The Blessed Trinity in the Iglesia Filipina Independiente during the period of controversy with the Catholic

Church[Question on the Validity of IFI Baptism and the Theological Background,

and Eventual Rapprochement]

By

Noel Dionicio L. Dacuycuy

1

Contents

Foreword

I. The Iglesia Filipina Independiente in the Historical context of the Filipino People’s Faith and Struggle

1. The Colonial Captivity of the Christian Faith (The Context)

2. The Struggle for Freedom, The Struggle for Faith (The Experience)

3. The Proclamation of the IFI (The Perspective)

II. The Iglesia Filipina Independiente as “Filipino People’s Church”

1. The Operative Conceptual Framework

1.a Theological Grounding and Fundamental Objectives

1.b. Catholic and Apostolic in Doctrines, but Independent in Polity

2. The Struggle towards Theological Growth

2.a Theological Pains from 1906 to 1940 Sources of Theological Pains on Baptism Early Notions on Baptism

2.b Theological Settling Down in 1947 The IFI Affirm to Confess the Universal Faith The IFI Received The “Gifts of the Apostolic Succession” in the Anglican Line

III. The Fundamental Doctrines of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente on Holy Baptism: Theological Background and Practices

1. Baptism is Instituted by Christ

2. Baptism is Necessary for Salvation

3. The Form and Matter in the Celebration of Baptism

4. The Ministers of Baptism

5. The Effects and Meaning of Baptism

6. The Subjects of Baptism: Believers and Infants

Afterword

Bibliography

2

Foreword

The Sacrament of Holy Baptism has been an essential element of the Christian faith. In Christian

Churches, Holy Baptism is collectively accepted as the rite of initiation, performed with water, usually in

the name of the Blessed Trinity: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit or simply in the name of Jesus as

in the biblical and apostolic fathers. While other Christian churches require baptism by total immersion,

pouring and sprinkling are more frequent in other churches. Similarly, most churches regarded baptism

as a sacrament, or sign of grace; some regarded it simply as an ordinance, or rite, commanded by the

Lord to His disciples.

Nonetheless, baptism is the sacramental process of the initiation into the Christian community,

the Church, with the purview to carry on the ministry of the Lord. It is likewise viewed as the doorway to

other sacraments of the church. Evidently, there is an inner dynamism, which moves from baptism to

other sacraments professed by Christian churches. However, it is not only the sacramental theology,

which is at stake in the discussion of baptism, but also of ecclesiology.

In fact, there is a deep inference of valid reception of the Sacrament of Holy Baptism to the unity

of Christian Churches. As some churches claim that all validly baptized enjoy the basic rights as people of

God and are bound by the same fundamental obligations to continue the ministry of Christ. The

question on the validity of baptism of one church over the other churches sometimes, if not often, the

source of animosity among Christian churches.

The validity of baptism administered in the Iglesia Filipina Independiente (IFI) has been the

theological and ecclesiological issues of some churches, especially the Roman Catholic Church. Often, if

not at all times, their theological expositions are vehement attacks against the IFI in order to discredit as

well as to entice the Aglipayans1 to renounce allegiance to IFI and to be converted into other churches,

especially the Roman Catholic Church. Some are less polemical, but more influential.

The persistence of other churches to discredit the validity of IFI baptism obliges us to look into

the doctrine of the IFI on the sacrament of Holy Baptism. Thus, this paper is written from the viewpoint

of the IFI, which attempts to present the IFI’s doctrine and practices on Baptism. The approach of this

paper is necessarily interdisciplinary in intent and design.

1 The adherents of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente are usually called the “Aglipayans” in reference to Obispo Maximo Gregorio L. Aglipay, the first Obispo Maximo (Supreme Bishop) who led the Filipino clergy and people to establish a Filipino catholic church. The expression “Aglipayan” usually used as derogatory term to disgrace the IFI membership, but implies the unique and distinguishing character of this church, catholic and apostolic in doctrine, but independent in ecclesial governance.

3

Its primary purpose is to provide an understanding on the IFI teachings and practices on

baptism. Secondly, it is to appreciate the historical context and approaches of the IFI to explain the

Christian faith to the struggling Filipino people. Nevertheless, it should also be implicit in today’s context

of a pluralistic world in the pursuit of Christian unity. Other than explicitly from the perspective of

presenting the validity of IFI baptism, it does not conceal the fact that as many questions may be raised

as it seeks to answer especially during the period of “IFI theological wanderings”.

This paper has three major sections. The First Section tries to illustrate the historical context in

which the IFI was born. Hence, it deals with the expansion and the role of the Christian faith in the

history and struggle of the Filipino people. Thus, it describes the historical development of the struggle

of the Filipino masses for emancipation, i.e., from revolts and reforms to revolution.

The Second Section presents the theological and operational framework of the IFI as the Church

of the Filipino people. It deals with the distinguishing character of the IFI when its founding fathers seek

to interpret the Christian Faith in a manner understood by the Filipino people who were struggling for

liberation towards the fullness of life. It gives a glimpse of the “theological pains” of the IFI for forty

years wherein it becomes the source of animosity with other churches, and which also the “ready”

source to question the validity of IFI baptism. However, it also renders a glance to the IFI’s “theological

settling down” in 1947 wherein it reiterates its adherence to the Catholic Faith and the bestowal of the

“Gifts of the Apostolic Succession” from the Anglican Line.

The Third Section, which is the final section, focuses especially on the IFI’s fundamental

doctrines on Sacrament of Holy Baptism, to wit: (a) the divine institution of Baptism by Christ; (b) the

necessity of Baptism for salvation and remission of sins; (c) the essence of Baptism (matter and form);

(d) the ministers of Baptism; (f) the effects and meaning of Baptism; and, (g) the subjects of Baptism.

The Afterword treats the IFI ecumenical relations with other churches worldwide. It hopes that

these relationship with other churches worldwide whose baptisms were accepted as validly instituted,

concur the Sacrament of Holy Baptism administered in the IFI is valid in substance and in form. It further

affirms that the Iglesia Filipina Independiente holds all the essentials of the Christian faith and a ‘Church

one with the Churches of the ages’.

4

I. The Iglesia Filipina Independiente in the Historical context of the Filipino People’s Faith and Struggle

The history of the IFI could be only appreciated when it is view within the history of the Filipino

people’s struggle for liberty and freedom. It traces its history intertwined with the emancipation of the

Christian faith and the Christian church from the clutches of colonial and feudal oppressions.

1. The Colonial Captivity of the Christian Faith (The Context)

There is no doubt that the Western Churches were zealous to bring salvation to the entire world

in obedience to the Great Commission (Matthew 28). Unfortunately, the Western world has the feeling

of religious superiority, which would also spawn beliefs about “Western cultural superiority” in these

guises: proclaiming the “gospel of peace”; spreading a “beneficent civilization”; and “civilizing and

Christianizing” the entire world. Thus, the “gospel always comes to people in cultural robes”.

In such case, colonialism and evangelization were intertwined as the result of the magisterial

commissioning of the Roman Pontiff, known as papal bulls.2 Unfortunately, the appalling consequences

of these bulls were the colonial conquest of non-Western world and the union of the Church and State.

Henceforward, the Christian faith became colonial machinery in the guise of Christianization.3

Thus, when Christianity reached the Philippines in the 16th century, it was a Spanish colonial cog

of domination. It established a theocratic society administered through encomienda system until the

17th century.4 However, the collapse of the galleon trade in the 18th century, Spain shifted to hacienda

system. The Church, as a beneficiary of colonial plunder, unfortunately promoted colonialism; and, the

Christian faith became largely an instrument of oppression.

2 The crusading bull Romanus Pontifex of Nicolas V in 8 January 1455 gave the Portuguese rulers under King Alfonso possession of the land they had conquered from the non-Christians, with the right and duty to set up Christian establishments and pious organisations in occupied territories.

In like manner, the demarcation bull Inter Caetera Divinae of Pope Alexander VI Borgia, who was of Spanish origin, divided the world outside Europe between the kings of Portugal and Spain. This bull granted to both rulers the full politically and ecclesiastically authority over their respective colonies and other colonies to be conquered.

Consequently, new agreements were made and resulted in the legal definition of the right of patronages in 1508 for Spanish (patronato) and in 1514 for Portugal (padoardo). Within the framework of the right of patronage, evangelisation was often subject to colonial and European politics.

3 Bosch, David J. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2001), 302-13; see also, Stephen Neil, Colonialism and Christian Missions (London: Lutterworth Press, 1966), 39-60.

