B.N.P.? They claim to be Catholic ... anyone know?

[alagad]

You seem hell bent on giving a bad reputation to the BNP group,
were you ever a member?

----Did you even made enough research on this issue over a bishops
alleged ban?

I’m still not seeing an answer to my question. Is it okay to defy a bishop’s authority over his diocese?

It’s a simple yes or no question. You only need answer either yes or no.

–the answer to this question is yes and no for the simple matter that no one except God will determine if a group/person/individual
is blessed to do His works, as attested to by countless saints ‘banned’ by the high priests.

It seems to me that you were a former member.

 

[Kay_Cee]

Before I answer this question . we need to define terms ,
In what way do you see defiance in what the BNP does ?
Where in Canon Law and even in the Cathechism does it give the bishop absolute authority over a non-profit Catholic oriented lay ministry ?
Answer me those 2 questions and I will answer yours.

The question has nothing to do with the BNP.

I’m just asking if you think it’s okay to defy a bishop’s authority over his diocese.

 

[Kay_Cee]

You seem hell bent on giving a bad reputation to the BNP group,
were you ever a member?

No, I have never been a member. I never even heard of it before this thread.

And I’m not hell-bent on anything. I don’t understand why I can’t get a simple yes or no answer to a simple question.

----Did you even made enough research on this issue over a bishops
alleged ban?

Since the question isn’t about the BNP, I see it as irrelevant.

I’m still not seeing an answer to my question. Is it okay to defy a bishop’s authority over his diocese?

–the answer to this question is yes and no for the simple matter that no one except God will determine if a group/person/individual
is blessed to do His works, as attested to by countless saints ‘banned’ by the high priests.

By the law of non-contradiction, it can’t be both yes and no. Either it’s okay or it isn’t. If it’s okay under even one circumstance, the answer has to be yes.

So is it okay to defy a bishop’s authority over his diocese?

It seems to me that you were a former member.

You are wrong about that, as I have indicated above.

Can we all step back and take a breath here? My question is not about the BNP. I don’t know enough about the organization to make any comments on it. The reason I’ve asked the question is because I seem to be getting an indication that some here seem to think it’s okay to defy a bishop’s authority. I want to set the record straight on where you and Believer112 are coming from regarding that. That’s all.

 

[Rleng616]

Kay Cee

Yes

 

[Kay_Cee]

Kay Cee

Yes

Thank you for the answer.

Under what conditions is it permissible? And who has the authority to decide it is permissible under those conditions?

 

[believer112]

A bishop or any bishop assigned to a diocese has two major roles ( there are numerous others , but these two are the ones the bishop usually spends a lot of time on )

1. His first major role is the final arbiter for any argument about doctrine and dogma in the diocese .He decides what is the Catholic response for any dogmatical challenges.
2. The bishop is the keeper of the keys. He holds title to all diocesian properties? In other words he is the real estate manager and can decide if any properties held in his trust can be put up for sale or rented. He also has final say on which organizations can use any diocesian owned facility.

The problem with your question is that there are no doctrinal or dogmatical decisions on the BNP yet . So technically, we cannot be in defiance of any bishop .That is why you cannot give any example of the BNP defying the bishop because there are none. The BNP as a movement is something new , and is not covered by dogma or doctrine .
And if your question is not about the BNP , why post it on this thread , which is about the BNP ?
Shouldn’t you start another thread .

 

[Kay_Cee]

A bishop or any bishop assigned to a diocese has two major roles ( there are numerous others , but these two are the ones the bishop usually spends a lot of time on )

1. His first major role is the final arbiter for any argument about doctrine and dogma in the diocese .He decides what is the Catholic response for any dogmatical challenges.
2. The bishop is the keeper of the keys. He holds title to all diocesian properties? In other words he is the real estate manager and can decide if any properties held in his trust can be put up for sale or rented. He also has final say on which organizations can use any diocesian owned facility.

