​“Dear Kuya Jeff, thank you so much for letting us be part of your recent mission with children on the spectrum and those with other disabilities. I’m really grateful that you always involve us in works of mercy whenever we can. I noticed during our pilgrimages that some church images were covered, and this morning at our Palm Sunday Mass, the statues in our parish were covered too. Why is that done during this time? And is there a specific color that’s supposed to be used? I hope you can share some insight when you have time. Praying for you and your ministry always!” – Iris P.

​
1. The veiling of images and statues in churches during Passiontide is a deeply symbolic tradition that prepares the faithful to enter more fully into the mystery of Christ’s suffering. Passiontide begins on the Fifth Sunday of Lent and continues until Holy Saturday, and it is at this point—not merely during Holy Week—that crosses and images are traditionally covered with purple or red cloth. According to the Roman Missal, crosses may be unveiled on Good Friday, while other images remain veiled until the Easter Vigil. This practice reflects the Gospel moment when Christ begins to withdraw from public view as His Passion draws near: “Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple” (Gospel of John 8:59). In veiling sacred images, the Church enters into this same “hiddenness,” allowing the faithful to experience a kind of spiritual deprivation that sharpens their longing for the joy of Easter and focuses attention more intensely on the Passion. The use of purple signifies penance and mourning, while red points to the blood of Christ. Early Christian thinkers like Saint Augustine reflected on how Christ’s divinity was veiled during His Passion, while Saint Cyril of Jerusalem emphasized encountering the mysteries of faith through visible signs; the Ceremonial of Bishops likewise affirms that such practices deepen reflection on the Passion.

2. This same logic of “veiling” is not only visual but also liturgical and verbal. During Passiontide, in certain traditional practices of the Liturgy of the Hours and the Holy Rosary, the joyful doxology Gloria Patri (“Glory be to the Father…”) is set aside and replaced with the Christological acclamation: “Christ became obedient for us unto death, even death on a cross (Si Kristo ay naging masunurin para sa atin hanggang kamatayan, maging kamatayan sa krus),” drawn from Letter to the Philippians 2:8. Just as sacred images are covered, so too the Church in a sense “veils” her most familiar expression of Trinitarian praise. This is not a denial of God’s glory, but a temporary concealment that allows the faithful to dwell more profoundly on the humility and suffering of Christ. The praise of the Trinity is not lost—it is hidden, just as Christ’s divinity was hidden in His Passion. In this way, both the covering of statues and the substitution of the Gloria Patri serve the same spiritual purpose: they draw the Church into the silence, humility, and obedience of Christ in His suffering. By fasting not only from sacred images but even from certain liturgical expressions of glory, the faithful are led more deeply into the mystery of the Cross, so that when both the images and the full doxology return at Easter, they are received not out of routine, but with renewed awe, gratitude, and joy.

3. Concealing a pregnancy until the second trimester or keeping a baby’s gender a surprise naturally builds anticipation, making the eventual revelation more joyful, meaningful, and deeply felt. In the same way, the Church “veils” both her images and even her familiar praise like the Gloria Patri, so that by temporarily hiding them, she heightens longing and prepares hearts to receive their return at Easter with greater awe and joy.

<enrique,ofs>

"Dear Kuya Jeff, we had a great session last night in the spiritual warfare series, especially the part about moving from being wounded to becoming a witness. Thank you for that—it really spoke to us. We just wanted to ask a question about sacramentals, particularly crucifixes. Our worship ministry head recently instructed that all crucifixes should depict Jesus with His right foot over the left. Because of this, he asked that crucifixes showing the left foot over the right be removed. We found this a bit confusing and wanted to understand if there is a Church basis for this. We also wanted to ask if it matters where we buy religious articles. Is it important that they come specifically from Catholic religious stores, or is it okay to buy them from other places as well? We’d really appreciate your guidance on this. Thank you, and we’re looking forward to our next Formation Friday." - Maricel and Rochelle

​1. I wish to begin by honestly acknowledging my personal uncertainty regarding the directive to eliminate crucifixes in which Jesus’ feet are nailed left over right. To date, I am not aware of any official Church document—magisterial, liturgical, or canonical—that mandates a specific positioning of Christ’s feet on the cross. For this reason, I find myself seeking further clarification. Should there be particular sources, traditions, or pastoral guidelines informing such a prohibition by a worship ministry head, I would sincerely welcome learning more, as this would aid proper discernment. Nevertheless, I offer the following theological, biblical, and pastoral reflections, together with references that may be independently verified.

2. The General Instruction of the Roman Missal clearly states: “On or near the altar, there is to be a cross with the figure of Christ crucified” (GIRM, no. 308). Notably, this norm specifies neither the artistic style nor the anatomical details of the crucifix, including the position of Jesus’ feet—whether right over left, left over right, or placed side by side. This silence is significant. Sacrosanctum Concilium emphasizes that sacred images exist to foster the faith of the people and direct them toward the mystery they signify, not to impose unnecessary uniformity (SC, nos. 122–125). The crucifix, therefore, serves primarily as an aid to public worship, drawing the assembly into contemplation of Christ’s redemptive sacrifice.

3. Sacred Scripture consistently affirms the reality of Christ’s crucifixion without providing anatomical specifics. The Gospels state that Jesus was nailed to the cross (cf. Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:33; John 19:18), yet none describes the positioning of His feet. Even John’s detailed Passion narrative, which mentions the nails (John 20:25), refrains from elaborating on such particulars. The biblical focus remains theological: Christ “was lifted up” for the salvation of the world (John 3:14; 12:32).

4. Likewise, the Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church concentrate on the salvific meaning of the Crucifixion rather than its physical mechanics. Saints such as Augustine, Ambrose, and Thomas Aquinas reflect deeply on the Cross as the locus of redemption, obedience, and love, yet they do not specify the position of Christ’s feet. Their silence underscores that what matters is that Christ was crucified for our salvation, not how every physical detail was arranged.

5. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches extensively on the mystery of the Cross (cf. CCC, nos. 616–618) but offers no commentary on artistic details of crucifixes. Similarly, the Code of Canon Law contains no prescriptions regarding such matters. This absence strongly suggests that the positioning of Christ’s feet is considered a minor or non-essential detail, unworthy of doctrinal definition or juridical regulation, precisely because it does not affect the substance of faith or worship.

6. Church history further confirms this freedom. Numerous revered crucifixes differ in foot placement yet have long aided public worship. The Miraculous Crucifix of San Marcello al Corso in Rome, attributed to a 14th-century sculptor and carried in penitential processions during plagues, depicts Christ’s feet nailed right over left. Michelangelo’s Crucifix (c. 1540), created for Vittoria Colonna, shows the feet left over right and has been admired since the Middle Ages for its anatomical precision and devotional depth. The Cross of San Damiano, beloved by Franciscans worldwide, presents Christ’s feet nailed separately side by side; before this very image, Saint Francis of Assisi heard the call to “rebuild my Church,” making it a symbol of ecclesial renewal. These examples demonstrate that foot placement is not determinative of a crucifix’s devotional value. What matters is that the image directs minds and hearts to the worship of the one true God (cf. CCC, nos. 2131–2132).

