Chapter 9:

The Retraction
Controversy of Rizal

Reporters:
Cometa, Jhon Carlo H.
Frane, Shirley Vernice V.
Fule, Macreen Kiela E.

ARC-2105
Contents of Rizal’s Alleged Retraction

2
ADD A FOOTER 3
 Contents of Rizal’s Alleged Retraction

Me declaro católico, y en esta Religión, en que nací y me eduqué, quiero vivir y morir. Me retracto de
todo corazón de cuanto en mis palabras, escritos, impresos y conducta ha habido contrario á mi
calidad de hijo de la Iglesia. Creo y profeso cuanto ella enseña, y me someto á cuanto ella manda.
Abomino de la Masoneria, como enemiga que es de la Iglesia, y como Sociedad prohibida por la
misma Iglesia.
Puede el Prelado diocesano, como Autoridad superior eclesiástica, hacer pública esta
manifestación, espontánea mía, para reparar el escándalo que mis actos hayan podido causar, y
para que Dios y los hombres me perdonen
 
Manila, 29 de Diciembre de 1896
José Rizal
Jefe del Piquete
4
Juan del Fresno
Contents of Rizal’s Alleged Retraction

I declare myself a Catholic and in this religion in which I was born and
educated I wish to live and died
I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings and publications
And conduct has been contrary to my character as a son of the Catholic
Church. I believe and I confess whatever she teaches and I submit to
whatever she demands. I abominate Masonry, as the enemy which is of the
Church and as a society prohibited by the Church
The Diocesan Prelate may, as the Superior Ecclesiastical Authority, make
public this spontaneous manifestation of mine in order to repair the scandal
which my acts may have caused and so that God and people may pardon me 5
 4 different sources

December 30, 1896 December 31, 1896 February 4, 1897 May 18, 1935

1st text publish in La Voz 2nd text appeared in El 3rd text appear in Alleged “original text”;
Española and Diaro de Imparcial after Rizal’s Barcelona, Spain on discovered by Fr. Manuel
Manila on the very day of execution; short formula February 14, 1897 in Garcia C.M., in
Rizal’s execution, of execution magazine La Juventud- archdiocesan archives
December 30,1896 anonymous writer but after it disappear for 39
after 14 years revealed years from the afternoon
as Fr. Balaguer of December 31, 1896

6
JOSE RIZAL WROTE THE
RETRACTION!!!

7
JOSE RIZAL WROTE THE RETRACTION!!!

The Jesuit Version

La Voz Española, El Español, El Comercio, and La Oceania Española.
– newspapers that reported the retraction

Some even reprinted the retraction letter that he wrote, in order to

prove that he did indeed die a Catholic.

The Spain-based newspapers and magazines that covered the

retraction were El Imparcial, Heraldo de Madrid, and El Siglo Futuro.
They based their narrative on the testimonies of the Jesuits
8
JOSE RIZAL WROTE THE RETRACTION!!!

Manila Archbishop Bernardino Nozaleda - asked for the

comfortability of Rizal for the last 24 hrs. before execution

Fr. Pio Pi (the Superior of the Jesuits) - he sent Frs. Vicente Balaguer,
Jose Vilaclara, Estanislao March, Luis Visa, Federico Faura, and
Miguel Saderra to persuade Rizal to retract his anti-Catholic
teachings

9
 JOSE RIZAL WROTE THE RETRACTION!!!
According to Fr. Miguel
Saderra, Fr. Luis brought
with him the figurine of the
Sacred Heart of Jesus that
Rizal had carved while a
student of Ateneo
Municipal. He kissed it and
put it on his desk.
ADD A FOOTER
Of all the Jesuits whom
Fr. Pi commissioned to
deal with Rizal, it was Fr.
Vicente Balaguer who
wrote extensively about
what happened in Rizal’s
detention cell the day
before he was executed.
“Of all that has been narrated, I am
positive by personal knowledge. I have
personally intervened and witnessed it
myself; and I subscribed and confirmed
it with an oath. And lest, perhaps,
someone may think that I could not
remember it with so many details, after
twenty years. I testify that on the very
day of Rizal’s death, I wrote a very
detailed account of everything. The
original of this account I have preserved,
and from it I have taken all the data of
the present narration. (Cavanna 1956,
10)”
10
JOSE RIZAL WROTE THE RETRACTION!!!

