REPUBLIC ACT NO.

1425

AN ACT TO INCLUDE IN THE CURRICULA OF ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES COURSES ON THE LIFE, WORKS AND WRITINGS OF JOSE RIZAL, PARTICULARLY HIS NOVELS NOLI ME TANGERE AND EL FILIBUSTERISMO, AUTHORIZING THE PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTION THEREOF, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

WHEREAS, today, more than any other period of our history, there is a need for a re-dedication to the ideals of freedom and nationalism for which our heroes lived and died;

WHEREAS, it is meet that in honoring them, particularly the national hero and patriot, Jose Rizal, we remember with special fondness and devotion their lives and works that have shaped the national character;

WHEREAS, the life, works and writing of Jose Rizal, particularly his novels Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, are a constant and inspiring source of patriotism with which the minds of the youth, especially during their formative and decisive years in school, should be suffused;

WHEREAS, all educational institutions are under the supervision of, and subject to regulation by the State, and all schools are enjoined to develop moral character, personal discipline, civic conscience and to teach the duties of citizenship; Now, therefore:

Section 1.

Courses on the life, works and writings of Jose Rizal, particularly his novel Noli Me

Tangere and El Filibusterismo, shall be included in the curricula of all schools, colleges and universities, public or private: Provided, That in the collegiate courses, the original or unexpurgated editions of the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo of their English translation shall be used as

basic texts.

The Board of National Education is hereby authorized and directed to adopt forthwith measures to implement and carry out the provisions of this Section, including the writing and printing of appropriate primers, readers and textbooks. The Board shall, within sixty (60) days from the effectivity of this Act, promulgate rules and regulations, including those of disciplinary nature, to carry out and enforce the provisions of this Act. The Board shall promulgate rules and regulations providing for the exemption of students for reasons of religious belief stated in a sworn written statement, from the requirement of the provision contained in the second part of the first paragraph of this section; but not from taking the course provided for in the first part of said paragraph. Said rules and regulations shall take effect thirty (30) days after their publication in the Official Gazette.

Sec. 2.

It shall be obligatory on all schools, colleges and universities to keep in their libraries an

adequate number of copies of the original and unexpurgated editions of the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, as well as of Rizal's other works and biography. The said unexpurgated editions of the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo or their translations in English as well as other writings of Rizal shall be included in the list of approved books for required reading in all public or private schools, colleges and universities.

The Board of National Education shall determine the adequacy of the number of books, depending upon the enrollment of the school, college or university.

Sec. 3.

The Board of National Education shall cause the translation of the Noli Me Tangere and

El Filibusterismo, as well as other writings of Jose Rizal into English, Tagalog and the principal Philippine dialects; cause them to be printed in cheap, popular editions; and cause them to be distributed, free of charge, to persons desiring to read them, through the Purok organizations and Barrio Councils throughout the country.

Sec. 4.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed as amendment or repealing section nine hundred

twenty-seven of the Administrative Code, prohibiting the discussion of religious doctrines by public school teachers and other person engaged in any public school.

Sec. 5.

The sum of three hundred thousand pesos is hereby authorized to be appropriated out of

any fund not otherwise appropriated in the National Treasury to carry out the purposes of this Act.

Sec. 6.

This Act shall take effect upon its approval.

Approved: June 12, 1956

The Church under attack, May 5, 1956

In Classic articles on May 5, 2006 at 11:00 am THE CHURCH UNDER ATTACK May 5, 1956 There is a new outburst of anti-clericalism as Catholic politicians denounce the Catholic hierarchyts opposition to the bill requiring Filipino students to read the two controversial novels of Rizal

By Teodoro M. Locsin Staff Member NOT for a long time has the Catholic Church, or, at any rate, the Catholic hierarchy in the Philippines, been subjected to such attacks as it has for the last two weeks. Archbishops, accustomed to having high government officials kiss the ring of their office, were mocked and ridiculed, were called enemies of freedom, to great applause. Catholic political leaders led the attackg. Did the hierarchy expect the attacks when it issued the pastoral letter objecting to the Senate bill which would make the two novels of Rizal required reading in all public schoolsy novels the hierarchy considered impious and heretical? If it did, and went ahead just the same and registered its objection, it could only be because of an overriding concern for the safety of the Faith; to read

Rizal is to endanger it. A temporary embarrassment is nothing in the light of eternity; the Church is 2,000 years old; it will still be standing when the supporters of the bill are no longer around. The Senate, as it is presently composed, will not prevail against it. Thus, perhaps, wen the thought of the churchmen. It was a calculated risk.