7. From a pastoral and spiritual perspective, intention and authority are paramount. A crucifix—whether of wood, metal, or stone—is blessed before use in public worship to signify its dedication to God and to remove any ambiguity about its purpose. This aligns with the biblical principle that material objects can become channels of grace when ordered by God’s authority (cf. Numbers 21:8–9; John 3:14). So long as a crucifix is dignified and capable of lifting the soul toward the holy, it fulfills its ecclesial function.

8. Finally, those with an artistic eye can find beautiful and worthy crucifixes throughout the Philippines that foster genuine devotion. While stories circulate—such as images acquired casually and later associated with unsettling experiences—they serve as pastoral reminders of prudence rather than fear. One may obtain religious images from various sources, but they should be beautiful, dignified, and conducive to prayer. They ought to be blessed, or even exorcised if necessary, to dedicate them clearly as aids to worship rather than mere decoration. As a final recommendation, purchasing from reputable religious stores is wise: it ensures quality, supports Catholic stewardship, and often reflects craftsmanship rooted in prayer. I hope these reflections help clarify the issue and encourage balanced, informed discernment.

<enrique,ofs>

​“Dear Kuya Jeff, congratulations! We had a wonderful discussion earlier tonight. I particularly appreciated when you said, 'If you’re not asking sorry or repenting, God’s forgiveness is not applied in the way that reconciles you with Him. But God is always ready to forgive the moment you turn to Him with a contrite heart.' This reminds us that the key is admitting one’s fault and being truly sorry. Similarly, God forgives us as we forgive those who have wronged us. As you mentioned in Luke 17:3-4, we are called to forgive anyone who admits their fault and seeks forgiveness—even if it happens repeatedly. My question is: how should we respond when someone who has wronged us never admits their fault or shows remorse? Can we still forgive them? I also read in Matthew 5:23-24 that before presenting an offering to God, we must reconcile with anyone against whom we hold a grudge. Does this mean we can forgive without full reconciliation? I would greatly appreciate your insights on this. I also promise to continue attending our Spiritual Warfare series every Friday. Thank you, and more power to you!” – Mayline K. / Macario C.

1. Matthew 5:23–24 follows Jesus’ teaching on anger and hatred (Matthew 5:21–22). Here, Jesus deepens the commandment “You shall not kill” by showing that unresolved anger and broken relationships already violate God’s will. The key points He emphasizes are: right worship cannot be separated from right relationships, God desires forgiveness and mercy before ritual correctness, and the love of God and love of neighbor are inseparable. This teaching echoes 1 Samuel 15:22, “Obedience is better than sacrifice,” and Hosea 6:6, “I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” The Greek word diallagēthi, from the root diallassó, literally means “change” or “exchange.” In the New Testament context (Matthew 5:24), it carries the sense of a command: “make peace” or “exchange peace”—urging one to let go of anger and move from hostility to harmony. This principle forms the foundation for the kiss of peace during the Communion Rite at Holy Mass.

2. In Matthew 5:24, Jesus is not speaking merely about emotions but about broken communion. In the Jewish tradition, corporate worship requires at least ten people, known as a Minyan. However, even when the group is complete physically, Jesus implies that true worship cannot occur if internal communion is fractured. Holding grudges or harboring anger and resentment cuts one off from the assembly, preventing full participation in communal worship. Similarly, as Catholic Christians, it is difficult to fully participate in the Holy Eucharist if we are not in a state of grace or carry emotional burdens in our hearts. This is why it is essential to seek reconciliation with God and forgive those who have wronged us—often through Sacramental Confession—so that nothing obstructs our hearts from approaching Jesus, listening to His Word, and receiving His Body and Blood at Mass. Unforgiveness, anger, and resentment act as barriers within the heart, rendering ritual worship empty and meaningless.

3. Forgiveness and reconciliation are related, but not the same. Forgiveness means letting go of resentment, hatred, and the desire for revenge, entrusting justice to God. It happens within you, even if the other person never apologizes. It does not deny that a wrong was done. It does not excuse sin or pretend nothing happened. Forgiveness is done not because the offender deserves it but because you deserve peace, and because God has forgiven you first (cf. Matthew 18:21–35; Colossians 3:13; CCC 2840). As the Church teaches, refusing to forgive closes our hearts to God’s mercy.

4. Reconciliation goes further than forgiveness. It means restoring communion, rebuilding trust, and repairing a relationship where possible. It requires truth, repentance, and healing. It involves both parties. It does not happen instantly. It may not always be possible, especially when there is abuse, injustice, or lack of repentance. This is why forgiveness does not automatically mean returning to the same relationship “as if nothing happened.” Jesus’ command to make peace assumes a sincere effort toward peace and a heart already freed from hatred through forgiveness.

5. Jesus is saying that true worship cannot coexist with a heart that refuses peace. God does not reject sacrifice because ritual is bad. God rejects sacrifice when it hides a refusal to love. Jesus is not commanding forced reconciliation at all costs. Rather, He calls for a forgiving heart, a genuine desire for peace, and an honest effort toward reconciliation when possible. The first step is forgiveness—without it, reconciliation is impossible. Reconciliation does not happen overnight. It may take time, healing, repentance, and professional or spiritual guidance. If you are not ready to reconcile, that does not mean you have failed. You are called to forgive first, pray for the grace of reconciliation, and allow God to work in His time. Forgiveness opens the door. Reconciliation walks through it—slowly, carefully, and by grace.

6. As we begin this new year, please pray with me: Dear God, I come to You carrying a heavy heart, hurt by someone who never admitted their wrong or asked for forgiveness. Part of me still wants revenge, still wants justice on my own terms, but I know that path only steals my peace. Today, I choose to forgive—not because they deserve it, but because You forgave me first, and I want the freedom that comes from letting go. I release the anger, the resentment, and the bitterness I have been holding in my chest. Heal what is broken in me, Lord, and replace it with the peace only You can give. If reconciliation is meant to happen someday, grant me the grace when my heart is ready, and when the other person is ready to admit, to say sorry, and to repair what was broken. I know this may take time, but today I take the first step— I choose forgiveness. I ask this in Jesus' name, Amen.

