment must have

stemmed from the Censor(s)’ lack of adequate knowledge
about Mother Mary’s messages addressed primarily to
her Beloved Priests (extended to the Laity by virtue of
their Baptism’s sharing in the priestly role) as published
in the Blue Book, particularly Message No. 126 which was
referred to by the author, Fr. Olaguer, entitled “My Plan,”
which states in particular that:

126b It is you, O priests, sons of my maternal
predilection, who are the strategic elements of
this plan.
c My plan can be carried out only through you . . . .
f It is for me to arrange everything according to
the plan prepared long ago by my Immaculate
Heart, in the light of the wisdom of God.
g Some of you will be called in the line of action . . . .
n My priest-sons, I am now calling you from every
part of the world . . . Let yourselves be assembled
by me; let everyone answer with a yes . . . Only
then will I have completed my plan and will the
cohort of my priests (those consecrated to her) be
ready.
Thus Our Lady through Fr. Gobbi says that priests
do not just “have an important role” in the economy of
salvation, but together with the Laity they are meant
precisely to perform indispensable strategic roles within
the Mystical Body for the salvation of mankind. How
could these be ‘excessive and misleading rhetoric’? And
if this Plan and Mission of Our Lady succeeds, why would
it be ‘Mariolatry’ to call it the Triumph of her Immaculate
Heart? Was it therefore also ‘Mariolatry’ for the Blessed
Trinity to crown Our Lady after her assumption into
Heaven, as Queen of Heaven and Earth?
If so, the universally accepted prayer “Hail Holy
Queen,” Pope John Paul II’s personal and Papal motto
“Totus Tuus,” as well as St. Bernard’s thousand-year-old
“Prayer Consecration to Our Lady” (which starts with “O
my Queen, O my Mother, I give myself entirely to you . . . ”
and ends with “And therefore, O good Mother, as I am thine.
keep me, guard me as thy property and possession…”), are all
unadulterated heretical Mariolatry too?
The eminent Jesuit priests who taught and led many
of us in the Ateneo’s classrooms in reciting St. Bernard’s
Prayer everyday without fail, must be, in the light of
our Censor(s)’ Mariological point of view, also heretical
idolaters of the Virgin Mary, or at best theological

ignoramuses, especially St. Bernard! Reductio ad absurdum
once again.
And so too with the Jesuits’ Founder, St. Ignatius of
Loyola! In his Autobiography by Joseph F. O’Callaghan, it
is written that after Ignatius became a priest, he decided
to spend a year without saying Mass! Wow! And why?
Only in order to prepare himself and to beg Our Lady
to “place him with her Son Jesus.” And subsequently
indeed, one day while praying in a Church a few miles
from Rome, St. Ignatius realized very clearly that God
the Father Himself “had placed him with His Son Jesus
Christ.” Ad Jesum per Mariam ad Patrem . . .
And this incident in the life of St. Ignatius has been
highlighted in the 1988 Spiritual Retreat Guidebook
of the Philippine Jesuits, under then Father Provincial
Bienvenido Nebres S.J. within the pattern set by St. Igna-
tius’ famous Spiritual Exercises. And following this Jesuit-
popularized Ad Jesus per Mariam ad Patrem spirituality (by
most Jesuits circa 50 to 70 especially 400 years ago!), in that
same Guidebook for the Ignatian Exercises, designed for
Jesuits for their use during Spiritual Retreats, a frequent
prayer-colloquy is prescribed “in the presence of Mary,
of Jesus her Son, and (the) Father, in Heaven” for the
purpose of “establishing and confirming a personal
relationship with the Father or Jesus or Mary” (p. xii).
Was St. Ignatius himself and his famous Spiritual
Exercises a combined case of Mariolatry and imprudence,
for having placed Mary in the same level as God the
Father and the Son, and believing in “a private revelation”
without Church approval? Ubinam gentium sumus, hodie?
VII
page 3, paragraph 2: “But first, before everything

else, we have to dispose our hearts and minds in order
to see and appreciate what we’re trying to do. We have
to have faith. That is to say, we take the word of some
person for what is true. In our present case, Mother Mary
herself and our Holy Father, Pope John Paul II. We believe

him because we recognize and acknowledge his authority,
which means that his word helps us grow in the spiritual
life of grace. For us to believe, we do not argue or discuss,
much less critique his word. It’s enough to know what
he’s really saying. We believe, then we’ll understand in
the Spirit.”
Censor(s) Objection: Mary and the Pope in the
forefront seem to be missing the more basic fonts
on which “faith” is built: Scripture and Tradition
enlightened by the prompting of the Spirit within the
context of an ecclesial community. Mary and the Pope
are being uprooted from the setting in which they play
an important, though contributory role, in the history of
salvation, and made almost absolutes.
REBUTTAL
It seems that not only is our Censor(s) habitually

allergic but also sharply in disagreement with the
Catholic doctrinal view that our Lady is “the most perfect
embodiment of faith in God.” In addition, he/she/
they apparently also are allergic to the Pope as one of
the visible “forefronts” and “basic fonts” on which our
Catholic Faith is enhanced, thus obviously disregarding
the fact that it was Christ Himself who installed Peter as
such.
“Tu es Petrus et super hanc petram, aedificabo ecclesiam
meam, and never will the powers of death overcome it.”
The simple Latin translation from this verse in Matthew
16 makes Christ sound even more majestic and autho-
ritative. Behind that verse is the Catholic Church’s
unbending exegetical support for the ecclesial supremacy
of our first Pope Peter and his unbroken line of successors
throughout the ages all the way to Pope John Paul II
today, as the visible Head of His Mystical Body. And so
the Pope must, by duty and necessity, be also a basic font
and Pontiff (bridge) at the “forefront” of salvation history.
Thus it is the Censor(s) who would like to “uproot” the

Pope from this God-ordained pre-eminent position and
to reduce him to a mere “contributory role.”
The Censor(s) also cleverly attempt to hide behind
Scripture, Tradition, and the Holy Spirit “within the
context of an ecclesial community” by insinuating that Fr.
Toti disregarded all these other basic fonts of our Catholic
Faith, just because he mentioned only Our Lady and
the Pope in the subject paragraph. And yet Fr. Toti had
already acknowledged the key role of the Gospel and all
the above in the preceding paragraphs! Including the Pope
and the Catholic Magisterium united with him! Because
without the latter and their collegial unity with the Pope,
Scripture and Tradition will be subject to thousands of
different and contradicting interpretations. It is in fact the
Censor(s) who have failed to mention these two essential
guiding elements for the proper and Catholic exegesis and
hermeneutics of Scripture and Tradition . . .
VIII
page 3, paragraph 3: “The other aspect of our pre-

disposition is (to) think Body. We comport ourselves
as members of the one Body of Christ. Not as mere
individuals.”
Censor(s) Objection: paragraphs 2 & 3 seem to be
repeating in essence what was already presented on
pages 1-2.
REBUTTAL
Earlier in his objection/comment No. 7, our nitpicking

Censor(s) decried the absence in the paragraph (albeit
mentioned in a previous one) of his favored modernist
phrase “within the context of an ecclesial community.”
Meaning, members of the Church or Mystical Body of
Christ working together for Christ, and in Christ. For
such is the phraseology Fr. Toti and his Catholic Jesuit
contemporaries preferred. Now that Fr. Toti briefly
repeats the same idea but with the catch phrase “think

Body,” the Censor(s) consider it as sophomoric and
repetitive.
But in the Jesuit Ratio Studiorum, familiar to Fr. Toti and
some of us, repetition is an essential and effective tool for
communication, learning and emphasis. And so likewise,
our aforecited Jesuit Guidebook for Spiritual Retreats
uses the very same repetitive technique as shown by its
instructions for “Repetition” appearing successively in
many of its pages. Aw shucks . . .
IX
page 3, paragraph 4: “We come now to Mother

Mary’s Plan. We begin with our Consecration to the
Immaculate Heart of Mary. Totus Tuus, says the Pope.
We entrust ourselves completely to Blessed Mother Mary
(69e), just as Jesus did entrust himself completely to her,
in his divinity as well as in his humanity (287s-v). She
can then be a Mother to us just as she was Mother to her
Son Jesus (287z). As our Mother, she would take care of
everything (5i), think of everything (111i), even act through
us (6d). Her task as Mother is to make each one of us into
‘a living copy of my Son Jesus’ (69g).”
Censor(s) Objection: Beginning with Mary seems to
bring about a false focus, one that would be disastrous
for any kind of ecumenical dialogue.
Jesus’ entrusting “his divinity “ to Mary also seems
to invite the type of errors prevalent in Monophysite
thought.
“Mother to us just as she was Mother to her Son
Jesus” is not exactly accurate and needs to be qualified.
Furthermore, the last two sentences seem to have Mary
replace the Holy Spirit.
REBUTTAL
Here we go again! Poor Mary, despite her Vatican II’s

official confirmation as Mother of the Church, she seems
to have no place to fit within the Church that would please

our Censor(s)! Now his/her/their fears of offending
kindred anti-Mary spirits, themselves included, would
have us shut Mary away, for the same reasons why many
modernist-inclined parishes in the U.S. of A. have re-
moved her statues and those of any other saints, including
the Corpus of Christ on the Cross, away from the altars,
nay the whole Church interior, into somewhere unseen
and forgotten. As justification, they piously claim that
Mary and the saints might or will dilute the importance
of Christ, or the Father, and/or the Holy Spirit. And that
it would be “disastrous” for ecumenism. Exactly such
perhaps is the ecumenical orientation of those behind the
design of the brand new Church of the Gesu at the Ateneo
campus in Quezon City, This supposedly “modernistic”
church-building absolutely has NONE of the traditional
statues of saints and of Our Lady, and except for the nails,
not even the Corpus Christi on the huge thus empty cross
[NOTE: since this was written, the cross now has a corpus] . . .
But here is what our Catechism has to say about this
pernicious point of view:
paragraph 966 She is our Mother in the order of
grace! [Exclamation point supplied for emphasis!]
paragraph 967 By her complete adherence to the
Father’s will, to his Son’s redemptive work, and to
every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is
the Church’s model of faith and charity. Thus she is a
“preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church”;
indeed, she is the “exemplary realization” (typus) of the
Church.”
paragraph 968 Her role in relation to the Church and
to all humanity goes still further. “In a wholly singular way
she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope and burning
charity in the Savior’s work of restoring supernatural life
to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order
of grace.”
paragraph 969 “This motherhood of Mary in the
order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent
which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she

sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the
eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she
did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold
intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal sal-
vation . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the
Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress,
and Mediatrix.”
paragraph 970 “Mary’s function as mother of
men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique
mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But
the Blessed Virgin’s salutary influence on men . . .
flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of
Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it
and draws all its power from it .” “No creature could
ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and
Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is
shared in various ways both by his ministers and the
faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated
in different ways among his creatures, so also the
unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude
but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which
is but a sharing in this one source.”
II. DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN
paragraph 971 “All generations will call me blessed”:
“The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is
intrinsic to Christian worship.” The Church rightly
honors “the Blessed Virgin with special devotion.
From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has
been honored with the title of ‘Mother of God,’ to
whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers
and needs . . . This very special devotion . . . differs
essentially from the adoration which is given to the
incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the
Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration.”
And here is a recent article straight from the Vatican’s

Communication Center headlined “Mary as a Boost for
Ecumenical Dialogue”:

MARY AS A BOOST FOR ECUMENICAL DIALOGUE
A Waldensian’s View at the End of Forum on Mariology
ROME, Nov. 25, 2002 (Zenit.org)—Mary seems
to have become a reason for dialogue, rather than
division, among separated Christians.
That was a view that arose at the 3rd International
Forum on Mariology, which closed Sunday in Lecco,
Italy. The initiative, organized by the Pontifical
Marian Academy, was encouraged by John Paul II.
In a telegram addressed to the participants, the
Pope said he hoped the event would “inspire a
renewed fervor of Mariological studies.”
During the meeting, the person of Mary was
analyzed from the biblical, theological, spiritual,
liturgical, and ecumenical points of view. Thus, the
Lecco forum continued the kind of ecumenical re-
flection about Mary promoted by the French Dombes
Group of Catholic and Lutheran theologians.
Among the speakers in Lecco was professor
Renzo Bertalot, pastor of the Waldensian Church, a
dissident group with roots in 12th-century France.
Quoting Martin Luther, the pastor, who is also
a consultor of the Marian Academy, spoke of the
way Mary made God’s action possible through her
listening.
Bertalot spoke with Vatican Radio today about
the role Mary plays in the dialogue among separated
Christians.
“The figure of Mary is the last of the five points
that the present Pontiff proposes for ecumenical
rethinking,” Bertalot said. “On this point, notable
progress has been made, moving from opposition
to convergence, that is, examining the points of
difficulty and those that are being surmounted.”
The pastor said he agrees with the Dombes Group’s
suggestion, which he summarized with a motto: “It is
necessary for Protestants to discover Mary in the

Bible, and for Catholics to discover the Bible in
Mary.”
Need we say anything else? Reluctantly, yes. Lest Fr.

Toti be accused of not knowing what Monophysitism is
really and correctly all about, I have to continue.
And so with the reader’s kind indulgence:
Monophysitism was a 5th century heresy which was con-
demned by the Fourth Ecumenical Council at Chalcedon
in the Year 451, because Monophysites insisted that
Jesus Christ’s human nature had ceased to exist, or was
completely absorbed by His Divine nature, at the moment
of Incarnation up to the time He died on the Cross. In
short, and in simple terms, the Council of Chalcedon re-
affirmed that Christ is, and always was true God and
true Man. In contrast, the Monophysites claimed that
Christ was mainly and only Divine in His nature, albeit
in human form.
But Chalcedon’s affirmation that Christ is true God and
true Man, is exactly what Fr. Toti said in the paragraph
questioned by our Censor(s), to wit: that Jesus Christ
entrusted Himself “completely” to Mama Mary both “in
his humanity and in his divinity”.
Our Censor(s) is therefore clearly all mixed up. Or
perhaps without his/her/their realizing it, he/she/they
actually believe(s) in Monophysitism . . .
(Sorry, if we have now become too “gender sensitive,”
and thus confused with the plural or singular for my
verbs.)
As to our Censor(s) third and last comment about the
same ‘offending’ paragraph from Fr. Toti, that Mary’s
motherhood over us (members of Christ’s Mystical Body)
is not exactly the same as her actual physical motherhood
over Jesus Christ, for the first time I must agree with
him/her/them! For Mary is our Mother “in the order of
grace.” On the other hand, “Jesus Christ truly became her
Son according to the flesh” while still truly “the Father’s
eternal Son” (which none of us are), the Eternal Word

and second person of the Holy Trinity. Thus the Church
affirms that Mary is truly “Mother of God”.
Okay, so that needed some explaining, which Fr. Toti
could have easily done but chose not to do so, perhaps
for the sake of brevity and to reduce costs for his friends
Dina & Willie, Ching, Henry, Janice and Sincera, who
volunteered to print the book practically for free and/or
to finance it.
Aw shucks, there is still that matter where our Censor(s)
say that the last two sentences of Fr. Toti’s paragraph
“seem to have Mary replace the Holy Spirit.”
Wow! And wow, again! Suffice it to be said for rebuttal
purposes, that per our Catechism’s paragraph 969 which
we quoted earlier (last 4 lines), Mary in Heaven “continues
to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation” . . . (as) “Advocate,
helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.” We are absolutely
sure that as such, and per Fr. Toti, as our Mother she has
promised . . . to make each one of us who are sincerely and
sacrificially consecrated to her, eventually here on earth
or beyond, into a living copy of Jesus, or as St. Bernard’s
earlier quoted Prayer-Consecration says, “to keep us and
protect us as (her) property and possession.”
We are sure that the Holy Spirit, Mary’s Spouse, will not
object. For Mary the Seat of Wisdom and perfect humility
cannot possibly consent to the slightest suggestion
from her children for her to replace God the Holy
Spirit, because she is His perfect instrument of love for
mankind. And remember she is completely submissive to
the Father’s Will!. And so fear not, dear Censor(s)! Mary
will never disobey or be disloyal to the Trinity. And more
apropos, here for us, she still loves you, too . . . including
our Censor(s) especially if you are priests! And I say, and
mean that very sincerely . . . .
XI
page 5, paragraph 3 : “If we carry out and spread

the Programme of the Pope, we fulfill her Plan towards
accomplishing her Mission. And thereby bring about the

Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. All this in
accord with God’s will regarding our eternal salvation in
Christ Jesus.”
Censor(s) Objection: Mary’s mission as the

“Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary” hardly
sounds like what Scripture says, either about Mary
or the work of salvation. Try feeding that to our
non-Catholic, let alone our non-Christian brethren
as part of what we believe.
NB: Pages 1-6 are a somewhat fuzzy presentation
and contain a variety of questionable statements.
REBUTTAL
More of the same, which we believe we have already and

more than sufficiently rebutted, including the supposed
“fuzzy presentation” and “questionable statements.”
Fortunately and providentially however, just a few
hours ago, from our Internet connections to the Vatican-
wired Zenit.org, we have received Cardinal Ratzinger’s
own unintentional but most appropriate rebuttal of the
obvious “pro Relativism” behind our Censor’s Remarks:
CARDINAL RATZINGER CALLS RELATIVISM

THE NEW FACE OF INTOLERANCE
HAS ADVICE FOR YOUNG THEOLOGIANS;
SPEAKS OF THE ROLE OF UNIVERSITIES
MURCIA, Spain, December 1, 2002, Zenit.org—

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger thinks relativism has
become the new expression of intolerance . . . .
CARDINAL RATZINGER: “I would say that today
relativism predominates. It seems that whoever is
not a relativist is someone who is [falsely labeled]
intolerant. To think that [if] one can understand
the essential truth, (he) is already seen as someone
intolerant [by these relativists].”

“However, in reality this exclusion of truth [by
relativists] is a type of very grave intolerance and
reduces essential things of human life to subjectivism.
In this way, in essential things we no longer have
a common view. Each one can and may decide as
he can. If so, we lose the ethical foundations of our
common life.”
Thank you! Dear Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger! (EBO)....
XIII
page 15, paragraph 1:“With each day that passes, I

will liberate you from your attachments and I will make
you more and more free, little, trusting and surrendered,
until you are totally mine and my Immaculate Heart is in
fact your only good. Then I will be able to act in you and
carry out my work as a Mother, which is that of making
each one of you into a living copy of my Son Jesus” (69g)
Censor(s) Objection: “My Immaculate Heart is
in fact your only good” seems to be overstated, to
say the least.
REBUTTAL
The phrase, “your only good” means “your only ASSET.”

What’s wrong with that? Saints Bernard, de Montfort, and
John of the Cross reflected the same principle i.e. Mary’s
“property and possession,” becoming “slaves of Mary”
or being reduced to nada, meaning emptiness! . . .
XXXVII
page 38, paragraph 2: “Two things we must consider:

sin and Christ’s saving act. We cannot fully comprehend
what damage Adam’s sin has done to man. All the evil
in the entire history of man is ultimately due to our first
parents. If Adam did not sin, we wouldn’t experience
death and suffering. None of these social upheavals, like
wars and fratricidal conflicts. No physical illnesses and
ailments, like AIDs and the ordinary cold. No natural

disasters, like earthquakes, famine, and floods. Worst of
all, our dullness of mind and weakness of will with regard
to knowing and following the will of God.”
Censor(s) Objection: The presentation of the

way “all evil” comes from our first parents is a
rather simplistic view of the human situation, one
that modern people might find naïve. It sounds like
what the nuns would tell grade school children in
pre-Vatican 2 cathechism classes.
REBUTTAL
(For and in behalf of Fr. Olaguer

and in defense of the Catholic nuns who taught us)
Fr. Toti is simply saying that the ultimate, first cause
or source of all the evils in the world was the first sin of
our first parents, Adam & Eve. He qualifies it by saying
that the “worst of all,” worse than Adam’s sin, is “our
dullness of mind and weakness of will” in obeying God’s
will. At any rate, here’s what our Catechism says: “We
must know Christ as the source of grace in order to know
Adam as the source of sin . . . ” (page 99, paragraph 388); and
here is what St. Paul says: “By one man’s disobedience
many (that is, all men) were made sinners . . . sin came
into the world through one man and death through sin,
and so death spread to all men because all men sinned
(Romans 5:12-19).
And so we’d rather continue to love and believe the
“pre-Vatican” nuns who taught us exactly the same solid
truths and thereby nurtured our faith. Such as Benedictine
Mother Gracia of St. Scholastica at Pennsylvania St.,
Singalong; Belgian Sr. Felici of St. Theresa’s College at
San Marcelino; Benedictine Sr. Irmburg at the St. Agnes
Academy in Legaspi City; plus Mother Angelica of EWTN
today, and many other simple but wisdom-filled nuns,
who have chosen to follow the Magisterium, rather than
accept speculative albeit modernistic interpretations,

such as from “contemporary incarnational theology and
modern psychology.”
XXXVIII
Next to the last paragraph: “To make a long story

short, without bringing an end to it, Mother Mary has
come to us. She claims that the Lord has sent her on a
Mission, for which she has a plan for accomplishing it.
Her plan culminates in the Programme of the Pope
which we’re now assiduously promoting. Duc in Altum.
Mission accomplished is the Triumph of the Immaculate
Heart of Mary.”
Censor(s) Objection: I’d rather shorten the long
story with something more substantial. Better
still, skip the long story and read something more
worthwhile.
REBUTTAL
Incidentally, I am still looking for instances of Fr.

Toti’s supposed extensive, egregious “errors in grammar,
formatting,” etc. Unless our common Jesuit teachers in
English were so incompetent and we their former pupils
even more so, and already blind to boot, this accusation
against Fr. Toti of murdering the King’s English is so sad,
even if only to shrug off ‘good-naturedly.’
Indeed it is a long story, sad as of now, but due for a
happy ending, eventually. Because in faith, we who accept
the dictum Ad Jesus Per Mariam Ad Patrem also submit
that God allows evil to happen out of the free will of
disobedient, proud creatures, such as we all are, because
in his foreknowledge a greater good will eventually arise
out of such sinful pride and disobedience. And on my
own part I pledge that at the end of the day, I shall obey
and submit myself to whatever the legitimate Church
authorities will have to say about this presently sad
story.


9 December 2002
His Eminence Jaime Cardinal L. Sin
Villa San Miguel
Torres St. corner Shaw Blvd.
1501 Mandaluyong City
Dear Cardinal Sin:
I have taken the liberty, distasteful as it is, of furnishing
you a copy of my extensive Rebuttal of the local Jesuit
Censor’s Report vis-à-vis the unpublished 2nd volume of
the book Waiting for the Lord written by my late brother,
Fr. Antonio B. Olaguer S.J.
The undersigned, representing the Olaguer family and
the thousands of friends and former spiritual wards of Fr.
Toti Olaguer among the many Marian-inspired apostolic
prayer groups he organized throughout the country as
far as the Ilocos region and southernmost Mindanao, are
protesting against what we believe to be so patently false,
unjustified, and even personally cruel accusations of
theological shallowness, ignorance, and even Mariolatry,
allegedly rife all over Fr. Toti’s book.
Thus we are protesting, NOT so much against the most
negative dispositive portion of the Censor’s Report which
says that the book should NOT be published because
(among others) it is NOT in consonance with the reputation
and doctrines of the (Jesuit) Society. Perhaps this is
because many of us have been so thoroughly dismayed
or confused anyway over at least the past thirty (30)
years or so, as to what the LATEST official “doctrines” and
prevailing or desired “reputation” of the congregation
founded by St. Ignatius of Loyola, the greatest and most
loyal defender of the Catholic Faith and the Papacy in
his time, may have now evolved into, or perhaps revised
by its latter-day authorities without the knowledge of its
many former students such as some of us are.
We are however explicitly protesting the fact that the
Censor’s Report by its thirty eight (38) specific allegations
of theological shallowness, ambiguity or ERROR on the part

of Fr. Toti, is obviously and repeatedly proclaiming to
all and sundry, that what we learned many years ago as
Catholics from our Catholic diocesan, Jesuit, Benedictine,
Dominican, Augustinian, etc. priests and nuns alike, and
continue to hear from the homilies of most of our elderly
Catholic diocesan and religious priests especially from
Your Eminence and at the EDSA Shrine, or read in the
official Catechism of the Church, such as with respect
to proper devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, loyalty to
and faith in the legitimacy and teachings of the Roman
Papacy, are ALREADY THEOLOGICALLY UNSOUND according to
our Jesuit Censor! And so, implicitly according to them,
being pre-Vatican II, these should be set aside in deference
to modernist interpretations such as those trumpeted by
“contemporary incarnational theology” and “modern
psychology.” As if all other Church Council’s teachings
before 1962 had been revoked by Vatican II and anything
labeled as supposedly “modern” must be better!
Furthermore, a major reason for our bringing to Your
Eminence’s attention this seemingly small parochial
problem if at all, is the fact that for at least the past 30
years, we the laity have been increasingly bombarded by
so many questionable or perhaps obviously wrong or even
scandalously false teachings from some usually younger
members of the clergy, involving grave issues of faith
and morals, such as abortion, contraception, Mariology,
and the perpetual virginity of Our Lady, Purgatory, Hell,
the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, etc. But
because of lack of solid evidence other than our personal
testimonies, fear of being wrong ourselves, or timidity, or
our culturally ingrained deferential attitude towards the
clergy, we lay people have refrained from reporting or
contesting the modernist-inclined clergy’s questionable
theological utterances, especially when delivered from
the pulpit. We have preferred to be comfortably silent
and for so long . . .
This time however, it is our considered and collective
discernment that we should at least bring our honest

opinions, whether ultimately proven right or wrong, to
the attention of our legitimate Church authorities who
can do and (as we believe so) who ought to do something
to correct the situation if necessary. For how can we keep
silent for example over the Censor’s Report questioning
the theological soundness of “consecration to Mary,”
while we publicly campaign for the Consecration of
our Catholic Families to the Immaculate Heart of Mary,
in positive response to an Archdiocesan-wide project,
explicitly endorsed by Your Eminence?
And it is but natural for us to seek your judgment on
this matter, because even Your Eminence’s prior written
endorsement given some two years ago, recommending
Fr. Toti’s Seminar Recollection booklet on the very
same matters covered by Waiting for the Lord, has been
impugned by the same Censor’s Report as inconsistent
with the “elevated level of acumen or responsibility in
dispensing such approvals.”
Considering however, that it also just possible that
what we have done or thought to be correct, is actually
wrong, and thus making us liable in justice to seek the
forgiveness of those we may have wrongly accused of
error, there is all the more reason therefore for us to seek
Your Eminence’s advice or judgment on this matter.
Very truly yours,
EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

December 20 , 2002
The Ateneo de Naga Alumni Community
c/o Rev. Fr. Joel Tabora S.J., President
Ateneo de Naga University, Naga City
Dear Fr. Joel, fellow Alumni and Alumnae:

It is with great sadness that I am announcing my
decision to return all the medals and awards I have
received from the Ateneo de Naga and its alumni, to

signify my deep-seated protest against the many and
recently increased indications of abandonment or even
betrayal and scorn for the long-standing Jesuit-Ateneo
traditions of “Ad Jesum Per Mariam” spirituality, and
loyalty to the Roman Papacy, coming especially from
highly placed Metro Manila based Jesuit authorities.
Attached is a thick set of documentation attesting as
solid evidence to a most recent incident of only one but
typical of such betrayal and scorn for our filial Marian
traditions and unquestioning loyalty to St. Peter’s
legitimate successors, coming from the highest levels of
the present-day Jesuit hierarchy.
These are grave accusations contained in these docu-
ments, which if true are more damaging not just to the
Jesuit-educated Ateneo alumni communities here and
abroad, but to the Mystical Body of Christ as a whole,
compared even to recent more widely publicized but
isolated incidents of individual sexual wrongdoing
among the Catholic clergy. Thus I believe too that this
protest of mine should not be merely swept under the
rug, so to speak, in order to avoid early enough another
“Bernard Cardinal Law” situation in the making.
And so I have requested my dear friend and classmate
way back 50 years ago, Mr. Perfecto Palacio and our
Ateneo de Naga High School Class ’52 “survivors,” to
make these known to all of you, and kindly to return
through Fr. Joel, these medals and awards dating as far
back as 1948.
At the very least, these should be returned to my
former Alma Mater if only to serve as a continuing
protest-warning against the danger of Our Lady and our
Alma Mater being betrayed at the highest levels of a once
cohesively and uniformly Catholic Society fiercely loyal
to the Pope.
Presumptuous as others may say it sounds, I also hope
that this protest will also serve as a wake-up call for the
professed sons of our Lady the Blessed Virgin Mother,
and of St. Ignatius of Loyola in that Society, among the

Ateneo alumni and the Catholic hierarchy and laity in
general.
And if I, a former Ateneo Sodalist of Mary and those
like me who cling to traditional Marian and Papal loyalties
are naively wrong, or the Marian traditions taught to us by
our Jesuit mentors a half-century ago are now considered
“heretical” or pre-Vatican II ( meaning obsolete) by many
leading and/or younger Jesuits today, then my Ateneo
classmates and I should be properly informed together
with the hundreds of thousands, nay perhaps, hundreds
of millions of traditional Catholics who still believe as we
do.
And if such modernistic and seemingly “scholarly”
re-interpretations of the Faith of our fathers have truly
become the prevailing and a la mode Jesuitic theology
today, then so be it. For then truly and gladly will I
deserve to be stripped of all these innocently hard earned
but now worthless awards and citations.
And so I urge all Ateneo alumni kindred spirits and
Legionaries of Mary such as I once was, to band together
once again in defense of Our Lady, our Pope, and our
Faith, “ad majorem Dei gloriam et primum regnum Dei!”
Very truly yours,
EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

December 23, 2002

Villa San Miguel
Torres corner Shaw Blvd.
Dear Cardinal Sin:
I am acknowledging with heartfelt thanks Your
Eminence’s quick response to my December 9 letter.
Allow me however to point out with due respect
that my friends and other relatives of Fr. Toti are not

contesting the Jesuit Society’s decision not to publish his
book, per se. In fact we are no longer pursuing the project,
as you say Fr. Toti would also do, in humble obedience to
his Superiors.
The main issue we have brought to Your Eminence’s
official attention is NOT about the disparaged unpublished
book of Fr. Antonio B. Olaguer S.J., but the fact that what
we who are not so insufficiently-educated Catholics
believe, nay know, to be patently false arguments contrary
to official Church doctrine, have been unabashedly used
by these Superiors. Unwittingly however, they have
provided evidence and bolstered the widely accepted
and public impression that many well-known and highly-
placed Jesuits today are publicly flaunting and advocating
theological interpretations, theories, and propositions
vis-à-vis the most basic faith and moral issues, that are
contrary to age-old and official teachings of the Catholic
Magisterium.
Nevertheless, like all accusations or impressions, ours,
particularly mine, could also be wrong or exaggerated,
whether in its factual premises, logic or conclusions. Thus
my referral of the matter to your Eminence.
I have even deliberately refrained from citing other
similar instances of Jesuit priests’ disloyalty to Church
teaching, thinking that these being widely publicized,
Church authorities are already aware of it. I am citing
as one example, Ruben M. Tanseco S.J. and his many
offensive (to loyal Catholics) articles in his Sunday
column “God’s Word Today” [sic!] in the Philippine Star.
His Jesuit Superiors must have been reading them the past
few years and yet must have found all of them acceptable
to Jesuit doctrinal thinking and reputation, despite its
frequent scornful dissent against Catholic priests’ vows
of celibacy, or the “monarchical” nature and “male
chauvinism” of the clergy and hierarchy of the Church,
etc. The most recent example is Fr. Tanseco’s article “The
New Creation” in his column last Sunday, December 22.

