CHAPTER 3:

ONE PAST BUT MANY HISTORIES:

CONTROVERSIES AND
CONFLICTING VIEWS IN THE
PHILIPPINE HISTORY
Learning Outcomes
At the end of the lesson, the students should be able to:

a. Demonstrate the ability to formulate arguments in favor or

against a particular issue using primary sources.

b. Develop critical thinking skills in analyzing the various

controversies and conflicting views in Philippine History.

c. Acquire an understanding of past events to better

understand the matters that affect its antiquity, the present,
and the future.
What’s there to talk about?
This chapter presents some of the controversial
events in the history of the Philippines. Each lesson will
present the primary sources of these disputed accounts and
discuss the main issues and arguments. The student’s task is
to decide which argument to side with by analyzing the
primary sources available.
1. SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
 SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
One of the most controversial topics in Philippine history is the site
of the first Catholic Mass, which happened on March 31, 1521 (Easter
Sunday). Today, debates on the matter are being opened as the
Philippines celebrates the 500th year of Christianity, and this time it is
not just Masao, Butuan, and Limasawa Island in Leyte, but including
other places in Butuan such as Baug Island, Suatan, and Bood
Promontory.

In this lesson, we will continue reading the accounts of Antonio

Pigafetta which is considered as a complete record of the journey of
Magellan.
 SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
Primary Source:

The First Voyage Round the World, translated from the accounts
of Antonio Pigafetta accompanied by original documents, with
notes and an introduction by Lord Stanley of Alderley.
 SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
In the island belonging to the king who came to the ship there are
mines of gold, which they find in pieces as big as a walnut or an egg, by
seeking in the ground. All the vessels which he makes use of are made of
it, and also some parts of his house, which was well fitted up according to
the custom of the country, and he was the handsomest man that we saw
among these nations. He had very black hair coming down to his shoulders,
with a silk cloth on his head, and two large gold rings hanging from his ears,
he had a cloth of cotton worked with silk, which covered him from the waist
to the knees, at his side he wore a dagger, with a long handle which was all
of gold, its sheath was of carved wood. Besides he carried upon him scents
of storax and benzoin. He was tawny and painted all over. The island of this
king is named Zuluan and Calagan, and when these two kings wish to
visit one another they come to hunt in this island where we were. Of
these kings the painted king is called Raia Calambu, and the other Raia
Siani.
SITE OF THE FIRST MASS

Benzoin gives 'body' to many

perfumes (it's especially widely-
used in ambrées) and is sweetly
seductive. As perfumer Alienor
Massenet explains: 'Benzoin is as
suave as vanilla, and has a touch of
cinnamon to it. I use it for feminine
and masculine fragrances: it gives
an “openness” and sensuality to
fragrances.
 SITE OF THE FIRST MASS

On Sunday, the last day of March, and feast of Easter, the captain sent the chaplain ashore early
to say mass, and the interpreter went with him to tell the king that they were not coming on
shore to dine with him, but only to hear the mass. The king hearing that sent two dead pigs.
When it was time for saying mass the captain went ashore with fifty men, not with their arms,
but only with their swords, and dressed as well as each one was able to dress, and before the
boats reached the shore our ships fired six cannon shots as a sign of peace. At our landing the
two kings were there, and received our captain in a friendly manner, and placed him between
them, and then we went to the place prepared for saying mass, which was not far from the
shore. Before the mass began the captain threw a quantity of musk rose water on those two
kings, and when the offertory of the mass came, the two kings went to kiss the cross like us, but
they offered nothing, and at the elevation of the body of our Lord they were kneeling like us,
and adored our Lord with joined hands. The ships fired all their artillery at the elevation of the
body of our Lord.
SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
 SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
After mass had been said each one did the duty of a Christian, receiving our Lord. After that
the captain had some sword-play by his people, which gave great pleasure to the kings. Then he
had a cross brought, with the nails and crown, to which the kings made reverence, and the
captain had them told that these things which he showed them were the sign of the emperor his
lord and master, from whom he had charge and commandment to place it in all places where he
might go or pass by. He told them that he wished to place it in their country for their profit,
because if there came afterwards any ships from Spain to those islands, on seeing this cross,
they would know that we had been there, and therefore they would not cause them any
displeasure to their persons nor their goods; and if they took any of their people, on showing
them this sign, they would at once let them go. Besides this, the captain told them that it was
necessary that this cross should be placed on the summit of the highest mountain in their
country, so that seeing it every day they might adore it, and that if they did thus, neither
thunder, lightning, nor the tempest could do them hurt. The kings thanked the captain, and
said they would do it willingly.
 SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
Then he asked whether they were Moors or Gentiles, and in what they
believed. They answered that they did not perform any other adoration, but
only joined their hands, looking up to heaven, and that they called their
God, Aba. Hearing this, the captain was very joyful, on seeing that, the first
king raised his hands to the sky and said that he wished it were possible for
him to be able to show the affection which he felt towards him. The
interpreter asked him for what reason there was so little to eat in th at place,
to which the king replied that he did not reside in that place except when he
came to hunt and to see his brother, but that he lived in another island where
he had all his family. Then the captain asked him if he had any enemies who
made war upon him, and that if he had any he would go and defeat them
with his men and ships, to put them under his obedience. The king thanked
him, and answered that there were two islands the inhabitants of which
were his enemies; however, that for the present it was not the time to attack
them. The captain therefore said to him that if God permitted him to return
another time to this country, he would bring so many men that he would put
them by force under his obedience. Then he bade the interpreter tell them
that he was going away to dine, and after that he would return to place the
cross on the summit of the mountain. The two kings said they were content,
and on that they embraced the captain, and he separated from them.
 SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
After dinner we all returned in our dress coats, and we went together
with the two kings to the middle of the highest mountain we could find, and
there the cross was planted. After that the two kings and the captain rested
themselves; and, while conversing, I asked where was the best port for
obtaining victuals. They replied that there were three, that is to say, Ceylon,
Zzubu, and Calaghan, but that Zzubu was the largest and of the most
traffic. Then the kings offered to give him pilots to go to those ports, for
which he thanked them, and deliberated to go there, for his ill-fortune would
have it so. After the cross had been planted on that mountain, each one said
the Paternoster and Ave Maria, and adored it, and the kings did the like.
Then we went down below to where their boats were. There the kings had
brought some of the fruit called cocos and other things to make a collation
and to refresh us. The captain, being desirous to depart the next day in the
morning, asked the king for the pilots to conduct us to the above-mentioned
ports, promising him to treat them like themselves, and that he would leave
one of his own men as a hostage. The first king said that he would go
himself and conduct him to this port, and be his pilots but that he should
wait two days, until he had had his rice gathered in and done other things
which he had to do, begging him to lend him some of his men so as to get
done sooner. This the captain agreed to.
 SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
This kind of people are gentle, and go naked, and are painted. They
wear a piece of cloth made from a tree, like a linen cloth, round their body to
cover their natural parts: they are great drinkers. The women are dressed in
tree cloth from their waists downwards; their hair is black, and reaches
down to the ground; they wear certain gold rings in their ears. These people
chew most of their time a fruit which they call areca, which is something of
the shape of a pear; they cut it in four quarters, and after they have chewed
it for a long time they spit it out, from which afterwards they have their
mouths very red. They find themselves the better from the use of this fruit
because it refreshes them much, for this country is very hot, so that they
could not live without it. In this island there is a great quantity of dogs, cats,
pigs, fowls, and goats, rice, ginger, cocos, figs, oranges, lemons, millet, wax,
and gold mines. This island is in nine degrees and two-thirds north latitude,
and one hundred and sixty-two longitude from the line of demarcation: it is
twenty-five leagues distant from the other island where we found the two
fountains of fresh water. This island is named Mazzava.
SITE OF THE FIRST MASS