It was all very surprising. A month ago, one could not have imagined a Filipino politician speaking in any but the most respectful terms of the prelates of the Church; he would have considered it political suicide to express himself critically of them. Now all caution seems to have been thrown to the wind. Anything goes. There is a new freedom, or, to put it another way, license. The Church has grown in power and influence since the days immediately following the Revolution. Then every other Filipino leader seemed to be the critic if not the enemy of the Church. Many had lost their faith; even among those who retained it, there were not a few who were, in some degree, anti-clerical. The women were pious but the men were something else. During Mass, when the priest turned around to deliver a sermon, the men would walk out of the church; when the priest was done, they would come back. uDo what I say, but dontt do what I do,v the men would say, referring to the man of God. In time, many Filipino leaders returned to the Church, abjuring Masonry as in the case of the late President Quezon; they became quite devout. It no longer seemed queer to be a priest or to listen to one. The Church grew in prestige. When a Protestant, Camilo Osias, made known his intention to run for president, he was told he couldntt win; he was not a Catholic. He could be a senator; he was. He could never be president. He must face the facts of political life. When he wouldntt, and bolted to the other side, he couldntt even get elected as senator. If Ramon Magsaysay is president of the Philippines today, it is due not a little to the help of the Church. The hierarchy, reluctantly coming to the conclusion that the perpetuation of the Quirino administration through electoral fraud and terrorism would eventually drive the people into Communism, urged the faithful to keep the elections free. Free elections would mean the defeat of the Quirino administration. The Church couldntt help that. The elections were free, and there was a new administration.

Never had the Church seemed such a power in Philippine politics! A maker of presidents, it suddenly seemed. At any rate, a maker of senators it proved itself two years later, when Francisco

Rodrigo ran as a candidate of the Catholic Church to be precise, the people were made to believe he was the candidate of the Church; with no political experience whatsoever, he polled more votes than man veteran politicians. The Church had become a great, perhaps the greatest, political factor in the Philippines. Catholic action had taken on a political color. This was, Catholics felt, as it should be. It is impossible to separate politics from religion, or the practice of religion. Human life is a unit , not a series of separate compartments. A good Catholic not onl goes to the right church but votes for the right people. Then came the Senate bill making Rizalts novels required reading in all schools and the pastoral letter opposing the bill. Bishops and archbishops were suddenl being called unpatriotic, worse than the countr ts former Spanish oppressors. The political climate had suddenl changed. So storm was the atmosphere that Senator Rodrigo proposed running for cover; let the debate on the bill be held behind closed doors, he said. Let the hearings remains public, said Sen. Lorenzo Taada, as good a Catholic as Rodrigo. (Rodrigo had left Taadats Citizens Part without even a letter of resignation to run for senator on the administrationts ticket.) Closed-door sessions would impl that the Filipino people were not et prepared for democratic processes, Taada said. Another senator, Quintin Paredes, observed that when Rodrigo pleaded for national unit , all he reall wanted was for ever bod to do his will. According to Rodrigo, Paredes went on, there would be unit onl if the bill was not passed, and no unit if it was. uHow can we instill unit when ou, who advocate it, insist on enforcing our will?v asked Paredes? uGive to Caesar what is Caesarts and to God what is Godts,v Rodrigo said. uThen wh not give Rizal what is Rizalts and God what is Godts?v demanded another senator, Domocao Alonto of Mindanao. The Moro senator disclosed that Rizalts books were the Bible of the Indonesians during their struggle for independence. He attacked Filipinos who proclaimed Rizal as utheir national herov but seemed to udespise what he had written.v

