ON THE RELIGIOUS REVOLUTION
OF GREGORIO AGLIPAY
I. Life and Times of Gregorio Aglipay
The birth of Filipino nationalism in the 19th century in Spanish Colonial Philippines was a factor why the issue of secularization heightened between regular and secular clergy. Filipino secular priests agitated for reforms and questioned why they were denied of the rights and privileges granted to their Spanish counterparts in the parishes.
Happening and coinciding during the era when the Filipino Nation started her quest for identity, not far from Manila and in the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of Nueva Segovia, Gregorio Aglipay, a prominent name in Philippine Church History was born on May 5, 1860 in Batac, Ilocos Norte from parents Pedro Aglipay Cruz and Victoriana Labayon Hilario.
Barely five days after Aglipay’s birth, he was baptized as Roman Catholic and while still at the age of one year and a half, his mother Victoriana died, thus he was raised with his mother’s family. It is neither commented nor discussed why aglipay’s father Pedro of Caoayan, Ilocos Sur did not rear the boy; and what is known is the fact that aside from him, he had two brothers named Canuto, a School Teacher and turned Police Chief during the revolution in July 1898, and the other one was Benito.
In 1876, he began his formal studies and at first studied in a private school of Julian Carpio for two years. However, due to the intercession of his uncle, he transferred to San Juan de Letran, a school run by the Dominicans in the Intramuros area. It was good for him to have been there because he was granted scholarship through the assistance and benevolence of the Dominican Sisters. So,
he was working while studying, or a working student (capista) for short, as such he was able to provide his own personal needs.
Thereafter, he entered the University of Santo Tomas (UST) for a dream to take up Law. However, he took Bachelors of Arts first, and perhaps beyond his wildest dreams he decided to enter priesthood instead of entering the law school.
It can be recalled that Nueva Segovia was Aglipay’s diocese. The said diocese covered all the Ilocos area [Norte and Sur] and the provinces or districts in its immediate vicinities. As it was a common practice being adhered too by diocesan bishops previously, and seldom anymore today; that seminarians from his diocese shall study and have their formation in the seminary of the diocese, Gregorio Aglipay studied at the Seminario Conciliar de Vigan, where Fray Celedonio Mateo de San Jose was the Rector. At the seminary, he was known as clever but not to mean a very good student, and he too was also defiant. Nonetheless, in the field of sports, he was considered as a good athlete and acceptingly he bragged of this fame.
Aside from these known comments for his near excellence in sports and weaknesses in the opposite fields of endeavors, he was also known to be kind and generous. However, for notoriety as a night owl or having the feel to stay late at night in order to serenade the lovely ladies nearby, he was dismissed dishonorably from the seminary because he usually escape at night through a line of tied clothing to ferry him down from his room at the upper floor. The Seminary sent him home, but he went to the Archdiocese of Manila; and not much longer with some luck or grace, he received the Sacrament of Holy Orders.
He was ordained Sub-deacon, and later on as Deacon; all these happened in 1887-1888. In December 21, 1889, he was ordained as priest at the age of 29 years old by Msgr. Bernabe Garcia Cezon, the Titular Bishop of Biblios in Sto.
Domingo Church.[i] His first mass was celebrated on Janary 1, 1890 in Sta. Cruz, Manila with Fathers Faustino Luna and Teodoro Revilla as sponsors.
After that he began his ministry and was assigned to various parishes as an aid, or coadjutor to the regular clergy.
Gregorio Aglipay’s first assignment outside Manila was in Indang, Cavite, and it started in April 1890. He was an assistant to Fray Manuel Pastor.[ii] From Cavite, he was re-assigned to San Antonio, Nueva Ecija on October 31, 1891, and was the assistant of Fray Benito Ibañez.
A Filipino priest’s life was always on a move, a year on assignment in San Antonio, he again was transferred to Bocaue, Bulacan in October 1892. Taking a longer grip of his assignment in Bocaue, he was however transferred on February 29, 1896 to San Pablo, Laguna; and ten (10) months later, he again moved to Victoria, Tarlac on December 15, 1896 under the tutelage of an Augustinian Friar Policarpio Ornia.
Why was there an unreasonable movement of Filipino priests during those times? Was it because of extreme pastoral works that compelled the need of reassignment, or was there any primer reason other than priestly ministry functions why there had been a continuous and unusual movement, or transfer of Filipino priests?
In the case of Gregorio Aglipay, when Bonifacio and his band of Katipuneros started the call to revolution in the historic Cry of Pugad Lawin or Balintawak by tearing off their cedulas in protests, the former was stationed yet in San Pablo, Laguna. But when the embers of revolution reached the town of Victoria, Tarlac in January 1897, Aglipay assisted his Parish Priests when the havoc and fear of unrest rocked their place.
Despite of his close attachment to his Superior, Friar Policarpio Ornia by assisting him much when the revolution reached their parish, could it be possible that Aglipay went underground and was closely involved with the insurrectos or insurgents?
From the writings of scholars in authority of the revolution, they say Aglipay was involved. As such, if he was jumping from one parish to another, it was an outcome of suspicion out of his own making if ever he had been involved politically in the struggle the nationalists were dealing with.[iii]
So, based on this, it is therefore not unusual for Filipino priests during those times to be transferred anytime to other places of assignments, or even drastically sent to exile like Fr. Mariano Sevilla who was exiled in Marianas.[iv] By mere suspicion only even if based from unfounded beliefs, an Indio priest could be transferred immediately elsewhere.
If accusations were stronger, and bunch of fabricated evidences and file of lies were presented, it may even cause one’s life like what happened to Fathers Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez, and Jacinto Zamora in their indictment to have participated or behind the Cavite Revolt in 1872.[v]
Doubt was then a priceless virtue of those who ruled the Philippines. The Indio priests acted always under the shadows of suspicion of their Superiors, nonetheless, we could not say the situation was endemic, but it was indeed happening.
II. The Revolution: Aglipay’s Involvement and His Schismatic Ideas.
Despite the Revolution in 1896 had gained momentum, which previously was like a spreading wildfire not only in the nearby provinces of Manila, but as well as in Mindanao, it was unfortunately brought to a temporary end as a consequence of the
peace efforts of Don Fernando Primo de Rivera, Governor General of the Philippines.[vi] He signed on behalf of the Spanish Colonial Government a truce or an agreement known as the Pact of Biak-na-Bato on December 14, 1897 with the leaders of the revolution, thus ending the hostilities between the two warring forces.
