SOC SCI 101 – Readings in Philippine History

“One past but many histories: controversies and conflicting views in Philippine history.” It presents three topics
which include: Site of the First Mass, Cavite Mutiny and Cry of Balintawak or Pugad Lawin.

SITE OF THE FIRST MASS

The first mass in the Philippines was made by both Spanish and Filipino scholars. Butuan has long been believed as the
site of the First Mass.

According to Candelaria & Alporha (2018) there are only two primary sources that historians refer to in
identifying the site of the first Mass. One is the log kept by Francisco Albo and the other, and the more complete, was
the account by Antonio Pigafetta.

FRANCISCO ALBO
 a pilot of one of Magellan’s ship, Trinidad
 one of the 18 survivors who returned with Sebastian Elcano on the ship Victoria after they circumnavigated
the world.

PRIMARY SOURCE: Albo’s Log

Source: “Diario o derotero del viage de Magallanes desde el cabo se S. Agustin en el Brazil hasta el regreso a Espana dela
nao Victoria, escrito por Frandsco Albo,” Document no. xxii in Collecion de viages y descubrimientos que hicieron por mar
los Espaῇoles desde fines del siglo XV, Ed. Martin Fernandez de Navarrete (reprinted Buenos Aires 1945,5 Vols.) IV, 191-
225. As cited in Miguel A. Bernad “Butuan or Limasawa? The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination of
Evidence” 1981, Kinaadman: A Journal of Southern Philippines, Vol. III, 1-35.

1. March 16, 1521 – Magellan and his fleet sailed in a westerly course from Ladrones, they saw land towards the
northwest; but owing to many shallow places they did not approach it. They found later that its name was
Yunagan.
2. They went instead that same day southwards to another small island named Suluan, and there they anchored.
There they saw some canoes but these fled at the Spaniards’ approach. This island was at 9 and two-thirds
degrees North latitude.
3. Departing from those two islands, they sailed westward to an uninhabited island of “Gada” where they took in
a supply of wood and water. The sea around that island was free from shallows, (Albo does not give the latitude
of this island, but from Pigafetta’s testimony, this seems to the “Acquada” or Homonhon, at 10 degrees North
latitude.)
4. From that island they sailed westwards towards a large island names Seilani that was inhabited and was known
to have gold. (Seilani – or, as Pigafetta call it, “Ceylon” – was the island of Leyte.)
5. Sailing southwards along the coast of that large island of Seilani, they turned southwest to a small island called
“Mazava.” That island is also at a latitude of 9 and two-thirds degrees North.
6. The people of that island of Mazava were very good. There the Spaniards planted a cross upon a mountain-top,
and from there they were shown three island to the west and southwest, where they were told there was much
gold. “They showed us how the gold was gathered, which came in small pieces like peas and lentils.”
7. From Mazava they sailed northwards again towards Seilani. They followed the coast of Seilani in a
northwesterly direction, ascending up to 10 degrees of latitude where they saw three small islands.
8. From there they sailed westwards some ten leagues, and there they saw three islets, where they dropped
anchor for the night. In the morning they sailed southwest some 12 leagues, down to a latitude of 10 and one-
third degree. There they entered a channel between two islands, one of which was called “Matan” and the
other “Subu”.
9. They sailed down that channel and then turned westward and anchored at the town (la villa) of Subu where
they stayed many days and obtained provisions and entered into a peace-pact with the local king.
10. The town of Subu was on an east-west direction with the islands of Suluan and Mazava. But between Mazava
and Subu, there were so many shallows that the boats could not go westward directly but has to go (as they
did) in a round-about way.

It must be noted that in Albo’s acoount, the location of Mazava fits the location of the island of Limasawa, at the
southern tip of Leyte, 0’54’N. Also, Albo does not mention the First mass, but only the planting of the cross upon a
mountain-top from which could be seen three islands to the west and southwest, which also fits the southern end of
Limasawa.
SOC SCI 101 – Readings in Philippine History

