What comes first when you hear

the word "retraction"? When

we say retraction it is when you
change your mind and take back
something you said previously.
If a politician says something
offensive,
he will sometimes issue a
formal retraction later. When
someone needs to withdraw an
opinion or
backpedal on something they've
said, they send out a retraction.
Basically, when we are talking
about history, we already knew
that it is all about retraction of
Dr. Jose
Rizal controversy. The
discussion or argument still
continues if Dr. Jose Rizal, our
national hero, retracted
for real. He was recognized
for the novels he had
written during the Spanish
period. Because of
courageous acts of rebellion
against the said colonizers, he
became our national hero.
I can say that Dr. Jose Rizal did
not retracted. Because Rizal’s
‘retraction’ has nothing to do
with the
revolution as the revolution was
already raging by the time he
was supposed to retract. It has
everything
to do with his Catholic faith,
which, at that moment, was
virtually non-existent.
To retract will go against
everything Rizal believed in.
But because of love, he may
have done it. Don’t
discount love. Josephine
Bracken wanted to be
recognized as Rizal’s legitimate
widow. So they have to be
married before Rizal died. The
Jesuit friars wanted Rizal to
retract first before they do the
ritual. Well,
they were married, according to
some sources, so it’s possible.
But the question is, why
did the church keep it a
secret? There were some
accounts of Rizal’s
retraction in some local and
foreign newspapers right after
Rizal’s death, but the retraction
letter itself
was shown years later. The
retraction revealed only years
after Rizal’s execution. Logic
will tell you that
the Catholic Church would have
headlined it in all of their
newspapers.
Even though according to
Teodoro Kalaw, a
professional on our hero’s
writings and other
handwritings experts, the
retraction was originally written
by Dr. Jose Rizal and it has
been judged by
them through their deep
study. There are also
prominent Philippine
historians who uphold the
authenticity of Rizal’s retraction
such as Nick Joaquin, Nicolas
Zafra, Gregorio Zaide and many
more. As
of them, they consider the
witnesses when Rizal wrote the
retraction paper, signed the
book of prayers
of the Catholic, and recited the
prayers of the Catholic. Base on
them, there were also people
who saw
him when he kissed the crucifix
before the execution. But all of
this has no proof or evidence
because it
is just a statement.
If Rizal retracted, they would
have shown it to the Spanish
authorities to stop Rizal’s
execution. So
either the authorities have
already decided to kill Rizal no
matter what, or there was no
retraction in the
first place, or the church simply
wanted Rizal to be killed,
retraction or not. So for me it's a
no, history did
not change because of Rizal’s
retraction, if there ever was. It
was simply so insignificant
compared to
Rizal’s role in our history. It is
only the Catholic Church that
makes a big deal out of it.
What comes first when you hear
the word "retraction"? When
we say retraction it is when you
change your mind and take back
something you said previously.
If a politician says something
offensive,
he will sometimes issue a
formal retraction later. When
someone needs to withdraw an
opinion or
backpedal on something they've
said, they send out a retraction.
Basically, when we are talking
about history, we already knew
that it is all about retraction of
Dr. Jose
Rizal controversy. The
discussion or argument still
continues if Dr. Jose Rizal, our
national hero, retracted
for real. He was recognized
for the novels he had
written during the Spanish
period. Because of
courageous acts of rebellion
against the said colonizers, he
became our national hero.
I can say that Dr. Jose Rizal did
not retracted. Because Rizal’s
‘retraction’ has nothing to do
with the
revolution as the revolution was
already raging by the time he
was supposed to retract. It has
everything
to do with his Catholic faith,
which, at that moment, was
virtually non-existent.
To retract will go against
everything Rizal believed in.
But because of love, he may
have done it. Don’t
discount love. Josephine
Bracken wanted to be
recognized as Rizal’s legitimate
widow. So they have to be
married before Rizal died. The
Jesuit friars wanted Rizal to
retract first before they do the
ritual. Well,
they were married, according to
some sources, so it’s possible.
But the question is, why
did the church keep it a
secret? There were some
accounts of Rizal’s
retraction in some local and
foreign newspapers right after
Rizal’s death, but the retraction
letter itself
was shown years later. The
retraction revealed only years
after Rizal’s execution. Logic
will tell you that
the Catholic Church would have
headlined it in all of their
newspapers.
