THE LAST SAMURAI [film review]

        You were something before you were a soldier. You were a boy who was sad to see the leaves fall and the trees die.
        Like those trees, we are all dying. The future is an illusion, our plans are an illusion, our fears an illusion. We live life in every breath. Eat, drink, fuck. Now.
        Every cup of tea. Every word we write... Every blossom we hold. Every life we take.
        Life in every breath. That is bushido. The way of the samura

(The words of Kasumoto to Nathan Algren)

         The samurai (or bushi) were the members of the military class, the Japanese warriors. Samurai used a variety of weapons, but their most famous weapon and their symbol was the sword. Samurai were to lead their lives according to the ethic code of bushido ("the way of the warrior"). Bushido stressed concepts such as loyalty to one's master, self discipline and respectful, ethical behavior. After a defeat, some samurai chose to commit ritual suicide (seppuku) rather than being captured or dying in a shameful defeat.

         We may disagree with the practice of committing ritual suicide. Our disagreement might be based on the precept that human life is sacred. But for the warrior (in Japan), choosing to die by killing oneself is an honor. It is their way of how to live their lives. All members of their community already understood such practice Thus they are no longer alarmed when they see a soldier committing ritual suicide. Instead, they will have a very high regard to that person. This could be seen in the movie at the end. When Katsumoto committed the ritual suicide, almost all the soldiers who fought against his group lay prostrate to honor him may be due to his courageous act. Therefore, this attitude is held by almost all in Japan at that time no matter what was the affiliation of the individual. This could be used as an example of culture as praxis.

          Another point of interest is the statement of the Emperor during the last part of the movie.

           “And now we are awake. We have railroads and cannon and Western clothing. But we cannot forget who we are. Or where we come from.”

           The Emperor here might be alluding to the influences of the Western cultural influences that became so visible in its external manifestations such as the way of dressing, transportation, infrastructures, etc. If we see culture as civilization, Japan as projected in the movie has changed or somehow developed into something apart from their traditional way of living. But the people could still remember their origin. Why did they were not able to preserve some elements of the past? Was it due to their weakness to maintain their heritage or was it because the outsider has more power to persuade them to adapt to the foreign influence?

           In the movie, there were people who would have tried to preserve their heritage, but most of their compatriots favored the modern way. Thus, there was a clash of two imperial armies who fought against each other. Perhaps this could be a good imagery to illustrate an encounter between two different cultures. In the battle, the group armed with high-powered ammunitions would surely win. This means that who has the greater power has the strongest possibility of conquering the other. But on the other hand we must also consider the question of who is more dignified. Kasumoto, of course, was defeated but he died honored by his opponents.

             Reflecting upon this particular scene, I realized that in our present time in which our traditional practices are usually supplanted by a modern or foreign culture we still have the chance to safeguard our values. If we are strong enough to stand on our treasured ideals, I think we could not be overcome by the habits that tend to shrink our moral stance. But if we just remain reluctant and indecisive, our good values will just become history and will no longer be found in the present. For example, the advent of modernization and urbanization has gradually eroded our sense of community. This emerging culture as we can observe is going far in contrast with our traditional rural societies where we know each other by name and one is truly concerned for the welfare of another. Are the people in the cities especially those in subdivisions willing to preserve such interconnectedness despite the condition of city life?

            Cultural influence does not only happen by physical force. There are also instances that a certain social group or an individual would adapt other cultures because the values are convincing and worth emulating. Another reason could be the realization or deeper understanding of a strange culture through concrete experiential contact. This could be demonstrated by the convergence of the paths of the two warriors, Algren and Katsumoto.

           Katsumoto captures Algren after the battle. He wants to study his new opponent, to understand whom he's fighting. Badly wounded, Algren spends few months in Katsumoto's mountain village where he learns about Japanese culture and the ways of the samurai. It is obvious that Algren's loyalties eventually become torn between the noble samurai he has grown to respect and the fellows who hired him. Finally, Algren sided with Kasumoto.

