Demonstrate the ability to

formulate arguments in favor or

against a particular issue using
primary sources
“Resolved that
Dr. Jose Rizal
retracted from
masonry and
his heresies.”
1.The retraction
documents discovered
in 1935 is considered as
the chief witness to the
reality of retraction.
 DID NOT
RETRAC
RETRAC
T
T
Diario de Manila √
La Voz Española √
El Español √
• Masonry El Comercio √
• Conversion to Catholic faith
La Oceania √
• Solemnly abjured his errors, re-entered the
El Imparcial √
true religion
• Showed repentance for his errors and
Heraldo de Madrid √
written and signed the following abjuration El SigloFuturo √
• Pride was the cause of his perdition Madrid Dailies √
(signed with several military witnesses his (La Epoca, El Nacional, El
retraction of his religious errors Resumen, El Correo Español, El
Pais, La Correspondenciade
(notarized) España, El Liberal, La Iberia)
Magazines √
1. Año Politico
2. La Juventud
3. La Politica de España en
Filipinas
Foreign Paper √
O Extremo Oriente
2. The testimony of the press at the time of the event,
of “eyewitnesses”, and other “qualified witnesses”, i.e.
those closely associated with the events such as the
head of the Jesuit order, archbishop, etc.

3. “Acts of Faith, Hope and Charity” reportedly

recited and signed by Dr. Jose Rizal as attested by
“witnesses” and a signed prayer book which was
amongst the documents discovered by Fr. Garcia
along with the retraction.
 DID NOT
Testimony of RETRACT
RETRACT
eyewitnesses Rev. Vicente Balaguer √
Capt. Rafael Dominguez √
• retraction of errors Lt. Mariano Martinez √
publicly professed by him Rev. Luis Viza √
in words and writings and Rev. Pio Pi √
a profession of the
catholic faith
Lt. Juan del Fresno del √
Amo
• Declared himself a Lt. Eloy Moure √
catholic
Rev. Bernardino Nozaleda √
• Read his own retraction (
Fr. Pio Pi) Rev. Silvino Lopez Tuñon √
• Abjured in writing his Rev. Tomas Gonzalez √
Feijoo
religious errors and
declared his abomination
Gaspar Castaño √
of masonry Antonio Rosal √
• Detest masonry Don Cecilio Velarde √
(notarized) Reporter of La Voz √
Española
 DID NOT
RETRACT
RETRACT
Testimony of Luis Taviel de Andrade √
eyewitnesses Manuel Sastron √
Don Manuel Garcia
Barzarallana
√
• Retracted and Trinidad Rizal √
abjured all his errors Paciano Rizal √
• Signs of repentance Sisters of Rizal (Narcisa,
Lucia, Josefa:
√
and wrote the accompanied Josephine
Bracken)
retraction Mrs. Jose Rizal √
• Sister of Rizal gave Manuel Luengo √
news about the Fr. Joaquin Villalonga √
conversion and Mariano de Ycaza √
retraction Isabelo de los Reyes √
Fr. Serapio Tamayo √
(notarized) Don Felipe Calderon √
People at the time of
execution
√
 DID NOT
RETRACT
RETRACT
Manuel Sastron √

Testimony of Don Manuel Garcia

Aglipayan Bishops of the Phil. Independent

√

historians
Church
Viriato Diaz-Perez √

and writers
Fr. Serapio Tamayo √

Wenceslao Retana √

Miguel de Unamuno √

Editor of El Liberal √

Fr. Pio Pi √

Published Editors of Maucci House, Barcelona

Don Juan Ortega

√

news articles Fr. Pablo Pastells

Don Gabriel Maura

√

and books Prof. Austin Craig

Don Gonzalo Pinana

√

confirming Charles Edward Russel and EB Rodriguez

Louis La-Ravoire Morrow & Norberto

√

√
Romualdez
Rizal’s Prof. Gregorio Zaide √

retraction Prof. Eufronio Alip

Camillo Osias
√

Prof. Jose Hernandez √

4. Acts of Piety performed by
Rizal during his last hours as
testified by witnesses

5. His “Roman Catholic

Marriage” to Josephine Bracken
as attested by witnesses. There
could be no marriage without a
retraction.
a. First of all there is the matter of the
handwriting

b. A second prong directed against the

authenticity of the documents itself is based
on the principles of textual criticism
c. Its content is strongly 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 is
spontaneous.

d. Finally, there is the confession of the

forger.

