Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 36 views

    Lantin-Rph-Retraction of Rizal

    Uploaded by

    Alwin Lantin
    1) The two accounts of Rizal's retraction provide differing details, with Father Balaguer claiming he convinced Rizal to retract and condemn Masonry while the Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila account says Rizal did not initially sign the retraction. 2) The Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila account is seen as more credible as it contains specific details of events and times, while Father Balaguer's account is viewed as biased and opinionated. 3) Based on the sources, a definitive conclusion cannot be made about whether Rizal truly retracted due to the lack of clear evidence and reliability of the witness accounts.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Lantin-Rph-Retraction of Rizal

    Uploaded by

    Alwin Lantin
    36 views4 pages
    1) The two accounts of Rizal's retraction provide differing details, with Father Balaguer claiming he convinced Rizal to retract and condemn Masonry while the Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila account says Rizal did not initially sign the retraction. 2) The Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila account is seen as more credible as it contains specific details of events and times, while Father Balaguer's account is viewed as biased and opinionated. 3) Based on the sources, a definitive conclusion cannot be made about whether Rizal truly retracted due to the lack of clear evidence and reliability of the witness accounts.

    Original Title

    LANTIN-RPH-RETRACTION OF RIZAL

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The two accounts of Rizal's retraction provide differing details, with Father Balaguer claiming he convinced Rizal to retract and condemn Masonry while the Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila account says Rizal did not initially sign the retraction. 2) The Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila account is seen as more credible as it contains specific details of events and times, while Father Balaguer's account is viewed as biased and opinionated. 3) Based on the sources, a definitive conclusion cannot be made about whether Rizal truly retracted due to the lack of clear evidence and reliability of the witness accounts.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    36 views4 pages

    Lantin-Rph-Retraction of Rizal

    Uploaded by

    Alwin Lantin
    1) The two accounts of Rizal's retraction provide differing details, with Father Balaguer claiming he convinced Rizal to retract and condemn Masonry while the Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila account says Rizal did not initially sign the retraction. 2) The Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila account is seen as more credible as it contains specific details of events and times, while Father Balaguer's account is viewed as biased and opinionated. 3) Based on the sources, a definitive conclusion cannot be made about whether Rizal truly retracted due to the lack of clear evidence and reliability of the witness accounts.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 4

    Alwin Lantin BSEE-2C Readings in Philippine History 04/13/22

    “Retraction of Rizal”

    “Account of Father Vicente Balaguer”

    • September 1896:

    - Rizal boarded a boat in Manila to proceed to Cuba and continue as a


    medical officer.

    • December 1896:

    - Jose Rizal was imprisoned and sentenced to death in Spain.

    - he summoned the Jesuit Fathers.

    - he signed the retraction and made a profession of faith.

    - around 10 am of December 29, both Fr. Balaguer and Fr. Vilaclara


    arrived in Rizal’s prison cell.

    - Fr. Vicente and Rizal talked and seemed to have argued about
    Religion.

    - on that day, he also managed to convince Rizal to denounce Masonry


    and return to Catholic.

    - at the night December 29th, he wrote the copied report published by


    the Barcelona Review.

    - on December 30 of 1896 was executed in Bagumbayan (currently


    known as Luneta), Manila.
    “The Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila Accounts”

    • December 1896

    - at 7:50 am of December 29 Jose Rizal was accompanied by his


    counsel Señor Taviel de Andrade and Fr. Jose Vilaclara when he was
    sentenced to death.

    - He was also served a light breakfast light breakfast afterwards.

    - At approximately 9 am the Garrison Adjutant Señor Maure asked


    Rizal what he wants, then Rizal asked for a prayer book which was
    brought by Fr. March.

    - 10 am in the morning the Jesuit Father presented Rizal with a


    prepared retraction that he refused to sign.

    - At 12:30 pm Rizal ate some poached eggs and chicken then


    afterwards asked the Jesuit Fathers to leave for him to have some
    time to write retraction.

