The Philippine Islands, 1493-1898, Volume 38, 1674-1683 / Explorations by early navigators, descriptions of the islands and their peoples, their history and records of the Catholic missions, as related in contemporaneous books and manuscripts, showing the political, economic, commercial and religious conditions of those islands from their earliest relations with European nations to the close of the nineteenth century

by Unknown

CONDITION OF THE CLERGY OF THE PHILIPPINES

The procurator-general of the Dominicans in Madrid, Fray Pedro Diaz del Cosio, made a representation to the queen-regent in August, 1674, in regard to the condition of the clergy of the islands, because of the almost perpetual vacancies [in the sees] of the archbishop and bishops, and the excessive subjection in which the governors held them, and the harsh treatment accorded them.[1]

He represented that the bishopric of Nueva Caceres had been vacant for about thirty-one years; and that he who had last been presented (on September 30, 1672) had not obtained the bulls from his Holiness.

That the bishopric of Cebu had not had any bishop who was regularly appointed and who took possession, for about nineteen years, when Don Fray Juan Lopez assumed that post in 1666; that the latter had been promoted to the bishopric of Manila; that Don Diego de Aguilar was presented in 1672, a Dominican of the age of sixty years, but had not yet, at that date (1674), obtained the bulls (although he had accepted the dignity)—without doubt, because he was old and lived in Mejico.

That the bishopric of Nueva Segovia had been vacant for about fifteen years, since the death of the last bishop, Don Fray Rodrigo de Cardenas,[2] a Dominican; for he who had then (1674) been presented, namely, Don Jose Poblete, dean of the cabildo of Manila, had not yet obtained the bulls nor his authorization, for lack of money.

That the archbishopric of Manila, the one which had been vacant the least time (since the death of Don Miguel de Poblete in 1668), had been given to Don Fray Juan Lopez, bishop of Cebu, whose bulls could not arrive until 1674—six years of vacancy.

That the governors were interested in having vacancies; for they filled the posts provisionally, and for that reason they were slow in giving information of a vacancy.

That the incomes of the bishops were scant, and were collected at the will of the governors, who paid them poorly, and curtailed them. Therefore arrangements should be made to let the bishops themselves collect their dues from the tributes, as these were paid in.

That the cost of the bulls ought to be paid from the royal treasury.

That appointments ought to be given to persons not over forty years of age.

That they should be given to Dominican friars, who would obtain the bulls without any delay.

That the third part of the income of the vacancies should be given to the persons appointed, in order to pay for the bulls.

That the power of exiling bishops should be taken from the governors and Audiencia.

That three auxiliary bishops should be appointed, who should succeed, according to their seniority, [in case of vacancies] in the archbishopric and bishoprics, and should begin to govern immediately.

The father procurator, Fray Pedro del Cosio, set forth those claims, but no one took any notice of them. The memorial was presented to the Council, October 26, 1674. Having been investigated by the fiscal—whom, as well as the other persons who intervened in it, Father Cosio visited—it was examined in the Council, March 11, 1675, and gave rise to the following resolutions:

That the governors of Filipinas should report promptly to the Council the vacancies of the bishoprics, under penalty of a fine of two thousand pesos.

That the archbishop of Manila should appoint governors ad interim in the vacancies of the three bishoprics of Filipinas; and his Holiness should be petitioned for despatches, so that in such case the ecclesiastical spiritual authority should be exercised by the consecrated bishops left.

That the royal officials of Mejico should remit on separate account what was owing to the archbishop and cabildo of Manila, without the governor and royal officials of Filipinas having any part in it.

That the Audiencia alone could proceed, in accordance with law, against the ecclesiastics, and not the governor by himself alone.

That the archbishop should report the amount of the tithes of the islands, in each of the three bishoprics, in order to erect cathedrals and establish cabildos.

That the royal officials of Manila should report the amount of the third part of the [incomes of the] last vacancies of the bishoprics.

