The Woke Juan

03/08/2025

In the days surrounding the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., leaders of the civil rights movement startled their white supporters with a change in direction. Their efforts had...

03/08/2025

Is religion really preventing progress? It is not a new accusation, but it lands with the same familiar punch. The claim goes something like this: if only religion, and let us be honest, they almost always mean the Catholic Church, would get out of the way, society could finally move forward. But that invites a deeper question. Forward toward what, exactly?

Progress today is often defined as the expansion of abortion rights, the normalization of no-fault divorce, the celebration of gender ideology, the legalization of euthanasia, the state sponsorship of surrogacy, the codification of subjective laws, the promotion of s*xual objectification, and the redefinition of family and identity in ways that sever them from anything fixed or inherited.

When the Church voices concern about these developments (which frankly, the clergy in the Philippines has not done a great job of), it is accused of standing in the way of freedom. But we need to ask what kind of freedom is being offered. Is it a freedom that allows the human person to flourish, or is it a freedom that asks us to forget who we are?

Christianity has always held that history moves with purpose. It does not loop aimlessly, nor does it drift without direction. There is an arc, but it bends not toward novelty for novelty’s sake, but toward a final truth—toward redemption. The Church teaches that history culminates in Christ. Progressivism, on the other hand, borrows the idea of an arc but removes its anchor. It trades the promise of fulfillment for the pursuit of endless self-expression. It replaces destiny with novelty and substitutes union with God for union with the self.

Yet at the heart of this version of progress is a strange emptiness. Its promise of liberation depends on erasing boundaries: boundaries rooted in nature, reason, tradition, and even the body. It offers autonomy, but only after stripping away the very structures that make autonomy even intelligible.

And here lies the irony. In the name of “freedom”, we are increasingly told what to believe, how to speak, and which truths are safe to express. Disagreement is no longer dissent. It is harm. And so, to protect this fragile vision, the state must step in—not just to guard rights, but to reeducate and reshape the conscience. It is a curious vision of liberty that demands ever more power for the state in order to keep everyone "properly" free. And if not the state, then other actors who profit from by supplying the unnatural products to sustain this unsustainable "freedom" being offered.

Much of what is framed today as progress rests not on truth but on emotion, particularly the invocation of happiness. We are told abortion empowers women because it frees them to pursue their goals without the burden of a child. Divorce is praised for giving people a second chance at happiness, though few mention that second marriages often end in the same sorrow. We are asked to affirm any identity or lifestyle because doing so makes people feel seen, as if feelings were sufficient to define what is real or right.

In each case, happiness becomes the unquestionable good, the final word in every debate. And to challenge that narrative is to be cast as unkind, outdated, or worse, a moral obstructionist. Bigot. Transphobe. Prude. To accommodate this new definition of progress, those who see the dangers are labeled as people with an irrational fear. So much for diversity of thought.

But a society that cannot distinguish between compassion and indulgence will not remain healthy for long. If happiness alone justifies our choices, then even the indefensible can be reframed as virtue. Let's respect adults having relationships with minors because, well, that makes them happy. Or let's allow people to marry their pets because, well, we need to respect their happiness. That is not progress. That is collapse dressed in sentiment.

This is the deeper concern that thinkers like John Rawls, and even more so his critics, have pointed to. Freedom is not merely the absence of limits. True freedom depends on the proper formation of reason. And reason does not form itself. It must be taught, shaped, corrected, and refined. Left to drift, it can mistake sentiment for logic and novelty for truth.

Culture, the Church, and natural law are not shackles. They are guideposts. They orient us toward what is good and enduring. They do not crush human freedom. They instruct it. And they do so with the long view of human dignity in mind, not the short-term comfort of affirmation without understanding.

Those who push for the new kind of progress often place their trust in the power of law to shape a new kind of person. Where moral formation was once the work of family, Church, and culture, it is now increasingly the task of legislation and state-sponsored norms. The personal becomes political not because it naturally belongs there, but because once the compass of tradition is discarded, something else must guide the way.

If inherited wisdom is seen as a threat to freedom, it must be dismantled. If cultural memory stands in the way, it must be rewritten. The law becomes the teacher. Every institution becomes the classroom. And the lesson is always about liberation, never about limits.

