retraction letter

Retraction

The act of pulling, holding or drawing a part back; a denial or taking back of a previous assertion

Forgery

A copy represented as the original; a criminal falsification by making or altering an instrument with intent to deceive

Apostate

A disloyal person who betrays or deserts his cause or religion or political party or friend, etc.

The Retraction Issue of Jose Rizal

The issue concerning Jose Rizal's alleged reversion to the Catholic Faith and linked issues such as his marriage to Josephine Bracken

Roman Catholic Defenders' Claim on Retraction

Roman Catholic defenders claimed the retraction was true and that handwriting experts concluded long ago that the document is genuine

Anti-retractionists' Assertion on Retraction

Anti-retractionists asserted the retraction issue was deceptive and claimed that the retraction document is a forgery

Rafael Palma's Opus on Rizal

A biography titled Biografia de Rizal which is so anti-Catholic that the Church successfully opposed its publication using government funds

Rizal's Affiliation in Masonry

Accounted by Romberto Poulo to have caused a drastic change to Rizal's religious ideas upon his exposure to Europe

Rizal's Observation of Europe

Rizal observed Europe was different from the Philippines in way of life, attitudes towards Roman Catholicism, and the freedom citizens enjoyed

Dapitan Retraction Incident

An incident in Dapitan where Rizal wrote a form of retraction with a priest's help to marry Josephine Bracken, but reclaimed it before it was mailed

Impact of Retraction on Rizal's Heroism

Whether Rizal died a Catholic or an apostate adds or detracts nothing from his greatness as a Filipino hero

Total Number of Retraction Texts

At least four texts of Jose Rizal's retraction have surfaced

First Text of Retraction

Published in La Voz Española and Diario de Manila on the day of Rizal's execution, December 30, 1896

Second Text of Retraction

Appeared in Barcelona, Spain on February 14, 1897 in La Juventud, provided by an anonymous writer later revealed as Fr. Balaguer

Third Text of Retraction (Discovered Original)

Discovered in the archdiocesan archives on May 18, 1935 by Fr. Manuel Garcia, C.M., after being lost for 39 years

Fourth Text of Retraction

Appeared in El Imparcial on the day after Rizal's execution, representing the short formula of the retraction

Fr. Balaguer's Copyist Revelation

Fr. Balaguer revealed in a 1910 letter to Fr. Pio Pi that reproductions of the lost original were made by a copyist who could imitate Rizal's handwriting

Fr. Pi's Copy of Retraction

Contains the same text as Fr. Balaguer's copy but follows the paragraphing of the Manila newspapers

La Voz Española Report on Original Text

Reported seeing and reading Rizal's own hand-written retraction sent to the Archbishop

F. Stahl's Letter Observation

Stated that nobody had seen the written declaration, including Rizal's family and Manila correspondents of Madrid newspapers

Don Manuel Alhama

Correspondent in Manila for the newspaper El Imparcial who was unable to see the handwritten retraction

Sr. Santiago Mataix

Correspondent in Manila for the newspaper El Heraldo who was unable to see the handwritten retraction

Rev. Thomas Gonzales Feijoo

Secretary of the Chancery to whom Archbishop entrusted the holograph before it went missing

Discovery of the "Original" Document in 1935

Discovered on May 18, 1935 by archdiocesan archivist Fr. Manuel Garcia, C.M., raising new doubts due to differences from Jesuit and Archbishop copies

First Textual Difference (mi cualidad vs mi calidad)

The original and newspaper texts use "mi cualidad" (with "u"), whereas the Jesuits' copies use "mi calidad"

Second Textual Difference (Catolica)

The Jesuits' copies omit the word "Catolica" after the first "Iglesias", which is present in the original and newspaper texts

Third Textual Difference (misma)

The Jesuits' copies add the word "misma" before the third "Iglesias", which is absent in the original and newspaper texts

Fourth Textual Difference (Paragraphing)

Fr. Balaguer's text starts the second paragraph at the fifth sentence, while the original and newspaper copies start it at the second sentence

Fifth Textual Difference (Punctuation)

The original and Manila newspaper texts contain only four commas, whereas Fr. Balaguer's copy contains eleven commas

Sixth Textual Difference (Witnesses)

Fr. Balaguer's original copy lacked the names of witnesses found in Manila newspaper texts, which he only named 20 years later in notarized testimony

Señor Fresno

Chief of the Picket, named 20 years later by Fr. Balaguer as a witness who signed the retraction

Señor Moure

Adjutant of the Plaza, named 20 years later by Fr. Balaguer as a witness who signed the retraction

Fr. Pi's Account of Conversion (1909)

Stated that Fr. Balaguer dictated to Rizal from Fr. Pi's short formula previously approved by the Archbishop

Fr. Balaguer's Contradiction (1910)

Admitted dictating Fr. Pi's short formula to Rizal, but also claimed the "exact" copy came from the Archbishop

Long Formula vs Short Formula

The long formula was prepared by the Archbishop and rejected by Rizal; the short formula was prepared by Fr. Pi and dictated to Rizal

Phrases Added by Rizal

Rizal insisted on adding "in which I was born and educated" and "as the enemy that is of the Church" regarding Masonry

Capt. Dominguez

Military officer guarding Fort Santiago who claimed in his 'Notes' that he heard Rizal read his retraction aloud, though his text matched Fr. Balaguer's copy

Reason for Rizal's Dapitan Retraction Attempt

Rizal sought to marry Josephine Bracken canonically, which required a signed retraction and profession of faith approved by the Bishop of Cebu

Manuela Orlac

Guide of Josephine Bracken and her adopted father to Dapitan, who was an agent and mistress of a friar

Prof. Austin Craig

Professor who recorded Fr. Antonio Obach's 1912 revelation about Rizal reclaiming his Dapitan retraction document

Fr. Antonio Obach

Priest in Dapitan who revealed to Prof. Austin Craig that Rizal came hurrying back to reclaim his written retraction before it was mailed

Civil Marriage in the Philippines

Spanish law established civil marriage, but local government provided no practical way for citizens to avail themselves of the right

Wenceslao Retana

Spanish civil servant and primary historian who wrote on Rizal's life, motivations, and rationale for retracting

Retana's View on Rizal's Retraction Motivation

Retana asserted Rizal retracted to protect his family from religious persecution, elevate Josephine's status through marriage, and gain comfort from the Jesuits

Rizal's Nature according to Retana

Rizal was described as a scientist, rationalist, poet, mystic, and deeply religious man who accepted his death as destiny