CHAPTER I

THE RIZAL LAW

INTRODUCTION
The way José Rizal is celebrated in the Philippines as a national hero finds no match in
the world. Shrines and monuments dedicated to his figure are abundant throughout the
archipelago, and his name indicates often the most prominent street or plaza in town. Rizal is a
subject in the university as it has become a symbol of Philippine patriotism.

LEARNING OUTCOMES
At the end of this chapter, students are expected to:
1. Explain the history of the Rizal Law and its important provisions.
2. Compare and contrast the views of those in favor and against the RA 1425.

WHY STUDY RIZAL

Laurel and Recto were branded as communists and threatened with excommunication
when they raised the idea of teaching Jose Rizal’s works in the tertiary level. In the early 1950s,
they thought knowing Rizal’s ideology would make Filipinos realize that they have their own
interests to promote and protect. The sentiment during that time was to view the Americans as
our eternal savior, and the two nationalists were afraid that it could weaken the youth’s resolve
to love their nation and their countrymen better.
Fighting the odds and the invectives hurled at them, they persevered, resulting in the
passage of Republic Act No. 1425, the teaching of Rizal’s novels. It is obvious that the subject
was not about the failed love of Rizal and Leonor Rivera, or about his being gay or not; nor was
it about when and where “El Filibusterismo” was printed. Whether he loved Suzanne Jacoby
more than Gertrude Beckett borders on the inane. Memorizing “Mi Ultimo Adios” may be
challenging to mass communication and language students, but could be torture to others. What
good will that do toward inculcating the values of patriotism, honesty, courage, and fortitude in
students?
Where does learning about Rizal fit in? Maribel Q. Galindo was correct in saying, “A
dead person cannot do anything about the life of the living, but the thoughts, ideals, dreams,
principles, or convictions that he left might be very influential to people’s life as a basis of getting
strength in their day to day existence. And that’s where the relevance of the Rizal subject came
in.” The Rizal Course is about being loyal to your fellow Filipinos in times of crisis. It is upholding
the truth as you perceive it. It is being unafraid to do what is right. It is contributing to the
wellbeing of the community. Finally, it is about the love of your neighbors and how you and they

1|Page
together can contribute to make this nation vibrant and progressive. This is the theme of its
discourse, and the reason for its being.
Rizal could serve as a model for all times, for all places, and for all people who cherish
freedom and justice. He condemned the corrupt thinking of his fellow Indios, demanding that
they live with dignity and pride, as much as he denounced the abuses of the colonial rulers. He
would have rejected political dynasties or the economic disparity of foreign trade. He would
have decried the millennials’ declining participation and indifferent attitude. He would have
denounced the politicians who would rather promote their own agenda than that of the people.
He would have frowned upon those who would rather go abroad instead of employing their
talents to promote the welfare of their neighbors.
Learning is integrating our acquired experiences with the world we have constructed on
our own. Louis Pasteur is reported to have said, “In the fields of observation, chance favors only
the prepared mind.” Mel Thompson writes in “Understanding Philosophy” (1995): “In life as in
observation, the varied situations and crisis that chance throws up present both hazards and
opportunities.” He believes that a “person that is alert and sensitive to what life is about, and
who has already considered the fundamental principles of what we can know or what we should
do, will hopefully be better able to grasp and use each situation to the full.”
Going back to the narrative of Rizal’s novels is no longer compelling since they were
already discussed in the secondary grades. Analyzing the plot of the “Noli” and “Fili” and
dissecting the meaning of his essays are more critical. “Everything we do is a process where
our past experiences, stored in memory, shape our choices and intentions. The crucially
important moment is a fleeting transition from past to future.”
George Santayana said that those who do not know about the past are condemned to
repeat its mistakes. Rizal believed that those who do not know where they came from will never
get to where they are going. It has become a prophetic warning to us. Furthermore, we need to
discuss Jose Rizal’s life and works all over again? Well, it’s because of the Rizal Law or
Republic Act 1425.

