Nineteenth-Century Philippines and the Friar-Problem

Author(s): Vicente R. Pilapil

Source: The Americas, Vol. 18, No. 2 (Oct., 1961), pp. 127-148
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/979040
Accessed: 17-12-2015 08:20 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Americas.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NINETEENTH-CENTURYPHILIPPlNESAND THE
FRIAR-PROBLEM

T the closing years of the nineteenthcentury the Philippine

yi
] Islandsbecamea territorialpartof the UnitedStates.For this
"imperialist" domination of anotherpeople,the lattergovern-
ment,beingbasedon the principleof popularsovereignty,hadto find
a justification.It foundreasonin the contentionthat it was helping
the Filipinopeopleachievetheirindependence fromthe despotismof
Spanishrule;afterthat,the UnitedStatesGovernment felt obligedto
providea stablegovernment in theislandsin placeof the formercolonial
government.Forthebenefitof theAmericanpeople,mostof whomhad
only then heardof the Philippines, scoresof articleswere writtenon
thisFarEasterncountry.In line with the government's position-that
of posingas the "savior" of an oppressedpeople-andinfluencedby
the revolutionary propaganda which had characterized the periodof
strugglefor independence, thesewriterstendedto painta moreor less
darkpictureof thePhilippine Archipelago asit stoodin thelastcentury
of Spanishcolonization.Whatreallywasthe stateof the Philippines in
the nineteenthcenturyhas remaineda questionof greatinterestand
undiminished historicalimportance.AnotherPhilippineaffairwas met
with equalinterestin this country:the friar-problem.
As in the SpanishAmericancoloniesthe Philippinerevolutionwas
botha poliiicalandreligiousfight. The Spanishfriars,representing the
CatholicChurchas well as their mothercountry,were placedin a
doublyadversesituation.In the actualcourseof the fightthey suffered
physicallyfrom the hostilityof the revolutionaries; somewere mur-
deredandotherswereimprisoned.Theirmoralsufferinghadbeguna
quarterof a centuryearlier.The natives,for whomthey hadleft home
and fatherland, inveighedloudlyagainstthem. Insteadof theirbeing
welcomedwith traditional respectand obedience,theirexpulsionwas
openlyaskedfor.
It is alwaysa bafflingquestionhow such thingscouldhappenin a
purportedly Catholiccountry. The Philippines, whichpridesitself as
the " Spearhead of Christianityin the Orient,"presentsno lessa puzzle.
Americans havefollowedthePhilippine friar-problem withgreatinterest
alsobecauseit wasa problemthatconfronted theUnitedStatesGovern-
mentitself,havingalreadyreplacedSpanishsovereigntywith its own.
The reportsof the variousAmericancommissioners and officialswere
127

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 FRIAR-PROBLEM
IN THEPHILIPPINES
128
oftenprefacedwith the statementthatthoughthe UnitedStatesCon-
stitutionprovidesfor the separation of ChurchandState,sucha prin-
ciplecouldnot be followedin dealingwith Philippine affairs.
This issueon the friarswas muchconfusedin the heatof the fight.
Now thatthe soundandfury of the revolutionhasfadedout, we may
attemptto examineandanalyzemoreobjectivelythe causesof thatanti-
Spanish-clericalismwhichdevelopedmarkedlyin the lastquarterof the
centuryand explodedin the insurrection of 1896,whichitself blazed
up to becomethe 1898revolution.
Aside from Americaninterestin the mattersconcerningthe nine-
teenth-centuryconditionsof the Philippinesand the friar-problem,
thereis a logicalconnectionwhich gives a good reasonfor studying
both at the sametime. An examination of the latterproblemsupple-
mentsthe investigation of the civil administrationwith a knowledgeof
its religiousaspect-anelementof essentialimportancein Philippine
colonialhistory.
March16, 1521-Magellan foundthe Philippine Islandsfor the West-
ernWorld. Thiswasthe historicnewsbroughthomeby Sebastian del
Canoafter havingfirst circumnavigated the world. Thereafterthree
other expeditionswere at intervalssent by Spainto the "Western
Islands,"1 until in 1565 MiguelLopez de Legaspiagainsuccessfully
reachedthe islandof Cebuto markthe beginningof Spanishcoloniza-
tion in the Philippines.Beforethe centurywas over,Spanishdomina-
tionwassecured.Then,PhilipII, the monarchafterwhomthe islands
were named,could truthfullyboastthat the sun neverset upon his
kingdoms.Fourcenturieslaterthe statementno longerremainedtrue.
In thefirstquarterof thenineteenth centurymostof theLatinAmerican
colonieswerelost to Spain.Onlythe islandsof CubaandPuertoRico
were left to her in the Americas.In the FarEasttherewere still the
Philippines andsomeotherislands.
Unlikethe coloniesin SouthAmerica,this "Pearlof the Orient"
colonydid not proveto be commercially profitable.The councilthat
dealtwiththe overseaspossessions of Spainadvisedthe abandonment of
those distantlylocatedislandsshortlythereafter.To them PhilipII
retortedwith his classicstatementthat he wouldratherspendall the
1Becausethey were sailing westwardfrom Spain across the Pacific Ocean, these
navigatorsmisconceivedof the Philippinesas being situatedin the West. Under this
misconceptionthe Spaniardsthoughtthat the PhilippineIslandsbelongedto them in
accordancewith the provisionsof the Treatyof Tordesillas.The threeexpeditionsmen-
tioned were the Loaisa(1525), Saavedra(1527), and Villalobos(1542) expeditions.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 VICENTE
R. PILAPIL 129

richesof Spainandthe Indiesfor the conversionof a singlePhilippine

native'ssoul. SincethenSpainhadbecomecommittedto the Philippine
colony. By mid-nineteenth centurythe ideaof abandoning the Philip-
pines was still being advocatedby some royal officials.2Obviously
Spain'sanswerafterfourcenturieswasstillthesameasthatof PhilipII.
Muchagainstherwill, however,Spainwas to lose her orientalcolony
at the turnof thiscentury.
Manyof the historicalworkson the Philippinerevolutionattribute
its causeto the fact that throughoutthe threeanda half centuriesof
domination Spainhadoppressed andtyrannized overtheFilipinopeople
throughpolitical,commercial, and religiousmeans.It is traditionally
heldthatwhereverSpainplantedherrulethecolonizedinhabitants were
oppressed andexploited.However,a casualexamination of the Recopi-
lacionde las Leyesde Indiasandthe otherdecreespromulgated with
regardto the colonieswill bearoutthe statement thatSpanishcoloniza-
tion "was farmorehumanein its treatmentof dependentpeoplesthan
eitherFrenchor Englishsystems." 3