            Algren’s stay at Kasumoto’s mountain village could be an ideal model of inculturation process. I find no imposition of one’s culture here but just the desire to understand profoundly the other. The route taken is to journey with the other not in a manner that is imposing and coercive.

           If we have to use such principles of accompanying and understanding the other in the missionary efforts there would be a strong possibility that the faith we evangelize will be deeply imbedded in the hearts of the people. It might also be a matter of diplomacy but it would be gradual. However, in the turn of events persons will value their faith as their own not as an imposition from a foreign power.

News Reflection

IBP backs Lozada, urges public to join Friday protest[1]

I got this news from the official website of the Philippine Daily Inquirer and let me quote this in full as follows:

MANILA, Philippines -- The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) voiced support for Rodolfo Noel Lozada Jr., key witness in the Senate inquiry into the scandal-tainted national broadband network (NBN) deal, and urged people to join street protests scheduled Friday to denounce rampant corruption in the government.

IBP president Feliciano Bautista, in a press conference Wednesday morning, said: “We are greatly appalled and concerned by the revelations made by [Chinese firm] ZTE [Corp.]-NBN deal witness Rodolfo ‘Jun’ Lozada, Jr. during the Senate investigation.”

“We condemn and oppose all kinds of corruption. There could be no ‘moderation of greed,’” he said.

Lozada told the Senate that close allies of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo demanded kickbacks from the project. He also claimed that former Commission on Elections chairman Benjamin Abalos Sr., who allegedly brokered the deal between the government and ZTE Corp., threatened to kill him.

“We would like to join the parliament of the streets and denounce the violations of the Constitution and the law,” Bautista said.

He added the IBP is ready to help Lozada and to extend legal assistance to all those who might be prosecuted for joining the Friday protest.

Bautista also said the IBP will “take immediate action” on complaints against lawyers who may have violated their oath and ethics in connection with the Senate investigation into the $329-million deal, which was scrapped following allegations of kickbacks and bribery.

While he declined to name lawyers who might face sanctions, Bautista said a lawyer who forces someone to sign documents violates the profession’s Code of Ethics.

In his testimony to the Senate, Lozada claimed lawyer Antonio Bautista made him sign a letter requesting police protection. The lawyer denied Lozada’s claim. The IBP president said as of now no complaint has been filed against Bautista yet.

***

Reflection:

Let me begin my reflection by going directly to the main point of the news. The IBP through its president invited the public to join the parliament of the streets to condemn corruption. This form of protest is a non-violent activity to call the attention of our government leaders to take action to solve our present political crisis. But would the concerned parties heed to the groaning of the people?

Ever since when I was a child I have been hearing news of alleged graft and corruption in our government. Some concerned Filipinos and cause-oriented groups go to the streets to denounce government malpractices. These things already happened during the time of Marcos, Cory, Ramos, Erap and is still happening today. But has this country ever changed? Have we ever changed? As a Filipino citizen, what is my contribution or how did I contribute to this situation?

The Catholic Bishop’s Conference of the Philippines, in response to our present crisis, has published a statement on January 27, 2008. A part of this statement says:

If in your minds, corruption—the worst offender against our common good—is rampant today, sparing no level of social and political life, and most glaringly and reportedly so in the various corridors of power, we have to confess that corruption is in truth our greatest shame as a people. But if it goes on unhindered, it is because…we all too often condone it as part of the perquisites of power and public office.

If Jesus were present today, what would be his attitude towards these things? I could not find an explicit proclamation of Jesus denouncing graft and corruption in the government. But contemplating the face of Jesus in the Bible, I see his attitude towards sin and the sinner in this passage:

Once again he went out along the sea. All the crowd came to him and he taught them. As he passed by, he saw Levi, son of Alphaeus, sitting at the customs post. He said to him, "Follow me." And he got up and followed him. While he was at table in his house, many tax collectors and sinners sat with Jesus and his disciples; for there were many who followed him. Some scribes who were Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors and said to his disciples, "Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?" Jesus heard this and said to them (that), "Those who are well do not need a physician, but the sick do. I did not come to call the righteous but sinners" (Mark 2:13-17).