ANTONIO PIGAFETTA
 like Albo, Pigafetta was a member of the Magellan expedition and an eyewitness of the events, particularly,
of the first Mass.
PRIMARY SOURCE: Pigafetta’s Testimony on the Route of Magellan’s Expedition
Source: Emma Blair and James Alexander Robertson, The Philippine Isalnds, Vols. 33 and 34, as cited in Miguel A. Bernad,
“Butuan or Limasawa” The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination of Evidence” 1981, Kinaadman: A
Journal of Southern Philippines, Vol. III, 1-35.
1. March 16, 1521 (Saturday) – Magellan’s expedition sighted a “high land” named “Zamal” which was some 300
leagues westward of Ladrones (now the Marianas) Islands.
2. March 17, 1521 (Sunday) – “The following day” after sighting Zamal Island, they landed on “another island whish
was uninhabited” and which lay “to the right” of the above-mentioned island of “Zamal.” (To the “right” here
would mean on their starboard going south or southwest.) There they set up two tents for the sick members of
the crew and had a sow killed for them. The name of this island was “Humunu” (Homonhon). This island was
located at 10 degrees North latitude.
3. On that same day (March 17, 1521) – Magellan named the entire archipelago the “Islands of Saint Lazarus,” the
reason being that it was Sunday in the Lenten season when the Gospel assigned for the Mass and the liturgical
Office was the eleventh chapter of St. John, which tells of the raising of Lazarus from the dead.
4. March 18, 1521 (Monday) – In the afternoon of their second day on that island, they saw a boat coming towards
them with nine men in it. An exchange of gifts was effected. Magellan asked for food supplies, and the men went
away, promising to bring rice and other supplies in “four days.”
5. There were two springs of water on that island of Homonhon. Also they saw there some indications that there
was gold in these islands. Consequently, Magellan renamed the island and called it the “Watering Place of Good
Omen” (Acquada la di bouni segnialli).
6. March 22, 1521 (Friday) – the day the native returned. This time they were in two boats, and they brought food
supplies.
7. Magellan’s expedition stayed 8 days at Homonhon – from Sunday, March 17, to the Monday of the following
week, March 25.
8. March 25, 1521 (Monday) – this was the feast-day of the Incarnation (in the ecclesiastical calendar), also called
the feast of the Annunciation and therefore “Our Lady’s Day.” When they were about to weigh anchor, Pigafetta
fell into the water but was rescued. He attributed hi narrow escape from death as grace obtained through the
intercession of the Blesses Virgin Mary on her feast-day.
9. After leaving Homonhon, they took on the route “toward the west southwest, between four islands: namely
Cenalo, Hiunanghan, Hibuson and Albarien.”
a. Cenalo – is a misspelling in the Italian manuscript for what Pigafetta in his map calls “Ceilon” and Albo call
“Seilani”: namely the island of Leyte.
b. Hiunanghan – a misspelling of Hinunangan, seemed to Pigafetta to be a separate island, but is actually on
the mainland of Leyte (i.e., “Ceylon”).
c. Hibuson – Pigafetta’s Ibusson, is an island east of Leyte’s southern tip.
10. March 28, 1521 (Thursday) – In the morning of Holy Thursday, they anchored off an island where the previous
night they had seen a light or a bonfire. That island “lies in a latitude of nine and two-thirds towards the Arctic
Pole. And in a longitude of one hundred and sixty-two degrees from the line of demarcation. It is twenty-five
leagues from the Acquada, and is called Mazaua.”
11. They remained seven days on Mazaua Island.
12. April 4, 1521 (Thursday) – They left Mazaua, bound for Cebu. They were guided thither by the king of Mazaua who
sailed in his own boat. Their route took them past five “islands” namely: “Ceylon, Bohol, Canighan, Baibai, and
Gatighan.”
13. At Gatighan, they sailed westward to the three islands of the Camotes Group, namely, Poro, Pasihan and Ponson.
Here the Spanish ships stopped to allow the king of Mazaua to catch up with them, since the Spanish ships were
much faster than the native balanghai – a thing that excited the admiration of the king of Mazaua.
14. April 7, 1521 (Sunday) – They entered the harbor of “Zubu” (Cebu). It had taken three days to negotiate the
journey from Mazaua northwards to the Camotes Islands and then southwards to Cebe.
SOC SCI 101 – Readings in Philippine History

CAVITE MUTINY
Many believed that one of the factors that ignited the Filipino sense of nationhood and eventually led to the
Philippine Revolution in 1896 was the Cavite Mutiny. This event has been remarkable among Filipinos because it
prompted to the martyrdom of GOMBURZA who were executed on February 17, 1872.

The following are the three versions that every Filipino student must read for them to articulate arguments that
would support their stand about the issue on the terms used, causes, effects, and the unraveling truth about the Cavite
Mutiny.