RA 1425: THE RIZAL LAW

The Rizal Bill became the Republic Act No. 1425, known as the ‘Rizal Law’. The full
name of the law is “An Act to Include in the Curricula of All Public and Private Schools, Colleges
and Universities Courses on the Life, Works and Writings of Jose Rizal, Particularly His Novels
Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, Authorizing the Printing and Distribution Thereof, and for
Other Purposes.” This Republic Act calls for an increased sense of nationalism from the
Filipinos during a time of a dwindling Filipino identity. According to the judicial system, a republic
act is a law that has already been passed and implemented. In contrast to this, a bill is merely a
proposed law, in other words it may or may not be passed by the Congress.
The RA1425 states that every public and private schools, colleges, and universities
should include courses about the life, and works of Jose Rizal, particularly his novels Noli Me
Tangere and El Filibusterismo, in their curricula.
It was Senator Claro M. Recto who authored the Rizal Bill, while Senator Jose P. Laurel,
Sr., who was then the Chairman of the Committee on Education, sponsored the bill in the

2|Page
Senate. Both of them were known for their great sense of nationalism. This nationalism served
as the foundation to come up with this republic act, to set our country free from the hands of
others and stand up on our own—exactly the ideals and values that Rizal strove to fight for. It
was written for the Filipino people, specifically the Filipino youth, who may have lost their sense
of nationalism and since the youths are important in nation building, it is natural to remind them
about the past. The bill was enacted in June 12, 1956.
The Rizal Law provides for the following:
1. Requirement for students in the colleges and universities to study the life, works and
writings of Jose Rizal; (Section 1)
2. Requirement for the colleges and universities to have sufficient and unexpurgated
copies of Rizal’s works and writings especially his novels Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo in their respective libraries; (Section 2)
3. Translation and publication of Rizal’s works to English and the other dialects of the
Philippines in cheap editions and the distribution of his works through the Purok
organizations and Barrio Councils throughout the country; (Section 3)
4. Stipulation that the discussion of Rizal’s idea does not violate the state’s prohibition of
discussion of religious beliefs in the country’s public learning institutions; (Section 4) and
5. The appropriation of the sum of Php. 300,000.00 for the publication of popular and
cheap editions of Rizal’s works. (Section 5)
This document was obviously written during a time when patriotism and nationalism was
lost and needed, and a time when people were inspired by the initiative of the authors of this
act. It was during this time when the Philippines and its’ citizens relied on the United States for
guidance, support and welfare. It was written in order to seek aide from the same brilliant mind
that drove the Filipinos of the past to fight for freedom from colonists entails another need for
another meaningful revolution in spite of the absence of invaders; the country may have needed
a slow-paced revolution driven by patriotism against dormancy, apathy and futility.

THE TRIALS OF THE RIZAL LAW

The transition from being a bill to becoming a republic act was however not easy as the
proposal was met with intense opposition particularly from the Catholic Church. They saw the
bill as an attempt to discredit the Catholic Religion; and by the idea of compulsion to read
something against one’s faith, impairs freedom of speech and religious freedom.
In the campaign to oppose the Rizal bill, the Catholic Church urged its adherents to write
to their congressmen and senators showing their opposition to the bill; later, it organized
symposiums. In one of these symposiums, Fr. Jesus Cavanna argued that the novels belonged
to the past and that teaching them would misrepresent current conditions.
Cavanna argued that the novels of Rizal should be read according to their character as
novels. Hence, if the persons in the novel are liberal Catholics or have lost their faith, it is only
right that the opinions they express be taken as what is fitting for such a character to say, and
do not express the teaching of the author of the novel. He had added that “we are able to
discover no clear example of Rizal doing this,” that is, “suggest that these are his own opinions
which he proposed to his readers as true” so as to be “teaching and not merely portraying

3|Page
error.” Thus he concludes that no passage may be found in which Rizal shows that he wishes to
attack the church itself rather than the abuses and distortions of her teaching.
Later on, this statement was retracted and altered because they chose to interpret it as
an attack on the church itself, even apart from being deceived by the prejudiced translation.
They were denying that there was any passage in the novels where Rizal could be shown to
speak in his own person attacking the church, rather than having his characters speak as
befitted them, the “Statement” continues in contradiction:
Furthermore, there are passages in the two books where it is not anymore the
novels’ characters but the author himself who speaks. And among these
passages, there are many which are derogatory to Catholic beliefs and
practices as such, aside from the criticisms leveled upon unworthy priests.
([Philippine Hierarchy] 1956, 4–5 par. 6)