Although in the gospel Jesus dined with tax collectors and sinners, he did not consented with fraud. Instead he invited Levi to follow him. If we have to follow the example of Jesus, perhaps we should not be throwing stones at the corrupt politicians. We have to befriend them yet we should not be in agreement with graft and corrupt practices. As Christians we have to shed light to our government officials and echo Jesus’ invitation to follow in his ways. Our relationship with our government leaders and politicians ought to be life-changing and life-giving.

If we have to go to the streets to hold rallies and demonstrations we need to purify our motivations first. We have to bear in mind that we stand to denounce and condemn the evils of corruption but we still have to love the persons involved. Thus, government, civic, and religious leaders, the ordinary citizens, each one of us needs a conversion of heart. Our nation needs a profound reform and conversion and the time to begin is now. Now is the time for a spiritual combat against the enemy within, our pride and greed, our lust for power and wealth.[2]

---

[1] [By Kristine L. Alave, Philippine Daily Inquirer, First Posted 14:29:00 02/13/2008] http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view/20080213-118586/IBP-backs-Lozada-urges-public-to-join-Friday-protest (accessed: Feb 13, 2008)

[2] CBCP Statement, January 27, 2008.

Am I intrinsically prone to evil or completely free to do good and avoid evil?

It is good to think that I am completely free to do good and avoid evil. Thus I hold full responsibility to everything I did. If ever I would make a mistake, it would be due to my own neglect to use my freedom to do good.

But I asked myself, do I possess this freedom completely? Why is it that there were times when I wanted to choose the good I rather did the opposite. For example, during that time when the final exam was yet to come I planned to study ahead so that I would not be preparing for the exam hastily. But there were things that somehow distracted me. I was somehow tempted to postpone studies in favor of reading other materials not related to the subjects I have taken. There were also times when I chose to go with my classmates and put aside studies at later time. It was really awful to discover only later that I have wasted my time.

Another example is the experience of making resolutions. Well, making resolutions is seldom now that I have realized it would just fail. But who do not want to have a good life? So, as much as I could, I want to attain that fullness of life. This could be the main reason of taking resolve once a fault is discovered. But mistakes just keep on repeating or they just come in another forms. Looking back to these mistakes, there are circumstances that made them succeed. We were able to tackle more of these during the SPFY. The reasons of committing mistakes might be past experiences, the surrounding community, the subconscious, or just the lack of strength to resist temptation.

Thus, I see myself as prone to evil. I think, I myself if just left alone on my own would not be able to resist temptation. I want someone to give me the strength and courage to oppose evil. This weakness makes me humble before God. Because of my weakness I should have to cling to Him more constantly; only in Him and through Him that I could find strength against evil.

TR 4

Experience

Kaniadtong miaging Sabado, Pebrero 9, 2008 tungod kay bisperas man sa pista sa Parokya mi-serve ‘mi sa misa. Unya, pagkahuman sa misa ug sa wala pa sugdi ang prosesyon nahimamat nako ang usa ka membro sa BEC selda, si Ate Tessie. Tungod kay pista man lagi mi-greet ko niya og happy fiesta. Malipayon usab siyang mitubag ug unya misugilon siya nga nagpadayon sila sa ilang makalipang matag biernes. Miingon siya nga si Nanay Gloria ang miuban nila sanglit bag-o pa man lang silang nagkapundok o na-organize. Nalipay ko sa maong balita tungod kay sa una pa nakong pagbisita didto ug pag-awhag nila nga magporma og BEC diyutay ra gyud ang makahigayon sa pagtambong. Adlaw man gud kadtong Sabado ug daghan kanila ang may nagkalainlain nga kakulian.

Social Analysis

Ngano kahang ang sitwasyon man sa ilang BEC ang gisugilon dayon ni Ate Tessie sa among panagkita? Tungod ba kaha kay ako ang nag-follow-up didto o gusto lang gyud niyang mahibalo ko sa ilang kalambo-an? Bisan unsa pa man ang iyang rason akong nakita ang iyang concern sa ilang gamayng katilingban. Tingali gusto niyang madasig ang iyang mga kauban sa pagsuporta sa ilang pundok. Nagkinahanglan pa gyud tingali sila og mo-agak nila, salamat na lang kay nagpadayon pag-uban nila si Nanay Gloria, ang lider sa ilang silingang selda.

