POSITION PAPER (Rizals Retraction) SAMPLE ONLY

READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY (GE1 7 1 2 )
ONE PAST, YET VARIOUS HISTORIES: THE CONTROVERSIES AND DIFFERENCES IN

POINT OF VIEW IN THE PHILIPPINE HISTORY
m
er as
co
eH w
o.
rs e
POSITION PAPER ON JOSE RIZAL’S RETRACTION CONTROVERSY
ou urc
o
aC s
vi y re
Ben Hur Ambrosio II
Submitted by
ed d
ar stu
is
Th
Diko aram
Coach
sh
(November 9,2020)
This study source was downloaded by 100000830437266 from CourseHero.com on 09-19-2021 07:22:32 GMT -05:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/75291640/position-paper-jose-rizal-retractiondocx/
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Title of the Case Point
II. Introduction of the Controversy
III. Sides and/or Evidences of the Controversy
IV. The Stands
V. Final Stand (Generalization)
m
VI. References
er as
co
eH w
o.
rs e
ou urc
o
aC s
vi y re
ed d
ar stu
is
Th
sh
JOSE RIZAL’S RETRACTION CONTROVERSY
II. Introduction of the Controversy
For many years, Filipinos glorified respect for Jose Rizal because of his sacrifices and
huge contribution as a citizen of our country and his beliefs as an honest propagandist.
However, his reputation as an unwavering “bayani” has been doubted due to lingering issues
that contradict the very core reason why we Filipinos gratify his efforts, his existence in our
history. One of the most intriguing issues in our history was the issues of Jose Rizal on his
alleged retraction before his execution on the 30th of December, 1896 which was all about his
reversion to the Catholic Faith and all other issues linked to it such as his marriage to Josephine
m
er as
Braken. Many historians arguing whether Rizal retracted from what he had stated about the
co
eH w
Catholic Church or not. From Rizal’s statement: "I retract with all my heart whatever in my
o.
words, writings, publications and conduct have been contrary to my character as a son of the
rs e
ou urc
Catholic Church.", some says that this document is a forgery and the other are asserting that it’s
authentic and Rizal was the only who wrote and signed the retraction paper. There are
o
arguments found that depend the both claims.

aC s
vi y re
Retraction is the public statement made about an earlier statement that withdraws, cancel,
refutes, or reverses the original statement. In this case , he is taking back what he have stated
ed d
ar stu
against the Catholic Church and in the Philippines and the Friars. There were four well-known
reasons behind Rizal’s retraction. First, He wanted to marry Josephine Bracken and to make her
is
his wife legally. Second, He wanted to protect his family. Third, He wanted to reforms from the
Th
Spanish Government. Lastly, He wanted to heal the sickness of the Catholic Church. All theories
came from the retraction paper that was written by Rizal. Other people insist that Rizal did retract
sh
while some says that he did not. There are different evidences that appeared to defend each side.
In some sources, they state that Rizal’s alleged retraction did not actually happen. These
sources say that the friars who visited him within twenty four hours prior his execution convinced
him to confess the sins they accused him of committing. [1]The main motive, of which, is to
make Rizal admit his errors against religion and retract them. At least seven Jesuits visited Rizal
at various times during the course of the day.[2] If the friars of the future could state with
authority that Rizal’s expressed views were not what he really believed, it would cast an element
of doubt over everything he had written, making people hesitate to believe it.
m
er as
co
eH w
III. Sides and/or Evidences of the Controversy
o.
rs e
ou urc
Moreover like a coin, there were also two sides of the story. According to Teodoro Kalaw, a
professional on our hero’s writings and other handwritings experts, the retraction was originally
o
aC s
written by Rizal and it has been judged by them through their deep study. There are also
vi y re
prominent Philippine historians who uphold the authenticity of Rizal’s retraction such as Nick
Joaquin, Nicolas Zafra, Gregorio Zaide and many more. As of them, they consider the witnesses
ed d
ar stu
when Rizal wrote the retraction paper, signed the book of prayers of the Catholic, and recited
the prayers of the Catholic. Base on them, there were also people who saw him when he kissed
is
the crucifix before the execution. Rizal was also said that he had his 4 confessions, beheld by
Th
different qualified witnesses, newspapers, and historians including the leader of the Spanish
Supreme Court. And this affirmation was stated by Rizal’s great nephew [3]
sh
While the other stands for the contradicting, that of which claims Rizal of actually signing a
statement of his retraction. There are sources indicating that there are proofs of Rizal not
actually retracting. An example of such is his burial. He was not buried within a Catholic
cemetery and was listed as a suicide case, a neglected body along with the persons with
unknown causes of death.
If he did retract and admonished Masonry, then the Church, claiming his retraction and his
reconciliation with the religion, would have had the decency of giving him a proper Catholic
burial and declare his death under the list of Catholics, to acknowledge the confession the friars
claimed they witnessed Rizal committed. The alleged retraction papers also only were revealed
about thirty (30) years after Rizal’s death. A matter of concern was uprooted when two
statements of the declaration were recognized, both of which had a great deal of differences.
m
Some claim that one of these was fabricated, and some claim that the original copy aged and
er as
co
rotted in the grasp of the Spanish Catholic friars. [4] What they saw was a copy done by one
eH w
who could imitate Rizal’s handwriting while the original (almost eaten by termites) was kept by
o.
rs e
some friars. After analyzing six major documents of Rizal, Ricardo Pascual concluded that the
ou urc
retraction document, said to have been discovered in 1935, was not in Rizal's handwriting.
o
Senator Rafael Palma, a former President of the University of the Philippines and a
aC s
prominent Mason, argued that a retraction is not in keeping with Rizal's character and mature
vi y re
beliefs. He called the retraction story a "pious fraud."
However , Those who affirm the authenticity of Rizal's retraction are prominent Philippine
ed d
ar stu
historians such as Nick Joaquin, Nicolas Zafra of UP León María Guerrero III, Gregorio
Zaide, Guillermo Gómez Rivera, Ambeth Ocampo, John Schumacher, Antonio Molina, Paul
is
Dumol and Austin Craig. They take the retraction document as authentic, having been judged
Th
as such by a foremost expert on the writings of Rizal, Teodoro Kalaw (a 33rd degree Mason)
and "handwriting experts.