It is not withinthe scopeof thisarticleto go backto the verybegin-

ningsof Spanishrulein the PhilippineIslands.It can not herebe dis-
cussedhowthe missionaries hadprotectedthe nativesagainstthe usurp-
ing avidityof the encomenderos, how the colonialpolicieshad been
formulated andadaptedin consonance withthe expenenceof the earlier
colonizedAmericas, andhowthePhilippine inhabitants
werebroughtto
a higherlevel of cultureandcivilization.Sufficeit to say thatthereis
hardlya Philippine scholaror historian
who deniesthisfact of brilliant
achievement in the firstcenturiesof Spanishcolonization.It is different
with the nineteenthcenturywherewe findextremeviewswhichclash.
This is whereobjectivityis mostrequired.Howsoeverone may look
at it, the story of the nineteenth-century Philippinescannotfail to
impressfavourably an objectivemind.
2 The ofiicial Spanishcommissioner, Sinibaldode Mas, for example,proposedthe
abandonmentof the Philippinesin his Informesobre el estadode las IslasFilipinasen
1842 (3 vols.; lMadrid,1843). The particularvolume referredto is the third in this
reportentitled,"The InternalPoliticalConditionof the Philippines," of which, because
of its contents,only "few copieshave been printedfor the ministers,gentlemenof the
Councilof the Government,and other personsinfluentialin the affairsof the nation.
Consequently, your excellencyis requestedto keepit for your own use,withoutallowing
it to circulateor permittinga copy to be madeof it," a note which the authorhimself
wrote in the text of the copy belongingto the PeabodyInstituteLibrary.This rare
third volume is given in an English translationin Emma Helen Blair and James
AlexanderRobertson(eds.), The PhilippineIslands(55 vols.; Cleveland:The Arthur
H. ClarkCompany,1903-1909),LII, 29-90. Hereafterreferredto as B ek R.
3 EdwardG. Bourne," HistoricalIntroduction," B ek R, I, 69.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 FRIAR-PROBLEM
IN THEPHILIPPINES
130
Havinglost her manyAmericancoloniesat the earlypart of the
century,Spainturnedher greaterattentionto the PhilippineArchi-
pelago.The mid-eighteen hundreds, in fact, couldbe takento marka
veritablefloodof progressive reformsandadvantageous changesintro-
ducedby the homegovernmentin the Philippinecolony. To starta
surveyof suchreformsin thesphereof the civilgovernment let us note
thefollowingfew facts.
Undergoingseriousrevisionwas the colonialadministraiive system
in thisperiod.In 1884a royaldecreewas promulgated concerningthe
appointment, promotion,and restrictionof the alcaldesor provincial
officers.Underthe new set-uponly lawyerswho hadpractisedtheir
professionfor two yearscould be appointedto the officeof alcalde.
Sincethe alcaldiaswereof differentranks,promotionfromone alcaldia
to anotherof higherrankwas basedon efficiencyandresidencein the
immediatelysubordinate position. Thus an alcaldewho governeda
provinceof thirdrankcouldnot be immediately promotedto a first
classone withouthavingformerlyoccupiedthe immediately preceding
alcaldia.Moreover,fromthe beginningof the colonialrulethe alcaldes
maryores andthe lieutenantgovernorshadenjoyeda commercial privi-
lege,calledthe indultode comercio,whichwasnow withdrawndueto
the manyabuseswhichhadarisentherefrom.Tnthe sameyearanother
decreewaspassedto complement this.
The provincialandmunicipaladministrations weremademorecom-
pletein 1886,anda yearafter,"to put an endto existingabuses," the
systemof electionsin the townswasrevised.The Filipinosweregradu-
allygivenmoreandmoreautonomyin the localgovernment.Minlster
ManuelBecerra'smeasureof 1889 airnedto be a preparation of the
nativesfor the exerciseof completecontrolin localaffairs.4Climaxing
all thesereformswas the MauraLaw of 1893whichprovidedfor the
greaterparticipationof the peoplein the localgovernment.5 Its liberal
provisionswere assailedby not a few conservatives andwere laterto
be blamedby somefor havingin partcausedthe revolution.
Sirnilarly,
the royaldecreeof 1863was epochmakingin the fieldof
4 JamesA. LeRoy, The Americans in the Philippines(2 vols.;Bostonand New York,
1914),I, 43.
5 A text of the MauraLaw is given as ExhibitI in John RogersMeigsTaylor, ' The
PhilippineInsurrectionAgainstthe United States;A Compilationof Documentswith
Notes and Introductions " (a five-volumework in galley proofs kept at the U. S.
National Archives), I, 50FZ. Subsequentreferenceswill be to Vol. I of this work.
An exposeon why these volumeswere not publishedis John T. Farrell's,' An Aban-
doned Approach to PhilippineHistory: John R. M. Taylor and the Philippine
InsurreciionRecords,"The CatholicHistoricalReview,XXXIX (January,1954), 385407.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 R. PILAPIL
VICENTE 131

education.This is not to say thatit was the firstdecreeof its kindto

be promulgated. Farfromit. The Spanishmonarchshadalwayspro-
videdforthe educaiionof thenatives,promulgating no lessthanthirteen
decreesin thisrespect.6(The 1863decree,however,was the firstcom-
issuedby the Spanishgovernment
pleteset of regulations on education.)
As hadoftenhappened, circumstancesandthe colonialconditions-lack
of necessaryfunds, lack of teachers,etc.-left the civil government
unableto carryoutthesedecrees.The missionaries, aspartof theirwork
of Christianization,automaticallybecamethe teachersof the natives.
FrayDomingoSalazar,
In 1582the firstbishopof the Philippines, O. P.,
recognizedthisfact by issuinginstructionsto the clergyasregardstheir
taskin educatingthe natives.Fromthen on, and for threecenturies
thereafter,educationwas the work andresponsibility of the religious.
The challengecouldnot havebeenbettermet. The followingcompara-
tive datademonstrate theirsuccessconvincingly:
The Philippineshadtheirfirstschoolin Cebu,in 1560,andbeganto
establishprimaryschoolsin 1565,and organizeda systemof popular
educationin lS81, while" fifty yearsago (at the beginningof this 20th
century)populareducationhardlyexistedin Asia" (Christopher Daw-
son, " OrientalNationalism ").
The Philippinesorganizeda modernsystem of Public Education
controlledby the State,in 1863;in Spain,that happenedin 1857;in
France,in 1880.
The Philippineshada UniversityseventyyearsbeforeHarvard,and
a centurybeforeYale,in U. S. A.
The Philippineshad . . . a ConciliarSeminaryfor the educationof
nativepriests,in 1707,while the firstAmericanSeminary,that of Bal-
timore,datesfrom 1791,andthe second,that of St. Louis,from 1835.
Andthesewerenot for the nativeIndians!
The Philippineshad Normal Schoolsat about the sameepoch as
France,Germany,U. S. A., andSpain;andmuchbeforeRussia(1924),
Italy (1898),England(20thcentury)....
At the end of the Spanishregimethere was aboutone schoolfor
every 154 students,in the Philippines.In 1916,that is, 15 yearsafter
the Americanschoolsystemwas established here,therewas one school
for every 265 children. . . and in 1936, [sic] i. e., after 30 years of
educationunder America,there was still one school for every 153
students.7

