What An Attitude of a Servant! (Luke 17:7-10 Attitude of a Servant)

Attitude of a Servant

But which of you having a servant ploughing, or feeding cattle, will say to him, when he is come from the field: Immediately go, sit down to meat: [8] And will not rather say to him: Make ready my supper, and gird thyself, and serve me, whilst I eat and drink, and afterwards thou shalt eat and drink? [9] Doth he thank that servant, for doing the things which he commanded him? [10] I think not. So you also, when you shall have done all these things that are commanded you, say: We are unprofitable servants; we have done that which we ought to do.

Jesus Christ gives his apostles a story giving them a right to be "masters" of a servant that He chose to be an example for them - even if it just a story - I believe there is a hidden humor in this Gospel - at least Lord Jesus let the apostles feel and experience how to be masters, to be masters even if it is just in a story made by the Lord.

"Who among you would say to your servant who has just come in from plowing or tending sheep in the field, 'Come here immediately and take your place at table'?

These words let the apostles imagine they are the masters. They were thinking that how lucky the servant if he will be treated just like that - even after the servant is surely exhausted or dead tired returning from plowing or tending sheep in the field which is a very tiring work to do - laborious in "bloody" terms.

Imagine the apostles’ reaction after hearing these words from the Lord. Surely you will think that the apostles will get angry to the servant Jesus Christ portrays to them - in a story.

"Feeling lucky, punk!", says the apostles to the servant - of the story.

But in reality, although it may seem that the Gospel do not show compassion, mercy, love, care, humane or brotherly love, nor warmth the master have toward his servant, actually it is really how a master treats his servant.

We must know the analogy - when the story applies to God as master and the apostles as His servants. That's how God will treat His servants. It may seem inhumane or "capitalistic", but that Gospel story shows how it is really to be a master, and how it is really to be a servant. Different from this world who some aspires to establish a communist ideology which will imaginary lead to brotherhood and equality.

Jesus Christ added, "Would he not rather say to him, 'Prepare something for me to eat. Put on your apron and wait on me while I eat and drink. You may eat and drink when I am finished'?

So humorously, the apostles who became masters of the servant had high hopes to be boastful, for Jesus Christ provided words for them that they will use as command to the servant - in the imaginary story.

Here, we see how a master treats his servant. The master commands. The servant has an obligation - to be obedient to the master and his command. The servant is still a servant of the master. He does what is commanded of him. He serves the

master even if his stomach is revolting against itself - even if he is dead tired from laborious work. He puts on the apron, that is, the working clothes that shows his servant hood and his readiness to do the commands demanded of him by the

master. He waits for the master. The servant is prepared and on standby as part of his servant hood. And after the master is finished from his eating and drinking, here goes the reward for his fidelity, faithfulness, and loyalty to the master and his

commands or master's words. He can eat and drink as commanded; the servant undeservingly receives his food and drink! He is undeserving of these things.

"Is he grateful to that servant because he did what was commanded? So should it be with you." Here, humorously, ends the "master hood" of the apostles when our Lord Jesus Christ said the words, "So should it be with you." The apostles

sighed for they are really servants, and Jesus Christ is their Master - and there is no other.

God and the master of the Gospel story shows gratitude and thankfulness towards the servant, for the servant did what was commanded of him.

But still, the servant is nothing and deserves nothing.

"When you have done all you have commanded, say, 'We are unprofitable servants; we have done what we were obliged to do.'"

The master will be more grateful or thankful to the servant if this is his attitude - because he is really nothing and deserves nothing, and the servant knows this. That is also a command from the Lord Jesus, to say those words He said!

Here are some points worth considering:

1. We are not masters. We all have but only one Master and that is Jesus Christ.

2. We are all servants. Therefore we must have a proper attitude a servant has.

3. We must have the attitude of self-emptiness, self-nothingness, and self-forgetfulness as servants. We must be obedient, humble, prepared, and careful in listening.

4. We must not be assuming. Remember we are servants.

5. We should say always as what was commanded of us by Jesus Christ, "We are unprofitable servants; we have done what we were obliged to do."

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam!

