READINGS IN

PHILLIPINE
HISTORY
WEEK 15-16
INSTRUCTOR:
Donna Mae LIanes
STUDENT:
JERICHO DAMO
BSCE-1
THINK
CITE A DEFINITION OF THE WORD DEBATE
 Technically, a discussion presents an argument in a structured way. Arguing or
discussing with family or friends is never the same as discussing. In fact, rather
than blindly attacking your opponent, you should develop a concise and
effective argument that will help you gain support. Debate in Parliament is
debate, where both sides usually alternate in favor and against specific
statements based on real-world issues, with each person given time to speak.
Interjections are carefully controlled, and topics of discussion are often
negotiated in advance. A key trademark of debate is that it rarely ends in
agreement, but rather allows for a robust analysis of the issue or topic
discussed. And for debates carried out in assemblies to discuss matters, ends
with voting to make resolutions for the actions to be taken.

EXPERIENCE
WHAT PROOF DID GARCIA PROVIDE TO DEFEND HIS
ARGUMENT?
 His letter of defense was originally intended to be given to Fr. José Rodriguez,
an Augustinian friar who, in 1888, published a pamphlet entitled “¡CAIÑGAT
CAYO! Sa MañgaMasasamangLibro,t, Casulatan (Beware Of Malevolent Books
and Writings)”. The publication is filled with scathing condemnation of Jose
Rizal’s writings.[1] However, his friends dissuaded him from doing so. The
letter was published in La Solidaridad on March 15, 1895.
 In his defense-letter the priest belied Fr Rodriguez’s accusation that Rizal was
an “impious man, a heretic who hated religion and Spain.” According to Padre
Garcia while the friar was quick to issue such accusations, he failed to cite any
proposition made by Rizal that showed his “impiety, heresy, or blasphemy.”
Padre Garcia then proceeded to cite various phrases in the Noli that showed
the hero to be the exact opposite of the heretic and blasphemer that Fr
Rodriguez had accused him of being. He signed his name as V. Caraig.
ASSESS
HOW DID YOU FIND ANY CONSISTENCY IN GARCIA’S
ARGUMENT?

GARCIA’S
ARGUMENT

His letter of defense was In his defense-letter the priest

originally intended to be given
to Fr. José Rodriguez, an
Augustinian friar who, in 1888,
published a pamphlet entitled
“¡CAIÑGAT CAYO! Sa
MañgaMasasamangLibro,t,
Casulatan (Beware Of
Malevolent Books and
Writings)”. The publication is
filled with scathing
condemnation of Jose Rizal’s
belied Fr Rodriguez’s accusation
that Rizal was an “impious man,
a heretic who hated religion and
Spain.” According to Padre
Garcia while the friar was quick
to issue such accusations, he
failed to cite any proposition
made by Rizal that showed his
“impiety, heresy, or blasphemy.”
CHALLENGE
WHY DID GARCIA BELIEVE THAT RIZAL REALLY RETRACTED HIS
MASONIC AFFILIATION?
 Masonry (the Free Masons) were misunderstood in the 1800s. Even in the
1900s. In the 1800s membership in Freemasonry is anathema to the Catholic
Church. Of course the mindset changed now. Rizal is a fixed past which
influenced widely the emerging present (late decades of the 1800s) and still
influences the future Pinas horizon. In Asia, Pinas included, I will hazard the
line that Past Present & Future simply merge with blurred separating lines.

HARNESS
HOW IMPORTANT IS THE STUDY OF THE RIZAL RETRACTION?
 This document is very important because Rizal served as the inspiration for
Katipunan, who defended the independence of the Philippines. Ironically, Rizal
himself did not support independence. He realizes that at the moment he was
there, the people were not yet ready to start the struggle for independence,
and any attempt would cause great loss and suffering to the people. He
advocated better treatment of people, representatives of Cortes, Spain, and
education of the people, clearly in order to better prepare the people for
independence. When katipunan visited him in Dapitan, he emphasized this to
Dr. PioValenzuele. But when he insisted, he advised that if a revolution was
imminent, at least the rich were neutral, as they could easily change the
charter with the revolutionaries. He even suggested contacting his friend
Antonio Luna, who at the time supported reform rather than independence.
By showing a retraction document, the Spanish authorities are hoping that
Rizal’s death will not become a rallying cry for the Filipinos in the quest for
independence. They fear it so much that the authorities even broke a promise
to the Rizal family to release the body to them after the execution and instead
dumped his body on a secret, unmarked grave.