As to Fr. Toti’s “legacy of love and service, especially
to the poor” which your letter advocates that we continue,
kindly rest assured dear Eminence that despite the
Jesuit censor’s scornful dismissal of that legacy as being
shallow, we shall continue to do so. But we also wish to
emphasize that working for the poor cannot be an excuse
NOT to come to the defense of our Faith, Our Lady, and our
Pope if these are being undermined within our very own
Catholic ranks. Otherwise, we members of the Laity are
NOT, contrary to what has been repeatedly emphasized by
your Eminence and the local hierarchy in the recent past,
considered worthy even to question anybody on matters
most basic to our faith. How will the hierarchy then learn
about any such problems? And if that is the preferred
behavioral norm in the Church, the same “see no evil,
hear no evil” attitude, should then also be advocated
for us citizens towards even a corrupt government and
highly placed government officials.
With all due respect therefore, I am furnishing your
Eminence a copy of a prior letter I have sent to other
ecclesiastical parties regarding the same matter.
Very truly yours,
EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

January 7, 2003
Rev. Fr. Romeo Intengan S.J.
Philippine Province of the Society of Jesus
De la Costa House
132 B. Gonzales, Varsity Hills
Loyola Heights, Quezon City
Dear Fr. Provincial:

It has been almost a month already since I sent you
my letter of protest dated December 19, 2002 concerning
what I believe to be a terribly unjust and theologically
“modernist,” albeit grossly erroneous, Jesuit Censor’s

Report on the manuscript of my deceased brother, Fr.
Antonio B. Olaguer S.J., entitled Waiting for the Lord.
I also provided you a written point-by-point rebuttal
of the Censor’s thirty-eight (38) objections. Sad to say
however that up to this time I have not received any reply
or even an acknowledgment that you have received my
letter and rebuttal documents which were all delivered to
your office and signed for by your Secretary.
Thus my earlier suspicion that it was you yourself who
actually made that unsigned Censor’s Report, becomes
even more credible. I have considered also the added
fact that when I personally inquired from you about the
progress of the reviewer/censor’s work sometime in
November 2001, you said in no uncertain terms, that Fr.
Toti’s work would need a “lot of re-writing” because of
his “old-fashioned traditionalist point of view.” In fact I
immediately reported these very disturbing comments of
yours to Priscilla “Ching” Zapanta, Sincera Villavicencio,
and my daughter Didi who were the ones who brought
Fr. Toti’s manuscript to you personally and directly.
I hasten to add however and in clarification, a most
important point. The issue we are protesting is NOT
that the Jesuit Society under your present leadership
has decided per your Censor’s recommendation which
you have accepted and in fact promulgated so that Fr.
Toti’s manuscript should NOT be published. Thus we are
accepting your decision as Jesuit Provincial, for your
Society NOT to publish it. We are not contesting that.
What we are vehemently protesting against, as it is our
Catholic Christian right and duty to do so (and more so
in the Olaguer family’s case who have been alumni of the
Ateneo for three generations already all the way back to
pre-war in Grade One at Intramuros with Fr. Pacquing!),
are the explicitly written theological reasons directly
contradicting official Catholic Magisterial teachings on
faith and moral issues. Therefore, you and/or your still
unidentified Censor have deliberately and knowingly
falsified official Catholic teachings in order to denigrate,

and very scornfully at that, Fr. Toti’s manuscript,
including his own personhood.
Incidentally, you have even ignored the obvious
circumstances of his being recently deceased and a bona
fide brother Jesuit of yours for more than fifty (50) years!
And in your uniquely personal case, Fr. Toti and his
many friends and relatives particularly “yours truly,”
the undersigned, literally risked their fortunes, their own
lives and their families’ lives by substantially helping
and collaborating with you and your ideological group
Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista (PDSP) for several years and
sub-rosa! And to save you from arrest and prison, we all
kept silent about it even under threat of Col. Abadilla’s/
Panfilo Lacson’s threats of physical torture particularly
with respect to the Light A Fire rebellion cases during
the darkest years of the Marcos Martial Law period. Thus
your PDSP co-founder and present Cabinet-member
Norberto Gonzales and yourself were able to flee and
hide in Spain/Europe for several years.
And so the main object of our continuing protest,
to repeat for clarity’s sake and for emphasis, is that
your present “Society’s” theological points of view, as
enunciated by yourself as the head of the Philippine Jesuit
province in that Censor’s Report, which most probably
you yourself had written or at least approved of, are so
clearly scandalous and diametrically in opposition to
what our own revered and truly Jesuit mentors in the past
consistently taught to us as students at the U.P. Catholic
chaplaincy, Ateneo de Naga, and Ateneo de Manila.
And worst of all, these present views of yours are also
so clearly contrary to the past, present, and still official
teachings of the Catholic Magisterium.
These issues are therefore no longer limited to
ourselves. For they also confirm what I and thousands of
other Ateneo alumni have observed for at least 25 years
already—that these and other anti-Catholic views exactly
like or similar to yours are shared by many of your
contemporary Jesuits. And these are being taught in your

classrooms and seminaries and even publicly flaunted
in homilies at Mass and in newspaper columns, to the
detriment or at least confusion of our own children and
grandchildren at the Ateneo and in many other Jesuit-run
institutions throughout the country. And imitated, nay,
transmogrified even more by an increasing number of
your fellow “modern-day priests” who have picked these
up as “gospel truth” in your multinational Seminaries.
It has become that scandalous and confusing that
the earlier and dearly missed crop of true Jesuits such
as the kindred spirits of the Delaneys, Goughs, Hogans,
Mulrys, the Hugendoblers, the Adorables, de la Costas,
Hayes, Guerreros, Burns, Alingals, Pacquings, Bellos, and
perhaps even the Diazes, Clarks, and the Kennallys must
be turning in their graves. And the latter others still around
may be looking forward to eternity in atonement for their
misguided confreres or out of sheer embarrassment.
I just wonder how St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Francis
Xavier, St. John Berchman, St. Aloysius of Gonzaga,
and hundreds more like them who were unabashedly
Marian in their spirituality, would say to you today. For
together with the Blessed Virgin and Mother of God,
these world-acclaimed Jesuit saints’ statues are now even
considered unworthy or even detrimental for reverence
and inspiration inside your newest “modernistic” church
at Loyola Heights!
And so in your present day Ateneos, opportunities or
facilities for regular weekly confession, daily recitation
of the Rosary, the October devotion, and Sodalities of
Our Lady, and the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius, are
all almost extinct or ignored. Just like the eagle, blue or
otherwise. And the teaching of religion to your young
students are considered beneath the dignity of most
Jesuits in academe, so that it is practically relegated only
to lay people.
Thus it is more a la mode and considered more
“relevant” to be members of the Board of Directors of big
business companies, or to perorate on mainly secular or

partisan political, legal, or socio-economic issues. And
if you haven’t noticed at the Ateneo de Manila chapels
especially in the main Quezon City campus, there are
practically no longer any MALE acolytes or even attendees
during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass on ordinary class
days. Shades of so-called gender-sensitivity run astray!
Yes, ubinam gentium sumus?
Thus the late most revered and missed Jesuit Father
John P. Delaney never tired of saying, how can one see
and love Christ among the poor and lowly, if you refuse
to see and honor Him in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Or
even render justice to them . . .
And if such is the case, the proper resolution of this
whole issue particularly because you have blithely
ignored our initial protest, must go beyond the personal
boundaries of the Olaguer family and the present
Philippine Jesuit hierarchy.
In summary, the related issues of what is properly
Catholic veneration of the Blessed Virgin, acceptance of
selectively valid private supernatural revelations, loyalty
to the Papacy, the rejection/absence of Our Lady’s and
the Saints’ statues including the Body of Christ on the
Cross in our Catholic Churches and chapels, which were
all part of my rebuttal documents, are as much a concern
of all Philippine dioceses and archdioceses where Jesuits
teach and preach. And if need be, of Holy Mother Church
authorities all the way to the Vatican.
For I believe despite anticipating your vehement
objection, that the crises in the Catholic Church
sensationalized by local and worldwide media, involving
sexual transgressions among our nuns and clergy and
the Catholic laity as well, are but SYMPTOMS albeit most
alarming. These are not the root DISEASES.
I dare say that the root disease is the rampant
disobedience born of intellectual PRIDE, in both the clergy
and the laity, vis-a-vis their rejection of the spiritual and
doctrinal teachings of the Catholic Magisterium and/or
the Pope, particularly with respect to the old universally

traditional Catholic practices towards a prayerful and
habitual interior life ad Jesum per Mariam . . .
How and where the present day Jesuit allergy to
Marian spirituality all started and spread, nobody really
knows. But the fact remains that as far back as at least 30
years ago the unabashedly Marian aspects of Ateneo and
Jesuit spirituality in the practice of the Catholic Faith has
been lost and now oftentimes ridiculed.
And so if the Virgin and Mother Most Pure has been
proudly rejected as an explicitly and divinely gifted and
most efficacious assistance to the children of God, can the
whirlwinds of gross impurity not be close behind?
Can there be real faith, justice and wisdom without
purity/chastity? Even if chastity and priestly celibacy are
now considered “old fashioned” by so-called modernistic
theologians . . .
And so in the hope, presumptuous as it may sound,
that the true and loyal members of the Society (but still)
of Jesus and their consciences may be aroused, enough
to do something bold and drastic about a real problem,
and as a 20-year long auxiliary member of the Marian
Movement of Priests, I must but with due respect,
continue my protest.
For it is also Our Lady’s main motherly concern,
repeatedly and sadly expressed in her messages to Fr.
Stefano Gobbi and published in the Blue Book, Our
Lady Speaks to her Beloved Priests. It is the clergy’s (Jesuit,
Benedictine, Dominican, Diocesan, and whatever)
betrayal of her and her Son, particularly by their rejection
of or apathy towards Catholic magisterial teachings, lack
of support for the Pope, and consequent lack of alter
Christus priestly fervor, that make her shed tears of
blood!
And yet in that same Blue Book, she repeats even more
frequently that it will be through her simple but beloved
priests consecrated to Her, led by and in unity with the
Pope, that the Book of Genesis and Fatima-prophesied

crushing of Satan’s head and her consequent triumph and
that of her Son Jesus Christ, will soon be achieved . . .
Very truly yours,
EDUARDO B. OLAGUER

PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL

January 10, 2003
Villa San Miguel
Torres St. corner Shaw Blvd.
Dear Eminence:
Thank you most kindly for your January 1 reply! But
I must hasten to add that after slowly reading once more
that letter of mine Your Eminence replied to, I now realize
that I owe Your Eminence my sincerest apologies. For in
the hurry to finish, I failed to notice except just now that
I should have been more filial in tone and choice of some
words.
I also ask for Your Eminence’s kind indulgence for
burdening you further with this added presentation of
more relevant circumstances behind my protest against
a growing number of Jesuits, Jesuit-influenced, or Jesuit-
trained priests.
As far back as 1968-69 when my three sons were at the
Ateneo Grade School, I remember that a large group of
parents including myself, Daisie, and Mr. & Mrs. “Peps”
Bengzon (now deceased), formally complained to the
Ateneo Grade School Faculty that our children were no
longer being properly instructed in the Catholic Faith
during their RELIGION classes. Instead, the lay teachers (no
more Jesuits available) were merely using mostly secular
materials appropriate only to our pre-war public schools’
subject on Good Manners and Right Conduct!

We all insisted that because we paid for and sent our
children to a Catholic School, our children were entitled
to a Catholic education.
Nothing came out of it because soon after I was sent on
a scholarship by IBM together with my whole family, to
the Harvard Graduate School for my MBA studies. And
martial law was declared shortly after I returned in June
of 1972.
Thereafter I must confess that I too was caught up
and immersed in the prevailing Jesuit thrust for justice,
through my intimate association and collaboration with
Jesuits “Derps” Blanco, Archie Intengan, and my own
Brother Toti, aside from Sr. Christine Tan RGS. They all
separately but quickly convinced me that as a logical
consequence of being a Christian, NOW here on earth
and not just in the “hereafter,” a patriotic fight for such
justice against the “illegitimate corrupt and oppressive”
dictatorship, if “rooted in (our Christian) faith,” was
morally acceptable even if it led eventually and by moral
necessity to “armed struggle.”
I was also similarly assured by no less than our
Movement’s Lay Leaders such as the late Soc Rodrigo,
Senators Lorenzo Tañada Sr., Ninoy Aquino (represented
by Paul Aquino and Soc), Raul Manglapus, and Jovy
Salonga. I received further Jesuit re-assurances that our
Movement was initiated by no less than their previous
Jesuit Provincial Superior, Horacio de la Costa S.J., and
that their own continued involvement was also with the
consent of his successor, Fr. Joaquin Bernas S.J. Moreover
in 1978, our Movement’s plan of action was allegedly even
presented to your Eminence for comments (according to
my brother Toti your only comment was that “Only the
lay people should be involved!”).
Thus I ended up playing a central role in that anti-
martial law movement. Our explicit objective was to
topple down the Marcos dictatorship and to return
our nation to democratic rule under a clean and honest
regime.

Our entire program of action (much of which I
understand was explained to Your Eminence but with
no details) was based on the plans and policies I myself
drew up, consistent with our Catholic Christian doctrines
on what are morally acceptable under the circumstances
then prevailing. These were reviewed and approved
unanimously by all the Jesuit clergy associated with
us and the aforementioned lay leaders in our group,
including Raul Manglapus and U.N. Undersecretary
(then) Rafael Salas, who represented our U.S.-based
counterparts. I was always present in all these review/
approval meetings, here or abroad in the U.S.
The armed struggle aspect of our Movement was
originally the exclusive role of Bert Gonzales and Fr.
Archie and their PDSP group supposedly numbering
500,000 throughout the Philippines. But when PDSP
disintegrated after they expelled one another, mainly due
to the question of their exaggerated number of members
(“phantomic” according to Jovy Salonga), and accounting
of their funds donated by us and other supporters, my
group of closely-knit UPSCA- A.I.M.-Ateneo-IBM-Legion
of Mary friends and I were prevailed upon to act as their
TEMPORARY replacements.
As chief planner and substitute (for PDSP)
implementors, I completely rejected the old previous
PDSP/Manglapus’ proposal for a “MacArthur/Arafat/
IRA” type (according to Jovy Salonga) of bloody and
expensive urban warfare. Instead I opted for a “more
symbolic than real” type of small operations geared to
“conscienticize rather than to harm.” Fr. Toti remained
as our Catholic Chaplain, the same role he played for Fr.
Archie and his PDSP group.
I revealed all these and more to my old friend, mentor
and spiritual/intellectual father, Rev. Fr. James B. Reuter
S.J. (since 1948!) in the presence of Sr. Christine Tan at
the San Lorenzo house of Maring Feria, sometime on Dec.
19 or 20, 1979. I did so as some sort of Confession, for
my own peace of mind and to make sure that the whole

truth would be known among my friends and family in
the event that I was arrested, tortured, or killed. For by
that time I was already in hiding underground!
A few days after my meeting with Fr. Reuter, I was
arrested by Col. Rolando Abadilla, Capt. Panfilo “Ping”
Lacson, et al. just before early morning dawn of December
24, 1979. The rest of my Light A Fire involvement and
subsequent military trial and conviction were more or
less known to the general public at that time.
What the public did not know was that my 22 days and
six (6) years in prison, including the Military Tribunal’s
death sentence by electric chair (short-circuited only be-
cause of Your Eminence’s perseverance in personally
pleading for leniency with Ferdinand Marcos which
resulted in my January 16, 1986 release from Bicutan!)
were all real blessings for me. For my body and soul,
especially the latter. The only losses I suffered were my
modest savings, financial embarrassment of my family,
and humiliation to my personal pride. For I was then
publicly dubbed a Communist, “terrorist,” etc. all of
which were, albeit by hindsight, also real blessings . . .
For it was in prison that I received the graces for
Our Lady and her Son to return, even more intimately,
into my daily life. It was there and in prayerful solitude
throughout the day, with Scriptures, Fr. Gobbi’s Blue
Book, Our Lady Speaks to Her Beloved Priests (a result of
reading Howard Dee’s book God’s Greatest Gift which had
numerous quotations taken from Fr. Gobbi), the daily 15
Mysteries of the Rosary, the Liturgy of the Hours, books
on Philosophy, Theology, Law, and Economics supplied
by my regular visitors such as Jesuit Fathers Reuter,
Bogart, and William L. Hayes S.J.
With all these I was able to re-think out, meditate,
contemplate, and re-learn, especially vis-à-vis my
previous errors in our extraordinary political activism.
For example I realized that:
1. What I had planned and done vis-à-vis our anti-
Marcos and Light A Fire activities were marginally

correct per se under the prevailing circumstances
BUT terribly inadequate in both the spiritual and
practical sense because during the planning and
doing, I had ignored or even abandoned most of
the time a prayerful interior and sacramental life.
2. I realized that underlying ANY work for secular
justice, whether for the abjectly poor or politically
oppressed, must ALWAYS be the live roots to the
TWO Great Commandments (actually only one and
indivisible in practice) and in CORRECT ORDER of
motivation. The love of God/Christ should have
been the main motivating factor, and NOT pro-
democracy, nor pro-poor, nor anti-dictatorship,
much less anti-Marcos. Then and only then would
it result in being actually and truly pro-poor, pro-
neighbor, pro-country and so on.
3. Previously I had presumptuously and wrongly as-
sumed, just like other so-called activists, especially
the Communist NDF/NPA, traditional politicians,
social workers and the like, that it was sufficient, or
at least NOT harmful, to have good intentions while
working for the poor, and oppressed, and that
AUTOMATICALLY this would result in love for God
and country.
But while in prison, looking back and meditating
on the results of my previous endeavors, I realized
that such GRACE-less personal undertakings, sooner
or later, would degenerate into self-seeking,
confusion, corruption, and even hatred . . . And so
I re-learned that even our previous CFM motto
in the mid-1960s “to bring back Christ to the
marketplace” which served as our initial albeit
skin-shallow inspiration to resist Martial Law,
would only result in further dirtying and confusing
the “marketplace,” if Christ was NOT DEEPLY in us in
the first place. So simple yet unerring in its logic!

4. Thus we as former U.P. Student Catholic activists in
the 1950s, also ignored Jesuit Fr. Delaney’s advice
that Christ Himself in the daily and Holy Sacrifice
of the Mass must be THE motivation and source of
spiritual strength and discernment, for ALL of our
daily activities – especially difficult ones. In short,
to LIVE THE MASS . . .
And so it was a natural progression in prison for me to
re-focus my attention on my children and their education,
who were now all College students at the Ateneo. I was
therefore shocked to see that their College Theology
courses were mostly South American or Jesuit “Liberation
Theology” concepts and exhortations re-cycled by
Fr. Assandas Balchand S.J., most of which if accepted
would lead the impressionable young into the cadres of
the NPA/NDF. If Your Eminence will recall, I was also
locked in ideological and even personal conflict with my
fellow NPA/NDF detainees and their supporters/visitors
among the nuns and clergy (including a Bishop), while I
was incarcerated in Muntinlupa and Bicutan.
It was worse when after my release from prison and
the euphoria from EDSA 1 was over, I was invited several
times as a speaker at the Ateneo, only to be greeted with
unbelieving eyes and negative body language by my
College student audiences, whenever I emphasized the
primacy of the First Commandment, and the absolute
need for a prayerful and sacramentally nourished interior
life. And there was their Margie Holmes teaching all about
physical sex so graphically, without any reference at all to
any Christian, much less Catholic marital values.
It was even more shocking to me to hear Jesuit priests
in our parish church at La Vista (especially Indian and
other foreign nationality priests studying at EAPI)
denigrate the Blessed Mother and ignore the main aspect
of Christ’s mystical Sacrifice or re-enactment of Calvary
in the Mass. They would concentrate only on the “sacred
meal” aspect. Others questioned the Catholic teachings

on hell, purgatory, angels, Satan and his legion of devils,
or the latter’s real existence.
After many years since 1986 of keeping my growing
outrage to myself, I wrote a protest letter in August of
2001 against Fr. Davis (an Indian Assistant Parish Priest
of La Vista who studied at EAPI). The protest was acted
on by my fellow parishioners and Monsignor Pat Lim.
Soon after Fr. Davis left the parish—according to him, in
order to be “free to preach the Word of God.”
I also complained last year to Fr. Vic Apacible, and
again to Fr. Aris Sison, about Fr. Ruben Tanseco S.J. in
his Trainors’ Seminar at the Ateneo’s Center for Family
Apostolate as Santa Maria della Strada’s official repre-
sentative in connection with the Festival of Fathers. I was
literally shocked to see that his exclusive source-material
was Dr. Scott Peck’s (a Protestant) New Age book The Road
Less Traveled, and the fact that he did NOT MENTION Christ
nor the Sacraments even once. But instead he condemned
all “organized religions” as “obstacles to unity and
justice,” to the extent of badmouthing Your Eminence,
and advocating psychology and sociology as “superior
to Theology”! You can ask Fr. Vic and Fr. Aris about my
reaction and walkout from Fr. Tanseco’s Seminar.
Thus to me, this latest incident with Fr. Archie Intengan
and/or his anonymous Censor’s Report condemning Fr.
Toti’s book manuscript on Our Lady and the Pope, has
for the first time provided me with solid and extensive
documentary evidence of such a pattern of betrayal of our
Catholic Faith.
I also went through several days of prayerful discern-
ment before the Blessed Sacrament, on what to do about
it all, including asking Fr. Reuter for advice. (His self-
explanatory letter-reply to me is attached.) [NOTE: Letter is
reproduced in photo section between pages 282 & 283.] I ended
up finally writing my letter-protest and extensive rebuttal,
thus bringing the problem to your pastoral attention.
I have poured out my heart in this long letter, dear
Eminence, in the hope of giving you a better view of what

I may have done wrong, or poorly, or with less-than-
noble reasons.
But above all I wish to assure you while invoking
God’s continued grace of discernment, that I am deeply
committed to my continued loyalty to Holy Mother
Church, one of whose main loyal shepherds here in
our country is Your Eminence. The whole country will
certainly miss Your Eminence’s pastoral care and advice,
if and when you will retire due to poor health.
Again, please accept my apologies and assurances of
my prayers.
Very truly yours in Christ and His Mother,
EDUARDO B. OLAGUER
Pride and Disobedience, Deception and Hypocrisy

The most intriguing question at this stage is, how and why
did all these happen to such a divinely favored organization
with over 400 years of priceless contributions to Holy Mother
Church given in defense and in support of that Mystical Body
and of its visible leaders, Christ’s vicars on earth, the Popes?
I submit that in addition to penetrating analyses of the
Jesuits’ historic rise and fall such as that of McDonough and
Bianchi, it can only be fully explained within the ambit of
classic spiritual laws and dynamics. Particularly in relation
to PRIDE and DISOBEDIENCE as related earlier in Chapter 6 of this
work coming from Fr. Eugene Boylan O.C.D. in Chapter 7 of his
book, This Tremendous Lover! To quote Fr. Boylan once again:
Pride which makes us appropriate the glory of all the
good we have or do, is directly opposed to the law of God’s
action—I am the Lord I will not give my glory to another
(Isaiah 13: 8), and therefore puts a limit to it. God cannot
pour out His gifts to the proud without self-contradiction
as long as they are obstinate in their attitude. As God
Himself tells us by the pen of St. James: God opposes the
proud but gives grace to the humble (James 4: 6).

416
SECTION SIX
HAIL HOLY QUEEN!
Chapter 23 The Otto Point of View

Chapter 24 Apologia Pro Fide Catolica
Chapter 25 Epilogue: The Luminous
Cross of Grace
417
418 HAIL HOLY QUEEN!
Chapter 23
THE OTTO POINT OF VIEW
Since 1997 I had been prodding my ex-jailbird friend, fellow

worker at IBM and in several other companies, and, like me,
a Jesuit educational guinea-pig though at different Ateneo
locations, to be the main author for our joint memoirs on the
Light A Fire Movement. For Othoniel “Otto” V. Jimenez, OVJ
for short at IBM Philippines, was always a faster and better
writer than yours truly. After every such prodding over the
years, he would just look at me with a grimace and after a
while, reply, “What for?”
But when I showed him the 90% completed manuscripts for
this work with the request for him to help edit it, to improve
its factual accuracy, cohesiveness, clarity and logic, not only
did he consent though still half-reluctantly, but wonder of
wonders, he also showed me a voluminous pile of his own pre-
cious previous memoirs of sorts. These were mostly for diary
purposes to be left to his grandchildren, grand nephews, and
nieces.
With a little more prodding, he consented to have a few of
them incorporated in this book, for they are germane to its
whole thrust. But they still do not render sufficient justice to
the many talents and granite character of OVJ. Here they are:
MILITARY TRIAL REFLECTIONS

August 1980
(Excerpts)
Last Monday, they were very angry.
We were scheduled for arraignment
But we did not show up.
They could have charged us with contempt.
The Otto Point of View 419

But we would not have been guilty.
We were all dressed up
And we showed the guard the charge sheet
Stipulating the date of trial.
But he could not let us go
Because he had no orders.
And there were no guards to escort us to the trial
Because none had been scheduled,
Because nobody had received any orders.
And in any case, there was no vehicle
To bring us to the trial,
Not even the rusty, barred, and grilled derelict
They usually pack us into,
Because there were no orders.
We had been given our orders,
But they had not been given theirs.
Oh, they were very angry.
To have been kept waiting.
They could have charged us with contempt.
But we would not have been guilty.
We should have been very angry.
For justice delayed is justice denied.
We should have charged them with contempt.
For their callousness and indifference
To our suffering, to our languishing in
Captivity and oppression.
But we did not.
We shrugged our shoulders.
Aren’t we doing this all the time,
We, behind bars, and
You, on the other side,
Also behind bars?
We live in oppression,
We groan under their yoke,
We starve while they feed,
We cower as they shout,
We smile as they run their

Insults up our
Sensitivities.
And we shrug.
When we should be very angry.
When we should charge them with contempt.
Ah, melancholy is the wrong note to strike
On such a fine August morning.
See how crisp and starchy they look
In their well pressed uniforms.
With such a fine army,
How can oppressors e’er trample
Our sacred shores?
Bugles should blow.
I hear them coming,
Our lawyers,*
The finest in the land.
Our champions,
Thank God for them.
Though this joust be hopeless,
We know we will not have lost
For want of an able defense.
My heart swells with joy and pride
That I stand behind these giants.
Longer than I have known the light of day,
They have stomped up and down
The Halls of Justice
To interpret the law;
They have stood
On the floor of the Senate
To formulate the law;
They have pounded at lecterns
To explain the law.
They are here
Laughably opposed by pygmies
Who have learned, of law,
Not quite a fifth of what
These, our champions, have forgotten.