But for all the talk of liberation, we are lonelier. We are more divided. We are less sure of who we are. Is this really progress? Isn’t this a symptom of a society slowly detaching itself from what once gave it shape and meaning. What we are living through then is not progress, but unrooting. And it is not the Church that stands in the way of true progress. It is the Church that still dares to ask whether what we call progress today is worthy of the human person. Whether it leads to flourishing or to degradation.

To believe in truth is not to oppose freedom. It is to insist that freedom must be ordered toward something greater than the self. These days, we want the self to be the new gods. If the Church is guilty of anything, it is in refusing to treat every desire as destiny. It still proclaims that real freedom is not found in casting off the truth, but in allowing ourselves to be formed by it.

02/08/2025

Curious, isn’t it, what now passes for “progress.” The unraveling of marriage, the erasure of the family, the sanctioned killing of the unborn, and the growing industry of reimagining bodies to suit inner feelings—all hailed as milestones of human achievement.

We are told it is compassionate to hasten death, liberating to confuse and s*xualize children, and enlightened to codify subjective identities into law. Nature is no longer something to be respected but something to be reconfigured. Death is framed as dignity. Disintegration is reframed as freedom. And somehow, this march toward disorder and human degradation is considered a step forward. Perhaps profit is blinding.

Progress, at least the last time I checked a dictionary, implied movement toward something better. One might ask, what precisely is improved when alienation replaces belonging, when children are deprived of a stable home, or when human worth is made contingent on autonomy? What precisely is bettered? Feelings?

This is not moral evolution. It is regression wrapped in euphemism. A tower of Babel bound to collapse.

And yet, the usual suspects are blamed. Religion, they say, is the root of repression. But perhaps the deeper problem lies in the abandonment of religious moral frameworks and not their presence. Strip away structure and what do you get? Chaos. Go against nature and you pay the consequences: loneliness.

Send a message to learn more

01/08/2025

Andrew Amos calls out the harm of gender “affirmation”

31/07/2025

The men and women of Courage demonstrate in Finding the Pearl of Great Hope what authentic witness looks like in our time. Subtitled Faith Stories of Persons with Same-Sex Attractions and Gender Identity Concerns, with Their Loved Ones, this book is more than a collection of testimonies. It is a response to a culture that has lost its bearings on s*x, identity, and the demands of discipleship. These are not polemics. These are lives lived in fidelity to Christ and the Church. The power of this book lies precisely in its refusal to conform to the assumptions of the age.

There will be those who dismiss this volume. The cover may be beautiful, but the words “same-s*x attractions” and “gender identity concerns” will make some uneasy. For others, the book will seem to court controversy, perhaps even be mistaken for a kind of apologetic for q***r Catholicism. But this is not q***r literature. It is Christian literature. It does not affirm self-invention. It speaks of surrender to truth. In doing so, it gives voice to those rarely heard. Within the so-called LGBTQ+ community there are men and women who have chosen to walk the narrow path. They are often ridiculed or ignored by both the secular world and by progressive factions within the Church. This book finally allows them to speak and have their voices heard.

Ours is a time of caricature. The LGBT label flattens out complexity. It reduces human persons to symbols in a moral and political contest. These stories push back against that reduction. They are not narratives of pride. They are confessions of grace. The contributors do not seek applause. They speak of wounds, conversion, prayer, and sacrifice. What emerges is not ideology, but fidelity. These are lives marked by struggle, yes, but also by obedience, gratitude, and most importantly, hope.

The dominant culture celebrates self-assertion. This book offers something different. It insists that the human person finds fulfillment not in the affirmation of desire, but in conformity to Christ. That may be a scandal today. So be it. The Church has always been a sign of contradiction. This book is a reminder that within the Body of Christ are those who carry heavy crosses and still choose to remain. They are not demanding change to doctrine. They are asking to be seen, and to be accompanied in the truth.

Finding the Pearl of Great Hope charts the journey of Courage Philippines from its humble beginnings to its present mission across the country. These pages document thirty years of quiet fidelity. From the isolation of a pioneer member living in Japan to a woman who learns to see her same-s*x attractions not as a curse but as a call to chastity, the book reveals the hidden lives of those striving to follow Christ. There are stories of sorrow and abuse, including a painful account of clerical betrayal. There are stories of deliverance, reconciliation, and of parents learning to walk with their children. One man recalls his descent into promiscuity, numbering his partners in the hundreds, and how he was brought to repentance. Another recounts the silent prayers of his mother, whose intercession brought her back to the faith. These stories do not conform to a single narrative. Some are marked by dramatic reversals. Others unfold slowly. But all testify to the grace of conversion.

