Timeline of the Rizal Bill

 April 3, 1956- Senate Bill No. 438 was supported by all but 3 of the members of the
Upper House and seemed, to all appearances, a non- controversial measure
 April 17, 1956- Senator Jose P. Laurel, as a Chairman of the Committee on Education,
began his sponsorship of the measure. This was to mark the start of the long drawn
debate that would divide the nation for 3 tense week.
 April 19, 1956- The conflict reached the House of Representative, when Congressman
Jacob Z. Gonzales introduced House bill No. 5561, which was an identical copy of Senate
bill No. 438
 April 23, 1956- Senator Laurel was supported by a prestigious college an ardent
nationalist, the formidable Senator Claro M. Recto.
 May 2, 1956- The Committee on Education gave a report recommending approval
without amendment, the discussion, also revolved on the constitutionality and the
property of the measure. This battle in the state drew more public attention

m
er as
 May 9, 1956- The debate started and the controversy took a new though not quite
unexpected from the stirred new hope for a final resolution of the issue. This came

co
eH w
about when Senator Laurel, sensing the futility of further strife on the matter, rose to
propose in his own name, an amendment by substitution.

o.

rs e
May 12, 1956- The substitute bill on the same day was amended and unanimously
ou urc
approved on the second reading
 May 14, 1956- The Senate’s solution seemingly accepted enough and Congressman
Tolentino, the brilliant House Majority Floor Leader, sponsored an amendment by
o

substitution identical to Senator Laurel’s substitution bill. It was amended and approved
aC s

on second reading in the Upper House.

vi y re

 May 17, 1956- The bill was passed by the latter Chamber without amendment and also
provided that the number of the Senate bill should also appear on the enrolled copies
 June 12 1956- The bill was signed into law by President Ramon Magsaysay and become
Republic Act No. 1425
ed d
ar stu

Different issues against RA 1425

 According to the Catholic elements in and outside the Congress, the two novels
is

contained views inimical to the tenets of their Faith and accused the nature of the bill as
offensive to religious Freedom.
Th

 Some say that Rizal attacked the Church based on the numerous passages of the two
novels, in which Catholic beliefs are satirized and the most heinous crime ascribed to
Catholic priest and religious practices.
sh

 Cavanna, who is alleged to have said, at a symposium on the novels that the Noli was
not really patriotic because out of 333 pages only 25 contained patriotic passages while
120 were negative outlook on the Catholic Church
 According to Paredes, since some of novel’s had objectionable matter, Catholics had the
right to refuse to read theory as not to endanger their salvation

This study source was downloaded by 100000829356667 from CourseHero.com on 07-16-2021 21:41:39 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/53168260/Timeline-of-the-Rizal-Billdocx/
  According to Pimentel the bill was Recto’s revenge against the Catholic voters who
together w/ Magsaysay were responsible for his poor showing in 1955 senatorial
election.
 There’s a threat that Catholic schools would close if the Rizal bill pass
 According to Senator Recto. It was competent for the State to require the reading of Noli
Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo in our public and private schools.
 The sole objective of the bill was to poster the better appreciation of Rizal’s times and of
the role he played in combatting Spanish tyranny in this country without any religious
motivation
 According to Recto, based on the passages of the novels, which regarded as attack on
the doctrines of the Catholic Church, he said he could understand the foreign clergy
taking such positioning but difficult to understand for Filipino bishops, could adapt such
a stand when Rizal exalted the Filipino clergy in his novels
 According to Rodrigo, the one against this bill, declared his faith was then firmed enough
after reading the books

m
er as
Recto & Laurel VS. Catholic Church

co
eH w
 Recto: Wrote a bill that would make Rizal’s Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo

o.
rs e
compulsory reading in all universities and colleges. Reported out by the Committee on
ou urc
education, sponsored by Senator Laurel
 Church: Opposed by saying that the bill would violate freedom of conscience and
religion. They also issued a pastoral letter detailing it’s objections to the bill and
o

enjoining Catholics to oppose it. They even proposed that the education committee hold
aC s

a closed door conference with the Catholic hierarchy to search for a solution to the
vi y re

dispute.
 Recto & Laurel: They rejected the proposal in as much as the public hearing had already
afforded the church the opportunity to be heard fully.
 Church: An organized campaign against the bill was launched under the auspices of the
ed d

Catholic Action of Manila. It’s first activity was a symposium and open forum in which
ar stu

two announcements were made: first that the Sentinel, official organ of Philippine
Catholic Action, would henceforth be published daily instead of weekly, which would
contain writing concerning to kill the Rizal Law.
is

 Recto: He declared that the pastoral letter had been “more severe” in it’s condemnation
of the novels that a committee of Spanish Dominican preists whose findings had resulted
Th

to Rizal’s execution. He also brought up that the pastoral letter had passages from Rizal’s
two novels.
 Church: Rodrigo said that the novels was a threat to the Catholic faith and wouldn’t let
sh

his young son read because, unlike him who’s faith is firm enough, the novels could
harm other who’s not literate enough to the faith.
 Recto: He said that the church’s purpose is “to hide th real intentions of the pastoral
letter, which is to separate the people from Rizal” and that on the contrary the reading
of the hierarchy’s letter “shall open the eyes of the people to the real enemies of Rizal
and to true nationalism”

This study source was downloaded by 100000829356667 from CourseHero.com on 07-16-2021 21:41:39 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/53168260/Timeline-of-the-Rizal-Billdocx/
 In The end, Recto claimed a complete victory and the bill was passed, becoming a Republic act.

m
er as
co
eH w
o.
rs e
ou urc
o
aC s
vi y re
ed d
ar stu
is
Th
sh

This study source was downloaded by 100000829356667 from CourseHero.com on 07-16-2021 21:41:39 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/53168260/Timeline-of-the-Rizal-Billdocx/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)