We are going home now,
Home to our bunks and barbs and bars.
It was a debacle, of course.
What would you expect
When pygmies oppose giants,
When runts face the Furies?
I would have fared better against Fischer.
They were clubbed on the head
With their fallacies and inconsistencies.
They were kicked in the teeth
With their erroneous references
And misquotations of LOIs and decrees.
Their non sequiturs were rammed
Right down their little throats.
Time and again we wanted to
Stand up and clap and cheer.
But they were very angry.
They would have charged us with contempt.
You see, half the time,
They dimly suspected
They were being insulted somehow.
They won the game this morning, though,
As I’m sure you also expected.
We haven’t won a single game yet
In this best-of-I-don’t-know-how-many,
Our seven footers notwithstanding.
We made all the shots,
But they scored all the points.
Our shots were ruled “no count,” you see,
And theirs were counted.
Even those that didn’t go in.
But we walked out with our heads held high
Because in our scorebook, we had won.
In our hearts we know
Our victory is more valid
Than dubious medals.

Our victory is sweet
Because we know that every game we “lose”
Opens your eyes further to the brand of play
Of these well-pressed puppets,
And of the hidden puppeteer,
And the sickness in the land.
And we know that when courts are free,
This case will be re-tried,
And our innocence will be upheld,
And our gallant lawyers
And our steadfast supporters
Who come each time to strengthen us
With their silent courage,
Will be enshrined in your hearts
And paid the homage that is their due.
Lorenzo Tañada, Jose W. Diokno, Joker P. Arroyo,
*
Sabino Padilla, Joaquin Misa, and Rene Saguisag

UNPUBLISHED LETTER TO THE EDITOR

OF THE PHILIPPINE DAILY INQUIRER
(JULY 1997)
I was shown a copy of Mr. Tulfo’s column of June 17
where he reprinted former Judge Jose T. Apolo’s [NOTE: A
1951 Ateneo de Naga High School graduate and Night League
Basketball teammate of Ed Olaguer] unsolicited testimonial
about Ed Olaguer. And Mr. Tulfo ends his column with
the very meaningful remark, “Mr. Apolo, you really don’t
know Olaguer.”
Well, I have known Ed Olaguer way back since 1952,
but more intimately for the last 32 years of his life since
1965. And I don’t agree with Mr. Apolo either, when he
describes Ed Olaguer as “meek and mild.” But I agree
with everything else he says about Ed. Especially the
part about being a “true Christian gentleman and a man
for others.” Okay, he won’t consistently win medals for
diplomacy and tact. And unfortunately, he is often sent

on clean-up missions with a big broom. And you cannot
expect a man with a big broom to be very popular. But
he is a veritable mountain for honesty and integrity. And
may the Lord and our Mother Mary help him and all of
us continue to live up to our ideals, to obey Him in this
world, so that we will be happy with Him in the next.
So, I am sorry, Mr. Tulfo, that I cannot agree with your
unsubstantiated claims about Ed’s “corrupt practices” at
the Journal and (in your June 21 column) at the PNCC.
And putting out a contract to have you at one time, and
Danny Hernandez more recently, assassinated? I can
only call this ridiculous. It would be funny if it were not
so malevolent. Mr. Tulfo, you don’t really know Olaguer.
[NOTE: Weeks later the real culprit was apprehended!]
Worse, you aren’t even well researched. You say his
first job after the EDSA revolution was at the PNCC?
Wrong. It was at the DBP. You say he was kicked out of
the PNCC and the Times Journal newspaper for corrupt
practices? Wrong. Could you maybe reprint some docu-
ments to prove this? You say he was sentenced by a
military commission during the Marcos regime to face
the firing squad? Wrong, although it would have been an
honor. It was to death on the electric chair!
Ah, and here Mr. Tulfo, you and I might have a long
argument. You mention (June 21) that Ed Olaguer dared
to fight the dictatorship, albeit in a manner that also
killed and maimed innocent civilians. Wrong again!
You mention that when the military men raided his
hideout (when they arrested him, I presume), they found
documents that mentioned the buildings which the group
had already bombed. Wrong. You mistakenly attributed
those incidents to the “Light A Fire” movement, including
Rustan’s in Makati where an American woman was killed.
Wrong! When that happened, Ed Olaguer had already
been detained by the military for almost a year already.
You say that Ed Olaguer (and his companions, of course)
were convicted for terrorism. Mr. Tulfo, either through
ignorance or malice, you are adopting and continuing to
foist on the innocent public the Marcos propaganda line.

That’s what his military were saying then. And that’s
what you’re saying now. Now, almost 20 years later,
you’re still mouthing the Marcos propaganda line. [NOTE:
Mr. Tulfo should read the Supreme Court unanimous decision
and glowing praises of its Chief Justice vis-à-vis Olaguer et al.,
which is at the end of Chapter 12.]
We, who made up the “Light A Fire” movement,
dared to fight the mighty dictatorship, yes. When
people ask each other “Where were you during EDSA?”
we remember that by then, we had been suffering in
detention for six lonely years (seven Christmases!), and
had a death sentence hanging over our heads. We never
sought nor were given accolades as freedom fighters or
as heroes who gave up everything to start what later
snowballed into EDSA. On the contrary, then, and later,
and till now, by people like you, we have been, and con-
tinue to be, much maligned. We couldn’t defend ourselves
then, because our resources were so puny compared to
the mighty Marcos propaganda machine. And we never
defended ourselves later, because to tell our story might
have seemed like bragging. We felt like farmers who had
taken up arms to go to war, and later, quietly returned to
our fields to take up where we left off.
But our children have repeatedly asked us to explain.
They didn’t have the knowledge then, for obvious
security reasons. And, when it was over, there seemed
to be no need to talk about it. And, frankly, there were
so many painful memories that we wanted to just put
them all behind us. But now our children ask what they
can tell their children when they ask? What do they say
when their children read people like Mr. Tulfo? Why was
grandpa in prison? Why was he sentenced to death? Was
he truly an arsonist? Was he truly a terrorist?
Mr. Tulfo, I believe that you should research what the
Light A Fire movement was all about. And when you find
out what it really was all about, if you are an honorable
man, to make up for all the times that you have maligned
us (and in print at that, reaching tens of thousands), you
should take it upon yourself to defend us. All it takes is

some intellectual honesty on your part, for the truth to
be told.
To start your research off: The Light A Fire movement
was simply a small group of people who wanted to urge
their countrymen not to take the conjugal dictatorship
sitting down. We wanted them to remember that the brave
blood of our forebears who fought to the death in Bataan
and Corregidor still ran in their veins. We wanted them
to show the world that Filipinos were not bowing down
to a dictatorship. We wanted to conscienticize honest
and respectable people in government to resign and stop
lending the dictator a semblance of respectability. We
wanted foreign governments to realize that the Marcos
government was a repressive dictatorship and to stop
supporting it. We wanted the Marcos sycophants and
cronies to feel, and fear, the groundswell of protest
and leave the country like rats deserting a sinking ship.
Dreamers as we were, we dreamed of Marcos, isolated
and beleaguered, then stepping down. We were urging the
people to rally, to protest, in many ways . . . through civil
disobedience, by not paying taxes, by work slowdown,
by boycotting crony organizations. All this was in 1979.
Later, in 1986, after the February snap-elections and
before Marcos took flight, Ninoy’s widow Cory Aquino
was urging the very same from the Filipino populace.
The name “Light A Fire” was actually tagged upon
us by the military, a take off from chain letters that we
were then sending out asking people to “light the fires
of protest.” Copies of these letters were submitted
as evidence in our trial before the kangaroo military
commission.
In order to dramatize this call to action, SYMBOLIC fires
were started in public places and in crony establishments
which were habitually used by the dictatorship, to cheat
or to corrupt our people. These were carefully staged to
be nothing more than symbolic—attention getting and
harmless to life and limbs. Thus they were, as they were
intended to be, almost without exception, quickly spotted
and put out. NOT A SINGLE PERSON WAS INJURED!

As to why Sulo Hotel and, to some extent, the floating
casino (not, Mr. Tulfo, at the Philippine Village) completely
burned down, maybe, Mr. Tulfo, some deeper research
is necessary. But as to those reasons, take my word
for it, these should NOT be blamed on the Light A Fire
movement.
By the time the next phases of civil disobedience
escalated to SYMBOLIC bombings, Ed Olaguer and the small
band that made up the intrepid Light A Fire movement
were already behind bars and barbed wire in Col.
Abadilla’s gulag in Camp Crame or the dictatorship’s
show-window in Bicutan. The band of patriots that then
took up the torch were the equally often maligned April
6 Liberation Movement, so named to commemorate the
Metro Manila-wide noise barrage and protests on the eve
of the sham elections.
The objective was to dramatize these protests, not to
harm anyone, least of all civilians. Terrorists? If the intent
was to harm, they would have pulled an Oklahoma City’s
McVeigh! They would not have planted a tiny bomb in a
toilet bowl and repeatedly call to warn about a bomb in
the building! The great Marcos was shaken and ash gray
when the courageous Doris Baffrey planted such a tiny
one that blasted a few rows of empty seats behind the
dictator at the PICC. She could just as easily have planted
a much bigger charge that would have blown him and all
his guards in the room to kingdom come.
True, there was a risk. But there was just as much
risk, even more, of injury or death to civilians during
protest marches and rallies, especially because of the then
prevalent technique of planting provocateurs among the
rallyists. But when an important thing has to be done,
after doing what can be done about minimizing the risks,
one just has to go ahead and do it. Countless more patriots
and innocent bystanders were injured and died at rallies.
When we of the Light A Fire, and later on, of the April
6 Liberation were arrested, and languished in jail, we
could not defend ourselves as our pictures were flaunted
in the dailies and branded as arsonists, mad bombers, and

terrorists! And our friends and supporters outside could
not defend us either. But we understood all that because
they had to continue the struggle outside of prison.
Never mind the various forms of physical, mental, and
psychological torture to which the military subjected us.
Never mind the ignominy of the world thinking of us as
arsonists, bombers, and terrorists. That was our lot. That
was the sacrificial but still unfortunate part of the struggle,
inevitable for some. The struggle had to continue outside
our prison walls.
And then the unthinkable worst happened. Marcos just
allowed us to rot in jail. He didn’t want to have us executed.
He was too smart for that. He didn’t want martyrs. And
while he was too sick to know what was happening, some
other parties, not as smart, engineered Ninoy’s death. You
will perhaps think of that as an empty claim, especially if
I tell you that Ninoy repeatedly counted himself in our
number. It does not matter. What matters is in death, he
succeeded in what we his friends of kindred spirit were
too weak to achieve—arouse the people to action. The
rest is history. What we were fighting for was achieved—
a return to free elections, flawed though oftentimes they
may be, as democracy often is. Some of us, and many of
the cronies, assumed the seats of power. Most of us have
gone back to our fields.
And now, almost 20 years later, you still call us
terrorists? If you only knew, Mr. Tulfo, the countless
number of public personalities, of well known probity and
nationalism, who were our members, leaders, advisers,
sympathizers, and supporters, but who precisely because
of their public stature could not move behind the scenes
as quietly as we did, you would not find it so easy to
malign us and brand us as terrorists.
And I call on them now, senators, business executives,
and religious, who counted themselves in our number, as
a legitimate, non-violent, Christian Third Force. They have
remained silent for so long. I call on them to stand and be
counted, not in order to brag about their part in the fight

for freedom, but to defend their maligned compatriots.
Tell Mr. Tulfo, and the rest of the world about us, and
what we did, and what we were, and the kind of people
we are. If you don’t owe it to yourselves and to us, you
owe it to your and to our, grandchildren.
Othoniel V. Jimenez
Loyola Heights, Q.C.

UNPUBLISHED LETTER TO
ATENEO DE MANILA’S THE GUIDON
(DECEMBER 1986)
I am proud to be counted as one of the sons of this

Jesuit school that is so dear to me, and to which I owe
so much. I thank God, and my parents, through whose
efforts and sacrifices I was put through school, for the
rare and wonderful opportunity of having come under
the influence and tutelage of such Jesuits, giants of men,
as Delaney and de la Costa, and some other mentors I will,
with gratitude and fond memories, enumerate below.
I thank them for holding up to our young minds, only
the fine examples of men of courage and dedication, such
as Isaac Jogues, John de Brebeuf, Ignatius Loyola, and
Francis Xavier, all of whom died in harness, in service to
God, and to their fellowmen in whom they saw the image
of God.
Down the corridors of time, their words, dinned into
our ears some 50 odd years ago, still ring—Face the music
like a man. (John P. Delaney); First you learn grammar, then
you learn style (Lino Banayad); Before you can learn how
to lead, you must first learn how to follow (Bartholomew
Lahiff); Championship comes when opportunity meets with
preparedness (James B. Reuter); You can’t know everything,
you just have to know where to look for it (Nicholas Kunkel);
and other immortal words they transmitted to us from
earlier Jesuits—Never do anything with half a heart (St.

Aloysius Gonzaga); What doth it profit a man if he gain the
whole world and suffer the loss of his immortal soul (Christ
through St. Ignatius of Loyola).
This I learned, as the recipe for a true-blue Atenean:
The process of an Ateneo-initiated self-education is a
prerequisite first step, to prepare oneself to be a complete
person, an adequate husband and father, a mature citizen
of one’s community, and country, and of the world, and
a well tuned instrument of God’s Will. Add concern,
courage and commitment. Mix well. Top with idealism,
integrity, and a prayer life. Remember to go to God
through Christ, through Mary.
If we are to do this, it can only be by living according
to the words Christ spoke when He walked this earth. Do
not lay up for yourself treasures on this earth. Instead, we are
bidden to love our neighbor, feed the hungry, give drink
to the thirsty, clothe the naked. These easily translate, in
the current Philippine scene, to—work for social justice;
fight evil, corruption, cruelty, injustice, oppressive social
structures; strive that every man, woman, and child
may share equitably and abundantly of the goods of the
earth that God has put there for them, to use for their
salvation.
One thing should remain clear, though. We are not for
this earth. There can be no Utopia for us on this earth, for
“thorns and thistles it will bring you,” we are clearly told.
It is not success in liberating our fellow men from injustice
and oppression that is important. What is important is
striving unceasingly for it, with all our strength and mind
and heart, the best way we know how, in keeping with
His Word. The rest is up to Him.
And so we strive with our utmost, the best way we
know how, in keeping with His Word. As we were taught.
By the Jesuits of our generation, Ad majorem Dei gloriam!
FROM LIGHT A FIRE I TO LIGHT A FIRE II

It had always seemed clear to me that some time or
another, I would have to pick up a pen and write about
the Light A Fire Movement, as so many have ever since

been urging me to do, if only to tell our children, and their
children, what it was really all about.
But my efforts to do so were always bogged down by
how to go about it without it sounding like so much horn-
tooting. So, almost 20 years have passed. And we have
been overtaken by events. For clearly, there is another
widespread and sinister evil to be fought against. And
so once more the bugles blow and wait for us to rise and
follow the call.
The Light A Fire Movement sought the removal of a
corrupt dictatorship, a dictatorship that was destroying
this country that we so dearly love. And the target of this
effort was very clear, very visible.
But now we have something much more dangerous,
because it is insidious, because it still tries, by and large,
to hide behind seemingly innocuous words and phrases.
Light A Fire II seeks to unveil this insidious monster,
the monster of modernism, the monster of pride and
disobedience (which was also Lucifer’s downfall), the
monster of compromise, the all too familiar monster of
rationalizing those sins that one is already practicing,
This monster seeks to destroy our minds, our hearts,
our faith, our Catholic schools, and thus the hearts and
faith of our children whom we so trustingly place in those
schools.
This monster seeks to mock and uproot and cast away
all those things that we were taught, and have held so
dear for ever since we were graders—Mass, confession,
communion, love for Mama Mary, and seeking our way to
her Son through her, and love, allegiance, and obedience
to Our Holy Father the Pope, Christ’s Vicar on earth . . .
ON INVOLVEMENT OF THE RELIGIOUS

IN THE FIGHT FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE
The path that leads us astray always seems so right
at the start. We chide ourselves for not being “a man
for others,” for sitting on our hands and paying only lip
service to the idea of “preferential treatment for God’s
poor.”

And there is nothing wrong with this. But maybe priests
and religious should preach (and practice) social justice,
not fight for it, not to be involved (or even recommend)
armed struggle to attain it.
Did Jesus not say, “My kingdom is not of this world”?
Truly, his kingdom is not of this world, since this world
so quickly passes, this world in which “thorns and thistles
WILL grow.” His kingdom is in the hearts of men, which
will live, for better or worse, forever.
Paying household help just wages is practicing social
justice, and if done because it is as Jesus commands, then it
is allowing Him to reign in our hearts. Taking up arms to
fight for social justice is a secular, not primarily a spiritual
undertaking. Not of common notice is that Jesus never
said a word against slavery, an evil practiced in His time,
nor against the oppression of Rome. Thus, such concerns
do not seem to be part of the mission of Peter and the rest
of the Apostles.
A priest who sees a man practicing social injustice
would do well to approach that man and to try to convert
him (corny or silly or stupid as that may sound), even as
John the Baptist called out Herod for taking his (Herod’s)
brother’s wife, and lost his (the Baptist’s) head as an
indirect consequence. He would do well to try to make
that man see that he must practice social justice, firstly, in
order to save his soul, and secondarily, so that the goods
of this earth may be equitably distributed. For the first
is a spiritual reason, the second, a secular one. And in
fact, success in the first (convincing him to practice social
justice to save his soul), will result in better prospects of
success in the second (a more equitable, albeit all too often
fleeting, distribution of the goods of this earth).
ON THE CLAMOR FOR A MORE FLEXIBLE CHURCH

Then, there is the all too frequently heard view that
the Church should relax her views on contraception, etc.,
else, Catholics will simply ignore these rules.
Should we take this to mean that rules which we expect
will simply be ignored, should be relaxed?

Well, drug abuse is as old as the earliest smokers of
hashish, and prostitution is often referred to as the oldest
profession in the world, and murder goes all the way
back to Cain. Should rules on these also be relaxed? For
certainly these are being ignored!
It is said that the Church must be more “in synch with
the times.” The Church’s “rigid” stand on contraception
is blamed for over-population, and therefore for our
economic woes.
The Church stands foursquare against artificial means
of birth control since these pervert nature and God’s Will
and the primary purpose of sex and marriage. To expect
or demand that the Church change her position on this is
to argue that there are no absolute truths and principles,
and that every truth and every rule should be relative
to the “changing needs of the changing times.” Isn’t it
relativism?
There are indeed many rules and commandments that
are difficult to follow. Christ commands us to love our
enemies. Loving those that are good to us is easy. “Even
the Gentiles do that,” He said. But that is the way to
Heaven. And we need to pray for strength. God will not
send us trials without the necessary grace to overcome it.
WHO IS UNDERMINING
OUR ALLEGIANCE TO THE POPE?
Today, our Holy Father the Pope is besieged on all sides,
on major issues concerning contraception, homosexuality,
gay marriage, celibacy of priests, ordination of women,
and recognition of Our Blessed Lady as our Mother and
most powerful Intercessor.
What is worse, what is really most painful, is that the
ones most damagingly undermining his authority are
his own lieutenants—ordained priests, even bishops and
cardinals.
Truly, this is a cause for concern, for these are the ones
closest to the faithful, and capable of changing their mind-
set insidiously, while hiding behind seemingly innocuous,

nay, even high sounding generalities, ambiguities, and
“namby-pamby piosities”.
The Pope is said to be “not attuned to the times,” and
“cannot fully comprehend” the difficulties of, for example,
married Catholics, or single ladies who are unexpectedly
expecting a baby.
But we must believe that the Pope truly understands,
and truly feels for, and empathizes with the difficulties of
the faithful in keeping God’s commandments. We must
believe that he is aided by the wisdom of the Magisterium,
by the counsel of his advisors, and by long, long hours of
solitary prayer.
We cannot be “cafeteria Catholics” (a term I first heard
in high school, in the Ateneo!), choosing what we want
to believe and obey, and casually ignoring the rest. If
we cannot accept the Pope’s authority over us, then we
should not consider ourselves Catholics, not in spirit, not
in name. We should opt out of the organization. We are
free to do that. But as long as we are in, we should accept
the authority of the Pope, Christ’s Vicar on Earth, in direct
line of succession from Peter “the Rock, on whom I will
build My Church.”
HOW DO WE LOSE OUR WAY?

Today’s modernist priests seem to be far away, nay,
a universe away, from the Ignatian spirit. The devil is
truly constantly, unceasingly, hard at work, luring us
away from the ideals of our First Communion days with
the pleasures of the flesh, desire for wealth, popularity,
power. And he is no slouch! He is fiendishly, devilishly,
smart. He will waste no time tempting you where you are
strong. He will find your weakness.
I am reminded of a story of a Jesuit priest, assigned
as a parish priest, zealous in all his efforts as a parish
priest, all fire and brimstone in his Sunday sermons.
Until he got to preaching that supposedly there was

“no salvation outside the Catholic Church, literally and
absolutely.” And thus he claimed that only Catholics
could be saved. This he continued zealously, even after
being gently reminded by his diocesan superiors that this
was NOT the Church’s teaching. For the Church teaches
that sincere non-Catholics or even non-Christians can be,
and in fact have been saved, but ALWAYS through Christ.
Even if without their knowing it to be so. When finally, he
was being removed by his Jesuit superior from his parish
assignment, he refused to be transferred to a teaching
position in a Jesuit-run high school because, he insisted,
he could not desert his parishioners, as they needed
him. He had, somehow, arrived at a state where he was
insubordinate to both his diocesan and Jesuit superiors.
He was excommunicated and expelled from the Society!
(There was, fortunately, and thank God, a happy ending
to this story.)
But this was a case where the devil was too smart to
tempt this ascetic, prayerful priest, NOT with pleasures
of the flesh, or desire for wealth, popularity, or power.
Instead, he used this priest’s very zealousness to lead him
astray. And when he was being reassigned, he pridefully
refused.
This, then, is the most dangerous and insidious
sin. Pride! For when it sneaks in, it masquerades itself
as the desire to do well, to excel, to be better, more
knowledgeable.
But pride, really, was the first sin. For the snake
tempted Eve, and told her that if she ate of the fruit of
the Tree of Knowledge and Evil, she would be as wise as
God. And that was why, he said, they had been forbidden
to eat of it.
And going back even further, pride was the sin of
Lucifer, the brightest and most glorious of the angels.
Tradition has it that he was shown a vision of the crucified
Christ, and bidden to pay allegiance. And he took one
look at the battered, bleeding, and sorry figure, and said,
pridefully, “I will not serve.”

Truly, the devil is constantly, unceasingly, hard at
work. We have to be reminded of this. The old Tridentine
Mass included Final Prayers at the Foot of the Altar which
I wish they had not removed. These prayers included one
to St Michael:
Holy Michael, the archangel, defend us in the
conflict; be our protection against the malice and
snares of the devil. May God restrain him, we humbly
pray. And do thou, O prince of the heavenly host, by
the divine power, thrust into hell Satan and all the
other evil spirits who roam about the world, seeking
the ruin of souls. Amen.
A LONG, SLOW SLIDE

But a holy person does not fall into sin overnight. It is
a long, slow slide. Almost always, it starts with being too
busy. If he is a teacher, he is too busy with his students,
with his preparations for class, and as moderator for
other activities. If he is a parish priest, he is too busy with
parish activities, sick calls, visiting parishioners at their
homes and getting to know them better. A nun assigned
at a hospital is too busy attending to her patients, the
unending stream of emergency cases being brought in,
cleansing and binding wounds, administering injections,
giving medicine.
LOSING ONE’S PRAYER LIFE

Too busy. Too busy for what? Too busy to say his
prayers, to busy to make his daily examination of
conscience, too busy to say his rosary, too busy, in short,
to maintain his prayer life. And to lose one’s prayer life
is to open the door to the devil. That is when he can and
will, surely come in. He cannot come in otherwise. To lose
one’s prayer life is to lose one’s hold on integrity, honesty,
humility, charity, chastity. To lose one’s prayer life is to
lose the way. To lose one’s prayer life is to be doomed!
When I was in high school, the Jesuit novices in
Novaliches, (two of them were my own brothers), used
to say their daily rosary during their ambulatio. The Jesuit

priests in Padre Faura used to read their breviaries, pacing
the school grounds at twilight. (If nobody in the Ateneo
today knows about breviaries, it is because the Jesuits
today are not teaching their students about it.)
DWINDLING NUMBER OF VOCATIONS

You wonder why there are no vocations today? In
the old days, a young Catholic boy or girl in a Catholic
school would so admire their mentors, priests or nuns,
their commitment, their zeal and fervor, their dedication,
their character, and would say, “That’s what I want to be
when I grow up!” So, where are such role models today?
Doesn’t this tell us something?
THE OLD ATENEO

Back then, Friday was for the weekly Holy Mass for
the whole high school. Saturday was for the college
students. And the day before the weekly Mass, students
were allowed, in turn, to leave their class for weekly
confession.
In the afternoon of First Fridays, there also was
Benediction, and it was heady to kneel there, and smell
the incense, and join in the strong all-male strains of
Tantum Ergo and O Salutaris Hostia, and bow down as the
little bells rang while the Sacred Host was held aloft, in
the shining golden monstrance, for veneration.
Daily, the members of the St. John Berchmans Altar
Society came as early as 5:30 at dawn, to serve Mass in
the myriad little (3 x 3 meter) chapels where the Jesuit
priests said their daily Masses. (After the final Prayers at
the Foot of the Altar, the priest would turn to the sacristan
kneeling beside him and bow to him, and solemnly say,
“Thank You.”)
No Atenean would ever be caught without his rosary
in his pocket, and we all tried hard to say our daily Rosary
(well, we were just kids, after all, and the many lapses
must surely have been forgiven).

Well-celebrated events were March 19, Feast of St
Joseph; July 31, Feast of St Ignatius; August 15, of course,
Feast of the Assumption; September 8, Feast of Our
Blessed Mother’s Nativity; and October 2 (especially for
the Grade Schoolers), Feast of the Holy Angels.
Paramount of course, aside from the October Medal
devotion, was the devotion to the Sacred Heart, and the
Nine First Fridays Devotion. (I remember Fr. James B.
Reuter, in a radio sermon, saying so earnestly—“Christ so
hungers for our love that He is willing to ‘sell’ us Heaven
for Nine First Fridays!”)
Daily, first thing of the day, was the Morning Offering,
offering up “our prayers, works, joys, and sacrifices of the
day, for the intentions of Thy Sacred Heart, in union with
the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, throughout the world,
in reparation for our sins,” ending up with “and for the
general and particular intentions of Our Holy Father, the
Pope.”
All of these, you may say, were little nothings. But
these were important in that they helped us feel close to
Jesus and to Our Mother Mary, and feel ourselves little
children of God, and to behave as such in and out of the
campus, for to behave otherwise would be a miserable
hypocrisy.
OUR PLEA
And so we ask our Jesuit friends, our admired
followers of St Ignatius, who years ago, on top of their
vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, made a special
vow of obedience to the Pope, to bring these all back.
To bring back to the Ateneo campus, and to our
children studying there, that old feeling of closeness to
Jesus and His Mother Mary, which our old Jesuit mentors
so unceasingly tried to foster in us. To give them back the
old role models—the patient St Joseph, the courageous
heroes Sts. Isaac Jogues and John de Brebeuf, and the
numerous other Saints of note. To bring back the devotions

of the Rosary, and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (“Don’t
pray at Mass, pray THE Mass!” Fr Delaney would say).
And to bring back the old but ever new core doctrine
of our Catholic Catechism, “God created us to know Him,
to love Him, and to serve Him here on earth, in order to
be happy with Him in Heaven.”
THE LONG WAY BACK

But before you can bring all these back, you have to
bring yourselves back. And it may be a long, long way
back. Back to how you felt when you were ordained. Back
to your own old, short pants, First Communion days
The long way back starts with humility. Many of the
long forgotten hymns and prayers would help. And may
I mention snatches of them here:
Who am I, my Jesus, that Thou comest to me,
I have sinned against Thee, often grievously.
I am very sorry, I have caused Thee pain,
I will never, never, wound Thy Heart again.
And a prayer my eldest sister (she died one year short
of her Golden Jubilee as an RVM nun) taught me when I
was a toddler.
Take my body, Jesus, eyes and ears and tongue,
Never let them, Jesus, help to do Thee wrong.
Take my heart and fill it full of love for Thee,
All I have, I give Thee; give Thyself to me.
Best of all, I think, is a stanza from a poem written by
Mary Dixon Thayer.
Lovely Lady dressed in blue,
Teach me how to pray.
God was just your little boy,
And you know the way.

