The Manila Metropolitan Cathedral the Philippines' holiest place is desecrated by Mr. Carlos Cedran by disrupting the Holy Mass and by shouting against the Bishops and priests worshipping peacefully inside. This man violated the rights of our Bishops and Priests for peaceful worship yet for some columnists they are still treating this guy a sort of a hero.
-
Ms. Rina David's column "Friars and Bishops
Mr. Editor,
In Ms Rina David-Jimenez's column item (PDI 10/5) on "Friars and Bishops", she says the arrest and detention of Carlos Celdran for the disruption of a religious ceremonies inside the Manila Cathedral "speaks of lingering vestiges of Church power and influence." She stated that the Church has "effectively lost ground in the arena of public opinion"
First, as a lay Catholic, I am deeply offended and resent the rude act of Mr. Celdran as an assault of our Christian faith in the hallow ground of the Cathedral. No, Ms David, Celdran did not embarrass the bishops there, it was he who made a fool of himself and should be the one embarrassed for his disregard to the sensibility of others. I join the more decent part of our people in denouncing his arrogant act.
For his disruption of a religious proceeding, he infringed on our penal laws punishing such acts that insults one's faith regardless of religious affiliation. His arrest and detention are fully justified as simply the natural course in the regular enforcement of the law, having committed an offense, in flagrante. If he were arrested a day or two later, that would be unwarranted and illegal.
There is therefore entirely no basis to say or suspect that such normal recourse to the ordinary processes of the law in Celdran's case entailed the exercise of "lingering vestiges" of the "power and influence of the Church". Such a reckless statement without any factual foundation betrays one's malice and repugnance towards the Church and the faith it represents - Catholicism.
That the Church "has effectively lost the ground in the arena of public opinion" is a perception spawned by a massive dose of Catholic-bashing nowadays, particularly fostered in the media to secularize the public square. The overwhelming majority of the Filipinos remain faithful to the Church.
Thank you.
Atty. George C. Dee
Couples for Christ-Foundation for Family and Life Laguna District
.jpg)
![ST. JEROME EMILIANI [1486-1537]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6dKQTchkJaA/R0lo013dyBI/AAAAAAAAB_4/XzUAPDESwwQ/s1600/St.+Jerome+in+prayer,+small_1.jpg)
marami kasi ang hindi edukado
ReplyDeletetama si rizal mahalaga talaga ang edukasyon
ang dami mga ignorante
dapat ginagawa nila mandatory ang cathecism sa bawat school hehehe
just my opinion
Hindi na ba nababawasan ang mga bobo sa pilipinas?
ReplyDeletemay pa rizal rizal pa ang bobong yan
eh hindi naman sya sumusunod kay rizal
diba sabi ni rizal "ang kabataan ang pag-asa ng ating bayan?"
eh pano yan Mr.Celdran pabor ka pala sa RH bill mo hipokrito ka ulol!
nasaan ang firing squad? barilin si pepe
ReplyDeleteI've gone through both the senate and house versions of the RH bill. My comments:
ReplyDelete1. Both clearly endorse both natural family planning and artificial contraception, as can be seen from the definition of "modern methods of family planning" and the constant reference to "a full range" of reproductive health services. In fact, the statement of policies in the house version of the bill explicitly states that state shall promote both natural and artificial methods without bias. The Senate version of the bill mentions both natural and artificial methods in the appropriations section.
2. The definition of reproductive health says that "This implies that people are able to enjoy responsible and safe sex," without mentioning whether this responsible and safe sex is to be between married couples or just between any two consenting adults. While it will be impractical to criminalize all forms of immoral sexual behavior, it's a totally different thing for the government itself to facilitate licentiousness by providing contraceptives at taxpayers' expense.
3. The bills require employers to provide a "full range" of reproductive health services to their employees, and require accredited health centers to do the same. What if providing artificial contraceptives is against the corporate philosophy of your company/hospital?
4. The bills require mandated sex education in schools. Again, what if the contents and methodology of the sex education program which the RH bill mandates is contrary to the mission/vision of your school?
5. The penal sanctions imposed on those who violate the proposed law, as well as the list of prohibited acts, violate religious freedom. The provision that conscientious objectors will be respected is useless since it requires those conscientious objectors to refer the patient to someone who will provide the "health care service" asked for.
There's a Supreme Court ruling saying that students cannot be forced to salute the flag if doing so would be against their religious beliefs. I submit that to require, for example, a hospital to provide contraceptive services even if it will go against the hospital owner's religious beliefs similarly offends religious freedom. Remember, religious freedom is a constitutional right.