Rodrigo hinted that

lterior political motivesv were behind the filing of the Rizal billg

They say that this bill was filed not really for the sake of Rizal, b t for the sake of political expediency. They say that this bill was filed to create cleavage and conf sion in the ranks of o r Catholics in order to nip in the b d the growing political nity of Catholic citizens. I even heard some people say that the real p rpose of this bill is to p t President Magsaysay in a very tight spot. If this bill, they say, passes Congress, and if the present controversy spreads and increases, then when this bill reaches the President for his signat re, he will be placed between the two horns of a dilemma, where he will s ffer politically either way. If he approves the bill, then he antagonizes a big Catholic voting sector; if he vetoes the bill, then he alienates the sympathy and the votes of those who zealo sly favor the bill. And if he does not act on the bill and j st allows it to become a law, then he loses even more, for he will be acc sed of moral timidity.v Mayor Arsenio H. Lacson of Manila spoke p, deno ncing those who opposed the Rizal bill as

enemies that threaten the very fo ndations of o r freedom.v This new breed of Filipinosv wo ld, on the one hand, deny to the state the right to prescribe the books to be read in school, on the other hand, dictate to the state what books sho ld not be read by the peopleg. These are colonial-minded people who, fronting for their alien masters, wo ld shackle the minds of o r yo th with the fetters of artificial prej dice, of artificial ignorance, and of artificial imbecilitygThe evils that Rizal deno nced exist very m ch to this day, tho gh it may be in a modified form, and those co ntrymen of his who set s ch a high premi m on their animal comfort are very m ch alive and with s today, together with their alien masters still as bigoted and intolerant as of old.v Gen. Emilio Ag inaldo attacked Filipino Catholic priests for being still, according to him, nder the

yoke of the old Spanish friars, against whom the Filipinos of 1896 had risen in arms for their tyrannies.v The government sho ld assert the constit tional separation of ch rch and state. The revol tionary general recalled how Rizalts Noli was banned by the Spanish a thorities who had kept Filipinos s bject for more than 300 years nder the g ise of Christianity.v The infl ence of the Spanish friars was still here, according to Ag inaldo, despite o r blood spilled on the battlefields.v

While the Philippine Public School Teachers Association, with a membership of 70,000, came out in favor of the Rizal bill, a spokesman of the Cavite chapter of the Philippine Veterans Legion announced that the chapter had unanimously approved a manifesto calling uun-Filipino and morally repulsivev any opposition to the bill. The spokesman, a Catholic, said he would stop going to church on Sundays until the bill was approved.

In the House of Representatives, Rep. Pedro Lopez of Cebu told the story of the Filipino struggle for national independenceg.Filipinism asserted itself for the first time in Mactan Island, according to him. There Lapulapu, urefusing to yield to alien imposition, slew Magellan, thus repelling Spanish aggression.v That turned out to be uthe first, the only, and the last successful defense put up by our people throughout our history against foreign invasion and dominationg.v The congressman then hit the men of the Church: uNowhere in the world except here have alien educators garbed in their ecclesiastical habits had the temerity to act as our back-seat drivers or kibitzers and publicly tell a congressional committee what books our youth in school should not read.v In the Senate, Sen. Claro M. Recto accused the Catholic hierarchy of being more intolerant than the Spanish friars whom Rizal had attackedg uIt was natural for the Spanish friars to retaliate against Rizal because he had been unmerciless in his charges against some of them. But I cantt understand why Filipino bishopsgare now condemning his books. Without Rizalts books, perhaps there would not be any Filipino bishop today.v Those who oppose the Rizal bill, Recto said, uwould blot out Rizal from our memory.v Instead of being grateful to Rizal for helping in their exaltation, they call him and his books impious, and heretical. When Senator Rodrigo asked Recto to point out where in the pastoral letter the Catholic hierarchy had directly called Rizal or his books impious and heretical, Recto read the portions of the letter accusing Rizal of having attacked various dogmas and practices of the Church. To attack the dogmas and practices of the Church is to be impious and heretical; the letter says that Rizal had

attacked the dogmas and practices of the Church; that is the same as calling him impious and heretical, Recto said. Rodrigo insisted it was not the same. uIf you describe a person as constantly telling falsehoods, is that not calling him a liar? asked

