Unveiling the

Veiled: Jose
Rizal's Retraction
- A Journey
through Truth
and Perception
 What is a
“Retraction?
Retraction is a term that refers to the idea of
publicly changing one's belief or disavowing a
previously held belief, statement, or opinion.
Essentially, it's a way of saying, "I take back
what I said!" In religion, retraction means
renouncing one's beliefs that go against
religious doctrines or teachings in a formal
manner. Retraction mostly occurs in organized
religions like the Catholic Church, which needs
an individual to adhere to specific beliefs to be
considered a valuable member.
The Philippine's national hero, Jose
Rizal, is famously associated with the
What is a
issue of retraction because of his
passion for nationalism and his
“Retraction?
opposition to the Spanish colonial Retraction is a term that refers to the idea of
regime. Rizal's Noli Me Tangere and El publicly changing one's belief or disavowing a
Filibusterismo, two of his popular previously held belief, statement, or opinion.
novels, criticized the abuse of colonial Essentially, it's a way of saying, "I take back
agencies and the influence of the what I said!" In religion, retraction means
Catholic Church in Philippine traditions renouncing one's beliefs that go against
and society. However, there are religious doctrines or teachings in a formal
debates among scholars on whether manner. Retraction mostly occurs in organized
Rizal truly retracted his criticisms and religions like the Catholic Church, which needs
previous beliefs regarding the Church, an individual to adhere to specific beliefs to be
as he was already facing the death considered a valuable member.
penalty for his nationalist views.
Who was Jose
Rizal?
Jose Rizal: A Filipino national hero, a
writer, and a visionary. He left behind
a legacy of literary works and
revolutionary ideas that shaped the
course of Philippine history.
 Rizal was not just a writer, but also a
Who was Jose medical doctor. He's got talent in
different fields, and that's what makes
Rizal? him so interesting. But, beyond that,
Jose Rizal: A Filipino national hero,
hea was an agent of change who used
writer, and a visionary. He left behind
his talents to shed light on the
a legacy of literary works and government's atrocities during their
revolutionary ideas that shaped the time.
course of Philippine history.
In his two famous literary pieces, Noli
Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, Rizal
exposed the harsh realities of the
colonized Filipinos. And, his belief in
the power of education is admirable,
as he believed that it is the key to our
nation's progress.
 The Controversial
The letter,Retraction
dated December 29, 1896, was said to
have been signed by the National Hero himself.
Rizal retracted because the church would not allow
his marriage to Josephine Bracken unless he
retracted his masonic affiliation.

This is the letter

“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.”
Manila 29 of December of 1896 Jose Rizal – The
Retraction Letter
 Unraveling the Truth

Unraveling the Truth: Exploring the

evidence, theories, and conflicting accounts
surrounding Rizal's alleged retraction,
shedding light on the complexity of historical
narratives.
 Pro-Retraction
There are various claims and evidences regarding Jose Rizal's
supposed retraction from his beliefs against the Catholic Church.
Here are some of them:

1. The Retraction Document - One of the most significant pieces of

evidence is the Retraction document itself, which Rizal allegedly
wrote and signed just a day before his execution. In the
document, Rizal acknowledged the errors of his ways and
expressed his profound regret for the pain and harm he had
caused the Catholic Church.

2. Witnesses - According to historical accounts, three Jesuit

priests served as witnesses to Rizal's retraction: Fr. Vicente
Balaguer, Fr. Pio Pi, and Fr. Antonio Obach. They testified that
Rizal voluntarily signed the document and was of sound mind
when he did so.

