THE RETRACTION

OF JOSÉ RIZAL
PRESENTED BY; GROUP 9
The Retraction about

Dr. Jose Rizal was arrested, tried, and sentenced to death

by a Spanish court martial after being implicated as a
leader of the Philippine Revolution. On December 30,
1896, accounts exist that Rizal allegedly retracted his
masonic ideals and his writings reconverted to Catholicism
following several hours of persuasion by the Jesuit priests.
A few hours before he was shot, Rizal signed a document
stating that he was a Catholic and retracted all his
writings against the church and the document were as
“The Retraction”. Moreover, Rizal’s retraction letter was
discovered by Father Manuel Garcia, C.M. in 1935 at the
Catholic hierarchy’s archive in Manila. The letter, dated
Fr. VICENTE BALAGUER

• Balaguer was born in Alcony, Alicante, Spain

on January 19 1851.
• He entered the society of Jesus on July 30
1890, and came to the Philippines in 1896.
• He transferred to Dapitan when he met Rizal,
Months later, he was attesting to have heard
the most important final words of Dr. Josè Rizal
• Balaguer was one of the Jesuit priests who
visited Rizal during his last hour in fort
Santiago.
• He claimed that the managed to pursued the
hero to denounce Mansonry and returned to
the Catholic Fold.
RAFAEL PALMA
• Rafael Palma was born on October 24, 1874.
• Died in May 24 1939
• He was a Filipino politician, lawyer, writer,
educator and a famous freemason.
• He became the forth president of the University of
the Philippines.
• He was later elected as senator under the
Nacionalista Party, consistently representing the
4th district, in both the 1919 senatorial polls.
• He was the author of Boigrafia de Rizal a work on
the life of the national hero which won a literary
contest in 1938 sponsored by the Commonwealth
Government. The story of Rizal’s alleged
retraction is found in chapter 32 and 33 with his
ARTICLE’S ANALYSIS
The article “Retraction of José Rizal” by Fr. Vicente Balaguer
and Rafael Palma explore the debated question of whether
José Rizal, the national hero of Philippines, renounced his
anti-Catholic sentiments before his execution in 1896. This
inquiry is not merely a matter of personal belief; It engages
with profound themes of faith, colonial power dynamics, and
national identity that continue to resonate in Philippine
society today.
Documents, Proof
According to a testimony by father Balaguer, a Jesuit missionary who befriended
the hero during his exile in Dapitan, Rizal accepted a shorter retraction
document prepared by the superior of the Jesuit Society in the Philippines,
Father Pio Pi.
Contextual Background
To fully grasp the significance of this debate, It is
essential to contextualize Rizal within the socio-political
landscape of late 19th century Philippines. As a reform
movement, Rizal’s writings particularly “Noli Me
Tangere” and “El Filibusterismo” critically examined the
justices peroretratex by both Spanish colonial
authorities and the Catholic Church. His portrayal of the
Church as complicit in societal oppression positioned
him as revolutionary figure, yet also made him a target
for colonial repression.
In this context, Balaguer, a Jesuit priest who was
present during Rizal’s final hours, claims that
through persuasive dialogue, Rizal rejected
Masonry and reaffirmed his Catholic faith. The
narrative details multiple meetings where Rizal
debated the implications of signing a retraction
letter, ultimately leading to a signed document that
has since been scrutinized for authenticity. This
assertion raises significant questions about the
nature of belief and the pressures exerted by
authority figures in moments of crisis.
Analyzing Balaguer and Palma’s
Claims
Balaguer and Palma present several arguments to
support their claim that Rizal retracted his previous
criticisms. They emphasize the moral and spiritual
turmoil that Rizal faced as he approached death. Fr.
Balaguer recounts how he engaged Rizal in discussions
about faith, salvation, and redemption—suggesting that
these conversations led him to reconsider his earlier
positions. This portrayal frames Rizal not merely as a
revolutionary but as an individual grappling with
profound existential questions.
However, critics argue that this narrative may overlook
crucial aspects of Rizal’s character and intentions. Many
scholars contend that the retraction may have been
coerced or fabricated under duress. The motivations behind
such an act are complex; some suggest that Rizal may
have sought to protect his family or secure a more dignified
legacy in death. The suggestion that his desire to marry
Josephine Bracken played a role in this decision adds
another layer of complexity, implying personal stakes
intertwined with broader ideological battles.
The Question of Authenticity

The authenticity of the retraction letter itself remains a contentious

issue. Critics point to inconsistencies in its documentation and argue
that it lacks corroboration from other witnesses present during Rizal’s
final moments. Furthermore, the letter’s sudden emergence after Rizal’s
death raises suspicions about its origins and motivations. This
skepticism invites readers to critically assess how historical narratives
are constructed and whose voices are prioritized in these accounts.