Mary H. Distributist

Sensitivity, Gratefulness, Knowledge, Faith (Luke 17:11-19 The Cleansing of the Ten Lepers)

The Cleansing of the Ten Lepers (Luke 17: 11-19)

And it came to pass, as he was going to Jerusalem, he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee. [12] And as he entered into a certain town, there met him ten men that were lepers, who stood afar off; [13] And lifted up their voice, saying: Jesus, master, have mercy on us. [14] Whom when he saw, he said: Go, show yourselves to the priests. And it came to pass, as they went, they were made clean. [15] And one of them, when he saw that he was made clean, went back, with a loud voice glorifying God.

[16] And he fell on his face before his feet, giving thanks: and this was a Samaritan. [17] And Jesus answering, said, Were not ten made clean? and where are the nine? [18] There is no one found to return and give glory to God, but this stranger. [19] And he said to him: Arise, go thy way; for thy faith hath made thee whole.

"17 This led Jesus to say, 'Were not all ten made clean? The other nine, where are they?

18 It seems that no one has come back to give praise to God, except this foreigner.'"

According to St. Luke the evangelist, Our Lord Jesus Christ continued his journey to Jerusalem, travelled between Samaria and Galilee.

We may firmly believe here that our Lord met many people and graced them by His presence.

As He was entering a village, we are told, that ten lepers met him. They stood at a distance from him for they bear leprosy in their own selves. But their condition did not became a hindrance on crying out to God, to our Lord Jesus who hears the cry of the poor and the afflicted ones who were abandoned, deprived of love, mercy, and compassion from the rest of the world, those who are cast out from the rest.

They raised their voice saying, "Jesus, Master! Have pity on us!" They know that God will pity them and by faith knows that God will save them from their condition.

Lord Jesus in turn listened, heard their cry and pitied them, gave them a mysterious command to go and show themselves to the priests. They did go and as they are going, they were cleansed. And one of them, realizing he had been healed, sensed that God saved him from his affliction, the Eternal High Priest healed him from

his leprosy, understood that God is the priest - the only priest that heals and saves. In realizing that God healed him (even without the assurance of the healing words of God but in obedience to the Lord they left Him to present themselves to the priests), it shows that he is sensitive enough to know to whom he must be thankful for. He knew to whom he should give glory - to God alone. He intensified his

voice much louder than the first cry he made when he is pleading to God for mercy. He returned the healing he received from God by returning himself - his whole self to God giving the Lord the homage He deserves and, he did this with humility, self-emptiness, and gratitude.

The Lord is merciful and loving even to those people whose identity and race is detestable - just like this Samaritan leper. He acknowledges the fact Jesus is the Lord, God, and Master and he knew by faith that he will be healed by this Eternal High Priest who is a Jew. The Samaritan leper became a Jew - for he returned to God and acknowledged Him who is the One True God - the Only Healer and Savior - the One and the Only Priest - the Eternal High Priest.

Jesus Christ seemed amazed by the return of the Samaritan leper where in fact, He healed ten lepers. He is inquiring for the nine who were insensitive and ungrateful to God. But the Samaritan just did what he ought to do - he stayed at the feet of Jesus Christ giving homage and gratefulness, not minding the other nine - he is enjoying the moment with Him.

Jesus Christ in turn said to the thankful man, "Be my rejoicing disciple who will be my witness of healing and life. Your faith has saved you from your iniquities."

We must consider the following:

We must return to God with rejoicing and thankfulness for He saved us from sin and death and from the fruits of these.

We must acknowledge Him as the One and Only Eternal High Priest and there's no other.

We must know and realize that God is the Only Healer and Savior and there is no other.

We must be sensitive and grateful enough to realize whom we must be thankful for - God alone.

We must be solid in our faith in God.

We must empty ourselves from ourselves to be humble enough and grateful enough to God

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam!

Mary H. Distributist

Fortune-Tellers Indeed Defile! (A True Story)

"Do not go to mediums or consult fortune-tellers, for you will be defiled by them. I, the Lord, am your God." (Leviticus 19:31)

"Should anyone turn to mediums and fortune-tellers and follow their wanton ways, I will turn against such a one and cut him of from his people." (Leviticus 20:6)

"When you come into the land which the Lord, your God, is giving you, you shall not learn to imitate the abominations of the peoples there. Let there not be found among you anyone who immolates his son or daughter in the fire, nor a fortune-teller, soothsayer, charmer, diviner, or caster of spells, nor one who consults ghost and spirits or seeks oracles from the dead. Anyone who does such things is an abomination to the Lord, and because such abominations the Lord, your God, is driving these nations out of your way." (Deuteronomy 18:9-12)

This account is a true story.

