CBCP...going too far?

[eax]

so when they tell us that this congressmen are going to far, pina-agi sa ilang style nga buhaton bsan onsa para lng mapasa ang con-ass... which they see as immoral... does it make them going too far? Maau gani karon ra ni sila ni lihok... kng sa pag July pa ni... hagbay ra nawala ang inyong pinalanggang bakakong GMA.

Do you think ang church dili mamakak. Unsa diay ilang gibuhat sa katong pari nag-harass sa mga Abellana students?

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/ceb...ticle_id=39882

Unsa diay pag-tuo pud nimo sa church, pirmi lang sila sakto?

[eax]

I agree. The religious leaders calling for "character change" should be the ones leading the way by "changing their character" of meddling in political and government affairs. They are constantly sticking their noses where they shouldn't.

They should practice what they preach and start giving respect to the constitutional provision on the separation of church and state.

Sakto pud na mag-chacha pud sila. Ilang i-chacha kay kanang mga pari kay maka-minyo na. Mao bitaw na ang hinungdan ngano daghan kaayo mga pari na accused of sexual molestation especially sa young boys.

[INFRACTION]

ngano ni enter

[FK]

Mao man gyud na ang definition sa separation of the church and the state. ang pari dili mo apil sa politics. same pud sa politiko dili pud mo apil sa church.

kanos-a man ni apil2x ang pari sa politics bai? naa bay active nga pari nga naghimo og pamalaud og nag serve sa government? kng mao na ang definition nga mag ija2x sila... so ang balaud sa gobyerno wala labot sa church... og ang balaod sa church wala epek sa gobyerno. lahi imo pagsabot sa separation sa state of church nga concept bai.

like sa previous post nako thats why dili ta ma-asenso kay naa ta mga bala-ud babagan man pud sa simbahan kay maka-sala kuno.

kanos-a ba jud bai nga wala na implement ang balaud kay gi veto sa mga pari? death penalty na dayon man lagi?

Try for example kanang family planning, thats why overpopulated na kaayo ta diri kay tungod ana nila.

mao ba? sure ka na overpopulated ta tungod kay ang mga taw ni tuo sa mga pari? sayop ka bai... kay kng ni tuo pa na sila sa pari... mo tuo na sila sa ingon sa pari nga mag control.... ang mga taw dili mo gamit og contraception kay wala daw lami. i-excommunicate ba sa simbahan ang mga taw nga mag gamit og contraception?

If they are voicing their opinion, they should talk on their civilian clothes not on their priest clothes (or what it call it). If you the newspaper last year or two years ago, naa usa parish nag-walk ang mga tawo kay nag-sermon man ang pari ug politics.

onsa man difference bai kng mag sul-ob sila og priest clothes og mag civilian? naa ba?

O.T.

Do you think ang church dili mamakak. Unsa diay ilang gibuhat sa katong pari nag-harass sa mga Abellana students?

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/ceb...ticle_id=39882

Unsa diay pag-tuo pud nimo sa church, pirmi lang sila sakto?

i believe nga pwede sab masayop ang mga pari... they are mere mortals like us... gitago-an d i sa mga pari ang kato gi pasanginlan nga ng harass? kng naa sakto ebidensiya against sa pari... di ikiha.

[eax]

onsa man difference bai kng mag sul-ob sila og priest clothes og mag civilian? naa ba?

Correct me if im wrong. Naay difference, kung magsul-ob ka ug priest clothes your speaking in behalf sa church with or without their consent. Unlike kung mag-civilian clothes, I think he is speaking in behalf for himself. For example just like a school uniform, kung mo-adto mo ug usa ka inter-school competition mag-wear gyud mo ug school uniform para i-represent ninyo ang inyong school. Just like that analogy, when they wear a priest clothes they just representing the church.

O.T.i believe nga pwede sab masayop ang mga pari... they are mere mortals like us... gitago-an d i sa mga pari ang kato gi pasanginlan nga ng harass? kng naa sakto ebidensiya against sa pari... di ikiha.

O.T. Ila naman gi-submit sa NBI kay based on the link, dili man mo-support si cardinal vidal. Human unsuccesful man ang ilang dialogue between both camps. I think when they submit it to the NBI, i-treat na ang case as a normal criminal offense kana dako na ang iyang punishment. Based sa mga previous newspaper clippings, mo-forgive unta ang mga 14 students kung mag-public apology ang pari. Then wala man niya gibuhat.

