¹ Especially his The Intellectual Background of the Revolution in South America, 1810–1824 (New York, 1926). Góngora, Mário, “Estudios sobre el Galicanismo y la Ilustración Católica en la América Española,” Revista Chilena de Historia y Geografia, no. 125 (1957), 96–151 Google Scholar seems to offer a better understanding of the intellectual background.

² du Dezert, G. Desdedives, “L’Eglise Espagnole des Indes a la fin du XVIIIe Siècle,” Revue Hispanique, 39, (1917), 112–294.Google Scholar For its time, this was a very ambitious study but the author attempted too much. He was restricted to sources found only in the archives of Spain. These seem to have attracted a disproportionate amount of negative material and thus the over all balance of the study was vitiated.

³ These statistics are taken from the relación of Bartolomé de las Heras, the last Spanish archbishop of Lima, to the nuncio, Madrid, December 3, 1822. See Leturia, Pedro, La Emancipación Hispano-americana en los Informes Episcopales a Pio VII (Buenos Aires, 1935), p. 97.Google Scholar See also Unanue, Joseph Hipólito, Guía Política, Eclesiástica y Militar del Virreynato del Perú para el año de 1796 (Lima, n.d.), p. 185,Google Scholar who States that there were 660 diocesan clergy in the Lima diocese in 1795.

⁴ Rangel’s, Bishop Hipólito informe, Madrid, October 17, 1822,Google Scholar is in Leturia, op. cit., pp. 50, ff.

⁵ These statistics are taken from Unanue, op. cit., pp. 220; 251; 264. They seemed to be the most reliable.

⁶ Ugarte, Rubén Vargas, Manuscritos Peruanos del Archivo de Indias (Lima, 1938), pp. 370, ff.Google Scholar

⁷ Pereyra, Carlos, Historia de la America Española: Perú y Bolivia (Madrid, 1925), 7, 327.Google Scholar Of the buildings in Lima owned by the Church only 157 belonged to the religious orders. In 1854, Cristóval Váldez could write that one fourth of the arable lands of Peru were in the hands of the Church. Váldez, wrote a series of articles under the title “Estudios Económicos.” The series began in El Comercio (Lima) September 29, 1854, and ended in the issue of October 5, 1854, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar The tone is not hostile to the Church.

⁸ Stevenson, William B., A Historical and Descriptive Narrative of Twenty Years’ Residence in South America (3 vols.; London, 1829), 1, 237, 241, 248.Google Scholar Stevenson is here possibly repeating the street gossip, which may well be more reliable than the official statistics. In the present state of research on the subject, almost the only certain conclusion is that the reporting of clerical finances is a muddle. This is true even of the estimates of the annual income of the archbishop. Thus, Unanue, op. cit., p. 173 says that the income of the archbishop of Lima in 1795 was 36,280 pesos — a surprisingly low figure. On the other hand, de Espinosa, Antonio Vázquez (Charles Upson Clark [trans, and ed.] Compendium and Description of the West Indies [Washington, 1942], p. 779)Google Scholar states that Archbishop Hernando Arias Ugarte (1630–1638) received 50,000 pesos per annum. Figuerola, Justo, the notario mayor of Archbishop Las Heras, in his Cartas a Un Amigo (Lima, 1820), p. 194 Google Scholar says that Las Heras’ income earlier had been 54,000 pesos but that by 1820 it had been reduced to about 43,000. This is confirmed by the cathedral chapter of Lima which testified that in 1819 Las Heras’ income was 43,391 pesos: 28,391 pesos from the tithe and 15,000 pesos from the cuartas funerales. Informe del Cabildo Eclesiástico de Lima sobre el Proyecto de Ley (Lima, Imprenta de Juan Masías, 1832), p. 26.

⁹ “Razón de los curatos vacantes en esta arquidiócesis,” in Archivo Arzobispal de Lima (AAL), Relaciones del clero, Libro no. 38. Also “Regulación de mesadas eclesiásticas practicadas en virtud del Supremo Decreto de 1° de Agosto de 1825.” Archivo Histórico de Hacienda, Lima. O. L. 120-130 b. Father Tomás Diéguez, later bishop of Trujillo, in 1824 by his own account books had an annual income of 3, 456.1 pesos from Mass stipends and stole fees alone when cura of Catacaos. Archivo Nacional, Lima. Colección Diéguez. Caja I 1 .

¹⁰ Francisco Javier Echague to Hipólito Unanue. Lima, 23 febrero de 1825. AAL, Seminario de Santo Toribio, leg. 3. The silver mark was ordinarily valued in Lima at this time at 10 pesos per mark.

¹¹ Hall, Basil, Extracts from a Journal written on the Coasts of Chili, Peru, and Mexico in the years 1820, 1821, 1822 (2 vols.; Edinburgh, 1825), 1, 131.Google Scholar Hall, in general, describes only the exterior of the church buildings. To give some idea of the interior splendor, we may cite the monstrance which until 1817 was used in liturgical services by the Archicofradía del Rosario of the Convento de Santo Domingo of Lima. It was made of pure gold and silver and adorned with 1,304 diamonds, 522 rubies, 1,029 emeralds, 45 amethysts, 121 select pearls, among other precious stones. In 1818, this same Archicofradia owned silver utensils used in divine service which weighed 12,599 marks of silver. The mark was valued at 10 pesos to the mark. Fuentes, Manuel, Estadística General de Lima (Paris, 1866), p. 415.Google Scholar The monstrances of La Merced in Cuzco and in Ayacucho at that time rivalled, or perhaps even surpassed, in value that of Santo Domingo.