I. SPANIARDS’ VERSION OF THE CAVITE MUTINY OF 1872

Jose Montero y Vidal

o Born on January 28, 1851
o Born in Andalusian Town of Gergal
o Went to Madrid to study law
o Government official residing in Manila in 1872
o Civil Governor in colonial provinces of the Spanish Empire in 1875
o Married Carolina Marin-Baldo Burgueros in Murcia and had 4 children
o a Spanish historian, who wrote the “Historia General de Filipinas”.
o Who also wrote this Spaniards’ version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872
Call for Secularization
o Filipinos wanted to overthrow the Spanish Government to install new kings in the likes of the three
priests Fr. Mariano Gomez, Fr. Jose Burgos, and Fr. Jacinto Zamora (i.e., GOMBURZA)
o These priests enticed participants by giving them charismatic assurance that their fight will not fail
because God is with them coupled with promises of rewards such as employment, wealth, and ranks
in the army.
Feast of the Virgin of Loreto
o In the evening of January 20, 1872, fireworks were displayed and rockets fired into the air to
celebrate the feast.
o The conspirators in Cavite mistook these for the signal to revolt. Hence, at 9:30 pm of that day 200
native soldiers under the leadership of Sergeant La Madrid rose up in arms, assassinated the
commander of the fort and wounded his wife.
Prisoners pointed out these individuals (and several other Filipinos) as instigators:
o GOMBURZA
o MAXIMO PATERNO
o ANTONIO MARIA REGIDOR
o JOAQUIN PARDO DE TAVARA
Execution of GOMBURZA
o On February 17, 1872, in an attempt of the Spanish government to instill fear among the Filipinos so
that they may never commit such daring act again, the GOMBURZA were executed.
o This event was tragic but served as one of the moving forces that shaped Filipino nationalism.
Dr. T.H. Pardo de Tavera

o Dr. Trinidad Hermenegildo Pardo de Tavera

o He was born in Manila on April 13, 1857, of parents belonging to the Spanish nobility.
o A Filipino scholar, scientist and historical researcher.
o He was known for his writings about different aspects of Philippine culture.
o He served as a member of Taft’s Philippine Commission and founded the Federal Party.
o He died in Manila on March 26, 1925, aged 68. He is the one who stated that “in narrating the Cavite
episode, does not speak as a historian; he speaks as a Spaniard bent on perverting the facts at his
pleasure; he is mischievously partial”.
Polo y Servicio
oThe incident was merely a mutiny by the Filipino soliders and laborers againtst Gen. Izquiedo's harsh
policy.
o The abolition of the privileges enjoyed by the laborers of the Cavite arsenal of exemption from the
tribute was the main cause of the insurrection.
(1871 – 1873) The Arrival of General Izquierdo
o A complete change in the aspect of affairs.
o He made it clear that his views were different from those of La Torre.
o Intended to govern the people "with a crucifix in one hand and a sword in the other."
SOC SCI 101 – Readings in Philippine History