The problem with your question is that there are no doctrinal or dogmatical decisions on the BNP yet . So technically, we cannot be in defiance of any bishop .That is why you cannot give any example of the BNP defying the bishop because there are none. The BNP as a movement is something new , and is not covered by dogma or doctrine .
And if your question is not about the BNP , why post it on this thread , which is about the BNP ?
Shouldn’t you start another thread .

Well, since my question is not about the BNP, it does seem off-topic. I might start another thread, but I’m super busy today and tomorrow, so maybe later.

However, just as a side note, I did ask if it’s okay to defy a bishop’s authority. I didn’t ask if it’s okay to defy him in areas over which he has no authority–that wouldn’t be defying his authority at all. Since Rleng616 has answered yes to my question, it would be interesting to explore the subject.

So maybe I’ll see about starting a new thread when I have the chance to give the whole matter enough thought.

 

[pizzaguy]

This is an exc. from an ongoing investigation by the office of homeland security, this document is in the public record. That issue relates to the religious denominational affiliation of the
petitioner and his intending employer, the BNP Church. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(m) contains the
following pertinent definitions:
Bona fide nonprofit religious organization in the United States means an organization exempt from taxation as described in section 50l(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as it
relates to religious organizations, or one that has never sought such exemption but establishes to the satisfaction of the Service that it would be eligible therefor if it had applied for tax exempt status. Bona fide organization which is affiliated with the religious denomination means an organization which is closely associated with the religious denomination and which is exempt
from taxation as described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as it relates to religious organizations.
Religious denomination means a religious group or community of believers having some form of ecclesiastical government, a creed or statement of faith, some form of worship, a formal or informal code of doctrine and discipline; religious services and ceremonies, established places of religious worship, religious congregations, or comparable indicia of a bona fide religious denomination. For the purposes of this definition, an interdenominational religious organization which is exempt from taxation pursuant to section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 will be treated as a religious denomination.
The petitioner must identify the religious denomination involved with this petition. The petitioner must demonstrate either that the BNP Church is a self-contained religious denomination in its own right, or that the BNP Church is affiliated with a religious denomination.
An unattributed document in the record, entitled “The Banal na Pag-aaral Church,” reads, in part: The Banal na Pag-aaral Church was founded in 1968 in the Philippines and was brought to
the United States in 1983… Its worldwide membership total 55,000 to date. There are 187 BNP Chapters, defined by locations, all over the world… The BNP Church is governed and administered by the BNP Council. It is the policy-making
body of the entire organization. It also serves as a consultative body to the office of the President/Pastor, who is the head of the BNP Church. The above claims suggest that the BNP Church may be its own denomination, but further evidence is
necessary to support a conclusion in this regard. The director must provide the petitioner the opportunity to provide definitive evidence to establish whether Banal Na Pag-Aaral is a denomination in its own right or, in the alternative, a “movement” within some other denomination (such as, e.g., the Roman Catholic Church). A publication in the record contains numerous terms that appear to be associated with Roman Catholicism,
such as “the Feast ofthe Lady of Guadalupe” and “the Lady of Lourdes.” On a related note, all ofthe petitioner’s religious credentials were issued by the Universal Life Church, which,
according to the web site themonastery.org (visited July 30, 2007), “welcomes all who ask to Become an Ordained Minister and grants it without question.” Different religious denominations have different standards as to who qualifies for ordination, and it does not appear that denominations that normally require rigorous seminary study would readily recognize the “pop-up instant ordination credential” available
from the Universal Life Church Monastery.
Therefore, the director must ascertain not only the religious denomination of the BNP Church, but also the
normal minimum requirements for ordination within that denomination. If the petitioner’s credentials from
the Universal Life Church are not generally accepted by the denomination, then the petitioner’s eligibility is
in question. We note that, because the petitioner has claimed that the BNP Church is an international
organization led by a “President/Pastor” and “governed and administered by the BNP Council,” the petitioner
must provide documentation of the ordination standards set forth by the BNP Council. A letter from a local
church official in Ontario cannot suffice, unless accompanied by independent documentary proof that the
local official is also a BNP Council member and/or the BNP President/Pastor. The materials in the record
offer no clue as to the location or identities of the BNP Council and President/Pastor.

