the church problem.docx

7/30/2019 THE CHURCH PROBLEM.docx

1/58

1

(Source: Henry Parker Willis(1905),Our Philippine problem: A study of

merican colonial policy, pp. 191-225)

THE CHURCH PROBLEM

THE problem of the relationsbetween government and religiousorganisations in the Philippines is of apeculiar type. For several hundredyears the Roman Catholic Church andthe state have been so closelyintertwined in the islands as to beinseparable to the eye of the ordinaryman. The church question has beenabove all things a question of politics.Little can be said of administrationunder the Spanish rgime withouttouching upon religious questions,nothing of the church without referenceto its political functions.

It was unavoidable that ourgovernment in the Philippines shouldbe obliged to meet and cope with this

situation. From the beginning,American administrators found theSpanish priests and friars generally


2/58

2

opposed to American rule and inclined

to throw obstacles in their way. Thiswould have been a serious state ofaffairs if the Spaniards had retainedany hold upon the natives. The fact thattheir influence had been largelyweakened through their ownmisgovernment placed them in theposition of an uninfluential third partybetween the foreign invaders and thedisaffected inhabitants. It had beenfeared by the religious authorities thattheir holdings of land and otherproperty would be forfeited to theUnited States, but having beenprotected in this matter through the

shrewd manoeuvring of the Spanishdiplomats at the Paris negotiations,they speedily began scheming to retaintheir property in its old form, and,through the recognition and aid of theUnited States, to regain their oldposition in the archipelago. The more

enlightened American administratorshad, however, set before themselvestwo cardinal objects, (1) reduction ofthe economic power of the church, and(2) expulsion of the religious ordersfrom the islands. Both these objectswould have to be obtained by

negotiation unless the United Stateswere to resort to extreme, possiblyillegal, means for their forcible


3/58

3

realisation.

The economic problem presentedby the church situation wasfundamentally agrarian. A large part ofthe land of the islands was in the handsof three orders of friars, theDominicans, Recoletos andAugustinians. Associated with theseorders was that of the Franciscans,which, however, is not permitted tohold property, except convents andschools.

The land held by the three orders inquestion was officially estimated

as follows:1

Dominicans 161,593 acres

Augustinians 151,742 acres

Recoletos 93,035 acres

406,370 acres

These holdings were chieflydistributed among the differentprovinces as follows:

Province of Cavite 121,747
http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#1http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#1http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#1http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#1


4/58

4

acres

Province of Laguna 62,172 acres

Province of Manila 50,145 acres

Province of Bulacan 39,441 acres

Province of Morong 4,940 acres

Province of Bataan 1,000 acresProvince of Cagayan 49,400 acres

Island of Cebu 16,413 acres

Island of Mindoro 58,455 acres

403,713

acres

The importance of the figures willbe better comprehended when it isstated that the total amount of land in

the Philippines is estimated at73,345,415 acres, of which probablynot over 4,940,000 acres are clearedand improved land held in privateownership. Not only did the friars holdabout one-tenth of all improved land,but their holdings included a very largepart of the best lands in thearchipelago. The mere fact that somuch agricultural property wascontrolled by three corporations would


5/58

5

alone have been of serious import.

When, however, it is considered thatthe owners of these lands were alsopractically the rulers of the country,and were at the same time grasping andoppressive landlords, it can beunderstood that the status to beoccupied by the friars was offundamental importance. A glance atthe table already furnished shows thatthe largest holdings of friar lands weresituated in Cavite and Laguna, andexperience showed that these provincesfurnished some of the fiercestresistance to Spanish control. Somerelation between land ownership and

the political problems connected withthe insurrection against Spain seems tobe established, and this is notsurprising when the political functionsof the friars are fully understood.According to the testimony of the"provincial" of the Franciscan order

furnished to the PhilippineCommission, the local padre or friar ina given town had duties as inspector ofschools, as president of the board ofhealth and as inspector of taxation. Hecertified to the correctness of the"cedula" or certificate of identification;

he had charge of the census of thetown, was supervisor of elections,president of the prison board and


6/58

6

member of the provincial board and of

the board for partitioning crown lands.Other duties also devolved upon him.There can be little doubt that thesegreat powers were abused, and that thepolitical authority of the friars wasemployed in extending their landholdings. Sometimes boundaries werestraightened, and neighbouring smallfarmers, who had supposed themselvesindependent landowners, suddenlyfound that they were tenants.Sometimes good pieces of governmentforest abutting upon the religiousestates were taken in by a resurvey.And constantly pressure was being

exerted upon wealthy men to transfertheir property at a nominal price to thereligious orders. Moreover, the orderspaid no taxes. All these causes offriction worked together to precipitate acontest between the people and theirrulers.

The secular representatives ofSpain wielded a relatively smallinfluence compared to that of the friars.They remained for relatively shortterms and were likely to find theirtenure of office yet more curtailed if

they should venture to interfere with orquestion friar control. Thedissatisfaction, which culminated in the


7/58

7

revolution, nominally against Spain,

was, therefore, really a revolt againstthe religious orders.

Upon assuming control in thePhilippines, the Civil Commission hadunavoidably to deal with the religiousquestion, especially in its economicaspects. The friars had left theirparishes, driven in by the first outbreakof the insurrection.2In their place thereremained a body of native priests whohad formerly acted as assistants to thecurates, and these at once took chargeof the churches. By the terms of theTreaty of Paris, the American

Government was bound to protect thereligious orders in their property rights.Whether this implied the necessity ofreturning them to their estates andsecuring to them the control of thechurches was another matter.

The Philippine Commissionaccorded from the outset very greatweight to the dangers involved in thereturn of the friars.

"If the friars return to theirparishes," wrote the Commission in its

first report, "though only under thesame police protection which theAmerican Government is bound to


8/58

8

extend to any other Spanish subjects

commorant in these islands, the peoplewill regard it as the act of thatgovernment. They have so long beenused to have every phase of theirconduct regulated by governmentalorder that the coming again of the friarswill be an executive order to them toreceive the friars as curates with theirold all-absorbing functions."

It was speedily recognised thatneither of the cardinal objects setbefore themselves by ourrepresentatives could be attained savethrough negotiation with and voluntary

agreement on the part of the friars,since the latter were protected by theTreaty of Paris, and could neither bedeprived of property really belongingto them nor, if well-behaved, beexpelled from the islands. Moreover,while the various details of the transfer

of the islands from Spain to the UnitedStates were being worked out, the friarshad taken occasion to protectthemselves by transferring theirproperty to certain individuals or tocompanies formed for the specialpurpose of taking them over.3After

much fruitless negotiation of anunofficial sort, the Commissionrecommended that authority be granted


9/58

9

it to issue bonds guaranteed by the

United States for the purpose of buyingthe estates of the religious orders, theseestates to be then partitioned and resoldto the tenants settled upon them.4Thisrecommendation was renewed in thesecond report of the Commission, andled to the insertion of provisions5inthe Civil Government Act of July 1st,1902, which included the followingfeatures

1. Authority to acquire and holdreal estate by the exercise of the rightof eminent domain.

2. Permission to use such authorityin acquiring the friar lands.

3. Power to issue 4 1/2% five-thirtybonds for the purchase of the lands.

4. Authority to treat the acquired

lands as a part of the public domainand to sell, convey, or lease them.