First Official Act

o To prohibit the founding of a school of arts and trades.
o All of those who had offered their support to ex-Governor La Torre were classed as personas
sospechos (suspects).
o The workmen in the arsenal at Cavite and engineer corps' old-time privileges were abolished by
General Izquierdo and caused them dissatisfacation and discontent.
o Leads to an uprising among the soldiers in the San Felipe fort, and the commanding officer and the
other Spanish officers in charge were assassinated.
Night of January 20, 1872
Central Government
o The Central Government of Madrid announced its intention to deprive the friars in matters of civil
government and of the direction and management of the university.
o The friars feared that their power in the colony would be a thing of the past and took the advantage
that those who favored the a continuation of the colonial modus vivendi presents as a vast conspiracy
with the objective of destroying Spanish sovereignty.
Dared to oppose themselves to the friars
Condemned to death and executed by garrote.
o Antonio M. Regidor
o Joaquin Pardo de Tavara
o P. Mendoza
o Curate of Santa Cruz, Guevarra and Quiapo
o The priests Mariano Sevilla, Feliciano Gomez, Ballesteros, Jose Basa
o Lawyers Carillo, Basa, Enriquez, Crisanto Reyes, Maximo Paterno
o and many others
Sentenced to life imprisonment on the Marianas Islands
Leads to the awakening of Nationalism and outbreak of Philippine Revolution.
Leads to the awakening of Nationalism and outbreak .
Governor General Rafael Izquierdo
o Insurrection was motivated by the native clergy, some local residents and intellectuals.
o To carry out their criminal project, they (instigators) protested against the injuctice of the
government.
o They take advantage of indios' ignorance by making use of superstitions, and made them believe
that the hari will minister.
o Those who will not support will be killed immediately.
o Insurrection was motivated by the native clergy, so...
o They offered the wealth of the Spaniards and jobs to those who revolted.
o Padre Zamora and Padre Burgos were great probabilities to be the head of the government.
o All Spaniards, friars would be executed except for women and foreigners.
o They offered the wealth of the Spaniards and jobs .
Revolution
o Set fire to the district of Tondo
o Fire cannons to inform the rebels of their success
o 500 natives led by Camerino
o Set fire to the district of Tondo
o Fire cannons to inform the rebels of their success
o 500 natives led by Camerino
o Spanish navy had placed gunboat and armed vessels
o Loyalist went to arrest the priest of Bacoor
o Newspapers are solicited
o Spanish navy had placed gunboat and armed vesse...
El Eco Filipino
o Established by Spanish brother-in-law of Jose Basa, with Manuel Regidor as editor.
o "Spain in the Philippines, The Philippines with Spain."
o Their aim was to secure reforms from the Spanish Government.
o Its first issue appeared on September 5, 1871 and died out before the end of 1872.
o Its tragic demise was caused by the restoration of the reactionary regime in Spain and the exile to the
Marianas.
SOC SCI 101 – Readings in Philippine History

o Izquierdo blamed it for the eruption of the Cavite Mutiny.

THE CRY OF PUGAD LAWIN or “BALINTAWAK”

FIRST TOPIC
Background
o A historical event during the struggle for Philippine independence.
o It was the starting signal of the Philippine Revolution.
o Andres Bonifacio and his comrades from the Katipunan tore their cedulas in the hills of Balintawak.
SECOND TOPIC
Controversy
Lt. Olegario Diaz
o officer of the Spanish Guardia Civil, took place in Balintawak on August 25, 1896
Teodoro Kalaw
o in his 1925 book The Filipino Revolution, took place during the last week of August 1896 at Kangkong,
Balintawak
Santiago Alvarez
o son of Mariano Alvarez, the leader of the Magdiwang in Cavite stated in 1927 that it took place in Bahay
Toro now in Quezon City on August 24, 1896.
Teodoro Agoncillo
o historian, took place in Pugad Lawin on August 23, 1896, echoing Pio Valenzuela's statement
Milagros Guerrero, Emmanuel Encarnacion and Ramon Villegas
o taken place in Tandang Sora's barn in Gulod, Barangay Banlat, Quezon City
o It has placed a commemorative plaque marking the location of the "Cry" in Pugad Lawin, Quezon City.
The National History Institute of the Philippines
o At September 1896, stated that Katipunan meetings took place from Sunday to Tuesday or August 23 to 25
at Balintawak
o At 1911, states that Katipunan began meeting on August 22 while the "Cry" took place on August 23 at
Apolonio Samson's house in Balintawak
o Stated that "hindi sa Balintawak nangyari ang unang sigaw ng paghihimagsik na kinalalagian ngayon ng
bantayog, kung di sa pook na kilala sa tawag na Pugadlawin."
o Valenzuela memoirs (1964, 1978) states that the Cry took place on 23 August at the house of Juan Ramos at
Pugad Lawin. The NHI influenced by Valenzuela’s memoirs, in 1963, upon the NHI endorsement, President
Diosdado Macapagal ordered that the Cry be celebrated on 23 August and that Pugad Lawin be recognized
as its site.
Dr. Pio Valenzuela
o He says that, “I would certainly give much less credence to all accounts coming from Pio Valezuela, and to
the interpretations Agoncillo got from him verbally, since Valenzuela gave so many versions from the time
he surrendered to the Spanish authorities and made various statements not always compatible with one
another up to the time when as an old man he was interviewed by Agoncillo.”
John N. Schumacher, S.J, of the Ateneo de Manila University
o Story: In Pugad Lawin, at the back yard of house of Juan Ramos (son of Melchora Aquino aka “Tandang
Sora”), at 1896, August 23, Katipunans listened to the speech of Bonifacio and tore their cedula and vowed
to fight.
THIRD TOPIC
The Pact of Biak-na-Bato
o signed on December 14, 1897, created a truce between Spanish Colonial Governor-General Fernando Primo
de Rivera and Emilio Aguinaldo to end the Philippine Revolution
THE CONTROVERSIAL “CRY OF BALINTAWAK”
LT. OLEGARIO DIAZ
Date: August 25, 1896
Place: Balintawak
TEODORO KALAW
Book: The Filipino Revolution in 1925
Date: last week of August 1896
Place: Kangkong
SANTIAGO ALVAREZ
Father: Mariano Alvarez
Date: August 24, 1896
Place: Bahay Toro
SOC SCI 101 – Readings in Philippine History