Theological Reflection

Sa pagkatinuod nalipay ko sa maong balita. Morag duna na man gud akoy kadugtungan ngadto nila mao nga mobati usab ko kun unsa ang ilang dangatan. Apan dili na gyud ko maka-uban sa ilang makalipang sanglit sa lain man kining adlaw nila gihimo. Hinuon ako man silang gi-apil sa akong pag-ampo. Ug naka-amgo ko nga dili lang gyud diay kutob sa atong kaugalingong paningkamot ang tanan. Matod pa sa Ikaduhang Consilio Plenario sa Pilipinas, ang Espiritu Santo mao gyud ang maga-una, maga-uban ug magpabunga sa misyon sa Simbahan (PCP II, 214). Mao nga sa bisan unsa man nga kalambo-an diha sa mga paningkamot sa pagsangyaw ug pagpalambo sa Simbahan angayan lang nga timan-an sa kanunay ang kalabutan sa Espiritu Santo nga modasig natong tanan sa pagpadayon.

Pastoral Action

Bisan dili na ako makahigayon sa pag-apil sa ilang makalipang, maayo usab tingali nga ako silang duawon sa ilahang panimalay aron pagpangumusta. Kondili man gani kini mahimo pwede sab nga himamaton ko sila didto sa simbahan human sa misa sa Domingo.

A Reflection on John 7:37-39

Back in our home about ten years ago, we had the problem of the lack of water. We had to buy water from dealers who sold it at P5.00 per container. Our community is somehow used to this situation. But we just couldn’t do something to remind our local government to solve this problem by means of providing water system. What was ironic then was the news that some of our water resources would be sold to Cebu. Thus, some concerned citizens aired their objections during the public hearing.

This story is a very clear sign how essential water is. Thus, it is so necessary to conserve water. By this I remember a small add in the paper that says “water is life, save it.” There is real connection between water and life. And water is a symbol of life.

Today, we experience the increase of the market of bottled water. People need safe drinking water and the access to this water is becoming more and more commercialized. Thus, those who couldn’t afford the price would just have to settle down to what the government can provide, an inexpensive water from the tap.

Amidst all of these wants for a safe drinking water, could we still hear Jesus saying: “Come to me and drink.” But we may ask is this the water that we need today? Would the scarcity or the high cost of safe drinking water today urges us to seek for the life-giving and eternal source of water? Perhaps one may object that I am talking here of two different aspects of life, the physical and the spiritual. But no matter how different they would seem, they are still part the totality of our persons.

If we experience the scarcity of drinking water, are we not also experiencing the scarcity of life-giving structures in our society? If we seek for an adequate water sources, should we not also seek for the source of living water, Jesus Christ?

Our society could be compared to a drying land in which water is so insufficient. People are thirsting not just for drinking water. But our society is thirsting for justice, peace, solidarity, honesty, good governance, and more. To whom should we turn to if not to Jesus? Jesus invites us to come to him and drink. Now is the time to turn to Jesus. We have to let our society be satiated with living water. We have to let Jesus saturate in all sectors of our society so that our seemingly dying world may come back to life.

An Analysis of Water in John 7:37-39

Delimitation

The situational circumstance of the passage in John 7:37-39 is the Feast of Tabernacles. At the beginning of chapter 17 of this Gospel the Feast was about to start, while at verse 37 it was already the last day of the celebration. Verse 37 could be considered as a beginning of a pericope since it introduces another moment of time. Another reason could be the topic or subject matter. Between verses 36 and 37 we could find a shift in the idea. Verse 36 and a few prior verses tell about Jesus’ saying, “You will look for me and not find [me] and where I am you cannot come.” We find here a shift since verses 27-39 deal with the living water. After verse 39 and following the matter would be about the question of the Messiah’s origin, hence another shift in idea.