¹² The facade of the Lima cathedral was uncovered about 25 years ago by the then obrero mayor, Emilio Harth-terré. More recent earthquakes have discovered the brick work in the churches of Arequipa and Cuzco.

¹³ I found this type of document in quantity only in the archives of Lima. There the material consists of the relaciones de meritos of the clergy who were in competition to become curas. In Arequipa (in the Archive of the Cathedral Chapter) there is a very fine collection of similar material. In Arequipa, the collection consists of the documents presented by those who wished to be ordained priests. The Lima material is by far richer in details of social and cultural significance, while the Arequipa documents are more limited but also more precise.

I have completed a study of 100 Lima relaciones from about 1750 to 1810 which will be published within a few months. The conclusions stated here are drawn from that study.

¹⁴ This was a board of examiners named by the bishop to examine those who wished to be ordained priests or to be promoted.

¹⁵ 5Archbishop Las Heras emphasized this distinction. See Leturia, op. cit., p. 97. The cura was very definitely a part of the colonial establishment by reason of his position, and very often also by reason of his training and wealth. The curato or parish was the basic unit in both civil and church administration and was to remain so for many decades after independence. It is a cause of wonder that we have no detailed study of such a basic unit.

¹⁶ Mariátegui, Francisco Javier, Anotaciones a la ‘Historia Independiente’ de don Mariano Felipe Vaz Soldán (Lima, 1925), p. 16.Google Scholar At the end of a long paragraph in which Mariátegui nostalgically recalls the contribution of the clergy to independence, he ends with: “Que no dieran los hombres del Perú porque el clero de hoy (1869) se pareciese al de 1820 en saber, en patriotismo y en virtudes.” Junius in a long article of a column and a half in El Comercio, March 26, 1855, p. 3, dated in Lurin on March 17, 1855 also laments the lost spirit of cooperation in Peru between the clergy and the lay leaders. Junius, who was most probably José Gregorio Paz Soldán, former professor in the seminary of Arequipa and author of a text book on canon law for his pupils, laid the blame for this loss in great measure on the work of the Spanish Franciscans. Junius certainly knew that other factors helped to contribute to the effect which he deplored.

¹⁷ Oquillas, Conrado, Historia del Colegio Seminario de San Carlos y San Marcelo (Trujillo, 1925), 1, 81–107.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Cateriano, M.A., Memorias de los lltmos Srs. Obispos de Arequipa (Arequipa, 1908), pp. 216–228.Google Scholar Also by the same author, Recuerdos del lllmo. Sr. Dr. Don Pedro José Chaves de la Rosa Galván y Amado (Arequipa, 1888). Also, Belaunde, Victor Andrés, “Transcendencia de la obra educadora de Chaves de la Rosa,” in Boletín del Museo Bolivariano, 2, (Abril-Mayo, 1930), 234–237.Google Scholar Almost the entire issue of the Boletín is taken up with an appraisal of the life and work of this bishop.

¹⁹ For succinct biographical details see “Rodríguez de Mendoza, Toribio,” Diccionario Enciclopédico del Perú, 1st ed., III, 68–69. For an unusual appraisal of Rodríguez as a teacher by one who calls him mi Maestro see, Matamoros, Patricio [F. J. Mariátegui], Manual del Regalista (Lima, 1872), pp. 5, ff.Google Scholar The author says that all the Peruvian delegates to the Cortes of Cádiz were alumni of San Carlos. In AAL, Sección Cabildos, leg. 3, años 1769–1799 in the 'Autos sobre la oposición a la canongia théologal… vacante por muerte del Dr. D. Nicolás de Cárdenas y Peña, año de 1773,” there is a document of ordination to minor orders by Archbishop Parada on October 22, 1773 of a Dr. D. Alexius Thoribio Rodriguez y Collantes of Chachapoyas, whose signature is Dr. Thoribio Rodriguez. Could this possibly be our Rodriguez or some relative?

²⁰ The election of such a high percentage from among the alumni of San Carlos of Lima was due in part to the fact that in May, 1822, when the Congress met, many parts of Peru were still in the hands of the enemy. Delegates to represent these sections were elected in Lima in theory from among residents of those areas then in free Peru. Of the 57 delegates and their substitutes, 35 were actual graduates of San Carlos; of the remainder almost all had either taught there or had been connected in some way with the institution. Obín, Manuel Jesús y Aranda, Ricardo, Anales Parlamentarios del Peru: Congreso Constituyente, 1822–1825 (Lima, 1895), passim.Google Scholar No matter how they were elected, the fact is that the carolinos got in on the ground floor of the bureaucracy of the new state and they continued to dominate it for many decades.