Chapter 24
APOLOGIA PRO FIDE CATOLICA
Pope John Paul II has just passed away with some three
million mourners moving heaven and earth to be able to come
to Rome and pray for him. Reviewing my work thus far, I still
maintain that the main issue in this controversy with neo-
Jesuits, is NOT their right as individuals or as a Society to exercise
their free will in determining whether or not to continue their
age old vows of obedience to the Pope, and thus adhere to the
teachings of the Catholic Magisterium united with the Pope.
They are free to do or not to do so! Albeit I hasten to add, that
like anybody else they are strictly accountable for the temporal
and spiritual consequences of their choice and subsequent
actions. Here and now and in the eternal hereafter!
Thus the main issue is the LACK OF FULL DISCLOSURE to the
public especially with respect to their Catholic students and
their parents, and to us Catholic alumni, particularly as to the
full and honest meaning of the official turnaround of their
Society as was embodied in the Decree on the Promotion of
Justice enacted by their 32nd General Congregation in 1975.
I have been particularly hard on Joaquin Bernas S.J. and
Bienvenido Nebres S.J. because here in the Philippines, these
two are the most eminent and recognized academic and
administrative leaders of the Ateneo de Manila University,
which caters mainly to Catholic parents and their Catholic sons
and daughters. The vast majority of the university’s studentry
are therefore still Catholics! The parents explicitly or at least
implicitly still believe or are led to believe that the Jesuits of
today are still primarily Catholic-ordained priests all solemnly
pledged to the Catholic vows of apostolic Obedience, Poverty,

and Chastity. And therefore the Ateneo de Manila should
NORMALLY still be a Catholic academic institution as defined by
the Catholic Magisterium.
FREEDOM, yes! But with HONEST transparency . . .
But of course the Philippine Jesuits of today are still free
to revert their Ateneo institutions of learning to something
like the University of the Philippines. Or even to a New Era
College equivalent to that of the local religious sect, the Iglesia
ni Kristo. Nevertheless, simple justice and honesty demand
that full disclosure of such a reversion, and more so if for a
radical change or transmogrification, should be made as soon
as possible together with the “whys and wherefores” to be
ventilated to the public, especially to the students, parents,
alumni, and benefactors.
But it is not only the academic heads and administrators
among present day Society of Jesus hierarchs who are afflicted
with the disease of modernism and extreme liberalism.
In a previous chapter, I related the post-mortem condemnation
by the Philippine Jesuit hierarchy of a religious book authored
by my elder brother, the late Antonio B. Olaguer S.J. for being
“NOT consonant with the Society’s doctrine and reputation.” I was
then still ambivalent about the role played in the Censor’s
Report by the Jesuit Provincial at that time, the Reverend Fr.
Romeo Intengan S.J. For I strongly suspected then that he
himself wrote the Censor’s Report but deliberately did not affix
his signature. He was the one to whom we gave the unedited
manuscript and who promised to review it himself. And about
a year later he told me personally that the book needed to be
“extensively re-written,” which he said he had started to do
but couldn’t promise when to finish it considering his hectic
schedule as Father Provincial.
I thought however that the close personal ties and mutual
dangers shared between Toti and Intengan, who both had
long preceded me in organizing the Jesuit-led rebellion against
Apologia Pro Fide Catolica 441

the Marcos dictatorship, plus Intengan’s sense of justice and
Catholic priesthood, would have prevailed. However I very
well knew about his ultra-liberal sociological and theological
views. But I still had nothing definitely modernist or contrary
to Catholic teaching that he had written or said on which to pin
him down. But now, I do have!
Loyalists vs. Modernists
And so apparently there is an on-going process of dichotomy,
or institutional schizophrenia within the local Jesuit community.
On one hand there is the modernist-liberal cabal led by the
trio of former Provincial bosses Bernas, Nebres, and Intengan,
whose theological and sociological views smack of pantheistic
New Age rhetoric and a re-invented Liberation Theology
disguised in seemingly scholarly language such as Christ is met
in the hurly-burly of history.
On the other hand, there are those who independently
continue to observe the classic norms of Ignatian and Catholic
traditions and practices, such as the veteran lay women teachers
at the Ateneo de Manila Grade School who now and then are
able to prevail and thus adequately and orthodoxly prepare
the Grade 2 boys for their First Communion. Among others
too many to name here, are the remnants together with my
old Ateneo de Naga dormitory colleague Jesus V. Fernandez
S.J., John Phelan S.J., William L. Hayes S.J. who passed away
in 2002, and others such as my former teacher, the late Lorenzo
Maria Guerrero S.J. who was the National Director of the
Marian Movement of Priests before my brother Toti took over.
It is a Movement which is so explicitly loyal to the Pope and
Our Lady, a loyalty that is “heresy” and thus anathema to the
Bernas-Nebres-Intengan led cabal. And leading our prominent,
albeit dwindling Ignatian Jesuit Catholic priests still alive
such as the eminent theologian Catalino G. Arevalo S.J., is my
old mentor, friend, and inspiration for the last 57 years, the
Reverend James B. Reuter S.J. He is still as Ignatian, Marian,

and loyal to the Papacy and as Catholic in his priesthood as
he was in 1948 when I first knew him. But apparently he and
Arevalo are of the same view as the late Pope John Paul II in
SILENTLY suffering their neo-Jesuit colleagues, and to let Divine
Providence take the lead in solving the problem.
For in the parable of the Sower and the unexpected weeds,
the owner declined his servants’ suggestion to pull out the
weeds which “the enemy” had sowed:
No, when you pull up the weeds, you might uproot
the wheat with them. Let them just grow together until
harvest, and at harvest time I will say to the workers: Pull
up the weeds first, tie them in bundles, and burn them,
then gather the wheat into my barn.
—Matthew 13:28-30
That harsh denouement is also reflected in Matthew 5:13:

You are the salt of the earth. But if salt has lost its
strength, how can it be made salty again? It has become
useless. It can only be thrown away and people will
trample on it!
And even more harsh is Christ’s direct warning:

If any of you should cause one of these little ones who
believe in me to stumble and fall, it would be better for
you to be thrown into the depths of the sea with a great
millstone around your neck!
—Matthew 18:6
In fairness, however, these loyal Ignatian Jesuits’ continued

Catholicity in their pastoral work, private behavior, and
especially in their published newspaper articles, have been
obviously motivated by or done, as Catholic Jesuit priests of
the Ignatian mold. These have been LOUD ENOUGH for their own
neo-Jesuit colleagues to hear. Fr. Arevalo’s theological treatises
and opinions for example are solidly main stream Catholic
orthodoxy. The latest one I read that was authored by him was

on the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed
Virgin Mary and her singular graced holiness.
A friend of ours who reviewed this particular chapter
commented that we should distinguish between “the weeds,”
as against “the enemy” who sowed the weeds! And that we
should not allow that “enemy” to continue sowing those weeds
with our apparent consent. Amen!
Fr. Reuter however optimistically believes that if there will
be a headcount and loyalty-check on all Jesuits, not more than
thirty percent would explicitly and publicly align themselves
with the neo-Jesuit bloc. Thus despite this tyranny of the
minority, I believe that there is great hope for a miraculous
return of this prodigal institution, still the largest single and
most secularly educated congregation of priests, brothers and
scholastics.
But that miraculous return of neo-Jesuits to the genuinely
Catholic fold will be, as prophesied by Our Lady, because of
God’s grace dispensed through her! She will work through
people CONSECRATED TO HER, like Catholic Jesuit priests such
as Reuter, et al. In fact in my research efforts for this work,
I discovered that the Philippine local recruiters/promoters
for new Jesuit vocations still use, publicly at least, much of
the old Ignatian norms for selecting their candidates. Albeit
their language is mixed with a few but significant neo-Jesuit
shibboleths. Here are excerpts from their recruitment web site:
1. What Is To Be A Jesuit?
It is to know that one is a sinner, yet called to be
a companion of Jesus, as Ignatius was, who begged
the Blessed Virgin to place him with her Son, and
who then saw the Father Himself as Jesus, carrying
His cross, to take this pilgrim into his company. It
is to engage, under the standard of the cross, in the
crucial struggle of our time, the struggle for faith and
that struggle for justice which it includes.

2. What Is The Jesuit Vision?
Saint Ignatius desired his men to be contempla-
tives-in-action, men seeking their union with God
through active and total service of their fellowmen.
He wanted his men to combine a total, personal
commitment to Christ and His Cross, with decisive
involvement in the transformation and salvation
of the world. Thus, the Jesuit is an apostle: one
sent by the Father through Jesus into the world to
spread the Good News. As apostles, Jesuits must
be all things to all men: men ready to go anywhere,
live anywhere, do anything, suffer anything, be
anything, in order to be instruments of God’s
salvation . . . Today, the Society of Jesus, considering
these criteria of Ignatius, and aware of the needs and
hopes of men today, focus their service of God and
man on ‘The service of faith and the promotion of
Justice’.” [sic! And as if they will do so INDEPENDENTLY of
the Catholic Magisterium and the Pope . . . ]
3. What Is The Meaning Of The Vows Which All
Jesuits Take?
The Jesuit takes religious vows which are apostolic.
He commits himself until death to the evangelical
counsels of poverty, chastity, and obedience. This is
so that he may be totally united to Christ and share
His own freedom to be at the service of all God’s
people . . . free by their vow of obedience, to respond
to the call of Christ as made known to them by him
whom the Spirit has placed over the Church, and
to follow the lead of their superiors, especially the
Father General, who has all authority over them.
[Sic! And please recall Articles 7 and 66 of the 32nd General
Congregation’s Decree No. 4] Moreover, following
Ignatius they have asked Christ our Lord to let them
render this service in a manner that gives them a
personality of their own. They have chosen to give it
in the form of a consecrated life, placing themselves

at the service not only of the local churches but of
the universal Church, by a special vow of obedience
to him who presides [sic!] over the universal Church,
namely the Pope. [NOTE: The Catholic Magisterium
says otherwise! The Pope does NOT MERELY PRESIDE, but he
RULES over the Universal Church as the Vicar of Christ!
Again, semantic lines of retreat . . . ]
4. What Do I Do If I’m Discerning My Vocation?
Continue to pray, receive the sacraments, write
or get involved in your parish and your school’s
religious activities specially in the liturgy of the
Eucharist. [NOTE: Okey na rin, despite the fact that
only these few terse phrases in all the announcements
are devoted to the more important message NEEDED by
the aspirants, that the loftiness and the all-encompassing
Jesuit mission-objectives and promises to be heroic in
their vocation, are impossible to attain, if without the
regular spiritual nourishment by the Sacraments and
the intercession of Our Lady to persevere in striving for
the ultimate union with Christ in the Trinity.]
But even these recruiters’ exhortations are already a marked

departure from the language and sentiments of Bernas, Nebres,
and Intengan vis-à-vis our Catholic Faith and the Pope!
Especially the latter. For just before this chapter was started,
Pope John Paul II died on the second day of April 2005, a FIRST
SATURDAY. It was also just one day before the Sunday of Mercy,
which the Pope had proclaimed in keeping with the messages-
instructions from Our Lord, as received by a Polish nun,
Faustina Kowalska, whom the Pope had elevated to sainthood.
But barely a day or two following the burial of the Pope on
April 8, and after the world’s most spiritually moving funeral
rites attended by millions of mourners and avidly watched on
TV by hundreds of millions more, Romeo Intengan S.J. finally
and publicly displayed his neo-Jesuit colors.

Intengan, a U.P. College of Medicine graduate and licensed
physician, was interviewed by the Philippine Star because he
was the immediate past Jesuit boss in the Philippines. That fol-
lowing Monday, the 11th of April, the Philippine Star came out
with the front-page headline under the byline of a certain Mike
Frialde, an excerpt of which follows:
RP CLERGY SPLIT ON “LIBERAL” NEW POPE

The local Roman Catholic Church is split on whether
Pope John Paul II’s successor should be a liberal steward
of the Petrine office or a conservative one.
According to the former provincial of the Philippine
Province of the Society of Jesus, Fr. Romeo Intengan,
the new pope “should be open to discussing ideas that
apparently seem too liberal and yet are affecting the daily
lives of Catholics” . . . .
OPENNESS TO DIFFERING OPINIONS
In a statement sent to reporters, Intengan said a
“significant proportion” of theologians and pastors in
the Catholic Church “have expressed preference for a
pope (who) would tolerate or encourage open, informed
and respectful discussions of issues on which many
committed and practicing Catholic Christians of goodwill
have differing opinions.”
These issues “include questions of bioethics and
sexual ethics, such as the beginnings of human life,
contraception, population management, the relations
between persons of the same sex and the legal regulation
of these relations,” he said.
While Intengan feels the new pope should be open
to discussing these issues, a majority of theologians
and pastors in the Catholic Church still feel that sexual
intercourse should remain within the framework of
marriage and that the term marriage should still be
reserved for heterosexual unions.
Homosexual couples who insist on “living together”
as sexual partners, could instead avail of a civil union that
would protect their civil rights, he added.

Many of these pastors and theologians admit, however,
that same-sex couples who insist on living together as
sexual partners “could avail of a civil union that could
protect their civil, political, social, and economic rights,”
he said.
Intengan said that despite favoring civil same-sex
unions, a number of pastors and theologians in the
Catholic Church also expressed doubts “on allowing
same-sex couples to adopt, much less biologically beget
children, by one partner or by surrogates.”
He also said a “majority of pastors and theologians in
the Catholic Church remain opposed to abortion.” These
pastors, Intengan said, also wish that the new pope share
the same view on the matter.
These pastors and theologians “would want a Pope
who would lead the Church in grasping better and
addressing more effectively the societal factors that exert
pressure on some women to have an abortion, such as
unemployment, unavailability of affordable housing, and
discrimination in workplace and career against pregnant
women or women with children,” he said.
They would also “like a pope who would have the
same concern and compassion for those who chose to
undergo abortion, as Pope John Paul II had and which he
expressed in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel
of Life),” Intengan said. “They also hope for a pope who
would encourage the Church, while not unduly relaxing
its moral teaching, to care not only for the ‘ideal’ family
of father, mother and children, but also for single-parent
families, families whose parents are in irregular unions,
parentless families, same-sex unions, and those living
alone.”
He said these pastors and theologians also hope the
new pope will encourage, or at least tolerate, open,
informed, and respectful discussion of important issues
of Church governance and ministry.
Intengan said these issues of ministry include: Balan-
cing the authority of the Pope as head of the “college” or
assembly of all the bishops and the authority of bishops as

a whole, according to the teaching of the Second Vatican
Ecumenical Council or Vatican II; empowerment of the
worldwide Synod of Bishops by giving it more freedom
in deliberations and making its decisions binding rather
than merely recommendatory; increased autonomy for
regional and national episcopal conferences or assemblies
of bishops; making celibacy optional for the diocesan
clergy and; the admission of women to ordained ministry
in the Church.
Significant in the lengthy Frialde news story was its focus

on Intengan’s ultra-liberal and modernist views about wanting
the next Pope to be equally liberal with him on bio-ethics
and sexual ethics, contraception, population management,
homosexuality and same-sex marriage, extra-marital relations,
optional celibacy of priests, women’s ordination, abortion,
divorce, and Intengan’s so-called “balanced” independence of
Catholic Bishops’ authority. He was quoted as wanting these
decisions of national groupings of Bishops to be “binding
rather than merely recommendatory”!
In effect Intengan spoke for the entire Jesuit community
in the Philippines. Worse, he went practically whole hog in
espousing the liberal-modernists’ complete cafeteria-shopping
hit-list, that would utterly demolish the legacy of Pope John
Paul II and his staunch defense of the Catholic Faith. Thus
more than two-thirds of the news story was devoted to
Intengan’s heretofore privately held theological aberrations.
And in ostensibly speaking for all Jesuits in the Philippines, he
gave the clear impression to his interviewer that indeed the RP
clergy are “split” not just on a “liberal” pope, but more so on
their love for and loyalty to the late Pope John Paul II! The main
reason offered by Intengan for his advocacy of the next Pope
being liberal on these issues, was that these had “affected the
lives of many people!” If so and as Otto Jimenez has suggested
with tongue-in-cheek, why not throw in the liberalization of
laws and doctrines on drug abuse and prostitution?

In contrast, the opposing opinions of two bishops, a diocesan
priest Anton Pascual in charge of the Manila archdiocesan
ministry of social justice, and that of a Catholic lay leader
and television evangelist were given short-shrift in the Mike
Frialde news report. Catholic Archbishop Ramon Arguelles
was however directly quoted as having said that the election
of a liberal pope is “not even worthy of asking (for) . . . This
is against the law of God. The pope can’t go against the law
of God, especially if by liberal you mean that the next pope
will allow abortion, use of contraception, or divorce.” And
the Philippine Catholic Bishops Conference’s chairman for
its Office on Faith Matters, Bishop Luis Tagle was quoted in
his challenge to all Catholics “to remain firm in the faith” and
to shun the “shopping mall mentality” on Catholic doctrinal
matters.
Had Intengan expressed even just 10% of his publicized
views in 1950 when Joaquin Bernas S.J. and I were still
studying at the Ateneo de Naga, when Pope Pius XII was the
incumbent Pope, and Jean Baptiste Janssens S.J. the Father
General, I believe it would have been utterly impossible for
him to have been accepted even as an aspiring novice-brother
in the Ignatian Society of Jesus at that time.
Sad to say, the published views of Romeo Intengan S.J. have
not been challenged nor retracted at all by the incumbent Phil-
ippine Jesuit Provincial Daniel L. Huang S.J., who has been a
protégé of Intengan. Thus it also confirms the stark conclusions
of McDonough and Bianchi and their book’s reviewer Fr. Paul
Shaughnessy S.J. about American Jesuits, and its applicability
to their former protégés-students here in the Philippines. To
McDonough, Bianchi, and Shaughnessy, American Jesuitstru-
ly are mostly papists who hate the pope, evangelists who have lost
the faith! And apparently, so too are their former students and
wards who now control the Jesuit hierarchy in the Philippines.
Sad, very sad . . .

The Vilification of Toti Olaguer’s Memory, Re-visited
And now it can also be told why Intengan either authored,
or at the very least surely agreed with the condemnation of
Fr. Toti’s obviously orthodox, Marian, and pro-papal book,
Waiting for the Lord, and why it was so vicious and personally
mocking. Because Fr. Toti had been the National Director of the
Marian Movement of Priests (MMP), whose daily consecration
to “The Immaculate Heart of Mary” and the “Sacred Heart of
Jesus” are anathema to neo-Jesuits such as Intengan. But for
Fr. Toti and the Movement he propagated, it was their raison
d ‘etre.
Above all, Intengan knew fully well that many of Our
Lady’s messages to Dom Stefano and a significant passage of
the movement’s Daily Consecration to the Immaculate Heart
of Mary, were clearly condemnatory of modernist priests such
as he was! Here is a portion of that Consecration Prayer:
We further promise you to be united with the Holy
Father, with the Hierarchy, and with our Priests,
in order thus to set up a barrier to the growing
confrontation directed against the Magisterium, that
threatens the very foundation of the Church. Under
your protection, we want moreover to be apostles of
this sorely needed unity of prayer and love for the
Pope, on whom we invoke your special protection.
Fr. Toti had printed and distributed throughout the country,

tens of thousands of leaflets containing this Act of Consecration
when Intengan was still the Father Provincial. The latter and
his neo-Jesuit followers must have been aware that my brother
and I had them particularly in mind as among those behind
the growing confrontation directed against the Magisterium that
threatens the very foundation of the Church.
But these prayers which Fr. Toti spread far and wide, are
mild in its condemnation of modernist Catholic clergy and
neo-Jesuitry, compared to similar condemnations coming

directly from the Gobbi messages of Our Lady. These have been
published starting in 1973 when Gobbi first received them,
until 1997.
“Fight, children of the light!”
The messages stopped as announced by Our Lady herself
when she gave her 604th and last message to Gobbi on Decem-
ber 31, 1997. Six years later in January 2004, Fr. Gobbi sent
a letter to all national Directors of the MMP throughout the
world. I received a copy just when I started to write this book in
earnest. That letter cemented my decision to write and to finish
it soonest, and if possible before July 31, 2005, the Memorial Day
of St. Ignatius of Loyola. Except for the first three paragraphs
which dealt with his travel plans to visit the national chapters,
here is Fr. Gobbi’s letter, with my selective emphasis. Surely
the likes of Kolvenbach, Intengan, Bernas, Nebres, Tanseco, et
al. would if they could, condemn and suppress this letter too:
[emphasis supplied]
Ave Maria
Milan: January 1, 2004
TO THE NATIONAL AND REGIONAL DIRECTORS

OF THE MARIAN MOVEMENT OF PRIESTS
Dear Brothers,
At the beginning of this new year, I am spiritually
close to you to offer you my fraternal wish of peace. From
every part of the world, the Immaculate Heart of Mary
is gathering her little children, to form with them her
victorious army.
In these times of the purification and the great
tribulation, in which Satan has set up his reign in the
world, has seduced humanity with theoretical and
practical atheism, making it the victim of a materialistic
and hedonistic civilization, and in which the Law of
God becomes violated and publicly trampled, I invite
you to trust and to hope. If the days in which we live are

dominated by violence, by terrorism, and by wars, our
hope must be ever greater.
The name of our hope is Mary. “ . . . so too does she
shine forth on earth [on our path] . . . , as a sign of sure hope
and solace . . . ” (Lumen Gentium, Chap. 8, V., #68) As a support
for our hope and as a maternal refuge in the painful and
bloody trials which await us, she offers us her Immaculate
Heart. In her Immaculate Heart she forms the Apostles
of the last times.
( . . . ) Mary’s power over the evil spirits will especially
shine forth in the latter times, when Satan will lie in
wait for her heel, that is, for her humble servants and her
poor children whom she will rouse to fight against him.
In the eyes of the world they will be little and poor and,
like the heel, lowly in the eyes of all, down-trodden and
crushed as is the heel by the other parts of the body. But
in compensation for this they will be rich in God’s graces,
which will be abundantly bestowed on them by Mary.
They will be great and exalted before God in holiness.
They will be superior to all creatures by their great zeal
and so strongly will they be supported by divine assistance
that, in union with Mary, they will crush the head of
Satan with their heel, that is, their humility, and bring
victory to Jesus Christ.”
–St. Louis-Marie Grignon de Montfort
Treatise on True Devotion to Mary, No. 54
This is the task that Our Lady is entrusting to those
who belong to the Marian Movement of Priests: to be the
Apostles of the last times . . . .
1. THE APOSTLES OF THE LAST TIMES
56. But what will they be like, these servants, these slaves,
these children of Mary?
They will be ministers of the Lord who, like a flaming
fire, will enkindle everywhere the fires of divine love . . .
They will carry the gold of love in their heart, the
frankincense of prayer in their mind, and the myrrh of

mortification in their body. They will bring to the poor
and lowly everywhere the sweet fragrance of Jesus, but
they will bring the odor of death to the great, the rich
and the proud of this world.
57. . . . Attached to nothing, surprised at nothing, troubled
at nothing, they will shower down the rain of God’s
word and of eternal life. They will thunder against sin,
they will storm against the world, they will strike down
the devil and his followers . . .
58. They will be true apostles of the latter times…
—St. Louis-Marie Grignon de Montfort
Treatise on True Devotion to Mary, Nos. 56-58
I am the Mother of the Second Evangelization. Mine is

the task of forming the apostles of the second evangelization.
During these years, I have formed you with particular care
and through the gift of my words, to be the apostles of
these last times.”
–To the Priests, Our Lady’s Beloved Sons (TTP)
December 8, 1994, 533h
2. THE APOSTLES OF FAITH
Apostles of the last times, because you must
announce to all, to the very ends of the earth, the Gospel
of Jesus, in these days of the great apostasy. In the great
darkness which has descended upon the world, spread the
light of Christ and of his divine truth.”
–TTP, December 8, 1994, 533i
There is a great uneasiness, at this time, in the
world and in the Church, and that which is in question
is the faith . . . What strikes me, when I think of the
Catholic world, is that within Catholicism, there
seems sometimes to pre-dominate a non-Catholic
way of thinking, and it can happen that this non-
Catholic thought within Catholicism, will tomorrow
become the stronger. But it will never represent the

thought of the Church. It is necessary that a small
flock subsist, no matter how small it might be.
—Pope Paul VI
Jesus is the Truth because it is He—the living Word—

who is the font and seal of all divine revelation. [Yet some]
work to obscure his divine word, by means of natural
and rational interpretations and, in the attempt to
make it more understandable and acceptable, empty it of
all its supernatural content. Thus errors are spread
in every part of the Catholic Church itself. Because
of the spread of these errors, many are moving
away today from the true faith . . . The loss of the faith
is apostasy.
—TTP, June 13, 1989, 406l
The apostasy has now been spread into every part

of a Church betrayed even by some of her bishops,
abandoned by many of her priests, deserted by so very
many of her children, and violated by my Adversary.
—TTP, August 26, 1983, 270j
Therefore it is necessary that, in these times, we become

true apostles of faith.
I bring you to a great love for Jesus-Truth, making

you courageous witnesses of the faith . . . making
of you strong proclaimers of all the truths of the
Catholic faith, as you set yourself in opposition, with
strength and courage, to all errors.”
—TTP, June 13, 1989, 406 s,u
Let us preach all the truths of our faith, especially those

which today are no longer preached. Let us speak of death,
of the judgment of God, of hell, of purgatory, of heaven,
of the Cross that saves us, of sin that separates us from
God, of the necessity of the sacrament of Reconciliation,

of the obligation to follow the way that Jesus traced out
for us in his Gospel.
—Spread my light, by preaching the Gospel of
Jesus with force and fidelity. His divine word must
be proclaimed by you with the same clarity and
simplicity with which Jesus has announced it to you.
If you are faithful ministers of the Gospel, set up
the strongest possible defense against the continual
propagation of [errors] . . . In this way you become
the apostles of the second evangelization, so much
asked for by my Pope, and the precious instruments
of my motherly triumph.
—TTP, Nov. 15, 1995, 557 f, l
3. THE APOSTLES OF HOLINESS
Apostles of the last times, because you must give
to all the very life of God, by means of grace which you
communicate with the sacraments of which you are the
ministers. And thus you spread the fragrance of purity
and of holiness in these times of great perversion.
—TTP, Dec. 8, 1994, 533j
“59 . . . they will be true disciples of Jesus Christ, imitating

his poverty, his humility, his contempt of the world and
his love. They will point out the narrow way to God
in pure truth according to the holy Gospel, and not
according to the maxims of the world. Their hearts
will not be troubled, nor will they show favor to anyone;
they will not spare or heed or fear any man, however
powerful he may be. They will have the two-edged sword
of the word of God in their mouths and the blood-stained
standard of the Cross on their shoulders. They will carry
the crucifix in their right hand and the rosary in their
left, and the holy names of Jesus and Mary on their
heart. The simplicity and self-sacrifice of Jesus will be
reflected in their whole behavior . . .
—St. Louis-Marie Grignon de Montfort
Treatise on True Devotion to Mary, No. 59

I want all the priests of the Marian Movement of
Priests to be like this. They must be my priests! . . .
Because these priests are mine, they must become
accustomed to letting themselves be guided by me,
with simplicity, with abandonment.
My joy is that of leading them, as Mother, to the
great goal of sanctity. I want them to be fervent; I
want them to be in love with my Son Jesus; I want
them ever faithful to the Gospel. They must be docile
in my hands for the sake of the great plan of mercy.
—TTP, August 24, 1973, #13 f, i-k
You—little babes consecrated to me who live from my

very own spirit—are the apostles of these last times.
Live as faithful disciples of Jesus, in contempt for
the world and for yourselves, in poverty, in humility,
in silence, in prayer, in mortification, in charity and in
union with God, while you are unknown and despised by
the world.
The moment has come for you to come out from
your hiddenness in order to go and shed light upon
the earth.
Show yourselves to all as my children, for I am
with you always. Let the faith be the light which
enlightens you in these days of darkness, and let zeal
alone consume you, zeal for the honor and glory of
my Son Jesus.
FIGHT, CHILDREN OF THE LIGHT, because the hour of my
BATTLE HAS NOW ARRIVED. In the harshest of winters, you
are the buds which are opening up from my Immaculate
Heart and which I am placing on the branches of the
Church to tell you that her most beautiful springtime is
about to arrive.
This will be for her the second Pentecost.
—TTP, Dec. 31, 1997, #604 r-w

You are being called to bring down the dew of the
merciful love of Jesus upon a world parched by the
inability to love and menaced more and more with
hatred, violence and war.
—TTP, Dec. 8, 1994, 533k
Spread my light, dispensing about you the balm

of my motherly tenderness. Go out to meet, above
all, the little, the poor, the sinners, those far away, the
stricken, the innumerable victims of every injustice
and every act of violence, and bring them all into the
safe refuge of my Immaculate Heart.
—TTP, Nov. 15, 1995, 557k
4. THE APOSTLES OF UNITY
[Some] seek to destroy the foundation of the unity of

the Church, through subtle and insidious attacks
on the Pope. [They] weave plots of dissension and of
contestation against the Pope; [they] support and reward
those who vilify and disobey him; [they] disseminate the
criticisms and the contentions of bishops and theologians.
In this way the very foundation of its unity is demolished,
and thus the Church becomes more and more torn
and divided . . . .
I make of you precious instruments of its unity. For
this reason, I have given you, as a second pledge of my
Movement, a special unity with the Pope. By means of
your love and of your fidelity, the divine plan of perfect
unity in the Church will once again shine forth in all its
splendor.
—TTP, June 13, 1989, #406 r,w
In the person and the work of the Holy Father,

John Paul II, I am reflecting my great light which will
become stronger, the more the darkness envelops
everything.