4 Amado Guerrero, Philippine Society and Revolution (PSR), Third Edition (USA: International Association of Filipino Patriots, 1979), 6; see also, Teodoro A. Agoncillo, Introduction to Filipino History (Quezon City: R. P. Garcia Publishing Co. Inc., 1974), 53-56.

5

This national oppression resulted in numerous revolts and subsequent movements for religious

and political reforms. But the failure of the Filipino people to complete the revolution against Spanish

colonialism resulted to the direct rule of United States. The Manifest Destiny of the then US President

William McKinley became a disguise to colonize the Philippines.5 He boasted that US colonialism was a

noble mission and the philosophy of the “white man’s burden” held sway.6 Unsurprisingly, American

Protestantism came not only as a new breed of Christianity but also as a part of the US machination of

domination. In fact, it came behind the army of Rear Admiral George Dewey.

These historical facts illustrate that Christianity was in colonial captivity. Consequently, the

struggle for emancipation from foreign domination was entwined to the liberation of the Christian faith

from its colonial captivity. Nonetheless, Christianity was likewise adapted by the masses in their struggle

for liberation.

2. The Struggle for Freedom, The Struggle for Faith (The Experience)

Throughout the Spanish colonial rule, there had been sporadic uprisings against feudal

oppressions. However, the early political resistances were expressed in religious forms as defenses of

native religion or a return to it – “Nativism”7 and to restore the pre-Spanish economic and social

systems, but not envisage the overthrow of Spanish domination.

Gradually, the Filipino people began to question social injustices and started to assert their basic

human rights. This assertion was first manifested from among the Filipino clergy prompted by the

flagrant racial discrimination within the church. This struggle led to the “Filipinization” movement that

resulted to the execution of the GOMBURZA. Though it halted the reform movements, the seed of

Filipino nationalism had been instilled to those who witnessed the execution and felt the necessity for

national unity.

5 A verbatim of the Manifest Destiny of McKinley is printed in The Advocates, an official organ of the Methodist Church in the USA: “I walked the floor of the White House night after night, until midnight;…that I went down on my knees and prayed God for light and guidance more than one night. And one night late it came to me this way—I don’t know how it was, but it came: (1) That we could not give them back to Spain—that would be cowardly and dishonourable; (2) that we could not turn them over to France and Germany—our commercial rivals in the orient—that would be bad business and dishonourable; (3) that would not leave them to themselves—they were unfit for self-government—and they would soon have anarchy and misrule worse that Spain’s was, and (4) that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilise and Christianise them…And then I went to bed, and went to sleep, and slept soundly…” Daniel S. Shirmir and Stephen R. Shalom, eds., The Philippines Reader (Quezon City: KEN Incorporated, 1897), 22-23, quoted in Salvador D. Eduarte, “Religious Imperialism in the Philippines: Some Critical Reflections”, in Asian Journal of Theology, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1989, 478.

6 Bosch, Transforming Mission, 298-302. 7 Paul Dimayuga, “Messianic Leaders of the Revolution” in Hector Santos, ed., Philippine Centennial Series; available from

http://www.bibingka.com/phg/religious/dt.htm; Internet; accessed 23 September 2008.

6

A decade later, the opposition against Spain entered a new phase. The revolts of the masses and

the campaigns for reforms by illustrados became unified and culminated in a national democratic

revolution in 1896. The interplay of Christian faith and patriotism was evident in the struggle for

emancipation. Thus, it explains that the struggle waged by the Filipino people was not an anti-Christian

position, but as a political position justifiable by Christianity.

While the Filipino people were preoccupied with the consolidation of the Filipino government,

Spain and the Unites States signed the Treaty of Paris in 10 December 1898 ceding the Philippines to the

United States for the sum of $20 million.8 Consequently, President McKinley issued the Benevolent

Assimilation Proclamation for the United States to exercise sovereignty over the Philippines. The United

States boasted the Philippine conquest as a noble mission to “civilize” and “Christianize” the Filipino

people. Thus, the victory of the Filipino people against Spanish colonialism was snatched away by

American aggression.

The American pacification period was marked by various peasant revolts, again using religious

beliefs with many Christian symbols. However, it had a sharper focus on two issues: freedom from

foreign domination, and a kind of utopian socialism, especially regarding land ownership. In its gestation

period, the newly born Filipino independent church imbibed and expressed these ideas as it continues

to take part in the continuing struggle for national liberation and social transformation.

3. The Proclamation of the IFI (The Perspectives)

Although the revolution was not completed, historians claim that the IFI was a tangible result of

Philippine Revolutions of 1896. The fact is¸ the IFI formation was intertwined with the economic,

political, cultural and religious struggle of the Filipino people. An inquiry of the two prominent figures in

the revolution, Bishop Gregorio Aglipay and Don Isabelo de los Reyes, Sr.,9 conceals the history of the

Filipino independent church.

8 The United States became the protector of the Spanish authorities and involved in the religious question in the Philippines. The Terms of Capitulation in August 1898 stated that “its churches and religious worship…and its private property of all descriptions” were placed “under the special safeguard of the faith and honour of the American army”. The full text of this term is found in Louis S. Young and Henry D. Northrop, Life and Heroic Deeds of Admiral Dewey (Philadelphia, 1899), 175-76; quoted in Peter G. Gowing, “The Disentanglement of Church and State in the American Regime in the Philippines” in Studies in Philippine Church History, Ed. by Gerald H. Anderson (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1969), 207.

9 Isabelo de los Reyes y Florentina (1864-1938), born in Vigan, Ilocos Sur. He was a radical, journalist and reformist who had been incarcerated in Montjiuich prison in Barcelona. He was appointed by the “government in exile” to work for Philippine emancipation after the original members of the First Philippine Republic surrendered to the United States in 1901.

7

Bishop Aglipay had spent his whole career in the shadow of the Philippine revolution. He himself

had admitted his “familiarity and long friendship with the leaders of the revolutionary forces”.10

Representing the nationalist temper and sentiments of the Filipino clergy and the aspirations of the

Filipino people, Aglipay emphasized that the aims of the movement were the Filipinization of the

Catholic Church and the preservation of the Catholic religion. But as regards to the Roman Catholic

Church, in effect it was a schism, for it declared the independence of the Filipino clergy from the direct

control and supervision of the Spanish authorities in the Philippines, which runs counter to the “rights of

patronage” prearranged to the crown of Spain.

Simultaneously, a radical reformist Isabelo de los Reyes, Sr. returned from Rome and unleashed

the anti-American sentiment of the people “by campaigning for a jury system, universal suffrage, and

labor laws to liberate workers from their economic dependence and docility”. 11 In July 1901, he founded

the first labor union in the Philippines, Union Obrera Democratica (UOD) which became the sound

institution for political and religious movements.

In fact, on 15 November 1901, both Aglipay and de los Reyes met Protestant missionaries in the

office of the American Bible Society to discuss the setting up of independent Filipino church. However,

this cooperation did not prosper because of the radical changes proposed by the missionaries, i.e.:

renounce the catholic practices such as on the Virgin Mary, veneration of the saints, etc. Consequently,

the native clergy from different towns of the Philippines met in Kullabeng on 8 May 1902 and decided a

complete separation from Rome. Likewise, on 3 August 1902, de los Reyes met the union leaders at the

Centro de Bellas Artes, delivered a strong anti-friar speech, and prepared the establishment of a Filipino

Church completely independent from Rome. Thus a Filipino independent church was born, commonly

known as Iglesia Filipina Independiente. Its establishment was the most important result of the Filipino

people’s struggle for liberation and democracy. The revolution started as a political upheaval but it

ended as a religious triumph. Aglipay himself declares that, “If you say that I founded the IFI that is a

misleading statement because our Church was founded by the Filipino people as a product of their

desire for liberty—religiously, politically and socially. I was only one and until now the chosen head.”12

Thus, the Filipino people’s resistance throughout Spanish colonialism and early American

imperialism was a struggle for economic and socio-political liberation entwined with religious reform

10 An interview with Aglipay published in El Pueblo, 28 September 1902.11 William Henry Scott, Cracks in the Parchment Curtain and other essays in Philippine History (Quezon City: New Day

Publishers, 1985), 291.12 Mons. Gregorio Aglipay, Herald Magazine, 3 August 1932

8

that became the impetus for the establishment of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente. Historically, the IFI

was born out of the struggle of the Filipino masses for national liberation and democracy. Theologically,

it is acclaimed as a movement of God’s people in the Philippines towards total and integral salvation.