<enrique,ofs>

​“Dear Kuya Jeff, my daughter’s classmate recently took her own life by drowning. Sa diary niya, she wrote about being bullied in school and how much she was struggling with her parents’ separation. She was also diagnosed with a mental disorder and was under treatment for severe depression before it happened. I tried to help the family talk to their parish priest, pero mukhang senior clergy siya, and he refused to offer a Mass after finding out na suicide ang cause of death. Ano po ba talaga ang guidelines ng Church in cases like this?” – Vita Dulcedo

Dear Vita, I’m really sorry to hear about what happened to the young girl. She must have been going through so much mentally, and she truly deserves our full understanding and compassion. If ever you, your family, or any of your friends need help when it comes to mental health struggles, please don’t hesitate to reach out to the 𝗡𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗠𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗛𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘀 𝗛𝗼𝘁𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗮𝘁 𝟬𝟵𝟭𝟵-𝟬𝟱𝟳-𝟭𝟱𝟱𝟯 𝗼𝗿 𝟭𝟴𝟬𝟬-𝟭𝟴𝟴𝟴-𝟭𝟱𝟱𝟯. I’ve outlined some general guidelines below on how the Church usually handles situations like this, but it’s best to get in touch with your diocesan secretariat for more specific pastoral care since policies can differ per diocese. Take consolation that “masakit sa kalooban ng poon kung may papanaw kahit ito ay iisa, higit syang magdaramdam (cf. Awit 115:15-16).” Let’s keep hoping in His compassion for your daughter’s classmate.
​
1. The term suicide comes from the Latin words sui (“of oneself”) and caedere (“to kill”), meaning “to kill oneself.” It refers to the deliberate taking of one’s own life. The Church teaches that human life is a sacred gift from God, entrusted to each person for a purpose. To take one’s own life is to reject God’s sovereignty and loving plan. According to the Catechism, “We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us” (CCC 2280). Thus, suicide is considered a grave moral disorder because it contradicts the natural inclination to preserve and cherish life.

2. The Bible records several instances of suicide, such as that of King Saul, who fell on his sword to avoid capture (1 Samuel 31:4); Ahithophel, who hanged himself after his counsel was rejected by Absalom (2 Samuel 17:23); Zimri, who set fire to his palace (1 Kings 16:18); and Judas Iscariot, who hanged himself after betraying Jesus (Matthew 27:3–5). These narratives, however, are descriptive rather than prescriptive—they portray the tragic consequences of despair and sin but do not justify the act. In contrast, Scripture consistently upholds the sanctity of life: “You shall not kill” (Exodus 20:13) and “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit?” (1 Corinthians 6:19). These passages emphasize that life belongs to God, and it is godly to preserve it, even amidst suffering.

3. The early Church Fathers firmly condemned suicide, teaching that it violates both divine law and natural reason. St. Augustine, in The City of God (Book I, Chapter 20), argued that suicide is a sin against the commandment “You shall not kill,” since it applies equally to oneself. He taught that no one may rightfully take a life, even to escape suffering or preserve honor. St. John Chrysostom likewise denounced suicide, reminding the faithful that trials and suffering are opportunities to grow in virtue and trust in God. Later, St. Thomas Aquinas reaffirmed this in his Summa Theologica (II-II, Q. 64, Art. 5), stating that suicide is contrary to charity, both toward oneself and toward the community, and it usurps God’s sole authority over life and death.

4. Ecclesiastical funeral rites may be denied to those who die by suicide if it is clear they acted with deliberate contempt for the faith (CIC can. 1184 §1, 3°). However, pastors are urged to consider the possibility of diminished responsibility due to mental illness or distress, showing pastoral care rather than judgment: “𝗚𝗿𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗽𝘀𝘆𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗯𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗴𝘂𝗶𝘀𝗵, 𝗼𝗿 𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗳𝗲𝗮𝗿 𝗼𝗳 𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽, 𝘀𝘂𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴, 𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗱𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝘂𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲 (𝗖𝗖𝗖 𝟮𝟮𝟴𝟮).”

5. The Church recognizes that psychological suffering can reduce a person’s moral culpability. Therefore, it urges compassion and prayer for those who have taken their own lives. The faithful are encouraged to support the grieving, affirm the sanctity of life, and place hope in God’s infinite mercy, who alone knows the depths of every human heart (CCC 2282–2286).

In the light of Scripture, the Church Fathers, and the Catechism, suicide is understood as the deliberate taking of one’s own life—an act contrary to God’s authority and the divine call to preserve life. Yet, while the Church upholds the gravity of this sin, she also recognizes human weakness and entrusts all who have despaired to the mercy of God. Ultimately, the Christian response is to defend the gift of life, accompany the suffering with compassion, and hope in the Lord who heals and redeems.

<enrique,ofs>

​“Dear Kuya Jeff, thank you po for extending our Bible Study to include the Biblical Walk Through the Mass! Super enlightening. Now I get it—the Jewish people who didn’t recognize Jesus as the Lord of the Sabbath still worship on Saturdays hanggang ngayon. May mga sects din na ganito pa rin, like the Seventh-Day Adventists. Pero since Jesus rose from the dead on a Sunday, ascended to heaven on a Sunday, and the Holy Spirit also descended on a Sunday, the early Christians started gathering, reading Scripture, and breaking bread on the first day of the week, which is Sunday (Acts 20:7; Revelation 1:10). In our family, Sunday Mass has always been part of life—though for decades, we’ve been going every Saturday afternoon kasi may anticipated Mass sa parish namin. Okay lang po ba ‘yung ganitong practice? I know that Sunday is the Lord’s Day, pero parang na-curious lang ako, kasi we’ve been doing this for so long. Promise, Catholic pa rin ako—hindi po ako Jew or Adventist!” – Sabado Girl

1. The ancient Greeks had at least two words for time that Christians still find spiritually fruitful: kronos (chronos) is measured, sequential, countable time—the “tick-tock” of clocks and calendars, the time in which we keep appointments, earn a living, plan school terms and work schedules. Kairos, by contrast, names the opportune, qualitative moment when God acts—a moment that “dwells” with meaning (the appointed time, the right season). In pastoral terms, our Mondays through Saturdays are lived mostly in kronos: we count hours, meet responsibilities, and keep the ordinary rhythm of life. Sundays (the Lord’s Day), however, are meant to interrupt kronos with kairos: a sacred time when we gather as the Body of Christ to enter more fully into God’s presence and the Paschal mystery. Sunday is not simply another calendar day; it is a kairotic celebration that gives depth and meaning to the rest of the week. 
​
2. Judaism counts a day from evening to evening—“And there was evening and there was morning, the first day” (Genesis 1). This biblical rhythm (Genesis 1) is reflected throughout Jewish life (e.g., Sabbath begins at Friday sunset) and was the lived experience of Jesus and the apostles (the Gospels show feasts and sabbaths reckoned by evenings). The early Church inherited this pattern: liturgically the Church recognizes that the observance of Sunday and solemnities begins on the evening of the preceding day, a principle enshrined in the Universal Norms on the Liturgical Year and the Calendar. Practically, this is why a Mass celebrated on Saturday evening with the texts of Sunday fulfils the Sunday obligation. For pastoral clarity, the Holy See and liturgical practice have long addressed how early such an “evening” Mass may sensibly begin; in modern authoritative practice an often-cited earliest hour is 4:00 PM (Pius XII and subsequent clarifications have treated late afternoon/early evening from about 4:00 PM onward as the pastoral lower bound). This harmonizes the Jewish biblical pattern, the Church’s liturgical theology, and pastoral pastoral care so faithful people can reasonably know when a Saturday evening celebration is already Sunday liturgically. 

