42633062

The Filipino Clergy and the Secularization Decree of 1813
Author(s): LUCIANO P.R. SANTIAGO

Source: Philippine Studies, Vol. 36, No. 1 (First Quarter 1988), pp. 54-67
Published by: Ateneo de Manila University
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42633062
Accessed: 05-02-2020 08:14 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Ateneo de Manila University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Philippine Studies
This content downloaded from 122.3.252.178 on Wed, 05 Feb 2020 08:14:55 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Philippines Studies 36(1988): 54-67
The Filipino Clergy and the

Secularization Decree of 1813
LUCIANO P. R. SANTI AGO
In the Cavite Mutiny of 1872, three native priests,

Zamora who dared to speak out against the persecut
clergy were charged with sedition. After a hast
executed by the garrote and their prominent sympa
laymen alike, were banished from the colony.
About sixty years before the Cavite event
foreshadowing in the little-known ordeal of the native
province. The Cavite clergy in 1812 were led
Domingo Sevilla Pilapil, a predecessor of Padre Go
of Bacoor and vicar forane of Cavite.1
PRECEDING EVENTS
In order to understand more clearly the ecclesiast

we have to look back to another little known episod
during the reign of Archbishop Basilio Sancho de Sa
(1767-87). The latter was succeeded by Archbishop F
de Orbigo y Gallego, O.F.M. (1787-97) who had e
bishop of Nueva Caceres (1780-89). Toward the
Orbigo erected the new parishes of Sta. Rosa (La
and Las Pifias (in the old province of Manila) bu
Filipino clergy by assigning the first curacy to the
last two to the Recollects. As expected, the nat
numbers had multiplied in the past three decades a
better organized - rose in protest at these grants.
conflict could be resolved, the archbishop died in 1
1. See also Luciano P.R. Santiago, "Hie Straggles of the Native

Philippine Studies 33 (1985):176-202.
FILIPINO CLERGY 55
chapter, which subseq

had three Filipino m
clergy and appealed th
ruled in their favo
Unfortunately, it al
governor general shel
to enjoy their new paris
THE PHILIPPINES AND THE SPANISH CORTES OF

1810-14
The Spanish War of Independence against Napoleon (1808-14) gave

rise to the legislative body called Cortes which passed laws for the
country and its colonies in the name of the imprisoned King Carlos IV.
The first elected Philippine representative to the initial session of this
assembly (1810-13) was a Manila Creole, Don Ventura de los Reyes.
He emerged as one of the signers of the liberal Constitution of 1812
which was proclaimed in Manila on 17 April 1813.3
Five months later, the elections of the next Philippine delegates to the
regular session of the Cortes (1813-14) were held through the
principales of the province of Manila which was extended to mean the
wider jurisdiction of the archdiocese of Manila. This was in direct
violation of the electoral code promulgated by the Cortes to enlist the
entire male population of the colony. Nevertheless, the results of the
suffrage reflected the will of at least a representative segment of the
colonized people. It also brought to the fore the role of the native clergy
as their chosen leaders. Ten of the twenty-five electors selected by the
principales of nine provinces or districts of the archdiocese were native
priests. These provincial electors, in turn, converged in Intramuros on
17, 18 and 19 September 1813 and chose the four Philippine deputies.
Three of the winners were also Filipino priests: Licenciado Don Joseph
de Vergara y Masangcay, Doctor Don Mariano Bemabe Pilapil and
Bachiller Don Camilo Pividal. The alternate delegate chosen was
likewise a native priest, Bachiller Don Juán Andrés Gatmaitán. The
2. Pablo Fernandez, O.P. History of the Church in the Philippines (Manila: National Book
Store, 1979), p. 120; Archives of the Archdiocese of Manila (A AM), Libro de Gobierno
Ecclesiàstico (LGE) (1789-97), f. 118.
3. Luciano PJL Santiago, "The Filipino Priest-Delegates to the Spanish Cortes of 1813,
PQCS 13 (1985):221-34. This article gives a more detailed account of the Philippine
participation in the First Spanish Cortes.
56 PHILIPPINE STUDIES
lone lay representativ

Criollo agriculturist of C
Three of the delegates
able to embark for Spain
almost a year's journey t
VII who had succeeded h
This news, however, wo
the following year.s
THE SECULARIZATION DECREE OF 18 13
On the penultimate day of the first session