3. Confession - Around the time of his execution, Rizal reportedly

made a confession to a priest, indicating his desire to die as a
Catholic. This, along with the Retraction document, was seen as
strong evidence that Rizal had indeed retracted his previous
views.
 Pro-Retraction
There are various claims and evidences regarding Jose Rizal's
Fr. Vicente Balaguer and Fr. Pio supposed retraction from his beliefs against the Catholic Church.
Pi: Here are some of them:

1. The Retraction Document - One of the most significant pieces of

- Affidavit of Fr. Vicente Balaguer. evidence is the Retraction document itself, which Rizal allegedly
- Tasked with assisting Rizal during wrote and signed just a day before his execution. In the
his last day. document, Rizal acknowledged the errors of his ways and
- Received retraction formula expressed his profound regret for the pain and harm he had
composed by Fr. Pio Pi. caused the Catholic Church.

- Discussion and persuasion with

2. Witnesses - According to historical accounts, three Jesuit
Rizal about the importance of faith. priests served as witnesses to Rizal's retraction: Fr. Vicente
- Rizal's emotional response to the Balaguer, Fr. Pio Pi, and Fr. Antonio Obach. They testified that
threat of damnation. Rizal voluntarily signed the document and was of sound mind
when he did so.

3. Confession - Around the time of his execution, Rizal reportedly

made a confession to a priest, indicating his desire to die as a
Catholic. This, along with the Retraction document, was seen as
strong evidence that Rizal had indeed retracted his previous
views.
 Pro-Retraction
There are various claims and evidences regarding Jose Rizal's
Fr. Vicente Balaguer and Fr. Pio supposed retraction from his beliefs against the Catholic Church.
Pi: Here are some of them:
Cuerpo de Vigilancia and
Federico Moreno:
1. The Retraction Document - One of the most significant pieces of
- Affidavit of Fr. Vicente Balaguer. evidence is the Retraction document itself, which Rizal allegedly
- Tasked with assisting Rizal during - Role
wrote and signed justof thebefore
a day Cuerpo de Vigilancia.
his execution. In the
his last day. - Witnessing
document, Rizal acknowledged the
the signing ofways
errors of his the and
- Received retraction formula expressed his profound regret
retraction for the pain and harm he had
document.
composed by Fr. Pio Pi. caused the Catholic Church.
- Federico Moreno as a member of
- Discussion and persuasion with
2. Witnessesthe Cuerpo
- According de Vigilancia.
to historical accounts, three Jesuit
Rizal about the importance of faith. - as
priests served Official documentation
witnesses and
to Rizal's retraction: Fr. Vicente
- Rizal's emotional response to the Balaguer, Fr.verification of theObach.
Pio Pi, and Fr. Antonio retraction.
They testified that
threat of damnation. Rizal voluntarily signed the document and was of sound mind
when he did so.

3. Confession - Around the time of his execution, Rizal reportedly

made a confession to a priest, indicating his desire to die as a
Catholic. This, along with the Retraction document, was seen as
strong evidence that Rizal had indeed retracted his previous
views.
 Pro-Retraction
There are various claims and evidences regarding Jose Rizal's
Fr. Vicente Balaguer and Fr. Pio supposed retraction from his beliefs against the Catholic Church.
Pi: Here are some of them:
Cuerpo de Vigilancia and
Fr. Manuel Garcia and Dr.Federico
H. Moreno:
1. The Retraction Document - One of the most significant pieces of
- Affidavit of Fr. Vicente Balaguer.
Otley Beyer: evidence is the Retraction document itself, which Rizal allegedly
- Tasked with assisting Rizal during - Role
wrote and signed justof thebefore
a day Cuerpo de Vigilancia.
his execution. In the
his last day. - Discovery of the document,
"original" - Witnessing
Rizal acknowledged the
the signing ofways
errors of his the and
- Received retraction formula
retraction documentexpressed
by Fr.hisretraction
profound regret for the pain and harm he had
document.
composed by Fr. Pio Pi. Manuel Garcia. caused the Catholic Church.
- Federico Moreno as a member of
- Discussion and persuasion with
- Authentication Witnessesthe
of2.the Cuerpo
- According de Vigilancia.
to historical accounts, three Jesuit
Rizal about the importancedocument
of faith. by Dr. H. Otley
priests - as
Official
Beyer.
served witnessesdocumentation and
to Rizal's retraction: Fr. Vicente
- Rizal's emotional response to the
- Significance of the written
Balaguer, Fr.verification of theObach.
Pio Pi, and Fr. Antonio retraction.
They testified that
threat of damnation. retraction document.
Rizal voluntarily signed the document and was of sound mind
- Expert validationwhen he did so.
of its
authenticity. 3. Confession - Around the time of his execution, Rizal reportedly
made a confession to a priest, indicating his desire to die as a
Catholic. This, along with the Retraction document, was seen as
strong evidence that Rizal had indeed retracted his previous
views.
 Pro-Retraction
Combining the Accounts:
- Coherent narrative emerges.
- Fr. Vicente Balaguer and Fr. Pio Pi provide firsthand
testimony.
- Cuerpo de Vigilancia witnesses the formal signing.
- Fr. Manuel Garcia's discovery and Dr. H. Otley Beyer's
authentication provide concrete evidence.

