REFUTING ELISEO SORIANO

A picture of an Angry Eli Soriano (Presiding Minister of ADD, MCGI, Iglesia ni YHWH etc.) 
during his debate with William Sarago (Pastor of Kingdom of Jesus Christ)


Refuting Eliseo Soriano on the Papacy of Peter

When I was surfing the internet I accidentally stumble into Mr. Eliseo Soriano’s blog the leader of the infamous Ang Dating Daan (The Old Way). Upon exploring his blog I got into his archives and found few articles that malign the Catholic Church so I decided to copy his article and refute it.

Written in black is his article and in red is my refutation (Isahel N. Alfonso).

The claim that Peter was the first pope and the rock whereupon the church was built is erroneous and can not be substantiated, either in history or in the Bible.

Dream on can not be substantiated??? Is that all you can say? It can be substantiated both in history and the Bible; Mr. Soriano can not just accept that fact. The World Almanac Book of Facts 2009 (we can not say that this book is bias since it is not owned by the Catholic Church, this is standard reference) has a complete list of popes from peter to Benedict XVI this book can not be called “Book of facts” if it contains error Mr. Soriano refuse to accept this facts. Biblical proof? No problem Mt.16:16-19, Christ change Simon Bar-jona’s name to Peter, in the Bible it only happens if God gave someone a mission which is for the salvation of his people, like Abram to Abraham. Secondly Christ build the church upon Peter “though art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church”. Lastly Christ gave Peter the keys to bind and to loose, the keys signify authority Is.22:22, Christ is the King the successor of the Davidic throne, before Christ ascended to heaven he gave the over all authority to Peter to govern and guide the church. Peter the rock? Well let Jesus Christ answer this question John 1:42 “And he brought him to Jesus. And Jesus looking upon him, said: Thou art Simon the son of Jona. Thou shalt be called Cephas, which is interpreted Peter.” Cephas is an Aramaic word for ROCK. To whom shall we believed that Peter is the rock? Mr. Eliseo Soriano who is just a man or Jesus Christ who is God?

How can Peter be a pope when such title was first used 400 years after the death of Peter?

Where is your logic Mr. Soriano? The existence of a person, thing or office doesn’t depend on when their title was invented. For example the word stone was first used 3 billion years after the stone was created does that mean that the stone only existed when the word stone was invented? Using your logic we would end up in a funny conclusion “How can a stone be a stone when such a word (stone) was first used 3 billion years after the stone was created?

Biblically, Peter can not be a pope! It is prohibited by Christ to the original twelve disciples to be called ‘rabbi’ or teacher because their only teacher was Jesus Christ.

(Matthew 23:8) “But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren.” 

They were also forbidden to address anybody on earth their father because (religiously speaking) they have only one Father, which is the Father in heaven.

(Matthew 23:9) “And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven.”

Mr. Soriano how do you address the husband of your mother? Bruno? Doggy? or father? I had already explain Mt.23:8-9 on my previous post, it simply means that don’t give honor to a man what belongs to God alone. Lk, 16:24 He called out Father Abraham have pity on me.. what did he called Abraham?

So, we can safely conclude that Peter did not ever hold the position of pope, biblically and historically, according to the Bible, and to official documents from the Catholic Church itself.

We have already proven that Peter holds the position pope historically and Biblically. Mr. Soriano even have the guts to claim that in the official documents of the Church, Peter was never taught as holding the position pope this is laughable gross ignorance to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful.For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered. CCC 882

Mr. Soriano, Pope Benedict XVI is the successor of Peter, then what is Peter?

But was he the rock upon which the Church was built?

Of course! Who else is the rock on Mt.16:16-19?

Note that the Church was founded on a ‘petra’ — in the feminine gender, and not on a ‘petros’ ( a stone), the name ascribed to Peter.

There is no problem in this word game. Petros is masculine and petra is feminine either/or the meaning is the same ROCK says Strong’s Hebrew and Greek dictionary. The Greek name/word is very gender sensitive when you are talking about a male the words you use in Greek should be masculine, that is why Jesus called peter petros not petra. If Jesus said “though art petra and on thispetra” etc. our first pope will be a laughing stock, imagine his name will be petrina instead of Peter! And besides if petra was used it will confuse Greek readers they might think that Peter is a female since Christ called him petra. Furthermore if we read it in Aramaic we will be reading “though art kepha and on this kepha I will build my church.”

