Marites and Marisol in 1635

Today, the two famous coined words in the Philippines loosely refer to people who are eager to bring to another the latest gossip (MARITES) or insinuate others to take actions inimical to a relationship (MARISOL). The "Marites" and the "Marisol" often become the source of misunderstandings in relations resulting from outright quarrels and feuds. The "Marites" and "Marisol" abounds with broader misuse of social media. Often the "Marites" and the "Marisol" will start their sentence with, "word has it."

In 1635 an event occurred where the "Marisol" and the "Marites" played a significant role in causing a crisis, resulting in a dispute between the Civil authority and Church. The incident started with Francisco de Nava, an artilleryman posted in Manila. De Nava had maintained an illicit relation with his servant. The word reached the ears of the archbishop, who ordered the artilleryman to hand the girl under the protection of Doña Maria de Francia, who became fond of the servant. De Nava was so desperate over the girl's loss that he refused to accept any amount of compensation for her.

On the contrary, he insisted that he wished to marry her. However, Doña de Francia, a society matriarch, would have none of these and succeeded in getting the girl under her ward with minimal effort. Distressed and regretful the artilleryman was infuriated, almost mad, and repeatedly went to the house of Doña de Francia. He received a sound beating on one occasion because he insisted on getting the girl, as he was resolute to make her his wife.

By that time, desperate and unable to get over a broken heart, he saw the girl pass in the carriage with Doña Francia. He went after her and asked her whether she still knew him. The servant replied that she had moved on and did not wish to be with him anymore, at which he, blinded with rage, drew his dagger. In other words, he was friend zoned. Before anyone could react, he repeatedly stabbed her in the middle of the street. The people who witnessed the killing ran after the artilleryman who successfully escaped and sought refuge inside the church convent in Manila.

The news reached the governor and immediately ordered the Major-Sargent, Don Pedro de Corcuera, his nephew, to arrest the artilleryman from the Church and declared that the immunity of the sanctuary did not apply to him because he had committed a heinous crime. The governor added that he assumes responsibility for his orders' consequences (like PRRD). However, his action was the effect of the anger he felt over the killing which occurred in front of his nephew. Similarly, Don de Corcuera, mulling over a recent quarrel with his wife, discharged the governor's order with less prudence. He ordered his men to surround the convent and the Church and went to turn the Church inside out. Even the sacristy was searched and violated. Unable to find the refugee, Don Pedro left the Church and convent but ordered a double guard. He added that no cleric was allowed to enter or leave upon the governor's orders until the refugee was arrested. Finally, the refugee was found and surrendered. Immediately the commander of the artillery proceeded as the judge held a trial acceding to the flattery of the people and in obedience to the governor expeditiously condemned the artilleryman to death.

The archbishop's deputy, Don Pedro Monroy, got the word that the commander of the artillery's alacrity of judgment was following the governor's wishes. With proper composure and careful judicious action, Don Monroy proceeded against the decision of the commander of the artillery. He sent three priests to parley with the governor and respectfully requested that the judge should deliver the prisoner to them. Unhindered, the priest entered the governor's palace. Since it was already after-hours, they failed to secure an audience with the governor and prepared to leave to return the following day. However, the guards did not allow them to leave, stating that such was the governor's directive.

Word has it that the sentence handed out to the artilleryman was not the result of proper judicial proceedings but was already made out by the governor for the judge to sign and execute. In response, the archbishop's deputy threatened religious censure and imposed an injunction and religious function suspension. The governor unaffected showed further contempt of the ecclesiastical immunity by ordering gallows erected in front of the Church of St. Augustine and the convict to hang. Though, the usual place of execution was remote from the Church.

The governor was elated to receive the word that his orders were executed and wrote to the archbishop to instantly remove the censures and injunction to suspend religious functions raised and open the churches to celebrate our Lady's nativity. The archbishop was aghast at the deviousness of the governor and did not respond but consulted with some clergymen who reiterated that the archbishop should not grant the request of the governor, who repeatedly demonstrated a hostile and repugnant behavior to the ecclesiastical immunity. However, the Recollect Fathers of St. Augustine, responsible for the celebration of the feast, exerted enough influence that the archbishop decided to remove the injunction, and the religious festival proceeded. To be continued...