CHAPTER III -“ ONE PAST BUT MAY HISTORIES”: CONTROVERSIES AND

CONFLICTING VIEWS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

Unit: RIZAL’S RETRACTION

Learning Outcomes:
a. Critically identify and differentiate the conflicting views and accounts surrounding José
Rizal’s retraction.;
b. Conduct a thorough analysis of each perspective by evaluating its historical context,
source reliability, and possible biases; and
c. Demonstrate the ability to construct a reasoned argument for or against the authenticity of
the Rizal retraction by effectively using primary sources.

For decades, the authenticity of Jose Rizal’s retraction documents has raised
issues, skepticism, and heated debates among those who seek to know the
truth regarding this controversy. However, the lack of evidence and
different statements by significant people involved have only contributed
to the complications and uncertainty which envelope this fiery argument. "I
retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications and
conduct have been contrary to my character as a son of the Catholic
Church.", this was the statement in the document which made the historians
believed that Rizal had retracted.

The Retraction of Rizal

One of the most intriguing of all was the issues of Jose Rizal was his
alleged retraction which was all about his reversion to the Catholic Faith and all
other issues linked to it such as his marriage to Josephine Bracken. That issue
was claimed to be true by the Roman Catholic defenders but asserted to be
deceptive by anti-retractonists. They claim that the retraction document is a
forgery, but handwriting experts concluded a long time ago that it is genuine.
Rafael Palma’s opus on Rizal, titled “Biografia de Rizal” is so anti-Catholic that
the Church successfully opposed its publication using government funds. In an
article authored by Romberto Poulo, Rizal’s affiliation in Masonry was accounted
to have caused drastic change to his religious ideas. It was in the moment Rizal set
foot on European soil when he was exposed to a great deal of distinctions
between what was happening to his country, the discriminations, abuses,
partialities, injustices, and some other things made to cause sufferings to his
countrymen, and what was the actual scene of the European nations. He observed
that Europe was a lot more different compared to the Philippines in terms of way
of life, attitudes towards Roman Catholicism, and most importantly, the freedom
all the citizens enjoy.

The exact copy had been received by Fr. Balaguer in the evening immediately
preceding Rizal's execution. Jose Rizal with the addition of the names of the
witnesses taken from the texts of the retraction in the Manila newspapers. Fr.
Pi's copy of Rizal's retraction has the same text as that of Fr. Balaguer's "exact"
copy but follows the paragraphing of the texts of Rizal's retraction in the Manila
newspapers. In order to marry Josephine, Rizal wrote with the help of a priest a
form of retraction to be approved by the Bishop of Cebu. This incident was
revealed by Fr. Antonio Obach to his friend Prof. Austin Craig who wrote
down in 1912 what the priest had told him; "The document (the retraction),
inclosed with the priest's letter, was ready for the mail when Rizal came hurrying I
to reclaim it." Rizal realized (perhaps, rather late) that he had written and given to a
priest what the friars had been trying by all means to get from him.

Jose Rizal’s 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)

