150 ANALYZING PRIMARY SOURCES

The Rizal family found if difficult to accept either the

retraction or the marriage. They knew their brother; they
knew that if he had retracted he would certainly have so in
his 6 a.m. communication to his mother, knowing the
consolation it would have given her.
Difficulties began as disbelief spread, and they were
deepened by Balaguer's urge to elaborate and to see himself
publicly praised. As he affirmed on oath in 1909, he settled
down that very night, 29 December, to write his account, in
which, since he intended it to be published anonymously, he
included much praise of himself, an aspect which, since he
admitted the authorship, renders him a sorry and rather
absurd figure....
Balaguer had in fact damaged the Church's case. Worse
than this, he had unwittingly revealed his own fraud. In his
account, he made no mention of the Ultimo Adios.
That Rizal on the night of the 29th wished to write verses
Balaguer knew; he told a journalist about it. But when the
following morning only letters, books and an alcohol burner
remained to be disposed of by the authorities, he erroneously
concluded that no poem had been written and thus made no
mention of it in his account, thereby revealing the truth,
which was that he was not within Fort Santiago during the
middle of that last night, and had no knowledge of what was
then taking place...
Not only did Balaguer in his account not mention the
poem; he made his account so elaborate that Rizal is allowed
no time in which to write; and only a glance at the Ultimo
Adios is needed to show that it would have taken several
hours to write.
THE RIZAL RETRACTION 149

Balaguer had the intelligence to perceive that

everything depended on the speed and audacity with which
he declared his success. The Archbishop was waiting for a
retraction, hoping for it. When news of it came he would
announce it immediately, after which it would be too late
for any of Balaguer's colleagues to gainsay it.
 Certainly there was no signed letter of retraction. Rizal
knew too well the damage such a letter would do him,
besides which he believed before God he had nothing to
retract..
Finally, there is the minor point that in view of the
public disbelief the Archbishop's statement provoked, had
there been a signed retraction letter it would certainly have
been produced for inspection, particularly to the Rizal
family, who asked to see it, and to many of whom—to
Teodora Alonso in particular—it would have been a source
of consolation.
Once the execution was over, and Vilaclara and March
returned to be faced with Balaguer's claims, the fraud was
apparent to the Jesuits, but it was already too late to rectify
matters.
What appears with complete certainty is that neither
Pio Pi y Vidal nor any of the Jesuits of probity believed that
Rizal had retracted and died confessed. Had Vilaclara and
March, who were with Rizal at his execution, been satisfied
that there had been a retraction, it is inconceivable that
they would not have given him Christian burial. The Jesuits
had been entrusted by the Archbishop with the spiritual
care of the condemned man; and it was their responsibility,
if they were satisfied that he had died confessed, to see he
was decently buried. This the two Jesuits at the execution
did not do....
148 ANALYZING PRIMARY SOURCES
The Analysis
The morning after the execution the newspapers of
Manila and Madrid recorded the event, and announced that
on the eve of his death, Rizal had retracted his religious
errors, adjured freemasonry, and in the last hours of his life
had married Josephine Bracken. In most newspapers the text
of a letter of retraction supposedly written by Rizal was
printed in full. By the government the announcement was
sent to Spanish consulates abroad with the request to obtain
for it the widest possible publicity.
Those who had read Rizal's books or who knew him
closely, which at that time meant the family and his wide
circle of personal friends, most of whom were abroad, took
one look at the announcerzent and dubbed it... an
ecclesiastical fraud.
While unquestionably a fraud, however, to suggest that
the Archbishop's announcement was issued knowingly, or
that there was a plot among the higher ecclesiastical
authorities to perpetrate a fraud is going too far. The nature
of society within the church, the society of priests, is such
as to render it virtually impossible for such things to happen.
When frauds occur, they are not the planned work of the
church as an organization, though this may be what it looks
like to outsiders; they are usually the work of a small man
with his own idea; and the Church, if unwittingly it accepts
the fraud as genuine, has to protect him. Rizal believed that
there was a strong likelihood of fraud, and that the prime
mover in this would be the friar archbishop. It was the friars
who wanted his retraction. But while in the event Rizal's
intuition did not play him false, there is no evidence to
implicate Nozaleda. Along came a small man with what the
Archbishop wanted.
 THE RIZAL RETRACTION 147

any result. Why would he renounce his religious ideas for a

few hours more of life?

