# THE STORY ## WHO IS JOSE RIZAL? https://steemitimages.com/DQmefb1dDd1Np6sEoqJoYxCioc7Cf2vBLUDGj7kGLxFL61j/image.png [Source]( https://www.filipiknow.net/jose-rizal-facts/) Dr. Jose Protacio Rizal Mercado y Alonso Realonda or popularly known as Jose Rizal born on June 19, 1861 was a Filipino specialist, nationalist and the most noticeable promoter for reforms in the Philippines during the Spanish time. Born to a middle-class family in the town of Calamba, Laguna, He was seventh out of the eleven children of Ms. Teodora Alonzo. Both his parents were educated and belonged to distinguished families. His father was Francisco Engracio Rizal Mercado born on May 11 of 1818, the youngest son of Cirila Alejandro and Juan Mercado. He was born in the place Biñan, Laguna. He was on the fourth generation of a Chinese settle in sixteen hundreds, Domingo Lam-co. His mother was Teodora Morales Alonzo Realonda born on the 9th of November 1827, and a resident of Sta. Cruz, Manila. She was famous for becoming a disciplinarian as well as a devoted, polite and meticulous mother. She had a deep influence on Rizal, being his first teacher to his development and was his inspiration in taking up medicine.
### CHILDHOOD ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmXxEpyiQHF986sTbGLUsRNfn2qiM7zVy6c7HGHjcQivnK/image.png) [Source]( http://www.knights-of-rizal.be/?page_id=115) The childhood of Jose Rizal can be considered by his wish to learn. Jose Rizal was not materially blessed or tough child yet, he had a strong will steered and trained by his mother, his first teacher. He acquired knowledge almost without the use of books. His mother was the one who laid the foundation of his great knowledge achieved in his life time. His intelligence was also the character of the young Jose Rizal. Jose Rizal learned the Alphabet letters at the age of 3 after insisting that he be taught to read and share the lessons learned by his elder sister. Rizal even tried to spell out the words of his sister’s story book. He also spent much of this time in a church nearby his house just watching or observing the people coming in and out of the place.
### MANHOOD ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmTm6f2iESibbPuT2nEMyGWUcXi16kmKu23Yc4z4nUzqfJ/image.png) [Source](https://volcomlife.blogspot.com/2011/06/what-made-jose-rizal-great-hero-of.html) Rizal as a brilliant child, as he became a man, was still so eager to know more about the things he is interested of, that is why he attended the Ateneo Municipal de Manila, in which he earned a degree Bachelor of Arts and also enrolled in the University of Santo Tomas in Medicine and Surgery and many more. He was an intellectual man with the schools he attended including his units in Spain. He was a creative poet, author, journalist and novelist whose most famous works were his two novels, Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. He also was a founder of many groups like La Liga Filipina and La Solidaridad. Thus, with this contributions to our country, He was considered as the national hero the country, Philippines.
### RIZAL AS A HERO ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmZg7Sw3UiAoLHumBvUDE3gx8svsan7iyzKembyVewTPSo/image.png) [Source](http://drjoserizal.weebly.com/the-choosing-of-rizal-as-our-national-hero.html) While in Europe, Jose Rizal became a part of the Propaganda Movement, involving with other Filipinos who wanted to have improvement in the Philippines. He also wrote his first novel, Noli Me Tangere (Touch Me Not) which some translated it into “A Social Cancer”, a masterpiece of Rizal that explains the dark side of Spain's colonial regulations in the Philippines, with specific emphasis on the role of Catholic friars. The book was banned in the Philippines long time ago, though copies were still being distributed by concerned individuals. Because of this two novel, Rizal's return to the Philippines was shortened because of the hidden plan of the government to exile and to kill him. He was ground for execution due to the following ground for publishing anti-Catholic and anti-friar books and articles; for having in possession a bundle of handbills, the Pobres Friars, in which advocacies were in violation of the Spanish orders; for dedicating his novel, El Filibusterismo to the three traitors the GomBurZa, Gomez, Burgos and Zamora and for emphasizing on the novel's title page that “the only salvation for the Philippines was separation from the mother country; and for simply criticizing the religion and aiming for its exclusion from the Filipino culture.
### RIZAL AS A LEADER ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmQsoegHyW7Ji23o6s1E6FzpA9KqHzDN85SDUjdgGdpqga/image.png) [Source](https://rlp.hds.harvard.edu/faq/jos%C3%A9-rizal) Rizal then returned to Europe and continued write, releasing his follow-up novel, El Filibusterismo, translated into The Filibusters, in 1891. He also circulated articles in La Solidaridad, one of the organizations of the Propaganda Movement. The reforms that Rizal promoted for focus on the desire to have the same treatment of Filipinos and Spaniards, regulating the authority of Spanish friars in the country and to have a representation for the Philippines in the Spanish parliament. Later that year, he delivered a speech at a banquet organized in honor of Juan Luna and Felix Resurrection Hidalgo, who had both won gold and silver medals at the Exposition Nacional de Bellas Artes. In the speech, Rizal expressed his deep regard for Spain, but condemned the friars in the Philippines. When copies of the speech reached Manila, he earned the anger and enmity of the authorities who called him a filibuster or a subversive. According to Jorge Bocobo, Rizal believed that one could be a good and moral person without the need for organized religion or “the one true faith.” With his trip to Spain, Rizal entered into a fraternal organization called Freemasonry. Dr. Rizal’s decision to become a freemason came as a direct effect of his education attainment, experience, travel and with his belief that a guild or brotherhood would aid him in achieving his dream of the liberty that must be attained by the Filipino people and country from oppression and abuse from the catholic friars and Spanish rulers. These freemasonry means different things to each of those who join. For some, it’s about making new friends and acquaintances. For others it’s about being able to help worthy causes like making an impact to family and humanity. But for Rizal, it is about gaining protection and assuring security in his life towards these Spanish bullies.
