Notes

Did Jose Rizal Retract?
No, Rizal did not retract. Although there were many opinions and evidences presented by various authors as to whether Rizal did or did not retract. Nonetheless, until now there is no proof or any justification to end the debate.
First was the copy of the retraction paper that was allegedly signed by Rizal that was even kept secret and was only published in newspapers. When Rizal’s family requested for the original copy, it was said that it was lost. Could the Jesuits be this irresponsible to not know the value of the paper? Or was it just hidden?

Thirty-nine years later the original copy was found in the archdiocesan archives. Ricardo Pascual Ph. D who was given permission by the Archbishop Nozaleda to examine the document and later concluded in his book, “Rizal beyond the Grave” that the documents presented was a forgery. The common rebuttal of this argument was either Father Balaguer or Father Pi had made errors in reproducing another copy of the original.

Another evidence as to Rizal did not retract is that when Father Balaguer came to terms that he married Jose and Josephine, after Jose had signed the retraction paper, however, there were no marriage certificate or public record shown that could prove Father Balaguer’s statements.

Why would Rizal retract when he knows for a fact that even if he signs the retraction paper he would still be executed? Since the Archbishop and Jesuits cannot do anything to mitigate his penalty because the judicial process involved was purely a military tribunal where civilian or church interference was uncommon and not allowed. Rizal was accused of participating in filibusterous propaganda where the penalty as provided by the Spanish Code is death. The same of what happened to the three priests who were garrotted years earlier, even though they were still a part of the church; they were still treated as rebellious and were also not given a proper burial.

Furthermore, way back when Rizal was still exiled in Dapitan, Father Sanchez- Rizal’s favourite teacher from Ateneo- was sent by the Jesuits superiors to try to convince his former student’s allegation towards the Catholic religion and Spanish religious in the Philippines. Father Sanchez told him to retract in exchange of a professorship, a hundred thousand pesos and an estate (Laubach, 1936) however Rizal rejected the offer.
It was argued that Rizal retracted in order to save his family from further persecution, to give Josephine Bracken a legal status as his wife and to assure reforms from the Spanish government. It is more likely to be of Rizal’s mentality however, come to think of it, would Rizal just simply neglect all the writing he conceived with his hard work? The same writings that brought him to the point of being executed? No.

Rizal’s behaviour during his last hours in Fort Santiago does not point to a conversion- the Mi Ultimo Adios and letters- or indicate even a religious instability. In the evening where his sister and mother arrived, never had he mentioned about the retraction, contrary to what Father Balaguer claimed that even in the afternoon, Rizal was oblivious and was asking for the formula of the retraction.

Rizal was fixated of the thought that he would die for the love of his country, he, himself had coveted death a long time ago. His character speaks so loud that even all of Rizal’s friends do not believe that he have written a retraction.

Let us look at Rizal’s character as a man aged 33. He was mature enough to realize the consequences of the choice he had made even before he opposed to the Jesuits; he had been anticipating this to happen and would be unlikely if he had a behaviour showing a threat from death. Anyone who has been studying his biography and had been acquainted with him knows this is so, even the priests had admitted that Rizal showed a behaviour consistent of what he was throughout his mature years.

Whatever further study that may emerge as to the truth about Rizal’s retraction controversy, “…it detracts nothing from his greatness as a Filipino.”

Retraction of Doctor Jose Rizal

Doctor Jose Rizal is known as the hero of revolution for his own writings focusing on ending the colonialism and liberating Filipino minds in contribution on creating Filipino’s nation. His works Noli Me Tangere and El Filibustersimo are still famous and influential up to this time. Therefore, every piece of writing he makes against the friars and the Catholic Church in the Philippine could cause a heavy damage to his image as Filipino revolutionary.

Jose Rizal is a member of Mansory, a group whose members are anti catholic. In his essays, he wrote harsh and critical things over the friars who were the main agents of the injustice in the Philippine society. He did not really vilify the Catholic Church. Did Rizal Retract?

The doubts on the retraction document abound, especially because of that only one eye-witness account by the Jesuit friar named Fr. Vicente Balaguer. According to his testimony, Rizal woke up several times, confessed four times, attended a mass, received communion, and prayed the holy rosary. All of which seemed out of character. But since it was the only testimony of allegedly “primary” account that Rizal ever wrote a retraction document, it has been used to argue the authenticity of the document. On the year 2016, Professor Rene R. Escalante researched on another eyewitess account by Cuerpo de Vigilancia. In that account, the documents included a report on the last hours of Rizal, written by Federico Moreno.

There are different claims regarding this issue. First, Rizal retracted because he was married to Josephine Bracken. In the first place, the marriage would not have permitted if Rizal didn’t retracted. Second, Rizal did not really retracted because their marriage certificate is fake and he was buried with no ceremony at all. Lastly, the original copy that was lost yet was found on May 18, 1935 by an archivist named Manuel Garcia, rumored to be fake. Therefore, the retraction wasn’t really sure.

Jose Rizal did not retract. Although there were many opinions and evidences presented by various authors regarding whether Rizal did or did not retract. In the first place, he was not the one who wrote the letter. He was just the only one who was asked to sign.

If Rizal had retracted from his attacks against the teachings and practices of the Catholic Church, and if, according to his Catholic biographer Leon M. Guerrero, Rizal had gone to confession four times, heard mass in his death-cell, and received holy communion before he was executed, then Rizal should be branded a traitor to all freedom fighters. He deserve not to be respected or admired as a hero. He should, instead, be canonized a saint of God. But then again, if Rizal had retracted, why then should the church feel dedicated to get Rizal’s true character expunged out of the Filipino psyche? The truth of the matter was that the Church did everything possible to counteract Rizal’s honest-to-goodness scientific temper of mind. Indeed, in his Noli and Fili, Rizal exposed the Philippine damaged culture caused by organized superstition otherwise popularly known as Christianity. Thus, the story of his retraction was nothing more than a theological concoction to sanitize, if not to neutralize considerably the volume of Rizal’s humanistic and scientific messages to the Filipino as a people. Poch Suzara

resources:

http://philippinecommentary.blogspot.com/2009/12/on-death-of-jose-rizal-and-retraction.html
https://puchikamalucho.wordpress.com/2012/04/08/did-jose-rizal-retract/
https://zdocs.cz/doc/case-study-01rdy3devlpg