Priests and faithful consecrated to my Immaculate
Heart . . . unite, all of you, about the Pope, and you will be
clothed in my own strength and in my marvelous light!
Love him; pray for him; listen to him! Obey him in all
things . . .
—TTP, January 1, 1979, #167k-m
Unite yourself, through love and prayer, with all the
priests of my Movement, whom I myself am bringing
to an ever greater love for the Pope and for the Church
united with him. You must support him with prayer, with
your love and with your fidelity. You must follow him,
carrying out to perfection whatever he determines for
the good of the Church. In this, be a good example to all.
You must defend him at those times when my Adversary
lets loose his fury upon him, deceiving those of my
poor children who oppose him.
—TTP, Oct. 17, 1978, 162d-f
Today I confirm for you that this is the Pope

of my secret, the Pope about whom I spoke to the
children during the apparitions, the Pope of my love
and of my sorrow . . . .
My Immaculate Heart is wounded in seeing how,
all about him, there is an expanding emptiness and
indifference; contestation on the part of some of
my poor children—bishops, priests, religious and
faithful; haughty opposition to his Magisterium.
For this reason, my Church is today wounded by a
deep division; it is threatened with the loss of the
true faith; it is pervaded with an infidelity which is
becoming greater and greater.
—TTP, May 13, 1991, #449 c,e
5. THE APOSTLES OF THE EUCHARIST
Apostles of the last times, because you must
announce the closely approaching return of Jesus in glory,
who will lead humanity into the new times, when at last

there will be seen new heavens and a new earth. Proclaim
to all his forthcoming return: ‘Maranatha! Come, Lord
Jesus!’ (cf. Rev 22:20)
—TTP, Dec. 8, 1994, 533 l-m
The coming of the glorious reign of Christ will

coincide with the greatest splendor of the Eucharist.
Christ will restore his glorious reign in the universal
triumph of his Eucharistic reign, which will unfold
in all its power and will have the capacity to change
hearts, souls, individuals, families, society and the
very structure of the world.
When He will have restored his Eucharistic
reign, Jesus will lead you to take joy in this habitual
presence of his, which you will feel in a new and
extraordinary way and which will lead you to the
experience of a second, renewed and more beautiful
earthly paradise.”
—TTP, August 21, 1987, 360 v-w
In the Holy Mass, under the sacramental sign, the

same sacrifice completed by Jesus on Calvary is renewed.
In the Eucharist, Jesus makes Himself truly present with
his body, his blood, his soul and his divinity.
The Mass makes present the sacrifice of the Cross . . . .By

virtue of its close relationship to the sacrifice of Golgotha,
the Eucharist is a sacrifice in the strict sense . . . .
The sacramental re-presentation of Christ’s sacrifice,
crowned by the resurrection, in the Mass involves a most
special presence which—in the words of Paul VI—“is
called ‘real’ . . . because it is a presence in the fullest sense:
a substantial presence whereby Christ, the God-Man, is
wholly and entirely present.” [Encyclical Letter Mysterium
Fidei (3 September 1965): AAS 57 (1965), 764]
—Pope John Paul II,
Ecclesia de Eucharistia, #12, 13 & 15

[In these times] “ . . . in many and subtle ways [some]
seek to attack the ecclesial devotion towards the sacrament
of the Eucharist. They give value only to the meal aspect,
tend to minimize its sacrificial value, [and] seek to deny the
real and personal presence of Jesus in the consecrated Host.
In this way there are gradually suppressed all the external
signs which are indicative of faith in the real presence of
Jesus in the Eucharist, such as genuflections, hours of
public adoration and the holy custom of surrounding the
tabernacle with lights and flowers.”
—TTP, June 13, 1989, #406q
In some places the practice of Eucharistic adoration
has been almost completely abandoned. In various
parts of the Church abuses have occurred, leading
to confusion with regard to sound faith and Catholic
doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament.
At times one encounters an extremely reductive
understanding of the Eucharistic mystery. Stripped
of its sacrificial meaning, it is celebrated as if it were
simply a fraternal banquet.
Ecclesia de Eucharistia, #10
In these times, the practice of approaching Eucharistic

Communion in the state of mortal sin is propagated. It is
necessary that we preach to the faithful the necessity of
sacramental Confession prior to receiving the Eucharist,
for whomever finds himself in the state of mortal sin. And
by means of us priests there can flourish again, in all the
Church, the Sacrament of Reconciliation.
If a Christian’s conscience is burdened by serious

sin, then the path of penance through the sacrament
of Reconciliation becomes necessary for full
participation in the Eucharistic Sacrifice.

But above all, it is the sacrileges which today
form, around my Immaculate Heart, a painful crown
of thorns. In these times, how many communions are
made, and how many sacrileges perpetrated! . . . If
you only saw with my eyes, you too would shed
copious tears with me.”
—TTP, August 8, 1986, #330A
And so, my beloved ones and children consecrated

to my Heart, it is you who must be today a CLARION
CALL for the full return of the whole Church Militant
to Jesus present in the Eucharist. Because there alone is
to be found the spring of living water which will purify its
aridity and renew the desert to which it has been reduced;
there alone is to be found the secret of life which will open
up for it a second Pentecost of grace and of light; there
alone is to be found the fount of its renewed holiness:
Jesus in the Eucharist!
—TTP, August 8, 1986, #330B
I ask that there be once again a return to the
practice of making everywhere hours of adoration
before Jesus, exposed in the Most Holy Sacrament. I
desire that there be an increase in the homage of love
towards the Eucharist . . . .
Priests and faithful of my Movement, go often
before the tabernacle; live before the tabernacle; pray
before the tabernacle.
—TTP, August 21, 1987, #360 r,t
It is the responsibility of Pastors to encourage, also
by their personal witness, the practice of Eucharistic
adoration, and exposition of the Blessed Sacrament
in particular, as well as prayer of adoration before
Christ present under the Eucharistic species.
It is pleasant to spend time with him, to lie close
to his breast like the Beloved Disciple (cf. Jn 13:25) and
to feel the infinite love present in his heart.”

. . . Then, just as John was the beloved apostle, called to
a profound intimacy of life with Jesus, living in his human
body, so too, you become the new Johns, called to have a
profound intimacy of life with Jesus in his glorified body,
really present in the condition of a victim and hidden
under the appearance of consecrated Bread, which is kept
in every tabernacle of the earth.”
—TTP, March 31, 1988, 377k
It is NOT your pastoral plans and your discussions; it
is NOT the human means on which you put reliance and
so much assurance, but it is only Jesus in the Eucharist
which will give to the whole Church the strength of a com-
plete renewal, which will lead it to be poor, evangelical,
chaste, stripped of all those supports on which it relies,
holy, beautiful and without spot or wrinkle, in imitation
of your heavenly Mother.
—TTP, August 8, 1986, #330C
Above all, let us listen to Mary Most Holy, in
whom the mystery of the Eucharist appears, more than in
anyone else, as a mystery of light. Gazing upon Mary,
we come to know the transforming power present in
the Eucharist. In her we see the world renewed in love.
Contemplating her, assumed body and soul into heaven,
we see opening up before us those ‘new heavens’ and that
‘new earth’ which will appear at the second coming of
Christ. Here below, the Eucharist represents their pledge,
and in a certain way, their anticipation: ‘Veni, Domine
Iesu [Come, Lord Jesus]!’ ” (Rev 22:20)
I entrust to you, who are the directors, the task
of sending this letter to the members of the Marian
Movement of Priests, so that it may bring to all my
affectionate greeting along with my priestly blessing.
I await your response, informing me of your news.
In the Immaculate Heart of Mary,
Your little brother,
Dom Stefano Gobbi

I close this chapter with selected quotations from Pope John
Paul II in his last major Apostolic Letter, Novo Millennio Ineunte.
For it seems as if he himself had given his reply and testimony
to all our neo-Jesuit friends who have wandered away from his
teachings, by these his marching orders to his Catholic flock
upon “entering the New Millennium”:
THE LIFE OF FAITH

How had Peter come to this faith? And what is asked
of us, if we wish to follow in his footsteps with ever
greater conviction? Matthew gives us an enlightening
insight in the words with which Jesus accepts Peter’s
confession: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to
you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 16:17).
The expression “flesh and blood” is a reference to man
and the common way of understanding things. In the
case of Jesus, this common way is not enough. A grace of
“revelation” is needed, which comes from the Father
(cf. ibid.) Luke gives us an indication which points in the
same direction when he notes that this dialogue with
the disciples took place when Jesus “was praying alone”
(Luke 9:18). Both indications converge to make it clear that
we cannot come to the fullness of contemplation of the Lord’s
face by our own efforts alone, but by allowing grace to take
us by the hand.
STARTING AFRESH FROM CHRIST

It is not therefore a matter of inventing a “new
programme.” The programme already exists: it is the
plan found in the Gospel and in the living Tradition, it
is the same as ever. Ultimately, it has its center in Christ
himself, who is to be known, loved and imitated, so that
in him we may live the life of the Trinity, and with him
transform history until its fulfillment in the heavenly
Jerusalem. This is a programme which does not change with
shifts of times and cultures, even though it takes account
of time and culture for the sake of true dialogue and
effective communication. This programme for all times is
our programme for the Third Millennium.

PRAYER
Yes, dear brothers and sister, our Christian communi-
ties must become genuine “schools” of prayer, where the
meeting with Christ is expressed not just in imploring
help, but also in thanksgiving, praise, adoration,
contemplation, listening and ardent devotion, until the
heart truly “falls in love.” Intense prayer, yes, but it
does not distract us from our commitment to history: by
opening our heart to the love of God it also opens it to the love
of our brothers and sisters, and makes us capable of shaping
history according to God’s plan.
But it would be wrong to think that ordinary
Christians can be content with a shallow prayer that is
unable to fill their whole life. Especially in the face of the
many trials to which today’s world subjects faith, they
would be not only mediocre Christians but “Christians at
risk.” They would run the insidious risk of seeing their
faith progressively undermined, and would perhaps
end up succumbing to the allure of “substitutes,” accepting
alternative religious proposals and even indulging in far-
fetched superstitions.
THE EUCHARIST
It is therefore obvious that our principal attention
must be given to the liturgy, “the summit towards which
the Church’s action tends and at the same time the source
from which comes all her strength.” We do not know what
the new millennium has in store for us, but we are certain
that it is safe in the hands of Christ, the “King of kings
and Lord of lords” (Rev 19:16).
THE PRIMACY OF GRACE

If in the planning that awaits us we commit ourselves
more confidently to a pastoral activity that gives personal
and communal prayer its proper place, we shall be
observing an essential principle of the Christian view
of life: the primacy of grace. There is a temptation which
perennially besets every spiritual journey and pastoral
work: that of thinking that the results depend on our ability to

act and to plan. God of course asks us really to cooperate
with his grace, and therefore invites us to invest all our
resources of intelligence and energy in serving the cause
of the Kingdom. But it is fatal to forget that “without Christ
we can do nothing” (cf. Jn 15:5).
PROCLAIMING THE WORD

To nourish ourselves with the Word in order to be
“servants of the Word” in the work of evangelization: this
is surely a priority for the Church at the dawn of the new
millennium. We must revive in ourselves the burning
conviction of Paul, who cried out: Woe to me if I do not
preach the Gospel (1 Cor 9:16).
WITNESSES TO LOVE
“By this all will know that you are my disciples,
if you have love for one another” (Jn 13:35). If we have
truly contemplated the face of Christ, dear Brothers and
Sisters, our pastoral planning will necessarily be inspired
by the “new commandment” which he gave us: “Love
one another, as I have loved you” (Jn 13:34).
The Lord’s words on this point are too precise for us to
diminish their import. Many things are necessary for the
Church’s journey through history, not least in this new
century; but without charity (agape), all will be in vain. It is
again the Apostle Paul who in the hymn to love reminds
us: even if we speak the tongues of men and of angels, and
if we have faith “to move mountains,” but are without
love, all will come to “nothing” (cf. 1 Cor. 13:2).
THE FAMILY
At a time in history like the present, special attention
must also be given to the pastoral care of the family,
particularly when this fundamental institution is ex-
periencing a radical and widespread crisis. In the Christian
view of marriage, the relationship between a man and
a woman is a mutual bond and total bond, unique and
indissoluble, and is part of God’s original plan, obscured
throughout history by our “hardness of heart,” but which

Christ came to restore to its pristine splendour, disclosing
what had been God’s will “from the beginning” (Mt 19:8).
Raised to the dignity of a Sacrament, marriage expresses
the “great mystery” of Christ’s nuptial love for his Church
(cf. Ephesians 5:32).
On this point the Church cannot yield to cultural pressures,
no matter how widespread and even militant they may be.
Instead, it is necessary to ensure that through an ever
more complete Gospel formation, Christian families
show convincingly that it is possible to live marriage fully
in keeping with God’s plan and with the true good of the
human person and of the spouses, and of the children
who are more fragile.
CONCLUSION
Let us go forward in hope! A new millennium is
opening before the Church like a vast ocean upon which
we shall venture, relying on the help of Christ. Now, the
Christ whom we have contemplated and loved bids us to
set out once more on our journey: “Go therefore and make
disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 28:19).
On this journey we are accompanied by the Blessed
Virgin Mary to whom, a few months ago, in the presence
of a great number of Bishops assembled in Rome from
all parts of the world, I entrusted the Third Millennium.
During this year I have often invoked her as the Star of
the New Evangelization. Now I point to Mary once again
as the radiant dawn and sure guide for our steps. Once more,
echoing the words of Jesus himself and giving voice to the
filial affection of the whole Church, I say to her: Woman,
behold your children (cf. Jn 19:26).
Obviously and sadly however, Romeo Intengan S.J. and all

his neo-Jesuit cohorts will condemn all of the above as “too
traditional, verging on Mariolatry, and NOT consonant with the
(Neo-Jesuit) Society’s doctrine and reputation!”

Chapter 25
EPILOGUE: THE LUMINOUS CROSS OF GRACE
I used to tell my friends visiting me in prison, but with

tongue-in-cheek, that the Jesuits ought to be blamed for my
having languished behind bars. Most culpable I believed, were
Ignatian Jesuit Fathers John P. Delaney, Antonio B. Olaguer
and James B. Reuter. For even as of now, I can NOT seem to
be able to shake-off the Pader Reyooter’s untiring tentacles,
despite and thus far his 89 years of hard work, when for sure
his inevitable date with Eternity is not so far away. And yet
in March of 2005, he still entertained two lady strangers who
appeared from nowhere and who wanted his endorsement for
an outrageously wild idea that absolutely no bank in the world
would touch even with a coconut-tree-long contraption.
Sellers of the Brooklyn Bridge
The two lady solicitors were dead-set on building the first of
what could potentially become a world-wide chain of high-rise
edifices, starting from the boondocks of a Timbuktu-equivalent
in the Philippines. Their very first project was going to be
located in a community as forlorn and poor as Guinobatan, my
hometown! And they were trying to raise an enormous sum
of money to fulfill fantastic instructions purportedly given to
them and to a motley band of other characters with the same
recurring fantasies or “messages,” from who else but another
lady—Our Blessed Virgin Mother . . .
After (I suppose) succumbing to their womanly wiles and
promising to “endorse publicly” this impossible dream of such
an assortment of “visionaries” who even constantly referred to
themselves as “fools,” the poor Pader Reyooter blessed them

and sent them off with a cryptic instruction of his own: “Go
and see Ed Olaguer who will tell you what else to do!”
I had never met these two ladies myself. Nor did Reuter
ever call or write to warn me that two dreamers of the same
gender and persuasiveness as Eve were coming to sell me a
Brooklyn Bridge. Probably, to be charitable to an old man,
Reuter remembered that the Aurora Milestone Tower, our
“18-storey Tall Cross,” was built along Aurora Boulevard in
Quezon City. Both the building and the boulevard were named
after Aurora Quezon, the assassinated widow (by Communist
Hukbalahaps some 55 years ago) of our World War II President
Manuel L. Quezon. Quezon City and Quezon province were
named after him much earlier. But, must a struggling real
estate developer such as I, though a friend of the Reyooter,
help build the Sanctuary of the Luminous Cross of Grace? And
in the godforsaken town of Agdangan in Quezon Province?
Building for the Boondocks
Agdangan is somewhere in the middle of the thinnest
landmass of Luzon (our largest island), right in between the
Pacific Ocean and the South China Sea. Thus it is a 20-kilometer
wide isthmus similar to where the Panama Canal was built,
which the late President Quezon once thought of for a possible
replication.
Less than a month after Reuter’s cryptic instruction to them,
Ms. Aia Santos Halili, a University of the Philippines graduate in
its College of Fine Arts and now the chief designer, “architect,”
and “visionary promoter” of the Sanctuary, together with Ms.
Cynthia Lazo, a ranking government career executive and “co-
visionary” of Aia and “fanatic” Marian devotee to boot, have
already bamboozled me into getting deeply enmeshed in their
wildly crazy building project! (www.luminouscrossofgrace.com)
My involvement has gone to the extent that these dreamers
led by another unique character (reminiscent of my Jesuit
brother Toti) who happens to be the Catholic parish priest of
Epilogue: The Luminous Cross of Grace 469

Agdangan, namely Fr. Raul “Puti” (meaning, white-skinned!)
Enriquez, have ensconced themselves every Tuesday evening
since then, on the 11th Floor of our 18-storey Tall Cross. They
are habitually there, in our hitherto usually deserted Chapel of
the Holy Spirit. Fr. Puti is the same former environmentalist
“freak” (according to his many enemies) who was featured in
a special edition cover story of Time magazine as one of three
celebrated “Heroes for the Planet” . . .
Even my wife Daisie and eldest daughter Deanna have
been dragooned by Fr. Puti, Aia Halili, et al., into the weekly
gathering of their “coven,” starting as early as 5 P.M. to as late as
one o’ clock the next morning. The gathering is for their weekly
7 P.M. Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, extended Puti homilies,
public sharing of spiritual and physical healing, Sacramental
Confessions, and other interminable conferences involving
a fast growing number of other equally deluded dreamers,
Marian devotees, faith healers—all proclaiming themselves as
“fools for Christ’s sake!”
Aia Halili, who I learned later is the niece of my co-investors
in our building, Nini and Romy Jorge, and the daughter of
aptly-named Ben and Nora Santos—my first Volkswagen
Kombi buyers in 1962—has gifted me and this book with her
heightened artist’s talents. Thus this book’s cover was designed
by Aia, incorporating her original sketches of John Paul the
Great and Christ’s Blessed Mother—the Queen of Heaven and
Earth!
No Bed of Roses
But as usual, S.A. Tan mightily and cleverly infiltrated him-
self to sow weeds of dissension among the wheat of Aia Halili
and a couple of the “visionaries.” Apparently there was some
confusion about the origin and intellectual property rights over
Aia’s subsequent artwork symbolizing the Blessed Trinity, Our
Lady’s major apparitions, and loyalty to the Papacy. All those
three principal elements were depicted within the design of

the Luminous Cross itself. The controversy, which spilled over
in the local media, was a particularly heavy cross for Aia.
Thus Aia’s frequent tearful depressions and humiliation have
been even more efficacious fertilization for holy apostleship,
considering that her own parents and extended family have
quietly endured her gradual slide into a dignified, simple, but
hectic lifestyle. For it appears that she is bent on assuming a
vow of holy poverty . . .
“By their fruits you shall know them . . .”
While this “final” chapter was being written as an
afterthought, the Agdangan Sanctuary was half-finished but
still struggling for funds for its completion. Nevertheless, Fr. Puti
deepened the Catholic roots of his pastoral ministry through
his Delaney-like constant exhortation for the Holy Sacrifice of
the Mass and the twin Sacraments of the Holy Eucharist and
Confessional Reconciliation. Aia Halili with husband Dan, her
sister Nona Aquino, and elderly friends Dra. Paz Carandang
and Miguela Lomotan, editors-journalists Randy V. Urlanda
and Ruby Paurom, recent converts from Agdangan such as
Al Glinoga, and Miss Saigon stage-performer turned homilist
Gene Lopez with his entire choir for sacred music, have all
been continuously donating their material goods, time, and all
their professional services for free, in favor of the Agdangan
Sanctuary of the Luminous Cross of Grace.
Danny Olivares, a tenant at the Aurora Milestone and elder
brother of prominent newspaper columnist Belinda Olivares
Cunanan, has promised to build within two months and at his
own expense, a replica of the Luminous Cross at the highest
point of his unique memorial park at the southern island of
Mindanao in Cagayan de Oro City. His friend from Agdangan,
businessman Grizeldo Gonzales, also promised to help Fr.
Puti, and, to initiate a similar project together with his migrant
brother and Marian devotee, there in faraway Australia.

By “chance” I had earlier but casually confided to our tenant
Danny Olivares my plans to construct a similar replica of the
Luminous Cross on top of our building’s communication
tower, thus his subsequent entrapment. My own plans
however, might metamorphose our own figurative 18-storey
Tall Cross into a real 25-storey-high Luminous Cross! That is,
if my co-investors in the corporation which owns the building,
such as Romy and Nini Jorge, Runy and Linda Sarda, Greg
and Cory Abreu, Ben San Diego, Manolo and Fely Santos,
Lulu Hernandez, my brother-in-law Dr. Emil Pantig and his
wife Dra. Zenaida Pantig, both of New York City, will also be
“deluded” into approving my wild idea.
Faith versus Naívete
This latest vignette on the Luminous Cross of Grace is the
fourth of its kind involving yours truly and messages, visions,
and the like, purportedly from Our Lady and given to third
parties who were completely unknown to me beforehand.
Thus oftentimes I am troubled by the thought that I may be
too naïve and trusting, the way I also was as a creditor-truck
salesman and rebel recruit.
I never met nor knew the obscure Italian priest, Dom Stefano
Gobbi, when I read those early “messages” from Our Lady
purportedly received by him through “interior locution.” And
yet there in my prison cell, I had faith that those were authentic,
especially when one such message received by Gobbi on the
24th of December 1979 which came out in an early edition of
the book in 1980, was entitled “Light A Fire”! That was the
very same day I could no longer light a real fire against the
oppressive physical structures of the Marcos dictatorship, for I
was arrested exactly at early dawn of December 24, 1979. Thus
I realized later in prison, that I could then more freely “light a
fire” against oppressive moral and theological aberrations . . .
Daisie’s first cousin, Cecilio “Sonny” Cruz, had never visited
me in prison, nor had he ever met a so-called “visionary” by

the name of Alice Uggadan. But when told by Alice that Our
Lady wanted me to tell Fr. Reuter, who in turn should tell
Cardinal Sin to ask dictator President Marcos to release me
from prison—I believed them!
More so did I believe them when the subsequent purported
messages were for me to “stay pure, pray the Rosary and
Novena to the Wounds of Christ daily, and to forgive my
enemies.” Now that, especially the last one, could not possibly
have come from S.A. Tan!
Years later and soon after our Medjugorje encounter with
Our Lady, it was Fr. Toti as Counsellor-Confessor for another
“visionary,” a certain Rowel Darang from Rosales, Pangasinan
who both led me to believe once again, that Our Lady was
manifesting herself to Rowel and dispensing dire messages
similar if not exactly like those given by her in Fatima, Akita
(in Japan), and in Medjugorje. I believed even more when Our
Lady severely scolded Toti and us his anti-Marcos coterie, for
having uncharitably snubbed Imelda Marcos while on a visit
to the apparition site in Rosales. If it were S.A. Tan making
fools of us in Rosales, he would have rewarded Toti, not with
a stinging rebuke, but with some BODY of the same gender and
as beautiful as Eve . . .
I similarly believed Aia Halili et al. even if Fr. Reuter had
never known them beforehand. And more so when she had to
carry her own heavy cross soon after, and Fr. Puti was turning
out to be another Fr. Delaney.
And now Rowel Darang has re-surfaced, traveling to key
cities of the Philippines and Southeast Asia, in order to relay
Our Lady’s latest urgent message to pray in the face of an
imminent catastrophe within the area encompassed by the
Pacific Ocean and the South China Sea. But that’s where the
Philippines is located, and particularly Agdangan . . . I believed
in Rowel and his Marian friend-supporter Tess Espino when
they asked for my help in getting a visa for Papua, New
Guinea. So I wrote to Foreign Secretary Alberto P. Romulo,

whose assistant responded. Bert Romulo was in an out-of-town
conference with the Foreign Ministers of the very same South
East Asian countries located around the Pacific and South
China Sea waters. Coincidence or God-incidence? For nothing
is “by chance,” considering that even a sparrow cannot fall
dead without the consent of God’s Will!
The Last Congruence
Unknown to me, Rowel was in Davao City at about the
same time I was invited to a conference by Bishop Guillermo
Afable of the Diocese of nearby Digos. Bishop Afable is now
the southern Philippines’ foremost spiritual leader of the
Marian Movement of Priests (MMP) and its affiliated Cenacle
Prayer Groups. They are persevering in their advocacy for true
Marian devotion, loyalty to the Papacy, and to follow John Paul
the Great’s marching orders for the Third Millennium—Novo
Millennio Ineunte. Thus I have a more than sneaking suspicion
that Our Lady wishes to have more sites to have the Luminous
Cross of Grace erected, through the auspices of her Marian
Movement of Priests, there in their bailiwicks on the shores of
Digos, in Zamboanga, and elsewhere.
I wrote this last chapter in Davao City where we had a 3-day
grand reunion and Cenacle gathering from the 27th to the 29th of
May 2005 at the Dominican House of Prayer with Bishop Afable
and some one hundred delegates from the Philippines. Most of
them were personally recruited by Fr. Toti into the Movement.
And we do hope that one of these days, Bishop Afable will
become the next National Director of the MMP! Thus Toti’s
MMP disciples such as Henry Ocier, Sincera Villavicencio,
Ching Zapanta, Willie and Dina Pardilla, Vic Cañete, Inday
Banquerigo, Laurice Guillen, and Johnny Delgado will no
longer feel orphaned, as we all did after the demise of their
Marian mentor—Ignatian Jesuit Father Antonio B. Olaguer,
the truly favorite son of my parents Gloria Buenaventura and
Lino S. Olaguer.

