P

OSITION PAPER
A Historical Controversy: The
Site of the First Mass in the
Philippines
Readings in Philippine History

Prepared by:
Erana, Jonafer N. BSTM 1I

October 29, 2024

I. Introduction of the Controversy
The site of the first mass became one of the well-known controversies in Philippine
history for a reason that there are more than one places claiming that the birth of Roman
Catholicism in Philippine islands was held on their respective locations. For the record,
there are four sites debating about the real venue of the first mass celebration but only two
of them have strong arguments and proofs to the point that they almost had unending
discussion about this matter.
488 years ago, Ferdinand Magellan rediscovered archipelago in March 1521 and
made a history. This part of our history started the controversy regarding where did the
first Catholic mass really took place in the Philippines. There are a lot of arguments and
evidences that were released by different sides which made the people more confused and
at the same time deepen their curiosity about the truth.
This controversy tested the reliability and credibility of the artifacts collected during
the time of Magellan and his fellow explorers. In this case, people may notice that
artifacts sometimes can be manipulated which may lead to unsolved issues and
misinterpretation of our history.

II. Sides and/or Evidences of the Controversy

According to the researches, the four places contesting for the site of the recorded first
mass in the Philippines are Pangasinan, Homonhon, Butuan and Limasawa. Each of them
has different viewpoint and evidences to support their arguments. However, the Butuan
and Limawasa became the two main arguments in the debate because both of them has
more evidences and stronger stand compared to the side of Pangasinan and Homonhon.
a. Pangasinan
In front of the St. James the Great Parish Church, located in Bolinao, Pangasinan, is a
marker stating that the first mass was celebrated in the Philippines in 1324.

After landing and

taking refuge in Bolinao,
Pangasinan during a stormy
weather, Father Odorico, a
courageous and religious
Franciscan missionary,
celebrated a Thanksgiving
Mass in honor of their safe
journey and his mission. He
also indoctrinated and baptized
many of the Malay immigrants
in Bolinao during that time.
b. Homonhon
According to Tomas “Buddy” Gomez III, a one-time press secretary of President
Cory, the First Mass could actually have been held not in Limasawa or Butuan but in
Homonhon. He cited records showing that Magellan stayed in Homonhon, which is now a
part of Samar Island, for eight days, including March 24 which was Palm Sunday. He also
claimed that Pigafetta never said that the Easter Mass in Limasawa was the ‘first’, neither did
any of the survivors of Magellan’s expedition.
c. Butuan

The evidences of Butuan are as follow:

