"The Christianity of history is not Protestantism. If ever there were a safe truth it is this, and Protestantism has ever felt it so; to be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant." (-John Henry Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine).

"Where the bishop is, there let the people gather; just as where ever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church". -St. Ignatius of Antioch (ca 110 AD)a martyr later thrown to the lions, wrote to a church in Asia Minor. Antioch was also where the term "Christian" was first used.

“But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” 1 Timothy 3:15

"This is the sole Church of Christ, which in the Creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic." -CCC 811

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Did Felix Manalo "RAPE" Rosita Trillanes or not?

Raped is a serious offense and a serious accusations. That is why when accusing someone of being a "rapist" one has to have evidences and proofs which can be considered beyond any doubt. and should prove the allegations. Yes, the FOUNDER and Iglesia ni Cristo's 'LAST MESSENGER' whom they considered "an ANGEL" FELIX Y. MANALO was accused by Ms. Rosita Trillanes, a member of his cult of raping her.

Is it true? Was there any rape happened? Did the court believed Ms. Trillanes' statements? Was Trillanes' retractions nullify her earlier statements? FIND OUT in this article.

In my desire to be balance in my views, I will post here two opposing sides. Of course, on the side of the INC, they would use all their might in defense of Felix Manalo's innocence. Proof of evidences leading to Felix Manalo's conviction as the founder, and INC's "Last Messenger-Angel" would be destructively damaging to the already damaged image of the INC exposed by it's rival cult Ang Dating Daan founded by former members of the Iglesia ni Cristo.

On the other side are the opinion of those who know much about the legality of the accusations and the underlying truth in Rosita Trillanes' statements and why she retracted later on.  And what could be the REAL REASON for Ms. Trillanes in retracting from her earlier statements. And what could be Manalo's underlying REASONS why he REWARDED Ms. Trillanes of a POSITION in the Iglesia ni Cristo after she retracted?  Of course we cannot just set aside the possibility of intimidation and threat against Ms.Trillanes. perhaps due to the fast-growing popularity and influence of Felix Manalo during those times.

I would like to PRESENT two accounts. One an Iglesia member defending the innocense of its founder and the other is a Catholic Defender who believes a RAPE took place.

But before that let me post some newsclips from old nedwspapers alledgedly accusing FELIX MANALO of RAPING Ms. ROSITA TRILLANES.

Ang sulat ng nagngangalang Rosita Trillanes na napalathala sa Official Gazette, Vol. 1, July 1942, na hinango naman namin na munting aklat na sinulat ni Lino Javier at pinamagatang “Anghel ba o Haring Solomon si Felix Manalo?” page 4-6

Ganito ang nilalaman ng liham ng iyon:

Mga Kapatid:

Dahil sa pag-ibig ko sa Iglesia at ukol sa inyong kabutihan ay sumulat ako sa inyo upang magtapat ng bagay na talagang nangyari sa akin at ng mga bagay na aking nasaksihan at nalaman sa panahon ng dalawang taong pagkatigil ko sa Central. Ako ay isang dalaga na naging kaanib ng Iglesia ni Cristo sa Batangas. Ako ay kinapootan at itinakwil ng aking mga magulang. Sa paniwala kong ako’y makakatagpo ng pag-aampon ay pumayag ako kay kapatid na Jacinto Torres na dalhin niya ako sa opisina Central. Noong ako ay naroon ay naransan ko ang lubhang napakapait at napakasakit sa buhay ng dalaga gaya noong lapastanganin ako ni Manalo na itinuturing kong isang ama. Noong una ay niligawan niya ako ngunit nang tumanggi ako sa kanyang mga ninanais ay binugbog at hinataw niya ako ng aking ikinawala ng malay-tao. At noong ako’y wala nang malay-tao ay ginawa niya ang kahalayang ibig niya sa akin. Doon ay lubhang naghirap ako dahil sa masamang palakad sa akin, paghataw at pagbabanta na tinatanggap ko kailan ma’t tumututol ako sa mahahalay niyang nais sa akin.

Marami din akong nasaksihang mga ginahasa ni Felix Manalo, ang iba ay mga dalaga; ang iba ay mga asawa ng mga kaanib; samantalang ang isa ay asawa ng isang Ministro. Sinabi ni Manalo sa akin ang tungkol sa mga ibang kanyang ginawan ng kahalayan, noong ako’y kanyang hinihikayat na pumayag sa kanyang mga ninanais. Sinabi niya sa akin ang tungkol sa tatlumpung mga babaing kanyang kanyang pinagsamantalahan. Hindi ko maaaring ihayag ang kanilang mga pangalan upang pagtakpan ang kanilang karangalan, ngunit madalas silang nagpupunta sa Opisina. Sa piling ko ay pinagsikapan niyang ginahasa ang isang dalaga na pagkatapos ay nagbuntis at iyon ay nangyaring napapunta din sa opisina central ukol sa tanging pagkakataong may kaugnayan sa Manalo. Marahil ang dahilan kung kaya si Liloy ay nagbitiw, ay sapagkat sinikap ni Manalong pilitin si Amanda. Ang lahat ng mga itong kanyang nilapastangan ay nangatatakot magsabi sapagkat sila’y binalaang papatayin kung sila’y magsasabi, katulad ng ginawa niya kay Basilia Santos ng Paco, na itinuturo niya si Manalo, bilang ama ng kanyang dalawang anak. Naging balitang-balita ito sa Paco.

Bago nagpunta si Manalo sa America, ay dinala niya ako sa bahay ng mga Protacio, sa Pasay. Ngunit noong wala pang isang buwan ay dumating siya upang kunin niya akong pabalik, nangangambang baka sinabi ko sa mga Protacio ang lahat ng kanyang inasal at ginawa sa akin; noong ako’y tumangging sumama sa kanya ay binalaan niya ako ng masama at tinakot niya ako ng isang rebolber at sa pamamagitan ng lakas ay pinilit niya akong sumama sa kanya. Pagkatapos nito ay pinalayas niya sa Iglesya ang mga mag-anak ng Protacio at pinaratangan ng kabulaanan.

Kanyang ginugugol ang lahat niyang buwanang sahod na P 1,300.00 ukol sa mga babae at sa mga mahahalay na mga gawain, samantalang ang abang manggagawa ng Iglesya ay tumatanggap lamang ng P5.00, P 10.00, P 15.00, P 20.00 isang buwan. Ang nangyayari sa lahat ninyong mga abuloy na iniaalay sa Dios, ay nagpupunta sa kanya at bagay na kanyang ginugugol ukol sa lahat niyang mahahalay na gawa. Sinabi ko kay kapatid na Doro ang lahat ng bagay na ito noong si Manalo ay naroon pa sa America.Sa ganitong paraan ay pababayaan ba ninyong pagmalabisan ni Manalo ang mga kaanib at tanggapin ang Iglesya sa ngalan ng Dios…? Hindi ba ninyo iniibig ang Iglesya…? Ang inyong asawa at mga anak na babae ay nasa panganib sa kasawian sa mahahalay na pita ng taong iyan na ipinalalagay at kinikilala ninyong bilang tagapagturo ng mga salita ng Dios.

Ipinagtatapat ko sa inyo ang lahat ng bagay na ito, ipinauubaya ko sa inyo ang kapasiyahan na magagawa ninyo kung tunay na iniibig ninyo ang Iglesya at ang Dios. Sa paghimok sa babaeng iniibig niya maging siya ay isang dalaga o isang may asawa, ay binabanggit niya ang maraming asawa ni Solomon at inaangkin niyang ang taong sinugo ng Dios, ay dapat gawing maligaya at ang pagpayag na pagsang-ayon sa kanyang mga ninanais ay isang kapuri-puring gawa sa mga mata ng Dios. Matatanggap ba ng inyong mabuting diwa ang walang kaayusang ito…? Nasa inyo ang kapasiyahan.
Ang inyong kapatid na naging sawingpalad dahil sa malabis ng pagtitiwala.

ROSITA

1. Citing the case of People versus Trillanes, published in the Official Gazette, Volume I, No. 1, July 1954, p. 394, docketed as Case No. 8180, April 21, 1942. The Court of Appeals where Trillanes was acquitted. The appellate court upheld Trillanes and categorically called Manalo “a man of low morals” (“un hombre de baja moral’).

2. Further more: “…Manalo, took advantage of his position as head of the Iglesia ni Cristo, and …employed religion as a cloak to cover his…immoral practices; that he pretended to be the Messias sent by God; and that to persuade his victims, he cited the example of Solomon and his many wives”

[Sources: examineiglesianicristo.com & thesplendorofthechurch.blogspot]



Philippine Mission
Churches of Christ
Leslie Wolfe Carrie A. Wolfe

P.O. Box 8774
Manila, P.I.


Oct. 14, 1933

Mr. Salvador Laspinas,
1535 Felix Huertas, Int. C.,
Manila

Dear Bro. Laspinas:

I have your letter of Oct. 7th. You know I am sick. I am not able to give you all the information about Felix Manalo that you desire. He was a student in our mission and I was one of his teachers. We had him employed as an evangelist, paying him a salary. He was minister for the church at Singalong for some time. His wife accused him of cruelty and of adultery. She came to my house and showed the wounds which Felix had made by blows on her back. I called the doctor who is now in Manila to examine her wounds. The church at Singalong had an investigation of Felix. The wife of Felix came andmade complaints, but Felix did not come. The church at Singalong voted that Felix was guilty of the charges of his wife. As a consequence we took away the salary that we were giving to Felix. Then Felix left us.

I do not have further personal knowledge of the life of Felix. There was, however, a Teresa who studied with us. It was proven in court that Felix was the father of her child.

Bro. Baronia has much typewritten information about Felix Manalo and especially about the Teresa case, which he says he will be glad to furnish to any one desiring the information.

I hope you will be able to continue your work and that you will be very successful. I am

Cordially yours,

Leslie Wolfe






“Felix Manalo
Angel Or Sex Maniac?

“By JOE CRUZ
(FIRST OF A SERIES)

“(This article is not written in defense of a group of persons or organizations; neither is it designed to accuse publicly or personally a certain individual nor purposely designed for those to whom there is a great gulf fixed between the law-abiding citizens and the wrongdoers.–EDITORS)

“MANALO, FELIX ISAGUN

“Superior Minister of the “Iglesia Ni cristo,” or Church of Christ. Born in Barrio Calsada, Tagig, Rizal, on May 10, 1886, he is the first of the two sons of Mariano Isagun and Bonifacia Manalo. At the age of seven, he entered a barrio school then conducted by a certain Maestrong Cario, wherein he obtained his primary education.

“When the revolution came in 1896, he was unable to continue his studies, so he lived with his parents to help them sometimes by fishing but most of the time by plowing their own field. When he grew older he studied photography and later a hatter’s trade and established a hat store. But this kind of living did not satisfy him for he aspired to lead a religious life.

“To realize his aspiration he joined the Methodist Episcopal Church in 1904, and attended the classes given by that institution, but not being satisfied with the teachings of that church, he transferred to the Ellinwood Presbyterian school. He was likewise so dissatisfied with the teachings of the Presbyterian Church that he decided and joined the Christian Mission, where later he was made an evangelist. As he was also dissatisfied with the teachings and doctrines of this church, he resigned his position and joined the Seventh day Adventist, popularly known as “Sabathist.” He continued his studies in the Scriptures, while in his spare time he canvassed books and wrote for the publications of the Philippine Publishing House, the organ of the Seventh Day Adventist. Then he was made a minister, but due to his constant and profound study of the Bible, he began to entertain many doubts in the doctrines and teachings of the Adventists, so that he finally decided to preach the Gospel as it was revealed to him. This was the beginning of the establishment in the Philippines of the “Iglesia Ni Cristo.” (ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE PHILIPPINES, Vol. IX, Versonco).

“But according to the same source, Felix Manalo Isagun is not the actual founder of the “Iglesia Ni Cristo” as claimed although the propagation started on or about November 1913. Thinking that it might be his success in pursuing his task by preaching the Scriptures in his own version, the said Church of Christ was registered under his name at the Bureau of Commerce and Industry, July 27, 1914. From then on, after many years of its survival as an organization the Philippines Free Press, dated April 23, 1950, made all estimation of more or less two million members. It was the most shocking news perhaps to other religious organizations ever made publicly. Since it scattered like wildfire that engulfed the four corners of the Philippines, Roxas, Avelino and Quirino were prompted to see the founder of “Iglesia Ni cristo,” and perhaps President Magsaysay too, for some political reasons. Analyzing its members whether such number is true, there are only 86, 125 members as of 1953, as far as the Bureau of Census and Statistics is concerned and not two million as claimed.

“Mr. Manalo, perhaps, is not fully satisfied with his wife and six children. In the early twenties he started already victimizing several women. To mention the few which met a strange, most bitter and painful experience lives are Rosita, whom he can not deny that this woman is one of those that met her doom during that time; Teresa Teodoro, another victim of the so-called “Angel”; Basilla Santos, if he can recall is also one among those that suffered under his hypnotistic system. Wives of several ministers that can not talk for fear that they might be expelled as “Diakonesas” might be known by their husbands. Our informant disclosed that the following are more or less under his sex domination: Felicidad, Rosa, Virginia, Bining, Mrs. Santos, Toddy, Atang, Paz, Pilar and several weeping souls that perhaps twice as much as those above-mentioned are, in one way or another, seeking revenge against Felix Manalo.

“To support our allegation, we want to prove to the reading public the following:

“Letter of Rosita to Her Brothers

“Brothers: In my belief that I will find protection I agreed that I be brought to [the] Central Office by Brother Jacinto Torres. When I was already there I experienced the most bitter and painful in [t]he life of [a] maiden like when Manalo, whom I considered as a father, abused me. At first he courted me but when I refused to accede to his desires he struck and beat me which rendered me unconscious. And when I was already unconscious, he raped me. There I suffered much because of the ill-treatment, beating and [threatening] that I received whenever I protested against his lewd designs.

“I also witnessed many who have been raped by Felix Manalo: some are maidens; others are the wives of members and ministers. Manalo himself told me about the others whom he molested when he was persuading me to accede to his desires. He told me about some thirty women he abused. I could not reveal their names to protect their dignity, but they frequently come to the Office. In my presence, he raped a maiden who later became pregnant and that happened when she went to the central office in that only instance which concerns Manalo. … Could your good sense accept these anomalies…? It is up to you to decide.”

[Source: Emily Jordan]

IGLESIA NI CRISTO SIDE: Now here is the DEFENSE of an INC member by the name "readme" under the title "Is Bro. Felix Manalo a "Rapist"?

The most raised issue, and most often attack by Catholic defenders, ADD members and other faiths, is about Bro. Felix Manalo. They conclude that Bro. Felix is convicted, others say guilty in the case of him and Sis. Rosita Trillanes. Well, lets find out what really is the story, si Bro. Felix a “rapist”??

I found an answer from the bearens.net forum, from a member and here, it is stated (Ill also try to translate it in English^_^):



Quote from: Teddy Lejero

Isa ito sa pinag-aralan kong mabuti at ayon sa aking pagsusuri, may tatlong tao na itiniwalag si Felix Manalo. Isa sa tatlong ito ay kamag-anak ni Rosita Trillanes. Na-convince nila si Rosita na gumawa ng sulat para pagbintangan si FYM na humalay sa kanya para lamang makaganti sila sa pagtiwalag sa kanila. Pumayag naman si Rosita. Kumalat ang sulat na ito sa mga tao at sa mga pahayagan. Kaya idenemanda ni FYM si Rosita ng libelo. Nanalo si FYM. Ngunit nag-apela si Rosita hindi sa kasong rape or paghahalay kundi upang baligtarin ang unang desisyon na libelo.

(One of those ive studied, and the result of my examination, there are 3 inc members expelled in the church. One of them where relatives of Sis. Rosita. They convince Sis. Rosita to write a testimony and accuse Bro. Felix that he was harassed by him just for them to repay from the expulsion of them in the church. Sis. Rosita was convinced. The letter/testimony spreads from the people and from the newspapers. That’s why Bro. Felix petition her of libel. Bro. Felix won the case, but Sis. Rosita appealed not in the case of rape or harassment but to reverse the 1st decision of libel. )

Ngunit natauhan si Rosita. Gumawa siya ng affidavit na hindi totoo ang mga una niyang salaysay ukol sa panghahalay.

(But Sis. Rosita regain consciousness. She make an affidavit that her 1st testimony were not true about the harassment.)

Republic of the Philippines
City of Manila S.S.


AFFIDAVIT

I, ROSTIA TRILLANES, Filipino, of legal age, married a resident of and with a postal address at 639 Piy Margal, Manila, upon being duly sworn according to law depose and say:

1. That I am the same ROSITA TRILLANES who was accused of libel by Mr. Felix Manalo before the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila, in the month of September in the year 1939;

2. That I was convicted by the Court of First Instance for that crime upon my failure to prove the truth thereof, said conviction having been published by the Taliba, on January 4, 1941;

3. That I appealed from the decision of the said Court of First Instance to the Court of Appeals because of my fear that upon my failure to pay the fine imposed threat that I would be imprisoned;

4. That concerning that libelous letter I wrote and for which I accused by Mr. Felix Manalo, I hereby state and so declare, that all matters therein stated and written are all false and pure fabrications without any truth whatsoever;

5. That the letter and all those matters stated therein was fabricated by Messrs Raymundo Mansilungan, Tedoro Briones and Cirilo Gonzales who induced me to sign the same upon their representation that it would be shown only to the brethren of the Church of Christ (IGLESIA NI CRISTO) to convince them to revolt against the administration of Mr. Felix Manalo, in retribution against him for expelling us from the Church;

6. That together with Messrs Raymundo Mansilungan, Tedoro Briones and Cirilo Gonzales, we were expelled from the Church for Acts and behaviors contrary to the doctrines of the Church;

7. That contrary to my expectation, my companions above mentioned not only showed the letter to the brethren in the Church, but published the same in a Pampango Newspaper, entitled “Ing Cawal”, whose editor at the time was Salvador Tumang, and as a consequence thereof, Mr Felix Manalo filed a libel suit against me and against Salvador Tumang and Cirilo Gonzales, resulting in our conviction,

8. That after my conviction I appealed the case to the Court of Appeals and by claiming that I was motivated by good intentions I was able to acquit myself (see Official Gazette Vol. 1, July 1942 – No. 8180, April 21, 1942), although, since then and up to the present time, I have been bothered continuously by remorse and a guilty conscience;

9. That I have therefore executed the foregoing affidavit to confirm the truth of all I haves stated above and for such other purposes for which the same could be availed of to right the wrong and injustice I have committed against Mr. Felix Manalo about whose integrity and character I have the highest of regard and resepect. Furthermore, I have executed the same without any consideration whatsoever, without having been induced by any one, except for the reasons I have stated, and without mental reservation whatsoever.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this affidavit, and affixed my right hand thumb mark below that of my signature at the left margin of the first pageand at the bottom hereof, to remove any doubt about the authenticity of this instrument, this 21st day of November 1952, in the City of Manila, Philippines.

(signature)
Rosita Trillanes
Right hand_________Thumb mark

Signed in the presence of:

(Signature of witness) (signature of 2nd witness)


Subscribed and sworn to before me this 21st day of November, 1952, at Manila, Philippines; affiant exhibited to me her Residence Certificate No. A0385178 issued at Maila, on November 7, 1952.

(signature)
(Notary Seal) Frolian Tafalla
Notary Public
Until December 31, 1952
Doc. No. 118
Page No. 97
Book No. II
Series of 1952

Si Rosita Trillanes ay bumalik at namatay na Deaconess sa loob ng Iglesia ni Cristo.

(Sis. Rosita Trillanes came back in the church and died as a Deaconess.)

This affidavit of Sis. Trillanes were also the SUMMARY of what really happen, that she was only convinced by other people to do it because they were EXPELLED from the church. However, still these nonmembers ask many questions regarding this, because they cannot accept the truth, that they malign and made such LIES saying Bro. Felix is a “rapist” however, when it is about the case of their priest ABUSE children and etc, they are SILENT, when it is about Mr. Soriano, who have many cases being thrown to him, not even FACE the accusations on him, his members says that all those were only ACCUSATIONS and not true.

But when it is about Bro. Felix Manalo, they even adulterated pictures of him, make blogs/sites discussing that the court favored Sis. Rosita and that the court said that Bro. Felix is “a MAN OF LOW MORALS”, this is their source:

1. Citing the case of People versus Trillanes, published in the Official Gazette, Volume I, No. 1, July 1954, p. 394, docketed as Case No. 8180, April 21, 1942. The Court of Appeals where Trillanes was acquitted. The appellate court upheld Trillanes and categorically called Manalo “a man of low morals” (“un hombre de baja moral’).

2. Further more: “…Manalo, took advantage of his position as head of the Iglesia ni Cristo, and …employed religion as a cloak to cover his…immoral practices; that he pretended to be the Messias sent by God; and that to persuade his victims, he cited the example of Solomon and his many wives”

Here is the retraction of Bro. Ismael to the church, in his letter he also tackled and PROVE that the issue about Bro. Felix is a “rapist” is not but a big LIE!

“…One of those things I say on air was the issue concerning Rosita Trillanes. They say in their program that we (Iglesia ni Cristo) do not dare touch that issue. We've (InC) already responded to that, a while back. Not just me, but even Bro Paul Guevarra answered that. Even Maximo Bularan. Even then, when they we're forcing me to say those things, I refused. I told them 'I know that case'. She (Trillanes) was sued by Bro Felix Manalo and they were convicted, she and her accomplishes. There even came a time when she (Trillanes) retracted. Why would I repeat something that's not true?...”

Let us one by one clear this issue. Many questions were raised in our minds about this issue because of the LIES of nonmembers to the Church of Christ.

By the way, who are those MEMBERS that were expelled from the church?

from examineiglesianicristo.com

Teofilo Ora leaves Church of Christ
In May 1922, former members of the Philippine-based Iglesia Ni Cristo (Church of Christ), Teofilo Ora, Januario Ponce and Basilio Santiago gather some members of the Iglesia ni Cristo formally separating from the church. Several months later, they name the Church Iglesia ng Diyos kay Kristo Hesus (English Translation: Church of God in Christ Jesus). That same year, Nicholas Perez became a member and preacher of this group at Maragondon, Cavite.
wikipedia

So now its clear, those are the three members expelled in the church and made their own churches. It is where the church founded by Eliseo soriano rooted, like protestantism.

Many will ask, why then only ten years or whatsoever Sis. Rosita retracts?

Just see the sequence of the events above, because she was bothered by her guilty conscience. And after realizing that, that is why she wanted to came back in the church!

Why the church accept her and became a deaconess while she is a PERJURER?

If a member is expelled in the church, he/she has the chance to came back in the church, its called "balik loob" where there are also a process if the expelled member regretted to his/her mistakes/sins which he/she cause to be expelled. That's the only time when he/she can came back in the church. Like Sis. Rosita, she also have the chance to be back on the church especially, she was forgiven by Bro. Felix Manalo.

Some says, why is that the suspect(Bro. Felix) is the one who petition to the court, is it should be the victim(Sis. Rosita)?