While the Civil Government Billwas under discussion, Governor Taftreturned to the United States to aid insecuring its passage, and was instructed

by President Roosevelt to visit Romeand confer with the Pope regarding thepurchase of the lands and the
http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#4http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#4http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#4http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#5http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#5http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#5http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#5http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#4


10/58

10

withdrawal of the friars.6The outcome

of these negotiations wasindeterminate, but Governor Taftbelieved that progress had been madein reaching an agreement7Such anagreement was in fact arrived at late in1903. On December 2d, theCommission entered into contractswith the companies to whom the landhad been transferred for the purchase o164,127 hectares of land at$7,239,784.66. Further, on April 26th,1904, an act was passed by theCommission for the arrangement of thebusiness details and for theinvestigation of the titles to the lands.

Meantime, a change of policy hadbeen determined upon by the RomanChurch. Archbishop Chapelle, whocame to the Philippines some time afterthe American occupation as ApostolicDelegate, had in 1901 attempted to

secure the return of some of the friarsto their parishes, but the difficultiesencountered seem to have convincedthe church authorities of the unwisdomof further efforts in the same direction.Cardinal Rampolla, in correspondencewith Governor Taft in 1902-03,

expressed a determination to recedefrom the policy of sending back thefriars, and many of them were


11/58

11

withdrawn from the islands or at all

events kept from returning. Thenumber actually in the Philippines isofficially stated as follows:

1898 1902

(DEC. 1)

1903

(DEC. 3)

Dominicans 252 127 83

Recoletos 327 76 53

Augustinians 346 111 67

Franciscans 107 66 43

Total 1,012 380 246

The act passed bythe Commission8for the satisfactorydisposition of the land questioncontained the following leadingprovisions:

1. Authority for the civil governor

to examine, through competentlawyers, the soundness of the titles tothe friar lands.


12/58

12

2. Instructions to the consulting

engineer to the Commission to surveythe lands for the purpose ofascertaining whether each tractcontains the number of acres itprofesses to have.

3. Authority for the civil governorto pay over the purchase money($7,239,784.66) to the corporations assoon as the titles had been found to besatisfactory.

4. Instructions to the Bureau ofPublic Lands to ascertain the actualnames, holdings, etc., of the settlers on

the lands, and to lease or sell suchholdings to the settlers occupyingthem, the purchase price in case of salenot to exceed the cost to thegovernment.

It would seem that the success

attendant upon the efforts of thePhilippine Commission has been verysatisfactory, but closer examinationseems to indicate that it is nominalrather than real. In the first place, theactual conditions of the friar landsproblem forbid that any such scheme as

that which has been undertaken by theCommission could meet with morethan very qualified success. Supposing


13/58

13

that the titles to the holdings of the

friars prove satisfactory, and supposingfurther that the transfers are duly madein good faith, so that the governmentbecomes the actual bona fide owner ofthe lands in controversy, the questionstill remains whether the proposedsettlement of the difficulties will satisfythe population. Here the inquirer isforced to recognise the fact that afterall what the tenants upon the friarestates wanted was not a chance to buytheir holdings, but the ownership ofthem in fee simple without furtherpayment of money. Thebasis for theagrarian element in the revolt against

the friars was, at the bottom, the beliefthat their claims to land were not wellfounded and should not be recognisedat all. As already briefly indicated,many of the estates had been enlargedby very irregular, not to say dishonest,means, and it is maintained by a great

number of tenants on the estates thatthey and not the friars are the realowners, and that annual rents paid bythem partook more truly of the natureof tribute, which they had to paybecause of the political power of thechurch and their hesitation to

antagonise the friar claimants. They donot look with more favour upon theidea of paying rent or purchase money


14/58

14

to the government of the United States

than to the religious orders. The factthat many of the friar titles can beconsidered valid only through longpossession or by a kind of prescriptiveright is freely admitted in conversationby members of the Commission whohave looked narrowly into the questioninvolved, and is hinted at inofficial utterances.9That such is theattitude of many of the tenants is madeclear by recent difficulties and bydisplays of hostility toward surveyingparties. Supposing further that theCommission has bought, in roundnumbers, 400,000 acres for $7,200,000,

the price has evidently averaged about$18 per acre, a very high valuationeven for the best land in thearchipelago. The provisions of the"Friar Land Act" authorise its sale atnot more than what the government haspaid, and it is intended to recover the

purchase money, so that about all thatis offered to the population is a chanceto buy land, which they in manyinstances regard as their, own, at aninflated price. A minor, though veryserious and probably long-continuing,difficulty is found in the necessity of

dividing the land into parcels andproperly adjusting the price of eachtract, a process likely to result in the


15/58

15

greatest imaginable friction, even if the

values are assigned with perfect justice.It is a fair question whether theCommission did well to recognise titlesof the kind the friars could offer. I havebeen informed by persons (attorneys)familiar with the legal aspects of thesituation through personal study andinvestigation that while many of thetitles are as good as any to be found inthe islands (there having been noregular system for the registration ofland or the recording of sales), it oftenhappens that two personsa religiousorder and a tenantcan show equallygood rights to a given parcel of land. In

such cases, the government, bypurchasing the friar titles, recognisesthem and thus assumes the character ofaggressor against the tenant.10

It may be, and it is, said that even ifthe price paid for the lands was too

high, and the titles in many cases bador defective, and even if money couldhave been saved and possible frictionwith the people eliminated by furtherdelay and by greater care innegotiation, it was well worth while tosettle the question at the earliest

possible moment and to end the debate.Though the government were to losethe bulk of what it is expending,


16/58


17/58

17

property. But that the real percentage is

much larger than this seems certain. Asalready seen, the lands were nominallytransferred to certain companies by thereligious orders. It is these companiesthat must make the final transfers, andwhile they may be able to convey thelands specified in the contracts, andmay be able to give titles of a sort tothese lands, this is far from meaningthat all the lands of the orders havebeen so transferred. It is believed bysome of those most familiar with theconditions that tracts of land have beenheld out under fictitious deeds and byother means. The lands thus excepted

are said to be among the best holdingsof the friars, and those whose titles areopen to the least doubt. The truth isprobably that the orders have sold at ahigh price to our government thelargest difficulties, the friction and thepopular hatred from which they

suffered, and have retained thesoundest elements in their property forthemselves. They will, moreover, try totrim the property to be transferred tothe government at every possible point,and suits to establish that certainestates were not included in the

contracts have alreadybeen filed.11How heavily thegovernment has had to pay for the load


18/58

18

of litigation and friction it has assumed

may be seen from the estimatedincomes (prior to the war) of the landsunder negotiation. These, according tothe Philippine Commission itself, wereas follows:12

Dominicans $211,536 Mexican

Augustinians 150,000 Mexican

Recolletos 88,464 Mexican

Total $450,000 Mexican

This sum may be generouslyestimated as equivalent to $225,000, U.S. We are to pay them $7,200,000.Were this sum to be lent in the islandsat the prevailing rate of 12 per cent forfirst-class real estate security, it wouldgive the orders an annual income of$864,000, or nearly four times what

they realised from rents. Even at 4per cent., the rate paid on the friar landbonds, the income would be $324,000.

