Monday, August 31, 2015

The case of Jesuit Vicente Cañas, killed in 1987 in Brazil, is reopened

by Luis Miguel Modino (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Religión Digital
August 23,2015

The Jesuits have always been present on the "frontiers." In fact, the first Jesuit pope often repeats that we need to be present at the peripheries. One of those Jesuits committed to the causes of the excluded was Vicente Cañas Costa, born in Albacete on October 22, 1939, and killed in Mato Grosso, Brazil, on April 6, 1987.

Father Vicente, who was part of CIMI (Indigenous Missionary Council, per its acronym in Portuguese), started in 1974 to have first contacts with the Enawenê-Nawê indigenous people who were living in voluntary isolation in the state of Mato Grosso. In 1977, he decided to live among them, along with fellow Jesuit Tomás Aquino Lisboa, learning their language, assuming their customs and way of life, being known as Kiwxi and considered another member of their people by the natives themselves. For ten years he worked on the preservation of their territory and demarcation of indigenous land and issues related to health.

The missionaries were concerned about the abuses of the landowners in the region who were arriving, occupying large tracts of land and killing the natives who were there. We are talking about the period of the military dictatorship, in which the persecution and attempted extermination of the indigenous people was cruel and constant. In this situation, the presence and especially the actions of the Jesuits, made the landowners uncomfortable, and so, ten years later, they ordered him killed.

The order came from the owner of the Londrina Hacienda, Pedro Chiqetti, who had misappropriated a large area within the indigenous land of the Enawenê with the collaboration of the chief of police of the city of Juína, who hired the thugs to carry out the assassination.

Vicente Cañas was in a shack away from the village where he kept "white stuff" -- radio, clothes, utensils, tools -- and where he stayed quarantined when he returned to the village after some time off, in order not to spread diseases from elsewhere to the indigenous. That was the situation that the six sent by the landlord took advantage of to commit the heinous murder. They beat and stabbed him to death, wanting in this way to cast blame on the indigenous, arguing that they might not have been happy with his presence among them.

After a time without any signs of life, his fellow Jesuit went looking and found his mummified body which would be buried by the natives in the land where he had spent the last years of his life.

The murder trial took place 19 years later and no one was convicted for lack of evidence, as many people were afraid to testify and face the same fate of Father Vicente, which is not surprising in many regions of Brazil, where life is worth nothing and ending it is all too easy and cheap.

The news is that the Federal Regional Court of the 1st Region of the State of Mato Grosso has decided to hold a new trial, because in the one carried out at the time, the jury did not consider substantial evidence in the process.

In fact, the chief of police of Juína, Ronaldo Antonio Osmar, one of those involved in the murder, was the one who led the later investigations, manipulating the evidence so that the accusation would fall on the indigenous, as the prosecution acknowledges today. Add to that the disappearance of expert evidence, such as the skull itself of the Jesuit missionary which "mysteriously" disappeared from the Instituto Médico Legal in Belo Horizonte where the forensic analysis was taking place, to be found days later in a plaza of the city.

The Federal Public Ministry has just denounced in recent days that "the jury really looked the other way in the face of the body of evidence, ignoring the statements gathered in the instruction stage, only dealing with the interrogation of the accused, who denied involvement in the episode the whole time, which was to be expected."

Hopefully reopening the trial can help public clarification of the truth. Regardless, we can say that Vicente Cañas was a martyr in the cause of the poor, of the always persecuted indigenous peoples. His faith led him to live on the periphery and give his life for a better world for all, for the Kingdom.

There's more information in Portuguese in this article from CIMI: TRF-1 determina a realização de um novo júri para delegado envolvido no assassinato de Vicente Cañas

Marriage and Eucharistic Communion in poor countries

By Ángel Arnáiz Quintana, OP (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Fe Adulta
August 30, 2015

How can a priest deny Communion to someone seriously ill with cancer because he hasn't fulfilled the rite of marriage in the Church, even though he is an exemplary father and an admirable husband?

How can the bread of life be denied to thousands, millions of peasants on the Latin American continent and throughout the world because they don't have this Church rite, though they are fathers and mothers who love their sons and daughters and sacrifice themselves for them, and are wonderfully humane as spouses?

Why condemn immigrant couples who can't get married in a Church ceremony because they don't have their baptism papers in order because of an infernal war years ago now?