This is not a book of lament. It does not treat suffering as a spectacle, nor reduce personal histories to cautionary tales. What emerges instead is an interior landscape shaped by search and surrender. Each writer offers insight into the deeper conditions of the human heart, especially as it wrestles with desire, identity, and the longing for God. The stories are not apologetics. They are testimonies. In them we hear of chastity not as repression but as freedom. We see that holiness is not an ideal imposed from without, but a summons written into the soul. What is most striking is how often these lives were overlooked or misunderstood, even by the Church. And yet, here they are—faithful, open, ready to speak.

The interweaving of verses from the Song of Songs is fitting. These stories are shaped by longing. There is yearning here, not only for belonging, but for God. The language of the soul in search of its Beloved runs through each chapter. In a world obsessed with affirmation, these men and women testify to something else. They remind us that true fulfillment cannot be found in the city of man.

The book opens with reflections from Courage chaplains and closes with the teachings of the Church to contextualize the testimonies. This is not incidental. It is an act of fidelity. In a time when q***r theology seeks to revise Christian doctrine to conform to contemporary sensibilities, Finding the Pearl of Great Hope offers a different vision. It does not deny the complexities of experience. But it insists that experience must be interpreted in light of God’s Word and the moral wisdom of the Church.

This is not a book only for those with same-s*x attractions or gender identity concerns. It is for Catholics who want to understand their brothers and sisters more deeply. It is for families who do not know how to speak. It is for pastors who do not know how to listen. And it is for all who are tempted to see this issue as merely a matter of politics or policy. The lives within this book are not abstractions. They are lives formed, broken, healed, and made whole in the Church. They are signs of contradiction in a culture of confusion. And they point us, again and again, toward the One whom the heart loves.

As part of our 30th anniversary celebration, we have compiled the faith journeys of Courage and Encourage members through the years in a book. We have entitled it “Finding the Pearl of Great Hope: Journeys of Courage”.

The book launch will be this Friday, July 18 and Saturday, July 19 at the PCNE at UST.

We invite you to listen to and read the stories of persons with same s*x attraction and gender identity concerns journeying through their faith and, in the process, find too the Pearl of Great Hope that found us.

See you at the PCNE!

28/07/2025

Happy 30th Anniversary to Courage Philippines!

21/07/2025

Just to add to what The Cebuano Conservative said: “Kindness costs nothing” sounds good at first, but it’s now being used to force people into agreeing with things they may not believe in, like calling someone by their preferred pronouns or agreeing with gender identity claims (yes, claims). If you don’t go along with it, you’re suddenly called unkind, hateful, or a bigot.

But is it really kind to lie?

Imagine someone with anorexia says, “I’m fat,” when they’re actually very thin. Would it be kind to agree with them? No, it would be harmful. The truly kind thing to do is to tell them the truth, even if it’s hard.

Or you can think about a child who believes they’re a dog. Do we start feeding them from a bowl on the floor? Do we leash them? No, because love means guiding someone back to reality, not encouraging confusion.

Kindness without truth can actually hurt people.

"Kindness costs nothing."

I've been noticing the LGBTQIA movement use this quote more and more nowadays as some sort of slogan. The idea is that, for instance, respecting someone's preferred pronouns is not hurting anybody. It's simply the "kind" thing to do.

Here's the thing. When they say this, what they're implying is that any disagreement is "unkind," that any nonconformity is "hate," that any pushback is "homophobia." A seemingly well-intentioned proverb turned into a weapon of manipulation, emotional blackmail, and gaslighting to guilt you to submission.

In most instances, yes, kindness costs nothing. But in the context of the gender ideology, where "kindness" means complying to their demands without fail or question, there's a heavy price to pay down the road, including suppression of speech, erasure of women, rejection of objective reality, and indoctrination and castration of children.

Kindness costs nothing. But when it's kindness without the truth, then you become an instrument for deception. There are nuances even in seemingly wise-sounding sayings. "Kindness" should never be used as a tool to silence people. It's never unkind to speak the truth.

16/07/2025

16/07/2025

"Is liberal America finally rousing itself from its trans-rights fever dream? One hopeful sign is the recent publication in the New York Times of an excoriating critique of the trans lobby’s attempt to defend ‘gender-affirming healthcare for children’ in the US Supreme Court."