Even though according to
Teodoro Kalaw, a
professional on our hero’s
writings and other
handwritings experts, the
retraction was originally written
by Dr. Jose Rizal and it has
been judged by
them through their deep
study. There are also
prominent Philippine
historians who uphold the
authenticity of Rizal’s retraction
such as Nick Joaquin, Nicolas
Zafra, Gregorio Zaide and many
more. As
of them, they consider the
witnesses when Rizal wrote the
retraction paper, signed the
book of prayers
of the Catholic, and recited the
prayers of the Catholic. Base on
them, there were also people
who saw
him when he kissed the crucifix
before the execution. But all of
this has no proof or evidence
because it
is just a statement.
If Rizal retracted, they would
have shown it to the Spanish
authorities to stop Rizal’s
execution. So
either the authorities have
already decided to kill Rizal no
matter what, or there was no
retraction in the
first place, or the church simply
wanted Rizal to be killed,
retraction or not. So for me it's a
no, history did
not change because of Rizal’s
retraction, if there ever was. It
was simply so insignificant
compared to
Rizal’s role in our history. It is
only the Catholic Church that
makes a big deal out of it.
What comes first when you hear
the word "retraction"? When
we say retraction it is when you
change your mind and take back
something you said previously.
If a politician says something
offensive,
he will sometimes issue a
formal retraction later. When
someone needs to withdraw an
opinion or
backpedal on something they've
said, they send out a retraction.
Basically, when we are talking
about history, we already knew
that it is all about retraction of
Dr. Jose
Rizal controversy. The
discussion or argument still
continues if Dr. Jose Rizal, our
national hero, retracted
for real. He was recognized
for the novels he had
written during the Spanish
period. Because of
courageous acts of rebellion
against the said colonizers, he
became our national hero.
I can say that Dr. Jose Rizal did
not retracted. Because Rizal’s
‘retraction’ has nothing to do
with the
revolution as the revolution was
already raging by the time he
was supposed to retract. It has
everything
to do with his Catholic faith,
which, at that moment, was
virtually non-existent.
To retract will go against
everything Rizal believed in.
But because of love, he may
have done it. Don’t
discount love. Josephine
Bracken wanted to be
recognized as Rizal’s legitimate
widow. So they have to be
married before Rizal died. The
Jesuit friars wanted Rizal to
retract first before they do the
ritual. Well,
they were married, according to
some sources, so it’s possible.
But the question is, why
did the church keep it a
secret? There were some
accounts of Rizal’s
retraction in some local and
foreign newspapers right after
Rizal’s death, but the retraction
letter itself
was shown years later. The
retraction revealed only years
after Rizal’s execution. Logic
will tell you that
the Catholic Church would have
headlined it in all of their
newspapers.
Even though according to
Teodoro Kalaw, a
professional on our hero’s
writings and other
handwritings experts, the
retraction was originally written
by Dr. Jose Rizal and it has
been judged by
them through their deep
study. There are also
prominent Philippine
historians who uphold the
authenticity of Rizal’s retraction
such as Nick Joaquin, Nicolas
Zafra, Gregorio Zaide and many
more. As
of them, they consider the
witnesses when Rizal wrote the
retraction paper, signed the
book of prayers
of the Catholic, and recited the
prayers of the Catholic. Base on
them, there were also people
who saw
him when he kissed the crucifix
before the execution. But all of
this has no proof or evidence
because it
is just a statement.
If Rizal retracted, they would
have shown it to the Spanish
authorities to stop Rizal’s
execution. So
either the authorities have
already decided to kill Rizal no
matter what, or there was no
retraction in the
first place, or the church simply
wanted Rizal to be killed,
retraction or not. So for me it's a
no, history did
not change because of Rizal’s
retraction, if there ever was. It
was simply so insignificant
compared to
Rizal’s role in our history. It is
only the Catholic Church that
makes a big deal out of it.
What comes first when you hear
the word "retraction"? When
we say retraction it is when you
change your mind and take back
something you said previously.
If a politician says something
offensive,
he will sometimes issue a
formal retraction later. When
someone needs to withdraw an
opinion or
backpedal on something they've
said, they send out a retraction.
Basically, when we are talking
about history, we already knew
that it is all about retraction of
Dr. Jose
Rizal controversy. The
discussion or argument still
continues if Dr. Jose Rizal, our
national hero, retracted
for real. He was recognized
for the novels he had
written during the Spanish
period. Because of
courageous acts of rebellion
against the said colonizers, he
became our national hero.
I can say that Dr. Jose Rizal did
not retracted. Because Rizal’s
‘retraction’ has nothing to do
with the
revolution as the revolution was
already raging by the time he
was supposed to retract. It has
everything
to do with his Catholic faith,
which, at that moment, was
virtually non-existent.