Can't a medical doctor take the sacramental Body of Jesus when she lovingly fulfills her work with the sick and is faithful in her marriage, even though she didn't get married by the Church in the official rite for the various reasons there may be?

Where is the merciful love that Jesus proclaimed as the greatest Christian commandment -- "Be merciful as your Heavenly Father is merciful?" Where is the cry of the prophets -- living, experiential knowledge of God I desire, and not sacrifices (liturgical rituals today), mercy instead of burnt offerings (laws devoid of human content)? Where are the beatitudes?

How are the Catholic churches in the rural parts of every continent not going to empty out if they are considered sinners or, at least, unworthy to approach Jesus? But weren't they the preferred ones of Jesus of Nazareth? Weren't the beatitudes addressed to them before anyone else? Didn't Jesus surround himself with sinners and people who hadn't even been married civilly, as we would say today? Didn't the Apostle explain that Christ liberated us so that we might be free?

One humiliation after another -- a married life, a family one so marvelous in human Christian values -- the limitations of that life are not unknown too, obviously -- is not worthy to receive Jesus' sacrament of love.

It doesn't matter that you have a devoted generous love, faithful love, with no other relationships, a permanent love, lived for life here on earth, that is, the characteristics of true Christian love.

That's how they've been held for centuries -- colonized, humiliated, marginalized -- and that's how those who want to be among the faithful of the Church are kept, deep down.

It's more important to fill a church with flowers, musicians, carpets, vestments and words even though the consistency of that love isn't even known. The ritual is worth more than tried and tested everyday life. We shouldn't be surprised that good people are absorbed by religious groups that speak directly to them and accept them without so many barriers. At this rate, the Catholic Church will be devoid of the poor, the favored of Jesus.

I'm speaking to you from crucified Central America, from a tiny little country, El Salvador, but it's a cry of a whole continent. Don't be deaf to its voice.

Image: Fr. Quintana, a missionary from Spain now working in El Salvador, prepares to bless the new community center of the Asociación de Comunidades Unidas para el Desarrollo Económico y Social del Bajo Lempa.

Not clinging to human traditions

by José Antonio Pagola (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Buenas Noticias: Blog de Jose Antonio Pagola
August 30, 2015

Mark 7:1-8,14-15,21-23

We don't know when or where the confrontation took place. The evangelist is only interested in evoking the atmosphere in which Jesus moves, surrounded by teachers of the Law, scrupulous observers of tradition who blindly resist the novelty that the Prophet of Love wants to introduce into their lives.

The Pharisees, outraged, observe that his disciples are eating with unclean hands. They can't tolerate it. "Why do your disciples not follow the tradition of the elders?" Although they're talking about the disciples, the attack is directed at Jesus. They're right. It's Jesus who is breaking that blind obedience to traditions to create around him a "space of freedom" where what matters is love.

That group of religious teachers hasn't understood anything about the kingdom of God that Jesus is proclaiming to them. God doesn't reign in their hearts. The Law, rules, uses and customs marked by tradition still rule. For them, the important thing is to observe what has been established by the "elders." They don't think about the good of the people. They don't care about "seeking the kingdom of God and His righteousness."

The error is serious. Therefore, Jesus responds with harsh words: "You disregard God's commandment but cling to human tradition."

The doctors speak reverently of "the tradition of the elders" and attributed divine authority to it. But Jesus calls it "human tradition." God's will must never be confused with what is the fruit of men.

It would also be a serious mistake today if the Church were to remain a prisoner of the human traditions of our ancestors, when everything is calling us to a profound conversion to Jesus Christ, our only Master and Lord. What must concern us is not preserving the past intact, but making possible the birth of a Church and some Christian communities able to copy the Gospel faithfully and make the plan of the Kingdom of God real in contemporary society.

Our first responsibility is not to repeat the past, but to enable the acceptance of Jesus Christ nowadays, without concealing or obscuring him with human traditions, however venerable they may appear.

Friday, August 28, 2015

A note on women and the Church today

By Eduardo de la Serna (English translation by Rebel Girl)
Blog 2 de Eduardo de la Serna
August 27, 2015

I am not an expert on the subject, but that doesn't stop one from having some sensitivity, as well as ears open to learn.

