Vacation Leave!

My 2 weeks vacation is nearly coming to an end. By monday, I have to prepare myself for the whole week long class. So how did i spent my vacation? Well, i just went to several malls here in manila, walk in the near vicinity and most important of all is to read.

My close friend even candidly told me, "Nababasa ka na naman!, baka magkatuluyan kayo ng mga libro mo ah!" Well, what should i suppose to do! just sleep, wake up, take a bath and walk every day during my vacation! I would increase in weight if that would be my routine! ( unfortunately i decided to eat all my favorite food coz during opening of the class, i might not be that lucky anymore hehe!)

So book did i read? law books? Hector de leon? Tolentino? or Divina? of course not! though i am anticipating from my classmates when they read this " eto na naman c moi!" Syempre hindi law books ang binasa ko noh mga pare't mare maawa naman kayo saken noh! hehe

So what was it? Some may be surprised but i read the book, Passion and Purity by Elisabeth Elliot.

I was introduced to the book through Josh Harris message Revisiting Romance (you can download the message here). In his sermon, Joshua Harris reminisced the day when his mother gave him a copy of the book. He was in a relationship back then, yet he never bothered to read it. He thought that the book contains things that he already knew such as "date/court only Christians", "don't kiss" and the likes. When his relationship with his girlfriend ended, he then decided to read the book and he received biblical encouragement from it. The book even inspired him to write his first book when he was 21 years old, I kissed Dating Good Bye!

Since the book inspired Josh Harris to pursue a love life that would please God, so i told myself not just to give it a try, but to spend time on it and reflect.

I bought it and read it. I was not disappointed. I am the type of person who is apathetic of romantic things. Parang bale wala lang sa akin na makapanuod o makapagbasa man ng love story. However the love story narrated in the story is different! It narrated the love story of Jim and Elisabeth Elliot and their struggles during their courtship days.

I noticed their experiences were not different from mine. I even shared them to my beloved and to her surprise she was thankful that others had also the same experiences as ours in our journey called love.

One basic theme that i noticed through out the book and that is the concept of waiting. Not just any type of waiting but waiting for the Lord. Through out the book, i read the struggles of both young people who were in love to each other yet were undecided to continue with their relationship or not. To obey God or not.

I was renewed through this book. I was reminded that there is blessing in the road called obedience. I have to admit that i myself is an impatient person. I want things to be instant. Whenever i need it, it should be there whenever i am of need of it, yet this book taught me to be patient.

"but they who wait for the LORD shall renew their strength, they shall mount up with wings like eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint." Isa 40:31

Oh, Lord continue to teach thy son to be patient! Always be willing to surrender to your will!

Latest Update

It has been a while since i posted here in my blog. i had been busy with my studies at law school that caught every second, minute, and hour of my day per week per day per week and even per months, of my time. I would say that I am privilege to study at law school. Some people wished that they would even have the opportunity to study yet didn't pursued their dream for some unknown reason.

It is not easy to study at law school. You have to read a lot, memorize several provisions, face difficult professors and even take their difficult exams!! (what do you expect! the professors are hard to deal with, how much more their exams!) You will be experiencing mental anguish whenever you enter your class, hoping that the professor would be absent or be busy to attend the class. If the professor is around, your faith will be tested, that is if you have prayed hard enough in order not to be called for the recitation. Well that's life in law school, though difficult yet it is exciting; Full of suspense! Full of Thrill! Full of wonderful experiences..
'

Camper's Notes : The Sweetest Link Part 3

With that said, the primary readiness for a relationship involves the wisdom of choosing a right partner. The following qualities are what would make a pivotal difference in the happiness of a relationship:

• Sense of responsibility. A person must be responsible and accountable in order to handle the demands of a committed relationship. He or she must be able to answer to the demands of real-life expectations and fulfill promises made.

• Emotional stability. A person who lacks emotional stability would not be able to provide the trustworthiness and dependability so important to a healthy relationship. Only those who are emotionally stable can provide the steadfastness, both in affection and otherwise, so essential in a partner.

• Leadership quality. Leadership quality is a combination of responsibility and initiative. A person with such qualities will be able to direct a family, either outside or inside the home. It is a quality that one can observe through time spent in church, school, and other community settings. (Insert: personal ad for camp officers, hehe).
  
