What's not wrong with street parties during the Novena week again?
After all the denials and the protestations of Mayor Jesse Robredo and his administration, the recently released joint statement of the Naga City government with the Archdiocese of Caceres has proven that street parties not only have nothing to do with the celebration of the Peñafrancia Fiesta. They also serve as undue distractions to pilgrims and devotees.
The statement which was a result of the deliberations between representatives of the City government and the Archdiocese has vindicated what this newspaper-together with a multitude of INA's devotees-had raised nearly two years ago: street parties should not be allowed during the Fiesta week because not only do they have any relevance to the celebration of the Fiesta, they are also inimical to its celebration.
The Robredo Administration's retraction of its position on this matter, as evidenced by its agreement with the Archdiocese of Caceres on banning street parties during the Novena week is to be welcomed for its good sense in admitting to be wrong.
Meanwhile, the reason for the dialogue itself which issued these results requires some rehearsal if only to further explain the latter.
It is clear and obvious that the dialogue was about which civic and business activities are in consonance with the authentic celebration of INA's fiesta and thus be allowed by the Naga City government. It is clear that the schedule of the Traslacion and the Fluvial processions, the novena masses-activities which are relevant to the Fiesta-were never subjected to deliberation. Consequently, what were at issue from the very outset were the civic and business activities allowed and even pushed by the City government during the Fiesta week. The dialogue, at the very outset, was not about the religious activities inhering in the celebration of INA's fiesta. They were about street parties, beauty pageants, parades, trade fairs, and other activities which in the past the City government through Mayor Robredo's decision allowed if not initiated.
In other words, what the dialogue really tried to resolve was which civic and business activities previously allowed by the City government can be deemed "acceptable" by the Archdiocese AS relevant to the Fiesta.
To reiterate, street parties-the dialogue's results prove-are undue distractions. If these results are to be questioned or challenged because of, say, "lack of consultation"; then it befalls upon the organizer of the dialogue (the Robredo Administration, in this case) to provide an explanation. Excepting those from the Archdiocese, the City government was the one who sent, supposedly, representatives of the sectors involved.
In the end, and even notwithstanding a supposed survey that indirectly defends the harm these street parties cause, they are now banned during the novena week. Much to the chagrin of their rabble-rousing and demagogic defenders.