I think great open-mindedness is needed -- because we are children of millennia of chauvinism -- to learn to see the right and necessary place that women must have in society and the Church. And this goes far beyond female quotas on lists (a kind of lesser evil), or the incredible imbalance in wages between men and women doing the same job. And although I would like to look more closely at the issue of women in the Church, it does have repercussions on the issue of "women in society / culture / family ..." Precisely because of not being an expert, I recognize that I must educate my ear and heart, and I hope to continue doing so. These are some steps.

I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was quite daring (as in many other spheres) on the recognition of women. That he had female disciples was not taken for granted because of his environment -- that he would talk to women, or even that they would eat at his table wasn't usual. Paul continued this dynamic in his communities (although it doesn't seem to have been a cause for scandal in a world ruled by the Julio-Claudians -- the descendants of Julius Caesar -- during the first empire). The progressive assimilation of sociocultural "home" schema led to relegating women (as seen in the Deutero-Pauline writings and others of the second Christian generation such as Matthew and -- to a lesser extent -- Luke). The arrival of the Flavian imperial rule (Vespasian, Titus, Domitian) -- that occurred around the same time -- relegated women from public life. To this must be added, later, the gradual symbiosis between Christian thought and Greek philosophy. Thus, while many 2nd and 3rd century theologians were particularly "biblical," there were quite a few -- and they were increasing -- theologians influenced by Greek, particularly "androcentric", philosophy. The increasingly apparent invisibilization of women continued forward, especially with Platonism. There were always (as on many other issues) great people (among the fathers and mothers of the Church, for example) who sought to give women their rightful place, but the "predominant wave" was particularly chauvinist.

It is not a matter of -- or my chance to -- do a long and comprehensive "history of the Church" and the place of women in it. But neither must it be forgotten that the whole society "walked those roads." It's enough to recall that Husserl, on giving up his professorship in Germany (1928), lamented that Edith Stein was a woman and therefore would not be able to be his logical replacement.

But while theology (and many other sciences) have moved forward along many - and diverse - rails in recent years in feminist studies, the institutional Roman Catholic Church doesn't seem to act or speak accordingly. When the Aparecida document was adulterated by some sectors of the Curia, the already scant acknowledgement of the role of women was cut even more (plus the addition between the second and third draft of "gender ideology" [# 40]):

Original text

109. We regret...the shortcomings of our living out the preferential option for the poor, and significant numbers of secularizing lapses in consecrated life, discrimination against women and their frequent absence in pastoral institutions. As the Holy Father stated...

Adulterated text

100 b. We regret...the shortcomings of our living out the preferential option for the poor, and significant numbers of secularizing lapses in consecrated life under the influence of a merely sociological rather than evangelical anthropology. As the Holy Father stated...

But in a merely indicative way, it remains striking that the issue has not been fully taken up by the Curiae.
  • The strange phrase "feminine genius" has all but imposed itself -- I understand it originated with John Paul II.

  • Pope Francis, when asked about the place of women, said it is an issue that should be studied carefully. To which more than one woman theologian told him that the issue has been seriously and carefully studied for many decades.

  • Phrases such as "icing on the cake", "old maids" and many others are, rightly, very badly viewed and interpreted when done from a feminist perspective.
We should not think that because of being women, their outlook is necessarily feminist. Similarly, I can point out that I know hundreds of theologians who live in Latin America and who don't think "from" Latin America (and more than one European theologian who does, or at least tries to do so), just as there are dozens of lay people who look at things from a clerical perspective, many Africans and Asians who come back home "European" when studying in European schools ... In this sense, I will rescue the use of the term "kyriarchal" coined by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, noting that many have introjected the dominator (kyrios, lord), and it is this mentality that impairs an integral and liberating outlook.

In conclusion (my intention is simply to alert the eye), I deeply regret the recent statements of the new president of CELAM, Cardinal Rubén Salazar:

"That [Women in the Church] is another key issue, which has to be worked on transversely in all departments of CELAM. In the words of Pope Francis, it isn't so much about finding employment for women within the Church, but that they bring us the feminine genius, since the Church is sometimes viewed too much from men's point of view. They bring us all the subtlety, tenderness, caring, motherhood that women imply, and the Church as mother is enriched by their contribution in her life and mission." (reported in Periodista Digital)

What's this "they bring us ..."? What concept of "women" do [these words] contain? "Subtlety, tenderness, caring, motherhood"? And what would men's contribution be, from this perspective? Can't men have caring, tenderness, subtlety? Do all women bring "motherhood"? Can't women bring capability, theology, decisiveness, commitment, ministry, initiative, leadership and management ability...?

