HISTORY 10

LIFE AND WORKS OF RIZAL

COURSE OVERVIEW

 Mandated by RA 1425
 Focused on Jose Rizal’s Life, works, and ideas particularly his NOLI ME TANGERE
and EL FILIBUSTERISMO.
 Seeks to develop a sense of moral character, personal discipline, civic consciousness, and
duties of citizenship.

COURSE OBJECTIVES

 At the end of the course students should be able to;

1. Discuss Jose Rizal’s life within the context of the 19 th’ century Philippines in relation to
international events.

2. Understand the context that produced Rizal and other nationalists.

3. Analyze Rizal’s various works, particularly the novels Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo.

4. Organize Rizal’s ideas into various themes.

5. Demonstrate a critical reading of primary sources from various personages relevant to the
formation of nationalism.

6.Interpret the values that can be derived from studying Rizal and nationalists’ life and works.

7. Display an appreciation for education and love of country.

THE TRIALS OF THE RIZAL BILL
- DR. J. B. LAUREL JR.

 The enactment of R.A 1425 otherwise known as the RIZAL LAW sparked heated
disputes and bitterness among Philippine legislators.

 It was originally filled by the Senate Committee on Education on April 3, 1956 as senate
Bill No. 438. It was supported by the all the senators except for three (3).

 When Senator Jose P. Laurel, the then Chairman of the Committee on Education started
his sponsorship of the bill on April 17, 1956, dispute between the pros and antis emerged.

SENATE BILL NO. 438

AN ACT TO MAKE NOLI ME TANGERE AND EL FILIBUSTERISMO

COMPULSORY READING MATERIAL IN ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

SECTION 1. JOSE RIZAL’S NOLI ME TANGERE AND EL FILIBUSTERISMO ARE

HEREBY DECLARED COMPULSORY READING MATTER IN ALL PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE SCHOOLS, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES IN THE PHILIPPINES.

SECTION 2. THE WORKS IN SECTION 1 OF THIS ACT SHALL BE IN THE ORIGINAL

EDITIONS OR IN THEIR UNEXPURGATED ENGLISH AND NATIONAL LANGUAGE
VERSIONS.

SECTION 3. THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SHALL TAKE STEPS TO

PROMULGATE RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE IMMEDIATE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT.
SECTION 4. NO PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT SHALL BE CONTRUED AS PROHIBITING
OR LIMITING THE STUDY OF THE WORKS OF OTHER FILIPINO HEROES.

SECTION 5. ANY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY FOUND

VIOLATING, FAILING TO COMPLY WITH, OR CIRCUMVENTING THE PROVISIONS
OF THIS ACT SHALL BE PUNISHED ACCORDINGLY:

(A) THE HEAD OF ANY PUBLIC COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY CHARGED WITH

IMPLEMENTING PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, WHO SHALL HAVE BEEN FOUND GUILTY
OF VIOLATING, FAILING TO COMPLY WITH, OR CIRCUMVENTING THE PROVISIONS
THEREOF, SHALL BE DISMISSED IMMEDIATELY FROM PUBLIC SERVICE AND SHALL
BE DISQUALIFIED FROM TEACHING IN ANY PUBLIC OR GOVERNMENT RECOGNIZED
PRIVATE SCHOOL, COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY.

(B) GOVERNMENT RECOGNITION OF ANY PRIVATE COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY FOUND

VIOLATING OR CIRCUMVENTING THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT SHALL BE
IMMEDIATELY WITHDRAWN, AND THE RESPONSIBLE HEAD AND PROFESSOR OR
PROFESSORS CONCERNED SHALL BE DISQUALIFIED FROM TEACHING IN ANY
GOVERNMENT-RECOGNIZED COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY.

SECTION 6. THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT UPON ITS APPROVAL.

 JOSE P. LAUREL argued that the object of the measure was to disseminate the ideas and
ideals of the great Filipino patriot through the reading of his works, particularly NOLI
ME TANGERE and EL FILIBUSTERISMO

 “NOLI ME TANGERE and EL FILIBUSTERISMO must be read all Filipinos. They must
be taken to heart, for in their pages we see ourselves as in a mirror; our defects as well
as our strength, our virtues as well as our vices. Only then we would we become
conscious as a people, and so learn to prepare ourselves for painful sacrifices that
ultimately lead to self-reliance, self-respect, and freedom.” – JOSE P. LAUREL
 OPPOSITION OF THE CATHOLIC
CHURCH

 The hierarchy of the Philippine Church claimed that the two novels contained errors
which were against the teachings of Catholicism.

 The ‘compulsory’ nature of the bill was also challenged as a breach of religious freedom.

 In general, the Philippine Church strongly opposed due to the following reasons:

(1) show open criticism to the Catholic Church;

(2) in the “compulsory” teaching of the unexpurgated versions of Rizal’s Noli and El Fili,
a teacher would have the tendency to discuss – or worse, to criticize – certain Church
doctrines; and
(3) the inevitable criticism of Church doctrines might lead to the jeopardy of the faith of
people.

EXCERPT FROM THE STATEMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE HIERARCHY ON THE

NOVELS OF DR. JOSE RIZAL

“Among the many illustrious Filipinos who have distinguished themselves in the service
of their country, the highest place of honor belongs to Dr. Jose Rizal. And justly so, for Rizal
possessed to an eminent degree those virtues which together make up true patriotism. He loved
his country not in word alone but in deed. He devoted his time, his energies and the resources of
his brilliant mind to dispelling the ignorance and apathy of his people, and combating the
injustices and inequalities under which they labored. When these salutary activities fell under
the suspicion of the colonial government and he was condemned to death as a rebel, he
generously offered his blood for the welfare of his country.”

“Did Rizal attack only the abuses of certain priest but never contradict Catholic
doctrines? No. When in May 1889, Dr. Tavera told Rizal in Paris “that he (Tavera) tried to
defend him (Rizal) before Fr. Faura explaining that, in the attack upon the friars the stone was
thrown so high and with such force that it reach religion,” Rizal corrected him saying; “This
comparison is not quite exact; I wished to throw the missile against the friars; but as they used
the ritual and superstitions of a religion as a shield, I had to get rid of that shield in order to
wound the enemy that was hiding behind it.”
 “In these two novels we find passages against Catholic dogma and morals 11 where
repeated attacks are made against the Catholic religion in general, against the possibility of
miracles against the doctrine of Purgatory, against the sacrament of Baptism, against
Confession, Communion, Holy Mass, against the doctrine of Indulgences, Church prayers, the
Catechism of Christian Doctrine, sermons, sacramentals and books of piety. There are even
passages casting doubts on or covering with confusion Gods omnipotence, the existence of hell,
the mystery of the Most Blessed Trinity, and the two natures of Christ.”

I. We, the Catholic Philippine Hierarchy in our name and in the name of millions of faithful
Filipino Catholics, wish on this occasion to restate our unshakable loyalty to our fatherland, as
well as to the lawfully constituted authorities of the country.

II. Faithful Catholics wish to be second to none in love and veneration for our national hero, Dr.
Jose Rizal, whose patriotism remains for us a noble inspiration.

III. we assert that he is our greatest patriot and our greatest national hero, not however for what
one day he wrote against our religion and which at the end he retracted “with all his heart”. But
for what he did on behalf of the welfare of our country;

IV. The novels NOLI ME TANGERE and EL FILIBUSTERISMO were doubtlessly written as an
expression of Rizal’s ardent and generous love for our dear Philippines, and there are many
beautiful passages in them showing this and we are in favor of propagating these passages and
encouraging our young generation to read and learn them.

V. But unfortunately these novels were written when Dr. Jose Rizal, estranged for a time from
our faith and religion, did contradict many of our Christian beliefs.

VI. This in no way implies that we must reject him in order to remain loyal to our faith. It only
means that we have to imitate him precisely in what he did when he was about to crown the
whole work of his life by sealing it with his blood: we ought to withdraw as he courageously did
in the hour of his supreme sacrifice. “Whatever in his works, writings, publications and conduct
had been contrary to his status as a son of the catholic Church.” A dying person’s last will is
sacred. Taking into account Rizal’s last will, we must carry out for him what death prevented
him from doing namely, the withdrawal of all his statements against the Catholic faith.

VII. It is our Conviction that to disregard our national hero’s last will expressed in his
Retraction aw well as his Last Farewell, is, far from revering his memory, bringing it into
contempt.

VIII. It is true, as the Explanatory Note to the proposed Bill No. 438 – 3 rd C.R.P says that “to
praise Rizal without taking the trouble to study that which elicits our praises is to be
hypocritical.” Hence, we suggest that a Rizalian Anthology be prepared where all the patriotic
passages and the social political philosophy of Rizal not only from these two novels but from all
the rest of his writings are the patriotic teaching of Rizal to be found. In order to compile an
Anthology of the kind we suggest, we have already organized a committee which is making the
necessary studies.
IX. Our objection then to the Bill proposed is not an objection against our national hero nor
against the imparting of patriotic education to our children.

X. Our Constitution (Art. 3, section 1 (7) guarantees the free exercise of religion. The Supreme
Court of the United states has decided that the American school children belonging to a certain
sect cannot be compelled to salute the American flag because said act is offensive to their
religious belief. (West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319, U.S 624). On this basis, we
believe that to compel Catholic students to read a books which contain passages contradicting
their faith constitutes a violation of a Philippine constitutional provision.

XI. We, the Catholic Philippine Hierarchy maintain that these novels do contain teachings
contrary to our faith and so, We are opposed to be proposed compulsory reading in their
entirety of such books in my school in the Philippines where Catholic students may be affected.
We cannot permit the eternal salvation of immortal souls for which We are answerable before
the throne of Divine Justice, to be compromised for the sake of any human good, no matter how
great it may appear to be. “For what does it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, but suffer
the loss of his own soul?”

Given this 21st day of April in the year of Our Lord, 1956. Manila, Philippines
For the Philippine Hierarchy:

(Sgd.)+RUFINO J. SANTOS, D.D

Archbishop of Manila
President, Administrative Council
Catholic Welfare Organization
 OPPOSITION OF THE CATHOLIC
CHURCH

 The Catholic Action of Manila (CAM) was one of the principal organization that initiated
campaigns against the bills. Its two attempts were to release articles of resistance daily,
instead of weekly, through the Sentinel, its official organ, and to convince the Catholics
to write the senators and the congressmen to junk the bills.

 Fr. Jesus Cavanna, a speaker on the symposium organized by CAM, lambasted Rizal’s
novels by saying that the Noli and Fili”… belong to the past and it would be harmful to
read them because they presented a false picture of conditions in the country at that time.
Noli Me Tangere is an attack on the clergy and its object was to put to ridicule the
Catholic faith. The novel was not really patriotic because out of 333 pages, only 25
contained patriotic passages while 120 were devoted to anti-Catholic attack” (quoted
from Rosales, Sinag Vol.1)

THE PROS AND ANTIS

 Debates on Senate Bill no. 438 stated on April 23, 1956.

 PROS – JOSE P. LAUREL AND CLARO M. RECTO
 ANTIS – MARIANO J. CUENCO, FRANCISCO “SOC” RODRIGO AND DECOROSO
ROSALES

 CLARO M. RECTO argued that under the police power and the Article 14 Section 5 of
the (1935) Constitution, the state could require the reading of NOLI ME TANGERE
and EL FILIBUSTERISMO

“Rizal did not pretend to teach religion or theology He wrote those books. He aimed at
inculcation civic consciousness in the Filipino, national dignity, personal praise, and
patriotism, and if references were made by him in the course of his narration of certain
religious practices in the Philippines in those days and to the conduct and behavior of
erring ministers of the church, it was because he portrayed faithfully the general
situation in the Philippines as it then existed.”
“……. But while he criticized and ridiculed the unworthy behavior of certain ministers of
the church, he made exceptions in favor of certain ministers of the church, he made
 exceptions in favor of the worthy ones, like the Dominican friar, Padre Fernandez, and
virtuous native priest, Padre Florentino, and the Jesuits in general.”

-CLARO M. RECTO

“A vast majority of our people are at the same time the Catholics and Filipino citizens.
As such, they have two great loves: their country and their faith. These two loves are not
conflicting loves, They are harmonious affections, like the love of a child for his father
and for his mother.”

“This is the basis of my stand. Let us not create a conflict between nationalism and
religion; between the government and the church.”

– FRANCISCO ‘SOC’ RODRIGO

HOUSE BILL 5561

THE PROS AND THE ANTIS

 PROS – Jacobo Gonzales, Emilio Cortez, Maria Benzson, Joaquin T. Roces, and
W. Rancap Lagumbay.

 ANTIS - Ramon Durano, Jose Nuguid, Marciano Lim, Manuel Zosa, Lucas Paredes,
Godofredo Ramos, Miguel Cuenco, Carmen D. Consing, and Tecla San Andres Ziga.