• Ability to Focus on Others’ Needs. A person who is selfish will never be able to sustain a relationship, for a relationship is about service and forgiveness. A potential partner must be someone who helps others consistently in real life, not only in a couple setting.
  Empathy. A partner must be someone understanding. An unsympathetic person cannot be supportive within a relationship.

In personal evaluation and in evaluating someone else, one must make sure that there is at least one respected adult advisor involved. Such people help us observe things we ourselves cannot see, and they can supply opinions regarding a person’s character out of their concern and experience.

Beautiful as true love with a right partner at the right time is, the world teaches myths about love that steal our joy:

• You need a significant other to be happy. Joy is found in the Lord. No earthly thing is essential to one’s complete happiness.

• Marriage will make me happy. Once again, no earthly thing is indispensable to happiness, and marriage is not an ending point that will bring happiness in and of itself.

• A partner will make me complete. We are complete in Christ. There is nothing lacking in a person’s life merely because he or she is single. A person’s completeness can be lacking only when he or she has not found the Lord.

While a relationship can be fulfilling, there are also cool reasons to be single for the season of waiting:

• Personal identity. One who is single does not need to face the baggage and pressure of an identity linked to or formed by one’s significant other.

• Controlling the remote. A single person can make life decisions without having to consider the impact or consequences the decisions would bring to a partner.
  
• School, work, etc. When single, a person has much greater time and attention to devote to other areas of life.
  
• Jealousy will be a problem. Jealousy is a tricky and perhaps inevitable relationship issue that can consume much time, thought, and emotion. Someone single can be free from its influences.
  
• Power to have high standards. An attached person has to focus on the relationship with the person at hand; a single person can maintain high standards in the search for a partner.
  
• Better friendships. Someone single always has more freedom of time than someone in a relationship. That time can be invested in building better friendships with others.
  
• Nothing to lose. A single can have greater freedom in trying new things, for there is no fear of losing or offending one’s partner.
  
• Sweaty palms? Who cares! When one is single, there is less worry about one’s impression upon others and no worries about what one’s partner would think about one’s appearance and so forth.
  
• The sky’s the limit. With no strings attached, one can shoot for the stars carefree.
  Time to figure. Singlehood gives one time to ponder upon one’s life and choices. One can figure out what he or she wants, what he or she has to do, and how God is calling him or her.

Camper's Notes: The Sweetest Link Part 2

(continued from part 1...)


If casual dating is defective, then there must be an alternate answer to the initial question. In the light of God’s Word, the answer is responsible dating.

What are the differences between modern dating and responsible dating?

• Modern dating asks the question: “Is there reason to marry?”
  Responsible dating asks the question: “Is there any reason NOT to marry?”

• Modern dating entails no commitment, and a relationship is merely a trial.
  Responsible dating leads to a covenantal relationship, an established promise.

• Modern dating seeks self-gratification.
  Responsible dating seeks to guard and to save each other for marriage.

• Modern dating utilizes manipulation in order to attain one’s goals.
  Responsible dating applies kindness and patience.

When Is the Right Time for a Relationship?
First of all, we look at when is NOT the right time for a relationship.

One is not ready for a relationship when 1) the motive is physical attraction only, and when 2) one is unready to deal with complex emotional issues, which are so abundant in romantic relationships.

The ultimate key to knowing the right time is MATURITY, not AGE. One needs to be emotionally mature in order to be able to realize a flourishing relationship.

Camper's Notes : The Sweetest Link Part 1

(Nota bene: The notes were taken by one of the campers, Sis. Wenslyn Reyes, as the special Topic, The Sweetest Link, was delivered by Bro. Collen Lo during the YGC Student Conference-Real or No Deal.. )

THE SWEETEST LINK
Brother Collen Lo

A quick survey of the young people present indicates that people do want relationships in the span of their lifetimes. All desire to be attached in one way or another. The difference is, however, that people seek these relationships in different ways.

Human standards change. Clothes that were fashionable a few decades ago are ridiculous today. The standards for beauty and practice in clothing, hair, and other forms of art are varying in every generation. Yet the standard of God’s Word does not change, and we need to submit our lovelives to whatever it is He has to say about this area.

How Should We View Dating and Courtship?

It is true that romantic relationships fulfill a need of human nature. They often provide the comfort, affirmation, and companionship that people naturally desire. The fact is, however, that young people are unable to handle the emotional and physical pressures that accompany premature romantic attachment.