Personally, seeing these poor statements -- which are what motivated this disorganized writing -- I think that unfortunately women in the Church of Latin America will still have to continue to wait many years to be recognized, unless they are the ones who capture spaces (with the support of those of us who believe they belong to them). It doesn't seem that they can expect too much from "above" for now. It doesn't seem - for example - that the phenomenal contributions of so many women to theology have been "received" by the hierarchy.

Eduardo de la Serna is a Catholic priest in Argentina and coordinator of that country's Grupo de Curas en Opción por los Pobres.

Des Moines Catholic Worker House denied privilege of celebrating Mass after service with woman priest

The Roman Catholic Diocese of Des Moines "has revoked the privilege of celebrating the Roman Catholic Mass at the Catholic Worker House" for the moment, due to what it has euphemistically called "concerns related to variances in Catholic liturgical rubrics, doctrine, and practice." (full text below)

It is believed that this action was taken following a Eucharist celebrated at the Catholic Worker last December by Roman Catholic woman priest Rev. Janice Sevre-Duszynska, pictured above with members of the Des Moines CW community, a long-time friend of the Catholic Worker movement.

Frank Cordaro, a co-founder of the Catholic Worker House in Des Moines, called the bishop's actions "bullying" and added that the community would be preparing an official response to the Diocese and will determine how it will proceed with Mass in the future.

Statement of clarification regarding celebration of Roman Catholic Mass at Catholic Worker House in the Des Moines Diocese

August 12, 2015 (published in the August 2015 edition of The Catholic Mirror)

In response to publicity generated by the Catholic Worker House in Des Moines, Bishop Pates, upon the unanimous recommendation of the Diocesan Presbyteral Council of the Diocese of Des Moines, has revoked the privilege of celebrating the Roman Catholic Mass at the Catholic Worker House for the time being. The concerns are related to variances in Catholic liturgical rubrics, doctrine, and practice.

This determination was communicated to the leadership of the Catholic Worker House community on May 5, 2015 and remains in effect. At the time of printing of "The Catholic Mirror" no corrective or substantive response has been made to the Bishop and Presbyteral Council.

The Bishop of Des Moines and the Presbyteral Council have enormous appreciation for the legacy of Dorothy Day, co-founder of the Catholic Worker movement, and the philosophy she espoused. They are also aware that while her radically faithful witness to the Gospel was highly challenging to her fellow Catholics, especially in the Social Justice arena, she was equally faithful to the liturgical traditions of the Church and followed them with great dedication benefitting her courage to serve Christ in the poorest of the poor and to actively witness for upholding their human dignity.

Members of the Presbyteral Council are:
Rev. Dan Kirby
Rev. Daniel Siepker
Rev. David Fleming
Rev. Frank Palmer
Rev. Guthrie Dolan
Rev. Michael Amadeo
Rev. Michael Peters
Rev. Robert Harris
Rev. Thomas Dooley, chair
Rev. Thomas Kunnel

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Support Rev. Alexandra Dyer

In a horrific attack last week in Long Island City, New York, Rev. Alexandra Dyer, a Roman Catholic woman priest, was assaulted by a man who tapped her on the shoulder wanting to "ask her something" and, when she turned, threw a cup of drain cleaner in her face. The attack took place in the late afternoon as Rev. Dyer was leaving her job as Executive Director of the Healing Arts Initiative, an organization which breaks down barriers by "bringing art into schools, hospitals, prisons and other health and social service settings as well as by taking marginalized individuals into the community and cultural venues."

Rev. Dyer, who has a BA in Philosophy and Religion from Barnard College, an M.Div. from Union Theological Seminary, and an MBA with specialization in not-for-profit management from Columbia, was ordained to the priesthood in 2014. Prior to her current position, she worked at the Greyston Foundation and the Lower East Side Harm Reduction Center and she ministers at the St. Praxedis Roman Catholic Community with a fellow Roman Catholic woman priest Gabriella Velardi Ward.

