Note 33 — The Camacho Ecclesiastical Controversy, 1697–1700

Another argument of which the reverend archbishop avails himself is, to say that if the regulars who are parish priests do not submit to his visitation and jurisdiction, he will finally be a [mere] bishop de anillo.33 Answer is made, first, that even if this were the case (which, however, it is not), the reverend archbishop would not have any reason to complain in this particular, as, according to the law, no wrong is done to him who, before entering on any negotiation, acquaints himself with it and determines it beforehand.34 For while he was yet in España he knew that the regulars in Filipinas were not parish priests by title, nor subject as such to the ordinary; and if with this knowledge he decided to go to Manila in order to be its metropolitan archbishop he ought to take for granted what has been proved by experience, and not wonder that the regulars, convinced by so effective arguments, are, constrained by these, giving up the native curacies, in order not to be ministers of instruction at so much risk. Nor will any one grant that reason countenances the reverend archbishop more in trying to secure the extension of his authority than it does the religious in maintaining themselves as much as possible in what they had professed.