ForSeparation

There were almost as many advocates for the separation as for the unity of Church and State Among the separation advocates were Freemasons Tomas del Rosario who helped draft the Malolos Constitution, and Arcadio del Rosario, a member of Rizal's Liga Filipina. Del Rosario presented the amendment that "The State recognizes the equality of all religious worships and the separation of the Church and State."

Tomas del Rosario argued that it wasn't really the Church alone that unified the country, and in the case of the Philippines, it bred intolerance The other advocates, it could be imagined, discussed the abuses of friars and recalled before the members of the Congress the "antifriarism" of the Propaganda Movement. Reminding the Congress that there were Moslem Filipinos, del Rosario warned that adoption of Catholic religion as state religion might bring about a civil war. He maintained the theory that the state must not protect any particular religion and that no religion should depend on the state Otherwise, it would be to allow a state within a state. Calderon countered that the Filipino clergy would not usurp state powers. Arcadio del Rosario said the danger of usurpation would not come from the Filipino priests but from the Pope. He further argued that "a state religion does not necessarily constitute a more efficient brake on passions," and that to "protect a religion is to grant a privilege and all privileges are like money loaned at a usurious rate which sooner or later will ruin the state." Like Marcelo H. del Pilar, Arcadio del Rosario also pointed out that in all its 350 years in the Philippines, the Catholic Church hindered rather than advanced the progress of the country. While admitting that the Church was not its ministers, he argued that the ministers might use both Church and State to promote their own interests.

EnterMabini

In his Mis Memorias sobre la Revolucion Filipina, Calderon said Mabini did not accept the form in which the proposed amendment for the separation of Church and State was presented. Mabini was also a Freemason. He was for the separation of Church and State, but he surprised Congress when he proposed that the execution of the 5th article of title 3 be suspended until the meeting of a constituent assembly.

The particular amendment 5th article on the separation of Church and State I had been voted on twice, and twice the votes were tie. The chairman of the committee discussing the amendment, Pablo Tekson on the third voting went along with the amendment of Tomas del Rosario, and the voting was 26 in favor, 25 against. On Mabini's proposal to suspend execution of principle of the separation of Church and State, the contemporary UP scholar, Dr. Cesar Adib Majul (in The Political and Constitutional Ideas of the Philippine Revolution) points out that Mabini's position was one of political expediency, that Mabini was expecting an outbreak of hostilities between Aguinaldo's Revolutionary government and the American army which was awaiting more reinforcements and would not allow the revolutionaries from entering Manila. Majul concludes that Mabini was fully aware of the prestige of the Filipino clergy and that they could be counted on in case of a Filipino- American war. Majul quotes Mabini's memorandum to Aguinaldo on the separation issue then being discussed. "If you favor one faction then the other will separate itself from the government... It is imperative that you commission a Secretary to inform Congress that unless the time becomes normal, such problems should not be discussed... If you accept the unity of Church and State, these men from whom one could expect more services in critical times, will break with you." In his memorandum to the council of state, Mabini warned that to establish openly the separation of Church and State at the time "may give cause for the withdrawal of the supporters of religion."

TheRevolutionaryGovernmentand theFilipinoClergy

The support of the Filipino clergy had been sought by the Revolutionary Government months before the Malolos Congress. On July 26, 1898, Aguinaldo decreed that governors of provinces under the government should ask the Filipino clergy, in the name of patriotism, to call upon their parishioners to support the government in securing the country's Independence. Again on September 1, 1898, the civil authorities were ordered to avoid conflicts with the clergy

Aguinaldo named Gregorio Aglipay, an Ilocano priest excommunicated by the Church, commissioner, to see to it that parish funds collected by the Filipino clergy do not go to Friar Bernardino Nozaleda, Manila Archbishop, who had continued to appoint Filipino priests. On October 20, 1898, Aguinaldo decreed that these Filipino priests nominated by Nozaleda would not be recognized unless confirmed by Aguinaldo. Aglipay, commissioned by Aguinaldo in 1899, went to the parish churches. Imbued with the nationalism of Burgos, Zamora, and Gomez, the Filipino clergy helped raise funds for the Revolutionary Government and even more so during the FilipinoAmerican war

When the Malolos Constitution article on the separation of Church and State took effect, the Revolutionary Government continued to recognize its need for the Filipino clergy, without however allowing it to become so economically powerful as to repeat the abuses of the friars. The Filipinization of the clergy was one of the demands of the revolution. Earlier, in 1898, the Hong Kong Junta in its first manifesto declared its desire "that the native clergy be those to direct and teach the people from every step of the ecclesiastical hierarchy " However, some priests still recognized the authority of Archbishop Nozaleda, although they were supporting the Revolutionary government. Mabini was for an establishment of a National Church.

He argued that Nozaleda could not exercise jurisdiction in the provinces occupied by the revolutionary Government because Manila, where Nozaleda was, was already occupied by the American forces.

EntertheAmericans

Nozaleda through General Otis of the American army asked the government of Aguinaldo to release Spanish civil officials who were prisoners; Aguinaldo replied that “the Spanish Government and the Pope have proven themselves ignorant of law or justice when one deals with their interests... the Filipinos wish to hold the civil officials in order to obtain the liberty of the prisoners and deported Filipinos." Aguinaldo would also hold Spanish friars in order to obtain recognition of the Filipino clergy by the Vatican.

Aglipay, with the title "Vicario General Castrence de la Republica o Clero Filipino," and only priest delegate to the Malolos Congress rallied the Filipino clergy to support the revolution and reminded them that the revolution sought to preserve the purity of the Catholic religion professed by Filipinos He went as far as proposing the establishment of a National Church and to meet with Vatican representatives to discuss the structure and aims of the Filipino church. On October 23, 1899, in Paniqui, Tarlac, the Filipino clergy met and named a committee to get Papal approval. The outbreak of the war between the US and the Republic of the Philippines shelved the establishment and formal organization of a National Catholic Church.

Majul gives the opinion that the formation of a Filipino church "was... a tool to further the aims of the Revolution... Since the Revolution fought the friars vehemently, the revolutionary leaders tried to avoid being judged anti- religious, by demonstrating that they had no intention of taking away the Faith from the people." Majul concludes that "the formation of a national church may also be viewed as a preventive against control by foreign religious corporations."

After the betrayal of the Revolution by the Americans, the US turn about on its avowed aims, and its takeover of the Philippines through deceit and imperialist force, the separation of Church and State was to be discussed again. An Aglipayan movement was encouraged, but the new missionary forces of the US Protestants and Catholics were already in the land. MPK

AnewspapercorrespondentreportstheRevolutioninthejournalisticidiomoftoday.