end part 1

 

[pizzaguy]

part 2

The record contains a copy of an October 6, 1986 letter from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), stating that
the IRS recognized Banal Na Pag-Aaral, Inc. as a 50I(c)(3) tax-exempt non-profit organization. The IRS
classified the employer not as a church, under section 170(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC),
but under a more general classification, section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) of the IRC. This latter section can apply to
religious organizations, but it applies to many types of secular organization as well. The letter is, therefore,
notprimajacie evidence that the BNP Church is tax exempt as a religious organization that is affiliated with
a religious denomination.
Apart from the issue of the BNP Church’s specific classification under section I70(b)(1)(A) of the IRC,
contact with the IRS reveals a more fundamental issue of concern. The IRS maintains an online, searchable
version of Publication 78, Cumulative List oj Organizations described in Section 170(c) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 at irs.gov/charities/article/0…id=96I36.OO.html. When the AAO searched
this site for the BNP Church, on November 27,2007, there was no listing for that entity.
There are various reasons why a church might not be listed in Publication 78; those reasons are set forth at
irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/O…id=I50282,00.htmi. None of those reasons, however, appear
applicable to the BNP Church. For instance, if a church did not apply for recognition, then it would not appear in the list. The IRS determination letter from 1986 shows, however, that the BNP Church did apply for (and receive) recognition. The same IRS web page that allows access to the searchable version of Publication 78 also provided the BNP Church’s employer identification number and telephone number. to “confirm an organization’s status.” The AAO called this number on November 27,2007 the IRS representative stated that the BNP Church lost its tax-exempt status in December 1997, thus explaining its absence from Publication 78. If the BNP Church is not tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the IRC, then the BNP Church is not a
qualifying employer under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(m)(3)(i), and it is not a bona fide nonprofit, religious organization in the United States as required by section 101(a)(27)(C) of the Act and its relevant subsections. The BNP Church’s loss of its tax-exempt status effectively voids the petition because no qualifying job offer
can exist. Throughout the ten years following the approval of this petition, the petitioner has consistently maintained that his job offer from the BNP Church entitles him to special immigrant classification, which could only be true if the BNP Church has been, and still is, a qualifying tax-exempt religious organization. The IRS, however, has indicated that the BNP Church lost its tax-exempt status only a month after the November 1997
approval of the petition. The petition cannot be approved unless the petitioner establishes that the BNP Church was tax-exempt without interruption from August 8, 1997 (the date the petition was filed) through the date of this notice. I It will not suffice for the petitioner to establish that the BNP Church regained its taxexempt status after the issuance of this appellate decision or any subsequent notice of intent to revoke or notice of adverse information regarding the loss of that status. Pursuant to Arias , the BNP Church 's tax-exempt status (or lack thereot) cannot be used as a basis for revocation unless and until the director cites that issue in a new notice of intent to revoke. Should the
petitioner wish to contest the above findings regarding the BNP Church ‘s tax-exempt status, the AAO advises that an IRS representative has already confirmed the loss of status in 1997, and the petitioner therefore bears a very heavy burden of proof to rebut the IRS’ confirmation. A copy of the IRS determination letter from 1986 or a pre-1997 copy ofiRS publication 78, listing the BNP Church, would not suffice as rebuttal, because such
documents would not establish that the petitioner is now tax-exempt, and has been for the last ten years . If the petitioner intends to submit documentation directly from the IRS, such documentation must be unequivocal and verifiable.
The information above pertains to a person trying to immigrate to the US from the Philippines under false pretense to work as a youth advisor in the BNP. As of this posting the matter is still under investigation.