Clearly the facts had been laid down in the previous essay that since Gregorio Aglipay started his ministry as priest in May 1890, he was already assigned to five different parishes for a span of time of about six years i.e. that from May 1890 up to December 15, 1896 in Victoria, Tarlac.
His involvement during the Revolution of 1896 was keenly noted to have happened in 1897, when he founded a group called as Liwanag, an auxiliary of the Katipunan in Victoria, Tarlac.[vii] Such fact was attested by scholars and in the history of that town. The extent of his participation was probably only minute logistical support and maybe too for human resource development in the recruitment of men for the cause. But the ratification of the Pact of Biak-na-Bato on December 14, 1897, had concluded the hostilities; and probably too ended his revolutionary fervor temporarily more so that the prominent leaders of the revolution were exiled. General Aguinaldo for one, with his core officers agreed to be exiled in Hongkong.
The Onset of the Spanish-American War:
While Aguinaldo was in Hongkong, the American-Spanish War broke out on April 21, 1898. The Philippines being a colony of Spain was attacked by Admiral George Dewey’s fleet off the coast of Cavite on May 1, 1898. The Spanish fleet under Admiral Patricio Montejo was defeated, however no beachhead position was established by the Americans because their seaborne marines were only few, just enough to man or guard the shipyard (Sangley Point) in Cavite, which they occupied. So, Dewey waited for the infantry to arrive, which were in route yet to the Philippines from San Francisco for the final invasion.[viii]
Before the battle of Manila Bay on May 1, 1898, envoys of Admiral Dewey had contacted Aguinaldo in Hongkong and part of the concluded agreement was that Aguinaldo shall return to the Philippines and start the war anew against Spain. U.S. Government would recognize Philippine sovereignty should he be successful in the crusade for liberation and the Philippines shall be made as a naval protectorate by the Americans.
Indeed Aguinaldo arrived to Cavite on May 19, 1898 on board one of Dewey’s naval ship, USS McCullock. Not much later, the cache of guns and ammunition arrived too, those he bought it while he was in Hongkong; and such was shipped by a consular official named Wildman[ix]. The cargoes amounted to P50,000.00, a huge sum of money in those days.
By June 1, 1898, Aguinaldo’s forces surrounded Manila and blockaded it purposely to starve the city, nevertheless; it was not successful even on the first day because most of the inhabitants in the city had relatives or friends in the Aguinaldo Army. It was unfair blocking in food lines going to the city, as if they were writing the death sentences of their friends and relatives.
Proclamation of National Government:
One thing sure, there was fighting, but perhaps it had not reached to a point where we can say that it was fought hard or there was heavy fighting. On June 12, 1898 Aguinaldo proclaimed Philippine Independence in Kawit-Bacoor, Cavite; he was now not merely the military leader of his province, as in 1896-97, but he acted now as President of the national government, as well.[x] He was in dire need of learned men as adviser; Apolinario Mabini became the principal advisor in June 1898.[xi] Mabini was no longer a believing Catholic; he was a Mason, as most of the Filipino activists in Spain, who were members of the Masonic lodges under the Gran Oriente Español. So, rightly, there had been deep inside him that feeling of anticlerical.[xii]
In June 1898, Aguinaldo appointed Fr. Gregorio Aglipay as Military Chaplain and sent him to Ilocos to raise funds for the cause. Despite, the former was an Ilocano, he belonged to the archdiocese of Manila, as he finished Theology in Manila and ordained priest at Sto. Domingo Church in 1889, as can be recalled.[xiii] His assignment in the north clearly implies that revolutionary fervor was active in those areas.
In the meanwhile going back to Manila, when Aguinaldo heard that the Americans were on their way from San Francisco, California, he exerted more pressure upon the city of Manila. They attacked Blockhouse No. 2 from Caloocan Road on July 20. At last the American Expeditionary forces arrived in Manila after steaming for many weeks across the Pacific Ocean, and they were first noticed on July 22, 1898 near Fort San Antonio Abad. On the following day, July 23, Aguinaldo’s forces attacked San Pedro Makati and Blockhouse No. 11. By the end of the second week of July, the Spanish Army lost 10 officers and another 50 soldiers.[xiv] Still, this was not heavy fighting yet, it has to come, soldiers from both camps may have thought of these grim realities.
On August 7, 1898, General Wesley Merritt and Admiral Dewey gave an ultimatum to Brig. General Jaudenes, Spanish Commander of Manila, who had just assumed the command from General Basilio Agustin; to surrender otherwise if he would no, anytime after the expiration of 49 hours, an attack would be launched. Nevertheless, Jaudenes would not surrender nor evacuate the children and the sick away from the battlegrounds. The wall city was jumped pack with about 70,000 people that supposedly would accommodate only 10,000. When bombardment was inevitably near, the inhabitants of Manila began to flee for safety to the suburbs.
When the day of days came i.e. August 13, 1898, after a night of rain on the 12th the following early morning was muggy. At about 9:30 in the morning, the mock battle began, Dewey‘s naval ships bombarded Fort San Antonio Abad in Malate and the entrenchment, and the roof of the walled city. USS Utah fired her against Blockhouse No. 14 and the fortification fronting them or that on the west side. Barely an hour of bombardment, at 10:25 A.M. the ships’ batteries ceased on firing, a white flag was hoisted from the southern bastion of Intramuros. The prearranged signal was given by the Navy for the American seaborne to go in. The gunboat Callao backed up General Greene forces who moved in the direction of Camino Real, some 220 years from the beach, while General Arthur MacArthur breakthrough to Singalong. At San Antonio Abad, the big guns were silent; the soldiers had abandoned them and so with the trenches.
The terms of surrender was signed by Brig. General Jaudenes and General Wesley Merritt, American Commander. Shortly thereafter, the American flag rose and saluted by the batteries of the navy; and the 2nd Oregon Regiment was deployed at the city’s wall as provost guards. Their commanding officer, a colonel was directed to receive the arms of the defeated Spanish Army. Filipinos began to doubt the sincerity of Uncle Sam’s promise, they were forbidden to go inside the wall city nor their officers participated in the drafting of the Term of Capitulation. On the part of the Filipino soldiers, the day therefore was ended by scattering rifle fires of Filipinos against retreating Spaniards.[xv]
By September 1898, the Malolos Congress tackled the affairs of the new Philippine government, they met at Barasoain Church. The proposed Programa Constitucional, which Apolinario Mabini drafted, provided the separation of the Church and the State. It was set aside because such was a big issue inasmuch as Filipino clergy headed by Fr. Mariano Sevilla[xvi] were opposed to the separation, as were most of the good Catholics. There was a constitutional draft authored by Felipe Calderon providing Catholicism as the state religion. Other provisions of the constitution had no much difficulty in its approval, but when the provisions of religion were opened to debate, Congress was divided into two schools of thoughts.
