Note 78 — The Pardo Controversy

The archbishop summoned an assembly, by means of the document which I send you with this, full of contemptuous remarks about the royal authority—as the paper itself shows, without further explanation. The good old man is obliged to decide with the Troyan and his friars what he has to do, and then seek the support of the religious orders. For this conference a letter was written to the bishop of Sinopolis, and the latter told the fireworks secretary his poor opinion of such conferences; that if he must do what was there determined by the friars, and if this was to be like the former conference—so many black-gowns [negritos] crowding in, and, when one asked a question, its stirring up fifteen hundred other things—it was best to cease having such assemblies. The bishop remained at home, but sent his written opinion that the archbishop ought to absolve Don Juan de Vargas, and that privately. The Franciscans and Theatins did not attend the conference, nor did they send their opinions—excusing themselves by letter, with various pretexts, which did not taste like honey to him. The archbishop wrote to the guardian of St. Francis an ill-tempered letter, threatening him with vengeance; but the guardian was not asleep, nor did he forget the rule of “interrogation and reply,” etc. At the said conference were present the Troyan, the Augustinian and Recollect provincials, and the two Dominicans Marron and Verart, the axletrees of the other cart; these last and the Troyan said that poor Vargas could not be absolved. Father Duque, the Augustinian provincial, declared that he could and ought to be absolved, and that privately, saying: “As for the offences of Vargas, either they are or are not committed against the faith; if they are against the faith, as is being assumed, they do not belong to your illustrious Lordship or to us, and it is not allowable to discuss them here.” Verart sprang to his feet like a flash, and began to argue with the Recollect. In such debates the entire afternoon went by, without their reaching any decision. At the end of a week the sentence was uttered, and Vargas was notified that for four months he must do what follows: During the first month, he must go on every feast-day to divine worship in the cathedral, clad in the sackcloth robe of a penitent, and with a halter round his neck; and in this guise, he must listen in public to mass. The second month, he must do the same at the convent of San Domingo; the third month, at San Gabriel; and the fourth, at Binondo—and this, when it had been decided in the conference that he should be “absolved privately,” which are the formal terms of the sentence! When he was notified of this, he appealed from that decree to the court where this matter legally belonged;78 but as all the bishops were Dominicans, where could he go where they would not confirm his sentence? Accordingly, Vargas came before the royal Audiencia, asking a laymen’s decree.79 His petition was considered in the session of that court, and [afterward] shown to the fiscal of his Majesty, who [at the time] was absent, inspecting a Chinese ship. In this state (which is not one of innocence) the affair remains at the time of this writing; but if it shall be decided before the ship sails [for Acapulco] I will write further.