I knew a money-grabbing parish priest—a friar—who publicly announced raffles from the pulpit of the church from which he preached morality and devotion. On one occasion a 200-peso watch was put up for ₱500—at another time he raffled dresses for the women. Under the pretext of being a pious institution, he established a society of women, called the Association of St. Joseph (Confradia de San José), upon whom he imposed the very secular duties of domestic service in the convent and raffle-ticket hawking. He had the audacity to dictate to a friend of mine—a planter—the value of the gifts he was to make to him, and when the planter was at length wearied of his importunities, he conspired with a Spaniard to deprive my friend of his estate, alleging that he was not the real owner. Failing in this, he stirred up the petty-governor and headmen against him. The petty-governor was urged to litigation, and when he received an unfavourable sentence, the priest, enraged at the abortive result of his malicious intrigues, actually left his vicarage to accompany his litigious protégé to the chief judge of the province in quest of a reversion of the sentence.
A priest of evil propensities brought only misery to his parish and aroused a feeling of odium against the Spanish friars in general. As incumbents they held the native in contempt. He who should be the parishioner was treated despotically as the subject whose life, liberty, property, and civil rights were in his sacerdotal lordʼs power. And that power was not unfrequently exercised, for if a native refused to yield to his demands, or did not contribute with sufficient liberality to a religious feast, or failed to come to Mass, or protected the virtue of his daughter, or neglected the genuflexion and kissing of hands, or was out of the priestʼs party in the municipal affairs of the parish, or in any other trivial way became a persona non grata at the “convent,” he and his family would become the pastorʼs sheep marked for sacrifice. As Government agent it was within his arbitrary power to attach his signature to or withhold it from any municipal document. From time to time he could give full vent to his animosity by secretly denouncing to the civil authorities as “inconvenient in the town” all those whom he wished to get rid of. He had simply to send an official advice to the Governor of the province, who forwarded it to the Gov.-General, stating that he had reason to believe that the persons mentioned in the margin were disloyal, immoral, or whatever it might be, and recommend their removal from the neighbourhood. A native so named suddenly found at his door a patrol of the Civil Guard, who escorted him, with his elbows tied together, from prison to prison, up to the capital town and thence to Manila. Finally, without trial or sentence, he was banished to some distant island of the Archipelago. He might one day return to find his family ruined, or he might as often spend his last days in misery alone. Sometimes a native who had privately heard of his “denunciation” became a remontado, that is to say he fled to the mountains to lead a bandits life where the evils of a debased civilization could not reach him. Banishment in these circumstances was not a mere transportation to another place, but was attended with all the horrors of a cruel captivity, of which I have been an eye-witness. From the foregoing it may be readily understood how the conduct of the regular clergy was the primary cause of the Rebellion of 1896; it was not the monksʼ immorality which disturbed the mind of the native, but their Cæsarism which raised his ire. The ground of discord was always infinitely more material than sentimental. Among the friars, however, there were many exceptional men of charming manners and eminent virtue. If little was done to coerce the bulk of the friars to live up to the standard of these exceptions, it was said to be because the general interests of Mother Church were opposed to investigation and admonition, for fear of the consequent scandal destructive of her prestige.
The Hierarchy of the Philippines consists of one Archbishop in Manila, and four Suffragan Bishoprics, respectively of Nueva Segovia, Cebú, Jaro, and Nueva Cáceres.[3] The provincials, the vicars-general, and other officers of the Religious Orders were elected by the Chapters and held office for four years. The first Bishop of Manila took possession in 1581, and the first Archbishop in 1598.
The Jesuits came to these Islands in 1581, and were expelled therefrom in 1770 by virtue of an Apostolic Brief[4] of Pope Clement XIV., but were permitted to return in 1859, on the understanding that they would confine their labours to scholastic education and the establishment of missions amongst uncivilized tribes. Consequently, in Manila they refounded their school—the Municipal Athenæum—a mission house, and a Meteorological Observatory, whilst in many parts of Mindanao Island they have established missions, with the vain hope of converting Mahometans to Christianity.[5] The Jesuits, compared with the members of the other Orders, are very superior men, and their fraternity includes a few, and almost the only, learned ecclesiastics who came to the Colony. Since their return to the Islands (1859) in the midst of the strife with the Religious Orders, the people recognized the Jesuits as disinterested benefactors of the country.
Several Chinese have been admitted to holy orders, two of them having become Austin Friars.[6] The first native friars date their admission from the year 1700, since when there have been sixteen of the Order of St. Augustine. Subsequently they were excluded from the confraternities, and only admitted to holy orders as vicars, curates to assist parish vicars, chaplains, and in other minor offices. Up to the year 1872 native priests were appointed to benefices, but in consequence of their alleged implication in the Cavite Conspiracy of that year, their church livings, as they became vacant, were given to Spanish friars, whose headquarters were established in Manila.
The Austin Friars were the religious pioneers in these Islands; they came to Cebú in 1565 and to Manila in 1571; then followed the Franciscans in 1577; the Dominicans in 1587, a member of this Order having been ordained first Bishop of Manila, where he arrived in 1581. The Recoletos (unshod Augustinians), a branch of the Saint Augustine Order, came to the Islands in 1606; the Capuchins—the lowest type of European monk in the Far East, came to Manila in 1886, and were sent to the Caroline Islands (vide p. 45). The Paulists, of the Order of Saint Vincent de Paul, were employed in scholastic work in Nueva Cáceres, Jaro, and Cebú, the same as the Jesuits were in Manila. The Benedictines came to the Islands in 1895. Only the members of the first four Orders above named were parish priests, and each (except the Franciscans) possessed agricultural land; hence the animosity of the natives was directed against these four confraternities only, and not against the others, who neither monopolized incumbencies, nor held rural property, but were simply teachers, or missionaries, whose worldly interests in no way clashed with those of the people. Therefore, whenever there was a popular outcry against “the friars,” it was understood to refer solely to the Austins, the Franciscans, the Dominicans and the Recoletos.[7] There was no Spanish secular clergy in the Islands, except three or four military chaplains.
The Church was financially supported by the State to the extent of about three-quarters of a million pesos per annum.
The following are some of the most interesting items taken from “The Budget for 1888,” viz.:—
| Sanctorum or Church tax of 18¾ cents (i.e., 1½ reales) on each Cédula personal, say on 2,760,613 Cédulas in 1888, less 4 per cent, cost of collection | ₱496,910.00 |
The friars appointed to incumbencies received in former times tithes from the Spaniards, and a Church tax from the natives computed by the amount of tribute paid. Tithe payment (diézmos prediales) by the Spaniards became almost obsolete, and the Sanctorum tax on Cédulas was paid to the Church through the Treasury (vide p. [55]).