Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 21 views

    Religion - Garces v. Estenzo, 104 SCRA 510

    Uploaded by

    Andre Ates
    The barangay council passed two resolutions to hire a lawyer to recover a religious image from a priest after a dispute over ownership. The image was purchased with barangay funds for community celebrations and made available to residents, not for any religious favoritism. The court found no violation of freedom of religion clauses, as using public funds for the image's acquisition and determining its custody did not interfere with residents' beliefs or favor any religion, since the image was intended for community use rather than exclusively for the church. Not every government action involving public money that has religious aspects violates separation of church and state.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Religion - Garces v. Estenzo, 104 SCRA 510

    Uploaded by

    Andre Ates
    21 views1 page
    The barangay council passed two resolutions to hire a lawyer to recover a religious image from a priest after a dispute over ownership. The image was purchased with barangay funds for community celebrations and made available to residents, not for any religious favoritism. The court found no violation of freedom of religion clauses, as using public funds for the image's acquisition and determining its custody did not interfere with residents' beliefs or favor any religion, since the image was intended for community use rather than exclusively for the church. Not every government action involving public money that has religious aspects violates separation of church and state.

    Original Title

    Religion_Garces v. Estenzo, 104 SCRA 510

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The barangay council passed two resolutions to hire a lawyer to recover a religious image from a priest after a dispute over ownership. The image was purchased with barangay funds for community celebrations and made available to residents, not for any religious favoritism. The court found no violation of freedom of religion clauses, as using public funds for the image's acquisition and determining its custody did not interfere with residents' beliefs or favor any religion, since the image was intended for community use rather than exclusively for the church. Not every government action involving public money that has religious aspects violates separation of church and state.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    21 views1 page

    Religion - Garces v. Estenzo, 104 SCRA 510

    Uploaded by

    Andre Ates
    The barangay council passed two resolutions to hire a lawyer to recover a religious image from a priest after a dispute over ownership. The image was purchased with barangay funds for community celebrations and made available to residents, not for any religious favoritism. The court found no violation of freedom of religion clauses, as using public funds for the image's acquisition and determining its custody did not interfere with residents' beliefs or favor any religion, since the image was intended for community use rather than exclusively for the church. Not every government action involving public money that has religious aspects violates separation of church and state.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    Garces v.

    Estenzo, 104 SCRA 510


    Facts:
    There are two (2) resolutions of the Barangay Council of Valencia, Ormoc City.
    These resolutions have been ratified by 272 voters, and said projects were
    implemented. The image was temporarily placed in the altar of the Catholic Church of
    the barangay. However, after a mass, Father Sergio Marilao Osmeña refused to return
    the image to the barangay council, as it was the church’s property since church funds
    were used in its acquisition.
    Resolution No. 10 was passed for the authorization of hiring a lawyer for the
    replevin case against the priest for the recovery of the image. Resolution No. 12
    appointed Brgy. Captain Veloso as a representative to the case. The priest, in his
    answer assailed the constitutionality of the said resolutions. The priest with Andres
    Garces, a member of the Aglipayan Church, contends that Sec. 8 Article IV (1) and Sec
    18(2) Article VIII) 2 of the constitution was violated.
    Issue:
    Whether or not any freedom of religion clause in the Constitution violated.
    Ruling:
    No. As said by the Court this case is a petty quarrel over the custody of the
    image. The image was purchased in connection with the celebration of the barrio fiesta
    and not for the purpose of favoring any religion nor interfering with religious matters or
    beliefs of the barrio residents. Any activity intended to facilitate the worship of the patron
    saint (such as the acquisition) is not illegal. The image was placed in a layman’s
    custody so that it could easily be made available to any family desiring to borrow the
    image in connection with prayers and novena. It was the council’s funds that were used
    to buy the image, therefore it is their property. Right of the determination of custody is
    their right, and even if they decided to give it to the Church, there is no violation of the
    Constitution, since private funds were used. Not every government activity which
    involves the expenditure of public funds and which has some religious tint is violative of
    the constitutional provisions regarding separation of church and state, freedom of
    worship and banning the use of public money or property.
    Principle:
    Not every governmental activity which involves the expenditure of public funds
    and which has some religious tint is violative of the constitutional provisions regarding
    separation of church and state, freedom of worship and banning the use of public
    money or property.

    You might also like