## THE FREEMASONRY ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmT9DvcyVZCeuz59kBhAch33fHE89PyCC7Ww2soZcuAzK2/image.png) [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasonry) Freemasonry is one of the world’s oldest and biggest non-sectarian and non- governmental group. It teaches principles through contribution in their ceremonies and activities. Members are likely to be of high ethical standing and are encouraged to express openly about Freemasonry. These freemasons have symbolic names among them, Rizal having a symbolic name of “Dimasalang” which means untouchable was designated as an Honorable and Venerable Master in the said fraternity. He was appointed under the Gran Oriente de España. Rizal is said to have been influenced to join Masonry by Miguel Morayta, a history professor at the Universidad de Madrid. Revolutionaries such as Andres Bonifacio, Apolinario Mabini, Marcelo H. del Pilar, Juan Luna, Deodato Arellano, Graciano Lopez-Jaena, H. Pardo de Tavera, Ladislao Diwa, and so many others in the Propaganda Movement and La Liga Filipina were also Masons and as such were automatically excommunicated as decreed for all Catholics becoming Masons since 1738 and reaffirmed by the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines in 1990. Rizal is called Dimasilang who is likewise considered one of those greats he was referring to in his statement. Simply because we recognize him as our National Hero and a staunch member of the controversial fraternity of the French Masonry. Rizal’s membership in the fraternity was deemed of significant importance to him, as its values sustained his principles and beliefs such as the separation of the Church and State, education for the youth and religious freedom.His association with this group means that he abolishes his connection or involvement in the Catholic religion, from its practices to its culture and beliefs. Many native Filipinos had been shock with the move of Rizal, with his mother, Teodora Alonzo who was so devoted to Catholism, and not just Teodora but even the family as a whole were very dedicated to the said religion. But still Jose Rizal decided to separate himself from the belief and rituals of his family and his nation. ## RIZAL’S ARREST ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmVLVPpG1LxRDxyMdok4gwmqAzuAAjrDoCpc2iuwApLbay/image.png) [Source](https://xiaochua.net/2012/12/25/the-last-days-of-jose-rizal-a-timeline-of-his-last-arrest-incarceration-execution-and-the-journey-of-his-remains/) But then, upon his return to the Philippines, he was arrested by the Spanish government for being a rebellious and for his reported participation in the mutiny. He was then exiled to the island of the Dapitan in the southernmost island group of the Philippines, Mindanao. There he created a school that taught English to the people there, and he worked on some agricultural developments and he continued to practice medicine, eventually meeting his last lady in his life, Josephine Bracken. But then Dr. Rizal was been judge as guilty in his charges of rebellion due to his reported contributions with the revolutionary groups. With this crime, he was sentenced to death. Then, as Dr. Rizal was a about to be executed, some said that he made a letter, a letter of retraction, renouncing his involvement in the freemasonry and embracing back the teaching of the church and of Christianity. This letter made so many questions about what really was the last decision of Jose Rizal about his participation of this group. Did he really want to retract from being a mason man and embrace again the teaching of his church? Or did he want to be firm with his decision as he entered the masonry, then he would die as a mason? These were just the few question we will try to uncover. The mysteries of Rizal’s retraction.
# THE RETRACTION ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmT4BuZK5NxQYRbuFidVnTCxLpCQMqWE8UvwikyqoFxtVt/image.png) [Source](http://thesplendorofthechurch.com/2013/12/31/the-retraction-of-dr-jose-rizal-renouncing-freemasonry-upholding-his-catholic-faith/) “Me declaro catolica y en esta Religion en que naci y me eduque quiero vivir y morir. Me retracto de todo corazon de cuanto en mis palabras, escritos, inpresos y conducta ha habido contrario a mi cualidad de hijo de la Iglesia Catolica. Creo y profeso cuanto ella enseña y me somento a cuanto ella manda. Abomino de la Masonaria, como enigma que es de la Iglesia, y como Sociedad prohibida por la Iglesia. Puede el Prelado Diocesano, como Autoridad Superior Eclesiastica hacer publica esta manifastacion espontanea mia para reparar el escandalo que mis actos hayan podido causar y para que Dios y los hombers me perdonen.” This was said to be the original words that Dr. Jose Rizal wrote in his letter of retraction renouncing his involvement towards the freemason group. This letter was discovered by Father Manuel Garcia on 18th of May 1935. There were two opposing groups that are keenly studying about this retraction, this group would benefit the result whether he retracted or not. These two most involved groups are the Masonic Rizalists and the Catholic Rizalists. To let us understand more clearly about the retraction letter, these are the words that had been translated into the English language, “I declare myself a catholic and in this Religion in which I was born and 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.” This letter of retraction was said to be Jose P. Rizal’s last letter to his people saying his abomination to the Freemasonry organization, as an enemy of his church. Declaring himself still as a catholic as his religion of which he was born. There are two opposing groups, who had firm beliefs about the controversy, the Masonic Rizalist who believed that Rizal did not withdraw from being a mason, and the Catholic Rizalist who really assumed that he retracted. These are the group who tries to justify whether Rizal had really retracted or not from the masonry.
### CATHOLIC RIZALISTS ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmNSmSQNLGERznUrvXdP7uwaKS6GFfC2LRxZdJv2Zbfbur/image.png) [Source](https://www.theodysseyonline.com/the-catholic-guilt-trip) The Catholic Rizalist believed that Jose Rizal retracted from being mason. There are points that I have figured out that seems to support the belief of this Catholic Rizalists about Rizal who really retracted with his masonic beliefs . These points are supported by articles which was been written in the bibliography part of this term paper for you to have more references about it. Also, I have expounded these things based on what my finite mind can comprehend about their points.
