It is also certain that the Filipinos are sincere Catholics. Their religion suits them, and is congenial to their nature. They practice it spontaneously, and profess it openly and publicly, without any objection. Far from all their minds is the most remote suspicion that Catholicism is not the true and only religion capable of bringing about their temporal and eternal happiness. All of these Indians are by nature docile to the teachings and admonitions of their parish priests and spiritual fathers. Many good people approach the holy sacraments easily and frequently; and the fact that many others do not approach or frequent them so often must be attributed to neglect, to heedlessness, or to real difficulties, but never to aversion. The ceremonies and the solemnity of the worship attract them very powerfully, and so do the popular Catholic exhibitions of great feasts and processions. They display without any objection, but rather with great pleasure, the pious objects and insignia of any devotion or pious association to which they belong; and in many places the women wear the scapular or rosary around the neck as a part or complement of their dress. It may be said that there is no house or family, however poor it be, that does not have a domestic altar or oratory. There are some careless Christians among the Filipino people, vicious and scandalous because of their evil habits; there are even some who are ignorant of the most necessary things of their religion: but there are no unbelievers or impious ones among them—unless some few, relatively insignificant in number, who have become vitiated and corrupted in foreign countries, and afterward have returned to their country. Even these latter have hitherto, because of a certain feeling of shame that they retain, taken care not to let that change be seen, except among irreligious associates or those of another form of worship. Finally, the tertiary orders, brotherhoods, and pious and devotional associations, old and new, have always had a great number of individuals enrolled in the Filipinas, and even constant and fervent affiliated members.
The Catholic religion, always holy and sanctifying, works in those who adopt it, according to the natural or acquired disposition of the same. Thus it is that the defects of character in the Indians, if they are frequently moderated, thanks to the religion that they profess, wholly disappear but with difficulty, and generally even have some influence on the private life and religious character of the natives. Since they are, therefore, more superficial and more impressionable to new things than those of other races, they would perhaps be less constant in their Catholic practices, sentiments, and convictions, and would feel more easily than do others the evil influences of false doctrines and worships, if they had experience with these. They are readily inclined to superstitions, now by their former bad habits, now by their nearness to and communication with those who are yet heathen, now by their exceedingly puerile imagination, and by their nature, which is influenced by their surroundings.
This we believe is, in broad lines, the religious character of the Indians of Filipinas. Let us now see what has been said recently also in regard to this same point by another contemporaneous witness, with whom we almost entirely agree. Mr. Peyton, a Protestant bishop, said, when speaking of Catholicism in the Filipinas, at a meeting of the Protestant bishops of the Episcopal church held at St. Louis (United States), in the month of last October: “I found a magnificent church in every village. I was present at mass several times, and the churches were always full of natives—even when circumstances were unfavorable, because of the military occupation. There are almost no seats in those churches, while the services last—an hour, or an hour and a half. Never in my life have I observed more evident signs of profound devotion than in those there present. The men were kneeling, or prostrated before the altar; and the women were on their knees, or seated on the floor. No one went out of the church during the service, or talked to others. There is no spirit of sectarianism there. All have been instructed in the creed, in the formal prayers, in the ten commandments, and in the catechism. All have been baptized in infancy.[5] I do not know whether there exists in this country a village so pure, moral, and devout as is the Filipino village.”
Granting the above, would freedom of worship be advisable for Filipinos?
Since, then, the religion in Filipinas, and consequently their morals, is so unanimous, would it be advisable to introduce freedom of worship into this country? If one understands by freedom of worship only actual religious toleration, by virtue of which no one can be obliged to profess Catholicism, and no one be persecuted for neglecting to be a Catholic, or that each one profess privately the religion that he pleases, that freedom has always existed in Filipinas; and no Filipino or foreigner was ever obliged to embrace the Catholic religion. But if one understands by freedom of worship the concession to all religions (for example, to those of Confucius, Mahomet, and to all the Protestant sects) of equal rights to open schools, erect churches, create parishes, and celebrate public processions and functions, as does the Catholic church, we believe that not only is this not advisable, but that it would be a fatal measure to any government which rules the destinies of Filipinas. If, in fact, this government should concede such freedom of worship, it would cause itself to be hated by the six and one-half millions of Filipino Catholics; for, even though such government should profess no worship, the Filipino people would consider it as responsible for all the consequences of such a measure; and therefore it would not be looked on favorably by these six and one-half millions of Catholics. These people are fully convinced that theirs is the only true religion, and the only one by which they can be saved. If any government should endeavor to despoil them of that religion—which is their most precious jewel, and the richest inheritance which they have received from their ancestors—even should it be no more than permitting the Protestant or heterodox propaganda publicly and openly, then they could not refrain from complaint; and from that might even come the disturbance of public order, or perhaps some politico-religious war, accompanied by all the cruelty and all the disasters which, as are well known, are generally brought on by such wars.