In short, R al's conversion was a pious fraud to m the

people beli e that that extraordinary man down and
succumbed be o e had fought. The Archbishop was
interested in his conversion for political motives, and the
Jesuits lent themselves as his instrument. The example of
Rizal would have great resonance in the whole country and
it was necessary to bolster the drooping prestige of religion
with his abjuration. What if Rizal was a man of valor and
convictions and his conversion would be unbelievable? So
much the better. The interest of religion was above him. His
aureole of glory had to be done away with if necessary.
What did it matter? He was only an indio.
Austin Coates's Critical Analysis
Austin Coates's interest in Jose Rizal began when he was
Assistant Colonial Secretary and Magistrate in Hong Kong in
1950. His first study on Rizal was on the latter's year-long stay
in Hong Kong (1891—1892). At that time, many of the
personalities who knew Rizal were still alive. This early
awareness on Rizal eventually led to the writing and
publication of his book—Rizal: Philippine Nationalist and
Martyr (Oxford University Press, 1956)—the first Rizal
biography written by a European since Vida y Escritos del Dr.
Jose Rizal by Wenceslao Retana in 1907. The second edition of
the book was published in the Philippines by Solidaridad
Publishing House in 1992.
Coates's analyses of Rizal's retraction and other events that
happened before his execution are found in Part Vll, Chapter 5
of the book.
146 ANALYZING PRIMARY SOURCES

of canonical marriage with Josephine Bracken, both

petitions were denied. In the third placem Rizal's burial was
kept secret, the cadaver having been delivered to the
members Of a Catholic association friendly to the friars
instead of being delivered to the family, who had claimed it.
How is Christian charity applied to one who dies within the
Church if not even the desire of this family to bury him on
their own account is respected? In the fourthDace, in spite
of what Rizal meant to the Filipinos and of what his
conversion meant, no masses were said for his soul or
funeral held by the Catholics. In the fifth place,
notwithstanding (the claim) that Rizal was reconciled with
the -Church, he was not buried in the Catholic cemetery of
Paco but in the ground without any cross or stone to mark
his grave. Only the diligence of the family was able to
identify the spot where he was buried. In the sixth place,
the entry in the book burials of the interment of Rizal's body
is not made on the page with those buried on December 30,
1896, where there were as ntany as six entries, but on a
special page wherein appear those buried by special orders
of the authorities. Thus, Rizal figures on a page between a
ntan who burned to death and who could not be identified
and another who died by suicide; in other words, he was
considered among persons who died impenitent and did
not receive spiritual aid. seventh and last place, there was
no moral motive for the conversion. The extraordinary or
abnormal acts of a person are always to some reason or
rational motive. What was the motive that could have
induced him to adjure masonry and reconcile himself to the
rites of the religion which he had fought? Did he not realize
that to do so was to be a renegade to his own history?
Rizal was a man of character and he had demonstrated
it in his many circumstances of his life. He was not likely to
yield his ideas because his former preceptors and teachers
talked to him. They did it in Dapitan and did not obtain
 THE RIZAL RETRACTION

145

Analysis
For the first time in this work, those who should have
en from the beginning because of their direct
vention in the act of conversion and retraction of Rizal,
k and confirm in all its parts the narrative which
ared in 1897 in Rizal y su Obra. That should be
lusive; but that is not. All the declarations therein cited
hose of ecclesiastics and their friends, and it is to be
osed t the ver
given by the former. The only testimony that might b
idered impartial is that of Taviel de Andrade, the d nse
sel of Rizal, but his testimony to the conversio ofar the
ts say, and that diminishes its value very much.
We must consider the weight and value Of these
monies which to be partial and interested. We do not
e the respect that is due to the sacred character of said
ons; but as Brutus said, "You are a friend, but truth is a
er friend." Lastly, we must consider whether the
neous acts performed by the ecclesiastical authorities
the government are in accord with the belief that Rizal
been converted for if they are not, they would not
uce the moral evidence that is needed.
Well, then, these acts tend to demonstrate that Rizal was
econciled with the Catholic church, judging from the
they treated him after his death. Iv_tbgfirst place, the
ment of retraction was kept secret so that no one except
uthorities was able to see it at that time. Only copies of
re furnished the newspapers, but, with the exception of
person, nobody saw the original. In fact, this original
kept in such a way that it was not found until after thirty
s had transpired. In the second place, when the family
izal asked for the original of said document or a copy
as well as a copy of the certificate
 soul the faith of old and his Christian sentiments. At last, he
surrendered so willingly and so completely, and the proofs
of religiousness and piety were such and so many that, with
much less, the most exacting person would have been
satisfied. He was right indeed when he said, wondering at
the change wrought in himself, that he was the Rizal of some
time ago, but another entirely different...
When the retraction was to be subscribed to, he found
certain objections in the form of the composition presented
by Father Balaguer, the one sent by the Archbishop. The one
which I had made was shorter although conclusive, and this
pleased him. Nevertheless, to make it appear more of his
own and spontaneous, he wished to introduce some little
modifications. He wrote it entirely in his own hand and
signed it with a steady hand... Beneath Rizal's signature, the
Chief of the Picket, Juan del Fresno, and the Adjutant of the
Plaza, Eloy Moure, also Signed as witnesses.
Not satisfied with signing so explicit an adjuration, Rizal
himself, without pressure from anyone, took into his hands
his own document and knelt down before the altar of the
chapel. Aloud and slowly, and even with a certain solemnity,
he read his own retraction...