Last Minute Addendum: In Defense of Maria Valtorta
My daughter Didi (who is also my proofreader, last-minute
editor and page layout expert!) had just “chanced upon” a
vitriolic Internet denigration of the memory of Italian victim
soul, Maria Valtorta, and her 5-volume “Poem of the Man
God.” The critique was written by a certain Fr. Mark Slatter, a
priest of the Companions of the Cross based in Ottawa, Canada. I
believed I should respond and defend her and her monumental
work, considering that I also had referred to its being called
by her many admirers and believers as the “5th Gospel,” in a
manner of speaking.
Together with the New Testament, I have read all five
volumes of the “Poem” more than 20 times over the last 18
years. Thus I take issue with Slatter’s false premises and con-
clusions. In particular he starts off by saying that “Every
message hinges upon the authenticity of the messenger.”
That may oftentimes be true “dear Slatter,” especially when a
dubious message is new, different, and clearly in contradiction
of a previous authoritative instruction. But such is NOT ALWAYS
the case!
Certainly therefore for us Catholics, such a “Slatter
statement” is a FALSE PREMISE when absolutely yet frivolously
applied to the sources of “private revelation” with messages,
statements, or declarations that are clearly consistent or supportive
of prior instructions or teachings that are known to be solidly
authoritative and unchangeable. Examples are such as those
found in the Sacred Scriptures which are in accordance with
Catholic teaching.
There are many known and recorded instances of such prin-
ciples in discerning the authenticity of messages. Unwisely,
Simon Peter himself and Christ’s other disciples would not
accept His message given to Mary Magdalene (most probably
because she was a “mere woman” and “seven demons” had
previously possessed her) that she had seen, talked to the Risen

Christ, and given an important message for all of them. Thus
the disciples ignored the fact that Christ Himself had repeatedly
foretold to them that He would indeed be immolated and
thereafter rise from the dead within three days.
So were the parish priests at Lourdes in France, some of
whom were even as skeptical, even hostile, and vitriolic as
Slatter in their criticisms of Bernadette. And yet St. Bernadette
could not have known of the recently proclaimed dogma of the
Immaculate Conception, which Our Lady said was her message
and her title as relayed to the young, poor and unschooled
visionary. So with Fr. Stefano Gobbi, Vasulla Ryden, Aia Halili,
etc. So too with Maria Valtorta! For 99.99% of the spiritual,
moral, and theological “messages” in all five volumes of her
Poem of the Man God are solidly orthodox and faithful to the
Scriptures and Catholic exegesis.
Similarly, the Slatter internet piece slandered Maria
Valtorta by its unwarranted claim that “her personal life raises
serious questions.” He even used unverified quotations from
EWTN host Fr. Benedict Groeschel and third-hand quotes
of supposedly but casual remarks years ago from Cardinal
Ratzinger, to support Slatter’s underlying thesis that the Poem
of the Man God must have been written by Valtorta under the
state of a “catatonic schizophrenia.”
The truth is Maria Valtorta lapsed into a semi-vegetative
state, only and long AFTER she had finished writing all her
published and unpublished works, including the Poem.
And how in the world can anyone authoritatively rely on a
psychologist’s findings made from a continent away on a dead
person, without having personally met and diagnosed Valtorta
when still alive, but relied exclusively on her written works?
But the worst is Slatter’s conclusion, yet still blaming
Valtorta, that there has been “a transference of authority from
the Bible to the private revelation” just because a number of
people, including yours truly, have referred to the Poem of the
Man God, but only in a manner of speaking as a “Fifth Gospel.”

Maria Valtorta, the quintessential defender of Scriptures and
its ultimate interpreter, the Catholic Magisterium, has now
been falsely accused as a usurper . . .
For indeed Valtorta’s account of the Life of Christ and His
Mother are from an objective point of view, truly faithful to the
four canonical Gospels. It is on that latter basis that we accept
Maria Valtorta’s version! It is true that there may be a very
few inaccuracies or doubtful statements in the Poem. However,
I challenge any human author or chronicler, or secretary,
dead or alive, to write a book with pen and paper only, and not
commit a mistake on the average of at least twice in every
page! Even with the constant aid of my secretary (my niece
Cecil Olaguer), editors, and proofreaders and their PCs, I still
have had to correct these computerized manuscripts at least
FIVE TIMES! Human messengers cannot therefore be expected to
be perfect.
On the other hand, Slatter blithely dismisses the reliable
eyewitnesses and recorded accounts of His Holiness, Pope
Pius XII having instructed the confessors and advisors of
Valtorta, to: “Publish this work as it is. There is no need to give
an opinion about its origin whether it be extraordinary or not.
Who reads it will understand!” (Please do so, dear Slatter!)
Furthermore, in 1985, Cardinal Ratzinger explained in a letter
to Cardinal Siri, that Maria Valtorta’s work was put on the now
extinct Index as a cautionary measure “for the least prepared”
among readers who were not knowledgeable enough to
distinguish between public and private revelation. But in 1993,
the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith gave permission
for the work to be read and distributed, and no longer with any
such warning for “the least prepared”!
As for me, I shall always be guided by the official teachings
of the Catholic Church Magisterium, particularly with respect
to its relevant instructions on the matter contained in the
following quote from Pope John Paul II and the Magisterium-
certified Catholic Catechism:

Throughout the ages, there have been so-called private
revelations, some of which have been recognized by the
authority of the Church. They do not belong however,
to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or
complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to live more
fully by it in a certain period of history. [emphasis supplied]
Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus
fidelium know how to discern and welcome in these
revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of
Christ or His Saints to the Church.
For indeed, Maria Valtorta’s “comments,” which many of

us believe to have also come from supernatural sources, made
after the last chapter of the fifth volume of the Poem of the Man
God, was intended for the specific purpose of positioning the
Poem as a supernatural support for the Catholic Magisterium’s
official teachings. Thus I dare say, that in this age of theological
modernism, the works of Valtorta are in clear rejection and
condemnation of so-called modernist interpretations of Scrip-
tures and of Catholic doctrines and dogmas, in order to help
the faithful “to live more fully” in their one, holy, catholic and
apostolic Faith.
The Last Words of This Epilogue
To end this book which I have written during this Marian
and Eucharistic year celebrated by the Philippine Church, let
me quote this January 1, 2005 letter sent by Fr. Stefano Gobbi to
all the National and Regional directors of the Marian Movement
of Priests:
In the face of the dangerous snare of a globalism
which tends to make all religions equal, in these times
the Church must proclaim to all the world with the
courage and the strength of her witness to the point of
shedding blood, that which St. Peter announced before
the Sanhedrin:

For of all the names in the world given to men,
this is the only one [Jesus Christ] by which we can
be saved.
—cf. Acts 4:12
Jesus Christ is the First and the Last, the Beginning and
the End, the Alpha and the Omega, the bright Morning
Star, who leads us to live the new Day, awaited and
prepared with so much suffering.
Be apostles of the last times, because you must

announce the closely approaching return of Jesus in
glory, who will lead humanity into the new times,
when at last there will be seen new heavens and a
new earth.
Proclaim to all his forthcoming return: “Mara-
natha! Come, Lord Jesus!” (cf. Rev 22:20)
—TTP, December 8, 1994, 533 lm
Above all, let us listen to Mary Most Holy, in

whom the mystery of the Eucharist appears, more
than in anyone else, as a mystery of light. Gazing
upon Mary, we come to know the transforming
power present in the Eucharist. In her we see the
world renewed in love. Contemplating her, assumed
body and soul into heaven, we see opening up before
us those “new heavens” and that “new earth” which
will appear at the second coming of Christ. Here
below, the Eucharist represents their pledge, and in
a certain way, their anticipation: “Veni, Domine Iesu
[Come, Lord Jesus]!” (Rev 22:20).
Ecclesia de Eucharistia, 62

AD MAJOREM DEI GLORIAM


480 LIGHT A FIRE II
GLOSSARY
a priori – Latin for “at the outset” often used as a euphemism
ab aeterno – from eternity for bribes/gifts
ad Jesum per Mariam – to Jesus apologia pro fide Catolica – in

through Mary defense of the Catholic faith
ad majorem Dei gloriam – for aswang – Pilipino for a ghost or

the greater glory of God evil spirit
adobo – a Filipino pork dish bagon – freight train – section

sautéed in soy sauce & garlic bandala – abaca hemp bundled
ah so desu ka! – “now I in bales
understand” in Japanese bandejado – a large serving dish
ahedrez – the “Game of Kings” balidiktoryan – valedictorian
or chess, in Spanish balikbayan – a returning
alalay – “close – in assistants” in Filipino resident from abroad
Pilipino baol – a wooden chest for clothes
alter Christus – an other Christ baon – food taken on a journey;
ambulatio – a walking about; a brown paper bag – wrapped
walk food
americana – formal coat attire barandillas – balustrades of a
named after Americans who staircase
made it popular Batasan – short for Batasang
amicus curiae – friend of the Pambansa, or National
court; an adviser to the court Legislature
on some matter of law who is botica – small drugstore
not a party to the case
butong pakwan – dried water-
Amor con amor se paga! – “love melon seeds
repaid with love!” in Spanish
buwisit – ill omen, jinx, vexing
amor propio – self – love, in
Spanish carissime pater et fratres – dear
father and brothers
ampaw – literally, junk food
made of puffed rice, but now cartero – mailman
Glossary 481
CDPJ – acronym for Civil Dis- dura lex, sed lex! – “the law is
obedience and Public Justice tough but that’s the law!
Cherchez le femme! – French for (Latin)
“there’s a woman behind the EDSA – Epifanio delos Santos
story” Avenue, a circumferential
chinelas – slippers road in Metro Manila where
the 1986 revolution against
compadre – godfather of your Marcos started
child; also friend, companion
escritorio – desk for writing and
comprador – middleman keeping documents
cuatro manos/seis manos – a ex gratia et amore – given for
piano piece played by two free and with love (Latin)
(4 – hands) or three (6 – hands)
people ginebra – gin
Cursillo de Cristianidad – Short fin de siècle – French for “end of

Course (literally “little the century”
courses”) in Christianity; a GMA – Gloria Macapagal
Catholic renewal movement, Arroyo, incumbent President
spiritual retreat Guinobateño – a native of
Cursillista – one who has Guinobatan, a town in Albay
attended a Cursillo province in the Philippines
dacion en pago – payment in gulay na amargoso – a dish of
kind, through a part or all of bitter melon green vegetables
the mortgaged property cooked in coconut milk
de hilo – a coat made of herencia – inheritance
expensive material kangkong – water-borne plant
de colores – literal: “with popular as a vegetable
colors”; a popular greeting among the poor; swamp-
among cursillistas cabbage, watercress
delenda est – Latin for “be Iglesia ni Cristo – “Church of
destroyed” Christ” whose members
dormitoriano – intern; a boarder assert that Christ is NOT God
in a dormitory Ima – mother; nickname for a
stepmother or auntie
in aeterno – from eternity
482 LIGHT A FIRE II

in illo tempore – at that time lechon de leche – a roasted
insulares – island-born residents piglet; roast suckling pig
referring to Filipinos during Lola – grandmother
the Spanish regime as against longganisa – native hotdog;
peninsulares (those who chopped and seasoned meat
came from Spain) stuffed into a casing
Isong – Bicol nickname for those lux ex mundo – light from the
named Jesus world
Kilusang Bagong Lipunan lux in Domino – light in the Lord
(KBL) – “New Society
Movement,” political makata – poet
party of Marcos during the mañanita – an early dawn
dictatorship serenading of Cursillo
kundiman – a native Philippine attendees by their sponsors,
song friends, and relatives
kuya – elder brother mano po – customary reverence

to parents by placing their
LABAN – acronym for the right hand on one’s forehead;
opposition party headed by to kiss an elder’s hand in
Ninoy Aquino – meaning to greeting
fight against
manong – elder brother, cousin
Lacrimae Mater Dolorosa – or friend who are much older
tearful, sorrowful Mother
referring to the Virgin Mary manoy – ditto, in Bicolano
LAFM – Light a Fire Movement masiteras – potted plants
lampaso – coconut husk for Memento Pater, quia non

scrubbing wooden floors; pulvis es – Remember Father,
to clean with a mop that you are not dust
lavandera – laundry woman merienda – snacks
laway lamang – “saliva only,” mestizo – American, Caucasian

meaning it was not validly or Spaniard with Filipino
acquired or with little effort ancestry; half-breed
Lawiswis Kawayan – mga daga – land properties

Whispering Bamboo miting de avance – grand
political rally on the eve of
national elections
Glossary 483
mompo – mandated liturgical leaves and cooked in coconut
red wine for use in the milk
Catholic Mass pobrecito hijo de Gloria
moo-moo – particle Buenaventura, esposa de
mosquitero – mosquito net viudo Lino Olaguer – poor
son of Gloria, wife of the
Nanay – mother widower Lino
Nardong Putik – nickname of a pocholo – small boy in Spanish
pre-World War II notorious
outlaw praesidium – smallest unit in the
organizational structure of
nemo dat quod non habet – one the Legion of Mary
can not give what one does
not have President GMA – President
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
ninang – godmother
primum regnum Dei –seek first
ninong – godfather the kingdom of God
Noche Buena – Christmas Eve promdi – a tongue-in-cheek
meal after the midnight Mass reference to supposedly naïve
Nonoy – small boy in Bicolano people from the provinces
pakialamero – busybody; pulutan – hors d’oeuvres,
meddler appetizers served during
palancas – sacrificial acts and drinking sessions
prayers made by friends in quod erat demonstrandum –
behalf of Cursillo attendees which was to be demonstrated
pandesal or pan de sal – salted quondam – Latin for erstwhile
bread the size of a small fist RAM – acronym for Reform the
pari passu – in equal proportions Armed Forces Movement
pensionado – a government- recorridas – regular inspection of
subsidized student scholar one’s land properties
per mundum – by the world reductio ad absurdum – disproof
pina-ngat – a native vegetable of a proposition by showing
delicacy of Bicol cooked in that it leads to absurd or
coconut milk; fish or shrimp untenable conclusions
wrapped in taro or yam res ipsa loquitor – the thing
speaks for itself, i.e. obvious
484 LIGHT A FIRE II

rollos – a lecture on a specific training before his final
religious topic during a ordination as priest
Cursillo tigas – solid, indestructible
ropero – a container for dirty tocayo – somebody with the
clothes same name
sacristan – the acolyte of a priest tsuper – chauffeur
during the Mass
Tu es Petrus et super hanc
saran – market petram – “You are the Rock
Sandiganbayan – the anti-graft and upon this rock I shall
court in the Philippines build my church”
S.A. Tan – Satan tuta – lapdog
sawali – wall covering material ubinam gentium sumus –
made of interwoven slatted “Where in the world are
bamboo we?” in Latin (hodie – today)
sensus fidelium – literally the ultreyas – one-hour weekly post-
“sense of the faithful” Cursillo prayer vigils among
siopao – a Chinese delicacy of Cursillo alumni
steamed meat dumplings and UPSCAn – University of the
eggs or other condiments Philippines Student Catholic
sipa sa puwet – kick-in-the-ass Action member
soutana – clergymen’s cassock ut unum sint – that we may be

one
suma total – “in sum” (local
Spanish version) vales – cash advances from the
middleman
surat – Bicol for a personal letter
zarzuela – early 18th century
Susmariosep! – contraction of Philippine stage play in the
“Jesus, Maria, Jose” used as Tagalog vernacular and later
expression of surprise in Spanish
taipan – local Chinese tycoon
tejeras con mosquitero – canvass
cot with separate mosquito
net
tertianship (only with Jesuits)
last two years of a Jesuit’s
Glossary 485
AUTHOR’S ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I have worked on these manuscripts in earnest, though not

on a full time basis, since November 2004. Since I do not know
how to use a typewriter except by “hunting and pecking,”my
niece Cecil Olaguer, granddaughter of Papa’s elder sister,
Tia Masa, has borne the heaviest physical burden of all in
endlessly interpreting, typing, and re-typing my handwritten
manuscripts in its original hieroglyph-like script. This was on
top of her regular work as my executive secretary, appoint-
ments secretary, and purchasing officer of our company.
Surely this is an Olaguer family venture, it being the
Publisher, and because my daughter Deanna, “Didi,” has taken
charge of the final page-layouting and last minute re-editing—
a tedious one-month long chore.
If there are any mistakes left in the book, “blame” should be
laid on the mighty shoulders of Otto Jimenez who had the “last
clear chance” of spotting any errors of whatever nature.
But of course, the ultimate responsibility is on yours truly
and on my beloved wife Daisie, who even consented to let
me do my work in a separate bedroom and office combined,
during all the preparatory and final stages of the book. And
most of all, for being of one body with me, in the Sacrament of
Matrimony since June 28, 1958.
There were many other friends, nuns, and priests who were
part-time reviewers of certain chapters but who wish to remain
unidentified.
To them and to all the aforementioned friends, relatives,

helpful critics, and collaborators, I express my heartfelt thanks
through the Hearts of Jesus and Mary. And may St. Joseph
bless them all!
486
APPENDIX A
On the 4th of July, my daughter Didi and I brought the

supposedly “Final Manuscripts” and its exact digital files on a
compact disc to Father Gianluigi Colombo SDB. I was born on
January 31, the feast day of Don Bosco, so I had decided that
the Don Bosco Press had to be my printers for this book!
Father Colombo appeared to me like a latter-day version
of my patron Saint. I first met him while he was peeling
tomatoes in the midst of flitting back and forth to the most
efficient and modern local printing press. The good news
was that this perfectionist priest found our manuscripts
completely acceptable in form and readiness for printing. The
bad news was that Rosalie Alcantara, their pre-presswork
specialist, discovered that we had wrongly computed our page
numbering. And so we still had at least ten more free pages to
fill up. Within 48 hours!
Fortunately for us but unfortunately for some others, a
copy of the latest issue of the Philippine Jesuit Magazine, The
Windhover, came into my hands serendipitously the day before.
I will thus fill up some of these ten free book pages with an
analysis of two radically contrasting articles in that magazine.
It should further drive home one of the conclusions of this
work—that there is a schizophrenic theological divide among
our local Jesuits . . .
The first article I chose was written by a newly-ordained
Jesuit priest, Norlan Julia S.J. The Reverend Julia “coinciden-
tally” graduated from the Ateneo de Naga high school where
he apparently was spiritually molded and got his vocation for
the priesthood from his association with Jesuit icons, among
whom was my friend, Fr. Jack Phelan.
In its stark simplicity and ordinariness, just like the writing
style of St. Ignatius, the orthodox authenticity of Fr. Norlan’s
testimony is obvious and requires no further comment. Here
Appendix A 487
are significant excerpts of Fr. Norlan’s article, “The Chapters
of my Journey to the Priestly Ordination”:
In Ateneo, I built on the basics that I learned in NPS

(Naga Parochial School), but the most important lesson
that I learned in Ateneo de Naga was precisely its
motto: Primum Regnum Dei. First the Kingdom of God.
While in Ateneo, I continued to be a knight of the altar
in Naga Cathedral. At the same time, I was also serving
in Calabanga when Fr. Lorenzo delos Santos was parish
priest there. Couldn’t it be God’s design that he was to be
transferred to Magarao where my family lives? And there
I also served as his acolyte. As Knights of the Altar, we
went to Lingap Center for streetchildren where Fr. Sanz
or Fr. Belardo would say Mass and our beloved, the late
Ms. Febes Cedo would teach catechism after the Mass.
We brought food to the inmates of the City Jail on St.
Ignatius Feast day and on the day of Peñafrancia Fiesta.
Yes, first the Kingdom of God, and that meant selfless
and cheerful service to the poor, the front row honorees
of that Kingdom.
Hence I owe much to my teachers from both NPS and
AdeNU. They were my second parents. They were my
earlier formators . . .
Authenticity: Primum Regnum Dei. Faith in God. These
are not abstract principles all lodged in the mind of one
preparing for the priesthood, as if formation is simply a
mental exercise, a mind over matter affair. No, it’s not
all in the mind. It’s also in the heart. And these three
are the gifts that God bestows on the man whom He has
chosen to be the recipient of an oh so wonderful gift of
the priesthood, a pure gift, truly undeserved, given to the
most unworthy of people, like me.
The other article was entitled “FINDING GOD in All Things:

The Inclusive Spirituality of St. Ignatius.” It was written by
Salvador C. Wee S.J., who purportedly conducts “Ignatian
recollections and retreats” at the Ateneo de Zamboanga
488 LIGHT A FIRE II

University, the southernmost city in Mindanao island. Here it
is in its entirety, with emphasis supplied:
There is really nothing special about the spirituality

of St. Ignatius of finding God in all things, because it
should be the ordinary way of approaching God and
life. Children learn that God is everywhere, but adults
forget this basic truth, because we all grow up and learn
to see God in very prescribed ways. [AUTHOR’S NOTE: God
is indeed everywhere, but in different modes of His presence,
power, and essence!]
Finding God in all things is liberating ourselves from
the usual idea that we only find God in our religious
practices and beliefs. It is freeing God from all our
contrived ways of being pious and holy. It is coming to
God without any add-ons or put-ons. It is coming to God
as we really are, naturally and truthfully. It is to encounter
God directly, as described by the Psalmist in Psalm 139,
without any mask or artificiality.
Finding God everywhere is a no-nonsense, no-beating-
around-the-bush spirituality. It is a come-as-you-are-
warts-and-all spirituality. It is the inclusive spirituality of
the compassionate and forgiving father of the prodigal
son. It is a no frills, no complications, no abstractions,
no format, very natural way of experiencing God. This
spirituality respects the freedom of God’s spirit not to
be imprisoned or entombed in any fixed category, notion or
method. It takes seriously the principle that God’s ways
are not our ways, neither are our ways God’s ways. [NOTE:
In short, Wee wants a freewheeling type of religious pluralism,
without doctrine, dogma, nor prescribed liturgy, not even the
Sacraments and the Holy Mass!]
Finding God in all things is real and authentic
because it is not trapped in form, image, or concept. It is
encountering God without the pretensions and dramatics
that can distract or even deceive us. It is stripping away all
the superfluous make-up we have put on ourselves and
God, so that we can experience God truly and directly. It
Appendix A 489
is retrieving that image of God already in all of us. It is
relearning how to find God naturally and simply, because
we have gotten lost in the maze of our varied rules, beliefs and
practices through the centuries. [NOTE: Now it becomes clearer
that Wee is repudiating the Catholic Church’s beliefs in its
official dogmas, doctrines, and liturgical practices.]
It appears that we have forgotten the basics of our rela-
tionship with God, because we now pay more attention
to the non-essentials or trappings of our faith. Instead
of worshipping God truly by loving and serving others,
we worry more about liturgical guidelines or devotional
pomp and circumstance. [NOTE: Wee should read the Jesuit
Constitution, Articles X-1, 2, and 3.]
Finding God in all things is a spirituality that is
open, inclusive, compassionate and accepting of all that
is good, true and just. This spirituality remembers and
honors God as the author of all creation. It retrieves the
universal principle of welcoming everything according
to the way God unconditionally welcomes everything.
True catholicity or universality should not classify, discri-
minate, exclude or reject anyone or anything, because it
returns to the example and experience of Jesus in the
gospels. [NOTE: In short, Christ in the Gospel did not reject the
Pharisees nor any Pharisaic notions, according to this “Wee-
phorism”!]
Finding God in all things is walking in the footsteps
of Jesus, who tried to show others how to worship God
in spirit and in truth. Jesus dared to heal on the Sabbath,
because God to him was not confined to any fixed human
tradition. He saw faith in terms of compassionate care
and concern for all, regardless of status, background and
appearance. For him, to love God by helping others was
the summary of all the commandments. The law of love
and compassion was his way of finding God in all things.
[NOTE: Wee has subsumed the FIRST Commandment into the
Second!]
The starting point of our encounter with the Author
of Life should be life itself. This point has been forgotten
490 LIGHT A FIRE II

because of our preoccupation with human traditions. We
ignore the warning of Jesus about these traditions. We
now find it difficult to find God in all things, because
we have learned to find God only in specific things. To
approach God spiritually is to humbly follow God freely
and flexibly [sic!], because God is above and beyond all
our ways and means and methods. [NOTE: Shades of Ruben
M. Tanseco S.J. and his Lux Ex Mundo notions!]
Those who go through the Spiritual Exercises of St.
Ignatius may agree with his principle notionally, but
making this real is something else. After the long retreat,
we return to our usual specific ways of finding God not
in all things. [NOTE: Wee is also repudiating St. Ignatius’
Spiritual Exercises . . . ?]
St. Ignatius started his long road to sainthood by
teaching catechism to small children. He did not get stuck
with this but went on to university studies and founded
a new apostolic religious order, whose spirituality was
radically different from that of the existing religious
orders at that time. Our understanding of God starts
with our pious beliefs and practices, [sic! Like teaching
Catechism to children!] but we need to get past these to
grow and mature in God’s wisdom, which means to
have a realistic and adult approach to faith and life. We
need to transcend our very limited and particular ways
of finding God in order to find the real God in all things,
the way Jesus and Ignatius showed us. [NOTE: Wow! Is he
mocking Christ and St. Ignatius?]
Compared to the first article, Wee’s is better packaged in

elegance and seeming scholarliness. But its “modernism” is
obvious in the euphemisms and relativism in his ideas sup-
porting the repudiation of Catholic doctrines as a “maze of our
varied rules, beliefs, and practices” that are “non-essentials or
trappings of our faith”!
Those who are familiar with the Ignatian Spiritual Exercises
can safely say that Wee is grossly ignorant of its essence and
Appendix A 491
substance. Or else he has deliberately mangled its orthodox
teachings and methodology!
Surely, St. Ignatius and thousands of Jesuit Retreat Masters
who have correctly used these Exercises over four centuries
will not agree with the following Wee reductionisms:
1. That God “unconditionally welcomes everything.”
True Catholicity or universality should not “classify,
discriminate, exclude or reject anyone or anything.” Wee’s
penchant for relativism in his theology is obvious.
2. To approach God spiritually is to “humbly [sic!] follow
God freely and flexibly.”
3. Our understanding of God “starts with our pious beliefs
and practices, but we need to get past these to grow and
mature in God’s wisdom, which means to have a realistic
and adult approach to faith and life.”
I truly wonder in the face of all these seemingly lofty
sounding but weeny yet woeful “Wee-phorisms,” if Wee has
understood Luke 10:21 and Psalm 139, the psalm he referred
to earlier. For these directly contradict his Ruben Tanseco-type
of recommendations for religious syncretism yet pluralism—a
freewheeling “adult approach” to faith, life and spirituality:
I offer you praise, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth,
because what you have hidden from the learned and the clever,
you have revealed to the merest children.
—Luke 10:21
If only you would destroy the wicked O God, and the men of
blood were to depart from me!
—Psalm 139:19
Probe me O God, and know my heart, try me and know my
thoughts; see if my way is crooked, and lead me in the way of
God.
—Psalm 139: 23-24
492 LIGHT A FIRE II

APPENDIX B
How I communicated with the outside world during the first few weeks of my
imprisonment: microscopic hieroglyphics inscribed on 3 ½ inch by 5 inch sheets
of paper (magnified here) smuggled out of my prison cell.
Appendix B 493
APPENDIX C
February 7, 1980
In a Manila Gulag
Philippine Archipelago
Mr. Aleksander I. Solzhenitsyn

c/o Some kindred spirits
Dear Mr. Solzhenitsyn:

It was some 15 years ago when I first ‘met’ you in One Day
in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. That first encounter led me on to
Cancer Ward and The First Circle.
I realize now that when I read those vivid portrayals of the
Russian revolutionary drama, I was deeply moved not only
by the incredible punishments inflicted on the Russian soul by
Lenin, Stalin, and their cohorts, as by the thought that these
were literary masterpieces revealing to the whole world the
structural weakness of a classic Bolshevik dictatorship.
About four years ago I read The Gulag Archipelago, in its
English translation by Thomas P. Whitney. This time around
I found your latest book, as well as the previous ones, much
more compelling and closer to home in their social and moral
significance. I can almost say that your books helped pave in
no small way the road to my present Gulag, for by that time,
we Filipinos had allowed ourselves to be innocently imposed
upon by a supposedly impeccable, infallible, and indestructible
great Father, and compassionate Mother to boot.
Can you imagine the consequences to your Mother Russia
if Joseph Ivarionovich also had someone as iron-willed and
self-righteous a conjugal partner and co-dictator as our ruling
queen? If Vladimir Ilyich had a female Joseph Ivarionovich as
his wife?
494 LIGHT A FIRE II