The "friar question" has not beensettled. At most, it has only beenbrought a step nearer to solution, and

that at great cost to the government,which, of course, means to the mass ofthe people of the country. What has


19/58

19

been done, therefore, has been done in

a most expensive way

a way, too,which does not at all guarantee thewithdrawal of the friars. Not only dothey retain much property and admitthe continued presence in the islands offully one-fourth of their old number,but they are steadily drifting back toManila, and nearly every ship brings afew who are returning. The money paidthem for the lands must be invested,and it is the policy of the church to useit for the advancement of Catholicismin the Philippines. If it is to bereinvested in the islands, there is noreason why it should not furnish the

church as strong a temporal hold overthe native population, throughmortgage and other loans, as it everhad.

This agrarian problem, whichseemed to be at the outset the main, if

not the only, church question withwhich our government would have todeal, has, however, turned out to beonly the beginning. At least twoimportant, and probably continuing,questions have presented themselvesand are now pressing for solution. The

first is the broad general issue of thetreatment to be awarded the CatholicChurch by our government. The second


20/58

20

has lately been pushed forward by the

appearance of divided counsels uponthe church question among the nativesthemselves.

The relation between the Americanauthorities and the chiefs of theecclesiastical hierarchy in the islandshave been a matter of progressivedevelopment. At the outset, ourrepresentatives were distinctly hostileto the church and were inclined to treatthe discredited Spanish hierarchy as ifit were identical with the church itself.Further experience in the Philippinesbrought the Commission to see what an

immense power was still wielded bythe church as such. While the friar landdiscussion was still in progress, theregrew up an unmistakable desire on thepart of those representing ourgovernment to make use of the stillgreat power of the church as a means o

political control, rather than, byopposing it, to keep it continuouslyagainst American rule. There began avigorous effort on the part of our publicmen for the substitution of American inthe place of Spanish priests, the ideabeing that the attitude of American

priests toward the United StatesGovernment would be a reflection ofthe attitude of the Spanish members of


21/58

21

the religious orders toward their own

country. This effort so far succeeded asto bring about the nomination ofAmericans to the high ecclesiasticalposts in the Philippines,13the questionhow to dispose of the rank and file ofSpanish members of the religiousorders being left nominally for theseecclesiastical authorities to deal with.

Meanwhile, too, a marked changehad come over the attitude of thechurch toward American rule. Thereactionary attitude of Spanishecclesiastics naturally was abandonedas Americans took their places. But the

church was still unfriendly. Many of itsauthorities openly supported themovement for Philippine independencewhich was being maintained in theUnited States. They felt that thecontinued determination of ourgovernment to evict the friars might be

merely the precursor of an anti-Catholic policy, and that a nativegovernment carried on by nativeCatholics would be far easier to dealwith. A radical change came over thisattitude upon the appearance of adangerous and extensive schism in the

church under the leadership of PadreGregorio Aglipay, a former priest andex-insurrecto general. The rapid spread


22/58

22

of the heresy showed that native rule

would be far from implying Catholicdomination and might mean thedownfall of the church itself. The truepolicy of the church was thus displayedas union with the American authoritiesand support of the rule of the UnitedStates in the Philippines. Theacceptance of this policy was at firstprobably unconscious, but is nowcertainly well understood andrecognised. It appeared very clearlyduring the Presidential campaign of1904, in the political preaching ofRoman prelates in the United States,and was thus clearly set forth in a

despatch to the New YorkEveningostpresumably by Mr. F. E. Leupp,

the biographer and newspaperspokesman of the President:

The Catholic Church believes thatthe Republican administration stands in

the Philippine Islands for themaintenance of the claims of theRoman organisation to the churchproperty, as against the demands of theAglipayan schismatics. The latter arguethat the churches were built by thecommunity through forced labour, and

accordingly belong to the community,as its majority may determine. Thisidea has not been sustained by the Taft


23/58

23

government. In helping to save the

islands from the Aglipayan movement,which was believed to be at heart asmuch devoted to an independentgovernment as to an independentchurch, the Roman Catholics feelkindly disposed toward the Republicanadministration. More than that, theybelieve that to set the Filipinos adrift asan independent people would lead to anindependent church; and from this timeforth the Catholic Church can probablybe counted as in favour of maintainingthe status quo in the archipelago.Whether future administrations willacquire more colonial territory cannot

now be foreseen; but whereever thechurch issue is involved a valuable allymay be counted on in advance.

In the Philippines, the alliancebetween church and secular authoritiesis even more apparent. Concessions to

the older church have been made inseveral ways.14In the matter of thefriar lands, as elsewhere seen, theadministration practically consented tothe retention of a very considerableamount of property by the religiousorders, besides paying an exorbitant

price for the land taken. Then whenfears began to be loudly expressedfrom clerical sources concerning the


24/58

24

increasing influence of the American

schools and their alleged"Protestantising" tendency, a consciouseffort was made to secure Catholicteachers from the United States, and aconsiderable body of them wasobtained prior to the time when theteaching force was put under civilservice rules. It is well understood thatCommissioner Smith (who is a devoutCatholic) was appointed by way ofrecognition of the Catholic influencesin the United States.15Various otherexamples of the special regard of thegovernment for the Catholic Churchmight be cited.

The object it is hoped toaccomplish by the aid of the CatholicChurch, manned by American priests,is the same as that which was attainedby the Spanish priests, who co-operated with the Spanish rulers in

dominating the Philippines. Had it notbeen for the corruption and oppressionof the friars, the aid of the church incontrolling the Roman Catholic nativeswould have been incalculable. Whatcould be done by a Roman Catholichierarchy today, if purged of the

objectionable elements which have solong cursed the natives, would be less,but might be still considerable. The


25/58

25

Commission, in fact, naively referred

to the friars in its first report as "priestswho are still subjects of a monarchywith which the American Governmenthas been lately at war, and who havenot the slightest sympathy with thepolitical principles of civil libertywhich the American Governmentrepresents." The political advantagethat might be gained by a change in thecomposition of the Philippinepriesthood was also recognized.