*Rizal’s Interest on God’s Word* As written in the Jose Rizal University’s website, joserizal.ph, during his last hours at 5:00 – 6:15am of the day of his death, after he takes his breakfast, he was said to read the bible and meditated it. Which may seem to support this Catholic Rizalist were saying. This act of Rizal may seem to show Rizal being interested with the bible, may implicate that Rizal are able to embrace the teachings of the church. Also, at 6:15 – 7:00am, as Rizal was about to be executed, before the sounds of guns has been heard, Rizal utter this words “It is finished”. These are the words that Jesus Christ spoke when he was about to experience death in the cross (John 19:30). These manifestations of Rizal towards the teachings of the Bible before his execution had allowed the mind of some historians to believe that Jose Rizal retracted. These confessions of the word can only be heard and seen to those people who really meditated the Bible, Also there was a letter that Rizal wrote to Josephine Bracken quoting again the words in the Bible.
*Possible Reasons why Rizal Retracted* They stated some possible reasons why this Rizal retracted from this fraternal group. First is to save his family from being oppressed and persecuted by Spanish friars. Rizal may have been said that he encountered the problems of signing the retraction or of having his relatives followed by further persecutions. Since he anticipated his death would end the harassment of his nation, the letter may have appeared to him to be the only tactic of attaining his purpose. Second, so that the Spanish friars would allow Rizal and Josephine to have legal rights as a married couple. He wanted to experience this marriage towards Josephine even though he will be executed still. Lastly, to help church in gaining back the dignity they have lost, when Rizal had harmed them. Rizal did not want to damage the Church, specifically the Roman Catholic Church, but to eradicate the disease which caused great damage between the church and state in the Philippines. The control of the friars of the land and power by the government. He was also harassed for freedom of belief and thoughts to the individual. He may have sensed that of his novels had produced the insecurities, and have apologized for that. His letter to his brother, Paciano which was written the night before the execution.
*Burial Place of Rizal* “He (Rizal) retracted. He died as a Catholic, and a proof that he died as a Catholic was he was buried inside the sacred grounds of Paco Cemetery,” said De Viana, who compared the martyr with Apolinario Mabini, a revolutionary and free mason who was buried in a Chinese cemetery.” (De Viana. 2011). Only those people that are died Catholics are buried in the Paco Cemetery. It was the cemetery of the Spanish friars and the Filipino Catholics. If Rizal really did not retract, why is his body are on these burial place? This may seem a supporting evident that Rizal died as a Catholic of the reason that no one on that place died as a Catholic. The evidence speaks for itself and moves on to the question on Rizal’s character as some argue that the retraction is not in line with Rizal’s mature beliefs and personality. He was mature enough to understand the costs of the choice he had made even before he faced to the Jesuits; he had been expecting this to happen and would be doubtful if he had a behavior displaying a danger from death. Anyone who has been reading his life and had been acquainted with him knows this is so, even the priests had admitted that Rizal showed a behavior consistent of what he was throughout his mature years.
*Rizal and Fr. Obach’s conversation* The letter of Fr. Obach specifies Rizal’s advantage of entering a store in Dapitan to compete with the Chinese traders. In fact, Rizal had prepared the statutes and regulations of the Society of Dapitan Agriculturists, aiming to facilitate the easy buying, selling, and storage of products for export, and curtailing the trade monopoly of the Chinese. He believed that they had successfully persuaded Rizal to turn back away from his errors: “I am convinced that Rizal is now tired and wants to retract, but his pride strongly holds him …I think he will immediately break away from everything and he would be an excellent Christian.” Fr. Obach continues: “…Rizal says his family owned two houses of heavy materials, and he asks that they be returned or their equivalent…I answered that the only thing I could do was to look into the situation and if there is no difficulty, for I do not know how things are…As for the third, I said that I do not think they would give him such a big amount. His plan…is to raise a huge cement plant which, on a small scale. has been quite successful. But this third condition is not important, for without it, he is ready to make a retraction provided his family is provided for. Besides, if they grant him this amount, it would be on condition that he repays it.”
*His Marriage towards Josephine Bracken* The historian there was more intrigued, which has led many writers into hesitation, concerning the marriage of Rizal. Father Balaguer swears that he married José and Josephine about fifteen minutes before the time for the execution. But the marriage certificate could not be seen in the Manila Cathedral nor in the Registry of Fort Santiago where it should have been place. This raised suspicions. Lucia, the sister of Rizal, who went with Josephine to the chapel that morning, saw a priest activity, but said she did not see the wedding ceremony. Other fact supports the marriage report. Rizal wrote in a copy of The Imitation of Christ, by Thomas a Kempis, these words: To my dear and unhappy wife. The obvious answer might be that Rizal had considered Josephine as his wife since they first held hands in Dapitan a year and a half before, but in no letter he did not call her "wife" before this time. The strongest circumstantial evidence for the wedding comes from Rizal's sister Maria. When she went to say farewell the last night, Jose said to her: "Maria, I am going to marry Josephine. I know you all oppose it, especially you, yourself. But I want to give Josephine a name. Besides you know the verse in the Bible, The sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the children to the third and fourth generation.' I do not want them to persecute you or her for what I have done."
