The Church Strikes Back (Marites and Marisol part2)

The Pope is the ultimate head of the Church, the supreme teacher who succeeded St. Peter. In matters of faith and morals, the Pope cannot err, based on the doctrine that Christ entrusted to the Church the mission to teach through the grace of the Holy Spirit. Broadly established on the principle that the Pope is the vicar of Christ here on earth, Filipinos in a predominantly Roman Catholic country were shocked beyond belief when then PRRD cursed the pontiff. Surprisingly, PRRD's popularity rating continues to soar though he profusely asked forgiveness from the Pope, promising to journey in pilgrimage to Rome in remission of his sins. The tirades of PPRD were incomparable to his predecessor, who believed that to criticize the Church was political suicide. Yet PRRD describes the Church as the "the most hypocritical institution in the country." He called the clerics "sons of bitches” and "homosexuals." During his speeches, he expressed his desire to "beat up," "slap and whack" the bishops and clerics who condemned his "war on drugs." In one of the public appearances, he specifically mentioned a prelate and a staunched critic he wanted to decapitate. PRRD seems to relish recommending the book "Secrets of the Altars," which exposed priests' corruption and sexual abuses in the Philippines. However, PRRD did not cross the redline. He did not interfere with the affairs of the Church, such as imposing on the appointment of bishops. Unlike the Governor de Curcuera, you will learn later used both civil authority and the intrigue inside the Church to weaken the archbishopric. As it would be, PRRD just succeeded in shocking the sensibilities of many people aside from compelling the Church to reexamine its role in politics.

For Governor de Curcuera, "all is well that ends, well," right? not for the Church. The commander of the artillery, who was condemned by the deputy of the Archbishop, Don Monroy, with monetary fines, made a petition to the judge of appeal, the bishop of Camarines. In the Philippines, there were two justice systems, the ecclesiastical (Church) and the Real Audiencia (Civil). The bishop of Camarines refused to admit the appeal, which threatened the ruling of Royal Audiencia, composed of the governor and one auditor, which decided in favor of the artillery commander. Eventually, Don Francisco Zamudio, an Augustinian from Mexico, declared the commander of the artillery free from the sentence of the ecclesiastical judge.

However, the trial of the artillery commander proceeded to its second hearing. During the trial, the ecclesiastics succeeded in documenting specific charges against the governor, such as ordering the detention of the clerics in the guardhouse. Also, the governor was heard declaring that ecclesiastics in the Philippines do not have the power over him and only the Pope can excommunicate him. Above all, several people swore they heard the governor boldly exclaimed that if there were an order to arrest the pontiff, he would gladly drag the Pope from the Vatican in one foot. The governor published a manifesto denying all the accusations against him to extricate himself from these charges.

As if the governor was appointing himself the head of the Church in the Philippines, he ordered the archbishop's deputy Don Monroy to serve as the chief chaplain on the island of Hermosa (Taiwan). At the same time, it was a way for the governor to avenge himself by declaring that he had spiritual jurisdiction over all the religions in the Philippines. Horrified by the audacity and insolence of the governor, Don Monroy resisted and informed the archbishop. Rubbing salt into the wounds, the governor ordered a letter to the archbishop to replace Monroy with someone who has a passion for spreading the gospel under his majesty's service—inferring that Monroy lacks the fervor, the faith, and conviction to evangelize the people. Moreover, the governor chided the archbishop that the position of the archbishop's deputy did not befit Don Monroy, who lacked the necessary learning, which contradicts the royal decree. (It was similar to PRRD calling out the Wharton diploma of former Senator Roxas) Although Don Monroy possesses a sufficient educational background and there was no such requirement based on the holy canons from the Holy Council of Trent. The governor suggested somebody from the Society's religious (Jesuits) and not from the secular. It was a scheme from the governor to expose the division between the secular and the Society in the Philippines. A house divided cannot stand.