Rafael Palma's Critical Analysis

Lawyer, writer, educator, and politician Rafael Palma was
the author of Biografia de Rizal, a work on the life of the
National Hero which won a literary contest in 1938 sponsored
by the Commonwealth Government. The publication of the
book, however, was postponed because of World War Il and
only saw print in 1949. That same year, an English translation
by Roman Ozaeta with the title Pride of the Malay Race was
published by Prentice-Hall, Inc. in the United States. The story
of Rizal's alleged retraction is found in Chapters 32 and 33 with
Palma's analysis in the latter chapter.
 THE RIZAL RETRACTION

143
Fr. Pi
r. Pio Pi was t Jesuit Superior in the Philippines during the
e when R' al was executed. In 1917, he issued an affidavit Ing
his involvement in the alleged retraction of Rizal. Unlike Father
Balaguer, however, he was involved only in securing the
retraction document from the Archbishop of Manila Bernardino
Nozaleda, and writing another shorter retraction document as
well which was the one Rizal allegedly copied.

The Account
On the eve of the day when Dr. Rizal was put in the
chapel, that is, on December the twenty-eight, I received the
commission, which Archbishop Nozaleda entrusted to the
Jesuit Fathers, for the spiritual care of the convict. We accept
it most eagerly, not only because it came from the venerable
Prelate, but especially because of its object was to reconcile
with God and with the Church, and to save the soul of him
who had our very distinguished and dear pupil. Rizal had
always preserved for us, the Jesuits, a special esteem and
affection even after his enstrangement from the Church and
had rendered us good service.
Even though I myself, who had not been acquainted
personally with Rizal, did not visit him. All the Fathers who
remained with him during his stay in the chapel or who
accompanied him to Bagumbayan, the place of the
execution, went there at my request or with my knowledge,
and they kept me informed of all the happenings.. „
In regard to conversion, at the beginning not a little
difficulty was found in convincing and persuading him. A
long discussion, to which he maintained principally with
Father Balaguer, became necessary in order to revive in
that
 SOURCES

And thus it was done. As I suggested the idea, he proceeded

to write with steady hand and clear letters, making at times sonte
observation or adding some phrase. Certainly, after the
discussion, Dr. Rizal was yielding to the impulse of grace, since
he had retired into himself and prayed as he had promised. Thus
he appeared to be while writing his retraction....
He finished the writing, and thus it remained. It was half
past eleven; it was dated December the twenty-ninth....
This declaration or retraction was signed together with Dr.
Rizal by Senor Fresno, Chief Of the Picket, and Senor Moure,
Adjutant of the Plaza.
After all these acts, ... he knelt down of his own accord
before the altar of the Virgin, placed in the chapel cell. In the
presence of the Fathers, of the Judge Advocate, of the Chief of
the Picket, of the Adjutant of the Plaza, of three artillery officers,
Rizal asked me for his retraction and profession of faith. He
proceeded to read it with pause and devotion....
Of all that has been narrated, I am positive by personal
knowledge. I have personally intervened and witnessed it
myself; and I subscribe and confirm 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.
Before Rizal reached Bagumbayan, I went to the Ateneo and
delivered the aforementioned document to Father Pio Pi, who
that very day brought it to the Palace and handed it to
Archbishop Nozaleda.
 THE RIZAL RETRACTION