Since Mabini was too sharp and noticed the danger of disunity among the Filipinos, he insisted that matters on religion must be put aside and taken later when the atmosphere would be alright. But the final draft the State recognized the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the separation of the Church and State.
To quiet the issue on separation of the Church and State, Mabini’s solution was creating and providing a Transitory Provision. The theme in the transitory provision was the suspension of the separatist provision; the latter can be discussed again till a new constitutional convention shall be formed in peaceful times. The Constitution was ratified and the republic was proclaimed on January 23, 1899.
Shortly after the Malolos Congress was convened and before the ratification of the constitution in January 1899, President Emilio Aguinaldo and his brother Baldomero, the Secretary of War; signed a decree promoting Gregorio Aglipay from Military Chaplain to Vicario General Castrense or Military Vicar General effective October 20, 1898 in recognition of his laudable spiritual services.[xvii] With such appointment, he was the Chief Ecclesiastical Superior of those under arms during the revolution.
Aglipay’s Manifestos:
In line with his appointment, Aglipay issued three (3) manifestos on October 21st, 22nd, and 28th, respectively.[xviii] He issued the first manifesto from Malolos, and it was centered on a call, encouraging the Filipino clergy to unite and take over the jurisdiction and spiritual authority of the Catholic Church in the Philippines. Along with that a Canonical confirmation is desired to be secured from Rome for the recognition of the temporary system and structure where the Filipino clergy and the Catholic Church have been advocating. It was their intention not to separate from Rome.[xix]
His second manifesto was more on a circular and it says that it was justifiable to cooperate with the revolutionary government (Aguinaldo) because it would steadfastly support the church with proper intentions. The third manifesto was a treatise on Church and State relations. The following were stipulated and affirmed by the Assembly: (a) The Church is independent or separate from the State; (b) Clergy must live in harmony with the civil authorities; (c) Filipino clergy shall obtain from government whatever was needed for their works. [This is some sort of the revival of medievalism where the Cross and the Sword work in unison.] If the church is independent from the state, why would it be necessary for her to tell the state of what she has been doing, or what had been done?
Since Bishop John Hevia Campomanes of Nuevo Segovia was taken prisoner by General Tinio’s group in Aparri while the former was attempting to escape, Aglipay had realized that he could only function effectively if he had a jurisdiction and clothe with proper ecclesiastical authority. Thus, he went to Pangasinan and asked Fr. Jorge Arjol, the Vicar Forane to convey into him his title. Arjol refused and threatened Aglipay for excommunication in pursuance to Apostolica Sedis. Defeated but still possessing that last flicker of hope, he shifted to other strategy and this time he went to Aparri from Vigan on board a ship “Saturnus”; and with him were three letters of introduction or commendation from Fathers Eustquio Gallardo, Pedro Brillantes, and Doroteo Foronda.
Probably being thoroughly convinced of Aglipay’s integrity and performance as vouched by the endorsements of the three priests whom he knew well, on November 15, 1898, Campomanes issued an appointment to Aglipay appointing him as the Ecclesiastical Governor of the diocese vice his absence being in prison.
From Aparri he traveled on similar route and arrived in Manila on November 28, 1898. After finishing his business in Manila, he went home to Vigan on land and not much later, he was installed as the Ecclesiastical Governor of the diocese. However, such appointment had substantial moral deficiencies and perhaps issued by his Superior out of ignorance of the happening of times.
There exists therefore an academic question whether or not the appointment of Aglipay, which Campomanes issued, was valid?
For this, Archutegui and Bernad answer the said question this way: The appointment was issued or made in ignorance of the true state of affairs. Had Bishop Campomanes known of Aglipay’s three manifestos issued a few weeks previously, he would never have appointed Aglipay to that title or position of prestige. At the time of his appointment, he had already willfully denied the jurisdiction and authority of the incumbent bishops, which too included Campomanes. The appointment therefore was null and void from the beginning [null and void ab initio], for what he did was indeed subject, or had incurred excommunication. (Archutegui and Bernad, 84.)
Furthermore, they (Archutegui and Bernad) said, he (Aglipay) had exercised ecclesiastical jurisdiction which did not belong to him. Doing that he had already incurred excommunication because it is a maxim that no person can validly be granted ecclesiastical jurisdiction if that person is excommunicated from the church. (Scott, 26).
The evil side of Aglipay’s grabbing of authority maybe was compensated by the fact that he was able to re-open the Vigan seminary and a School for Girls thereat. With that just named position of honor, he was able to issue 24 circulars pertaining on administrative, political and finance; and all that of course were anti-American.[xx]
The Excommunication:
By May 4, 1899, Bishop Bernardino Nozaleda of the Archdiocese of Manila issued a decree finding Fr. Gregorio Aglipay guilty of excommunication based on the following reasons:
a) Aglipay vehemently ignored three summons dated respectively on November 22, 1898, December 23, 1898, and January 9, 1899, and consequently had his declaration for rebellion and contumacy;
b) His circular and having appointed Fr. Eutiquio Gallardo as Vicar Forane of Nueva Segovia, it was done without proper authority; and further styling himself as the “Capellan Castrense de Ejercito de la Revolucionario;
c) His issuance of two manifestos on October 21-22, 1898;
d) His open letter to Bishop Nozaleda, published in El Heraldo; and it had been grubby with much sarcasm;
e) His unauthorized action in trying to organize and unite the clergy to give some teeth on the execution of the contents of the manifesto he issued on October 21, 1898.
Aside from the above enumerated reasons of excommunication, four (4) considerations were further laid down:
a) Usurpation of authority and either done with malice or done because of unpardonable ignorance of Canon Law by appointing Fr. Eustaquio Gallardo;
b) His two issued manifestos contained doctrines subversive of ecclesiastical authority and discipline;
c) The title as Vicar General Castrense was arrogantly abused by Aglipay, using as such it had incurred penalties that include excommunication, interdict, and in contumacy – he shall be deprived of the exercise of sacred ministry; and
d) In ecclesiastical matters, Aglipay recoursed to civil authority to gain aid and favor.[xxi]
The Dean of Cathedral Chapter in the Archdiocese of Manila, Silvano Lopez Tunon, who too was a Vicar General summarized Aglipay’s case and rendered decision in the presence of a Notary Public on April 29, 1899. Nevertheless, excommunication was not inflicted on Aglipay, however he was found guilty of excommunication, for he had committed actions in contrary to Church Laws and Teachings.