It was not only Peter which was called a stone, but Peter himself called the members of the first century Church as lively stones.

(1 Peter 2:5) “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.”

Members of the first century Church were called by Peter as ‘lively stones’ or‘lithos’ in the original Greek tongue.

There is no big deal about this, if we read Mt.16:16-19 in context it clearly refers to Peter as the Rock not other Christians or apostles. Peter was talking metaphorically here about the “lively stones”, while Jesus was talking about a literal stone Peter on Mt.16:16-19. The word rock does not only or exclusively used in one person:

· in Ephesians 2:20, the apostles are called the foundation of the Church;

· in 1 Corinthians 3:11, Jesus is called the foundation of the Church.

· In 1 Corinthians 3:12, the faithful build upon the foundation;

· in Matthew 16:18, Jesus builds upon the foundation.

· In 1 Peter 2:5, the faithful are called the stones of God’s spiritual house;

· in Acts 4:11, Jesus is called the stone of God’s house.

· In 1 Corinthians 3:16, the faithful are the temple of God;

· in Apocalypse 21:22, Jesus is the temple of God.

· In Acts 20:28, the apostles are called the bishops of the flock;

· in 1 Peter 2:25, Jesus is called the Bishop of the flock.

This only demonstrates Mr. Soriano’s lack of understanding and gross ignorance on exegesis.

They, Peter, other Apostles, and the members, altogether formed the edifice founded on the rock or ‘petra’.

This is an erroneous conclusion, did Jesus change the names of the other 11 apostles to Kepha/Petros?

(Ephesians 2:20) “And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone…”

Note that the Apostles (including Peter) and prophets are built upon the foundation(they are not the foundation), the chief cornerstone, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Mr. Soriano misses the metaphor In Eph. 2:20 Paul is the builder and Christ is the foundation in Mt.16 Jesus is the builder and Peter is the foundation. How poor are you on your exegesis Mr. Soriano.

Anybody who will build a church, and make Peter or any other man its foundation is rejecting Christ and building it in vain.

Don’t eat your own words Mr. Soriano “anybody who will build a church”, who founded Ang Dating Daan again? Your saying that Christ is building in vain? It was Jesus who made Peter the Rock foundation in Mt.16 remember?

(1 Timothy 3:15) “But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”

God built it upon Christ — the real foundation.

(Hebrews 3:4) “For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.”

(Psalams 127:1) “Except the LORD build the house, they labor in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.”

Mr. Soriano don’t eat your words again the Catholic Church can trace its origin to the time of Jesus Christ, standard references attest to this World Almanac Book of Facts, World History by O’brien and many more. However Dating Daan or Church of God International didn’t even make it to the standard references.


Source:REFUTING ELISEO SORIANO

Infallible teaching on artificial contraceptives By Bernardo M. Villegas

Even before the “limits to growth” hypothesis broke out in the 1970s, as an economist I had always rejected any attempt to resuscitate the completely discredited theory that Thomas Malthus first proffered more than two centuries ago. My training at Harvard under Nobel Prize winners like Simon Kuznets inoculated me once and for all against the Malthusian germ. Over the last half century, the Malthusian theory has been disproved time and time again. Population growth does not lead to mass starvation given the unlimited propensity of the human mind to increase the productivity of the earth’s resources. What limits human resources is the propensity of the human will to evil. But that’s another thing.

No matter how convinced I am about my economic theory concerning population and poverty, however, I try to have the intellectual humility to admit that I could be wrong since economics is a very inexact science. Of course, the population controllers could also be wrong. That is why I want to turn in this instance to a science—theology—in which freedom from human error is possible. I am absolutely sure that the Reproductive Health bill can do much damage to Philippine society because it promotes artificial contraceptives which are intrinsically evil. I have the infallible authority of the popes who pronounced many times that “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil (Humanae Vitae, 14). Under this declaration, contraceptive pills, condoms, IUDs, tubal ligation, vasectomy and other forms of artificial contraception are intrinsically evil from the moral point of view.