That should be the one for NONMEMBERS to think! What really happened, is that Bro. Felix is the victim here, read the affidavit of Sis. Rosita for the events. He filed libel because Sis. Rosita and other make such lie to Bro. Felix saying that they were harassed by him.

Nonmembers argue,we thought that an INC member should not file a suit in a member also?

In those times, Sis. Rosita and others were already EXPELLED in the church before the issue spreads.

They say, Why Bro. Felix Manalo did not appeal to the court in its decision saying about his "immorality"?

That's the thing that shows the humbleness of Bro. Felix, he knows that the accusation is not true and also the members know it. Many persecution come around on the church especially to Bro. Felix, this is just ONE of those! The decision dated July 1954 and the retraction was made November 7, 1952. Therefore, the decision of the court before the retraction was made is nothing but false/wrong!

CONCLUSION: If the accusation is true, that Bro. Felix "raped" many, and Sis. Rosita is one of them, she will probably would not, in any way, wanted to come back in the church. If you were really raped, would you want to go back in the "suspect"? Dont say Bro. Felix or the Church of Christ INFLUENCED her and etc. because in those times, INC is not that HUGE and influential. Sis. Rosita Trillanes came back in the church and died as a DEACONESS. Therefore, it just proves, that the accusations about "immorality" on Bro. Felix Manalo were all, but a LIE! Meaning, all those written in the NEWSPAPERS like bombshell and official gazzete were published BEFORE the retraction made, meaning, NOT UPDATED IN THE TRUTH.

CASE CLOSED!

CATHOLIC DEFENDER SIDE: Here's a thorough, brilliant and intelligent analysis on the RAPE CASE against FELIX MANALO by its own member ROSITA TRILLANES. Thanks to Cenon Bibe owner of TUMBUKIN NATIN.


Felix Manalo vs Rosita Trillanes: May rape ba o wala?

MAY CHALLENGE po sa ATIN ang isang KAANIB ng IGLESIA na ITINAYO ni FELIX MANALO noong 1914.

Sinabi po ng nagpapakilalang ANONYMOUS INC:

"NAPATUNAYAN NG KA FELIX NA WALA SIYANG KASALANAN KAYA HINDI SIYA NAHATULAN KAILANMAN O NAPARUSAHAN NG HUKUMAN. KATIBAYAN, HINDI SIYA KAILANMAN NABILANGGO."

MATAGAL na po nating HINIHILING sa mga KAANIB ng INC na IPAKITA RITO ang PRUWEBA at PATUNAY na "WALANG KASALANAN" ang PASTOL NILANG si FELIX MANALO, pero WALA po SILANG MAIPAKITA.

Bakit po kaya?

ANONYMOUS INC:

"MANANATILI LANG IYANG AKUSASYON, AT HINDI MAPAPATUNAYAN NINOMAN NA TOTOO NA NANG-RAPE SIYA, HINDI NGA NAPATUNAYAN NG KORTE, NG MGA KUMALABAN SA KANIYA NOONG NABUBUHAY PA SIYA ..."

HINDI po iyan SIMPLENG AKUSASYON. MAKIKITA po NINYO sa ILALIM.

ANONYMOUS INC:

"KUNG TALAGANG NAPAKATIBAY AT HINDI MAPAGDUDUDAHAN ANG MGA EBIDENSIYANG IYAN, ABA HINDI AKO MAG-AATUBILING ILABAS SA PUBLIKO IYAN...KAYA NGA KAYO TAKOT NA TAKOT KASI ALAM NINYO, WALANG KAKUWENTA-KUWENTA IYANG MGA EBIDENSIYA NA SINASABI NINYO...WALA KAYONG ILILITAW KASI NGA WALA NAMAN KAYONG PINANGHAHAWAKANG DOKUMENTO."

"NAPATUNAYAN BA NG KORTE NA GUILTY SIYA? MAY MAIPAPAKITA KA BANG EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT THE COURT HAVE GIVEN THE VERDICT GUILTY OF RAPE TO KA FELIX MANALO BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT? Kaya nga tingnan mo, kung totoo ang mga alegasyong iyan, at napatunayan iyan ng hukuman at nabilanggo siya."

MAGANDANG TANONG po iyan: KUNG TOTOONG GINAHASA NI FELIX MANALO SI ROSITA TRILLANES AY BAKIT HINDI NAKULONG SI MANALO?

SIMPLE lang po ang SAGOT: HINDI NAGDEMANDA SI TRILLANES LABAN KAY MANALO.

TIYAK po na PAPALAKPAK at MAGLULUNDAG sa TUWA ang mga KAANIB ng INC matapos nilang MABASA ang mga NAUNANG SALITA.

HUWAG po MUNA. Paki tuloy po ang PAGBABASA.

Dahil po sa CHALLENGE nitong ANONYMOUS INC, at sa HANGARIN NATIN na MALAMAN ang KATOTOHANAN, ay NAGSIYASAT po AKO sa sinasabing KASO laban kay FELIX MANALO.

Ganito po ang NAPAG-ALAMAN NATIN.

Noon pong 1938 ay may isang "ROSITA TRILLANES" na gumawa ng SULAT kung saan INAKUSAHAN NIYA ang isang "FELIX MANALO" ng PANGGAGAHASA sa KANYA at sa ILAN PANG BABAENG KAANIB ng INC (1914).

Dahil diyan ay IDINEMANDA ni FELIX MANALO si ROSITA TRILLANES ng LIBEL o PANINIRANG PURI.

Sa COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE sa MAYNILA ay NATALO si ROSITA TRILLANES kaya UMAPELA siya sa COURT OF APPEALS na PUMANIG naman sa KANYA.

Dahil sa PAGPANIG ng COURT OF APPEALS kay ROSITA TRILLANES ay IBINASURA ng KORTE noong 1942 ang KASONG ISINAMPA ni FELIX MANALO laban kay ROSITA TRILLANES.

Ibig sabihin po niyan ay HINDI NAPATUNAYAN ni FELIX MANALO na PANINIRANG PURI LANG ang mga SINABI ni ROSITA TRILLANES sa KANYANG SULAT.

Ngayon, KUNG IDINEKLARA mismo ng KORTE na HINDI PANINIRANG PURI ang SINABI ng isang BABAE na GINAHASA SIYA ng isang LALAKE ay ANO po YON?

Maaari po bang sabihin na NANIWALA ang KORTE sa SINABI ng BABAE? KAYO na ang SUMAGOT sa tanong na yan.

Ayon sa NABASA ko ay ganito ang SINABI ng COURT OF APPEALS patungkol sa AKUSASYON ni TRILLANES kay MANALO:

"... the Prosecution admits that there is reason to believe that the offended party, Manalo, did commit immoral acts with some women members of the Iglesia."

MAKIKITA po NINYO riyan ang SABI ng KORTE kung NAGAWA nga ni FELIX MANALO ang sinasabing GINAWA NIYA.

IDINAGDAG pa po ng COURT OF APPEALS:

"And the Solicitor concludes that he found out through proofs presented that Manalo is a man "de baja moral" (man of low moral) and that he took advantage of his position in the Iglesia to attack and sully the virtue of some of his female followers."

Diyan po ay SINASABI naman ng KORTE kung ANO ang PANINIWALA NITO sa URI ng PAGKATAO ni FELIX MANALO.

Ang mga SIPI sa itaas ay HALAW sa DESISYON ng COURT OF APPEALS na NAGBABASURA sa KASONG LIBEL na ISINAMPA ni FELIX MANALO laban kay ROSITA TRILLANES (Case No.8180, April 21, 1942) at INIULAT ng OFFICIAL GAZETTE sa Vol. I, No. 1, July 1954, p. 394.

Ang DESISYON ay ISINULAT ng mga JUSTICE na sina HONTIVEROS, BRIONES and TORRES.

BATAY sa DESISYON ng COURT of APPEALS na NAGBABASURA sa DEMANDA ni FELIX MANALO kay ROSITA TRILLANES ay MAKIKITA NATIN kung SINO ang PINANIWALAAN ng KORTE: Si ROSITA TRILLANES ba na NAGSABI na GINAHASA SIYA ni FELIX MANALO? O si FELIX MANALO na NAGSASABING SINISIRAAN LANG SIYA ni ROSITA TRILLANES?

At BATAY po sa DESISYON ng COURT OF APPEALS, SINO po ang PANINIWALAAN NINYO? Si ROSITA TRILLANES o si FELIX MANALO?

Ngayon, kung PINABORAN ng KORTE si ROSITA TRILLANES at IDINEKLARA na HINDI PANINIRANG PURI ang mga SINABI NIYA LABAN kay FELIX MANALO, bakit hindi nakulong si FELIX MANALO?

Simple lang po ang SAGOT: Si ROSITA TRILLANES po kasi ang INAAKUSAHAN sa KASONG ISINAMPA ni FELIX MANALO. Si FELIX MANALO po ang COMPLAINANT.

Si FELIX MANALO ang HUMIHINGI sa KORTE na PARUSAHAN si ROSITA TRILLANES dahil sa umano'y PANINIRANG PURI sa kanya.

Ang papel ni ROSITA TRILLANES ay PATUNAYAN na HINDI PANINIRANG PURI ang KANYANG MGA SINABI sa KANYANG SULAT.

Ika nga, DUMIDEPENSA LANG si ROSITA TRILLANES.

Kaya KAHIT pa NOONG NANALO si ROSITA TRILLANES sa KASONG ISINAMPA sa KANYA ay HINDI KASAMA ang PAGPAPAKULONG kay FELIX MANALO sa BUNGA ng KANYANG PANALO.

Para MAKULONG si FELIX MANALO, DAPAT ay INIREKLAMO rin ni ROSITA TRILLANES ang NAGTATAG sa INC (1914).

HINDI na NAKAPAGREKLAMO si ROSITA TRILLANES.

Bakit?

Ayon mismo sa SULAT ni ROSITA TRILLANES, siya ay isang DALAGA na ITINAKWIL ng KANYANG MGA MAGULANG.

Ibig sabihin ay WALA SIYANG PINANSIYAL na KAKAYANANG MAGSAMPA ng ANUMANG REKLAMO.

Isa nga raw sa DAHILAN kung bakit siya NAPAHAMAK ay dahil "Sa paniwala kong ako’y makakatagpo ng pag-aampon ay pumayag ako kay kapatid na Jacinto Torres na dalhin niya ako sa opisina Central."

So, WALANG PERA at WALANG TUTULONG kaya PAANO MAKAPAGDEDEMANDA si ROSITA TRILLANES?

Iyan po ang malamang na DAHILAN kung BAKIT HINDI NAKAPAGDEMANDA si ROSITA TRILLANES.

At DAHIL HINDI NAKAPAGDEMANDA ay HINDI TALAGA MANGYAYARI na MAIPAKUKULONG NIYA ang SINASABI NIYANG GUMAHASA sa KANYA.

Iyan po ang SAGOT sa TANONG nitong KAANIB ng INC kung BAKIT HINDI NAKULONG ang SUGO NILA kung totoo man ang mga sinabi ni ROSITA TRILLANES laban sa kanya.

Ngayon, tulad po ng LAGI NATING SINASABI: KUNG MAY MALI TAYONG NAIBIGAY na IMPORMASYON ay WELCOME po ang ANUMANG REAKSYON o PAGTUTUWID na GUSTONG GAWIN NINO MAN, LALO NA NG MGA KAANIB NG INC.

Salamat po.

Rosita Trillanes binawi ang akusasyon?

DAHIL PATAS po TAYO ay ILALABAS po natin dito ang UMANO ay RETRACTION ni ROSITA TRILLANES sa SINABI NIYANG GINAHASA SIYA ni FELIX MANALO.

Ito pong "RETRACTION" na ito ay IBINIGAY ni ANONYMOUS INC, isang KAANIB ng IGLESIANG ITINATAG ni FELIX MANALO.

Republic of the Philippines
City of Manila S.S.

AFFIDAVIT

I, ROSTIA TRILLANES, Filipino, of legal age, married a resident of and with a postal address at 639 Piy Margal, Manila, upon being duly sworn according to law depose and say:

1. That I am the same ROSITA TRILLANES who was accused of libel by Mr. Felix Manalo before the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila, in the month of September in the year 1939;

2. That I was convicted by the Court of First Instance for that crime upon my failure to prove the truth thereof, said conviction having been published by the Taliba, on January 4, 1941;

3. That I appealed from the decision of the said Court of First Instance to the Court of Appeals because of my fear that upon my failure to pay the fine imposed threat that I would be imprisoned;

4. That concerning that LIBELOUS LETTER I WROTE AND FOR WHICH I ACCUSED BY MR. FELIX MANALO, I HEREBY STATE AND SO DECLARE, THAT ALL MATTERS THEREIN STATED AND WRITTEN ARE ALL FALSE AND PURE FABRICATIONS WITHOUT ANY TRUTH WHATSOEVER;

5. THAT THE LETTER AND ALL THOSE MATTERS STATED THEREIN WAS FABRICATED BY MESSRS RAYMUNDO MANSILUNGAN, TEDORO BRIONES AND CIRILO GONZALES WHO INDUCED ME TO SIGN THE SAME UPON THEIR REPRESENTATION THAT IT WOULD BE SHOWN ONLY TO THE BRETHREN OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST (IGLESIA NI CRISTO) TO CONVINCE THEM TO REVOLT AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION OF MR. FELIX MANALO, IN RETRIBUTION AGAINST HIM FOR EXPELLING US FROM THE CHURCH;

6. THAT TOGETHER WITH MESSRS RAYMUNDO MANSILUNGAN, TEDORO BRIONES AND CIRILO GONZALES, WE WERE EXPELLED FROM THE CHURCH FOR ACTS AND BEHAVIORS CONTRARY TO THE DOCTRINES OF THE CHURCH;

7. THAT CONTRARY TO MY EXPECTATION, MY COMPANIONS ABOVE MENTIONED NOT ONLY SHOWED THE LETTER TO THE BRETHREN IN THE CHURCH, BUT PUBLISHED THE SAME IN A PAMPANGO NEWSPAPER, ENTITLED “ING CAWAL”, WHOSE EDITOR AT THE TIME WAS SALVADOR TUMANG, AND AS A CONSEQUENCE THEREOF, MR FELIX MANALO FILED A LIBEL SUIT AGAINST ME AND AGAINST SALVADOR TUMANG AND CIRILO GONZALES, RESULTING IN OUR CONVICTION,

8. That after my conviction I appealed the case to the Court of Appeals and by claiming that I was motivated by good intentions I was ableto acquit myself (see Official Gazette Vol. 1, July 1942 – No. 8180, April 21, 1942), ALTHOUGH, SINCE THEN AND UP TO THE PRESENT TIME, I HAVE BEEN BOTHERED CONTINUOUSLY BY REMORSE AND A GUILTY CONSCIENCE;

9. THAT I HAVE THEREFORE EXECUTED THE FOREGOING AFFIDAVIT TO CONFIRM THE TRUTH OF ALL I HAVES STATED ABOVE AND FOR SUCH OTHER PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE SAME COULD BE AVAILED OF TO RIGHT THE WRONG AND INJUSTICE I HAVE COMMITTED AGAINST MR. FELIX MANALO ABOUT WHOSE INTEGRITY AND CHARACTER I HAVE THE HIGHEST OF REGARD AND RESEPECT. Furthermore, I HAVE EXECUTED THE SAME WITHOUT ANY CONSIDERATION WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT HAVING BEEN INDUCED BY ANY ONE, EXCEPT FOR THE REASONS I HAVE STATED, AND WITHOUT MENTAL RESERVATION WHATSOEVER.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this affidavit, and affixed my right hand thumb mark below that of my signature at the left margin of the first pageand at the bottom hereof, to remove any doubt about the authenticity of this instrument, this 21st day of November 1952, in the City of Manila, Philippines.

(signature)
Rosita Trillanes
Right hand_________Thumb mark

Signed in the presence of:

(Signature of witness) (signature of 2nd witness)


Subscribed and sworn to before me this 21st day of November, 1952, at Manila, Philippines; affiant exhibited to me her Residence Certificate No. A0385178 issued at Maila, on November 7, 1952.

(signature)
(Notary Seal) Frolian Tafalla
Notary Public
Until December 31, 1952
Doc. No. 118
Page No. 97
Book No. II
Series of 1952

Ngayon, para po BALANSE ay HETO naman po ang KOMENTO ng isang KATOLIKO sa RETRACTION umano na iyan.

HALAW po ito sa GAWA ni ESTEBAN RAYMUNDO sa isang OPEN LETTER TO AN IGLESIA NI CRISTO MEMBER.

Sabi po ni RAYMUNDO kaugnay sa RETRACTION umano ni ROSITA TRILLANES. (Ang mga EMPHASIS o PAGDIDIIN ay AKIN)

When I raised the issue on Rosita Trillanes, someone in this group responded to me by posting the purported “retraction” of Trillanes.

I pointed out that said RETRACTION DOES NOT SERVE ANY FATHOMABLE LEGAL PURPOSE WHATSOEVER. A recantation, retraction or desistance should be executed and filed before the prosecution files a criminal information in court. In the Trillanes case, however, that cannot be legally possible, for the following reasons:

1.Manalo was the private complainant. He should have been the one who executed and filed an affidavit of desistance or retraction.

2.The case was already filed in court. In fact, the case reached the Court of appeals where Trillanes was acquitted. The appellate court upheld Trillanes and categorically called Manalo “a man of low morals” (“un hombre de baja moral’).

3.The retraction was executed by Trillanes many years after the dismissal of the case.

The person who furnished me the alleged text of the retraction berated me and told me to leave Trillanes alone because “matagal nang namayapa si Kapatid na Trillanes” and “masigasig siyang naglingkod sa Iglesia bilang diaconesa hanggang sa kanyang kamatayan.”

The point that Trillanes remained a deaconess until her death, after the scandal that she caused, struck me.

Why would a self-confessed liar be allowed to serve in the church as deaconess?

In 1 Timothy 3:10, Apostle Paul provides the qualifications for the office of deacon:

“And let these also be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderer, sober, faithful in all things.”

You consider a self-confessed liar blameless?

Manalo himself considered Trillanes a libeler, in fact he filed a criminal case against her for libel.


Then, why would she be appointed as deaconess even if she does not qualify as one who is “not a slanderer.”?

You consider a conspirator against the church like Trillanes as “faithful in all things”?

The doubt continues to linger in the air that her retraction can be construed as a quid pro quo for her position as deaconess. This is not to mention the undue influence and tremendous power Manalo formidably wielded during that time, both as the Sugo, Founder and Executive Minister of his church.

Sa halip po na MAKALINAW ay LALONG NAGPALABO ang UMANO'Y PAGBAWI ni ROSITA TRILLANES sa MGA SINABI NIYA LABAN kay FELIX MANALO.

Halimbawa po, GANOON po ba talaga sa INC (1914)? Ang NAG-AKUSA sa PUNO NILA ng PANGGAGAHASA ay IPINO-PROMOTE pa?

Kung ginawang LEGAL ang RETRACTION ni ROSITA TRILLANES, MALINAW na BINABAWI NIYA ang mga SINUMPAAN NIYANG SALAYSAY sa HUKUMAN.

Hindi po ba PAG-AMIN iyan ng PERJURY?

Lalabas na HINDI LANG po UMAMIN si ROSITA TRILLANES na siya ay MAPANIRANG PURI, UMAAMIN din po SIYA na SIYA ay PERJURER o NAGSINUNGALING.

NANGYAYARI po ba talaga na ang isang NANINIRANG PURI at isang UMAAMING NAGSINUNGALING ay GINAGAWANG DIAKONO o DIAKONESA sa IGLESIANG ITINATAG ni FELIX MANALO?

ANONG URI po ng PAMUNUAN ang MAGKAKAROON sa INC (1914) kung ang magiging BATAYAN sa PAGBIBIGAY nila ng POSISYON sa mga KAANIB ay ang PAGGAWA ng KASAMAAN?

Kaya po ba MARAMI sa mga KAANIB ng INC na NARITO sa BLOG na ITO ay NAGSISINUNGALING, NANINIRA at NAGMUMURA? Iyan po ba ang TIKET NILA para UMANGAT sa KANILANG SAMAHAN?

Hindi po magiging KATAKA-TAKA kung ang KASO ni ROSITA TRILLANES ang KANILANG PAGBABATAYAN.

So, SORRY po kung talagang KADUDA-DUDA ang sinasabing RETRACTION at PAGBABALIK-LOOB nitong si ROSITA TRILLANES.

KUNG HINDI KAYA SIYA BINIGYAN ng POSISYON bilang DIAKONESA ay GAGAWIN KAYA NIYA yung RETRACTION?

Lumalabas pa kasi na SINUHULAN LANG SIYA para "LINISIN" ang PANGALAN ni FELIX MANALO, hindi po ba?

MAIKUKUMPARA po natin ang RETRACTION at PAGBABALIK-LOOB na GINAWA ni JOSE RIZAL sa IGLESIA KATOLIKA.

Noong NAG-RETRACT si RIZAL ay WALA SIYANG NAKUHANG PABOR MULA sa SIMBAHAN.

KATUNAYAN, ni HINDI nga po NAPIGILAN ng RETRACTION ni RIZAL ang PAGBARIL sa KANYA sa LUNETA.

Iyan po ang ISANG TUNAY na HALIMBAWA ng NAGBABALIK-LOOB at GUMAGAWA ng RETRACTION--KUSANG LOOB at WALANG KAPALIT na SUHOL.

Pero KUNG ang PAGABALIK-LOOB at RETRACTION ay MAY MALAKING KAPALIT, masasabi po bang TUNAY IYON? HINDI po ba LALABAS na NABILI LANG ang RETRACTION?

Ngayon, HINDI po NATIN SINISISI si ROSITA TRILLANES. Sa halip ay KINAAAWAAN po NATIN SIYA.

AYON mismo sa SALAYSAY NIYA sa KANYANG SULAT na IBINIGAY sa KORTE, SIYA po ay ISANG DALAGA na ITINAKWIL ng KANYANG MGA MAGULANG.

Sa KANYANG KAHIRAPAN at KAWALAN ng MAPUPUNTAHAN ay SINUBUKAN NIYANG MAGPA-AMPON sa CENTRAL ng INC (1914).

HINDI po MAHIRAP ISIPIN na ang ISANG MAHIRAP at WALANG MAPUNTAHANG BABAE ay TUMANGGAP ng "POSISYON" sa isang samahan para MAIBSAN ang KANYANG PAGHIHIRAP at PAGDURUSA.

Kaya po kung totoo na SINUHULAN si ROSITA TRILLANES para AMININ NIYA na NAGSINUNGALING SIYA ay lumalabas na PANIBAGONG DAGOK at PANG-AAPI na naman po iyon sa KANYA.

Now, I won't say much about these two opposing opinions. However I will leave to you the judgment: Did Iglesia ni Cristo FOUNDER FELIX MANALO raped ROSITA TRILLANES? or NOT? Then you still have the ample time to save your souls from damnation.