Be that as it may, judging from the exclusively lavish praises
for our conjugal dictators emanating daily from the utterly
objective and fiercely independent local press, it appears to me that
Lenin, Stalin, and even Hitler could have learned a few lessons
from our king and queen, Ferdinand and Imelda. Lessons on
how to speak for the people, on how to vote for the people.
Instructions on how to choose cronies, business associates, and
relatives who are all so smart that they deservedly become the
richest and most powerful handful among some 40 million
generally poor and helpless citizens. [The population now is some
80 million]
Poor Misunderstood Mr. And Mrs. Marcos
It is sad to note however, that despite these seemingly
Solomonic and Croesus-like skills of our sovereign couple, the
irrepressible, sinister, Western press and imperialist-dominated
organizations like Amnesty International have had the gall
to criticize THEM. And even to publicize well-documented
reports on the “gulag” conditions here in the Philippines. Yes,
complete reports on vintage, postwar Soviet-style methods
for conditioning Filipino political detainees undergoing inter-
rogation. Oh yes, with all the trimmings! Such as electro-
genital exercises, Thai-boxing matches, where the detainees
are rated so skillful that their hands and feet are tied by their
captors-interrogators-referees-boxing opponents all rolled
into one. Such too are interminable interrogations, where the
detainees become absolutely cooperative because there are no
lawyers permitted to interfere with these fraternal bull sessions
and endurance-under-heavy-stress exercises. Sound and light
effects, epidermal ashtrays, starvation and punishment cells,
water-drip treatment—the whole works, Mr. Solzhenitsyn!
And so, when I read The Gulag Archipelago about the same
time as the Amnesty International report on alleged tortures
of Filipino political prisoners, I was naive enough to believe
you and Amnesty International as well. I believed that these
Appendix C 495
inhuman practices were being performed and tolerated here in
the Philippines.
My Subversive and Colonial Background
I must confess at this stage, Mr. Solzhenitsyn, that like
many of your countrymen during the late 1930s and 1940s, I
too must have been guilty even then of crimes equivalent to
those proscribed by Soviet Criminal Code Article 58-10. Like
AMA, or Anti-Marcos Agitation, similar to your ASA, or Anti-
Soviet Agitation. I could have been guilty of an even more
serious crime, such as your VAT (in Cyrillic alphabet), or
Praise of American Technology, or perhaps Praise of American
Democracy, or even PZ, toadyism toward the West.
My guilt must have had its roots in the fact that I had
enough of a colonial mentality to have studied at a well-known
graduate school of Business Management in the US East
Coast—somewhere near your place of self-exile in Vermont.
And worse, I have continuously associated with, and continue
to treat as old friends or relatives, Filipinos who are now living
in the United States, many of whom have chosen to stay there
as self-exiles until the day when our reigning monarchs will
have abdicated.
I also have realized, quite belatedly, my unmitigated guilt
in holding on to my beliefs in those “obsolete and dangerous”
concepts of morality and democracy, such as denouncing evil,
punishing the guilty evil-doer, justice before mercy. Also the
rule of law; the inviolability of the secret ballot; the sovereignty
of the people over any king, president, prime minister, first
lady or governor; the strict accountability of those governing
to the governed; and a free responsible press.
The Fallen Idol
I felt even more guilty in harboring these beliefs when a
supposedly wise old man, known all over the world for his
advocacy of these very same concepts, started to belittle them
as merely hackneyed Western notions inapplicable to a poor
496 LIGHT A FIRE II

Asian country like ours. Especially since this supposedly wise
little old man was once a Pulitzer Prize winner. And he had
highly recommended me for acceptance as a student in that
“well-known” Eastern business school. He was the Foreign
Minister of my country at a time when these “absolute”
concepts were still in vogue, at least for the public rhetorical
purposes of little wise old men like the Foreign Minister.
He is still the Foreign Minister. He is also the oldest and
most persistent apologist in the king’s cabinet, glorifying
here and abroad every decision of his master and every major
happening in our so-called New Society, regardless of the
fact that he was one of the original signatories of the United
Nations Declaration of Human Rights and once the President
of the United Nations General Assembly.
He used to make a great living out of a public lecture series
in the US, boasting about the great Philippine showcase of
American-nurtured democracy, while being boosted in local
circles as that great little brown American. This fallen idol
claims he “walked with heroes,” in a book he wrote about his
heroes, General Douglas MacArthur, Dwight Eisenhower, and
Philippine Commonwealth President Manuel Quezon. These
were men who had somehow lived and died for such “obsolete
Western notions.”
Despite this little wise old fallen idol’s dialectical inconsis-
tency, I am compelled to marvel at his keen objectivity in
praising to high heavens the present sovereign, conjugal dis-
pensation. And I am amazed even more by this former darling
of the western press whenever he castigates the foreign
media for criticizing his conjugal Masters. Why should he not
condemn these alien critics, when nobody but simply nobody
in the established print and broadcast media in the Philippines
has ever publicly criticized his Masters—not even once—since
the local monarchy was established on September 21, 1972?
And why should he himself criticize his Masters?
Appendix C 497
The Gulag’uer
Five weeks ago, I became all the more confused!
For I, Eduardo B. Olaguer, am now a Gulag inhabitant,
literally and figuratively a Gulag-uer! Courtesy of “President
and Prime Minister” Ferdinand Marcos himself, by virtue
of his having personally authorized my “Arrest, Search and
Seizure order” (ASSO) served on me on December 24, 1979.
Since then, Mr. Solzhenitsyn, I have the firmest conviction that
there is such a thing as a real Gulag Archipelago in my country.
I have experienced and seen with my own two eyes the same
startling phenomena you so eloquently wrote about. I have
witnessed and interviewed direct witnesses of local Gulag
practices heretofore supposedly concocted by the big, bad
Western press and Amnesty International. And I myself have
been incriminated for supposed acts, intentions, and personal
associations proscribed under Ferdinand Marcos’ Proclamation
No. 1081, a latter-day equivalent of your ‘favorite’ Article 58
under the Soviet Criminal Code of 1926.
My Arrest
My own initiation into the local “sewage disposal system”
started at around one o’clock that cold early morning of
December 24, 1979. How they followed your Gulag Archipe-
lago textbook, Mr. Solzhenitsyn! At that unholy hour, around
20 fearsome military intelligence agents, in ragged civilian
attire and with cocked Armalite rifles, stormed the house I
was sleeping in at 113 V. Luna, Quezon City. Besides me, there
were four other people in the house: Carlos Lazaro, a 25-year-
old messenger-driver in my newspaper-publishing office, his
pretty 20-year-old wife Arlynn, the Lazaros’ one-year-old only
child Jimmy, and their 18-year-old maid-baby sitter Gertrudes
Dingcal. Gertrudes can neither read nor write, and she had
arrived in Manila for the first time less than a month before.
No matter. She has been crying her heart out since, while
languishing in jail. Despite my repeated protestations to our
498 LIGHT A FIRE II

blase captors of her absolute non-involvement. She hasn’t even
been interrogated at all because none of our captors can speak
Cebuano, the only language she knows. I suppose Mr. Marcos’
minions found it unnecessary to look for a Cebuano-speaking
interrogator for Gertrudes, because her having been found in
the same house where I was arrested was enough proof of her
probable guilt of whatever crime I would be charged with.
And so they clapped her into the Gulag with Carlos
Lazaro and me. Arlynn Lazaro and her baby were kept under
house arrest and held incommunicado before she was even
interrogated. Do you know why? To keep her virtually alone
and defenseless with her all-male guards and subsequent male
interrogators, as a constant cruel reminder for her husband
Carlos to cooperate, or else . . . Oh, how clever, and how
sinister, Mr. Solzhenitsyn.
Just before we were whisked off to the military gulag, I
was made to sign a supposed inventory of things confiscated
from the house (I had been sleeping there for several nights
after I learned that the military intelligence authorities were
looking for me). With all those guns pointed at us and the
seeming hopelessness of the situation, I signed the “inventory”
of heaven knows what items and where they came from with
wild abandon. I clearly remember though that one of the items
they confiscated was my two-volume set of Arnold Toynbee’s
“Study of Civilization.” I didn’t realize until then that historian
Toynbee’s books are considered subversive material by Mr.
Marcos’ minions, for they have refused to return them even after
I vigorously asked for the books’ return several weeks later. I
suppose they are afraid of great historians’ future judgment of
Mr. Marcos’ regime, even of dead ones like Arnold Toynbee.
Our Interrogation
I arrived like a walking zombie in the military gulag at around
3:00 A.M., with my captors watching my every move. There I
saw that some ten of my friends and business associates had
Appendix C 499
similarly been arrested. And some wives with their husbands.
My ordeal that first day was not to end until about 8:00 P.M.,
Christmas Eve.
Prior to that, an endless relay of interrogators tried to
question me, with none of them volunteering their names or
official designations. It was only later that we were able to piece
together vital information on these supposedly law-abiding
military intelligence agents of Mr. Marcos. I was alternately
switched from a hot stuffy room crawling with bedbugs to an
air-conditioned room cold enough to make me shiver, like one
with palsy. In fact I felt colder in those interrogation rooms
than when walking across the frozen Charles River during
those Boston winters of the early ‘70s. And I could overhear
my friends undergoing similar treatment in adjoining rooms.
I particularly remember the morning of that first day, about
4 o’clock. I could hear very clearly the vigorous interrogation
of Mr. Reynaldo Maclang. Rey was a former employee of a
transportation firm I once managed for the company’s over-
extended commercial bank creditors. I could hear his pitiable
cries of denial, the subsequent loud thumpings on the walls
and other violent sounds. I distinctly heard someone with a
rasping, exasperated voice threaten Rey (in the vernacular)
that he would kick him and rape his wife who had also been
arrested. Mr. Maclang later on revealed to me and our lawyers
that he had been threatened by Major Melencio Manlulu (as I
have just described), after the same gentle Major had already
manhandled him. Bear in mind that during all this time, and
for at least two full weeks thereafter, none of us were with
our families, nor received any visitors except 62-year-old co-
detainee Mrs. Ester Jimenez. Our places of confinement were
either extremely cold or stuffy with heat, cockroaches and
bedbugs so that sleep was barely possible.
What did they ask me? From the drift of their uncoordinated
questionings, I gathered that they were suspecting practically
the entire who’s who in the community of being subversives
500 LIGHT A FIRE II

and enemies of Mr. and Mrs. Marcos. The Philippine Catholic
hierarchy, human rights activist-priests and nuns, Mr. Marcos’
cabinet of whose members I happened to have had dealings
with at least ten, the Supreme Court, militant anti-Marcos leftist
organizations, student and labor leaders, business tycoons,
leaders of the political opposition, high ranking military offi-
cers, my business partners, anti-martial law organizations here
and abroad, U.S. multinational companies, and the CIA. They
were all being suspected of complicity with poor me! How
they tried very subtly to pin me down on the identities of local
and foreign business tycoons who were supposedly financing
us rebels and subversives with millions of U.S. dollars and
Philippine pesos!
What did I tell them? Frankly, those early hours of December
24 almost turned that date into my day of infamy. I was a pathe-
tic figure, with tears involuntarily trickling down my unshaven
face. Gut-wrenching fear, near despair, utter confusion, and
virtual physical exhaustion—all these must have taken their
toll somehow. I am sure you know the exact feelings yourself,
Mr. Solzhenitsyn. But then, when my desperate, mumbled
prayers for help got into high gear, a few inexplicable things
started to happen, with the end result that up to now I have
told them nothing, except my personal circumstances and my moral
and ideological convictions on the Marcos- Romualdez dictatorship. I
told them that I considered this de facto regime as illegitimate
and corrupt. I told them that their so-called New Society was
nothing but a monumental hoax.
Looking back on those terrible but somehow exhilarating
days, there were a few reasons why I got away still sane and
relatively happy. For one thing, our captors were apparently
led to believe that they were getting excellent results from their
interrogation of the younger detainees, thanks to their physical
and psychological conditioning methods. And so they got an
earful of the wildest sort of “confessions,” all purportedly
pointing to me as the alleged ringleader. Therefore, there
Appendix C 501
was no immediate need that very morning to break me down
through grossly improper methods.
But soon after lunch that never came, I was subjected to
a more dizzying round of interrogations and not too subtle
threats. And just when I thought the moment of truth and its
excruciating physical pains were just around the corner—in
the person of a burly insolent fellow whom I recognized as the
brother of a top executive in Business Day whom I had fired for
cause a few years ago—an inexplicable but welcome diversion
took place that required the urgent attention of my insolent
would-be tormentor.
Another detainee, a Philippine Constabulary non-commis-
sioned officer by the name of Alex Bustamante had run amuck
in an adjoining cell. Sergeant Bustamante was arrested for
illegal drug activities. Upon investigation, he claimed he was
on an assignment with the anti-drug operations group as
a secret agent. His claim was denied by his superior officer.
That afternoon, he went off the deep end. He grabbed hold
of two empty Coke bottles, broke the tops off them, and with
their jagged ends started to slash away at his own midsection.
It took the whole brave gang of Metrocom-MISG personnel
available that afternoon more than an hour to subdue their
dying colleague Bustamante! But not before he had already
disembowelled himself, and severed pieces of his own guts lay
trampled on the floor.
By the time the whole gory mess was over, my insolent
interrogator must have lost his appetite for more of the same
thing, for he never came back. But not knowing this at the
time, I kept waiting for his return for more than three hours.
All that time I was extremely cold, mumbling my prayers, and
trembling without letup, until Lt. Gutierrez came and allowed
me to eat my first meal. Then I was brought over to the same
stuffy cell I occupied earlier, and was left alone for the night
and its hordes of attacking mosquitoes.
502 LIGHT A FIRE II

The Best Christmas Gift Ever
The next day, Christmas Day, I was able to send word
surreptitiously to my wife about my exact predicament. About
4 o’clock that afternoon, I received my best Christmas day
present ever—the tearful, distant presence of my wife, my
children, and my closest of kin. I could not talk to them but at
least I could see and be seen by them through the window slits
of my cell.
From then on Mr. Solzhenitsyn, they must have moved
heaven and earth to intercede for us. Through my family’s
efforts and those of my Jesuit priest brother, my two sister-
nuns, my co-detainee Mr. Otto Jimenez’ own Jesuit priest
brother and sister-nun, through their respective congregations,
through our mutual friends and people of kindred spirits here
and abroad, help did arrive. In the nick of time! An avalanche
of prayers and urgent inquiries to any civilian or military
authority responsible enough to acknowledge the calls.
The inquiries had one common urgent refrain: “Please
verify if they are being tortured!” For such is the notoriety of
military intelligence handling arrested political dissenters, that
everybody expects them to be brutalized when apprehended.
At any rate, over in the Gulag the grapevine we were able
to establish was soon crackling fast with what to us was
electrifyingly good news. The Catholic Primate of Manila,
Jaime Cardinal Sin, a couple of military generals, brave nuns
and priests, lawyers, a Supreme Court justice, the foreign press,
and then Amnesty International—to all these good and brave
people and organizations we owe a lifetime debt of gratitude.
Their persistent inquiries broke the lid on the military intel-
ligence’s efforts to keep our arrest and whereabouts secret.
Their humanitarian concern scared off whatever intentions our
captors may still have had to brutalize us physically. Without
them, any one of us may have suffered the fate of Filadelfo
Gantuangco, a close associate of Mr. Otto Jimenez, whose finger
nails were apparently pounded with a hammer.The batteries,
Appendix C 503
electric wires, portable extension sockets and field-telephone-
dynamo sets they were preparing and parading were never
used on us. We were spared from these brutal techniques which
they vented with a vengeance on others who had no Cardinal,
no Jesuits, no priests and nuns, no generals, no friends and
lawyers and no representative of Amnesty International to cry
out to.
Psycho-Warfare
As you so accurately expressed, Mr. Solzhenitsyn, in the
Interrogation Chapter of The Gulag Archipelago, these outrightly
brutal techniques were not really necessary. You said:
The actual boundaries of human equilibrium are very
narrow, and it is not really necessary to use a rock or hot
coals to drive the average human being out of his mind.
They may have succeeded in doing this earlier to Filadelfo

Gantuangco, Carlos Lazaro, and Teddy Diesmos. They tried to
do it on Mr. Ben Lim, on Mr. and Mrs. Otto and Ester Jimenez,
on Mr. and Mrs. Reynaldo and Magdalena Maclang, and on
Mr. and Mrs. Rene and Marie Marciano by means of insults,
petty meannesses, harassments, and humiliation.
But all their efforts failed. There was one countermeasure
available to us which they may have failed to reckon with—
the power of prayer, especially group prayer. They even tried
to take this away by not allowing us to worship our God on
Sundays during Mass. And so we endured Massless Sundays
for one month, besides Christmas and New Year’s day. They
gave us a reason for the repeated denials: they were on Red
Alert, so no priest could be allowed to say Mass for us!
If they deliberately tried to starve us out from our staple
spiritual diet, they were just as bad concerning our food, living
quarters, lawyers’ and our loved ones’ visits. Food was one peso
(Pl.00) per meal per person, good enough to fetch a handful of
rice and two tablespoons of soggy vegetables, or one fingerling-
size salted dried fish (tuyo) in place of the vegetables.
504 LIGHT A FIRE II

The 3 x 4 meter cell of Mr. Otto Jimenez, Mr. Marciano and
Mr. Ben Lim et al. was at one time packed with 17 detainees.
They were never less than nine, and so people had to sleep
on the cement floor or in the toilet room because the normal
sleeping space available was good for only four bunk beds. The
first lawyer of our choice was finally permitted to see just me,
but only for 30 minutes, more than 2 weeks after my arrest.
I suppose Mr. Solzhenitsyn, that every Gulag institution
has its own “Bluecaps” who are the prime servitors and sole
arbiters of the state’s “sewage disposal system.” Our local
equivalent, in terms of methods, notoriety, and the terror its
very name evokes, is the PC-Metrocom’s MISG—the Philippine
Constabulary Metropolitan Command’s Military Intelligence
and Security Group.
The Philippine Constabulary is the equivalent of a national
police force. The Metrocom’s overall intelligence chief is Major
Rolando Abadilla. He may already be a full Colonel by now,
thanks to me and my alleged co-conspirators. On account of
our arrest, Abadilla was supposed to have obtained a spot
promotion of one rank higher (actually they got two ranks up),
as well as some fifty of his MISG cohorts. I’ll refer to him as
Col. A from hereon.
Encounter with Colonel A
I first met Col. A at about 1:30 on the morning of my arrest.
He was very friendly, too friendly for a captor. He even
addressed me by my nickname as if I were an old friend. But
that thin veneer easily wore off when I started to ask for my
lawyer and to refuse to answer his probing questions. He
curtly assured me that I could get any number of lawyers I
wished, but it would not be of any help to my case anyway. As
to my claim that it was my constitutional right to choose not to
answer any of his questions other than those pertaining to my
personal circumstances, he sneeringly answered that I was not
a “sport.” In other words, according to him I was a poor loser.
Appendix C 505
Our conversation was cut short by the arrival of his Com-
manding Officer, Brigadier General Prospero Olivas, the
Metrocom chief. Col. A chose that moment to tell Gen. Prospero
(indeed he looked every inch a most prosperous soldier) that I
and my men had been planning to kill Col. A himself. And now
that I was captured, I was a poor sport in “not cooperating”
with them.
I interposed and told the general that this alleged plot to kill
Col. A was a figment of his imagination. If he considered himself
a true soldier, then he should respect a captured soldier’s right
to reveal only his name, rank, and serial number. At this point
Col. A sneered again and laughed: “Those Geneva Convention
rules are only for captured foreign enemy soldiers!”
I had no chance to retort because Gen. Prospero ignored
the issue and apparently preferred to try another tack on me.
I would have wanted to tell Col. A that his views inferred that
I should expect worse treatment from him, my own country-
man, than our foreign enemies would. Gen. Prospero then
tried to steer the conversation to an ideological discussion. He
must have quickly regretted it, for I then launched my first,
mild as yet, tirade against the illegitimacy and corruption of
his Masters. That was when Col. A shed off whatever friendly
posturings he had and the General quickly took off. And my
knees started to shake.
My next encounter with Col. A came a few days after
Christmas, when he barged into my cell to berate a particular
guard for his lax and friendly attitude with me. For the Colonel
saw us playing chess! I reminded him of the written request to
see my lawyer which I sent him on December 24 through one
of my captors, Major Reynaldo Berroya, now probably a Lt.
Colonel.
“You can’t have a lawyer because you don’t need one!” was
the insolent reply I got.
“But it is I and not you who should decide whether I need a
lawyer or not!” My dander was up a bit.
506 LIGHT A FIRE II

“You have not made any statement to our investigators, so
you can’t have a lawyer. Unless you are now ready to cooperate
and make a statement.”
“But the constitutional provision for the right to have counsel
doesn’t contain any such qualification!”
“You can’t impose your views on us here. Who are you
anyway? Do you think we are stupid? Don’t you think we
know that your lawyers will be used to contact your friends
outside?”
So that was the real reason. They did not want the world
outside to know anything about our situation.
“In that case,” I countered, “Please furnish me with a formal
denial of my request. I would appreciate it if you stated your
prerequisite for me to make a statement before I can see a
lawyer.”
“Yes, you can get that letter anytime.” Realizing it was a
mistake to issue such a damning letter, he added quickly: “But
we are very busy people here, and you are in no position to
make any demands on us, remember that.”
I just shrugged my shoulders and looked at him with uncon-
cealed contempt. Then he walked away to scold my close-in
guard some more. (There was another platoon of them outside
my cell!) Soon after, I decided to go on a hunger strike.
Minister of Defense Juan Ponce Enrile
On January 3 or thereabouts, I had another occasion to cross
swords with Col. A, this time in the presence of no less than
Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile. I was unceremoniously
brought to Minister Enrile’s Fort Aguinaldo office, apparently
so that he could check for himself if I had been subjected to
physical torture. [This incident followed that which was mentioned
on page 196 of chapter 12]
According to Minister Enrile, several parties had made
representations on my behalf. He cited the names of Sister
Christine Tan of the Good Shepherd religious order, and Jaime
Appendix C 507
Cardinal Sin. He first asked me how I was. I said I was okay so
far, for unlike Otto Jimenez and Ben Lim who were locked up
at the 3 x 4 meter detention cell with 15 other detainees, I was
relatively more comfortable in solitary confinement.
“But please, look into the cases of the others, like Reynaldo
Maclang and Carlos Lazaro,” I ventured further. Had I known
the true situation at that time, I would have also brought to his
attention the fingernail pounding case of Filadelfo Gantuangco.
But perhaps it would have been to no avail, because nothing
was done to look into the cases of Lazaro and Maclang.
“But why am I still not allowed to see my lawyer?” I asked
further, and pointing to Col. A continued, “This fellow here
says that unless I am ready to sign a statement which means a
confession, I am not entitled to a lawyer’s visit.”
“We will allow you to have a lawyer,” the Defense Minister
mildly replied.
“Excuse me.” Col. A spoke for the first and only time during
the entire one-hour dialogue with the Minister. “What I meant
was that his investigation is not yet complete because he refuses
to answer our questions and is very uncooperative, therefore
he does not yet need a lawyer.” (Thus the earlier incident!)
“Yes Mr. Olaguer, you do not have to remind us what our
duties are. We know these things ourselves. You will have your
lawyer.” Minister Enrile thus tactfully avoided commenting
directly on Col. A’s obviously twisted interpretation of a very
basic constitutional and human right. And so Col. A kept quiet
and was red-faced for the rest of that morning.
Col. A may have apparently lost that round in Minister
Enrile’s office. In fact he was told in no uncertain terms to allow
my lawyers to visit me. But by hindsight, these may have all
been mere histrionics. Or, more probably, Col. A’s real boss,
as far as my subversion case (later upgraded to “rebellion”)
was concerned, was somebody up there higher in authority
than Minister Enrile. For it took no less than another week
and two urgent petitions to the Supreme Court, albeit unacted
508 LIGHT A FIRE II

upon until now, before my lawyer Atty. Sedfrey Ordoñez was
“allowed” to see me. But for only 30 minutes, and in a room at
the MISG compound where there were obvious paraphernalia
for bugging our conversation. Thereafter, it took another two
weeks before Atty. Ordoñez came, and by that time, thank God,
I was no longer under the custody of Col. A. I learned later on
from extremely cautious sources in the military that officials in
the Supreme Court called up Col. A’s superiors to warn them
that Col. A’s insubordination and high-handedness might
cause the government much embarrassment. That is probably
why I was taken out of Col. A’s clutches. I also learned from
the same fearfully whispering sources that Col. A is not exactly
the most popular fellow in the military. The Lavrenty Berias
of this world, Mr. Solzhenitsyn, certainly generate a lot of fear
and hatred even from their own colleagues.
Dialogue with the Dictator’s Defense Minister
The greater part of that one-hour dialogue with Minister
Enrile [he is now a Senator once again!] was spent on the subject
of the legitimacy and efficacy of Ferdinand Marcos-Imelda
Romualdez’ conjugal rule. All this time Col. A sat speechless,
red-faced, and sulkingly uncomfortable. For somehow my 3-
day-old hunger strike against their deprivation of my right to
counsel made me bolder and more clearheaded than usual.
Minister Enrile started off by asking me routinely about the
identities of my other associates. In answer, I quiveringly told
him that he might as well order me to be brought then and
there to a firing squad. I said that I had completely surrendered
my body to them, but my conscience and my soul were not
theirs to control. This refusal to answer his questions and my
dare to be brought to a firing squad were the only reports of
the interview with Enrile that came out in the local press the
next day. Why this flattering account in the controlled press, I
still cannot explain.
Appendix C 509
At any rate, I half-expected the Defense Minister to explode
in anger over my refusal to answer his probing questions.
Instead he caused my tears to roll down in a slow trickle when
he said, “It is your right not to answer these questions. That is
why I respect you as a man. And I respect your desire to protect
your men from possible harm.” For once I was speechless yet
felt ten feet tall. Like Cyrano de Bergerac, I could face giants.
But Col. A became all the more red-faced.
From thereon, I proceeded to grasp the opportunity to
regale the Defense Minister with my ideological convictions.
I told him what I honestly thought about the “blank check”
Ferdinand Marcos claims the Filipino people endorsed to him,
which he used as the basis for the supposed mandate to act as
lifetime dictator. I claimed this was a bogus check. But even if
it were a genuine “blank check,” he should regularly account
for it and recognize the people’s right to cancel or re-indorse it
in a genuinely free and honest Presidential election.
There could never be any such free and honest election for
as long as the Marcos-Romualdez conjugal martial rule was not
dismantled. Not even if it were temporarily lifted, as they had so
often postured in the past during periodic so-called referenda
and farcical elections.
I said that these temporary liftings of the “effects of martial
law” was a big joke, because its real oppressive effects were
still on, and in the people’s minds. The people were afraid of
what Marcos could and would do after martial law would be
fully reinstated a few weeks later.
I said that the so-called New Society was a big farce. That
Marcos-Romualdez cronies, relatives, business and political
associates never had it so good—no matter how dumb or smart
they were! That the local press was shockingly subservient
and gutlessly afraid of criticizing the conjugal rulers, precisely
because these institutions were either owned by Marcos and
his cronies or controlled by fear of closure. And that history
would be the eventual and impartial judge of Marcos, Col. A,
510 LIGHT A FIRE II

and of my actuations as a conscientious objector to the Marcos-
Romualdez corrupt and illegitimate martial rule.
The Defense Minister tolerated my tirade despite Col.
A’s furtive and red-faced restlessness. In fact the Minister
condescendingly or, perhaps even sincerely, said in reply to
all these verbal assaults on Mr. Marcos that he and I shared
exactly the same objectives but were using different methods.
“You can’t just line them up against the wall,” referring perhaps
to those insatiable corrupt cronies and relatives I had visibly
poured my anger on earlier.
I protested that neither did I ever advocate “lining them up
against the wall” and massacring them. I vehemently added
that the recent press releases of Col. A that we were out to
assassinate Mr. Marcos and a whole slew of Cabinet members,
including Minister Enrile himself, was a figment of Col. A’s
imagination. I knew it was a propaganda ploy to misrepresent
our objectives and to generate misplaced sympathies.
At this point Minister Enrile casually assured me that he did
not believe I personally advocated lining people up against the
wall and shooting them down like dogs. He went on, however,
to state his own belief in Mr. Marcos’ integrity, and to cite the
benefits his people in Cagayan Province had received from the
New Society. I was tempted to smirk but I kept a solemn face
and my silence. He also admitted that the New Society was a
dictatorship, but that was necessary under the circumstances.
And then he asked me what “you people would do if you
were in the shoes of Mr. Marcos.” First of all I stressed the
fact that I could not speak for anybody except myself, and
that running a government and a country was a very complex
piece of business which I could never do justice to by just
reciting what I, if I were Marcos, would do at that moment’s
notice. Because government has to be everybody’s business,
the entire people’s business, if it was to succeed, was precisely
the reason why I absolutely rejected dictatorship as a form of
government.
Appendix C 511
I pointed out the fundamental difference between the
dictatorship of Mr. Marcos and a legitimate temporarily
authoritarian government during abnormal conditions.
Marcos’ dictatorship was absolute and illegitimate, and more
importantly, there was no definite timetable for its duration, nor
any formal mechanism for a subsequent rigorous accounting
to the people of his actions as a dictator.
The key concept in these issues was that the people or their
duly elected representatives should have the sovereign power
to accept or reject the leader’s proposal for temporary full
authority and to accept or reject his subsequent accounting.
This expression of the people’s formal acceptance should
never be by means of that farcical show of hands Marcos stage-
managed in January 1973, or through the subsequent equally
rigged affairs he has had the gall to call people’s referenda or
elections. And never again a signed blank check.
I went on to emphasize that what was equally important, if
not more important than short-term results, is the methodology
or the process employed to obtain those results. And therefore,
we the people could not just depend on the supposed good
intentions and on the legendary intelligence and astuteness of
Mr. Marcos, nor on his self-serving repetitious claims of good
results. I then pointed out that I was not advocating a return to
the freewheeling days of the so-called Old Society. As a matter
of fact, I said that this Old Society never left us.
“It is still here, but masquerading by a different name.
Because the chief hierarch of the last seven years of the Old
Society is still Marcos himself. Because practically his entire
gang of gangsters are still the same ones lording it over us
now. To say one is automatically in favor of the Old Society
because he does not accept the so-called New Society is mental
dishonesty of the highest order. If the Filipino people really
have never had it so good except under the New Society, then
why is Marcos so afraid to submit himself to the people for
judgment in a free and honest national election?”
512 LIGHT A FIRE II