Before a few Catholic priests or lay people can object that this pronouncement of the popes is not infallible because it was not made ex cathedra, let me remind them of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council (the 50th anniversary of whose opening we celebrated last Oct. 11).  As any one can read in the document “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church” (Lumen Gentium) promulgated on Nov. 21, 1964, “Bishops who teach in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be revered by all as witnesses of divine and Catholic truth; the faithful for their part, are obliged to submit to their bishops’ decision, made in the name of Christ, in matters of faith and morals, and to adhere to it with a ready and respectful allegiance of mind. This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra (emphasis provided) in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and sincere assent be given to decisions made by him, conformably with his manifest mind and intention, which is made known principally either by the character of the documents in question, or by the frequency with which a certain doctrine is proposed, or by the manner in which the doctrine is formulated (Lumen Gentium, 25).”

In short, the Vicar of Christ on earth, the Supreme Pontiff, is infallible every time he teaches on matters of dogma or morals, even if he does not teach ex cathedra.  His ordinary teaching authority is enough to oblige Catholics to adhere to his teachings.

Some local pundits have made much of the fact that the Pontifical Commission of experts summoned by Pope Paul VI to advise him before he wrote Humanae Vitae had a majority of its members in favor of artificial contraceptives. The Pope’s decision to disregard the majority opinion is actually a dramatic illustration that Jesus Christ appointed one and only one person to hold the key to infallibility, and that was St. Peter and his successors in the papal throne. Moral truth is not determined by majority vote.

I have news for Catholics—whether priests or lay people—who maintain that they can still be good Catholics while rejecting the teaching about the intrinsic moral evil of artificial contraceptives. You may not be excommunicated (considered today as too extreme a solution to doctrinal error). But you are violating the obligation to “submit to your bishops’ decision, made in the name of Christ, in matters of faith and morals.”  You are willfully refusing to adhere to a teaching on morals (not economics or politics) with  a ready and respectful allegiance of mind. In short, you can consider yourself a Catholic of good standing only by a wide stretch of your imagination. If you have influence on others because of your position or social standing, you are doing a great damage to the souls of others.

I am very glad that Catholic bishops in the Philippines have been very vocal about the infallible doctrine concerning the intrinsic evil of artificial contraceptives. As Lumen Gentium further states, “Although the  bishops, taken individually, do not enjoy the privilege of infallibility, they do, however, proclaim infallibly the doctrine of Christ on the following conditions: namely, when, even though dispersed throughout the world but preserving for all that amongst themselves and with Peter’s successor the bond of communion, in their authoritative teaching concerning matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement that a particular teaching is to be held definitively and absolutely.”

Bernardo M. Villegas is senior vice president of the University of Asia and the Pacific. For comments, e-mail bernardo.villegas@uap.asia.

Source: Infallible teaching on artificial contraceptives

INC bows down to no one!

Except to their Executive Minister.

The Bible says about laying on of hands, but does it say that you have to receive it kneeling?

Where did Manalo get his ordination?

His dad, right?  Who got it from his rapist grandpa, Felix, who got it from some other Protestant group!

And he calls himself an Angel!


Bwahahahahaha

Love these bunch of jokers!

They always crack me up.

Nice to go to sleep laughing your heart out.

Source: INC bows down to no one!

IS IT POSSIBLE FOR PROTESTANTS TO BE SAVED?

Pope Benedict XVI meeting Protestant leaders in Ecumenical Dialogue

Julio Tesoro

MARK 9:40 “FOR HE THAT IS NOT AGAINST US IS FOR US.” 
Does it mean, Protestants are also for Christ? And shall also be SAVED? hmmm… heheh 

Ramon Gitamondoc  

That’s a good question you ask there [Julio Jesoro] Louie Jay. There are men who out of sincere convictions are against the Church not for what it is but for what they think it is. If they are invincibly ignorant of the true gospel of Christ and of his Church these men can still attain salvation by the grace of God (Titus 2:11) if they follow the dictates of their conscience according to the light of truth that is shown to them. These men will be saved not because of their being a Muslim, a Buddhist, or a Protestant but because of the Catholic Truth which they also hold [like Muslims believe in one God and protestants believe in the Trinity and scriptures]. But since men in our fallen state is easily deceived by the Evil One (Rom 1:23-24) then there is the most urgent imperative to convert them to the Catholic Church in which alone Christ entrusted the fullness of salvific truth and salvific means. God does not outrightly condemn a person to hell because his name is not in the Catholic baptismal registry nor outrightly will admit a person into heaven just because his name is in the list. This heresy called Feeneyism has long been condemned by the Church. In present generation, there are many protestants who are born into a protestant environment and upbringing many of which are hostile to the Catholic Church. This men cannot be faulted with the same gravity of offense as the original reformers like Luther, Calvin, et al. But again, even though they possess some elements of truth but they lack the fullness which Christ willed for his followers which can be found in Christ’s Catholic Church ALONE.