1 41

tears gushed from his eyes, and he said: "No I will not damn
myself"
"Yes "—I will go to hell, for, whether you like it or not.
Yes; out of the Catholic Church there is no salvation. Truth is
and cannot be but one.
At three o'clock or a little past three, I returned to the
Royal Fort where Father Vilaclara had remained, and I
resumed the discussion with Dr. Rizal, that lasted until dusk,
arriving at the point which I have already indicated. Then I
went to the Ateneo and thence I went with Father Viza to the
Palace. There I reported on the condition of the convict, who
offered some hope for conversion, since he had asked for the
formula of retraction. Hence, I requested the Prelate for the
formula he had promised, and he told me that it was not yet
finished. Soon he would send it to me.
It was already night when I arrived at the Fort. I found Dr.
Rizal impatient. He asked for the formula of the Prelate. This
came at last, at about ten o'clock; upon knowing it, the
convict asked me for it insistently. Without letting me read it
first, he called and asked me to read it to him.
Both of us sat at a desk, where there was stationery and I
began to read it. Upon hearing the first paragraph, he told
me: "Father, do not proceed. That style is different from
mine. I cannot Sign that, because it should be understood that
I am writing it myself "
I brought out then the shorter and more concise formula
of Father Pi. I read the first paragraph and he said to me:
"That style is simple as mine. Don't bother, Father, to read it
all. Dictate what I ought to profess and express, and I shall
write, making in any case some remarks.

140 ANALYZING PRIMARY SOURCES

declared it to be sufficient. He said, however, that he would
prepare or order to prepare another more extensive one.
Before going to the Fort, I went to to the Palace in order to
receive orders and instructions from the Prelate. The
Archbishop gave me the formula of retraction and profession
of faith, composed by Reverend Father Pio Pi....
Therefore, when we, the two Fathers, met him in the
chapel, after exchanging greetings with him and talking on
various matters, l, who knew the history and errors contained
in his books, in order to fulfill our delicate mission asked Rizal
to gwe an explanation of his ideas on religion.... He came to
say more or less explicitly that his rule of faith was the word
Of God contained in the Sacred Scripture. I tried to make him
see how false and indefensible such a criterion was, inasmuch
as without the authority to the Church he could not be sure of
the authenticity of the Holy Scripture or of the books truly
revealed by God; how absolutely impossible it is for the
individual reason to interpret at his will the word of God. Then
he declared himself openly a rationalist freethinker, unwell to
admit any other criterion of truth than individual reason.
I then pointed out to him that absurdity of rationalism for
the lack o/ instruction of the immense majority of humankind,
and for the absurd monstrous errors professed by the greatest
sages of paganism. .... When I attacked him with the arguments
of Catholic doctrine, he began to expound the objections of the
heretics and rationalists, a thousand times refuted already....
When I attacked him with the logic and evidence of Catholic
truth, I told him with energy that if he did not yield his mind
and his reason for the sake of faith, he would soon appear for
judgment before God and would surely be damned. Upon
hearing this threat,
 THE RIZAL RETRACTION 39

Until today, the issue whether Rizal retracted or not and whether
the document is forged or real is a subject of continuous debate
between historians and Rizal scholars alike.
The following primary sources are of two kinds: the first two
are the official accounts as witnessed by the Jesuits who were
instrumental in the alleged retraction of Rizal. The other two are
critical analyses by two Rizalist scholars who doubted the story of
the retraction.

Fr. Vicente Balagucr's Statement

Fr. Vicente Balaguer was one of e Jesuit priests who visited
Rizal during his last hours in Fo Santiago and claimed that he
managed to persuade Rizal t denounce Masonry and return to the
Catholic fold. In ana davit executed in 1917 when he had returned
to Sp , Balag e Iso claimed that he was the one who solemnized
the of Josephine Bracken and Rizal hours before the hero's
execution.
The Account
At about ten o'clock in the morning (December 29),
Father Vilaclara and I went to Fort Santiago, where the
chapel cell of the convict was. He received us with great
affection and embraced us. I think it convenient to point
out that when the Archbishop sent his commission to the
Ateneo, he remarked that, in case of conversion, before
ministering the Sacraments to him, Dr. Rizal should make a
retraction of errors publicly professed to him in words and
writings and a profession of the Catholic faith. To this
effect, when the Father Superior of the Mission went to the
Archbishop's Palace, he brought by way of precaution a
retraction and profession of faith, concise, but including
what he thought out to be extracted from Dr. Rizal. The
Prelate read it, and
 Lesson Il
THE RIZAL RETRA ION

Learning Outcomes
At the end of this lesson, yo should be able to:
l. Identify the conflicting views/accounts about the Rizal
retraction
2. Analyze each view or source
3. Use primary sources in presenting/writing about a local
issue

Historical Context
A leader of the reformist movement in Spain, Dr. Jose Rizal
was arrested, tried, and sentenced to death by a Spanish
courtmartial after being implicated as a leader Of the Philippine
Revolution. The night before his death by firing squad at the
Luneta on December 30, 1896, accounts exist that Rizal allegedly
retracted his Masonic ideals and his writings and reconverted to
Catholicism following several hours of persuasion by Jesuit
priests. There was considerable doubt to this allegation by Rizal's
family and friends until in 1935, the supposed retraction document
with Rizal's signature was found.