Love in itself is no evil thing; it is a beautiful invention of God. Yet just like so many good things in this world, it can be applied by fallen human beings in sinful and wrong ways.
A look at the modern dating scene will reflect this reality.

Modern dating practices, based on emotions and passion, often lead to sexual arousal that ought to be renounced. The norms of society are based upon a desire for self-gratification. People enter relationships seeking to be entertained, to be cared for, and to be satisfied emotionally, physically, or otherwise.

God’s Word speaks clearly against sexual involvement outside of marriage. It is a detestable act in His sight, and an act that will reap definite consequences. Therefore, practices that are founded upon impurity should be rejected. There is simply no other way to true romantic happiness except by the way of the original manual, the infallible Word of God.

A closer look at the patterns of dating will show their defectiveness.

1. Dating leads to intimacy but not necessarily to commitment. Couples tend to become too close to each other emotionally and physically without truly having a committed relationship in mind for the near future.


2. Dating tends to skip the “friendship” stage of a relationship. Jumping directly into dating will keep people from observing each other in the more neutral ground of friendship.
   Dating often mistakes a physical relationship for love. Society’s dating patterns tend to emphasize the physical aspect of a relationship, and couples often confuse physical intimacy with true, giving love.


3. Dating often isolates a couple from other vital relationships. Premature dating relationships usually occupy so much time for couples that they have no quality time to commit to family, friends, and other vital relationships.


4. Dating, in many cases, distracts young adults from their primary responsibility of preparing for the future. When young people are in a relationship leading nowhere, they often don’t have time and effort left to develop their god-given talents, or to fulfill their current responsibilities.
   


5. Dating can cause discontentment with God’s gift of singleness. Dating often crowds out the human mind with an idea that singlehood is not good, while it is actually a beautiful season of life given by God.


6. Dating creates an artificial environment for evaluating another person’s character. Relationships built upon secluded time together prevent individuals from understanding each other in the context of reality.

(to be continued...)

Checklist for Church music

(Nota Bene: the article below is posted at Pastor Nathan Busenitz blog, Faith and Practice. It can be access at http://faithandpractice.blogspot.com/2006/08/checklist-for-church-music.html all credit is given to Pastor Busenitz. I posted this article in my blog to be of service to the other readers of my blog. May the article be of help and service to you, especially if you are a worship leader in your Church).

A Checklist for Church Music
(By Nathan Busenitz)

What type of music is appropriate for church worship services? While the question is simple enough, the answers given are often both complex and controversial. Yet, the question is a crucial one to consider because music is a central part of Christian worship. If our music does not please the Lord, neither will the worship that music is intended to produce

So how can churches be God-honoring in the music they use? In order to answer this question correctly, we must begin by looking to the principles of God’s Word. Neither personal preferences nor cultural trends can be our guide. Even in the area of music, Scripture must be our authority.

Below are ten questions that pastors and church leaders (along with the congregation as a whole) should ask about the worship music they use. Drawn directly from biblical principles, these questions may not answer every specific case, but they do provide a theological check-list for examining church music.

1. Is your church music God-focused?
Without question, true worship must be God-centered (Ex. 20:3–6) for He alone is worthy of our praise (Ps. 148:13). He deserves our most fervent devotion and our highest priority. He is our exalted King and He must have center stage. Anything short of God-centered worship is idolatry (cf. Jer. 2:13, 27–28), and false worship is clearly unacceptable (Deut. 12:29–31; 16:21–22; Gal. 5:19–21).

Because the purpose of church music is to provide a vehicle for worship, it must be God-focused rather than man-centered (cf. Ps. 27:6; 150:3–4). Any other purposes or priorities are secondary. From the style and performance to the audience and their reaction, nothing should ever usurp God’s place as the supreme object of our affection. Because biblical worship demands a God-centered focus, church music (if it is to legitimately be called worship music) must begin and end with Him.

2. Does your church music promote a high view of God?
It is not enough for church music to merely focus on God, if the view of God presented is inadequate. Too many Christian songs come dangerously close to violating the commandment, “You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain” (Ex. 20:7) by treating Him in a common, almost mundane fashion.

