SPEECH
Good day and to everyone present here today.
We Group __, firmly take the position that Jose Rizal’s alleged retraction is false and we
are here to show you why.
As we all know, Rizal is considered a national hero because of his courage to stand up
against the injustices of the Spanish regime. His novels, Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo, exposed the abuses of the clergy and inspired Filipinos to fight for
freedom. He was a man of principle and to say that he took all of that back before his
execution is not only questionable, it is deeply contradictory to everything he lived and
died for.
The claim that Rizal retracted rests on a so-called document said to be signed the day
before his death where he allegedly renounced his writings and returned to the Catholic
faith. But we ask you: where is the original? Why has no handwritten document or copy
ever been shown to the public, to historians, or even to Rizal’s own family.
Throughout this debate, we will present you with facts, not assumptions, and show you
that the evidence supporting the retraction is shaky, inconsistent, and politically
motivated. We will show that the church and colonial authorities had every reason to
fabricate this story, to prevent Rizal from becoming a martyr and a symbol of revolution.
We speak today not to disrespect any belief or religion, but to seek the truth about Rizal
because even faith must not be used to distort history.
We are not here to blindly defend Rizal, we are here to defend truth and historical
integrity. We owe it to our history, and to future generations, to question what was
handed to us especially when the facts don’t add up.
Thank you, and we hope you listen closely and critically as we present our case.
~~~~~~~~~
POINT 1: No original copy exists.
The most basic requirement of truth is evidence, but in this case, the original handwritten
retraction has NEVER been found.
Yes, there are printed versions, but no one has ever seen the actual signed manuscript
that supposedly came from Rizal himself.
If this were real, why not preserve the original as proof?
POINT 2: Contradictions in testimonies and dates.
There are inconsistencies in the timeline of the retraction’s discovery. The Catholic
newspaper La Voz Española claimed the retraction was discovered on the morning of
December 30, 1896, just hours before Rizal was executed.
However, Retana, a known biographer of Rizal, claimed the document was discovered
only in 1901 — five years later!
Which is which? When was it really found? The uncertainty casts serious doubt on its
authenticity.
POINT 3: The motive behind the forgery.
The Catholic Church had a strong political motive. They needed Rizal, a symbol of the
revolution, to return to the faith in order to show the people that rebellion against Spain
and the Church was wrong.
They wanted to kill the hero, but not make him a martyr.
CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, the alleged retraction of Rizal is a historical lie, built on missing
documents, inconsistencies, and political manipulation.
We must remember Rizal not as someone who bowed down, but as someone who stood
firm until the very end.
We say NO — Rizal never retracted. And we must not retract from defending the truth
about our national hero.