6 JEsusMariaCavanna y Manso,C. M., Rizaland the Philippinesof his Days (Manila,

1957), pp. 75-76. The author lists the Spanishrulers and their respectivedecrees
regardingeducation.
DZbid.,pp. 86-87.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
132 FRIAR-PROBLEM
IN THEPHILIPPINES
Thusby 1846the archbishop of Manilawasableto say thattherewere
manyvillagesin the Philippines whereone cannotfinda singleboy or
g¢l unableto readandwrite,of whichadvantageonly few placesir
Europecouldboast.8At aboutthe sameiime,Sinibaldode Maswrote,
" I reallybelievethatthereareproporiionately morepersonswho know
how to readandwritein theseislandsthanin Spainandin someother
civilizedcountries." 9
In what actuallyconsistedthe educationof the Filipinosis another
matter.Havingbegunas partof a missionary work and havingbeen
relegatedalmostexclusivelyto the friars,religionwas, of course,the
centralcore. The curriculum satisfiedsimpleneedsas reflectiveof the
laggingeducational standards in Spainaftershe had passedfrom her
periodof gloryandalsodueto thestillpresenthandicaps suchasthelack
of personnel.To be addedto thesewerethe policiesof the friarsthem-
selvesregardingeducaiion.l°In lateryearsthissystemwouldbe inade-
quateto quenchthe thirstfor knowledgeon the partof the few ad-
vancedelementsfor whomunconsciously the Spanishmissionaries and
educators themselves hadprovideda stimulusto curiosity.
The economiccondiiionsof the countrywere perhapsthe most
neglected,but yet the nineteenthcenturypresenteda hopefulpicture.
Earlyin the centurythe exclusiveManila-Acapulco tradewasabolishedX
owingto the independence MexicohadacquiredfromSpain.Reform
billsandmeasures in the secondhalf of the centuryameliorated trade
conditionsand providedfor the abolitionof a numberof business
monopolies.Spaincaughton with the laissez-faire economicpolicies
of the periodand extendedsuch policiesto her colonies.There was
stillmuchto be deswed,buttherewasalsomuchto be hopedfor.
Very welcomereformscamewhen the personaltaxesvere made
equitablewith the abolitionof the old tributo.The cedulapersonal11
was substituted in its placewhicheveryone,withoutregardto raceor
rank, had to pay. Even some nine years before this revision,the
German-Protestant tourist,FedorJagor,hadcommented that,"thetaxes
imposedon the peoplewereso triflingthatthey didnot sufficefor the
colonialadministration. The deficitwas coveredby yearlycontribut-
tionsfromMexico." Furtherreliefwas addedwhenthe polo, or the
12

8 J. Mallat,Les Philippines;
histoire,geographie,moeurs,agriculture,industrieet cOm-
merce des coloniesespagnolesdans l'Oceanie(2 vols.; Paris,1846),I, 388.
9 Op. cit., Section,"InstruccionPublica,"II, 1.
lnfra, pp. 146-147.
A documentof identiScation.
F. Jagor,Reisenin den Philippinen(Berlin:1873),p. 32.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 R. PILAPIL
VICENTE 133

daysof laboron publicworks,whicheachnativehadto renderwithout

pay, was reducedin numberfromforty daysto justfifteendaysout
of a year. Theoreiically,free laborservicesaffectedeverybodyeven
thoseSpaniards andFilipinolocalofficialswho formerlyenjoyedprivi-
legesof exemption.
Contraryto commonbelief,reformsof the legal and the juridical
sphereswere not altogetherneglected.Thus in 1885justiceof peace
courtswereestablished in the archipelago, anda yearlater,it wasmade
possiblefor the nativesto presidein thesecourts.This is an important
factto remember sincethesecourtslaterbecamea matterfor complaints.
So alsowiththe Guardias civiles,the allegedabusesof whomthe propa-
gandistswill loudlydecry. But hereagainit shouldbe takeninto ac-
countthatthe Filipinosconstitutedthe majorityof theseguards.
All thesereforms,all thesechangesclearlybeneficialto the native
inhabitants,werehighlighted by the extensionof theSpanish PenalCode
in 1888andof boththe SpanishCivilCodeandCodeof Commercein
1889. The verysamecodesregulating the Spaniardswerethenputinto
effectfor theFilipinos.Thesewereindeedgenerousconcessions.
Sucha briefsurveyof the governmental measuresshowsto us the
constantamelioration of the colonialadministration in the islands.One
thing,however,remained as a reasonfor complaint in the administrative
system,andthatwas the frequentdisruptionof the colonialprograms
whichwasreflectedalsoin the frequentchangesof government officials.
Causedby the lamentable instabilityof Spanishpolitics,this naturally
led to inefficiency.Hardlycoulda governorgeneralstartto implement
his programof administration when he wouldbe calledbackand re-
placedin office. Spain,in the shortspanbetween1834and 1862,had
our constltutlons, twenty-eightparliaments, forty-sevenpresidentsof
. . .

the Councilof Ministers,and 529 ministerswith portfolios.l3These

werethe timeswhen,aswell statedby a distinguished Spanishhistorian,
Spainwastryingto reconstruct herselffromtheverygroundupwards.l4
The trialof differentsystemsof government,the perennialfight be-
tween the Right and the Left, the replacement of one monarchby
another-thesecontributedto the chaoticpoliticalstateof Spain;the
repercussions of whichthePhilippine colonywellfelt. Herhighgovern-
mentofficeshad almostbecomeprizesto be won by the protegesof
whichsoever partyhadcometo powerin Madrid.Betweenthe begin-
ningof Spanishrulein the Philippines(1565) to the end (1898) there
13 LeRoy,I, 52.
Spain: A ModernHistory (New York, 1958),p. 56.
Salvadorde Madariaga,

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
134 FRIAR-PROBLEM
IN THEPHILIPPINES

were 124 governorsgeneral.Twenty-fiveof thesetook officein the

briefperiodbetween1872and1898. Whilepriorto 1872theiraverage
termof officewas threeyears,in the lastquarterof Spanishruletheir
termslastedfor merelya year. A story was even told of one such
appointeeto the Royal Audienciaof Manilawho took the leisurely
routearoundthe Capeof Good Hope only to finduponhis arrivalin
thePhilippines
thathe hadalreadybeenreplacedby somebodyelse!
Takingall thesethingsinto accountandgivingwide leewayto all
possibleexceptionsand probableobjections,we would still have to
remarktogetherwiththeAmericanhistorian, JamesLeRoythat,
. . . far from being able to arguetherefromthat it was the blunders
of Spain'scivil administration which cost her the sympathiesof her
Philippinesubjectsandmadethemripefor activerevolutionwhen the
chancecameto throw off the yoke, we must,in any fair accounting,
findthatthe administration warsrearlly
marking
progresstowarrda better
regime.l5 mine.)
(Italics

Moreindicativeof the nineteenthcenturyPhilippinestateof affairs

were the recordedimpressions and observations madeby the visitors
to the colonyat thattime. Fortunately,therearea morethansufficient
numberof these,from whoseworksampleevidencescan be drawn.
These authorswere of variednationalities-French, British,American,
German,and Spanish-andwere likely diversifiedin background-
writers,historians,
foreigngovernment officials,andSpanishgovernment
commissioners. They cameat differentperiodsof thecentury.As early
asthelastquarterof the eighteenthcenturyPerouse,a Frenchexplorer,
was alreadycommenting that he foundthe Filipinosvery progressive
and"in no respectinferiorto the Europeans." The Englishhistorian 1G

of the Indies,JohnCrawfurd, expressed hissurpriseat seeingthe Philip-

pineinhabitants improvedin " civilization,wealth,and populousness "
underthe regimeof Spainsvhichwas regardedas a backwardcountry
and havingone of the worst governmentsin Europe. " Upon the
whole,"he categorically asserted,"they areat presentsuperiorto any
of the otherraces [in the East]." The two Spanishcommissioners,
17

Tomasde Comynin 1810andSinibaldode l\lasin 1842,aftersearch-

ingly investigatingthe conditionsof the colony,cameout with these
sameconclusions.AnotherFrenchman, J. Mallat,expressedin 1846
1 Op. cit., I, 56. The author is by no means a panegyrist of the Spanish regime in the
Philippines.
16 Voyage de In Perouse autour du Monde (Paris, 1797), II, 347, quoted in B eEr
R, I, 71.
]7 John Crawfurd, History of tSe Indian Archipelago (3 vols.; Edinburgh, 1820),

