Constructive Speech of The Negative Side.
Title of Debate: The Retraction Controversy of Rizal
First Negative Speaker : Escarez, Joyce Anne
For my arguments, I am going to discuss my two points. My first point is, there is no wedding
happen between Josephine Bracken and Jose Rizal. The reason for this is, when Father Balaguer
came to terms that he married Jose and Josephine, after Jose had signed the retraction paper,
however, there were no marriage certificate or public record shown that could prove Father
Balaguer’s statements. In his letter, ""Mi Ultimo Adiós'' which Dr. Jose Rizal did not called
Josephine as his wife, he only said that Adios, dulce estanjera, mi amiga, mi alegria'' instead of
""Adiós, dulce estranjera, mi espoja, mi alegria'' or ""Paalam mahal kong Dayuhan, Aking mahal,
Aking pilak. Pilak is closest to kasintahan. Second, Padre Balaguer who married Jose and
Josephine cannot provide evidence that they legally wed by church before his death. That sister
Lucia went to Josephine in the chapel and she said that she didn't see the ceremony of
Josephine and Rizal supposed marriage. There was no document of marriage between
Josephine and Rizal. Consequently a number of Rizal's writing and letters does not mention
Josephine as his wife. Now, how can you say that Rizal and Bracken is a husband and wife if their
marriage contract is non existent?
The second point is, Rizal burial was kept in secret. The reason with this claims is, around
masses were said for the soul or funeral held by Catholics , not with standing the claim that Rizal
was reconciled with the church, he was not buried in a Catholic Cemetery in Paco but in ground
and the entry of the book of burials of the internet of Rizal bodies that made on the page with
those burials.
If Rizal retracted, he would not have been executed, but he was executed. Therefore Rizal did
not retract. He would have been an example for the cause of the priors , he would have been
given a decent Christian burial, not buried like a dead dog outside Paco Cemetery. And as for
me, I believe that his burial was concealed with mystery as it is said that he was buried in a lot
out of the Roman Catholic Cemetery in Paco and his name did not appear on the registry of
Roman Catholic. In the circumstances, did Rizal really died as a Roman Catholic?
So Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, in conclusion, the evidences, statements and documents
presented are the strong proof that Jose Rizal did not retract. Moreover, the absence of the
This study source was downloaded by 100000860528116 from CourseHero.com on 01-22-2023 06:18:25 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/76068455/Constructive-Speech-Rizals-Retraction-Negative-Side-doc/
marriage document of Rizal and Josephine, and his burial outside the Catholic Church Cemetery
of Paco shows that Rizal did not retracted back to the Church. The lack of sufficient evidence or
evidences prove that results retraction was just a false accusation.
Thank you.
Second Negative Speaker: Sanchez, Kristina
For my arguments, I am going to discuss my two points. My first point is, after hunting all the
evidences and proof, I still believe that Rizal did not retract. This is because, if Rizal are truly
retracted and reconcile with a Catholic Church, this should have been an intervention from the
friars that Rizal leave but only his family to do so. If Rizal retracted , it should have been set free
but only executed which really means that Rizal did not retract at all. Also, most of Rizal's
relative believed that Rizal would never retract based on his personality and that he could not
written it. And if you say that Rizal really retracted, how come he still executed? Wasn't the
retraction enough for salvation of Rizal? Believing in retraction of Rizal is also saying that Rizal is
not a man of his words, these are the evidences that Jose Rizal did not retract before he was
shot in Bagumbayan.
The second point is, the request of copy of retraction wherein the copy of the retraction paper
that was allegedly signed by Rizal was even kept secret and was only published in newspapers.
The reason for this is, when Rizal’s family requested for the original copy, it was said that it was
lost and denied. The Rizal family was informed by the church that approximately nine to eleven
days after the execution, a mass for the deceased would be said, after which the letter of
retraction would be shown the family. Though the family was in attendance, the mass was
never celebrated and no letter of retraction was shown. They were told that the letter had been
sent to the Archbishop’s palace, and that the family would not be able to see it.
So Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, in conclusion, the evidences, statements and documents
presented are the strong proof that Jose Rizal did not retract. Thankyou!
Third Negative Speaker: Barza, Kimberly C.
Good morning/afternoon Chairman, distinguished guests, teachers and students. The topic for
our debate is The Retraction Controversy of Rizal. But We, the negative team, believe that Rizal
didn't retract and we will prove it to you by showing evidences we gathered.
This study source was downloaded by 100000860528116 from CourseHero.com on 01-22-2023 06:18:25 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/76068455/Constructive-Speech-Rizals-Retraction-Negative-Side-doc/
Let me summed up first the evidences we had that Rizal did not retract.
Our first speaker spoke to you that there is no wedding happen between Josephine Bracken and
Jose Rizal, That sister Lucia went to Josephine in the chapel and she said that she didn't see the
ceremony of Josephine and Rizal supposed marriage. There was no document of marriage
between Josephine and Rizal.
Our first speaker also said that Rizal's burial was kept in secret, In addition, with these claims
are no masses were said for his soul or funeral held by Catholics.
Our second speaker spoke to you about, the request of copy of retraction, and when Jose Rizals
family request to get a copy of the alleged letter and yet it was denied and lost.
