Celdran found guilty in ‘Damaso’

[trollolol]

whatever makes your day. I know how many I asked, the manner on how I asked, and what response I got.
Feel free to continue your speculation. I stated my point.

Respect is EARNED, not GIVEN. Nuff said.
And for me, the "Church" has not earned it. Not 1 percent of it.

Priests are always open with regards to questions about dogma as far as I've seen/heard. It's never a problem for me or for most people. Only one thing could explain the manner of their response to you and you explain it quite well.

Seems like you did not earn their respect. Try to earn it first.

bro how sure are you nga nag shagit2x cia dd2 as we all know we are just getting second rate information and sometimes exaggerated pa tawon...

Many church goers are witness to his disrespect and it has been documented through video and some pics. Don't tell you me you do not know this? LOL

The court found it sufficient enough to convict him beyond reasonable doubt which mind you is the same as saying he did it 99.9%.

[reptoid]

Politics involves debate and conflicting opinions. If the church insists of politicizing itself then it is the church which has changed the nature of the pulpit/congregation relationship. Are these holy men preaching or dictating?

[TheSunKing]

Politics involves debate and conflicting opinions. If the church insists of politicizing itself then it is the church which has changed the nature of the pulpit/congregation relationship. Are these holy men preaching or dictating?

Irrelevant bro.


As far as I know, he is not convicted for what he believed in. He was convicted for an irresponsible behavior which is against the law.


He has all the right to protest. BUT di jud ta pwede ka patuyang sa atong gibati, naa jud PROPER VENUE for such debates, and it is the CONGRESS or SENATE, definitely not the Church which is holding a service irrelevant to what he is protesting about.


If during that event the homily discussed something about RH, then maybe he can voice out his opinion. But wala man pud.


Just because you disagree with me does not give you the right to DISTURB me.




================================================== =====


Now, let me ask you (wala pa pud ni-answer ani sa mga supporters ni Carlos Celdran):

IF I disrupt the mass and SILENTLY wave a placard with the words "WHORE" in the middle of the mass, in front of the priest and the congregation, at the funeral of your mother, OK ra nimo?


Like others here, I'm sure you would not be offended, because Im expressing my freedom. Right?

Will you also protect my "right" to disturb the funeral the way you protect Carlos Celdran?

[reptoid]

^ It's entirely relevant. He was convicted of offending religious feelings, however by engaging in politics the church has arguably changed the venue from a place of worship to something completely different. What Celdran did was crass and I don't condone his methods, but the church has IMO also abused the notion of sanctity. There are lessons to be learned here.

[bb2]

It is the Church's duty to evangelize and "guide" It's flock. That includes using every means in their disposal to influence towards their teachings. 90% of all Religions will be the same. If they did not use their influence they would not be following their God's calling. It would be disappointment not to.

The Separation of Church and State is a POLITICAL doctrine (not a theological one) posed by the State on itself so no one religion will be favored.

Celdran and anyone here can always leave their Catholic religion if they don't agree with the CBCP or write the Vatican expressing why they don't agree with the CBCP so that the Holy See can direct them to change.

Celdran had his choice go to jail or go to hell. He should man up and face the consequences of his action. He dressed up like Rizal, a man who was willing to die for his conviction. Celdran however wants his internet friends to petition to get him off a punishment which can actually be reduced to probation, if he has a good lawyer.

[balipseyev]

they don't have to....
they have millions of followers to do that....

pero maayo pang mga sinugo sa mga akbayan/bayan muna/etc. kay sakto pas bayad ug kaon....
ang mga followers sa simbahan, sariling sikap tawn....

Gipasaligan man sad sila sa Simbahan na malangit sila...

[psyche54]

Gipasaligan man sad sila sa Simbahan na malangit sila...

Hmm.

mas grabeh ug pasalig ang uban to the extent nga ipang mute, ipang ban na diri sa istorya ang uban!

The catholic church never assured their followers nga siguro na ang kaluwasan. It is your deeds that would do justice after this life. Giunsa nimo pagpuyo aning kalibutana, mao nay magmatter, dili ang imong pagkamyembro sa usa ka secta...

Again this is an off-topic and mods can omit this if they want to...

[Romeojin]

I haven't received an ounce of respect from Catholic priests. Not once. Instead of answering my questions, which I asked in the most polite manner possible, they call me a heretic. I just had questions about the Cruxifiction which I wanted clarified, and instead of answering them, I was branded a heretic. I stopped following the "Church" then because of that. Note that this is not limited to just 1 priest, but all of whom I asked, 10 of them in fact. Why should I start respecting them?

Para maklaro lang kung unsa ug g.unsa nku cla ug pangutana, mao ni xa. Why did God the Father allow his only Son to be crucified? My own father would not even forgive anyone who would hurt us his children. Why is God any different, if we were made in his image?

Sa ako lang opinion, respect is earned, not given. And I believe it works both ways.

OT:

You went into trouble asking 10 priests, when all you need to do is to google the answers and yet the answer to your question is found on a millennium aged book called the Holy Bible

Im also curious on your methodology, it seems anyone who undergone Christian theology can easily answer your query.

[Romeojin]

Separation of Church and State

1. Its only for the state not the other way around.

2. It was made to protect the Church or religion, so no religion will be favored and so that other religion/Church wont be eradicated and also so that we wont end up like those Islamic states etc.

3. Constitutionally, the Catholic Church in this case has the right to redress grievances. and law such as "The Public Assembly Act of 1985" only strengthen their position. If you think "Separation of Church and State" means the Church has no right to interfere on State affair then you are dead wrong. Remember everyone is a constituent.

4. If the "separation of Church and state" is superior and an argument ender to stop Catholic from interfering the State... how come we never heard a pro RH proponents or lawmakers invoke such? because they know better

5. Plus why bother making laws regarding religion like what Celdran violated? if we follow that twisted definition of separation of Church and State?


And please do me a favor, if you see an istoryan who does not have a slightest of clue on what's Separation of Church and State. Please repost this

[ed168III]

laws are laws