Peace

 

[Bill_Pick]

This is an exc. from an ongoing investigation by the office of homeland security, this document is in the public record. That issue relates to the religious denominational affiliation of the
petitioner and his intending employer, the BNP Church. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(m) contains the
following pertinent definitions:
Bona fide nonprofit religious organization in the United States means an organization exempt from taxation as described in section 50l(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as it
relates to religious organizations, or one that has never sought such exemption but establishes to the satisfaction of the Service that it would be eligible therefor if it had applied for tax exempt status. Bona fide organization which is affiliated with the religious denomination means an organization which is closely associated with the religious denomination and which is exempt
from taxation as described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as it relates to religious organizations.
Religious denomination means a religious group or community of believers having some form of ecclesiastical government, a creed or statement of faith, some form of worship, a formal or informal code of doctrine and discipline; religious services and ceremonies, established places of religious worship, religious congregations, or comparable indicia of a bona fide religious denomination. For the purposes of this definition, an interdenominational religious organization which is exempt from taxation pursuant to section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 will be treated as a religious denomination.
The petitioner must identify the religious denomination involved with this petition. The petitioner must demonstrate either that the BNP Church is a self-contained religious denomination in its own right, or that the BNP Church is affiliated with a religious denomination.
An unattributed document in the record, entitled “The Banal na Pag-aaral Church,” reads, in part: The Banal na Pag-aaral Church was founded in 1968 in the Philippines and was brought to
the United States in 1983… Its worldwide membership total 55,000 to date. There are 187 BNP Chapters, defined by locations, all over the world… The BNP Church is governed and administered by the BNP Council. It is the policy-making
body of the entire organization. It also serves as a consultative body to the office of the President/Pastor, who is the head of the BNP Church. The above claims suggest that the BNP Church may be its own denomination, but further evidence is
necessary to support a conclusion in this regard. The director must provide the petitioner the opportunity to provide definitive evidence to establish whether Banal Na Pag-Aaral is a denomination in its own right or, in the alternative, a “movement” within some other denomination (such as, e.g., the Roman Catholic Church). A publication in the record contains numerous terms that appear to be associated with Roman Catholicism,
such as “the Feast ofthe Lady of Guadalupe” and “the Lady of Lourdes.” On a related note, all ofthe petitioner’s religious credentials were issued by the Universal Life Church, which,
according to the web site themonastery.org (visited July 30, 2007), “welcomes all who ask to Become an Ordained Minister and grants it without question.” Different religious denominations have different standards as to who qualifies for ordination, and it does not appear that denominations that normally require rigorous seminary study would readily recognize the “pop-up instant ordination credential” available
from the Universal Life Church Monastery.
Therefore, the director must ascertain not only the religious denomination of the BNP Church, but also the
normal minimum requirements for ordination within that denomination. If the petitioner’s credentials from
the Universal Life Church are not generally accepted by the denomination, then the petitioner’s eligibility is
in question. We note that, because the petitioner has claimed that the BNP Church is an international
organization led by a “President/Pastor” and “governed and administered by the BNP Council,” the petitioner
must provide documentation of the ordination standards set forth by the BNP Council. A letter from a local
church official in Ontario cannot suffice, unless accompanied by independent documentary proof that the
local official is also a BNP Council member and/or the BNP President/Pastor. The materials in the record
offer no clue as to the location or identities of the BNP Council and President/Pastor.

end part 1

I,m a little dumb what is a BNP church ?

 

[frowacp]

A list of cults recorded at “Cult Awareness Network, Inc.” includes BNP or Banal Na Pag-aaral as one of them…

lefawe

 

[frowacp]

Is BNP a separate Church?

A BNP member said “BNP is not a separate Church” and this is true. BNP’s status in the USA INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE (IRS) record as in October 6, 1986. IRS classified BNP under a more general classification, section 170(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code. This classification can apply to religious organizations as well as secular organizations for tax-exempt status. BNP, then, was recognized as BANAL NA PAG-AARAL, INC. as a tax-exempt non-profit organization.

However, a check on the status of the BNP on November 27, 2007, by the Administrative Appeal Office of the US Citizenship and Immigration Services in California, with the IRS revealed that BNP lost its tax-exempt status in December 1997.

Is BNP still a non-profit lay organization/ministry as of now as claimed by a BNP member?

lefawe

 

[frowacp]

Wait… Banal Na Pag-aaral is a church after all !!!