*The Issuance of Circular* The Rizal’s alleged retraction, men lacking in faith like the masons would surely deny its possibility for some evident reasons. But at the same time Archbishop Nozaleda was very much worried about Rizal’s soul. If he can’t oppose Rizal’s belief by a Spanish rule of law court for involvement against Spanish authorities and death sentence, but for at least, pursued to influence the man to return to the Church before his killing. Besides sending the Jesuits to Rizal’s cell, he issued a circular to all the religious communities in the city. That they pray for the conversion of the condemned man which is Jose Rizal. This is one element the masons and other anti-Catholic minds cannot understand the power of prayer. In fact, just a day before Rizal’s execution, the hero was still immovable as in his debate with Fr. Pastells, refusing to retract masonry. Shortly after Nozaleda’s prayer request, another of his former Ateneo teachers, Fr. Vicente Balaguer visited him and frankly told him that unless he renounces masonry, he’ll surely go to hell the next day. This made the hero reflect deeply. As Balaguer was about to leave, Rizal told him that “I’ll pray for the gift of faith”. In the evening, Rizal finally announced to the Jesuits his intention to retract masonry and return to Catholicism. Upon being informed, Archbishop Nozaleda ordered the preparation of a retraction formula, which the hero must agree and sign before he is readmitted to the Church and the sacraments When Rizal was shown the retraction formula, he rejected it but he asked if he could write his own. After doing so, he was finally allowed to receive the sacraments, such as confession, communion, holy mass and the sacrament of matrimony with his foreign sweetheart. Josephine Bracken, giving her as a wedding gift. Thomas A Kempis, the Imitation of Christ. By daybreak, Rizal walked into eternity a Catholic once more.
*Rizal, not an Anti-cleric* One factor which made Rizal convert, according to my opinion, is he was never a true, blue anti-clerical. Although he learned about the French style of anti-clericalism. He did not favor it, and probably was more inclined toward the American style of Church-State separation, which simply left the Church and State in its separate spheres of influence and no persecution of the Church by the government. In Mexico in the 1920s, a French-style persecution of the Church occurred under the presidency of Plutarco Ellas Calles. Earlier, a similar wave of persecution happened in Portugal after the overthrow of the monarchy during the 1910 Revolution (which explains the harrasment of the three seers of Fatima by the mayor of their town, even locking them up in jail with common criminals). Violent anti-clericalism seems to be the hallmark of Latin masonry, something lacking in its Anglo-Saxon version in the United States and Britain (although no one can deny that they also subscribe to anti-religious philosophies) . But by analyzing Rizal’s ideas on the subject, Rizal may have become anti-clerical, but he did not favor of going into the extent of persecuting religious belief, for he subscribed so much into the idea of freedom of conscience. That is an indication that he never fully accepted the anti-clerical masonic beliefs, and probably abhorred the persecution of believers by masonic-dominated governments in Europe and Latin America. With this, I believe, would pave the way for Rizal’s eventual return to the Faith when contronted with the fact of death.
*Epilogue of Jose Rizal and Fr. Villa Clara* For some month previously I had been in contact with Dr. Rizal since I was the missionary pastor in Dapitan where he had been exiled. Following instructions I had received from Superiors, 1 tried to treat him with the greatest respect and affection, to which he reciprocated with affection and confidence in me. He boarded the boat for Manila in September 1896 to proceed to Cuba as a medical officer. I went to Manila in December when Rizal, back from Spain, was in prison and sentenced to death. When he summoned the Jesuit Fathers (this is clear and cannot be denied), he received them with affability. He asked if any of his former teachers were around. Only Fr. Vilaclara,'they told him, and that providentially I had arrived. Since he had known me as his pastor and friend, he had me summoned. This is why I went there and was involved in these incidents. Neither Retana nor his co-religionists can deny this. He received me with open arms. Since I liked him very much, I was ready to do whatever I could with divine grace to save his soul. I was aware nof his story, but not exactly where he had erred. I can affirm that in the few moments before we started discussing his ideas, he asked to make his confession. I understand that if I had acceded to his request, he would have confessed just as he had often done many times in his youth. But I had to remind him that I believed he was not properly disposed to receive the sacraments of the Church; that we had to talk first about his ideas and errors which, if he held on to them, he ought to retract. He then began to talk respectfully of God, of the Sacred Heart, of Holy Scripture; that he was praying and asking God to let him know His will in order to carry it out. But since any Protestant could say this, I urged him, despite his desire to confess, to tell me his rule of Faith. Only Holy Scripture, he told me. In this, he was apparently a Protestant. I then told him I was surprised that a man as talented as he was should apply to a norm so false and so baseless. With a simple observation, I made him admit the inconsistency of the Protestant rule of Faith. I pressed him further to tell me his basis for religion and philosophy. As though forced by, the power of logical thinking, he admitted to his only criterion was reason which God had given as his all-embracing guide. He was indeed a rationalist. By reminding him of the stupid absurdities of the wisest of men outside of Christianity, it was not hard to make him realize the lack of logic in the rationalist criterion. Here he found himself as though caught in a conflict. He could not maintain the rationalist norm, whose absurdity universal history and everyone's experience show. He was forced to admit the Catholic rule of revelation and the authority of the Church. There one could see the power of self-love keeping him from acknowledging the Faith he had professed but later abandoned because of the air of disbelief he had breathed in Europe. He kept in mind part of the errors learned from protestant and heretical books, especially from the German rationalist bibles, and we had a long and painful fight. This was