Tale of Two Ateneos
December 20, 2008 1 Comment
In her Inquirer commentary entitled, “Ateneo’s Freudian slip,” Minyong Ordonez wrote about the two Ateneo de Manilas:
Many Ateneo alumni are asking questions. Whatever happened to “Ratio Studiorum,” the Jesuit-conceived curriculum concept that inspired many Ateneans in the past to pursue excellence of mind and spirit? What is happening out there in Loyola Heights? Are there two schools of thought in Ateneo today?
On one side are followers of the Church magisterium who obey the Church teachings with humility as taught by Jesus Christ in his Sermon on the Mount. On the other side are a coterie of modernists, populists and personalists whose attitude on Catholicism is a matter of feel not faith, a matter of body and not of soul, a matter of material pragmatism not spiritual idealism, a matter of worldliness not of saintliness and a matter of selfish love not self-less love.
The media savvy lawyer and priest, Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J., who wrote his opinion on the RH Bill does not augment Fr. Nebres’ kind of spirituality at all. He chose to skin the cat in many ways, replete with ifs and buts, hence the good father was disabled from making a truly Catholic stand on morality. Methinks Fr. Bernas is too fascinated with life in a pluralistic society. He chose to be a politically correct constitutionalist first, an ordained Catholic priest second.
A top-rating TV preacher in America, the late Bishop Fulton Sheen, had an unequivocal view on moral issues. He said, “Right is right even if only one person believes it and millions don’t. And wrong is wrong even if millions think it’s right and only one thinks it’s wrong.”
Quo vadis, Ateneo?
Accurate observation. Sad but true. And we little hobbits of the Old Ateneo can only weep and mourn (and blog) as we silently pray our Alma Mater song.