Module 3

Topic 2: The Retraction?

A. Balba

The Life and Works of Jose Rizal (LifeRiz)

Introduction

Is there really a retraction? We will

be dealing with this question in this
topic. Retraction is a big issue and
it will be crucial in Rizal’s being a
hero.
The signature

This is a question of authenticity of the retraction document and signature of Rizal.

Among the controversies in his life, which up to now continue to be discussed, is his
retraction of masonry which the Jesuits accepted as fact. They have the retraction to
buttress their position.
The historian, Ambeth Ocampo, agrees with the Jesuits, and I sometimes tend to
believe that Rizal did write that retraction if only to save his life. But the English writer,
Austin Coates, who wrote the best biography of Rizal says, there was no such
retraction, that the document was a forgery. He said it was contrary to Rizal’s
character. F. Sionil Jose

https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2019/12/30/1980659/recovering-rizal
The text

I declare myself a catholic and in this Religion in which I was born and educated I wish to live and die.

I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications and conduct has been contrary to
my character as son of the Catholic Church. I believe and I confess whatever she teaches and I submit to
whatever she demands. I abominate Masonry, as the enemy which is of the Church, and as a Society
prohibited by the Church. The Diocesan Prelate may, as the Superior Ecclesiastical Authority, make public
this spontaneous manifestation of mine in order to repair the scandal which my acts may have caused and
so that God and people may pardon me.
Manila 29 of December of 1896

Jose Rizal

http://www.joserizal.ph/rt02.html
The Story

It was supposed to have been signed by Jose Rizal moments before his death. There were
many witnesses, most of them Jesuits. The document only surfaced for public viewing on May 13,
1935. It was found by Fr. Manuel A. Gracia at the Catholic hierarchy’s archive in Manila. But the
original document was never shown to the public, only reproductions of it.

However, Fr. Pio Pi, a Spanish Jesuit, reported that as early as 1907, the retraction of Rizal
was copied verbatim and published in Spain, and reprinted in Manila. Fr. Gracia, who found the
original document, also copied it verbatim.

In both reproductions, there were conflicting versions of the text. Add to this the date of the
signing was very clear in the original Spanish document which Rizal supposedly signed. The date
was “December 29, 1890.”
http://nhcp.gov.ph/the-rizal-retraction-and-other
cases/#:~:text=The%20document%20of%20the%20retraction,viewing%20on%20May%2013%2C%201935 .
The first text

The first text was published in La Voz Española and Diaro de Manila on
the very day of Rizal’s execution, Dec. 30, 1896. The second text appeared
in Barcelona, Spain, on February 14, 1897, in the fortnightly magazine in La
Juventud; it came from an anonymous writer who revealed himself fourteen
years later as Fr. Balaguer. The "original" text was discovered in the
archdiocesan archives on May 18, 1935, after it disappeared for thirty-nine
years from the afternoon of the day when Rizal was shot.
http://www.joserizal.ph/rt03.html
Fr. Balaguer

How did Fr. Balaguer obtain his copy of Rizal’s retraction? Fr. Balaguer never alluded to having himself
made a copy of the retraction although he claimed that the Archbishop prepared a long formula of the
retraction and Fr. Pi a short formula. In Fr. Balaguer’s earliest account, it is not yet clear whether Fr.
Balaguer was using the long formula of nor no formula in dictating to Rizal what to write. According to Fr.
Pi, in his own account of Rizal’s conversion in 1909, Fr. Balaguer dictated from Fr. Pi’s short formula
previously approved by the Archbishop. In his letter to Fr. Pi in 1910, Fr. Balaguer admitted that he
dictated to Rizal the short formula prepared by Fr. Pi; however; he contradicts himself when he revealed
that the "exact" copy came from the Archbishop. The only copy, which Fr. Balaguer wrote, is the one that
appeared on his earliest account of Rizal’s retraction.

http://www.joserizal.ph/rt03.html
Conclusion

The retraction of Rizal remains a controversy since there is no clear

proof of whether he retracted or not? Whatever the answer to this
question is, it cannot override the many things that Rizal did and
contributed for the liberation of our country.