The debate over the retraction also reflects broader societal tensions
between colonial authority and emerging national consciousness. The
Catholic Church played a significant role in maintaining Spanish colonial
rule, often aligning itself with oppressive structures while
simultaneously serving as a source of comfort for many Filipinos. Thus,
Rizal’s alleged retraction can be interpreted as emblematic of the
HISTORY OF THE ARTICLE
José Rizal, a prominent figure in the Philippine reform
movement, was executed on December 30, 1896, by a Spanish
court-martial for his alleged role in the Philippine Revolution.
His writings, particularly Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo,
criticized colonial rule and the Catholic Church’s influence in
the Philippines. In the context of his execution, Jesuit priests Fr.
Vicente Balaguer and Fr. Pio Pi claimed that Rizal retracted his
Masonic beliefs and reconciled with the Catholic Church in his
final hours.
The Retraction Narrative

Balaguer’s account asserts that he and Pi

persuaded Rizal to sign a retraction
document on December 29, 1896. This
document allegedly expressed Rizal’s
renunciation of Masonry and
reaffirmation of Catholic faith. The
narrative gained traction when a
purported original retraction document
was discovered in 1935, although its
Critical Perspectives

The veracity of Rizal’s retraction has

been a subject of intense scholarly
debate. Critics argue that the retraction
narrative serves to undermine Rizal’s
legacy as a revolutionary figure.
Prominent historians, including Rafael
Palma, have labeled it a “pious fraud,”
suggesting it contradicts Rizal’s
Legacy and Impact

The implications of the retraction

controversy extend beyond historical
inquiry; they influence contemporary
interpretations of national identity in
the Philippines. While some view the
retraction as an act of betrayal, others
argue it does not diminish Rizal’s
contributions to Philippine
independence. The ongoing debate
Chronological timeline connecting
the key date and events related to
Dr. Josè Rizal’s Retraction and the
cry of Pugadlawin or Balintawak
1. December 1886 – 1887: Dr. Jose Rizal publishes *Noli Me Tangere*, which exposes the injustices of
Spanish rule and sparks nationalist sentiment among Filipinos.
2. 1891: Rizal publishes *El Filibusterismo*, continuing his critique of Spanish colonial policies and
further inspiring revolutionary ideas.
3. July 7, 1892: Andres Bonifacio and others form the *Katipunan*, a secret society aimed at gaining
Philippine independence through revolution. Rizal’s writings influence the organization, even though
he is not directly involved.
4. August 1896: The Spanish authorities discover the existence of the *Katipunan*, prompting Andres
Bonifacio and other leaders to gather and plan for open revolt.
5. August 23, 1896: The Cry of Balintawak (or Pugadlawin) occurs, marking the official start of the
Philippine Revolution. Revolutionaries, led by Bonifacio, tear their *cedulas* as a declaration of
rebellion against Spanish rule.
6. September 1896: Dr. Jose Rizal, who had previously been arrested for sedition in 1892 and exiled
to Dapitan, is implicated in the ongoing revolution and arrested by Spanish authorities while en route
to Cuba as a military doctor.
7. December 29, 1896: Rizal reportedly signs a retraction document renouncing his association with
the revolution and retracting his previous writings against the Catholic Church. This retraction
remains a controversial topic among historians, with debates about its authenticity.
8. December 30, 1896: Dr. Jose Rizal is executed by firing squad in Bagumbayan (now Luneta Park).
His martyrdom becomes a rallying point for the revolutionaries and intensifies the resolve of the
Filipino people to fight for independence.
9. 1897: The revolution continues despite Rizal’s death. Bonifacio is eventually succeeded by Emilio
Aguinaldo, who leads the movement to further stages.
10.Chronological relationship between Rizal’s retraction and the Cry of Balintawak, illustrating the
sequence of events that influenced and propelled the revolutionary movement in the
THANK YOU PO!😥