166 comments:

  1. Why would a self-confessed liar be allowed to serve in the church as deaconess?

    To Err is human to forgive is divine

    American Fr. Joseph Skelton Jr. is a convicted sex offender yet he still allowed to serve in Catholic.

    Now i throw back your question.

    Why would a convicted sex offender allowed to serve in the church as priest?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well that´s a part of the business functionality.

      Delete
    2. First of all, I want you to know that i´m not judging the religion and keep that on your mind…


      You know my wife was an "Iglesia ni cristo" servant and she was a mang a awit for several years, and everything was just perfect on her side at that time.

      And then I came along .

      …Guess what...

      She committed a relationship with somone from "sanlibutan" and then she…got tiwalag…
      How come so strict and so you cant be involve in politics or even drink...
      Do you know why?...it´s simply means they cant manipulate people with a bit of knowledge.
      A knowledge that could be an obstacle on their way one day.

      So everything just started to fell into its place and make sense since I have turned the page of life…

      For years of being tiwalag , we spent those long lost years in a tiny corner inside the globe, to learn how real life is…

      After 11 years of lesson, we felt that there was something is missing in our life during the journey.
      There was a Lack of something good for our sensitive feelings and a need to feed to strengthen our soul to help fight against bad things in everyday life.

      So I started to seek on the nearest "Kapilya ng Iglesia ni Cristo" around upang makapag balik loob.

      …Guess what i found in the first place…

      This old unlocked issue.

      An issue I know you all trying to ignore a long time ago and, you may think all of this are just an invention of someone crazy or maybe, should I say, "Helpless" that can´t even afford a lawyer at that time.

      This is just a long time ago issue….and blah blah blah…and it´s just paninira lang , and you know.

      A common general answer.

      I wonder how they feed or what is on their mind.

      There is only heaven and Hell...Christian and anti Christ...Black and white…Rich and poor…and how come there is no other option on your mind…

      Sanlibutan ang banyag kung hindi Iglesia ni Cristo…
      Balat kayo ay banal na mensahero sa likod ng maskara ay isa pa lang diablo…

      …Banal na aso at santong kabayo kanta ng "Y.A.N.O"…
      …Lagim from "Siakol"…

      If i´m not wrong, those Ph Bands was the best and a real messengers of god.
      No one can copy that easy their songs, because they are just that easy as pure.

      I remember an (INC) friend singed that cover requested song from Y.A.N.O. once in lamay and it was a very hard song to play alone.
      I experienced (INC) friends which was (hiding ) active on that forbidden activity.
      Not on politics but, on drinks, smoke weeds and other stuff heavier than that during lamay just to keep them awake.
      I remember once when I was young , I caught an destined ministro, eating "Dinuguan" and he just easily ignored the presence of this kid´s innocence.

      That was just another long time ago issue.

      Not for being tiwalag, but for some reason, we left Ph...(sariling bansa)…to survive...
      and every time we go visiting Ph. Unfortunately, was always a Funeral.

      …And guess what again…

      My parents in law...SAD is in it ?....
      But the saddest part was during "Lamay" is none of your Iglesia ni cristo´s destined "Ministro" visited even for a short time just to tell "nakikiramay"…
      My parents in law was Diakono and Diokonessa.
      If I´m not wrong, during my stay, i never saw none of them.
      I was´nt awake all the time, but there was no sign of them.

      …(Menos isang mag aabuloy ika nga)………………End of part 1……

      Delete
    3. First of all, I want you to know that i´m not judging the religion and keep that on your mind…


      You know my wife was an "Iglesia ni cristo" servant and she was a mang a awit for several years, and everything was just perfect on her side at that time.

      And then I came along .

      …Guess what...

      She committed a relationship with somone from "sanlibutan" and then she…got tiwalag…
      How come so strict and so you cant be involve in politics or even drink...
      Do you know why?...it´s simply means they cant manipulate people with a bit of knowledge.
      A knowledge that could be an obstacle on their way one day.

      So everything just started to fell into its place and make sense since I have turned the page of life…

      For years of being tiwalag , we spent those long lost years in a tiny corner inside the globe, to learn how real life is…

      After 11 years of lesson, we felt that there was something is missing in our life during the journey.
      There was a Lack of something good for our sensitive feelings and a need to feed to strengthen our soul to help fight against bad things in everyday life.

      So I started to seek on the nearest "Kapilya ng Iglesia ni Cristo" around upang makapag balik loob.

      …Guess what i found in the first place…

      This old unlocked issue.

      An issue I know you all trying to ignore a long time ago and, you may think all of this are just an invention of someone crazy or maybe, should I say, "Helpless" that can´t even afford a lawyer at that time.

      This is just a long time ago issue….and blah blah blah…and it´s just paninira lang , and you know.

      A common general answer.

      I wonder how they feed or what is on their mind.

      There is only heaven and Hell...Christian and anti Christ...Black and white…Rich and poor…and how come there is no other option on your mind…

      Sanlibutan ang banyag kung hindi Iglesia ni Cristo…
      Balat kayo ay banal na mensahero sa likod ng maskara ay isa pa lang diablo…

      …Banal na aso at santong kabayo kanta ng "Y.A.N.O"…
      …Lagim from "Siakol"…

      If i´m not wrong, those Ph Bands was the best and a real messengers of god.
      No one can copy that easy their songs, because they are just that easy as pure.

      I remember an (INC) friend singed that cover requested song from Y.A.N.O. once in lamay and it was a very hard song to play alone.
      I experienced (INC) friends which was (hiding ) active on that forbidden activity.
      Not on politics but, on drinks, smoke weeds and other stuff heavier than that during lamay just to keep them awake.
      I remember once when I was young , I caught an destined ministro, eating "Dinuguan" and he just easily ignored the presence of this kid´s innocence.

      That was just another long time ago issue.

      Not for being tiwalag, but for some reason, we left Ph...(sariling bansa)…to survive...
      and every time we go visiting Ph. Unfortunately, was always a Funeral.

      …And guess what again…

      My parents in law...SAD is in it ?....
      But the saddest part was during "Lamay" is none of your Iglesia ni cristo´s destined "Ministro" visited even for a short time just to tell "nakikiramay"…
      My parents in law was Diakono and Diokonessa.
      If I´m not wrong, during my stay, i never saw none of them.
      I was´nt awake all the time, but there was no sign of them.

      …(Menos isang mag aabuloy ika nga)………………End of part 1……

      Delete
    4. ......part 2......


      And after that, I just started thinking...
      There´s a lot of thing´s that ain´t gonna do no more.
      I don't hate my self to say this truth so, You! (INC) are all far away from the reality...
      You are all (Alipin) "Slaves" of your beloved leader using a borrowed name of "Cristo" for the success of the business known as your beloved religion and I know you all know that.

      And there you are useful for your leader´s EGO to help build and Reign that endless dream…

      How he can afford on everything ?

      How his life was so perfect to live and go travel whenever he wants while you just stay on your corner satisfied on what your god gave to you ?

      Is it just the life awaits on you?

      Is in it because you have mental limitations and that´s why you never had a chance to explore even your own land ?

      What is the feeling when you go visiting his sacred palace, had you ever been there, do yo know how he live inside his palace ?

      What makes him that sacred to you ?

      Do you think he spend the rest of his time praying for your good ?

      How confident "Sumamba" when you got nothing for "Abuloy" ?

      Since you´re (INC) Magkano na ang nai abuloy mo ?

      So binibilang mo lang ang dalawang araw na paglilingkod sa loob ng isang linggo ?

      Do you trust your "Daughter" in his hands ?

      After reading this, I know you all will continue serving and keep wasting your time as a miserable servant .
      And yes!... thats what you are! .

      You will just ignore or maybe forget this "nonsense" is in it, Slave ? .

      I don´t want to bother no one, but...I am not encouraging or even forcing you to believe on whatever I believe.

      Someday you all will realize that you are all "Bitches" of your beloved religion…
      And you will remember this, Nakaka inis but,

      "I do believe what Rosita Trillanes been through"

      And i also believe you have sisters and daughters.

      Sa mga kapatid at anak nyong babae, huwag sana dumaan sa ganito balang araw.

      Hindi ko kayo tinatakot at lalong hindi ko kayo tinutulak umakto ng mali.

      Ngunit sana ay bukas ang isipan at inyong mga na tanggapin ang tama at katotohanan.

      This is just a long time ago issue.

      In the deepest side of my heart is only the Mighty One.


      …"Ancient Aliens"…

      Delete
    5. Gago tlga to c catholic defender.ndi posisyon ang diakonesa.wla yang financial assistance.ms mdmi pa nga gingwa pag diakonesa.ang tanga mo!

      Delete
    6. oo nga sa amin bukal sa puso ang pag-uukol ng tungkulin kya ano say nyo?, alam q gusto nyo ung malaya kau sa buhay halos nakakamtan nyo gusto nyo khit mali pa eh gnagawa nyo, pero snabi na nga ni cristo kay apostol pablo na wag kayong padaig sa lugso ng laman at magpakalayaw etc etc.. alalahanin nyo na ang laman at espiritu ay likas na magkaaway !!!>.... "huwag kayong maging malayaw sa lahat ng oras hindi q sinabi na masama ito kundi ito ay labis na uri ng kalayaan ang kalayawan ....

      Delete
    7. Bkit ang daming naninira sa INC? e puro patungkol naman sa BIBLIYA ang mga aral dito.. palibhasa taliwas sa mga totoong aral ni KRISTO ang ginagawa nyo..kaya paninira nalang ang tanging magagawa nyo..walang sapilitan s loob ng sambahan namin.puro pagkukusa lang...

      Delete
    8. Miss Em-Em INC po b hindi naninira sa iba? ipagpalagay na po natin na nasa Bibliya ang tinuturo nyo. ang problema po kasi puro out of context po ang interpretation nyo sa nilalaman ng Bibliyang sinasabi nyong batayan nyo.. Ask ko lang po may Bible Scholar po ba ang INC? Speaking of sapilitan.. bkit po pag ilang araw ng hindi nakasamba eh dinadalaw at sinusundo sa bahay para sumamba? Parang salungat po yata kayo.. tanong lng po..

      Delete
    9. Arvin Tiongco - Saan po ba out of context ang tinuturo ng INC? Bible Scholar, kaya nga po may ministro kami para mag turo ng lesson sa amin. Kaya po dinadalaw ang mga kaanib ng INC pag hindi po nakasamba eh, utos po yan. Pagdinalaw po eh nagtatanong lang ang mga kapatid sa INC kung bakit at anong dahilan bakit hindi sila nakasamba, hindi po pinipilit, pinapayuhan lang po.

      Delete
    10. TINATAKOT... ang PANLALAMIG sa INC ay DAGAT-DAGATANG apoy ang katapat sa PAGHUHUKOM.. yan ang sinasabi ng mga Ministro niyo...

      sinong binobola mo!

      Delete
  2. Point 1: The sex abuse issues of Fr. Joseph was revealed only after the ordination NOT BEFORE.

    Point 2: Rosita Trillanes accused "God's Last Messenger" of sexual abuse and it was proven in court. So Felix raped women and that Rosita trillanes was awarded a position after her retraction.

    Point 3: Fr. Joseph never accused the Pope nor questioned his authority but he did abused kids.
    Rosita Trillanes accused "God's Last Messenger" of which her accusations were proven TRUE by the court but later she retracted. Felix did abused women in his church.

    Was Fr. Joseph rewarded with any position? No!
    Was Fr. Joseph free from guilt? No!

    Rosita enjoyed her position ONLY AFTER her retraction, not before.
    Felix Manalo was found GUILTY of sexual abuse!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a twisted mind. You can't be a lawyer because you can't argue properly and your argument are way way wrong. OMG!

      Delete
    2. Oh you are talking about the COURT of APPEALS under the JAPANESE IMPERIAL ARMY who invaded the Philippines and who killed and raped our people? So you are agreeing with them (MAKAPILI)?

      Delete
    3. isa lamang sa halimbawa ng mga kamalian ng ministro ng INC ay ang ang pandadaya nila at nililigaw ang mga myembro tungkol sa paliwanag nila na ang mga tinatakan daw sa apocalypsis ay mga INC subalit kung ituloy mo lang ang pagbabasa ay hindi INC ang tinatakan kundi mga angkan ni Juda na 144,000. ganon ang dyablo ililigaw ang mga tao.

      Delete
  3. Retraction - 1952
    Court of Appeals' "Un hombre de baja moral" - 1954

    You said you wanted to be balanced, yet you typed something like "thorough, brilliant and intelligent analysis on the RAPE CASE" with the caps lock and such.

    Please examine the sequence of how that guy from Tumbukin Natin posted the documents. He copy pasted the Court of Appeals document before the retraction of Sis Trillanes, yet the dates say otherwise, and he even claims balance (lol). And from what I see, there's nothing intelligent in ranting over the internet with Caps Lock (it's hard to read actually, eye sore, I had to exhaust my mind to comprehend what he says).

    Regarding the deaconesses being slanderers and such, I think it doesn't refer to the past of someone. Doesn't it pertain to how a woman should not be a slanderer whilst serving as a deaconess? I mean, all of us were slanderers in the past, and St. Paul knows that, right?

    Please show documents in correct order next time. Remember, the author becomes branded as unreliable reeking with bigotry when he fails to show the correct sequence of events. The argument crumbles and the bias shows its true colors when we remember these years:
    RETRACTION - 1952
    COURT OF APPEALS - 1954

    If I throw you facts about scandalous priests, it will look as if I'm trying to balance the accusations against Bro. Manalo with yours, hence admitting in some manner that the accusations are true. If that is the reason, but please take note that I will show you these facts to let you know that you should examine yours first before your neighbor's. I hope it all ends here, and that you will ACTUALLY read them to justify the "balanced" judgment you claim.



    Priests are not allowed to have children right? I had my history class this morning, and we discussed a bit about an Italian warlord named Cesare Borgia. Baaah, just read at your own leisure.

    Note: this is history, friend.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cesare_Borgia

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sexually_active_popes









    Footnote: Dapat di na to pinapatulan e. Tagal nang nasagot to, at alam ko na naman sa sarili ko ang totoo. Silence does not mean guilt, it only means humility. Pero hindi ako humble e, sila lang. Tsaka siyempre, maiisip mo rin na may mga taong maliligaw dito tapos mababasa to, makukumbinse agad. Next time, wag magclaiclaim na balanced pero ang baho naman ng pagka-bias ha? Halata e. Lastly, wag mo idelete tong comment na to ha? I hope this doesn't hurt your pride in any way, and will instead prompt you to research, or even retract? hahaha!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah. Why not try to research. Stop slandering. Instead open yours eyes and see what is right from wrong.

      Delete
    2. we INC are realy sure na ito ang tunay na sa Diyos... ano kami mga bobo? cno ba tlga ang bobo? ung ndi ngresearch o ung pinanindigan ang mga bagay na ndi manlang inalam? alamin nio muna kng ano ang kinaaaniban nio.. mga bulag at bingi!!

      Delete
    3. I was an INC member since birth, handog but i quit recently... It so hard to be in a church where most of the preachings focuses on attacking other churches instead of giving glory to the Lord... Where do u think the name came from? which bible translation did they use for that name? Isn't it a George Lamsa translation version who is considered an occult? stop the name game and concentrate on God's purposes for our lives which is to glorify HIM.. not for our own glory or for the glory of a religion or the ministers of the church.. salvation is freely given to those who believe Jesus and let HIM take control of our lives.. examine your heart whether you are happy deep within with the teaching of INC or its just because you have been brain washed? sad sad sad... poor Teresa Trillanes, she must have been really helpless...

      Delete
  4. Thank you Friendster for the comments.

    You really feel the SEQUENCE is VERY IMPORTANT to know which came first—the “RETRACTION” which you said was in 1952 and the decision of COURT OF APPEALS to be 1954 to which I say, both are correct.

    But YOU FAILED to appreciate the LOGICAL SEQUENCE of history from 33 AD to 1914 AD.

    If I would use your standards, it’s quite appalling how you conveniently applied those “sequence” to us while you IGNORED the CHURCH founded by Christ in 33 AD and Felix Manalo’s founded church in 1914?

    It’s also quite surprising why you can EASILY FEEL “sored eyes” with CAPS LOCK while you DID SEE what was written in Romans 16:16 (small letter “c” churches – mga iglesia) to your Pasugo publications with big letter “I” Iglesia ni Cristo?!!!

    Nahalata mo pala ang malaking pagkakaiba ng MALAKING TITIK sa MALIIT na TITIK eh di mo napansin ito sa inyong pasugo kung bakit ang maliit na titik na “i” ay pinalitan niyo ng malaking titik na “I”!!!!!

    That’s another DOUBLE-STANDARD two faceted hypocrisy of the INC members.

    The truth is that the COURT of APPEALS found FELIX MANALO guilty of immorality.

    The same COURT branded FELIX MANALO—“God’s Last Messenger” to be “UN HOMBRE DE BAJA MORAL” (man of low morals)!!!—regardless of the sequence, the court FOUND FELIX MANALO to be a “man of low morals”!

    Comparing those Catholic priests who were found guilty of immorality to Felix Manalo, I can say they WEIGH THE SAME.

    In as much as we condemn Felix Manalo’s IMMORALITY, those Catholic priests found guilty of immorality are also condemned and they should pay the heavy prize of betraying the Lord while being priests.

    But those Catholic priests were humans. They were never called “ANGELS” or “God’s Last Messengers”. They NEVER brought the whole CHURCH with their downfall. They never returned back to the priesthood. They never been awarded with higher positions.

    They are now imprisoned! Justice has been served for the sake of their victims! We, as the CHURCH stand with the VICTIMS, not with the guilty Judases.

    But with the “man of low morals”, he was found guilty of immorality by the COURT but was free and maintained his assertions that he’s “God’s Messenger”!

    Where is HUMILITY THERE?

    Even before Rosita Trillanes accused “God’s Last Messenger”, a certain LESLIE WOLFE of the Churches of Christ put it in writings about how the IMMORALITY of FELIX MANALO reached him.

    As from your own words, the failure of the INC to show us clear sequence from history about the supposed “Total Apostasy” of the Church you INC “becomes branded as unreliable reeking with bigotry when he fails to show the correct sequence of events.”

    ReplyDelete
  5. I appreciate the reply, thank you. Thanks for the "sored eyes" thing, if it was meant as a correction. I'm sorry if I ever commited/will commit English mistakes, hence leading to confusion of the context.



    You misunderstand me Catholic Defender. I proceeded to point the sequence out in reference to the case at hand - that is, if Bro. Manalo did rape Sis. Trillanes. Then I come to read your reply, attacks against our doctrines. Have we not learned that doctrine bashing is futile? Wala tayong mararating dyan, it is because our Church has its own interpretation of the Bible, and your Church has its own, and still, both our Churches continue to prosper. To add to the point, I'm not a minister, so please have pity on me if by chance you are a priest or a biblical scholar.


    Sidenote: Pre, pareho naman tayong tao. Hinay hinay lang sa "!". I get the impression that you are angry, and I can't help but feel glad. You're not angry right? Of course you'll say you're not.



    Re: "But YOU FAILED to appreciate the LOGICAL SEQUENCE of history from 33 AD to 1914 AD."

    - As I said, we have our own interpretations, and July 27 1914 is very significant for us, even in history it is. We believe in apostasy and you do not, so this discussion will not go anywhere. Don't you agree? You yourselves incorporated Christmas in your doctrines. Research its origins, you'll see your Church's syncretism at work. After that, read the Book of Deuteronomy, how God commands his people to destroy the temples of the gods of the godless, not adapt to them. But of course you have your own interpretations, so this will go nowhere. :) (Folk Catholicism in the Philippines is also an example.)


    Based on your comment, I presume that you assume the Court of Appeals to be infallible. Such a big assumption for a Court that disregarded a Retraction Statement dating 1952, and proceeded on with its 1954 Decision... What it should have done first is investigate why there was a retraction statement, i.e. threats, balik-loob, etc. It did not.

    Still, the sequence of events (1952, 1954) play an important role in this investigation. I have a question, and please answer - why did your friend post a document dating 1954 first before a document dating 1952? It creates a nice story, doesn't it? Even if you deny it. I myself became confused at first, fortunately a brother pointed out the dates. A follow-up question - is it still considered brilliant after the bias has been uncovered?


    Re: "Comparing those Catholic priests who were found guilty of immorality to Felix Manalo, I can say they WEIGH THE SAME."

    I'm sorry, I made a mistake here. I meant Catholic POPES. And remember, Bro. Manalo was not officially found guilty - if he was, he'd die in prison or in hiding.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Part II - Haba eh. Sorry. By the way brother, I enjoy this discussion. Sana may marating tayo. I thank you. Now continuing my rant, if it looks like it :) I wish to apologize if at some points I get carried away and I appear to be unpleasant or the like.


    Re: "But those Catholic priests were humans. They were never called “ANGELS” or “God’s Last Messengers”. They NEVER brought the whole CHURCH with their downfall. They never returned back to the priesthood. They never been awarded with higher positions."

    You call them the fathers of your souls, hence you address them as "Fr." (Reference: a Catholic book. Each of our ministers has a copy, I'm sure. Another source, the Vatican II. I'm not sure where, but our catholic theology professor once cited that) That's a heavier title than "angel" I think. And again, I wish to correct - not only priests but POPES as well. I made a big understatement. Popes and priests alike shouldn't bear children while serving as popes/priests, as what it says in the Catholic doctrine. Nilabag ba ito ng mga mismong nagtatag ng doktrina, mga Papang nanumpang proprotektahan ang tradisyon ng Simbahang Katoliko? I wish to know your insights about this.


    Re: "But with the “man of low morals”, he was found guilty of immorality by the COURT but was free and maintained his assertions that he’s “God’s Messenger”!

    Where is HUMILITY THERE?"

    What humility are you seeking for? Please enlighten me, what should have been the actions of Bro. Manalo to show humility? (Again, please don't assume that he actually raped. Remain neutral.)


    Re: Leslie Wolfe.
    You readily believe his words? Let's put the benefit of the doubt here.

    Moreso, Si Propetang Moses pinalayas sa Ehipto diba? For the sake of discussion, imagine this - I sent a letter to his Egyptian "brother" asking about Moses' whereabouts. What will I expect to read, then? (Note: Please don't misinterpret this as exalting Moses and Bro. Manalo on the same status.)


    Re: "As from your own words, the failure of the INC to show us clear sequence from history about the supposed “Total Apostasy” of the Church you INC “becomes branded as unreliable reeking with bigotry when he fails to show the correct sequence of events.” "

    Talaga? We have a sequence of events, as how our Church interpreted the Bible. You can confirm it with an INC minister. (Ask about the four horses, I don't know, I'm not wise nor spiritual, so forgive me if ever I'm mistaken) And lastly, I don't see them as parallel. This is a totally different case when compared to the concern about the 1952, 1954 dates. (Yung post na may caps lock.)