3. Code of Canon Law (1983), canon 1248 §1: the faithful satisfy the Mass obligation “either on the feast-day itself or in the evening of the preceding day.” General Norms on the Liturgical Year and the Calendar (Universal Norms) explicitly states the liturgical day runs midnight-to-midnight but that Sunday and solemnities begin with the evening of the preceding day. In the Archdiocese of Manila, Circular No. 2022–108 explicitly affirms the principle that solemnities and Sundays begin on the evening of the preceding day, citing Universal Norms no. 3.” General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) (esp. chapter on the choice of the Mass and its parts, nos. 353–367) governs which texts/readings are proper to each celebration and therefore underlines that only the texts proper to Sunday/solemnities may be used when their observance is lawfully celebrated on the previous day. Vatican/Papal documents (e.g., Pius XII’s Christus Dominus and related instructions) historically provided the pastoral permission and practical limit (often quoted as not before 4:00 PM) for evening Masses to count for the following holy day in contexts where local ordinaries authorized them. Major commentaries (for example the New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law edited by Beal, Coriden & Green) and canonical opinions by recognized canonists (e.g., John M. Huels in the New Commentary and related CLSA opinions) explain and interpret canon 1248 §1 and the accepted pastoral understanding that “evening” is to be read broadly (commonly from about 4:00 PM onward). These commentaries are the standard resources consulted by bishops and diocesan tribunals when applying the norms pastorally. 

4. Pastors and people commonly say “anticipated Mass” when they mean the Saturday evening celebration that fulfills Sunday’s obligation; however, that exact phrase is colloquial and not a formal and real technical term in the primary magisterial texts—you will not find a canonical definition under that label. Official texts speak of Mass celebrated “in the evening of the preceding day” (canon 1248 §1) or of “Vigil Masses” only where the Roman Missal provides proper vigil formularies (e.g., the Easter Vigil, Christmas Vigil) with readings/prayers different from those of the day. A true “Vigil Mass” in liturgical terminology has its own proper readings and prayers designed for the vigil; by contrast, a Saturday evening Mass that uses the Sunday propers is the Mass of Sunday celebrated on the preceding evening. Additionally link this back to theology: only Sundays and solemnities are celebrated liturgically from the evening before (a kairos intruding into kronos). This is why we do not celebrate ordinary weekdays by using the next day’s texts—those weekdays remain governed by kronos (sequential, proper texts for each calendar day) and must be respected liturgically. The rule is therefore limited and the distinction between kairos (Sunday’s salvific time) and kronos (our measured work-week) is precisely the theological insight that undergirds both the practice and the law.

5. If we look at the word anticipation, it simply means to prepare for something before it happens—to get ready ahead of time. You anticipate a guest by setting the table before they arrive; you anticipate rain by bringing an umbrella even before the first drop falls. But here’s the catch: when we gather for the so-called “anticipated Sunday Mass” on a Saturday evening, we’re not just preparing for Sunday—we’ve already entered it. Liturgically speaking, the Church isn’t warming up for Sunday; she’s already singing the first hymn of it. The prayers, readings, and mysteries we celebrate are not Saturday’s at all—they are Sunday’s. So, inappropriately calling it an “anticipated” Mass is a bit like saying you’re anticipating dinner while already eating it. In truth, you’re already at the feast! That’s why it’s more accurate—and more beautiful—to say that what we celebrate on Saturday evening is the Sunday Mass itself, already breaking into our ordinary time. It’s not a rehearsal or a prelude; it’s the real thing, the Lord’s Day arriving early, as God’s kairos time interrupts our kronos. Pastors should therefore use language that helps the faithful: call it a “Sunday Mass celebrated in the afternoon of the preceding day” or simply “Sunday Vigil (evening) Mass” for pastoral clarity. 

<enrique,ofs>

​“Dear Kuya Jeff, hi po! Alam ko sobrang busy mo, sorry talaga for bothering you. May quick clarification lang po ako. Last time sa Biblical Walkthrough the Mass, you mentioned na the Word of God is meant to be proclaimed and listened to during the Holy Mass. Sabi mo rin po na yung lector, deacon, or priest dapat nagpo-proclaim habang the faithful ay nakikinig hindi nagbabasa kasi the Word isn’t something to be studied at that moment, but a sacramental proclamation na dapat tanggapin through the ears and the heart. Pwede po ba ako makahingi ng mga references for follow-up reading? Alam ko busy ka po, sorry ulit ha! Thank you so much in advance, Kuya!” — Ann M.

​1. When we gather for the Holy Mass, we come not to take but to receive. At every celebration of the Eucharist, God offers Himself to us twice: first at the Table of the Word then at the Table of the Eucharist. The same Christ who speaks when the Scriptures are proclaimed is the Christ who gives Himself in the consecrated bread and wine. In both moments, our posture is one of receptivity—we open our hearts and listen, for it is God who acts first, and we who respond in faith.
​
2. From the beginning, God’s relationship with His people has always begun with listening. “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4). Saint Paul continues this tradition, teaching that “faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ” (Romans 10:17). In the Liturgy of the Word, God does not merely share information; He speaks Himself into our midst. When the lector or deacon proclaims the readings, the Church listens because Christ Himself is speaking. This is why the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM 29) teaches that “when the Sacred Scriptures are read in the Church, God himself speaks to his people, and Christ, present in his word, proclaims the Gospel.” GIRM #55 further notes that in the readings “God speaks to his people, opening up to them the mystery of redemption and salvation.” The very purpose of the proclamation is to be heard, not silently read. GIRM #128–129 emphasizes the dignity of the ambo and the ministry of the lector or deacon, whose role is to proclaim the readings so that they may be heard clearly. Indeed, Word is meant to strike the ear and pierce the heart (cf. Hebrews 4:12) (cf Acts 2:37)

3. Listening is an act of faith. The Word of God, proclaimed in the assembly, is meant to be heard as living speech—not followed like a textbook. Reading along in missalettes or on personal devices, unless truly necessary, can turn the Word into private study rather than communal worship. The early Christians, as described by Saint Justin Martyr in the 2nd century, gathered on Sundays to listen to “the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets,” after which the presider preached and the people responded, “Thanks be to God.” Saint Augustine even reminded his flock, “The ears are the door of the heart.” The Church, therefore, asks the faithful to listen attentively, not read silently. When we allow the proclaimed Word to enter our hearts through the ear, we make room for grace to move within us. This is why, after the readings, we respond aloud—“Thanks be to God” and “Praise to you, Lord Jesus Christ.” These are not polite conclusions but acts of faithful reception, our way of saying: “Yes, Lord, I have heard You, and I receive Your Word.”

4. In both Word and Sacrament, we receive, we do not take. When we come forward for Communion, we do not grab the host; we open our hands or mouth in humility to receive Christ’s Body. Likewise, when the Scriptures are proclaimed, we do not seize the Word as our own; we receive it as divine gift. As Saint Jerome once preached, “When we are listening to the Word of God, and God’s Word is poured into our ears, what great danger we run if we think of something else!” The Church’s posture is always one of receptivity—a deep acknowledgment that God gives Himself freely.