Henceforth, in Nueva Segovia every Church’s door was posted printed copies of excommunication and circulated in the province.
Repudiation of Excommunication:
The charisma of Aglipay was indeed smeared by the decree of excommunication that was posted and circulated in every parish and in the vicariates of the entire diocese. So, in order to reverse the tide of shame, Fr. Pio Romero, Aglipay’s Secretary issued a circular, summarizing his denial of the validity of the excommunication, as follows:
a) That the circulated copies of Aglipay’s excommunication are not authentic;
b) That the Ecclesiastical Tribunal of Manila has no jurisdiction in Nueva Segovia; and
c) That the considerantos and the dispositive portion of the sentence do not conform to the indictment, which supposedly has to substantiate it.
Archbishop Nozaleda Response:
In answer to Pio Romero’s circular, the Archbishop of Manila on September 13, 1899 sent a Letter Circular to the clergy of Nueva Segovia. The following points were stressed:
a) Aglipay incurred grievous excommunication case before the Ecclesiastical Tribunal of Manila;
b) Supposedly he could not call himself legally as either Military Vicar General or Ecclesiastical Governor of Nueva Segovia;
c) All appointments made by Aglipay were null and void, as such it included the appointment of Eustaquio Gallardo as Vicar Forane;
d) His appointment as Ecclesiastical Governor was null and void because the appointee was excommunicated, henceforth he was incapable, by absolute impediment, of obtaining or exercising any ecclesiastical jurisdiction;
e) The only legitimate ecclesiastic superior of Nueva Segovia is the bishop.
As a result of Archbishop Bernardino Nozaleda’s answer to Pio Romero’s circular and when the excommunication of Aglipay became public, Fr. Isaac Albano of Alcala, Cagayan, a supporter who accepted the authority of Aglipay previously, wrote a retraction letter to Bishop Campomanes and affirmed his support and allegiance to the former.[xxii]
Probably to express or execute fully the validity of the Archbishop’s decision regarding the nullity of appointments issued by Aglipay, on September 13, 1899, Nozaleda issued an appointment to Eusebio Natividad as Vicar Forane replacing the bogus appointment. Nozaleda expected that there would be some interventions from government. Thus, it had.
At this point in time, the Philippine Government intervened. Severino de las Alas, the Secretary of the Interior pointed out that the ecclesiastical authority of Aglipay as Military Vicar General was recognized by the government. As such, any attack on him can also be classified as an indirect attack also to the government. It was said that Aglipay’s bitterness was the result of constant hatred from the Friars.
Earlier in August 1899 to be specific on the 19th of the month, Bishop Campomanes issued five (5) circulars deposing or ejecting Aglipay in line with the circularized excommunication decree.
For this, Aglipay defended himself with the following arguments, to mention a few:
a. All Friar Bishops including Nozaleda lost their jurisdiction by virtue of the Philippine Revolution. Being enemies of the people, they could not rule them.
b. The revolution was indeed a blessing, the Friar Bishops and regular clergy disregarded or neglected the rights of Filipino clergy and people.
c. Accordingly, Aglipay was compelled to take leadership in ecclesiastical governance in the interest of the church, in the absence of ecclesiastical jurisdiction.
d. The Filipino Government did not appoint Aglipay as Head of the Church; instead it merely recognized him as the leader.
e. He was not guilty of usurpation of authority; what he did was to try to do what shall be done in the existing circumstances.
By the way, the brilliant Apolinario Mabini, who was a Mason and a non-believing Catholic, prepared the written defenses of Aglipay.
The Onset of the Filipino-American War:
The Malolos Constitution was ratified in January 1899 by the congress. In some sense, the ratification of the constitution meant that the Filipino government did not recognize the sovereignty of the American occupation of Manila. Why would also the Filipino Government recognized the sovereignty of U.S. in the Manila, it would have even the other way around – U.S. shall recognize Filipino sovereignty in their own country because it was also part of the deal in Hongkong that the Philippines shall be under the naval protectorate of the U.S.; and its sovereignty ensured.
But it did go the other way, and eventually the Filipino-American War started on February 4, 1899 being ignited by a incident at the bridge when an American soldier mistakenly shot a Filipino, who was on the other end of the bridge. The war eventually started later after the first volley of fire went delivering its lethal blow.
The Paniqui Assembly, Its Constitution:
In October 1899, the Panique Assembly was convened by Aglipay in Paniqui, Tarlac. In attendance were 25 Filipino clergy. Its purpose was to organize the Filipino clergy under his leadership and to demand from Rome the appointments of Filipino Bishops in consonance with his first manifesto in October 1898.
The assembly was geared to withdraw allegiance and recognition of the authority of Spanish Bishops [Bishops of Manila, Nueva Segovia, Nueva Caceres, Cebu, and Jaro] and for effecting the organization that Mabini called as the “Organizacion del Clero Filipino”, which had the provisional constitution of the Filipino Church.
It had three (3) theses: a) The downfall of Spanish sovereignty, the authority or legal ascendancy of the incumbent bishops likewise fell; b) the Spanish bishops in the Philippines were in actual fact incapacitated; and c) any appointment of Bishops, who are not Filipinos, must not be consented.[xxiii]
Rightly, it was the perception of the Filipino clergy that the revolutionary cause was so great, and it would soon be recognized by Rome and the world powers.
So, a council was formed composed of a President, Secretary appointed by the President, two delegates from each diocese who were to be elected by the Lieutenant Vicars of the province within the diocese. The approved constitution had a preamble, nine (9) Canons, and three temporary provisions.
In brief, the constitution contained the following main points:
a) It had a declaration of loyalty to the Holy Father;
b) Repudiation of the jurisdiction of the Friar bishops;
c) No Bishop would be accepted unless they were Filipinos; and
d) Governance of the Filipino Church was under the rein of a council headed by Aglipay as Military Vicar General.
The Paniqui Assembly was disbanded, the Americans moved towards the direction of Tarlac; and Aguinaldo pulled back to the north – Ilocos Norte on November 18, 1899. Aglipay withdrew too with Aguinaldo and proceeded to Batac, Ilocos Norte, where he organized his own band of guerillas with Simon Mandac, as an Aide de Camp and Deputy Commander.