She told me that her mother with a companion was once consulted a fortune-teller who uses cards. The fortune-teller told her mother that she will die before she celebrates her birthday that year. To the mother's companion the fortune-teller predicted that on that year of a certain month, one of her loved ones or close to her will die.

Then the day of misfortune came. The mother's companion had a great horror and the prediction became real when her daughter died alone in a building. The daughter was left in a room who does not know at that time that the building she is in is in flames. But when she's trying to save her life, she choose to escape by riding an elevator. In this elevator she died. When the authorities found her inside the elevator, she was found petrified, burned to death. Her own arms was stretched out as if she's pushing something in front of her. She is the only one who did not survived the tragedy. The fortune-teller was right.

But not in the case of her mother. Her daughter is the one who recounted this story to me. Because the prediction of the fortune-teller did not worked. Because the mother on that same year celebrated her birthday - contrary to the fortune-teller's prediction that she will die one month before the day of her birthday.

So the family became at rest for the prediction did not happened. They were relaxed that the mother celebrated her birthday that year. But they did not expected that on that year, this mother will die.

The mother died on a plane accident. The airplane was shattered into pieces while on air and so its passengers. They were really shocked that this mother , this member of their family died - she died after one month after her birthday celebration.

On asking further the sharer whom I know personally, also told me that the fortune-teller was not only using cards or tarot cards, she also held or examined the palm of the two who consulter her.

I asked her if there was a thing they brought with them that was given by the fortune-teller and she said their was nothing.

I asked her if aside from palm examination and card reading, do the fortune-teller did strange things beside these and she said no, there's none.

And I asked her a few more questions. Then she and I came into conclusion (an opinion perhaps for we are not persons in authority when it comes to extraordinary phenomena) that the fortune-teller has a demon who is powerful in sending curses to those persons who consults this fortune-teller. Just the words or predictions of her can take away a person's life, how is this fortune-teller now?

According to the sharer, her relatives also knew the fortune-tellers name. Her name is Baby Resma. Resma is the surname. I do not know if the "Baby" is her first name or just the nick name.

For study and catechetics :

Commission on Extraordinary Phenomena / Ministry of Exorcism 

G/F Lay Formation Center

San Carlos Pastoral Formation Complex
EDSA, Guadalupe, Makati City
E-mail: amoe.request@yahoo.com
Tel:  899-4971 Telefax: 896-7595
Minister/Assistant Exorcist: Rev. Fr. Jose Francisco C. Syquia
Exorcist: Rev. Fr. Mateo Goldaraz, OFMCap
Deliverance Minister: Rev. Fr. Roberto D. De la Cruz
Coordinator: Ms. Rowena Delos Reyes

ADMG

Mary H. Distributist

Did Felix Manalo "RAPE" Rosita Trillanes or not?

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 [source: http://www.pipeline.com/]

“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 toCenon 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 SULATkung 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.

http://catholicdefender2000.blogspot.com/2010/11/did-felix-manalo-raped-rosita-trillanes.html

How To Pray Vocally (inspired by a Jesuit priest)

I was and still stunned  about how Rev. Fr. Timoteo "Tim" Ofrasio S.J. enlightened me indirectly from his answers and explanations when he talked about the dispositions of the priests who celebrates the Holy Mass and how is the priest when he is praying the prayers said in the Mass.

Rev. Fr. Timoteo "Tim" Ofrasio S.J. lecturing on Sacraments of Holy Orders and Matrimony, 9th Annual Apologetics Seminar of Defensores Fidei Foundation, November 9, 2013.

Fr. Tim shared to us that one guy asked him why he do not look at the congregation while saying the prayers in the Mass to which Fr. Tim replied that I will remember forever, "To whom the prayer is addressed? Para kanino ba yung panalangin? Sa mga tao ba? O sa Diyos? For whom are the said prayers? To the people? Or to God?"

Now that sharing of Fr. Tim S.J. is very crystal clear to me and very moving and it really made sense for although it just pertains to how priests should do when saying the prayers which are for God alone, it also tells me to act how should I pray as an individual.

Fr. Tim Ofrasio lecturing on Sacrament of Holy Orders.

"To whom the prayer is addressed?" is a very striking question that came from an old Jesuit priest for it helps me to meditate on how should I pray especially when praying vocal prayers or prayers designed to be said.

There is an element, I really believe, that cannot be taken for granted and that is how we talk to God especially by prayers vocally expressed.

