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. [↑]