CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO

THE COURSE
 Learning Outcomes
• At the end of this chapter, the student is
expected to:
1. Explain the history of the Rizal Law and its
important provisions;
2. Critically assess the effectiveness of the Rizal
Course
 THE TRIALS OF RIZAL BILL

Jose B. Laurel, Jr.

Former Speaker, House of Representatives
December, 1960
• Filled by the Committee on Education on April
3, 1956, Senate Bill No. 438 was supported by
all but three of the members of the Upper
House and seemed, to all appearances, a non-
controversial measure.
• After the sponsorship of the House Speaker on
April 17, 1956, mark the start of the long-
drawn disputations. . . that would engross and
divide the nation for three tense weeks.
• According to Senator Laurel, the object of the
measure was to disseminate the ideas and
ideals of the great Filipino patriot through the
reading of his works, particularly Noli Me
Tangere and El Filibusterismo.
• He was supported by Sen. Claro M. Recto and
opposed by Sen. Mariano J. Cuenco, Francisco
Rodrigo and Decoroso Rosales.
Catholic Church Does Not Approve
• The two novels contained views inimical to the
tenets of their faith
• They challenge the compulsory nature of the
bill as in violation of religious freedom
• An alleged Pastoral Letter that branded the
two novels as heretical and impious
• April 19, 1956 – the conflict reached the HOR when
Rep. Jacobo Z. Gonzales introduced House Bill No.
5561.
• May 2, 1956 – after the report of the Committee on
Education, recommend its approval without
amendment.
• May 9, 1956 – Debates started.
• May 14, 1956 – Rep. Tolentino, the House Majority
Floor Leader sponsored an amendment by
substitution
• Rep. Bengzon claimed that the substitute bill
represented a “complete triumph of the Church
hierarchy.”
• HOR vote – 71 Yay; 6 Nay; 2 Abstained; 17 Absent
• Senate vote – 23 Yay; 1 Absent
• May 17, 1956 – the Bill was passed in the HOR
• June 12, 1956 – the Bill was signed into law by
Pres. Ramon Magsaysay
Controversies on the Passing of the Rizal Law

• Strong opposition by the Catholic Church

• In 1955 election, the Church charged Recto with
being a communist and an anti-Catholic
• The Church urged its adherents to write to their
congressmen and senators showing their
opposition to the bill
• Fr. Jesus Cavanna argued that the novels
belonged to the past and that teaching them
would misinterpret current conditions.
• Radio commentator Jesus Paredes also said that
Catholics had the right to refuse to read them as it
would “endanger their savation.”
• Groups that were against the Bill: Catholic Action of
the Philippines, The Congregation of the Mission, The
Knights of Columbus and the Catholic Teachers Guild
• Groups that were in favour of the Bill: Veteranos de la
Revolucion (Spirit of 1896), Alagad ni Rizal, the
Freemasons and the Knights of Rizal.
• Archbishop of Manila, Rufino Santos protested
that Catholic students would be affected if
compulsary reading of unexpurgated version
were pushed through.
• Arsenio Lacson, Mayor of Manila, walked out
of mass when the priest denounced the bill.
• Catholic schools threatened to close down if
the bill was passed.