The original draft written
by; FR. HORACIO DE LA
COSTA
Jose Rizal was an
honorable hero who
objectively narrated the
abuses experienced by the
Filipinos from the Church
that was brought by the
colonizers present in his
time. Through his writings,
he was able to shed light
towards ignorance,
injustices and inequality
(p. 536).
He raised moral standards
and his novels teach moral
qualities of justice,
responsibility and integrity
(p. 538).
The reasonable exertion of
De la Costa to compose a
goal draft that benefits
both the Church and the
Philippine history can be
seen through his cautious
investigation of the books
just as of different sources.
De la Costa's consistent
counsel from artistic
pundits and history
specialists cleared
the way towards a
contextualized vision that
is predominant in his draft.
With the undiscovered
history of the nineteenth
century, it is without a
doubt that the youth will
find the novels of Rizal a
substitute for the truth (p.
537).
QUESTION/ISSUE
Be able to say that there was
an unmistakable endeavor to
control the connection of
religion to Philippine History.
Conclusion and Justification
The endeavor to remove the
Church from the wrongdoings
present during the time of
Rizal can be seen from the
progressions produced using
the first draft to the bishops’
"statements". The contentions
introduced in the "statement"
to the disallowance of the two
books shows the longing of
clerical power to shroud the
violations that scar the dividers
of the Church.
(The Bishops’ Final
“Statement”)
Despite keeping the
positive approach, the
cautious effort to not
praise Rizal so highly was
noticeable and his heroic
qualities were deemed
patriotic alone. Turning
from Rizal himself to the
novels, there is evident
desire not to grant too
much important to them
even when not dealing
with religious matters (p.
542).
The Church took offence to
the novels of Rizal, arguing
that Rizal blatantly attacks
not the abuses in the
practice of religion, but
some practices of religion
itself. The “statement” also
stated that the aim of the
novel in most its entirety
was to injure the morals of
the priests and to
exaggerate the
superstitious observances
and practices of the
Church (p. 543).
Fr. Cavanna as the principal author of
the bishop’s final letter, clearly
disregards evidences that attack his
arguments. One of which was Rizal’s
letter to Resurrección Hidalgo as a
clear evidence that points out the
intention of Rizal in his novels. His
shortsightedness hindered his
interpretation of the novels (p. 545).
He proceeds to give over 120
references to prove how Rizal
himself speaks his opinions using the
characters of the novel (p. 546).
Fr. De la Costa therefore
suggested that the novels
be accurately translated
from the Spanish text,
annotated by scholars
objectively familiar with
the ecclesiastical and civil
history of Rizal’s period,
and the student be under
the guidance of a teacher
who can explain the text in
the most proper way that
it should be understood (p.
535).
There were drastic changes
made from the original draft
to the draft De la Costa
submitted to the episcopal
commission which will be
later on used as reference by
Cavanna. In this draft, De la
Costa discredited Rizal of his
moral role. His novels that De
la Costa deemed having
moral qualities was demoted
to having a “sane and
constructive nationalism” (p.
538). His draft made the
crimes in Rizal’s novels
typical while admitting that
the crimes may have had a
basis in fact (p. 540). The
change of tone from draft A
to C raised questions and the
probability that he was
compelled to do so arose. It
was assumed that De la Costa
simply contented himself
with a draft that he could still
agree towards, limiting the
respect he has to Rizal (541).
The Church therefore
prohibits the two novels
for public use. Only to be
read by those with
permission of an
ecclesiastical authority,
“readily granted for
justifiable reason” to those
with sufficient knowledge
of Catholic doctrine (p.
546).
The changes from Draft C
to the final Bishops’
“Statement”, showed the
opposite perception of De
la Costa and the Church.
The omissions found in the
final “statement” limited
Rizal’s life work from being
“a sane and constructive
nationalism” to “patriotic”.
The crimes in Rizal’s novels
were interpreted as the
voice of Rizal himself
where he criticizes the
practices of the Church.
The evidences that proved
otherwise was overlooked.
The Church made use of
Cavanna’s analysis of the
novels alone as foundation
for their prohibition (p.
546).
DISCUSSION MAP
BY: CIALANA, JOHN CARLO A.
LIFE AND WORKS OF RIZAL
MARGINAL NOTES
Page 542

Changes from Draft C to the Bishops’ “Statement”

Question: Would we be able to say that there

was an unmistakable endeavor to control the
connection of religion to Philippine History?
IMPORTANT KEY DEFINITIONS:
 1. Pastoral letter
- often called simply a pastoral, is an open letter addressed by a bishop to the clergy or laity of a diocese
or to both, containing general admonition, instruction or consolation, or directions for behavior in
particular circumstances.
2. Ilustrados
- The Ilustrados (Spanish: [ilusˈtɾaðos], "erudite", "learned" or "enlightened ones") constituted the
Filipino educated class during the Spanish colonial period in the late 19th century. ... They were key
figures in the development of Filipino nationalism.
3. Interlocutor
- is someone who participates in a discussion or conversation, sometimes as a go-between. If you and
your friend are in an argument and aren't speaking, a third friend could act as an interlocutor, delivering
messages back and forth.

4. Veneration
- is the act of honoring a saint, a person who has been identified as having a high degree of sanctity or
holiness. Angels are shown similar veneration in many religions.