These perspectives collectively offer compelling

evidence supporting the assertion that Jose Rizal
indeed underwent a retraction before his execution.
They shed light on the historical context, interactions,
and documentation surrounding Rizal's engagement
with the Catholic Church and his decision to retract his
beliefs. While the topic remains subject to ongoing
debate, these primary sources provide valuable
insights into the perspective supporting Rizal's
retraction.
 Anti-Retraction
1. Coercion - It is possible that the Spanish colonial
authorities coerced Rizal into making the retraction,
as they saw him as a threat to their regime. Rizal was
already on trial and facing the death penalty, so he
may have felt pressured to make a statement that
could potentially spare his life.

2. Timing - The timing of the Retraction document is

also suspicious. It was signed just a day before
Rizal's execution, which raises questions about the
authenticity of his decision. Some speculate that the
retraction was simply a last-ditch effort by the
authorities to discredit Rizal and his nationalist
movement.

3. Inconsistencies - There are inconsistencies in

Rizal's writings and actions that suggest he may not
have fully retracted his previous views. Some of his
works, particularly the novels Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo, remain critical of the Catholic Church
and its role in Spanish colonization. Rizal's letters
and other writings also show that he continued to
express skepticism and criticism towards organized
religion.
 Anti-Retraction
1. Ricardo Pascual 1. Coercion - It is possible that the Spanish colonial
• was one of the persons who was authorities coerced Rizal into making the retraction,
given permission by the archbishop to as they saw him as a threat to their regime. Rizal was
examine the retraction document already on trial and facing the death penalty, so he
may have felt pressured to make a statement that
• He scrutinized the document could potentially spare his life.
thoroughly and came up with a book
that questioned its authenticity 2. Timing - The timing of the Retraction document is
also suspicious. It was signed just a day before
• He identified inconsistencies in the Rizal's execution, which raises questions about the
slants of the handwriting, Rizal’s authenticity of his decision. Some speculate that the
signature, the inks used, the font of retraction was simply a last-ditch effort by the
some words, the margin, and the way authorities to discredit Rizal and his nationalist
individual letters were formed movement.

• He concluded that the newly found 3. Inconsistencies - There are inconsistencies in

