The declaration of the tercentenary of the devotion to the Virgin of Pefiafrancia in 2010 and other matters regarding the devotion have brought forth questions many dare not ask. Of course, when a centenary or any anniversary for that matter is declared, one of the most important points to be determined is where to begin the counting of the centenary or the anniversary.
The declaration has been ably explained from the point of view of history. In fact it refers to the one and only document available at the moment that states that the devotion was already in existence in 1710 as contained in the letter written by Fr. Miguel Robles de Covarrubias dated May 10, 1710 which was quoted in Bishop Francisco Gainza’s account El Santuario de Nuestra Senora de Pena-de-Francia, the one current and most authoritative source of every account and story on the origin of the devotion to the Virgin of Pena-de-Francia. At this point in time in the Archdiocese of Caceres, there is no research yet undertaken that is able to come up with documents and facts that could challenge the statements contained in the Gainza account and point to another year as the start of the devotion.
Bishop Gainza’s reference to the Covarrubias letter, however, was just a reproduction of a narrative published by Fray Domingo Caballero and printed in Salamanca, Spain, in 1728. Gainza himself found difficulty in determining the origin of the devotion. In fact, in his narrative, he did not give the precise date when the image was carved and varnished with dog’s blood. Perhaps, for Gainza the date when it all began is not as important as the devotion itself.
This brings us back to the fixing of the date of the tercentenary of the devotion in 2010. While declaring a tricentenary of the devotion may be commendable, fixing it in 2010 might not be historically correct. The May 1, 1710 letter itself of Fr. Covarrubias states: Concluida la ermita se llevo’a ella con solemne procesion la Imagen de Nuestra Señora, con el titulo de la Pena-de-Francia (After the chapel was constructed, thereto the Image of Our Lady, under the title of Peña-de-Francia, was brought in solemn procession). The implication in the letter is that even before May 1, 1710, the devotion was already existent. That period of existence of the devotion, before the May 1, 1710 letter was written by Fray Covarrubias, might be months or even years before the construction of the chapel was ever thought of. As of this moment this period is a gray moment in the history of the devotion and it is best left that way.
It is commendable that Caceres has commissioned Dr. Danilo M. Gerona, the historian of historians in Bikol, to make a research on the origin of the devotion in Spain. We are confident that Dr. Gerona can give color to this gray moment in the history of our devotion. Should Dr. Gerona come up with a year other than 1710, what would we do with the declared 2010 tercentenary? Is this declaration taken to preempt whatever Dr. Gerona finds in his research in Spain?
This brings back the issue on the method of reckoning the date of the Peñafrancia fiesta. The rescript issued by Rome fixing the date on “the Sunday after the octave of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary” could no longer be used as the basis for such a reckoning since the “octave” is for the exclusive use of Easter and the Nativity of Christ. Yet Caceres has been using it until today. Could the word “octave” mean eighth day? If the word “octavam” in the rescript is strictly interpreted as octave, then the Peñafrancia fiesta shall always fall on the third Sunday of the month of September. Why then did the rescript not state that the fiesta shall be on the third Sunday of September? Was the rescript making reservation on the meaning of “octavam” for such a probability that the fiesta might fall on the fourth Sunday of September? A case of another gray area?
We are asking these questions in our quest for answers. Faith, after all, demands of us to have unquestioning trust in God. But not when God’s instruments on earth fix dates on gray areas.
