Readings in Philippine History: Christine Michelle A. Balancad BSN 4B

Readings in
Philippine History
Submitted by:
Christine Michelle A. Balancad
BSN 4B
The Retraction
of Dr. Jose Rizal
BEHIND THE CONTROVERSY
A retraction is the act of taking back an offer
or statement, or admitting that a statement
was false.
Dr. Jose Rizal (1861-1896)
He is regarded as one of the most important
personalities in Filipino history. He was a
versatile scholar and political activist most
known for his political writings, which
spurred the Filipino revolution and
eventually led to his death by Spanish
invaders.
The Controversial Retraction of Dr. Rizal
The alleged retraction of Dr. Jose Rizal, which concerned his return to the
Catholic Church and all other matters connected to it, including his marriage
to Josephine Bracken, is one of the controversial subjects in the history of
the Philippines.
Roman Catholic defenders maintained certain claims to be true, whereas

opponents of retractionism asserted these claims to be false. Although they
contend that the retraction document is a forgery, handwriting experts have
long since agreed that it is authentic. Hence, the discussion about whether or
not Rizal retracted.
English Translation of the Retraction
I declare myself a Catholic and in this Religion in which I was born and educated I wish to live
and die.
I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications and conduct has been
contrary to my character as son of the Catholic Church. I believe and I confess whatever she
teaches and I submit to whatever she demands. I abominate Masonry, as the enemy which is of
the Church, and as a Society prohibited by the Church. The Diocesan Prelate may, as the
Superior Ecclesiastical Authority, make public this spontaneous manifestation of mine in order
to repair the scandal which my acts may have caused and so that God and people may pardon
me.
Manila 29 of December of 1896
–José Rizal–
The Different Versions
There are allegedly four distinct versions of
Rizal's retractions:
1. The initial text was released on

December 30, 1896, the day of Rizal's
execution, in La Voz Española and
Diaro de Manila.
2. The second text, written by an unnamed author who eventually identified
himself as Fr. Balaguer, first appeared in the monthly magazine La
Juventud in Barcelona, Spain, on February 14, 1897.
3. The third one was purported to be the "original" text, and it was found in
the archdiocese's archives on May 18, 1935, after going missing for 39
years starting in the late afternoon of the day Rizal was killed.
4. The short formulation of the retraction is contained in the fourth text,
which first appeared in El Imparcial the day after Rizal's execution.
Significant Differences from the “Original”
1. First, instead of the words "mi cualidad" (with "u") which appear in the
original and the newspaper texts, the Jesuits’ copies have "mi calidad"
(without "u").
2. Second, the Jesuits’ copies of the retraction omit the word "Catolica"
after the first "Iglesias" which are found in the original and the
newspaper texts.
3. Third, the Jesuits’ copies of the retraction add before the third
"Iglesias" the word "misma" which is not found in the original and the
newspaper texts of the retraction.
4. Fourth, with regards to paragraphing which immediately strikes the eye