the epilogue if Jose Rizal and Fr. Villa Clara as Fr. Villa Clara had convinced Jose Rizal to retract from his Masonry. There he stated detail by detail how he swayed Rizal to retract from his fraternal organization. I loved him as one of my best friends. An incident occurred which alarmed me, and I prepared to battle Rizal's heterodoxy. They advised me he was feverish and in grave danger of death. Although I usually did not go to his house, I went there and, alone with him, I said, 'They say you are gravely sick. Tell me the truth." He looked at me affectionately. "No, Father. Yesterday indeed I was in danger of dying. Today I am better. I shall not die." Then I said, 'The thing is, if you die near me, I shall not let you die as a pagan, but as a Christian." At these words, he grabbed my hand, looked me in the eye, and spoke with gratitude, "Thank you, Father. No, no, I shall not die that way." Fr. Villa Clara added. “How could this be? We ask. It could be, for the circumstances and people had connived. It could be, for there was no other recourse. It could be, for the moth had burned its wings! Twenty-four years after the garroting of the Filipino clerics, Fathers Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez, and Jacinto Zamora, the pogrom and intimidation had to continue. It had to continue for the dying Empire and had now sensed its own death. It had to continue, for it wanted to display its final domination of a reawakened people. However, it would not be completely so! The man they had just martyred was a man whose politics and faith were unshakable and timeless. As we know, and as history recounts, it also projects.” (Ramon Lopez, 2013). To paraphrase these words, Mr. Lopez believe that Rizal could be really retracted, though he was smart and sharp, he was still a human being. He wanted his family to be safe as he was about to leave his life. He wanted to be happy after all, and pursued to retract to give Josephine Bracken, the legal rights as his wife. He also knew that the mind of the people had already awakened for its revolution towards the Spanish Authorities who oppressed the Filipino people. As we may know, he was never anti-God or anti-Church. He was anti-cleric to those who molested their duty and concealed behind their conceited robe of religiosity. He knew there were those who practiced religion but did not worship God. After the execution there are further studies and investigation conducted that would somehow clarify the validity of the letter. These are found, at the Paco Cemetery, the name of Dr. Jose Rizal was listed among those who died impenitent. The entry made in the book of burials at the cemetery where Rizal was buried was not made on the page for those buried on December 30, 1896 but on a special page, as ordered by the authorities. Father Estanislao March, S.J., and Fr. Jose Vilaclara, S.J. could have ordered a Christian burial, but they did not. Despite numerous immediate supplications from the Rizal family after the execution, no letter of retraction could be produced. The Rizal family was informed by the church that approximately nine to eleven days after the execution, a mass for the deceased would be said, after which the letter of retraction would be shown the family. Though the family was in attendance, the mass was never celebrated and no letter of retraction was shown. They were told that the letter had been sent to the Archbishop’s palace, and that the family would not be able to see it.
*Some Catholic Rizalists* Furthermore, “Those who affirm the authenticity of Rizal's retraction are prominent Philippine historians such as Nick Joaquin, Nicolas Zafra of UP Leon Maria Guerrero III, Gregorio Zaide, Guillermo Gomez Rivera, Ambeth Ocampo, John Schumacher, Antonio Molina, Paul Dumol and Austin Craig. They take the retraction document as authentic, having been judged as such by a foremost expert on the writings of Rizal, Teodoro Kalaw.”, (Camacho and Magsipoc, 2013). Historians also refer to eleven eye witnesses when Rizal wrote his retraction, signed a Catholic prayer book, and recited Catholic prayers, and the multitude that saw him kiss the crucifix before his execution. A great grandnephew of Rizal, Fr. Marciano Guzman, cites that Rizal's 4 confessions were certified by 5 eyewitnesses, 10 qualified witnesses, 7 newspapers, and 12 historians and writers including Aglipayan bishops, Masons and anti-clericals. One witness was the head of the Spanish Supreme Court at the time of his notarized declaration and was highly esteemed by Rizal for his integrity (Camacho et. Al.). Some believe that Jose Rizal made the retraction showing that Rizal has a moral courage to recognize his mistakes and able to restore the conflicts he had with the church and the government. ### MASONIC RIZALISTS ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmPHbHagNhDvAjEBNpY1wW56aaN2Qr8aNswW3YRmUgbbZn/image.png) [Source](http://futurestorm.blogspot.com/2009/12/freemasonry-and-oath-of-nimrod-masonic.html) The other side of the story, the Masonic Rizalists firmly believed that our hero did not retracted. These group gave possible points that Rizal really did not retract.
*Document Forgery* First, was that the retraction was considered as being forged by the Spanish friars. With the case that the one who presented the retraction was a priest of the Catholic Church, was quite questionable. First of all is that there is some matter of the handwritings. To date, the only technical study criticizing the validity of the document was made by Dr. Ricardo R. Pascual of the University of the Philippines just after the paper was found. Having some of Rizal’s writings as his standard, he notes a number of differences with the penmanship on the document, he further decided that it was a document written by a one man because of the comparisons in some aspects between the body of the letter and the writing of all the signers. Second is that there is the revelation of a forger. “Antonio K. Abad tells how on August 13, 1901 at a party at his ancestral home in San Isidro, Nueva Ecija a certain Roman Roque told how he was employed by the Friars earlier that same year to make several copies of a retraction document.” (Alojado et. al.) Why would Jose Rizal would retract from his freemason group when he knows that even if he signs the retraction letter he would still be executed? Since the Spanish friars cannot do anything to alleviate his consequences because the court process involved was purely a military tribunal where civilian or church interference was uncommon and not allowed. Rizal was accused of participating in rebellious propaganda where the penalty as provided by the Spanish Code is death.
