ACTIVITY: ANALYZING HISTORICAL DOCUMENT

NAME/S: KEITHLEEN DZEILA CURAMENG SCORE:

DATE: 11/22/21

Directions:

FILE NAME: ACTIVITY 5-FULL NAME (E.g. Activity 5- Juan dela Cruz)

1. Read carefully the “Rizal’s Retraction: A Note on the Debate”

2. Work individually and answer the following questions.
3. Use the rubric below as a guide in accomplishing the required task.
Success Indicator Descriptor Allotted
Points
Completeness All questions are answered completely and substantially. 10

Quality Each answer is explained well with elaborations and/or 10

example.
Miscellaneous The paper is free from grammatical lapses and spelling 5
errors. It makes use of reader-friendly format/layout.
 Pro-Retraction
AUTHORS
- JESUS MA. CAVANNA Y
MANSO
He was a Catholic priest from
the order of the Congregation
of the Mission, more
commonly known as the
Vincentian Fathers. He was of
Filipino-Spanish heritage. He
often spoke in English and
Spanish but he was also very
fluent in Tagalog and Latin. He
spent his last years as a
formator, spiritual advisor
and teacher to Vincentian
Seminarians in Quezon City.
-LEON MA. GUERRERO
a top-notch writer and
diplomat, served six
Philippine presidents. He was
a nationalist scientist and was
so-called the "Father of
Botany in the Philippines”. He
was also dubbed as the 1st
Filipino industrial scientist,
forensic chemist and "Father
of Philippine Pharmacy." He is
also widely known as the
highly-regarded translator of
Rizal's novels: Noli Me
Tangere and El
Filibusterismo. Aside from
this he was one of the
foremost nationalists of his
era. A partner in the law
practice of Claro M. Recto he
became Undersecretary of
Foreign Affairs during the
Magsaysay administration. He
then pursued a diplomatic
career which took him to
London, Madrid, New Delhi,
Mexico City and Belgrade, all
as Ambassador. On his
retirement he became only
the third recipient of the
Gawad Mabini - the highest
award in the Philippine
Foreign Service.
-RICARDO GARCIA
A former school principal
turned publisher who has
since published three
enlargements of his original
attempt to answer a number
of works written against the
Retraction, including those by
Palma, Collas, Juan Nabong,
SPEAKER
 Who are the authors?
 Who are the witnesses?
 What are their gender,
age, religion, nationality,
ethnicity, profession,
social class, political
belief, and other
affiliation?
 Are they credible or can
they be trusted? Why?
Why not?
Anti-Retraction
AUTHORS
-RICARDO PASCUAL
He was a professor and an
administrator for 34 years at
University of the Philippines.
Finishing his studies under
the tutelage of the logical
positivist Rudolf Carnap, Dr.
Ricardo Pascual led the newly-
independent Department of
Philosophy into the forefront
of Anglo-American analytic
philosophy. In the succeeding
decades, the MA Philosophy
program of the Department
was established, bolstering
the Filipino's capacity for
research in traditional
analytic problems. He retired
in 1977 as professor of
philosophy after 10 years at
Bradley. He is the founder of
the Filipino-American
Association of Illinois.
-FRANK C. LAUBACH
He was a Christian Evangelical
missionary, author, and
educator who specialized in
international literacy. Dr.
Laubach recognized literacy
as a "first step toward ending
the suffering and exploitation
of the world's disadvantaged"
(Laubach Literacy
International brochure); he
was the founder of the "Each
One Teach One" literacy
teaching method and of
Laubach Literacy, and is
credited with teaching more
than 100 million people to
read."
-JUAN COLLAS
He handles both Spanish and
English with consummate skill
and has opened up to many
English readers much of
Rizal’s thought by translating
Rizal’s most important minor
writings.
-RAFAEL PALMA
He was a Filipino politician,
Rizalian, writer, educator and
a famous Freemason. He
became the fourth President
of the University of the
Judge Garduñ o, and Runes
using as his defense chiefly
Cavanna.
-DR. DEL ROSARIO
a Catholic and from Ateneo.
He was a handwriting expert,
known and recognized in
courts of justice.
WITNESSES
-FR. VICENTE BALAGUER
He was born in Alcoy,
Alicante, Spain on January 19,
1851. He entered the Society
of Jesus on 30 July 1890, and
came to the Philippines in
1894. In 1896, he was
transferred to Dapitan, where
he met Rizal. He is a Jesuit
priest who claimed that he
conveyed to convince Rizal to
denounce Masonry and return
to Catholic fold.
-FR. MANUEL GARCIA
He was an Archdiocesan
Archivist who discovered the
lost "original" copy of Rizal's
Retraction.
Philippines. He was later
elected a Senator under the
Nacionalista Party,
consistently representing the
4th District, in both the 1916
and 1919 senatorial polls.
Palma died in Manila on 24
May 1939.
Places named after him
Barangay Rafael Palma Real
Estate Property, Diffun,
Quirino.
-ILDEFONSO T. RUNES AND
MAMERTO M. BUENAFE
They are the authors of The
Forgery of the Rizal
Retraction and Josephine's
Autobiography. No
background known.
-HERMENEGILDO CRUZ
was a Filipino writer and
trade union organizer. He was
a founding member of Unió n
Obrera Democrá tica Filipina
and a member of the
Philippine Assembly. He
became Director of the Bureau
of Labor in 1924.
WITNESSES
One reporter got into the
chapel during part of the
twenty-four hours. He states
that “studies, frolics of
infancy, and boys’ stories,
were the subject of our chat.”
As for the actual eye
witnesses, some eight testified
to having seen one or more of
the acts mentioned above.
Only three testify to having
seen the signing of the
Retraction. (According to the
article)
ANTONIO MERCADO ABAD
He was a poet, fictionist,
playwright and essayist from
Cebu, Philippines, who wrote
in Spanish when such was the
language of the Filipino
society.
He was educated at the
University of San Carlos. He
was a professor at Far Eastern
University and the University
of the Philippines, where he