Music that is worthy of our Savior must promote an accurate and exalted view of who He is (cf. Is. 40:12–26). Throughout Scripture, all who encountered the living God were radically changed (Moses in Ex. 33–34; Isaiah in Is. 6; Peter, James, and John during the Transfiguration in Matt. 17). There was nothing ordinary about the Lord they saw or the trembling worship-filled response they had. Our music then, if it is to facilitate heartfelt worship, must clearly convey the majesty, glory, and honor of God (cf. Heb. 10:31; Rom. 11:33–36; Rev. 14:7).

3. Is your church music orderly? The God whom we serve is a God of order. This is most clearly seen in His creation of the world, where He brought form and function out of a watery mass (Gen. 1; cf. Rom. 1:20). It is no surprise, then, that the Apostle Paul commands the Corinthians that “all things [in the church] must be done properly and in an orderly manner” (1 Cor. 14:40).

Along these same lines, Ephesians 5:18 commands believers to continually be under the control of the Holy Spirit at all times. Church music, then, should never encourage participants to exchange the control of the Spirit for the control of some other force—be it emotional, psychological, or other. Rather, church members are to be under the influence of the Spirit-empowered Word of God (cf. Col. 3:16). Mindless emotionalism, often hyped up by repetition and “letting go,” comes closer to the paganism of the Gentiles (cf. Matt. 6:7) than to any form of biblical worship.

4. Is the content of your church music biblically sound? While instrumental music is certainly appropriate during the worship service (cf. 2 Chr. 5:13), most church music includes lyrical content. At the very least, these lyrics should be both intelligible and biblically accurate—readily conveying Scriptural truth to all who sing them (cf. Eph. 5:19–20).

Beyond accurate, lyrics should also be clear and in keeping with the biblical context. For example, songs that come from the Old Testament (even when the lyrics are directly cited from a passage) should not be made to apply to the church today if they only apply to Israel before Christ. (An excellent example of this is when Psalm 51:11 is sung without any explanation of the context.)

Lyrics should never be trite or flippant in their treatment of great biblical themes. Instead, church music (no matter the style) should deepen the biblical and theological understanding of the congregation. A song that is inaccurate, out-of-context, or trite only hinders the spiritual growth of those who sing it.

5. Does your church music promote unity in your church? As noted above, the primary goal of church music is worship. Yet, Scripture also speaks of Christian songs as a form of edification (1 Cor. 14:26; Eph. 5:19–20). Because the church is a body (1 Cor. 12), our worship toward God includes our service towards others (Rom. 12:1–9).

The goal of corporate worship then is to glorify God while serving others. With this in mind, the right approach to church music never selfishly demands personal preference, but always looks out for the interests of others (Php. 2:1–4). Moreover, if something we do tempts a fellow Christian to fall into sin, we must proceed with great caution and care (Rom. 14; 1 Cor. 8).

6. Is your church music performed with excellence? Church music, along with everything else we do, should be done for the glory and honor of God (1 Cor. 10:31). As our perfect Master and loving Father, He certainly deserves the very best that we can offer. To give Him anything less falls far short of what He demands. Even Old Testament Israel was expected to give the first and the best to the Lord (cf. Lev. 1–7; Num. 18:32).

Needless to say, if it bears His name, it’s worth our best. While a church may not have the resources to hire a full orchestra or recruit a large band, the music should still be done whole-heartedly and with excellence. Music that is not sincere, from a pure heart, is not worship (Ps. 24:3–4; Amos 5:23). And music that is done without excellence is usually distracting, thereby taking away from the God-centered atmosphere essential to true worship.

7. Does your church music prepare your people for the preaching of God’s Word? Second Timothy 4:2 commands us to “Preach the Word!” Just a few verses earlier, the Apostle Paul expounds on the sufficiency of Scripture and its importance in our lives (2 Tim. 3:16–17). It is only through God’s Word that we learn about Him; it is only through the Bible that God reveals Himself to us. The Scripture, therefore, must be the centerpiece of corporate worship—providing both the construct and the climax.

For this reason, times of singing (when God’s people speak to Him) should never overshadow or eclipse preaching (when God speaks to His people through His Word). Instead, worship through song should compliment the proclamation of the truth. Church music that takes place before the sermon should prepare the congregation for what the Holy Spirit wants them to hear. And church music that follows the sermon should be an appropriate response to what has just been received (cf. Col. 3:16–17).

8. Does your church music adorn the gospel of Jesus Christ? The New Testament model of church life implies that the local assembly is to primarily function as a place of worship and edification (cf. Acts 2:41–42). Evangelism, on the other hand, is expected of believers “as they go” throughout the rest of their daily activities (Matt. 28:18–20).

