King Mj. M.

De Villa
BSEntrep1-1

THE RIZAL LAW AND SOCIETY’S RESPONSE

The History of Republic Act No. 1425 or the Rizal Law, how do you weigh the
contradicting points of the authors of the law inspired Sen. Claro M. Recto and
that of the Catholic Church? Which among them has a valid claim over the
argument? Discuss your point as extensively as you can.

Answer:

The opposing parties have their own points regarding the matter but for me,
imparting about Jose Rizal, his life, works and writings may greatly help as a pattern of
the present and the future generation to instill nationalism and love of country in many
aspects in many different ways not necessarily by force but in a diplomatic form as
heroes of the modern era. To mention, the Rizal Bill, originally filed by Senator Claro M.
Recto and sponsored by Senator Jose P. Laurel encountered formidable opposition.
The bitterness and recrimination that accompanied its enactment was unparalleled in
the annals of Congress. The story of the opposition to the legislation of a law that was
supposed to promote patriotism and love of country came from the Catholic Church and
allies in Congress and the media though his purpose is clear. He saw no problems in
legislating it in Congress. It was supposed to be non-controversial considering its
intention. As the original bill that would eventually become the Rizal Law was filed by
the committee on Education in the Philippine Senate as Senate Bill 438 on April 3,
1956 when it was first filed supported by majority of the Senators in the Upper House
except for three members so it appeared non-controversial and should easily passed
the legislative process. An Act to Make Noli Me tangere and El Filibusterismo
compulsary reading in all Public and Private Colleges and Universities and for other
Purpose. But it was called an attack on the church.

Though majority of the clergy are now Filipinos the same abuses done by some
of their numbers were still committed. Some priests were known to keep mistresses and
had children by their mistresses. Those who were addicted to material wealth managed
their churches as if they were personal property. Others lived licentiously just like the
abusive friars half a century before.

Besides saying that the novels had messages not applicable to the present time,
the opponents said that the two novels of Rizal, the Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo contain passages that were harmful to Catholic beliefs and teachings.
The church had powerful allies in opposing the Rizal Bill.
 Central to the argument of the opponents the Rizal Bill was it forced young
students to read Rizal’s works which had religious overtones. It would be a violation of
constitutional freedom of religion and freedom of conscience. Seminars led by
supporters of the Catholic were held denouncing the Rizal Bill . In one event, Fr. Jesus
Cavanna said that Rizal’s novels painted a false picture of the conditions of the country
in the 19th century. If Rizal intended to promote patriotism and nationalism,, he said that
the novels for required reading contained more anti-Church statements rather than
nationalistic statements. Another commentator Jesus Paredes said that the novels
contained objectionable material and the Catholics have a right not to read them in
order not to endanger their faith.

Opponents of the Rizal Law saw the approval of the compromise bill as a
complete victory. Its proponents however felt they had gained something as students
still have to study Rizal works though they can be exempted from reading the two
novels .It was passed more than 50 years ago. It had an implementing rules and
regulations until the National Historical provide them in 2001, Republic Act 1425.Rizal
BIill had its supporters like Veterans de la Revolucion Filipina, the war veterans, Alagad
ni RIzal Knight of the Grand Order of Rizal and Freemasons, Mayor Arseno Lacson of
Manila. Within the Catholic church the lone voice of which supported the Rizal Bill as a
Jesuit scholar and historian, Horacio de la Cuesta he admitted that abuses did happen
in the Catholic church and there were historical mistakes committed by the Church. As
an organization,. composed of men mistakes were bound to be committed. He said that
Rizal’s works only exposed abuses within the church, he said however, that the abuses
were committed by individual clergymen and should not be treated as reflection of the
entire clergy. He wrote expounding his views but these were suppressed by the Church
and Fr. Dela Cuesta only had to obey his superiors.

In general, despite of many oppositions , the most important thing, the

continuity of Rizal’s life, works and writing still part of the curriculum in the tertiary
education as recognition of his significant contribution in the Philippine History and the
entire country as well, and Rizal remains the Philippine National Hero.