6. The provision penalizing anyone who gives malicious disinformation on the proposed law is also problematic. What does it mean by "malicious disinformation"? The phrase is vague. Will it apply to any expression of one's opinion opposed to the RH bill? If yes, this will violate freedom of speech. Again, freedom of speech is a constitutional right.
Atty. Cristina Montes
Alumna, U.P. College of Law
[nasaan ang firing squad? barilin si pepe]
ReplyDeleteSI RIZAL AY NAMATAY NA CATOLICO. BAGO MAMATAY AY NAGKUMPISAL, NAGMISA AT NAGKOMUNYON.
PAPUNTA SA BAGONG BAYAN NIREQUEST NYA NA DALAWANG PARING JESUITS ANG UMANTABAY SA KANYA. HINDI MGA KOMUNISTA. HINDI MGA ATEISTA. HINDI MGA FEMENISTA. HINDI MGA CONDOMNISTA.
OO NGA NAMAN. SABI NI RIZAL "ANG KABATAAN ANG PAG-ASA NG BAYAN". SABI NAMAN NG MGA CONDOMNISTA AT MGA CONDOMNIZERS: "ANG MGA KABATAAN ANG SALOT SA LIPUNAN" - HUWAG GUMAWA NG BATA! MAG CONDOM.
ReplyDeleteNAPAKA ANTI-RIZAL ANG ATTITUDE.
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20100924-294156/The-Philippine-population-is-not-exploding
ReplyDeleteFr. Abe, magandang (hating)gabi po, sorry kung medyo out place ang post ko.
ReplyDeletePero matanong nga lang.
Ano ang katotohanan hinggil sa pag claim ng mga Orthodox na noong 1054, the Pope broke away from the Church and declared himself as infallible?
Isa pa ho, yung claim din nila na dinag-dagan ng mga Romana Katolika ang Creed ng Latin na word na "Filioque" (...the Father and of the Son)
Pwede ho rin ba'ng malaman ang talagang dahilan kung bakit nagkaroon ng schism sa West at sa East?
Nag research po ako Fr. Abe, ngunit kinailangan ko talagang mag tanong. Tsaka Katoliko po ako.
Maraming salamat po!
Ganito ang mangyayari kapag hahayaan natin ang mga leftist, socialist, communist, secularist, modernist, atheist at liberalist na pumasok sa ating gobyerno at sa media. Sa totoo lang it's the secular media that hijacks the truth. Tingnan nyo si Carloose. Nawalan na ng fundamental respect sa mga taong may otoridad kahit sa ating Panginoon. Dapat palalakasin pa natin ang apologetics.Epektibo itong panlaban sa mga kasinungalingan sa ating lipunan.
ReplyDeleteTama po kayo Bro. Tito. We need to stand up for the Truth of Faith.
ReplyDeleteTama ka Bro Tito na dapat palakasin ang pagtuturo ng apologetics sa simbahan, subalit ayaw naman ng ibang mga pari at obispo dahil simple catechism lang ang gusto nilang maibahagi sa nakararaming katoliko.
ReplyDeleteKaya maraming mga Katoliko na simple cathechism lang ang alam ay napunta sa ibang relihiyon at ang iba naman ay nag ALA RIZAL. . .
[Fr. Abe, magandang (hating)gabi po, sorry kung medyo out place ang post ko.]
ReplyDeleteOK LANG BROD.
[Pero matanong nga lang.]
SIGE LANG.
[Ano ang katotohanan hinggil sa pag claim ng mga Orthodox na noong 1054, the Pope broke away from the Church and declared himself as infallible?]
UNA, YAN AY MALI AT WALANG BASEHAN.
SIMULA NG UMPISA ANG ROME AY TINUTURING NA BILANG THE FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANT SEAT OF THE CHURCH. YAN ANG DAHILAN KUNG BAKIT SA LISTAHAN NG MGA LOCAL CHURCHES SA BIBLIA ANG EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS ANG FIRST IN ORDER OF DIGNITY AND HONOR BAGAMAT ANG FIRST LETTER TO THE THESSALONIANS ANG UNANG NAISULAT NI SAN PABLO.
BEFORE 1054 KINIKILALA NA AT ITINUTURO ANG SUPREMACY NG CHURCH OF ROME DAHIL ITO ANG 'SEE' OR 'SEAT' OF THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER:
St. Cyprian of Carthage
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).
“There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Whoever has gathered elsewhere is scattering” (Letters 43[40]:5 [A.D. 253]).