II, 446.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 VICENTE
R. PILAPIL 135

hisbeliefthattheFilipinosenjoyeda " freer,happier,andmoretranquil

life thancouldbe foundin the colorliesof any othernation." After 18

havingmadea trip to the Philippinesin 1858,the Britishgovernorof

Hongkongterselysummarized hisimpressionsthus: " My observations
andreflections,
then,leadto thisconclusion-that,whateverexceptional
casestheremaybe, the greattideof advancement rollsforwardin ever-
growingstrength....77 19 No less glowingwas the tributepaidby
FedorJagor,who is consideredas the keenestobserverof them all
becauseof hispropheticinsightinto events.
To Spain[headmitted] belongsthegloryof havingraisedto a rela-
tivelyhighgradeof civilization
andof havingimproved greatlythe
conditionof a peoplewhichshefoundon a low levelof culture,dis-
tractedby pettywarsanddespoticrule.Protected
fromoutsideenemies
andgovernedby mildlaws,the inhabitants of thosesplendid islands,
takenasa whole,haveno doubtlivedmorecomfortably duringrecent
centuries
thanthepeopleof anytropicalcountrywhetherundertheir
ownorEuropean rule.20
In likemanner,W. Palgrave, writingon the " MalayLife in the Philip-
pines,"authoritatively
attestedto this"internalprosperity " and" hap-
piness." In the twentiethcenturyMr. Sawyerrhetoricallyasked,
21

"whatBritish,Frenchor Dutchcolonycan comparewith the Philip-

pinesastheyweretill 1895>7 22

To delveinto the religiousconditionsof the Philippines in the past

centuryis to inviteperilousdifficulties.Yet anyonewho knowsa little
aboutthe characterof the Philippinerevolutionalsorealizesthatsuch
a studyis not only importantandnecessary,but inevitable.Besides,a
cleargraspof the religioussituationis vitallynecessaryfor an under-
standingof the Philippinerevolutionary era.
Spanishconquestshadalwaysbeeneffectedby the use of the sword
andthe cross.In the processof Philippine colonization
therewasnever
morethana handfulof soldiersinvolved,but the Spanishcrownwas
ableto implantsecurelyits sovereignty uponthe archipelagoin lessthan
a quarterof a century.In anothertwenty-fiveyearsthe Spanishma-
chinery of governmentwas completelyestablished.Other factors
accountfor the relativefacilityof the conquest.After all has been
18 Op. cit., I, 357.
9Sir John Bowring,A Visit to the PhilippineIslands(London,1859),p. 108-.
-oop. cit., p. 287.
>1WilliamGiffordPalgrave,Ulyssesor Scenesand Studiesin Many L;lnds(London,
1887),pp. 138-139.
'2FrederickH. Sawyer,The Inhabitants of the Philippines(London,1900),p. viii.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
136 FRIAR-PROBLEAF
IN THEPHILIPPINES
said,the fact will remainthat the primefactorwas the
friarswh()
precededthe conquistadores into the remotestplaces,pavix1g the way
and makingeasierwhat would havebeen an insurmountable
theirsecularcounterparts. task for
Spain,whateverheroriginalaimswere,held
thePhilippines solelyfor religiousreasons.In thiscolony,therefore,we
do not finda multitudeof Spaniards streaming in, owingto the lackof
prospectsfor materialrewards.And thatwas not all. Throughout
Spanishregimetherewas a sorelackof government the
officialsandof an
adequatemilitaryforce. Yet the Philippinesremainedunder
Spain's
domination dueto the laborsof the friarsin eachof whom,it wassaid,
"teniael rey en Filipinasun capitangeneraly un ejercito
was,indeed,a government entero." It 28
thatcloselyresembled a theocracy.
It is hightimeto clarifythe meaningof the term"friars."
All the
expeditions thathadbeensentto the Philippines, includingthe original
one of Magellan,were accompanied by the missionaries who usually
belongedto a religiousorder.The Augustinian (Hermit)missionaries,
totakean example,accompanied the successfulLegaspiexpedition.So
from1565on the Augustinians took root in the Philippinemissionary
field.The next orderof missionaries to comewas the Franciscans
1577,and then followedthe Dominicansin 1581. In this in
someJesuitsarrived.This Societyremainedin the same year
itsestablishment Philippinesfrom
there eight yearslater until the expulsionin 1768.
Members of the RecollectAugustinian Ordercameat the very begin-
ningof the seventeenth century.Thesefive Orderssubdivided the Iliis-
sionary workin thePhilippine Islandsamongthemselves, allbeingtermed
theregularclergy. "Friars" or the Spanishappellation,
generally "frailes,'
refersto the members of the regularclergy. In the contextof
Philippine historyit usuallyreferredonlyto the members of the above-
mentioned Orders.Yet, the attribution was,in the islands,confinedto
justthefourOrdersby the mid-eighteenth centurydueto the expulsion
ofthe Jesuits;andeven on the latter'sreturnin 1859,they
wouldno
longerbe classedamongwhat the propagandists and revolutionaries
wouldcolloquiallyandbitterlycall the " frailes."So, too, the
chins,the Benedictines, Capu-
andthe Vincentians, who arrivedlaterin the
thirdquarterof the centuryandwho confidedthemselves to the mis-
sionaryandeducational worksalone,wereexcludedfromthe term.
If thoseofficials,scholars,andothertravellers, who were quotedon
thecivil administrationof the Philippines, commented ratherfavorably
andevenenthusiastically on Spain'sworkandachievement, thesesame
23 A
statement supposedly made by a viceroy of Mexico; Mallat, I, 389.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 24 AI1 Englishman,"
" Remarks
on the Philippine Islands, 1819-1822" (Calcutta,

VICENTE
R. PILAPIL 137

writersseemedmore impressedby the work of the religiousin the

Philippines.They realizedthe obstaclesthe friarshadto overcomeas
well as the innumerable dutiesfoistedon them. Consequently, they
laudedthe tremendousaccomplishment these religioushad wrought.
They attestedto the respect,reverence,andgratitudewith whichthese
missionaries were held by the people. Even an observerwho himself
admittedbeing "rathersevere" in his judgmentscould not help but
acquiesceandstatethat " the degreeof respectin whichthe ' Padre'
is heldby the Indian,is truly astonishing.It approaches to adoration,
andmustbe seento be credited." And in the samebreathhe added:
24

"To their high honourbe it spoken,the conductof thesereverend

fathersin generalfully justifiesandentitlesthemto thisconfidence." 25

In the line of moreofficialstatements,GovernorGeneralPrimode

Riverareportedto the colonialministerthat the friarswere mostly
good andworthymenandlovedby the people. As a matterof fact,
" civilization
here,owesthemmuch,perhapseverything," he admitted.26
A very balancedconclusionafteran objectiveanalysisof the situation
wasthatgivenby Mr.Phelan:
It wouldbe rashindeedto argue,withouttakingintoaccountthe handi-
capsunderwhich they operatedand the limitationsof theirown iime
and place,that the regularclergy could havedone a morecompetent
job thanthey actuallydid.27
However,by the 1880'sthe propaganda literaturewill puzzleus. A
barrageof complaints coupledwithirlsults,
chargestogetherwithcalum-
nies,wereto flow frombothsides. Hencewe needto investigateand
findthe truthof the matter.
The grievances andthedenunciations madeby thepropagandists were
directedagainstthe friarsas friars (their personalqualitiesand be-
havior), the friars as constitutingthe religiouscorporations(their
economicandlandedinterests),andthe friarsas Spanishrepresentatives
(theirpoliticalauthority).Intoallthesesphereswe needto inquire.
The friarsthemselveswere very much awarethat their personal
integritywasbeingassailed.Facingthesituation, theyasked,". . . where
are thoseabuses,thoseexcesses,thosevices,thoseoutrages,of which

1828),B ek R, LI, 113.