sh
IV. The Stands
There are also those who strongly believe that Rizal could not have had any reason to
retract, arguing that Rizal was a noble man who would not stoop so low as to follow those whom
he initially was writing against. A man of his character with such devotion and patriotism to his
country and, moreover, willingness to die for the country would break down in a moment and
write the alleged retraction for no other reason than to abjure masonry and return to the Roman
Catholic Church for fear of the damnation of his soul in case he did not do it.
Opinions in this issue would not be the same because some may agree and some may not. It
was also argued that Rizal retracted in order to save his family from further persecution, to give
Josephine a legal status as his wife, and to assure reforms from the Spanish Government.
m
er as
co
eH w
o.
rs e
ou urc
V. Final Stand (Generalization)
o
aC s
In my humble stand, retraction was being fabricated or fogged to make Rizal look as if he was
vi y re
defeated by the church. The ecclesiastical authorities at that time didn’t want to become
“poisoned” by the writings of Rizal. If they can convince the people that Jose Rizal retracted, all
ed d
ar stu
of his writings would be void.
When it comes to history, we may never be fully certain if an event really occur or did not. The
is
people can have the power to obscure or belie an occurance of an event and deceive others We
Th
also know that Rizal stands on what he believed in and could not be cowed by threat of eternal
damnation from anybody. Besides, he could remain a mason and a Catholic at the same time
sh
just as many masons in the Philippines. Knowing his character, he's clever enough not to let
those Spaniards get the upper hand. There are many documents and loopholes debunking the
idea of the retraction. If he retracted before his execution, then he must been buried properly. He
was buried in the place for those who are against the Catholic Church. He did not even get a
proper burial. If he died as a catholic, they should have given him the burial that deserves. And
also the retraction was made for Rizal to be able to marry the love of his life, which is Josephine
Bracken, then why was there no marriage certificate presented. And as we could remember from
our history, Offense against the Roman Catholic is an offense to both Spain and Rome .
Remember the power of Spain was accorded by the Vatican to the Catholic . And whether Rizal
retracted or not, it still didn’t changed the fact that his works led the Filipino people to fight for their
rights. His works stirred the nationalism and patriotism in the hearts of the Filipino and secure the
future generations. So It is immaterial whether Rizal retracted or not. One fact remains, Rome and
m
er as
Spain were both behind the death of Rizal.
co
eH w

o.
rs e
ou urc
o
aC s
vi y re
ed d
ar stu
is
Th
sh
VI. References
[1] An excerpt from The Life and Writings of Dr. José Rizal Chapter 16: Did
Rizal Retract paragraph 2
[2] An excerpt from The Last Hours of Rizal by Coates, as cited by
www.geocities.com/rizalretraction paragraph 3
[3] An excerpt from The Last Hours of Rizal by Coates, as cited by
www.geocities.com/rizalretraction paragraph 2
[4] An excerpt from www.joserizal.ph The Retraction paragraph 25
[5] A statement by Gumersindo Garcia, Sr., M.D., as cited by Maria Stella S
m
er as
Valdez, from the book Dr. Jose Rizal and the Writing of His Story
co
eH w
o.
Cavanna, Jose Ma. 1956. Rizal’s Unfading Glory: A Documentary History of the Conversion of
rs e
ou urc
Dr. Jose Rizal. Manila.
o
aC s
vi y re
ed d
ar stu
is
Th
sh
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

POSITION PAPER (Rizals Retraction) SAMPLE ONLY

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

POSITION PAPER (Rizals Retraction) SAMPLE ONLY

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

POSITION PAPER (Rizals Retraction) SAMPLE ONLY

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY (GE1 7 1 2 )

ONE PAST, YET VARIOUS HISTORIES: THE CONTROVERSIES AND DIFFERENCES IN

Ben Hur Ambrosio II

I. Title of the Case Point

II. Introduction of the Controversy

III. Sides and/or Evidences of the Controversy

IV. The Stands

V. Final Stand (Generalization)

JOSE RIZAL’S RETRACTION CONTROVERSY

arguments found that depend the both claims.

unknown causes of death.

beliefs. He called the retraction story a "pious fraud."

and "handwriting experts.

IV. The Stands

of his writings would be void.

Rizal Retract paragraph 2

[2] An excerpt from The Last Hours of Rizal by Coates, as cited by

[3] An excerpt from The Last Hours of Rizal by Coates, as cited by

[4] An excerpt from www.joserizal.ph The Retraction paragraph 25

[5] A statement by Gumersindo Garcia, Sr., M.D., as cited by Maria Stella S

You might also like

[2] An excerpt from The Last Hours of Rizal by Coates, as cited by

[3] An excerpt from The Last Hours of Rizal by Coates, as cited by

[4] An excerpt from www.joserizal.ph The Retraction paragraph 25