RETRACTIO OF RIZAL

The affirmative side of the controversy claims that there was a retraction while the
negative side claims that there was no retraction happened. Retraction refers to the withdrawals
of an announcement or an accusation regarding a personal or group. within the debate, it talks
about whether Jose Rizal retracted or withdrew his statements or accusations against the
oppressors. the primary speaker for the affirmative side presented their primary source which is
that the testimony of Father Vicente Balaguer. It is stated in the testimony that Father Vicente
Balaguer was responsible in convincing Jose Rizal in signing the retraction paper wherein within
the letter, it's stated in there that he's retracting most of his statements regarding the
oppressors. On the opposite hand, the primary speaker for the negative side based his claims
on the 2 novels of Jose Rizal namely: Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. Both novels were
against the oppressors. The speaker also express that the recantation could destroy the image of
Jose Rizal. The teachings and lessons of Jose Rizal that he wanted to point out to the Filipino
people could even be ruined however, this argument isn't that strong to prove that there was no
retraction that happened during that point. The secondary speaker for the possitive side based
his quarrel to the Jesuits versions. The speaker raised that through the days of Jose Rizal in prison
and execution day, it was dispute that local and foreign newspaper were eager and updated with
the events. Local newspapers like La Voz Espanola, El Comercio and El Espanol, as well as foreign
newspapers like El Siglo Futuro, Heraldo de Madrid and El Imparcial produce the retraction of
Jose Rizal. The argument was also supported with the very fact the Jesuits priest that always
visited Jose Rizal in prison actually witnessed the retraction. Two illustrations were also showed
to help the quarrel. The primary illustration is that the original copy of the retraction of Jose
Rizal and also the second is that the translation saying that Rizal was retracting all his statement
and accusations he has made with the oppressors and also claimed that he's a catholic. While the
second speaker for the pessimistic side claimed that the retraction letter was recover after 39
years of Rizal’s execution. The speaker mentioned that the first copy was different among the
opposite copies that was spread. during this case there was a hidden agenda which the speaker
concluded the Spanish friars or the church were answerable for it because Rizal has been
targeting them together with his works. Though these accusations weren't verified, the
speaker wasn't ready to justify his point he wanted to argue that after 39 years, the retraction
letter was retrieved. To summarize, Jose Rizal retracted his statements or accusations to the
persecutor. The controversy wasn't able to finish however, 2 arguments for the affirmative
side and a pair of arguments for the negative side in addition were presented. In my opinion, the
affirmative side has been ready to present their arguments and claims clearly with factual
information and evidences. to finish this position paper, I support the affirmative side thus, there
was really a retraction for Jose Rizal that happened.