September 1813, the legislators enacted into law
resolution which had been introduced by the Bis
Don Jose Ventura Cabelle to secularize the parish
Guyana prelate had complained of the "moral and
emanated from the fact that the religious orders had
his rightful jurisdiction their missions "of ov
years" in spite of "decrees after decrees" compell
the Philippines, of course, the time span was mo
The decree of 1813 as sweeping and as devasta
regular clergy, merely repeated earlier royal ord
1753, 1757, 1768 and 1774 which had gathered du
the colonial archives.7
The new law consisted of six sections:
1. All the missions in the colonies which had been under the care of
the religious orders for ten or more years were to be transfered
immediately to the administration of the bishops concerned.
2. These missions, like the curacies, would be assigned to the
secular clergy according to the laws of the church and of royal
patronage.
3. The missionaries displaced by the above transfer should be
assigned to the missions of infidels who are in need of their
services.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. A AM, "Expediente seguido de Oficio contra los curas párrocos del Partido de Cavite sobre
lo que adentro se expresa, Año de 1815," Expedientes sobre Diferentes Matérias (EDM) (1800-32)
A. This is the main source of this article and henceforth, it wül be referred to as "Expediente."
7. Fernández, History , pp. 1 17-20.
FILIPINO CLERGY 57
4. The bishops might

pastors or as acting pa
5. Each religious orde
in each ecclesiastical d
6. The missionaries sh
and administration of the haciendas to the Indios themselves.
Through their local government and under the supervision of their
provincial officials, the Indios, in turn, should choose among
themselves the administrators of the lands who would eventually
distribute them to the people as their private properties according
to the decree of 4 January 1813.8
We can deduce that this decree was received by Archbishop Zulaibar in

Manila on 1 December 1814 for on the same day, he acknowledged
receipt of the other decrees issued by the Cortes on 13 September
1813.9 Apparently shaken by its contents, however, the Dominican
prelate and the governor-general lost no time in consulting each other on
what to do with it and predictably, they agreed that "its implementation
was inadvisable due to the dearth and the inadequate preparation of the
secular cleigy here."10
But an urgent document such as this which dealt with the long-
standing issue of secularization could hardly be suppressed. And this,
the governor and the archbishop were soon to find out Curiously
enough, it was a Recollect priest, Fray Manuel Medina, chaplain of the
ship Magallanes who, sometime in the first week of December 1814,
informed the Cavite pastors of San Roque and San Francisco de
Malabon, (now General Trias), Padres Eulálio Ramírez and Dionisio
Ramos, respectively, of the arrival of the decree in question. This ship,
which was apparently one of the official carriers of the decrees from
Cadiz, had just cast anchor at the Port of Cavite. A cleric in the Cavite
arsenal, Pedro Advincula, then obtained a copy of the document for
Padre Ramirez. The two Filipino pastors immediately notified their
vicar forane, B.D. Domingo Sevilla Pilapil, parish priest of Bacoor and
first cousin of the Filipino priest-delegate of the same surname. The
vicar, in turn, asked Don Pedro Vergara, public scrivener of the city of
8. AAM, "Expediente."
9. AAM, Ceduiarios (1811-14), f. 323 et seq.
10. Fernández, History, pp. 120-21. Fr. Fernández is the first church historian to mention
this episode in his work which is apparently based on documents preserved at the Dominican
Archives in the Philippines.
Manila (Intramuros) and br

verify its existence for him
copy of iL Now convinced
it on 9 December among th
circular11
Lord Pastors:
I send Your Graces the enc
parish house of the town of
for it is a matter of great i
God keep Your Graces man
(Sgd.) B.D. Dom
In the meantime, they gai

Advincula and another cl
elector of Cavite for the
assistant to the provincial
seminarian and another e
previous year. '2 These th
clergy. Almost all the past
thus signifying the impo
Sevilla Pilapil himself, Ram
of Cavite el Viejo or Kaw
leaders of the group. Th
Dionisio Ramos of San
Gavino, pastor of Puerto
Leon de los Santos, pastor
curate of the Hacienda o
Indang who was sent by
who was ill. The sixty-yea
(now Tanza), Padre Nar
attend.13
The group decided to draft a letter addressed jointly to the archbishop
and the cathedral chapter and another one to the four other Filipino
vicars forane of the archdiocese. At first, they had thought of
submitting a separate entreaty to the chapter or ecclesiastical council, but
decided against iL In the process, they apparently glossed over the fact
that their case pertained only to the governor and thé archbishop "by the
11. Ibid.
12. Ibid; LGE (1789-97), p. 140v; Santiago "Filipino Priest- Delegates.
FILIPINO CLERGY 59
laws of the Indies an

ecclesiastical notary d
Evidently, they were
had supported them i
(1796-1804). They disp
chapter after the mee
the initial reaction to th
other vicars forane
archbishop responde
signatories in the lett
out, summary detenti
follows:
Most Illustrious Lord an