Had the Paniqui Assembly not been disbanded, it would have led to the early beginnings of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente.
In the meanwhile, the war indeed reached north, and Aglipay holed in Mabaleng. On April 16, 1900 his band of guerillas met the Americans; there was an engagement. So, they moved to Payao, unfortunately however again they were ambushed and ninety-six (96) men died. In another place again named Maoakoakar, they lost 27 more men from enemy attack. Starved, weary, and outfought, they transferred to Simibulan, then to Tipcal in December 1900. Thereafter, they transferred to Possuak in February 1901.[xxiv]
Extremely tired of fighting and had given up hope to be able to achieve final victory because of the might of the Americans and the futility of the cause they had been fighting for, Aglipay surrendered. He felt safer with the Americans than with his brother guerillas.[xxv]
With the assistance of Dr. Telesforo Ejercito, a fellow student while Aglipay was at Letran College, persuaded him to surrender. However it was Dr. Trinidad Pardo de Tavera, who initiated such move which brought Ejercito to the Ilocos Region. But in order to contract or see Aglipay, Ejercito needed the services of Dr. Juan Purugganan, who lived in Dingras.
Aglipay together with his friends or emissaries went to Laoag, where the headquarters of Colonel MacCaskey, where the former surrendered.[xxvi] His surrender was perhaps looked upon by his followers as the right thing to do. After some persuasion he made to his followers, they surrendered too. However, a few chose to continue the struggle in the dense forest of the north that safeguarded them.
While in Laoag after his surrender, Aglipay stayed in the house of Fr. Jose Evangelista. By the end of June 1901, he and Simon Mandac transferred to Manila and lived in the house of Dr. Ejercito’s aunt, Doña Francisca de Lisa Ocampo; in Sta. Cruz until October 3, 1907.
III. The Founding of the IFI to the Demise of Aglipay:
Aglipay while in Manila stayed at No. 54 Calle Espelleta in Sta. Cruz [in the house of Doña Francisca]. An important event in Philippine Church History took place, on August 3, 1902. Isabelo de los Reyes, an appointee of Aglipay to represent the Filipino Clergy at the Holy See in Rome; who was an anti-friar and likewise anti-American, and by some circumstance was formerly a prisoner in Barcelona, Spain, decided to launch formally the Filipino Church. Sensing and believing that it was the appropriate time to daringly proclaim the separation and be independent from the Roman Catholic Church in Rome.
The rupture was on August 3, 1902, however a month earlier, preparation, and notice had been made, in fact it was published in “El Grito del Pueblo” with Don Pascual Poblete as the Editor. It was an invitation of a grand meeting at Teatro Zorilla; the meeting would demand the expulsion of the friars and highlighted by the proclamation of a Filipino Independent Church. However, due to the intervention of the Americans, the meeting did not take place at Teatro Zorilla as planned, but instead it convened through the call of de los Reyes at Centro de Bellas Artes, where it was attended by the members of the Union Obrero Democratica or Democratic Labor Union, which he headed.
The reason of the abrupt change of venue, which supposedly to happen at the Teatro was attributed to the ban imposed by the civil authority on such assembly probably for the interest of state security more so that the Filipino-American War was just concluded. Despite of the predicament, Isabelo de los Reyes delivered his speech eloquently to a crowd of forty-two (42) members of the Union Obrero Democratico, who were there; nevertheless, to other sources, the attendance was amplified in numbers to give a band wagon effect.[xxvii]
De los Reyes’ speech declared that their greatest enemy was the Pope, probably because he did not abide with the terms they submitted to Vatican regarding the sole appointments to bishopric by Filipino clergy only.
During his speech, he announced the church structure shall be composed of two councils, the Executive and Dogmatic.[xxviii]
Perhaps the newly declared Filipino Church was not able to gain widespread support from prominent Catholic Filipinos, neither from the leaders of civic organizations nor from the Filipino clergy themselves. Take the case of Fr. Jorge Barlin, he was appointed by Isabelo de los Reyes to a position of distinction in the IFI on October 3, 1902; nevertheless, he refused and sent the appointment back to him. For Trinidad Pardo and Jose Alemany who both were from the Federal Party, they denied to have been connected with the organization of De los Reyes; and they did not accept the appointments. Even Aglipay himself reacted to the launching by circulating a letter through the El Grito, where it invited Filipino clergy to a conference.
Unequivocally, Gregorio Aglipay was appointmented as the Head of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente, however he did not accept the appointment right away, but went to a spiritual retreat to give him ample time whether or not he would have to accept it. He was at the Jesuit House in Sta. Ana in Pasig – La Ignaciana for four days. On the fifth day he left the retreat and had decided to accept the appointment and started working on the constitution of the IFI, which Isabelo de los Reyes had drafted.
They issued four (4) epistles with the following contents:
a. First Letter dated September 2, 1902. It was an Episcopal Consecration and it emphasized the argument: “In cases of extreme necessity, if even a layman could confer baptism, the most essential of the sacrament; why would not a priest take the place of a bishop and confer the Sacrament of the Holy Order in case of necessity.”[xxix]
b. Second Letter dated October 2, 1902. Apparently, it was a letter replying Bishop Garcia Alcocer of Cebu and about the establishment of seminaries, temples, and cemeteries belonging to the church.
c. Third Letter dated October 17, 1902.
Well, it said that the Cult of the Saints, or in what we know as Veneration of Saints, was an innovation of the Friars.
Furthermore, novenas were just “written forms of prayers made by Friars, who had nothing to do, and were neurasthenic and starved for meat.”
[What maybe they meant to say was denoting on carnal desire.]
d. Fourth letter dated October 29, 1902. The letter was signed by fifteen (15) Bishops, who accepted their appointments. It contained on matters about the formation of diocese and parochial committees of lay Filipinos; and a plan for training of priests for simplified an amplified Theology, a study for a year each.
Eventually, after the declaration of the IFI in August 1902, what followed next was the solemn inauguration of the IFI on October 26, 1902 at 8:00 in the morning in Azcarraga Street (now Claro M. Rector St.) in front of Botica Morelos. Felipe Buencamino organized the Pontifical Mass, which Gregorio Aglipay celebrated. When the mass ended, the celebrant took off his chasuble and began his persuasive sermon why they parted from the Roman Catholic Church of Rome.
