Silence and Rage
By Antonio Montalvan II
Inquirer News Service

CHRISTIAN monasticism has a tradition of silence that is at once profound and formidable. There are Catholic religious monasteries, for example, where the evening period, which lasts until dawn, is a period of "Great Silence." In their traditions, silence is essential to prayer and piety and is deemed as a profound way of listening to God.

But non-monastic religious orders have also appropriated the tradition of silence. The Jesuits, for example, undergo the 30-day retreat of the so-called Ignatian Exercises, where the retreatants can opt for silence-that is, 30 days without conversation, unless it is carried out with the retreat director.

Then there is the non-divine side of silence-as the Mafia's dreaded "omerta" -- the code that binds a mafioso from "spilling the beans" on a crime committed by a fellow mafioso. Needless to say, the violation of the code can cost a mafioso his life. This is one instance where silence is used as a tool for abetting crime.

But apart from its dramatic uses, silence is also practiced in everyday life, depending on the mores and customs of a culture group. There is the so-called "silent treatment" that two persons in a state of misunderstanding may resort to. In this case, the silence is broken when the differences are mended.

On the other hand, romping kids are sometimes hushed to silence by the adults in the household with a "shhh!" Silence has its golden moments, too. In another context, I have seen families whose table manners sway into delightful conversations breaking into wholesome laughter. But they make it a point never to laugh at other peoples' mistakes. They simply do not stab people behind their backs. Any sassy interjection is met with silence, a signal that such talk is uncharitable.

The dictum "less talk, less mistake" is another form of silence in the context of self-preservation. In another context, silence may be the only "choice" available to people under a despotic regime. Sociopolitical pundits refer to this kind of silence as a "culture of silence." But in the classic song "The Sound of Silence," Simon and Garfunkel remind us that "silence (is) like a cancer (that) grows." Taken to mean in a sociological light, the "silent majority" may be silent for now but not for long. Rage can be silent, but as a saying goes, "Silent waters run deep."

I want to understand what the silence of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on the "Garci" tape controversy means. And I am reminded of a real-life anecdote about a girl who was suspected of wrongdoing by her parents. The girl admitted her mistake-that was after her father spoke to her and told her one simple truth: the importance of a good name and the power we have to achieve that name.

Gloria told clerics in Cagayan de Oro that she is in a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation. The opposition will aim for the kill whether she admits or not that the female voice in the controversial tape is hers, she said.

Such narrow vision surprises me. I do not say she is guilty. It may not be her on the tape, after all -- given today's age of immense technological possibilities. I give her the benefit of doubt. But if you listen to the tapes and read the transcript, and use as hypothesis that it was an official of a constitutionally independent body she was talking to -- and she was at that time a candidate who enjoyed the perks of her incumbent office -- then the matter is something that certainly should not be met with silence. That is precisely why I think she is not damned either way. She truly has a choice. At the very least, she can apologize for impropriety. And I think the Filipino people will believe her, nay, even respect her. Why, we have short memories anyway and, at best, we are easily forgiving. Look, we have forgotten Joseph Estrada's midnight Cabinet carousals and Laarni's (Laarni Enriquez, one of Estrada's mistresses) mansions.

On the other hand, if she does an admission and relinquishes power, won't she be hailed for statesmanship? Gloria is now at the crossroads: one direction gives her the choice to preserve a good name. A good name in history is priceless. But I do not think she understands the great value of the opportunity that now lies before her.

So what does her silence mean? Without saying she is guilty, I think it means this: arrogance. When a family member is suspected of wrongdoing, her family first asks: Did you do it? That is now what Gloria's Filipino family is asking. And ask they should. For Malacañang is not all about power. It also signifies service. But when the person who is asked simply ignores the question, now that is haughtiness. How much more if the silence comes from a person who has the obligation to answer the question?

If there is anybody who needs to be silent, it is the demagogues out there taking advantage of the precarious situation we now are in. Why, even Samuel Ong is suspect and shouldn't be off the hook himself. Why was he surrounded by FPJ's honchos? Why could JV Ejercito not hide his glee as he called in the crowd a la Edsa and declared that his father, detained in a villa, is ready to take the reins of government, as an interim president? Many opposition leaders immediately issued statements reminiscent, or even suggestive, of People Power. And Bishop Teodoro Bacani was no help either by impressing upon us a subliminal message, blessing Ong who is part of the problem. The demagogues must shut up. It is Gloria who needs to talk.

What we need at this time is a respite from our lying, blabbering, rumor-mongering, politicking national leaders. And what great silence it will truly be.

Comments to monta@cu-cdo.edu.ph