The questions I'm asking myself were these :

1. Am I focused on God alone while praying?

2. Am I aware that I am not just talking to an ordinary person but to God?

3. Do my disposition in praying is in harmony in what I think and what I say?

4. Am I on guard when praying that is, in control of my imagination that thinks of things not subject of my prayer that will more or less unconsciously take away my focus?

5. Do I properly address the prayers to whom it is rightfully addressed?
And the questions to be meditated upon could be extended.

We must really be on guard while praying for our imagination and focus can be a block to our connection to God and the heavens if we are not aware that we are praying and we are talking and listening to the Person we do not see but a lot more bigger than us.

So in other compact words, prayer is talking and listening to whom the prayer is addressed.

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam!





Mary H. Distributist

The Blessed Virgin Mary is Full of Grace

"When faith in the Mother of God declines, faith in the Son of God and God the Father declines also." - Ludwig Feuerbach, atheistic philosopher, in The Essence of Christianity.

If God really intended not to give Mary the honor which is due to her becoming the Mother of God and if she is really nothing and an unimportant woman to him, then, God shouldn't be sending an angel to her and will just instantly approached by the Holy Spirit and overshadowed by the Most High, without telling her, without her consent on using her womb for the Word to be incarnated.

The Annunciation; Francesco ALBANI; circa 1645; oil on copper; the Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg

How pitiable it is to imagine that God was such a user as if He was a playboy - using Mary's womb and then forgetting about Mary, as if Jesus Christ is saying, "She is just the mother of my flesh and of my bones, and my hair as well. Forget about that woman!"

If such were the case, how painful it is to see how the Lord violates the word of God, "honor your father and your mother."

If Mary is not a special woman and a woman dear to God, why is it that Mary received that mysterious salutation from the Archangel Gabriel?

"Chaire, kecharitomene, ho kurios meta sou."

"Rejoice, you who have been perfected in grace! The Lord is with you."

"Hail, full of grace! The Lord is with you."

"Hail, highly favored one. The Lord is with you."

Charis is a Greek word which means grace or favor and kecharitomene is the past-perfect participle of it.

Now, how really amazed I am seeing this sacred text from St. John's Gospel, "And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father's only Son, full of grace and truth." (John 1:14)

If Jesus Christ is full of grace, what is Mary then?

Mary will always be the Immaculate Mother of God for in her God the Son was born and had flesh. "The Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the Most High will overshadow you." Mary's whole being is full of grace, not just the womb of hers which will carry the Son of God.

Blessed Virgin Mary, oh how blessed you really are!

Full of grace is Mary's another name.

Full of grace!

Ite inflammate omnia!

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam!


Mary H. Distributist

Effective, Powerful Praying With Blessed Virgin Mary

Let us not fool ourselves. The praying of the holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary is really the hardest prayer to pray for not only the words of it were one and the same, it is also far more different to other prayers who have "variety of words and expressions which keeps us alert, prevents our imagination from wandering, and so makes it easier for us to say them well." - The Secret of the Rosary, St. Louis-Marie Grignion de Montfort.

Now, let me share you a subjective, biased discovery and experience of mine while praying the holy Rosary (yes, subjective and biased for it's my personal experience and I do not want to impose this method to anyone. But you can do it also, if it is effective and fitting for you. But if not, pray that God, with the help of Mama Mary, show the most effective way of praying it).

Listening! Listening is the key in order to fight distractions and to still our lurking imagination when praying the holy Rosary!

What do I mean by this?

An inspiration (insight while praying) came into my mind that it is listening. And a thought also added in me : "How can you become a good spiritual director if you are not good in listening?"

Whoa! That's it! It is listening! In order for me to enjoy more fully and attentively the holy Rosary I must listen!

This is what I discovered also.

When I started to pray, I started with the sign of the cross, then next is the Rosary Confraternity prayer (which our "opening" prayer as members of the Confraternity of the Most Holy Rosary), then next is what I want or desire to pray for (what we call "petitions"), and then I will begin the holy Rosary proper : kissing the crucifix then making the sign of the cross, then the Creed (Apostle's, sometimes Nicene), then as usual, passing the beads in my thumb and index finger with respect to the bead's corresponding prayer.

Then I listen to the words I pray - by the way, it starts on the beginning of your praying of course. I reiterate! It is listening! Listen to the words you say for those words are the Word of God and it's Jesus Christ Himself! The Word who became flesh!

