The Life and Works of Jose Rizal

Metacognitive Reading Report # 1

Name: Alvarez, Dolph Marcus L. Date: 02-14-2020

1. Three (3) Things that I significantly learned from the readings

The readings that were used in this MRR talked about the same thing, just with different
complexity and each of them was more elaborate than the first. It was about how the
Rizal law came to be and the challenges it faced.

The first thing that I have learned about the readings is the Recto was the person behind
the bill that started it all, it was sponsored by Laurel and the main obstacle that prevented
them from having a smooth journey was the catholic church, which was so passionate
about stopping them because the novels written by Rizal namely, Noli and El Fili had
content that may spark unwanted thoughts in the minds of the potential readers especially
catholic students. The church did several things to push their cause such as make false
accusations like how they accused Recto of presenting the bill because he wanted to take
revenge against the catholic people along with Magsaysay who were responsible for his
poor-showing in an election. Also is by threatening the senators that should they support
the bill and they will be punished in the next elections, and lastly is their attempt to ruin
Rizal’s image through their statement which took a lot of drafts.

Secondly is that Rizal may have been a figure of patriotism and nationalism but
according to the church, he is not a figure of morality, hence he should not be put in such
a high ground, although I don’t support the church’s side, they may have enough
evidence to back this accusation up, but their credibility I don’t trust because those drafts
they had each having different content than the other made me see how ununited and
controlling they were.

Lastly, I learned about how the catholic church acts to defend their faith. Their ways were
not on brand with what they stand for and its off-putting how petty they were during the
hearings.

2. Three (3) Things that are still unclear to me

Although I may have gotten the gist of what really happened, due to a lot of jargons I
think I failed to fully wrap my head around what happened at the time.

There was a section in the reading stating how de la Costa’s drafts had an interlocutor; I
think it implied that there was a third party who made him change his original statement,
but I don’t think I got it clearly.
 I don’t understand how the church got to get involved in the bill when there is church and
state separation.

3. I used to think that….

I used to think that the heads of the church were strong and are models that represent
their virtues, but the way they behaved as they defended their faith against a novel made
it clear how feeble their whole thing is. They were scared of fiction because they were so
convinced that their people are gullible enough to lose their faith over literature.

4. Three (3) questions that I want to ask about the readings

What is an interlocutor and what does he do?

Why did the church take such a long time to write a statement and so many drafts?

What made Recto want to make the bill?