MANILA, Philippines -- It is almost midnight as I write this, with a live television feed from the House of Representatives ongoing. Our representatives are casting their vote on the issue of declaring the post of Speaker vacant. So far, those in favor are a majority and one can only imagine what Speaker Jose de Venecia feels as he watches former friends, relatives and allies vote against him. Some go through the motions of reiterating their friendship before stabbing the Speaker in the back. Let’s hope he and his family now know who their real friends are...

The historian of the 21st century has the advantage of video recordings of the proceedings of the Senate and the House. In the past, everything -- the debates, interventions and other comments -- were transcribed from stenographers’ notes. Then all the documents admitted as part of the record were compiled and published in those hefty unread volumes known as “Record of the Senate” and “Congressional Record.”

As the late historian Teodoro Agoncillo used to say, there is a lot to harvest in the vineyard that is Philippine history, but unfortunately there are few workers in the field. Fortunately, there have been a handful of books on the Philippine legislature that have recently seen print. The most comprehensive but now outdated “Assembly of the Nation: A Centennial History of the House of Representatives of the Philippines, 1907-2007” by Quezon, Barns, Albano, Jose and Martinez is a good place to start...

Watching the televised voting Monday night made me realize that the written record may be easier to scan and use, but the dry text does not indicate inflections of voice, facial expressions, background noise, all the emotions that come with the heat of the moment. All these minor details add color and context to the vote or the interpretation of this when viewed later. Watching the proceedings at the House was watching history unfold, but it was a boring show indeed.

Monday night at the House has been described as a “numbers game,” something that we have seen from the very beginning in the short-lived republic at Malolos. The issue was the separation of church and state. Long and eloquent speeches were made, but the delegates stopped short of voting and making a final decision. The Conservatives were partial to the friars and the Radicals were in favor of clear separation of church and state. According to the memoirs of Jose Alejandrino, the impasse was broken by Gen. Antonio Luna, who employed one of those tricks peculiar to his character and which made him famous later. He assembled all the delegates of the Radical faction who had confidence in him and advised them to keep away from sessions of the Congress but to remain within call at a moment’s notice. With the Radicals absent, the Conservatives constituted a majority during the sessions. Having made a careful count and thinking themselves assured of victory, the Conservatives asked for a vote while the few Radicals present registered token opposition. The motion to call a vote was carried. Then at the precise moment of balloting, Luna asked all his adherents to enter the session hall en masse, to the surprise of the confident Conservatives. The vote was taken and they won, if I remember right, by one or two votes. In this manner the provision in our Constitution calling for the separation of church and state was secured.

The Malolos Republic may have been smaller in size but the complexities of legislation have not changed in a century. Comments are welcome at aocampo@ateneo.edu.

(From : www.inquirer.net 06 February 2008. Copyright INQUIRER.net. All rights reserved.)

The Philippine Daily Inquirer reports the same event with the following headline : The Assassination of De Venecia and the report partly reads -

Compare this "baptism into congressional politics" with Jesus' "baptism into ministry" also referred to as "pilgrimage of love and service" by the writers of The Way of Pilgrimage -