²¹ Mariátegui, Anotaciones, p. 85 says: “El otro error as reputar frailes a los clérigos de San Felipe de Neri…”

²² The relación of Las Heras in Leturia, op. cit., pp. 98 and 99. Las Heras states that the revolutionary activities of the friars were occasioned by their fear that the Spanish political powers were about to cancel their exemptions and place them completely under the control of the bishops. Perhaps. But the royalist Las Heras, accustomed to sanctifying every action of the king, seems to have failed to appreciate the effect of the alternativa, among other things. Fr. Francisco de Sales Arrieta, later a successor to Las Heras in the see of Lima, had just been named by the royal government Visitador General and Presidente of the provincial chapter of Lima when San Martin entered Lima. On July 29, 1821, the Franciscan community of Lima swore allegiance to his government. On September 20, 1821, in the first definitorial meeting held after independence, Arrieta resigned his post and requested the definitorium to elect another friar as Visitador. He was unanimously reelected. When the capitulars arrived for the subsequent chapter, Arrieta suggested that the first matter of business should be a reexamination of the alternativa. He reminded them of the stubborn opposition of the province to it and even had the secretary read the pertinent documents concerning its forced imposition. Arrieta then suggested that the alternativa should be suspended while the Province of Lima applied to the Holy See for the proper remedy “que la derogue absolutamente con el que se quitaran de raiz los males incalculables y notorios, en los que por ella se a visto miserablemente sumergida, privada de la facultad de reclamar por el influjo opresor y preponderancia irresistible de los peninsulares…” Archivo San Francisco, Lima, Libro Definitorial, no. 61, fols. 424, 495, 496.

²³ Eguiguren, Luis Antonio, Guerra Separatista del Perú: La Revolución de León de Huánuco (Lima, 1912), passim.Google Scholar

²⁴ The audiencia of Cuzco suggested that the number of these friars be reduced to 20 or 30. AGI, Cuzco, 4. “Informe de la Real Audiencia del Cuzco acerca de la insurección que acaba de ocurrir en aquella provincia.” Cuzco, 12 de abril de 1815. Certainly the desire of these friars in 1814 and 1815 to be rid of the Spaniards would not have surprised the writer of this marginal note: “Todo clérigo Americano es por lo menos sospechoso en su lealtad. Muchísimos son positivamente rebeldes.” AGI, Cuzco 29. “Relación cierta de los sujetos que han servido en este Obispado del Cuzco en la sufrida rebelión del vil traidor Jose Gabriel Tupa-Amaro.”

²⁵ To me it is a significant and at the same time a puzzling fact that Peruvian Franciscans preached the festive sermon on two of the most important occasions of independent Peru: the proclamation of independence itself in Lima on July 29, 1821 and the official celebration in Cuzco of the victory of Ayacucho. Fr. Jorge Bastante, O.F.M., preached the sermon in Lima while the Guardian of San Francisco of Cuzco spoke at the solemn Mass of Thanksgiving celebrated in the church of Santo Domingo. One would expect that if the friars were all that prominent in the independence movement to be granted such distinguished favors, they would also share in some of the preferred jobs of the new government. Perhaps few friars were Carolines who seem to have preempted those spoils of victory. Both sermons alluded to here were printed but I have not seen a copy of either one. Luna Pizarro, Francisco Javier, Plática del Ilustrisimo Señor Arzobispo en la Solemne Rogativa que en la Dominica de Pentecostés se hizo… (Lima, 1850), p. IV, nota b.Google Scholar

²⁶ Unanue, Guía, passim. This author furnishes the numbers of religious in each diocese of Peru for 1795. Adding up his figures we receive these totals: Augustinians—289; Dominicans —331; Franciscans—745; Mercedarians—415; St. John of God—145; Bethlehemites—83; Agonizantes—58; Oratorians—41; Minims—42; Benedictines—2. Only the Franciscans and Mercedarians had two provincial headquarters in Peru: Cuzco and Lima. In 1776, the Lima Franciscan Province counted 359 members: 268 priests, 54 lay brothers, and 37 student clerics. Thus, Nomina de los religiosos de la Provincia de los Doce Apóstoles de Lima, hecha por P. Fr. Juan Francisco de Landa, Ministro Provincial (Lima, 1776). The Cuzco Franciscan Province, whose headquarters alternated each three years between Cuzco and La Paz had about 250 members in 1795. The remaining Franciscans lived in the mission colleges of Ocopa and Moquegua.

Viceroy Teodoro de Croix says that in 1784 there were 823 Mercedarians in the two provinces of Peru but the rentas of the conventos were sufficient only for 311 friars. These lived in the conventos while the remainder made out as best they could. Croix praises the Visitador Juan de Barry for his efforts to decrease the number of friars and to bring the total in harmony with the rentas. Evidently Barry almost succeeded. Archivo de Simancas. Guerra Moderna: no. 7130. Papeles de Croix, 1784–1790. Libro, 3, carta 110, 5 de diziembre de 1784.

²⁷ ASFL., “Libro de Profesiones, 1750…”

²⁸ El Comercio, September 30, 1848, p. 3.

²⁹ “Informe del P. Prior de Santo Domingo, P. Manuel Cruz Sol, a la curia eclesiástica de Lima. Lima, 11 de noviembre de 1827.” AAL, Sección Santo Domingo, leg. 12.

³⁰ El Comercio, January 28, 1847, p. 4. “Most of this decrease was in friars born in Peru and so the article notes”…hoy en día nos amarga una horrenda invasión europea que traerá males positivos.” Of course from 1821 to 1834 there was no bishop in Lima who could ordain priests except after 1826 when Orihuela had retired there from Cuzco. However, Orihuela was often reluctant to ordain the candidates presented to him. See his letters on this point to Echague in AAL, Correspondencia 1769–1829.