It would, of course, be of muchassistance to the American cause if theCatholic Church were to send among

the people American priests with thelove of their country that they havealways shown and with their clearunderstanding of civil liberty andconservative popular government . . . .

It is certain that the Commission

has always strongly favoured theintroduction of American priests intothe islands, and apparently relies todayvery largely upon what may be done bysuch priests when they have beenintroduced in sufficient numbers andfirmly placed.

The only weak point in thisreasoning seems to lie in the


26/58

26

assumption that American churchmen

are more acceptable to the natives thanSpaniards. Evidence in support of sucha supposition is not wholly clear. Therevolution struck not solely at theeconomic power of the church, but alsoat its policy of exalting foreigners anddepressing the status of natives in theecclesiastical hierarchy. Fully asimportant as the demand for changedagrarian conditions was the demand forfull, perhaps sole, recognition of thenative priesthood in the archipelago.The American ecclesiastic is doubtlessfar more upright, according to ourstandards, but he is hardly more

acceptable, according to those of thenatives, than the Spaniard. He, too, is aforeigner.

It is clear, therefore, that animportant defection from the CatholicChurch would materially weaken the

hierarchy as an aid to our government,and that our present policy wouldcommit us to do what we consistentlycan to suppress such a revolt. Such arevolt has occurred, and constitutes thethird of the important problemsreferred to above as constituting the

crux of the religious situation.

From the beginning, a large


27/58

27

element among the natives, which was

deeply and permanently disaffectedtoward the Catholic Church, watchedwith interest for the development of theAmerican ecclesiastical policy. In themeanwhile, various efforts to organisenative opinion had been made. Whenthe real nature of our religious policybecame apparent to the natives, theferment already pervading all classes ofsociety increased. Military effort hadbeen fruitless, the attempt to organisethe national spirit by means of clubsand workingmen's unions had beenbrought to nothing. It remained to seewhether a religious schism could

succeed, a separate religiousorganisation recognising native aims bemaintained. Nor was it strange thatsuch a movement should crystalliseabout some of the revolutionaryleaders, who were known to be in full-sympathy with national aims. Thus was

laid a foundation upon which shortlysprang up as a superstructure areligious organisation apparentlycontaining a large percentage of thepopulation of the archipelago. It is saidthat when the Americans were about totake Manila, Archbishop Nozaleda,

foreseeing the failure of the Spanishcause, and fearing the loss of all churchproperty, cast about for a means of


28/58

28

protection. In his extremity, he is said

to have concerted with GregorioAglipay, a native priest, plans wherebythe latter should go among the nativesand organise a pretended churchdistinct from the orthodox organisation.Secretly, this church was to regaincontrol of the estates and to hold themin trust for the orders, but all this wasupon the assumption that Aguinaldowould be left in control of the islands.Aglipay is said to have been secretlyconsecrated a bishop in recognition ofhis prospective services, and to havegone out upon his mission with theunderstanding that its success would

result in still moresubstantial rewards.16The outcome ofthe war, assuring American rule, andthe Treaty of Paris, guaranteeing theorders in the possession of theirproperty, led Nozaleda, always a keen"businessman," to feel that Aglipay and

his work could be disowned. He in factrefused to recognise any part of thealleged bargain with Aglipay or toconsider him a bishop. This ledAglipay to take thought whether, in theexisting state of public opinion, anindependent Catholic organisation

might not succeed; and, in companywith other disaffected men, to organisetheIglesia Catholica Independiente of


29/58

29

the Philippines, usually called

theIglesia Filipina.

The doctrines and position of thischurch as claimed by its adherents maybe compactly stated asfollows:17

The Iglesia Filipina has more than250 priests and 20 bishops, the formerdistributed among all the provinces, thelatter in the principal places. It has tenseminaries at various points in thearchipelago, and includes 4,000,000members. This church is recognised byall the churches in Europe, America,and the English possessions in Asia

and Oceanica, except by Rome. Thechief Bishop is frequently invited to theinternational Christian assemblies ofEurope and America. Its doctrines arerationalistic, conforming rigorously tothe results of modern science. Itaccepts Darwinism, harmonising it

with Biblical doctrine. It denies thetrinity of the persons of the Divinity,but believes in a trinity of attributesand names. The explanation of this ideaaccepted by the church is entirely newand peculiar to itself, founded uponreasoning based on scriptural text and

upon rationalist writings. It deniesoriginal sin, as well as the view that theconsequences of such sin were expiated


30/58

30

through Jesus Christ, but it maintains

that Christ's sacrifice has redeemed usfrom our own errors, weaknesses, andpassions by means of his divineattributes and inimitable example, butnot through an actual material sacrifice.It aims in its constitution and rules tore-establish a more pure democracyand the common holding of wealthwhich Jesus preached and the apostlespractised. The explanation afforded byits catechism of the creation of theworld follows recent geologicaldiscoveries.

The Roman Church has suffered

greatly from desertion and defectionbecause the Pope undertakes tomaintain in the parishes friars who aremost odious to the country, owing tothe great evils they have caused it. TheAmerican bishops likewise haveproved themselves very distasteful to

the people because of their efforts tosustain the friars. For that reason, of the6,000,00 or 7,000,000 FilipinoCatholics formerly counted by it, itwould be difficult to find 1,000,000now remaining. The former membershave chiefly passed over to the Iglesia

Filipina, which is the representative ofthe wishes of Philippine Catholics. Therest have become Protestants.


31/58

31

In general, the advanced doctrines

of the Iglesia Filipina aim to re-establish evangelical truth, disfiguredas it has been by the Romanists, and torestore the pre-eminence of thePhilippine clergy, which has beenusurped by the friars.18

It would be out of place in thisdiscussion to do more than indicate thebearing of the doctrines thus outlined.It may be added, however, that thestatement just quoted represents viewsthat are beginning to make headwayamong the upper classes of nativeFilipinos. The ordinary labourer in the

rice fields knows and cares little ornothing for purely doctrinaldiscussions. The Iglesia Filipina offersthe same service and the same festivals,enjoins the same duties and recognisesthe same principles of conduct as theCatholic Church. More than this the

average man does not ask, and when heis informed that the Iglesia Filipinastands for certain important causes thehumbling of the religious orders, thegreater recognition of the nativepriesthood and the idea of Philippinenationalism in generalhe is ready to

transfer his support from the ancientchurch to what he considers the newform of the same faith. To this extent,


32/58

32

therefore, the Iglesia Filipina is a

political factor of serious importance.