    Romans 16:16 is another interpretation of our own. It would be unwise to put its discussion here, instead, a formal debate between the Bible scholars would be proper. (They happen so rarely now, my grandfather told me that they had a lot of this back then, before the WWII, priests vs our ministers.)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Who is Mr. Salvador Laspinas pala? It's surprising to know that thorough investigations like this happened back in 1933. I wish to ask about him, and in some way maybe we can verify the validity of the document. (To put it bluntly, san galing yang dokumentong yan?)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hello Friendster,

    Please do not inject your own impression about me. No, I am not angry. INC of Manalo are humans like me. They feel the same like me and we share the same humanity.

    When Felix Manalo first preached his church, he was ferociously attacking every fiber of Catholic doctrine. The first 40 years of Manalo’s Church was full of hatred—attacking Catholic practices and teachings, published officially in their Pasugo!

    The INC branded Catholics (and Protestants) as “devils” and popes as “anti-Christ” etc. etc. And they consider ALL BELIEVERS OF JESUS (as GOD) to be damned into hell!

    PASUGO Disyembre 1965, p. 5:
    “Kaninong Ministro kung ganyan ang mga Paring Katoliko? Mga Ministro ni Satanas na Diablo."

    PASUGO Oktubre 1959, p. 5:
    “Mga magdaraya at anti-Cristo, ang mga nagtuturong si Cristo ay Dios."

    PASUGO Agosto 1962, p. 9:
    “Kaya ang tunay na anti-Cristo, ang mga Papa ng Iglesia Katolika Apostolika Romana. At ang tunay na ampon ng anti-Cristo ay ang mga Katoliko.”

    PASUGO Oktubre 1956, p. 1:
    “Ang Iglesia ni Cristo ay nagdaos ng pamamahayag sa Lunsod ng Davao. Nagsalita roon si Kapatid na Felix Manalo at ang kasama niyang mga Ministro. Ipinahayag doon ng mga nagsalita na ang Iglesia Katolika Romana ay hindi itinatag ni Cristo kundi itinatag ng Diablo."


    Would you consider these OFFICIAL STATEMENTS from your OFFICIAL MAGAZINE to be genuinely expressions of LOVE for Catholics? Or you sense the opposite of it?

    Find something like these in our OFFICIAL CATECHISM? Never!

    I am glad you have a lot of excuses in your comments. Just as you hated “immoratlity” we, the CHURCH also hated sin but not the sinner “let those who have no sin cast the very first stone.”

    Undoubtedly, one of the fertile breeding grounds for anti-Catholics propaganda are the “Bad Popes”.

    Can we erase those pages from history books?

    No! They will remain. Just as we can’t ignore what Judas Iscariot did to the Lord but from there, came our salvation.

    Bad popes, bad priests, bad Catholics, we all have it. But we should not deviate our attention from the REVEALED TRUTHS in the Church. We have NUMEROUS SAINTS who LIVED HEROIC LIVES for the sake of the Gospel and his CHURCH.

    We should all remember that the CHURCH is a CHURCH of sinners and saints.

    Jesus beautifully illustrated the CHURCH into a fisherman and a farmer. Just as a fisherman lifts his net separating the good fish from the bad fish. In the same way, during harvest, a farmer separates the wheat from the weeds—so must the FOUNDER of the CHURCH will be doing on the LAST DAYS.

    The bad popes, the bad priests and bad Catholics, they will answer to the Lord on the Last days. Hence the Bible says “to whom much is given, much is required.”

    In our official Catechism, it says:
    598 In her Magisterial teaching of the faith and in the witness of her saints, the Church has never forgotten that "sinners were the authors and the ministers of all the sufferings that the divine Redeemer endured."389 Taking into account the fact that our sins affect Christ himself,390 the Church does not hesitate to impute to Christians the gravest responsibility for the torments inflicted upon Jesus, a responsibility with which they have all too often burdened the Jews alone:
    We must regard as guilty all those who continue to relapse into their sins. Since our sins made the Lord Christ suffer the torment of the cross, those who plunge themselves into disorders and crimes crucify the Son of God anew in their hearts (for he is in them) and hold him up to contempt. And it can be seen that our crime in this case is greater in us than in the Jews. As for them, according to the witness of the Apostle, "None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." We, however, profess to know him. And when we deny him by our deeds, we in some way seem to lay violent hands on him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can I ask? have you ever tried asking for a debate with our Ministers? cuz it sounds like you've already proven that what you're saying is all nothing but truth and what our doctrines were nothing but lies. Guess I just noticed your confidence in what you say, is waaaaay too high.Feels so confident huh? :D

      Delete
    2. The counterparts of your paid ministers should be our theologians. However that is not a good match since ours are intellectual giants while you've hardly had one.

      Leave those wishful thinking to yourself and please do not put further shame to your beloved cult.

      Delete
    3. At kung may mga debate tayong mapapanood sa Youtube na pumatol ang isang Apologist sa kanilang ministro, makikita ang kawalang respeto at kaguluhan at kagulangan nila sa debate. Play of words at palakasan ng sigaw ang alam nilang debate.
      Sabi mo nga "MAsters of Deception" talaga.
      Nakapagtatakang napakarami pang utu-uto sa kabila ng maraming paliwanag na nagtatama ng kamalian nila.
      "Bakit di niyo pag-aralan ang mga turo namin, siguradong maliliwanagan kayo," anila. Kaya nga sila itinatama dahil pagkatapos ng masusing pag-aaral eh napapatunayang mali sila!
      Nakaaasar ngunit nakaaawang mga kaluluwa!

      Delete
  9. Comparing the “Bad Popes” to Felix Manalo is very interesting.

    For the Bad Popes, good heavens NO ONE EVER DID CHANGE any of the CHURCH TEACHINGS. Or never had anyone LEFT the CHURCH or declared himself “God’s Messengers” or “Last Prophets” or “Angels”. They remained to be part of the chastisements of the Church and their immoral acts keeps us Catholics humble enough to admit that we are a CHURCH of SINNERS and SAINTS—but the CHURCH will remain HOLY for her founder is HOLY—JESUS CHRIST THE SON OF GOD.

    The reason why I am particular with your interest in the logical sequence of events, these are the same THINGS we were asking your church—show us in HISTORY when the CHURCH COMPLETELY APOSTATIZED and that NO ONE EVERY SURVIVED in HISTORY until FELIX MANALO came and “re-ESTABLISH” the CHURCH of JESUS (in Tagalog)?

    What happened in HISTORY will remain to be HISTORICAL. The Bad Popes, bad priests, bad Catholics—and Bad Felix Manalo! Their immorality will go down in history, you and I cannot change that.

    We Catholics accept that fact, why aren’t you accepting that fact to FELIX MANALO?

    We Catholics DO NOT consider the BAD POPES and BAD PRIESTS and BAD CATHOLICS to be saints. WE never teach our members to EMULATE them. We simply teach our members that these sins should not happen again.

    In contrast, you EMULATE FELIX MANALO. You ESTEEMED him to the highest possible position such that you even COMPARED HIM with JESUS CHRIST!

    PASUGO Hulyo 1965, p. 12:
    “Parehong-pareho ang espiritu ni Cristo sa diwa ni Kapatid na Felix Manalo sa pamamaraan ng pagdadala ng tungkuling tinanggap sa Dios."

    PASUGO Mayo 1964, p. 1 ay ganito:

    “Inihandog ng Dios ang kanyang sarili sa kanyang huling sugo upang dumiyos sa kanya. Samakatuwid, ang tanging may Dios na huling araw na ito'y ang huling sugo -- si Kapatid na Felix Manalo."
    Why Bad popes? It’s because they did evil things.

    The Court of appeals says FELIX MANALO is a man of low morals, why he can’t even be “bad”?

    I hope you see now the difference between BAD POPES and BAD FELIX MANALO!

    ReplyDelete
  10. You did not answer my main questions, the Popes and such were only subordinate points. Sigh. I thought we can engage in an intelligent discussion. I am wrong, obviously. I will reply to some parts, you can find my answers to other parts of your comment from the post above, just read it again.



    Re: "Please do not inject your own impression about me. No, I am not angry. INC of Manalo are humans like me. They feel the same like me and we share the same humanity."

    We are humans. We make our own impressions of our fellow human beings :) You are angry, friend. Evidence? You don't have the respect you should have as a Catholic towards others. If you had a simple grain of respect, you wouldn't be ranting INC of Manalo all the time, right? Heck, you wouldn't even jump to your own conclusions if you respect people. Remember what Pope John said about something like kahit ano pang relihiyon or faith as long as you seek God? Show love! :) (I'm not injecting it though. I don't have to, I think)



    Re: "When Felix Manalo first preached his church, he was ferociously attacking every fiber of Catholic doctrine. The first 40 years of Manalo’s Church was full of hatred—attacking Catholic practices and teachings, published officially in their Pasugo!

    The INC branded Catholics (and Protestants) as “devils” and popes as “anti-Christ” etc. etc. And they consider ALL BELIEVERS OF JESUS (as GOD) to be damned into hell!"

    Hmmm... So? Because of this you have a personal vendetta against him, and this affects your judgment about the rape case? Please stay on the track.



    Re: "Would you consider these OFFICIAL STATEMENTS from your OFFICIAL MAGAZINE to be genuinely expressions of LOVE for Catholics? Or you sense the opposite of it?"

    The Pasugo excerpts you posted are not genuine expressions of love for the Catholic Church whatsoever. Do you get the error in your question? You said "Catholics", thusly referring to people. Also, a phrase for you in relation to your post: tolerance is not always love. I will not expound :)



    Re: "I am glad you have a lot of excuses in your comments. Just as you hated “immoratlity” we, the CHURCH also hated sin but not the sinner"

    Huh? What excuses? I'm waiting for you to answer my questions directed to the points. Remember, we have not proven the case at hand. And why is "immoratlity" inside ""? I did Ctrl-F and only found it in your post. What do you imply?



    According to your Vatican II, the Popes get appointed by the divine grace of God Himself. (I have a theology class yay!) I'll leave that phrase to you, it's up to you to comprehend and relate to the discussion we're having :)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Re: For the Bad Popes, good heavens NO ONE EVER DID CHANGE any of the CHURCH TEACHINGS. "

    Kaya nga andaming konsehong naisagawa, at Vatican II na nga e, wala na yung edition I. They do reforms, don't fool yourself. Refer to my post about Christmas and the addressing of "Fr.", few among the many. Refer to the law of celibacy among priests as well.


    Re: "The reason why I am particular with your interest in the logical sequence of events, these are the same THINGS we were asking your church—show us in HISTORY when the CHURCH COMPLETELY APOSTATIZED and that NO ONE EVERY SURVIVED in HISTORY until FELIX MANALO came and “re-ESTABLISH” the CHURCH of JESUS (in Tagalog)?"

    I told you already, go visit a resident minister in a near locale if you want to know about this. Dude, can't you read? In fact, you didn't even refer to my post about your friend's bias. Does that silence/evasion mean that you were wrong in your judgment that Tumbukin Natin owner was balanced and brilliant?



    Re: "What happened in HISTORY will remain to be HISTORICAL. The Bad Popes, bad priests, bad Catholics—and Bad Felix Manalo! Their immorality will go down in history, you and I cannot change that."

    Oh Lord. We have a bigot here. You haven't proven a single point about the case, yet you brand Bro. Manalo as Bad.




    Re: "We Catholics accept that fact, why aren’t you accepting that fact to FELIX MANALO?"

    Hey, parrothead, don't you remember that we are still trying to prove this? Have we reached certainty? Live your dreams by saying yes.





    Re: "In contrast, you EMULATE FELIX MANALO. You ESTEEMED him to the highest possible position such that you even COMPARED HIM with JESUS CHRIST!"

    Kailan? Porket baliko ang pagkakaintindi mo sa Pasugo, binabias mo na? Don't reply with a Pasugo clipping, chances are they are out of context.




    Re: "The Court of appeals says FELIX MANALO is a man of low morals, why he can’t even be “bad”?"

    Tagalugin mo nga. The context dissipates, I don't know what you're implying.



    I cited the scandals of the Popes since they too are leaders of the Catholic Church once, hence comparable to Bro. Manalo. You particularly avoided my questions or points about the rape case, and I consider myself disappointed. Will we not accept the accusation that Bro. Manalo is a rapist, if the case was proven? Of course we will, but the fact is, it was not proven. In fact, the retraction statement came earlier than the decision (or the publication of the decision, same whatsoever), and that says a lot about the case. I'm questioning the balance of this post, yet you focused on one point - that is the thing about the Popes.


    Bottom-line: Hindi mo nalinawan mga tanong o punto ko about the rape case. Affected ka masyado sa Papal scandals e.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Re: "We have NUMEROUS SAINTS who LIVED HEROIC LIVES for the sake of the Gospel and his CHURCH."

    So heroic you treat them as mediators of your prayers to the Father... (Reference: Front page ng blog mo. Yung mga pray for us.) What happened to the only mediator, Jesus Christ?


    Sino nga si Salvador Laspinas? Puro ka tabloid clippings e. Tsaka alam mo yung mga titulo ng lupa? Sa court proceedings vineverify yung validity nun. Let's do the same here. It's your responsibility to verify your sources, ayaw mo yun, para wala kaming mga INC na masabi? :)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thanks Frienster for calling me “parrothead”. Now you have showed your true color, a genuinely INC attitude. I am use to that.

    I owe you no explanation so please do not DEMAND anything from me. Because IF you really want to know the REAL CATHOLIC TRUTH you MUST have consulted our CATECHISM (official) instead which is very much available in the internet. You’re claiming you had studied “Theology” ehh so what have you learned? Why haven’t discussed these questions to your Theology professor? Is it because questioning him (in a debate) will expose your own bigotry against the CHURCH?

    Remember: LITTLE LEARNING IS DANGEROUS!

    You owed us explanation. If our PASUGO clipping were not accurate then I am giving you all the freedom to explain my “inaccuracy.” Instead of questioning our Catholic position (which we had all the explanations in the internet by renown theologians) it’s YOUR DUTY to give us your HONEST side.

    You obviously are not interested to know the truth about the Catholic Faith much that I wanted to have firsthand information about your official teachings. Do not fault us of your own failure to explain your man-made teachings.

    Your PASUGO clippings are very very important to us. Your church’s utmost secrecy was partly revealed in your Pasugo. It’s just more than enough for our desire to know the truth. Now I know why you’re DISCREDITING the authenticity of these Pasugo clippings.

    In truth, I have the impression that that’s the reason why your iglesia ARE AFRAID to expose your teachings officially for the public, no.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Re: "Thanks Frienster for calling me “parrothead”. Now you have showed your true color, a genuinely INC attitude. I am use to that."

    Lol turning the tables? Yea sure. You're a good fishing net guy, and I have to commend you for that. Moreso, I am not surprised that you are "used" to that. You should get that a lot, considering how you respond to a well-constructed argument.




    Re: "I owe you no explanation so please do not DEMAND anything from me. Because IF you really want to know the REAL CATHOLIC TRUTH you MUST have consulted our CATECHISM (official) instead which is very much available in the internet. You’re claiming you had studied “Theology” ehh so what have you learned? Why haven’t discussed these questions to your Theology professor? Is it because questioning him (in a debate) will expose your own bigotry against the CHURCH?"

    I want you to explain the bias of YOUR POST, asswipe. My respect for your doctrine is the reason why I halt myself. And I don't need to ask these questions to my Theo prof lol. They don't bash other religions. They are good people, good Catholics, unlike you.
    It is evident that you rage-type now friend. You miss a lot of words, and your paragraphs are poorly formed.
    Of course you owe a lot to the people you put your accusations to. It is called responsibility, prove until the end your claim. Defend your claim, because if it is unguarded and left behind (As evident as it may be, it just happened here!), it will turn to dust.
    I want you to explain your claim that Bro. Manalo is a rapist, simply put. I want to see proofs parrothead. INSTEAD YOU EVADE. Ito na ba yun? Sobrang hindi ako satisfied. I want a head-on clash, not this escape you make.
    I pity you. Talo agad? And if you must know, I am not citing my Theo class for bragging reasons. Heck I just cited them for reference, but you based your arguments there. That's wise, eh?



    Re: "You owed us explanation. If our PASUGO clipping were not accurate then I am giving you all the freedom to explain my “inaccuracy.” Instead of questioning our Catholic position (which we had all the explanations in the internet by renown theologians) it’s YOUR DUTY to give us your HONEST side."

    WRONG! In court, and in any other forms of formal debate for that matter, if you present something, you have to prove its validity, interpret it in the right context, etc. I want you to prove that letter you posted above, if you can, then good for you! (still won't change a thing if you prove it lol, but if you can't prove it, it changes a lot) You misuse our Pasugo clippings, then we owe you an explanation? You selfish crab lol. Typical internet dude. "Renown theologians" haha!





    Re: "You obviously are not interested to know the truth about the Catholic Faith much that I wanted to have firsthand information about your official teachings. Do not fault us of your own failure to explain your man-made teachings."

    Cmon. You could have phrased this whole paragraph as "I don't want to answer your points, I'm not telling you anything neither." I have posted a lot of questions, ALL LEFT UNANSWERED. You are one evasive imp haha. Can't you do better than this? I mean, for the record, you really have not answered any of my attacks about your claim! Shocking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Go Brother...i am with you all the way.....You know the People against to..INC...they don't stay to the topic...and don't answers the questions directly they always turn the table upside and down......only to confused people....But not INC hindi kayang lituhin palaging matatag at lumalaban basta sa katotohanan lamang (:>)

      Delete
    2. You are wrong, Anonymous. It is the other way around. You incs never stay on the topic that is being addressed. you tend to jump around avoiding what has been presented and the reason for that is obvious. you are scared because your answers would be the destruction of your cult. And friendster, what's with all these name callings? It is obvious you are steaming up like your father lucifer.








      Delete
    3. Yes, GENUINELY INCorporated Church thing! Anong galing ng English mo Friendster, INC ka pa rin. No matter how you dressed a chimp, he remains a chimp and acts like a chim.

      Delete
  15. Re: "Your PASUGO clippings are very very important to us. Your church’s utmost secrecy was partly revealed in your Pasugo. It’s just more than enough for our desire to know the truth. Now I know why you’re DISCREDITING the authenticity of these Pasugo clippings."

    When did I discredit the Pasugo clippings you posted? Come on, you're more intelligent than that. What I react to is how you put our Pasugo clippings into context. And what I want you to validate (very different than discredit) is the authenticity of the letter you posted above (or do you consider that as a Pasugo clipping? lol)



    Re: "In truth, I have the impression that that’s the reason why your iglesia ARE AFRAID to expose your teachings officially for the public, no."

    Oh but it is available to the public. You just have to walk a few distance to the nearest locale in your area :) Our Iglesia "IS" never afraid :D






    My questions about the post itself, ABOUT THE POST ITSELF, all fail to be answered/tackled. You cannot prove your claim that Bro. Manalo is a rapist.

    Ano ba yan. Kinain kita nang buhay? I expected more... Please fight a good fight in your next post. I challenge you parrothead =))




    REMEMBER: My points are left unanswered. I DEMAND the proof to your claim :)


    If I play your game, here's what I find based from YOUR OWN WORDS.
    "Your PASUGO clippings are very very important to us." Thank you :)


    Lastly, I deeply appreciate your replies. I like calling people parrotheads, as they rightly deserve, for CLAIMING THINGS THEY CANNOT PROVE. Moreover, they thank me for it =))

    ReplyDelete
  16. You are a good troll :) Anyway, noone will believe this post considering how the author failed to prove it, I have been a fool to take this seriously, hoping that we can arrive at a scholarly debate at the least. Please don't delete this piece of article regarding our today :)

    PEDOPHILE PRIEST TOLERATED BY CURRENT POPE!!!

    http://www.examiner.com/atheism-skepticism-in-new-york/in-the-times-pope-allowed-child-rape-to-continue

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yes indeed. you are a fool.

      Delete
    2. Indeed friendster is a FOOL with the capital "F".

      Delete
    3. Yes! A FOOL AND A HALF!! Hahahaha!!

      Delete
    4. Yes indeed! A FOOL AND A HALF!! BUHAHAHAHAHA!!

      Delete
  17. VATICAN ANSWERS TO ACCUSATIONS AGAINST THE POPE ON SEXUAL ABUSES OF PRIESTS

    http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=5725

    Why not prove to us that Felix Manalo is "NOT" a rapist?

    I am sure you don't like to humiliate further your "LAST SUGO" and "Angel" who was found by his former churches (Seventh Day Adventists and the Churches of Christ) to have abusisve attitude while in their churches. That's the reason why he was KICKED OUT.

    I refuse to answer your REPEATED and RECYCLED questions. Amidst the many questions to your Iglesia, NONE has been answered in public by Ministers like you.

    So can you please make your publications and teachings available to the public WITHOUT COMING into your CULT houses?

    and I invite you to read our OFFICIAL TEACHINGS inside the comfort of your room without going inside our houses of worships...

    So rant as much as you want but the truth remains: The "Last Messenger of God" (angel) FELIX was FOUND GUILTY of IMMORALITY!

    Shall I also call you INC ministers as "parrothead" for not answering the many questions in the internet about your weird man-made teachings?

    Thanks for the term... parrothead. ^_^

    ReplyDelete
  18. Sorry but clicking your name “friendster” leads me to nowhere. Why are you afraid to create something that our readers may have a glimpse of your identity? Typically INC attitude!!! Get lost!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. just keep your cool, you are on the right track... let him call you whatever but from your discussions, we can see who is winning.. :) Go for it! nail INC. I just hate seeing them being brainwashed by the church.. Well I was also a "handog" INC since birth and whole clan belongs to the church but I cant take it anymore so I quit recently... So nail him and let him see the truth (or maybe he wont see as he is blinded by the doctrines of INC)... Just do your best and let God do the rest :)

      Delete
  19. You want my proof? Read the retraction statement, the latest document ever published by the PRIMARY people involved in the issue ^^

    Really though. Is this how irresponsible you are? You fail to prove your claim, then you put the burden upon my shoulders? Come on. You can do better than that by answering my questions. None of them is recycled. Your answers are cyclical, evasive tactics eh? TROLOLOLOL :)) Mag-9gag ka na lang hahahaha! This goes to show that you do not have the ability to answer legit points. Remember how it goes in a courtroom, verify that online or with a lawyer :)

    Alam mo yung Ad ignorantium? Dahil hindi mo masagot mga tanong ko, ganyan na din ginagawa mo, promise :))

    Re: "and I invite you to read our OFFICIAL TEACHINGS inside the comfort of your room without going inside our houses of worships..."

    Oh no. This is dangerous. Without the proper guidance of your priests? I might get lost. Will you assure me to pick me up when I fall?





    OMG... Seriously. Why do you wish to know me...? Are you considering Ad hominem? Don't worry, I'm no blogger. I just felt the need to reply to this post, and voila, I remember that I made a Google account a long time ago.

    Lol. "Typically" INC attitude. Hahaha astigin ka ring blogger ka e no :)) I prefer to be anonymous. May blog si readme tungkol sayo e... (yep napadpad din ako dun, dapat di na lang nagblog e. baka mamaya may masabing mali) Lalaki po ako. Just saying. :D Not that I'm saying that what he says about you is true, no! I'm just... careful :)



    Ano ba yan. This far wala pa ring nasagot? Bring more challenge naman!

