The Rizal Retraction
the Archbishop of Manila Bernardino
Historical context
 Dr. Jose Rizal was arrested, tried, and
sentenced to death by a Spanish court-
martial after being implicated as a
leader of the Philippine Revolution.
 At the Luneta on December 30, 1896,
accounts exist that Rizal allegedly
retracted his Masonic ideals and his
writings and reconverted to Catholicism
following several hours of persuasion by
Jesuit priests.
The following primary sources are of two kinds:
the first two are the official accounts as
witnessed by the Jesuits who were
instrumental in the alleged retraction of Rizal.
The other two are critical analyses by two
Rizalist scholars who doubted the story of
retraction.
Fr. Vicente Balaguer’s Statement
 Fr. Vicente Balaguer was one of the
Jesuit priests who visited Rizal during
his last hours in Fort Santiago and
claimed that he managed to persuade
Rizal to denounce Masonry and return
to the Catholic fold. In an affidavit
executed in 1917 when he had returned
to Spain, Balaguer also claimed that he
was the one who solemnized the
marriage of Josephine Bracken and Rizal
hours before the hero’s execution.
Fr. Pio Pi’s statement
 Fr. Pio Pi was the Jesuit Superior in the
Philippines during the time when Rizal
was executed. In 1917, he issued the
affidavit recounting his involvement in
the alleged retraction of Rizal. Unlike Fr.
Balaguer, he was involved only in
securing the retraction document from
Nozaleda, and writing another shorter
retraction document as well which was
the one Rizal allegedly copied.
Rafael Palma’s Critical Analysis
 “Rizal’s conversion was a pious fraud to
make the people believe that the
extraordinary man broke down and
succumbed before the Church which he
had fought. The Archbishop was
interested in his conversion for political
motives, and the Jesuits lent themselves
as his instrument. The example of Rizal
would have great resonance in the
whole country and it was necessary to
bolster the drooping prestige of religion
with his abjuration. What if Rizal was a
man of valor and convictions and his
conversion would be unbelievable? So
much the better. The interest of religion
was above him. His aureole of glory had
to be done away with if necessary.
What did it matter? He was only an
indio.”
Austin Coates’ Critical Analysis
• “Rizal believed that there was a strong
likelihood of fraud, and that the prime
mover in this world would be the friar
archbishop.”
• “Balaguer had the intelligence to
perceive that everything depended on
the speed and audacity with which he
declared his success.”
• “Balaguer had in fact damaged the
Church’s case. Worse than this, he had
unwittingly revealed his own fraud. In
his account he made no mention of the
Ultimo Adios.”