It is not primarily with theecclesiastical status of the church, butwith its significance as a social andpolitical power that we have to do. Asalready stated, the new organisationrelied in the beginning very largelyupon those of independenttemperament who had in manyinstances been identified with nationalmovements in other forms. As timewent on, and as the movement tookdefinite shape, it passed very farbeyond its original limits and assumed

a new character. It is charged by some,especially by those who represent theCatholic Church proper, that the newmovement both has been and isinsurrectionary in character; that itsleaders are collecting funds for thesupport of new revolutionary

outbreaks; that its chief men are swornmembers of the Katipunan society, andmuch more to the same purport. Myown inquiries have failed to convinceme of the truth of any of theseassertions, and while it is clear that theAglipayan Church contains many

radicals and malcontents, as well as thegreat body of those who smarted fromfriar rule and who dislike foreign


33/58

33

control, whether in church or state, I

believe that no evidence exists to showthat the movement has an organised orself-conscious political character of anysort whatever.

The Commission, however, isoutspoken in its belief that the Aglipaymovement has such a political content.Instead of according to the movementthe same standing that is accorded toany other church, strong suspicionseems to be entertained concerning it.Aglipay himself is plainly spoken of bythe members of the Commission as a"danger," and it seems to be only the

religious character of the movementand the fear of charges that might bebased on religious persecution thatprevents the Commission fromvigorously attacking Aglipay and hisfollowing. What seems to be desired isthat the hands of the orthodox church

should be upheld and its armstrengthened in dealing with theschismatics, that the schism may beended and the hierarchy brought intoharmony with the authorities of thestate.

The church situation is likely tobecome critical in a very short time. Itwill soon have to be decided who


34/58

34

actually owns the church buildings and

church property of the islands.Throughout the Philippine archipelagothere may be seen massive stonechurches worthy to stand in a Europeancapital, rising above the nips roofs andunsanitary cabins of the congregation.These poor people, who barely makethe living of the day by the day's toil,built these structures either by theirenforced labour or by gifts of moneyand produce, wrung from their hardhands by the cruelest oppression andthe most calculating appeals tosuperstitious fear. They not only builtthe churches, but they equipped them

magnificently, and in some instancesprovided jewels and altar accessoriesworth many thousands, even hundredsof thousands, of dollars.

Today the legal status of the churchquestion is absolutely confused and

indeterminate. In an order given outabout a year ago, Governor Taftdirected that churches should in allcases remain in the hands of thoseactually in possession until the mattercould be referred to the courts by thatparty to the controversy which should

feel itself ready to test it there. Theresult has been that in most cases thepriest in charge has been regarded as


35/58

35

the actual holder of the church. Where

he and his congregation have turnedAglipayan, he has been able to carrythe church itself into the ranks of thereformers. Where the congregation hasrevolted, but the priest has stood fast,the church building has remained theproperty of the established hierarchy.In no case, probably, has a priest beenbold enough to join the new movementwithout being accompanied by hispeople.

To whom do these churchesbelong? Are they the property of theCatholic hierarchy or of the inhabitants

of the municipalities where they stand?The people who built them claim themas the property of the municipality, andthey protest that they shall be used inthe service of the church to which theyhave given their allegiance. Thatchurch is in many places the Iglesia

Filipina, for all through the islandswhole congregations, towns andmunicipalities have gone overenmasse to Aglipay, and they demandthat the proprietorship of the churchshall accompany the members. Theconstituted authorities of the Roman

Catholic organisation hold a differentview, and as a result have resorted tovarious measures for regaining control


36/58

36

of the churches. The struggle is now

approaching a climax where it willhave to be decided by the courts of law.Heretofore, the Catholic Church as awhole has been exceedingly reluctantto recognise the temporal authority byresorting to legalproceedings.19InSpanish times, such action on the partof the church would have beenunknown, and to concede that a changein affairs has occurred would be aconcession to secular power which thehierarchy does not feel disposed tomake. Facts, however, are provingstronger than prejudices, and beyonddoubt the church will shortly be forced

to give over its scruples and invoke theaid of the law, unless it is willing to seeits buildings slip gradually out of itscontrol. Then the question of ethics asto the true ownership of the churchproperties will have to be decidedforit is a question of ethics pure and

simple, the legal problems involvedbeing wholly technical. In this decisionby the courts the attitude of theAmerican administration will havecontrolling importance, and if itfavours the older church, thatorganisation will be recognised as the

true owner of these buildings and theirequipment. This is no unwarrantedreflection upon the insular judiciary.


37/58

37

Experience has shown that whatever

may be its ability in matters whereplain legal issues are at stake, causesinvolving political considerations willalways be decided in harmony with thewishes of the government. Thisconclusion is simply an observationfrom facts. The American Governmentthus has presented to it a political andmoral question of great moment. Whatwill be the result of a decision adverseto the claims of the Aglipayans?

Many think that the loss of itschurch properties would disintegratetheIglesia Filipina and ultimately

drive the schismatics back into theCatholic communion. Those who lookmore closely believe that themovement is now too firmlyestablished for any such result to bepossible, and they maintain that actionof the sort suggested, whether masked

under forms of law or not, will merelyintensify the national feeling and makemore bitter the antipathy of theFilipinos to American rule: It will, theybelieve, perpetuate the struggle againstclerical domination. It will strengthenthe belief that the Americans, like the

Spanish, are using the church as anagency in secular rule.


38/58

38

Aglipay himself does not demand

the actual ownership of the churchbuildings and the property belongingthereto. His contention is that theseproperties belong in justice to theUnited States, as the successor ofSpain, and that they should beemployed for public (religious) uses inprecisely the same way as in the caseof municipal and provincial buildings.

"I give it as my opinion," he says inan authorisednewspaper communication,20"that thegovernment of the United States, assuccessor of the government of Spain,

is the only party that can showownership or is competent to appear incourt, just as in the San Jos Collegecase, which is now pending in theManila courts. And I may say, inexplanation, that the position of theIndependent Catholic Church in every

case has been to have the churchproperty registered with the municipalofficials in trust for the people, and weare entitled to the use of such propertywhere the great majority of the peoplebelong to our branch of the CatholicChurch.

"Every case thus far brought incourt has been only for the possession,


39/58

39

as there never was a title issued to any

church any more than in the case ofany other government building, andtherefore it will be seen that theestablishment of ownership by any onebut the United States Government isabsurd."

A final judgment as to the legalbasis of such a contention as this mustrest upon investigations into therelations between the Catholic Churchand the Spanish Government in thePhilippines during the periodantecedent to the American occupation.It is the contention of the Aglipay party

or church that Pope Alexander VI, bythe bull of May 3d, 1493, in giving tothe Catholic kings of Spain supremecontrol over all matters of the RomanCatholic Church in the Spanishcolonies, surrendered also the title toall religious buildings in those

colonies. Royal orders by the Spanishkings undoubtedly did from time totime direct how the churches should bebuilt andadministered.21Beyondquestion, too, church and state werepractically identical in the Philippines,so that what belonged to the church as

a whole belonged really to the state.

