What’s in a name?: Take 2

By JUAN L. MERCADO
January 12, 2014

(A former United Nations colleague emailed that he had resent a 2011 column we had written titled: “What’s in a name?” That dealt with what startles visitors here but which we take for granted. We’ve re-read the piece. Does it bear up? – JLM)

A British Broadcastng Corporation reporter and a business executive from England have written, nine years apart, witty features on unique Filipino names that we take for granted but stun foreigners.

“On my first day in Manila, I…was served by a smiling coffee shop girl who wore a name badge: BumBum,” Kate McGeown of BBC recalls. “I did a double-take. But if it’s is a joke the whole country seems to be in.”

Matthew Sutherland agreed in an Obsever feature “The secretary I inherited on arrival had an unusual name: Leck-Leck.” Filipinos, he discovered, were fond of “repeating names.” They include: Lenlen or Ning-ning.

“Names are refined by using the ‘squared’ symbol as in Len2 or Mai2,” Sutherland wrote. “How boring to come from the UK, full of people named John Smith. How wonderful to come to a country where imagination rules.”

The head of the Catholic Church here then was named Jaime Cardinal Sin. “Welcome to the house of Sin,” he’d greet guests. “Where else in the world could that have happened but in the Philippines!”

Everyone here has a nickname: Babes, Lovely, Precious, Honey Boy, Bing, and Dong. Even the former chief of the National Police, and now Rehabilitation czar Panfilo Lacson has a doorbell name: “Ping.”

“There are millions of them”, gasped Sutherland. Such names are frequently used in doorbell combinations like: Dingdong; and Bingbing. Others graduate into “repeating names” like: Len-Len, Let-Let; Mai-mai or Petpet.

“How wonderful to come from a country where imagination and exoticism rule,” Sutherland says. “How boring to come from a country, like the U.K., full of people like John Smith.”

“The President’s full Christian name is Benigno Simeon Cojuangco Aquino,” McGeown weighed in. “(These) names are Spanish, Hebrew and Chinese. His nickname, Noynoy, is the only part that is truly Filipino.”

Former president Joseph Estrada is commonly known as “Erap.” When spelt backwards, Erap becomes “Pare.” That means mate in Aussie or buddy in Tagalog.

“No one questions the integrity of Joker Arroyo, one of the country's most respected senators (who has since retired),” McGeown wrote. “That is his real first name. Apparently he got it because of his father's fondness for playing cards. Joker's brother is called Jack.

Sutherland points to another category: the “randomly-inserted letter “H” names. “It results in creations like: Lhenn, Ghemma, Jhimmy or Jhun (Jhun2?). I think it is designed to give a touch of class to an otherwise only averagely weird name.”

Then, we have the tendency to cluster names for children, like Jun, Joy, Joyce, Luzviminda splices Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. And Jejomar, of course, is not only the vice-president; the name melds Jesus, Joseph and Mary. “They look great painted on the trunk of the cab you hail.”

Why those unique names?" McGeown asked Filipino friends. Soon a heated debate began. “They agreed that, to outsiders at least, it all might sound a bit strange.” The Philippines is a melting pot of different cultures.

The Spanish, in a 1849 decree, mandated everyone had to have a surname. That resulted in tens of thousands of newly christened Marias and Joses.

So even today, most surnames are Spanish. “With the Americans came names like Butch, Buffy and Junior – and the propensity to shorten everything if at all possible.

The large Filipino-Chinese community here is caught up in this national name game. “Their surnames are often a form of Anglicised Chinese. But the Philippine penchant for fun shines through.”

Tsinoys apply imagination and humor in the naming process. Sutherland’s favorites include: Bach Johann Sebastian, Edgar Allan Pe, and Van Go.

When they become U.S. citizens, some Filipinos opt to “Americanize” their names. What happens then?

Side-splitting mayhem, says a tongue-in-cheek Internet feature. Gregorio Talahib, for example, becomes who else? George Bush! That’s who. Tomas Cruz is recycled as Tom Cruise, while Remigio Batungbacal becomes Remington Steel. But Maria Pascua prefers Mary Christmas.