My source is a copy of the same document that Pizzaguy has quoted in his entry in this forum.

According to this document ( from U.S. Depatment of Homeland Security, a public document), Banal na Pag-aaral as the intending employer of one who applied for special immigrant religious worker status pursuant to section 203 (b) (4) ( case is still on going), of the Immigration National Act, presented itself as a CHURCH. The petitioner here is BNP Church. The person/applicant is “to perform services at BNP Church in Ontario, California, where he holds several titles.” What kind of Church is BNP if it is after all a Church?

For sure, it is not a Catholic Church. The same document recorded that " The Banal na Pag-aaral Church… was founded in 1968 in the Philippines and was brought to the United States in 1983…Its worldwide membership total (s) 55,000 to date. There are 187 chapters, defined by locations, all over the world… The BNP Church is governed and administered by BNP Council. It is the policy-making body of the entire organization. It also serves as a consultative body to the office of the President/Pastor, who is the head of the BNP Church." This does not sound as if BNP is a Catholic Church nor associated with the Catholic Church.

Can we say here that BNP is a separate Church? It seems… what do you think?

By the way, According to the St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Catholic Community Bulletin dated November 16, 2008, when BNP “built their church on Riverside Dr. in Ontario, CA, they filed with the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles in Long Beach, and claimed to be a separate church with ESTANISLAO HOKSON STUART as their pastor.”

As we know that Estanislao Hokson Stuart is the current husband of Remedios Bautista Rios. Do you know who Remedios Bautista Rios is? According to the document I have dated May 16, 1996, she is the same as Mrs. Salvacion Aguillon Carreon or Ate Salve in short. Why did she change her named when she married Estanislao Hokson Stuart? That I will have to research… If you know, post it here.

lefawe

 

[frowacp]

The document from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security revealed that BNP has no clear identity of itself: Is it “a self-contained religious denomination it its own right, or that the BNP church is affiliated with a religious denomination?

It states further that, it appears to be associated with Roman Catholicism because “A BNP publication in the record contains terms that appear to be associated with Roman Catholicism, such as “the Feast of the Lady Guadalupe” and “the Lady of Lourdes”.

Yet, when asked to submit a religious credentials, a member who applied for a status as a special immigrant worker to “perform services at the BNP Church in Ontario, California,” submitted religious credentials issued by the Universal Life Church, which, according to the web site themonastery.org (visited July 30, 2007), “welcomes all who ask to Become an Ordained Minister and grants it without question.” Different religious denominations have different standards as to who qualifies for ordination, and it does not appear that denominations that normally require rigorous seminary study would readily recognize the “pop-up instant ordination credential” available from the Universal Life Church Monastery.” ( According to the same Document mentioned above).

I wonder if the chief pastor of BNP who is identified as Estanislao Hokson Stuart, the husband of Remedios Bautista Rios or Mrs. Salvacion Aguillon Carreon (Known as Ate Salve) got his religious credentials from this Universal Life Church. If the “ministers” of BNP got their religious credentials from this Church, then this is one of the clear evidences that BNP is not Catholic even if they have catholic terms and practices. Anyone catholic who is associated with BNP must go beyond the external like praying the rosary, retreats, vigil etc. and dig “what BNP does not tell them.” Praying the rosary, attending retreats and vigil do not automatically make one a catholic. Catholicism goes much much deeper than that. There are mainstream Christians like some Lutherans who recite the rosary, but they are not Catholic. Conversion does not also prove that one is a catholic. There are non-catholic groups in which conversion occurs. In fact some of their members are “holier” and more committed to the Lord than many Catholics are. But this does not prove they are catholic.

Thus, if BNP has done good things to anyone in bringing them to God, fine. But do not pretend to appear what you are not, and confuse the catholic believers, even divide the bishops and priests who don’t know much about BNP except that which are external.