To retract will go against
everything Rizal believed in.
But because of love, he may
have done it. Don’t
discount love. Josephine
Bracken wanted to be
recognized as Rizal’s legitimate
widow. So they have to be
married before Rizal died. The
Jesuit friars wanted Rizal to
retract first before they do the
ritual. Well,
they were married, according to
some sources, so it’s possible.
But the question is, why
did the church keep it a
secret? There were some
accounts of Rizal’s
retraction in some local and
foreign newspapers right after
Rizal’s death, but the retraction
letter itself
was shown years later. The
retraction revealed only years
after Rizal’s execution. Logic
will tell you that
the Catholic Church would have
headlined it in all of their
newspapers.
Even though according to
Teodoro Kalaw, a
professional on our hero’s
writings and other
handwritings experts, the
retraction was originally written
by Dr. Jose Rizal and it has
been judged by
them through their deep
study. There are also
prominent Philippine
historians who uphold the
authenticity of Rizal’s retraction
such as Nick Joaquin, Nicolas
Zafra, Gregorio Zaide and many
more. As
of them, they consider the
witnesses when Rizal wrote the
retraction paper, signed the
book of prayers
of the Catholic, and recited the
prayers of the Catholic. Base on
them, there were also people
who saw
him when he kissed the crucifix
before the execution. But all of
this has no proof or evidence
because it
is just a statement.
If Rizal retracted, they would
have shown it to the Spanish
authorities to stop Rizal’s
execution. So
either the authorities have
already decided to kill Rizal no
matter what, or there was no
retraction in the
first place, or the church simply
wanted Rizal to be killed,
retraction or not. So for me it's a
no, history did
not change because of Rizal’s
retraction, if there ever was. It
was simply so insignificant
compared to
Rizal’s role in our history. It is
only the Catholic Church that
makes a big deal out of it.
What comes first when you hear the word "retraction"? When we say retraction it is when you
change your mind and take back something you said previously. If a politician says something
offensive,he will sometimes issue a formal retraction later. When someone needs to withdraw
an opinion or backpedal on something they've said, they send out a retraction.
Basically, when we are talking about history, we already knew that it is all about retraction of Dr.
JoseRizal controversy. The discussion or argument still continues if Dr. Jose Rizal, our national
hero, retractedfor real. He was recognized for the novels he had written during the
Spanish period. Because ofcourageous acts of rebellion against the said colonizers, he
became our national hero.I can say that Dr. Jose Rizal did not retracted. Because Rizal’s
‘retraction’ has nothing to do with therevolution as the revolution was already raging by the
time he was supposed to retract. It has everythingto do with his Catholic faith, which, at that
moment, was virtually non-existent.To retract will go against everything Rizal believed in. But
because of love, he may have done it. Don’tdiscount love. Josephine Bracken wanted to be
recognized as Rizal’s legitimate widow. So they have to bemarried before Rizal died. The Jesuit
friars wanted Rizal to retract first before they do the ritual. Well,they were married, according to
some sources, so it’s possible.But the question is, why did the church keep it a secret?
There were some accounts of Rizal’sretraction in some local and foreign newspapers right
after Rizal’s death, but the retraction letter itselfwas shown years later. The retraction revealed
only years after Rizal’s execution. Logic will tell you thatthe Catholic Church would have
headlined it in all of their newspapers.Even though according to Teodoro Kalaw, a
professional on our hero’s writings and otherhandwritings experts, the retraction was
originally written by Dr. Jose Rizal and it has been judged bythem through their deep study.
There are also prominent Philippine historians who uphold theauthenticity of Rizal’s
retraction such as Nick Joaquin, Nicolas Zafra, Gregorio Zaide and many more. Asof them, they
consider the witnesses when Rizal wrote the retraction paper, signed the book of prayersof the
Catholic, and recited the prayers of the Catholic. Base on them, there were also people who
sawhim when he kissed the crucifix before the execution. But all of this has no proof or evidence
because itis just a statement.If Rizal retracted, they would have shown it to the Spanish
authorities to stop Rizal’s execution. Soeither the authorities have already decided to kill Rizal
no matter what, or there was no retraction in thefirst place, or the church simply wanted Rizal
to be killed, retraction or not. So for me it's a no, history didnot change because of Rizal’s
retraction, if there ever was. It was simply so insignificant compared toRizal’s role in our history.
It is only the Catholic Church that makes a big deal out of it.