Retraction of Rizal: Did Rizal betray the Philippines? ( part 1)

0 74
Avatar for Reyanna
3 years ago

One of the controversies which still remains unresolve until now is the retraction of our National Hero, Jose Rizal. Different claims and versions resurfaced as to our hero retracted or not, labeled as pro-retraction and anti-retraction. The said issue was claimed by the Roman Catholic defenders that Rizal did retract but asserted to be deceptive by the anti-rectractionists claiming that the document was forged.

Lots of debates was held to investigate the authenticity of Rizal's retraction. Father Vicente Balaguer served as one of the leading contributors of the rise of the said controversy. The priest was a missionary who dealt with Rizal during his exile. He is believed to be the person who proclaimed that the original text of Rizal's retraction is said to be in his custody. During the midafternoon of 29th day of December 1896, the priest convinced Rizal to retract so he would be able to marry Josephine Bracken before he dies. At almost 7 pm, Rizal is said to allegedly retract and requested for a retraction formula from his former Physics professor Father Jose Villaclara. The formula was delivered by the archbishop himself but Rizal rejected it due to its lengthy composition. Rizal is said to ask for a new formula which is a short one made by Father Pio Pi.

Father Balaguer appeared to prove the authenticity of Rizal's retraction. The priest sent a letter which contains the original copy of the retraction signed by Rizal, together with the retraction formula to Father Pio Pi. However, the said original copies were suddenly lost.

The retraction letter was discovered by Father Manuel Garcia, C.M in 1935. The letter which was dated December 29, 1896 was said to be signed by Rizal. The retraction context has lots of reproductions of it. Due to many reproductions, inconsistencies were observed such as the dates. On the original Spanish document, the date bears December 29, 1890, another imitation of the document bears "December 29, 189C" and later became "December 29, 1896".

Anti retractionists believed that the letter was fake, reported that Rizal's signature was forged by Roman Roque. He was said to be the same person who forged the signature of Urbano Lacuna, which was used to capture Aguinaldo, and that the mastermind was Lazaro Segoria. This information was exposed by Roman Roque's neighbor Antonio K. Abad. Others believed that the retraction of Rizal was a scheme made by the friars in order to lessen their exposed evildoings which Rizal wrote in his works namely, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo.

According to Professor Michael Charlestone "Xiao" Briones, an assistant professor at De La Salle University and a historian, based on his news segment "Xiao Time: Ako ay Pilipino", he stated that from what Rizal wrote on the first page of the "Imitations of Christ" by Thomas รก Kempis, "To my dear and unhappy wife, Josephine, December 30th, 1896, Jose Rizal". This copy of book was given to Josephine Bracken on his last visit of Jose Rizal and this book consists of the imitation of the life of Jesus Christ. Rizal even left his last will to his family that he would be buried and to put a crucifix on his grave.

Upon researching and understanding the sides of pro-retractionists and anti-retractionists of Rizal. I came to a conclusion that Rizal really did retracted, to the evidence that he called Josephine Bracken his wife means they were married and for them to be married, he must retract first. Nevertheless, on the issue whether Rizal retracted or not, it will not change the fact that Jose Rizal, our national hero, imparted a huge role in our freedom and from the hands of the Spanish colony and his works helped us achieve our independence which also empowered the fighting spirit of the Filipinos.

4
$ 0.00
Avatar for Reyanna
3 years ago

Comments