Your right masayop pud sila, thats why dili sila mag-hilabot sa politcal affairs. Para nako ang simbahan gani, mas-hugaw pa sa politics. Lastly, unsa man ang gi-sulti sa ginoo na katong bitayon or patyon si Mary Magadelene.

[FK]

Correct me if im wrong. Naay difference, kung magsul-ob ka ug priest clothes your speaking in behalf sa church with or without their consent. Unlike kung mag-civilian clothes, I think he is speaking in behalf for himself. For example just like a school uniform, kung mo-adto mo ug usa ka inter-school competition mag-wear gyud mo ug school uniform para i-represent ninyo ang inyong school. Just like that analogy, when they wear a priest clothes they just representing the church.

ok... point taken. but magsul-ob ba jud sila sa ila priest clothes kng mo issue sila og comment re: politics? kay usually interviewhon na sila sa media after sa misa, which i think wala na sila ga sulti in behalf sa simbahan. Pero ibutang nato nga ni issue sila og statement regarding sa stand sa simbahan... panghilabot na ba gud na sa pang gobyerno? Kng ang INC mo issue og statement nga ni support sila ni GMA og kang kinsa pa na dha? panghilabot ba na sa gobyerno?

Your right masayop pud sila, thats why dili sila mag-hilabot sa politcal affairs. Para nako ang simbahan gani, mas-hugaw pa sa politics. Lastly, unsa man ang gi-sulti sa ginoo na katong bitayon or patyon si Mary Magadelene.

ambot bai kng kinsa ang mas hugaw... pero ako tan-awon kay dili man kinsa ang mas hugaw... pero onsa ang ila nabuhat nga sayop. Imo pasabot bai kana kng kinsa walay sala maoy una mo labay sa bato? ikaw bai ni labay man ka og accusation sa mga pari... wala kay sala?

[eax]

Kng ang INC mo issue og statement nga ni support sila ni GMA og kang kinsa pa na dha? panghilabot ba na sa gobyerno?

Dili man na gobyerno ilang gi-endorse. Its a politician man. I think lahi man na ang politician ug government. Maayo unta nag-endorse sila ug government program or laws.

kay usually interviewhon na sila sa media after sa misa, which i think wala na sila ga sulti in behalf sa simbahan. Pero ibutang nato nga ni issue sila og statement regarding sa stand sa simbahan... panghilabot na ba gud na sa pang gobyerno?

Mao gani akong gi-sulti sa previous post, with or without the consent sa church. But ang overall kay nag-wear man na sila ug priest clothes which means they representing in behalf sa Church. Mura ba ug naa kay immunity. Nanghilabot man na kung nag-issue ka ug usa ka statement.

ambot bai kng kinsa ang mas hugaw... pero ako tan-awon kay dili man kinsa ang mas hugaw... pero onsa ang ila nabuhat nga sayop.

Unsa diay na ang ilang gibuhat sa katong pari na nag-harass sa mga Abellana students. Mao gani ang akong gi-sulti, maayo unta wala na silay mga sala before sila magbuhat ug mga in-ana.

[nocram]

Sakto pud na mag-chacha pud sila. Ilang i-chacha kay kanang mga pari kay maka-minyo na. Mao bitaw na ang hinungdan ngano daghan kaayo mga pari na accused of sexual molestation especially sa young boys.

unsa pa minyuon ug mga young boys

[FK]

Dili man na gobyerno ilang gi-endorse. Its a politician man. I think lahi man na ang politician ug government. Maayo unta nag-endorse sila ug government program or laws.

the politicians runs the government... in effect, pwede ka ma influential ana nga politician og posibling hatagan og pabor tungod sa utang na loob. so onsa man kalahi-an ana?

But ang overall kay nag-wear man na sila ug priest clothes which means they representing in behalf sa Church. Mura ba ug naa kay immunity. Nanghilabot man na kung nag-issue ka ug usa ka statement.

Is it the meaning of the priest clothes? or you are the one just giving meaning to it? Ngano tagaan man og immunity kng magsul-ob og sanina sa pari... dili na d i na sila ordinaryong pinoy?

Unsa diay na ang ilang gibuhat sa katong pari na nag-harass sa mga Abellana students. Mao gani ang akong gi-sulti, maayo unta wala na silay mga sala before sila magbuhat ug mga in-ana.

maau kaau ka mo sulti og "maayo unta wala na silay mga sala before sila magbuhat ug mga in-ana." pero kahibaw na ba ka tanan sa istorya bai? naa na ba kaso napasaka? Kng nakasala ang usa ka pari ani... sala ba ni sa tanan... sila ba tanan ga harass sa mga estudyante?