2. The acts and facts do not fit well with

the story of the retraction.
On May 18, 1935, the lost "original" document of
Rizal’s retraction was discovered by the
archdeocean archivist Fr. Manuel Garcia, C.M. The
discovery, instead of ending doubts about Rizal’s
retraction, has in fact encouraged it because the
newly discovered text retraction differs significantly
from the text found in the Jesuits’ and the
Archbishop’s copies. And, the fact that the texts of
the retraction which appeared in the Manila
newspapers could be shown to be the exact
copies of the "original" but only imitations of it. This
means that the friars who controlled the press in
Manila (for example, La Voz Española) had the
"original" while the Jesuits had only the imitations.
3. The third chief line of argument against
the Retraction is that it is out of character

4.The story concerning the forger should be

further investigated.

5. Attention should be given more to

Rizal’s mature faith and thought.
Dr. Jose Rizal’s diary clearly bolsters
his unchanging adherence to his
deep ideals and principles. His
encounter with Japanese culture
made him embrace the calmness of
death with honor. This made it
second to impossible that he
submitted himself to the Spaniards’
whimsical importuning.
Dr. Pascual opined that “the
difference in the forms of
letters, slants, habits of
writings, distinct
characteristics in the
signature between the
genuine writings on one hand
and the retraction on the
other, and the closed affinity
between the writings
supposed to be done by
different persons in the same
document,” demonstrate
that the retraction is a forgery
“Notwithstanding the conversations of the
famous Jesuit Fathers Faura and Vilaclara
with Rizal in the chapel (of the prison), the
convict continued to refuse to confess and
remained obstinate in his philosophical and
political theories.” During their conversation,
Dr. Jose Rizal said that when he was in
Madrid, the Republicans were telling me that
liberties are sought with bullets, and not by
kneeling down. “Truly, these ideas aroused in
my soul are the authors of my work. My only
sin is that of pride.” Cavanna, Rizal's Unfading
Glory (Manila: 1961)
 Dr. Ricardo Pascual, “Dr. Jose Rizal: Beyond the
Grave,” MANLAPIT PRESS,1008 Juan Luna-P. 0. Box 98,
Manila, Philippines, 1935
 Guerrero, Leon Ma. The First Filipino. Manila: National
Historical Institute, 2006
 Zaide, Gregorio F. and Sonia M. Zaide. Jose Rizal
Buhay, Mga Ginawa, at Mga Sinulat ng Isang Henyo,
Manunulat, Siyentipiko, at Pambansang Bayani.
Quezon City: All-Nations Publishing Co, Inc., 1997
 Tezuka, Tatsumaro. Footmarks of Rizal in Japan.
Reprinted in The Cable Tow. July, 1961
 Ocampo, Ambeth “Osei-san”. Philippine Daily
Inquirer. June 23, 2009
 http://mdn.mainichi.jp/features/archive/news/2011/0
6/20110620p2g00m0fe086000c.html
Other sources:
 Dr. Eugene A. Hessel. Rizal's Retraction: A Note
on the Debate.
http://joserizal.nhcp.gov.ph/Reflections/retracti
on.htm
 Did Rizal Retract?
http://joserizal.nhcp.gov.ph/Biography/man_an
d_martyr/chapter16.htm.
 http://nhcp.gov.ph/the-rizal-retraction-and-
other-cases/
 http://joserizal.nhcp.gov.ph/Reflections/retracti
on.htm
 http://primacyofreason.blogspot.com/2013/06/j
ose-rizals-retraction-controversy.html