³¹ Soldán, Mateo Paz, Geografia del Perú (Paris, 1862), p. 304 Google Scholar carries the official government statistics for the religious houses in Lima in 1839:

Santo Domingo—41,011 pesos, 4 reales; Oratorians—54,709 pesos; Agonizantes—157,370 pesos, 4 reales; San Francisco—13,788 pesos, 7 reales. I think that these figures would also be valid for 1820 for given the temper of the times, it is not likely that the income of any religious house in Lima would have increased in any substantial way after that date. Quite possibly the Agonizantes' total in 1820 was even larger than in 1839 because in 1821 San Martin assumed the management for the government of the seven largest haciendas of the Agonizantes near Cañete. These had not been returned by 1839. For details of the wealth of the seven haciendas and their annual production, see Suplemento al Mercurio Peruano, no. 430, January 21, 1829, 2 pages.

³² These are general judgments based on my readings: the part taken by various religious in the Mercurio Peruano, the opinion of travelers, especially the members of the scientific expeditions, Steele, Arthur P., Flowers for the King (Durham, N.C., 1964),Google Scholar and the early newspapers of Lima. Bartolomé Herrera, in his funeral address for Archbishop Arrieta of May 30, 1843, gave the opinion of the Lima Franciscans which I follow here. El Comercio, June 1, 1843, pp. 3–5. I rate the Cuzco Franciscans from the alumni of the College of St. Bonaventure and by the splendid collection of lectures of the Franciscan professors of the period 1780–1820 formerly in San Francisco in Cuzco which I examined in 1945. I could not locate the collection on a subsequent visit.

³³ Moreno, G. René, Biblioteca Peruana, 1 (Santiago de Chile, 1896) 84, item no. 304,Google Scholar “Discurso de Ramos Arizpe.” The fact that the castes and even some Indians were educated in the schools of the religious may help to explain the contempt of the Carolines for the friars. Despite this, Francisco Orueta, later archbishop of Lima, says that in 1820 San Ildefonso rivalled San Carlos in prestige as an educational institution. See his Exposición que el lllmo. Sr. Dr. D. Francisco Orueta hace… sobre el Proyecto de Ley de Desamortización de bienes eclesiásticos (Trujillo, 1867), pp. 73 and 74.

³⁴ Unanue, , Guía, p. 188, f.,Google Scholar says thtat the Augustinians received the privilege and title of a university for the members of the order by a bull of Paul V, October 13, 1608. The title of Universidad de San Pedro Nolasco was granted to the Mercedarians by Alexander VII in 1664.

³⁵ These reasons appear over and over again in the literature of nineteenth-century Peru, so there is no need to belabor the point here. For a full statement, see Matamoros, Manual, pp. 72–122. See also El Revisor (Lima), February 23, 1827, pp. 2–3. As an indication where Peru may have found such ideas, the interested reader can consult Confrontación de los antiguos con los modernos liberales de las antiguos con los modernos serviles sobre la Extinción de los Frailes (Cádiz, Imprenta de Quintana, 1812).

³⁴ This framework was not particularly friendly to the friars. The friars had lost their Indian parishes to the diocesan clergy by royal decree in 1753 and it was not easy for them to develop new activities because Lima and its environs was saturated with clergy.

In 1766, in Lima alone there were eight curas in the five parishes plus 256 clérigos. “Razón del donativo de 1766” lists each one and how much he gave or did not give. In 1807, in; the same five parishes there were nine curas and 211 clérigos. “Razón de los SS. Eclesiásticos que han concurrido al donativo, año 1807.” Both documents are found in AAL, Sección Donativos del clero. On January 1, 1827 there were still at least 89 curas and clérigos in Lima. “Padrón de contribuyentes pertenecientes al gremio de los SS. curas y presbíteros de monasterios i.e. capellanes…y empieza a correr desde el 1° de Enero de 1827.” AAL, Sección: Notas del Supremo Gobierno, 1847–1852.

In view of these statements, what opportunities would be open to the friars who had returned from the Indian parishes? In many ways, it would have been better had the crown suppressed them also. Mission work on the frontiers was largely in the hands of the Spanish friars of the mission colleges. At home, the friars found hostility and leisure to brood and get into mischief. Certainly this malaise was one of the factors which contributed to the lack of vocations mentioned above.

³⁷ The section Padrones in the AAL consists of three fat bundles. Most of the documents are the padrones from which the curas worked. Frequently they contain their personal annotations such as that he or she cumplió con la iglesia or no cumplió or se confesó pero no comulgó and the like. Usually there is a note too what the cura did to those who had not fulfilled their religious obligations. Each family is described in full with the names of the father, mother and each child, as well as the single persons. Sometimes too their occupations are listed.

It is evident that this system presupposed a stable community. With the wars of independence, it began to break open. But the civil wars after independence with their need for huge impressment of ordinary citizens really seem to have destroyed it and by the period of 1835 to 1840 it seems to have disappeared almost completely.