Legal questions aside, the problems


40/58

40

of equity involved are perfectly clear.

The people built the churches by theirforced labour, and if they belong to anyone, they belong to those who builtthem or their successors. It does notseem open to question that where awhole town has changed its religion itshould be allowed to carry with it theuse of the house of worship which ititself erected. How will theCommission decide this questionthrough the courts? The principles oflaw which govern it must be of anextremely elastic character, capable ofinterpretation in almost any mannerthat may be suggested by authority. In

fact, the problem is essentially ethicaland political rather than legal in itscharacter. It must be solved primarilyupon equitable principles, andsecondarily only upon a basis of legaltechnicality. The decision shoulddepend upon the view taken of the

rights of the case and the wishes of thepeople, not at all upon politicalconsiderations of party standing, asaffected by the attitude of a powerfuland semi-political church party in theUnited States. As yet, however, thebalance has seemed to swing in the

direction of the Catholics. It hasappeared that in spite of GovernorTaft's circular concerning undisputed


41/58

41

possession of the churches, the

government has been willing to wink atforcible effort by the Romanists todispossess their opponents, but never atviolent action on the part of theAglipayans.

An incident which took place atIloilo is given as a case in point. In thatcase, the people of La Paz, a suburb ofIloilo, having all turned Aglipayans,received a priest who used the parishchurch for worship. The SpanishCatholic acting bishop having broughtsuit to regain possession of theproperty, the case was dismissed by the

American judge before whom it cameup; on the ground that no evidence oftitles of ownership or possession hadbeen presented by the Catholic party tohim. Yet some few months later aCatholic bishop with a crowd of armedretainers, Spaniards and Americans,

took possession of the church, and,strange to say, was allowed by thegovernment to continue in possession.

To state the precise extent of thefollowing gained by the Iglesia Filipinawould be difficult, if not impossible.

Aglipay himself estimates the numberof his followers at 4,000,000, but someenthusiastic partisans raise this figure


42/58

42

to 5,000,000. More conservative

estimates, made by Americanobservers, place the number ofAglipayans at 3,000,000. Catholicauthorities are inclined tounderestimate the strength of themovement very considerably. Theyusually speak of the whole organisationas artificial and temporary, and placethe number of people actually engagedin it far too low. The truth is that themovement has gained a very stronghold in many parts of the islands, andhas left other portions entirelyuntouched. This, of course, is due tothe extreme shortness of the period

during which active operations havebeen conducted by the Aglipayans,while on the other hand the newness ofthe movement makes it impossible tosay how firm will be the allegiance ofthose who have already acceptedmembership in it. Aglipay has

apparently secured firm foothold in andabout Manila and in the northernprovinces of Luzon. In Panay and

egros something has been done, and abeginning made in Cebu. In Romblon,Masbate and many of the southernislands, as well as in the southern parts

of Luzon, relatively little effort hasbeen made and small progressconsequently achieved. But it is


43/58

43

certainly true that in many regions

where no Aglipay churches have beenestablished, dissatisfaction is such thata revolt from the established church isever imminent, and vigorous work onthe part of Aglipay himself or hisfollowers and representatives may atany time cause further defection. Noone can visit the provinces of thePhilippines without being convinced ofthe immense extent of the disaffectiontoward the Catholic Church as well asof the great hold, actual and potential,already obtained by the Aglipayans.The attitude of a section of the peopleand of the government of the

Philippines toward the establishedchurch may be comprehended from asingle striking example22of thecontroversy now in progress. AtTernate, in Cavite province, about fiftymiles from Manila, on the shores of thebay, a congregation of Catholics had

turned Aglipayans almost to a man.Ternate was a little hamlet containingabout 2,000 people dwelling in acollection of nipa huts about an oldstone church. The church itself hadbeen constructed by the labour of thesefishermen, and contained an image of

great sanctity. During the year 1903,when the secession of the churchtook place,23the usual question had


44/58

44

arisen regarding the ownership of the

property, and a judge in Cavite towhom the keys had been intrustedturned them over to the priest of aneighbouring parish, thus putting himin charge of the church. From thisaction an appeal was taken by theseceding congregation. While thechurch property was in dispute,Archbishop Harty determined to makea journey through Cavite province. Forthis purpose he was provided by thegovernment with an army wagon andhorses, a fact which aroused muchindignation among the Aglipayans.Among other places, Ternate was

visited, and the archbishop not havingkeys with him, it was sought to forceopen the door of the church. Thisaction was resisted by the inhabitants,who had hastily gathered about theentrance; and the priests of thearchbishop's party persisting in their

efforts to force an entrance, a riotoccurred, in which the priests knockeddown and injured two women. Onarriving at the neighbouring town of

aic after this incident, warrants weresworn out for those concerned in the"riot." A party of scouts was sent to

Ternate, arriving there about midnight;the accused were dragged from theirhouses (the most seriously injured


45/58

45

woman being carried in a hammock),

and the party returned to Naic about2.30 A.M., where the prisoners werelocked up without anyaccommodations whatever until thefollowing morning. Bail was then fixedso high that it was several days beforethe prisoners could secure it.

Meantime, the controversy hadassumed a new phase. Shortly after thesecession of the Ternate church hadbeen effected, the parish had beenreorganised in the interest of Aglipayand a priest placed in charge of it. Theold church being still in litigation, a

nipa structure had been erected, andsome of the images, including theChrist of peculiar sanctity alreadymentioned, as well as altar furniture,removed from the old building to thenew. After the resistance to thearchbishop, it seems to have been

desired to wreak vengeance upon thecongregation. A scout officer armedwith a search warrant was thereforedespatched to Ternate, and afterbreaking into the nipa church andgoing through the priest's house, hefinally removed the images and

ornaments. These he deposited with aneighbouring Catholic priest, and at thesame time charges of robbery were


46/58

46

preferred against the people of Ternate.

A sergeant of scouts, who had beenpresent at the time of the archbishop'svisit, but had failed to repress thepopular demonstration because of lackof orders, was reduced to the ranks.Moreover, warrants issued at theinstance of the Ternate natives againstthose who had looted their church weredisregarded. Many days elapsed beforeservice of them could be secured, andthen only after agitation and protest. Itis fair to add that during the remainderof the archbishop's progress throughthe province he was accompanied bythe American provincial governor,

Captain Shanks, who brought with himan escort of constabulary.