The parish priests of t
doubt by the supreme o
Most Illustrious Lordsh
at the same time by th
not inform you of wha
A copy of the royal or
our attention. Its publi
violation of another ro
the following:
"Don Fernando VII, etc. The Cortes in its regular and special sessions,
desiring to promote the responsibility of public employees and in
compliance with the provisions of the decree of 14 July to ensure the
prompt observance of its sovereign laws, ordain that all public employees,
civil or military, who three days after receipt of a law or decree of the
National Congress fail to comply with its directives, will, by this
omission, be deprived of their employment, etc., etc.'
Since the reason for its dissimulation is unknown to us, we, therefore,
formally petition His Very Illustrious Lordship, the Governor, that he may
be pleased to order its publication and compliance as we have thus
communicated to Your Most Illustrious Lordship.
May God keep His Most Illustrious Lordship many years. District of
Cavite, 26 December 1814.
(Sgd.) B.D. Domingo Sevilla Pilapil, et al
The Cavite clergy also attempted to rally the other Filipino priests
through their vicars forane to their cause. Unfortunately, they could not
14. Ibid.
reach their colleagues

friars.15
The parish priests of this district of Cavite, in view of the copy of the
royal order which we send you with this letter, have tried to petition the
superior authorities to publish and comply with it Since it appears to us
that the lack of participation of our colleagues in your province in our
petition can weaken the force necessary to pursue this case, we suggest
that you confer with all your pastors, informing them of what we have
tried to accomplish in this regard which is to petition the Reverend
Archbishop and the Cathedral Chapter to appeal to the superior authorities
to comply with the said royal order. Further, since contribution to this
undertaking with the same diligence will redound to the benefit of the
entire clergy, in case we are frustrated in our petition, we will be
compelled without doubt to appeal to the Regency of the Cortes and thus
we have to share the expenses to be incurred in sending an attorney- in-fact
or one of our delegates to plead our case before it
May God keep you many years.District of Cavite, 2 June 1815.
(Sgd.) BD. Domingo Sevilla Pilapil, et al
From his interrogation of the first Cavite cleigyman, Padre Gavino

of the Port of Cavite, on 31 December 1814, the archbishop had
discovered the existence of this communication and he lost no time in
issuing on the same day his own decree requiring all his vicars to
immediately tum over to him this letter and the copy of the royal order
attached to iL
Only the Pampanga clergy found enough time to answer the letter of
their confreres in Cavite. The first to respond on 4 January was B.D.
Gaspar Macalinao (1749- 1 8 16) the vicar of upper Pampanga and pastor
of San Luis. He stated that he had only seven parishes under him
which were quite distant from one another. Furthermore, three pastors
had no coadjutors and some of them were ill. Hence, they could not
even hold meetings. He counseled his spiritual sons to be patient and
await their prelate's decisioa
In contrast, the younger vicar of Pampanga proper, Padre Felipe
Basilio, pastor of Bacolor, circulated the letter from Cavite together
with the decree on 7 January 1815 in order to "let (his pastors) express
their feelings (expusiesen su sentir)" about these developments and
IS. Ibid.
FILIPINO CLERGY gl
"with the end in view

Before doing so, he
Civil Court of the Dis
province for the Co
former elector of P
pastor of Guagua toge
majority (nine) of th
proposed by their Cav
by the will of the m
Archbishop before th
to hold a meeting in
and personally present
Cavite pastors. But
overtaken by the chai
fall of their vicar who
THE INTERROGATION AND DETENTION
After being summoned for interrogation on 29

by one or in small groups, the Cavite pastors we
chief notary, Don Antonio Claro Zobollino in
Archbishop. It is from their composite statemen
able to reconstruct part of the events we have so far
As noted earlier, the first to appear the day be
Padre Gavino of the Port of Cavite. The day a
Ramirez and Ramos, presented themselves at the
Three days later, three more priests arrived:
Maragondong, Ayala of Silang and Mercado of
days elapsed before Padre Capistrano of Kawit re
January 1815. Two days later, the tardy Padre
summoned anew as well as the Recollect friar Medina, who was
summoned for the first time. The two showed up the following day, 12
January.1*
Fray Medina admitted giving notice of the controversial decree to the
pastors of San Roque and San Francisco de Malabón, but denied
informing them that the archbishop or the governor had received copies
of iL To add fuel to the fire, he volunteered that "he has heard from a
16. Santiago, "Filipino Priest-Delegates" ; AAM, "Expediente."