*Questionable Persuasion of the Spanish Friars for Rizal to Retract* Furthermore, way back when Rizal was still exiled in Dapitan, Father Sanchez, Rizal’s favorite teacher from Ateneo, was sent by the Jesuits chiefs to try to persuade his former student’s accusation towards the Catholic religion and Spanish religion in the Philippines. Father Sanchez told him to retract in exchange of a professorship, a hundred thousand pesos and an estate however Rizal rejected the offer. (Laubach, 1936). These persuasion reveals that the Church really wanted Rizal to retract from his anti-Catholic works and groups. This may be the reason why the Catholic Church did everything to claim that Rizal really retracted. The letter was very defensive towards the Catholic religion, addressing Rizal’s loyalty towards them, even though Rizal did not really have loyalty over them. It was believed that the priests have motives in making Rizal retract. It is because “The Church was interested in his retraction ever since he was in Dapitan in 1982 and the friars never mentioned about the retraction until after Rizal’s death. Also, they want him dead and retracted. If Rizal retracted earlier, he could have used this as a defense to save him from the verdict.” (Pascual, 1950), Pascual believed that Rizal did not retract, but it was mainly the intention of the Priest for Rizal to retract to revert the things he had written about them. The novels he wrote was very influential that it stirred up the minds of the people and really believe about what is happening in the Philippines as it was been corrupted by Spanish Priests. The Spanish friars' project retraction started from the first day of Rizal's exile in Dapitan, which was entrusted particularly by the Jesuit order headed by Fr. Pablo Pastells, chief of the Jesuits in the Philippines in the 18th Century. Father Sanchez, head of the Jesuit mission house in Dapitan, was specially tasked to convince Rizal to retract in exchange for his stay in the Jesuit mission house and, much later, as a condition prior to his marriage to Josephine Bracken in a formal religious ceremony. “Briefly then the picture presented before us is that of Dr. Jose Rizal, the man, the scientist, and rationalist who wrote vigorously against the Catholic Church, and who ridiculed the idea of hell. A few hours before his execution, when threatened with eternal damnation, he became suddenly ‘distributed’ and like a child, ‘ No, no, I would not be condemned’. Answered by Father Balaguer that he would certainly go to hell if he did not retract and return to the Catholic Church, the fear became greater, his reason capitulated to faith, and he exclaimed: ‘Well father, I promise that the remainder of my lifetime I will employ asking God for the grace of faith’ Where he signed a retraction in which he renounced all that he said and wrote in contradiction of the church and reject his masonry. This theoretical facts brought out in the way of evidence, when pieced together, do not seem to fit psychologically into the picture.” (Ronnie, 2012). This reason may sound so unintelligent, a man who had been so firm with his decision for his lifetime, with just this threat of Father Balaguer, had turned his mind. And actually, it was the wrongdoings of the priests that Rizal did not like, it was not the church at all.
*The Over Defense of the Church* Why is the Catholic Church very defensive with it? The ones who believed that Rizal retracted are mostly basing their opinions to the statement of Father Balaguer who have given the story of how the friars managed to convince Rizal to go back to church and make a retraction. The retraction letter and the book (Act s of Faith, Hope, and Charity) was their most important proof. These proofs instead of verifying that Rizal retracted caused more suspicions. Rizal’s relatives were promised that the letter would be read to them in Paco Church, but the never heard it. That caused doubt. The newspapers published varies in different versions. These caused doubt. Then came the report that it had been lost. Father Balaguer swears under oath (1917) that he took it to Ateneo before Rizal was brought out to be shot, and that Father Pio Pi carried it to the Palace of Archbishop Nozaleda, entrusting it to Gonzales Feijoo, who deposited it in the chest for reserved papers. Then all trace of it was lost. Father Pio said they looked for it but could not find it. That caused doubt. There are so many move that the Church priest that caused doubt to the readers, move that may not seem to help show the retraction but seem to show personal intentions about it. If Rizal had withdrew from his attacks in contradiction of the teachings and practices of the Catholic Church, and if, according to his Catholic biographer Leon M. Guerrero, Rizal had gone to confession four times, heard mass in his death-cell, and received Holy Communion before he was executed, then Rizal should be branded a traitor to all freedom fighters. He deserve not to be respected or admired as a hero. He should, instead, be canonized a saint of God. But then again, if Rizal had retracted, why then should the church feel dedicated to get Rizal’s true character expunged out of the Filipino psyche? The truth of the matter was that the Church did everything possible to counteract Rizal’s honest-to-goodness scientific temper of mind. Indeed, in his Noli and Fili, Rizal exposed the Philippine damaged culture caused by organized superstition otherwise popularly known as Christianity. Thus, the story of his retraction was nothing more than a theological concoction to sanitize, if not to neutralize considerably the volume of Rizal’s humanistic and scientific messages to the Filipino as a people.