Merry Christmas sa d i.

[budmendz]

The bishops and naiveté

By Antonio J. Montalvan II
Inquirer
Last updated 10:30pm (Mla time) 12/24/2006

Published on page A13 of the December 25, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

READER FRANKY A. NOYAN OFFERED A RANGE of disparate reasons to explain the low turnout at the bishop’s Dec. 17 prayer rally at the Luneta. Another reader, Marvin Malabanan, writes of the “waning influence” of the Catholic Church as a “once-venerable institution.”

The minuscule crowd apparently wasn’t confined to the Luneta rally. The other rallies organized by some bishops in their respective provincial dioceses were not as well attended either. To add to Noyan’s list of possibilities, these are some of what I have picked up from various sources. Some of them are obviously meant as a warning to Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and to Jose de Venecia of rallies yet to come; but more importantly, they should serve as lessons that the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines can possibly learn from.

1. The bishops promised that the rallies would be apolitical. But days before the rally, many politicians had already sounded out their attendance. And even if they were not made to sit on stage, there they were in full view occupying front-row seats, unlike the rest of the Catholic hoi polloi and the students from Catholic schools, who were probably obliged to attend under pain of attendance checks.

2. Was it coincidence that those who came were all opposition politicians? A subtle way of the Church endorsing partisan personalities. The rally was not a unifier but a political divider, something that the Church must definitely avoid.

3. The Church has unwittingly drawn itself into the hypocrisy game of politicians. Jinggoy Estrada was there, even if his own father had also pushed for Charter change during his time, although in the guise of the more pleasant sounding name “Concord.” Or have we forgotten that?

4. Panfilo Lacson was also there, he who so rabidly talked against the Church by threatening to legalize artificial population measures if he were elected mayor of Manila. Is the Church playing convenience footsies?

5. Church vigilance from political opportunism? By all means, yes. Then, why were the political opportunists there?

6. The bishops had realized too late that their strategies had been upstaged by the consummate traditional politics of President Arroyo when she announced that she and her cabal were abandoning the constituent assembly. Now we know that it was just a ploy to keep the people away from Luneta.

7. Have the bishops suddenly become gullible to traditional politics, both of the GMA and opposition varieties? If the bishops have their gullible moments with GMA, then they can be as gullible to the opposition politicians who are as consummate (in political gimmickries) as GMA is. The principle, not the person. The sin, not the sinner.

8. Bishop Antonio Tobias’ exhortation to the soldiers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines to join the rallies simply left a bad taste in the mouth, as he did when he apologized to Joseph Estrada for the role the Church played in Erap’s ouster.

9. Does the “adventurist” Tobias speak for the CBCP, or even just for the Diocese of Novaliches? Is he still part of the Catholic hierarchy of Benedict XVI? He does not sound like he is.

10. Cory Aquino again and her saccharine views of democracy? Enough.

11. But who has ever thought, except perhaps some of the bishops, that Dinky Soliman is on the side of the truth? Until now she has not told us the truth that she wanted a Cabinet position in a Noli de Castro presidency.

12. Character change for all, yes. But remember, it should also cover erring clergy. So where does character change start?

13. Double standard. The Church incessantly denounces the politics of one while keeping a blind eye on the politics of the other.

14. People are just fed up with the endless debates. This is not the case of one being right over the other, because both sides are wrong. This is simply a case of politicians from the same ruling elite squabbling over the same spoils. The silence and non-attendance from the discerning public turned out to be a powerful voice. Is the Church listening?

15. Will Archbishop Angel Lagdameo be as valiant in denouncing an act of political dishonesty committed by Franklin Drilon? That is the problem when bishops forge ties with political personalities and identify with them.

16. Has the CBCP lost the much-vaunted teeth it had during the people power uprisings that ousted Marcos and Estrada? There are those who say it has not done enough this time, even if a legislative rape was going on in full view of television spectators. But then again, can the Church denounce a rapist as “more rapist” than another rapist? There is the dilemma.

17. Prayer rally? Why, many of our priests do not pray at all.

Clearly, it takes more to be a bishop.

Merry Christmas without the partisanship of dirty politics. A blessed Christmas with the politics of common good.

* * *

Comments to monta@cu-cdo.edu.ph


Copyright 2006 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.