It appears further: That the Council was about to resolve that one-third of the incomes of the vacancies of the bishoprics of Filipinas should belong to the treasury, and another third part should be conceded to the bishops-elect to pay for the bulls. That it was resolved to augment the income of the archbishop to five thousand pesos, and that of the bishops to four thousand pesos. That it was about to petition Roma to lower by one-third the cost of the bulls to the bishops of Filipinas. That the archbishop should punish public scandals of incontinence, both of lewd women and of men living in concubinage. That in the disputes of Don Gerónimo Herrera with the archbishop[3] some matters were determined in favor of the latter.

---

[1] This document in the Ventura del Arco MSS. is evidently a mere synopsis of the original. [↑]

[2] “In the year 61 the three bishops had died—Don Fray Rodrigo de Cardenas, of Nueva Segovia; Don Fray Antonio de San Gregorio, of Nueva Cazeres; and Doctor Don Juan Velez (a cleric, formerly dean of the holy church of Manila), of Zebú; and the royal decrees for the new incumbents did not reach Manila until the year 65. Therein were proposed the following names: For the diocese of Nueva Segovia, Fray Francisco de Navarro, a discalced Franciscan, who set a most unusual example by refusing so honorable a dignity. For that of Nueva Cazeres, Fray Francisco de la Madre de Dios (or de la Alameda) also a discalced Franciscan; but the royal decree found him dead two years before. For that of Zebú, the most illustrious Don Fray Juan Lopez, who came in this ship ‘San Joseph,’ and had been already consecrated in Mechoacan.” (Concepción, Hist. de Philipinas, vii, pp. 140, 141.) [↑]

[3] In 1673 arose a controversy between the archbishop, Fray Juan López, and Don Jerónimo de Herrera, the chief chaplain of the royal chapel, who undertook to exercise among the soldiers the functions of parish priest. He was excommunicated by the archbishop, but instituted proceedings against that prelate in a military court. This suit was quashed by the Audiencia, but the governor withheld the archbishop’s stipends. These conflicts led to certain of the measures adopted by the Council, recorded in our text. [↑]

PREROGATIVES OF EX-PROVINCIALS

GRANTED TO THE PROCURATORS OF THE ORDER OF HERMITS OF ST. AUGUSTINE IN FILIPINAS

Innocent XI, Pope. In future remembrance of the affair.

Not long ago it was represented to us on the part of our sons the brethren of the Order of Hermits of St. Augustine of the province of the islands known as the Philippines, in the Ocean Sea that as they had to send a religious to attend to urgent matters of the said province in the Roman and Spanish royal courts, nor was any religious found willing to undertake such burden because of the very long and toilsome journey, that could not be made without grave discomforts and danger of life, as also because such procurators after laboring three years and longer in their charge were not allowed any prerogative, the same petitioners very earnestly desire a grant from us to the effect that those who for three continuous years shall exercise the duty of procurator in the said courts shall enjoy the privileges of ex-provincials. Since, moreover, not only the whole province aforesaid, but also the late prior-general of the said order, has petitioned for the grant of such indulgence, therefore the said petitioners have humbly solicited us to make through our apostolic bounty due provision in the premises.

1. Accordingly, desiring to reward the petitioners with special favors and graces, moreover considering them all and singular to be free from any sort of excommunication, ... and being not indisposed to hearken to their prayers, with the counsel of our venerable brethren the cardinals of the Holy Roman Church who are in charge of matters appertaining to bishops and regulars, and with the consent of the aforementioned prior general, by our apostolic authority, in virtue of these presents, we grant and allow those religious of the said province who in the future shall exercise at least for three years the duty of procurator of their province in the aforesaid courts the full and lawful possession and enjoyment of all the privileges, prerogatives, and exemptions now possessed and enjoyed by ex-provincials of the same province—due regard, however, always being had in the premises to the authority of the congregation of the same cardinals.

2. Decreeing that these present letters shall always be held as binding, valid, and efficacious, and shall obtain their plenary and entire results, etc.

Given at Rome, at St. Mary Major’s, under the seal of the Fisherman, December 17, 1677, the second year of our pontificate.