II. The Iglesia Filipina Independiente as “Filipino People’s Church”

The IFI asserts itself as “the people of God” endowed with all the virtues of the universal Church

commissioned to be witnesses of God’s love for total salvation. This assertion is affirmed in its early

documents of doctrinal and canonical instruments of governance. Hence, two subsections elaborate

these concepts, namely: (1) the operative conceptual concept; and (2) its struggle towards theological

magnification.

1. The Operative Conceptual Framework

The IFI affirms its understanding of itself as a true church called by God to continue the mission

of Jesus in the proclamation of salvation to the Filipino people adhering to the Catholic and Apostolic in

doctrine, but with discipline and worship emancipated from foreign domination.

1.a Theological Groundings and Fundamental Objectives

Theological Groundings. The IFI believes that its inception is God’s plan. The following citation

from Epistle II serves as the articulation of the biblico-theological grounding of the IFI’s institution:

“Neither the leaf of a tree nor a single bird falls to the earth without the will of our heavenly Father

(Matt 10:29). Revolutions therefore are perfectly providential, and despite their causing us momentary

disasters, they ultimately bring us far-reaching redemption and result in benefits that will bless many

generations to come. They are like typhoons which, in the twinkling of an eye, destroy and erase secular

vices and abuses, and their social upheavals, moreover, have this been used by Divine Providence to

castigate the errors of an unthroned frailocracy, errors over which we now wish to draw the veil of

merciful oblivion…”13

Its existence was seen as a presence of Christ “who crowned the effort of our countrymen, who

were zealous for the true glory of the one God and for our national dignity, have accomplished the great

enterprise of our religious emancipation―against wind and tide, in the words of our very detractors.”14

The notion that man an “imago Dei” strengthened its firmness for liberation. “Man emerged perfect

13 Epistle II was a Circular dated September 1902, as a reply of Aglipay to Bishop Alcocer, who denounces the schism.14 Epistle IV.

9

from the omnipotent and generous hands of God, like all his admirable works (Genesis 1:31); and

consequently he was born with all his rights. He was born free as the bird that sings among branches of

the trees, free as the air that gives us life, the plant that perfumes the valleys with the aroma of its

flowers, the like the stars and all other creatures”.15

Because as Christians, we have been called to liberty (Gal. 5:13), since Jesus has come to free us

(Luke 4: 18; Isa. 61:1)16. It is from this God-given right for liberty that the IFI was born: Liberty is one of

the most precious gifts with which the Creator has favored us; so it is that we may in no way set any

more limits to it than those which the purest morality and right conscience impose on all things “the

perfect law is the law of liberty”, according to the General Epistle of St. James (1:25)17

Clearly, the IFI recognizes that the revolution was an absolute option for a people to defend

their rights; and the birth of the IFI was a necessary option and God-given right. This is a theological

assertion that the IFI can claim that the revolution and its birth was perceive to be God’s will for the

Filipino people.

Fundamental Objectives. In the Doctrine and Constitutional Rules declares the three interrelated

objectives of the IFI. While the first objective refers to the object of worship, the other two simply

articulate about the subjects, who worship the one true God.

1] The object of the founding of the Philippine Independent Church is principally to respond to the imperative need to restore worship of the one true God in all its splendor and the purity of his most holy word which, under the reign of obscurantism, has been diluted and distorted in a most disheartening manner for any Christian of even moderate education (Epistle II of the Supreme Council of the PIC);

2] To liberate the conscience from all error, excesses and unscientific scruples against the laws of nature and blessed good judgment. (Epistle VI); and

3] To form and dignify a Filipino clergy by re-conquering all the prerogatives which they lost through the exploitation of which they have been, and still are, the object.

What therefore being portrayed in these objectives is that God, alone is the true source and

fulfillment of a struggling people for freedom and liberty, the source of inspiration, the source of

strength and hope, and the animating and moving spirit in the celebration of life.

1.b Catholic and Apostolic in Doctrines, but Independent in Polity

The intention of the IFI was not to depart from the Catholic faith, tradition and practices

although a separation from the Church of Rome was an option.

15 Epistle VI.16 Ibid.17 Ibid.

10

Catholic and Apostolic in Doctrine. It was very explicit in the de los Reyes’ proclamation in

August 3, 1902 that the IFI while separating from Rome, “still maintains the doctrines and practices

excluding the excesses and abuses of the Roman church.”18 Likewise, the 1903 Doctrine and

Constitutional Rules (DRC)19 professes the the IFI’s adherence to the Catholic Faith. Therein, in its

Declaration of Principle affirms that:

God is only one, but those who bear witness to him in heaven are three ― the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these are “one” (John 5:7; Matt. 28:19)

There is a distribution of gifts, of services, and of works, but that which causes everything in all that is the same Spirit, the same Lord and the same God (I Cor 12:4, 6). One Spirit, one Lord, and One God and Father of all, who is above all things, in all things, and in all of you (Eph. 4:4–6).

Therefore just as a triangle is the symbol of the powers or functions of straight lines or of beauty, so in the Biblical Trinity we see all the perfection of God symbolized, the meeting, consolidation, and unification of the Omnipotence that created the Universe, together with the Sublime Abnegation of Jesus who died to redeem humanity and all Creation, and the Spirit who sustains us all with his ineffable love guides us along the pathways of our life with his divine light.

God is only one. As the power which created us and assists us in everything with his loving Providence, we fondly call him Heavenly Father, from whom we ask gratification of all our needs and whose merciful protection we invoke at all moments of our life.

And he became human to redeem us and teach us to love all creatures not excluding our enemies, we call him Son, because such humanity proceed from his very Divinity; to him we confess our failings; repentant, we implore pardon from him, and pray him to continue interceding for us before the tribunal of his Justice, balancing his inexorable scales with the weight of his own mercy.

As love sublime, which ceaselessly attracts us to God for our own sanctification, and as the eternal Truth which enlightens our minds, we call him Divine Spirit.

But all is the same God.”20

Throughout, the IFI categorically confesses its adherence to the Holy Trinity: “Father Everlasting,

our Sweet Redeemer, and the Divine Spirit…”21 Likewise, the concluding statement of Epistle VI, it states:

Holy, holy, holy art thou, Eternal Trinity to whom we owe our religious freedom! The heaven and all

creation are filled with your glory. Amen.22

18 See the “Proclamation of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente.”.19 While Achutegui and Bernad (Religious Revolution, Vol. II; 152) recognizes that the DCR’s Profession of Faith was a

‘verbatim insertion’ from Epistle III, they apparently have not considered that the DCR was formulated from the Provisional Constitution of the IFI in 1902 which clearly states in Section 3, “The Dogma and Creed [of the IFI] shall be the same [with the Roman Church] as all the Apostolic Catholic Christians profess and practice, except for obedience to the Pope.”

20 Doctrine and Constitutional Rules of 1903 (DRC), Part One, Chapter II, Section I. 21 Epistle IV in “Epistles,” 48.22 Epistle VI in “Epistles,” 56.

11

Furthermore, it has several statements with the same theological emphasis: “Here we also

follow the Roman Church in all that is saintly and dignified; but not the falsification of the ancient

Biblical rites and the methods it had invented for simoniacal and deceitful ends.”23 Likewise, in its altar, it

gives advice that “always reserve the center of all altars for the symbols of the most Holy Trinity of the

Eternal Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, assigning the side altars to the sweet Virgin Mary and the

Servants of God.”24 It recommends also to “always to give due preference to the one God, just as the

Trisagion should always be more frequent than the Rosary. Preferences shall be given to novenas to the

Holy Trinity, the Heavenly Father, to Jesus, and the Holy Spirit…”25

Through these aformentioned declarations, the IFI thereby relates its Faith to that Faith that

they had known and been accustomed with―the (Roman) Catholic Faith. This is obvious in the IFI’s

practices e.g. Proclamation of the Apostle’s Creed in baptism, Baptism in the name of the Trinity, images

of the Trinity, Parishes dedicated to the Most Holy Trinity, etc. It was an attempt to relate the faith to

the incarnate Jesus who “became human to redeem us” and to “continue interceding for us”―an

expression that focuses on the Son’s continuing mediation of grace to humanity’s needs and struggle

against foreign domination.26

Independent in Polity. The IFI was envisioned as a Filipino Catholic Independent Church: catholic

by faith and independent in ecclesial governance.27 The term ‘Filipino’ explains its distinctiveness as an

ecclesial body irrupted from people’s religious nationalism.28 But this nationalism of the IFI was founded

upon the concept of justice, for it believes that all persons were all equally children of God which not to

be divided by nor be subjected to any abuse because of ethno-cultural origins or social class status in

society. It is clear in its understanding of Catholicity: “Our Church is Catholic, that is, Universal, because

in reality it is profoundly cosmopolitan by conviction and sentiment, considering all men without any

distinction children of God, and it bears the designation ‘Philippine Independent’ only to identify it as an

association of free men who, within the said universality, admit servility to no one.”29

Its dominant ecclesial character resembles the characteristics of a servant church. Wherein, it

understand salvation as an integral fulfillment of the promised freedom and liberty, the hope for a new

23 DCR, Part One, Chapter III, Section I.24 DRC, Part One, Chapter III, Section III. 25 Ibid. Section VI.26 Ibid. Chapter II, Section I. 27 See: 1902 Constitution of the Philippine Independent Church, Sections Two and Three. 28 Epistle VI.29 DRC, Second Part, Chapter I, Section II; cf. also Epistle VI.