Roman Catholic Womenpriests and Women's Ordination Conference issued a joint press statement saying that they were saddened by the attack on Rev. Dyer, which they believe was not related to her status as a priest, and asking prayers and funds for her on her road to recovery.

Rev. Dyer suffered 3rd degree burns on her face from the drain cleaner and was fortunate not to have lost her eyesight. She was aided by a passer-by who called 911 and then transported first to Elmhurst Hospital and then to New York-Presbyterian. Now Dyer is facing an uncertain financial future due to required surgeries and rehabilitation for the attack that has left her disfigured. Another priest, Rev. Susan Schessler, has set up a Go Fund Me account to help Dyer with her expenses.

Meanwhile, the New York City Police Department has issued a sketch of the suspect in this crime and is asking the public's help in locating and arresting him.

Monday, August 24, 2015

Spanish theologians initiate petition supporting communion for divorced and remarried Catholics

A group of Spanish theologians of considerable prestige has launched a manifesto of support for an eventual decision of the Synod to allow communion to divorced and civilly remarried people. To complement, if not counter, the petition with almost half a million signatures asking the Pope the opposite. The campaign will also be launched in English, French and Italian, according to the petition website, but we are providing you with the translation of the Spanish text right now so those of you who want to add your names can do so immediately. The Spanish petition has already garnered over 3,000 signatures. And, brothers and sisters involved in this petition project, if you want to use my English translation of the letter, you are welcome to do so.

The theologians, including such notables as José Antonio Pagola, José Ignacio González Faus, and Andrés Torres Queiruga, say in their statement that, by admitting divorced people to communion, the Church is faithful to the spirit of the Gospel and not its letter. As it is also faithful to the dogma defined at Trent, well interpreted. And they bring in a series of biblical and anthropological reasons to support their request. They conclude by giving thanks for the Pope's efforts, "amid cruel resistance, to give the Church a face more in keeping with the Gospel and with what Jesus deserves."

The hard-line sectors are putting more and more pressure on the Synod and Rome. It is time that the Pope hear the cry of the people of God, silent on this issue so far. Join this petition and sign on to this campaign. Let's protect the Pope and the Synod Fathers who want to follow him on the path of mercy.

LETTER TO THE BISHOP OF ROME

Brother Francis, "a glimpse of Peter,"

These lines would be to complement, on the other side, the letter of nearly half a million faithful, in which they ask you earnestly to "reaffirm categorically the Catholic teaching that divorced and civilly remarried Catholics cannot receive Holy Communion." For the love of Jesus, we would ask with equal zeal that we all be faithful to the spirit of the Gospel, beyond alleged loyalties to the letter of certain teachings of the Church.

We are speaking of alleged loyalty not to judge the intentions of those who wrote you but because, in reality, the teaching of the Church is not that those divorced and remarried "can not receive Holy Communion" but, according to the Council of Trent, "the Church does not err when it denies them communion." That wording, carefully chosen at the council, left open the possibility that there is no error or infidelity in the opposite position either, and that it is more a pastoral issue than a dogmatic one.

In our opinion, pastoral prudence not only allows but rather today demands a change in position. For these reasons.

1. In 1st century Palestine, Jesus' words directly concerned the husband who betrays and abandons his wife because he likes another one more, or for reasons of that kind -- they are primarily a defense of women. Thus the Master's phrase is definitive: "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder."

In Jesus' time, the situation of a married couple failing at their partnership project (maybe the fault of both, or because of previously undiscovered incompatibility), was unknown. Given the situation of women with respect to their husbands in 1st century Palestine, such a scenario was unthinkable. And applying Jesus' words to a different situation unknown at the time, where what there is is not the abandonment of one party but a failure of both, could amount to distorting his words. We would thus be manipulating Jesus for the sake of our own dogmatic security, and putting the letter that kills ahead of the spirit that gives life, against Pauline counsel.

The gospel must be inculturated, and when it isn't inculturated, it is betrayed. The following examples may clarify this a bit more.

2. The evangelist Matthew, who is perhaps the one who tells the most transgressions of the law by Jesus, is curiously the only one who puts in his mouth the phrase "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law ... I have come to fulfill it...to the smallest letter." Thus we are given to understand that, in those transgressions of the letter, Jesus was fulfilling the Law to its depths, because he was keeping its spirit.