5. But what about our brothers and sisters who cannot hear with their ears? The Church, in her maternal wisdom, recognizes that hearing is not limited to sound waves. The deaf faithful “hear” with their eyes, their hands, and their hearts. Sign language—expressive, embodied, and visual—becomes for them a sacred form of hearing. It is a superb way of receiving God’s Word, for it translates divine speech into human gesture. Just as the Word became flesh, so too does it become visible in signs. When the readings of the Mass are interpreted in sign language or projected for accessibility, this is an act of charity and inclusion for the deaf not of convenience for the hearing. The Church is not replacing proclamation she is ensuring that every member of the Body of Christ can receive the same Word. Whether through sound or sight, faith still comes from hearing—for what matters is not the ear that receives, but the heart that believes. And that is why, after the reading, deaf Catholics also respond joyfully, “Thanks be to God,” signing those words with their hands—the same hands that become instruments of praise and participation.

6. In the end, both the hearing and the deaf are invited into the same mystery: God speaks, and His people listen. The Liturgy of the Word is not a time for reading along, but for receiving together. The one who listens through the ear and the one who listens through the eyes share the same interior act of faith—an encounter with the living Christ who gives Himself to all. Thus, when we come to Mass, let us remember: we are gathered not to take the Word, but to receive Him. Whether we hear through sound or sign, the same Christ speaks, and the same Church responds, “Thanks be to God.”

<enrique,ofs>

​“Dear Jeff, anak, our discussion last Tuesday about the Communion of Saints really opened my eyes. At 86, I see that our journey of knowing, loving, and serving the Lord truly lasts a lifetime—I still get so many ‘aha’ moments and new learnings in our sessions. I got cut off last time because my phone’s battery died. I’ve been meaning to ask you about something I often see on Facebook during the birthdays of those who have passed away—the greeting, ‘Happy birthday in heaven.’ How does this fit, or not fit, with our Catholic belief in the Communion of Saints and life after death? Last Tuesday you mentioned that you pray and offer daily sacrifices for each of us. In the same spirit, I promise to keep praying for you and for all my loved ones, both living and departed, as part of the Communion of Saints. Thank you for always guiding us, anak. God bless you!” – GLORIA In Excelsis Deo

​1. Birthdays are tied to the passage of earthly time; yet after death, the soul enters eternal life, where temporal categories such as years, aging, and anniversaries no longer apply. As the Book of Revelation declares, “the former things have passed away” (Rev 21:4). Just as earthly milestones—such as school graduations, wedding anniversaries, or work commemorations—cease once their contexts end, so too does the counting of birthdays once earthly life concludes. The Catechism teaches that eternal life is not measured by time but is a definitive state in which the blessed “reign with Christ… for ever and ever” (CCC 1029). The Fathers of the Church further clarify that the true dies natalis (“day of birth”) of a Christian is not the day of earthly birth, but the day of death, when the faithful enter eternal communion with God. For this reason, the Church commemorates saints on their day of death rather than their birthday.

2. As St. Teresa of Avila profoundly said, “Everything else is passing; only God is enough.” In heaven, where the soul is united fully with God, nothing else will matter but God Himself. Earthly celebrations such as birthdays pale in comparison to the eternal joy of divine communion. However, the Church also cautions that

one should not presume a soul to be in heaven,” “Unless the Church has formally recognized someone as a saint, we can never be certain of their eternal state. Catholic teaching affirms that many souls undergo purification in purgatory before entering eternal glory (cf. 1 Cor 3:15; CCC 1030–1031). St. Augustine likewise teaches that “temporary punishments are suffered by some in this life only, by some after death, by some both here and there; but all of them before that strict and final judgment” (Enchiridion, 69). Thus, while birthdays recall the gift of earthly life, eternal life with God far surpasses any temporal milestone.
3. While "Happy birthday in heaven" is often used with sincere affection, from a Catholic perspective it does not fully reflect the reality of eternal life.

Instead of using this phrase  one might consider offering the following alternative apostrophic expressions: “Happy birthday! I’m saying a prayer for you today so God takes care of you.” “It’s your birthday, and I’m asking Jesus to keep you close to Him.” “I can’t celebrate with you here, but I’ll pray that you’re happy with God.” “Happy birthday in a special way—I’m praying that God gives you peace and joy forever.” What is common to all these greetings is not merely a remembrance of the departed, but the expression of Christian hope in the eternal life promised by Christ and the sincere commitment to pray for the dead. This practice reflects the Church’s belief in the Communion of Saints, the spiritual solidarity of all the faithful—those on earth, the souls in purgatory, and the saints in heaven. As St. Paul exhorts, “pray without ceasing” (1 Thess 5:17), our prayers for one another do not end with death but continue across the boundaries of this life into the next. In offering such greetings rooted in prayer, the faithful affirm their ongoing bond with the departed and their trust in God’s mercy to bring all His children into eternal communion with Him.

4. At her deathbed, St. Monica, the mother of St. Augustine, urged her son: “One thing only I ask of you when I am long gone: remember me at the altar of the Lord wherever you may be.” The deceased have no use for flowers, which wither; they do not require tears, which eventually dry; they do not need food, which decays; nor do they need songs, which fade away. Coins hold no value for them, for they cannot be spent in their present state. What they truly need is prayer—the faithful remembrance that endures before God and holds great power in His sight.

5. Rather than saying “Happy Birthday in Heaven,” the most faithful response is to pray for the deceased, entrusting them to God’s mercy. Scripture provides the foundation for this practice: Judas Maccabeus “made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin” (2 Macc 12:46), which the Church regards as a holy and pious act. St. Paul himself prayed for the departed Onesiphorus: “May the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that day” (2 Tim 1:18). Moreover, Paul teaches that after death, a person’s works are tested by fire; though some “suffer loss,” they are “saved, but only as through fire” (1 Cor 3:15). The Church understands this as purification in purgatory. In this way, our prayers, sacrifices, and especially the offering of the Holy Mass can hasten the faithful departed’s entry into the eternal joy of heaven.

Eternal rest grant unto Marita + and Rodel +, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon them. May they rest in peace. Amen.

<enrique,ofs>

​“Dear Kuya Jeff, thank you for breaking down the Holy Eucharist and how it’s tied to Christ’s passion and death in our Messianic Fulfillment Part 3 talk. I get it now—Holy Thursday and Good Friday are actually one continuous story. By the way, what’s the heresy called when some groups only do singing and preaching for worship but skip the sacrifice part? Is it basically a false teaching the Church already addressed?” - In Eucharistic communion with him, Macario

​1. How has God been inviting His people to worship Him since the very beginning?

From the very beginning, God created man with a purpose: to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him. Man was created on the sixth day along with the beasts of the earth (Genesis 1:24–31), but unlike the beasts, God gave man a spiritual calling. On the seventh day, God rested, blessed it, and made it holy (Genesis 2:2–3), inviting man into worship. In Revelation 13:16–18, those marked with the number 666 are symbolically those who live as beasts—creatures of the sixth day—never answering God’s call to rise into the seventh day of worship. Those who do not know, love, and serve the Lord refuse the very purpose for which they were created.

2. Why did God set Israel free from slavery in Egypt?

When God sent Moses to Pharaoh, His command was clear: “Let my people go, so that they may hold a festival to me in the wilderness (Exodus 5:1).” “Let my people go, so that they may worship me (Exodus 8:1; Exodus 9:1).” The liberation from Egypt was not just for political or social freedom—it was to worship the one true God. Worship has always been God’s end goal for His people.