    ReplyDelete
  20. O eto mas present na articles:
    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/pope-benedict-fired-growing-sex-abuse-cover-ups/story?id=10200682#.Tr-mzVZ6KSo

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/world/europe/21pope.html?pagewanted=all

    Dun sa second article, parang si Gloria lang a :))))

    ReplyDelete
  21. Friendster,

    You are right, I haven’t proved anything about Felix Manalo’s IMMORALITY. Perhaps the Seventh-Day Adventist Leslie Wolf and the Churches of Christ head minister can prove that fact. Remember your Last Sugo was once a minister there and was kicked out from these churches because of the same accusations.

    You might want to rejoice in that since your Last Sugo was never brought to court amidst the many complaints these mentioned churches received but the most damaging part in the life of your Last Sugo was when his IMMORALITY was published to the public through newspaper.

    Felix Manalo—your Last Sugo sued Rosita accusing her of “Libel” but the court didn’t favor with his. Instead your Last Sugo was called “A MAN OF LOW MORALS”.


    I can’t prove that! The COURT did! Now I understand why you are challenging me to give more proofs.


    I do not wish to know you Mr. Friendster. It’s just a gentleman’s wishes. Besides I have no personal interest in knowing you just as your own co-religiounists has personal taste in knowing me such like ReadMe (minister) and the notorious Conrad J. Obligacion’s RESBAK.com (another minister in hiding). And I can understand that why you want to remain anonymous too (Mr. INC Minister). It’s a typical INC thing ^_^

    Besides, naming names is a sign of weak argument. Lalo na kapag halatang nang-aasar ka lang ^_^



    O eto mas present na articles:
    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/pope-benedict-fired-growing-sex-abuse-cover-ups/story?id=10200682#.Tr-mzVZ6KSo

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/world/europe/21pope.html?pagewanted=all

    Dun sa second article, parang si Gloria lang a :))))

    CD2000:

    These articles were NOT RECENT ones… they were OLD articles long have been refuted by the Vatican. If you think that we were too ignorant about the sex abuses of Catholic priest, let me help you find good articles about that topic.

    Here is the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases
    Magpiesta po kayo diyan… ^_^

    Heto naman ang response ng SANTA IGLESIA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecclesiastical_response_to_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases
    Magpiyesta rin po kayo ^_^

    Heto naman ang Curial Response: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curial_response_to_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases
    Sabi ng Santo Papa these sins are “grave sin”

    May nagsabi ba kay FELIX MANALO the Last sugo na “grave sin” din ang immorality? Oh sorry, he’s an ANGEL so he should be emulated, right? Sorry for my sarcasm.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The CAtholic Church is still the TRUE CHURCH of Christ, no matter you fret out!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can I ask where exactly in the bible can you read that CATHOLIC is the real church?

      Delete
    2. The topic is not about US.

      It's about your SUGO, the RAPIST!

      Delete
    3. I can see YOU'RE VERY SENSITIVE in using words. Directly claiming our Sugo is a rapist.


      Well, being nasty is a very Catholic thing.
      How do you feel about that? :)


      Also, you didn't answer my question. I'm just asking for that certain part of the bible, and yet what I get is a very respectful answer.

      If you know that INC is not the true Church. Then prove that your Church is the "True Church of GOD".

      How could you pinpoint the wrong church, if you can't even identify and PROVE what's the True Church.

      Delete
    4. Who is nastier? Let's see.

      Here is OFFICIALLY PUBLISHED in your OFFICIAL MAGAZINE about the CATHOLIC CHURCH and Catholics in general:

      1- PASUGO Disyembre 1965, p. 5:
      “Kaninong Ministro kung ganyan ang mga Paring Katoliko? Mga Ministro ni Satanas na Diablo."

      2- PASUGO Oktubre 1959, p. 5:
      “Mga magdaraya at anti-Cristo, ang mga nagtuturong si Cristo ay Dios."

      3- PASUGO Agosto 1962, p. 9:
      “Kaya ang tunay na anti-Cristo, ang mga Papa ng Iglesia Katolika Apostolika Romana. At ang tunay na ampon ng anti-Cristo ay ang mga Katoliko.”

      4- PASUGO Oktubre 1956, p. 1:
      “Ang Iglesia ni Cristo ay nagdaos ng pamamahayag sa Lunsod ng Davao. Nagsalita roon si Kapatid na Felix Manalo at ang kasama niyang mga Ministro. Ipinahayag doon ng mga nagsalita na ang Iglesia Katolika Romana ay hindi itinatag ni Cristo kundi itinatag ng Diablo."


      Now, do you think we will keep silent when the TRUTH is on our side?

      It's because of your NASTY OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS that CATHOLICS today learn to DEFEND the CHURCH which CHRIST HIMSELF BUILT!!!

      And in order to help you identify the true Church, here is from your OFFICIAL MAGAZINE:

      PASUGO Abril 1966, p. 46: “Ang Iglesia Katolika na sa pasimula ay siyang Iglesia ni Cristo."

      And what about the INC founded recently by a man named Felix Manalo, a name he got from the Catholic Church?

      PASUGO Mayo 1968, p. 7:
      “Ang tunay na Iglesia ni Cristo ay iisa lamang, ito ang Iglesiang itinayo ni Cristo. Kung mayroon mang nagsisibangon ngayong mga Iglesia at sasabihing sila man ay INK rin ang mga ito ay hindi tunay kundi huwad lamang!"

      Kayo na nagsabi nun.. OFFICIALLY!

      Continue reading: ANG KATOTOHANAN TUNGKOL SA INK-1914

      Delete
    5. Way to go, Cath.Def!! Stick to the Truth. It really keeeps these miserable inc ministers behave like baboons.

      Delete
  23. If the Court says That Felix Manalo is a Man of Low Morals
    therefore it is true, the court won't lie in their statements.
    Giving Rosita Trillanes a position in order to cancel the case is a form of bribery.

    ReplyDelete
  24. They even belittle court findings... "Man of Low Morals" that's very serious for a man who proclaimed himself as "God's Last Messenger"!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Excuse me... but SIS. ROSITA Trillanes died as a Deaconess (INC)

    If the accusation is true, that Bro. Felix "raped" many, and Sis. Rosita is one of them, she will probably would not, in any way, wanted to come back in the church. If you were really raped, would you want to go back to the "rapist"?

    http://forum.philboxing.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=211993

    read this link... thanks

    ReplyDelete
  26. AFFIDAVIT

    I, ROSTIA TRILLANES, Filipino, of legal age, married a resident of and with a postal address at 639 Piy Margal, Manila, upon being duly sworn according to law depose and say:

    1. That I am the same ROSITA TRILLANES who was accused of libel by Mr. Felix Manalo before the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila, in the month of September in the year 1939;

    2. That I was convicted by the Court of First Instance for that crime upon my failure to prove the truth thereof, said conviction having been published by the Taliba, on January 4, 1941;

    3. That I appealed from the decision of the said Court of First Instance to the Court of Appeals because of my fear that upon my failure to pay the fine imposed threat that I would be imprisoned;

    4. That concerning that libelous letter I wrote and for which I accused by Mr. Felix Manalo, I hereby state and so declare, that all matters therein stated and written are all false and pure fabrications without any truth whatsoever;

    5. That the letter and all those matters stated therein was fabricated by Messrs Raymundo Mansilungan, Tedoro Briones and Cirilo Gonzales who induced me to sign the same upon their representation that it would be shown only to the brethren of the Church of Christ (IGLESIA NI CRISTO) to convince them to revolt against the administration of Mr. Felix Manalo, in retribution against him for expelling us from the Church;

    6. That together with Messrs Raymundo Mansilungan, Tedoro Briones and Cirilo Gonzales, we were expelled from the Church for Acts and behaviors contrary to the doctrines of the Church;

    7. That contrary to my expectation, my companions above mentioned not only showed the letter to the brethren in the Church, but published the same in a Pampango Newspaper, entitled “Ing Cawal”, whose editor at the time was Salvador Tumang, and as a consequence thereof, Mr Felix Manalo filed a libel suit against me and against Salvador Tumang and Cirilo Gonzales, resulting in our conviction,

    8. That after my conviction I appealed the case to the Court of Appeals and by claiming that I was motivated by good intentions I was able to acquit myself (see Official Gazette Vol. 1, July 1942 – No. 8180, April 21, 1942), although, since then and up to the present time, I have been bothered continuously by remorse and a guilty conscience;

    9. That I have therefore executed the foregoing affidavit to confirm the truth of all I haves stated above and for such other purposes for which the same could be availed of to right the wrong and injustice I have committed against Mr. Felix Manalo about whose integrity and character I have the highest of regard and respect. Furthermore, I have executed the same without any consideration whatsoever, without having been induced by any one, except for the reasons I have stated, and without mental reservation whatsoever.

    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this affidavit, and affixed my right hand thumb mark below that of my signature at the left margin of the first pageand at the bottom hereof, to remove any doubt about the authenticity of this instrument, this 21st day of November 1952, in the City of Manila, Philippines.

    (signature)
    Rosita Trillanes
    Right hand_________Thumb mark

    Signed in the presence of:

    (Signature of witness) (signature of 2nd witness)


    Subscribed and sworn to before me this 21st day of November, 1952, at Manila, Philippines; affiant exhibited to me her Residence Certificate No. A0385178 issued at Maila, on November 7, 1952.

    (signature)
    (Notary Seal) Frolian Tafalla
    Notary Public
    Until December 31, 1952
    Doc. No. 118
    Page No. 97
    Book No. II
    Series of 1952

    ReplyDelete
  27. Mhykel,

    Obviously you DID NOT read the whole article.

    The alleged "retraction" you've RE-POSTED was brilliantly explained above.

    But the truth remains: The Court of Appeals branded FYM as "a man of LOW MORALS".

    ReplyDelete
  28. It was not the Court of Appeals (Judges) who branded FYM as "a man of LOW MORALS" but the Solicitor.

    quoting: "And the Solicitor concludes that he found out through proofs presented that Manalo is a man "de baja moral" (man of low moral) and that he took advantage of his position in the Iglesia to attack and sully the virtue of some of his female followers."


    Your ignorance of the law is quite obvious in this article. Is the solicitor the same person who rendered the decision on this case? The answer is NO.

    The solicitor is the government's lawyer who at that time is defending the case againts Trillanes being the lawyer for the republic as the case is not anymore FYM vs Trillanes but People of the Philippines versus Rosita Trillanes since libel is criminal in nature. So you can see, it was not only FYM who lost in this case but the entire people of this country.

    Did the solicitor did a good job defending the case? The answer again is obviously NO. As a matter of fact, it was the solicitor himself who sold the case as his own statement and "personal opinion" was quoted by the Court of Appeals which rendered the reversal of the lower court's decision.

    quoting: "And the Solicitor concludes that he found out through proofs presented that Manalo is a man "de baja moral" (man of low moral) and that he took advantage of his position in the Iglesia to attack and sully the virtue of some of his female followers."

    Though there are some of your followers who asked, why it was not appealead in the Supreme Court? The answer is simple, it is not allowed by the law since it will constitute DOUBLE JEOPARDY.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ha ha ha, you are so bright, that makes you not to noticed that when it was quoted the one who quotes for instance the court of appeal believes in that citation that's why it was quoted. go ahead bright boy you just proved your innocence of that argument that you perfectly believe.

      Delete
  29. Good point! It was not the Court of Appeals (per se) which branded your LAST MESSENGER as "a man of LOW MORALS" but the Solicitor General.

    Have you ever thought that the Court of Appeals is the arbitrer and not the accuser? Depending on the presented evidence against the accused the outcome of the judgment is rendered.

    Therefore the Court of Appeals believed the testimony of the Solicitor General saying that your LAST MESSENGER was indeed "a man of LOW MORALS" and therefore FYM case against Trillanes was "rejected".

    Lawyers like you (assuming that you are "expert" in law) are not the owners of truth. You can defend anyone even the most grievious offender in our society-- depending on the accuse financial status etc-- I am saying this because I believe you are a lawyer (as I assume you are) in the Philippines-- pera pera lang yan.

    However, the fact remains: FELIX MANALO is a MAN OF LOW MORALS!

    Since you accuse me of my "ignorance of the law" how could you ever not see your INCorporated 1914 All Rights Reserved Church of Manalo so IGNORANT about HISTORY when you claim TOTAL APOSTASY to accomodate your LAST MESSENGER in the Bible?

    How ignorance is your INCorporated 1914 All Rights Reserved Church of Manalo in the BIBLE when you insist MANALO's call NOWHERE to be FOUND in the BIBLE!

    How easy for you to see the log in my eyes when you cannot even see clogs of logs in yours?

    That's typically INCorporated All Rights Reserved Church of Mananalo members are...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First, let me thank you for approving my comment to be posted here as my reason is to merely provide clarifications as it appears some of your readers made a conclusion on this matter based on twisted and illogical appreciation of facts.

      It’s also good that we agreed on one important matter, that it was not the CA which branded FYM as “a man of low morals” but the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG). It is important to establish that fact as you will see later why. And to quote your statement:

      “Good point! It was not the Court of Appeals (per se) which branded your LAST MESSENGER as "a man of LOW MORALS" but the Solicitor General.”

      The statement of the OSG will thus remain his own personal opinion, nothing more, nothing less.

      I also agree in your statement that CA is not, and should not be the accuser for that matter in any case. Its role is to render judgment based on the arguments and evidences presented by contending parties. However, in this case People of the Philippines versus Rosita Trillanes, who is the accuser and who is the defender? The accuser is the Office of the Solicitor General since he is the counsel for the government and Rosita as the defendant being accused of libel which is criminal in nature. However, based on the decision rendered by CA wherein it quote the Office of the Solicitor General on several occasions accused not Rosita Trillanes but FYM.

      "... the Prosecution admits that there is reason to believe that the offended party, Manalo, did commit immoral acts with some women members of the Iglesia."

      "And the Solicitor concludes that he found out through proofs presented that Manalo is a man "de baja moral" (man of low moral) and that he took advantage of his position in the Iglesia to attack and sully the virtue of some of his female followers."

      The Office of the Solicitor General/prosecutor did not defend this case instead made its own judgment against FYM which became the basis of the decision of the CA. Strange isn’t it? Whatever made the OSG took that position on this case, we can only again “assume” things.

      To put things in perspective and for your appreciation, let’s say you file a case against someone. Naturally, you would hire a lawyer. Then during the hearing of the case, your lawyer would appear and tell to the court “Your honor, I believe my client is of low moral standard.” How do you think the court would rule on your case?

      The statement provided by the OSG thru its motions to the court tied the hands of the CA to render but only to one decision, to acquit Rosita and reverse the ruling of the lower court. How can CA convict Rosita if the prosecution/OSG themselves corroborated the statement of the defendant? It was not in essence the CA who acquitted Rosita but the Office of the Solicitor General.

      (Page 1 of 2 since number of characters is limited here.)

      Delete
    2. page 2 of 2.

      It is also sad to note that since Trillianes was acquitted in the CA ruling, most of your readers are quick to conclude that FYM is guilty of rape. First, a man is only convicted of any crime if an accused was found guilty by the court. And that was never the case for FYM. No court ruling can ever be found that convicted him of any crime. As such based on our law, unless proven guilty there will always be presumption of innocence. The case being tried here is not whether FYM is guilty of rape or not but whether Rosita in fact committed libel. Any conclusion as to the guilt or innocence of FYM to rape based on this case is immaterial and baseless.

      Let me also bring this to your attention. In the affidavit of Rosita, she mentioned:

      “ 7. That contrary to my expectation, my companions above mentioned not only showed the letter to the brethren in the Church, but published the same in a Pampango Newspaper, entitled “Ing Cawal”, whose editor at the time was Salvador Tumang, and as a consequence thereof, Mr Felix Manalo filed a libel suit against me and against Salvador Tumang and Cirilo Gonzales, resulting in our conviction.”

      Are you aware what happened to the case of Salvador Tumang who was convicted together with Rosita in the lower court? Tumang was not as lucky as Rosita. His case reached the Supreme Court and convicted of the said crime. Please refer to the SC decision below provided in this link: http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1942/sep1942/gr_48498_1942.html. To quote some portions of the decision:

      “In view of the above, we find no merit in petitioner's contention that he had been unlawfully deprived of his right to prove the truth of the libelous imputations. The Court of Appeals has rightfully held that proof of the truth of those acts imputed the offended party which do not constitute a crime can be admitted, since he is not a government employee, and, consequently, none of those imputations can have any reference to facts related to the discharge by a government employee of his official duties. This is in consonance with the second paragraph of article 361 which limits the scope of the general rule set forth in the first paragraph of the same article.”
      We find no conflict between the decision under review and the decision rendered by the Court of Appeals in People vs. Trillanes (C. A.-B. R. No. 8180). In the latter case, proof of the truth and justifiable motives was permitted to be presented because the Court found that the charges complained of involved the commission of "various public offenses such as grave threats, abduction, rape, acts of lasciviousness, adultery, etc." In the instant case petitioner was likewise permitted to prove the truth of the criminal acts imputed to the offended party but the Court of Appeals has found that the evidence so presented has completely failed to substantiate such charges. And the conclusions of fact in the Trillanes decision, however strong, cannot affect or alter this finding in the case under review.”

      The question is what would have happened if the Rosita case reached the Supreme Court? We can only guess. But the Salvador Tumang case can be an indication as to the answer to my question.

      With regard to your questions about the Apostacy, the Last Messenger, and FYM’s call (which seems like your tactic to avoid the issue on hand), I will not engage myself in a debate with you on this matter for the following reasons: First, it’s out of topic thus irrelevant. And lastly, as a matter of personal policy, I do not engage in religious debate. As Sen. Miriam Santiago pointed out yesterday, which I quote:

      “I can engage in a public debate with the priest, and we can exchange quotation for quotation from the Bible. But that would be foolish, because the Bible can be interpreted in as many ways as there are Christian churches,”

      Delete
    3. Page 1 of 2. Tumang vs People of the Philippines

      Republic of the Philippines
      SUPREME COURT
      Manila
      EN BANC

      G.R. No. L-48498 September 30, 1942
      SALVADOR G. TUMANG, petitioner,
      vs.
      THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.


      YULO, C.J.:

      Petitioner seeks a review of the decision of the Court of Appeals convicting him of the crime of libel, and alleges that said Court had erred in the application of article 361 of the Revised Penal Code when it refused to reverse the ruling of the trial court denying petitioner's right to prove the truth of the libelous imputations and the fact that the offending article was published with good motives and for justifiable ends. Article 361 of the Revised Penal Code reads:

      Art 361. Proof of the truth. — In every criminal prosecution for libel, the truth may be given in evidence to the court and if it appears that the matter charged as libelous is true, and moreover, that it was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the defendant shall be acquitted.

      Proof of the truth of an imputation of an act or omission not constituting a crime shall not be admitted unless the imputation shall have been made against Government employees with respect to facts related to the discharge of their official duties.
      In such cases if the defendant proves the truth of the imputation made by him, he shall be acquitted.

      It appears that the libelous article contained imputations which insinuate the commission of criminal acts as well as of many other acts which do not constitute a crime. As to those imputations insinuating the commission of a crime, the Court of Appeals found that the petitioner was allowed to introduce evidence on the truth thereof but that said evidence was insufficient. Said the Court of appeals:

      With regard to the first point, counsel for appellant contends that the lower court erred in not allowing the appellant to prove the truth of the imputations and aspersions appearing in the article in question. But the appellant should be reminded that under article 361 of the Revised Penal Code, proof of the truth may be offered and may lead to the acquittal of the defendant if the latter succeeds in his effort to prove the truth of the matter charged as libelous and that it was published with good motives and for justifiable ends; but this rule is qualified by the other rule that no proof of an imputation of an act or omission not constituting a crime shall be admitted "unless the imputation shall have been made against Government employees with respect to facts relating to the discharge of their official duties."

      Delete
    4. page 2 of 2 Tumang versus People of the Philippines.


      The case before us does not fit within the rules just cited and, therefore, the appellant cannot seek the protection of the provisions of said article 361 of the Revised Penal Code, in order to justify his criminal intent and secure his acquittal, it appearing that many of the imputations made against Felix Manalo in the libelous article in question do not constitute a crime; while in others where an insinuation was made of some criminal act, the evidence submitted to prove the truth has completely failed to support the stand of the accused, and in general the imputations made against Manalo are not at all connected with the discharge of the duties of a Government official or employee, as it is well known that Felix Manalo is not a Government employee and proof of the truth of the imputations would not be admissible.

      In view of the above, we find no merit in petitioner's contention that he had been unlawfully deprived of his right to prove the truth of the libelous imputations. The Court of Appeals has rightfully held that proof of the truth of those acts imputed the offended party which do not constitute a crime can be admitted, since he is not a government employee, and, consequently, none of those imputations can have any reference to facts related to the discharge by a government employee of his official duties. This is in consonance with the second paragraph of article 361 which limits the scope of the general rule set forth in the first paragraph of the same article.

      We find no conflict between the decision under review and the decision rendered by the Court of Appeals in People vs. Trillanes (C. A.-B. R. No. 8180). In the latter case, proof of the truth and justifiable motives was permitted to be presented because the Court found that the charges complained of involved the commission of "various public offenses such as grave threats, abduction, rape, acts of lasciviousness, adultery, etc." In the instant case petitioner was likewise permitted to prove the truth of the criminal acts imputed to the offended party but the Court of Appeals has found that the evidence so presented has completely failed to substantiate such charges. And the conclusions of fact in the Trillanes decision, however strong, cannot affect or alter this finding in the case under review.

      The decision appealed from is affirmed, with costs against the petitioner. So ordered.


      Moran, Paras, Bocobo and Lopez Vito, JJ., concur.

      Delete
  30. So much with the COMPLICATIONS in the TECHNICALITY of your argument is there anyway that simple minds like most of your "converts" can comprehend?

    Just as you totally reject all sound CATHOLIC TEACHINGS though they are INTELLIGENTLY explained by GIFTED EXPERT THEOLOGIAN in our official CATECHISM available in the internet so you are trying to be SMART in the LAW just to save your LAST SUGO from shame?

    Did you have any OFFICIAL PRONOUNCEMENT regarding this issue? If not then I will still consider your explanations as PERSONAL subjected to your own understanding of the issue.

    However, have you thought what might have prompted Ms. ROSITA TRILLANES to accuse your LAST MESSENGER of having abused her?

    And why she, as a LIAR was brought back to Manalo's church and showered her the duty of being a DIAKONESA?

    In our modern understanding, BRIBING her with a good position in Manalo's Church could stop her from damaging further the already damaged reputation of your Last Sugo?

    Somewhere there is TRUTH in Rosita Trillanes accusation and there is something behind the story why Rosita retracted and then a deeper mystery why FELIX MANALO decided to confer her the position of a DIAKONESA.

    What is behind these pertaining mysteries behind ROSITA TRILLANES story is more interesting than your explanation from the stand point of a defense. Please reserve your arguments to lawyers like you and see where your claims will go down in history.