When the Defense Minister interjected his rhetorical question
as to whether I knew of any completely honest government, I
replied as follows: “Of course there is no such thing. But there
are degrees of honesty and of corruption in government and
ours is in an advanced degree of the latter. And precisely, it
is not so much because Marcos is there, but because there is
such a terrible lack of check and balance. People are afraid to
criticize and are equally afraid not to praise the government.
Even if you placed St. Peter in the shoes of Marcos, the same
widespread mendacity will eventually take place. That is—if
St. Peter were also the dictator with everybody afraid not to
praise him constantly.”
Finally I tried to bring out the notion that the highest
government official himself would have to set the example,
to set the tone of personal morality and intellectual honesty if
he expects his underlings to behave themselves. In contrast, I
cited the outright gimmickry, the cheap sloganeering, and the
highway robbery going on in the most immediate circles of
Marcos’ official family and his so-called First Family, belying
in the process Marcos’ lofty public rhetoric, and shattering his
credibility here and abroad, perhaps irrevocably.
I stopped only when an aide came in to inform the Minister
that another visitor was waiting outside. Mr. Enrile had the last
word. He repeated his feelings of respect for me and his belief
we were after the same objectives. Then, with obvious emotion
he said: “But you people will never catch me alive. And when
I go, many other people will go down with me. And we will all
know who the real liars are in this world, for there are many
of them.” He sounded ominous, and very strange to me at that
time. I have often wondered whether his last statements were
really meant for me or for someone else in that room.
TV Non-interview
About a week later one early evening, I was again uncere-
moniously told to dress up and to follow my guard-escort.
Appendix C 513
Something new was up. Earlier that day, a nurse had taken
my blood pressure and a certain medical staffmember, who
claimed he was a major, asked me to strip and be cursorily
examined. The entire ritual took about two minutes. Yes,
something must be up in the air. I was brought now to Col. A’s
office and lo and behold, a whole television crew was there to
greet me with their whirring cameras and blinding lights. Col.
A was there with a big plastic smile on his face to greet me like
I was a brother Mason. Deputy Minister of Defense Carmelo
Barbero was also there. And I recognized somebody else.
He was the government information ministry’s radio-TV
high-priest, famous or perhaps notorious for his unvarying
obsequious praise for Mr. and Mrs. Marcos. His naturalization
papers as a Filipino were approved by Mr. Marcos himself.
And his ‘nom de guerre’ is “Ronnie Nathanielz.”
Deputy Minister Barbero had visited me earlier on New
Year’s day at the request, so he claimed, of His Eminence
Jaime Cardinal Sin, to see to it that I be treated decently by Col
A’s men. The good Deputy then spent more time in trying to
extract information from me and in sowing distrust between
me and my co-detainees, particularly Mr. Otto Jimenez, than
in listening to my complaints about the denial of our right
to legal counsel and the brutalization of Carlos Lazaro and
Reynaldo Maclang. (By the way, up to the time of this writing,
Carlos Lazaro has not been allowed to see a lawyer and is still
locked up at the MISG punishment cell.) Deputy Minister
Barbero struck me then as a very unctuously smooth and oily
character.
Have you ever been simultaneously confronted, Mr. Solzhe-
nitsyn, by the reincarnations of the Marquis de Sade, Uriah
Heap, and Uriah Heep Jr.? That is how I felt that evening with
all these smiling and fawning characters. I was being set up.
With hands clasped unctuously as usual and facing the
cameras, Barbaro started off by asking me how well I was
doing. I glared at him and mumbled an incoherent and non-
514 LIGHT A FIRE II

comittal “I’m ok.” I stuck to this answer and changed it once in
a while by mumbling “Ask the other detainees!” After a short
while, Nathanielz could not stand the ridiculousness of the
pantomine, so he openly asked me to grant him an interview.
Standing up, I looked at him and in a coldly furious tone, said:
“No, certainly not. I know what you people normally do with
these so called interviews. You will splice, edit out of context
and put words in my mouth. I know you. And this whole thing
is an outrage.”
“Mr. Olaguer, I will not do those things. I was just going to
ask you about conditions here, whether you are comfortable,
whether you have a TV and how is the food . . . ”
And that was when Col. A got into the act and unwittingly
set off another comedy of horrors. “Minister Barbero, they are
getting P12.00 a day each as their food allowance.
“Well, that is excellent, even considering today’s high prices,”
commented Barbero while bowing and beaming unctuously.
I couldn’t stand the naked display of mendacity. And so I
found my voice again blurting out, “That’s a lie! It is certainly
not P12. It is only P3 a day or P1 per meal per detainee. Why
don’t you find out from the canteen operator?” And that
outburst finished off whatever was left of the interview.
The next day’s controlled newspapers went to town
denouncing Amnesty International’s “concoctions” about my
being tortured, and reporting that I claimed I was being treated
well. The TV news report showed me and Mr. Otto Jimenez as
if we were interviewed together, with me talking but without
any sound. Somehow they couldn’t splice my mumblings and
my denunciation of Nathanielz and the Gulag food of the New
Society. Looking back, somehow I can’t feel any anger towards
the Uriah Heeps of this world. Anger, no. Contempt, perhaps.
Pity, yes . . .
I had a pleasant surprise the day following that Heep-de
Sade lovefest. For breakfast I got two, yes two smaller pieces
of tuyo instead of the usual one. And for lunch, in addition to
Appendix C 515
the regular quantity of rice and vegetables worth P1.00, I got
another piece of tuyo! Their kind of arithmetic must have led
them to the discovery that, quadrupling the food allowance
per meal from P1 to P4 meant adding one measly piece of tuyo
worth no more than P0.25 or U.S.$0.03!
Soon after that sumptuous lunch, Lt. Alejandro Gutierrez
came in to announce that our food allowance had been in-
creased to P4 per meal. I didn’t have the heart then to disabuse
his trust in Col. A’s largesse. Sure enough, within a few days
Col. A uncermoniously junked the food concessionaire-can-
teen operator. She was the wife of an MISG sergeant who
had been complaining about her unpaid bills and the recent
added burden of supplying each of the detainees P4 of food in
exchange for P1 of more I.O.U.s.
The next concessionaire was smarter and more brazen.
The food was poorer in quantity, quality, and cleanliness.
She claimed she was being paid only P0.75 per meal. By this
time though we really didn’t care because food packages from
friends and relatives were pouring in despite the confiscatory
“food tax” imposed by our MISG protectors. We also knew that
we would soon leave the clutches of Col. A. But not before one
last (knock on wood!) bruising verbal encounter with Marquis
de Sade.
Col. A Gets Mad
A few days before we were transferred to our present
gulag, I was again summoned and escorted under guard to
Col. A’s office. After that aborted interview with Ronnie
Nathanielz (Uriah Heep Jr.), I had been brought once more
to be “interviewed” again, this time by TV Channel 7. The
young girl-reporter pleaded with me (I don’t recall her name
now) with tears in her eyes. I was almost tempted to accede
because she was obviously sincere, and Channel 7 in my view
is much less brazenly under government control than Channel
4. And Col. A was unusually subdued and conciliatory. But I
516 LIGHT A FIRE II

still refused, although I could not prevent them from taking
pictures of me.
This last time around (again, knock on wood!), Col. A
was deceptively quiet. There in his office waiting for me,
was an old friend from my student days at the University of
the Philippines. He was Major Aniano Desierto of the Judge
Advocate General’s Office at the central military headquarters.
He had come to visit me for no stated purpose. Desierto spent
the next fifteen minutes reminiscing in front of Col. A about our
U.P. escapades some 25 years ago as Catholic Action activists
under Fr. John Delaney S.J.
Glad as I was to see Maj. “Ani” Desierto for the first time
after 25 years, I felt a growing uneasiness. If “Ani” was there
for a personal visit, why was he talking about our U.P. Catholic
Action activities mostly to Col. A and in the presence of three
other unidentified men? If Ani was there for official reasons,
then I should know what for. Besides, on my way in, I saw my
lawyer Atty. Sedfrey Ordoñez at the door of Col. A’s office. He
had been trying every day to get permission to see me, after our
(previous) first 30-minute session. But all to no avail. I decided
to cut short Maj. Desierto’s nostalgic account of our younger
days. He had just finished recounting the story of his fist fight
with Johnny Remulla, the incumbent Cavite governor, while
Fr. Delaney was lying in state at the U.P. Chapel, all because of
Johnny’s “insults” against our hero.
“Ani,” I said, “The Colonel must be a very busy man and I
see that my lawyer is there waiting for the Colonel so he can
see me. Would you mind if I take this opportunity to bring up
the matter of my lawyer’s visit?” Maj. Desierto had no chance
to reply.
“Oh, I already told your wife to come back this afternoon or
tomorrow to find out if Gen. Olivas has already approved your
lawyer’s visit.”
‘’But Col. Abadilla,” I flared up, “You have been blatantly
giving us the run-around for the last three weeks. I was
Appendix C 517
already told by Minister Enrile, your superior, and in your very
presence he authorized my lawyer’s visit. That was almost two
weeks ago. And what about the others like Jimenez, Lazaro
and Maclang, are their requests to see their lawyers not being
processed at all?”
“Speak only for yourself! The others can . . . ”
“The trouble with you, Col. Abadilla,” I was really wrought
up by then, “is that with your exclusively police mentality,
you have no appreciation at all of such things as constitutional
rights and other basic rights and . . . ”
“What about you? Did you respect my rights and the rights
of all those government officials you planned to murder?”
“Oh, so you presume I am guilty of all those fabricated
charges. So you . . . ”
“And I’ll see to it you are found and sentenced guilty . . . ”
“Yes you want to be Gestapo, fiscal, judge, jury, and
hangman all at the same . . . ”
“Guard! Take him out of here. I don’t want to see him
anymore.”
I stood up, looked at Col. A with what must have been
blazing anger and slowly said: “So do I!” And I sped out of
the room amid the startled protestations of Maj. Desierto that
he’d see me again soon. I haven’t seen either Col. A or Major
D, ever since.
Gulag, Filipino Style
I have spent exactly 28 days in Col. A’s gulag encampment.
From all the accounts of the many people, detainees, nuns
looking after other detainees, soldiers, and officers I have
talked to, Col. A’s enclave most closely approximates the worst
of your Soviet gulags, Mr. Solzhenitsyn. And within Col. A’s
fiefdom, the MISG compound under Major Panfilo Lacson
(Col. A’s second in command) is “ground zero” as it were, in
severity of punishment, bluecap norms and attitudes, odious
physical environment, and interrogation methods.
518 LIGHT A FIRE II

Over at the MISG side, the Bluecaps come to the cells at
any hour of the day, either to amuse themselves by beating
up a detainee, or to ‘borrow’ soap, slippers, nail clippers,
drinking glasses, jackets. Anything! And these are seldom if
ever returned.
Bluecap Roberto Velasquez, for example, went to a cell one
night, evidently drunk. He proceeded straightaway to practice
his considerable punching and kicking skills on a detainee who
was already asleep, in full view of sixteen other terror-stricken
cell mates.
In another instance, the usually idle Bluecaps noticed the
luxuriant mustache of a detainee. He was ordered to pull it
all off with his bare hands. The poor fellow couldn’t do it fast
enough to satisfy the amused Bluecaps. Two other detainees
were ordered to help out. Out of fear they finished the job in
less than two minutes!
An inmate was suddenly called for interrogation in the
middle of the night. He returned a couple of hours later all black
and blue and crying piteously. His cell mates then massaged
him gently with Vicks ointment and prayed with him to help
ease the pain, and to steel themselves against the time when
it would be their turn to be a punching bag. Food parcels sent
by relatives and friends would normally arrive in complete
disarray and with less than half of its original contents.
We were witnesses to the nightly drinking and gambling
sessions of the Bluecaps, with their girl friends and their favored
wealthy detainee-friends; the foulmouthed remarks directed
against female detainees and visitors; the electro-genital mas-
saging of stubbornly uncooperative witnesses and suspects . . .
It is particularly dangerous, Mr. Solzhenitsyn, if you are
to be charged eventually with a major crime and are also
suspected of having large amounts of ill-gotten cash stashed
away. Then you should prepare for completely no holds-
barred interrogation sessions. It is worse if you break down
and reveal the location of the loot. For you will probably be
Appendix C 519
made to appear as if you were trying to escape. You will have
died, shot down like a dog, and “your” money recovered and
appropriated by your “friends.”
Last January 30, the usually ‘objective and independent’ local
press reported another ‘heroic’ exploit of our Bluecaps. It was
a group of five suspected Hongkong-Manila based kidnappers
of four wealthy Chinese. These suspects had been captured
several weeks before. Some of us even had a chance to talk
to the wife of the suspected ringleader at the MISG premises.
Millions of pesos and dollars were supposed to have been
paid to the suspects by their victims. Based on the newspaper
accounts, they were brought to the suspects’ safehouse where
they had been previously apprehended. There they were
asked to “re-enact their crimes.” Through the simple pretext
of having to go to the comfort room, the suspected ringleader
was reportedly able to get guns stashed away in the ceiling,
disarm his guard, use the guard as hostage, distribute the guns
to all his gang mates, and escape. Our heroic Bluecaps were
reportedly too smart for them. The end result, according to
the newspaper accounts, was that all five were shot dead on
the spot while trying to escape! All our MISG ‘heroes’ were
unhurt, including the stupid guard and erstwhile hostage. The
suspects’ guns and forged passports were reportedly found,
but absolutely no money . . . Sounds familiar?
Col. A’s concept of guilt by association, as applied in the
cases of Gertrudes Dingcal and the wives and neighbors of my
co-detainees, was also applied to our valuable personal assets.
From my family and office alone, two cars, a delivery van,
several motorcycles, and three typewriters were taken away,
mostly without benefit of receipts. Ben Lim’s patent leather
attache case was receipted for, but minus P4,000 in cash, his
wallet, hundreds of U.S. dollars and valuable credit cards. Otto
Jimenez’ house was ransacked three times. He lost his three
cars—a brand-new Toyota Corona, a Mercedes Benz, and
the Honda mini-car of his wife, a motorcycle, all his watches
520 LIGHT A FIRE II

and expensive lighters, his portable TV set, his cameras with
telephoto lenses. And the Jimenezes were given absolutely no
receipts for any of these. They tried to confiscate Mr. Maclang’s
expensive electronic calculator, but fortunately Ray convinced
them that it belonged to one of his boarders’ girl friend. They
arrested this boarder, Atty. Vic Amado and issued a warrant
of arrest for his girl friend. They carted away my Arnold
Toynbee books and my Aseptron contact lens cleaning kit. Two
brand-new jackets given to me as Christmas gifts were missing
barely five minutes after they raided the house. When my wife
Daisie tried to inquire from Col. A about our confiscated assets,
he arrogantly retorted, “You’ll never get them back!”
There are many more of these morality stories about Col. A’s
minions. In just four weeks, we learned quite a bit. Stories about
the crude usurpation of civilian courts’ jurisdiction solely for
the benefit of favored friends and relatives, about confiscation
and subsequent misappropriation of private properties on the
pretext of investigating a possible crime, about the use of poor,
ignorant detainees as permanent personal servants, etc., etc.
And I, Eduardo B. Olaguer, solemnly accuse them, Mr.
Solzhenitsyn, of all these crimes against common decency and
humanity. I accuse them before God, my country and all you
brave people of kindred spirits. I accuse them because it is my
duty to do so. I accuse them because I utterly agree with you
Mr. Solzhenitsyn, in the concluding portion of the chapter on
“The Bluecaps” in The Gulag Archipelago. And I quote these
excerpts:
We have to condemn publicly the very idea that some
people have the right to repress others. In keeping silent
about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of
it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will
rise up a thousandfold in the future. When we neither
punish nor reproach evil-doers, we are thereby ripping
the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.
It is for this reason that young people are acquiring the
Appendix C 521
conviction that foul deeds are never punished on earth,
that they always bring prosperity.
It is going to be uncomfortable, horrible to live in such
a country.
I Plead Guilty
As for my supposed crimes, Mr. Solzhenitsyn, if crimes they
are, I plead guilty of them, before God and my country.
I plead guilty of having rejected and of still rejecting Mr.
Marcos’ so-called Constitution of 1973. I consider that bastardly
document as nothing more than an instrument of oppression
dastardly carved by Marcos’ usual tools of bribery, deceit,
coercion and fraud. It is a shameful piece of document which
even that spineless Supreme Court of 1973 ruled out as not
having been “validly ratified.”
And yet this Marcos-dominated Court shamelessly admitted
in the same breath that they did not have enough votes in the
Court, nay, not enough men of guts and conscience, to declare
that monstrous piece of villainy as unconstitutional and thus
invalid. Therefore it is still in effect and “valid” on a mere de
facto basis!
I plead guilty of having continued my allegiance, as I hereby
re-affirm my allegiance to the 1935 Philippine Constitution.
It may be an imperfect primary law born out of a colonial
past, but at least it was freely accepted by our fathers and
by ourselves. At least it contains adequate mechanisms for
legitimate amendments and proper safeguards for the valid
ratification of a subsequent Constitution. At least it does not
institutionalize nor legitimize a lifetime dictator of the breed
of men like Ferdinand Marcos. So I solemnly pledge my life to
defend this pristine Constitution until its successor shall have
been validly and freely ratified by my countrymen. So help me,
my God . . .
I plead guilty of having denounced as I hereby denounce
Ferdinand Marcos and Imelda Romualdez as illegitimate,
522 LIGHT A FIRE II

corrupt, and deceitful dictators, acting as a conjugal team in
order to perpetuate themselves and their progeny in their illicit
power. I denounce them as obnoxious usurpers propped up by a
bogus de facto Constitution, and protected by a huge expensive
private army dominating the decent elements of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines. I denounce them for propagating a
deep slur on the entire Filipino people by claiming, precisely
by reason of their continued dictatorship, that they and they
alone can govern the Philippines effectively and efficiently.
I plead guilty of having advocated, as I hereby still advocate,
the reasonable and moral use of force if necessary, as I believe
it is necessary under the circumstances, to defend our people
from the continued abuse by Marcos-Romualdez et al., of the
Filipino people’s basic political, civil, and human rights, and to
restore these rights under a genuinely democratic government
run by leaders explicitly chosen by the people in a free and
honest election as defined by our 1935 Constitution, or by a
subsequent Constitution to be validly ratified by the Filipino
people. I submit to the conviction that the reasonable and
moral use of force for the legitimate defense and restoration
of the people’s basic rights has long been necessary, precisely
because Marcos-Romualdez et al. have usurped and controlled
all available institutions to which the people normally have
recourse for redress of their grievances against their governors.
And I believe that it is a fundamental right of a citizen to bear
arms and to use those arms against tyrannical oppressors
whether home-grown or foreign-born, especially when exclu-
sively peaceful means are no longer available or have proven
to be of no avail.
I plead guilty of having obeyed the dictates of my conscience
in consonance with a “higher law” to denounce evil and to
seek appropriate punishment for evil doers—be they Mr. and
Mrs. Ferdinand Marcos or Rolando Abadilla. As a Christian, I
reaffirm my convictions in following the tenets of this “higher
law” as revealed by the Prime Lawgiver Himself, to seek mercy
Appendix C 523
for evildoers, if they are appropriately sorry for having done
evil. For the God of Mercy is also the same God of Justice who
has denounced evildoers in terms as unmistakable as “whitened
sepulchers,” “brood of vipers,” or that “it were better if the man
had not been born.” He has punished entire cities in righteous
anger, nay, entire civilizations, and inflicted an incurable skin
disease on corrupt tyrants like King Herod. Yes, indeed this
same God has poured out mercy on a repentant thief like
Dimas and on a repentant fallen woman like the Magdalene.
But precisely because they realized their evil ways, repented,
made amends, and returned to a path of virtue.
To these and many more, I humbly plead guilty. And I
willingly submit myself—not to Mr. Marcos’ tainted justice
nor to his token mercy, no and never—but to the Almighty
God of infinite justice and loving mercy, through the legitimate
civil authorities of my country someday.
Pleas for Liberty!
Permit me now, Mr. Solzhenitsyn, to paraphrase and
re-phrase your favorite verse from Soviet Lt. Shmidt’s last
speech at his kangaroo-court trial which you said touched you
so deeply. For so has it touched me too:
Forty-four years of sweat and breath
I have toiled in my native land
‘The Pearl of the Orient Sea.’
Yet fears of tyrant nor danger of death
Can’t shackle my thoughts and my hand.
Nor my passions for her to be free.
For sure from the tyrant his servants of death
I shall neither expect an even hand,
Nor miss his indulgency.
When my cell mate Otto Jimenez saw me struggling

laboriously to re-compose Lt. Shmidt’s verses to fit our present
situation, he made his own composition and dedicated it to
ourselves, and to all those still under the clutches of Col. A and
Mr. Marcos. Here it is:
524 LIGHT A FIRE II
Pain of battle, gut churning,
It is release to be smitten,
And, after barefanged moments
With bestial captors,
Float nerveless, sprawled,
In cool dark comforting dungeon womb,
With meager meals measuring
Surcease from strife and struggle.
But in the blessed dark,
A touch, a whisper,
In the precious place,
In the shattered silence,
In the—dear God—
In the not so blessed dark,
A call.
My chains are loosed
And in my hand is thrust
My sword. Dear God,
If thou wilt but let this chalice pass,
But not my will.
My God, be Thou my strength,
Our refuge and our strength.
Holy Michael, defend us in battle,
Be our protection against the malice and snares,
of the devil.
Oh Mother Mary, help! We are weary.
In the darkness, groping, I find
My blue flag of honor.
And faith kept with one’s self,
And the white flag
With golden cross emblazoned,
For the liberation of the oppressed.
Sun-moon-star-flag, also your shining field
Nor dimmed by tyrant’s might.
Up, sword, Mary help!
My flag must fly.
Appendix C 525
I do not know, Mr. Solzhenitsyn, for how long I shall be an
inhabitant of our own Gulag Archipelago. So I live on a day
to day basis. And I have long been reconciled to the prospect
of an indefinite, perhaps even lifelong, detention. For I have
found life here meaningful enough. And I have embraced it as
my present vocation until Heaven knows when. I expect and
even look forward to the coming days when this life could even
be more meaningful. Because when the highest Gulag masters
learn about this letter to you, the pots prepared for us will boil
once more!
And so I beg you and my loved ones and all my friends of
kindred spirits, I beg you in the name of the One God we serve,
to let this letter be read by as many people as possible—be they
friendly, hostile, or indifferent to my cause. Regardless of what
my Gulag masters will do to me or to my friends. Regardless
that they can always retaliate with any imaginable scheme to
harm or to vilify us. As indeed they already have done so. They
have caused the repeated publication in the controlled press of
the wildest sort of stories about our supposed plans to murder
the top officials of this country! Justice and freedom, yes! But
murder? No, and a thousand more times, no!
Mr. Marcos and his coterie of sycophants have labeled me
as the ringleader of a terrorist organization. To this accusation
I wish to quote as my reply, a few of the lyrics from the U.S.
Declaration of Independence in a song we used to sing as an
all-male choir during my students days at the University of the
Philippines:
The God who gave us life, gave us liberty!
At the same time, at the same time!
The hand of Fate may destroy,
But cannot disjoin them.
Cannot, cannot disjoin them.
We have counted the cost of this conquest;
And find nothing so dreadful as voluntary slavery!
Honor, justice and humanity forbid us
tamely to surrender,
526 LIGHT A FIRE II

That freedom which we received
from our gallant ancestors.
And which our innocent posterity have a right
to receive from us.
We cannot endure the infamy and fear of resigning
succeeding generations,
To that wretchedness, which inevitably awaits them.
If we basely entail, hereditary bondage upon them.
In our native land,
In defense of these liberties,
That is our birthright . . .
We have taken up arms!
Arms, arms, arms!
We will in defiance of every hazard,
With unabating firmness and perseverance . . .
Employed for the preservation of our liberties . . .
Resolve to die free men!
Rather than to live slaves .
And finally I wish to quote from what I consider the most

stirring passage from my country’s national anthem, a passage
which, like your literary works Mr. Solzhenitsyn, is relevant to
all the peoples of this world.
Beautiful land of light, oh land of love . . .
In thine embrace ‘tis rapture to die.
And it is glory ever when thou art wronged . . .
For us thy sons to suffer and die!
Long Live a Free Philippines!

EDUARDO B. OLAGUER
February, 1980
(Published in the SPECIAL ISSUE newsletter of the Association of

Major Religious Superiors of the Philippines—AMRSP Volume III,
No. 16, April 1980 and re-edited July 2005.)
Appendix C 527
LIGHT A FIRE II
will be available in major bookstores!
For more information, please contact:

EDOLAGUER Family Publishing House
(beside the Katipunan Station
of the Light Rail Transit Line LRT-2)
(632) 913-6382 • 913-6383 • Fax 913-6385
[email protected]
homepage.mac.com/dolaguer/lightafire
528 LIGHT A FIRE II

2

Light A Fire II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Light A Fire II

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Light A Fire II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3

EDOLAGUER Family Publishing House

All rights reserved.

First Edition, July 2005

Published by: EDOLAGUER Family Publishing House

This work is one of a kind, in terms of contemporary

ISBN Number 971-93313-0-5

AUTHOR’S FOREWORD ..............................................................................3

SECTION I ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM AND IGNATIAN JESUITRY

SECTION II PURSUED BY THE HOUND OF HEAVEN

SECTION III LIGHT A FIRE I (TO TOPPLE A DICTATORSHIP)

SECTION IV STRUGGLES FOR JUSTICE

SECTION VI HAIL HOLY QUEEN!

GLOSSARY ............................................................................................ 481

AUTHOR’S ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...........................................................486

PHOTO SECTION ................................................... between pages 282-283

Thus some 25 years ago, our defense of our Faith was

CHAPTER 1 Papa and the Jesuits

PAPA AND THE JESUITS

I was 5 years and 4 months old when Papa, Lino S. Olaguer,

Papa and the Jesuits 15

16 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Papa and the Jesuits 17

18 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Papa and the Jesuits 19

20 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Papa and the Jesuits 21

22 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Papa and the Jesuits 23

24 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Papa and the Jesuits 25

26 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Papa and the Jesuits 27

28 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Papa and the Jesuits 29

30 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Papa and the Jesuits 31

THE GIFT OF FAITH AND TRUE-BLUE NUNS

32 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

The Gift of Faith and True-Blue Nuns 33

34 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

The Gift of Faith and True-Blue Nuns 35

36 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

The Gift of Faith and True-Blue Nuns 37

38 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

The Gift of Faith and True-Blue Nuns 39

40 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

The Gift of Faith and True-Blue Nuns 41

JESUITS OF A GENERATION GONE

Looking back to my formative years, I do believe with a

42 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Jesuits of a Generation Gone 43

44 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Jesuits of a Generation Gone 45

46 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Jesuits of a Generation Gone 47

48 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY

Jesuits of a Generation Gone 49

50 ROOTS IN TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM & IGNATIAN JESUITRY