Source:IS IT POSSIBLE FOR PROTESTANTS TO BE SAVED?

ROMANO CATOLICO DAW ANG NAGPAPATAY KAY CRISTO SABI NG AGLIPAY

Pontius Pilate was a Catholic?

From the Movie: The Passion of the Christ

Anonymous October 6, 2012 12:49 PM 

 kaya hindi umuunlad ang pilipinas dahil panahon pa lang ni rizal marami ng traydor kapalit pwesto at pera., marami lumaban sa espanya, pero ng dumating amerikano.. bumalimbing dahil sa treaty us and spain na may basbas nang papa sa roma. I retain ang roman catholic. Kaya ano nangyari di hanggang ngayon sunud sunuran pinoy sa vatican. Yumaman ba. O kinarma. o pinagkaperahan, Isipin nyo nga anong pangunahin produkto ng Roma, bakit sila first world country?…Roman catholic nagparusa kay kristo, tapos ngayon nagtuturo kay kristo. Romano pari isang dahilan bakit nag alsa pilipino sa kastila ngayon Romano paring mga pari sinusunod. Nakakatawa Ang daming santo na pinapaniwalaan galing roma. Saint saint. Saint si ganito ganito..Pero pag pinoy na magiging saint. Mangisay tayo dahil kulang na lang sabihin walang kadating dating pag pilipino magiging santo.. Pag sila nga nakakakita daw o nakaka usap ang diyos. Madali nila tayong paniwalain, tuwang tuwa naman. Pero pag pinoy may makakausap daw na anghel. Sira na daw ulo dahil sa gutom marahil sa buhay. Hay naku pinoy hanggang ngayon utu uto pa rin.

[kaya hindi umuunlad ang pilipinas dahil panahon pa lang ni rizal marami ng traydor kapalit pwesto at pera.,]

SI AGLIPAY ANG HALIMBAWA NIYAN. GUSTONG MAGING OBISPO SUPREMO PARA TUMAAS ANG RANGGO.

[marami lumaban sa espanya,]

MARAMI SA MGA LUMABANG IYAN AY MGA CATOLICO. KAYA NGA NANATILING MGA CATOLICO ANG MGA PILIPINO E. HINDI NAGPALOKO KAY AGLIPAY NA ANG HANGAD LANG POSISYON, KAPANGYARIHAN AT BABAE PARA SA KANIYANG MGA PARI PARIAN PERO MAHILIG NAMAN.

[pero ng dumating amerikano.. bumalimbing dahil sa treaty us and spain na may basbas nang papa sa roma.]

SINONG DEMONIO ANG ANG MAY SABI SA IYO NA MAY BASBAS NG PAPA ANG U.S. AND SPAIN TREATY? ANONG PATUNAY MO LAWAY?

ANG BUMALIMBING AY SI AGLIPAY KASI NAGPA ORDINA SIYA SA MGA PROTESTANTENG MGA KANO PARA MAGING OBISPO SUPREMO. NAGPA UTO SA MGA ANGLICAN AT EPISCOPALIANS FROM U.S.

[I retain ang roman catholic.]

KASINUNGALINGAN. YOU ABANDONED THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. YOU DIDN’T RETAIN IT. TUTA KA NA NI AGLIPAY.

[Kaya ano nangyari di hanggang ngayon sunud sunuran pinoy sa vatican.]