25lbid.,p.114.

9sTaylor,Exhibit6, 60F.
97 John Leddy Phelan, The Hispanizationof the Philippines:SpanishAims and
FilipinoResponses,1565-1?00(Madison,Wisconsin,1959),p. 160.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 138 FRIAR-PROBLEM
IN THEPHILIPPINES
their [the propagandists'
and the revolutionaries']
mouthsare so full
Afterthislengthyenumeration
. . . ?aX 28
theypoeticallycontinued:
With our handuponour heart,with our foreheadsraised
who walksin the light and fearsnot to have his deed aloft,as one
discussed examined
in thelight,we challengeanddefy ourdetractors and
ators,andthosewho flippantly,or by any otherunjustandand calumni-
motive,talkandmurmur,to showus with exactdata inaccurate
andwith perfectly
authenticinformation,not only the accuracyof all their
but the mereprobabilityof whateverthey allegeagainst accusations,
ourhonor,and
well-established
credit,touchingthe fulfilmentof our duties,both re-
ligiousandpatriotic.29
Thusdidthe friarschallengethosewho hadblemished theirnamesand
theirpersonalconduct.The "PadreDamaso" character in Jose
novel,Noli Me Tangere,who was depictedas cruel,slyly Rizal's
arrogant,andimmoral,adeptlypicturesthe friaras the malicious,
would,in thefinalsum,leadus to believehewas. Butthefriar propagandists
"Will they prove it sometime? challenge
" remainedunanswereduntil after
Spanishsovereigntywas lost in the islands.Then proofswere
Thesehaveto be takenwitha grainof salt.30Arewe brandingoffered.
thenthe
propagandists as whollylibelous?By no means.Rizal,like the restof
thepropagandists, was depictingdefinitesituations,31
although
bodywho was tryingto obtainreformsfromSpain,he was as some-
giveway to someexaggeration. boundto
Someunworthyfriarsexisted,but for
usto generalizefrom such casesis as unscholarlyas it is
Uponthe authorityof GovernorGeneralPrimode Rivera unfounded.
that". . . the immensemajorityof them are good men, we know
worthy of
consideration;they practicecharityand makethemselvesbelovedin
theirtowns,aninsignificantnumberof themarebadmen." 32

The inclusionof an occasionalbadfriarinto the fold of the

wasratherinevitable.Furthermore, religious
the priestsin the Philippines were
working underverystrenuous conditions.Beingscarcein number,these
friarswere throwninto the missionary field alone,oftentimesfinding
28ManuelGutierrezet al., "The FriarMemorialof 1898"
Bek R, LII, 243-244. (Manila,April 21, 1898),
29 Ibid.,pp. 246-247.

30See Thomas Middleton'scritiqueon the "Reports

(of1899-1900)on Religiousand EducationalMatters," of the PhilippineComniission
XXVIII AmericanEcclesiasticalReview,
( 1903), 262-302.
31 Reportsof the Philippine
Commissionto the President;SenateDocumentNo. 138
S6thCongressn Ist session (4 vols.; Washington: GovernmentPriniing
1901),
I, 83. Hereaftercited as SenateDocumentNo. 138. Office, 1900-
32 Taylor, Exhibit6, 60F.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 VICENTE
R. PILAPIL 139

themselvesthe only white manin the area. The next priestwas some
two to threepueblosaway. Sucha changethiswasfromthecommunlty
life they hadhithertolived. Oneobserverwonderedwhy they did not
go crazy;anotherrecordedthatsomenativeshadthoughtof the friars
as not beinghumanbecauseof tlleirchastecharacter.It is perfectly
understandable andhighlyprobablethata few shoulddeviatefromthe
high standardsof religiousdiscipline.It must also be admittedthat
becauseof the highesteemandexpectation the nativeshadof the friars
the effectof a singlebadfriar'sfaultscouldbe disastrous.
Friarimmoralitywas the favoritethemeof the propagandists. The
U. S. PhilippineCommission hadtakengreatpainsto uncoverall this,
butin theendconcludedthat
. . . it is concededby the most intelligentand observantof the wit-
nessesagainstthe friarsthat theirimmorality,as such,wouldnot have
madethemhatefulto the people. On the contrary,the Filipinopriests
who havetakentheir placesare shownto be fully as immoralas the
friars,but the people do not feel any ill will againstthem on this
account.
We mustlook elsewhere,therefore,for the chiefgroundof the deep
feelingcherishedagainstthe friarsby the Filipinopeople.33
Letus followwhatthe Commission bidsus to do andturnourattention
to the economicsideof the problem.
In termsof financialrewardSpaingot nothingout of herFarEastern
colony. Insteadshe hadto supplythe expensesincurredin the Philip-
pinesfromthe treasuryof Mexico. Well andgood whilethatsystem
lasted.However,Spainlost Mexico,andthe PhilippineadministratorsS
particularly
thereligiousenterprisers,
wereforcedto supporc themselvest
Forthisthefriarsadoptedthe commonecclesiastical practiceof collect-
ing contributionsfromthe faithfulandaskingfeesfor religiousservices.
Forthefirsttimein threecenturies theFilipinoswereobligedto support
the Churchwhich formerlyhad cost themnothing. They couldnot
comprehend the situation.They were reluctantto pay. But, on the
otherhand,the friarswereforcedby circumstances to collectthesefees.
The officialcommissioner,De Mas,in hisreportwrote:
One of the acts to which the curasnow see themselvesobliged,alld
which robs them of greatprestige,is the colleciionof the parochial
fees at marriagesand burials.... Thesescenesare very unpleasant
to
the religious,andyet, they can do no lessthanshow themselveshard,
33Reportsof the Taft PhilippineCommission(Washington: GovernmentPrinting
Office, 1901),Part I, p. 29. Part I of these reportswill be referredto as Taft Com-
missionand Part II as SenateDocumentNo. 190 (56thCongress,2nd session).

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 140 FRIAR-PROBLEM
IN THEPHILIPPINES
forif theydidotherwise theywouldbeunableto collectanyof thefees
whichbelongto themandformthegreaterpartof theirincome.34
Alreadythenit was ominouslyforetoldthatsucha practice"gnawsat
andgivesa deathblow to theprincipalbaseuponwhichreststheprestige
andvenerationenjoyedby the religiousof the Filipinas." 35 Herefrom
stemmedthe accusations thatthe friarsexploitedthe peopleby religious
means,being unrelentingin the exactionof the exorbitantfees for
re 1g10US serv1ces.
* . e

