PANLILIO + PADACA TANDEM!!!

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Francis on April 11, 2009 at 12:32pm

Yes I do. But Gov Panlilio is a priest-on-leave, in that case he is still a recognized priest by the church, and I supposed that his candidacy is with the concent of the catholic church, otherwise he should have been suspended.

Without Gov Ed, Pampanga might still be governed by greedy governor, whose intensions are the control of the Province's resources, particularly the quarying of lahar.

Tang Nang Yan aka CD said:

Point well taken; but Father Panlilio still is in violation of Canon Law.

You also forgot to highlight this passage: and receives the consent of the bishop after consultation with the priests’ council and, if circumstances call for it, with the episcopal conference.”
There was no consent, approval or consultation

If you cannot obey the laws of your church and god, will you obey the laws of your government?


Francis said:

It's not my intension to engage in a political debate, but it's healthy conversation with my dear MP friend

I excerpt from your reply:

THE EXTENT AND LIMITS OF THE PARTICIPATION
OF PRIESTS IN POLITICS

by the

Canon Law Society of the Philippines


Can. 287, §2: Clerics are not to have an active role in political parties and in the direc-tion of labor unions unless the need to protect the rights of the Church or to promote the common good requires it in the judgment of the competent ecclesiastical authority.
This means that priests cannot engage in partisan political activity unless in a particular case “this is truly required by the good of the community, and receives the consent of the bishop after consultation with the priests’ council and, if circumstances call for it, with the episcopal conference.”

I highlighted those 3 particular items above. I believe Gov Panlilio chose to serve the people of Pampanga not to engage into political circus but to serve with sincere honesty, because he have seen enough of the corruption and only him at that moment can beat those TRAPOS. Father Panlilio's leadership is truly required by the good of the community and the circumstances really call for his service.

Time is changing, what's not applicable then maybe necessary now, and our dear country is badly in need of real leaders. Leaders that are not greedy and corrupt, leaders that does not owe any one except the voting people. Gov Panlilio proved that any ordinary citizen that are willing to go against the tide of our political system can suceed, same thing with Gov. Padaca of Isabela & Gov. Umali of Nueva Ecija when they beat the heavy weights and dynasty in their respective province. With their victory, maybe and hopefully, more people like them would come out on 2010 to wipe out these TRAPO's


Tang Nang Yan aka CD said:

Among Ed may be qualified and competent to be President but in doing so, he is violating the laws of his own church...if you cannot follow your own God's law, how can you be expected to follow the laws of man?

It is a reflection of a person's moral principal, not a question of competence.

Here is the excerpt from the Position Paper on:

THE EXTENT AND LIMITS OF THE PARTICIPATION
OF PRIESTS IN POLITICS

by the

Canon Law Society of the Philippines


1. PARTICIPATION OF CLERICS IN POLITICS ACCORDING TO
THE UNIVERSAL LAW OF THE CHURCH

a. In the Code of Canon Law

There are two provisions of the 1983 Code of Canon Law that forbid participation by clerics in certain types of political activity:

Can. 285, §3: Clerics are forbidden to assume public offices, which entail participation in the exercise of civil power.
This provision of the Codex means that priests cannot assume public offices, which entail the exercise of legislative, administrative and judicial authority.

Can. 287, §2: Clerics are not to have an active role in political parties and in the direc-tion of labor unions unless the need to protect the rights of the Church or to promote the common good requires it in the judgment of the competent ecclesiastical authority.
This means that priests cannot engage in partisan political activity unless in a particular case “this is truly required by the good of the community, and receives the consent of the bishop after consultation with the priests’ council and, if circumstances call for it, with the episcopal conference.”

Permanent deacons, even though they are clerics, do not fall under these prohi-bitions but these apply also to members of religious orders (c.672) and to members of societies of apostolic life (c.739).

b. In the Magisterium of John Paul II

These canonical prohibitions to priests and bishops are in line with the pro-nouncements of Pope John Paul II. To a gathering of religious-order priests in Mexico City in January 1979, he said: “You are not social directors, political leaders or func-tionaries of temporal power… Let us not be under the illusion that we are serving the Gospel if we ‘dilute’ our charism through an exaggerated interest in the wide field of temporal problems” (AAS 71, 1979, p.193). He repeated these very same words during his first Mass in Manila on February 17, 1981.
In Zaire, he exhorted priests in similar terms: “Leave political responsibilities to those who are charged with them. You have another part, a magnificent part; you are “leaders” by another right and in another manner, participating in the priesthood of Christ, as his ministers. Your sphere of interventions, and it is vast, is that of faith and morals, where it is expected that you preach at the same time by a courageous word and by the example of your life.”

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Candy Diazes on April 11, 2009 at 12:47pm

Francis said:
Yes I do. But Gov Panlilio is a priest-on-leave, in that case he is still a recognized priest by the church, and I supposed that his candidacy is with the concent of the catholic church, otherwise he should have been suspended.

There was no consent. Just because he was not suspended does not mean there was no violation.

Francis further said:
Without Gov Ed, Pampanga might still be governed by greedy governor, whose intensions are the control of the Province's resources, particularly the quarying of lahar.


The end does not justify the means.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by JESELLE DAYRIT on April 13, 2009 at 11:59am

i like this topic, may i respectfully butt in...your brainyness....first of all, much as i want to, I did not vote for Panlilio.. i know he is an advocate of change and i share his visions,however it is against my principles to vote for someone who i know serves two masters. Strength is the ability to make difficult choices. He should choose, one cannot have the best of both worlds. He did not, then there goes my vote, down the drain.

Separation of the church and state, it is one of what i have always fought for when it comes to legislation. Even when consented by bishops or whatever the laws imply, i cannot vote for a man who puts his sense of morality and religious beliefs first before the needs of the people, for compassion serves only a few but firmness, boldness, strength may save millions, what must be done, should be done, what is necessary does not always seem just, what serves the greater good will not be pleasant for all.

It is a lone crusade, and i admire him for his strength, for his love for the people of Pampanga, but it is not enough. Patience, my friends. we never can achieve anything in a snap, we have to prepare, we have to equip ourselves before we strike or if there is any victory achieved through haste, it is but short lived.

▶ Reply to This

▶ Reply to This

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page