[5] Among the media employed by the Holy See in the restoration of one’s conscience to its good estate, are the bulls of composition. In the case of persons in possession of ill-gotten goods, as prebendaries who have forfeited their canonical allotments, or trustees who have maladministered estates, and the like, an arrangement (Latin, compositio) is sometimes made—only, however, when the rightful owners or heirs of the property in question are unknown (si domins sint ignoti), whereby the said “unjust steward” is allowed to keep for himself a moiety of what does not belong to him, on condition that the rest be handed over for the maintenance of church services, or institutions of charity, as hospitals, asylums, and the like. See Ferraris’s Bibliotheca, art. “Bulla Cruciatae.”—Rev. T. C. Middleton, O.S.A.
The bulls for the dead were placed on the heads of the dying, or in the hands of the dead—purchased by their friends or relatives in order to rescue then souls from purgatory. Those de lacticinios (literally, “for milk-porridges”) permitted to ecclesiastics the use of certain foods at times when these were forbidden by church law. The bulls of the Crusade were valid as dispensations only one year in Spain; but according to Solórzano they were extended to two years in the colonies, on account of the long time required for them to teach those distant places. See Bancroft’s Hist. Mexico, iii, p. 605. After the victory of Lepanto, Gregory XIII resumed the issue of these indulgences, and extended them to twelve years; and since then his bull has been renewed every twelve years, (E. H. Vollet, in Grande Encyclopédie, Paris, Lamirault et Cie.), xiii, p. 453.
[6] Apparently the “farming out” of this revenue, by the crown, to private persons. A law of May 30, 1640, enacted that all the expenses connected with the bulls of the Crusade should be paid from its proceeds, the remainder being paid to the crown (Recopilación, lib. i, tit. xx, ley xvi).
[7] Tournon was the papal legate sent to China for the settlement of the famous controversy regarding the “Chinese rites,” which had lasted some seventy years. The missions to China were entirely in the hands of the Jesuits until 1631, when Dominicans entered that country, and Franciscans in 1633. The new missionaries soon began to accuse the Jesuits of undue complaisance and conformity with heathen customs, and made complaint against them at Rome. For a time the Holy See permitted the practice of the Chinese rites, but frequent contentions arose on this subject between the Jesuits and the other orders, which were not definitely settled by Rome for many years. Finally, Clement XI sent Tournon (1703) to investigate the matter thoroughly, who condemned the rites in question as idolatrous and was therefore imprisoned by the Chinese emperor. He died in this captivity (1710), but his decision was accepted by the pope, and all Catholic missionaries to China were required to take an oath that they would resist those rites to the utmost. See full account of this controversy, with citations of authorities, in Addis and Arnold’s Catholic Dictionary (Meagher’s revision), pp. 926–928. For accounts of Tournon’s stay at Manila, and the dissatisfaction which he aroused there, see La Concepción’s Hist. Philipinas, viii, pp. 306–324; and Zúñiga’s Hist. Philipinas (Sampaloc, 1803), pp. 411–416.
[8] Sidoti (or Sidotti) was an Italian priest who came to Manila with Tournon, intending to enter the forbidden land of Japan. In 1709, he succeeded in doing this, by persuading the captain of a Spanish vessel to land him on the Japanese coast; Zúñiga says (Hist. Philipinas, pp. 420, 421) that nothing more had ever been learned regarding him. La Concepción, however, writing somewhat earlier, says (Hist. Philipinas, vi, p. 82) that in 1716 news of Sidoti’s imprisonment and death arrived at Canton—the latter being attributed to his continual fasts and austerities. But Griffis relates (Mikado’s Empire, pp. 262, 263) so much as may now be known about Sidoti’s fate, derived from a book—Sei Yō Ki Bun (“Annals of Western Nations”)—written by the Japanese scholar who examined the priest, which gives the facts of the case, and the judicial proceedings therein. Sidoti “was kept a prisoner, living for several years after his arrival, in Yedo (Tōkiō), and probably died a natural death.”
[9] See La Concepción’s detailed account (Hist. Philipinas, viii, pp. 315–338) of the founding of this college.
[10] This was only ad interim, during the absence of Bishop Salazar in Spain, from 1591 to Salvatierra’s death early in 1595. He had come tu Manila with Salazar, whose provisor he long was; he also ministered to the Indians, and went to Maluco as chaplain with a Spanish expedition. See Reseña biográfica, i, pp. 50–52.
[11] In the margin at this point occurs the following: “A total of 105,503 souls.”
[12] This law (which is contained in the book entitled, “Concerning the universities, and general and private studies in the Indias”) is as follows: “Permission is conceded for the cities of Santo Domingo in the island of Española, Santa Fé in the new kingdom of Granada, Santiago de Guatemala, Santiago de Chile, and Manila in the Filipinas Islands, to have halls for study, and universities where courses may be pursued and degrees given, for the time that has appeared advisable. For that we have obtained briefs and bulls from the holy apostolic see, and we have conceded those universities certain privileges and preëminences. We order that what has been ordained for the said halls of study and universities be kept, obeyed, and executed, without violating it in any manner. Those universities which shall be limited in time, shall present themselves before our royal Council of the Indias to petition for an extension of time, where the advisable measures will be taken. If no extension is granted, the teaching of those studies shall cease and end; for so is our will.” A note to this law in the Recopilación reads in part as follows: “It must be borne in mind that the universities, seminaries, conciliars, and other schools of learning erected by public authority in the Indias were declared to be under the royal patronage by a circular letter of June 11, 1792.”
[13] See this law in Vol. XX, pp. 260, 261.