    ReplyDelete
  31. When you raised the Court of Appeals decision in favor of Trillianes, which is a LEGAL document, to write this article and to accuse FYM of rape, there is no other way but to discuss this issue on a legal point of view. You should have prepared yourself on that. If your simple mind cannot comprehend what I presented, there is nothing much I can do, can I? But I hope, you have intelligent followers who can appreciate this more that you can.

    There are no mysteries surrounding this case, only facts; Rosita was convicted in the lower court, Rosita was acquitted in the CA, Rosita made a retraction based on her affidavit and Salvador Tumang was convicted in the Supreme Court. These facts serve also as "official pronouncement" to this issue and I suppose these facts does not sit well in your accusations against FYM as such you would rather hold on to the "mysteries" you claim exist. Facts versus "Mysteries"? Let the people decide.

    "However, have you thought what might have prompted Ms. ROSITA TRILLANES to accuse your LAST MESSENGER of having abused her?" - The answer is in her affidavit. She answered it herself.

    "And why she, as a LIAR was brought back to Manalo's church and showered her the duty of being a DIAKONESA?" - To answer this, let me quote some biblical verses for your understanding.

    The Parable of the Lost Sheep (Luke 15:3-7)

    3 Then Jesus told them this parable: 4 “Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Doesn’t he leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it? 5 And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders 6 and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says, ‘Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep.’ 7 I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent

    The Parable of the Lost/Prodigal Son (Luke 15: 21-24)

    21 “The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’

    22 “But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. 23 Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate. 24 For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate

    There are no financial/monetary rewards being a deacon or deaconess in INC, just as there are none in the lay ministers serving the Catholic Church. In fact it entails alot of sacrifices on the part of those who want to serve their church, which i find truly admirable. What these people hold on to (both for the Catholic and INC) is the belief of being rewarded in heaven when the time comes when we all have to face our creator and be judged. I suppose this is also exactly the reason why you created this blog, in your belief you are serving your church as well. I have to give you credit for it. But when you write particularly this kind of articles judging and attacking people/others, please be guided with following biblical verses:

    James 4:11-12 (NIV)

    11 Brothers and sisters, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against a brother or sister or judges them speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. 12 There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?


    Matthew 7:1-2 (NIV)

    1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

    ReplyDelete
  32. DREIN SAID: When you raised the Court of Appeals decision in favor of Trillianes, which is a LEGAL document, to write this article and to accuse FYM of rape, there is no other way but to discuss this issue on a legal point of view. You should have prepared yourself on that. If your simple mind cannot comprehend what I presented, there is nothing much I can do, can I? But I hope, you have intelligent followers who can appreciate this more that you can.

    CD2000: So legally you are barking on a wrong tree. Have you noticed that this post was taken from three articles: Two from Catholic point of view and One from your own? Why not address your legal ‘expertiese’ to the origin of those articles?

    For sure, your own README would find your LEGAL EXPERTIES so complicated that he couldn’t possibly comprehend. Simple mind does not make me lesser to understand your point. I am just wondering why you can easily claim “legal point of view” when “theologically speaking” your own INC cannot comprehend our Catechism?

    And kindly tell your “unintelligent” members to try to convince your Central and publish officially what it has to say about the unending FELIX MANALO RAPE CASE circulating in the internet.

    DREIN SAID: There are no mysteries surrounding this case, only facts; Rosita was convicted in the lower court, Rosita was acquitted in the CA, Rosita made a retraction based on her affidavit and Salvador Tumang was convicted in the Supreme Court. These facts serve also as "official pronouncement" to this issue and I suppose these facts does not sit well in your accusations against FYM as such you would rather hold on to the "mysteries" you claim exist. Facts versus "Mysteries"? Let the people decide.

    CD2000: Just as the Catholic Church presents FACTS of HISTORY to prove our case against your claim of being the “original church” established by Christ. Apply the same method!

    Read back. Have you seen that letter from LESLIE WOLF? What do you call that? That is a FACT! We don’t need your “legal expertise” to find if those accusations against your LAST SUGO did happen or not. Simply, the letter says FELIX MANALO abused many women and even beating her wife. Do you not see that as a reason why your FYM was “a man of low morals”?

    DREIN SAID: "However, have you thought what might have prompted Ms. ROSITA TRILLANES to accuse your LAST MESSENGER of having abused her?" - The answer is in her affidavit. She answered it herself.

    CD2000: You believe in an affidavit more than what was presented in the Court of Appeals? Still your statements do not convince me well. There is a mystery why Rosita retracted and was later on awarded with good position in the Manalo’s church? That’s not fact.. that is MYSTERY!

    ReplyDelete
  33. DREIN SAID: "And why she, as a LIAR was brought back to Manalo's church and showered her the duty of being a DIAKONESA?" - To answer this, let me quote some biblical verses for your understanding.

    The Parable of the Lost Sheep (Luke 15:3-7)

    3 Then Jesus told them this parable: 4 “Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Doesn’t he leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it? 5 And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders 6 and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says, ‘Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep.’ 7 I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent

    The Parable of the Lost/Prodigal Son (Luke 15: 21-24)

    21 “The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’

    22 “But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. 23 Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate. 24 For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate

    CD2000: What a nice excuse. I remember your LAST SUGO’s biblical reference on his WOMANIZING, it was SOLOMON’s many wives.

    Thanks to your biblical reference but that hardly convinces me to believe why a woman who accused your Last Messenger of abusing her was even awarded with handsome prize? That’s a MYSTERY, not fact.

    DREIN SAID: There are no financial/monetary rewards being a deacon or deaconess in INC, just as there are none in the lay ministers serving the Catholic Church. In fact it entails alot of sacrifices on the part of those who want to serve their church, which i find truly admirable. What these people hold on to (both for the Catholic and INC) is the belief of being rewarded in heaven when the time comes when we all have to face our creator and be judged. I suppose this is also exactly the reason why you created this blog, in your belief you are serving your church as well. I have to give you credit for it. But when you write particularly this kind of articles judging and attacking people/others, please be guided with following biblical verses:

    James 4:11-12 (NIV)

    11 Brothers and sisters, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against a brother or sister or judges them speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. 12 There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?


    Matthew 7:1-2 (NIV)

    1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

    CD2000: I do not claim knowledge how the Manalo family run their company but Manalo’s influence was very great. Could that also prompted Rosista Trillanes to recant because he has no other option?

    And thank you for your Biblical verses. How I wish you use these verses from the Bible against your ANTI-CATHOLIC programs in TV, Radio and magazine? All your PANDOKTRINA articles were meant to DESTROY Catholic doctrines and the Catholic Church and to mislead Catholics to your fold!

    Once you did that, please come back and use the same Biblical verses. For I can promise you, once your INC will stop ATTACKING the Catholic Church and our doctrines, this blog will simply fade away!

    ReplyDelete
  34. There seems to be a lot of confusion with some facts
    posted in this forum because some were copied from
    sites that have self serving motives or by design of some
    blogger to confuse this issue. Let us tackle this ...

    On the controversial dates:

    DECISION which says Felix Y. Manalo is a rapist
    ---- July 1942

    After 10 years... "RETRACTION"
    ---- Nov. 1952
    PUBLICATION in the Official Gazette of the
    DECISION which says Felix Y. Manalo is a rapist
    ---- July 1954

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, as I have stated above, FYM was not tried in court for rape case. The decision you mentioned was whether Rosita Trillanes committed a libelous act.

      Delete
    2. Let me state the facts .
      ---------------------------------------------------
      1. Felix sued Rosita because he insists he did not rape her.

      2. The court decides that Felix is indeed "of low moral character" and used the word of God to rape many and dismisses his case against Rosita and have this decision published for all the world to know.

      Delete
  35. On the what would happen if Felix Y Manalo pursued the case up to the Supreme Court. DREIN posted the following ruling...
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    “In view of the above, we find no merit in petitioner's contention that he........ decision rendered by the Court of Appeals in People vs. Trillanes (C. A.-B. R. No. 8180). In the latter case, proof of the truth and justifiable motives was PERMITTED TO BE PRESENTED because the Court found that the charges complained of involved the commission of "various public offenses such as grave threats, abduction, RAPE, acts of lasciviousness, adultery.... such charges. And the conclusions of fact in the Trillanes decision, however strong, cannot affect or alter this finding in the case under review.”

    "The question is what would have happened if the Rosita case reached the Supreme Court? We can only guess. But the Salvador Tumang case can be an indication as to the answer to my question."
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This is a typical INC reply, I thought they only do that to the bible and not in legal document , the answer to his question is just above and yet he choose to ignore it and tried vainly to mislead readers. Let me post it for you to read....

    And the conclusions of fact in the TRILLANES DECISION, HOWEVER STRONG, cannot affect or alter this finding in the case under review.” (Caps lock for emphasis).

    What is clear here is that in Trillanes Case evidence was accepted because of the element of RAPE and there is STRONG evidence in conclusions of FACTS.

    Tumang lost because he was NOT allowed to present evidence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Ephesian, I think you deliberately deleted this statement from the Supreme Court decision, "In the instant case petitioner was likewise permitted to prove the truth of the criminal acts imputed to the offended party but the Court of Appeals has found that the evidence so presented has completely failed to substantiate such charges." Now how can you claim that Tumang lost because he was NOT allowed to present evidence?

      Delete
    2. And in general the imputations made against Manalo are not at all connected with the discharge of the duties of a Government official or employee, as it is well known that Felix Manalo is not a Government employee and PROOF OF TRUTH of the imputations would NOT be admissible.

      Delete
    3. What you said is only true for an act or omission not constituting a crime. Rape is a criminal case, as such among the so many accusations thrown againts FYM, PROOF OF TRUTH related to the rape accusation should be admitted in court as what happened in this case.

      "It appears that the libelous article contained imputations which insinuate the commission of criminal acts as well as of many other acts which do not constitute a crime. AS TO THOSE IMPUTATIONS INSINUATING THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME, THE COURT OF APPEALS FOUND THAT THE PETITIONES WAS ALLOWED TO INTRODUCE EVIDENCE ON THE TRUTH THEREOF BUT THAT SAID EVIDENCE WAS INSUFFICIENT. SAID THE COURT OF APPEALS".

      Delete
  36. Hello catholicdefender,

    Greetings again! Felix Manalo used all of the offering money for his immoral sexual acts. Whats even more sad is that the INC hasn't even been taken down yet. The Iglesia ni Cristo must be permanently dismantled. Thats all I can say though.

    Kind regards!
    John

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello sabertoothfreezingcooling! :)

      So sure of what you said huh? You're even using money issue and immoral acts against Felix Manalo.

      I think you got that wrong when you said that INC must be permanently dismantled. Catholic church is more likely and most probably to be dismantled soon.

      Catholics don't have unity in what they do. Other Catholics would still continue doing their rituals or what so ever things, even if their Priest itself is already discouraging them, and would tell them that it has no biblical explanations.

      In other words, self-invented rituals.

      Aren't those the ones who are sooner to be dismantled? :)

      Delete
    2. Anonymous... in the end the CHURCH of JESUS CHRIST will TRIUMPH while the FAKE ones having copied its name will be SHAMED!

      Hindi lahat ng katunog ay kauri!

      Delete
  37. On why Felix Y. Manalo was not convicted of the crime of rape ....
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    It's already 2012 and Ecleo is still free, He murdered his wife and if he dies this year his follower would, in the future, say that their leader is INNOCENT because he was not convicted of killing his wife.He was even elected to the house of representative. His crime if we are to weigh it in the scale of justice is MORE serious than what Felix did, the case is much stronger for there is police reports, forensics finding,etc... that attest to the crime and yet he was NOT yet CONVICTED of that crime. Why is that so? Like Felix he can take advantage of the presumption of innocence and elevate it up to the supreme court if you have the money and influence which the self proclaimed angel has aplenty. Unfortunately Felix scheme of pressuring Rosita back fired on him, now we can READ and QUOTE the DECISION of the court that says Felix Manalo has victimized MANY. Mind you we are not talking of estafa victims here, its RAPE done in many years. Are we then judging the character of Felix here if we read, post, quote the decisions of the court? The court says he RAPED many and we believe it, please dont expect us to believe you and your self-serving, flimsy, written in English second Rosita affidavit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Ephesian, there are no any other explanation why FYM was not convicted any the crime rape except that Rosita never filed such case againts him, if indeed she was raped by FYM. Don't you think it would be easier to defend a case againts libel than proving someone actually raped you?

      Delete
    2. So now you admit as to why this self proclaimed angel was not convicted and that is.. "Rosita never filed such case againts him". The "why" we can tackle later and yes i agree with you that "it would be easier to defend a case againts libel than proving someone actually raped you" for DNA testing was not available at that time and also you can claim for consensual sex but you are wrong to say there are no other explanation for conviction as you can clearly see what is actually happening now. The dismissal was based on the basis that she was indeed RAPED. Your observation that 'opinions' as basis for decision is clearly misleading.

      Delete
    3. Mr Ephesian, even as to this moment, DNA testing is not acceptable in our court. Raped is proven primarily based on medico legal findings (if there was forced penetration) and testimonies of the complainant, the defendant and the witnesses. You can only speculate as how the hearing went, but again I trying for libel is totally different for trying a rape case. It's quite baffling that Rosita at that time opted just to defend herself on the libel case againts her and not file a countercharge of rape againts FYM?

      On the Ecleo case, here's an update for you:

      http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/regions/04/14/12/dinagat-congressman-gets-life-sentence#.T4vMj9k6y4Y.link

      MANILA, Philippines – Dinagat Island Rep. Ruben Ecleo Jr., who has been found guilty of killing his wife Alona Bacolod, is sentenced to life imprisonment by a Cebu regional trial court.

      In a 200-page decision issued by Judge Soliver Peras of Cebu Regional Trial Court Branch 10, Ecleo was given a sentence of 20 to 40 years imprisonment and was ordered to pay around P25 million compensatory damages to the family of Bacolod.

      Bacolod’s brothers Josebil and Angelito were both present during the promulgation and expressed gratitude over the court’s decision.

      Ecleo, who is also head of the Philippine Benevolent Missionaries Association, was not present during the promulgation but his lawyer Orlando Salatandre said he is still in the country.

      Salatandre, however, said he doesn’t know the exact whereabouts of his client.

      He said they will appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.

      Bacolod’s family, meanwhile, called on the House of Representatives to remove Ecleo from office.

      They will also make an appeal to President Benigno Aquino III to assist them and offer a reward for Ecleo's arrest.

      The family is also seeking protection from the Philippine National Police-Criminal Investigation and Detection Group. -- Reports from Carine M. Asutilla, Joworski Alipon, Edgar Escalante, ABS-CBN News Central Visayas


      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Delete
    4. Hahaha very good- an update on Ecleo, so you're implying now that Ecleo's and Felix case has no similarities? If Ecleo killed 1 woman, Felix raped many and he used the Word of God to do that deed, that maybe is the difference. What you are forgetting is that Ecleos deed was done 10 years ago!

      Delete
    5. Well, just to throw in your face that Ecleo case you brought in this discussion which is totally irrelevant with the topic on hand. I see no point prolonging this discussion with you any further. The longer this takes, the more incoherent you become. I am just wasting my time. I believe, all the things that need to be said and explained surrounding this case is already written here. I'll just leave it to the readers to make their own conclusion. Adios!

      Delete
    6. And the longer the discussion the more deceptive statements you will post, an example your first statement alone - "Mr Ephesian, even as to this moment, DNA testing is not acceptable in our court" Whereas
      " In April 2010, the Supreme Court approved DNA testing to be performed on the semen specimen obtained during autopsy from Carmela Vizconde." source wiki. of course, the readers will decide on how deceptive INC members are.

      Delete
  38. On the Tumang case and the Solicitor General 'betrayal' .....
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This reasoning is quite new, a desperate explanation for a factual decision, even the church administration have not taken this line....
    Nevertheless the source DREIN posted here is a treasure trove of information with regards to Felix , Here we can see that he DOES NOT have a FORGIVING character, He pursued the case against this man to the bitter end. Now we can get back to analyze the second affidavit, safely eliminating the forgiveness factor out. Why did Rosita made this affidavit only after 10 years. We know that they have an official stand regarding this affidavit, they say its about repentance and FORGIVENESS , as proven above, this is unlikely. Here, Felix got on his side an array of counsel AGAIN from the Office of the Solicitor General plus a private lawyer. Poor Tumang, he doesnt stand a chance. He will be taught a lesson he will never forget (we can also see here the falsity in their statement that The Solicitor General "betrayed" them, I will quote their stand regarding this ---("Did the solicitor did a good job defending the case? The answer again is obviously NO. As a matter of fact, it was the solicitor himself who sold the case as his own statement and "personal opinion" was quoted by the Court of Appeals which rendered the reversal of the lower court's decision.") ---- if this is true, why would you RETAIN counsels that betrayed you? We all know that this is part of strategy that once you get counsels from the OSG (Office of the Solicitor General), the case becomes PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS , and you cant avail of government counsel to face against OSG anymore even if you are penniless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr. Ephesian, let me educate you a bit on the rules of court. Once a case is filed which is criminal (with penal provision) in nature (ex. libel, murder, etc), the complainant automatically becomes the People of the Philippines (IT IS NEVER A STRATEGY TO ANYONE SEEKING RELIEF IN OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM TO DRAG THE ENTIRE POPULATION AGAINTS SOMEONE WHO COMMITED A CRIME AGAINTS YOU). The case shall be tried first at the lower court wherein the complainant (here being the People of the Philippines) shall be represented by the fiscal's office and (if the private complainant wishes so) the private complainant's private lawyer. If the case is won in favor of the complainants, the accused can elevate the case to the Court of Appeals. In this case, the People of the Philippines shall now be represented by the OSG (IT IS AUTOMATIC AND WHAT OUR LAW PRESCRIBES). The OSG shall take over the case from thereon. The case may reach the SC if the defendant again loses his case in CA, in such case, the OSG shall continue to represent the People of the Philippines. However, if at any point say for example, the defendant won his case in the lower court, such case can not be appealed to CA nor to SC by the complainant. Likewise if it is won in CA, it cannot be brought to the SC. So as you can see:

      a. it was Tumang who brought his case to the SC. He was convicted in the lower court, CA and eventually the SC.

      b. It was not FYM's choice for OSG to represent him. It is something automatic and what our law prescribes! Remember, in the Rosita case, it was OSG who convicted him in their manifestation presented in the CA which the said court even quoted "And the Solicitor concludes that he found out through proofs presented that Manalo is a man "de baja moral" (man of low moral) and that he took advantage of his position in the Iglesia to attack and sully the virtue of some of his female followers". Now don't you think your conclusion (that FYM retained the OSG) contradicts how the OSG treated his case againts Rosita in the Court of Appeals?

      Delete
    2. Still it is conclusive that in Trillanes Case evidence was accepted because of the element of RAPE and there is strong evidence in conclusions of facts, and Tumang lost because PROOF OF TRUTH of the imputations was not admitted. This you cannot deny.

      Delete
    3. Again, please read back the SC decision. Understand it carefully, to quote:

      "We find no conflict between the decision under review and the decision rendered by the Court of Appeals in People vs. Trillanes (C. A.-B. R. No. 8180). In the latter case, proof of the truth and justifiable motives was permitted to be presented because the Court found that the charges complained of involved the commission of "various public offenses such as grave threats, abduction, rape, acts of lasciviousness, adultery, etc." IN THE INSTANT CASE PETIONER WAS LIKEWISE PERMITTED TO PROVE THE TRUTH OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS IMPUTED TO THE OFFENDED PARTY BUT THE COURT OF APPEALS HAS FOUND THAT THE EVIDENCE SO PRESENTED HAS COMPLETELY FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE SUCH CHARGES. And the conclusions of fact in the Trillanes decision, however strong, cannot affect or alter this finding in the case under review."

      Delete
    4. I am posting this part of Supreme Courts decision again, for you to read and UNDERSTAND, "And in general the imputations made against Manalo are not at all connected with the discharge of the duties of a Government official or employee, as it is well known that Felix Manalo is not a Government employee and PROOF OF TRUTH of the imputations would NOT be admissible."

      Delete
    5. Well, go read the entire decision and not take out only portions which support your argument.

      "It appears that the libelous article contained imputations which insinuate the commission of criminal acts as well as of many other acts which do not constitute a crime. AS TO THOSE IMPUTATIONS INSINUATING THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME, THE COURT OF APPEALS FOUND THAT THE PETITIONES WAS ALLOWED TO INTRODUCE EVIDENCE ON THE TRUTH THEREOF BUT THAT SAID EVIDENCE WAS INSUFFICIENT. SAID THE COURT OF APPEALS".

      Like what I mentioned, Rape is a criminal act, as such, whether government official or not, Proof of Truth should be admitted in court as shown in the decision stated above.

      Delete
    6. Well, go read the entire decision and not take out only portions which support your argument.

      And in general the imputations made against Manalo are not at all connected with the discharge of the duties of a Government official or employee, as it is well known that Felix Manalo is not a Government employee and PROOF OF TRUTH of the imputations would NOT be admissible.

      It was Rosita who was raped not Tumang.

      Delete
    7. I fully understand the above topics even it complicates the battle of beliefs and in legal as well. Thanks Atty Drein for your legal presentation and I have no objections for the decisions rendered by the courts however the lower court commit a mistake in rendering decision infavor of FYM. In my own opinion in the case of Ms.Rosita, If Rosita and other victims of Mr. FYM had filed a case in court accusing for rape and acts of lasciviousness and supported by the evidence presenting the siblings of Mr. Manalo from the said woman is a strong material evidence against the accused Mr. Manalo. If I am the judge for this case, i will give a verdict guilty against Mr. Manalo at all cost.

      Delete
  39. On did the prosecutor " betrayed " Felix (2)?.....
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Let us see parallel court scenes happening now. The prosecution lead by Tupaz in the impeachment court is requesting subpoena of bank documents based on a faked documents and it cannot be proven that Corona has dollar account because of the secrecy law. What Cuevas say is that there is indeed strong evidence that Corona has dollar account because his client has CONFIDED in him that he has and will reveal it in an "appropriate time". Does it mean that Cuevas betrayed Corona? No, because his client has ALLOWED him to make this announcements! The counsel statements are based on his clients statements and not of his own, HEARSAYS and personal OPINIONS are not allowed in courts and DECISIONS are based on FACTS!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OSG is not the private counsel of FYM! Can't you get it?? OSG is the counsel for the government and represents the People of the Philippines. FYM's private lawyer was only able to represent him on the lower court where he won the againts Rosita Trillanes. However, when Trillanes brought the case to the Court of Appeals, OSG took over the case on behalf of the People of the Philippines.

      Let me educate you further on how OSG handles each cases. When a case is brought to the OSG (for cases in CA and SC), it is raffled to, among the many divisions in the agency who shall handle the case. The lawyer who will be assigned then to the case shall request for all the files related to the case. He shall then submit his pleading to the CA or SC to counter the appeal of the defendant. These cases are mostly resolved only on mere manifestation and pleadings. It is only on rare occassions that a hearing is set for any criminal cases appealed in the CA or SC.