This incident is representative, andthrows a strong light upon the presentsituation in the islands. In this case, notonly was the Taft order to await

udicial decision as to the ownership ofthe church neglected, but the violatorsof the order were upheld, furnishedwith government transportation, andescorted by the provincial governorhimself. Would the same aid have beenaccorded to Aglipay had he chosen to

travel through a Catholic country? Toask such a question is to answer it.Again, in the administration of the law


47/58

47

it seems clear that gross discrimination

in favour of the regular priesthood andagainst the schismatics was practised,while the unjustifiable brutality of theAmerican scout officer in serving hiswarrant upon the Aglipayans affords astriking contrast to his undue leniency,and even neglect, in serving thewarrants upon Roman Catholics. Inthis, as in so many other cases, the realdifficulties of the situation are chieflyattributable to a tendency on the part ofthe government to co-operate withCatholics in forcing the older form ofreligious polity upon the people whileconversely discouraging the national

religious striving which shows itself inthe Aglipay movement.

The religious question of chiefimportance in the Philippines is now,of course, the relations between thegovernment and the Catholic and

Aglipayan churches, respectively.Since the American occupation, therehas, however, sprung up a group ofProtestant churches under the guidanceof missionaries sent from the UnitedStates, each seeking to do the work ofhis denomination. While these

churches do not, of course, enter to anyconsiderable extent into the politicalsituation as factors therein, they are


48/58

48

serving as a complicating element, and

are indirectly producing results of moreor less importance.

Thus far, the actual hold gained bythe Protestant churches hasbeen small.24As a rule, they have nottrespassed upon one another, and thecause of their lack of success must besought elsewhere than in internaldissension. Some of them report thatthey can give no statistics ofmembership or converts, others claim afew thousand converts, but admit thatthe number of actual adherents varieslargely from year to year, almost from

day to day. It is true of manymissionary workers in the Philippinesthat they confess to seriousdiscouragement over the prospects forthe development of their respectivechurches. In many instances, they havebeen unable to make any serious

impression upon the natives and havehad to confine themselves to workamong the resident and transientAmericans with perhaps thedistribution of Bibles or Testamentsamong the natives as a side issue.While our schools have been hard at

work teaching the natives English,representatives of Bible societies havebeen equally busy in translating the


49/58

49

Scriptures into the dialect and in

distributing them. Undoubtedly, theAmericans themselves need all, andmore than all, the spiritual aid anddirection that can be afforded them bythe missionaries, but the latter were notsent to the Philippines with that objectin mind, and they consider it adisappointing limitation upon theirwork when they are unable to reachany except men of their own race.

In the search for a reason for theirlack of success among the natives,missionaries and others interested intheir work often fell back upon the

hostility of the Catholic Church. Thatsuch hostility exists is indubitable,though it should be observed that theaggressive attitude of certain of themissionaries is the thing primarilyresponsible for it. Many of them cameto the islands apparently with the

notion that their first and mostimperative duty was to fight theCatholics, and this standpoint hasconstantly appeared in every step theyhave taken. That the Catholic Churchhas repaid the evident hostility ofProtestants by the display of contempt

and dislike was to be expected. Itsconfessed opinion is that while it canwelcome Protestants who come to


50/58

50

minister to white men, it cannot receive

them in friendship, if they seek to makeproselytes among the Catholic natives.Catholic authorities profess to believethat the natives are "not fitted forProtestantism," and that efforts topropagate that form of religion amongthem can be greeted only as dangerousdesigns for stirring up strifeandunrest.25 The appearance ofProtestant churches upon the scene,although the numbers of their adherentshave been small, has had a peculiareffect upon the political situation.

It has alarmed the Catholicsthis

alarm being greatly intensified by theadvent of the American school systemand by the sudden appearance of the"Aglipayanos." It has necessarily putthe members of the Commission ontheir guard, by making them feel thatconcession to Catholics that might be

unwisely generous or extreme incharacter would lay them open toattack at home. At the same time thearoused feeling of the Catholicsthemselves has made them put forthevery effort to strengthen them selvesthrough political pressure exerted at

Washington. Even where theCommission was evidently with theecclesiastical authorities, and ready to


51/58

51

work their will, although through forms

of law and by regular modes ofprocedure, these authorities have veryfrequently been restive and impatient,fearing that, through political timidityor the scheming of enemies, their plansmight fail of success. On the whole,therefore, while the advent ofProtestantism in the islands has been acheck of considerable importance uponany tendency toward thereestablishment of Catholic dominancethat might have existed, it is certainlytrue that unnecessary friction has beenproduced by unwise and tactless actionon their part.

The real reason why Protestantchurches have made such slenderprogress in securing a foothold amongthe natives is seldom understood. TheFilipinos as a people are exceedinglysensitive to race distinctions. This

characteristic, which was developed bytheir experience for so many years as asubject people, has been accentuated bythe sharp racial distinctions drawn byAmericans and the disposition of manyof the latter to treat them as "negroes."It is most unfortunate that any

distinction of race, even if onlyapparent, should have been allowed toappear in the work of the religious


52/58

52

denominations that are seeking the

conversion of the Filipino masses fromCatholicism. This, however, has beenthe case. The establishment of separatechurches for Americans and natives byvarious religious denominations is saidto have operated to widen the breach offeeling and sympathy between theFilipinos and our people. What is moreto the present purpose, it is believed tohave had the effect of repelling thenatives from a form of religion whichapparently recognises race distinctionsas fundamental. Intelligent Filipinos,with whom the writer has discussed thereligious question, often place the race

issue foremost as a factor in explainingthe relatively slight success of theProtestant churches in the Philippines.If, therefore, this recognition isaccorded to race prejudice by themissionaries, it will doubtless retardthe growth of their churches, and just

so far as the natives feel that otherchurches have no place for them uponequal terms with other members, willthey tend to drift into the nativereligious organizationthe Aglipaymovement.

If the Protestant churches adoptappropriate methods, they may yet domuch in assisting the natives, while at


53/58

53

the same time enlarging their own

membership to a marvellous extent.But they have so far hardly met thenatives on their own ground, and thusfar the results of their labours must beaccounted indirect and semi-politicalrather than immediate and religious.

All in all, the church question in thePhilippines is discouraging. A realsettlement has been prevented by theapparent adoption of a pusillanimousattitude on the part of the Commissiontoward the Catholic Church and by aseeming desire to gain its aid as anagent in political control. When the

United States took possession of thePhilippines it found there a populationintensely and bitterly opposed to thecontinued rule of the Catholic Churchin the islands. There is not anauthoritative writer upon Philippineconditions who does not recognise the

fact that this feeling was a primarycause of the insurrection. That beingthe case, absolute separation betweenchurch and State, and careful avoidanceof anything resembling concessions tothe church, was a fundamental axiomof successful government. It was

recognised as such by our authoritiesfrom the beginning; and, had they beenable to live up to the terms of their first


54/58

54

professions, none of the church

questions now threatening could havearisen. The fact that our administrationis today deeply involved in churchcomplications of different sorts isattributable simply to political timidityand fears of the results that mightfollow in the United States upon apolicy which was even in appearanceanti-catholic.