*Carelessness* Was there ever such careless with important circumstantial evidence? Doubt has also been raised by the fact that neither the Archbishop nor the Jesuits asked for pardon or mitigation of the sentence. Only his family begged for mercy. The strongest argument was the character of Rizal. It was but a few months before that he had rejected Father Sanchez' offer of a professorship, a hundred thousand pesos, and an estate if he would retract; and he had declared that he could not be bought for half the Philippines. The streamer which brought Rizal to Dapitan carried a letter from Father Pablo Pastells, Superior of the Jesuits parish priest of Dapitan. In this letter, Father Superior Pastells informed Father Obach that Rizal could live at the parish convent on the following conditions: First is that Rizal publicly retract his errors concerning religion, and make statements that were clearly pro-Spanish and against revolution. Second is that he perform the church rites and make a general confession of his past life. Lastly, is that hence forth he conduct himself in an exemplary manner as a Spanish subject and a man of religion. Rizal did not agree with these conditions. Consequently, he lived in the house of the commandant, Captain Carnicero. The alleged retraction letter of Rizal content (perhaps it was really forged by the friars) because Rizal once exposed that it was one of the ways a friar can destroy the reputation of his enemy. It has been said that no one claimed to see the original text. Why the Catholic priests or their leaders would would hide that retraction if it could benefit them after all. Or even why did they not keep it and have shown it to the public if that would really raise their dignity and integrity as religious leaders. The family of Dr. Rizal never saw the Retraction document in spite of being assured to see it
*Rizal Uninterested with the Retraction* As Dr. Rizal did not agree with these conditions, these might mean that he really is not interested to retract from the masonry or he just don’t want to go back to the Catholic Religion. This conditions given by the Spanish friars had really brought rumors that they are into Rizal’s retraction so that their names will be cleansed, as it was been dirtied by Dr. Rizal with his novels that had brought rebellion towards the government and authorities of the said friars. Rizal’s behaviour during his last hours in Fort Santiago does not point to a conversion- the Mi Ultimo Adios and letters- or indicate even a religious instability. In the evening where his sister and mother arrived, never had he mentioned about the retraction, contrary to what Father Balaguer claimed that even in the afternoon, Rizal was oblivious and was asking for the formula of the retraction. Rizal was fixated of the thought that he would die for the love of his country, he, himself had coveted death a long time ago. His character speaks so loud that even all of Rizal’s friends do not believe that he have written a retraction. Also some other facts did not coincide to what other witness are saying, like when Trinidad and Father Luis Viza visited Rizal at the Cell when he was about to experience death. Trinidad said that she visited on 7 - 8 pm. Rizal never mentioned to her about his plans to retract and to be married Let us look at Rizal’s character as a man aged 33. He was mature enough to realize the consequences of the choice he had made even before he opposed to the Jesuits; he had been anticipating this to happen and would be unlikely if he had a behaviour showing a threat from death. Anyone who has been studying his biography and had been acquainted with him knows this is so, even the priests had admitted that Rizal showed a behaviour consistent of what he was throughout his mature years. Also some other facts did not coincide to what other witness are saying, like when Trinidad and Father Luis Viza visited Rizal at the Cell when he was about to experience death. Trinidad said that she visited on 7 - 8 pm. Rizal never mentioned to her about his plans to retract and to be married The family of Dr. Rizal never saw the Retraction document in spite of being assured to see it.
*The Marriage: Myth or Not* As I gather some thoughts of the authors in the articles, they have these points about the alleged lies of the Spanish friars, first is Fr. Vicente Balaguer, S. J. claimed that he performed the official marriage between 6:00 – 6:15 am of December 30, 1896 in the company of one of the Rizal sisters. But the Rizal family denied that any of the Rizal sisters were there that significant morning. Dr. Jose Rizal was martyred at 7:03 am. Nobody had reported seeing Ms. Josephine Bracken in the vicinity of Fort Santiago in the morning of the execution. Considering the time it would take for the three priests, Fr. Jose Vilaclara, Fr. Estanislao March, and Fr. Vicente Balaguer, to discuss the region of the walk to offer spiritual upkeep to the condemned In Josephine Bracken’s matrimony to Vicente Abad, the Church Register of Marriages kept at the Roman Catholic Cathedral in Hong Kong made no reference that Josephine was a “Rizal” by marriage, or that she was the widow of Dr. Jose Rizal. In the legal register of Hong Kong, Josephine used the last name “Bracken” instead of “Rizal” to be married to Vicente Abad. In Josephine Bracken’s litigation versus Jose Maria Basa for the possession of Dr. Jose Rizal’s valuable library, a certification from the British Consulate from Manila stating that she was indeed Rizal’s widow would have bolstered her claim. She did not pursue this. Why not? In 1960, inquiry at the Cardinal-Bishopric of Manila for evidentiary proof of a Rizal-Bracken marriage was not fruitful, or possibly, the issue was simply ignored by the religious.
*Rizal’s Biographer* Rizal’s biographer – Leon M. Guerrero, clearly notes that Rizal returned to the Church of his youth in extremes of self-abasement, frenziedly in childlike fashion, spending the remaining hours of earning indulgences from purgatory by confessing four times, and obsequiously attending to Fr. Balaguer and Villaclara’s wishes. In brief, according to this biographer, Rizal died as a timid coward. Indeed, according to this official government commissioned biographer, our national hero in the end turned out to be a turncoat, a creepy-crawly coward. But then again, four years before his death, Rizal in 1882 wrote a letter to Gregorio Aglipay: “. . . It is probable that I will be executed – then they will try to bring along my moral death by covering my memory with slander.” (Poch Suzara, 2009).