The Internet feature is captioned: “Filipino Names = U.S. Citizens.” It asserts the pre-September 11 Immigration and Naturalization Service “released the list of names of Filipinos, who changed their names, when they became naturalized U.S. citizens.”

The U.S. too, is full of John Smiths. But that does not deter the mint-new Pinoy Americans. Thus, Juanito Lakarin took the name of Johnny Walker, while Esteban Magtaka picked Stevie Wonder. Leon Mangubat flicked through the sports pages and chose Tiger Woods Victoria Malihim preferred to be literal; she picked Victoria Secret

“Pinoy is what Filipinos call each other, a term of endearment,” author Gilda Cordero Fernando writes. “You’re Pinoy from Pilipino just like you’re tisoy from mestizo or chinoy from chino.

“It’s a nickname just as Minoy is from Maximo, Tinay from Florentina and Kikay from Francisca. But now they’re Maxi and Ben and Tintin and Cheska.”

So, no one raises an eyebrow that Boxer Manny Paqaio named his two girls Queen Elizabeth and Princess. Ay, lintik!

The pursuit of eloquence

By Fr. ROY CIMAGALA, roycimagala@gmail.com
January 8, 2014

Everyone, I suppose, wants to be eloquent, that is, forceful and persuasive in his conversations, dialogues, speeches. Especially to those engaged in public speaking and publicity work, eloquence is the apple of their eye, their jewel of the crown.

Thus, politicians, media men, advertisers and all kinds of public communicators do all to sharpen their skills in that department. They check the quality of their voice, its pitch, tone and volume. All of these should be appealing to the public. The voice should be neither too strident nor too dragging. Better if it is clear, smooth and warm.

Then they employ all sorts of devices, tricks and gimmicks to enhance their expressiveness. Thus, they are fans of similes and metaphors, anecdotes, jokes, the popular expressions and slogans, buzz words and memes of the moment, and other literary sparklers. They are constantly minting new words and idiomatic expressions.

Of course, they also check their appearance and image. They are willing to go through complicated make-ups and make-overs just to achieve their desired persona or their preferred avatar.

Some people are not even averse to using underhanded means, like bombast, spins and hype, exaggerations and hyperboles to prop up their eloquence. This is not to mention many other factors, both licit and illicit, that also go into their pursuit of eloquence.

There can be pressures from outside, for example, from different sources – ideological, financial, commercial, political, etc., that are systematically pushing their partisan views, biases and prejudices.

We need to be aware of these forces that are at play in our public exchanges and know how to treat them properly. Of course, they are not altogether bad. They will always have some good, truth and beauty, otherwise they will not prosper. But they need to be examined with a fine-toothed comb to see what is fair and unfair, safe and dangerous in them.

We need to understand that eloquence is first of all a matter of having a vital union with God, the source of all that is true, good and beautiful. Without this, all claims of eloquence would be false and deceptive.

Thus, eloquence requires a great effort to be with God always, making him the beginning and end of our discourses, the motive and objective. This requirement is not at all inhuman and unnatural, but rather what is fundamentally proper to us, given our nature and dignity as persons and children of God. It may be hard, but it is practicable.

Since eloquence is a question of being persuasive, we have to understand that the first person we have to persuade is our own selves. We need to be persuaded that we need God first of all. Only then can we feel confident that we can persuade others about God and about anything else in life.

Eloquence should not just be a play of persuasion and expressiveness about worldly and temporal concerns, no matter how valid they are. Its first objective is the acceptance of God as our Creator, Father and Provider for everything. The ultimate objective of eloquence is to relate everything to God. This is the big challenge for us who seek eloquence.

So we have to be most wary of the glib talkers who only speak about politics or business or some worldly affair we have. Without a clear grounding on God, their words can only be shallow and biased, if not insincere and deceitful, even if they are heavily supported by facts and data and seasoned with all literary and rhetorical devices.

Real eloquence will always lead people to God, giving them true wisdom. It is not meant to lead people to mere ideologies or to some interest groups exclusively. It will always lead people to God, and because of that, it will also lead people to all others, in spite of one’s particular position that can be different or even in conflict with that of the others.

Real eloquence avoids contention and envying. It is not driven by bitter zeal. It does not arouse sensual or merely worldly reactions to issues. We have to be wary of speakers who are wont to stir intrigues and provoke controversies, restricting our discourses at the purely mundane level.