This being said, the local church (as an assembly of Christians) must still present a good testimony before a watching world (cf. 1 Cor. 14:23–25). After all, Paul commands us to “adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in every respect” (Titus 2:10), and Peter exhorts us to “proclaim the excellencies” of God (1 Peter 2:9). Church music, then, should be a wonderful witness to the greatness of our Lord and Savior. It should never tarnish His reputation or confuse unbelievers as to what the gospel teaches.

9. Does your church music promote passionate worship? As noted earlier, church music must be God-focused, reverently presenting Him in all of His majesty. At the same time, it should never be boring, dry, or stale. After all, God is not boring. And heaven (where the primary occupation is worship) is also not boring (cf. Rev. 4–5).

While maintaining a proper respect for God, biblical worship is always brimming with personal passion and Christ-exalting emotion (cf. 1 Chr. 15:29; 16:4–6). Of course, the expression of this passion will manifest itself differently in different congregations. Furthermore, this passion must be expressed in an orderly, Spirit-controlled manner. Nonetheless, passionless worship—sounding more like a lullaby than a glorious anthem—is not really worship at all (John 4:23).

10. Is your church’s philosophy of music based on biblical principle? Although numerous preferences and opinions exist, your church’s philosophy of music must be based on biblical principles. Church leaders should not simply adhere to certain standards because they have always done so. Nor should they blindly permit any type of music to be played in their church services. Instead, they should search the Scriptures (like the Bereans of Acts 17:11), determining the biblical principles that undergird a right philosophy of music in worship.

Once the principles have been established, the music leader has the liberty to apply those principles in different ways depending on the specific needs of his congregation. In the end, pastors must be careful not to exalt personal preference to the same level as biblical principle, or to ignore biblical principles under the assumption that everything about church music is preferential.

(This article was originally written for Pulpit Magazine and was later republished as an addendum in Fool's Gold? (Crossway, 2005). The entire contents of Fool's Gold? can be read online at Crossway's website.)

Executive Privileges: What are they

The Philippine Supreme court recently released its decision deciding in favor of Executive Privilege rather than the public's right to information. In its decision, SC held that the conversation between Romulo Neri and President Arroyo regarding the zTE NBN deal is covered by executive Privileges. So basically what are executive privileges. Below is a quotation from the landmark case Senate of the Philippines v. Ermita. This case discusses the constitutionality of EO 464.

SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. ERMITA
Carpio Morales, J:

Executive privilege:

The phrase “executive privilege” is not new in this jurisdiction. It has been used even prior to the promulgation of the 1986 Constitution. Being of American origin, it is best understood in light of how it has been defined and used in the legal literature of the United States.

Schwartz defines executive privilege as “the power of the Government to withhold information from the public, the courts, and the Congress.” Similarly, Rozell defines it as “the right of the President and high-level executive branch officers to withhold information from Congress, the courts, and ultimately the public.”

Executive privilege is, nonetheless, not a clear or unitary concept. It has encompassed claims of varying kinds. Tribe, in fact, comments that while it is customary to employ the phrase “executive privilege,” it may be more accurate to speak of executive privileges “since presidential refusals to furnish information may be actuated by any of at least three distinct kinds of considerations, and may be asserted, with differing degrees of success, in the context of either judicial or legislative investigations.”

One variety of the privilege, Tribe explains, is the state secrets privilege invoked by U.S. Presidents, beginning with Washington, on the ground that the information is of such nature that its disclosure would subvert crucial military or diplomatic objectives. Another variety is the informer’s privilege, or the privilege of the Government not to disclose the identity of persons who furnish information of violations of law to officers charged with the enforcement of that law. Finally, a generic privilege for internal deliberations has been said to attach to intragovernmental documents reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated.

Tribe’s comment is supported by the ruling in In re Sealed Case, thus:

Since the beginnings of our nation, executive officials have claimed a variety of privileges to resist disclosure of information the confidentiality of which they felt was crucial to fulfillment of the unique role and responsibilities of the executive branch of our government. Courts ruled early that the executive had a right to withhold documents that might reveal military or state secrets. The courts have also granted the executive a right to withhold the identity of government informers in some circumstances and a qualified right to withhold information related to pending investigations. x x x” (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)

The entry in Black’s Law Dictionary on “executive privilege” is similarly instructive regarding the scope of the doctrine.

