JOSE RIZAL'S RETRACTION

Jose rizal Issues in Philippine History is whether or not Jose Rizal in his final days retracted all his
previous works and statements that were contrary to the dogma and teachings of the Roman Catholic
Church. It was also a renunciation of his membership to the Masonic Brotherhood.

In the document it stated, "I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writhing, publications and
conduct have been contrary to my character as son of the Catholic Church."

1935 In the original file which was discovered by Fr. Manuel Garcia, an archdiocesan archivist in 1935
that the document that have stated the retraction of Rizal was a forgery.

The following four reasons are oftentimes cited by historians:

1. Rizal love his family so much that if he signs the retraction, he could save them from persecution
including other Filipinos.
2. to give Josephine a legal status as his wife
3. To secure reforms from the Spanish government.
4. To help the church cut away from the disease which harmed its organization.

4 texts of Rizal's Retraction have surfaced

• The first text was published in La Voz Española and Diaro de Manila on the very day of Rizal's
execution on December 30, 1896.

• The second text appeared in Barcelona, Spain on February 14, 1897, in the fortnightly magazine in La
Juventud.

• The third text, the original text was discovered in the archdiocesan archivist on May 18, 1935 after it
disappeared for 39 years from the afternoon of the day when Rizal was shot.

• The fourth text appeared in El Imparcial on the day after Rizal's execution. It is the short formula of the
retraction.

Fr. Balaguer himself revealed the fact to his letter to his former superior Fr. Pio Pi in 1910.

It stated that "an exact copy of the retraction written and signed by Rizal. The handwriting of this copy I
don't know, nor do I remember whose it is" He proceeded: "I even suspect that it might have been
written by Rizal himself. I am sending it to you that may verify whether it might be of Rizal himself."

Fr. Balaguer received the exact copy on the evening and immediately preceding to Rizal's execution,
Rizal y su Obra and was followed by Sr. W. Retana.

In his biography of Rizal, Vida y Escritos del Jose Rizal with addition of the names of the witness taken
from the texts of the retraction in the Manila newspaper Fr. Pi's copy of Rizal's retraction the same text
as that of Fr. Balaguer's "exact" copy but follows the paragraphing of the texts of Rizal's retraction in the
Manila newspapers.

No one claimed to have seen the original text, except the publishers of La Voz Espanola
Newspapers reported that they have seen and read Rizal's own hand-written of the retraction which
sent by there dear and venerable Archbishop.

Manila pharmacist F. Stahl wrote in a letter stated that "besides, nobody has seen this written
declaration in spite of the fact that quite a number of people would want to see it."

Fr. Pi ascertained himself whether Rizal was the one who wrote and signed the retraction.

Fr. Pi keep a copy of the same for there archives that he delivered personally that the same morning to
His Grace Archbishop.

May 18, 1935 the lost "original" document was discovered by the archivist Fr. Manuel Garcia, C.M.

Manila newspapers retraction

Manila newspapers retraction text shown to be the exact copies of the original but only imitations of it.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE COPIES OF "ORIGINAL", NEWSPAPERS AND FR. BALAGUER, JESUITS

ORIGINAL TEXTS – NEWSPAPERS  JESUITS’ COPIES, FR. BALAGUER’S TEXT

The words “mi cualidad” appeared. - n Jesuits’ copies the words “mi calidad” appeared.

Same text found - Jesuits’ copies omit the word “Catolica” after the first “Iglesias”.

Does not found a word “misma”- Add before the third “Iglesias” the word “misma” in Jesuits’ copies.

It start the second paragraph immediately with the second sentences. - In paragraphing Fr. Balaguer’s
text does not begin the second paragraph until the fifth sentences.

The texts have only four commas. -In Fr. Balaguer’s copy has eleven commas. 

Does have the name of witnesses.  -Fr. Balaguer’s copy does not have name of witnesses.

"This retraction was signed together with Dr. Rizal by Señor Fresco, Chief of the Picket and Señor Moure,
Adjutant of the Plaza."