Be honest to call a spade a spade and if BNP is “founded” by God (as claimed by a member) then He will bless you more.

lefawe

 

[sfbayherc]

I researched in google and this is what I found about BNP;

Bnp Inc
(Bnp House Of Prayer)
7877 E Riverside Dr, Ontario, CA 91761-6803
Contact Phone: (909) 673-1603

URL (web address): (none)
Business Category: Religious Organization in Ontario, CA
Industry (SIC): Religious Organizations
Business Information

This company profile is for the private company Bnp Inc , located in Ontario, CA. Bnp House Of Prayer’s line of business is religious organization.

Company Name: Bnp Inc
Address: 7877 E Riverside Dr, Ontario, CA 91761-6803
Alt Business Name: Bnp House Of Prayer
Location Type: Single Location
Est. Annual Sales: $240,000
Est. # of Employees: 10
Est. Empl. at Loc.: 10
Year Started: 1983
State of Incorp:
SIC #Code: 8661
Contact’s Name: Estanislao Stuart
Contact’s Title: Pastor
NAICS: Religious Organizations

I called the contact number several times in different days but no one answers the phone. I ask anyone who is in the vicinity of this address to check the place.

 

[frowacp]

Thanks for the informations.

It is becoming very clear now that BNP is a separate entity. It is a religious organization with a pastor, Estanislao Stuart. As such however, BNP is not recognized as a non-profit organization, as it was disqualified by Internal Revenue Service as such in 1997.

Therefore, BNP is not Catholic nor associated with Catholicism.

Catholics be careful with this group which is presenting itself as catholic.

lefawe

 

[frowacp]

it would be very interesting to know who the incorporators of these two BNP incorporations are and what is the role of Salve in them.

Also their tax records…are they paying taxes?..are the money raised in their various fund-raising activities reflected in these records?

lefawe

 

[believer112]

Now , I’ve seen it all .
Apparently , there are some people that would define the BNP by how we pay our taxes and corporate filings .
If I use your own definition and pull up the tax records of all the dioceses just in Southern California …you will find that the Diocese of Los Angeles has its own tax filings and corporate declarations separate from the Diocese of San Bernardino .
Each diocese has its own EIN ( Employer ID Number ) that is on file with the IRS .
Each diocese has its own set of leaders
Each diocese files its taxes separately
Each diocese is a separate corporate and taxable entity .
Since the United States and the State of California sees it diocese as a separate entity or church , does it mean that they are
NO ,
MATERIALLY, WE ARE DEFINED BY THE WAY WE PAY TAXES OR INCORPORATE OURSELVES.BECAUSE OF EXISTING TAX LAWS
SPIRITUALLY , WE ARE FREE TO DEFINE OURSELVES…

By the way if your argument is that the BNP is a separate church because it defines itself that way when its taxes are filed , I would’t use that without looking at the tax
filings of other lay groups . I asked a close relative who just happens to be in the Knights of Columbus and is 4th degree Knight ( I hope I have that right ) . Their group also has its own EIN and files its taxes separately from the diocese. and they are also
considered a separate corporate and non profit entity. And I would never consider calling
the K of C as non- Catholic.

May God Continue to shower his blessings on us all.

 

[frowacp]

you missed the whole point… K of C has no pastor. BNP has a pastor …as Record would show. If it has a pastor, and presented itself in its civil/legal transaction as a Church or religious organization then it is a separate entity. But the question is: Is BNP a Catholic entity just as every diocese (which is headed by a bishop who is a Diocesan pastor and ordained lawfully and sacramentally by the Catholic Church) is a catholic entity? Who ordained Pastor Stuart?

A record from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security reveals that a BNP member who applied for a special immigrant worker to work in BNP Church in Ontario, California, where he holds several titles, submitted his religious credentials issued by the Universal Life Church, not issued by the Catholic Church.

lefawe

 

[frowacp]

SPIRITUALLY , WE ARE FREE TO DEFINE OURSELVES…

You are absolutely right here… But a catholic group which defines itself as catholic must possess the elements that make it catholic. Unless BNP wants to define itself spiritually as it wishes without the official approval of the Catholic Church, then fine. Each one is free to define what or who he is spiritually.

lefawe:thumbsup: