GROUP THOUGHT PAPER #1

RZL10 / E04 / 4Q 18-19 CANDELARIA, ELAGO, FALCIS, MANDARIO, VENTURA

Republic Act 1425, or commonly known as the Rizal law which states that both public and private
schools, colleges and universities are to include courses on the life, works, and writings of the National
Hero, Jose Rizal. During the process of the amendment of this law, there have been numerous debates
and issues which spurred the question of whether it is another attack to the catholic church or if it is
eligible to promote nationalism and patriotism in the Philippines.

Rizal’s life being taught as hagiography is very much consistent with what was stated in the law.
This is evident in his ideologies and significant moral teachings that he purposely bequeathed to future
generations. The Rizal Bill was written in the 1950s, a time when the Philippines was finally free from
colonizers such as the Spaniards and the Japanese. With that context, a significant question arises: How
effective has it been performing since it was promulgated 63 years ago? Truly, Rizal’s life and works are
compelling and harbor very meaningful undertones. But even in the proper guidance of instructors, not
every pupil can willingly digest his works and teachings. Even if they do manage to learn, there’s no
guarantee that they would apply their gained knowledge throughout their lifetime. The Millennials and
succeeding generations are very prone to external factors that could easily avert them from their original
inclinations in several aspects of their lives, whether it may be social, political or even in their beliefs. This
might answer the question: Why aren’t we experiencing growth and prosperity? Adding insult to injury is
the fact that it might have been because we were ruled by foreigners for centuries and we lost touch of
what being a Filipino is which led to us gradually losing our identities, which unfortunately is a case of
Colonial Mentality.

But before all this, there was a heated battle that stifled the whole nation. Senator Recto’s bid in
passing the bill up in congress was met with solid opposition. The Catholic Church was against the Rizal
Bill for they worry about the possibility of apostasy of the Catholic population. Their conservatism
incorporates this principle - the avoidance of occasions of sin. Considering that the two novels of Rizal,
even now, are mistaken as a threat to the Catholic church herself because it might subject for open
interpretation especially without the right counsel. Just like how our generation today is easily
manipulated by fake news, peers, and social media rants. Rizal knew that his novels would cause scandal
and confusions and so he hoped that Filipinos would not label him as a heretic. This means Rizal studied
also the dogmas and doctrines of the Catholic Church. Additionally, Rizal was a graduate of Ateneo de
Manila in Intramuros. And while he was taking up his Bachelor of Arts degree, he underwent a steady
education from the Jesuits which fortified his theological background. In fact, there is a retraction letter
from Jesus Cavanna, Rizal's Unfading Glory: A Documentary History of the Conversion of Dr. José Rizal
(Manila: 1983);

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.

There are several articles that says that this letter was a hoax and published by the Spaniards.
Also, considering the studies and conclusions written by Fr. Horacio De La Costa, Rizal never attacked the
Church, and the Church came to terms with Rizal as the builder of nation instead. Therefore, if Rizal did
not intend to attack the Church, what was there to retract of?

This would possibly explain the other conclusion of Fr. Jesus Cavanna, which he stated that unless
with ecclesiastical provision and familiarization of Catholic doctrines, the two novels could not be read at
all. Because he believed Rizal attacked the Church, but later retracted it.

The prospects of Rizal’s retraction (whether it is true or not) might be to clarify or support his real
intention for writing the two novels (which De la Costa concluded), or he really did attack the Church
herself and not only the crooked friars (which Cavanna concluded). In present times, these two sides are
still debating and looking their way through what Rizal exactly intended.

Either way, it is clear that he wanted only to point out the ignorance and even the indifference of
those he called his fellowmen, his nation. And his disagreement that he relatively specified in his two
novels does not mean that he hates the Church and the Filipinos. We believe he was considered a hero
for he loved both enough to expressively state the truth. In Rizal’s works, he didn’t only reprimand the
colonizers, but also the colonized. He shows in his works the strengths and morality but also of our
shortcomings and weaknesses. This aims at making his intended audience, the people of the future to
learn from history and understand that it is our duty to honor and love our native land and become better
citizens who are ready to sacrifice anything to revive our freedom and identity once again.