    - At 3 pm Rizal handed the retraction to Fr. March. The chief of the


    firing squad Señor Juan del Fresno and the plaza assistant Señor
    Maure was informed and signed the document Rizal has written.

    - At 3-5 pm accompanied by Fr. March and Fr. Vilaclara, Rizal prayed


    and kneeled on the altar while reading his prayer book several times.

    - In the afternoon of 6 pm, the family of Jose Rizal arrived and then he
    embraced them while he bade them his farewell.

    - At 8 pm in the evening Rizal was served with tinola as his last meal.

    - The plaza assistant Señor Maure and both Jesuit fathers Fr. March
    and Fr. Vilaclara visited the accused at 9 pm of the evening.

    - On December 30, around 5 am of the morning Rizal’s lover arrived


    with his sister dressed in mourning. At the point of his death, the
    nuptial was performed in a chapel.

    - At 7:30 0f the morning Jose Rizal was handcuffed by a European


    artilleryman, and they went to his place of execution accompanied by
    the Jesuits and the plaza assistant. He was also given a picture of
    the holy virgin which he kissed repeatedly.

    - Afterwards, the execution of Rizal happened at Manila.


    COMPARISON OF THE TWO ACCOUNTS

    ACCOUNTS OF CUERPO DE ACCOUNT OF FR. BALAGUER:


    VIGILANCIA DE MANILA:

    SIMILARITIES:
    1. Father Vicente was 1. Undeniably self-opinionated.
    not mentioned in this
    account. 1. Contain important
    2. Lacks information.
    2. This account seems to informations about Rizal’s
    be more accurate. retraction.
    3. Mentioned some informations
    3. Gives better 2. Tells us how Religious Rizal
    before the retraction.
    information about the was.
    4. Claims that he convinced Rizal
    retraction of Rizal. 3. Shows how brutal the
    to retract and convert to
    4. Mentioned important Spanish Government was.
    Catholic.
    events that happened 4. Both accounts show how
    5. Shows more emotion about
    after the retractions. Rizal was unjustly sentenced
    Rizal’s situation.
    5. Tells us that Rizal did to death.
    6. Tells how important masonry
    not sign the retraction. 5. Both contain facts about the
    was for Rizal.
    6. Stated the time of the retraction.
    events.
    7. Concrete information.

    Guide questions:
    1. What was the major difference between the two testimonies?

    2. Based on the comparison, what does it say about the credibility of the witnesess?

    3. Based on the witnesses, can it be concluded that Rizal really retracted?


    ANSWER TO GUIDE QUESTIONS:

    1. The major difference between the two accounts is that these


    two tells us two different things during the signing of Rizal’s
    retraction. In Father Vicente Balaguer’s account, he stated
    that after their argument about “Religious things”; he
    managed to convince Rizal on condemning the masonry and
    convert into being a Catholic. Also, he mentioned that after
    their long argument he convinced Rizal to retract before his
    execution. In the other hand, the testimony presented by the
    Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila states that upon arguing to
    the Jesuit Fathers namely Fr. March and Fr. Vilarica; both of
    them did not convinced Jose Rizal to sign the retraction
    before his execution. It is also clear that the account of the
    Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila seems to contain more
    concrete informations about the events occurred
    before,during and after the retraction of the accused Jose
    Rizal.

    2. After reading and comparing both testimonies of the


    witnesses, I think that the account of Father Balaguer was
    mostly based on his self-opinion and emotions. While reading
    his testimony, I realized that most of his given informations
    were opinionated and seems to be biased. Comparing his
    testimony to Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila accounts which
    has the legitimate copies of the important documents
    including the Rizal’s retraction, the credibility of the sources
    of informations given by the CVM is way more believable
    than of Fr. Balaguer’s account.

    3. It has been argued for a long time whether Rizal really


    retracted or not. Due to lack of evidence, we can’t conclude if
    Rizal really retracted before his execution. Opinions cannot
    be used as evidence to prove something. In order to obtain
    the credibility of Rizal’s retraction, there must be enough
    reliable sources and evidences to support these claims.

    You might also like