BAKIT KAYO HINDI BA KAYO SUNOD SUNURAN SA MGA ANGLICAN AT EPISCOPALIANS NG U.S.? KAYO NGA ITONG MGA SIRA SIRA NA GAYA NG GAYA SA AMIN E. DAMIT NAMIN GAYA NIO, DASAL NAMIN GAYA NIO. SIMBAHAN NAMIN GAYA NIO. KUNWARI GALIT KAYO SA AMIN PERO GUSTONG GUSTO NIONG TUMULAD SA AMIN. LIBAN SA CELIBACY DAHIL GUSTONG GUSTO NG MGA PARI NIO ANG LAMAN. SA AMIN NAKAKA TIKIM NIYAN DAHIL SA PAGKAKA MALI SA INYO PAGPAPASASA. KAYA HINDI UMAASENSO ANG AGLIPAY CHURCH DAHIL ANG PERA NIO HINUHUTHOT NG MGA ASAWA NG PARI PARA PANG MAKE UP AT PAMPAGANDA.PATI MGA ANAK PAARAL, PALAMON, PADAMIT AT IBA PA.

[Yumaman ba. O kinarma. o pinagkaperahan, Isipin nyo nga anong pangunahin produkto ng Roma, bakit sila first world country?]

KUNG HINDI KA BA NAMAN TANGA SA KASAYSAYAN AT SA ECONOMIA. ANG ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH ANG NAGPA ASENSO NG BUONG EUROPE DAHIL SA PAGTATAG NAMIN NG MGA UNIVERSITIES AT PAG PRODUCED NG MGA SCIENTISTS AND ARTISTS. DI KAMI TULAD NINYONG MGA AGLIPAY NA INITUL AT WALANG CONTRIBUTION SA PAG-UNLAD NG CIVILIZATIONS.

ANG ROME AY MAYAMAN DAHIL SA TOURISM. MILYON MILYONG TAO ANG NAGPUPUNTA NG ROME AT NG VATICAN MISMO PARA MAKITA ANG SANTO PAPA, MAGDASAL SA LIBINGAN NI SAN PEDRO AT NI SAN PABLO, AT UPANG TIGNAN ANG MGA WORKS OF ARTS NI MICHELANGELO, RAPHAELLO AT LEONARDO DA VINCI AT MARAMI PANG IBA. NAPAKARAMI DING MGA SCHOLARS NA NAGPUPUNTA SA ROME PARA MAG RESEARCH AT NAPAKARAMING STUDENTS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD NA DUON NAG-AARAL KASI AYAW NILANG MAG-ARAL SA PAARALAN NG AGLIPAY DAHIL AYAW NILANG MAGING BOPOL.

 [...Roman catholic nagparusa kay kristo, tapos ngayon nagtuturo kay kristo.]

SINONG SIRA ULO ANG NAGSABI SA IYO NA ROMAN CATHOLIC ANG NAGPAPATAY KAY CRISTO? HA HA HA… KUNG HINDI KA PA NAMAN TANGA E HINDI NAMAN CATOLICO SI PONCIO PILATO KUNDI ROMAN PAGAN. ANG ROMAN CHURCH AY ANG MGA UNANG CRISTIANONG NANIWALA KAY CRISTO TULAD NG GOOD CENTURION AT NG MGA TAGA ROMA NA BINABAAN NG ESPIRITO SANTO SA JERUSALEM. SILA RIN ANG SINULATAN NI SAN PABLO SA KANYANG EPISTULA SA MGA TAGA ROMA. HINDI KAYONG MGA TAGA IGLESIA FILIPINA ANG SINULATAN NI PABLO DAHIL PEKE KAYO. GALING KAYO KAY SATANAS.

[Romano pari isang dahilan bakit nag alsa pilipino sa kastila ngayon Romano paring mga pari sinusunod.]

PWEDE BA, NAG ALSA ANG MGA PILIPINO SA GOBIERNONG CASTILA AT HINDI SA IGLESIA CATOLICA. MINAHAL NG MGA PILIPINO ANG IGLESIA CATOLICA AT ANG PAMAMAHALA NG ESPANYA ANG NILABANAN. HANGGANG NGAYON MAS MAHAL NG MGA PILIPINO ANG ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH KESA SA MGA GAYA GAYA PUTO MAYANG AGLIPAY NA KUNWARI GALIT SA ROME PERO INGGIT NA INGGIT SA ROME. PWE.

[Nakakatawa Ang daming santo na pinapaniwalaan galing roma.]

HA HA HA… TANGA TALAGA. HA HA HA… BAKIT SI SAN LORENZO DE MANILA BA GALING NG ROMA? PINOY NA PINOY. SI SAN PEDRO CALUNGSOD DE CEBU BA GALING NG ROMA? PINOY NA PINOY. 