12

world “wherein there is abundance and equality”. Thus, the struggle for liberty and equality, justice and

freedom becomes the very constitutive elements of its life and ministry, a Church pro Deo et Patria.

2. The Struggle towards Theological Magnification

Nonetheless, the IFI had to struggle to purify its teachings and practices in order to conform to

the faith ones delivered to the saints. With this, it suffered theological pairs that marred its genuinity

that became subject in order that the validity of its baptism becomes a “suspect” to the Roman Catholic

Church. However, with the conformity of the American Episcopal Church, that walks hand-in-hand with

the IFI, the later “regain” the path of the univesal faith. Thus these are the issues discussed in this

subsection, (1) its forty years of theological pains, and (2) its theological settling down in 1947.

2.a Theological Pains of IFI from 1906 to 1940

In the inception of the IFI, matters of theology were never the concern of the Filipino masses. It

was suffice that the clergy and people have gratified deep within them, i.e.: no longer under the pope

and had a sense of emancipation from foreign control.

Sources of Theological Pains on Baptism

The primary sources of theological that pinched the IFI were the “official books” of whom de los

Reyes admitted that he was the author but “published under the name of Aglipay” so that the clergy

respect these books.30 Only two of these books, namely: the Oficio Divino and Catequesis, were relevant

on the account of the IFI baptism during these period.

1.The Oficio Divino. The Oficio Divino was an IFI official book of worship. It was culled primarily

from the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and Roman Missal, while at the same time introducing

certain swift of “liturgical innovation and teaching” remains Trinitarian in practice. Nonetheless, one

should not miss the footnotes of the Oficio Divino as ready references to these innovations and

teachings. It has three parts. The first part called Novisimo Evangelio, which mainly a harmony of the

Gospels. The second part was the Cultus Eucharistico plus other offices for morning and evening prayer

and observances of the Church’s year. The third part was the Ordinal, which principally “The Ceremonial

30 Letter dated 18 June 1929 to Fr. Niguel Saderra Máso SJ. This letter is quoted in Achutegui and Bernard, The Religious Revolution in the Philippines, 4 vols. (Manila: Ateneo de Manila, 1960). They also enumerated these books with commentaries in pages 256-258. These were the Doctrina y reglas constitutionales (DRC), the Oficio Divino (OD), the Catecismo (CO), the Catequesis (CTQ), the Lecturas de Cuaresma, and the Biblia Filipina. They did not mentioned the Epistolas which is also an important book of the IFI, and the Biblia Christiana (1909) which its 1st part was printed only with a hundred copies and never been distributed; the 2nd part never published and became as collector’s item.

13

for Bishops and Presbyters” for the celebration of the remaining sacraments including the rites of

baptism.

In the Novisimo Evangelio, all contradictory accounts of the original Gospels were deleted and

only the miracles of healing were retained. Original sin was thought to be absurd, but of belief in life

after death. Jesus (born of the Virgin Mary) was God, but his manhood was an appearance only. It has

no sacrificial atonement because God cannot suffer upon the cross. Naturally, the Trinity of Persons is

not allowed, although there is a Trinity of attributes—God as Omnipotent Creator, God as Eternal Love

and God as Omniscient Providence.

Likewise, in the Cultus Eucharistico, Andrade and Yanga supposed that the “Oficio Divino was

aimed precisely to fulfill Christ’s purpose, specifically to uplift the Filipino fellowship in liberty, equality,

and fraternity. The Second Vatican Council finally articulated the function of liturgy to fulfill the

aspirations of all previous generations. Even before the epochal council, Don Isabelo de los Reyes, Sr.

had earlier written concrete provisions for it. May his memory be blessed for it forever.”31

Nonetheless, Whittemore affirms, “The essential thing to be emphasized about the Oficio Divino

is its deeply religious spirit as revealed by the sayings of Jesus quoted in the progress of the service, the

frequent use of the Psalms and in the content of the prayers, many of which are beautiful. As we look

through the book with a sympathetic eye, we are impressed not so much by its doctrinal deficiencies

(this point does not need to be labored) but by its spirit. Just as the fundamental theology of a Church

may be judged more by its hymn than by its official statements, so the prayers of the Oficio Divino reveal

deep, though hidden doctrinal foundations.”32

2. The Catequesis. As the title of the book denotes, it was about the so-called “doctrinal”

teaching of the IFI. It contains all of the so-called essential and fundamental elements of the faith.

However, after Aglipay’s death, on 10 October 1940, the Supreme Council of Bishops of the IFI declared

the Catequesis as not an official book of the church.

The fundamental tenets of this new theology of the Catequesis may be discerned in the Ordinal.

Evidently, since the different interpretations of the Trinity was allowed, both the conservatives and

radicals were content—at least they did not raise any objection whatsoever to the “new theological”

31 Moises b. Andrade and Edgar S. Yanga, The Oficio Divino and the Liturgy Inculturation by Isabelo de los Reyes, (Quezon City: Samba-Likhaan Foundation, 2002), 36.

32 Whittemore, 141.

14

trends in the IFI. However, it was only after 1920, when Bishop Aglipay was abrogating the Oficio Divino,

the alarm of the conservative group grew as well questioning the IFI “new” theological trends.

Thus, the following section deals primarily with the question on the IFI rites and teachings of

baptism in the so-called “Aglipayan books”. Whether these books were officially accepted or not by the

governing body of the church is out of the question; the fact is, these books caused IFI theological scars

especially if these were not properly appreciated with inquisitive wisdom.

Early Theological Notions on Baptism

The Aglipayan books have some marks “new theological” emphasis at time of IFI inception,

wherein others claim as ambivalent teachings and apparent gradual shift away from the Catholic

teachings.33 However, Whittemore concurs that while the IFI leadership grappled the problem of the

relationship of science and religion, “the great body of the Church was quietly going on its accustomed

way, administering the sacraments in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” 34

Likewise, Ellsworth Chandlee also claims that the vast majority of the IFI maintained the Trinitarian

faith.35

Consequently, the validity of baptism has been and continually the source of major controversy

between the IFI and the Roman Catholic Church, which continuously hang around today. Primarily, the

IFI baptismal rites and “teachings” in this period have employed unaccustomed procedures and

meanings, as “…the ancient sign or rite symbolic of our entrance to the sanctuary or communion of the

sons of God (Lev. 16: 4 and 24), a visible profession of our faith in God and the teachings of Jesus, a sign

of regeneration.”36 A special attention was emphasized from the pronouncement of the apostle Peter

that, baptism is “not a removal of dirt from your body; it is an appeal to God from a clean conscience”

(1Peter 3:21); however, it is necessary for “those who received God's spirit” Acts 10, 44-47; 11, 15 and

16.37 Thus, following this line of understanding, baptism per se has no intrinsic value of salvation, for

salvation can only be attained through the grace of God in understanding of the Gospel and the

conformity of conduct with its teaching. It states that, “Incorporation to the church of God is effected by

dying definitely to sin and by being born anew in the purity and grace of God – the spirit of virtue, peace

and charity, which cannot be had by ceremony of washing with water, but, by studying the Gospel and

33 Read the exposition of Achutegui and Bernard, The Religious Revolution in the Philippines, 279-310. 34 Whittemore, p. 145.35 Harry Ellsworth Chandlee, The Philippine Independent Church, 36 CTQ q 201.37 Note 2 of the Oficio Divino, 188.