retraction document was a forgery Rizal's writings and actions that suggest he may not
have fully retracted his previous views. Some of his
works, particularly the novels Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo, remain critical of the Catholic Church
and its role in Spanish colonization. Rizal's letters
and other writings also show that he continued to
express skepticism and criticism towards organized
religion.
 Anti-Retraction
1. Ricardo Pascual 1. Coercion - It is possible that the Spanish colonial
• was one of the persons who was authorities coerced Rizal into making the retraction,
given permission by the archbishop to 2. Rafael
as they saw himPalma
as a threat to their regime. Rizal was
examine the retraction document already
• isona trial
formerand facing the death
President of penalty,
the so he
may have felt pressured to make a statement that
• He scrutinized the document
University of the Philippines and
could potentially spare his life.
thoroughly and came up with a book a prominent Mason
that questioned its authenticity 2. Timing - The timing of the Retraction document is
also•suspicious.
He argued that
It was the just
signed retraction
a day before
• He identified inconsistencies in the Rizal's execution,
is not which raises
in keeping with questions
Rizal's about the
slants of the handwriting, Rizal’s authenticity of his decision. Some speculate that the
character and mature beliefs
signature, the inks used, the font of retraction was simply a last-ditch effort by the
some words, the margin, and the way authorities to discredit Rizal and his nationalist
individual letters were formed • He called the retraction story a
movement.
“pious fraud” for the following
• He concluded that the newly found 3. Inconsistencies
reasons; - There are inconsistencies in
retraction document was a forgery Rizal's writings and actions that suggest he may not
have fully retracted his previous views. Some of his
works, particularly the novels Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo, remain critical of the Catholic Church
and its role in Spanish colonization. Rizal's letters
and other writings also show that he continued to
express skepticism and criticism towards organized
religion.
 Anti-Retraction
1. Ricardo Pascual 1. Coercion - It is possible that the Spanish colonial
Fr. Balaguer’s
• was one of the persons who was text does not begin thecoerced Rizal into making the retraction,
authorities
second
given permission by the paragraph
archbishop to until theasfifth
2. Rafael
they saw himPalma
as a threat to their regime. Rizal was
examine the retractionsentences
document while the original and the
already on trial and facing the death penalty, so he
newspaper copies start the •
second is a former President of the
may have felt pressured to make a statement that
paragraph immediately with
• He scrutinized the document
University
the
could
of the Philippines and
potentially spare his life.
thoroughly and camesecond
up withsentences.
a book a prominent Mason
that questioned its authenticity 2. Timing - The timing of the Retraction document is
Also, Fr. Balaguer's copy hasalsoeleven
•suspicious.
He argued that
It was the just
signed retraction
a day before
commas whereas
• He identified inconsistencies in the the texts of the
Rizal's execution, which raises
is not in keeping with questions
Rizal's about the
retraction
slants of the handwriting, in the original and
Rizal’s in the
authenticity of his decision. Some speculate that the
manila newspapers have only character
four and mature beliefs
signature, the inks used, the font of retraction was simply a last-ditch effort by the
cmmas.
some words, the margin, and the way authorities to discredit Rizal and his nationalist
individual letters were formed • He called the retraction story a
movement.
The most important of all, Fr. “pious fraud” for the following
Balaguer’s
• He concluded that the copy did not have
newly found the
3. Inconsistencies
reasons; - There are inconsistencies in
names
retraction document was of the witnesses from
a forgery the writings
Rizal's texts and actions that suggest he may not
of the newspapers in Manila. have fully retracted his previous views. Some of his
works, particularly the novels Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo, remain critical of the Catholic Church
and its role in Spanish colonization. Rizal's letters
and other writings also show that he continued to
express skepticism and criticism towards organized
religion.
 OTHER EVIDENCES

1. The documents of retraction were kept secret so that no Claims and Evidences
one except the authorities was able to see it that time.
1.The Retraction document is a fraud and a forgery.
2. When the family of Rizal requested for the original copy of • Ricardo Pascual, through his critical observation and
the letter of retraction as well as the certificate of canonical comparison between the letter and other writings of Rizal, he
marriage with Josephine Bracken, both requests were denied. identified inconsistencies in the letter in terms of the slants of
the handwriting, Rizal’s signature, the inks used, the font of
3. Rizal’s burial was kept secret. In spite of the importance of some words, the margin, and the way individual letters were
Rizal to the Filipino people and the significance of his formed
conversion, no Catholic masses or funerals were given in his
honor. Rizal had reconciled with the church, but his grave • The forger of the retraction letter confessed. According to
was not marked by a cross or stone and was instead buried Antonio K. Abad’s statement in an interview, he told the
in the ground, not in Paco's Catholic cemetery. Also, in the authors that during his birthday party on August 13, 1901 at
entry of the book of burials, the interment of Rizal’s body is his ancestral home in San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, a certain
not made on the page for those buried on December 30, Roman Roque told how he was employed by the friars to
1896; instead, he was considered among those who died make several copies of a retraction document. He was
impenitent with no spiritual support. employed by Col. Funston to forge the signature of General
Lacuna on the document which led to the capture of
4. There was no moral motive for the conversion. Aguinaldo.

