Since many Filipinos have a devotion to the Virgin Mary, this piece of news should be interesting. A proposed 1 Billion peso Marine Shrine in Batangas is questioned by some Catholic bishops.
The pros and cons of building magnificent temples to God is a subject of debate throughout history. In the medieval period, the awe inspiring gothic “piles of stone” in Europe were largely financed by city corporations. The guilds contributed labour and money to raise these “gates to heaven”. In some cases the Monarch provided patronage and an everlasting gratuity.
When the Monarchs lost their divine right, it was left to the congregations to put one up. Thus the age of cathedral building ended. In the 19th century, in an England where Catholics were once again given liberty to practise their faith, Cardinal Manning decided against putting up new magnificent temple to show that Roman Catholicism had survived 400 years of Protestant persecution. Instead he advised that the money should be used for the poor. But the Catholics went ahead and now we see the magnificent temple of Westminster Cathedral.
In the Philippines the Roman Church was never persecuted. Even when Aglipayanism was ascendant, the Church was immediately staffed by American clergy and the Jesuits blunted our own version of Reformation. Magnificent temples were erected still. Felix Manalo’s Iglesia ni Cristo recognized that putting up awe inspiring temples was a necessity if the faithful were to be kept. Thus we see distinctive INC churches today.
But in a Philippine Catholic Church with a dose of liberation theology in its veins, putting up expensive churches is politically incorrect. So most post Vatican II Pinoy churches are architecturally nondistinctive. After all you need to spend a lot of cash to build a structure that will be noticed.
But the dioceses can’t afford to build churches anymore. With the Sunday collection plate becoming less and less, maintaining existing churches has become a burden to parishes. This is not an issue limited to the Pinoy church. Even the Church of England (which had inherited the gothic piles from the Catholics at the Reformation) has to charge “admission fees” for visitors to their cathedrals. You can only get in free if there is a service.
So in the Philippines those who can afford to put up magnificent piles of stones are priests and lay “brothers” and “sisters” who run their ministry like a for profit business. That’s why a Catholic like me finds the 1 billion peso shrine ironically dedicated to “Our Lady of the Poor” quite distasteful. The Philippine Catholic Church should audit these priests and “brothers” and “sisters”. That’s if it has the will to do so.
And who knows, the auditors may see the Devil’s handiwork in “cooking the books”!
And no wonder in the Gospels, Christ wanted to see the Temple razed to the ground after he had cast away the thieves and the moneychangers. He would rebuild the temple.
But at what cost? Visitors to Saint Peter’s in Rome gawk at the Baroque splendour but have to realize that the building itself is the cause of the Protestant Reformation and the Wars of Religion that came afterward.
Popularity: 1% [?]
My personal choice is I wouldn’t want to donate a single centavo to such a project. On the other hand, I wouldn’t fault the donors to the project, if they truly know where their personal donations are going, that’s not anyone’s else business and besides, who can judge their hearts? Sure it can generate employment (temporary) but those who will really benefit from such a massive 1B construction will be the construction materials firms, possibly the contractors, architects, and anyone closely linked to the project. But this kind of thinking is speculative and tinged with malice. Anyway, spending 1B for it is certainly going to be scandalous. I would rather donate to something like Gawad Kalinga.
It is Father Suares who is behind this project. most of the money did not come from the Filipino people. They came from the royalties in the middle east, the people from USA, from other countries of the world.From people who he has touched by his healing hands.
He just wanted to bring it to the Philippines.
If you think I am a believer, you are right.
In the year 2oo7, I was diagnosed with cancer. The doctor did not even suggested any treatment since the lab tests showed it had metastasized already.
I wrote already my will. Then a doctor of medicine referred me to him. The rest of the story is narrated in my Healing testimonial
There must be some jealousy and insecurity to some men of cloth.
Why are there projects where the middle class business owners get another chance to make asenso? :grin: Ayon, makaka-una na naman sila at gagawa ng pera, hindi dapat iyon!!
What’s wrong with putting up a Statue of Virgin Mary which is expected to be taller than the Liberty. It is being done for free by Ed Castrillo.
he wanted the Philippines to become one of the destinations of religious pilgrimages.