15

adapting our conduct to its teachings.”38 It is an indictment of the “diluted and distorted” practices

during the “reign of obscurantism”. Of which in concurrence to the IFI objectives “to restore worship of

the one true God in all its (entire) splendor and the purity of its holy Word” and “to liberate the

conscience from all error, excesses and unscientific scrupulous against the laws of nature and blessed

good judgment”. This importance implies the interplay of the faith and the response of persons to the

gift of God, which is salvation in Christ. Herein, it acknowledges that faith in Christ alone is enough for a

person in order to be worthy recipient to the gift of God’s spirit. For salvation, herein, is the grace of

God, and therefore a sacrament is “A collection of ritualistic prayers by which we implore from God the

graces necessary for our salvation…But it does not have any intrinsic virtue whatsoever, otherwise it

would be a superstitious ceremony like ‘anting-anting’ [amulets].”39

It also emphasized that the baptism preached by Jesus is spiritual and can be attained not by

mere external ceremonies but by spiritual regeneration in the grace of God. Likewise, “The Lord did not

teach us any rite, the fact is that his baptism, like his worship, was purely spiritual. Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16;

Matt 3:11; John 1:33...that Jesus was baptizing with Holy Spirit…John 4:2, says finally that Jesus was not

baptizing with water, but his disciples…”40 What is emphasized herein is the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Furthermore, it was cited that, “Justin Martyr (year 138) was saying: ‘What need do I have of the water

baptism, I that I have been baptizing of the holy spirit?’"41 Nonetheless, in the Synoptic Gospels, Christ

referred to his death as a baptism (Luke 12:50; Mt 20:22; Mk 10:38). Likewise, it is also to emphasized

that the act of water baptism Jesus added the promise of the baptism with the Spirit, i.e.: His

redemptive work is applied to human beings (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Luke 3:16; Acts 1:4ff; 11:16). Hence,

spiritual baptism in Christ (by the Holy Spirit) synonymous with the actual application of the virtues of

the Lord’s death and resurrection to sinners (Mt 3:11) and the redeemed sinner is incorporated into the

spiritual body of Christ.

Nonetheless, the matter for baptism is pure water42; and the prescribed form is “X…in the name

of our Lord Jesus Christ I baptize you, and know that the only by washing ourselves entirely, especially

interiorly, may we have part in the kingdom of our celestial Father.”43 The form was explained and

38 CTQ q 202.39 CTQ q 196, 197 and 198.40 Oficio Divino, Footnote no. 2; see also: CTQ q 202.41 Ibid.42 See the rubrics in the Oficio Divino, 200; CTQ q 202.43 The prescribed formula “X…En el nombre de nuestro Señor Jesucristo † yo te bautizo y sabed que sólo lavándonos por

completo, principalmente en lo interior, podremos tener parte en el reino de nuestro Padre celestial (Oficio Divino, p. 201).

16

justified that it was “Only in Jesus’ name the apostles were ‘baptizing’ according to his Acts and

Epistles.”44 Nevertheless, in both Acts (2:38; 8:12 and 16; 10:48) and Didache, the phrase “baptized in

the name of the Lord” were mentioned, wherein it was also interpreted as the formula that was being

used. Also in Acts 19:5, the twelve new converts “they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus”,

and eventually received the Holy Spirit from Peter.

Its effect was in order to be in “…the communion of the sons of God,” 45 but it cannot effect

remission of original sin nor cause the infusion if sanctifying grace. The denial of the remission of original

sin is in conjunction to the rejection of the existence of limbo.46 The IFI out rightly rejected the existence

of limbo and even of purgatory. The other justification is that, the sanctifying grace is a gift from God

and cannot be achieve through external rituals or “good works”. The preconditioned for baptism is,

“Each of you must turn from your sins and turn to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for

the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). These notions

imply the interplay of faith and the desire for baptism. Therefore, baptism is a mere sign conferred in

the name of Jesus to those who wish to make a visible profession of faith in God and manifest their

spiritual cleanliness or rebirth in grace by the observance of the old rite of washing oneself with water.

This would also imprint the description of IFI as “a congregation of new men (and women) educated in

and liberated by the teachings of Christ, dedicated to the worship of God in spirit and in truth, nourished

and sustained in the Eucharist, and commissioned to be witnesses to God’s love in the world”. 47 Of this,

Osborne similarly explains that all baptismal liturgies in the early Church which was explained in

different terms “point out to and speak about what is the very heart of baptism: the presence of God to

an individual. As rebirth, baptism does not focus simply on the birthing, but on the birthing to

something: new life with God”.48

In conclusion, IFI baptism, herein, is a sign or a ritual conferred through water in the name of

Jesus to those who wish to make a visible profession of faith in God and manifest their spiritual

cleanliness or rebirth in grace. What is emphasized is baptism in the Holy Spirit, not water baptism. In

the main, the emphasis herein is the biblical practices and the pre-Nicene understanding of baptism. As

44 See footnote no. 5 of the OD, p. 201: “Es falsa la interpolación en el Evangelio de Mateo de que se bautizaba en el nombre de la pagana Trinidad de dioses. Sólo en el nombre de Jesús bautizaban los apóstoles según sus Actas y Epístolas.”

45 (CTQ q 201).46 “Los Limbos y el Pecado Original”, CTQ (Manila, 1912), 28 and 29. 47 IFI Canons, No. 2; See also in “La Iglesia Filipina Independiente” CTQ, 2-3.48 Kenan B. Osborne, The Christian Sacraments of Initiation: Baptism, Confirmation, and Eucharist (New Jersey: Paulist

Press, 1987), 85.

17

a final point, the sanctifying grace of God is a gift and cannot be attained through “good works” or even

through a sacrament; but it is a gift from God.

Nonetheless, by 1930, Bishop Servando Castro, Bishop of the Ilocos and the elder statesmen,

believed that the Church had gone far from astray and should return to its original position. He made his

opposition known in the public press saying that the rank and file of the Independents was opposed to

the new changes of the doctrine. Hence, he led the movement to return to orthodoxy after the death of

Isabelo de los Reyes and of Aglipay.49 Nonetheless, the theological contribution of Isabelo de los Reyes

and of Aglipay in broad perspective can be recognized its essential validity if there were to be a true

Reformation in the Philippines.

Bishop Norman Binsted of the Episcopal Church wrote: “A small and highly influential minority

within the Church was contaminated with Unitarianism (or liberal theology, mine) though overwhelming

majority of the clergy and laity firmly adhering to the Catholic faith and practices…by reference to the

Holy Bible and the Fundamental Epistles (never abrogated), the sixth of which concludes with these

words: “‘Holy, holy, holy, Eternal Trinity, to Whom we owe our religious liberty! Full are the heavens, the

earth and the whole creation of thy glory. Amen.’”

2.b Theological Settling Down in 1947

The final settling of IFI doctrine and of the bestowal of apostolic succession marked not an end,

but the beginning of the IFI to be come closer with the rest of the Christendom. It is acclaimed as “That

event left our people full of joy. To them the words of Jeremiah 31:12 can be applied: ‘Their soul is a

garden well-watered; no longer shall they languish.’”50

The IFI Affirm to Confess the Universal Faith

After a forty arduous years of theological wandering causing insurmountable theological pains,

the IFI, though it had not truly abandoned its original position, affirmed its orthodoxy to the Apostolic

and Catholic faith.

The Declaration of Faith and Articles of Religions was voted unanimously by the General

Assembly in 1947 which signaled the “theological settling down” of the IFI and become once again a

‘Church one with the Churches of the ages’. The General Assembly univocally declared to believe in:

49 Whittemore, 149-150.50 IFI Ecumenical Commission, “The Iglesia Filipina Independiente in the World” published in 1966, 15.

18

1. The Holy Trinity . One God, true and living, of infinite power, wisdom and goodness the Maker and Preserver of all things visible and invisible. And that in the unity of this Godhead there be three Persons, of one substance, power and eternity the Father who is made of none, neither created nor begotten; the Son who is of the Father alone, not made nor created, but begotten, the Holy Ghost who is of the Father and the Son, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

2. Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God . Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, the second Person of the Trinity, very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father, took man’s nature in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, after she had conceived by the Holy Ghost. He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried. He ascended into Heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence, He shall come to judge both the living and the dead.

3. The Holy Ghost . The Holy Ghost, the Lord and the Giver of Life, Who proceeds from the Father and the Son, Whom with the Father and the Son together we worship and glorify.

4. One Catholic and Apostolic Church . The Church, Holy Catholic and Apostolic, which is the Body of Christ, founded by Christ for the redemption and sanctification of mankind, and to which Church He gave power and authority to preach His Gospel to the whole world under the guidance of His Holy Spirit.”

Likewise, the Articles of Religion that contains religious tenets such as on salvation, Holy

Scriptures, Ancient Creeds (Apostles and Nicene Creeds), among others, were in equivocally approved

and affirmed as well.