They then proceed to give over 120 references to passages that either “are against
Catholic dogma and morals” or “disparage divine worship” or “make light of ecclesiastical
discipline.” The “Statement” (the statement released by the Church as a protest to the Rizal Bill)
proceeded rather to quote canon law forbidding certain types of books, under whose categories
it declared the two novels fell. Only with permission of ecclesiastical authority, “readily granted
for justifiable reason” to those with sufficient knowledge of Catholic doctrine, could they be read.
The rest of the “Statement” dealt with the unreasonableness and injustice of the Senate
bill, making it obligatory for Catholic students to read attacks on their faith. Such a law would,
under the guise of nationalism, violate “one of the fundamental freedoms of our country, viz.,
their freedom of conscience” ([Philippine Hierarchy] 1956, 6–8 par. 11–13). It then proceeded to
offer to all Filipinos, especially to the law-giving bodies, eleven brief statements for their
guidance. After expressing their veneration for Rizal, the bishops insisted that, although he
wrote the novels at a time when he was alienated from the Catholic Church, before his death he
retracted whatever he had written against her. That last will of his should be inviolable.
Thus they suggested that there should be an isolating of “patriotic passages”, for it was
alleged that the novel Noli “was not really patriotic because out of 333 pages only 25 contained
patriotic passages while 120 were devoted to anti-Catholic attacks” (Constantino, 1971). The
Archbishop of Manila, Rufino Santos, the went on to say, in a pastoral letter directed to those of
his archdiocese, not merely that the novels were forbidden by the church. Rather, he
emphasized, “without due permission, it is a sin for any Catholic to read these novels in their
entirety, or to keep, publish, sell, translate, or communicate the same to others in any form”
([Santos] 1956, 350).
The senators soon after worked out a compromise, by which a student who would “serve
written notice under oath, to the head of the college or university that the reading and study of
the … unexpurgated edition is contrary to his religion or religious beliefs, said student shall be
exempt from using the said edition” (Acosta 1973). Although Acosta considered that this was “a
victory for the local Catholic Church,” it was in fact a face-saving compromise, which enabled it
to receive the unanimous vote of the Senate, and the signature of Pres. Ramon Magsaysay.
Professors who have taught the Rizal course can testify that no student has ever come with
such an affidavit (Ocampo 2000). (The following year an effort was made to introduce an
amendment removing the impractical provision.) Nor did people conceive it to be a sin to read
the novels. By insisting on an outright condemnation, the bishops did not prevent the novels

4|Page
from being read but merely removed the possibility that there would be an annotated edition
explaining the possibly offending passages. Even devout Catholics saw no possibility of
following the “Statement” and its “clarification” by Archbishop Santos, when faced with a
contrary civil law. In 1994, President Fidel V. Ramos ordered the Department of Education,
Culture and Sports to fully implement the law as there had been reports that it has still not been
fully implemented.

ASSESSMENT

Name: ________________________________________________ Date: ______

Course / Section: _______________________________________ Score: _____

Instructions: Write your answer on a separate sheet of paper. Always write your NAME,
COURSE and YEAR, and STUDENT NUMBER.
Answer the following questions comprehensively.

1. Considering the context of the 1950s, what issues and interests were at stake in the
debate over the Rizal Bill? Do these issues remain pertinent to the present?
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

2. Why do we need to study the Life and Works of Rizal? Reflect on the contribution of Dr.
Jose Rizal in the Philippine modern society.
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

5|Page
REFERENCES

Mañebog, J. (2014, June 25). Our Happy School. Retrieved from The Importance of the Jose
Rizal Subject .
Mojarro, J. (2018, June 24). Rappler.com. Retrieved from [OPINION] Reading, understanding,
and appreciating Rizal.
Presidential Communications Operations Office. (1956, June 12). Official Gazette of the
Republic of the Philippines. Retrieved from Republic Act No. 1425.
Quiray, E. L. (2018, May 05). Inquirer Opinion. Retrieved from How Rizal’s life should be taught:
https://opinion.inquirer.net/112944/rizals-life-taught#ixzz6TlpXXnnQ
Schumacher, J. N. (2011). The Rizal Bill of 1956 Horacio de la Costa and the Bishops.
Philippine Studies, 59(4), 529-553.

6|Page