Along with this matterand perhapsmoreseriouswas the burning

questionregardingthe landedpropertyof the Orders.Somereligious
Ordersownedlargehaciendas, or tractsof land,in the betterparcsof
the country.At firstsmallpurchases andthendonationsfromthe gov-
ernmentand fromthe faithfulhad enabledthemto accumulate these
possessions.It was estimated thatthe totalamountof landsownedby
the threelandedOrders,the Augustinian Hermits,the Recollects,and
the Dominicans, cameup to approximately 403,000acresin the Tagalog
territory.36 It is truethatthe revenuesthe friarsobtainedfromthe lease
of theselandswere not reallyenormousandit is proventhat a good
partof theincomewasspenttowardsimprovements al1dotherameliora-
tions in the landswhich had been leasedto Filipinotenants.37It is
equallytruethatsomeabuseswere committedin connectionwith the
administration of thesehaciendas.As earlyas 1743the tenantsin the
variousfriarestatesformallycomplained of suchmatters.The appointed
investigating committeefoundtruthin the complaints of the tenants.38
34B eWR, LII, 57.
35Sinibaldode Mas, "Characterand influenceof the friars,"ibid., XXVIII,245.
36Taft Commission. p. 27
37"To the Filipino . . . [the friar lands] seemedimmensein size and of boundless
revenues,and yet for the periodbetween1880and 1893,accordingto originalaccounts
which have found their way into the massof documentsfrom which this compilation
is made (P.I.R. [i.e., the PhilippineInsurgentRecordswhich were capturedby the
AmericanArmy], 320-4), after the fixed chargesfor improvementsin the estate of
SantaRosa de Pandihad been deductedthe amountturnedover to the religiousorder
owningthe propertyas profitswas only two percentof the sum which has lately been
paidfor that property.As an exampleof the methodsof administration it is of interest
tO note that 8,800pesos in 1888were spent by the estate for the purchase
of draft
animalsfor the tenants. They were given until 1893 tO reimbursethe amount so
expended,and no interestwas chargedupon it. In Pangasinan Provincein 1898a third
of the crop was paid as rent upon certainchurch estatesthere (P.I.R., 1222-1). In
1896the value of the sugarcrops upon the estatesof Calamba,SantaRosa, and Binan
was 1,586,263pesos. The rent received by the religiouscorporationsowning these
estateswere 33,200pesos (P. I. R., 1222-2)." Taylor, 24FZ.
38The Royal Cedulaof November7, 1751,summarizedthe invesiigaduon conducted
andpresentedits findingstherewith. This was reprintedin La Democracia(MarAla),
November25, 1901.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 IE R. PILAPIL
VICEN 141

At timestherewas smoldering agrariandiscontentin thesefriarlands.

Again in 1887 anothersuch troubleoccurredwith regardto the
DoIIiiIiican estatesin Calambain which the familyof Jose Rizalwas
implicated.
The haciendaownershipof the friarswassurelyone of the causesof
the 1896insurrection.Thatthe provinceof Cavitebecamethe hotbed
of the rebellionforcescanbe greatlyexplained by the factthat 121,000
acres,i. e., a fourthof the friarlandsin the Tagalogprovinces,was in
Cavitealone.39This alsoexplainswhy the Jesuitsandthe Franciscans
who ownedno haciendasat this time emergedfromthe revolutionin
a markedlyless bedraggledcondition.40 Furthermore, it was not only
the peoplewith legiiimatecomplaints thatstruckat the landedOrders;
whatis worse,on accountof theseproperties, the religiouscorporations
becamevulnerable to the selfishinterestsof not justa few. Suchmoti-
vation will showmoreclearlyin the actualcourseof the revolution.

The Spanishrnilitaryforce in the colonywas a negligiblehandful;

the navyin serviceable ships,non-existent; the ofiicials,wanting.But
Spainwasableto retainthePhilippines for almostfourcenturies, thanks
to the friars.They inculcatedrespectfor authority in the nativesand
securedtheir obedienceto the constitutedgovernment.With their
good works and honestintentions,they broughtwesterncivilization
into the islands,andwhateverwrongstherewere in the administration
they supposedlycounterbalanced and maderelativelyharmless.The
friars-suchneedtherewasfor themandsuchpowerstheyhad. Shortly
beforethe revolutionthey werevirtuallytornto pieces;afterthe revo-
lutionthey were blamedfor the loss of the colony. What a sudden
changehad happenedto their formerposition.In what mightbe a
paradox we findanexplanation fortheunhappylot thatbefellthefriars.
The absoluteneed of the Spanishgovernmentfor the friarsin the
Philippinecolony provedin the end detrimental.The heartof the
matterwas whatMarcelodel Pilar,one of the foremostleadersof the
propaganda movement,termedas the "monasticsupremacyin the
Philippines." What is this concretely;Testifyingbeforethe U. S.
41

Philippine Commission, ReverendJuanVillegas,the ProvincialSuperior

39 Taft Commission, p. 27.
40 Senate Document No. 190, pp. 68-70,90.
4lThis is the title of his pamphletbearingthe pseudonymof M. H. Plaridel,La
Soberan1aMonacal en Filipinas (Barcelona,1888),which he subtitled"Notes on the
disastrouspreponderanceof the friar in the islands,in the politicalas well as in the
economicand religiousspheres."This rareoriginaleditioncan be found at the Library
of Congress.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 142 FRIAR-PROBLEM
IN THEPHILIPPINES
of theFranciscan Order,enumerated no lessthantwentycivilfunctions
all of whichmadeup a majorpartof the parishpriest'sduties;his ap-
provalandcertification wereneededfor almosteverything, of officialor
semi-officialcharacter.42De Comynobservedin 1810that". . . thereis
scarcelya thingto whichtheir [friars']attentionis not called,andto
which it is not expectedthey shouldcontributeby their influence,
directlyor indirectly." In the samelanguage,but with a littlebit of
43

sarcasm,the U. S. PhilippineCommission reportedaboutthe dutiesof

the "reverendparochialpriest" by adding: " It will be noticedthat
thereis scarcelyany branchof the municipal government in whichthe
reverendparochial priestdoesnot playan importantpart."44
A centurybeforethe archbishop of Manilahad alreadydeemedit
expedientto instructhis clergy that the " affectionand reverenceof
the peoplewill be won if they attendsolelyto the welfareof soulsand
give personaladvice." But that was an impossibility.The above-
45

mentionedFatherVillegasshowedthe U. S. Commissioners that most

of the time the friardislikedhis innumerable politicalduties,but his
assumption of a civilrolewas necessitated by forceof circumstances.46
Interesting andsignificant it is to notethatGovernorGeneralPrimode
Riverawho complained aboutthe friars'intrusioninto politicalmatters
shouldadd in the samebreaththatin manymattersthesefriarswere
indispensable.47
The friarsretainedtheirpoliticalpower,as they hadto. Littledid
theyrealizethatthey hadinvitedthe envy,the resistance, andthe hos-
tilityof somefew advancedsegmentsof the population.To theircon-
sternation the insurrection brokeout. An investigation conductedby
oneof the Americancommissions reachedthe conclusionthatthe cause
of the friar-problem "is to be foundin the fact thatto the Filipinothe
government in theseislandsunderSpainwas the governmentof the
friars."48Addressing PopeLeoXIIIin thesummerof 1902,thenSecre-
taryof War,WilliamHowardTaft, informedhimthat:
42SencgteDocument No. 190, pp. 64-65. Father Villegas'knowledge of these mawers
isveryreliablebecause,aside
from having stayed inthePhilippinesfor quite a time arld
holdingahighofiiceintheOrder, hehadalsobeena parish priest
for some many years.
43Tomas decomyn, Estado de IctsIslas Filipinas en 1810 (Madrid,1820), p. 161.
44SencgteDocument No. 138, I, 57.
45Archbishop sasilioSancho deSanta Justay Rufina, "Instructionsto thesecular
clergy,issuedinManila onOctober 25, 1771, B ekR, L, 265.
46 SencgteDocument No. 190, loc. cit.
47Taylort
Exhibit
6, 60FZ.
48 TcgftCommission, p. 29-

