POSITION PAPER

Topic: Jose Rizal’s Retraction: Did he? Or Did he not?

When history started on December 30, 1896, a man who had been a doctor, an artist, a
writer, a genius, and a martyr was killed. He is a man who freely put his life on the line to battle
the Spanish brutality. His two renowned books, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibustirismo, awake
the imaginations of every Filipino throughout his work of art. He embodied patriotic patriotism
to a tee. Dr. Jose Protacio Rizal Mercado Y Alonzo Realonda is his name. His intelligence and
perspective have served as a source of inspiration for his fellow citizens. On the contrary, there
are disputes surrounding Rizal's life that have left us puzzled, and it is still being disputed by
renowned historians today. The subject of this issue is Jose Rizal's so-called "retracti

According to Father Balaguer's "Act of Faith, Hope, and Charity," Jesuits worked hard
the night before Rizal's execution, at 10 p.m., to reconcile Rizal into the Catholic Church. Father
Balaguer handed him the long retraction formula that had been drafted by the Prelate's
instruction, but Rizal refused to sign it because it was too long. Rizal instructed Father Balaguer
to scribble down what he would say. And that was Rizal's retraction document, which is
regarded the most reliable evidence of the retraction's validity. However, there are questions
about its legitimacy, and the retraction document has been accused of being a fake. Rizal is a
man who sticks to his statements, and there is no need for him to change his mind. The
statements that follow lead to the testimony that Rizal did not retract before his execution.

First, the original retraction paper discovered by Fr. Only replicas of Manuel A. Gracia
in the Catholic hierarchy's archive in Manila were ever displayed to the public. It was thought to
be lost, so even Jose Rizal's family did not see it. Could the Jesuits be so negligent as to be
unaware of the paper's worth? The original copy was discovered in the archdiocesan archives
after thirty-nine years. Ricardo Pascual, Ph. D., who was made accessible by Archbishop
Nozaleda to examine the paper, eventually determined in his book "Rizal Beyond the Grave"
that the document was a fake. The most popular counter to this claim is that either Father
Balaguer or Father Pi made mistakes in producing a duplicate of the original. . There were two
different versions of the text in the reproductions. Furthermore, the date of the signature was
clearly stated in the original Spanish paper that Rizal allegedly signed. The year was 1890, and
the date was December 29th. Later, a reportedly genuine paper with the date December 29,
189C appeared. The number "0" was obviously changed to resemble the letter C. Then, later,
another ostensibly original version surfaced. The date on it is December 29, 1896. The "0"
became a "6" this time. The fact that the paper was fabricated is evident.
Second, Rizal's attitude in general throughout his final days in Fort Santiago, and in
particular during the last 24 hours, is consistent. Rizal's Ultimo Adios, whether composed in the
last 24 hours or a little earlier, shows no change in Rizal's thinking. Rizal's letters from his final
hours show no signs of conversion or even religious conflict. Furthermore, Rizal was already a
"believer" in the fullest meaning of the word, and he would not just disregard all of the writings
he developed with his hard labor, the works that took him to the point of execution.

Third proof as to Rizal didn't withdraw is that when Father Balaguer settled that he
wedded Jose and Josephine, after Jose had marked the withdrawal paper, in any case, there
were no marriage declaration or openly available report shown that could demonstrate Father
Balaguer's assertions. Considering the time it would take for the three ministers (Fr. Jose
Vilaclara, Fr. Estanislao March, and Fr. Vicente Balaguer) to arrange the scope of the stroll to
give otherworldly mind to the censured Dr. Jose Rizal, how can it be that main Fr. Balaguer
could depict a wedding? Fr. Vicente Balaguer guaranteed that he played out the sanctioned
marriage between 6:00–6:15 AM of December 30, 1896 within the sight of one of the Rizal
sisters. The Rizal family rejected that any of the Rizal sisters were there that game changing
morning. Dr. Jose Rizal was martyred at 7:03 AM yet no one had detailed seeing Ms. Josephine
Bracken nearby Fort Santiago in the first part of the day of the execution. Additionally recollect
that Dr. Jose Rizal composed a short and last note to his folks dated December 30, 1896 at 6:00
in the first part of the day, without any notice of a happened or expected withdrawal and
marriage.
Moreover, in Josephine Bracken's marriage 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 Jose Rizal. In the legitimate register of Hong
Kong, Josephine utilized the last name "Bracken" rather than "Rizal" to be hitched to Vicente
Abad.

In conclusion, for what reason would Rizal withdraw when he knows beyond a shadow of a
doubt that regardless of whether he signs the withdrawal paper he would in any case be
executed? There is no work was made to save Rizal from capital punishment after his marking
of the withdrawal. Furthermore, if Rizal truly passed on as a catholic, for what reason did they
cover him outside of the Paco burial ground wherein Fr. Burgos had been situated, which is
clearly the graveyard for hostile to Catholic Church? Additionally, the record of his entombment
was not put on the page for sections of December 30 yet on a unique page where undoubtedly
another conceded non-contrite is recorded. Also the most exceedingly terrible part is, he have
been covered with no casket! Wouldn't it be Ironic? To demonstrate that Rizal himself had
withdrawn for what reason did they covered him altogether where blasphemers are laid? They
didn't offered a mass in chapel for Rizal.
In conclusion, Rizal was obsessed with the idea of dying for the love of his nation. Let's
take a look at this man's personality. Rizal possessed the maturity to make sound judgments.
Several of his works dealt with the brutality of Spaniards. All of them, even friars, are fully
accountable to the Catholic Church. Consider this: if Rizal retracts, would he just leave all of his
work of art, which took the majority of his time and effort, in return for a large quantity of
money and an estate? NO is the answer. It would be similar to vomiting and then swallowing
what you had just eaten. Finally, Rizal was fascinated with the concept of dying for the sake of
his country. Let's take a closer look at this man's character. Rizal was mature enough to make
smart decisions. Several of his paintings dealt with Spaniard violence. They are all entirely
answerable to the Catholic Church, even friars. Consider this: if Rizal retracts, would he just
hand over all of his art, which consumed the majority of his time and effort, in exchange for a
great sum of money and an estate? The answer is no. It'd be comparable to vomiting and then
eating the food you just ate.