Retraction of Jose Rizal

Historical Context

Jose Rizal – Jose Protacio Rizal Mercado y Alonso Realonda (June 19, 1861 – December 30, 1896).

Reason: Convicted of Sedition

Rizal was arrest, tried, and sentenced by death by a Spanish court-martial after being implicated as a leader of the
Philippine Revolution. The night before his death by firing squad at the Luneta on December 30, 1986, accounts exist that
Rizal allegedly retracted his Masonic ideals and his writings and reconverted to Catholicism following several hours of
persuasion by Jesuit priest.

There were considerable doubts to this allegation by Rizal’s family and friends until in 1935, the supposed retraction
document with Rizal’s signature was found.

Until today, the issue whether Rizal retracted or not and whether the document is forged or real is a subject of continuous
debate between historians and Rizal scholars alike.

The following primary sources are of two kinds: the first two are the official accounts as witnessed by the Jesuits who are
instrumental in the alleged retraction of Rizal. The other two are critical analysis by two Rizalist Scholars who doubted
the story of retraction.

Fr. Vicente Balaguer’s Statement

 Vicente Balaguer, S.J. – A Jesuit missionary, who became friends with Rizal during his days in Dapitan.
 One of the Jesuit priests who visited Rizal during the last hours in Fort Santiago and claimed that he managed to
persuade Rizal to denounce Masonry and return to the Catholic fold.
 In an affidavit executed in 1917 when he had returned to Spain, Balaguer also claimed that he was the one who
solemnized the marriage of Josephine Bracken and Rizal hours before the hero’s execution.
 Brought out the shorter and more concise formula (retraction) of Fr. Pio Pi.
 He finished writing the retraction when it was half past eleven and was dated December 29.
 The retraction was signed together with Dr. Rizal, Señor Juan del Fresno (Chief of the Picket), and Señor Eloy Moure
(Adjutant of the Plaza).

Fr. Pio Pi’s Statement

 Society of Jesus oh the Philippines, Superior

 Made a shorter retraction statement of Rizal.

Rafael Palma’s Critical Analysis

 Lawyer, writer, educator, and Politician (Former Senator of the Philippines).

 Author of Biografia de Rizal (Literary work on life of the National Hero which won a literary contest in 1938
sponsored by the Commonwealth Government)
 Palma’s critical analysis:
1. The document of Retraction was kept in secret so that no one except the authorities was able to see it at the time.
Only copies of it were furnished the newspapers, but with the exception of one person, nobody saw the original.
In fact the original was kept in such a way that it was not found until thirty years had transpired.
2. When the family of Rizal asked for the original of said document or a copy of it as well as a copy of the certificate
of canonical marriage with Josephine Bracken, both petitions were denied.
3. Rizal’s burial was kept secret, the cadaver having been delivered to the members of a Catholic association
friendly to the friars instead of being delivered to the family, who had claimed it.
 4. Rizal meant for the Filipinos and of what his conversion meant, no masses were said for his soul or funeral held
by the Catholics.
5. The claim that Rizal was reconciled with the Church, he was not buried in the cemetery of Paco but in the ground
without any cross or stone to mark his grave. Only the diligence of the family (Narcisa) was able to identify the
spot where he was buried.
6. The entry in the book burials of the interment of Rizal’s body is not made on the page with those buried on
December 30, 1896, where there were six entries, but on a special page wherein those by special orders of the
authorities appear. Thus, Rizal figures on a page between a man who burned to death and who could not be
identified and another who dies by suicide; in other words he was considered among person who died impenitent
and did not receive spiritual aid.
7. There was no normal motive for conversion.

Austin Coates’ Critical Analysis

 Assistant Colonial Secretary and Magistrate in Hong Kong in 1950.

 His first study on Rizal was on the latter’s year-long stay in Hong Kong (1891 – 1892).
 Author of the book Rizal: Philippine Nationalist and Martyr (Oxford Press University, 1956)
 The analysis:
1. Those who had read Rizal’s books or who knew him closely, which at that time meant the family and his wide
circle of personal friends, most of whom were abroad, took one at the announcement and dubbed it… an
ecclesiastical fraud.
2. Rizal believed that there was a strong like hood of fraud, and that the prime movers in this would be the friar
archbishop. It was the friars who wanted his retraction.
3. Certainly there was no signed letter of retraction. Rizal knew too well the damage such a letter would do him,
besides he believed before God he had nothing to retract to.
4. The Jesuits had been entrusted by the Archbishop with the spiritual care of the condemned man; and it was their
responsibility, if they were satisfied that he had died and confessed, to see he was buried decently. This two
Jesuits at the execution did not do.
5. The Rizal Family found it difficult to accept either the retraction or the marriage.
6. In Balaguer’s account he made no mention of the Mi Ultimo Adios.
7. The following morning only letters, books, and an alcohol burner remained to be disposed of by the authorities, he
erroneously concluded that no poem had been written and thus made no mention of it in his account, thereby
revealing the truth, which was that he was not within Fort Santiago during the middle of that last night, and had
no knowledge of what was then taking place.