*Vincente Balaguer in Rizal’s life* The retraction issue came about and was led by Fr. Vicente Balaguer, a Jesuit, who was not even a teacher of Rizal in Ateneo, nor, more importantly according to the report of the local publication in Bagumbayan then, had a glimpse of the room where Rizal was held or was he even present on that religious debate the day before Rizal was executed. This report was initially released by Balaguer in Spain while the real witness, Fr. Frederico Faura was still alive. The report however, was only released in the Philippines after Fr. Faura passed away, a good twenty years after Rizal’s own death. Even the perceived glory and honor of the responsibility of having obtained Rizal’s alledged retraction was contested over by the friars. In 1901, the Filipinos demanded for the copy of the retraction and having none to show, the Church accepted that it did not actually exist. Yet, in 1935, Fr. Manuel Garcia claimed that he had discovered the true copy from the Archbishop’s Palace, however, the date in the document was December 19, 1890, casting further doubt as the citizenry know very well that Rizal died in 1896. Except for these evidences, Rizal’s genuine emotions in his writings cannot be suppressed as in his poem, Last Farewell: "I shall be where no slaves bow to a master; where faith does not kill and where God is the only One Supreme." This, unarguably is the message for all Masons and readers, that until his ultimate hour, the heroes’ self-conviction remained steadfast and unrelenting. Rizal was among those Catholics who were excommunicated by the Church since 1738 for simply being a Mason and were not entitled to the Blessed Sacraments. This is why his body was lain in an unnamed and unmarked grave in Paco Cemetery in 1896. This is quite confusing, however, because had Rizal actually signed his retraction, the friars would have given him the proper burial he deserves. Yet, this did not happen until his remains were eventually transferred to Luneta in 1911 by his brothers in the Fraternity
*Points of Arguments* There are the points of argument pertaining to the letter. The Retraction Document discovered in 1935 is considered the chief witness to the reality of the retraction. The testimony of the press at the time of the event, of “eyewitnesses,” and other “qualified witnesses,” i.e. those closely associated with the events such as the head of the Jesuit order, the archbishop, etc. “Acts of Faith, Hope, and Charity” reportedly recited and signed by Dr. Rizal as attested by “witnesses” and a signed Prayer Book which was amongst the documents discovered by Father Garcia along with the Retraction. If true, Rizal would not only accept the general Roman Catholic teachings but would agree to a number of beliefs which he had previously disclaimed.
### THE THIRD SIDE ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmfBy95dA3BaC6SD1W9BknkhhNaD4aXBDcSi8pmhgyshi9/image.png) [Source](http://thirdside.co.uk/) As I have gathered information about these two opposing sides, I have figured out that there is still one more side. This is the group wherein neglecting these retraction issue, means they doesn’t care whether it is true or not, but is concerned with Jose Rizal as a hero. They believe that even with or without the retraction, we cannot deny the fact that Rizal had still contributed a lot to our society and to the independence that we are experiencing. These are that authors that stated the said-to-be “The Third Side” of the story. “Anti-retractionists ask, ‘What kind of hero is Jose Rizal?’ They say he was fickle-minded. Well, that may be true, but that is human character. Rizal was not a perfect person,” De Viana said. He also mentioned that just like any person, Rizal was prone to flip-flop. He believes that Rizal retracted because the national hero wanted to be at peace when he dies.But would Rizal’s works deem irrelevant and futile because of his retraction? De Viana answered, “Rizal awakened our knowledge of nationalism. For me, that is enough. The issue will not invalidate his works in any way.” (De Viana, 2011) Supporters see in the retraction Rizal's "moral courage...to recognize his mistakes," his reversion to the "true faith", and thus his "unfading glory,"and a return to the "ideals of his fathers" which "did not diminish his stature as a great patriot; on the contrary, it increased that stature to greatness." On the other hand, senator Jose Diokno stated, "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'." (Camacho and Magsipoc, 2013) Surely, we must put the question of retraction to rest, though Rizal is a hero, whether he retracted or not, we must investigate if he really did a turn-around. If he did not, and the documents were forgeries, then somebody has to pay for trying to deceive a nation. (Uckong et al, 2012) To conclude, whether or not Jose Rizal retracted, the researchers believe that the retraction 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 diminish Rizal’s stature as a great hero with such greatness. As mentioned the documentary entitled “Ang Bayaning Third World”, Joel Torre’s impersonation of Rizal told the time travelers that whether he retracted or not, it does change what he has already done and what his writings have already achieved. Furthermore, Senator Jose Diokno once stated, "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." (Alojado et. Al, 2013) Whatever further study that may emerge as to the truth about Rizal’s retraction controversy, “…it detracts nothing from his greatness as a Filipino.” (Fibboys, 2012) Though the issue of “Retraction” remains contentious for some people, it is my personal opinion that there is no controversy; that Dr. Jose Rizal did not make any recantation of his writings and beliefs. The arguments to the contrary made by his detractors are all smoke screen and “retreads” of the dubious accounts of the sycophantic Father Balaguer and his gullible minions. Let us not allow for the sands of time to cover the blunder of this ignoble and impious event. Let not the conspiracy of silence keep us chained to this fraudulent claim. As had been vigorously proposed then, and again now, let the document of retraction be examined by a panel of the world’s experts in hand-writing, and let a pronouncement be made. Let this hidden document come to the eyes of the public, for they have the greatest of rights to see, and to judge, and to know what is truthful. (Maximo et. al, 2011) The question, “Did Rizal retract?” depends upon the genuineness or otherwise, of the supposed retraction. The archbishop should settle this suggestion, or at least attempt to settle it, by permitting the document to be submitted to the greatest hand writing experts in the world, preferably to several of them working independently. He should permit the paper and the ink to be subjected to the best tests of modern science. (Ronnie, 2015). The truth of the matter was that the Church did everything possible to counteract Rizal’s honest-to-goodness scientific temper of mind. Indeed, in his Noli and Fili, Rizal exposed the Philippine damaged culture caused by organized superstition otherwise popularly known as Christianity. Thus, the story of his retraction was nothing more than a theological concoction to sanitize, if not to neutralize considerably the volume of Rizal’s humanistic and scientific messages to the Filipino as a people. (Poch Suzara, 2009) References: [joserizal.ph](http://www.joserizal.ph/rt03.html) [nhcp.gov.ph](http://nhcp.gov.ph/the-rizal-retraction-and-other-cases/) [nhcp.gov.ph](http://nhcp.gov.ph/did-rizal-consider-retracting-while-in-dapitan/) [cbcponline.net](http://www.cbcponline.net/documents/1950s/1950-malay_race.html) --- ![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmbcnTsdgqrJrDq3qQYbt17n4w2PBmRTkv6hQCbTrRSyd1/image.png)