And the fundamental spirit of the whole Gospel law is mercy -- not a wimpish mercy, of course, but a demanding mercy. But by no means a merciless requirement. Perhaps, then, the words with which Jesus responds to the scandals caused by his merciful conduct, have something to say to us here: "Go and learn the meaning of the words, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’..." (Mt 9:13 and 12:7)

3. The early church offers another glaring example of this fidelity to the spirit over the letter, with the abandonment of circumcision. Circumcision was something sacred as an expressive symbol of the union between God and His people; the aforementioned words of Jesus could have been valid for it too: "What God has joined together let no man put asunder." However, the Church abandoned the practice after forceful arguments and against the advice of some who believed themselves to be more faithful to God and, in fact, sought their own security. Thanks to that much discussed decision, the Church was not only faithful to God but opened the door to the evangelization of the world. Today that decision may seem obvious, but it was shocking to many then.

Peter himself, in his speech defending that decision, which today seems so true to the spirit of Jesus, spoke of "not imposing what neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear." (Acts 15:10) This is one of the biggest sins the Church can commit. And it is quite debatable whether celibate people can understand what it means to live intimately and peacefully every day with another person with whom one isn't the slightest bit in tune. As it is arguable whether celibate people could abstain from sexual intercourse with a person with whom they live day and night and whom they love.

4. We fear that advocates of the hard-line think that instilling a "discipline of mercy" in the Church would be equivalent to opening the door to moral laxity, or that the Church would accept the same views on divorce as our secular society. Actually it is not so -- the indissolubility of marriage is not being questioned at all, and the discipline of mercy remains a discipline that not everyone will be able to accept -- because it demands repentance, acknowledgment of guilt and a firm purpose of amendment. What it is about is not leaving those who have failed alone and unaided. Like Jesus -- eating with sinners not because they were good, but so that they could be.

Teresa of Avila, whose centenary we are celebrating, recalls in her autobiography that when she felt herself a sinner or unfaithful, she sometimes resorted to refraining from prayer because she did not feel worthy of it. Until she discovered that that remedy was worse than her evil. The Church has always taught (and practice confirms it) that participation in the Eucharist can be a great help and strength to live evangelically. We fear that depriving those who have failed in their first marriage project -- and have already done penance for that failure -- from this strength, might end up alienating them from the faith.

5. Finally, there is the question of whether the Church must have a double standard for infidelities to the Gospel that concern the sexual field and for those that concern other moral fields.

For example, the Church has always taught that the sole owner of the goods of the earth is God and that we men and women are only stewards of what we think we own. That stewardship status asks men and women to put all the surplus goods they have at the service of those who have less -- the poor and those without means. Precisely for this reason, the Church does not recognize an absolute right to private property, but only to the extent that this is a means to satisfy the primary and absolute right of every human being to the goods of the earth. That teaching on the primary destination of the goods of the earth, so often recalled by recent popes, is breached by the majority of Catholics without even showing the slightest remorse or will to amendment for it. Because that teaching of the Church is also very contrary to the mentality of this secular world. But is it not a glaring injustice that those Catholics are allowed to receive sacraments that are denied to other cases of failed couples, when there is repentance and amendment in the latter that aren't there in the former?

God doesn't have a double standard, or better yet, His bias is always in favor of the poor and the victims. In the parables told in the Gospel of the Pharisee and the publican, and the older brother of the prodigal son, Jesus was surprisingly on the side of the transgressors -- because for those who accused them, all their good deeds had not helped them to have a good heart, but to have a hard heart.

Nothing more, brother Peter. We just wanted to put forward an opinion. But we appreciate your efforts, amid cruel resistance, to give the Church a face more in keeping with the Gospel and with what Jesus deserves.

Complete list of signatories

Xavier Alegre Santamaría
José I. Calleja Saenz de Navarrete
Joan Carrera i Carrera
Nicolás Castellanos Franco
Maria Teresa Davila
Antonio Duato
Ximo García Roca
José Ignacio González Faus
Luis González-Carvajal
Mª. Terea Iribarren Echarri
Jesús Martínez Gordo
José Antonio Pagola
Joaquín Perea
Bernardo Pérez Andreo
Josep Mª Rambla Blanch
Lucía Ramón Carbonell
Andrés Torres Queiruga
José Manuel Vidal
Javier Vitoria Cormenzana
Josep Vives i Solé