The documents were written
according to and because of
these circumstances argued
by Cavanna:
- as Acts of Piety performed
by Rizal during his last hours
as testified to by “witnesses.”
- for his “Roman Catholic
Marriage” to Josephine
Bracken as attested to by
“witnesses.” There could be
no marriage without a
retraction.
The Roman Catholic church
insists that the Rizal who
needs to be remembered and
honored is the converted
Rizal. They and some Catholic
Christians are securing
evidences to prove the claim.
EYE-WITNESSES POV:
Father Balaguer, a Jesuit
priest claimed to have secured
Rizal’s Retraction, asserted
that this account was his work
which he originally wrote that
very same night of December
29, 1896.
BACKGROUND STORY OF
THE WITNESS:
Archbishop Nozaleda
suggested to Father Balaguer
who was one of the attending
spiritual care of Rizal that a
retraction from him is
necessary.
A day before Rizal’s execution,
they had an argument which
continued until dusk, by
which time, according to the
Father’s account, Rizal was
already asking for the formula
of retraction. That night Rizal
wrote out a retraction based
on the formula of Father Pi
(Father Balaguer) and signed
it about 11:30 p.m.
-on May 18, 1935, the
document was discovered by
Father Garcia, while he was
busily sorting through a pile
of documents.
CAVANNA
taught Spanish and co-
founded the Department of
Spanish (now European
Languages).
OCCASION
 Under what The anti-retraction party
circumstances was the argued that Rizal throughout
document written? his mature life was a “free
 Why was the document thinker and unbeliever”; thus,
written? the retraction is of necessity a
lie. It is not likely that he
would have been shocked into
abnormal behavior by the
threat of death as he was
already anticipating it.
AUDIENCE
 Who is reading or Avid fans and supporters of
listening the document or the national hero which
material? believe that it is out of Rizal’s
 What are the points of character to do such a thing,
view of the authors and members of masonry which
witnesses? he was part of and some
 How would you perceive protestants do researches to
the author’s and disprove the credibility of the
witnesses ‘narration and document.
argument? EYE- WITNESSES POV:
One reporter got into the
chapel during part of the
twenty-four hours. He states
that “studies, frolics of
infancy, and boys’ stories,
were the subject of our chat.”
In the evening of Rizal’s last
hours, his mother and sister
Trinidad arrive and nothing is
said to them about the
Retraction although Father
Balaguer claims that even in
the afternoon Rizal’s attitude
was beginning to change and
he was asking for the formula
of retraction.
For him, his arguments were
irrefutable facts since the
discovery of the document.
The pro-retraction authors
and witnesses’ aim to prove
the existence of Rizal’s
retraction.
These are the arguments
presented:
JESUS CAVANNA
1.The Retraction document is
considered the chief witness
to the reality of the Retraction
itself.
2. There are eye-witnesses
testifying to its existence.
Having made those remarks, it
cannot be dismissed
3. As attested by witnesses, it
was Rizal’s last act of faith and
act of Piety.
4. There could be no marriage
without a retraction.
DR. DEL ROSARIO’s
RESPONSE TO PASCUAL’S
CLAIMS
His main criticism is said to be
that Pascual does not include
enough of Rizal’s writings by
way of comparison. His
conclusion was that the hand-
writing is genuine.
CAVANNA’S RESPONSE TO