The IFI Received the “Gift of Apostolic Succession” in the Anglican Line

It was also in 1947 when Isabelo de los Reyes Jr. as the Obispo Maximo with the clergy and

people decided that the theology of the Anglican Communion, represented in all essentials, the IFI’s own

developed thought. The clergy and people, wishing to settle the Church in line with the Apostolic

Christianity, petitioned the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America to confer on the

IFI the “gift of Apostolic Succession” through The Right Rev. Norman S. Binsted, Bishop of the Philippine

Episcopal Church.

The petitioned for consecration was finally granted. On 7 April 1948, a great service was held in

the pro-Cathedral Church of St. Luke in Manila. Three bishops of the Philippine Independent Church

were consecrated in the Anglican succession. The three bishops at one consecrated the other bishops of

the Church and all priests and deacons were reordained.51

51 The three Filipino bishops consecrated in the Anglican line were Isabelo de los Reyes Jr., Manuel M. Aguilar and Gerardo Bayaca. The Rt. Rev. Norman S. Binsted, Bishop of the Philippine Episcopal Church was the Consecrator. Co-consecrators were the Rt. Rev. Roberto F. Wilner, Suffragan Bishop of the Philippine Episcopal Church, and the Rt. Rev. Harry S. Kennedy, Bishop of Honolulu.

19

III. The Fundamental Doctrines of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente on Holy Baptism: Theological Background and Practices

For the reason of theological oddities by the “Aglipayan books”, there were some distortion and

twisting on the IFI fundamental doctrine of Baptism especially those adversaries of the church.

Nonetheless, the following points must be considered as the IFI teaching on baptism.

1. Baptism is Instituted by Christ

The IFI affirms that baptism is instituted by Christ,52 which is rooted in His ministry, passion

death and resurrection. This assertion is ingrained in the biblical affirmation when Jesus sending the

apostles into the world, he commanded them to baptize (Matt. 28:18-20). It is also attested in the Acts

of the Apostles, the Pauline Letters of the New Testament, and the writings of the Fathers of the

Universal Church.

It is a divine institution as it is derived from the divinity of Christ. The IFI confesses that Jesus is

the Second Person of the Trinity and only through a vital faith in Him from whom one obtained

salvation. The IFI declares that, “Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, the second Person of the

Trinity, very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father, took man’s nature in the womb of the

Blessed Virgin, after she had conceived by the Holy Ghost.”53

However, one would raise the “theological scars” caused by the Oficio Divino, which denies the

institution of baptism. Precisely, to deny the divine institution of baptism would be heretical, but the

emphasis the Oficio Divino was the “spiritual baptism” in Christ (by the Holy Spirit), which synonymous

with the actual application of the virtues of the Lord’s death and resurrection to sinners (Mt 3:11). Thus,

it emphasizes that baptism is not a human institution, but a revelation from Jesus life and works. Despite

the fact that the “institution by Christ” has been constantly held, churches are disunited when such

institution of baptism took place. Therefore, the teaching that Christ institutes baptism is a matter of

theological opinion. Baptism is neither a historically nor humanly established ritual,54 but rather a matter

of faith wherein God’s grace is at work.

2. Baptism is Necessity for Salvation

52 Article of Religion (AR), No. 4. 53 Declaration of Faith, No. 2.54 Osborne, 13-14.

20

Likewise, IFI reaffirms that Baptism is “held to be generally necessary to salvation.”55 As it

professes that, “The Sacraments are outward and visible signs of our faith and a means whereby God

manifest His goodwill towards us and confers grace upon us.”56 Jesus as recorded in John in order to

have life has declared the necessity of baptism for salvation. Tertullian likewise attested that, "The

prescript is laid down that 'without baptism, salvation is attainable by none' chiefly on the ground of

that declaration of the Lord, who says, 'Unless one be born of water, he hath not life.'"57

In like manner, Justin Martyr attested that those who believed and be baptized shall be saved as

an exposition on the John 3:5, saying, “There, the one who refuses to be baptized is to be condemned as

an unbeliever, partially on the basis of what Jesus told Nicodemus…'Except a man be baptized of water

and of the Spirit, he shall by no means enter into the kingdom of heaven.' And again: 'He that believeth

and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned.'"58

Cyril of Jerusalem attested the necessity of baptism in order to attained salvation. "If any man

does not receive baptism, he does not have salvation. The only exception is the martyrs, who, even

without water, will receive baptism, for the Savior calls martyrdom a baptism [Mark 10:38]…Bearing

your sins, you go down into the water; but the calling down of grace seals your soul and does not permit

that you afterwards be swallowed up by the fearsome dragon. You go down dead in your sins, and you

come up made alive in righteousness"59

In one point, these patristic fathers indict the ambivalence of the IFI’s early understanding of

baptism as necessary for salvation. For it, a sacrament has no intrinsic value but only a “rite” of

incorporation to the body of Christ by “which we implore from God the graces of salvation”. Herein, the

issue is not really with the theological notion of baptism, but with Jesus. Hence, the issue is

Christological with impingement to ecclesiology. What the IFI denies is the superficiality of the

sacrament of baptism or any sacrament in that wise. It despises the constricted understanding of a

sacrament as “superstitious ceremony”. Theoretically, baptism is necessary for all; but the practical

consideration of baptism is the acceptance of Jesus as the sole source of salvation. Hence, the primacy

faith in Jesus, “not the ceremony of washing with water”, is necessary in order to attain salvation

55 AR, No. 4.56 Ibíd. 57 Tertullian, “On Baptism”, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, pg. 674-675.58 Justin Martyr, "Constitutions of the Holy Apostles," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 7, pg. 456-457.59 Cyril of Jerusalem, (Catechetical Lectures 3:10, 12).

21

Foremost, the IFI emphasizes the dynamism of faith and baptism. It professes that, “Salvation is

obtained only through a vital faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, as Lord and Savior. This faith should

manifest itself in good works.”60 In concurrence to this assertion, Basil the Great was very emphatic on

the dynamism of faith and baptism in his exposition on the Holy Spirit. He said that, "Faith and baptism

are two kindred and inseparable ways of salvation: faith is perfected through baptism, baptism is

established through faith, and both are completed by the same names. For as we believe in the Father

and the Son and the Holy Ghost, so are we also baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of

the Holy Ghost; first comes the confession, introducing us to salvation, and baptism follows, setting the

seal upon our assent"61

Herein, it is implied that, baptism is both the gift of God to humanity and the human response to

that gift from God. Thus, acceptance of baptism equates, among others, ones response or faith in God

(good works) towards the growth into the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ. In the words

of Paul, “until we come to such unity in our faith and knowledge of God’s Son that we will be mature

and full grown in the Lord, measuring up to the full stature of Christ.” (Eph. 4:13). In other words,

personal commitment to maturity in faith is deem for those who received baptism in Christ, a life of

continuing struggle for maturity of stature and yet of abiding experience of God’s saving grace through

the Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 3:8).

Precisely, this is the impetus of the impetus of the IFI Statement on Mission62 and the ethical

implications of “good works” which was not only call for personal consecration, but also to strive for the

realization of God’s will and purpose in all realms of life “for the glory of God through Christ” (Rom.

6:9ff), for all united with Christ in baptism and heirs of God’s promises (Gal. 3:27-28), and all trials are

only to test faith that bring glory when Christ revealed to the whole world (1 Peter 2:21-46).

3. The Form and Matter in the Celebration of Baptism

In the IFI Canons, baptism is administered “in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy

Spirit.”63 The Filipino Ritual affirms that the Priest shall thrice pour water upon the candidate, “N...I

BAPTIZE THEE IN THE NAME OF THE + FATHER, AND OF THE + SON, AND OF THE HOLY + GHOST.

Amen.”64 As pointed out by Orbone that, “Since the trinitarian doctrine of the Church developed

60 AR, No. 1.61 Basil the Great, “The Holy Spirit” 12:28.62 IFI “Statement on Church Mission”, 1977.63 AR, No. 4.64 Filipino Ritual, 63.

22

precisely to vindicate the incarnation…baptism into Jesus would be seriously compromised if the

Trinitarian formula was ambiguous or incorrect. The centrality of Jesus in baptism was is at stake in this

insistence on a correct trinitarian formula”.65 Nonetheless, as Whittimore affirms the Oficio Divino

formula was discarded and that “the great body of the Church was quietly going on its accustomed way,

administering the sacraments in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Spirit,”66 the

precise Trinitarian formula is used and affirmed by the whole church.