According to Fr. Balaguer, he and Fr. Vilaclara arrived in Rizal’s prison cell around 10 o’clock in the
morning. Fr. Balaguer mentioned that Rizal softened a bit when he warned him that his soul would go to
hell if he did not return to the Catholic fold. He reminded him that outside the Catholic Church, there was
no salvation (Extra Ecclesiam Catholicam nulla datur salus) (Cavanna 1956, 8). The two Jesuits left
Rizal’s prison around lunchtime

3 o’clock in the afternoon - Frs. Balaguer and Vilaclara returned

10 o’clock that night - they showed Rizal the two retraction templates Fr. Pi had given them.
According to Fr. Balaguer, Rizal found the first template unacceptable because it was too long. So Fr.
Balaguer withdrew it and offered the shorter one. Rizal did not sign it right away because he was
uncomfortable with the statement “I abominate Masonry as a society reprobated by the Church.”

The Jesuits allowed Rizal to revise the retraction template, and his final version read, “I abominate
Masonry as the enemy of the Church and reprobated by the same Church”. After making other
minor changes to the draft, Rizal signed his retraction letter before midnight. Fr. Balaguer handed it
ADD A FOOTER 11
over to Fr. Pi, who in turn submitted it to Archbishop Bernardino Nozaleda.
JOSE RIZAL WROTE THE RETRACTION!!!

The autobiography of Josephine Bracken, written on

February 22, 1897. The document written by Josephine
herself supported that they were married under the
Catholic rites the morning of Dec 30

12
JOSE RIZAL DID NOT
WRITE THE
RETRACTION?!?!?!

13
JOSE RIZAL DID NOT WRITE THE
RETRACTION?!?!?!

 A Fraud
Rizal believed that there will be a strong likehood of fraud after his death
the witnesses were the Jesuits
Others would like to believe that the purported retraction of Rizal was invented by the
friars to deflect the heroism of Rizal which was centered on the friar abuses.
Rizal had no Catholic burial, let alone a coffin 
Balaguer’s retraction claim was not corroborated by the two Jesuits who were present
at Rizal’s execution. If Rizal had indeed retracted, they would surely have given Rizal a
Catholic burial. How would he have been deprived of even a coffin, as in fact happened.
Balaguer himself was not present at the execution. Josephine Bracken was also absent
during Rizal’s final moments.
 Balaguer was unaware that Rizal wrote "Mi Ultimo Adiòs" the day before his execution
14
JOSE RIZAL DID NOT WRITE THE
RETRACTION?!?!?!

The Rizal family did not accept the retraction and the marriage.
They knew that that if he had retracted, he would certainly have said so in his 6a.m.
communication to his mother on the fateful day of his execution.
Rizal's sisters is not present on Rizal and Bracken's wedding as Balaguer claimed.
Balaguer’s account exposed itself through major discrepancies in his story. His claim of
marrying Rizal and Josephine was totally belied by the facts.
Rizal's signature was forged
Those who strongly believed the faking of the Rizal retraction document, reported that
the forger of Rizal’s signature was Roman Roque, the man who also forged the signature of
Urbano Lacuna, which was used to capture Aguinaldo.
This story was revealed by Antonio K. Abad, who heard the tale from Roman Roque
himself, them being neighbours.
15
JOSE RIZAL DID NOT WRITE THE
RETRACTION?!?!?!

Josephine Bracken's autobiography was allegedly not written by her.

