Retraction of Rizal

By

Fr. Vicente Balaguer and Rafael Palma

Fr. Vicente Balaguer was born in Alicante, Spain, on January 19, 1851. He joined the

Society of Jesus on July 30, 1890 and went to the Philippines in 1894. Moreover, he was one of

the Jesuit priests who visited Rizal’s last hours in Fort Santiago and claimed that he managed to

persuade Rizal to denounce masonry and return to the Catholic fold. In 1917 when he had

returned to Spain, an affidavit executed that proves he was who solemnized the marriage of Jose

Rizal and Josephine Bracken.

Rafael Palma was born on October 24, 1874. He was a Filipino politician, lawyer, writer,

educator and a famous freemason. Additionally, he became the fourth President of the University

of the Philippines. He was later elected as senator under the Nacionalista Party, consistently

representing the 4th District, in both the 1916 and 1919 senatorial polls. Furthermore, he 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 story of Rizal’s alleged retraction is

found in chapter 32 and 33 with his analysis in the latter chapter.

Dr. Jose Rizal was arrested, tried, and sentenced to death by a Spanish court martial after

being implicated as a leader of the Philippine Revolution. On December 30, 1896, accounts exist
that Rizal allegedly retracted his masonic ideals and his writings reconverted to Catholicism

following several hours of persuasion by the Jesuit priests. A few hours before he was shot, Rizal

signed a document stating that he was a Catholic and retracted all his writings against the church

and the document were as “The Retraction”. Moreover, Rizal’s retraction letter was discovered

by Father Manuel Garcia, C.M. in 1935 at the Catholic hierarchy’s archive in Manila. The letter,

dated December 29, 1896.

According to Fr. Balaguer, he and Fr. Vilaclara arrived in Rizal’s prison cell around 10

o’clock in the morning on December 29, 1896. He mentioned in his letter and affidavit that their

encounter with Rizal started with a discussion of some articles of Catholic faith. They debated on

issues such as the supremacy of faith over reason and the dogmatic differences that divided

Catholics and Protestants. They explained to him that they could not administer the sacraments

he needed without him signing a retraction letter and making a profession of faith. The two

Jesuits left Rizal’s prison around lunchtime, with Rizal still undecided over whether to sign the

retraction letter or not. The Jesuits went straight to the archbishop’s palace and informed their

superiors of what had transpired during their first meeting with Rizal. Frs. Balaguer and Vilaclara

returned to Rizal around 3 o’clock in the afternoon and tried until sunset to persuade him to

recant. They were still not able to convince him to sign the retraction document. Their third

meeting with Rizal took place at 10 o’clock that night, and it was during this meeting that 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 and its language and style

were not reflective of his personality. 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.” Rizal wanted to emphasize that Philippine

Masonry was not hostile to Catholicism and that Masonry in London did not require its members

to renounce their faith. 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” (Cavanna 1956, 9). After making other minor changes to the draft, Rizal together with

Señor Fresno, chief of the picket, and Señor Moure, adjutant of the plaza signed the retractionletter

before midnight. After which, Fr. Balaguer handed it over to Fr. Pi, who in turn submitted itto

Archbishop Bernardino Nozaleda. On the other hand, Rafael Palma, a prominent Mason,

disputed the veracity of thedocument of the alleged retraction because it did not reflect Rizal’s

true character and beliefs. Heregarded the resurrected retraction story as a “pious fraud”. Where,

according to his analysis, theretraction of Rizal was hearsay with the following reasons: First, the

documents of retractionwere kept secret so that no one except the authorities was able to see it that

time. Secondly, whenthe family of Rizal ask for the original copy of the document as

well as the certificate ofcanonical marriage with Josephine Bracken, bot petitions were denied.

Third, Rizal’s burial waskept secret, in spite of what Rizal meant to the Filipinos and of what his

conversion meant, nomasses were said for his soul or funeral held by Catholics. Notwithstanding
that Rizal wasreconciled 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. And, in the entry of the entry in the

book of burialsof the interment of Rizal’s body is not made on the page those buried on December

30, 1896,instead he was considered among persons died impenitent with no spiritual aid. Lastly,

there wasno moral motive for the conversion.To conclude, whether or not Jose Rizal

retracted, the researchers believe that theretraction document was more of Rizal taking

a moral courage to recognize his mistakes.Perhaps it may be true that he retracted and

reverted to his faith, but this does not diminishRizal’s stature as a great hero with such greatness.

As mentioned the documentary entitled “AngBayaning Third World”, Joel Torre’s impersonation

of Rizal told the time travellers that whetherhe retracted or not, it does change what he has already

done and what his writings have alreadyachieved. Furthermore, former Senator Jose Diokno once

stated, "Surely whether Rizal died as aCatholic or an apostate adds or detracts nothing from his

greatness as a Filipino. Catholic orMason, Rizal is still Rizal - the hero who courted death

"to prove to those who deny ourpatriotism that we know how to die for our duty and our

beliefs"