1 Report U. S. P. C., 1901, pp. 27, 28. [back totext]

2 In 1898, there were in the islands 746 regularparishes, 105 mission parishes, and 116missions967 in all. Of the regular parishes,all but 150 were administered by monks of the

Dominican, Augustinian, and Franciscanorders, to which natives were not admitted. Of1,124 friars in the archipelago in 1896, only472 remained in 1901, according to thePhilippine Commission (First Report, U. S. P.C., 1901, p. 23). [back to text]

3 First Report U. S. P. C., 1901, p. 32. [back to

text]

4 Second Report U. S. P. C., 1902, p. 32. [backto text]
http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%201http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%201http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%201http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%201http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%202http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%202http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%202http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%203http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%203http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%203http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%203http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%204http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%204http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%204http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%204http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%204http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%204http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%203http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%203http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%202http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%201http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%201


55/58

55

5 Laws, Vol. I, 1903, pp. 1071, 1072, secs. 63-65. [back to text]

6 Third Report U. S. P. C., Washington, 1903,p. 24. [back to text]

7 Ibid.,p. 25. [back to text]

8 No. 1120, April 26th, 1904. [back to text]

9 First Report U. S. P. C., 1901, p. 27. [back totext]

10 In some such cases the Commission, underadvice of its attorneys, has lately declined totake over particular estates. It has also obtainedguarantees from some of the orders (Report,1905, p. 30). [back to text]

11 The reports of its lawyers have alreadyenabled the Commission to reduce the allegedamount, and consequently value, of some ofthe estates to be purchased (Report U. S. P. C.,1905). [back to text]

12 Report U. S. P. C., 1901, p. 28. [back to

text]

13 This, I am informed by high ecclesiasticalauthority, was a cardinal point in Mr. Taft'snegotiations at Rome. [back to text]

14 One way in which the government shows itsleaning toward, and wish to conciliate, the

Catholic authorities is through the furnishing oftransportation to them as desired and throughgranting to them an official quality notaccorded to any other persons outside the
http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%205http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%205http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%205http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%206http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%206http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%206http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%207http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%207http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%207http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%208http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%208http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%208http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%209http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%209http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%209http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%209http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2010http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2010http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2010http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2011http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2011http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2011http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2012http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2012http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2012http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2012http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2013http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2013http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2013http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2013http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2012http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2012http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2011http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2010http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%209http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%209http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%208http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%207http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%206http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%205


56/58

56

administrative circle. Catholic dignitaries arefrequently provided with army wagons for

making pastoral tours, and occasionally a guardof constabulary is put at their disposal. It hasnot been unknown that the governor of aprovince should accompany the constabularyguard in such a progress. Launches andsteamboats belonging to the coast guard fleetare placed at the service of the dignitaries ofthe church in order to facilitate their operations,

a steamer being sometimes especially charteredor assigned to a particular trip in order to meetthe desires of a given prelate. [back to text]

15 Exerted through Archbishop Ireland. [backto text]

16 For Aglipay's own account of his relationsto Nozaleda, see NewYorkIndependent, October 29th, 1903, "TheIndependent Catholic Church in thePhilippines." [back to text]

17 Statement furnished to the writer byauthoritative persons in the Iglesia Filipina.[back to text]

18 In connection with this statement, I notesome information furnished me by a RomanCatholic dignitary. He pointed out that of thepriests of the diocese of Manila (by far thelargest in the islands), four, including Aglipayhimself, actually went over into the ranks ofthe new church. The other priests and bishops,he stated, were a helter-skelter collection of

stable boys, house servants, and others "of lowrank," who had been gathered from everyconceivable quarter, taught to go through theform of saying mass, and then consecrated.
http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2014http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2014http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2014http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2015http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2015http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2015http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2015http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2016http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2016http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2016http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2017http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2017http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2017http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2017http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2016http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2015http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2015http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2014


57/58

57

[back to text]

19 They have in some instances requested theCommission to order out the constabulary toput them in possession of the churches. [backto text]

20Manila Times, June 14th, 1904. [back totext]

21 Aglipay calls special attention to the royalorders of Philip II, dated Madrid, December8th, 1588, and of Philip IV, dated August 1st,1633, as well as to the orders of February 24th,1844; May 5th, 1852; July 31st, 1854; April25th, 1860; June 2d, 1866, and December 23d,1890. I take these dates and references asfurnished me, and present them merely for

what they may be worth. [back to text]

22 Personally investigated by the writer. [backto text]

23 The immediate cause of the secession seemsto have been demand made by a friar stationedin the neighbouring parish and enforced by acorrupt local justice of the peace for a fee offive pesos, payable whenever a grave wasmade. The cholera epidemic being then at itsheight, this tax would have yieldedconsiderable revenue and would consequentlyhave been very oppressive. [back to text]

24 A rough division of territory has been madeby mutual consent between them. The

Methodists have been assigned Luzon Islandnorth of Manila; Southern Luzon and thePacific side of the southern portion of thearchipelago have gone to the Presbyterians, the
http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2018http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2018http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2018http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2019http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2019http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2019http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2019http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2020http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2020http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2020http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2020http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2021http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2021http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2021http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2022http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2022http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2022http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2022http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2023http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2023http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2023http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2023http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2022http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2022http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2021http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2020http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2020http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2019http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2019http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2018


58/58

58

Baptists taking the China side of the southernislands. The Episcopal Church is working in

Mindanao and among the Igorrotes of Luzon.[back to text]

25 I regret to say that the evident viewpoint ofCatholic authorities in the Philippines is inmany cases one of unmistakable hostilitytoward the American school system. Thissystem is usually regarded as a direct rival to

that of the church itself, as well as a movementlikely to weaken the hold of the church upon itsmembers. It is only natural that the churchshould have endeavoured to uphold its schoolsin competition with the public school system,and there is certainly need for all and muchmore than all the work that can be done by bothworking actively in harmony. But in variousinstances the church seems to have passed from

an attitude of silent hostility to activecampaigning against these schools. Thus in______ province a certain school had fallen offfrom some 320 members to about 50 or 60.Investigation showed that a native teacher inthis school had been converted toProtestantism, and had on sundry occasionscast reflections upon the character and

purposes of the Catholic Church in the hearingof the pupils. This had led to the exertion ofCatholic influences against the school, andultimately to a demand from the bishop of thediocese for his discharge. With this demandwent a threat to the effect that unless the manwere compelled to go an order would be issuedforbidding Catholic children to attend furtherupon the sessions of the school in question.
http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2024http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2024http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2024http://www.philippinehistory.net/1905willis%202.htm#to%2024

the church problem.docx

Documents