³⁸ AAL, Sección: Notas del Supremo Gobierno. 4 de abril de 1830. Surprisingly, somewhat similar sentiments are related of Bolivar by visitors to Lima. Thus, Rev. Hugh, Salvin, Journal written on board H.M.S. Cambridge (Newcastle, 1829), p. 172.Google Scholar Also Meade, Rebecca Paulding, Life of Hiram Paulding, U.S.N. (New York, 1910), p. 78.Google Scholar

³⁹ As is evident, it is difficult to distinguish between true devotion and a desire to relieve the customary boredom of colonial Lima in this frequent attendance at religious gatherings.

I have not been able to find out exactly what the Escuela de Cristo was. Its origin is credited to the famous Archbishop Palafox and was introduced at the Lima cathedral by Archbishop Soloaga (1715–1722).

⁴⁰ El Comercio, May 8, 1858, p. 4, describes the custom and its social and religious significance.

⁴¹ The Señor Intendente de Policía of Lima forbade the addition by the serenos in 1852. A long article of protest appeared in El Comercio, June 30, 1852, p. 4, in which the anonymous author describes this custom as well as other religious practices under San Martin.

⁴² In my view, there are two areas in which the curas failed. One was the habitual non-residence of many pastors in their parishes. Substitutes of their own choice, whose qualifications had not been tested, discharged the pastor’s obligations for a small percentage of the annual parish income. The second area of failings can only be described as that of celibacy. See Appendix I: Condoned Clerical Concubinage.

⁴³ Unanue, , Guía, pp. 51–52 Google Scholar lists them. He also gives the bed capacity of each hospital. In all there were 1,027 beds for about 50,000 to 60,000 people. Irigoyen, Manuel Garcia, La Fundación de Lima (Lima, 1898), p. 17,Google Scholar says that Lima had 15 hospitals at the end of the colonial period but he does not name them.

⁴⁴ I am referring here to the doctrina or religion schools. My primary source concerning them is the collection of padrones in AAL already referred to. Some of these schools also taught other elementary subjects besides religion. I am not referring to the new type of elementary school which the crown commanded to be established in 1781. These were to be supported by the city council and were under the supervision of the intendant and not of the bishop. Apparently this type of school never became very numerous in Peru.

⁴⁵ Ugarte, Ruben Vargas, El Episcopado en los Tiempos de la Emancipación Sudamericana (Buenos Aires, 1942), p. 174,Google Scholar says that there were four but he names five: 1. The antigua for Señoras de la Nobleza; 2. Santa Rosa begun in 1813; 3. Nuestra Señora de Consolación begun by the Augustinians in 1810; 4. San Francisco Solano begun at the Franciscan Recoleta in 1774; 5. Casa de Ejercicios begun at San Francisco in 1777 but inaugurated in 1803. Its most famous retreat master was Fray Francisco de Arrieta, later archbishop. The Casa had 30 private rooms while San Francisco Solano had 80.

⁴⁶ Leturia, op. cit., p. 96.

⁴⁷ Naturally one of the sources where one would hope to find material of this kind would be in the papers of the tribunal of the Lima Inquisition. These I could not find (See Appendix II: The Lima Inquisition Papers.) A few expedientes survive in the archives of the archbishop of Arequipa. Some of these deal with attempts to change the liturgical language. Other sources are the Arancel Reformado (Lima, 1821 ) where the fees for burials, baptisms, marriages are either cancelled or drastically reduced, the proposed laws of the First Constituent Congress as found in the archives of the Peruvian Congress, as well as the pamphlets written in 1827 at the time when the Congress first proposed the renewal of official relations with Rome. It would seem that the first pamphlet of Francisco de Paula Gonzalez Vigil was published at that period.

⁴⁸ By a strong minority I refer not so much to the number of votes which this proposal gathered but to the prestige of the people who favored it. The actual vote on December 2, 1822 was 46 to 14. But among the 14 votes in favor of the motion were such outstanding priest leaders as Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza, Francisco Javier Luna Pizarro (then President of the Congress), Juan Antonio de Andueza, canon of Trujillo and rector of its seminary, and Mariano Arce, first head of the Biblioteca Nacional. The leaders of the opposition to religious tolerance were mostly lay politicians, who in part felt that religious tolerance would partially free the Church from state control. Orbín y Aranda, op. cit., pp. 202–225.

⁴⁹ I single out this work because I believe that it contains one of the clearest, even though at times erratic, statements of the thought concerning the Church, its role and organization then current among the enlightened priests and laymen of Lima at that time. Proyecto del Código Eclesiástico (Paris, Imprenta de Julio Didot Mayor, 1830). For a good understanding of Vidaurre’s background, see among other sources, Jos, Mercedes, “Manuel Lorenzo Vidaurre,” in Anuario de Estudios Americanos, 18 (1961), 443–545.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Pedro Gómez Labrador to Cardinal Albani. Rome, June 8, 1830. Arch. Seg. Vat. Seg. di Stato. Rub. 262. Bust. 548, fase. 14. In effect, the Spanish ambassador tells the papal secretary of state: See what these people print when the hand of Spain is no longer there. Albani in his answer of June 12 picks up the tone of the ambassador and speaks of the “…detestable progetto…”

⁵¹ As is well known, Pius VII in 1816 used stronger language than did Leo XII. Pius spoke of submission to authority as one of the principal precepts of our Holy Faith. Accordingly, he scored the movements for independence in the Americas as sedition and rebellion. Some Lima priests, quoting Pius VII, preached that the desire for independence was a mortal sin. Gaceta del Gobierno de Lima Independiente, July 28, 1821, no. 6, p. 21.