Portugal has the Fatima, France has Lourdes, Italy has Padre Pio and even the non-Catholic Jerusalem allows tourists in the birthplace of Jesusm why can’t we have one which is not even funded by the government.
The congregation also sends youth to school. Rosaries being sold are made by the out-of-school youth and poor families. There is soup kitchen which is financd by donations from all over the world.
What is wrong with that?
ay, naku, baka gumawa pa ng pera sina Leviste o sina Tolentino diyan sa proyekto na iyan, huwag na lang. At baka mag-extortion pa ang mga NPA, huwag na lang. At baka bisitahin ng terorista kapag nagawa na, huwag na lang. At baka may maakisidente pang manghininang ng bakal o tubero habang ginagawa iyang katedral na iyan, ano ba naman.
Ang kailangan ng Pilipinas, mga masigasig magtrabaho at may kumpiyansa sa sarili, hindi iyang katedral na iyan.
The Cat,
I’m all for Higanteng Maria being built and promoted in Batangas. I’ve decided it will be good for the Cause after all to promote Idolatry in all its forms. The bigger and grander the statuary too, the greater the chances are that the Faithful will come to believe more and more in the Giant Stone Idol itself than whatever the other thing above pretends to be.
I have only one suggestion: the promoters must discover the miraculous powers of this Beacon of Faith pronto, and how they are invoked by supplicants. Perhaps kissing its feet, or genuflecting at a distance, or taking a piece rubble from the sacred vicinity (which ought to be judiciously replenished at night).
Indulgences for making such an arduous pilgrimage must definitely be plenary in nature and available for no more than P50. Scapulars, statuettes, site maps and memorabilia of all sorts ought to be available at the site. The certain miraculous cures ought to be immediately posted on a http://www.higantengmaria.com.
We could become Christianity’s Mecca. But no throwing stones please.
As long as they dont use our tax money. They can
build any shrine to any deity or God. We have
the Freedom of Religion….
DJB,
With your superb ideas, you ought to apply as site manager. But first, you got to be healed first of a cancerous contempt for Catholics. Unfortunately, Fr. Suarez cannot heal that.
But that last one was really funny.
Where there are religious pilgrimages, there are tourists. Where there are tourists, there is the money.
it is not funded by the government.
Problem is that there are men of cloth who are deprived of their tithes.
If some Catholics want to build a Shrine to the Blessed Virgin, then let them do so. However a local congregation is not really separate from the rest of the Church. The Philippine Catholic Church is not separate from that in Rome. Thus a local congregation should listen to other bishops think about it.
The problem is that there is a doubt on the accountability of priests and lay brothers and sisters in using money wisely. The argument that the project does not involve tax money is irrelevant here. (Not really true. If the local government hires traffic enforcers to support Shrine activity then public money has been used for a particular religion.) There are laws (in civil and canon law) that deal with squandering of money.
In my parish I had a doubt that the money wasn’t being spent for the purpose it was collected. That’s why I have stopped giving money for ministry to the poor to my parish and instead give it to the Sabadistas. In the Adventist church,I get a receipt and know to which account the money went. I receive an audited statement each year informing me where the money went. I never received anything like that from the Catholic Church.
But the reality is when you are powerful, you aren’t accountable. The Catholic Church here still commands power.
Now I don’t believe the peasant woman which we know as the humble handmaiden of the Lord would agree that a giant statue be erected in her honour!
Blackshama,
The Church hierarchy is flat, and the cognizant bishop is supreme in his diocese in matters like building shrines in their own locale. In local administrative matters, usually bishops steer clear of each other. Well, usually.
As far as accountability for money is concerned, that accountability is obligated to the donors only. It is also the local government’s duty to protect all lawful activity within its domain, religious or otherwise.
Donors are free to decide which way their money goes, and nobody can question them.
Each believer is also free to believe whatever which way Mother Mary appreciates a statue made in her honor, whether extra large, medium, or regular.
@Blackshama on March 7th, 2009 12:53 am
by using funds ‘wisely’ do you mean:
1) corruption?
2) they shouldn’t have erected a statue for mary… thats not wise!
if its 2), then to each his own, di ba? the heirarchical nature of the church is more theological, than financial… no?
if its 1), then you are right… i wish the healing priest was more transparent. i wonder if there are regulations for social organizations to be transparent in their finances… probably not…