The Our Father or the Lord's prayer came from Jesus Christ's own mouth. The Hail Mary or the Angelic Salutation came also from God and the messenger is just St. Gabriel. Savor every words of the holy Rosary. Savor it by listening! Just listen! And savor the words!

Now, listening and imagination must go hand in hand here. It is important to meditate (think over) about the sacred mysteries of the holy Rosary. As you listen to the Hail Mary's, imagine the sacred mysteries by, of course, your mind. My imagination has a very important role when praying. Here, I exercise the command of our Lord. "Love God...with all your mind."

The listening and imagining must get along with each other, making a harmonious exaltation of both mind and heart. The words are for listening, while the sacred mysteries are the word's soul and meaning.

While saying the Hail Mary, listen to the words. Then at the background, let the sacred events pass or play in your mind. Pay attention to everything - savor everything. Make an exercise now!

The holy Rosary is the second highest prayer next to the Holy Mass and devotion to the Most Blessed Sacrament of our Lord. Please remember that.

So the elements present in praying the holy Rosary are the following :
1.) Listening
2.) Saying
3.) Imagining

May you love the holy Rosary everyday just like me.

Go and set the world on fire!

ADMG

Mary H. Distributist

Blessed Virgin Mary : The "First Woman Exorcist"

"The Blessed Virgin Mary has only two missions. The first is to bring God to humanity. The second is to bring the humanity to God." - Bro. Marwil N. Llasos O.P.

Who and what is an exorcist? According to Fr. Jose Francisco "Jocis" C. Syquia in his book, Exorcism : Encounters with the Paranormal and the Occult, an exorcist is simply a man whom the Lord uses as his instrument in order to liberate victims from the clutches of Satan's extraordinary activities.

Mama Mary is also an exorcist just like she can also become a priest for she has the right claim to say, "This is my Body" and, "This is my Blood" for the Son of god's humanity came from her and she is his mother.

The Blessed Virgin Mary consented to the conception of the Son of God, the Word of God in her womb and thus becoming obedient to God, she destroyed and made new the disobedient Eve who obeyed the serpent and not God, therefore Mama Mary did an exorcism - she summoned out the devil by becoming obedient to God.

The Blessed Virgin Mary also received the Word and the words of the angel of the Lord Gabriel with great humility and reverence thus becoming trustful to the messenger and to God and not relied on her own and destroyed the fear in her for "fear is the lack of trust in the Lord"(as said by Fr. Michell Joe "Jojo" B. Zerrudo), Mama Mary did an exorcism - she summoned out the fear out of her and trust reigned in her thus she destroyed and renew the Eve who trusted the serpent instead of God and relied on her own instead of relying on God, trusted the words of the serpent instead of trusting the words of God. 

Indeed, Mama Mary can also be counted as an exorcist for in her "the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us" [John 1:14].
Thus Mama Mary has her share in the salvation planned by God no wonder it is truly right and just to call her Co-Redemptrix. Mama Mary has also her share in "speaking" the Word of God to all of humanity by giving  way to him to manifest himself to the whole world. Mama Mary became also the mouth of God for in her Jesus Christ the Word of God was born therefore Mama Mary made an exorcism - in her was born the Word of God thus starting the first summoning out of the devil by the Word of God who liberate victims from the claws of the devil's works. "Whoever sins belongs to the devil, because the devil has sinned from the beginning. Indeed, the Son of God was revealed to destroy the works of the devil" - 1 John 3:8

The Blessed Virgin Mary simply the preacher of the "full of grace and truth" [John 1:14] in a greatly inexplicable way. She is preaching Jesus the Word of God from the beginning of her earthly life, and even God preached about her even before she was born. She preached Jesus, giving birth to him, thus Mama Mary is the first human preacher who said in silence but the loudest! "The Kingdom of the Lord is at hand!"

God started it.
The angel Gabriel sent the message from God and the receiver of the message is an unassuming virgin Mary.

The first message is this : 

"Chaire, kecharitomene, ho kurios meta sou."

In Latin, "Ave, gratia plena. Dominus tecum."

In english, "Hail, full of grace. The Lord is with you."

Luke 1:36-38

So the, "Hail, full of grace! The Lord is with you." are the words of God spoken by the angel to the Blessed Virgin Mary that started our salvation from sin and from the devil's works. 

The Blessed Virgin Mary is the first woman exorcist.

Hail Mary!

Mary H. Distributist