PIO VALENZUELA
Date: August 23, 1896
Place: Pugad Lawin
GREGORIO ZAIDE
Date: August 26, 1896
Place: Balintawak
TEODORO AGONCILLO
Date: August 23, 1896
Place: Pugad Lawin
GUERRERO, ENCARNACION & VILLEGAS
Date: August 24, 1896
Place: Barn of Tandang Sora

1872 Cavite Mutiny: Spanish Perspective

Jose Montero y Vidal, a prolific Spanish historian documented the event and highlighted it as an attempt of the
Indios to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines. Meanwhile, Gov. Gen. Rafael Izquierdo’s official report
magnified the event and made use of it to implicate the native clergy, which was then active in the call for secularization.
The two accounts complimented and corroborated with one other, only that the general’s report was more spiteful.
Initially, both Montero and Izquierdo scored out that the abolition of privileges enjoyed by the workers of Cavite arsenal
such as non-payment of tributes and exemption from force labor were the main reasons of the “revolution” as how they
called it, however, other causes were enumerated by them including the Spanish Revolution which overthrew the secular
throne, dirty propagandas proliferated by unrestrained press, democratic, liberal and republican books and pamphlets
reaching the Philippines, and most importantly, the presence of the native clergy who out of animosity against the Spanish
friars, “conspired and supported” the rebels and enemies of Spain. In particular, Izquierdo blamed the unruly Spanish
Press for “stockpiling” malicious propagandas grasped by the Filipinos. He reported to the King of Spain that the “rebels”
wanted to overthrow the Spanish government to install a new “hari” in the likes of Fathers Burgos and Zamora. The
general even added that the native clergy enticed other participants by giving them charismatic assurance that their fight
will not fail because God is with them coupled with handsome promises of rewards such as employment, wealth, and
ranks in the army. Izquierdo, in his report lambasted the Indios as gullible and possessed an innate propensity for stealing.

The two Spaniards deemed that the event of 1872 was planned earlier and was thought of it as a big conspiracy
among educated leaders, mestizos, abogadillos or native lawyers, residents of Manila and Cavite and the native clergy.
They insinuated that the conspirators of Manila and Cavite planned to liquidate high-ranking Spanish officers to be
followed by the massacre of the friars. The alleged pre-concerted signal among the conspirators of Manila and Cavite was
the firing of rockets from the walls of Intramuros.

According to the accounts of the two, on 20 January 1872, the district of Sampaloc celebrated the feast of the
Virgin of Loreto, unfortunately participants to the feast celebrated the occasion with the usual fireworks displays.
Allegedly, those in Cavite mistook the fireworks as the sign for the attack, and just like what was agreed upon, the 200-
men contingent headed by Sergeant Lamadrid launched an attack targeting Spanish officers at sight and seized the arsenal.

When the news reached the iron-fisted Gov. Izquierdo, he readily ordered the reinforcement of the Spanish forces
in Cavite to quell the revolt. The “revolution” was easily crushed when the expected reinforcement from Manila did not
come ashore. Major instigators including Sergeant Lamadrid were killed in the skirmish, while the GOMBURZA were tried
by a court-martial and were sentenced to die by strangulation. Patriots like Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, Antonio Ma. Regidor,
Jose and Pio Basa and other abogadillos were suspended by the Audencia (High Court) from the practice of law, arrested
and were sentenced with life imprisonment at the Marianas Island. Furthermore, Gov. Izquierdo dissolved the native
regiments of artillery and ordered the creation of artillery force to be composed exclusively of the Peninsulares.