⁵² José Calixto de Orihuela, Bishop of Cuzco, described the attitude very well in his prólogo to the Epístola Encíclica del León XII, Roma, 3 de mayo de 1824 (Lima, Imprenta Republicana, 1824), p. 3. He speaks of “el primado del sumo pontífice monárquico y real.”

⁵³ Gaetano Baluffi to Cardinal Secretary of State. Bogotá, November 24, 1837. ASV, Seg. di Stato. Rub. 279, Bust. 594, fase. 1. Despatch 279. According to Baluffi, independence was a failure in all Spanish America. Even the priests, most of whom worked for independence, longed for the old regime now that they had been stripped of their wealth and were oppressed by the civil governments. This, Baluffi said, was a just punishment of God. He thought that Charles V would be welcomed in America, if he would reestablish the monarchy.

Baluffi returns to this theme in despatch number 322 of December 14, 1837 and number 1,472 of May 29, 1840.

⁵⁴ The first letter is dated at Lima, December 29, 1821. ASV, Seg. di Stato, Esteri, Rub. 279, Bust. 592. Apparently this letter was not known by Vargas Ugarte. Echague sent it to Juan Manuel Iturregui, encargado de negocios del Perú in London, who in turn endorsed it and forwarded it to Rome. Echague in a very sincere tone informs the Holy Father of the fact of Peruvian independence, the departure of Archbishop Las Heras, his own election as gobernador eclesiástico (this fact is attested to by a separate document in the hand of Luna Pizarro as secretary of the Lima cathedral chapter). It closes with the request to the Holy Father that he send a vicario from Rome to observe and to advise.

The second letter is dated at Lima, June 29, 1825. Arch. Prop. Fide. Scritture referrite nei Congressi: America Meridionale, 1804–1825. Voi. 5, fols. 599–602. This letter likewise seems to be unknown. Substantially, it is the same as the first except that it informs Rome of the final defeat of the Spanish arms at Ayacucho. There are some overtones of panic on the part of Echague. He needs help to deal with some of the problems which have arisen. This letter was also sent through the Peruvian delegation in London. It is endorsed by D. Gregorio Paredes.

The third letter of August 30, 1828 (ASV, Seg. di Stato, Rub. 251, fase. 8) is reprinted in Ugarte, Vargas, El Episcopado, pp. 418–429.Google Scholar This third letter most probably was authorized by the Peruvian Congress and government. This was proposed to the Peruvian Congress on July 7, 1827 by Sr. Madalengoytia (later bishop of Trujillo). See, Archive of the Peruvian Congress, tomo 7, proposición 13. The Atalaya con los Vitalicios, September 14, 1828, no. 21, pp. 1–2, carries a long protest against letters which have recently been sent to Rome by the Lima cathedral chapter and the minister of foreign affairs through Sr. Chaumette des Fosses. A member of Congress, Sr. Telleria, on September 8, 1828 had even proposed that all documents in this matter should be submitted to his committee on ecclesiastical affairs. His proposal was voted down 8 to 7. See Archive of the Peruvian Congress, tomo 8, fol. 112.

Possibly because of its official nature, this third letter did receive an answer but Echague had died before its arrival in 1831. Echague had died the preceding December 17. The Mercurio Peruano of January 19, 1831, pp. 2–3 says that the Roman answer was given to Echague’s albacea, D. Gaspar Osma.

⁵⁵ The relación of Las Heras in Leturia, op. cit., p. 109. The warm recommendation of Las Heras for Jorge Benavente is found ibid. p. 110. Echague was a native of Córdova de Tucumán and had studied in Tucumán. AAL, Cabildos, leg. 3. Informes confidenciales sobre el cabildo eclesiástico.

⁵⁶ The Congregation of Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs discussed the nuncio’s letter as well as Goyeneche’s routine request for indulgences in its meeting of December 2, 1827. ASV, Seg. di Stato, Esteri, Rub. 279, Bust. 593, fase. 1.

⁵⁷ Benavente wrote his first letter, which I could locate, on February 10, 1832. Enclosed was a copy of Echague’s letter of 1828, to which at that time the cathedral chapter had not yet received a reply. He stresses that he is a friend of Goyeneche, that Echague was dead and that he is penitenciario. He also states that he too has a brother in Spain who is a general. ASV, Seg. di Stato. Rub. 251, Bust. 448, fase. 8. In a letter of July 3, 1833, he informs the nuncio in Rio de Janeiro that he had written already on February 10, 1831. I could not locate this letter.

The remarks of Herrera are found in Discurso pronunciado por el D. D. Bartolomé Herrera el día 26 de Julio de 183} en la Misa solemne con que el V. Dean y Cabildo de la Santa Iglesia de Lima, celebró la confirmación del Arzobispado del Ilustrisimo Señor Jorge de Benavente y Macoaga (Lima, 1835), pp. 9–15.

⁵⁸ His retraction has been noted above. His “Defensa de la Infalibilidad del Romano Pontífice en las Materias de Fe y Costumbres,” appeared in El Católico, (1859 and I860), VII and VIII. A tribute to Father Valdivia by Un Arequipeño in El Comercio, July 5, 1856, p. 3, says in part that Valdivia was a man noted always for his purity of life, his love of study, and devotion to the pulpit. He was gifted with a quick wit and facile tongue but a wooden hand. The warm, personal tribute continues through the issue of July 9.

