Thursday, November 29, 2012

LETTER OF CHITO VILLAGRÁN TO DR. DIEGO ANTONIO RODRÍGUEZ, JUNE 8, 1812




Supposing [it were true] that our insurrection were against our legitimate King and beloved monarch the Lord Don Ferdinand VII, and that we intended to throw off the yoke of his domination; and supposing that the Lord Pope Alexander VII [sic] and his successors had authority over the distribution of the Kingdoms of the earth as is argued, since his Kingdom is purely spiritual according to the teachings of Jesus Christ in the Gospels, and that the Bull were not fraudulent in which His Holiness orders that two mental lines be formed so that what is conquered on one side belongs to the King of Spain, and that conquered on the other side belongs to the King of Portugal, as is treated at length by Joseph Torrubia in his work on general history, where he includes the complete Bull of Alexander VII [sic] that you cite in your letter; and supposing that Cortés had not been sent by the ambition of [Diego] Velásquez, as Solís says, to the conquest of this Kingdom, but by Charles V, and that the embassy to Moctezuma had been genuine, and not invited in his [Cortés] head; and supposing that it were legitimate for a Christian King to despoil of his dominions a gentile King so that his vassals embrace the Catholic religion, since Moctezuma was as much natural lord of these kingdoms as Charles V was of his (Solorzano treats of this at length—James the Apostle brought religion to Spain, but did not because of that despoil its Kings of their Crown); and supposing that this were not the time determined by God for the Europeans to pay for the iniquities, robberies, cruelties, and deaths that with such impiety they committed in the Conquest of these Kingdoms, as noted in the representations of Bishop Las Casas, of Garcilaso de la Vega, of the cited Solís, and of many other authors; and supposing, finally, that all this were true, and that the entire American Nation had risen in mass as they have, asking a new government that will not overturn or suppress the edicts and laws of the Sovereign, or asking a King of the nation itself, and not a foreigner (or de fee), according to the expression of Padre Vieira in favor of the Americans of Brazil; I ask you, according to what has been said, upon what basis rest the censures fulminated against Senor Hidalgo and those who follow his party by the Holy Tribunal and the so-called Bishop of Valladolid?
If the Church does not hurl anathemas against the infamous Napoleon because, being a Corsican, he takes control of the Kingdom of France, nor against his brother Joseph who was crowned in Spain, nor against the Dutch who, renouncing their National Government, acknowledge [as monarch] the intruder Louis Bonaparte, why does it hurl anathemas against a nation that, to maintain pristine the Catholic Religion it professes, takes up arms to demand and acquire the rights usurped from it so long ago, to throw off a tyrannical government, and to take unto itself the sovereignty of its King, don Ferdinand, whom Napoleon and his emissaries (most of the Europeans [in New Spain]), after persecuting and almost decapitating, are trying to despoil of his rights? I cannot persuade myself, Senor Priest, that the anathemas fulminated by the Church fall on the defense we are making of Religion, and liberty, and thus I believe firmly that we are not comprehended in their penalties. I assume that you are informed that the Edict of the Holy Tribunal of the Faith, and the proclamation of the late Archbishop, tell us that Napoleon has despoiled our Ferdinand of his Kingdom; that his brother Joseph is King of Spain and proclaims himself also King of the Indies; that there are five hundred Spanish emissaries in our Kingdom, sent to seduce us; and finally that we should prepare to defend ourselves because all this threatened total ruin to our Religion.
According to what I have said, which you cannot deny, tell me, Señor Priest, should we permit our Religion and our liberty to perish, or should we not take up arms to defend both? If from fear of censure we had followed our generals, what would our fate have been by now? You, with your fervor, can infer the results. God’s Law commands us not to take the life of our neighbors, and that we are forbidden to take what is not ours, and he who denies this is a heretic because he denies the precepts of the Decalogue. Furthermore, it is the case that the Europeans are our neighbors, as are all the sons of Adam be they of any nation or religion—this is true. But tell me, Señor Priest: a Jew, an Aterite, a Calomite, or a Lutheran—are they our neighbors? There is no doubt that they are. And would you fail to hand over one of these people, if you saw him, to the Holy Tribunal of the Faith, or inform it of his presence, so that he be killed, burned, punished, and all his possessions confiscated? There is no doubt. But is not this man your neighbor? Does not the Devine Law command that you see him as yourself? This means that for them there is no law, nor are they protected by the laws of charity. And why? So that their false doctrines not contaminate others. And shouldn’t these principles operate against the Europeans, and shouldn’t they be destroyed, whose unjust possession of the government not only deprives our King of his rights, and tyrannizes us, but also threatens the loss of our Religion, and that we remain slaves forever—should they only be seen as our neighbors? Ah, Father Priest, how little you know of this matter of the Catholic, Christian American Nation of today! I assure you that if you scruple to discuss and communicate with the Americans for fear of anathemas, how much more scruple should we have in discussing with the Europeans, and with those of their party. Because it is doubtful if we are included in the anathemas, which are inspired by the passion of partisanship and the defense of material interests which the Europeans did not bring with them from their own land; but the Europeans and their allies are included in the anathemas of sacred canons and councils of the Church, hurled against those who burn homes, lay waste fields, profane churches, etc. Assume that not Saint Thomas the Apostle but the Europeans brought the faith to these regions, but seeing that they intend to destroy that which they have built, it is necessary to persecute them and drive them out. The Jews were the people beloved of God, those entrusted with the Religion, and from whom the Messiah came, but not because of that do we forbear to burn them when we see them. I could say much to you in answer to your letters. . . .

No comments:

Post a Comment