On 17 February 1872 in an attempt of the Spanish government and Frailocracia to instill fear among the Filipinos
so that they may never commit such daring act again, the GOMBURZA were executed. This event was tragic but served
as one of the moving forces that shaped Filipino nationalism.

A Response to Injustice: The Filipino Version of the Incident

Dr. Trinidad Hermenigildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and researcher, wrote the Filipino version of the
bloody incident in Cavite. In his point of view, the incident was a mere mutiny by the native Filipino soldiers and laborers
of the Cavite arsenal who turned out to be dissatisfied with the abolition of their privileges. Indirectly, Tavera blamed
Gov. Izquierdo’s cold-blooded policies such as the abolition of privileges of the workers and native army members of the
SOC SCI 101 – Readings in Philippine History

arsenal and the prohibition of the founding of school of arts and trades for the Filipinos, which the general believed as a
cover-up for the organization of a political club.

On 20 January 1872, about 200 men comprised of soldiers, laborers of the arsenal, and residents of Cavite headed
by Sergeant Lamadrid rose in arms and assassinated the commanding officer and Spanish officers in sight. The insurgents
were expecting support from the bulk of the army unfortunately, that didn’t happen. The news about the mutiny reached
authorities in Manila and Gen. Izquierdo immediately ordered the reinforcement of Spanish troops in Cavite. After two
days, the mutiny was officially declared subdued.

Tavera believed that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite Mutiny as a powerful lever by magnifying it
as a full-blown conspiracy involving not only the native army but also included residents of Cavite and Manila, and more
importantly the native clergy to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines. It is noteworthy that during the
time, the Central Government in Madrid announced its intention to deprive the friars of all the powers of intervention in
matters of civil government and the direction and management of educational institutions. This turnout of events was
believed by Tavera, prompted the friars to do something drastic in their dire sedire to maintain power in the Philippines.

Meanwhile, in the intention of installing reforms, the Central Government of Spain welcomed an educational
decree authored by Segismundo Moret promoted the fusion of sectarian schools run by the friars into a school called
Philippine Institute. The decree proposed to improve the standard of education in the Philippines by requiring teaching
positions in such schools to be filled by competitive examinations. This improvement was warmly received by most
Filipinos in spite of the native clergy’s zest for secularization.

The friars, fearing that their influence in the Philippines would be a thing of the past, took advantage of the
incident and presented it to the Spanish Government as a vast conspiracy organized throughout the archipelago with the
object of destroying Spanish sovereignty. Tavera sadly confirmed that the Madrid government came to believe that the
scheme was true without any attempt to investigate the real facts or extent of the alleged “revolution” reported by
Izquierdo and the friars.

Convicted educated men who participated in the mutiny were sentenced life imprisonment while members of the
native clergy headed by the GOMBURZA were tried and executed by garrote. This episode leads to the awakening of
nationalism and eventually to the outbreak of Philippine Revolution of 1896. The French writer Edmund Plauchut’s
account complimented Tavera’s account by confirming that the event happened due to discontentment of the arsenal
workers and soldiers in Cavite fort. The Frenchman, however, dwelt more on the execution of the three martyr priests
which he actually witnessed.

Unraveling the Truth

Considering the four accounts of the 1872 Mutiny, there were some basic facts that remained to be unvarying:
First, there was dissatisfaction among the workers of the arsenal as well as the members of the native army after their
privileges were drawn back by Gen. Izquierdo; Second, Gen. Izquierdo introduced rigid and strict policies that made the
Filipinos move and turn away from Spanish government out of disgust; Third, the Central Government failed to conduct
an investigation on what truly transpired but relied on reports of Izquierdo and the friars and the opinion of the public;
Fourth, the happy days of the friars were already numbered in 1872 when the Central Government in Spain decided to
deprive them of the power to intervene in government affairs as well as in the direction and management of schools
prompting them to commit frantic moves to extend their stay and power; Fifth, the Filipino clergy members actively
participated in the secularization movement in order to allow Filipino priests to take hold of the parishes in the country
making them prey to the rage of the friars; Sixth, Filipinos during the time were active participants, and responded to what
they deemed as injustices; and Lastly, the execution of GOMBURZA was a blunder on the part of the Spanish government,
for the action severed the ill-feelings of the Filipinos and the event inspired Filipino patriots to call for reforms and
eventually independence. There may be different versions of the event, but one thing is certain, the 1872 Cavite Mutiny
paved way for a momentous 1898.

The road to independence was rough and tough to toddle, many patriots named and unnamed shed their bloods
to attain reforms and achieve independence. 12 June 1898 may be a glorious event for us, but we should not forget that
before we came across to victory, our forefathers suffered enough. As we enjoy our freedom, may we be more historically
aware of our past to have a better future ahead of us. And just like what Elias said in Noli me Tangere, may we “not forget
those who fell during the night.”
SOC SCI 101 – Readings in Philippine History

RIZAL’S RETRACTION
RETRACTION
o an act of recanting; specifically a statement done by one retracting.
(www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/retraction)
o a formal statement of disavowal
(http://www.thefreedictionary.com/retraction)
A TRACE OF RETRACTION
Rizal’s exile to Dapitan
o Rizal’s second homecoming was in 1892. On July 3, 1892, Rizal organized the La Liga Filipina. He
conceived the founding of this organization in Europe.

Father Pastell’s instruction to Father Obach

Conditions framed by Fr. Pastells before Rizal could be allowed to stay in the convent of the parish Church in
Dapitan:
1.) that Rizal publicly RETRACT his errors concerning religion, and make statements that are clearly pro-Spanish and
against revolution.
2.) that he perform the Church rites and make a general confession of his past life.
3.) that henceforth he conduct himself in an exemplary manner as a Spanish subject and a man of religion.

Gov. General Blanco

o served as the Gov. Gen. in the Philippines from Dec. 9, 1893-1896.
o responsible for establishment of electricity in Manila on 1895.
o became the Captain-General of Cuba from 1897-1898.
Retraction Story of 1896 at Rizal's Prison Cell
People Involved:
1.) Fr. Sadera and Fr. Visa
2.) Fr. Rossell
3.) Fr. Vilaclara and Fr. Balaguer
4.) Fr. Faura

My Dear Parents and Brother:

I would like to see you before I die, though this may cause much pain. Let the brave ones come.
There are some important things that I have to tell you. Your son and brother who loves you with
all his heart.
Jose Rizal

FATHER SADERA and FATHER VISA

o sent by the Archbishop of Manila to draw back Rizal back to faith.
o brought with them the statue of the Sacred Heart that Rizal had carved
o got out of Rizal's prison cell at around 9 o'clock in the evening after being politely rejected by Rizal
Fr. Rossell and Santiago Mataix
o both came to Rizal's cell in an attempt to have him retract, but Rizal still repelled the plea of the
two.

Fr. Vilaclara and Fr. Balaguer

o Jesuit priests who were Rizal's friends in his students days in Ateneo

Rizal's response to Fr. Balaguer's warning:

"No, I shall not be condemned. Look, Father, if in order to please you I said yes to everything and senselessly
signed everything presented to me, I would be a hypocrite, and I would offend God. I promise you that in the remaining
hours of my life I shall employ asking God for the grace of faith.

Father Faura
o entered Rizal's cell together with the civil governor with the same intention as the previous priests
o and like the others, his plea was also denied by Rizal
SOC SCI 101 – Readings in Philippine History

PROs OF THE RETRACTION

o Circumstantial Evidences
o Notarized Testimonies

Publication of the Retraction Document

o Former senator Francisco Rodrigo wrote an article entitled "Rizal Abjured Masonry".
o Rodrigo claimed that the "Full text of the retraction" was published in all the local newspapers on
the very next day after Rizal's execution and NOT in 1935.

The Pamphlet entitled “La Politica de Espana en Filipinas

o published on February 28, 1897, a few months after Rizal's execution
o this became Rodrigo's basis on his claims that the church pronounced Rizal's retraction right after
his execution.

9 Other Retractions
1.) Francisco Roxas
2.) Ramon Padilla
3.) Luis Villareal
4.) Faustino Villareal
5.) Moises Salvador
6.) Jose Dizon
7.) Antonio Salazar
8.) Geronimo Cristobal
9.) General Antonio Luna

La Mazonizacion de Filipinas; Rizal y Su Ubra

o another published in 1897containing the full text of Rizal's retraction.

Rizal's Marriage to Josephine Bracken

o Rodrigo asserted that the canonical marriage between Rizal and Josephine by a Catholic priest was a
strong evidence of the veracity of the retraction.