CRUZ’S CLAIMS
The reason behind the
differences between the two
documents were because
Father Balaguer may have
made errors in preparing a
copy of the original and these
have been transmitted from
this earliest copy to others.
Father Balaguer must have
made corrections in the
formula which he supplied to
Rizal according to the charges
which he supplied to Rizal
writing out his own, but he
didn’t accurately note them
all.
PURPOSE
 What are the authors and The anti-retraction authors
witnesses’ central claim and witnesses aim to disprove
or argument? the claim that Rizal wrote a
 What do they hope to retraction.
accomplish? These are the arguments
presented:
RICARDO PASCUAL:
1.The retraction document is a
forgery. There are certain
errors in the writing of the
document that cannot be
ignored such as: penmanship
such that there are marked
similarities in several respects
between the body of the
Retraction and the writing of
all three signers, thus serving
to point to Pascual’s
conclusion that this is a “one-
man document.” There were
also notable differences
between the text of the
document found in 1935 and
other versions of the
Retraction including the one
issued by Father Balaguer,
and some of the content is in
part strangely worded for
example the phrase “I wish to
live and die,” yet there was
little time to live, and also
Rizal’s claim that his
retraction was “spontaneous”.
2.There was a confession of
the forger which was revealed
by Antonio Abad who was
fifteen years old during that
time. According to him a
certain Roman Roque told him
how he was employed by the
friars earlier that same year to
make several copies of a
retraction document.
HERMENEGILDO CRUZ
3. The document of Retraction
was not made public until
1935. Even members of the
family did not see it. It was
said to be “lost.”
4. No effort was made to save
Rizal from the death penalty
after his signing of the
Retraction.
5. His burial was kept secret
6. There was no public record
or marriage certificate to

The pro-retraction covers the
evidences of the said
retraction; testimony from
eye-witnesses, reason behind
the writing of the document
and actual document itself.
The documents are important
pro-retraction because by
showing a retraction
document, the document will
serve as a face-saving
measure for the friars whom
Rizal made fun of and
criticized in his novels. It
would also bring back
reverence to the Catholic
church.
This retraction has an important contribution to Philippine history because Rizal is our national
hero. The accuracy of the
testify the marriage between
Rizal and Bracken. It was
argued to be unnecessary.
7. His actions and behavior
during his last days do not
point to conversion and his
family was not informed of it.
8. It was out of Rizal’s
character basing on his past
works.
SUBJECT
 What topics do the The anti-retraction covers the
documents cover? evidences that proves the
forgery and falsity of the
document: errors in the
document, comparison
between documents,
testimonies from witnesses
and the insufficiency of the
evidences of the other party.
SO WHAT?
 Why are the documents This document is critical for
important? anti-retraction as Rizal
 What is the contribution became the inspiration of the
of the reading to Katipunan which advocated
Philippine History? for Philippine Independence.
The veracity of the claim
would be an insult for some
since it would mean he valued
his romantic partner more
than the welfare of his
countrymen.