Our second speaker also said that, If Rizal retracted , it should have been set free but only
executed which really means that Rizal did not retract at all.
Now, for my arguments, I am going to discuss 2 points. The first point is, the Confession in
August, 1901 of master forger Roman Roque that earlier in the year, he was employed by the
friars to make several copies of a retraction letter.
According to Roman Roque, he disclosed that he had been fetched by Lazaro Segovia in San
Isidro, Nueva Ecija, and later taken to Manila. He had stayed in the Hotel Quatro Naciones in
Intramuros and been employed by the friars for 10 days. He was given the equivalent of his
salary for two months in the government. For several days he studied Rizal’s handwriting.
According to him, he made about five copies of the retraction letter based on a draft prepared
by the friars. He thought of keeping one for himself, but when he was searched upon departure,
his copy was taken from him (Runes and Buenafe 1962, 107–128).
While the second point is, the character of Rizal. It was but a few months before that he had
rejected Father Sanchez’ offer of a professorship, a hundred thousand pesos, and an estate if he
would retract; and he had declared that he could not be bought for half the Philippines that is
why Rizal rejected the offer. Rizal’s behaviour during his last hours in Fort Santiago does not
point to a conversion- the Mi Ultimo Adios and letters- or indicate even a religious instability. In
the evening where his sister and mother arrived, never had he mentioned about the retraction,
contrary to what Father Balaguer claimed that even in the afternoon, Rizal was oblivious and
was asking for the formula of the retraction.
Rizal was fixated of the thought that he would die for the love of his country, he, himself had
coveted death a long time ago. His character speaks so loud that even all of Rizal’s friends do
not believe that he have written a retraction.
This study source was downloaded by 100000860528116 from CourseHero.com on 01-22-2023 06:18:25 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/76068455/Constructive-Speech-Rizals-Retraction-Negative-Side-doc/
So Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, We therefore conclude, that the absence of the marriage
document of Rizal and Josephine, his burial outside the Catholic Church cemetery of Paco, the
refusal of alleged letter, the execution of Rizal, statement of Roman Roque and the character of
Rizal shows that Rizal did not retracted back to the church. The lack of sufficient evidence or
evidences prove that results retraction was just a false accusation.
Whatever further study that may emerge as to the truth about Rizal’s retraction controversy,
“…it detracts nothing from his greatness as a Filipino.”
Thankyou!
INTERPOLATION:
Good afternoon Chairman, distinguished guests, teachers and students. The topic for our
debate is The Retraction Controversy of Rizal. We, the negative team, believe that Rizal didn't
retract and we will prove it to you by telling evidences we gathered.
She mentioned that some documents that was purchased by the Philippine government from
Spain in the mid-1990s, showed some interesting points. Now, do you know what are those
points? You said yes, but you failed to mention it that is why I didn't tell that it is enough
evidence to prove that Rizal was retracted especially that they failed to mention of what are
those points.
The third affirmative speaker said that Rizal died as Catholic, and a proof that is he was buried
inside the sacred grounds of Paco cemetery. This is wrong because, Rizal burial was kept secret.
And think of this, If Rizal retracted, he would not have been executed but he was executed.
Right? Therefore Rizal did not retract. His burial was concealed with mystery because it is said
that he was buried in a lot out of the Roman catholic cemetery in Paco and his name did not
appear on the registry of Roman Catholic. In the circumstances, did Rizal really died as a Roman
Catholic?
Great grand nephew of Jose Rizal testified that, Father March, S.J., and Fr. Jose (who had
accompanied Dr. Jose Rizal to the execution site) could have ordered a Christian burial, but they
did not. They must have known that no retraction was made.
As with regards of Dr. De Viana that he mentioned that just like any person, Rizal was prone to
flip-flop. It is a strongly false, because according to Filipino Masons, They argued that Rizal was a
strong-willed man of deep conviction and would not easily flip-flop even in critical times.
Then, in terms of Rizal signed the book of prayers of the Catholic, and cited the prayers of
Catholic. Are you saying that Rizal was already did a retraction because of what he did? This is
the anomaly we have to correct. Rizal was a religious man, but not the kind the Spanish friars’
This study source was downloaded by 100000860528116 from CourseHero.com on 01-22-2023 06:18:25 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/76068455/Constructive-Speech-Rizals-Retraction-Negative-Side-doc/
wanted him to be. More than anything, Rizal wanted to demonstrate to Filipinos that it was
possible to be religious and modern, and break with the status quo if need be, when a man
seeks the truth. We must recapture those moments to get at the most important lessons of
Rizal’s legacy to Filipinos.
Next, take a look on the authenticity of Rizal's retraction. • Dr. Ricardo R. Pascual, one of the
persons who was given permission by the archbishop to examine the document,
Pascual scrutinized the document thoroughly and came up with a book that questioned its
authenticity. Pascual identified inconsistencies in the slants of the handwriting, Rizal’s signature,
the inks used, the font of some words, the margin, and the way individual letters were formed
(Pascual 1959, 7–30).
This study source was downloaded by 100000860528116 from CourseHero.com on 01-22-2023 06:18:25 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/76068455/Constructive-Speech-Rizals-Retraction-Negative-Side-doc/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