Accordingly, the IFI administer baptism by “pouring of water over the child’s head three times”

rather than immersion. Both immersion and “pouring” were commonly practiced during the apostolic

and patristic fathers. In the Didache, baptism was conducted “in living [running] water; however, the

absence of it (living water), there was a proviso to “pour water three times on the head”, and use the

form of baptism. It states that, "After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and

of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water. If you have no living water, then baptize in

other water, and if you are not able in cold, then in warm. If you have neither, pour water three times

on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Before baptism, let the

one baptizing and the one to be baptized fast, as also any others who are able. Command the one who is

to be baptized to fast beforehand for one or two days". 67

Hence, the practice of “pouring water three times” has been a customary practice in the

apostolic fathers for a valid administration of baptism. What should be emphasized therefore are the

significance and the associations of “water” in the Christian faith, not how the “water” is being used in

the administration of baptism. Irenaeus reminded as that, "As we are lepers in sin, we are made clean

from our old transgressions by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord. We are thus

spiritually regenerated as newborn infants, even as the Lord has declared: 'Except a man be born again

through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.'"68

Herein, the symbolic dimension of water in the celebration of Baptism is taken seriously. The

use of water, with all its positive association with life and blessings, signifies and represents the

purification of a person desiring for baptism; thus, those who are baptized are made partakers of a

65 Orbone, Christian Initiation, 15.66 Whittemore, p. 145.67 Didache, 7:1.68 Irenaeus, "Fragments From Lost Writings", No. 34, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, 574.

23

renewed existence in Christ. Tertullian emphasized, “Baptism itself is a corporeal act by which we are

plunged into the water, while its effects are spiritual, in that we are freed from our sins”.69

4. The Ministers of Baptism

The ordinary minister of Solemn Baptism is the Priest. However, a deacon may administer

Solemn Baptism if granted permission of the bishop. Nevertheless, in extreme cases any baptized person

can perform “private baptism”. The IFI rite for “The Administration of Holy Baptism” 70 and Canons of the

Church, both affirm that, “The ordinary minister of Solemn Baptism is the priest. The deacon may

administer Solemn Baptism with the permission of the bishop or the priest, which may be granted, when

necessity demands.”71

However, in extreme and extraordinary cases any baptised person can perform baptism using

“the proper matter and form, and has the right intention” as further stated that, “Private Baptism may

be given by anyone who uses the proper matter and form and has the right intention. At least one

witness must be present.”72 In solemn Baptism, the ritual of the Church shall be strictly followed. 73

The usual norm in the IFI, baptism is administered in church, public oratories or chapels.

However, it can be administered at home with the expressed permission of the Bishop,74 hospitals and

clinics only in case of necessity and pastoral reason requires, with the permission of the Bishop.

Furthermore, in any case, the ritual of the Church should be followed.

5. The Effects and Meaning of Baptism

The IFI unequivocally declares that baptism “signifies and confers grace cleansing from original

sin as well as actual sin previously committed”75 The primary presumption on baptism is an absolution,

cleansing and purification into new covenant with Christ. These notions are affirmed in the New

Testament: “a cleansing of the heart of all sin” as well as an act of “justification” (Heb. 10:22; I Peter

3:21; Acts 22:16; 1 Cor. 6:11). Thus all baptized are “born again” (John 3:5) in Christ under the guidance

of the Holy Spirit. These likewise understood from the affirmation of Clement of Alexandria, saying, "We

are washed from all our sins, and are no longer entangled in evil. This is the one grace of illumination,

69 Tertullian, On Baptism, 7:2.70 Filipino Ritual, 57.71 IFI Canons, Chapter X, Sec. 2.72 Canons, Chapter X, Sec. 3.73 Ibid., Sec. 9.74 Ibid., Sec. 7.75 AR, No. 4.

24

that our characters are not the same as before our washing... In the same way, therefore, we also,

repenting of our sins, renouncing our iniquities, purified by baptism, speed back to the eternal light,

children to the Father."76

Also in baptism, the IFI adheres that God bestows the anointing and promise of the Holy Spirit to

the candidates. Likewise, God marks all baptized persons with a seal of inheritance as children of God.

The Holy Spirit indwells believers (Rom 8:1-27; 1 Cor 6:19), gives gifts (1 Cor 12:4), and produces the

“fruits of the Spirit” Gal 5:22-23). Cyprian was very emphatic on the sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit,

saying "For he who has been sanctified, his sins being put away in baptism, and has been spiritually

reformed into a new man, has become fitted for receiving the Holy Spirit; since the apostle says, 'As

many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.'77

The IFI likewise affirms that baptism “effects our entrance into the Church of God.” 78 Hence, it

brought to the union with Christ, with each other and with the Church of every time and place. In the

introduction of the Church Canon, it states that, “The Church is the Body of which Jesus Christ is the

Head, and all baptized people are the members.”79

Through baptism and incorporation to the body of Christ, it is a sign and seal of common

discipleship. Baptism likewise unites us to Christ in faith, thus a basic bond of unity as one people to

confess and serve one Lord in each place and in all the world.

Thus, the union with Christ in baptism constitute a call to the believers in order to visibly

manifest unity and fellowship for, “There is ...one baptism, one God, and Father of us all...” (Eph. 4:4-6).

It is apparent in the IFI also that baptism initiates the reality of new life, into the community of the

faithful, in pilgrim towards the kingdom of God. Consequently, baptism is a sign of the kingdom of God and

of the life of the world to come. The IFI affirms that, “The Church on earth is a pilgrim who goes out with

faith and looks forward to the city with which he has foundation, whose builder and maker is God (Heb.

10:10) who calls all men to repentance and salvation in Jesus Christ. She is the agent, the forerunner on

earth of the Kingdom of God, because her organization and institution constitute the method and the

sacramental means which God employs in exercising His sovereignty over those who accept His

Kingdom.”80

76 Clement of Alexandria, "The Instructor," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, 216-217.77 Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, 387-388.78 AR, No. 4.79 IFI Canons, “Introduction,” 1.80 IFI Statement on Church Mission, No. 5.

25

Through baptism, the church as “forerunner of the kingdom of God” is missionary in character.

The Church is not only called by God to be His people and sent them like the apostles “to make disciples

of all nation” (Matt. 28:19), likewise in John “As the Father has sent me even so I send you…Receive the

Holy Spirit” (Jn. 20:21-22).81

Lastly, the IFI acclaims that, “Jesus entrusted his ministry to the ekklesia (the Church)… Jesus

associates the Reign of God (cum: Kingdom of God), not with the salvation of souls, but with the

restoration of the wellbeing and wholeness of the human person. Our ministry affirms the wellbeing and

wholeness of the human person, thus our advocacy for the basic rights of the peasants and workers.”82

In his letters, Cyprian affirms that being received in to the church through baptism, “then finally

can they be fully sanctified and be the sons of God...since it is written, `Except a man be born again of

water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God'".83

6. The Subjects of Baptism: Believers and Infants

First, it should be understood that baptism is a personal profession of faith. Hence, only

unbaptized persons can be baptized based on theological principle that baptism effects incorporation to

the body of Christ and means to attain salvation. Therefore, the capacity to be baptized is based on two

conditions: (a) that the recipient be a human being still living, and (b) the recipient is not yet been

baptized. The latter is an affirmation to the Creed of the undivided church, belief ‘in one baptism for the

remission of sins’.

In the IFI Canons, subjects of baptism can either an adult or infants. For adults to be admitted to

baptism, the Canons set the following provisions, “An adult shall not be baptized except with his consent

and after due instruction in the principal mysteries of the faith. His assent to these points of faith and his

promise that he will keep the commandments of the Christian religion shall be deemed sufficient for

adult baptism.”84 The IFI has the provisions for those who are insane and insanity: “Persons who have

been insane from birth should be baptized as infants. Those suffering from lethargy of delirium or

insanity may be baptized only during lucid intervals while they are conscious and have expressed their

81 Ibid., No. 15-17.82 IFI Statement on Ministry.83 Cyprian of Carthage, Letters 71[72]:184 IFI Canons, Chapter X, Sec. 5.

26

desire to be baptized.”85 Moreover, godparents are required for the candidates, “Ancient custom

provides that no one is baptized unless he has, whenever possible, a sponsor, should be observed.”86

Likewise, priests are enjoined to admonish the faithful for the immediate baptism of children.

This admonition is enshrined in the rubrics of the rites of baptism, “The Priest of every Parish shall often

admonish the People, that they defer not the Baptism of their Children, and that except for urgent

cause, they seek not to have their Children baptized in their houses. There shall be for every Child to be

baptized, when they can be had, one Godfather and one Godmother, who are not the Parents of the

Child.”87

Nevertheless, infant baptism is also considered as a living tradition of the church as the apostles

have been administering baptism even to infants. While the New Testament does not explicitly state

when or whether the believers should have brought their children to be baptized, is not silent on the

subject. In fact in Luke 18:15-16, one could read that “they were bringing even infants” to Jesus; and he

himself, related this to the kingdom of God: “Let the children come to me...for to such belongs the

kingdom of God”. In “bringing someone to Jesus” means leading someone to faith. In fact the Scriptures

very much emphatic, that no way is bringing anyone to Jesus apart from baptism.

