Revolutionary Clergy: The Filipino Clergy and the Nationalist Movement, 1850-1903.

by John
N. Schumacher
Review by: David R. Sturtevant
The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 43, No. 1 (Nov., 1983), pp. 207-208
Published by: Association for Asian Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2054670 .
Accessed: 17/06/2014 22:32

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Association for Asian Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Journal of Asian Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.79 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 22:32:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BOOK REVIEWS-SOUTHEASTASIA 207

Revolutionary Clergy: The Filipino Clergy and the Nationalist Movement,

1850-1903. By JOHN N. SCHUMACHER. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila
University Press, 1981. viii, 298 pp. Selected Bibliography, Index. $36
(paper). (Distributed by the Cellar Book Shop.)

Most students of Philippine history share a perspective on the origins and early
development of insular nationalism. From their customaryviewpoint, members of the
secular clergy-such as Pedro Palaez and Jose Burgos-led challenges to Spanish
ecclesiastical and political power between 1850 and the Cavite Mutiny. After the
executions of Fathers Gomez, Zamora, and Burgos in 1872, however, churchmen
were relegated to secondaryroles and laymen took over the leadership of the emerging
nationalist movement. Historians of the revolutionaryera, consequently, have tended
to concentrate on the sometimes contradictory activities of ilustradosand commoners
between 1892 and 1902 while ignoring the perplexities confronting Filipino
clergymen. The purpose of John Schumacher'smonograph is to rectify this oversight.
His provocative reassessment restores the clergy to a central position by portraying
them "not merely as victims of 1872, but as the ones who brought nationalism to
birth, who nurtured it, who, when they had to yield the leadership to others,
continued to support the Revolution made by others, even when it was betrayed or
abandoned by many of its leaders"(p. 268).
His contentions rest on solid documentation. Basing his account primarily on
neglected archival materials in the Philippines, Spain, the Vatican, and the United
States, Schumacher reconstructs the kaleidoscopic difficulties facing Filipino priests
at the turn of the century. In oversimplified terms, their problems revolved around a
series of dilemmas involving the competing demands of revolutionary politics and
religious orthodoxy. Among other challenges, they had to respond to: (1) the
anti-friar thrust of the Katipunan; (2) the anti-clericalism and secularism of
influential members of the Malolos government; (3) the spiritual discord emanating
from Gregorio Aglipay and the Philippine Independent Church; and (4) the strict
separation of church and state that emerged under the Protestant administrators of
the American colonial regime.
Schumacher'sapproach to the complex subject is refreshing. Instead of analyzing
the issues from the conventional vantage ground of Manila, he discusses them on a
regional basis. This enables him to trace developments in each of the bishoprics:
Vigan (northern Luzon and the Ilocos), Manila (particularly Laguna, Batangas, and
Tayabas),Naga (the Bicol provinces), Cebu City (Cebu, Bohol, Leyte, and Samar),
and Jaro (Panay,Negros, and Mindanao). The provincial focus exposes rich varieties of
responses ranging from neutrality to belligerency. As a general rule, however, the
reactions of Catholic clerics depended upon religious and political circumstances
prevailing in each diocese prior to and during the Filipino-American War. Despite
individual and local differences, Schumacherdemonstrates that churchmen played an
important part "in mobilizing mass support, in providing intelligence behind enemy
lines, in collecting war contributions and even in playing leading advisory and
military roles" (p. 123). The majority of Filipino clergymen, furthermore, remained
loyal to the nationalist cause long after most ilustradosand many military leaders had
abandoned it. As late as 1903, at least 60 percent of the priests continued to oppose
American sovereignty (p. 275).
Schumacher's reinterpretations are based on a recognition of the existence of
"manyrevolutions within the one Revolution"(p. 268). Because of complex historical

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.79 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 22:32:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
208 JOURNAL OF ASIAN STUDIES

factors the social and economic aspirations of Filipinos caught up in turn-of-the-

century upheavals differed dramatically. Recent scholarship, particularly the work of
Reynaldo Ileto, has emphasized that the goals of ilustrados,provincial elites, and
peasants seldom coincided. Those differencesmanifested themselves in a multitude of
forms. Among them were a series of unorthodox religious movements devoted to
millennial objectives. Colorums in the Tagalog provinces, Guardias de Honor in
Pangasinan, Babaylanes in Negros, and Pulahanes in Samarevolved utopian ideals of
their own and proved equally antagonistic to governments controlled by Spaniards,
Americans, or socially prominent Filipinos. The spiritual character of the militant
mass organizations, in short, created problems for all secular leadership. It was
precisely in this area that the revolutionaryactivities of Filipino churchmen proved
to be significant. The challenge of the popular sects to public order, according to
Schumacher, "was likely to be subject to control, if at all, only by the clergy" (p.
270).
Some specialists will undoubtedly regard the work as controversial, but none will
find it to be inconsequential. Father Schumacher is a diligent professional. Serious
students of the Philippines can only express gratitude to him for another important
contribution to historical scholarship.
DAVID R. STURTEVANT
MuskingumCollege,Ohio

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.79 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 22:32:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions