There are many claims that are suggested and argued by many different historians in the Philippines regarding the first mass controversy or the introduction of Christianity in the Philippines issue. Throughout the centuries this unresolved issue or controversy were argued and studied to serve proofs that will support the claims of the historians on where or what place does the first mass was held. There are 2 places that appeared on the historian’s studies and claims where they believed the first mass was held. The Butuan City and Limasawa, Southern Leyte. These two places are said to be the place where the first mass celebration happens. Many findings are presented for these two places in order to prove their claims. It seems like at first, they believed that the place where the mass held is in Limasawa, but findings about the Butuan City should be that place are presented making the issue more confusing. Findings like, the only credible primary source regarding the first Christian mass in the Philippines is stated in Antonio Pigafetta’s chronicle of Magellan's expedition to the Philippine island, March 16, 1521. Here he stated that an island called “Mazaua” was the place where the first mass celebrated. This Mazaua is believed to be the Masao near Butuan City in Northern Mindanao. Unfortunately, the manuscript given to Charles V was never published and considered lost. Even with that the National Historical Institute (NHI) and Congress, still declared that the “First Mass” in the Philippines was held at Limasawa Island in Southern Leyte, through RA 2733 enacted in 1960. But the controversy to the first mass never ended up until in the present. The arguments in regarding this issue still, makes it seems like the people are still not yet satisfied or convinced about this belief. People still want to know the truth about the past, which is the reason why they are still seeking for more.
As for me, in my own opinion, I think and I believe that the first source written by Jani Arnaiz is more credible compared to other sources presented. Even though the author believed that Limasawa is the place where the first mass happens, the author still present findings contrary to his claims which I think supported more the claim of the authors. He thoroughly and detailed explain the issue and his claims, and the contradict claim to his. I think this makes more the readings easy to understand and expand the reader’s perspective about this controversy. The historian’s claims at the end are still not settled for the meantime that’s why they are seeking for more information and studying the issue so that people will be able to settle and enlighten their minds and perspective about what really happened in the past for their references in their study and for their appreciation in the present.