20110309180304religios imperial is me in the philippines

8/3/2019 20110309180304religios Imperial is Me in the Philippines

1/11

AJT/3:2/89

RELIGIOUS IMPERIALISM IN THEPHILIPPINES: SOME CRITICALREFLECTIONS

Salvador D. Eduarte*

Christianity in the Philippines, in its Roman Catholic form, is now more thanfour hundred years old, while the Protestant variety is now more than four scoreyears. B r u i t ~ d about as the only Christian country in Asia i f ootin the Far East, thePhilippines can rightfully claim to be crucial point where East meets West, andwhere Western pragmatism meets and blends with Oriental mysticism. The moreirreverent observers say that we spent four hundred years in a convent and about fiftyyears in Hollywood.C h r i s t i a n i ~ y an Importation

Before 1521, Christianity is practically unknown in the islands, although Muslimsantedated the religion of the Nazarene by at least three centuries. With the coming ofSpain into world supremacy, and with the growing need for the expansion ofcommerce and navigation, not to exclude the motivation for spreading the Catholicfaith, the Westeinnavigators ' set their sights into the then undiscovered lands. ThePhilIppines, by a quirk of history, belongs to Portugal by virtue of the Treaty ofZaragoza, signed with Spainin 1529 since the former, under the terms and stipulationof the accord, .claims all hinds "297 -1/2 leagues 'east of the M o l u c c a s I , But thenMagellanclaimed the islands forSpam and as a concession to the Royal Crown whowas his employer. .

Thet Christianity was an importation is an historical fact that seemsincontrovertible. And herein lies the paradoxical situation which puzzles and bafflesmany seriousminded Christians. For as an observer of Philippine life has said, .Two fundamental problems plagued the churches ... First, (it appears) thatChristiaruty is a potted plant in Southeast Asia.. It has been transported without. being transplanted. It is still viewed by Asian as a foreign importation. Secondly,Christianity in both Catholic and Protestant forms, eventually became imperialisticin nature and policy and failed to help substantially the native Filipinos inattaining sovereignty and independence,2This charge is quite serious. For if; asthe dictionary defines it, imperialism is

"the policy and practice of forming '"and maintaining an empire by ' conquest,colonisation, POlitical or economic doniination"3then Christianity in both Catholicand Protestant forrru., has hindered more than helped in driving the spirit 6f nationalisminto the psyche oftlle Filipinos. . .01< Salva:dor D Eduarte is assistant professor of ecclesiastical history and Christian dogmatics at SaintAndrew's Theological Seminary, Quezon City. He is also an ordained minister of the United Church

of Christ in the Philippines.

473


2/11

AJT/3:2/89

Causes of Imperialistic Power. The root causes of imperialism can be seen in t h ~ power and position of the friar

in Spanish times. As an extension of Spanish Catholicism in the village and municipalievel, the friar is often more powerful than the civil officials. The Archbishop ofManila is ex oficio head of the Philippine GoverIlment,and the moment the GovernorGeneral becomes incapacitated or dies, he ipso facto becomes the head of Governmentuntil a replacement is made by the Crown. .

Sinibaldo de Mas describes the power of the Spanish priest during the Spanishtimes.in these memorable words:- The governadorcillo; on receiving an order from the alCalde,goesfIrst to the(friar) to get his permission; and it is the latter, who, in strict terms, tacitly seesto its fulfilment, or prevents its course. The Father concludes or directs the suitsof the village, makes the writs, goes 'up to plead for his Indians, 'opposes hispetitions ;, and at times their threats, to the violence committed by the alcaldesmayor; and manages everything by the standard of his desire.3Since the friars were beneficiaries of wealth and power, it stands to reason thatthey would promote colonialism and imperialism.It was not strange, therefore, that the friars became the willing tools of suppression

of the natives by the brutal arms of the Spanish military. Fa.ther Pedro V. 'Salgado,O.P., trenchantly observes that

the missionaries importuned the Spanish government for soldiers to go in hotpursuit of the natives in the hills. Many times, missionaries paid for the soldiers'. wages and food, and supplied them with guns and blIllets to caPture or kill therecalcitrant natives. Many times, it was t9 the m i s ~ l o n a r y heads that the militarYheads reported the success or failure of their operations. Missionaries accompaniedthe soldiers to see to it'that everything was done accordingtoobjectives. 4Fr. Jose Herrera, Provincial pf the Dominican Order, fmanced military expeditions

for four years in a row, namely: in 1751, 7152, 1753, and 1754.5 In a document inwhich the provincial putshis imprimatur to the operation,dated April 12, 1755, ht;. .said: . . '. ,. I certify that ... the said troops were ,made possible at:my expense ... with my

p r o v i n c e ~ h o u l d e r i n g the food, gun-powder,and bullets, as well as the salary ofone peso monthly for each soldier.6 . . .Not to be outdone, Fr. Francisco Rocamora, O.P., parish priest of Dupax, in

Nueva Viscaya, masterminded military expeditions against the Ilonggots, of theSierra Madre mountains. This Dominican priest, who is supposed to be a servant ofGod, designed as . head for this Qlission a Don Tomas Manuel, who headed acontingent of soldiers and for 15 days burned the villages ofBin angan, Casaguiman,Butac and Guiyan.7 Certainly, these atrocities were carried out in the name of Christwho said, "fle who lives by the sword shall perish by the sword."8 . . .

But the bravery of the indios, the Novo Viscayanos, amazed the.white conquerors,and sUPP0l1ed by the military forces, they fInally overwhelmed organized resistance.But ,not without cost to the Christian murderers. "Fr. Diego Aduarte (not 'to beconfused with this writer's surname!) spoke thus of the natives:

474


3/11

AlT/3:2/89

These natives were so warlike that not even a religious went out of town exceptin the company of soldiers and with arms; nor did the encomendero go to collect"their tributes without an escort ofmany soldiers, coming back immediately with" anything that the Indians were pleased to give them.9 "Religion of Domestication

,' "What seems even more disturbing was the method employed by the missionariesto cushion the warlike traits of the natives. This was' done by emphasizing themeekness of Jesus Christ, who meekly suffered the death on the Cross, and whooffered "prayer for His tormentors. It was pointed out that as followers of theNazaiene; the natives must likewise be meek arid submissive, and im;tead ofcomplaining against the oppression inflicted upon them, should be patient, obedient,and meek.Fr. Diego Aduarta, already mentioned above, tells us about a certain Siribian, a

chief of Cagayan' s northwestern town, who was formerly a ferocious warrior, butwho became meek as a result ofChristian indoctrination. I wonder whether this friarAduarte does not have his tongue in cheek as he chronicles this example ofdomesticating religion:The Spaniards" grew angry at the answer and threatemed to " ane the Indian(Chief Siribian) unless he did what he was told (to bring a prostitUte). the Indian"turned his back and bending his head said, "Give me as much of a caning as yourplelise, for I am not going to do what you ask." The Spaniard was so intemperateand discourteous that he vented his anger upon him and caned him." .. I fbe hadshouted to his followers, they would have cut the Spaniards to p i e ~ e s . But as he"was a Spaniard, nor would he avenge himself, nor would he eVen"make use ofa just defense.... He said nothing more and uttered not a word of ndignation. DGreat , ndeed was the developed and organized campaign toinddctrinate thenative indios in the virtue of meekness and obedience that in sermons, prayers,novenas, and literature distributed by the Spanish colonial government the samerefrain is found. Jose Rizal, 'fu his attack against the friars faulted them for teachingthe natives to look up to heaven and pray, while the greedy conquistadores prey onthe natives' ignorance, andgnibbed their land. 11 While religion pointed upward toheaven, Spmngot what she wanted by appropriating hectares of land through theencomienda. ' " ,

-.l , "Agriculture in the Service of ImperialismStill another method employed by the friars and missionaries was to gather theFilipinos into one compact community within the sound of a bell, the reducciones forpurposes of indoctrination and manageability. Such a community, composed ofSpanish soldiers, missionaries, and natives needs.ta huge supply of rice and lowlandagriculture. The colonialists knew that if they didn't maintain the Filipinos in acommunity, the latter might go back to kaingin farming in the hills, far from theirinfluence, and thus revert to paganism. Thus, the missionaries introduced farmimplements, and even cashcrops,for the natives. Under the guise o f charity andimprovementof agriculture lurks the sinister desire to indoctrinate the natives so thatthey will be uncomplaining victims of imperialism. '

475


4/11

AJT/3:2/89

There is, therefore, more than meets the eye in the account given by historianAntonio M o ~ o :

For this reason, and because it is n e c e ~ s i l l - y to provide means by w h i c h t h ~ s e who are converted may obtain a suitable support, so that for lack of ~ h e s e theymay not go around wandering, as soon as we begin to confer baptism we ,endeavour to find animals and other necessaries for the cultivation of land thereligious being often the first one to commence it in order that the people mayimitate them ... 12Evidently, the Spanish friars and bishops were a great ally with the policies ofthe colonial government, andthe institutional Church, wealthy from thepillageof

the p e o p ~ e ' s r ~ l i g i o u s faith, reciprocated the power and privileges granted to itbytheState by aiding and abetting the abuses committed against the victims ofSpanishtyranny.it took another r()undofmartyrs before Filipinos finall ygathered enough courageto xebel against the foreign tyranny. It took the death of the priests Fathers Burgos,Gomez, and Zamora to shock the nation into a realization that they had been led byself-styled propagators of the Gospel of Christ who were actually 'willing tools ofSpain's colonial rapacity.

" ,Filipinos today seldom hear of the courage of Filipino clergy who withstoodagainst the institutional Church's imperialistic designs. But history has given usnames of individuals hitherto unknown Filipino.priestswhowere tortured for resistingabuses. Among these was Fr. Maraiano Dacanay, of Ilocos Sur, one of the 9 detainedpriestsaccuse;d of rebellion in 1897, who gives us an account of the beastly torturehe endured ul'the hands of the friars: '

Present during this heartrending and horrendous spectacle were the Provisor andthe seven superior of the Seminary who, instead of sympathizing with mysuffermgs and cruel torture, much to thecontrary, watchedmy martyrdom withvisible signs ,of pleasure, for they even went to the extent of encouraging theguards to treat me even more cruelly - Fr. Gavino Olas9,'for one. Duringmy._ orment, that Father said that i f I died on account ofthose lashes, they would putmy corpse in a ,box and just throw it in some corner; and when they saw memlirrnur a prayerbetween clenched teeth - because during my prayer I keptmurmuring the M emorare ofSaint Bernard to the Virgin t6 implore her protectionin those most cruel moments - they laughed at me and said, 'What can thishypocrite be praying?' And when I fell over due to the blows andthe fatiguecaused by such a contorted posture, rolling overon the floor, they added to mysufferings by kicking me roughly as if I were a football, and when I fell, I struckmy head against a post, causing a wound, and another time I rolled over nearF&therCavino, who was pacing quietly around the room, and he gave meanother tremendous kick in the head which completely stunnedme.13

Comes Now American Religious ,ImperialismWhen, in the course of time, revolution finally broke,out between the Spanishgovernnieni and some patriotic Filipinos, the latter thought that with the defeatofSpain, they would finally rid themselves of the hated religious iIllperialism. But thiswas not to be. For it was mereiy a case of changing from one inasterto another, with

476


5/11

AJT/3:2/89

American imperialism coming to theislands in more refined, albeit more dangerous,ways.Emilio Aguinaldo, as head of the Revolutionary Government of the Philippines,had already raised the flag of rebellion against Spain when he declared independenceat his home in Kawit, Cavite on June 12, 1898. Before that, Andres Bonifacio and hisKatipuneros had already tom their cedulas arid declared war with Spain.It was at this time that the Spanish-American War had already broken out inCuba, .when the USS Maine was blown to pieces while it was berthed at Havana,Cuba. Promptly, Admiral George Dewey, then .a commodore, received a cablegramfrom President William MacKinley to proceed from Hong .Kong and commencehostilities with_he Spanish flotilla anchored at the Manila Bay. This "mock battle"

brought the Americans to our shores. With the defeat of Spain's naval fleet, and theimminent collapse of the Spanish colonial government, it was only a matter of timebefore Aguinaldo and his revolutionary forces would claim victory over Spain. Butthen, the United States in the person of Dewey struck a deal, or so Aguinaldo laterclaimed, that if the . atter would help in defeating .Spain, the Americans would allowAguinaldo to enter Intramuros and accept the surrender of Spain in the name of thenewly proclaimed Republic of the Philippines.;ButDewey denied this. And so. twasthat the American . forces entered Intramuros and' accepted the .surrender of theSpanish forces, leaving AguinaldoandJhis men out in the cold.14 Once again, thePhilippines was had.This strange a ~ t u a t i o r i maybe undbrstood i f we remember that back home in theUnIted States, t h e a n t i ~ i m p e r i a l i s t league was pressuring MacKinley to respect theindependence of he Philippines. F o r ~ i n o s t s u p p o r t e r s of his movement include JaneAdams, Mark Twain, and William James. William iennings Bryanbecame thePresidential candidate of the Democratic Party, runningon an anti-imperialist platform.The Anti-Imperialist League was first organized in Boston in November 1898by a group of individuals who ' had been active in " he anti-slavery movementSpreading-rapidly throughout the country, the League held a conference in Chicago. in October 1899 and adopted thisplatform: . .

_ We hold that the policy known as imperialism is hostile to liberty and tends. towards militariSm, an evil from.which it is our glory to be free .... We demandthe immediate cessation of the war against liberty, begun by Spain and continuedby us. We urge thatCongress be promptly convened to announce to the Filipinosour purpose to concede to them the independence fOr-which they have so long_fought and which of right is theirs. IS

ButMacKinley and the Republican Party batted for American sovereignty overthe islands. This was motivated by two ignoble ';purposes-one religious and theother cOmrilercial.The religious motivation, which actually is but a cover up Or front for the second(business), took place during the visit to the White House of a delegation ofMethodistchurch leaders, November 21 ; 1899. TheMethodist official organ Christian A d w ~ c a t e gives us a detailed account of the ipcidentthus: -Hold a moment longer! (Said the President tothe delegation) Not quite yet,gentlemen! Before you go I would like to say just a wordabout the Philippine

477


6/11

AJT/3:2/89

.' business. 1 have been criticised a good deal about the Philippines, but don'tdeserve it. The truth is, I don't want the Philippines, and when they came to us,as a gift from. the gods, I did not know whatto do with them. When the SpanishWar broke out, Dewey was in Hong Kong, and I ordereq him to go to Manila andto capture and destroy the Spanish fleet, and he had to, because, if defeated, hehad no place to refit on that side of the globe '" When I next realized that thePhilippines had dropped into our lap I confess I did not know what to do withthem. 1 sought counsel from all s ides- Democrats as well .as Republicans -but got no help. I thought first we would only take Manila, then Luzon, thenother islands perhaps also. I walked the floor of the White House night afternight; until midnight; and I am not ashamed to tell you, gentlemen, that I wentdown onmy knees and prayed Almighty God for light and guidance more thanone night. And one night late it Came to me this way I don t know how it was,but it came: (1) That we could not -give them back to Spain '-'-, that would becowardly and dishonorable; (2) that we could not turn them over to France andGermany---' our commercial rivals in the Orient '- that would be bad businessand dishonorable; (3) that we could not leave them to themselves - they wereunfit for self';govemment - '- and they would soon have anarchy andrnisruleworse than Spain's was,and (4) that there was nothing left for us to do but totake them all, and to educate the Filipinos; and uplift and civilize and Christianize" them, and by 'God's grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow menfor whom Christ also died. And then I went to bed, and wentto sleep, and sleptsoundly, and the next morning I sent for the chief engineer ofthe War Department(our map maker), and l told him toputthe Philippines in the map of the United. States (pointing to a IWge,map on the wall of his office) and 'there they are, and,there theywill stay while lam President. 16 . . .With his undisguised ~ ' b e n e v o l e n c e " clothed in the religious ' language ofnineteenth century Protestant jargon, MacKinley succeeded in armexing .the Philippines

to, the United States. While not a professionrutheologian, an!i therefore may not befauhed for his apparent belief in polytheism ("a gift from the gods"), henonethelessmust be held accountable for his couching his 'imperialistic motives in the! guise'ofconcern for people "for whom Christ also died." This use of religious categories tomask his global design for American business gives Protestantism its respectabilitywhich, alas; is also its weakness. For in MacKinley hypocritical stance, which iscondescending'in the extreme, we find the height of Anglo"Saxon prejudice againstthe .brown race, and the ' attitude ' that Filipinos are uncivilized, unchristian, andperhaps as monkeys without tails. "

The second motivation is the real one: Amencais interested to extend herhegemony to the Philippines, not out .of benevolence or because of 'altruism; butbecause of the profits in trade and commerce that she will derive from the rich naturalresources.Such motivation was clearly spelled out by Senator Alfred I. Beverage, aRepublican and one of the leading lights of the MacKinley administration. In aspeech before the US Senate on January 9, 1900, he said: .Mr. President; the times call for candar. The Philippines are ours forever, ,'aterritory belonging to the United States,' as the Constitution calls them.'And justbeyond the Philippines are China's illimitable markets. We will riot retreat from

478


7/11

, AJT/3:2/89

either. We will not repudiate our duty in the archipalago. We will not renounceour part in the mission of our race, trustee under God, of the .civilizations of theworld. And.we will move forward to our work,not howling our regrets likeslaves whipped to their burdens, but with gratitude for a task worthy of ourstrength, and thanksgiving to God Almighty, that He has marked us as Hischosen people, henceforth to lead in the regeneration of the world,l?

Imperialism in Philippine SceneFinally, given this behind the scene m a c h ~ a t i o n of the United States governmentand its foreign policy, it does not seem strange that the first missionaries who ,cameto the Philippines came with the Thomasites. Education is said t o ~ the legacy thatthe Americans have bequeathed to us, aside from the democratic form of government.But whatkindof edllcationwas u s ~ d i n training us benighted Filipinos? Theuse of

English as a medium of instr,uction has been decreed by thethen Bureau of E d u ~ a t i o n . Language is the soul of the nation; and when a ation's language is not it,s own, thereis every likelihood that whoeverowns that language willhave an undue advantageover the other. This is cultural imperialism. Textbooks were printed in the UnitedStates. Examples and stories are tailored in the USA. In Kindergarten, the Filipino istaught hisA-B-C by saying, "A is for Apple." when there are no apples in thePhilippines. 'The author 'remembers vividly, in the late forties, when we are .supposed to beindependent already, he was taught to sing in Grade One:God bless America! Land thatTlove;Stand beside her and guide herThrough the night with t h ~ light from above.Throughthe prairies, through the mountainsThrough the ocean, white w,ith foamGod bless America, my horne sweet home!We did not even realize then that we are brown people,singing the song of thewhite Anglo-Saxon, and that there are no prairies in the Philippines. Such cultural

imperialism persisted to this very day when commercials with States-wide bias, as inMarlboro commercials, reveal our penchant for everything made in U.S.A, Onelistens to songs in the radio or TV and one discovers to one's horror ,that in. he,spaceofoqe hour, there are stations both in the AM and FM bands which never playedoriginal ,Filipin,o Music! W h ~ t has happened to our much vaunted nationalism?Religious Symbolism

Much that is sacred in religion is often also borrowed from the West. Thus, we'see Catholic saints with Caucasian features , blue eyes, and wearing a CastilIanmoustache. The Virgin Mary, inspite of the fact that she is Asian, is sometimespictured as having .blonde hair and blue eyes: Jesus Christ is more often thiul notpicturedas a sad-eyed Caucasian, reflecting a meek Christ, who seemed to beinatrance that He could not seewhat's going on in the stockinarket or in the sanctumoffices of the powers th,at be. No wonder we have an .anaemic Christ, meek and mild,rather than an angry Christ - as we read often in the Gospels - driving the moneychangers out of the temple.

479


8/11

AJT/3:2/89.Until only recently, not more than 25 years ago, Latin was the language used inthe Mass. All documents in the areas of canon law, theology, and even in prayerbooks are often written in a foreign tongue. Filipinos have a hard time pronouncingLatin suffixes or Spanish subjunctives because the Filipino is an Asian, whose palate

and larynx are not made for dipthongs of the Western. world. Yet, like RizaI' scharaCter Dona Victprina, in his Noli, many of us ape anything foreign as though itis a sign of being modem or even s o p h i s ~ c a t e d . How tragic indeed!Among Protestants, religious imperialism is evident in the use of hymns andchurch rituals that date back to the revivalistic movement of the 1920s. Such hymnsseldom, if ever, reflect the Filipino problems and aspirations, but are written withinthe framework of a Puritanical Calvinistic theology. In the United Churchof Christin,the Philippines, where this writer is art ordained minister, there is an attempt toFilipinize the hymns and the liturgical songs, including a Statement of Faith that

reflect the s o c i o ~ p o l i t 1 c a l contexto f he Philippines in the p o s t ~ E D S A event. l8 ButstilL there are a lot of vestiges of coloniaJismwhich ought to be exercised if notexcised" since amol1gthe Protestant denominations, the UCCP, along with theUNIDAandthe IEMILIF, is the most na'tionalistic.

This is also evident in the textbooks in the theological seminaries. Written bysuch famous European and American theologians as Karl Barth; Reinhold Niebuhr,Paul Tillich and others, the Filipino seminarians are exposed to the theological 'method of the West, nottlj.e Asian wayofdoing theology. Fortunately, there is nowa growing theologicalcoI,lsciousness among Asian churchmen and theologians todevelop textbooks written by Asians and Filipinos which would eventually do awaywith textbooks that are We,stemcoriented, and be able to do an Asian view of realitywith thought fonns and concepts that are rooted in Asian realities.

This nationalistic rennaisance in the field of religion in the Philippines is ahealthy sign of the growing assertiveness 'of the Filipino as he looks at his past andendeavours to trace his roots and histpricalheritage. The so called identity crisis isbeginning to disappear. Now we know' ~ h o we are and where we came from. Wealso share in the vision expressed by that foremost Filipino nationalist Claro MayoRecto and his kababayail the late Jose W. Diokno that nationalism is not just a. sentiment but it is

the ,detennination to uphold the sovereignty of the Filipino people, the right ofall 'Filipinos - not just of a few and 'definitely not of foreigners - to freelydecide the destiny of the nation, what kind ofgovemment we should have" andwho should run ' t, what is the common good and how to attain it, how ' oursociety should be structured, the wealth of our land and seas used, developedand shared, and how our culture should be preserved and enhailced. 19 .. ' . . . .Nationalism, iri the right context, could be the antidote if not the antithesis toreligious imperialism. But just as atrue nationalist is also an intermitionalist,'so theremedy against the onslaught of religious imperialism is not to shun the literature, themusic and the,culture of other nations, butto develop one's own approach to God, toChrist, .and to , he Church using the models of other nations" but always within theframework of What is useful and practical and appropriate for the Filipino Christian.For thebeliever of Christ in the Philippines today, the challenge isnot to ape the

480


9/11

AJT/3:2/89

West, nor to shun the West, but to see what's good and creative in other cultures andadopt one's own version of what it means to be a Filipino Christian in this decade.Filipino Contextualization

Asian theologians have a word for it: They call it 'contextualiZation." Thissimply means the Wlderstanding, interpretation, and application of the truths of theChristian faith and how it fits into the time and age and situation of the FilipinoChristian. As a hermeneutical principle, therefore, it seeksunderstimdthe Faith in thelight of existing Asian realities, aware of he vast Asian complex that this part of theworld poses to.the Christian religion from the world's oldest religions.2oThis contextualisation will take into account Filipino expression of religiosityand spirituality in terms of events that are takingplace in our country with theGospel, however, as something that does not change inspite of human aberrations.

Contex.tual theology will interpret the message of the Gospel, not incategOIlesthatWestern theology has imprisoned it, but in the living realities that areobtaiIlihg inAsia and the Philippines.Church people can express their deep religiosity by using Filipino materials andFilipino thought forms that reflect our roots as Asians .and.at the same time theheritage of the Christian Church that transcends geographical or regional locations.Oneexa.mple of this is FatherBenVillote's bamboo chapel in Tipas, Taguig, Rizalwhere basic Filipino materials and architecture express the meaning of the faith forthe Tipas parishioners. Sernions and homilies shoUld not use Amencan or European

examples where an equivalent illustration.can be obtained in the Philippine setting.Hymns that are found in 'American hymnbooksshould :be revised to include onlythose hymns that have relevance to Filipino life.What is envisioned in this transformation of our religious values is not an. a n t iAmerican bias, but a pro-Filipino stance which seeks to recover the ancientheritage

of the Faith without sacrificing our national ethos. Thereis now a need to re-examinewhether much of our practices in worship, in the liturgy of the hours, and similarexercises are influenced to a large degree by the Western form of Christianity -- ' beit Catholic or Protestant - which are'alien to the native aspirations of FilipinoChristians. ... . . . .' ." , .

0 _ 0 iIncreasingly, there is a need to develop a core ofFilipinotheologiap.s who will,without regard to religious denominations, evolve a common approach tonatiohalisticChristianity which will remain, 'in the words of Pope Paul VI, be "both fullyChristian as well as fully Asian:"21,Unfortunately, this is not carried out in practice.It is still evident that much of the rituals, practices, and symbolisms in .RomanCatholicism remain vestiges of imperial Rome. Inspite of the winds of changeintroduced and made possible by the Second VaticimCoimcil .:.:.... which changesoccasioned the split from. Rome led by .a traditionalist churchman named CardinalLefbvre - this Christian tradition is still.heavily saddled by Western polity,ritual,and canon law. '

Philippine Protestantism is not much different from Catholicism; Still a .virtualduplication ofMethodist and Presbyterian and Baptist churches in the Bible beltSouth,Filipino Baptists, Methodist, and Presbyterians (even withiii 'my own

481


10/11

AJT/3:2/89

communion in the United Church ofChrist in'the Philippines) sing the sarrierevivalistichymns made popular by the Negros and honky tonk Americans in the years of theDepression in the late 20s. Sermons from most Protestant churches are a digest ofBible commentaries written by American churchmen. Rural Protestantism's piety asmanifested in prayer meetings, testimonies, and emotionally laden hymns about "theold time religion" and the "hallelujahs" heard in Pentecostal meetings (now adoptedby ,charismatic groups) are 'an imp()rted American practice of bush preachers ,andillustrious but illiterate evangelists. '

Unless we recover a sense of nationhood, as long as we remain under theshadow of Mother America, or under the care of Holy Mother Church based in theVatican, Christianity in the ,Philippines cannot hope to be ,truly of, by, and for theFilipinos. Maybe a reform similar to the Aglipayan movement at the tumof ,thecentui-y is needed today, Hopefully, eveIl Indepenpents can ,also evolve a trulynationalistic chQrch, free from foreign influep.c'e and domination; and truly reflective'of the inmate spirituality of the Filipino , ace.Footnotes1. Peter G. Gowing, Islands Un4er the Cross, QuezonCity: National Council ofChurches in the Philippines, 1967, p. 25.2. GeraldH. Anderson,ed., Christ and Crisis in Southeast Asia. New: York:, Friendship Press, 1968,p. 11. ,3. Quoted by Pedro V: Salgado, O.P.,"Imperialism in the Church" in Kalinangan,Vol. 5, No. 4 (December 1985), 4.,4. Loc.cit.5., Ibid.' Cf. alsoGowing', pp. 61-62. " "6. JUlian Malumbres'; O.P., Historia de la babela, Imprenta de la Uni-versidad deSanto Tomas, Manila; 1918, p. 67.

. - _. , '. , .7. Juliam M ~ u m b r e s , < : . ~ . , Historia de Cagavan y sus Montanas desde el Principio

de su PacificaacionConguista hasta Nuastros Dias. Imprenta de la Universidadde Santo R Tomas, Manila, 1910, pp. 141-142. '8. SaintMattbew26:52.9. Diego Aduarte, O.P., Historia de la Provincia de SantoRosario de la OrdendePredicadores; Manila (1640), in Blair and Robertson, The Philippine Islanos;. Cincinnati:Ginnand Company, 1925, Vol. XXX. p.237 .

-, . . , , . .10. Ibid., in Elair and Robertson, Vol. XXXI, p. ~ 2 . 11. Jose P. Bizalin Lettersto the Young Women of Malolos", Epistelario Rizalino,Manila: La Solidaridad Publishing House,1965, p. 34. '12. Antonio Mozo. Noticia Historico-Natural. Madrid, 1763 in Elair and Roberstone,, , Vo1.48, p. 77.13. WilliamHenry Scott. Cracks in the Parchment9urtain and Other Essays inPhilippine Historyl. Quezon City: New Day Publishers, 1982, pp. 186-187.

482


11/11

AJT/3:2/8914. Read the interesting account of this infancy and treachery on the part of theAmericans inTo Agoncilloand M.Guerrero, History of he Filipino People, 6threv. ed., Quezon City: R.P. GarciaPublishing, 1977; pp. 1 9 1 ~ 1 9 5 . 15. Quoted in Daniel S. Shirrnif and Stephen R. Shalom, eds., The Philippines

Reader, Quezon City: KEN Incorported, 1987, p. 30.16. Ibid., p. 22-23. The Christian Advocate is the official organ of the MethodistChurch in the USA. This writer prefers to quote Schinnir, et al for obviousreasoris. , .. .

v17. Bfeveridge's speech is Jound in Congressional Record of the US Senate datedJanuary 9, 1900, pp. 704-711. See also Schirrnir, et al, in Readers, p. 2318. See FelicianoV.Carino, ed., Like A Mustard Seed: A Commentary on theStatementoJFaith. Quezon City: Faith arid Order Committee, United Church of

Christ in the Philippines, 1988. Read the introduction by Bishop Erme Camba,UCCP General Secretary.19. Jose W. Diokrio, A Nationfor Our Children. Selected Writings and Papers of thelate lW. Diokno. Quezon City: Jose Wright DiokrioFoundation, Inc., 1977, p.n .

. 20. Douglas d. Elwood & Emerito, Nacpil, eds., What Asian Christians Are Thinking:A Sourcebook. Quezon City: New Day Publishers, 1978, p. 12.21. From the Pope's sPfeech delivered at the Malacanang Palace, on the occasion of

his visit to the Philippines, Bulletin Today, Jan. 23,1980. The apparent disparitybetween pronouncement and practice in Catholicism as regards.nationalism andFilipinism may be appreciated by reading the critique of Vatican imperialism inworld affairs, and its politico-religious interference in State affairs, for whichseePaulBlanshard, American Freedom and Catholic Power, New York: BeaconPress, 1961, pp. 181 ..185, andAvro Manhattan,The Vatican in World Politics.Chicago: Holt, Rhinehart and Faber, 1949, pp. 233-35.

483

20110309180304religios imperial is me in the philippines

Documents