1910 In 1910 his letter to Fr. Pi, he said that he has the exact copy of retraction that was signed by Rizal
but has made no mention of the witnesses and no witnesses signed the retraction.

How did Fr. Balaguer obtain his copy of Rizal's retraction?

▪Fr. Balaguer never alluded to having himself made a copy of the retraction although he claimed that the
Archbishop prepared a long formula of the retraction and Fr. Pi a short formula.

▪In Fr. Balaguer's earliest account, it is not yet clear whether Fr. Balaguer was using the long formula in
dictating to Rizal what to write.

▪In 1909, in Fr. Pi's own account, Fr. Balaguer dictated the short formula that previously approved by the
Archbishop.
▪In 1910, the letter that sent to Fr. Pi from Fr. Balaguer he admitted there that he dictated to Rizal the
short formula prepared however he contradicts himself when he revealed that the "exact" copy came
from the Archbishop.

Where did Fr. Balaguer's "exact" copy come from?

▪This question, Fr. Balaguer himself has unwittingly answered this from the letter sent to Fr. Pi in 1910.

"...I preserved in my keeping and am sending to you the original texts of the two formulas of retraction,
which they (You) gave me; that from you and that of the Archbishop, and the first with the changes
which they (that is, you) made; and the other the exact copy of the retraction written and signed by
Rizal. The handwriting of this copy I don't know nor do remember whose it is, and I even suspect that it
might have been written by Rizal himself."

▪Fr. Balaguer received two original retraction.

~ First that came from Fr. Pi that contained the changes which Fr. Pi made.

~ Second is that the Archbishop "the exact copy of the retraction written and signed by Rizal"

▪He said that the exact copy was "written and signed by Rizal" but did not say "written and signed by
Rizal and himself".

According to Fr. Balaguer, the "exact copy' came from the Archbishop.

He called it "exact" because, not having seen the original himself, he was made to believe that it was the
one that faithfully reproduced the original in comparison to that of Fr. Pi in which "changes" that is
where deviated from the "exact copy" had been made.

Difference between that of the Archbishop (the exact copy) and that of Fr. Pi (with "changes")

According to Fr. Pi, Rizal rejected the long formula so that Fr. Balaguer had to dictate from the short
formula of Fr. Pi.

Allegedly, Rizal wrote down what was dictated to him, but he insisted on adding the phrases "in which I
was born and educated" and "Masonary" as the enemy of the Church the first of which Rizal would have
regarded as unnecessary and the second as downright contrary to his spirit.

MILITARY

▪They shown the exact copy of the Rizal retraction to the military men guarding in Fort Santiago.

▪Capt. Dominguez who claim in his notes that Rizal read aloud his retraction.

▪The truth is that, almost two years before his execution, Rizal had written a retraction in Dapitan.

▪Early in 1895, Josephine Bracken came to Dapitan with her adopted father who wanted to be cured of
his blindness by Dr. Rizal, their guide was Manuela Orlac, who was agent and a mistress of a friar.

▪Rizal fell in love with Josephine and wanted to marry her canonically, but he was required to sign a
profession of faith and to write retraction, which had to be approved by the Bishop of Cebu.
Prof. Craig wrote that "Spanish law had established civil marriage in the Philippines but the local
government had not provided any way for people to avail themselves of the right..."

▪In order to marry Josephine, Rizal wrote with the help of a priest a form of retraction to be approved by
the Bishop of Cebu.

▪In 1912, the incident was revealed by Fr. Antonio Obach to his friend Prof. Austin Craig who wrote
down that what the priest had told him; "The document enclosed with the priest's letter, was ready for
the mail when Rizal came hurrying to reclaim it."

▪All the said claim that they saw the retraction copy done by one who could imitate Rizal's handwriting
didn't really saw it.

▪The original copy was kept by some friars.

▪Both Archbishop and Fr. Pi acted innocently because they did not distinguish between the genuine and
the imitation of Rizal's handwriting.

The Unang Sigaw ng Himagsikan The first cry of the revolution Was it Balintawak or Pugadlawin or in
three other places?