of the critical reader, Fr. Balaguer’s text does not begin the second
paragraph until the fifth sentences while the original and the newspaper
copies start the second paragraph immediately with the second
sentences.
5. Fifth, whereas the texts of the retraction in the original and in the
manila newspapers have only four commas, the text of Fr. Balaguer’s
copy has eleven commas.
6. Sixth, the most important of all, Fr. Balaguer’s copy did not have the
names of the witnesses from the texts of the newspapers in Manila.
Behind the Controversies and Arguments
Fr. Vincent Balaguer
He claimed to have communicated with Rizal
to persuade him to renounce Masonry and join
the Catholic Church.
Visited Rizal three times in his cell until his
recant. He presented two templates in which
Rizal chose the short formula.
Fr. Pio Pi
A superior Spanish Jesuit, who transcribed
and transmitted the retraction of Rizal.
He sent Fr. Balaguer and Fr. Vilaclara to
Rizal’s cell to get him to change his anti-
Catholic views and his Masonic affiliation.
Archbishop Bernardino Nozaleda
Asked Fr. Pio Pi to accommodate the spiritual
needs of Rizal.
He approved two retraction templates to be
presented to Dr. Jose Rizal in his cell.
Thomas Gonzales Feijoo
He is the Secretary of the Chancery who received the letter from
Archbishop Nozaleda, entrusted on safekeeping the retraction of Rizal.
Following that, no one was able to access the records for inspection and
the letter was eventually deemed lost after efforts of searching.
Fr. Manuel Garcia
In 1935, decades after, he claimed to have found the
“original” letter of retraction. In the letter, Rizal
declared himself a Catholic and retracted all he had
said, written, published, or done against the
Catholic Church.
He immediately contacted Manila Archbishop
Michael O’Doherty regarding this.
Archbishop Michael O'Doherty
Received the report from Fr. Garcia that the
original letter of Rizal has been found.
The letter appeared in the Philippines Herald on
June 15, 1935, with the title "Rizal's Retraction
Found.
Senator Rafael Palma
He is the author of Biografia de Rizal. He
claims that the letter is inconsistent with Rizal's
character and mature convictions.
He dubbed the tale of the retraction as a "pious
fraud”.
He stated that the certificate of canonical
marriage of Rizal and Bracken were denied, and
that Rizal was not given a Catholic funeral.
Austin Coates
British author who wrote a biography of José Rizal,
also known as the Philippine Nationalist and Martyr.
He mentioned that Rizal thought that the Franciscan
bishop was the main perpetrator of deception and that
it was this friar who demanded that he retract.
Rizal is aware that if he retracts, it would do damage
and have an impact on him. He also thought he had
nothing to apologize for before God.
Commissioner Rene Escalante
On August 4, 2016, the OIC of the National
Historical Commission of the Philippines, read a
“Professorial Chair Lecture on Rizal Studies” entitled
“Re-examining the Last 24 Hours of Rizal Using Spy
Reports” De La Salle University.
The study mentioned another account on the
retraction of Rizal, one from Federico Moreno, an
agent of Cuerpo de Vigilancia, which contradicts with
the reports of Fr. Balaguer during that time.
Inspector Jefe Frederico Moreno
In the testimony of Cuerpo de Vigilancia, he reported that Rizal likewise
recanted but never named Fr. Balaguer in his report.
The material in his report conflicts with Fr. Balaguer's affidavit. One of
them is that neither did he go to Rizal's cell and persuade him to retract,
nor did he include Fr. Balaguer in his report.
He stated to have listed all persons who entered Rizal’s cell. Fr. José
Vilaclara and Fr. Estanislao March were the only two Jesuits named in his
report, both of which transpired on the letter of retraction.
The Arguments
1. If it were true, Rizal did not initiate his retraction, the Catholic Church
did.
The reason the friars wanted Rizal to recant was that his works had a
bigger influence and revealed the situation in the Philippines,
especially the activities of the friars and colonial authorities. To
basically elevate themselves, they wanted Jose Rizal to claim that
nothing he said or wrote was accurate.
2. If Rizal had truly retracted, he would have received the Catholic
sacraments that were previously described.
Scholars are dubious of Jose Rizal's retractions because they claim that
the only reason they wanted Rizal to do so was so they could
administer the catholic sacraments. However, after the execution, his
body was not handled in a catholic manner in the sense that he would
be given some blessings, hold a mass, and be buried in a catholic
cemetery.
3. The public was not shown the original letter. Just copies of the letter
were released.
The actual letter itself was not made available. The credibility of the
document is weakened if an original is not made available to the
public. Due to the absence of the original document, it diminishes the
veracity of Rizal's retraction.
Possible Reasons for Rizal’s Retraction
If the retraction indeed took place, the following would be the possible
reasons of Rizal:
1. To avoid further punishment and protect his town and family;
2. To formally recognize Josephine as his legal wife;
3. To assist the Church in cleaning its reputation; and
4. To convince the Spanish government to implement changes.
Conclusion
Whether Jose Rizal did retract or not, many researches feel that Rizal had
the moral fortitude to admit his errors in the retraction paper.
The fact that he recanted and returned to his faith may or may not be
genuine, but this does not lessen Rizal's status as a great hero of such
magnificence.
References
Jose Rizal [The Retraction]. (n.d.-a). http://www.joserizal.ph/rt03.html
Jose Rizal [The Retraction]. (n.d.-b). http://www.joserizal.ph/rt02.html
Prof Next Door. (2020, May 28). Rizal’s Retraction: Thoughts and Ideas - Readings in Philippine
History [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyD760wSw_M
Xiao Chua. (2020, June 4). Xiao Time: Retraction ni Jose Rizal, totoo kaya? [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYzG6tbcYxk

Readings in Philippine History: Christine Michelle A. Balancad BSN 4B

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Readings in Philippine History: Christine Michelle A. Balancad BSN 4B

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Readings in Philippine History: Christine Michelle A. Balancad BSN 4B

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Readings in

Roman Catholic defenders maintained certain claims to be true, whereas

1. The initial text was released on

4. Fourth, with regards to paragraphing which immediately strikes the eye

Jose Rizal [The Retraction]. (n.d.-b). http://www.joserizal.ph/rt02.html

History [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyD760wSw_M

You might also like