Real eloquence can use all the devices and gimmicks that are licit and moral, but as St. James said, it would embody a heavenly wisdom expressed in meekness and goodness.

That wisdom-infused eloquence would be “chaste, then peaceable, modest, easy to be persuaded, consenting to the good, full of mercy and good works, without judging, without dissimulation.” (3,16)

Who are we really?

By Fr. ROY CIMAGALA, roycimagala@gmail.com
December 12, 2013

"The communists tend to see man simply as a material creature, subject only to social, economic, historical, political forces."

A story is said about Alexander the Great who astounded a beggar who only asked for some alms but instead was given the government of five cities. When the beggar expressed his consternation, Alexander just said: “You asked like the man you are. I give like the man I am.”

Well, that’s how the cookie crumbles in this life. Whatever we do or say is determined by the way we are. We understand, see and react to things according to the kind of person we are.

As some Latin adages would have it, “Operare sequitur esse” (our deeds are determined by our being), or “Quidquid recipitur ad modum recipientis recipitur” (Whatever is received is received according to the manner of the receiver).

The guests in a wedding give gifts to the newly-weds in accordance to their station in life. The millionaire may give a car or a house, while an ordinary housewife may give a set of chinaware. It can happen, though, that the latter gives it more wholeheartedly than the former.

When you just have a little money, you usually give a modest tip to the barber or the waiter. But when you have a thick wallet, you tend to give away a lot more.

Different people react to issues or tackle problems according to the way they are. The intellectual sees things differently from the way a farmer sees them. Same with how believers and unbelievers approach challenges.

This is a law of life that somehow sheds light on the importance and the need of truly enriching our identity, our humanity, because everything else in our life would depend on who we really are.

I suppose we can readily see that we are much more than just a biological creature, or a socio-cultural product, or a political animal or economic phenomenon. For sure, these aspects also go into our identity, but there must still be some deeper underlying basis that holds these aspects together.

Some ideologies have put forward their conception of our nature. The communists tend to see man simply as a material creature, subject only to social, economic, historical, political forces. There is nothing beyond our death.

Atheists and agnostics tend to limit us only to our temporal and earthly dimensions. Hardly anything spiritual and supernatural is considered. In fact, they are averse to such considerations. They claim there is no God, or that God’s existence is doubtful, and therefore we hardly have any relation with God.

We need to enrich our identity because our humanity is not a static matter determined solely by genes or legal status or some social and cultural criteria. Our identity is a dynamic affair that ultimately depends on who we believe we are.

The quest to know our real identity and to bring our humanity to its fullness cannot help but touch on our core beliefs. It has to enter into the question of whether we are created, and if we are created, then how we are related to our Creator. Is it a relation between a person and a thing, or between a person and another person?

The Christian faith tells us a wholistic vision of our humanity, one that covers not only the temporal and earthly, but also the eternal and supernatural. It gives meaning not only to the good events we have like our joys and successes, but also the bad ones like our sufferings and defeats.

The Christian faith tells us that we are persons, not things, since we have intelligence and will. We can know and love. We can enter into a relationship and are conscious of it. More than that, we are expected to keep and strengthen that relationship.

This is a very crucial point to be understood by us – in fact, by all of us as much as possible. Sad to say, we often are remiss of this duty to keep and deepen this relationship. We just let ourselves be led by some feeling or changing perceptions. We seldom go to the root of our identity.

Our Christian faith tells us that not only are we persons, created in the image and likeness of God. We are children of God who with grace are expected to participate intimately in the very life of God. We have been enabled for this dignity, and this potential is made actual by God’s grace and our correspondence to it.

This is the truth of our faith that needs to be processed thoroughly and assimilated deeply so we don’t get lost in the confusing ways of our earthly life.

Killing the ideals of dissent and free speech - two more killed, one wounded in attacks

A Statement from the Asian Human Rights Commission
December 12, 2013

'License' to torture, kill and to silence the oppressed

On December 9, the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has expressed its deep concern over the renewed targeted attacks of journalists and activists. In the space of one week, five journalists and activists, known critics against corruption, wrong doings of local politicians, extrajudicial killings, and so on, have been killed. These killings were done in broad daylight and in crowded places displaying a blatant disregard for the rule of law and most definitely to send a message to the public - such dissent will not be tolerated!