 The name of the place: Masao/Mazaua

Proponents of the Butuan claim identify the place of the first Mass as Masao, located at
the mouth of the Agusan River in Butuan. They argue that "Mazaua," as mentioned in
Pigafetta's account, is a corrupted or variant spelling of "Masao." The Butuanon language
itself contains words similar to "Mazaua," with meanings suggesting a place of ritual or
offering. This linguistic connection is presented as evidence linking Pigafetta's "Mazaua" to
the specific location of Masao in Butuan. However, the etymology and precise meaning of
"Mazaua" remain debated, and this linguistic argument is not universally accepted.
 The route from Homonhon
The route from Homonhon to Butuan is a crucial element of the Butuan claim. Some
interpretations of historical accounts suggest Magellan's fleet sailed northwards along the
coast of Mindanao, passing through the Surigao Strait before reaching Butuan. This route is
consistent with a navigational path that would avoid the open ocean and utilize coastal
features for guidance. However, the exact route taken by Magellan remains uncertain, with
different interpretations of existing accounts leading to varying conclusions. The lack of
precise navigational data from the time period makes it difficult to definitively establish the
route.
 The Latitude Position
Pinpointing the precise latitude of Masao in 16th-century Butuan is challenging due to the
lack of accurate cartographic tools at the time. The latitude mentioned in some historical
accounts related to Mazaua does not precisely match the modern coordinates of Limasawa,
leading some to argue that it better aligns with a location in the Butuan area. However, the
accuracy of historical latitude measurements is debatable, and the discrepancies could be
attributed to inaccuracies in early cartography or variations in the coastline over time.
 The Geographical Features
The Butuan claim emphasizes the rich geographical features of the Masao area, including
fertile rice fields, abundant resources, and the presence of gold mines. These features are
presented as aligning with Pigafetta's description of Mazaua as an abundant and prosperous
place. In contrast, Limasawa is described as a smaller, less resource-rich island. However,
the descriptions in historical accounts are often vague, and the interpretation of "abundant"
can be subjective. Furthermore, the geographical features of both locations have likely
changed over centuries due to natural processes and human activity.
d. Limasawa
The evidences of Butuan are as follow:
 The evidence from Albo’s Log-Book
Francisco Albo's logbook, a primary source document, provides a navigational account of
Magellan's voyage. While less detailed than Pigafetta's account, Albo's log corroborates key
aspects of the Limasawa claim. He records the route from Homonhon, specifically noting
that after leaving Homonhon, Magellan's fleet sailed westward, then south-southwest, before
reaching Mazaua. This southwestern trajectory aligns with the geographical position of
Limasawa relative to Homonhon. The log also mentions the fleet's subsequent northward
journey towards Cebu, further supporting the idea that Mazaua was an island situated south
of Leyte, consistent with Limasawa's location.
 The Evidence from Pigafetta Account
Antonio Pigafetta's diary, a more detailed and widely known account, is crucial to the
Limasawa claim. Pigafetta explicitly names the island where the first Mass was celebrated as
"Mazaua," placing it at a latitude of 9 2/3 degrees north. This latitude is closer to Limasawa's
location than to Butuan. His account describes the island's geographical features and the
events surrounding the Mass, including the presence of the Rajah of Mazaua and the Rajah of
Butuan. Pigafetta's detailed narrative and map, though not perfectly accurate by modern
standards, provide strong circumstantial evidence supporting Limasawa.
 Summary of the evidence from Albo and Pigafetta
Both Albo and Pigafetta, as independent eyewitnesses, place the first Mass on an island
they call Mazaua. While their accounts differ in detail, they converge on key aspects: the
island's location relative to Homonhon and Leyte, the approximate latitude, and the events
surrounding the Mass. The consistency between these two independent accounts strengthens
the argument for Limasawa, as their descriptions align with its geographical characteristics
and proximity to the other locations mentioned in their narratives. The discrepancies between
their accounts can be attributed to different perspectives, memory, and the limitations of 16th-
century cartography.
 Confirmatory evidence from the Legazpi expedition
While not direct evidence of the first mass itself, the later expedition led by Miguel López
de Legazpi provides indirect support for the Limasawa claim. Pilots and navigators from this
expedition, familiar with the region, recognized Mazaua as an island near Leyte and Panaon.
This recognition, based on existing navigational knowledge and local understanding, suggests
that the location of Mazaua was well-established and consistent with the island now known as
Limasawa. This reinforces the interpretation of Pigafetta and Albo's accounts, indicating a
continued understanding of Mazaua's location in the region.