The book that Rizal gave to Josephine on the morning of his execution.
o Thome A Kempis
o The Imitation of Christ

Other Circumstantial evidences:

o Book entitled Anchor of Salvation which Rizal gave to Trinidad
o Rizal's burial certificate
o Rizal's utterance: " We are on the road to Calvary. I can well realize now the Passion of Christ. Mine
is so insignificant.

Notarized Testimonies
o Fr. Balaguer (notarized August 8, 1917)
o Fr. Visa (notarized May 22, 1916)
o Fr. Pio (notarized April 7, 1917)
o Silvino Lopez Tunon (notarized April 23, 1917
o Archbishop Nozaleda (notarized May 28, 1917)
o Gaspar Castano (notarized April 25, 1917)
o Fr. Rossell (notarized April 27, 1917)
o Luis Taviel de Andrade (notarized May 2, 1917)
o Gonzales Feijoo (notarized May 1, 1917)

Dr. Otley Beyer's Analysis

"I would say offhand, from my experience of 30 to 40 years of examining handwriting
documents, that there is not a single doubt that every word on that sheet of paper was written
by Jose Rizal except the signatures of the witnesses below. The whole document is his normal
handwriting.......The signature as fas as I can see is normal."
-Dr. Otley Beyer in a
symposium held at Diliman on
March 10, 1950 -
SOC SCI 101 – Readings in Philippine History

Fr. Martin Legaria O.R.S.A

o wrote a book entitled; The Triumph Because of Truth: Dr. Rizal Died a Catholic
In his book, he said:

"His warm desire to come back to God and the Church was soon becoming true, Kneeling before Fr.
Vilaclara, the minister of the Sacrament, Rizal opened the door of his soul, so that in the Confession he
could reveal his wounds, all his sins, that through contrition goodness and beauty that was lost for
many years were coming back home."

CONs of Retraction:
o Forged Documents
o Long Formula vs. Short Formula

Catholic Hierarchy's Document

o Pro-retractionist like Bassig, Hernandez, Fr. Cavanna, and Dr. Zaide claimed to have a facsimile of the
original copy of Rizal's retraction document.
o But according to the anti-retractionists, these people committed fraud for basing their copy on the
document kept, reproduced, and presented by the Archbishopric of Manila.

Argument against Dr. Otley Beyer

o Dr. Beyer said that the document of Rizal's retraction was lost, but the Hierarchy claimed to have
possessed it, still intact.
o Beyer claimed to have a photostatic copy of the said document with the date, 1896. "But the '6' in the
Beyer's copy is visibly differently written from the '6' in Fr. Cavanna's copy from Rizal's holograph.
o Dr. Beyer claimed to have seen Rizal's marriage certificate, but a letter addressed to the Jose Rizal
National Centennial Commission from Cardinal Santos denied the existence of any marriage
certificate.

Josephine Bracken's Autobiography and Retraction Formulas

Long Formula:

"I declare myslef catholic. I wish to live and die a Catholic. I retract with all my heart
all that I have said, written, and done against the Church. I believe and profess whatever
she (Church) teaches and I submit to whatever she demands; and, second, I abominate
Masonry, which is an enemy of the Church and as a society prohibited by the Church. The
Diocesan may publish this retraction; which I make spontaneously, to repair as much as
possible the scandal produced by my writings and may acts. May all the people pardon
me for the harm that I may have caused to many".

Short Formula:

"I declare myself catholic. I wish to live and die a Catholic. I retract with all my heart all
that I have said, written, and done against the Church and our Lord Jesus Christ. The
Diocesan may publish this retraction; which I make spontaneously, to repair as much as
possible the scandal produced by my writings and may acts. May all the people pardon
me for the harm that I may have caused to many".

The Short Formula Omitted the ff:

1.) I believe and profess whatever she (Church) teaches and I submit to whatever she demands; and,
2.) I abominate Masonry, which is an enemy of the Church and as a society prohibited by the Church.

References:

Agoncillo, T.A., (2010). Philippine History, “Expanded and Updated edition”, Quezon City: C & E Publishing, Inc.
Apsay, L.C., Espino, L.C.,Ligan, V.O., et.al.,(2018). Readings in Philippine History, Malabon City: Mutya Publishing House,
Inc.
Candelaria, J.L.P. & Alporha, V.C.,(2018). Readings in Philippine History, Sampaloc, Manila: Rex Book Store, Inc.
https://prezi.com/6yxaolr-cmg7/rizals-retraction/