ANALYSIS OF RIZAL’S RETRACTION
According to some, Jose Rizal, who was assassinated by the Spanish colonialists 120 years ago,
December 30, 1896, became a hero for his writings to destroy the idea of colonialism and free
our minds to form the nation the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo and his essays on La
Solidaridad, which question the beliefs that blind us, especially following the wishes of the friars
as messengers of God.
But, hours before he was shot, Rizal signed a document stating that he was a Catholic and that
he was retracting all his writings against the church. The document became known as the
retraction, “The Retraction.” Because of her conversion to the church, Josephine Bracken, her
last love, married them.
According to some, Rizal became more prominent in recognizing his errors against faith. But
for many, it is inconceivable that at the last moment of his life he would retract his writings, the
cause of his own heroism. It was as if he had thrown away his heroism. The testimony of Father
Vicente Balaguer
Although the alleged retraction document
was found in 1935, doubts continued.
Especially in the event's unique eyewitness
account written by Jesuit Father Vicente
Balaguer. However, the resplendent Rizal
suddenly woke up several times, four times
confessing, unanimous, agreeing and even
posting. Odd for some, including me.
I am one of those historians who does not
believe in retraction. And for me, “Retraction
Controversy” is never over.
Only one can dispute this, I say if there will
be another eyewitness account of the evening
and morning that may prove or disprove the
retraction or the testimony of Father
Balaguer. The testimony of Cuerpo de
Vigilancia
On 4 August 2016, Commissioner Rene R.
Escalante, 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.
In the documents of the Spanish spy called Cuerpo de Vigilancia, a report written on the day of
Rizal's death can be found by Federico Moreno, recounting a statement made to him by an agent
of Cuerpo de Vigilancia, a guard in the Rizal cell, therefore, an “additional independent
eyewitness account.”
According to the statement, Rizal wrote a paper he heard of the retraction. Also mentioned were
two Jesuit priests who entered Rizal's prison —Father Jose Vilaclara and Father Estanislao
March, and two others, Juan del Fresno and Eloy Moure. Here are some parts of the essay that
have been translated into English from the Spanish language:
“Most Illustrious Sir, the agent of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia stationed in Fort Santiago to report
on the events during the [illegible] day in prison of the accused Jose Rizal, informs me on this
date of the following:
“At 7:50 yesterday morning, Jose Rizal entered death row accompanied by his counsel, Señor
Tavielde 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.”
It can be seen that the two mentioned officials, Juan del
Fresno and Eloy Moure, were the only ones who signed the
document of the retraction of the witnesses' stand. The guard
also mentions that before taking Rizal to Luneta, he married
Josephine Bracken:
“At 5 this morning of the 30th, the lover of Rizal arrived at the prison ...dressed in mourning.
Only the former entered the chapel, followed by a military chaplain whose name I cannot
ascertain. Donning his formal clothes and aided by a soldier of the artillery, the nuptials of Rizal
and the woman who had been his lover were performed at the point of death (in articulo mortis).
After embracing him she left, flooded with tears.”
Not surprisingly, Moreno noted, everyone who went into the cell that night, never once
mentioned that Father Balaguer had entered. Meaning that Father Balaguer was not there, he
could have been a secondary source and only interviewed Father Vilaclara and Father March to
formulate his testimony.
I strongly believe that there is no reason for the guard or Moreno to lie in particular and they
made the record at that very moment.
What Rizal wrote in his copy of “Imitations of Christ”
Recently, a copy of the "De La Imitacion de Cristo" written by Thomas á Kempis was sent to
the Director of the National Museum of the Philippines, Jeremy Barns. This is the exact copy
that Rizal gave to Josephine Bracken during his last visit here on the day of his death. He wrote,
"To my dear and unhappy wife, Josephine, December 30th, 1896, Jose Rizal."
Except for what he called Josephine, his wife, which may refer to the legality of their marriage,
the very book he gave to the last woman he loved was a book about imitating the path of Christ.
He died a Christian.

“Suffer the moon to keep watch, tranquil and suave, over me:
Suffer the dawn its flying lights to release:
Suffer the wind to lament in murmurous and grave manner:
And should a bird drift down and alight on my CROSS,
Suffer the bird to intone its canticle of peace.
“...And when my grave is wholly unremembered
And unlocated (no CROSS upon it, no stone there plain):
Let the site be wracked by the plow and cracked by the spade
And let my ashes, before they vanish to nothing,
As dust be formed a part of your carpet again.”

Looking at it, Rizal wants to be given a Christian burial, just in case, a Catholic Christian died.
So with the light of new exterior documents and new interpretations, Jose Rizal could have
retracted. This can be true of retraction. There is a reason why he wrote the document.
But does it really matter if it's true? Can a man change his life and do something throughout his
life with the courage and courage of a role he signed on the day of his death?
Reasons of Retraction

1. To save his family and town for further persecution, Rizal may have been
told that he faced the dilemma of signing the retraction or of having his
relatives pursued by further persecutions. Since he hoped his death
 would stop the persecution of his relatives, the retraction may have seemed
to him to be the only way of achieving that purpose.
2. To give Josephine a legal status as a wife
3. To secure reforms from the Spanish Government
4. To help the church to cut away from the disease which harmed him