The AHRC has now learnt of two more persons being killed and another wounded. Those killed were: a broadcast journalist critical of local politics and a poor and ordinary villager trying to protect his son and their home from being demolished by armed policemen. The one wounded was another broadcast journalist. The names and reasons for why they were attacked are as follows:

On December 4, Nexon Togao, a poor and ordinary villager, was killed when policemen shot at him as he was trying to save his son who fainted from inhaling tear gas. He was struck in a kidney and the groin.

Nexon and other villagers were trying to prevent the demolition of their homes. A court sheriff and a demolition team, including policemen who were carrying loaded weapons arrived unannounced in Lugait, Misamis Oriental, to demolish the homes of the informal settlers. The police also allegedly hog-tied several women protestors at the height of the scuffle.

In separate incidents, a broadcast journalist was killed and another was also wounded in shootings. On December 10, Jonavin "Jhey-R" Villalba, (43), a reporter of radio station dyOK Aksyon Radyo in Iloilo, survived an attempt on his life. But on December 11, Rogelio "Tata" Butalid of Radyo Natin, was killed in front his radio station in Tagum City. Rogelio received threats to his life before he was murdered.

These renewed attacks, once again, clearly demonstrates the absence of adequate and effective protection from state agents, and persons or groups working for them. The government expresses its condolences to the victim's families and 'demonstrates' its 'political will' to ensure justice, but beyond that nothing happens. The perpetrators still kill, in broad daylight without fear of punishment; and their victims, still fear for their lives without any sort of protection.

Clearly, there is a pattern of the systematic, widespread and routine inability of the government to protect persons whose lives are threatened; as in the case of Rogelio and Jonavin. The government appears to be doing nothing to prevent the loss of lives and use of excessive force on poor villagers defending their dwellings, like in the case of Nexon and others. The government's, present and its past administration, are fully aware of this trend. However, why it has done nothing to halt these targeted attacks remains the question. If the government is and was in control of this situation, they must be asked: what is wrong and what went wrong?

While we express our concern on the lack of, if not the absence of punishment, or any sort of remedy for the victims and their families, we are more deeply concerned that the space to express dissent and to assert one's fundamental rights and one's freedom to express his opinion on matters of public interest, is becoming narrower with the passing of each day.

The AHRC is of the opinion that, in addition to killings people, to kill persons and to systematically target those embodying the ideals of dissent are causing far deeper damage to Filipino society. With these killings the attackers are not only killing the physical bodies of their victims but also the ideals they hold dear more than their own lives. These continued attacks and the government's inability to protect them perpetuates this.

Furthermore, we strongly urged the government of the Philippines and its justice institutions, the public and those who still value the ideals of those who were killed and those who continue to assert and fight at the risk of their lives for this ideal, to speak out in condemning these targeted attacks. In a society where killing people in broad daylight has become commonplace it must be realised that 'bodies' may inevitably die, but the ideals they embody must and will continue to live.

Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela – AHRC salutes a great man, embraces his Legacy

A Statement from the Asian Human Rights Commission
December 6, 2013

The Asian Human Rights Commission joins all people across the world to salute Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela of South Africa, who passed away at the age of 95 yesterday.

In the person of Nelson Mandela the world can proudly celebrate a towering personality, whose life has universal relevance for all times to come. His life and struggles have always focused on the greatest of ideals that any human being could aspire to: equality, freedom, dignity, truth, and – above all – love for all. And all of these qualities are centered in the greatest of the ideals of human rights.

In his life achievements he has justly acquired the honor of being a role model for every child born on this earth, irrespective of race, gender, colour, ethnicity or any other factor.

Nelson Mandela lived in extremely troubled times. Born a black, in apartheid South Africa, he knew very well the bitterness of being discriminated against. This profound knowledge of 'the humanity of the oppressed creature' guided him to become a relentless and uncompromising freedom fighter who remained loyal and steadfast to his fellow sufferers and, at the same time, made him a universal figure. Equipped with this knowledge, born from suffering, he takes his place amongst the other greats of this world, such as Frederick Douglass of the United States and Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar of India. Together with them, Mandela will remain an inspiration for all oppressed peoples struggling for their freedom and will retain a dignified place in the fabric of their societies.

