RIZAL'S RETRACTION

December 29-30, 1896

Before he was executed, he signed a retraction

RIZAL'S
letter. Signing this meant that he takes back his
words, deeds, and beliefs as a Mason.

RETRACTION Rizal's cell, Fort Santiago

CONTEXT The Jesuits were with him in his final hours.
They convinced him to sign the retraction,
which meant that he would die a Cathollic.
SO, DID HE RETRACT?
YES NO
The Jesuits The Freemasons
take note: it might be a
Fr. Vicente Balaguer's forged document
account
 COMMON POINTS

01 02 03 04

Presence of Rizal was presented Presence of The document's

the Jesuits with media out there
2 templates
 1st attempt: 10 a.m.

01 Along with Fr. Vilaclara, they

arrived at his cell and left at
lunchime.

2nd attempt: 3 p.m.

02 They both returned and stayed
until sunset.

FR.
BALAGUER'S 3rd attempt: 10 p.m.

03 They presented him two retraction

ACCOUNT templates provided by Fr. Pio Pi.

THE ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
Untraceable for years May 1935
It was nowhere to be found for Father Manuel Garcia found
a long time. Some even though the original document
it to be non-existent.

Authenticity of Garcia's findings

Every person that was asked about the legitimacy of the document confirmed
that it was indeed written by Rizal.
The Cuerpo de Vigilancia collection
This is where Moreno's report can be found.
This is used as a primary source of
information for this case because of its
authenticity and objectivity.

Federico Moreno's report

RIZAL &
He was a witness to their wedding on the
30th of December, the same day Rizal was
to be executed.
BRACKEN'S
Legal documents?
MARRIAGE
To this day, there is no written or tangible
evidence of this wedding aside from this
report.
MAYBE HE DID NOT RETRACT

01 02 03 04
It was a forgery No true original Moreno's report Rizal's heart
case document His report debunks the He's not the kind of
Antonio Abad's Was Fr. Garcia's copy Jesuit's narrative person to be easily
conversation with the really the original swayed to change his
forger himself proves document? heart
so
 THE NO ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT DOCUMENT
WAS FORGED Thorough analysis of the four circulating
copies of the retraction showed
Roman Roque shared that he forged Rizal's inconsistencies in writing style, spelling,
signature. and more.
MORENO'S REPORT
01
"It seems this was the
retraction"
He may have witnessed a
signing, but was it the
retraction that Rizal signed?
02
Fr. Balaguer's absence
His report never mentions
the priest, meaning he wasn't
there in the first place
 He's not that kind of person

01 “The Jesuits who had visited him

knew how unlikely it was that Rizal

AUSTIN would retract[...]"

COATES
For Rizal's own good
"The first was undertaken for what the
02 Jesuits sincerely believed to be his

ON RIZAL'S
own good, and possibly their own as
well."

RETRACTION 03
The Jesuits' ulterior motives
"If he could be made to admit his
errors against religion and retract
them, it would blunt the point of
everything that he had written[...]"
SO, DID HE RETRACT?
SO, DID HE RETRACT?
YES