In the desire to outflanked the governor and solve the matter, the archbishop wrote to the rector of the Society, Father Luis Pedrosa, a request to attend the meeting. Repeatedly, the rector excuses himself, although the archbishop summoned him numerous times. The rector repeatedly snubbed the invitation. The archbishop was forced to promulgate an act with minimal choices at hand. He refrained the Society's fathers from preaching throughout the country, including synodal examination and right of assembly. In other words, they have to sit on their hands because the archbishop was incensed at the Society for failing to defend the rights of the ecclesiastical estate. In the desire of the archbishop to subtly put the governor in his proper place, he requested the governor to accept the excuse of Don Monroy not to serve as chaplain of Hermosa island since the archbishopric needed a deputy. Moreover, the archbishop reminded the governor that secular judges do not have the power to appoint ecclesiastical vicars and assume spiritual jurisdiction.

In an attempt to uplift the dignity of his office, the archbishop, on behalf of the bishop of Cebu and members of the religious orders, petitioned the governor to refrain from such appointment. He further counseled the governor to consult only with learned and God-fearing men found only from the secular and the religious orders, alluding that there were none from the Society. The cat is out of the bag, and the archbishop's actions stirred the Society's anger, compounded by the heated exchanges from both sides. The Society finds themselves an ax to grind against the archbishop waiting for the opportune time to repay the prelate when the first opportunity arises. Sooner fate favored the Society in the person of a schoolmaster, Don Fabián de Santillán y Gabilanes, appointed as judge-conservator. Don Fabian wasted no time and erected a tribunal against the archbishop, issuing tight-knit and vacuum-sealed acts and fiery censures that deprived the prelate of any action to oppose the proceedings.

The embattled archbishop finds himself between a rock and a hard place. Lined against him was the tyrannical, despotic, domineering, and scheming Governor de Corcuera, and on the other side was the powerful and determined Society. The archbishop finds himself at the receiving end, a reversal of fortune, so to speak. He must appear before the Royal Audiencia (civil court) to plead for the charges against him, though he admitted that he could only accomplish very little by appearing in the court. The various religious orders steadfastly assisted and cautioned the archbishop to assert the ecclesiastical immunity by refusing to appear before the court. The archbishop defied his advisers and, wanting to take the bull by its horns, presented himself in the Royal Audiencia.

On two occasions, the archbishop's arguments raised the impartiality issues of the magistrates. Even when a protest was raised against the independence of the judge-conservator, the fiscal continued to prosecute the archbishop. Similarly, the judge-conservator continued to exert censure against the archbishop. Before the royal notary, Diego de Rueda, the archbishop, protested that both the governor and judge-conservator were prejudiced against him. Upon learning of these protests, the governor had the notary through the office of the judge-conservator incarcerated in Fort Santiago. The governor was informed that the disposition of the protest was a defamatory libel against him. However, the notary notified the governor that the protest of the archbishop was not prejudicial to anyone. Instead, it was only a direct defense of the archbishop's rights.

A crying shame for the governor to imprison the notary for doing his job, but the judge-conservators was not yet finished. He concocted a new censure against the archbishop, directing the prelate to withdraw the protest. The archbishop asserted that the new censure was invalid. Moreover, he added that the complaint was already filed and in possession of Fray Diego Collado. For the archbishop, he already crossed the Rubicon and, not wanting to entertain any attempt to reverse his decision, retired to the convent of St. Francis. As a part of his well-laid scheme, the governor went to see the archbishop under the pretense that he was acting as the conciliatory bridge between the prelate and judge-conservator. All the while, it was clear to the archbishop that the actions of the judge-conservator were all on behalf of the plot by the governor. Before leaving, the governor expressed again his intention to be the instrument of peace, for both parties to bury the hatchet. He requested the archbishop to give him the protest. He swore with "palabra de honor" of a Spanish gentleman to burn the document immediately without reading or showing it to anyone. The archbishop already pierced the veil of deception and reaffirmed his reply to the governor. To play along with the ruse promised the governor that he would not leave any stone unturned to recall the protest and give the document to him.

The political development in 1635, compared to the political shenanigans today, is considered benign. The unfolding of the events then depicted a plot comparable to a Shakespearean play. It was a reverse of art imitating life. Yet the chaotic events from the past shaped the political interactions of the present. Both the Church and the civil authorities undermine each other to have the upper hand ("tener mano superior"). To be concluded.