Two serious difficulties can be opposed against the rights of Catholicism in Filipinas. The first is in the Americans who are governing at present, and the second is in the Filipinos themselves. The Americans enjoy in America the most complete freedom of worship; why, then, should they not enjoy that same freedom when they go to Filipinas? We answer, that every inhabitant must conform to the laws of the country in which he lives. The Chinese enjoyed in China the most complete freedom to erect temples to Buddha or to Confucius; but for three centuries they have not enjoyed a like freedom in Manila, although no Chinese has been forced to become a Catholic. We go farther and say that no Chinese has had to boast of his religion in order to trade, become rich, and return to China. The same can be said of the English and Americans. If it is necessary for the good order and government of six and one-half millions of Catholics in Filipinas, besides those who are not Catholics (one and one-half millions, counting idolaters and Moros yet to be civilized), not to permit or encourage freedom of worship, the government which rules the destiny of these islands ought to legislate along those lines, since the laws ought to be adjusted to the needs of the majority of their inhabitants. The Americans themselves who shall take up their residence here ought to accommodate themselves to that law. No temporal or spiritual harm would result to them, for they could privately profess what their conscience dictated to them as the true religion. Thus the English do in Malta, where the Catholic religion is in force; and although the island is so small, there are two thousand Italian Catholic priests in it, who are more content to live under the English government than under the Italian.
The other difficulty against Catholicism in Filipinas springs from the Filipino insurgents themselves, who voted for freedom of worship and separation from the Spanish church in their congress of Malolos.[6] Why, then, has not that freedom of worship been granted to the Filipinos, if they themselves ask it? We reply that they also ask for independence. Will the Americans grant them the latter because of that fact? The majority of the Filipino insurgent chiefs were inclined to Masonry. They had bound themselves, for a long time past, to work for the expulsion of the friars; and, drunk with the wine of liberty, they asked for every kind of freedom, including that of religion. How many insurgents have abjured Catholicism? Their number does not exceed two dozen. The law of freedom of worship is unnecessary for them, since they profess no religion. The Filipino people—that is to say, the six and one-half millions of Catholics enrolled in the parish registers—do not ask or desire religious freedom, or separation from the Spanish church. They are content with their Catholicism, and desire nothing else; and they will not suffer their government to take from them their Catholic unity. We have heard this from qualified and accredited defenders of Filipino independence. They even deny that the vote at Malolos was the true expression of the will of that congress, which was also very far from being the entire and genuine representation of the Filipino people. The latter hold heresies, and all manner of religious disturbance, in horror. He who would introduce these into their homes would offer them an insult. Consequently, it is demonstrated that freedom of worship in Filipinas is not advisable, but adverse to the public peace.
If it is said finally, that there are some points of public interest which demand some reform, in what pertains to the religious estate of the Filipinas, we shall not be the ones to deny that. But the Church has the desire and the means to remedy these supposed or recognized evils. If, peradventure, it do not remedy them through ignorance, let anyone who is interested, and the government of the country first of all, bring them to its notice. On the other hand, this matter has no connection with religious freedom.
[From the same work (pp. 256, 257) is taken the following mention of the religious orders who recently established themselves in the Philippines:]
In all the dioceses the bishops looked after the founding of seminaries for the native clergy, not only because such were needed to aid in the administration of the sacraments in the large parishes created by the religious, but also for the occupation of some parishes which were reserved for them from very ancient times.