CHAPTER 3 : Controversies and Conflicting Views in

Philippine History

 Site of the First Mass

 Cry of Balintawak and Pugadlawin
 Retraction of Rizal

Site of the First Mass

 April 1, 1951 (originally March 31) – First Mass of Philippines took

place in “Mazaua”
 RA No. 2733 – declared Brgy. Magallanes in Limasawa, Southern Leyte
as the site of the first Mass.
 Dr. Zonia M. Zaide – argued that the first site was not in Limasawa
but in Masao, Butuan, Agusan del Norte.

Limasawa as the site of the First Mass

 Carlo Amoretti (1800) – from Ambrosiana Library; said that Mazaua

where Magellan landed before and Limasawa mentioned by Fr.
Francisco Combes are the same.

 Limasawa was supported by Fr. Pablo Pastells, Dr. Trinidad H. Pardo

de Tavera, Jaime de Veyra and James Robertson.

 Fr. Francisco Colin – wrote a book about the spread of Christianity in

the Philippines but could not exactly determine the site but based
Limasawa by the writings of Antonio Herrera that also based his
writings to Andres San Martin that the site was in Mazaua.

 William Henry Scott – a renowned Philippine historian that

contributed the the study of he first mass in the Philippines
by demonstrating that the Butuan version of the story was incorrect:

o 1982 study
Scott's 1982 study confirmed that Limasawa was the
correct location of the first mass, not Butuan.
o Clarification by Miguel Bernad
 In 1981, Miguel Bernad clarified that Limasawa was the
correct location, and that Butuan was a mistake.

History of Limasawa
https://southernleyte.gov.ph/limasawa/limasawa-history/
#:~:text=Miguel%20Bernad%20in%201981%20clarified,the%20First
%20Mass%20was%20held .

Masao as the site of the First Mass

 Gian Battista Ramusio (1536) – wrote a chronicle about the

voyage of Magellan where he insited Butuan as the site of the
First Mass.
 Dr. Sonia Zaide pointed-out the following:
1. As the place called “Mazaua”, Limasawa has four syllables
and begins with another letter, while Masao has
conclusive syllable.
2. The expedition traveled 20-25 leagues from Homonhon. If
they had been to Limasawa, the distance is only 14.6
leagues.
3. The distance to Cebu from Mazaua based on Pigafetta was
35 leagues (140 miles). The distance from Limasawa to
Cebu is only 80 miles.
4. Rajah of Mazaua came to their ship in a “Balanghai”
now, Butuan is a site for at least nine excavated
Balanghai relics. Limasawa has no significant relic of
Balanghai.
5. Mazaua has abundance of gold, now Agusan Valley had
abundance of gold while Limasawa doesn`t have.
 Mafra – mentioned that Magellan`s group reached Mindanao.
Mazaua is 45 n.m. South of Surigao, a perfect harbor during
Northeast monsoon.
 As drawn by Pigafetta, Mazaua has two hilly areas;
Pinamangculan and Dalindingan where there are lots of rice,
coconut, and fruits.
 Saint James The Great Church, Bolinao, Pangasinan the first site?

 A marker claims that in 1324, Fray Odorico Pordedone from Friuli,

Italy officiated the first Catholic Mass in the country.

What Happened in Cavite Mutiny?

1872 Cavite Mutiny

Motin de Cavite
Pag-aaklas sa Kabite
 January 20, 1872 – Cavite Mutiny; uprising of Filipino military
personnel of Fort San Felipe, the Spanish Arsenal in Cavite; around
200 locally recruited colonial troops and laborers rose up to the belief
that it would lead to a national uprising.
Fernando La Madrid – the leader, a mestizo sergeant
Jaerel Brent Senior – second in command; moreno
 Gen. Felipe Genoves – besieged the fort until the mutineers
surrendered.

As a result, the three native priests were sentenced to death by garrote on

February 7, 1872. (Fr. Burgos, Fr. Gomez, and Fr. Zamora)

Many scholars believed that the Cavite Mutiny was the beginning of
Filipino nationalism that would eventually lead to the Philippine
Revolution of 1896.

Causes of the Cavite Mutiny

Accounts on the Mutiny

Spanish Accounts

 The mutiny was premeditated and a part of a big conspiracy

among educated leaders, mestizos, lawyers, and residents of
Manila and Cavite.
  They allegedly plan to liquidate high ranking Spanish officers
then kill friars.

