Rizal’s Retraction Debate

Evidences that proves that Rizal did retract

 To save his family and town from 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.
 To give Josephine a legal status as his wife. Rizal, even though he for a time
suspected Josephine as a spy, seems to have become convinced that she now loved
him, and he may have desired to give her a legal status in the eyes of the church, and
so provide for her future.
 To secure reforms from the Spanish government.
 To help the church cut away from the disease which harmed her. Rizal did not desire
to injure the Roman Catholic Church, but to remove the cancer which ruined both
church and state in the Philippines -- friar control of land and domination by the
government. He was also struggling for freedom of thought and of conscience to the
individual. He may have felt that much of his propaganda had produced the
insurrection, and have repented of that. His letter to Paciano, written the night before
his execution, supports that theory. It also had been suggested that Rizal may have
written the word "Catholic" in the broad sense of the "Church Universal" as it is used
by all branches of the Christian Church excepting the Roman Catholics. All churches
repeat, "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church," in this broad sense.
 The argument between the original document and the released retraction documents
brought more controversy because this differs significantly from the text found in the
Jesuits. Which is really the “original”? Some of the significant differences between the
copies of the Archbishop and the Jesuits are the following: (1) the Jesuits’ copies have
“mi calidad” instead of “mi cualidad” from the Archbishop’s copies, (2) the word
“Catolica” was omitted after the first “Iglesias in the Jesuits’ copies, (3) the word
“misma” was added before the third “Iglesias” in the Jesuit’s copies, (4) the second
paragraph from the archbishop’s copies started with the second sentence, however,
from the Jesuits’ copies it started until the fifth sentences, (5) the Jesuits’ copies had

Page | 1
 11 commas, the other had 4 only and (6) the Jesuits’ copies did not have the names
of the witnesses. These arguments are further discuseed below.
 Dr. Eugene A. Hessel in his lecture given at Siliman University, summarizes the major
points of argument for the Retraction of Rizal as follows:
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-witnesses,” and other
“qualified witnesses,” i.e. 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 “witnesses” and a signed Prayer Book which was amongst the
documents discovered by Father Garcia along with the Retraction. If true, Rizal
would not only accept the general Roman Catholic teachings but would agree to a
number of beliefs which he had previously disclaimed. According to the testimony
of Father Balaguer, following the signing of the Retraction a prayer book was
offered to Rizal. “He took the prayer book, read slowly those acts, accepted them,
and took the pen and sad ‘Credo’ (I believe) he signed the acts with his name in
the book itself.” Acts of Piety performed by Rizal during his last hours as testified
to by “witnesses.” His “Roman Catholic Marriage” to Josephine Bracken as
attested to by “witnesses.” There could be no marriage without a retraction.

Evidences that proves that Rizal did not retract

 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.

Page | 2
 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 has written a retraction.

Page | 3
 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.
 Moreover, as what Father Balaguer’s stated as an additional evidence to prove that
Rizal really retracted. Is Rizal’s marriage to Josephine Bracken, but that had just
caused more confusion when he was asked to show their Certificate of Marriage. He
showed nothing. Besides in his last poem “Mi Ultimo Adios” if Rizal really was married
to Josephine Bracken why did he only stated her as a sweet stranger? And didn’t
wrote as his sweet wife? Also according to his poem which expresses “'Adiós', I go
where there are no slaves, no hangmen or oppressors, where faith does not kill” It is
evident that his referring to the Catholic Church, it is clear that there is bitterness
behind those phrases
 Additionally, if Rizal really died as a catholic. Why did they bury him wherein Fr. Burgos
had been positioned, which is evidently the cemetery for anti-Catholic Church? Why
haven’t they buried Rizal at Paco Cemetery in which good Samaritans are supposed
to be placed? And the worst part is, he has been buried without any coffin! Wouldn’t it
be Ironic? If Jesuits wants to prove that Rizal himself had retracted why did they buried
him collectively where heretics and infidels are laid? They didn’t even offer a mass in
church for Rizal who died as a penitent Catholic
 The Retraction Document is said to be a forgery. There are four points against the
document itself.
 First of all, there is the matter of the handwriting. To date, the only scientific study
criticizing the authenticity of the document was made by Dr. Ricardo R. Pascual of
the University of the Philippines shortly after the document was found. Having
some of Rizal’s writings dating from the last half of December 1896 as his
“standard”, he notes a number of variations with the handwriting of the document,
he further concluded that it was a “one-man document” because of the similarities
in several respects between the body of the Retraction and the writing of all three
signers: Rizal and the two witnesses. The only scholarly answer and criticism to

Page | 4
 Pascual is that given by Dr. José I. Del Rosario. Rosario’s main criticism may be
said to be that Pascual does not include enough of Rizal’s writings by way of
comparison and concluded that the hand-writing is genuine.
 A second argument directed against the authenticity of the document itself is based
on the principles of textual criticism. 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 Balaguer. To date, from the morning of
December 30, 1896 there have been, discounting numerous minor variations, two
distinct forms of the text with significant differences with regards to the use of
certain phrases within the document.The usual explanation of these differences is
that either Father Balaguer or Father Pi made errors in preparing a copy of the
original and these have been transmitted from this earliest copy to others. Some
have wondered if the Retraction Document was fabricated from the “wrong”
version of a retraction statement issued by the religious authorities.
 A third argument applies to the Retraction itself is that 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 his retraction was “spontaneous.
 Finally, there is the “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
 The second main line of argument against the Retraction is the claim that other acts
and facts do not fit well with the story of the Retraction. Those most often referred to
by writers as follows:
 The document of Retraction was not made public until 1935. Even members of the
family did not see it. It was said to be “lost.”
 No effort was made to save Rizal from the death penalty after his signing of the
Retraction. The usual rebuttal is that Rizal’s death was due to political factors and
with this the religious authorities could not interfere.
 Rizal’s burial was kept secret; he was buried outside the inner wall of the Paco
cemetery; and the record of his burial was not placed on the page for entries of
Dec. 30th.

Page | 5
  There is no marriage certificate or public record of the marriage of Rizal with
Josephine Bracken.
 Rizal’s behavior as a whole during his last days at Fort Santiago and during the
last 24 hours in particular does not point to a conversion.
 When Fr. Balaguer was asked for the original copy of the document for the handwriting
to be authenticated, the said document was allegedly lost, only to resurface 35 years
later in history, discovered by Fr. Manuel Garcia. At least 4 copies said to be the
retraction had surfaced. Although, the wording in the document found by Fr. Garcia is
different than those claimed by other, such as the copies of the formula which
appeared in Manila Newspapers.
 In the theories, the reason for his retraction was to marry the woman she fell in love
with while he was in exile, Josephine Bracken. However, no real record of the wedding
between Bracken and Rizal has been found, especially a marriage certificate. If the
retraction was true, then there should at least be a document that shows that the
marriage happened and, considering where Rizal was buried, outside the inner wall
of Paco Cemetery, and the record of burial is not the same day as his death.

Page | 6