This privilege, based on the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers, exempts the executive from disclosure requirements applicable to the ordinary citizen or organization where such exemption is necessary to the discharge of highly important executive responsibilities involved in maintaining governmental operations, and extends not only to military and diplomatic secrets but also to documents integral to an appropriate exercise of the executive’ domestic decisional and policy making functions, that is, those documents reflecting the frank expression necessary in intra-governmental advisory and deliberative communications.(Emphasis and underscoring supplied)


That a type of information is recognized as privileged does not, however, necessarily mean that it would be considered privileged in all instances. For in determining the validity of a claim of privilege, the question that must be asked is not only whether the requested information falls within one of the traditional privileges, but also whether that privilege should be honored in a given procedural setting.

The leading case on executive privilege in the United States is U.S. v. Nixon, decided in 1974. In issue in that case was the validity of President Nixon’s claim of executive privilege against a subpoena issued by a district court requiring the production of certain tapes and documents relating to the Watergate investigations. The claim of privilege was based on the President’s general interest in the confidentiality of his conversations and correspondence. The U.S. Court held that while there is no explicit reference to a privilege of confidentiality in the U.S. Constitution, it is constitutionally based to the extent that it relates to the effective discharge of a President’s powers. The Court, nonetheless, rejected the President’s claim of privilege, ruling that the privilege must be balanced against the public interest in the fair administration of criminal justice. Notably, the Court was careful to clarify that it was not there addressing the issue of claims of privilege in a civil litigation or against congressional demands for information.

Cases in the U.S. which involve claims of executive privilege against Congress are rare. Despite frequent assertion of the privilege to deny information to Congress, beginning with President Washington’s refusal to turn over treaty negotiation records to the House of Representatives, the U.S. Supreme Court has never adjudicated the issue. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in a case decided earlier in the same year as Nixon, recognized the President’s privilege over his conversations against a congressional subpoena. Anticipating the balancing approach adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Nixon, the Court of Appeals weighed the public interest protected by the claim of privilege against the interest that would be served by disclosure to the Committee. Ruling that the balance favored the President, the Court declined to enforce the subpoena.

In this jurisdiction, the doctrine of executive privilege was recognized by this Court in Almonte v. Vasquez. Almonte used the term in reference to the same privilege subject of Nixon. It quoted the following portion of the Nixon decision which explains the basis for the privilege:

“The expectation of a President to the confidentiality of his conversations and correspondences, like the claim of confidentiality of judicial deliberations, for example, has all the values to which we accord deference for the privacy of all citizens and, added to those values, is the necessity for protection of the public interest in candid, objective, and even blunt or harsh opinions in Presidential decision-making. A President and those who assist him must be free to explore alternatives in the process of shaping policies and making decisions and to do so in a way many would be unwilling to express except privately. These are the considerations justifying a presumptive privilege for Presidential communications. The privilege is fundamental to the operation of government and inextricably rooted in the separation of powers under the Constitution x x x ” (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)


Almonte involved a subpoena duces tecum issued by the Ombudsman against the therein petitioners. It did not involve, as expressly stated in the decision, the right of the people to information. Nonetheless, the Court recognized that there are certain types of information which the government may withhold from the public, thus acknowledging, in substance if not in name, that executive privilege may be claimed against citizens’ demands for information.

In Chavez v. PCGG, the Court held that this jurisdiction recognizes the common law holding that there is a “governmental privilege against public disclosure with respect to state secrets regarding military, diplomatic and other national security matters.” The same case held that closed-door Cabinet meetings are also a recognized limitation on the right to information.

Similarly, in Chavez v. Public Estates Authority, the Court ruled that the right to information does not extend to matters recognized as “privileged information under the separation of powers,” by which the Court meant Presidential conversations, correspondences, and discussions in closed-door Cabinet meetings. It also held that information on military and diplomatic secrets and those affecting national security, and information on investigations of crimes by law enforcement agencies before the prosecution of the accused were exempted from the right to information.