KUNG HINDI KA TANGA SA KASAYSAYAN E NAPAKA DAMING SAINTS NA HINDI GALING NG ROMA. MAY GALING NG ISRAEL, AFRICA, KOREA, JAPAN, U.S., AT IBAT IBANG LUGAR. TAMA NA PANG PANLOLOKO AT KATANGAHAN.

[ Saint saint. Saint si ganito ganito..]

SA INYO NAMAN AY DEMONIO, DEMONIO, DEMONIO, DEMONIO… AYAW NIO SA MGA SANTO E KAYA DEMONIO KAYO.

[Pero pag pinoy na magiging saint. Mangisay tayo dahil kulang na lang sabihin walang kadating dating pag pilipino magiging santo..]

HA HA HA… TANGA TALAGA ITO. PAPANONG WALANG DATING E SUPER NA SUPER NGA ANG DATING NI ST. LORENZO DE MANILA AT ST. PEDRO CALUNGSOD DE CEBU. SA INYO WALANG DATING KASI DEMONIO ANG GUSTO NIO AT HINDI SANTO. SA AMIN E NAPAKA LAKAS NG DATING. HA HA HA… WAG NIO KAMING IDAMAY SA INYONG KAHIBANGAN.

[Pag sila nga nakakakita daw o nakaka usap ang diyos.]

KATANGAHAN NA NAMAN. SINONG DEMONIO ANG NAGSABI SA IYO NA ANG MGA PILIPINONG SANTO NA SINA SAN LORENZO DE MANILA AT SAN PEDRO CALUNGSOD DE CEBU AY HINDI NAKAKA USAP ANG DIOS? KAYA NGA SILA DINEKLARANG SANTO DAHIL NAKAKA USAP NILA ANG DIOS AT POWERFUL INTERCESSOR SILA. HA HA HA… MGA BALIW NA TALAGA ITONG MGA NANINIRA NA ITO.

[ Madali nila tayong paniwalain, tuwang tuwa naman.]

KAYO ANG MADALING PANIWALAIN. IMAGINE, GINAYA LANG NG MGA PEKENG PARI NIO ANG DAMIT NG PARI NAMIN FEELING NIO TUNAY NA SILA. HA HA HA… MGA HANGAL. MGA BALIW. MGA ILUSYUNADA. MGA INGGETERA.

ANG PROCESO NG PAGIGING SANTO SA AMIN AY DUMAAN SA MATINDING PAGSISIYASAT AT ISA NA DIYAN ANG SCIENTIFIC-MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS OF MIRACLES.

[Pero pag pinoy may makakausap daw na anghel. Sira na daw ulo dahil sa gutom marahil sa buhay. Hay naku pinoy hanggang ngayon utu uto pa rin.]

KATANGAHAN NA NAMAN. LAHAT NG TAONG NAGKE CLAIM NA MAY NAKAUSAP NA ANGHEL AY SINISIYASAT NG SANTA IGLESIA. MAS MARAMI NGANG ALLEGED APPARITIONS ANG REJECTED SA U.S. AT SA EUROPE KESA SA PILIPINAS. KAYA ANG AKUSASYON MO AY WALANG PUNDASYON SA KATOTOHANAN. 

ISA PA, HINDI KAMI BALIW NA TULAD NIO NA NANINIWALA AGAD SA NAGSASABING NAKAUSAP NILA ANG ANGHEL. PWEDE BA. KUNG GUSTO NIO E DI PANIWALAAN NINYO SILA. GAWIN NIONG SANTO. TIGNAN NATIN KUNG MERONG BALIW NA MANIWALA SA INYO. HA HA HA… SI SAN LORENZO DE MANILA AT SI SAN PEDRO CALUNGSOD DE CEBU AY KINIKILALA NGAYON NG BUONG MUNDO BILANG SANTO DAHIL SA AUTHORIDAD NG SANTO PAPA NA WALA SA OBISPO SUPREMO NG AGLIPAY. WALA KAYONG CREDIBILIDAD AT WALA KAYONG KARAPATAN.

Source:ROMANO CATOLICO DAW ANG NAGPAPATAY KAY CRISTO SABI NG AGLIPAY
Translation: Google Translate