3. What does it mean to worship God in spirit and in truth?

Jesus told the Samaritan woman: “The true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks (John 4:23–24).” In the desert, God gave His people manna: “I will rain down bread from heaven for you (Exodus 16:4).” This heavenly bread prefigured Christ. In John 6:32–35, Jesus makes the connection: “It was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven… I am the bread of life.” True worship is not just listening to God’s Word—it includes receiving His heavenly bread.

4. Why did Jesus command His followers to eat His body and drink His blood? Jesus makes this command unambiguous: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you… Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life (John 6:53–54). At the Last Supper, He instituted the Eucharist: “Take and eat; this is my body… Drink from it, all of you; this is my blood of the covenant (Matthew 26:26–28).” St. Paul affirms this is to be done continually: “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes (1 Corinthians 11:26).” 

5. Are Catholics re-sacrificing Jesus every time they celebrate the Mass?

Dr. Taylor Marshall, a former Protestant minister turned Catholic, explains that the Eucharist is not a repetition of Jesus’ sacrifice at Calvary. Scripture teaches Christ offered Himself “once for all” (Hebrews 10:10–14). At Mass, that one sacrifice is made present in an unbloody manner, not repeated. The Last Supper instituted the Eucharist as the way His sacrifice would be applied until He returns (Luke 22:19–20). Early Fathers like St. Cyprian and St. John Chrysostom affirmed it is the same Lamb offered always. The altar is a window into the eternal offering in heaven (Hebrews 9:24–26). “Remembrance” (anamnesis) means making present, not merely recalling. Thus, the Eucharist unites us to Christ’s one perfect sacrifice for our salvation.

6. How is the Holy Mass connected to the Wedding Feast of the Lamb in heaven?

Dr. Scott Hahn, yet another Protestant minister who converted to Catholicism, come to see the undeniable connection between the Holy Eucharist and the Wedding Supper of the Lamb described in the Book of Revelation. It describes heavenly worship—the Wedding Feast of the Lamb—filled with the same praises and rituals we find in the Catholic Mass:
​

• Gloria: “Glory to God in the highest” (Luke 2:14; Revelation 15:3–4)
• Alleluia: “After this I heard… ‘Alleluia! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God’” (Revelation 19:1)
• Sanctus: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty” (Revelation 4:8)
• Candles/Torches: “Seven golden lampstands” (Revelation 1:12; Exodus 25:37)
• Incense: “The smoke of the incense, together with the prayers of God’s people” (Revelation 8:3–4)
• Water: “The river of the water of life… flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb” (Revelation 22:1)

As Scott Hahn explains in The Lamb’s Supper, what John saw in Revelation is the heavenly liturgy—and the Holy Mass is that same Wedding Supper made present on earth. It is not merely a remembrance; it is heaven touching earth. True worship is not about smoke machines, loud music, emotional highs, stage performances or financial literacy seminars—it is the Eucharistic celebration, the highest form of public worship in the Catholic Church. In the Mass, we both hear the Word of God and partake in the Body and Blood of Christ, joining the angels and saints in heaven.

7. What did the Early Church Fathers teach about the true meaning of the Eucharist?

St. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 107 A.D.):

• “They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ.” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 7)

St. Justin Martyr (c. 155 A.D.):

• “We do not receive these as common bread and drink; but… the food blessed by the prayer of His word… is the flesh and blood of that Jesus.” (First Apology, 66)

From the earliest days, Sunday gatherings without the Eucharist were considered incomplete and contrary to the apostolic faith. To remove the Body and Blood from worship and focus only on preaching is to omit what Jesus Himself commanded as central to worship in spirit and truth.

8. What is the Church’s authentic teaching on the Eucharist?

 The Feeding of the Five Thousand (Matthew 14:13–21; Mark 6:30–44; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:1–15)
This miraculous event, recorded in all four Gospels, is not only a testament to Christ’s compassion but also a profound prefigurement of the Holy Eucharist. Jeff Cavins, a distinguished Catholic biblical scholar and former Protestant pastor and biblical scholar who converted to catholicism describes the feeding of the five thousand as “the overabundance of the Holy Eucharist” foreshadowed in the ministry of Jesus. According to Cavins, the orderly arrangement of the people in groups of fifty and one hundred (Mark 6:40) symbolizes the structure of the Church — with the smaller groups representing parishes, the larger ones corresponding to dioceses, and the apostles foreshadowing the ordained clergy of the New Covenant. In this light, the miracle anticipates the role of Catholic priests today as those who, like the apostles, receive from the hands of Christ and distribute His Body and Blood to the faithful (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:23–26). The abundance of bread, with twelve baskets left over, reveals God’s inexhaustible generosity in the sacrament of the Eucharist — a foretaste of the heavenly banquet where all will be satisfied (cf. Isaiah 25:6–9).

9. Summary and Conclusion:

• God created man for worship, calling us to rise above living like beasts and to dedicate the seventh day to Him.
• He freed Israel to worship Him alone.
• He revealed that true worship is in spirit and truth—prefigured in manna, fulfilled in Christ, the Bread of Life.
• Jesus commands us to eat His Body and drink His Blood until He returns.
• The Mass is the earthly participation in the heavenly Wedding Feast of the Lamb, not a repetition of the sacrificing calvary.
• The early Church taught that worship without the Eucharist is not the full worship Christ instituted.
• The Holy Mass—where we both listen to God’s Word and partake in His Body and Blood—is the one true worship in spirit and truth, prescribed by Jesus and intended by God whenever we gather on Sunday.

<enrique,ofs>

Introduction: Understanding the Aswang as a Cultural Expression of Evil

The aswang occupies a central role in Philippine folklore as a symbolic embodiment of evil, fear, and moral transgression. Far from being merely mythological curiosities, aswang serve as cultural reflections of Filipino beliefs about the struggle between good and evil—one that plays out not only in the supernatural realm but in everyday human choices.

This moral conflict is mythically dramatized in Bicolano folklore through the rivalry between two ancient deities: Gugurang and Aswang. Gugurang is revered as the god of goodness, a divine teacher who gifted humanity with fire, healing, and the wisdom to live in harmony. Aswang, in contrast, is the god of chaos and cruelty, who grew resentful of Gugurang’s compassion and rejected the idea that humans deserved empowerment. Believing that humans should submit rather than thrive, Aswang sought to corrupt them, offering select individuals dark powers—shapeshifting, unnatural strength, and the ability to feed on flesh and life force—in exchange for their loyalty. These corrupted followers became the first aswang, no longer fully human but monstrous beings who hunted and tormented Gugurang’s faithful, especially under the cover of night, when Aswang’s influence was strongest.

Though Gugurang ultimately confronted and defeated Aswang in battle, driving him into hiding, the curse of his followers endured. The tradition of the aswang became a lasting cultural reminder that evil thrives not only through supernatural forces but also through human decisions—when individuals choose power, vengeance, or survival at the cost of their moral integrity.