Nonetheless, Peter declared, “Each of you must turn from your sins and turn to God, and be

baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the

Holy Spirit. This promise is to you and to your children...” (Acts 2:38-39). Furthermore, the apostolic

Church baptized whole “households”, a term encompassing children and infants as well as servants (Acts

16:33; 1 Cor 1:16).

It is the very reason why Origen was very insistent that infant baptism was also a tradition in the

Church. He clearly stated this way, "The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving

baptism even to infants. For the apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries,

knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sin, which are washed away through water and the

Spirit."88

He even emphasized in his Homilies on Leviticus, "Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by

the filth of wickedness and sin…In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according

to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which

85 Ibid., 6.86 Ibid., 8.87 Filipino Ritual, 57.88 Origen, Commentaries on Romans 5:9.

27

required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would

seem superfluous".89

Likewise, Hippolytus was very vigorous in saying that, "Baptize first the children, and if they can

speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them".90 In

like manner, this is the basic reason why in baptism, the IFI requires godparents for the children to be

baptized. It emphasizes that, “The responsibility of Godparents is to pray for their children and to aid in

their nurture that they shall grow to be faithful Christians and good citizens...Let all God parents teach

their Godchildren to become practicing Christians, they should work, pray and give for the spread of

Christ’s Kingdom”.91

Furthermore, towards the concluding part of the rite of Baptism, the minister has to exhorts the

Parents and God parents in this wise,

“My beloved Parents, Godfathers and Godmothers of this Child.“Holy Church commands me to remind you of your duties to this Child: to raise him

by the teachings of the Gospel, that in due time, he may willingly ratify the pledge you have now given in his name.

Ye shall keep him far from evil and all possible temptations...bring him up in the love of God, in charity with his neighbours, and in purity of life...”92

89 Homilies on Leviticus 8:3.90 Hippolytus, The Apostolic Tradition 21:16.91 Christian Register, Vol. 5, No. 2, 4.92 Filipino Ritual, 65-66.

28

Afterword

The Iglesia Filipina Independiente affirms adherence to the universal faith. Likewise, it asserts to

have received the fullness of God’s revelation to carry on the ministry of salvation. Similarly, it believes

to hold the essentials of the Christian faith. Nevertheless, it avows observance to the practices and

fundamental teachings of the universal church in administering the Sacrament of Holy Baptism.

The in ability of some churches to recognize or to “suspect” the validity of IFI baptism, Osborne

reminds that “...a ‘theology of baptism’ includes much more than merely the New Testament data or the

solemn teaching of the Church. There is a large historical variances and pluralism, or ritual variances and

pluralism, and of theological opinions. This found in all Christian Churches. If this area of ‘opinion’ or

‘variances’ or ‘pluralism’ is not acknowledged, then Churches tend to absolutize areas which in no way

represent ‘solemn teaching’”.93

Nevertheless, the IFI is active for Christian Unity throughout the world even before its

membership in 1958 to the World Council of Church (WCC). This depict the togetherness of the IFI with

all the non-Roman Catholic Churches confessing the Trinitarian faith of the Nicene Creed, baptism in the

name of the Trinity (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) and the celebration of the Holy Eucharist by sharing the

gift of the Apostolic Succession.

Of special significance was the IFI-American Episcopal Church Concordat of Full Communion in

22 September 1961 based on mutual acceptance on the following:

(1) Each Communion recognizes the catholicity and independence of the other and maintains its own.

(2) Each communion agrees to admit members of the other Communion to participate in the Sacraments.

(3) Full communion does not require from either Communion the acceptance of all doctrinal opinion, sacramental devotion, or liturgical practice characteristic of the other, but implies that each believes the other to hold all the essentials of the Christian faith.

Shortly, several Concordats with non-Roman National Churches were approved, as follows:1. The Church of the Province of the West Indies—September 1, 19622. The Church of the Province of Central Africa—November 12, 19623. The Church of the Province of West Africa—19624. The Church of the Province of East Africa—19625. Church of India, Pakistan, Burma and Ceylon—January 18, 19636. The Nippon Sei Ko Kai—March 15, 19637. The Church of Ireland—3rd Week of May, 1963

93 Osborne, The Christian Sacraments of Initiation, 22.

29

8. The Lusitania Church—October 9, 19639. The Church of England—October 16, 196310. The Episcopal Church in Scotland—December 5, 196311. The Anglican Church of Canada—196312. Church of Uganda and Ruanda and Urundi—196313. Spanish Reformed Church—196314. The Church of the Province of South Africa—February 17, 196415. The Church of the Province of New Zealand-April 29, 196416. From the Old Catholic Episcopate—September 22, 1965

a. The Old Catholic Church of Hollandb. The Old Catholic Church of Austriac. The Old Catholic Church of Czechoslovakiad. The Old Catholic Church of Germanye. The Old Catholic Church of Polandf. The Old Catholic Church of Switzerlandg. The Polish National Catholic Church of Americah. The Old Catholic Church of Yugoslavia

17. The Episcopal Church of Brazil18. The Church of Sweden19. The United Church of Christ in the Philippines20. The Episcopal Church of the Philippines

These Concordats of full communion concluded with the IFI affirms that the IFI is but part of the

universal body of believers in the redemptive imperatives of the Gospel; thus, it is in communion with

the church universal. These further affirm that the Sacrament of Holy Baptism administered by the IFI is

unequivocally recognized by non-Roman Catholic Churches worldwide as validly administered with

pouring of water in the name of the Father, of the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Nonetheless, the unity of Christian believers and churches is not on the ritual of baptism but the

faith in Jesus through the sacrament of baptism. Christology is the primal unity of Christian Churches,

rather than its ecclesiology nor sacramentology, since the proper perspective of both ecclesiology and

sacramentology derived from Christology.#

30

Bibliography

Achutegui and Bernard, The Religious Revolution in the Philippines, 4 vols. Manila: Ateneo de Manila, 1960.

Agoncillo, Teodoro A. Introduction to Filipino History. Quezon City: R. P. Garcia Publishing Co. Inc., 1974.

Andrade, Moises B. and Edgar S. Yanga. The Oficio Divino and the Liturgy Inculturation by Isabelo de los Reyes. Quezon City: Samba-Likhaan Foundation, 2002.

Bosch, David J. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2001.

Catequesis de la Iglesia Filipina Independiente, 1907.

Dimayuga, Paul. “Messianic Leaders of the Revolution.” In Philippine Centennial Series, at http://www.bibingka.com/phg/religious/dt.htm; Internet.

Doctrinas y Reglas Constitutionales, 1903.

Eduarte, Salvador D. “Religious Imperialism in the Philippines: Some Critical Reflections.” Asian Journal of Theology, Vol. 3, No. 2, (1989): 473-483.

El Pueblo, 28 September 1902.

Filipino Ritual, Manila 1969.

Gowing, Peter G. “The Disentaglement of Church and State in the American Regime in the Philipines.” In Studies in Philippine Church History, ed. Gerald H. Anderson, 203-222. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1969.

Guerrero, Amado. Philippine Society and Revolution (PSR), Third Edition.USA: International Association of Filipino Patriots, 1979.

Herald Magazine, 3 August 1932.

Iglesia Filipina Independiente, Constitution and Canons, Manila 1977.

___________, The Iglesia Filipina Independiente in the World, Manila 1966.

___________, Six Fundamental Epistles.

___________, Statement on Church Mission, 1977.

___________, Statement on Ministry.

Oficio Divino, 1906.

Osborne, Kenan B. The Christian Sacraments of Initiation: Baptism, Confirmation, and Eucharist. New Jersey: Paulist Press, 1987.

31

Roberts, Alexander and James Donaldson (Eds.), Ante-Nicene Fathers, 7 Vols. at http://www.anf.com.

Scott, William Henry. Cracks in the Parchment Curtain and other essays in Philippine History. Quezon City: New Day Publishers, 1985.

Shirmir, Daniel S. and Stephen R. Shalom (Eds.). The Philippines Reader. Quezon City: KEN Incorporated, 1897.

Stephen Neil, Colonialism and Christian Missions. London: Lutterworth Press, 1966.

The Christian Register, Vol. 5, No. 2, 4.

Young, Louis S. and Henry D. Northrop. Life and Heroic Deeds of Admiral Dewey. Philadelphia, 1899.

32