      Delete
    2. The only point i want you to understand and which you are insistent is in your statement that "The statement of the OSG will thus remain his own personal opinion, nothing more, nothing less." The basis for the decision of the court in deciding that Felix is indeed a rapist and the dismissal of his suit are based on FACTS and as a lawyer yourself knows , never on opinions.

      Delete
    3. I think you're the one not getting my point. The case was libel not rape. That's all there is to it. If indeed, given your argument, that the Court of Appeals, based on their decision, convicted FYM as rapist, then how come they didn't arrest him and sent to jail???

      Delete
    4. and by the way, there is such a thing as expert witness, wherein its testimonies based on his "opinion" as an expert is accepted in court! go read. you still have so much to learn.

      Delete
    5. The BASIS for the the dismissal of the libel case is the FACT that the self proclaimed angel raped many and used the word of God to satisfy his carnal desire.

      Delete
    6. Despite all your statements that tends to confuse, the court decision can be read again and again, that he was a man of low moral and used the word of God to victimize many. Tell me, can the court dismiss a case without BASIS? Or will the court dismiss a case because of an opinion? This "opinion" theory of yours is hard to accept if not downright nauseating.

      Delete
    7. You posted "and by the way, there is such a thing as expert witness, wherein its testimonies based on his "opinion" as an expert is accepted in court! go read. you still have so much to learn."--
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Deceptive statement again- You dont watch NCIS? "Opinions" are not facts! Why do they subject each evidence to microscopic analysis? They will present this evidence based on scientific standards and not on "opinions". Go fool your members, not us.

      Delete
  40. I am receiving numerous comments from an INC of Manalo member as an Anonymous. Sorry but I am not going to post it unless he/she identifies himself/herself with a proper name even how nasty it may seem.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Drein,

    presenting an educated argument to these troglodytes is like banging your head against a wall.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Oh sorry if DREIN got lump on his head, this wall of FACTS is really hard to break down.

    FACTS.
    1. Felix Manalo Ysagun raped many.
    2. He founded a Corporation Sole.

    Your OPINION.
    1. Felix Manalo Ysagun is an angel
    2. He founded a "church".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. well said, ephesian 5:11. felix mANALo should have also be charged with BRIBERY.

      Delete
  43. Just so you gentlemen know, Drein is a moron. He is using the SC decision on the Tumang case to explain away the different Court of Appeals Trillianes case decision. He is using bits and pieces of the SC's decision on Tumang to "refute" the CA Trillianes case when the fact is:

    "...And the conclusions of fact in the Trillanes decision, however strong, cannot affect or alter this finding in the case under review."

    Which means that the SC judges are aware and are convinced that Tumang losing the case does not mean that the CA's decision on the Trillianes case is wrong. They believe that the CA's decision is correct.

    Which further means that this moronic INC member DREIN is misquoting and misrepresenting the SC decision to "refute" the CA's decision.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I STRONGLY AGREE WITH THAT!! VERY TYPICAL OF THESE INCORRUPTED MORONS!!

      Delete
  44. Brothers, please pray for me, as I pray this for All of us.

    Lord God, I pray for the men and women who read this blog. We thank you lord for the gift of God fearing neighbors and the opportunity to know our brothers in Christ.

    Guide us Lord with Your presence and heal us from the pain and suffering caused by this disunity that surrounds us. Guide us to be gentle with our words, and show us mercy of Your love and the wisdom of Your ways.

    Grant us o Father, the gift of sharing Your message o Lord, the best way we can. This we ask through Christ our Lord. Amen.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Trillanes and her husband died active members in the INC. Even now, her children, in laws and grand children are all in the INC. They are all active members. Answer this honestly without any hypocrisy: If you are one of her children will you still stay in the church if the leader of this church rape your mother?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. when fame and money are involved, why not? Put on your thinking cap, Eric Buelva. Goodness gacious! Where's LOGIC in all this?

      Delete
  46. My question is, why did the court of appeals did not consider the affidavit of retraction of Mrs. Trillanes? This is clearly a blunder on their part. How can you not take into account the retraction of the woman who was in the first place the very person than can truly tell if she has been raped or not.

    Why do we have to concern ourselves in proving that Felix Manalo is a rapist when the respondent herself says that he is not so?

    Are you just basing your truths to the Court of appeals decision? How many times that even the supreme court has blundered on some cases? It is plain and simple. The court blundered in their decision.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As you miserable incs love to say,"THAT'S YOUR OPINION."

      Delete
  47. Keep you mind open, Catholic Defender. Who knows, in the end, you might be called to the one true church.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rather you need to open your mind to the promptings of the Holy Spirit and remove those spiritual pride in you. Humble yourself before the LORD JESUS CHRIST our GOD and ask for forgiveness for denying himself being GOD made FLESH. 2 John 1:7 says, many deceivers will come, those who DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE JESUS COMING IN THE FLESH. Such are the deceivers and anti-Christ.

      The following verses in 2 John 1:8-21 says we should NOT RECEIVE these kinds of people nor we should GREET them. If we do so, we share in their EVIL ways.

      Felix Manalo was proven to be a FAKE messenger. He DENIED and DID NOT acknowledge JESUS GOD coming in the FLESH. All he saw was the JESUS in the FLESH but failed to recognize HIS DIVINITY.

      he is the DECEIVER and the ANTI-CHRIST. Come home to the TRUE FOLD which CHRIST FOUNDED. He is waiting for you.

      Delete
    2. I guess you should be the one humbling yourself and recognize our God, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom He have sent is way different in nature. You and the rest of the catholic priest were proven to be "fake". You denied that there is only One true God by saying that our Lord Jesus Christ is god made flesh.
      Pag-aaralan mo lahat ng talatang ito at patunayan mo parin na ang Panginoong Jesus Cristo ay Diyos.

      /Matthew 16:15-16/John 3:16/Acts 2:36/Matthew 3:17/Acts 5:31/1 timothy 2:5/1Peter 2:21-22/Romans 5:12/ John 10:36/Ephesians 1:20-22/Philippians 2:9-11/Hebrews 4:14-16/ John 8:40/Acts 2:22/Matthew 26:39/Hosea 11:9/Ezekiel 28:2/John 17:1-3. Halos lahat yan testimonies ng mga apostles, ni Lord Jesus Christ at higit sa lahat Our Only True God about Lord Jesus Christ attributes and his nature.

      Tandaan mo ang araw na ito, ipapanalangin kita at ipagpapanata ko simula ngayon na makarating ka sa pagkaunawa at pag dumating ang banal na bautismo mo masasabi mong ang Iglesia Ni Cristo na inuusig mo ang may tunay na Diyos.

      Delete
    3. Ang TUNAY na IGLESIA NI CRISTO ang INUUSIG ng PEKENG Iglesia ni Cristo® (REGISTERED TRADEMARK).

      Pinapangalangin naming mga TUNAY na Kristiano na nasa loob ng TUNAY na IGLESIA NI CRISTO -- ang IGLESIA KATOLIKA (Pasugo April 1966, p. 46). At ang PEKENG INC™ ay matauhan.

      Galing mong mag-quote ng Bible pero kahit sa sa mga bayarang ministro niyo ay DALUBHASA sa Bible, puro kayo PERSONAL OPINION pagdating sa Biblia.

      At dahil NAGMAMARUNONG ka sa Bible, IPAKITA mo sa amin kung saan sinasabi sa Bible na HINDI DIOS si Cristo!!!!

      Maghihintay kami!

      Delete
  48. Sir, you did not answer my question: If you are one of her (Rosita Trillanes) children will you still stay in the church if the leader of this church (INC) rape your mother?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Allow me to answer that for you, eric buelva. When you have been paid a large sum of money and being offered a higher position in your company,then, why not? Be logical, dumbhead!!

      Delete
  49. YOU CAN't BRING US DOWN.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HAHAHA NO NEED TO BRING YOU DOWN CUZ YOU'RE ALREADY DOWN!!!

      Delete
  50. ANO na naman ang nangyari sa yo catholic defender? Di mo na masagot ang simpleng tanong ng ka brod namin. Pahiya ka na naman ba? Ikaw kasi mahilig kang mamulot ng basura kaya nagkakasugat-sugat ka tuloy. Akala mo brillante ang napulot mo dahil sa kumislap, yon pala puwet lang pala ng baso. Huwag kasing aanga-anga para di ka nasasaktan.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Takot ba na sagutin ang tanong sa yo ni brod Eric? So ako naman ang magtatanong, siguro naman ay sasagot ka na.

    If you are one of her (Rosita Trillanes) children will you still stay in the church if the leader of this church (INC) rape your mother?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hanggang ngayon ay di ka pa rin sumasagot, Nagkaproblema ka ba sa pinasukan mong paninira laban kay Ka Felix Manalo. Takot na nga ang mga gumamit ng isyung yan noon na lumaban ng harapan sa INC, Pinulot mo pa rin. Ikaw di ka ba duwag? Kaya mo bang patunayan ang akusasyon na yan na kaharap ang ministro namin?

      Delete
    2. The FACT that your fake sugo was called or BRANDED by the Court as a "MAN OF LOW MORALE" is something. Whether Rosita remained in Manalo's Church remains to be a question, however the fact that FELIX MANALO abused may women in his Church will always be perceived as a proof of his being a FALSE PROPHET... to this day your number does not even grow is another proof of that.

      Delete
  52. Hindi mo pa rin sinasagot ang mga tanong sa yo. Hanggang akusasyon ka lang! Ganyan ba ang ugali ng mga kagaya mo na Catholic Defender kuno?

    Ito ang tanong ni Brod Eric:

    If you are one of her (Rosita Trillanes) children will you still stay in the church if the leader of this church (INC) rape your mother?

    Ito ang tanong ko:

    Kaya mo bang patunayan ang mga akusasyon na yan na kaharap ang ministro namin?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you are not convinced of this article then you have all the rights and power to prove otherwise the INNOCENCE of your fake sugo!

      Delete
  53. Ito pa ang ipinadala ko sa yo sa link na ito, Di mo rin masagot:

    http://catholicdefender2000.blogspot.com/2013/01/how-inc-members-explain-their-belief.html


    [Was FELIX MANALO an "angell"?!!!!!]

    YES, HE IS! Bro. FELIX Y. MANALO is an ANGEL sent by God to restore the true Church in these last days because the Catholic Church turn away from the teachings of God.

    IS BENEDICT XVI AN ANGEL? DOES AN ANGEL OF GOD RESIGN IN HIS OFFICE?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Felix Manalo is NOT a messenger-- for the very reason that HE HAS NO MESSAGE coming from God. His alleged calling to the ministry was his OWN MAKING after 3 days and night in "prayer and fasting" reading religious articles he brought with him when he was a PROTESTANT PREACHER.

      He mixed everything and came up with a NEW RELIGION but with the same concept of ARIANISM which the CHURCH had condemned years ago even before the grand grand grand parents of FELIX MANALO were born.

      For the INC of Manalo, ALL their TEACHINGS are NOT ORIGINAL. They are COPIED!!!! So if you thnk that their argument were new, you better consult history for they have been ansswered long time ago.

      And for the record, WE DO NOT PREACHED the POPE as "ANGELS" looool. The Pope is the VISIBLE HEAD OF THE CHURCH commissioned by GOD in an APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION- thus BXVI is the 266th POPE of the Church---!!!

      I will repeat, FELIX MANALO has NO MESSAGE therefore he's NOT a MESSENGER nor an angel. His NAME was NEVER MENTIONED in the HOLY SCRIPTURES, only when they TWISTED SCRIPTURE to accomodate him there... funny.

      Delete
    2. Yes. felix mANALo's company hailed from the devil's anus!

      Delete
  54. Naniniwala ka ba na si Benedict XVI ay "angel of God"? YES or NO

    Ilan ba ang HEAD NG CATHOLIC CHURCH? ISA? DALAWA? TATLO?, ETC.?

    Di mo pa rin sinasagot ang tanong ni Brod Eric:

    If you are one of her (Rosita Trillanes) children will you still stay in the church if the leader of this church (INC) rape your mother? YES or NO

    Di mo pa rin sinasagot ng ayon sa itinatanong ang tanong ko:

    Kaya mo bang patunayan ang mga akusasyon mo na rapist si Ka Felix Manalo na kaharap ang ministro namin? O naduduwag ka na humarap sa ministro namin dahil sa alam mo na naninira ka lang at kailanman ay di mo kayang patunayan ng harapan ang akusasyon mo?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Benedict XVI as "angel"?

      Is it a CATHOLIC TEACHING?

      Yes, the CHURCH has the POPE as the VISIBLE HEAD and CHRIST as the INVISIBLE HEAD. "Feed my sheep... feed my lambs".

      I WILL REMAIN WITH YOU UNTIL THE END OF TIMES... said Jesus. Therefore the CHURCH will NEVER APOSTATIZED.

      Felix Manalo LIED and DECEIVED MANY!!! He is the FULFILMENT of BIBLICAL PROPHESIES about the coming of the ANTI-CHRIST!

      Delete
    2. Kaya mo bang patunaya na "HINDI" rapist si Felix Manalo?

      Delete
    3. Way to go brother! These stupid incs just don't get it through their thick skulls!

      Delete
  55. Nalimutan mo ata na ipost ang reply ko sa yo CAtholic defender!

    Naniniwala ka ba na si Benedict XVI ay "angel of God"? YES or NO

    Ilan ba ang HEAD NG CATHOLIC CHURCH? ISA? DALAWA? TATLO?, ETC.?

    Di mo pa rin sinasagot ang tanong ni Brod Eric:

    If you are one of her (Rosita Trillanes) children will you still stay in the church if the leader of this church (INC) rape your mother? YES or NO

    Di mo pa rin sinasagot ng ayon sa itinatanong ang tanong ko:

    Kaya mo bang patunayan ang mga akusasyon mo na rapist si Ka Felix Manalo na kaharap ang ministro namin? O naduduwag ka na humarap sa ministro namin dahil sa alam mo na naninira ka lang at kailanman ay di mo kayang patunayan ng harapan ang akusasyon mo?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yes or no mo ang lelong mong INM dyan kayo dalubhasa... mag 123, may isa dalawa tatlo kapang panglito dyan. Hoy sasagot kami sa mga tanong sa paraan na alam naming dapat at tama.

      Delete
    2. Alex Ferrera, HINDI ang SAGOT namin ang gusto mong marinig eh. Tama ang aming pang-unawa ngunit ayaw mong unawain ang aming paliwanag ayon sa AMING PANG-UNAWA.

      Katoliko kami kaya kami ang nakakaalam niyan.. kaya kung gusto mong malaman ang katotohanan sa Iglesia Katolika eh di sa amin ka dapat magtanong.

      Ilan ba kamo ang Head of the Church? Isa-- si CRISTO...
      At sino ba ang Papa? Siya ay VISIBLE HEAD of the Church.. siya ang INATASAN ni CRISTO na HAHALILI sa Santa Iglesia.

      O nganga kayo? Hindi naman PINALALAGAY ng Santo Papa na kapantay niya si Cristo noh... kayo PINAPANTAY niyo pa si FELIX MANALO kay CRISTO.. at pinalalagay na mas mataas pa nga siya kay CRISTO...

      PASUGO Hulyo 1965, p. 12:
      “Parehong-pareho ang espiritu ni Cristo sa diwa ni Kapatid na Felix Manalo sa pamamaraan ng pagdadala ng tungkuling tinanggap sa Dios."

      PASUGO Mayo 1964, p. 1 ay ganito:
      “Inihandog ng Dios ang kanyang sarili sa kanyang huling sugo upang dumiyos sa kanya. Samakatuwid, ang tanging may Dios na huling araw na ito'y ang huling sugo -- si Kapatid na Felix Manalo."


      DIOS KO PO.. di man lang kayo KILABUTAN!!!!
      Kakapal ng mukha, pikit matang naniniwala sa buktot na aral ng pekeng sugo.

      Basahin ang KATOTOHANAN TUNGKOL SA INK-1914

      Delete
  56. Sagutin mo na muna yong mga tanong ko na nakapost na sa itaas. Hanggang ngayon ay wala ka pa ring sagot ng ayon sa itinatanong ko. Kailangan pa bang ulitin ko ang mga tanong? Nababasa mo na naman, di ba? Tiyak ko nababasa na rin yan ng iba pa na sumusubaybay sa blog nyo. Naghihintay din sila ng sagot mo. Huwag mo namang ipahiyang muli ang simbahan niyo. Patunayan mo na ikaw ay isang tunay na maginoo at magiting na Catholic Defender.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sabihin mo lang kung suko ka na sa amin na mga INC para tapos na ang boksing. Sabihan mo ang mga kasamahan mo na hagisan ka na ng tuwalya para huwag kang masyadong ma-groge sa pakikipagsagutan mo sa amin. Naaawa rin naman ako sa yo dahil sa alam ko na nadaya ka lang ng mga pare na mga bulaang tagapangaral. Hindi na tunay yang Iglesia Katolika dahil sa humiwalay na yan sa mga aral na nakasulat sa Biblia. Pag-aralan mo na ang tunay na INC ngayon, kami yon. Sumama ka na sa amin na magcelebrate ng aming mga tagumpay sa iba't ibang aktibidad na panrelihiyon. Sa inyo ay napakaraming ng mga kahihiyan at eskandalo na nagaganap kaya tuloy nag-resign na lang ang Papa nyo dahil sa di na niya kayang lunasan ang mga katiwalian at immoralidad sa simbahan niyo. Alis na diyan bago tuluyang lumubog ang barko niyo.

      Delete
    2. Walang susuko sa amin.. nabuhay na kami sa loob ng mahigit 2,000 years, kayo uurungan namin?

      Ang HINDI pagpatol sa inyo ay hindi pagsuko.. USELESS lang na kalabanin ang mga grupong UNWORTHY of our attention.

      Delete
  57. HERE IS ANOTHER INC DEFENDER BLOGSITE PLEASE CONSIRE THEIR LYING http://pristinesearch.blogspot.ae/2012/12/answering-catholic-defenders-part-1.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. oh basura ba talaga? wala k nang utak retarded kpa... may ebidensyan eh pinipilit pa use your coconut tree tsong,, manira kpa sinisumpa kna ng Diyos di mo ba alam sa article ng "Catecismo ng Simbahang Katoliko" na hindi na raw nila kailangan ng Biblia para ituro sa tao ang aral ang 22o nyan "Gintong Aral" LANG ANG TINUTURO NYO PANG-ELEMENTARY LANG YAN SA VALUES EDUCATION AT GMRC TINUTURO YAN HAHAHAHA PIKON KNA NATURAL LNG NA MAGALIT KA DHIL 22O YAN LNG ANG ALAM NYO MGTURO AT MGADVISE LNG AT MGKWENTO SA SIMBAHAN NYO ANO NANGYAYARI SA MGA TAO LALO NA SA KABATAAN, E DI KALAYAWAN NA AT SEX ANG NATUTUNAN SA KANILANG DAILY LIFE, ANG TOTOONG NAGPAPAKO SA KRUS KAY HESUS AY ANG MGA TAGA ROMA WALANG IBA KUNDI ANG KATOLIKO!!!!! REAL HYPOCRITES!!!!!SUMASAMBA KAYO SA LARAWAN, MAY ANNULMENT PA MAY DIVORCE, EH ANU TAWAG NYO SA KASAL, PARANG MAGSYOTA LANG NA ANYTIME PUWEDE HUMIWALAY, KAYA NGA ITINATAG ANG KASAL DHIL DIYOS NA ANG NAGTALI SA MAGSINGIROG KOKONTRAHIN LANG NG BATAS NA GAWA NG TAO? KUNG NIRERESPETO NYO ANG DIYOS HINDI NINYO PAPAYAGAN NA MANGYARI ITO ADVICE Q TLAGA SA INYO NA MAGLINIS-LINIS NA KAU GUMISING NA KAYO D PANINIRA ANG TAWAG DITO DHIL NSA BIBLIA NA ANG MGA KASULATANG MAGPAPATUNAY, AT HEPHEPHEP,, WAG KAYONG 2MINGIN SA KASALANAN NG 1 TAO KUNG SISIRAIN NYO YUN BKIT WALA BA ANG DIYOS PARA MAGPATAWAD SA LAHAT NG SALA NATIN, KAYA NGA MAY PAGSAMABA UPANG KANIN ITO NG ATING KALULUWA, KAYA NGA ITINUTURO DIN SA AMIN NA MAY HINDI MALILIGTAS KHIT SA LOOB PA NG IGLESYA HINDI NAMIN SINASABI NA SA LABAS LANG NG IGLESIA ANG DI MALILIGTAS TAPOS NA PO ANG TOPIC NA ITO !!!!!!!! LONG LIVE BRO. EDUARDO MANALO TO THE JUDGMENT DAY NA PO TAU MAGKITA, KAU N PO MAGPASIYA KUNG GUSTO NYO MAGBAGONG BUHAY ....!!!!!....!!!!!......zZzZz

      Delete
    2. Tulad ng comments mo.. INCorporated Church... basura.

      Pero post natin para makita ng mga nagbabasa kung paano sumagot ang mga kaanib ng PEKENG INC.

      Delete
  58. HANGGANG NGAYON
    Singer and Composer;
    Eraño G. Manalo

    Ngayon, kung ang isang manggagawa, mga kapatid, sinungaling, hindi puwedeng manindigan. Kung ang isang manggagawa kakampi sa

    katiwalian, hindi puwedeng manindigan. Kung ang isang manggagawa siya pang nagtuturo ng katiwalian, eh lalong masamang manggagawa ito.

    Wala nang sariling paninindigan ay siya pang kasangkapan ng diablo. Eh sino ho iyang ganyang manggagawa? Maraming manggagawa natin, halos lahat ganyan.

    Hindi ho ba naman isang napakarahas na pagpaparatang iyan? Hindi. Kaya ko nalalaman sapagka't ang mga ulat na dumarating sa amin, hindi totoo. Bakit ho hindi naging totoo?

    Hindi sapagka't ang kapatid ang nagkamali kundi ang mga manggagawa ang siyang bumabago ng ulat para ilihis ang paniniwala ng pangangasiwa.

    Eh iyon ho bang mga tagapamahala nalalaman iyan? Nalalaman iyan ng karamihan. Pero nagkaisa ang mga manggagawa sa loob ng iglesia

    para linlangin at dayain ang pangangasiwa sa layunin nilang gumanda, kuminis ang bagay na marumi at ang bagay na hindi matuwid.

    Pero napakasama naman na ito palang mga tinustusang ito, ito pala naninira sa iglesia. NAPAKAGAGONG pangangasiwa, na gumagastos ka para sa maninira.

    Pero gusto kong masaktan kayo. Gusto ko na higit pa sa masaktan. Kung maaari ko lang DAGUKAN ang iba ay gagawin ko para maging matindi sa kaniya...

    Yung ibang mga kalihim sa probinsya, talagang wala eh, hindi abot ng kanilang kapasidad. Lalo na sa mga liblib na lugar, papaano makagagawa ng form 'yun?

    Kayong (Eh yong) manggagawa ngayon, inaasahan ko na kapatid, heto, mali ito, bakit ka mag-uulat ng hindi totoo? masama iyan.