Nelson Mandela gives meaning to the words 'ideal political prisoner'. The twenty-seven years of his imprisonment have now reached a state of universality, gifting all who live under oppressive political regimes a reminder of the value of making sacrifices to end their oppression, to achieve freedom.

Nelson Mandela is also an icon of faithfulness and truth. This was aptly demonstrated when he – even after achieving the status of a great and influential global political leader – was able to humbly admit to his son's death due to HIV/Aids, and continued work towards the prevention of Aids globally.

All the issues on which Mandela fought hard need further fight and struggle, for which his life will ever remain an inspiration. The defeat of apartheid has not turned South Africa into a paradise. The country is caught in global contradictions of harsh economic and political consequence. The tyranny of global economic bondage is a threat that humanity as a whole – white black, and brown, male and female – must face. Nelson Mandela was profoundly aware of this global phenomenon, and to his admirers in the more developed countries his message would be to face this global challenge which generates misery for the greater part of humanity.

Nelson Mandela would certainly say that – in order to bear the fruits of the struggles that he shared with freedom loving people across the earth – major changes need to be ushered in for a more just and a fair distribution of resources in the world. Facing this mammoth challenge is the only way forward, to continue Nelson Mandela's legacy and walk the path he would wish for his fellow beings.

Nelson Mandela, the uncompromising freedom fighter, was also a man capable of forgiving and reconciling with his opponents. The manner in which the victory over apartheid was used to unify a country and bring together people of all walks of life is another of his great legacies. In the art of reconciliation, the lessons he has left for us will remain an inspiration for all humanity, for all times.

We salute a great man, and we embrace his great legacy.

Truth objective and subjective

By Fr. ROY CIMAGALA, roycimagala@gmail.com
October 27, 2013

WE have to be clear about what is to be objective and what is also to be subjective. Very often, if not almost invariably, we contrast the two, as if to be objective is the very antithesis of being subjective. That is to say, that they cannot be together.

This concern is important to us, since out of a good understanding between the two would we know how to be truthful and fair. Such good grasp of the two concepts would help us to engage soundly in our dialogues and conversations in the different levels of our life that are growing and multiplying by the day.

To be sure, there is good reason to put the two notions in contrast. And that reason is when we mean by objective, being in the truth or being fair, and by subjective, being so opinionated as to miss the truth or to be unfair.

But that situation is more the exception than the rule, since the basic reality is that we cannot be objective unless we are subjective also. The objectivity of a certain truth or fact will always require a subject, who is a person who thinks, judges, reasons out and makes conclusions.

In other words, the objectivity of the truth cannot help but be apprehended by the subjectivity of the thinking, judging and reasoning person. There is need to establish an organic link between objectivity and subjectivity in relation to truth, whether we are looking for it, or desiring to establish it, or wishing to develop it, etc.

This cannot be avoided, and we should be ready to tackle the challenge and to undertake the task, since this proper connection between objectivity and subjectivity does not come to us automatically. It has to be worked out.

The Thomistic definition of truth as the correspondence of a thing to the intellect masks a lot of considerations that need to be uncovered. That definition is so generic that it fails to tell us much about what kind of thing is involved, whether it is merely a material thing or a non-tangible or spiritual or even moral thing, etc.

When we speak of a material thing or of a fact or data, objectivity should not be difficult to establish. It’s when we speak of non-tangible or spiritual or moral things that it becomes unavoidable that the question of objectivity becomes tricky.

To be sure, truth is not simply about material things or facts and data. Truth goes far beyond a mere statement of fact or data, or a simple pointing of a physical object. One can say, “I don’t have any whisky,” which may be true as a fact, but such statement does not capture the whole truth. There are a lot more of considerations behind that fact.

Truth should therefore not be limited to a simple statement of facts. The objectivity of a fact as truth should go hand in hand with the subjectivity proper to it.

While it’s right that for purposes of legality and other social considerations that govern more our external behavior than probing into our internal motives, we remain in the level of facts, it would be wrong to nail the whole concept of truth to its legal or social dimension alone. It has to look into the motives and goals involved.