• There were notable differences between the two version of

the retraction letter, one which was found in 1935 and the
other was the one issued by Fr. Balaguer in 1987.
 OTHER EVIDENCES

• There were also differences in

1. Theparagraph
documents of division
retraction were
and kept
usesecret so that no
of capital Claims and Evidences
one except the authorities was able to see it that time.
letters. 1.The Retraction document is a fraud and a forgery.
2. When the family of Rizal requested for the original copy of • Ricardo Pascual, through his critical observation and
the letter of retraction as well as the certificate of canonical comparison between the letter and other writings of Rizal, he
marriage with Josephine Bracken, both requests were denied. identified inconsistencies in the letter in terms of the slants of
the handwriting, Rizal’s signature, the inks used, the font of
3. Rizal’s burial was kept secret. In spite of the importance of some words, the margin, and the way individual letters were
Rizal to the Filipino people and the significance of his formed
conversion, no Catholic masses or funerals were given in his
honor. Rizal had reconciled with the church, but his grave • The forger of the retraction letter confessed. According to
was not marked by a cross or stone and was instead buried Antonio K. Abad’s statement in an interview, he told the
in the ground, not in Paco's Catholic cemetery. Also, in the authors that during his birthday party on August 13, 1901 at
entry of the book of burials, the interment of Rizal’s body is his ancestral home in San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, a certain
not made on the page for those buried on December 30, Roman Roque told how he was employed by the friars to
1896; instead, he was considered among those who died make several copies of a retraction document. He was
impenitent with no spiritual support. employed by Col. Funston to forge the signature of General
Lacuna on the document which led to the capture of
4. There was no moral motive for the conversion. Aguinaldo.

• There were notable differences between the two version of

the retraction letter, one which was found in 1935 and the
other was the one issued by Fr. Balaguer in 1987.
 OTHER EVIDENCES

Claims and Evidences 2. The Retraction is not in keeping with the character and
faith of Rizal as well as inconsistent with his previous
1.The Retraction document is a fraud and a forgery. declarations of the religious thought.
• Ricardo Pascual, through his critical observation and ▪ At the age of 35, it is not likely that Rizal would have been
comparison between the letter and other writings of Rizal, he shocked into abnormal behaviour by the threat of death but
identified inconsistencies in the letter in terms of the slants of he had accompanied two prisoners to the scaffold, and their
the handwriting, Rizal’s signature, the inks used, the font of behaviours was restrained and consistent.
some words, the margin, and the way individual letters were ▪As seen in Rizal’s writings, he had a consistent and
formed meaningful system of Christian thought and almost half of
Rizal’s writings were about religion. So if he did retract, this
• The forger of the retraction letter confessed. According to is not in keeping with his ideas.
Antonio K. Abad’s statement in an interview, he told the
authors that during his birthday party on August 13, 1901 at 3. Missing and Doubtful documents and signatures
his ancestral home in San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, a certain A. Retraction Document
Roman Roque told how he was employed by the friars to ▪ The original document of Rizal’s retraction was found by
make several copies of a retraction document. He was Fr. Manuel Garcia in the archdiocesan archives on May 18,
employed by Col. Funston to forge the signature of General 1935, after it was lost for 39 years from the day of his
Lacuna on the document which led to the capture of execution. The newly discovered text retraction differs
Aguinaldo. significantly from the text found in Jesuits’ and Archbishop’s
copies. And the fact that the texts of the retraction which
• There were notable differences between the two version of appeared in the Manila newspapers could be shown to be the
the retraction letter, one which was found in 1935 and the exact copies of the original but only imitations of it.
other was the one issued by Fr. Balaguer in 1987.
 OTHER EVIDENCES
B. Burial Record and Christian Burial Certificate
▪ Rizal’s burial was kept secret; he was buried outside the
inner wall of the Paco cemetery; and the record of his burial
2. The Retraction is not in keeping with the character and
was not placed on the page for entries of Dec.30th but on a
faith of Rizal as well as inconsistent with his previous
special page where at least one other admitted non-petinent
declarations of the religious thought.
is recorded.
▪ At the age of 35, it is not likely that Rizal would have been
▪ To top the rebuttal, Rizal’s “Christian Burial Certificate” was
shocked into abnormal behaviour by the threat of death but
discovered on May 18, 1935 in the very same file with the
he had accompanied two prisoners to the scaffold, and their
retraction document.
behaviours was restrained and consistent.
C. Autobiography of Josephine Bracken and Marriage
▪As seen in Rizal’s writings, he had a consistent and
Certificate
meaningful system of Christian thought and almost half of
▪ The autobiography was written on Dec. 30 1986, the day
Rizal’s writings were about religion. So if he did retract, this
Rizal was executed and had seen difference in handwriting. It
is not in keeping with his ideas.
states that they were married. This could have been forged
to support the idea that Rizal did really retract.
3. Missing and Doubtful documents and signatures
▪There is no evidence of their marriage certificate or public
A. Retraction Document
record of the marriage before of his execution.
▪ The original document of Rizal’s retraction was found by
4. Other facts do not fit well with that of the Retraction story.
Fr. Manuel Garcia in the archdiocesan archives on May 18,
▪ Based on Trinidad Rizal’s statement in a cross examination,
1935, after it was lost for 39 years from the day of his
she visited between 7-8 pm, Rizal never mentioned to her
execution. The newly discovered text retraction differs
about his plans to retract and to be married.
significantly from the text found in Jesuits’ and Archbishop’s
• On Fr. Luis Visa’s statements, at 6 am, he and Fr.
copies. And the fact that the texts of the retraction which
Saderra Mata (Rector of Ateneo Municipal) visited Rizal
appeared in the Manila newspapers could be shown to be the
because Rizal told his intentions to be married.
exact copies of the original but only imitations of it.
▪ According to Fr. Balaguer, Rizal’s family visited on Dec. 30;
however, according to the family, they were only allowed to
visit on the 29th. This proves Balaguer’s inconsistencies.
 The Legacy of Rizal
The controversy surrounding Jose Rizal's retraction has been the
subject of much debate and speculation among historians and
scholars. On one hand, there is evidence such as the Retraction
document itself, as well as the testimony of three Jesuit priests who
witnessed Rizal signing the document. Additionally, reports of
Rizal's confession to a priest further support the argument that he
did retract his previous beliefs against the Catholic Church.

However, on the other hand, there are reasons to doubt the

authenticity of the retraction. Some believe that Rizal may have
been coerced into making the statement, given that he was already
on trial and facing the death penalty. Additionally, inconsistencies
in Rizal's writings and actions suggest that he may not have fully
retracted his previous views and criticisms towards organized
religion.

Despite the lack of concrete evidence, the debate surrounding

Rizal's retraction speaks to the complexity of Philippine history and
identity. As a Filipino, it is fascinating to consider the impact that
Rizal had on Philippine society and the ongoing legacy of his ideas
and ideals. The debate surrounding his retraction reflects the
nuance and complexity of Rizal's life and work, and the ongoing
challenge of understanding and interpreting Philippine history.
 Conclusion
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 Bayani ng 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, former 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"
Thanks
!