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 R. PILAPIL
VICENTE 143

The popularhostilitywas chiefly manifestedagainstthe membersof

the four religiousorderswho had in addiiionto their clericalduties
as parishpriests,been chargedby the Spanishgovernmentwith the
performance of a burdenof localpoliticalandpoliceduiies,andin the
performance hadbeenheldresponsible by the peoplefor the oppression
of whichit was saidthatSpainwas guilty.49
The Holy Father'sreply was even morecandid:". . . the Holy See
admitsfirstof all thatthe systemobtainingunderthe Spanishdomina-
tionandthe mixingup of the religiousin the civiladministration might
havecreatedfor themin a portionof the peoplea certainill will." 50

The people,or at leasta partof them,becomingconsciousthatthey

too hadpoliticalrightsandtheireyes beingopenedto the conceptof
the equalityof all men,foughtandrebelledagainstthat authorityor
dominationwhich sought to imposeitself upon others and which
hamperedtheiraspirations to enjoy equality.In the Philippinesthat
authoritywas Spain,a secularpower,but represented almostuniquely
by her friars.Hence did thesefriarsfigureprominently in both the
fight for politicalequality and the fight for complete independence
whichlaterfollowed.
Actually,the friarswere beingfoughton diversefronts. The tri-
umphsof liberalism in Spain,whichin that countrywas synonymous
with anii-clencalism, hadalwaysaffectedthembadly. Someramifica-
tionsreachedout to the Philippines.Thencesomeregulations emitting
fromthe Madridgovernmentwere passedwith the obvioustendency
of weakeningthe friarcreditand influence.5lThe liberalgovernors
generalandotherofficialsassignedto the Philippines, the liberalSpan-
iardsandotherforeignersin the archipelago-these madeno effortsat
concealingtheirdislikeof the religiousand,consequently, of actingand
treatingthemaccordingto theirsentiments andbeliefs.To the former
it mighthavemostlybeena caseof angryresistanceandenvy of the
friars'sway andauthorityto which,in the long run,they hadto ac-
commodatethemselves.To the latterit could just havebeenpartof
theirpoliticalsystem.We read,for example,in the reportof the com-
mitteeassignedby the governorgeneralto investigateregardingthe
conductof somegovernment officialswho aimedatmolesting andlessen-
ing the influenceof the friarsthattheseofficialsdid not do so because
49 44How Our GovernmentAdjustedthe PhilippineChurchProblem,"T1e New
Century, XIX (October,1904),1.
5o Ibid.
51 De Comyn,p. 154-

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
144 FRIAR-PROBLEM
IN THEPHILIPPINES

they were irkedby the personalcharacterof the cleric,but simply

becausehe was a parishpriestanda friar.52
The enviablepositionenjoyedby the Spanishfriarsin the colony
alsocauseda conflictwiththesecularclergy.The factthatthereligious
ordersdid not includeFilipinoswhilethe seculars,on the otherhand,
werealmostall nativesunderlines the wholeissue.
The taskof PhilippineChristianization was entrustedto the careof
the regularclergywho, by royalorders,subdivided the colonyamong
themselves.Five ecclesiastical provinceswere drawnup, each under
one religiousorder. Royaldecreespromulgated by PhilipII provided
thattheseparishes assignedto theregularsshouldnotbe transferred into
the handsof the secularclergy. The latterwere to be given parishes
in placesnot occupiedby the religiousorders.The problem,however,
was thatthe originaldivisiondid not leaveany free territory,andthe
secularswere practicallyreducedto being assistantsto the religious
parishpriests.53It didnot takelong for the secularsto be discontented
with this stateof affairs.For the secularside of the controversy,we
muststatethatparishwork essentiallybelongsto them. The religious
missionariesaresupposedto pioneerinto new frontiers,buildparishes,
and then withdrawin favor of the secularclergy. But the religious
ordersalso had an argumentin the fact thatunderthe PGttronolto the
set-upwas different.54 Realizingthis complexity,CharlesIII decreed
twicein 1774thatall the missionsheldby the regularsshouldbe secu-
larizedassoonastheyfell vacant.Thiscreateda suddengreatneedfor
secularswhich led to the hasty trainingand ordinationof Filipino
secularpriests.The statement wasevenmockinglyspreadthatno more
workerswere to be found in the dockyardsfor the archbishophad
ordainedthemall. Theseill-trained seculars,intellectually
andmorally
unmolded,strengthened the contentionof the religiousordersthatthe
nativeswerenot fit for the priesthood.This dealta tremendous blow
to themovementof secularizing the parishes.The archbishop of Manila
52"Correspondence of theGovernor General to theMinistro deUltramar (No.
1,888; Manila, August 7, 1895), Memoria que al Senado dirige el General Blanco acerca
de los ultimos sucesos ocurridos en la Isla de Luzon (Madrid, 1897), p. 145.
53Horacio delaCosta, s. J.,"TheDevelopment of theNative Clergy inthePhilip-
pines,Theological Studies, VIII (June, 1947), 225.
s4TheReal Patronato de Indias wasa rightgranted by PopeJulius II in hisBull
Universalis Ecclesiae to theSpanish monarchs to permit orto provide fortheerection
of churches inthecolonies andto present candidatesforhighcolonial church offices
andbenefices. In return forthisprivilege, theSpanish crownwasto promote the
Christianization
of herpagan colonized subjectsandprovide forthematerial needsof
theChurch inthesecolonies. seeFrancisco xavierHernaez, Coleccio'nde bulas, breves
y otros documentos relativos a la Iglesia de Ame'ricay Filipinas (srussels,
1879)t I, 12-27.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 R. PILAPIL
VICENTE 145

who stronglyworkedin favorof the secularclergyevensteppedaside

in the face of theseunfortunate results.Anothersupportto the friar
side of the controversy came from the governorsgeneral.With rare
excepiionsthey favoredthe Spanishfriarsin the parishes to the Filipino
secularsin view of the former'spoliticalsignificance.
Luckilyfor the seculars,the Jesuitswere expelledin 1768, andthe
formerthentook overthe latter'secclesiastical province.At long last
a solutionwasfound. Butthe Jesuitsreturnedin 1863. This timethey
did not re-occupytheiroriginalprovince,but by the December,1861
decreeof QueenIsabellathey were given the parishesin Mindanao
whichhadhithertobeenoccupiedby the Augustinians. These,in turn,
took backfromthe secularsthe Jesuitparisheswhichthey had occu-
pied. After many unsuccessfulprotestson their part, the Filipino
secularswereagainrelegatedto theirformerunhappysituationto which
they could not resignthemselves.They, too, inveighedagainstthe
friarsandwereno lesssparingin theirdenunciations.
At thebeginningof therevolutionary periodthefirstformalorganiza-
tionsof thenativeswerethoseof thepropagandists or reformists.These
werecomposedof educatedmenwho sawno advantage in, norhadany
desireof, separatingfrom Spain. Their clamorwas for rightsand
liberiies;politicalequalitywith the Spaniards in short. Someof these
menevenadvocatedthe assimilation of the Philippinesas a provinceof
Spain. They representedthe group which first attacked the friars
openly.In theirprogramof entrusting thepoliticalofficesof thecolony
to the Filipinosthemselves" friarsovereignty " hadno place. Further-
more,they caughton with such conceptsspreadaboutthe friarsas
beingsymbolsof conservatism and mediaevalism which were then in
voguein the Europeanscene. Puttingthisinto the Philippinesetting,
theseconceptsseemedto gain an addedtruth. The friars,fearfulof
the consequences manifested in Europethroughtheinfluences of liberal-
ism,resistedheartandsoulsucha " diabolical"movementandtriedto
safeguard the Philippinesagainstit. They alsotriedhardto isolatethe
colony fromthesemoderntrendsso as to preservethe "Arcadia" of
innocentblissthat they hadcreatedthere-thesameattitudethe con-
servatives of Europehadin the reactionary yearsafterthe Congressof
Vienna in 1815. Even the widely-travelled Britishforeign officer,
W. Palgrave,recognizedthe conditionsof the Philippine life andcoun-
try as closestto hisideal;thisidyllicsituationbeing owed to a " healthy
conservatism, and a happyimmunityfrom the virus inoculationof
improvement and progress." 55 Such,too, was the sigh of the other

