Case Digest Aglipay vs Ruiz

Facts In May 1936, the managing director of Posts announced in the dailies of Manila that he would ordinance the progeny of legal tender stamps commemorating the celebration in the City of Manila of the 33rd International Eucharistic Congress, organized by the Roman Catholic Church. The askinger, Mons. Gregorio Aglipay, exacting Head of the Philippine Independent Church, in the fulfilment of what he considers to be a civic duty, put across Vicente Sotto, Esq. member of the Philippine Bar, to denounce the matter to the hot seat of the Philippines. In spite of the protest of the petitioners attorney, the Director of Posts publicly announced having sent to the get together States the designs of the postage for printing. The s encourage stamps were actually issued and sell though the greater part thereof remained unsold. The further deal of the stamps was sought to be prevented by the petitioner.Issue Whether the outcome of the postage stamps was in trespass of the Constituti on. Held Religious freedom as a constitutional mandate is not prohibition era of profound reverence for religion and is not a denial of its influence in human affairs. pietism as a profession of faith to an participating power that binds and elevates man to his Creator is recognized. And, in so far as it instills into the minds the purest principles of morality, its influence is deeply felt up and highly appreciated.When the Filipino people, in the preamble of their Constitution, implored the aid of Divine Providence, in order to establish a government that shall embody their ideals, conserve and develop the birthright of the nation, promote the general welfare, and secure to themselves and their posterity the blessings of freedom under a regime of justice, liberty and democracy, they thereby manifested their intense religious nature and placed starchy reliance upon Him who guides the destinies of men and nations.The elevating influence of religion in human society is recogniz ed here as elsewhere. Act 4052 contemplates no religious purpose in view. What it gives the Director of Posts is the discretionary power to determine when the issuance of special postage stamps would be expediencyous to the Government. Of course, the develop advantageous to the Government does not authorize the violation of the Constitution i. e. o appropriate, use or turn in of public money or property for the use, gather or support of a particular(prenominal) faction or church. In the case at bar, the issuance of the postage stamps was not inspired by every sectarian feeling to favor a particular church or religious denominations. The stamps were not issued and sold for the benefit of the Roman Catholic Church, nor were money derived from the trade of the stamps given to that church.The purpose of the issuing of the stamps was to take advantage of an event considered of international importance to give furtherance to the Philippines and its people and attract more tourist s to the country. Thus, instead of video display a Catholic chalice, the stamp contained a affair of the Philippines, the location of the City of Manila, and an inscription that reads Seat thirty-three International Eucharistic Congress, Feb. 3-7, 1937. The Supreme Court denied the petition for a writ of prohibition, without pronouncement as to costs.