The Philippine Islands, 1493-1898 — Volume 21 of 55: 1624; Explorations by early navigators, descriptions of the islands and their peoples, their history and records of the Catholic missions, as related in contemporaneous books and manuscripts, showing the political, economic, commercial and religious conditions of those islands from their earliest relations with European nations to the close of the nineteenth century.
History
The Philippine Islands, 1493-1898 — Volume 21 of 55: 1624; Explorations by early navigators, descriptions of the islands and their peoples, their history and records of the Catholic missions, as related in contemporaneous books and manuscripts, showing the political, economic, commercial and religious conditions of those islands from their earliest relations with European nations to the close of the nineteenth century.
Demarcation line of Alexander VI; Missions -- Philippines; Philippines -- Discovery and exploration; Philippines -- History -- Sources
While that meeting was being held, the auditors despatched a royal
mandate, which they said was given by Don Felipe, to the archbishop,
ordering him not to retain Don Pedro de Monrroy as provisor, as he
was exiled from the kingdoms, to absolve the excommunicated, and lift
the interdict--under penalty, if he did not do so, of banishment
and a fine of 2,000 ducados. The archbishop replied, demanding a
testimony of the cause and the corresponding acts [of the Audiencia],
in order to determine what he should do. But the auditors sent him
another royal decree, warning him that he would be considered to have
incurred the said penalties if he did not immediately lift the censures
and interdict. Since the archbishop held firm, the auditors sent the
chief court constable, together with the actuary of the Audiencia and
thirty pikemen under command of an adjutant, at four in the afternoon
on that same day, in order to take charge of the episcopal residence,
with orders not to permit any one to leave it or anything to be taken
from it.
At this juncture, the rector of the Jesuit college and others advised
the archbishop to raise the censures _ad reincidentiam_ [_i.e._,
"until a repetition of the offense"], and the interdict for one week,
since they thought that the auditors would return the prisoner. That
was done, and the archbishop requested the opinion in writing of the
orders and learned persons, which they gave him--with the exception
of the Dominicans, who excused themselves. The archbishop, seeing
that the auditors not only did not do what was promised, but even
issued another decree to arrest and expel the provisor, called another
meeting, at which the Dominicans had no part. In that meeting it was
decided to defend the ecclesiastical immunity, and that two individuals
of the assembly should go to talk with the auditors in the name of
the assembly, and notify them that the prisoner must be returned, or
else the archbishop could not raise the censures or interdict. Two
Jesuits went, and the auditors replied to them that they would not
desist or turn back. The interdict was immediately imposed again,
and the auditors were publicly declared to be excommunicated.
A Jesuit, who was a friend to the governor, advised him to take a
hand in the matter in order to cut short such scandals. The result
was that the governor decided to see the archbishop at the residence
of the Society, in order to discuss the most suitable method. The
interview was held, but without result. Another interview had the
same result. Meanwhile it was decided to appoint two arbitrators,
one from each side. Doctor Jolo was appointed for the auditors, and
Father Juan de Bueras, [22] rector of the residence of the Society
of Jesus, for the archbishop. They agreed that the prisoner should
be returned to the episcopal prison, and that each side should desist
from their claim in what was accomplished.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account