3rd Sunday of Advent

In the case of Cipriano “Efren” Bautista versus The COMELEC, Municipal Board of Canvassers of Navotas, Metro Manila (and Miguelita del Rosario), G.R. No. 133840, the petitioner was a duly registered candidate for the position of Mayor of Navotas in 1998 election. Then a certain Edwin “Efren” Bautista also filed a certificate of candidacy for the same position of mayor at the very last minute. Bearing the same appellation with the petitioner, the latter filed a petition to declare Edwin Bautista as a nuisance candidate which the COMELEC saw merit as they resolved it in his favor. Consequently, they ordered the cancellation of Edwin”s certificate of candidacy so that his name was not included in the list of candidates. But Edwin filed a motion for reconsideration which resulted to the inclusion of his name in the list pending its resolution. So the petitioner, through his counsel, gave instructions to the Board of Election Inspectors to tally separately the votes for “Efren Bautista”, “Efren”, “E. Bautista” and “Bautista”. The COMELEC chairman affirmed the said instruction in a Memorandum. All these events occurred before the election. It was only two days after the election the COMELEC finally denied Edwin’s motion for reconsideration and declared him a nuisance candidate. Given this set of facts, the primordial concern of the Court was to verify whether or not on the day of election, there was only one “Efren Bautista” as validly registered candidate as far as the electorate was concerned. It must be emphasized that the case involved a ground for disqualification which clearly affected the voters’ will and caused confusion. Thus, extreme caution was observed before any ballot was invalidated. The petitioner was able to prove his identity bearing the name Cipriano and appellation “Efren Bautista” in various elective positions, i.e., from Barangay Captain to councilor then Vice Mayor of Navotas. It was obvious then that the votes separately tallied were not really stray votes. Therefore, the COMELEC was directed to order the inclusion, as part of the valid votes of petitioner, those votes that were separately tallied by the Board of Election Inspectors.

My dear friends in Christ, this case reminds us that each person is born unique; that no person is exactly the same with the other even if they are twin brothers or sisters. Yet, there are times when an identity is challenged as one is closely identical or similar with the other. It also happens that two people resemble in a lot of ways which somehow causes confusion to the mind of many people to determine one from the other. In the cited case, it was the Court which verified the identity of “Efren Bautista”. On the part of the petitioner, he was able to reveal and prove his identity which was his alone to claim.

In contrast, our Gospel, Matthew 11:2-11, said that while John the Baptist was in prison, he heard of the activities of Christ. He was sure that only the Christ could do all the good things that he heard of; those were unique to Christ. Even if John was so sure about the Christ, he wanted to hear it from Jesus Himself to reveal His identity which is His alone to claim. He then sent his disciples to Jesus, asking Him: “Are you the one who is to come or should we expect someone else?” The question of John was in the form of a searching question. He wanted to verify whether or not on the day he heard about the activities of Jesus, there was only one Christ. If so, then it must be Jesus. I would like to emphasize that John asked Jesus not because he was confused regarding the identity of Jesus but for ordinary people including his disciples to avoid being confused if someone other than Jesus would claim for the title of Christ. The answer of Jesus to his question was not just a simple “Yes or No”. He answered them by saying, “Go and report what you hear and see: the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are made clean, the deaf hear, the dead are brought back to life and good news is reaching the poor.” Why did Jesus have to answer like this? Well, it is easy for one to say “Yes” that he is the Christ but how about proving it through one’s action? For Jesus, His actions speak louder than words that He is the Christ. If one wants to verify whether Jesus is the Christ or not, then let His actions prove everything. In our Gospel, truly the actions of Jesus proved His identity as Christ which was his alone to claim.

My dear friends in Christ, our Gospel presents to us how we should answer when our identity is placed in question. Unlike in the cited case, we are not encouraged to provide documents or record of credentials or accomplishments to reveal and prove our identity. We are not even encouraged to mention that we belong to a noble lineage or we are members of any respected social class. Rather, we are only called to answer in the same manner Jesus answered John’s disciples i.e., we reveal and prove our identity through our daily actions. Whenever we are criticized, mocked or unjustly judged, we learn from Jesus, we can prove them wrong by our actions. Metaphorically, we cannot expect a pig to crow like a cock. We cannot expect a cock to bark like a dog. The actions of these animals tell us what kind of animals they are. So too, our actions will tell us who we are. Our actions can prove our identity which is ours alone to claim. Therefore, let us do things the way we are. Amen.