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/07/15/is-the-new-york-times-turning-against-the-trans-lobby

Liberal America is finally voicing its scepticism of extreme gender ideology.

15/07/2025

A quote from Chesterton has a way of cutting through the noise. It reminds us that the most terrifying feature of our present ideological landscape is not its novelty or brazenness, but its sincerity. The apostles of today’s fashionable dogmas are not cynical manipulators. They believe. They are convinced. That is what makes them dangerous. Today’s ideological movements are propelled not by skepticism but by conviction. Their adherents are sure of their cause, persuaded that they are on the side of justice, freedom, and progress

Truth, at the very least, is accessible through common sense, through what we see and know by experience. And yet, in an age of scientific progress and technological mastery, we are more beguiled than ever by the lie that the body is malleable and a canvas that can be redesigned, that nature is negotiable, that one can, in effect, square a circle. Such myths now pass as knowledge, and dissent is denounced as hatred. Language is reshaped to suit the needs of the revolution. Words are diluted. Meanings are shifted. Euphemisms are deployed to disarm conscience and stifle reason.

Freedom, once understood as the capacity to choose the good, has been recast as a license to remake reality according to personal will. We are told that to deny anyone's “truth” is to oppress them, that the highest moral act is affirmation, and that the only sin remaining is judgment. The result is a culture adrift, no longer anchored in the permanent things but in the self’s shifting desires. We no longer worship the Creator. We worship choice. And the consequences of the choice are evident. We do not want the struggle. We want approval and even wholesale acceptance.

Those who claim to be oppressed are often made so not by genuine exclusion, but by those who profit from their grievance. The architects of our new order do not liberate; they conscript. They mobilize the aggrieved to wage cultural war on behalf of an elite that promises them dignity while robbing them of truth.

One must ask: How many of those who promote these falsehoods actually care for the people they purport to defend? How many are animated by genuine moral conviction, rather than by hostility to the Gospel and contempt for the created order? They reject Scripture as myth while bowing before the idols of the present age. The new cult demands sacrifice, and it is offered daily: reason, the human body, and the unborn are laid upon the altar of unbounded autonomy.

More troubling still is the fact that many who fall for these lies do so within the very precincts of religion. The lie does not only enter from without. It takes root within. Churches, temples, and sanctuaries—once places of worship and truth—now echo with half-truths and therapeutic mantras. The faithful are told to embrace ambiguity, to reinterpret the hard sayings of Christ in light of changing cultural moods. Priests, pastors, and preachers speak of a God of mercy but rarely of a God of justice, fashioning Him not as He is, but as they want Him to be. They preach a domesticated god, one who affirms every desire, never corrects, never commands, never wounds in order to heal.

One wonders if these people are truly prepared to meet the one who has commissioned them.

But nature is not easily dismissed. It is not infinitely plastic. It bears witness. The river, polluted and rerouted, will one day break its banks and return to its course, reclaiming by swallowing. So it is with the human person. We can ignore nature, mock it, and legislate against it, but we cannot erase it. Going against order has never been sustainable. Is it not enough that nations are quietly vanishing, their birthrates collapsing, their cradles empty? The very future is thinning before our eyes, and yet we call it freedom.

At the same time, diseases spread, the consequences of appetites no longer governed by reason but indulged without restraint. But rather than call for temperance, we are told to double down, to institutionalize the disorder, and to shield it with pharmaceutical artifice. The unnatural is exalted as progress, while the call to virtue, to chastity, to the recovery of moral sanity is dismissed as repression. We do not return to what is good. We flee from it.

And yet, men and women persist still in the ancient temptation: to become as gods. They deny what they are and call it freedom. They exalt impulse and call it authenticity. They demand the power to determine life and death, all in service of disordered desire. This is not progress. It is revolt—against nature, against truth, and ultimately against God.

Progress that degrades the human person is not progress. And yet we are told that the mutilation of the body is liberation, that the dismantling of the family is justice, that animals deserve more protection than unborn children, and that death—chosen, sterilized, and medicalized—is the final act of compassion. This is not human flourishing. It is human degradation, a culture of death dressed in the language of care, where nothing truly grows, only withers.

So many see nothing wrong. Perhaps that is the frightening thing. The loss of the sense of sin and to believe this loss as a gain.

Send a message to learn more