550p.cit.,p.138.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 146 FRIAR-PROBLEM
IN THEPHILIPPINES
observerswho saw this isolationbeginto breakdown. At aIly
strictcensorship rate,
andconstantsupervision wasthe friarpolicy. On the
otherhand,thefreedomsof pressandspeechandothersuch
the propagandists' rightswere
battlecry.
It is alsotrue that most of these friarswere behindthe
social
politicalcurrentsof theirtime. While young they left their and
and entereda monasteryas novices. Their training families
completed,they
wereshippedto Manilato finishtheologicalstudiesandto be
for the missionary prepared
workin the islands.Afterthisthey wereassignedto
a distantpueblowheretherewashardlyanotherwhite
manto
No wonderthen that most of themshouldnot havebeen be seen.
thelatestpolitical,social,andeconomictrends. abreastof
Somehowthe friars,for the greaterpart, never realizedthat
Filipinoswould aspirefor morethan just simplecontentment. the
didnot understand They
thatthe peoplewouldcarefor anythingmorethan
justto preparethemselves for the nextlife. To themit was
thattheseindios shouldaskfor more. Thatthe friarslookedimpossible
uponthe
Filipinos aspeopleof lessercapabilitiesis evidentin theirwritingsandin
theirattitudetowardsthe ordinationof the nativesto the
Beyond theirfirstimpressions priesthood.
of theseonce"uncivilized " natives,they
never passed.Addedto thiswastheclassicSpanish notionof superiority.
Consequently, the friarstaughtand gave to the people what they
thought wouldbefitthem. This is clearlydemonstrated in theirschool
curricula. Thus they fell prey to the vituperations of the progressive
reformers as obscurantists.
The attitudetowardsthe friarsof thosewho advocated
fromSpainis all too understandable. separation
The friarsin an afterchought
analyzed theirpositionvis-a-visthisgroupthus:
Apartfromtheiressentially religiouscharacter,the
archipelago haveanothersignificance that makes themregulars
odious
of the
to the
separatists. They arethe only permanent anddeeply-rooted
institution in the islands,with a suitableand Spanish
perfectlyadaptedto theseregions.Whiletherigorousother
organization,
peninsularslive
herein thefulfillment of theirdutymoreor lesstime,asis convenient
to theirprivateinterests, andwithno otherbondthatfollowsthemto
Filipinas thantheirown convenience, beingignorantof the language
of thecountryandhavingno otherrelations withthenativesthanthose
of a superEcial intercourse,we religiouscomehereto sacrificeour
wholelife. We formasit werea netof soldiersof religionandof
fatherland in thearchipelago, the
scatteredevento the remotest villagesof
theislands.Herewe haveourhistory,ourglories, theancestral
so to speak,of ourfamily.Biddingeternalfarewell house,
to ournativesoil,

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 VICENTE
R. PILAPIL 147

we condemnourselves voluntarily,
by nrtueof ourvows,to livefor-
everconsecrated to themoral,religious,andpoliiicaleducation of the
naiives,for whosedefensewe havein allageswagedcampaigns....56
[Italicsmine.]
Anotherreasonwhichmadethe friarsthe enemiesof the revolutionaries
was the former'sdevotionto Spainin whichregardthey were called
ultrol-espomoles or hyperpatriotic.The leadersof the revolutionfor
independence fromSpainwerecognizantof this. They alsorecognized
the truthof the statementmadeby the Provincialof the Augustinian
Order,Jose Labo,when he saidthat the friarswere the pedestalor
foundationof the sovereigntyof Spainin theseislands,andif removed,
the wholestructurewouldtoppleover.57Whatwas morelogicalthan
for the separatists to exerteffortfor the removalof sucha foundation?
It is necessary to emphasize the factthatin the contextof the Philip-
pine revolutionthe friarswere foughtin so far as they constituteda
politicaland socialclass,and not primarilyas a religiousunit. Many
Americanmilitaryofficersandcorrespondents in theirofiicialcommuni-
cationsgavetestimonythatthoughamongthe revolutionaries andsome
peopletherewashatredto the monasticorders,they wereloyalto the
CatholicChurch.58 " The PhilippinepeoplelovetheCatholicChurch." 59

Thatwasthe finaljudgmentof the U. S. Philippine Commission.

Earlierthe followingdescription wasmadeof thefriars:
He is in mostinstances a Spaniardby birth.... Buthisbirthplace,
complexion, andhabitapart,he is ordinarily as much,sometimes in a
manner more,of a nativein hissympathies andturnof mindthanthe
nativesthemselves. Thisis quitenatural.Boundfor life to the land
of his adoption, withno social,no domestic tie, no anticipatedhome-
returnto holdhimbackfromidentifying himselfwiththoseamongst
whomhis daysarehenceforth to be passed,his bonesat lastto rest,
havingeveryinterest,the highestas the lowest,in commonwiththe
sheepof hispasture. . . he commonly becomes, andthatin the truest
andbestsenseof the term,a veryfatherto his people,andfindsin
theirreverence andaffectionmotiveenoughto encourage himin con-
tinuingto deservethetitle. To clericalgovernment, paradoxicalasthe
statement maysoundin ModernEuropean ears,the Philippineislands
owe,morethanto anythingelse,theirinternalprosperity, the Malay
populaiion its sufliciency
andhappiness.6°
56B eER, LIIt238-239.
7 SenateDocumentNo. I90tp. 73
58 CesarAdib Majul,The Politicaland Constitutional
Ideas of the PhilippineRevo-
lution (Quezon City, 1957)s pp. 92-93. A good number of quotationsfrom these
communications are given here.
59Taft Commission, p. 30.
60 Palgravet pp. 149-lSO.

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
148 IN THEPHILIPPINES
FRIAR-PROBLEM
Laterthe friarshad suddenlybecomethe reverse,doing all possible
harmto the natives,as manywouldhaveus believe. Of the personal
chargesthey had been acquitted.It is true that some wrongswere
committed of theirhaciendas,
in the administration butin thenineteenth
centuryonly the tenantsof Calamba madeloud complaints.Whether
theirlandsbroughtthe friarsmoreharmdueto the vestedinterestsof
someratherthanto theallegedhardships someweresuffering is merelya
speculativequestion.Be thatwhatit may,the fact is thatthe friars,as
they were constitutedandas they functioned,stoodin the way of the
of a newly awakenedpeople. To the Filipinopeoplewho
aspirations
hadcometo desireto forgethe destinyof theirown naiionby them-
selvesthe civil authorityof the friarsposeda distastefulbarrier.In
the ultimateanalysis,it was the politicalsignificanceof the religious
whichhadcostthemso muchtrouble.
VICENTE R. PILAPIL
Molnilol,
Philippines

This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:20:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions