Whatever happened to the friar lands?

With the open hostility between church officials and the Duterte government, it is time we trace what are the motives behind it. First, not all church officials are against Duterte’s strict and straight governance. But we need to know the origin of their motives. There are historical and international political reasons which date back to colonialism.

These are recorded and ought to be known by a wider public.

I find the most helpful of these reports in the “The Early Journal Content on JSTOR and he adds it is free to anyone in the world.”

Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the mid-17th to the early 20th centuries.

We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial purposes.

I will not be able to include all the materials of the subject I chose: The Origin of the Friar Lands Question in the Philippines but I will excerpt important parts that in my opinion will lead others to seek more about the issue. The first article is written by Charles H. Cunningham.

“When the American government found itself in possession of the newly acquired portions of Spain’s colonial empire, and particularly of the Philippines, it was forced to deal with many new and hitherto unfamiliar problems. Social, political and ecclesiastical characteristics were encountered there which were entirely foreign to American governmental traditions, but which were interwoven in the fabric of Philippine institutions and society by three centuries of Spanish rule.

Among these was the universally recognized strength and importance of the ecclesiastical power, which in Spanish days had been fostered and protected by the state. Under the new conditions the ecclesiastical organization had to stand by itself, without governmental support.

Probably the most difficult problem which had to be solved was the celebrated friar land question. Thousands of hectares of the best land in the archipelago were owned or held by the religious orders. The friars had held these lands for centuries. The economic effect of these holdings was detrimental on account of the prohibitive rents which were demanded for them. The religious orders would not sell these lands of their own accord, and thus the Filipino agriculturists who desired to utilize them were prevented either from buying or renting. The government was also at a loss, since no taxes were paid on the lands of the church.

This state of affairs was held by the American authorities to be inconsistent with the best interests of the Filipino people, and with the ideals of a free government.

Mr. Taft made arrangements with the Holy See for the purchase of these lands, and thus the American government, by forcing the friars to sell, put an end to a problem which had been a cause of contention, not only under the new sovereignty, but through two centuries of Spanish rule. (There are still 23 friar lands today).

Here’s another from The American Political Science Review. Not only was the struggle over friar lands interesting and important as a series of events which actually occurred in the Philippines, New Spain and the viceroyalties of South America and therefore characteristic of the entire Spanish colonial empire, but it involved certain principles which lay at the foundations of the relations between church and state there.

The early attempts of the government to exercise jurisdiction over the friars in the matter of the inspection of their titles to lands, and the urgent pretensions of the orders to exemption on the grounds of ecclesiastical immunity, like the struggle over episcopal visitation, were only a recurrence in the Philippines of a conflict which has arisen in every country where church and state have been united and where the influence of the former has been predominant in political affairs.

At various times during the history of the islands the attention of the home authorities in Madrid had been called to the abuses of the religious orders in their tenure of lands. The general complaint was that the friars had laid claims to lands without title, and that through the seizure both of the lands of the natives and of royal domains, in addition to properties granted them by the crown, they had become extensive landlords. It was said that they had imposed heavy rentals on the natives who occupied these estates and that they had frequently dispossessed persons whose titles and right of occupation had been unquestioned before that time. They were accused of the alienation of the lands which the king had permitted them to occupy, and this proceeding was contrary to the conditions under which they were permitted to hold the royal estates.

These abuses had become so flagrant that during the latter part of the 17th century the government at Madrid determined that something must be done to remedy this state of affairs, and it was decided that all occupants of royal lands, and all persons claiming lands on their own account should be called upon to prove their right of tenure. In accordance with this resolution a cedula was promulgated on June 7, 1687, directing the Philippine audiencia to make an investigation of the friar lands of the islands and to report to the council of the Indies on the amount, value and rental of all properties held by the religious orders. Furthermore, the king asked for an estimate of the amount of land actually required by the orders for their support. The audiencia was governing temporarily when this order was received, and in compliance therewith it commanded that each alcalde mayor should investigate the friar lands in his district. This was accordingly done and the audiencia reported in due time to the council of the Indies.

It must not be imagined that this situation was confined alone to the Philippines. The above investigation, which was conducted by the Philippine audiencia, may be considered as a part of a general enquiry into the validity of land titles in all of the colonies of Spain. Don Bernardino Valdes, of the council of the Indies, was given supervision over this matter in his commission as “juez particular y privativo” for the collection of all sums due to the real hacienda in the viceroyalties of Peru and New Spain.

A scholarly examination on how the Church holds so much shares in one of the big banks and real estate company should be made instead of smarting about Duterte’s description of their Catholic god.