Filipino folklorist Maximo D. Ramos, in his seminal work The Aswang Complex in Philippine Folklore, identified the aswang as a diverse class of creatures—vampires, ghouls, viscera suckers, witches, and animalistic shapeshifters—rather than a single entity. While their outward appearances vary, they share common traits: they appear as ordinary humans by day and transform by night to prey on the vulnerable, particularly the sick, the unborn, and the dying. Ramos noted that these stories function not merely as superstition but as communal expressions of deeply embedded fears—of death, disease, betrayal, and moral disorder.

This warning is echoed in more contemporary legends such as those of Teniente Gimo and Maria Labo, which situate the aswang not in the distant supernatural past, but within the context of daily life. Teniente Gimo, a local leader in Dueñas, Iloilo, allegedly lured his daughter’s friend into their home with the intention of killing and eating her—a terrifying revelation that someone in a position of authority could harbor such darkness. Maria Labo, on the other hand, was a domestic worker and mother who, upon returning home, was discovered by her husband to be cooking their own child’s flesh. Her transformation into an aswang is often attributed to external corruption, trauma, or exposure to dark influences while working abroad. In both stories, the monstrous is not an alien force but a perversion of the ordinary—an unsettling reminder that anyone, whether a village official, a medical practitioner, a caregiver, a farmer, or an uninformed healer, can give evil a human face.

The Catholic Church does not affirm the literal existence of folkloric beings such as the aswang, vampires, or werewolves. Instead, it views these figures as cultural expressions of deeper spiritual truths. While rejecting superstition, the Church acknowledges the real presence of evil, sin, and demonic influence. As 1 Peter 5:8 warns, “Be sober-minded and watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.”
​
As articulated in Dei Verbum (§12), the Catechism of the Catholic Church (§§109–110), and the Pontifical Biblical Commission, mythic or symbolic narratives—though not scientific accounts or literal history—remain legitimate vehicles for expressing enduring religious truths when read in their proper cultural and experiential contexts. Within this framework, the aswang may be interpreted as a culturally embedded metaphor for the perennial human struggle against evil in both the physical and spiritual realms, underscoring the conviction that in this ongoing conflict, God actively aids and defends the faithful.

What follows is a taxonomy of twenty distinct aswang types drawn from regional traditions across the Philippine archipelago. This list, however, represents only a small fraction of what may be hundreds—perhaps even thousands—of local variations. This diversity underscores a deeper insight: that evil can manifest in countless forms, wearing familiar faces and assuming unexpected roles. The many guises of the aswang challenge us to remain vigilant—not only against mythical creatures of the night but against the real moral choices that define who we become in the light of day.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Catholic Church. Catechism of the Catholic Church. 2nd ed. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1997.
Catholic Church. Dei Verbum: Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation. Promulgated by Pope Paul VI, November 18, 1965. In Acta Apostolicae Sedis 58 (1966): 817–836. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Clavel, Leothiny S. The Oral Literature of Capiz (Panay Region). Diliman, Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press, 1972.
Ramos, Maximo D. Creatures of Philippine Lower Mythology. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press, 1990.
Ramos, Maximo D. The Aswang Complex in Philippine Folklore. Mandaluyong City: Anvil Publishing, 1990.
The New American Bible. Edited by the Catholic Biblical Association of America, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011.

ILLUSTRATIONS
Aswang Mike. “Bal‑Bal: Feaster of Dead Flesh.” Medium (Horror Hounds). Retrieved from: https://medium.com/horror‑hounds/bal‑bal‑feaster‑of‑dead‑flesh‑37f45f0321da
Aswang Mike. n.d. “The Black‑Eyed Children.” Medium (Horror Hounds). Retrieved from: https://medium.com/@AswangMike/the-black-eyed-children-ad817f70f1ea
Craiyon. “Portrait of a young Asian vampire woman smiling with fangs and red eyes in a gothic setting.” Retrieved from: https://www.craiyon.com/image/4nx3LvytRb2IdLfqJwedlA
De los Santos, Julia. “Mantiyanak.” Positively Filipino, October 30, 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.positivelyfilipino.com/magazine/halimaween-2024-spirits-that-rule-the-night-3
Emilio Adrias. Tiktik. Retrieved from: https://pseudocrow.artstation.com/projects/2qzGLx
Flores, Noel Layon. Ang Panday (2017): Manananggal. Retrieved from: https://www.behance.net/gallery/59478249/Ang-Panday-2017-Manananggal
Hey, Paul. “The Fisherman and His Wife.” ChildStories.org. Retrieved from: https://www.childstories.org/en/the-fisherman-and-his-wife-1678.html
Ike. “Abwak.” Aswang Against Other Aswangs. Nightskylie Blog, October 23, 2024. Retrieved from: https://nightskylie.blogspot.com/?view=flipcard&m=1
Ike. “Bangkilan.” Aswang Against Other Aswangs. Nightskylie Blog, October 23, 2024. Retrieved from: https://nightskylie.blogspot.com/?view=flipcard&m=1
Ike. “Gabunan.” Aswang Against Other Aswangs. Nightskylie Blog, October 23, 2024. Retrieved from: https://nightskylie.blogspot.com/2024/10/aswang-againts-other-aswang.html
Maglipon, Jo‑Ann Q. “Who Is Mother Lily Monteverde?” PEP.ph (Peptionary), August 6, 2024 (originally published in 1990 in PRIMED: Selected Stories 1972–1992). Retrieved from: https://www.pep.ph/peptionary/182145/mother-lily-monteverde-a710-20240806-lfrm8
Malonzo, Mervin. “Alan: The Deformed Winged Humanoid of Philippine Folklore.” The Aswang Project. Retrieved from: https://www.aswangproject.com/alan-creature-philippines/
Mythus.Fandom contributors. n.d. “Siyokoy (Philippine Mythology).” Mythus: The Myths and Folklore Wiki. Retrieved from: https://mythus.fandom.com/wiki/Siyokoy
Nair, Nitten. Amalanhig. Retrieved from: https://mythlok.com/amalanhig/
NightmareSyrup. n.d. Mildly Interesting Drawings. Retrieved from: https://nightmaresyrup.tumblr.com/
Pinterest. “PETA Fish-Human Gills Graphis.” Pinterest. Accessed July 30, 2025. Retrieved from: https://ph.pinterest.com/pin/peta-fish-human-gills-graphis--598275131762796037/
Rotten Tomatoes. “Impaktita.” Retrieved from: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/impaktita
“Sigbin.” Myth and Folklore Wiki – Mythus Fandom. Retrieved from: https://mythus.fandom.com/wiki/Sigbin
The Aswang Archive. n.d. “Gabunan.” The Aswang Archive: Philippine Folklore & Mythology, Creature #7. Retrieved from: https://theaswangarchive.com/creatures/7
The Aswang Project. n.d. “Creatures & Mythical Beings of Philippine Folklore & Mythology.” The Aswang Project. Retrieved from: https://www.aswangproject.com/creatures-mythical-beings-philippine-folklore-mythology/
Jojo Cunanan. “Magindara 2.” PH Spirits. Retrieved from: https://phspirits.com/magindara-2/