The motives and objectives that comprise the subjectivity of the truth should be those proper to the truth itself. And these motives and objectives cannot be none other than love for God and others, which is what truth is all about. Truth has to go with charity, otherwise it would not be truth in the strictest sense.

It’s charity that establishes the proper connection between the objectivity and the subjectivity of truth. This is how we should understand truth, and its derivatives – how we should be truthful, sincere, candid, etc.

It’s charity that makes truth really lovable, a principle that fosters unity and harmony in the different levels and aspects of our life in spite of our differences of views and position on certain issues.

The absence of charity with respect to truth, as when we just mention facts and data, would make our assertions prone to be divisive and destructive, sowing discord and contentions everywhere.

We have a lot of clarifying to do in this area and, hopefully, of building up the appropriate structures that would nurture this understanding of truth. Obviously, the task is first of all a personal affair before it ramifies into our social and cultural dimensions. It should be done freely, without forcing anyone.

Truth should be both objective and subjective.

Getting back on our feet

By Fr. ROY CIMAGALA, roycimagala@gmail.com
October 17, 2013

WE have been floored by a 7.2 magnitude earthquake. The number of casualties is increasing, and the damage has been extensive in terms of properties and infrastructure.

Houses and buildings have fallen. Landslides have blocked roads, bridges destroyed, isolating towns. But it’s most heartbreaking to see churches collapse or practically ruined. That sight alone touches right deep in people’s soul like no other.

Gone, for now, are those precious treasures that represent our people’s journey of faith and piety through the centuries. Their mere presence, even as we just happen to pass them by, never fails to evoke a certain sense of our identity.

We may not have been a very good member of the Church or one who is consistently faithful to it, but somehow we feel we belong to it, just as any child continues to belong to a family whether he behaves well or not. We are always welcome to enter it. It does not make easy, uncharitable distinctions.

Some of us are asking why these churches have to go the way they did during the temblor. Well, God has his ways, his very mysterious ways. And if we continue to have faith, we know that everything happens for a good reason. “Omnia in bonum,” as they say.

We have to reinforce our belief that God is conveying a beautiful message to us through their disappearance. Obviously we have to try to decipher and fathom it. We can always try.

We should not just focus on the purifying or penalizing aspect of their disappearance, destruction or damage, though that alone holds a good basis. For one, we have often taken them for granted, allowing them to drift to deterioration.

Very often, when I visited many of these old churches, I got the impression that they were treated like aging great-grandmothers who were more of a bother than a useful constituent. They seem to be maintained only as a religious prop or cultural ornament. Their sacramentality as our home with God is practically lost.

This is not to mention that in our life of piety, many things have gone sour. We like to strut our religiosity, yet even in the externals alone, many holes and inconsistencies can be seen. If we are not lax, our most prevalent predicament, then we go to the other extreme of being too fastidious as to be rigid and superstitious.

But I’m sure there is a lot more of positive reasons why these beautiful churches are gone for now. I like to believe that God is challenging us to rebuild our spiritual life so we can rebuild our churches, making them more beautiful, stronger and more adapted to current and foreseeable situations and challenges.

God is asking us to get our act together in both our own personal and collective life. We need to develop a strong and functioning interior life of love of God, and a vibrant concern for the others in all aspects of life, both material and spiritual, both mundane and sacred.

We have to break loose from our complacency in our relation with God and others, and really enter into a most meaningful engagement with him and everybody else.

We need to mature in our faith, after so many centuries already of Christian life. We need to man up so as to grapple with the real issues of our life and not get entangled with the non-essentials, though they too need to be duly attended to and related to what is truly important.

I know the transition is not easy. But it can be facilitated if we try our best to put our mind and heart, plus all our resources, into the task of rebuilding simultaneously our spiritual life and our churches. This can be done. This is not a quixotic dream.

We need to get back on our feet and move on with a revitalized and purified sense of purpose in life. We have to rise from the ruins, counting on God’s grace and our all-out effort.

Christ has reassured us that we can resurrect not only on the last day, but also on any day as long as make the necessary changes in our life. His promise of a new creation is effective as often as we decide to return to him and to take him and his beautiful will for us seriously.

◄◄home I next►►