From the above discussion on the meaning and scope of executive privilege, both in the United States and in this jurisdiction, a clear principle emerges. Executive privilege, whether asserted against Congress, the courts, or the public, is recognized only in relation to certain types of information of a sensitive character. While executive privilege is a constitutional concept, a claim thereof may be valid or not depending on the ground invoked to justify it and the context in which it is made. Noticeably absent is any recognition that executive officials are exempt from the duty to disclose information by the mere fact of being executive officials. Indeed, the extraordinary character of the exemptions indicates that the presumption inclines heavily against executive secrecy and in favor of disclosure.

R.A 9492

Republic Act No. 9492 July 25, 2007
AN ACT RATIONALIZING THE CELEBRATION OF NATIONAL HOLIDAYS AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 26, CHAPTER 7, BOOK I OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 292, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF 1987
Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Section 26, Chapter 7, Book I of Executive Order No. 292, as amended, otherwise known as the Administrative Code of 1987, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 26, Regular Holidays and Nationwide Special Days. ? (1) Unless otherwise modified by law, and or proclamation, the following regular holidays and special days shall be observed in the country:

a) Regular Holidays
New year's Day-January 1

Maundy Thursday-Movable date

Good Friday -Movable date

Eidul Fitr -Movable date

Araw ng Kagitingan(Bataaan and Corregidor Day)-Monday nearest April 9

Labor Day-Monday nearest May 1

Independence Day-Monday nearest June 12

National Heroes Day -Last Monday of August

Bonifacio Day -Monday nearest November 30

Christmas Day -December 25

Rizal Day-Monday nearest December 30

b) Nationwide Special Holidays:

Ninoy Aquino Day -onday nearest August 21

All Saints Day -November 1

Last Day of the Year-December 31

c) In the event the holiday falls on a Wednesday, the holiday will be observed on the Monday of the week. If the holiday falls on a Sunday, the holiday will be observed on the Monday that follows:

Provided, That for movable holidays, the President shall issue a proclamation, at least six months prior to the holiday concerned, the specific date that shall be declared as a nonworking day:

Provided, however, The Eidul Adha shall be celebrated as a regional holiday in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao."

SEC. 2. All laws, orders, presidential issuances, rules and regulations or part thereof inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SEC. 3. This Act shall take effect after fifteen (15) days following its publication in at least two newspapers of general circulation.
Approved,
JOSE DE VENECIA JR.Speaker of the House of Representatives
MANNY VILLARPresident of the Senate
This Act which originated in the Senate was finally passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on January 30, 2007 and February 7, 2007, respectively.
ROBERTO P. NAZARENOSecretary GeneralHouse of Represenatives
OSCAR G. YABESSecretary of Senate
Approved: July 25, 2007
GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYOPresident of the Philippines

Freedom of Religion: Ecclesiastical affairs according to Philippine Jurisprudence

G.R. No. 124382. August 16, 1999
Pastor Dionisio Austria v. NLRC
Kapunan, J:

"An ecclesiastical affair is “one that concerns doctrine, creed, or form or worship of the church, or the adoption and enforcement within a religious association of needful laws and regulations for the government of the membership, and the power of excluding from such associations those deemed unworthy of membership.Based on this definition, an ecclesiastical affair involves the relationship between the church and its members and relate to matters of faith, religious doctrines, worship and governance of the congregation. To be concrete, examples of this so-called ecclesiastical affairs to which the State cannot meddle are proceedings for excommunication, ordinations of religious ministers, administration of sacraments and other activities with which attached religious significance."

Freedom of Religion: Jurisprudence

G.R. No. 119673. July 26, 1996
Iglesia ni Cristo v. Court of Appeals
Puno, J:

"Under our constitutional scheme, it is not the task of the State to favor any religion by protecting it against an attack by another religion. Religious dogmas and beliefs are often at war and to preserve peace among their followers, especially the fanatics, the establishment clause of freedom of religion prohibits the State from leaning towards any religion. Vis-a-vis religious differences, the State enjoys no banquet of options. Neutrality alone is its fixed and immovable stance. In fine, respondent board cannot squelch the speech of petitioner Iglesia ni Cristo simply because it attacks other religions, even if said religion happens to be the most numerous church in our country. In a State where there ought to be no difference between the appearance and the reality of freedom of religion, the remedy against bad theology is better theology. The bedrock of freedom of religion is freedom of thought and it is best served by encouraging the marketplace of dueling ideas. When the luxury of time permits, the marketplace of ideas demands that speech should be met by more speech for it is the spark of opposite speech, the heat of colliding ideas that can fan the embers of truth."