John 7:37-39 talks about a single theme which could be treated separately from the preceding and following verses. The previous segment is about the attempt to arrest Jesus while the one that follows after the pericope we are dealing with has another topic. Although the verses that follow could be deemed as a continuation, the thought moved to the question of the origin of the Messiah. Thus, the passage in John 7:37-39 could still be extracted from its immediate gospel account and be considered as one periscope.

Verse 37 could be regarded as the introductory part of the pericope. It gives the setting and then expresses a Jesus’ saying: “Let anyone come to me and drink.” Verse 38 is a quotation from scriptures connected with the saying. An explanation then follows at verse 39 which says that the scripture text quoted refers to the Spirit.

Literary genre

This pericope could be understood as one of Jesus’ sayings particularly a Christological saying. What could have prompted for this saying? Or what could have led to the declaration of this saying? As we have already knew the occasion is the Feast of Tabernacles which lasts for eight days. A ritual that we could find to establish a connection with the ‘saying’ is the daily water libation.[1]

To whom the Gospel is addressed

The hint that could give us a slight description of the addressees of this text is verse 39. This is the author or editor’s explanation of the preceding statement. If the addressees were too familiar with the meaning of the statement, there could be no use of putting explanation. Thus, it is probable that the audience of this gospel were not familiar with the scriptures or they were non-Jews. Another possibility is that such verse is a later addition in order to emphasize the point that after the resurrection those who believe in Jesus would receive the Holy Spirit.

On the other hand, by not mentioning the water libation could be a presumption that the addressees were already familiar with the Feast of Tabernacles. Hence, they could be Jews who were converted to Christianity. They could also be Non-Jews but have contacts with the Jews.

Key phrase

We now put into consideration a key phrase of this pericope that is “rivers of living water”. Before this phrase is the invitation of Jesus, “Let anyone who thirsts come to me and drink.” What should satisfy physical thirst? It is precisely water. So, the invitation of Jesus to come to him and drink could be a signal that Jesus is the living water. But, does the statement refer to physical thirst alone? What could have been the meaning of water? The Greek text uses the word udatoς which appears in eight verses in John while only in seven verses in the synoptics. So, we could see here how significant water or its symbolism is in the fourth Gospel.

When Jesus encountered the Samaritan woman he told her that whoever drinks the living water will never thirst for it will become a spring of water willing up to eternal life (cf. Jn 4:10-14). In this story the woman was going to draw water from Jacob’s well and Jesus asked her for a drink. So, udatoς here is used to refer to the drinking water from the well. In Jn 2:7 the water was to be filled on a jar thus it is for drinking. In Jn 3:5 Jesus answered the question of Nicodemus on how to be born again and it is to be born of water and Spirit.

In the synoptics the word udatoς can be found in Mt 3:16 and Mk 1:10 in which the baptism is Jesus is being told. In Mk 9:41 water is referred to as used for drinking. In Mk 14:13 and Lk 22:10 water carried on a jar. In Lk 16:24 the rich man requested that Lazarus’ fingertip be dipped in water to cool his tongue.

Thus, in the synoptics for the usage of the word udatoς we found two, for baptism and for drinking; whereas, in John the meaning goes more deeply. Water is used in the wedding at Cana and Jesus turned it into wine (Jn 2:7-9). In His conversation with Nicodemus, water could be alluded to baptism (Jn 3:5). In His encounter with the Samaritan woman, Jesus is talking of the living water (Jn 4:10). And the usage reaches to its peak when Jesus gave an invitation to come to him and drink in which it could mean that He is the living water. Water as used for drinking could mean life-giving, but the living water referred to by Jesus gives eternal life. Water in baptism could symbolize new life in Christ because Jesus is the source of eternal life.

Summary

The main theme of the John 7:37-39 is the “living water”. Although in text there is no direct statement which says Jesus is the living water, it is obvious that He is the source of living water that gives eternal life. As we need water to sustain our earthly life, we need Jesus to attain eternal life.
[1] Notes on The Synoptic Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, Session 11-12, page 5.