III. The Stand

1. Positive Stand
The evidences given by the side of Pangasinan as the site of the first mass might be
true since it was stated that the Thanksgiving Mass led by Father Odorico was celebrated in
the year 1324 which was way earlier than the other 3 places’ date of celebration. It is also
possible that Ferdinand Magellan wasn’t the one who started the First Mass in the Philippines
because there are also some sources saying that there were other foreigners who’ve been in
the country before aside from Magellan.
The evidences from Tomas “Buddy” Gomez III claiming that the site of the First Mass
could actually have been held in Homonhon and not in Butuan nor Limasawa is believable
since he cited records showing that Magellan stayed in Homonhon for eight days including
the Palm Sunday. Also, the fact that Pigafetta nor any of the survivors of Magellan expedition
didn’t mention that the Easter Mass in Limasawa was the ‘first’ so there’s a possibility that
the First Mass happened in Homonhon but was only unrecorded.
The side of Masao, Butuan has strong evidences that it is the site of the First Mass
compared from the first two. It makes sense that the name of the place, “Mazaua” which is
written from the journal of Pigafetta, refers to the Masao of Butuan. Thus, it is really possible
that it was celebrated there. Butuan also has a lot of artifacts which prove that Magellan
really did arrive to their place including the piece of the balanghai which they believe came
from the ship of Magellan during his expedition. This shows that there is really a big
possibility that the First Mass did happen at Masao, Butuan because they are also claiming
that Butuan is the first place where Magellan landed.
The Limawasa, on the other hand, has a lot of strong evidences as well. According to
Pigafetta’s journal, the place where the first Christian Mass happened in the Philippine soil is
an island lying on the Southwestern tip of Leyte. The position of Mazaua in Pigafetta’s
writings matched that of Limasawa. The measurement of distances between Homonhon and
Limasawa, and between Limasawa and Cebu, as computed by the Limasawa group, matches
or approximates the descriptions made by Pigafetta in his “The First Voyage around the
World” book. The Limasawa indeed has solid evidences and noticing how all the findings
match what’s on Pigafetta’s writings makes it more reliable and credible as the place where
the First Mass was celebrated.
2. Negative Stand
Both the side of Pangasinan and Homonhon has a point but there is a lack of further
evidences to support their claims especially to the side of Homonhon. Stating that Magellan
stayed in Homonhon is not a strong argument to prove that the First Mass really happened
there. The Pangasinan may have a strong argument if we will be based on the dates but it is
not enough since there were also no records to show except for the marker found in front of
the St. James the Great Parish Church in Bolinao.
Butuan may have a lot of evidences to show that Magellan really did arrive first at
their place but it is not an enough proof to conclude that the First Mass really took place
there. If we will base from the writings of Albo and Pigafetta whom are primary sources
because they’ve been with Magellan during his expedition, the place of Butuan doesn’t match
the characteristics both of them described on their journals regarding the “Mazaua”. It is
stated on Pigafetta’s writing that “Mazaua” is an island but looking at the place of Masao, it
cannot be considered as an island, rather, it is a barangay of Butuan City located in a delta of
Agusan River which can be a confirmation that it is really not the Masao, Butuan, where the
First Mass was held.
The Limasawa has really strong arguments and evidences but even if it matches what
was stated on Pigafetta’s journal, it doesn’t mean that they celebrated the First Mass there
because there was no definite statement from the primary source that it is the first and there is
really a possibility that they celebrated it in other place but was only unrecorded or wasn’t
mentioned on Pigafetta’s writing.
3. Final Stand
There are four places contesting for the real venue of the First Mass but we know that
there is only one place where it really took place and I believe that it is in the island of
Limasawa. Aside from the evidences they have, they have a record that the mass during
Magellan’s expedition happened there. Although, it wasn’t stated that it is the first, the fact
that the place of Limasawa matches the features of “Mazaua” is an enough proof and very
strong evidence compared to the three sites to conclude or to consider that the First Mass in
the Philippines took place in Limasawa Island in Visayas on March 31, 1521 officiated by
Father Pedro de Valderrama. It was also affirmed that in the same date, Magellan with his
troops planted a cross on the same site. The Limasawa is supported with a number of solid
proofs which includes the Albo’s log book, evidences of Pigafetta, and the evidence from
Legazpi’s expedition. In Albo’s account, he did not mention the first mass and where it took
place. However, he mentioned that Magellan planted the cross “upon a mountain-top from
which could be seen three islands to the west and southwest.” These best fits the description
of the geographical area of Limasawa. These are very strong proofs since these people have
been part of the expedition. Albo and Pigafetta both took part in Magellan’s expedition. The
former was one of the pilots in Magellan’s flagship “Trinidad” and the latter was a member of
the expedition itself. Therefore, it is based on eyewitness accounts. Additionally, the National
Historical Institute has already implemented a law which is the Republic Act 2733 or the
Limawasa Law and then it was the Gancayco Commission who confirmed that it really
happened in Limawasa due to the findings that they have gathered. These, for me, are already
enough to finally give a conclusion that Limasawa is the real site of the First Mass here in the
Philippines.
REFERENCES:

Amazing Butuan (2009). Site of the first mass, after 488 years controversy continues.
Retrieved from http://amazingbutuan.blogspot.com/2009/04/site-of-first-mass-after
Butuan: The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines. (2020). Prezi.com.
https://prezi.com/p/wxzjblnzmnrn/butuan-the-site-of-the-first-mass-in-the-philippines/?
fallback=1&need_sec_link=1&sec_link_scene=im
Danao, E. L. (2015). Where was the first Mass in the Philippines held? Retrieved from
The Manila Times:
First Mass in the Philippines. (2019). Studocu.
https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/adamson-university/readings-in-philippine-history/
first-mass-in-the-philippines/9598018?need_sec_link=1&sec_link_scene=im
Gomez, Tomas (2019). 'First Mass' in Limasawa: Fact or opinion? Retrieved from the
ABSCBN News: https://news.abs-cbn.com/blogs/opinions/08/24/19/first-mass-in-
limasawafact-or-opinion
PenTasTic (2012). Butuan or Limasawa? Retrieved from
Blogspot: http://mjagbo.blogspot.com/2012/01/butuan-or-limasawa.html
Philippines to GO (n.d.). Revolvy (n.d.). St. James the great parish church in Bolinao,
Pangasinan. Retrieved from http://www.philippinestogo.com/st-james-the-greatchurch-
bolinao/
To, C. (2015, January 9). first Christian mass in the Philippines. Wikipedia.org;
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Mass_in_the_Philippines?
need_sec_link=1&sec_link_scene=im
Yhesha Esmilla. (2024). Evidences in Butuan. Scribd.
https://www.scribd.com/document/528955938/Evidences-in-Butuan?
need_sec_link=1&sec_link_scene=im