He said that (a) There existed a great necessity of re-establishing the true worship of the True God and restoring the purity of the Word of God. (b) The rupture or separation was essential to uphold the national dignity of the Filipino clergy who long were ignored and despoiled of their rights.[xxx]
After the lapse of two months and nearing the third month following the solemn inauguration of the IFI, Gregorio Aglipay was consecrated as Bishop on January 18, 1903 at a chapel on Calle Lemery with Fr. Jose Evangelista of Laoag officiating.
Early Action of the Holy See about Philippine Problems:
There had been no concrete remedies initiated by Vatican to solve the manifold of problems the Roman Catholic Church in the Phiippins had, from secularization down to friar lands, the situation went as is.
As can be traced historically, Spanish colonization of the Philippines was through a mandate of the Patronato Real, where Spain had the right to colonize and occupy the Philippines because of its ecclesiastic role to spread Christianity in this part of the world. The mandate of the Patronato ceased when Spain lost her sovereignty in the Philippines and new foreign power named America started her domination where many approvingly sided the American concept of “benevolent assimilation”.
In 1804 Carlos IV of Spain had coerced from Rome a papal document removing all the orders in Spain from the jurisdiction of their Roman Superiors. With the suppression of the orders in Spain in 1837, the Philippine Provinces of the Friar Orders [Dominicans, Augustinians, Franciscans, and Recollects] existed in isolation, and there was no outside assistance to enable them to counteract or solve the difficult situation to which they were in. Although, the Spanish Government used to criticize the friars of their lapses and inadequacies as a Religious Order; government however was unwilling to permit them to return to their normal existence, which was under the authority of their superiors and the Holy See.[xxxi]
The friars had taken some measures to free themselves from this unusual or extra-ordinary situation towards the latter part of the 19th century. In 1872, the Dominicans was able to reunite with Rome, despite government had efforts to block it. The Augustinians followed similarly only in 1894. The situation where they were in had constituted the relaxation of discipline and other ideal traits priests should have in all the orders. So, when Filipino nationalists or activists began to attack the morals of friars, the extent of their accusations were right and not merely exaggeration.[xxxii]
This was the scenario in those times and with regards to the inequality of rights between friars or regular Spanish Clergy and the secular clergy – the Filipino priests, the growth or birth of semi-schismatic ideas, and so on, Rome did nothing about these problems not until the appointment of Archbishop Placide Chapelle of New Orleans as the first Apostolic Delegate to come to the Philppines. Archbishop Chapelle arrived in Manila in January 1900.[xxxiii]
Although Archbishop Chapelle failed to champion the cause of Filipino clergy because he favored the return of the regular friars to the parishes, and such decision made was likely to provoke only disorder. Likely because his representations, in July 1900 the Roman Congregation of the Council issued a decree suspending from the ministry any priest who without permission left his post to take part in wars or revolution. In general, the Filipino clergy opposed their return to the parishes.
Despite, there were lapses and errors in the first visitation of Rome’s representative; it was too consoling that after all she had seen the problems in the Philippines. As early as the 1860’s headed by Fr. Pedro Pelaez, or 1872 (Gomburza), the Filipino Clergy had begun advocating for reforms regarding the confronting problems of the Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines.
Well, the second Apostolic Delegate to the Philippines was Archbishop Giovanni Battista Guidi. He arrived in Manila in November 1902 and he brought an apostolic letter “Quae Mari Sinico” that was promulgated latter on December 8, 1902. The apostolic letter had to address the ecclesiastical problems of the country.
These were the contents:
- It (Holy See) acknowledged the change of sovereignty in the islands.
- It reorganized the Philippines with the creation of new dioceses.
- It promised positions of responsibility to native clergy.
- It warned against participation in politics.
- It gave directions for seminaries, exhorted clergy to holiness.
- It raised UST as a Pontifical Institute (now a Pontifical University under the Dominicans)[xxxiv].
In the meanwhile, though there were solutions on hand, not all even Catholics liked the remedies the Holy See had proposed.
The return of Spanish Bishops to their respective assignments indeed happened after the political situation soon became stable. It was however an igniting factor for the native clergy to be having the same superiors whom they think had made their lives miserable. But there was nothing that could be done.
Unfortunately, it would be four more years before new bishops would come to replace them.[xxxv] But the appointments of American Bishops became also as factors to the rise of conversion to the IFI from the Roman Catholics. The IFI continued to spread except in the Diocese of Nueva Caceres (Camarines).
Despite it did rise, it also declined as a natural phenomenon; and there are reasons, to wit:
a) Firm adherence to the Roman Catholic Church of numerous Filipino clergy all over the archipelago;
b) Appointment of American bishops and re-opening of Roman Catholic seminaries. (Seminaries were closed in 1898 and from then on there was no ordination until it was opened later.)
c) Discovery and expose’ of a revolt led by Simeon Mandac in Ilocos Norte. He was the Executive Secretary of the IFI and convicted for murder and sedition;
d) Aglipay’s failure or inability to secure from Bishop Brent of the Protestant Episcopalian Church and Bishop Herzog of the Old Catholic Church in Switzerland of an “Apostolic Succession”; and
e) Fr. Jorge Barlin, a Filipino, elevation to the Episcopacy.[xxxvi]
Aglipay continued to push on his ecclesiastical works for the advancement of the IFI together with Isabelo de Los Reyes, although there was a significant decline in membership.
Putting the last cream of schism, he married Pilar Jamias aged 64 on March 12, 1939. Aglipay was at that time 74 years old, but to fulfill the deathbed final request of their daughter Liwliwa who was 24 years old at the time of her death.
On August 26, 1940, at 12:15 PM he died because of cerebral stroke after six (6) days of struggle to live. A Retraction letter would have been made but it is still unverified. He was laid in state at the Aglipayan Cathedral in Tondo and buried in the cathedral, but eventually was reburied in his hometown in Batac, Ilocos Norte.
CONCLUSION:
A great man in Philippine Church History though he was one of the controversial figures having been known also as the “Martin Luther in the Philippines”, Gregorio Aglipay successfully ruptured the Roman Catholic institution in the Philippines because of his schism.
As a man, he had his weaknesses and strong points. His strong point was that, he was able to achieve what he desires for in his life, desires to become a priest and indeed he became one. The weakness which he had was having a softer heart “pusong mamon”. From what we read, perhaps it is safe to say that he aspired for a change that was why he advocated for reforms and ultimately resorted to the use of arms to fight for what he believed was just for the sake of freedom. His thoughts maybe was like the way Fr. Jose Natera of Albay, who during the revolution died in battle as a deputy Commander of the Province with a rank of a lieutenant colonel.
