COURSE OUTCOME 3

CRY OF REBELLION
“Long live the Philippines! Long live the Philippines!” is the shout of the 100 katipuneros as they
gathered to tore their ‘Cedula’ apart. This is the known as the “Cry of Rebellion in Philippine history.”
But controversies surrounds this part of our past as to where and when was the true and exact date of
the “Cry of Rebellion”.

I would like to address today that the cry of rebellion happened in Balintawak on the 26th of
August 1896 as accounted by Guillermo Masangkay rather than the account of Pio Valenzuela in which
he claimed that it happened on 23rd of August 1896 in Pugad Lawin. According to the journal of
Guerrero, Encarnacion and Villegas, he is Bonifacio’s friend and adviser. He is also one of the first
members of Katipunan which makes him a reliable primary source.

He stated that the Cry took place on the 26th of August 1896 where a big meeting was
conducted at the place of Apolonio Samson. This source also mentioned several delegates with the likes
of Emilio Jacinto, Aguedo del Rosario, Tomas Regio and many others. The National Historical Institute
has confirmed that this statement of him has more weight as it was corroborated by eyewitnesses who
were photographed last 1917 when compared to the claim of Pio Valenzuela.

Lastly, the problem with Pio Valenzuela’s claim is that it became erratic when he was required to
submit his work for the Spanish Government. It had inconsistency on the time of meeting and the actual
cry. Balintawak was recognized first for being the site for “Cry of Rebellion” for good reasons.
Additionally, according to modern historians there were no Pugad-Lawin mentioned on the letters wrote
to Bonifacio and all was addressed to Balintawak.

Confusions and uncertainties may plague the history of the Cry of Rebellion but one thing is
common on both claims. The Cry of rebellion happened as it symbolizes the awakening of the Filipinos
for all the mistreatment the Spaniards have caused our country. The aim was to liberate our motherland
from the hands of colonizers.

RETRACTION OF RIZAL
Our national hero, Dr. Jose Rizal, was believed to retract during his final hours before he was
executed. This is an endless debate being argued if this was really true or only a fraud. Rizal’s retraction
letter was discovered by Father Manuel Garcia, C.M. in 1935. There are claims that support its
nonexistence: the retraction contradicts his works and writings, the document don’t have sufficient
evidences, etc. But on the other hand, there are supporting statements, documents and research that
supplement the authenticity of the document.

Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila – documents from Spain purchased by the Philippine

Government which consists of evidences during the Philippine revolutions and contains confidential
reports, transcripts, and photographs from Spanish and Philippine newspapers. This document was
assessed by experts like Jose Victor Torres, professor at the History department of the De La Salle
University and persuaded him to claim the retraction true.

The National Hero only renounced from masonry - Dr. Augusto De Viana, head of UST’s
Department of History supports the fact that this document does not exonerate Rizal from the works
that he has done but only to declare his Catholicism and to die at peace. Dr. Viana also mentioned that
the retraction was not forged because there are witnesses present when Rizal signed the document.

Testimonies from the Jesuits – Rizal’s execution were closely monitored by newspapers not only
his execution but also what happened hours before his death. There were reports from the press that
Rizal denounced his masonic beliefs and r- professed his catholic faith. The Jesuits assisted Rizal with his
spiritual needs as requested by the Archbishop of Manila. There are claims that he was ministered with
necessary sacraments and Fr. Pio Pi ordered to document this to be documented by paper.

Some may not accept whether retraction was true or not, but our stand believes that the
retraction was sustained by the above mentioned evidences to prove its authenticity. What we must
greatly appreciate is that the nationalism and patriotism that Rizal awakened for the Filipino People and
this retraction will not negate this.