Jose Rizal's Retraction: Chay Eugenio BSTM 1 Readings in Philippine History

POSITION PAPER
Jose Rizal’s
Retraction
Chay Eugenio
BSTM 1
Readings in Philippine History
Introduction of the Controversy
As we all knew Dr. Jose P. Rizal is our national hero because he fought from freedom in a silent
but powerful way. He expressed his love for the Philippines through his novels, essays, articles
and poems rather than a force of aggression. But do we really know him? Do you? Or all along
we are being deceived by our own national hero?
Rizal’s retraction is still one of the country’s greatest historical issue. This story of
retraction has been told and retold and has created tremendous.
Sides and Evidences
Rizal Retracted
Archivist Fr. Manuel Garcia, C.M. discovered the “original" text containing the so-called
retraction formula in the archdiocesan archives on May 18, 1935, thirty-nine years after Rizal’s
execution.
The Text appears to have been released to the press and published after the death of rizal but the
original document was not produced until 1935. Because, immediately after Rizal's death, Fr.
Balaguer gave it to Fr. Pi and Fr. Pi gave it to Fr. Nozaleda in order for his secretary to keep it.
There are two (2) major arguments that support Rizal's Retraction. These are:
The Retraction “Document” found in 1935 was considered imperative evidence to the Retraction,
itself; and there were eyewitnesses closely associated with the events. According to Ricardo P.
Garcia’s “The Great Debate: The Rizal’s Retraction”, there were two (2) great testimonies of
eyewitnesses who were privy to what happened in Rizal’s cell from early morning of December
29 to 6:30 am of December 30. They are:
 Fr. Vicente Balaguer. According to the priest's testimonies, the reasonable Rizal had
several rude awakenings; confessed, celebrated mass, had Communion, and prayed the
Rosary four (4) times.
 Former Lieutenant of the Infantry, Mariano Martinez Gallegos. He confirmed that Rizal
himself signed a document called a retraction along with key eyewitnesses Juan del
Fresno and Eloy Moure. Both named eyewitnesses confirmed Gallegos' statements.
To further cement the arguments, new documents were released with new interpretations. These
are:
The Cuerpo de Vigilencia (transcript portion seen below);
Translation of the Transcript:

“At 7:50 yesterday morning, Jose Rizal entered death row accompanied by his counsel, Señor
Taviel de Andrade, and the Jesuit priest Vilaclara. At the urgings of the former and moments
after entering, he was served a light breakfast. At approximately 9, the Assistant of the Plaza,
Señor Maure, asked Rizal if he wanted anything. He replied that at the moment he only wanted a
prayer book which was brought to him shortly by Father March.
“Señor Andrade left death row at 10 and Rizal spoke for a long while with the Jesuit fathers,
March and Vilaclara, regarding religious matters, it seems. It appears that these two presented
him with a prepared retraction on his life and deeds that he refused to sign. They argued about
the matter until 12:30 when Rizal ate some poached egg and a little chicken. Afterwards he
asked to leave to write and wrote for a long time by himself.
“At 3 in the afternoon, Father March entered the chapel and Rizal handed him what he had
written. Immediately the chief of the firing squad, Señor del Fresno and the Assistant of the
Plaza, Señor Maure, were informed. They entered death row and together with Rizal signed the
document that the accused had written. It seems this was the retraction.”
Rizal's short writing in Josephine Bracken's copy of, "De la Imitacion de Cristo (The Imitations
of Christ:
Rizal's frequent mentions of "cross" in his final writings.

Rizal Died Defiant
Arguments that counter the Pro-Retraction have been proposed by some historians due to some
loopholes that the pro-Retraction has failed to overlook. These are:
 The Retraction letter itself is not authentic according to some historians;
 Josephine Bracken herself remains unmarried; and
 The aftermath of the pro-Retraction's arguments point to a different direction.
The Stand
Positive Stand
I believe that Rizal retracted and just renounced from the freemasonry and not from his
Nationalistic works. It is not possible to forge his retraction letter because there were said to be
witnesses during the signing of Rizal and that the evidence speaks for itself. As for the character
of Rizal, I believe that Rizal was human in character and not a perfect person and are bound to
have flaws. Moreover, Rizal wanted to be at peace when he dies and that’s why there was
retraction.
Negative Stand
Maybe, those documents that were found by Spaniards are made to make us Filipino believe that
their hero is Christian again, so that the majority of Filipinos will be a Christian and it will be
widespread throughout the country. Spaniard manipulating Filipinos through Rizal.
Final Stand
As for myself, if I would be asked what I believe, I must say, I do not know what to believe and
who to believe. I just thought that whether Rizal retracted or not, I know the fact that what he
wrote about the Spanish Church in the Philippines at that time was the truth and there’s nothing
to be retracted about. I also know that Rizal was a believer of God. He had always Faith in Him
but he strongly disagreed of the twisted ways of the friars who ran the Church and the
Government during the Spanish Regime. And his works, his letters, his poems, his diary entries,
and during his last moments, his life as a whole, could attest to his Strong Faith in Him. And for
me, that was more important than knowing the truth about his retraction. From the presented
Retraction paper, I like that idea of him dying as a Catholic.
At some point I thought, If he really did retract, then I can say that it’s his choice and he
probably had his reasons but it also does not change the fact that he died serving and honoring
his beloved country, my perception about him will not also change, it might be relevant for
others, but for me, it does not make any difference since Rizal’s life as a whole is bigger and
significant than this retraction paper of him that if it was true was just one aspect of his life and
“…it detracts nothing from his greatness as a Filipino.”
References
Cavanna, J. M. M. (1961). Rizal's unfading glory: A documentary history of the conversion of

Dr. Jose Rizal, Volume 1. California: The University of California
Garcia, R. P. (1964). The great debate: The Rizal retraction. California: The University of
California
Pascual, R. R. (1950). Rizal beyond the grave: A reiteration of the greatness of the martyr of
Bagumbayan. Michigan: The University of Michigan
https://assenad.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/an-argument-on-whether-rizal-retracted-or-not/

Jose Rizal's Retraction: Chay Eugenio BSTM 1 Readings in Philippine History

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jose Rizal's Retraction: Chay Eugenio BSTM 1 Readings in Philippine History

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Jose Rizal's Retraction: Chay Eugenio BSTM 1 Readings in Philippine History

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

POSITION PAPER

Translation of the Transcript:

Rizal's frequent mentions of "cross" in his final writings.

Cavanna, J. M. M. (1961). Rizal's unfading glory: A documentary history of the conversion of

You might also like