Nevertheless, as a legitimate Roman Catholic priest in the order of Melquizedic, he should have observed strictly the Laws and Regulations and all the Church teachings he knew.
However, he strongly agitated that “In cases of extreme necessity, if even a layman could confer baptism, the most essential of the sacrament; why would not a priest take the place of a bishop and confer the Sacrament of the Holy Order in case of necessity.” Such statement is a schismatic. So, he therefore doubted or began to doubt the teaching of the church. It is unequivocal that only Bishops and above those hierarchal echelon shall have the authority to confer the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Why had he twisted the Church dogma?
It is therefore fair that a decree of excommunication was issued by Archbishop Bernardino Nozaleda inasmuch as aside from being schismatic, he was also rebellious to the Order where he belonged. He was summoned to appear for three times at the Cathedral Chapter, but he vehemently ignored the summons.
Henceforth, being rebellious to the Order or to his lawful Ecclesiastical Superior, he is disobedient. Obedience is one important vow of a priest regardless whether he is a religious or a secular priest.
Partly Church History shall remember Aglipay as the man who had kept the Church alive during the trying times of the Revolution. Had he not stood up when there were no more Spanish Friars because they fled from imprisonment and for their lives, exercise of piety such as regular masses and so on would have been unsaid. But there was this man, who stood and united the Filipino clergy to perpetuate the priestly functions even in times of war or revolution.
It was only by accident that he came to know Apolinario Mabini and Isabelo de los Reyes, who were all non-believing Catholics. Mabini was a Mason and there was no mentioned about Reyes to have been connected with Masonry, but his thoughts were indeed more or less similar with Mabini. Probably, these two associates had influenced him much that finally he severed his link with the Roman Catholic Church in favor of the ideology, which were even new to him, I believe so.
At first maybe it was not his dream to separate from Rome, in fact the Paniqui Constitution had manifested a declaration of loyalty with Rome, its idea was not of separation.
We are incapable of sizing Aglipay’s thought, we, here would just make some assumption based on what we read and had known about him. But clearly, Aglipay was seeking Divine guidance because before the appointment was spoonful fed by Isabelo de los Reyes to him, he did not accept nor grab the appointment wolfishly had he been hungry of power and fame, but instead he underwent to a spiritual retreat; and decided later to accept the appointment that would make and unmake him in the annals of Philippine Church History.
With him and in him, the ideals of “Padre Capitanes” had once more resurrected though Fr. Agustin de San Pedro, a Recoleto in Cagayan de Misamis, and Fr. Jose Ducos, SJ of Iligan had long demised. Be as it may, their memories still linger on, and Gregorio Aglipay from the north was able to achieve this fame, should we give that credit to him.
oOo
[i] The old Sto. Domingo Church/Convent was the first edifice built by the Spanish Dominicans shortly after their arrival in the Philippines. It was erected at Intramuros and inaugurated on January 1, 1588. Since it was made of light materials such as bamboo, wood, and nipa, it collapsed a year later. Reconstruction was done, and this time it was made of stronger materials, it lasted but it was unable to withstand the fury of the strong earthquake in 1603. Again, it was reconstructed, nonetheless; the quakes destroyed it in 1645 and twice in 1863. On August 30, 1864, a new Sto. Domingo Church/Convent was built that would be earthquake proof and typhoon-resilient. Dominican cooperator-brothers who worked when the Vatican was remodeled helped in the construction, and its result was splendid in Gothic architecture. If it had withstood destruction from natural calamities, it failed to escape the wrath of war. In 1941 Manila was heavily bombed by opposing air force, the Sto. Domingo was among that was destroyed. On October 10, 1954, the new Sto. Domingo Church/Convent was solemnly blessed by Rufino Cardinal Santos. The edifice is located in Quezon City and three kilometers ay from UST. __ See Rolando V. de la Rosa, O.P. History of the Filipinization of the Religious Orders in the Philippines, Beginnings of the Filipino Dominicans, (Manila City: UST Publishing House, 1990), 195-196.
[ii] W.H. Scott notes that Gregorio Aglipay’s first assignment started in May 1890 and not in April of the same year. See W.H. Scott, Aglipay Before Aglipayanism (Quezon City: Aglipayan Resource Center, 1987). 16.
[iii] Ibid., 18. Scott says that in 1897, Gregorio Aglipay founded in Victoria, Tarlac the Liwanag, an ally and logistical arm support of the Katipunan. Such fact was attested by Jose Villarte, Reseña Historica de Pueblo de Victoria. __ See also Archutegui and M.A. Bernad, Religious Revolution in the Philppines. (This is why Archutegui and Bernad in their works say that Aglipay had thirty men (30) men disguised as carpenters from General Lachambre, who helped General Makabulos.)
[iv] Fr. Mariano Sevilla was one of the exiles in 1872. See J. Schumacher, Readings in Philippine Church History, (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila, ___) 251.
[v] Enrique L. Victoriano, ed. Historic Manila, Commemorative Lectures: A Tribute to Fathers Burgos, Gomez and Zamora, (Lecture by Justice Flerida Ruth P. Romero). 56.
[vi] In Fort Victoria near in what is today Iligan City, the disciplinarios or convicts in the penitentiary area mutinied and killed their Spanish Officers before jail breaking and heading towards Misamis Oriental on their way to Surigao, the stronghold of the revolutionaries under the command of Don Simon Gonzalez, known as the General of Mindanao. He was also a nipa wine distiller in Guigaquit and an agent or representative of General Aguinaldo for Mindanao during the revolution. __ See J.S. Arcilla, Jesuit Missionary Letters from Mindanao, Vol. 4: The Dapitan-Balingasag Mission (UP CIDS, 2000) 35, 617, 624, and 674.
[vii] W.H. Scott notates that Aglipay in 1897 founded the Liwanag, an ally of the Katipunan in Victoria, Tarlac. Such fact is attested by Jose Villarte in his work Reseña Historica de Pueblo de Victoria. See also W.H. Scott, Aglipay before Aglipayanism, 18.
[viii] E.L. Victoriano, Ed. Historic Manila, Commemorative Lectures: The American Occupation of Manila, (Lecture made by Rosario Mendoza Cortes, Professor Emeritus of History, UP) 67-78.
[ix] Ibid.
[x] John Schumacher, Readings in Philippine Church History, 276.
[xi] Ibid., 278.
[xii] Ibid., 265 and 278.