​“Dear Kuya Jeff, thanks so much for that super engaging discussion on the Maccabean Revolt—it really got me thinking! It’s amazing and honestly inspiring how our spiritual ancestors stood up for their faith, even against the powerful Greek empire, knowing it could cost them their lives. It reminds me that above everything, our relationship with God is what matters most—definitely not something we should trade away, no matter the pressure or perks. Quick question though! I’ve been using the Good News Bible for my personal study (it proudly says “With Deuterocanonicals/Apocrypha” on the cover, by the way), and it has all 73 books. But my friend’s Bible—she’s using the King James Version—only has 66 books. I noticed that 1 and 2 Maccabees, plus a few others from my Bible, are missing in hers. I’d really love to have a thoughtful convo with her about why we Catholics include those extra books—and maybe even encourage her to explore the full version of God’s Word. What solid points or historical reasons can I share to help explain why those seven books (especially Maccabees) truly belong in the Bible? Looking forward to your insights and to more Bible Study sessions ahead. Thanks again and God bless, Kuya!” – Kring

The Catholic Church officially set the Bible’s canon at 73 books—that’s 46 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. But Martin Luther, a former Augustinian monk who was later excommunicated for refusing to take back teachings that challenged Church authority—especially about indulgences and the pope—disagreed with that. He believed that only the books found in the Hebrew Bible (the Masoretic Text) should count as Scripture. So he removed seven books from the Old Testament: Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Baruch, and 1 & 2 Maccabees. These were all part of the Greek Septuagint, which had long been used by the early Church and by Jesus and the Apostles themselves. Some of these books went against the new ideas forming in Luther’s theology—like purgatory and prayers for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:45), almsgiving as atonement (Tobit 12:9, Sirach 3:30), and the intercession of saints and angels. These didn’t fit with sola fide (salvation by faith alone) and other core ideas of the Protestant Reformation, so he labeled them apocrypha, meaning books to be “hidden.” But as Catholics—members of the One True Church founded by Christ on Peter and the Apostles—we believe and uphold all 73 books as the full and complete Word of God. Now, let me give you eight reasons why we should read all 73 books of the Bible—and not settle for a shorter version that’s missing key parts of the story:

1. The Bible itself gives a strong warning not to add or remove anything from God’s Word
In Revelation 22:18–19, it says that if anyone adds to the words of the book, they’ll face the plagues written in it. And if anyone takes away from it, they’ll lose their share in eternal life. Earlier in Revelation 1:11, Jesus tells John, “Write down everything you see and send it to the churches.” That’s a clear sign—everything God reveals should be written and kept whole, not edited or filtered. 2 Timothy 3:16–17 also reminds us that all Scripture is inspired by God (“God-breathed”) and useful for teaching, correcting, and guiding us in how to live. So if it’s inspired by the Holy Spirit, it’s not something we’re free to change. That’s where the Magisterium of the Church, together with Sacred Tradition, comes in. The Church—founded by Jesus and guided by the Holy Spirit—has the responsibility to safeguard truly inspired books. It’s not up to just one person to decide what stays or goes. So if God inspired all 73 books that the Catholic Church officially recognized in 382 AD, then we aren’t meant to mess with that. The Bible isn’t a personal project—it’s a sacred gift, and we’re called to receive it whole and unchanged.

2. They Were Included in the Septuagint
1 and 2 Maccabees were included in the Septuagint—the Greek version of the Old Testament that a lot of Jews in the 1st century used, especially in places like Alexandria and other Greek-speaking areas. Jesus and the Apostles often quoted from the Septuagint, even when it didn’t exactly match the Hebrew version. Since the early Church was mostly made up of Greek-speaking Christians, they naturally treated the Septuagint as their Old Testament. So if the early Christians used the Septuagint, and the Septuagint included 1 and 2 Maccabees, then those books—as well as the rest of the deuterocanonicals—were basically treated as Scripture.

3. Early Church Fathers Quoted Maccabees as Scripture
A lot of the early Church Fathers saw Maccabees as legit Scripture. For example, Origen (in the 3rd century) included 1 Maccabees in his list of biblical books. Augustine (around the late 300s to early 400s) also treated Maccabees as Scripture—he even used it to support teachings like purgatory and praying for the dead. In City of God 18.36, he wrote something like: “The Jews celebrate the day the temple was cleaned and restored… just like we read in the books of the Maccabees.”

4. Used in Liturgical and Catechetical Contexts in the Early Church
Passages from Maccabees were actually used in Church liturgies, homilies, and teaching sessions. That shows people didn’t treat them as ordinary literature or history—they were seen and used as sacred Scripture in real life.

5. Affirmed by Early Church Councils
Church councils officially confirmed 1 and 2 Maccabees as part of the Bible—starting with the Council of Rome in 382 AD under Pope Damasus I, then at Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419. Later on, the Councils of Florence (1442) and Trent (1546) backed that up again. Basically, these councils listed the same Old Testament books the Catholic Church uses today—including 1 and 2 Maccabees. The One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church was founded by Jesus Christ Himself on Peter and the Apostles. As the spouse of the Holy Spirit, the Church is guided and protected from error in matters of faith and morals. Because of this divine guidance, the Church—not any one individual—has the true authority to determine which books belong in the Holy Bible. It is not up to a single person like Martin Luther to change the canon that the Church, through the Holy Spirit, has recognized for centuries.

6. Supports New Testament Teachings
2 Maccabees 12:44–45 talks about praying for the dead, saying it’s a “holy and wholesome thought” to do so—so they can be freed from their sins. That lines up with Catholic teachings on purgatory and intercessory prayer, and it’s similar to what Paul does in 2 Timothy 1:18 when he prays for Onesiphorus. Also, Hebrews 11:35 seems to point back to the martyr stories in 2 Maccabees 7 about people being tortured but choosing to die in hope of rising to a better life. These kinds of references show that New Testament writers likely knew these stories and saw them as spiritually meaningful.

7. 1 Maccabees is a Historical Bridge
It fills in super important history between the Old and New Testaments—like the Maccabean Revolt, where Hanukkah came from, and how the Hasmonean dynasty started. Without it, Protestant Bibles leave a big 400-year gap they called the “400 years of silence” with no background on what happened during that time. God couldn’t just disappear for 400 years—right? He’s not the kind of Father who goes silent and walks away. He’s always loving, always guiding, always present—24/7. So it makes sense that He was still working, still speaking, still moving in those so-called “silent years.” Books like 1 and 2 Maccabees help us see that God was never absent—He was right there, faithfully preparing hearts for what was to come.

8. Orthodox and Catholic Churches Retain Them
The Orthodox and Catholic Churches are the two ancient branches of the one Church founded by Jesus Christ (Matthew 16:18). Both trace their origins to the apostles. They share the same sacraments, apostolic succession, and deep reverence for Scripture and Tradition. The Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Churches all include 1 and 2 Maccabees in their Bibles. So for over 1,500 years—and even now—most Christians around the world have recognized these books as part of Scripture.

<enrique,ofs>