November 27 marked the 40th year anniversary of the publishing of the once most famous manifesto in Ateneo de Manila’s history. On that day in 1968, The GUIDON published “Down from the Hill,” written by five passionate Ateneans-Jose Luis A. Alcaraz (AB ’70), Gerardo J. Esguerra (AB ‘70), Emmanuel A. F. Lacaba (AB ’70) and Leonardo Q. Montemayor (BS ’70), and Alfredo N. Salanga (AB ’69).

The piece was written as a condemnation of the social, economic, and political structures that perpetuated gross poverty, inequality, injustice, and great suffering for the masses. The writers’ names and the article itself may no longer evoke memories from current students of the university, but the spirit of the manifesto lives on as a call for the Ateneo to be an institution that lives up to its claim of forming men-and-women-for-others.

Now that the university is nearing its 150th anniversary, it’s important to look at how true we have been to the call of nation building. How far down the hill are we?

“We find the Ateneo today irrelevant to the Philippine situation because it can do no more than service the power elite. Its academic community is unresponsive to the needs of the Philippine situation.”

Written as a call for major changes in the university, one of the piece’s main objectives of was to push for Filipinization. At a time when the Ateneo was run by American Jesuits, these writers sought for the integration of more Filipino administrators and faculty members. Filipinization was fundamental to relating the university with the societal context it belonged to. The non-Filipino characteristic of the school was seen by the students as a hindrance towards genuine societal engagement.

Years after the manifesto was published, the Filipinization movement in the university has succeeded. Most faculty members and administrators are now Filipinos. There are now less American Jesuits who are active in the university. Yet, the call for an Ateneo that is relevant to the Philippine situation is still as powerful as ever.

The manifesto is known to be one of the sparks that ignited student activism in campus. Sadly, gone are the days when students were at the forefront of street protests. This is evident in the unimpressive numbers we’ve put up during mobilizations and noise barrages. As issues continue to beset our nation–from pervasive corruption to oppression of the marginalized–a sense of cynicism and hopelessness creeps into the minds of our fellow students.

Some have given up on calling for government reforms. But there are those who have chosen to act through various apostolate works. There are student organizations involved in various sectors and have specific social justice advocacies. Thus, student activism, though still equated by many to street protests, is slowly being transformed into engagement programs that are student-initiated.

The piece also fought for a curriculum that put emphasis on a “Christian response to the needs of the Philippine situation.” There has been much progress in our curriculum in terms of developing critical thinking for the Philippine situation and in exposing students into the various facets of our current problems, culture, and values.

Improvements in our curriculum include the creation of Theology 141, the use of Filipino in teaching Philosophy, and the use of Philippine context in our various academic classes. There is also a conscious effort in integrating service-learning, a teaching method of combining the classroom curriculum with service for society, to the program. This is seen in the effort of various departments to encourage students to make final requirements (e.g., theses) that have concrete application for NGOs and communities. Through this change of focus, we now have a more service-oriented curriculum that ushered in the era of forming professionals-for-others.

The academic curriculum is also complemented by various co-curricular and extra-curricular initiatives. We have the Integrated Non-academic Formation (INAF) programs that are meant to form professionals-for-others. Most of the current INAF programs, such as the immersion, were inspired by some programs initiated during the early 1970s.

Another example of non-academic formation that builds a culture of service is our organization system. In 1979, the SOA (Socially-oriented Organizations of the Ateneo) was set up as a formal block of students under the Council of Organizations of the Ateneo. The SOA was a breeding ground for many alumni that are currently engaged in various socio-civic works including former Jesuit Provincial Fr. Danny Huang, SJ, and Xavier University President Fr. Jett Villarin, SJ. Though the SOA, as an organizations cluster, no longer exists, the current roster of organizations has imbibed its essence of socio-civic service.

Other student groups have also continued their legacy as vanguards for the call to be responsive to the needs of the Philippine situation. The Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral has been one of the ardent instigators of mobilizations during that era. They were seen as leaders of the politicization movements inside campus. In addition, our student publications also kept with the times by covering socio-political issues from 1970-1981. The creation of Matanglawin in 1975, three years after the declaration of Martial Law, was a response to the need for a venue to discuss issues in Filipino. Even the literary folio Heights devoted issues to socio-political concerns.

“We therefore maintain that the Ateneo as a university has not exercised its moral and intellectual obligations of service to the oppressed masses but instead has catered exclusively to the oppressive power elite.”

Decades after “Down from the Hill” was published, much has changed in the Ateneo. Many battles fought inside and outside the school were won. But these were victories paid for by the sacrifices of many; including Ateneans that were expelled, persecuted, and executed.

What have we, as students, done to honor those who have come before us? What have we done as the current leaders in the institutions that they helped form as responses to the crises of their times? Has the Ateneo already taken the form of a university that they aspired for?

Much effort has been done to protect the victories of the past and to fight the current social battles of today. But are these efforts enough?

Has involvement in NSTP, JEEP, immersion, or sector-based organization work achieved the goal of making Ateneo relevant to the Philippine situation? Did these programs truly achieve their objectives of both formation and engagement?

Are the various student groups still vanguards of social, cultural, spiritual, and political activism? Has the Ateneo, going into its 150th year of existence, truly serviced the poor and not the elite?

How far down the hill are we, really?

Omar Castañar (V AB DS) is the President of the Sanggunian and the Union of Catholic Student Councils.