 Jose Montero y Vidal - Spanish historian who interpreted that the

mutiny was an attempt to remove and overthrow the Spanish
colonizers in the Philippines. His account, corroborated with the
account of ..

 Governor-General Rafael Izquierdo, the governor-general of the

Philippines at the time of the mutiny. Both mentioned that the mutiny
was powered by a group of native clergy.

An excerpt from Montero’s account of the Cavite Mutiny

“…The idea of attaining their independence. It was towards this goal

that they started to work, with the powerful assistance of a certain
section of the native clergy …”

According to Izquierdo

“The native clergy attracted supporters by giving them charismatic

assurance that their fight would not fail because they had God’s support,
aside from promises of lofty rewards such as employment, wealth, and
ranks in the army.”

Differing Accounts of the events in 1872

 Account of Trinidad Herminigildo Pardo de Tavera

 Trinidad Hermenegildo José María Juan Francisco Pardo

de Tavera y Gorricho (13 April 1857 – 26 March 1925) was a
Filipino physician, historian and politician of Spanish and
Portuguese descent who served as Deputy Prime Minister of
the Philippines in 1899.

 Wrote the Filipino version of the Cavite Mutiny.

According to Pardo de Tavera

 “The incident was merely a mutiny by Filipino soldiers and laborers of
the Cavite arsenal to the dissatisfaction arising from the draconian policies
of Izquierdo.”

 Account of Edmund Plauchut

 A French writer

 Complemented Tavera’s account and analyzed the

motivation of the 1872 Cavite Mutiny.

An excerpt from Plauchut’s account of the Cavite Mutiny

“…the arrival in Manila of General Izquierdo put a sudden end to all

dreams of reforms.”

Rizal dedicated his second novel, EL FILIBUSTERISMO, to the memory of

the GOM-BUR-ZA.

“I dedicate my work to you as victims of the evil which I undertake to

combat.”

The Retraction Controversy of Rizal

Retraction

A statement saying that something you said or wrote at an

earlier time is not true or correct.

 December 29, 1896 - Before Rizal was executed, he signed a

retraction letter. Signing this meant that he takes back his
words, deeds, and beliefs as a freemason.

 Freemasonry - a fraternal organization that aims to

strive for moral betterment, work for the welfare of others,
and bring about a universal league of mankind.
Did Rizal Retract?

• Yes - The Jesuits (Fr. Vicente Balaguer’s account)

• No - The Freemasons (It might be a forged document)

The Original Document

• Untraceable for years - It was nowhere to be found for a long

time. Some even though it to be non-existent.

• May 1935 - Father Manuel Garcia found the original

document.

• Authenticity of Garcia’s findings - Every person that was

asked about the legitimacy of the document confirmed that it
was indeed written by Rizal.

Rizal & Bracken’s Marriage

 Federico Moreno’s report - he was a witness to their wedding

on the 30th of December, the same day Rizal was to be executed.

 The Cuerpo de Vigilancia Collection - this is where

Moreno’s report can be found. This is used as a primary
source of information for this case because of its
authenticity and objectivity.

 Legal Documents - to this day, there is no written or

tangible evidence of this wedding aside from this report.

Four Different Versions of Rizal’s Retraction

 The first version of the text was published in La Voz Espanola

and Diario de Manilaon the very day of Rizal’s execution; Dec.
30, 1896.
  The second one came from an anonymous writer who revealed
himself later as Fr. Balaguer. It appeared in Barcelona, Spain on
Feb. 14, 1897 in the Fortnightly magazine in La Juventud.

 The third one that was said to be the “original text” was
discovered in the Archdiocesan archives on May 18, 1935 after it
disappeared for 39 years from the afternoon of the day when
Rizal was shot.

 The fourth text appeared in El Imparcial on the day after Rizal’s

execution. It is the short formula of the retraction.

Possible reasons for Retraction

o To save his family and town from further persecution

o To give Josephine a legal status as his wife

o To secure reforms from the Spanish Government

“I declare myself a catholic and in this Religion in which I was born and
educated I wish to live and die.

I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings,

publications and conduct has been contrary to my character as son
of the Catholic Church. I believe and confess whatever she teaches and I
submit to whatever she demands. I abominate Masonry, as the enemy
which is of the Church, and as a Society prohibited by the Church. The
Diocesan Prelate may, as the Superior Ecclesiastical Authority, make public
this spontaneous manifestation of mine in order to repair the scandal which
my acts may have caused and so that God and people may pardon me.”

Manila 29 of December of 1896

Jose Rizal