First Mass: Limasawa or Butuan?

The first mass is one of the most notable events of the Philippine history. It marked the first Christian
ceremony with Ferdinand Magellan and his mans. The controversy of the first mass which was debated
between the government side: Limasawa and the opposition side: Butuan was a good discussion in our
class last October 30, 2019.When Ferdinand Magellan and his European crew sailed from San Lucar de
Barrameda for an expedition to search for spices, these explorers landed on the Philippines after their
voyage from other proximate areas. On March 28, 1521, while at sea, they saw a bonfire which turned out
to be Mazaua (believed to be today's Limasawa) where they anchored.On March 31, 1521, an Easter
Sunday, Magellan ordered a Mass to be celebrated which was officiated by Father Pedro Valderrama, the
Andalusion chaplain of the fleet, the only priest then. Conducted near the shores of the island, the First
Holy Mass marked the birth of Roman Catholicism in the Philippines. Colambu and Siaiu were the first
natives of the archipelago, which was not yet named "Philippines" until the expedition of Ruy Lopez de
Villalobos in 1543, to attend the Mass among other native inhabitants. on the other hand, The event that
marked the birth of Christianity in the Philippines 485 years ago is still under dispute, with this city
renewing its claim that the historic first Mass celebrated by Spanish colonizers was held here and not in
Limasawa, Leyte. Local executives and Church officials as well as historians here said they have new
scientific evidence to substantiate the re-filing of a petition before the National Historical Institute (NHI)
asserting that Butuan City — particularly Mazzaua Island, now Barangay Pinamangculan — was the
official site of the first Mass on Easter Sunday in 1521. Among the pieces of evidence are 10 1,600-year-
old Balahanghai boats believed to have been used for trade and to transport people for worship services.
The speeches were all delivered fluently by the both sides. But above all the evidences presented, my side
goes to Limasawa because they presented reliable evidences and although the opposition group: Butuan
also prested the list of artifacts, accounts from different sources and evidences, there is no assurance that
their evidences can be a basis to say that the first mass was really held at Butuan.

Cavite Mutiny: Who is to blame: Spaniards or Filipinos?

The cradle of this controversy on who is to blame between the Spaniards and the Filipinos was one of the
subjects of debate. The government side who are the Spaniards and the opposition side who are
represented by the Filipinos are the two conflicting sides in the held debate last November 4, 2019.
However on the Spanish side Spanish historians have different versions on Cavite Mutiny of 1872. One is
from Jose Montero y Vidal who wrote the book Historia General de Filipinas as the Spanish version of
Cavite Mutiny of 1872. Another is Montero y Vidal who is able to narrate the Cavite episode and who
was normally a good historian, and speaks as a Spaniard bet on perverting the facts at his pleasure and is
mischievously partial. Lastly, Jose Montero y Vidal, exaggerated the mutiny of a few disgruntled native
soldiers and laborers into who is a revolt to overthrow the Spanish rule despite of unsupported by
documentary evidences. The Filipinos also have their versions. According to Dr. Trinidad H. Pardo de
Tavera, this was merely a mutiny of native Filipino soldiers and laborers of Cavite arsenal against the
harsh policy of despotic Governor and Captain-General Rafael de Izquierdo which abolished their old-
time privileges of exemption from paying the annual tribute and from rendering forced labor (polo). Both
groups presented their evidences in the class well. However, my position on who is to blame goes to the
side of Spanish. For me, it is the Spanish who should be blamed in this issue because all the sufferings
brought by them are the reasons why the Filipinos put aggression to them in return. I think that the
Spaniards were just waiting for a sign for them to [push through the battle. Base on the debate, the
Spanish didn’t defend their side3 well and they didn’t have accurate and sustainable answers on the
questions of the Filipino group. They also had a hard time to answer the simple questions brought by their
opponent. They also go through the bushes on their argument and speeches. One of their colleagues
discussed about “how the debate should be done” well in fact it’s not necessarily essential for their topic.

Retraction of Jose Rizal: Did he really retract his writing about the Catholic Church?

Our beloved national hero, Dr. Jose Protacio Rizal was incredibly intelligent and one of a kind as he
silently battled for our freedom; without the use of arms and aggression but with his pen and pieces of
paper. He wrote novels and poems against the Spanish government that woke up the nationality of the
Filipinos. But then it came to an end when the Spanish government caught him and planned to shot him to
death. But before doing that, they decided to make Rizal retract all his writings about the Catholic
Church. Do you think our national hero retract his writings? This question lead us to the another
controversy to clash ideas and evidences. This topic was debated last November 6, 2014 between the
government side who says that Rizal didn’t retract his writing and the opposition side who says that Rizal
retracted his writings. The retraction contains two significant points: 1) the rejection of masonry and 2)
the radiation of two things: “anything in my words, writings, publications, and conduct that have been
contrary to my character as a son of the Catholic Church,) together with the statement “I believe and
profess what it teaches and I submit to what it demands. In my point of view, Rizal didn’t retract his
writing about the Catholic Church because I do believe that pour national hero is brave enough to stand
still on his writings against all circumstances. It is also questionable that if he really retracted his writings,
would he be still shot to death? Because if he really did what the Spanish wanted him to do, he would
save himself rather. I believe that our national hero isn’t coward and brought his writings and opposition
on the Catholic Church up to his last breath.

The cry of the nationwide revolution: Is it in Blintawa or Pugad Lawin?

The historical event marked the beginning of the Philippine Revolution and their act of defiance against
the Spanish Empire wherein the Katipuneros, as led by Andrés Bonifacio, tore their cedulas. Such
disputes are due to the ambiguous definitions of what the "cry" meant and the overlapping statements by
the KKK veterans. The ambiguity of the venue and the date of the so called “Cry of Balintawak” or the
“Cry of Pugad Lawin” is another subject of controversy in Philippine history. Historians have conflicting
accounts on the site and the date of the cry. Pio Valenzuela’s memoirs mentioned that the cry took place
at a residence near Pasong Tamo Road at August 26, 1896 and it was the official position of the
government during the administration of Diosdado Macapagal. On the other hand, Guillermo Masangkay
has another version of the cry. Accordin g o him, the cry happened at August 24, 1896 at the site of the
hhouse of Tandang Sora at Gulod, now barangay Banlat, Quezon City. Masangkay’s final statement has
more weight as it is corroborated by many eye witnesses who were photographed in 1917, when the
earliest 23 August was installed. For me, the Cry happened at Balintawak because of the several
evidences. One is that: the place Pugad Lawin is not present in any of the Spanish maps which contain the
minor barangay and sitios of that place. Even the governmental maps were not containing such place
naming “Pugad Lawin.” Another thing is that the place “Pugad Lawin” was just a bird’s nest at the
highest tree at Balintawak and this statement was said by Tandang Sora. Emilio Aguinaldo’s memoirs,
Mga Gunita ng Himagsikan (1964), refer to two letters from Andres Bonifacio dated 22 and 24 August of
1896. Traditionally, people in his time referred to the “Cry of Balintawak” since that barrio was a better
known reference point than Banlat.