3. “Continuation of the portraiture of the Jesuits, drawn to the life by the most learned and illustrious Catholics, etc. Third edition, with permission of the authorities. At Madrid, in the shop of the widow of Ericeo Sanchez. In the year one thousand, seven hundred, and sixty-eight.”
4. “Portraiture of the Jesuits, drawn to the life by the most learned and most illustrious Catholics: authorized judgment formed of the Jesuits, with authentic and undeniable testimonies by the greatest and most distinguished men of both Church and State, from the year 1540, in which their order was founded, until 1650. Translated from the Portuguese into Castilian, in order to banish the obstinate prejudices and voluntary blindness of many unwary and deluded persons who close their eyes against the beauteous splendor of the truth. Third edition. With permission of the authorities, at Madrid. At the shop of the widow of Elicio Sanchez. In the year one thousand, seven hundred, and sixty-eight.” [↑]
[24] It seems that Auditor Basaraz prohibited the circulation of these books, in which he was supported by Raón; consequently the books that had been seized were held back, notwithstanding Santa Justa’s protest, and the matter was not settled in court, as it should have been. (Montero y Vidal, Hist. de Filipinas, ii, pp. 196, 224.) [↑]
[25] Referring to the Order of St. Francis, since many of its members were martyred in the Japanese persecutions. (About the time of the expulsion of the Jesuits, their enemies declared that, while martyrs abounded in the other religious orders, the Jesuits escaped that fate among the heathen.) In the other missions, the allusion is to the noted controversy over the Chinese rites, in which the Jesuits were accused of undue laxity and connivance with heathen customs; the same accusation was also made against them in some of the American missions. [↑]
THE COUNCIL OF 1771
Letter of a missionary father of the Order of St. Francis to a Spanish father of the Society of Jesus, written from the city of Manila in the Philippine Islands, December 13, 1771, and communicated not long ago to Father Aloysius Knapp.[1]
The provincial Council which was held this year by the archbishop of this place with his three suffragans has given rise to the greatest discord.[2] For therein the archbishop and the governor of the islands sought to have abolished the solemn votive Mass (of the Blessed [Virgin]) and the Salve Regina—which from the first christianizing of these islands it has been the custom to chant every Saturday in honor of the Blessed Virgin as well as other devotions to the Blessed Virgin, for the preservation and spread of the Catholic religion—under the pretext that the Indians might not [thereby] be led into idolatry and the worship of Mary as a goddess.[3] This purpose and decision of the two they gave in writing to the three suffragans. Two of the suffragans—one of whom was a secular, the other belonging to the Order of St. Dominic—yielded assent, or at least showed no displeasure thereat. But the third, by name De Luna, of the Order of St. Francis, bishop of Camarines, a man worthy of honor for his advanced age and uprightness, rose in indignation at the dastardliness of the motion, and with apostolic zeal declaimed against the written decision. On recognizing, however, that his endeavor was wholly fruitless, with the declaration that the council was a scandal he left the assembly, subsequently sending violent purpose, whereupon Bishop de Luna received orders to leave the city. Soon after his return to his episcopal see he issued a pastoral letter to his clergy, religious and secular, wherein he declared the council[4] null and scandalous. This declaration of the bishop was accepted by all except the Dominican fathers, who sided with the archbishop and the governor, who, quite unmoved by tumults, scandals, and bloodshed, continued this council of theirs. In the meantime Bishop de Luna put himself in hiding, and, it is said, took passage for Spain on a ship sailing for China, in order to present the case to his Majesty. In this council it furthermore was decreed, that Bishop de Luna should be wrested from his see, and all the Augustinian fathers driven from their parishes. Accordingly, on October 22 and 28 of the year 1771, a large body of soldiery, sent therefor from the city of Manila by the governor, gave to thirty-one Indian clerics[5] the parishes of the Augustinian fathers, whom they led away as prisoners after having pillaged their homes in the name of the king, and substituted the said Indian clerics in their place. The same fate that befell the Augustinian fathers was destined for us Franciscans; but, rather than be taken away as prisoners, we all abandoned our homes and our parishioners, and went up to our convent on a mountain, where we purposed to struggle with hunger and hardships until God should otherwise dispose of us. The father provincials of both orders sent word in writing to their religious who were not yet in captivity, to return to Spain, in any way and, in fine, by whatever road they could. It is said that before long soldiers are to be sent to pillage all our convents, both inside and outside the walls of Manila. The governor is intercepting all letters addressed to Spain; he forbids any to be sent thither. Accordingly, since he recently got hold of four letters which were intended for Spain, which had been written by the commander-in-chief of the troops, he had him thrown into jail and deprived of his command; another Spaniard, who sided with the Spanish religious and clerics, he fined three thousand dollars [talerorum]. For the governor and the archbishop declare that Spanish religious or clerics will no longer be tolerated, since with their masses, sodalities [institutis], and prayers in common [comprecationibus],[6] they are tricking the people, and with their devotions bleeding them of their money. During this persecution the Moros, the enemies of the Christians, are fishing in muddy waters; from the neighboring islands of Xolo and Mindanao they are making raids in every quarter, pillaging and setting afire churches and houses; they have slain many; many more they have carried away into slavery, as happened three days ago when they captured five hundred Christians a short distance from the city of Manila. All these miseries and the immense slaughter of Christians the governor and the archbishop view with unconcern, pleased with this conceit alone that thereby they are harassing the religious and are strong enough to persecute them—whose sorrowful fate, moreover, they rejoice at, when, in the midst of banquets and revelry [jocando], they intone the [invitatory] of the [divine] office: Regem, cui omnia vivunt, venite adoremus, venite exultemus,[7] etc.
They rejoice since they have driven very many religious away from their ministries; but it is greatly to be feared that their joy will soon be turned into mourning. For all the Pampangos, the people who occupy the most fertile and extensive region about the city of Manila—who are the bravest of all the Indians, and excel all the rest in religious fervor—are stirring up a revolt against the governor, the archbishop, the Indian clerics, and all their partisans, all of whom they threaten with death. They seem already to have leagued themselves with the Moros, to whom they have already given as captives five of the Indian clerics thrust upon them, in exchange for five Spanish soldiers, besides asking for the Augustinian fathers who were taken away from them by force.
Before opening the said council [conciliabulum], the archbishop made the charge that all religious were unfit and unworthy to attend the council—a statement that he insisted each one of them should subscribe to in his own handwriting. Such as refused were [punished], some by being thrown into prison, others by being very grievously distressed. Two fathers of the Pious Schools, however, as being members of his own order,[8] he chose as secretaries of the council.