2iif you’re living on the moon you may have missed the two most recent articles of AE on incsilentnomoreShe who must not be named and  Mandirigma no more. These two succeeding articles tend to go deeper into the rabbit hole and touch on a subject considered taboo. And that is the reason why the church goes haywire every time a short circuit occurs where it shouldn’t.  The Spiritual Warriors or Mandirigma which started with an unauthorized  and controversial logo; why wouldn’t it be with a plagiarized image of an eagle and two swords behind it. When a sword is placed on an emblem with the phrase warrior above it, what do you think this implies?  To maim? to kill? Who? Definitely not those Sanglibutan who we give goodybags every time we hold evangelical missions. So who do we imply when we use those swords with the word Mandirigma?  If you can’t silence them, kill them? Is that the motto now?

1But some sense I guess still remains with Ka Bien Santiago the General Evangelist of the church and overseer of any project related with the Church. He changed the logo with another, removed the sword and the word mandirigma. The approach is now more subtle. This is now their official logo.

In the Mandirigma article, I listened to the audio clip led by Arnel Tumanan and it made by stomach turn the way he tries to convince his audience that this organization is the work of God. By the way, he explains in detail that their logo is not yet official and will have to pass through the scrutiny of Ka Bien Santiago. Kahit papaano, may naiwan pang bait si Ka Bien. You can see now that the sword has been replaced by Light of Salvation and Spiritual Warriors by God’s Soldiers 1914.  Less confrontational.

Back to the subject, the Mandirigma meeting was held on June 24 at Max’s Restaurant where the Mandirigma was officially advised on its purpose. AE expounds this very clearly in his article. My question. When does our Church hold an official meeting to discuss official matters comprised of active members led by a VIP minister inside a restaurant?  Shouldn’t it have been done inside a Church’s chapel or conference room or in any of the Church’s offices? Why at Max’s? For the chicken? I doubt it. Pancake House’s chicken tastes much better. The only reason I can think of is exclusivity and deniability . If done at the chapel, anyone can sit down and join the meeting. Same holds true for a conference meeting at a chapel.  Once anyone sits down, you can’t just tell him or her to leave the room. Deniability, in case something goes wrong in the long run. Tapping into other peoples accounts is risky and can get you into trouble. So if things go out of hand and it will I assure you, do you really think the Church will risk her reputation to protect and defend you? I am addressing this to you  my dear Mandirigmas? They will not risk the whole Church for a few handful. Too much is at stake. Not the Church’s but THEIRS. So my advise to you is to stay within the bounds of the law and not delve into matters not of your concern. Facebook? Blogs? Aren’t these just matters of personal consideration and not matters related with spritual beliefs? So why mix the two? The end game here is you and you alone are responsible for whatever you indulge in.

 As I have said – Sometimes it’s better to believe a lie and discover it to be the truth than to believe a truth which you find out to be a lie.


(Credits to Felix Villocino and Company)

“Bagaman napakahirap ng inyong kalagayan dyan sa loob ng #36TS, Ngayon sa pagdiriwang ng inyong kaarawan kapatid na Jem Manalo Hemedez, naway sa kahit na papaano ay makadama po kayo ng kaligayahan at tiyak naman ang ating panginoong Dios ang siyang gagawad nito, At kami naman na mga DEFENDERS sa buong mundo ay hindi manghihimagod sa pagmamahal at pagtulong sa abot po ng aming makakaya sa inyo at sa inyong pamilya at ilang kasamahan..


(Sept. 17, 2016)”