    Eh hindi, yung kapatid mag-uulat ng totoo. Baguhin mo iyan! Eh ito ho ang nasa tuntunin. Ah, anong nasa tuntunin?

    Akin na iyan, pag hindi SUSUNTUKIN KITA! Iyan ang manggagawa natin ngayon. MANLULUPIG! MANINIKIL NG KAPATID.

    Kaya ang iglesia'y naghihimagsik laban sa manggagawa sa nakikita nilang KATIWALIAN AT KATAMPALASANAN na hindi nila inaasahang mangyari.

    Ano ang sulat sa akin ng isang kapatid? Baka gusto ninyong ipabasa ko sa inyo. Hanggang ngayon wala pa po akong nakikitang MATINO na manggagawa sa kasaysayan ng buhay ko, LAHAT ho puro TIWALI. Masakit na salita.

    NASAKTAN AKO... sapagka't ako'y manggagawa rin. Pero hindi ko masita yung kapatid sapagka't alam kong nagsasabi siya, kung hindi man buong-buo na katotohanan eh NAGSASALITA SIYA NG TOTOO.

    Wala nang nagkaroon ng takot sa Dios na kahit isa para tumayo at manindigan sa panig ng katuwiran. LAHAT MANLULUPIG na ng katuwiran.

    Bakit? SUWELDO ang hinahanap, yung TULONG niya, yung BAHAY niya, yung KASAGANAAN niya, siguro, ang TINATAMASA niya pero ang iglesia ay ayaw na niyang pagsilbihan ng totoo.

    Pero isipin ninyo, dumadami tuloy ang ating form. Nagagalit kayo sa opisina. Pati mga taga-opisina kinakalaban ng ibang mga manggagawa. Kapag nag-uulat sa akin, nagagalit. Nasaan ninyo gusto... Papaano ang ating gagawin sa iglesia?

    Kayo ang maghahari sa iglesia? Hindi. TAMAAN KAYO NG KIDLAT AT KULOG bago mangyari iyan. (Kung) Kaya sabi ko sa Dios, napakarami ho namang dapat BAHAING MANGGAGAWA, bakit hindi mo siyang binaha?

    PARA MALIPOL ang mga TAMPALASANG taong ito. Nadaig pa ang kasalanan ni Judas, iisang maestro ang ipinagkanulo. Iisa ang nagkanulo sa panahon ni Kristo pero NGAYON LAHAT NG MANGGAGAWA nagkakaisa ipagkanulo Dios

    Te' kayo, tingnan ninyo, mga kapatid, iyan ang tagapamahala sa Visayas at Mindanao. Nagpalitan tayo ng mga matatagal na sa pamamahala. Eh isa-isa, lumalapit sa akin,

    dumadaing sa akin. Kapatid, mayroon ho akong problema. Ano? Yun hong nakatala sa ating sa senso na mga pangalan ng kapatid, eh hindi ko naman ho makita (dito) ngayon sa aking destino.

    Ano kako ang ibig mong sabihin? Eh ang numero ho eh napakalaki pero sa katotohanan ho'y wala yung tao. Ang Camarines, este ang Sorsogon,

    hinihiling sa akin na alisin sa talaan ang kulang-kulang na apatnaraang tao eh kakaunti lang naman ang kapatid sa Sorsogon.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Bakit? Tinignan ko sa ulat ang nakaulat na malamig eh mahigit lang isandaan. Pero ang aalisin eh apatnaraan.

    Eh bakit, ano ho ba ang ginawa nung mga dating naroon? Aba'y e di binabago ulat. Pinakikinis para huwag mapagalitan.

    Samakamatuwid eh malaman, ang sinasanggalang iyong sarili, hindi ang kapakanan ng iglesia. Eh iyon ho ba'y sa Sorsogon lang? Laganap iyan kung saan-saan. Maski sa Maynila,

    ANG MGA MANGGAGAWA RITO'Y MAGDARAYA. Sasabihin sa iyo, dinoktrinahan ko iyan. Hindi naman. Sasabihin sa iyo, (nabautismu...) iyan ho'y nasubok sa pagsamba, pero hindi totoo. Eh bakit?

    Nakita sa matatandang ministro, nakita sa matatandang manggagawa na iyon pala ang paraan para siya ay bumuti sa paningin ng pangangasiwa.

    Sila ang nagsasanggalang ngayon sa kapakanan! Pero hanggang kailan tatagal ang iglesia'y INAAWAY ng mga MANGGAGAWA, BINABABAG,

    MINUMURA, NILALAIT at PINIPILIT NA KAYO ANG GUMAWA NG LIKO? Saan kayo nakakita ng manggagawa, sa halip na siyang magtindig sa nakalugmok.

    Yung nakatayo ang ilulugmok para lamang gumanda ang kanyang sarili. Eh kung dito sa Maynila nangyayari iyon eh, eh di lalo na sa probinsya,

    lalo na sa malalayong lugar. Ay, tingnan ninyo sa Mindanao at sa Bisaya ngayon eh, at sa lahat ng mga... eh iba, mabibigla, mababagong bigla

    ang senso ng iglesia. Ano ang dahilan? Wala pala yung mga kapatid na iyon, sinasabi lang na naroon. Sino ho ang may gawa niyan? Yung

    magdarayang manggagawa. Hindi iyong kapatid. Yung kapatid, magkamali man, eh hindi sinadya. YUNG MINISTRO, SINASADYA.

    Tumawag ako ng pulong ng mga pamunuan sa Maynila para sabihin: Mga kapatid, tumulong kayo sa akin. Ayokong mamatay ang manggagawa; ang gusto ko ay

    pagtulong-tulungan nating sila'y buhayin, Sabihin n'yo sa akin kung ano ang ating maitutulong. Aba'y hindi ang sinabi sa akin kung ano ang maitutulong.

    Ang sinabi sa akin kung anu-anong KATIWALIAN. Ang sabi sa akin nung isa; Kapatid, tama ho ba na hindi ho itinuturo outline? Tuwing mamimili ho ng tatlong talata, tatanungin, o ano, naiintindihan mo ba iyan? Tama ho ba kapatid, bungkos-bungkos na mga katibayan, siya pumipirma,

    PINAPALSIKA ho niya pirma ng mga kinauukulang kalihim at mga katiwala ng gawain? Pinigil ko. Ni hindi ko itinanong sino gumagawa niyan.

    Bakit? alam kong ang manggagawa sa Maynila, Mawawalan ng dangal kapag nalaman ng lahat, siya pala'y MAGNANAKAW at TAMPALASAN.

    Maski saan ka bumaling eh, wala kang makikitang liwanag. Bakit? Kumalat, lumalaganap iyang espiritung iyan na DAYAIN ANG ULAT, dayain ang ulat, LINLANGIN ANG PANGANGASIWA.

    Sayang ang papel. Katakut-takot ang nagagastos natin. Binabayaran natin ang mga empleyado sa opisina, hindi pala totoo ang sinisiyasat nila

    Dito ba magwawakas ang kamatayan ng mga ito? Sa tinagal-tagal ho ba ng iyong pagpapakasakit at pagpapakahirap,

    at iyon ang sugo sa huling araw ay dito ba lamang ba matatapos ang kanilang buhay at takbuhin?

    Kundi ang manggagawa ang siyang lumulupig sa mga kapatid na gustong manindigan, tinatakot. Kaya nagkaroon tuloy ng paniniwala:

    Ang pinakamasamang tao ang mag-ulat. Ang pinakamasamang tao ang mag-ulat. Ang mabuti ang tahimik. Ang mabuti ang kunsintidor.

    Ang mabuti ang tiwali. Kaya hindi ako nagtataka, mga kapatid, kung bakit ang Dios pagod na pagod ng katatatag, talikod naman ng talikod ang tao.

    Ang tuntunin niya ang tinatalikuran. Ngayon, nagsasanay na naman ang mga manggagawa talikuran ang tuntunin!

    Pero sa ginagawa natin ngayon, sa ginagawa ng karamihang mga manggagawa kung hindi man lahat, anong ehemplo ang ipakikita sa may tungkulin?

    Papaano ko ngayon, papaano natin kokontrahin ang: Mga may tungkulin, magtapat kayo.

    Sasabihin ng may tungkulin: Ikaw ang salbahe eh. Lumilikom ka ng abuloy, wala namang pahintulot.

    Ikaw ang nagsabi sa amin na huwag na kaming magsusumbong. Papaano kami magtatapat eh ikaw ang gumagawa ng

    katiwalian? Papaano tayo makakalikha ng mabubuting may tungkulin? Papaano? Kung ganyan ang ating ipamumukha

    sa mga kapatid natin? Wala na kayong bibig diyan. Isipin ninyo sa Agusan, ilang beses, likom ng likom ng abuloy.

    ReplyDelete
  60. KEY POINTS:

    1.KASANGKAPAN NG DIABLO (Maraming manggagawa natin, halos LAHAT ganyan)
    2.ang mga manggagawa ang siyang bumabago ng ulat para ilihis ang paniniwala ng pangangasiwa.
    3.NAPAKAGAGONG pangangasiwa, na gumagastos ka para sa maninira.
    4.Kung maaari ko lang DAGUKAN ang iba ay gagawin ko para maging matindi sa kaniya...
    5.SUSUNTUKIN KITA! Iyan ang manggagawa natin ngayon. MANLULUPIG! MANINIKIL NG KAPATID.
    6.KATIWALIAN AT KATAMPALASANAN
    7.Hanggang ngayon wala pa po akong nakikitang MATINO na manggagawa sa kasaysayan ng buhay ko,
    8.NAGSASALITA SIYA NG TOTOO.
    9.Wala nang nagkaroon ng takot sa Dios na kahit isa.
    10.LAHAT MANLULUPIG na ng katuwiran.
    11. SUWELDO ang hinahanap.
    12.yung TULONG niya
    13.yung BAHAY niya
    14.yung KASAGANAAN niya
    15.ang TINATAMASA niya
    16.TAMAAN KAYO NG KIDLAT AT KULOG
    17. Kaya sabi ko sa Dios, napakarami ho namang dapat BAHAING MANGGAGAWA, bakit hindi mo siyang binaha?
    18.PARA MALIPOL ang mga TAMPALASANG taong ito.
    19.Nadaig pa ang kasalanan ni Judas, iisang maestro ang ipinagkanulo.
    20.NGAYON LAHAT NG MANGGAGAWA nagkakaisa ipagkanulo Dios.
    21. Aba'y e di binabago ulat. Pinakikinis para huwag mapagalitan.
    22.Laganap iyan kung saan-saan.
    23.ANG MGA MANGGAGAWA RITO'Y MAGDARAYA.
    24.Nakita sa matatandang ministro, nakita sa matatandang manggagawa.
    25.MINUMURA, NILALAIT at PINIPILIT NA KAYO ANG GUMAWA NG LIKO.
    26.Yung nakatayo ang ilulugmok para lamang gumanda ang kanyang sarili.
    27. kung anu-anong KATIWALIAN.
    28.MAGNANAKAW at TAMPALASAN.
    29.kunsintidor.
    30.lumulupig sa mga kapatid
    31.Lumilikom ka ng abuloy, wala namang pahintulot.
    32.likom ng likom ng abuloy.

    Yan po ang katangian at komento ni Manalo sa kanyang One true Church(kuno).

    hekhekhek.. take note puno po nila may sabi nyan, hindi imbento yan.. hekehek

    puro paninira sa Santa Iglesia.. pero nagbubulagbulagan sa basura ng bakuran nila.. hekhek..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hahaha... CAUGHT ON CAM SI ERAÑO MANALO.. walang kawala. Ang kanilang mga MINISTRO ay mga MANDARAYA at TALAMPASAN.. MANLULUPIG....

      Get that in your thick skulls INCorporated church.

      Delete
  61. @Eric Buelva

    Rosita was disowned by her parents and relatives and so she has nowhere to go. Was she married to a die hard INC husband or not? When did she became a deaconess, was it before she made a " retraction" or before?

    You asked "If you are one of her children will you still stay in the church if the leader of this church rape your mother?"

    Can you honestly say the children were informed that their mother was sued of libel by the rapist "sugo" Felix, and she was exonerated on the basis that she was indeed raped by the rapist sugo?
    Wasnt this event kept secret for decades and was re-exposed only recently by ADD?
    Rosita simply surrendered to her fate,
    We all know that the rapist "sugo" was vomiting blood in this stage of his life and she knew that God was punishing him for the evil he has done.

    You wrote..
    "My question is, why did the court of appeals did not consider the affidavit of retraction of Mrs. Trillanes? "

    How can the court consider an affidavit of retraction made 10 YEARS (ikapo ng siglo/tenth of a century) AFTER the court affirmed that he was a rapist?
    You're a typical misinformed INC , I pity you for being continuously deceived by Drein and his ilk.

    What happened to the rapist sugo? He died a painful death caused by stomach disease similar to this.

    job 20:
    11 His bones are full of the sin of his youth,
    which shall lie down with him in the dust.
    12 Though wickedness be sweet in his mouth,
    though he hide it under his tongue;
    13 Though he spare it, and forsake it not;
    but keep it still within his mouth:
    14 Yet his meat in his bowels is turned,
    it is the gall of asps within him.
    15 He hath swallowed down riches,
    and he shall vomit them up again: God shall cast them out of his belly.

    Why? Because God struck him.
    2 Chronicles 21:11
    15 You will be struck with a painful stomach disease and suffer until you die.
    In short the rapist sugos stomach BURST.
    You dont believe it?, search for yourself how the rapist sugo died.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1 John 4:1
    Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Mga tanong ng isang Kulto ni Manalo member:

    "If you are one of her (Rosita Trillanes) children will you still stay in the church if the leader of this church (INC) rape your mother? YES or NO"

    Answer:

    Pwedeng oo at pwedeng hindi! Kasi pwedeng naman sabihin na ang mga anak sa labas ni Manalo ay inosente sa pangrarape at panghahalay ng tatay nilang si Felix Manalo sa kaawa-awa at kalunos-lunos na sinapit ng kanilang mga nanay! Di rin natin makakaila na may makukuha din naman silang salapi at benepisyo sa kanilang ama sapagkat RIGHT at PRIBILEHIYO nila yun.

    Pwede rin namang piliin nila na hindi umanib sa kulto ni Manalo at humingi na lang ng suporta.

    E kung ikaw naman ang tatanungin. Kung bunga ka ng PANGHAHALAY o RAPE, sasama ka ba sa ama mong nangrape sa nanay mo? OO o hindi? Ikaw lang din ang makakasagot diyan! Nasa iyo yan!

    "Di mo pa rin sinasagot ng ayon sa itinatanong ang tanong ko:

    Kaya mo bang patunayan ang mga akusasyon mo na rapist si Ka Felix Manalo na kaharap ang ministro namin? O naduduwag ka na humarap sa ministro namin dahil sa alam mo na naninira ka lang at kailanman ay di mo kayang patunayan ng harapan ang akusasyon mo?"

    HAHAHAHA! IBINASURA ng court of appeals ang kaso ni Felix Manalo laban kay Rosita Trillianes. PINATUNAYAN MISMO ni Rosita na makatotohanan ang mga paratang niya KASI NGA SA KANYA NANGYARI MISMO ANG MGA YUN! Lumabas na HINDI LIBEL at MAY KATOTOHANAN ang mga paratang ni Rosita kay Felix Manalo. Ano ba ang mga paratang? Ang mga paratang na pinagmalupitan siya at hinalay ng maraming beses ni Felix Manalo! Public knowledge at pubic record yan!

    O ayan nasagot na! Tambling na kayo ng sabay ng ministro mong polpol!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Windang na nga sila sa pagtatanggol sa kanilang bagong "cristo" na si Felix Manalo et al. habang niyuyurakan nila si Cristo!!!!

      A man of low morals daw si Felix sabi Court of Appeals.

      Delete
  63. this is really sad. I'm here on the internet trying to look for an image of ka felix y manalo. and this is what i found.
    it's saddening because i understand the catholic and other religions and how they do not like the church. and how INC members try to lead people out of those churches. but people here. they fight about every single little detail. from spelling mistakes to who said what etc etc.

    I hate seeing these things. humans will always be humans. people make mistakes. we commit sin. INC OR NOT. if you judge the church purely based on the members, then you are already wrong. because it's not about the people IN IT. it's the teachings being taught, WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS. PEOPLE WILL DRINK, SMOKE WATEVER, EAT DINUGUAN OR EVEN HAVE SPELLING MISTAKES! HUMANS ARE HUMANS. I COMMIT SIN. DONT YOU? I mean, saying those hurtful words and being not so humble is already a sin.

    stop with this nonesense. if you are going to defend your church, do it by the bible. as in with humility and love. not with heinous words and such an angry and unremorseful heart. and this goes for both catholic and INC members.

    by the way, INC members are not forced to do anything. what the administration say are only guides. You get 'tiwalag' because you have done something wrong. and it's not forever either. If you really have faith, no one will stop you from coming back to the chruch.

    love not hate,
    proud member of the church of christ (iglesia ni cristo)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your pontification but we do not hate them... we hate their LIES.. we do not attack personalities as what these INC members do.. we defend and attack their LIES and expose the truth.

      Is that wrong?

      Delete
    2. It is not wrong to hate lies. Caryy on Cath. Def. we're with you all the way.

      Delete
  64. "this is really sad. I'm here on the internet trying to look for an image of ka felix y manalo.
    and this is what i found.
    it's saddening because i understand the catholic and other religions and how they do not like the church."....
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Your understanding of Catholic and other religions came from your minister and I assure you it is biased against Catholics and I assure you that by just reading your old Pasugo magazine you will be enlightened that its the other way around, that INC HATES Catholics and you will be nauseated by what they have written against Catholic and other religion.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "and how INC members try to lead people out of those churches. but people here. they fight about every single little detail. from spelling mistakes to who said what etc etc."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    The manner in which they try to lead people into your corporation is only one of the many things Catholics are trying to explain here to enlighten readers. Most of the those who criticize spelling mistakes are INC members due to weak foundations of their teachings.
    -------------------------------------------------------------
    "I hate seeing these things. humans will always be humans. people make mistakes. we commit sin. INC OR NOT. if you judge the church purely based on the members, then you are already wrong. because it's not about the people IN IT. it's the teachings being taught, WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS. PEOPLE WILL DRINK, SMOKE WATEVER, EAT DINUGUAN OR EVEN HAVE SPELLING MISTAKES! HUMANS ARE HUMANS. I COMMIT SIN. DONT YOU? I mean, saying those hurtful words and being not so humble is already a sin."
    ---------------------------------------------------
    Do not hate when you see things contrary to what your minister have brainwashed into your system instead read the bible and if the Holy Spirit see the quest in your heart who knows you may be able to escape this corporation owned by Manalo's.
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    "stop with this nonesense. if you are going to defend your church, do it by the bible. as in with humility and love. not with heinous words and such an angry and unremorseful heart. and this goes for both catholic and INC members."
    --------------------------------------------------------------
    You can start it by telling your family member to read the bible and not the Pasugo.
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    "by the way, INC members are not forced to do anything. what the administration say are only guides. You get 'tiwalag' because you have done something wrong. and it's not forever either. If you really have faith, no one will stop you from coming back to the chruch."
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hundreds of nanlalamig like me becomes tiwalag then coming to your senses is doing something wrong to you?
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    "love not hate,
    proud member of the church of christ (iglesia ni cristo)"
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Its not a church, it is a corporation owned by the manalos, you can research it yourself and we are sorry for you are one of the many who are deceived and who have resigned to their fate like Rosita Trillanes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ang Diyos lang ang makakapagsabi kung sino ang ililigtas Niya at hindi kung sino man

      Delete
    2. Ibig sabihin eh FELIX MANALO is playing the role of God...

      Therefore FYM is a fake one tryiing to portray himself as judge over mankind...

      Delete
  65. Kung ang Simbahang katolika ay demonyo raw ang nag tatag. ang iglesia Ng Culto Rapist mamatay tao ang sugo. gasing mga mang mang. walang man loloko kung walang mag papaloko!

    ReplyDelete
  66. It seems that there won’t be any INC members to comment on said article so, I will take the responsibility. I understand the situation, yes, but I don’t have such diverse knowledge about law. I am just a 1st year high school student after all.

    Re: Cath Def –
    PASUGO Hulyo 1965, p. 12:
    “Parehong-pareho ang espiritu ni Cristo sa diwa ni Kapatid na Felix Manalo sa pamamaraan ng pagdadala ng tungkuling tinanggap sa Dios."
    You misinterpreted it haven’t you? This is what it really means:

    The spirit of Christ has something in common with the “diwa” of Bro. FYM. I am disappointed that you do not know how ‘diwa’ was used and what it means. Diwa was used synonymously to the ‘SENSE’ as of the sense Bro. FYM uses to propagate the Scriptures; it didn’t imply that they really are the same. (-_-)

    PASUGO Mayo 1964, p. 1
    “Inihandog ng Dios ang kanyang sarili sa kanyang huling sugo upang dumiyos sa kanya. Samakatuwid, ang tanging may Dios na huling araw na ito'y ang huling sugo -- si Kapatid na Felix Manalo."

    I can’t really explain it by myself but, have you even seen another PASUGO (I am referring to the new ones)? It was dated in 1964, an old one, and yet you force us (the INC’s) to read these even though we have new and updated ones? We can also reform you know? I bet you don’t.

    You Catholic Defenders bashed my dear brethrens too much since we became silent and yet you call us trash? We became silent because we chose not to, but it really is hard having these informations digested by others (those who are not members).

    I am no really sure if Bro. FYM really did those but if he did, of course he can change too! He is also human, right?

    To those manggagawa’s who do such immoral things, those actually don’t concern us. It concerns you, your entirety actually. It’s up to you if ever you lie or do misdeeds. It’s all up to you. Just don’t get caught, they say.

    We aren’t forcing you actually to “Come, be an INC member” or “You need to have some ‘tungkulin’ in the Church!” All we have are ‘initiative works’ not some ‘forced works’ and something like ‘to do whatever you want to do’. If ever a diakono or a diakonessa notices that you are distancing yourself from God, of course they will visit you and ask “why?” If you don’t like to serve God, then you will be defected. That is how we really work, Catholics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh for goodness sake!! go wash your behind, v_gio 123. your pamper stinks up this place.

      Delete
  67. Why do INC members loves to discriminate and tell bad things about Catholic? I am studying at a University where INC religion is dominant and we are ALL required to attend all their activities :( They are threatening us that we can have low grades if we don't attend. They even call Catholics devil. Racists.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ganyan ang mga insecure na inaralan ng pekeng sugo. May paraan bang umalis ka sa university nilang ayaw magturo ng Philosophy?

      Delete
  68. Great responses here Ephesians 5:11. Drein's and companies' lies are trapped and exposed. Thanks for the clear presentations of truth Catholic Defenders and brothers and sisters. Keep up the good work! God bless us all!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the prayers Mannix... God bless you too.

      Delete

Comments are moderated by the blog owner.

Thank you and God bless you.

My Blog List

My Calendar

No to RH Bill

No to RH Bill
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...