José Protasio Rizal Mercado

y Alonso Realonda
• June 19, 1861-December 30, 1896
• He is the 7th child of Don Francisco
Engracio Rizal Mercado & Doña
Teodora Alonso Quintos Realonda
in nine children
• Husband of Josephine Bracken
• A novelist
-Noli me tangere & El
filibusterismo
INTRODUCT
ION
One of the pressing issues on the study of the life,
works and writings of the national hero is concerned
with the historicity and veracity of certain acts,
which Rizal allegedly had performed a few moments
before he was led out to execution, more specifically
his alleged reconciliation with the Catholic church
and his abjuration of masonry, otherwise known as
RETRACTION
The act of taking back an offer or statement,
or admitting that a statement was false.
ISSUES THAT RICARDO GARCIA WILL TRY TO PROVE:

1. That Rizal retracted his masonic affiliation.

2. That he himself wrote down and signed his retraction.
3. That he and Josephine were married.
THE ORIGIN/REASON OF THE RETRACTION

1. To save his family and town from further persecution.

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 her.
Rizal did not desire to injure the Roman Catholic Church, but to
remove the cancer which ruined both church and state in the
Philippines -- friar control of land and domination by the government.
 
HOW DID THE RETRACTION CONTROVERSY
STARTED?
- Four texts surfaced after Rizal’s execution.

1. The first text was published in La Voz Española and Diaro de Manila on the
very day of Rizal’s execution, December 30, 1896.
2. The second text appeared in Barcelona, Spain, on February 14, 1897, in the
fortnightly magazine La Juventud.
3. The original text was discovered in the archdiocesan archives on May 18,
1935.
4. The fourth text appeared in El Imparcial on the day after Rizal’s execution. It
is the short formula of the retraction.
I declare myself a Catholic and in this religion in
which I was born educated I wish to live and die.
I retract with all my heart whatever in my words,
writings, publications and conduct has been
contrary to my character as son of the Catholic
Church. I believe and I confess whatever she
teaches and I submit to whatever she demands. I
abominate Masonry, as the enemy which is of the
church, and as a society prohibited by the church.
The Diocesan Prelate may, as the Superior
Ecclesiastical Authority, make public this
spontaneous manifestation of mine in order to
repair the scandal which my acts may have caused
and so that God and people may pardon me.
Manila 29 of December of 1896
Jose Rizal
ISSUE:
- The writer of this version was anonymous.
- It is a story method and designed for
children to understand.
- Have lots of difference from the original.
- Didn’t mention that Rizal signed the
document with witnesses.
 2 SIDES:
1.ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH
2.PEOPLE WHO DID NOT BELIEVE RIZAL'S
RETRACTION
FRIARS WHO ARE RELATED TO THE
CONTROVERSY:
Fr. Balaguer
- Had the "exact" copy but follows the paragraphing of the texts of Rizal’s
retraction in the Manila newspapers.
- Had 2 formulas of retraction.
2. Fr. Pio Pi
- Had his own copy of Rizal’s retraction document.
- Not sure if the retraction document was really written and signed by Rizal.
- Head of the Jesuit Order
3. Fr. Manuel Garcia
- He found the original document of retraction on May 18, 1935.
 PEOPLE WHO DID NOT BELIEVE RIZAL'S RETRACTION
1.Dr. Ricardo Pascual of the University of the Philippines stated that the retraction document is a
forgery.In his book entitled "Rizal beyond the Grave", he noted that the document that was
discovered in 1935 was not in Jose Rizal's handwriting.

2. Antonio K. Abad attested that a certain man named Roman Roque revealed that he was assigned
by the Friars to make several copies of the document.

3. Jose Victor Torres - “Personally, I did not believe he retracted, but some documents that was
purchased by the Philippine government from Spain in the mid-1990s, the Cuerpo de Vigilancia de
Manila,” showed some interesting points about the retraction.

4. Father Sanchez who was a Spanish Jesuit priest and was Rizal's favorite professor in Ateneo.

5. Senator Jose Diokno- "Surely whether Rizal died as a Catholic or an apostate adds or detracts
nothing from his greatness as a Filipino... Catholic or Mason, Rizal is still Rizal - the hero who
courted death 'to prove to those who deny our patriotism that we know how to die for our duty and
our beliefs'."
WAYS TO TELL THAT RIZAL DID NOT RETRACT
(1)No masses were held for his soul or funeral held by Catholics
(2)He was not buried in a Catholic Cemetery in Paco but in a ground
(3)The entry in the book of burials of the interment of Rizal’s body is not made on the page with those burials.
(4)The happenings of the 29-30 of December 1896 according to Fr. Balaguer did mention of the visits of the Rizal
family but contrary to the report of the family.
(5)How come the highly enlarge photo of Rizal’s execution, which is now displayed at the Manila City Hall,
shows him without a scapular around his neck or a rosary around his hand as Fr. Balaguer have reported?
(6)If Fr. Balaguer was the true officiating priest of the retraction controversy, why then did the Jesuits and the
archbishops not readily support his name on the day after Rizal’s death and the announcement of the retraction
scandal?
(7)After the so-called retraction’s text was released by the archbishop to the press after the execution, how come
the document mysteriously disappeared in 1896? And then conveniently appeared in 1935? What happened in
between?
(8)And if there was a canonical marriage between Josephine and Rizal, which proved retraction, how come
Josephine could never produce a certificate of marriage, in spite of being required to do so in her two famous
lawsuits for her legal and rightful share in Rizal’s state?