[xiii] Ibid., 280.
[xiv] E.L. Victoriano, Ed. Historic Manila, Commemorative Lectures: The American Occupation, 76.
[xv] Unknown to the Filipinos, Spanish and American commanders through the meddling of Rauson Walker, a British Consul who died later; and his work was continued on by a Belgian Consul, it was agreed that to satisfy Spain’s honor, a token bombardment shall be fired by the Americans, after that the Spaniards shall raise the surrender flag. It was agreed; the pretense shall be done to save the honor of Spain, and the “make-believe war” happened on August 13, 1898. The farce battle on that day was in fact not necessary anymore since Spain had sued for peace with U.S.A. on July 22, 1898 yet, and a draft of the document to end the hostilities had been transmitted by the U.S. Secretary of State to the Spanish Government on August 10, 1898, for signature of the highest ranking and authorized official, and by the French Ambassador to Washington, who was in representation of Spain’s interest.
However, the protocol or document was finally signed in Washington in the afternoon of August 12, before the presence of the American President. Immediately thereafter, Washington notified her commanders in Manila via Hongkong telegraph cable that had linkage with Manila. But because the submerged telegraph cable was cut previously by Dewey, there was no way to inform the commanders of the latest development of the ending of hostilities between America and Spain. See E.L. Victoriano, Historic Manila, 77-78.
[xvi] Exiled in the Marianas in 1872 and imprisoned in 1896 by the Spaniards. He was recognized by all as nationalist in line with the thoughts of Fr. Jose Burgos.
[xvii] J. Schumacher, Revolutionary Clergy (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila, 1981), 97. Aside from the inherent functions on the spiritual aspects, Aglipay’s other services include collection of funds in Ilocos as governor commissioner, the organization of education in the entire Ilocos Regional, and the reopening of a school for Girls in Vigan.
[xviii] Archutegui and Bernad, 44-60; A. Salanga, The Aglipayan Questin: Lierary and Historical Studies on the Life and Times of Gregorio Aglipay (Quezon City: Communication Research Institute for Social and Ideological Studies, 1982) 3-5.
[xix] The structure was authored by Apolinario Mabini and he had conceived the idea of an independent national church in union with Rome as a necessary expedient to prevent a serious rift and to give the republic a chance to seek recognition by negotiating a concordat with Rome. M.D. Clifford, Iglesia Filipina Independiente in Studies in Philppine Church History, (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1969), 230. Causes of Animosity against the friars: (a) Friars held vas estates where Filipino families lived as tenants (425,000 acres); (b) Missionary work of a particular religious order covered the entire region of the Philippines; (c) Frailocracy; (d) Friars opposed with the education of Filipinos; (e) Contemptuous treatment of Friars to Indios. See Archutegui and Bernad, 45-48.
Moreover, Schumacher says that Aglipay called on the Filipino Clergy to withdraw their allegiance to Archbishop Nozaleda, Bishop of Manila; and submit or accept the authority of the just named Vicario General Castrense. J. Schumacker, Readings in Philippine Church History, 280.
[xx] J. Schumacker says that while Aglipay was the Ecclesiastical Governor, he had suppressed the counter-revolutionary movement of the Gurdia de Honor in Tarlac, and consistently made very effort in stirring or enticing the clergy to revolt or go with the revolutionary fever.
[xxi] Archutegui and Bernad. The Life and Church of Gregorio Aglipay, 85-103.
[xxii] J. Schumacher, Readings in Philippine Church History, 282.
[xxiii] There was still no indications of Schism, Archutegui and Bernad, 109; See also Salanga, 6-8, 17. The Constitution of Paniqui gave an erroneous impression that it was constituting a new Church. Scott. 30.
[xxiv] Aglipay’s leadership was superb, his personal qualities such as being brave and charismatic, and for being a priest, he earned so much respect, which people had always for a priest. Likewise, the people knew fully well that he was the Vicario General Castrense. __ Archutegui and Bernad, 123; See also Schumacher, 101.
[xxv] Ibid., 136-137.
[xxvi] Aglipay’s surrender, which the Federal Party in Manila initiated, brought peace to Ilocos Norte, Clifford, 229.
[xxvii] Archutegui and Bernad, 182-183.
[xxviii] Ibid., 181. The Executive Council was composed of William Taft, the American Civil Governor; Emilio Aguinaldo, and Trinidad Pardo de Tavera, Federal Party; while the Dogmatic Council was composed of 16 priests with Aglipay as head.
[xxix] Ibid., 192 & 195. Based on such argument, Pedro Brillantes (one of the three priests who gave Aglipay an endorsement letter for Bishop Campomanes for the sought position of Ecclesiastical Governor of Nueva Segovia), was consecrated bishop by 24 priests whose hands were raised or imposed at St. James Church, Bacarra, Ilocos Norte.
[xxx] Ibid., 200-201.
[xxxi] J. Schumacher, Readings on Philippine Church History, 243-244.
[xxxii] Ibid.
[xxxiii] Ibid.
[xxxiv] M.D. Clifford, Iglesia Filipina Independiente in Studies in Philppine Church History. Ithaca and London: Cornell, 245.
[xxxv] J. Schumacher, Readings in Philippine Church History, 300.
[xxxvi] Ibid., 247.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1. Archutegui, P. and Bernad, M. The Life and Church of Gregorio Aglipay (1860-1940) Vol. 1 of Religious Revolution in the Philippines (Manila: Ateneo de Manila, 1960).
2. Scott, W. Aglipay Before Aglipayanism (Quezon City: Aglipayan Resource Center, 1987).
3. Salanga, A. The Aglipayan Question: Literary and Historical Studies on the Life and Time of Gregorio Aglipay (Quezon City: Communication Research Institute for Social and Ideological Studies, 1982).
4. Clifford, M.D. Iglesia Filipina Independiente in Studies in Philippine Church History (Ithaca and London: Cornell).
5. Victoriano, E.L. Ed. Historic Manila, Commemorative Lectures
6. De la Rosa, R.V., O.P. History of the Filipinization of the Religious Orders in the Philippines, Beginnings of the Filipino Dominicans (Manila City: UST Publishing House, 1990), 195-196.
7. Arcilla, J.S. Jesuit Missionary Letters from Mindanao, Vol. 4: The Dapitan-Balingasag Mission (UP CIDS, 2000) 35, 617, 624, and 674.
8. Schumacher, J. Readings in Philippine Church History
9. Schumacker, J. Revolutionary Clergy (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila, 1981).
