Sy, Sophia Stefan A.

2M3
April 3, 2018

I. Summary of the article

The Rizal Bill of 1956 Horacio de la Costa and the Bishops- by John N. Schumacher, SJ
The committee of bishops requested Horacio Dela Costa to draft a pastoral letter for the
church regarding the two novels of Jose Rizal particularly, the Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo being prescribed as a reading material for public and private schools. This was
when the church still viewed the two novels as anti-Catholic. Schumacher searched through De
la Costa's papers to analyze a few drafts of the bishop’s statement. The first of which actually
expressed a positive view on Rizal, with Dela Costa’s full-throated support of Rizal, even
regarded him as a "builder of a nation" and said that Rizal “possessed to an eminent degree those
moral virtues which together make up true patriotism.”

The draft A goes ahead to clarify with thorough intelligence why the books were not
against religion or the Catholic church, but rather appropriately denounces the practices of the
Church amid Rizal's era. This draft pictured Rizal is not one with an “Unthinking love” for his
country and that Filipino people suffered greatly not just under the colonial rule but also with
their own vices and defects. Rizal’s novels with further interpretations, was about bringing
attention to the ill practices and abuses done by “unfaithful priests” and excessive invocation of
saints. These scandals of the church does not make the Catholic doctrine untrue, but tarnishes its
principles. Fictional narratives such as those that are written by Rizal may cause more harm than
good if not interpreted correctly. The Satirization of the Catholics such as Padre Damaso and
Salvi may be may exaggerate the heinousness of the church and might be a way to disregard
Catholics like “the wise Padre Fernandez and the faithful Padre Florentino.”

In draft C, a new paragraph is added and showed the lapses of the faith of Rizal. The
original qualification of “moral” principles was omitted. The rest of the draft pictured Rizal as a
political and social reformer but not a moral one. An objection to Rizal’s Novels was written and

1|Page
stated that the portrayal of the friars as “licentious scamps” are seen even with adult readers.
Dela Costa also observes the insertion of liberal Catholics or Catholics who have lost their faith.
The rest of the draft states that the high school students should not be given the entire text
of the novel instead, should be given an abridged version adapted to their age levels. With all the
changes, Dela Costa is still firm with his stand that the novels were not made to attack the
Catholic religion but the scrutiny behind it was the real target. His final draft in 1952 still allows
the reading of Rizal’s novels but with careful guidance of teachers and professors.

However, four years later (April 21, 1956) Claro M. Recto introduced to the congress his
bill that would obligate the students to read the novels. Schumacher, however, seen that the
statement released was a watered down version of what Dela Costa had written. A trend in
omissions was found with the intention of avoiding the attraction of the attention of Spanish
religious orders.

After referring to canon law that permits the denial of specific books, the bishops'
announcement restricted the reading of the Rizal’s books with the exception of when permitted
by ecclesiastical authorities. This consent would just be given to people with adequate
information of Catholic principle. The statement also said that the bill recto passed was a
violation of the citizen;s “freedom of conscience,” since the students are obligated to read the
novels that is going against their religious beliefs and faith. Later on, it was also declared that
proliferation and possession of the novels is considered a sin.

However, the senators worked a compromise and the bill Recto filed was passed into a
law. Professor who have taught Rizal Course can testify that people did not conceive reading
these novels as a sin.

II. Comments and Insights

John Schumacher’s article uncovered movements behind the church’s statement

2|Page
for the pastoral letters, his draft has 5 versions to which are revised by church leaders such as Fr.
Cavanna.

In the final statement, only few of the original parts were included and the revisions
downplayed the significance of Rizal to avoid attracting the attention of the Spanish Religious
orders. Which was if further studied would be ironic since Rizal was praised for being brought
up by catholic schools. They even reinforced Rizal as someone who has an unthinking love for
his country and one who display the values of his Jesuit education. The "way" of Jesuit
Education entails that a person has morality closely intertwined with intellect, "an integral
relationship between the life of faith and the life of the mind". (Donahue 1992) He embodied
the Jesuit education in a means of making sure that his sense of morality permeates his
intellectual endeavors and that he is able to see the goodness in all things no matter what the
circumstances might be.

After the 1946 Philippine independence, education of the youth was the main
battleground of different sectors, views of students were crucial in handing down of faith and
beliefs, strongly believed by the church, should be of catholic faith. Threatened by the American
Colonization and the system of education that may brought about by Americans. The church
waged war with nationalization of school and the inclusion of nationalist publications in the
curricula of the students.
This is where the church is concerned, “The Philippines as a Christian nation the
bishops linked any form of nationalism independent of the church to those it considered
enemies, both new and old.” (Budde, 2016) Rizal's books recount some negative parts of
religion, with the characters of Padre Damaso and Padre Salvi as well as Kapitan Tiyago, , who
implored as much as a holy person in the story however won't not have mirrored this religious
sense regarding his activities. It would have been very simple for Dela Costa, or for anybody, , to
reject these cases as plain reactions of the Church, went for giving the individuals who don't
bolster the Church as an establishment with the fuel to tear them apart.

In any case, Dela Costa could utilize his sharp keenness and feeling of ethical quality and
goodness on Rizal's compositions keeping in mind the end goal to pinpoint bits of knowledge

3|Page
that went substantially more profound. He could deduce that Rizal was not hostile anti-catholic;
his works did not mirror a negative picture of Catholic teaching, but instead uncovered the
misuse and wrongdoings being conferred by the individuals from the Church, regardless of
whether these be in the higher positions, for example, the clerics or standard laymen.
Father Horacio de la Costa was not a twofold specialist in this engagement over Rizal, as
his contentions for the books were composed a long time before it would be discussed in the
Senate. De la Costa with the printed doctorate had basically connected his academic splendor to
the books and finished up – notwithstanding the overarching conclusion of the Church at the
time – what we underestimate today: Rizal was an ethical model who had an interestingly
shrewd comprehension of the country's history and a vision of equity that is as yet deserving of
interest. In the event that the Church had won with regards to doing this, the books would have
been overlooked today and the country would have been all the poorer in thought and
motivation.

Moreover, the Church wanted to eradicate that despicable piece of our Philippine history where
its clerics were more fascinated with power than everlasting life and the lessons of Christ. For
what reason can't our Church simply say "sorry" to the country for having a large number of its
clerics abusing the locals of the islands amid the Spanish Colonization. Filipinos are forgiving
people and can realize that numerous clerics are not any more that way.

III. Bibliography
Schumacher, John N. (2011). The Rizal bill of 1956: Horacio de la costa and the Bishops
[online]. Philippine Studies, Vol. 59, No. 4, 2011: 529-553

Donahue, J. (1992) Jesuit Education and the Cultivation of Virtue. Thought, 67, 2: 192-206,
Loyola eCommons, Ignatian Pedagogy Bibliography.

Budde, M. L., Anderson, B. P., Bingemer, M. C., & Butler, M. (2016). Beyond the borders of
baptism: Catholicity, allegiances, and lived identities. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books.

Bullivant, S. (2016). Theology and power: International perspectives. New York: Paulist Press.

4|Page
5|Page