17. Ibid.
IS. Ibid.
reliable person, the procu

Darvin had told the latt
pastor of Kawit (Padre C
and intended plans regard
is no justice in this coun
them, alluding to the
Cortes!"19
True enough, the next d
no chance of obtaining r
Cavite (now excluding P
still in Manila) forma
appointing Don Pedro V
Joseph de Vergara, as th
in the Spanish Cortes. T
their colleagues in the o
this undertaking.20 Lice
they had considered, an
priest-delegates who had
for this task.
The following are a co
notary as well as the answ
(Q) Did you know the co

cathedral chapter before
(A) Almost all of them s
Gavino of the Port of
claimed that they had s
the others. In fact, the
cooperation) runs throug
(Q) Who composed this l
(A) They pointed to th
the three most active me
(Q) Were there laymen w
what did they advise th
(A) They all mentioned D
were vague about his
apparently considering h
19. Ibid.
20. Ibid.
21. Ibid.
FILIPINO CLERGY 63
the Spanish Cortes.

Reyes and "many oth
(Q) Why was the letter
the cathedral chapter
(A) They all said the
chapter as forming
they wrote to them j
(Q) Do you know if th
(A) They assumed or
which were verified
even exclaimed half i
had reached the hands
the notary carefully
thought the archbish
(Q) Why did you assu
publication of the roy
royal order punishing
(A) They did not reall
that he might have "
with many other ma
been overlooked in
had objected to the s
"contravention" (cont
he had to sign the l
group.
(Q) Do you know if a
forane of the archdi
your group had done
(A) They all confirme
had responded. Pad
heard of the plans o
Manila personally. P
hand, added that the
provinces too had al
became necessary to e
(Q) Do you know if a
"Notice to Awaken th
Sacerdotes Nacionales
of the pastors of Cav
(A) To this last questio
"no."
The final interrogatio

Cavite. Upon the latter
Archbishop issued an
Domingo, the vicar's pat
Pilapil was forbidden
daybreak and attend com
was asked basically the
Having done with the C
colleagues in Pampanga
one Pampanga pastor wa
of Sexmoan. He arriv
collaboration between t
earlier. However, he said
the majority. On the
Pampanga, B.D. Felipe
as he arrived on 26 Janu
San Carlos Seminary. Du
archbishop's palace, Vica
confessed exceeding Iii
Nevertheless, he had to g
THE AFTERMATH
When the coast had been cleared for them by their

church, the civil authorities now entered the scene with a series of
official denials. First came the secretary of the governor, Don Juán
Nepomuceno Miciano disclaiming receipt of the controversial decree on
27 January 1815. Later on the same day, the governor- general
followed suit, disavowing the same thing. He requested a copy of Don
Pedro de Vergara's letter to the Cavite clergymen as well as the decree
he had enclosed with it.23 But predictably, his request fell on deaf ears
nor did he dare summon Vergara himself who could have exposed his
source of the document in Manila
Meanwhile on 28 January, the Vicar Pilapil wrote a letter to the
archbishop protesting his "incarceration" for the past eleven days
without being informed of the charges against him. Quite aware of his
rights, he cited article 300 of the New Constitution requiring
22 Ibid.
23. Ibid.
FILIPINO CLERGY 65
notification of the cha