For more information, see Quedas, Guillermo, El Deán Caudillo: Deán Dr. D. Juan Gualberto Valdivia, Obispo Electo del Cuzco, 1796–1884 (Lima, 1935).Google Scholar Also the shorter study by M. Cateriano published in Arequipa in 1889.

⁵⁹ Archbishop Las Heras to Ministro de Ultramar. Lima, December 20, 1813 (AGI, Lima 1568), says that originally the seminary was only a dormitory for the students who attended class at the university. When classes were no longer regularly conducted at the university, the seminary was forced to inaugurate classes for its seminarians. This was done, Las Heras says, without any coordinated plan. Las Heras has just done this (Viceroy Abascal in his Memoria, I, 34 says that the Rector, D. José Silva drew up this plan). The new curriculum comprised Latin, rhetoric, philosophy, history of philosophy, algebra and geometry (taught for the first time at Santo Toribio), dogmatic-scholastic, expositive, and moral theology, canon law, and ecclesiastical discipline. Classes are conducted for three hours each morning, three hours each afternoon, with one hour of conferences each night. In 1813, there were 54 students, of whom 24 had scholarships. By 1821, the number had increased to 70 or 80. The seminary was closed in 1823 and reopened on December 1, 1825 but it led a very tenuous existence because of a continuous financial crisis. On November 10, 1841, Archbishop Arrieta appointed a committee with Bishop Luna Pizarro as chairman to inspect the seminary (AAL, Cabildos, leg. 5). As a result, the seminary was closed in 1843 not to reopen until April 26, 1847 (Libro de matriculaciones in Archive of the Seminary), with an excellent staff and rebuilt physical plant. With the active financial support of the now Archbishop Luna Pizarro, Santo Toribio flourished to such an extent that the school proved to be too small for the numbers who wished to enter. To remedy this need, Luna Pizarro began the negotiations to purchase two cloisters from San Francisco, which the friars did not need at that time. His successor, José Manuel Pasquel completed the purchase and on April 8, 1859 classes were begun in this new locale (El Católico, VII, [1859], 166–168). Formerly there had been room for only about 90 students; now the new quarters were much more spacious and soon the number of students increased. By 1865, there were 252 boarders and 295 day students attending 19 courses. Santo Toribio had become one of the foremost colleges of Lima. Exposición que hace al Ilustrisimo Señor Arzobispo el Canónigo Juan Ambrosio Huerta (Lima, 1865).

⁶⁰ Schwab, Federico, “El inventario de la biblioteca de Francisco Javier Luna Pizarro,” Fénix, (1950), pp. 146–161.Google Scholar This library is preserved substantially today in the seminary.

⁶¹ The first so-called Catholic magazine published in Lima was El Redactor Eclesiástico, whose first issue appeared on December 13, 1845 and the last, no. 45, on June 17, 1846. Most probably the chief contributor and editor was Luna Pizarro himself. It contained no items of current news to speak of, except perhaps Luna Pizarro’s long letter on Church-State relations. There is an almost complete copy in the Library of the Lima cathedral chapter whose librarian, Mons. Alfonso Ponte, kindly permitted me to read it there.

El Católico was a biweekly, appearing on Wednesday and Saturday. It was edited at the seminary and printed there also by José Daniel Huerta, the brother of Juan Ambrosio. The first issue is dated May 5, 1855 and the last June 30, 1860. It was a solid improvement over its predecessor. At a period of so many controversies, it was always orthodox — almost to the extreme. Many of its articles are written with wit and telling logic. This is especially true of the feature La Prensa de Lima, a review of the Lima newspapers, begun in 1858 by Juan Ambrosio Huerta. Vigil was one of his favorite targets. In the April 28, 1860 .issue, Huerta reprinted the protest of Victor Hugo against the execution of John Brown in the United States. In part Huerta wrote:…Our daily papers, which ordinarily are so vocal on such occar'ons, are now too busy each day giving new subjects to the King of Sardinia to pay any attention to poor John Brown; we join in this protest.”

By far the best of the magazines published at the seminary was El Progreso Católico, begun on July 7, 1861. Its editor was Juan Ambrosio Huerta aided by such professors as Ezequiel Moreyra, José Antonio Roca, José Nicolas Piérola. The issue of June 30, 1861, is the last which I have seen, although it may have continued past that date. A judicious selection of articles would merit reprinting.

⁶² Herrera, Bartolomé, Escritos y Discursos (2 vols.; Lima, 1934).Google Scholar I refer especially to the biography by Gonzalo and Rodrigo Herrera.

⁶³ I refer especially to Herrera’s sermon in the Lima cathedral on “Soberanía popular” and the discussion which it evoked. See El Comercio, July 30, 1846, p. 3, for Herrera’s own inter-pretation. And the same newspaper of September 18 and 22 for the reactions of others.

⁶⁴ El Católico, II, (1856), 62 says “that in the last ten years perhaps six young men have been ordained from the first college of the Republic, San Carlos, while formerly they were ordained by the dozens.”