Other Believers or Defenders of Rizal’s Retraction:

1. Nick Juaquin, writer

2. Leon Maria Guerrero III
3. Gregorio Zaide, author of history books
4. Guillermo Gomez Rivera
5. Ambeth Ocampo, author of history books
6. John Schumaker
7. Antonio Molina
8. Paul Duval
9. Austin Craig, historian
10. Teodoro Kalaw, 33rd degree mason and handwriting expert
11. H. Otley Beyer, UP Professor
12. Jose Del Rosario, UP Professor
13. Fr. Marciano Guzman, great grandnephew of Rizal
 14. Fr. Vicente Balaguer, A Jesuit Missionary
15. Fr. Pio Pi, Society of Jesus of the Philippines, Superior
16. Dr. Ausgusto de Vierra, UST Dept of History, Head

Non-believers of Rizal Rectraction:

1. Ricardo Pascual, a historian

2. Sen. Rafael Palma, former UP President and prominent mason
3. Frank Laubach, a Protestant minister
4. Austin Coates, a British Writer
5. Ricardo Manapat, National Archives Director
6. Tomas U. Santos, a historian
7. Jose Victor Torres, history professor of De La Salle University

Believers of Rizal’s retraction had the following arguments:

1. The retraction document (letter) is authentic having judged by a foremost handwriting expert, Teodoro Kalaw and
experts are known and recognize in our courts of justice.
2. Eleven (11) witnesses saw Rizal wrote his retraction, signed a Catholic prayer book and recited Catholic prayers
and kissed the crucifix before his execution.
3. Rizal’s 4 confessions were certified by 5 witnesses, 10 qualified witnesses, 7 newspapermen, an 12 historians and
writers.
4. Aglipayan bishops, masons, and anti-clerics witnessed Rizal’s signing of the retraction document.
5. The head of the Spanish Supreme Court notarized his retraction letter.
6. Being a Catholic, he was buried inside the sacred grounds of Pako (now Paco) Catholic Cemetery.
7. The retraction letter was not forged because witnesses were present while Rizal was signing it.
8. Rizal retracted his masonry because he wanted to be at peace when he dies.
9. Direct evidence which have a greater weight need to prove Rizal’s retraction than just circumstantial evidence.

Non-believers of Rizal’s retraction ha the following arguments:

1. There is no certificate of Rizal’s catholic marriage to Josephine Bracken

2. There is an allegation that the retraction document was a forgery. There are two versions of the retraction letter
with some words missing in the second document. Which document is authentic? Were these documents written
in Spanish, English, or Filipino? Since the signing of the document, if it is true, would have been written in
Spanish, not in English. There was no mention that the original writing is Spanish and translated in English.
3. The document was not in Rizal’s own handwriting according to late Senator Palma.
4. The retraction letter is not in keeping with Rizal’s character and mature beliefs.

Chronological Arrangement before Rizal’s Execution

1
December 26, 1896 – A Spanish court martial found Jose Rizal guilty for sedition and sentenced him to death. 
2
December 28, 1896 – It was decided that Rizal will be executed by musketry, Governor-General Camillo Polavieja
confirmed the sentence. 
3
December 28, 1896 – Teodora Alonzo wrote the Governor-General asking for clemency for her son. 
4
December 28, 1896 – At Malacañan Palace, Rizal’s sisters pleaded to Governor-General Polavieja: stay Rizal’s execution.
5
December 29, 1896 – Rizal was read his death sentence.
6
December 29, 1896 – Rizal was visited by several priests including Fr. Faura, S.J. 
7
Decemeber 29, 1896 – Rizal wrote his last letter to Ferdinand Blumentritt which read:
My dear Brother, When you receive this letter, I shall be dead by then. Tomorrow at seven, I shall be shot; but I am
innocent of the crime of rebellion. I am going to die with a tranquil conscience. Adieu, my best, my dearest friend, and
never think ill of me!  Fort Santiago, 29 December 1896 José Rizal Regards to the whole family, to Sra. Rosa, Loleng,
Conradito, and Federico. I leave a book for you as my remembrance.
8
December 29, 1896 – Teodora Alonzo paid her final visit to Rizal. She was accompanied by her daughter, Trinidad
Mercado. 
9
December 29, 1896 – Rizal’s sisters were allowed to pay him visits. He gave them his worldly possessions:
Narcisa – Wicker Chair
Angelica, niece – Handkerchief
Mauricio, nephew – Belt, watch, and chain
Trinidad – Alcohol Burner with Mi Ultimo Adios
10
December 30, 1896, 6:30am – Rizal was brought to the execution site from Fort Santiago. 
11
December 30, 1896, 7:03 a.m. – Rizal was executed by musketry. 
12
December 30, 1896 – After the execution, Rizal’s body was brought to San Juan de Dios Hospital. 
13
December 30, 1896 – Rizal’s remains were buried in the Paco Cemetery in an unmarked grave. 
14
Rizal’s sister, Narcisa, searched suburban graveyards for where Jose Rizal was buried. She eventually discovered that he
was buried in Paco Park. She marked the plot with the letters R.P.J. (Rizal’s initials in reverse) 
15
August 17, 1898 – Rizal’s remains were exhumed and brought to the Rizal family house in Binondo.