SEE, HINDI SEE OF CONSTANTINOPLE NG MGA ORTHODOX ANG KINIKILALA KUNDI ANG CHAIR OF PETER NA WALANG IBA KUNDI ANG SANTO PAPA SA ROMA. ITO AY SINUPORTAHAN NG ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF NICEA NUONG 325 NA KINILALA ANG LIMANG PATRIARCHATES:
1. ROME
2. Constantinople
3. Alexandria
4. Antioch
5. Jerusalem
SEE, ROME IS THE FIRST AND THE HIGHEST OF ALL PATRIARCHATES. THE OTHERS ARE LOWER THAN ROME.
ISA PANG PATOTOO:
Optatus
“You cannot deny that you are aware that in the city of Rome the episcopal chair was given first to Peter; the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head—that is why he is also called Cephas [‘Rock’]—of all the apostles; the one chair in which unity is maintained by all” (The Schism of the Donatists 2:2 [A.D. 367]).
ITO NAMAN ANG SABI NI POPE ST. DAMASUS BEFORE 1054:
Pope Damasus I
“Likewise it is decreed . . . that it ought to be announced that . . . the holy Roman Church has not been placed at the forefront [of the churches] by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it” (Decree of Damasus 3 [A.D. 382]).
ITO NAMAN ANG SABI NI ST. AUGUSTINE:
ReplyDeleteAugustine
“If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly, and safely do we number them [the bishops of Rome] from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not conquer it.’ Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement. … In this order of succession a Donatist bishop is not to be found” (Letters 53:1:2 [A.D. 412]).
AND THIS IS THE PROCLAMATION OF THE BISHOPS OF THE COUNCIL OF EPHESUS:
Council of Ephesus
“Philip, the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See [Rome], said: ‘There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors’” (Acts of the Council, session 3 [A.D. 431]).
AND THIS IS THE TESTIMONY OF THE BISHOPS OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON:
Council of Chalcedon
“Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod, together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, has stripped him [Dioscorus] of the episcopate” (Acts of the Council, session 3 [A.D. 451]).
HE, HE, HE... NOW, TANUNGIN MO ANG MGA ORTHODOX KUNG MAY SINASABING GANYAN ANG MGA FATHERS OF THE CHURCH SA PATRIARCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE AT SA CHURCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE. WALA. NADA, NUNCA, NOTHING. HE, HE, HE...
THE SUPREMACY AND PRIMACY AS WELL AS THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH OF ROME IS WELL FOUNDED IN THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH BEFORE 1054. ANG PROBLEMA INGGIT LANG ANG MGA GREEKS SA MGA ROMANS. HINDI NILA MATANGGAP NA MAS MATAAS ANG ROME SA KANILA KAYA GUSTO NILANG MAGING KAPANTAY NITO PERO HINDI SILA UMUBRA DAHIL KAY SAN PEDRO IBINIGAY ANG SUSI NG LANGIT AT SI SAN PEDRO ANG UNANG SANTO PAPA NG IGLESIA CATOLICA.
[Isa pa ho, yung claim din nila na dinag-dagan ng mga Romana Katolika ang Creed ng Latin na word na "Filioque" (...the Father and of the Son)]
ReplyDeleteANG NICAEA-CONSTANTINOPOLITAN CREED AY ORIGINALLY WALANG FILIOQUE NA NAKALAGAY SA GREEK ORIGINAL TEXT. SUBALIT NAGKAROON NG HERESIES SA SPAIN IN THE WEST NA NAGTUTURO NA ANG HOLY SPIRIT AY HINDI DIOS. DAHIL DITO ANG FILIOQUE AY ITINURO PARA IPAHAYAG ANG PANANAMPALATAYA THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT PROCEEDS FROM THE FATHER AND THE SON.
BEFORE 1054 ITO AY TINUTURO NA NG MGA MONKS AT ITO AY SUPORTADO NG MARAMING SANTO MULA SA EAST AND WEST. TO MENTION A FEW, SI ST. EPIPHANIUS OF SALAMIS [d. 403] NA NAGTURO THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD 'FROM THE FATHER AND THE SON' [Ek Patros kai Huiou to Pneuma] AND ST. MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR WHO TAUGHT THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT PROCEEDS 'FROM THE FATHER THROUGH THE SON'.
LATER, NAGHARAP ANG MGA BISHOPS NG CHURCH OF ROME AT MGA EASTERN BISHOPS DURING THE COUNCIL OF FLORENCE [1438-39]. AFTER LONG AND BITTER DEBATES THE EASTERNERS WERE CONVINCED THAT THE 'FILIOQUE' IS IN HARMONY WITH THE FAITH. IT HAS BIBLICAL AND PATRISTIC FOUNDATION. SUBALIT PAGBALIK NG ILANG MGA EASTERNERS SA LUGAR NILA HINDI NILA TINUPAD ANG USAPAN. PERO ANG MGA UKRAINIANS UPHELD THE DECISIONS OF THE COUNCIL OF FLORENCE.
[Pwede ho rin ba'ng malaman ang talagang dahilan kung bakit nagkaroon ng schism sa West at sa East?]
ANG UNANG PINAGMULAN NG HINDI PAGKAKA INTINDIHAN AY POLITICAL CONFLICT. ANG EAST AY AYAW PASAKOP SA WEST. KASI FEELING NILA MAY SUPREME SILA SA EAST DAHIL DUON NILIPAT ANG CAPITAL NG ROMAN EMPIRE - FROM ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE. SUBALIT NILINAW SA COUNCIL OF NICAEA NA HINDI POLITICAL POWER ANG SOURCE NG AUTHORITY NG ROME KUNDI ANG AUTHORITY NI CHRIST NA IBINIGAY KAY ST. PETER SA SIYANG FIRST BISHOP OF ROME.
NUONG 1054 ANG EXCOMMUNICATIONS AY NANGYARI DAHIL SA HINDI PAGKAKAINTINDIHAN NG DALAWANG GRUPO: ANG PATRIARCH MICHAEL CERULARIUS AT NI CARDINAL HUMBERTUS. THE CARDINAL EXCOMMUNICATED THE PATRIARCH AND THE PATRIARCH IN UNION WITH HIS SYNOD EXCOMMUNICATED THE CARDINAL. BUT THE EXCOMMUNICATIONS WAS NOT DIRECTED ON BOTH THE ROMAN CHURCH AND THE CHURCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE.
NUONG 1975 TINANGGAL NA NI POPE PAUL VI AT PATRIARCH ATHENAGORAS I ANG EXCOMMUNICATIONS. AT INUMPISAHAN ANG PROCESS FOR FULL UNITY.
LET US PRAY NA MAGKAISA ULI.
[Nag research po ako Fr. Abe, ngunit kinailangan ko talagang mag tanong.]
VERY GOOD. TAMA YAN. MAGRESEARCH LAGI.
[ Tsaka Katoliko po ako.]
VERY GOOD.
[Maraming salamat po!]
WELCOME. GOD BLESS YOU.
Ms Rina David must knows her faith before criticizing the Church leaders. It is sad to say that Majority do not know their faith in intellectual manner. I challenge every Catholics to study and learn their faith so that they may not be deceived.
ReplyDeletehi Fr. Abe, gud day po.
ReplyDeleteIve' been following the Forum of RH Bill at the DFF.. and eventually have watched po one t.v program which fortunately tackle about RH bill and the Stand of The Catholic Church..
One of the reason po if I'm not mistaken according to one of the invited guest is that they say, that they are promoting contraceptives method(Natural and Artificial)in order to avoid Maternal Death to mothers having multiple pregnancies.(Medical or Health reasons)and eventually they will support the campaign of this said bill (and this basically will involved great amount of money.
My point po is,if they will support in the promotion of this said bill, Why don't they use it in finding other ways in avoiding this so called "Maternal Death" of mothers? have they ever came to think that it might be their own negligence that causes those deaths? and have they tried to give more time in informing the public about what will going to happen if mothers have multiple pregnancies?
Death is sometimes a choice (if information has already given) and it is not an enough reason to commit another mistake of affirming to this bill...
They might be looking at current situation and have came up with this RH bill and have focused only in one part of its usefulness and advantage but have neglected the most important thing (The MORAL aspect), What will be it's impact to the growing generations(the youth of today)? What kind of people are they going to raise? What Kind of Country?
Maybe a Progressive and Lesser populated country yet morally imbalance..
Thank you Fr. I just want to share my thought about this issue.
Rhea
THANK YOU SO MUCH RHEA.
ReplyDeleteWOMEN LIKE YOU MUST REALLY STAND UP AGAINST RH BILL. BECAUSE THE EVIL EFFECTS OF THAT BILL WILL ALL BE AGAINST YOU.
THE CONDOM SHALL BE INSERTED TO YOU.
THE PILLS WILL BE FOR YOU TO BE SWALLOWED.
IT IS YOUR BODY WHICH WILL BE LIGATED... ETC.
FIGHT FOR LIFE.