⁶⁵ These friars were to reside at Ocopa, the famous colonial mission center in the province of Jauja. The government decreed its restoration on March 11, 1836, and the first group of 19 friars, Spaniards and Italians, arrived at Callao in December, 1837. In time many more came, almost all Spaniards. These were not only select men but they were also for the most part especially trained for the work of home missions. While in Italy most of them had come under the influence of Fray José Costes, who had fled the Spanish mobs in 1835 and travelled to Italy on foot. There he had worked with Fr. Pallotti, the founder of that community, and the Precious Blood and Jesuit Fathers then giving very successful missions in the Papal States. After this experience, Costes drew up his own method for conducting home missions and thereupon trained other Spanish refugee friars, many of whom later came to Peru. In that country, the success of the Costes method and training was surprising. The Lima newspapers of the period eagerly reprinted accounts of the friars’ work from the local newspapers of Ayacucho, Huancavelica, Jauja, Huánuco and other places. So great was the prestige of the friar apostolic missionaries that soon some of the most highly respected diocesan priests such as José Mateo Aguilar, Pedro José Tordoya, and others requested from the Holy See the title or Honorary apostolic missionary. In time, their influence with the people became so great that when in 1862 Francisco García Calderón proposed the suppression of all religious communities in Peru, he had to exempt the Spanish friars (Diccionario de la Legislación Peruana (Lima, 1862), pp. 965–966). When this demand would be repeated later in the century by members of Congress, again it was the good work of these friars which would thwart the attempt.

⁶⁶ Saiz, Odorico, De Restauratione in Peruvia Collegiorum Franciscalium Propagandae Fidei, 1824–1860.Google Scholar Unpublished doctoral thesis.

⁶⁷ As early as 1846, these friars were being charged with supposedly preaching doctrinas subversivas in Jauja and Huánuco. So, El Redactor Eclesiástico, April 25, 1846, pp. 3–8; April 28, pp. 4–5; and June 3, 1846, pp. 3–4. The Redactor, of course, did not agree that they were subversivas.

⁶⁸ Basadre, Jorge, Historia de la República del Perú, 3 (Lima, 1961), 1104–1123.Google Scholar By this constitution the clergy and the military also lost their fuero.

⁶⁹ The archbishop was José Manuel Pasquel y Eraso. Ramón Castilla, then president, repeatedly pleaded with the archbishop to sign. Castilla argued that he also disagreed with many items in the new constitution but that he was going to sign so that he could work for the desired changes within the constitutional framework. Much of the original correspondence between the two men is still found in AAL, Notas del Supremo Gobierno, 1854–1857. Pasquel’s final letter on this topic is dated October 25, 1856 and Castillas on October 27. No other bishop signed.

⁷⁰ Much useful background material concerning the writing of this constitution is contained in the issues of El Comercio for that period.

⁷¹ Herrera’s informes are found in El Católico. This magazine was so adamant in its opposition to the constitution that José Gálvez ordered it to be suppressed on June 16, 1855. The editors retorted that President Castilla had proclaimed freedom of the press on March 25, 1855 (El Católico, I, (1855), 105) and refused to cease publication. On June 30, the chief of the Lima police on Gálvez’ order sealed the office of the magazine but El Católico appeared anyway, minus its frontispiece. Gálvez then ordered that the priest editors, José Jesús Ayllón and Francisco Solano Heros, should be locked up in the Descalzos and that the Church authorities should try them for disobedience (El Comercio, July 13, 1855, p. 2). Ayllón protested this move in an article in El Comercio, July 14, p. 3. Unfortunately, in this article, Ayllón’s name was misspelled. On July 17, he wrote again to correct the mistake lest Gálvez should not know who had written the earlier item.

El Católico apparently never ceased publication and also never yielded in its opposition. Finally, President Castilla took a hand in the matter. In a personal chat, he tried to persuade Father Ayllón that the warship Apurimac needed a chaplain and that Father Ayllón would fill that need admirably. But the priest said that life at sea did not agree with him. On August 28, 1856, Castilla invited Ayllón for another chat. The priest still refused to give in. He was escorted from the palace by an officer and two soldiers, placed under guard on the Callao train and then to the ship Santiago, which was waiting with raised anchors. The Santiago set out at once for Arica where the Apurimac lay. Ayllón had no time to say farewell to any one. El Comercio, August 29, 1856, p. 4. This account was signed by most of the prominent professors of the seminary.

⁷² This was Bishop Agustín Charún of Trujillo. Fortunately he died of an apparent heart attack on February 22, 1857, at Huanchaco, a little village on the ocean near Trujillo. His premature death prevented any overt act of rebellion. Charúm had been a part of the government since the time of independence but at the solemn funeral in the Lima cathedral on March 17, 1857 no government representative is listed as being present. El Católico, IV, (1857), 263–264.

⁷³ La Constitución y Leyes Orgánicas del Perú dadas por el Congreso de 1860 comparadas con las que sancionó la Convención Nacional de 1855 (Lima, 1863).

⁷⁴ This had been suggested in a long article in Mercurio Peruano, December 16, 1831, no. 1, 275, pp. 1–4. Benavente took up this suggestion in perhaps his first letter (March 18, 1834) to Rome after he had been confirmed as archbishop-elect of Lima. Fabbrini, the nuncio in Rio de Janeiro, forwarded the letter with his favorable endorsement. On Fabbrini’s letter there is a long marginal note categorizing a “concilio nazionale” as premature and dangerous. Apparently, this ended the project. It does not seem to have been discussed again.