Mediator : Good day everyone, I am pleased welcome you to our history debate 2023.

circumstances
surrounding one of the controversial topics in the history of the Philippines, the retraction of rizal.
Sitting on my right side is the government, and on my left side is the opposition. For our motion this
house believes that of the acts of jose rizal before the said execution have caused renouncement in
masonry and retraction against catholic church. Starting off of the prime minister of the government
is Kenj mayama

Prime minister
Kenj mayama: good day everyone, We, the government side, believes that jose rizal abjured masonry
and retracted his statements against the catholic church. The document presented to the public is a
strong evidence that rizal had truly withdrawn in masonry and retracted. Let us first address the
documents. First the letter of rizal to his mother receive on January 5, 1893. The letter says that rizal
have been going to the church every Sunday in dapitan, doesn’t this show that rizal had truly returned
to the church? Next the testimony of the eyewitness. Fr. Balaguer who was with rizal and presented
the retraction format prepared by Fr. Pio Pi, the superior of Jesuit society in the Philippines, before
the execution. He stated that on December 29, 1896, day before the execution, rizal have accepted
and sign the document. On may 13, 1935, Fr. Manuel A. Garcia fond a document of rizal`s retraction.
Isn’t the account of eyewitness not enough proof of retraction?

Mediator: now for the opposition, Angelique Razon, you may now rebut the previous statement and
provide the constructive for your side.

Leader of Opposition
Angelique Razon: Good day everyone, we the opposite side, believed that the said documents were
forged. According to an online source, joserizal.ph, maintained by jose rizal university the fact of
document forgery was revealed by Fr. Balaguer himself. Fr. Balaguer said that he could not
remember whose exact copy was the document and even Fr. Pio Pi couldn’t verify it in his own
statements. The copy of retraction paper that was said to be signed was even kept secret and was
only published in newspapers who claimed to have seen and read it. When Rizal’s family requested
for the original copy, it was said that it was lost. 39 years later, the original copy was found in the
archdiocesan archives. Instead of ending doubts, it only caused more arguments and questions in
many people because of significant differences in the text of the retraction documents. According to
Ricardo pascual Ph.D, who was given permission by the archbishop Nozaleda, to examine the
document, later concluded in his book, “Rizal beyond the grave” that the document presented was a
forgery. Moreover, Rizal didn’t expressly say that he retracted masonry. He only said tht he hted
masonry. So how is this a strong evidence of withdrawal and retraction? And if you say that rizal really
retracted, how come he was still executed? Wasn’t the retraction enough for salvation of rizal?

Mediator: we would like to thank the leader of opposition. Now let us call the Deputy Prime minister,
Geric Anthony Castro

Deputy Prime Minister

Geric Anthony Castro : In your argument of the forgery documents, it is also reasoned out in that the
same site that what the archbishop and Fr. Pi saw was not the original document of the retraction.
And the original document, which was almost eaten by termites, was kept friars for preservation.
Additionally, the retraction is a significant document because it established the act of marriage
between jose rizal and Josephine bracken. In Dapitan, the condition to them to be wedded was the
retraction. “no retraction, No marriage”. In other words rizal could never marry Josephine unless he
retracted first. And the sworn statement of the eyewitness , like Fr. Balaguer, agreed that there was a
retraction and marriage between the two. Moreover, after his marriage, Rizal dedicated a catholic
devotional book to his two sisters Josefa and Trinidad, as well as his wife Josephine, which in his
dedication mentioned “ to my dear and my unhappy wife, Josephine” aren’t this books proof of
Catholicism? In addition he said in his letter, “ I abominate Masonry as an enemy of the church and a
society prohibited by the church.” He used the word “abominate” which means to detest in the
highest degree: abhor. In this case he use a stronger language than “ I retract masonry..” likewise rizal
was suspected of rebellion, sedition, and illegal association against Spanish government. The
retraction government isn’t related to what he was accused of and as a consequence, it does not save
him from execution.

Mediator: I would like to thank the deputy of prime minister. Now, let us call the Deputy Leader of the
opposition, Mark Cabalsa .

Mark Cabalsa: Is it surprising that you speak the marriage wherein fact, there was no document of
marriage between Josephine and Riza. Consequently, a number of Rizal’s writings does not mention
Josephine as his wife. Correspondingly, Rizal did not even call Josephine “wife” in his last letter of mi
ultimo adios which was the last written text before his execution. In that letter, he said his farewell to
her as follow:” adios dolce estanjera, mi amiga , me alegria” instead of “adios, dulce estranjera, mi
esposa, mi alegria”. More so, if rizal died as a roman catholic, as you have argued, then he should
have been buried properly fitted to him. And us for us, his burial was still concealed with mystery
because it is it is said that he was buried in a lot of Roman Catholic cemetery in Paco and his name did
not appear in the registry for Roman Catholics, in this circumstances, did really rizal die as a Roman
Catholic?

Mediator: thank you, deputy leader of opposition

Member of Government:
Member of Opposition: Angelo Guinto

Moderator: now, for the government whip, kurt, you may now say your final words and conclude your
side’s argument
Government whip
Kurt : with regards to no documents of the marriage and having been not mentioned of Josephine in
Rizal’s writings. It is explained in Garcia’s account I his book , the great debate : Rizal Retraction, that
Fr. Manuel A. Garcia found or discovered the retraction letter including the marriage certificate of
Josephine and Rizal. It is also explained why Josephine was not mentioned in Rizal’s writings as hi
wife. It is because they were married before the execution or earlier, their marriage. Moreso, Rizal’s
Mi Ultimo Adios, the last official writing of rizal , was written a day or so before the execution , in
other words , before the marriage. In addition it is possible that rizal was not buried in a roman
catholic church was because he was already accused as traitor against the Spanish even though, we
filipinos, know that he is not. It is logical to think that the Spaniards didn’t want an enemy to be
buried with decency and rizal was no exception to that. In conclusion, rizal truly abjured masonry and
his retracted his affiliations against the catholic church for the reason that masonry is the enemy and
prohibited by the church and rizal was starting to return to his church. In this case, rizal did not fight
the catholic religion, rather, he fought those who abused their religion and the manner that the friars
practiced during that time. All of these reasons are proved and evidenced by documents presented
and found by people as well as the statements testified by the eyewitnesses.
Moderator: I thank the government whip,for the opposition whip, zybastian marquez, you may also
conclude your side’s argument and preside your final words.
Opposition whip
Zybastian marquez: about the related catholic books that rizal gave to Josephine and his sister this
doesn’t much weigh as an evidence.as Josephine was still in the catholic faith, it was only fitting that
rizal gave her related catholic materials. But this doesn’t mean that rizal have finally retracted his
words against the church. Moreover about the forgery of the documents. There are three copies of
the documents about the retraction. The first one indicates a year of 1890, the second changes it into
189C, and the final one, the written year’s 1896. Isn’t this enough proof that there was a forgery of
the retraction? Even Fr. Balaguer who was an eyewitness has some inconsistencies in his statements.
We therefore conclude, that the absence of the marriage document of rizal and Josephine, and his
burial outside the catholic church cemetery of paco shows that rizal did not retracted back to church.
The lack of sufficient evidence or evidences prove that Rizal’s retraction was just a false accusation.
Moderator: Thank you zybastian. The debate proper is now over. Thank you all very much for your
great arguments. May we now invite the both sides to cross the house
Conclusion he acknowledged this at the end when he wrote:” I retract with all my heart whatever in my works
writings publications and conduct has been contrary to my status as a son of the catholic church”.