therefore, beg His M
reason for my impriso
filed against me so th
justice that I implore H
The archbishop referr
recommended on 31 Ja
San Roque-whose war
admit their guilt befor
hand, the vicar of Pam
made his confession, b
other priests involve
respective parishes wh
their vicar's orders.25
Sevilla Pilapil was qu
avail. The vicar only w
I have erred in this cas
was sent back to Sto. D
dations for Padre Basil
he was set free at this
fifties.26
Summoned for the second time, Padre Ramirez anived in
Intramuros on 7 February apologizing for his tardiness because he had
to celebrate the Feast of the Three Falls (Tres Caídas ) of Christ on the
way to Calvary which had attracted countless devotees in his parish.
Padre Ramirez had already been ordered detained at the Franciscan
convent so he was immediately arrested. In this, his second
interrogation, he did not put up any resistance and simply
acknowledged his error in hosting and taking part in the conference of
the Cavite clergy.27
Within the next few days, however, the news of Fernando VTTs
restoration and subsequent abolition of the Cortes reached the
Philippines. Thus, on 11 February 1815, invoking the "good news,"
Padre Ramirez asked the archbishop to grant him his liberty but the
latter initially refused.28 However, both sides seemed relieved by this
24. Ibid.
25. Ibid.
26. Ibid; LG E (1815-24) f. 105.
28. Ibid.
unexpected turn of events. T

the archbishop, for one, ha
hand, the case against the na
anticipated.
By 21 February, the ecclesiastical fiscal Dr. Don Raymundo de
Mijares recommended that Padre Sevilla Pilapil and Ramirez be set free
in view of their "confessions." Although Pilapil had not definitely
"confessed" he was deprived of his office as vicar forane. Seeing the
futility of further resistance at this juncture, the vicar did give in four
days later, recanting to the archbishop his "error as a frail human being,
albeit the first time" he had committed such "error." On the same day,
Padre Ramirez repeated his petition for release.29
But the archbishop waited for two and a half weeks before he
announced the final sentence in their case on 15 March 1815, the week
before Holy Week.»
Padre Pilapil was removed from his appointive position as vicar
forane and his license to hear confessions was revoked indefinitely. He
was further commanded to start the Spiritual Exercises in Sto.
Domingo, after which he was to present himself before the governor-
general and beg his forgiveness. Then he was to present himself to the
rector of San Carlos Seminary to whom further instructions regarding
his case would be sent.31
On the other hand, Padre Ramirez's privilege to hear confessions
was also suspended for six months and he was to make the Spiritual
Exercises as well. Then he was to join Pilapil in imploring the
Governor's pardon at the palacio real .32
The other erring pastors of Cavite were called again to Intramuros to
make the Spiritual Exercises in the different convents of the friars,
whom they had sought to displace, after the Sunday after Easter
( Domingo in Albis). Upon completion of these, the group had to
present themselves again to the archbishop and then make a public
apology to the governor.33
The following were given their conventual assignments as they
arrived in the walled city for the Spiritual Exercises.34
29. Ibid.
30. Ibid.
31. Ibid.
32. Ibid.
33. Ibid.
34. Ibid.
FILIPINO CLERGY 67
5 April 1815 Padre Cap

Padre Ramos of San
Francisco de Mal
6 April 1815 Padre M
8 April 1815 Padre A
11 April 1815 Padre C
In the same week, Pad

that he was severely ill
On 17 April, the grou
the proceedings or ab
had pledged to contribu
The last note we have
Gavino of the Port of C
Exercises because he w
church. It was granted
35. Ibid.
36. Ibid.

42633062

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

42633062

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

42633062

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Filipino Clergy and the Secularization Decree of 1813

Author(s): LUCIANO P.R. SANTIAGO

The Filipino Clergy and the

In the Cavite Mutiny of 1872, three native priests,

In order to understand more clearly the ecclesiast

1. See also Luciano P.R. Santiago, "Hie Straggles of the Native

chapter, which subseq

THE PHILIPPINES AND THE SPANISH CORTES OF

The Spanish War of Independence against Napoleon (1808-14) gave

lone lay representativ

THE SECULARIZATION DECREE OF 18 13

On the penultimate day of the first session

4. The bishops might

We can deduce that this decree was received by Archbishop Zulaibar in

Manila (Intramuros) and br

In the meantime, they gai

laws of the Indies an

Most Illustrious Lord an

reach their colleagues

From his interrogation of the first Cavite cleigyman, Padre Gavino

"with the end in view

THE INTERROGATION AND DETENTION

After being summoned for interrogation on 29

16. Santiago, "Filipino Priest-Delegates" ; AAM, "Expediente."

reliable person, the procu

(Q) Did you know the co

the Spanish Cortes.

The final interrogatio

When the coast had been cleared for them by their

notification of the cha

unexpected turn of events. T

5 April 1815 Padre Cap

In the same week, Pad

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.