Major Arguments for the Retraction

Affirmative:
1. The Retraction Document discovered in 1935 is considered the chief witness to the
reality of the retraction
2. The testimony of the press at the time of the event, of “eye witness”, and other
“qualified witnesses”, those closely associated with the events such as the head of the
Jesuit order the archbishop etc.
3. “Acts of Faith, Hope and Charity” reportedly recited and signed by Dr. Rizal as
attested by “witness” and the signed “Prayer book” which was amongst the
documents discovered by Father Garcia along with the Retraction.
4. Acts of Peity performed by Rizal during his last hours as testified to by “witness”
5. His “Roman Catholic Marriage” to Josephine Bracken as attested to by the
witnesses, there could be no marriage without retraction.
Negative:
1. The retraction is said to be a forgery
2. Several critics have noted differences between the text of the document found in
1935 and other versions of the Retraction including the one issued by Father
Belaguer
3. Its content is in part strangely worded, e.g in the Catholic Religion “I wish to live
and Die,” yet there was little time to live, and also Rizal’s claim that this
retraction was “ spontaneous”
4. There was a confession of the forger. Antonio K. Abad tells how on August 13,
1901 at a party at his ancestral home in San Isidro, Nueva Ecija a certain Roman
Roque told how he was employed by the friars earlier that same year to make
several copies of a retraction document.
LEARNING ACTIVITY
PART I

_______1.What was the primary controversy surrounding José

Rizal’s retraction?

a) His decision to join Masonry.

b) His return to the Catholic faith and retraction of anti-Church writings.
c) His marriage to Josephine Bracken without Church approval.
d) His refusal to write a will before his execution.

_______2.Which document is considered the primary evidence

of Rizal's retraction?

a) His handwritten letter to Josephine Bracken.

b) The official court records from his trial.
c) A document discovered in 1935 that reportedly contained his retraction statement.
d) The "Imitations of Christ" book he gave to Josephine.

_______3.What argument do anti-retractionists use to claim

the retraction document is forged?

a) Rizal’s handwriting was inconsistent.

b) Witnesses failed to see him sign the document.
c) The document discovered in 1935 differed from other versions and contained strange wording.
d) Rizal explicitly denied any religious affiliations before his execution.

_______4.Which religious act did Rizal allegedly perform that

supports the claim he retracted?

a) Confession to Jesuit priests.

b) Publicly renouncing Masonry.
c) Reciting "Acts of Faith, Hope, and Charity."
d) Writing a letter to the Pope.

_______5. Why do some believe Rizal’s retraction was

motivated by personal reasons?
a) To secure reforms from the Spanish government.
b) To give Josephine Bracken legal status as his wife.
c) To save his family from persecution.
d) All of the above.

_______6. Who was the Jesuit priest that claimed to have

received Rizal’s retraction document?

a) Fr. Antonio Obach

b) Fr. Vicente Balaguer
c) Fr. Estanislao March
d) Fr. Jose Vilaclara

_______7. What piece of evidence contradicts Fr. Vicente

Balaguer’s claim about Rizal’s retraction?

a) Testimony from the Cuerpo de Vigilancia guards.

b) Rizal’s refusal to see any Jesuit priests in his last hours.
c) Rizal’s written dedication in the "Imitations of Christ" book.
d) A confession from Rizal denying retraction in his final hours.

_______8. What does the "Cuerpo de Vigilancia" document

reveal about Rizal's last hours?

a) Rizal signed the retraction willingly.

b) Rizal initially refused to sign the retraction but later wrote something independently.
c) Rizal was forced to write the retraction under duress.
d) Rizal denied all involvement with Catholicism.

_______9. Why is Rizal’s retraction significant in debates about

his heroism?

a) It suggests he betrayed the revolutionary cause.

b) It highlights the Church’s role in manipulating historical narratives.
c) It raises questions about his integrity and convictions.
d) All of the above.

_______10. What action could address the controversy

surrounding Rizal’s retraction?

a) Completely disregarding the retraction as irrelevant to his heroism.

b) Conducting further research and analysis on available primary sources.
c) Recognizing both perspectives to form a balanced view of Rizal’s life.
d) Both b and c.
PART II
Analysis Rizal’s Retraction

Compare the evidences on both sides. List down the pros and cons on the effect of this issue on
Rizal’s heroism
 Pros
 Cons
 Explain the historical significance of this controversy
 Propose an ideal/action on how this controversy may be addressed

References
Jesus Cavanna, Rizal’s Unfading Glory: A Documentary History of the
Conversion of Dr. José Rizal (Manila: 1983)
http://ournativehero.weebly.com/the-retraction.html http://www.joserizal.ph/rt03.html
https://www.google.com/amp/s/puchikamalucho.wordpress.com/2012/04/08/ did-
jose-rizal-retract/amp/