ON MAY 9, 1956, A SUDDEN TURN OF EVENT HAPPENED. IT BECAME APPARENT THAT

JOSE P. LAUREL WAS WILLING TO ENTER INTO A COMPROMISE WITH THOSE WHO
OPPOSE THE BILL

An act to institute in the Curricula of all Public and Private Schools, Colleges and
Universities courses The Life, Works and Writing of JOSE RIZAL, particularly his works
NOLI ME TANGERE and EL FILIBUSTERISMO authorizing the printing and Distribution
Thereof, and for other purposes.

Whereas, today, more than other period of our history, there is a need for a re-dedication to the
ideals of freedom and nationalism for which our heroes lived and died.

Whereas, it is meet that in honoring them, particularly the national hero and patriot, Jose Rizal,
we remember with special fondness and devotion their lives and works that have shaped the
national character;

Whereas, the life, works and writing of Jose Rizal particularly his novels Noli me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo are a constant and inspiring source of patriotism with which the minds of the
youth, especially during their formative and decisive years in school, should be suffesed.
Whereas, all educational institutions are under the supervision of and subject to regulation by the
state, and all schools are enjoined to develop moral character, personal discipline, civic
conscience, and to teach the duties of citizenship; Now therefore,

AN ACT TO MAKE NOLI ME TANGERE AND EL FILIBUSTERISMO COMPULSORY

READING MATERIAL IN ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATES COLLEGES AND
UNIVERSITIES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

VS.

AN ACT TO INCLUDE IN THE CURRICULA OF ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE

SCHOOLS, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES COURSES ON THE LIFE WORKS AND
WRITING OF JOSE RIZAL, PARTICULARLY HIS NOVELS NOLI ME TANGERE AND
EL FILIBUSTERISM, AUTHORIZING THE PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTION
THEREOF, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

 Senator Primicias proposed the inclusion of this amendment to the amendment:

“THE BOARD SHALL PROMULGATE RULES AND REGULATIONS PROVIDING FOR THE
EXEMPTION OF STUDENTS FOR REASONS OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF STATED IN A
‘SWORN WRITTEN STATEMENT…..”

 Senator Laurel explained that he eliminated the ‘compulsion idea” after consulting his
religious conscience as a member of the church
 ‘If Rizal was a hero, and on that there could be no debate, if Rizal is a national hero,
these books that he has written, whenever read, ‘must be read in the unexpurgated,
original form.”

THE PROPOSAL OF SENATOR PRIMICIAS WAS INCLUDED IN SECTION ONE (1)

PARAGRAPH TO (2) OF THE BILL.

SENATOR LAUREL’S SUBSTITUTE BILL WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY ON

SECOND READING ON MAY 12, 1956.

HOUSE BILL 5561

 The solution on the impasse by senator Laurel was deemed acceptable by members of the
House of Representatives.
 On May 14, 1956, Congressman Tolentino, the then House Majority Floor Leader
sponsored an amendment by substitution like the one proposed by Senator Laurel.
 Although there were minor dissents, 51 congressmen approved the bill on second
readings on the same day.

ANTI CLIMAX
 Just as how the deliberations in the both chambers of Congress were intense, it’s anti-
climax was dramatic as well.

 Representatives need to pass the bill as soon as possible because the Congress was to
adjourn indefinitely (sine die).

 Since the President did not certify the bill as urgent, it must undergo the rigors of the
constitutional process. FIRST, printed copies of the bill must be distributed among the
members of the House at least three (3) calendar days before its final approval.

 Through the help of Congressman Gonzales, Speaker Laurel managed to pull some
strings at the Bureau of Printing. He made an instruction not to destroy the printing molds
of Senator Laurel’s substitute bill. He ordered enough copies for the members of the
House altering the bill number and the chamber of origin.

 While Senate was still deliberating SB 438 for its 3 rd reading, copies of HB 5561 were
distributed among the members of the House of Representatives.

 While HB 5561 was being deliberated on its second reading, Speaker Laurel made sure
that no insertions or amendments be made in order to avoid its reprinting and
redistribution.

 SB 438 WAS ACCPETED AS IT IS.

 Speaker Laurel did not let the adjournment of the House not until the bill could be
approved.

 SB 438 was approved on its 3rd reading with 23 senators in favor in favor (1 was absent)
while HB 5561 was approved on its 3 rd reading with 71 representatives in favor (6
objected, 2 abstained, while 17 were absent).
 PASSING OF THE LAW

 On June 12, 1956, President Ramon Magsaysay signed the bill

and henceforth became REPUBLIC ACT 1425