Recto. uIf you call a boy the son of a woman by a man not her husband, there is no need to say that the child is an s s.o.b.t Recto went on: uThe tragedy of Rizal is that e en after his death he is being mercilessly persecuted. When Rodrigo said that it was not necessary to ha e read the no els of Rizal in order to enerate him, that Rizal would still be a hero e en if he had not written his books, Recto quickly tore that argument to pieces. For what would Rodrigo honor Rizal if he had no written the Noli and the Fili? When Rodrigo said, uFor the suffering he had endured, Recto pointed out that if Rizal had not written the two books, the Spaniards would not ha e made him suffer; they would not ha e shot him. He would not be the national hero of the Philippines. When Rodrigo said that the Church ban on Rizalts books was not absolute, that a Catholic could always obtain permission to read them if the Church was satisfied that it would not shake his faith, Recto asked, sardonically, how the Church would go about processing the applications of millions of Filipinos to read the no els of Rizal. Rodrigo must ha e found Recto a difficult if not impossible man to debate with; again and again, Recto would not permit Rodrigo to complete a thought, to finish a sentence; again and again Rodrigo had to plead for the elementary right to speak; Recto kept butting in. Ne er once, howe er, did Rodrigo lose his patience. If he lost the argument, and that would seem to ha e been the erdict of the gallery which kept cheering Recto, he won the sympathy of many who listened to the debate on the radio. He might ha e engaged in sophistry, as Recto accused him of doing, but he was a gentleman e ery inch of the way.

Then Sen. Decoroso Rosales spoke up for those who would not make Rizalts no els compulsory reading in school. Those in fa or of the Rizal bill would make those opposed to it appear as unpatriotic, said the brother of an archbishop. This is unjust.

During the Japanese occupation, the senator recalled, he and others now opposing the Rizal bill fought the enemy. Archbishop Rufino Santos, who is against the bill, was imprisoned for 10 months in Fort Santiago by the Japanese. Meanwhile, some Filipinos collaborated with the Japanese. Now collaborators would brand as anti-Filipino Archbishop Santos, Rosales and others for opposing their measure. Only these collaborators, it would seem, love their country. They have the monopoly on patriotism. There was no answer to this, although it might have been pointed out that not all those favoring the bill collaborated with the Japanese; there are patriots, too, behind the measurey patriots in Rosalests sense of the word. They fought the Japanese; they would make Filipino students read Rizal. They fought the Japanese and now they are fighting the Church. Rosales warned that rather than make students read Rizalts novels, Catholic schools throughout the country, numbering more than 600, would close. Recto expressed scepticism. uThey are making too much profit which they can ill-afford to give up,v said the Batangueo. Not for a long time has the Catholic Church, or the Catholic hierarchy in the Philippines, been subjected to such an attack. There was an anti-clerical tradition among Filipino leaders early in the century; many considered themselves Catholics but had no use for priests. A footnote in the Derbyshire translation of Noli Me Tangere tells us of a Fray Antonio Piernavieja, O.S.A., who was taken prisoner by the insurgents of Cavite and made ubishopv of their camp. uHaving taken advantage of his position to collect and forward to the Spanish authorities in Manila information concerning the insurgentst preparations and plans, he was tied out in an open field and left to perish of hunger and thirst under the tropical sun.v Filipino leaders became Masons; an uindependentv church was founded. Eventually, many returned to the Church. Anti-clericalism seemed to have died outy unlike in Italy where millions of Catholics dontt listen to priests, vote Communist. Now, here are Catholic Filipinos speaking out against the bishops and archbishops of the Church.

The Church could have been devious. It could have pretended to make students in its school read Rizal, but quietly prevented them from doing it. Instead, it chose to be ustraightforward.v It will not make students read the books of one it considers impious and heretical, though he is the national

hero. It just wontt. The result: a crisis, not only of conscience for individual Catholics, but a political one for the Church. But should anyone, after all, be made to read a book no matter how detestable he may think it to be? How could he think it detestable before reading it?