It was solely one Jesuit priest, Vicente Balaguer,S.J, who laid the basis for the story
that Rizal retracted his words and deeds. It was also he who made the claim that he
married Jose Rizal and Josephine Bracken at 6.15 a.m. on December 30, just minutes
before Rizal was executed.
 Incidentally, Fr. Pio Pi, the superior of the Jesuits, who also copied verbatim
Rizal’s retraction, also figured prominently during the revolution. It was him,
Andres Bonifacio reported, who had intimated to Aguinaldo the cessation of
agitation in exchange of pardon.
Reason
To kill Rizal's influence in the future

16
RECENT DICUSSIONS
AND STUDIES

17
RECENT DICUSSIONS AND STUDIES

The controversy whether the National Hero actually wrote a

retraction document only lies in the judgment of its reader, as no
amount of proof can probably make the two opposing groups—the
Masonic Rizalists (who firmly believe that Rizal did not withdraw)
and the Catholic Rizalists (who were convinced Rizal retracted)—
agree with each other.

18
Jose Victor Torres, professor at the History
department of the De La Salle University.

“Personally, I did not believe he retracted, but some documents that

was purchased by the Philippine government from Spain in the mid-1990s,
the Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila,” Popularly known as the Katipunan and
Rizal documents, the Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila is a body of
documents on the Philippine revolutions that contains confidential reports,
transcripts, clippings, and photographs from Spanish and Philippine
newspapers.

Despite this, Torres said his perception of the Filipino martyr would not change
even if the controversies were true.

19
Jose Victor Torres, professor at the History
department of the De La Salle University.

“Even though it would be easy to say he retracted all that he wrote about
the Church, it still did not change the fact that his writings began the
wheels of change in Philippine colonial society during the Spanish
period—a change that led to our independence,” Torres said. “The
retraction is just one aspect of the life, works, and writings of Rizal.”

But then, Torres noted that the controversy is irrelevant today.

“The way Rizal is taught in schools today, the retraction means

nothing,” he said.

20
Filipino historian Nicolas Zafra

Considered the controversy as “a plain

unadorned fact of history, having all the
marks and indications of historical certainty
and reality” in his book The Historicity of Rizal’s
Retraction.

21
Dr. Augusto De Viana, head of UST’s Department of
History

Believes that Rizal retracted and said the National Hero just renounced from the
Free Masonry and not from his famous nationalistic works.

“He (Rizal) retracted. He died as a Catholic, and a proof that he died as a

Catholic was he was buried inside the sacred grounds of Paco Cemetery,”
said De Viana, who compared the martyr with Apolinario Mabini, a
revolutionary and free mason who was buried in a Chinese cemetery.

De Viana said it is not possible that the retraction letter had been forged because
witnesses were present while Rizal was signing it.

22
Dr. Augusto De Viana, head of UST’s Department of
History

He added that the evidence speaks for itself and moves on to the question on Rizal’s
character as some argue that the retraction is not in line with Rizal’s mature beliefs and
personality.

“Anti-retractionists ask, ‘What kind of hero is Jose Rizal?’ They say he was fickle-
minded. Well, that may be true, but that is human character. Rizal was not a perfect
person,” De Viana said.

He also mentioned that just like any person, Rizal was prone to flip-flop. He believes that
Rizal retracted because the national hero wanted to be at peace when he dies.
But would Rizal’s works deem irrelevant and futile because of his retraction?
De Viana answered, “Rizal awakened our knowledge of nationalism. For me, that is
enough. The issue will not invalidate his works in any way.” 23
REFERENCES CHU CHU

 https://englishkyoto-seas.org/2019/12/vol-8-no-3-rene-escalante/
 https://www.manilatimes.net/2018/01/02/opinion/columnists/topanalysis/rizal-remains-living-burning-issue-amon
g-us/371727/amp
/
 https://varsitarian.net/news/20111004/rizals_retraction_truth_vs_myth

24
 BIG IMAGE

ADD A FOOTER
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. 25
Maecenas porttitor congue massa