MORE IN THE FB POST

 SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
Main Issue: The questions about where the first mass happened in
the Philippines came from the dichotomy of understanding of
“Mazaua” based on the accounts of Pigafetta. This led to the
Limasawa and Masao, Butuan debate.

1. MASAO, BUTUAN – The claim is based on a tradition that was highly observed from the
17th to 19th century. Historians claim that there has been no mention of Limasawa Island in the
primary sources of this dispute history. Masaua according to them is now Masao.

2. LIMASAWA ISLAND – The accounts of Pigafetta, jointly read with Francisco Albo’s diary (in a
form of a logbook), showed that Magellan’s expedition did not reach Mindanao when they
landed in Homonhon. Instead, they have settled on an island in a latitude like the position of
Limasawa today, south of Leyte. In addition, the disputed location in Masao is near a river, but
in there has been no mention of such a geographical feature in the story of Pigafetta.
DID JOSE RIZAL BELIEVE
IN GOD?
DOES HE HAVE FAITH OR
RELIGION?
 WHY IS HE TARGETING
THE CHURCH, IT MUCH BE
HE’S AN ATHEIST?
WHEN HE’S ABOUT TO BE
EXECUTED, DID HE PRAY?
WHAT WOULD BE THE
CONTEXT OF HIS
PRAYERS?
DOES HE CONSIDER HIS
OWN RELIGION WHEN
HE’S ABOUT TO DIE?
DOES HE CONSIDER HIS
OWN RELIGION WHEN
HE’S ABOUT TO DIE?
DID RIZAL REALLY
RETRACTED?
 WHY IS IT VERY
IMPORTANT TO KNOW IF
RIZAL REALLY
RETRACTED?
 IN YOUR OPINION, DOES THE
ISSUE OF RIZAL’S RETRACTION
DIMINISH HIS CONTRIBUTIONS TO
PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE, OR
DOES IT ADD COMPLEXITY TO HIS
CHARACTER AS A HERO?
1. DID JOSE RIZAL BELIEVE IN GOD?
2. DOES HE HAVE FAITH OR RELIGION?
3. WHY IS HE TARGETING THE CHURCH, IT
MUCH BE HE’S AN ATHEIST?
4. WHEN HE’S ABOUT TO BE EXECUTED, DID
HE PRAY?
5. WHAT WOULD BE THE CONTEXT OF HIS
PRAYERS?
6. DOES HE CONSIDER HIS OWN RELIGION
WHEN HE’S ABOUT TO DIE?
7. DID RIZAL REALLY RETRACTED?
2. RETRACTION OF RIZAL
 RETRACTION OF RIZAL
One of the most controversial documents in Philippine history is the
retraction of Jose Rizal. Two texts have been published on this matter –
the first was on December 30, 1986, in Diaro de Manila and La Voz
Española; the second one was on February 14, 1897, in La Juventud.
Both were said to be written by Fr. Balaguer.

Primary source:
Here’s the alleged original copy found by Fr. Manuel Garcia, CM on May
18, 1935. Following is the text from Fr. Balaguer in January 1987 and its
English translation.
 RETRACTION OF RIZAL
Me declaro catolica y en esta Religion en que naci y me eduque quiero vi- vir y morir.

Me retracto de todo corazon de cuanto en mis palabras, escritos, inpresos y conducta ha habido
contrario a mi cualidad de hijo de la Iglesia Catolica. Creo y profeso cuanto ella enseña y me somento
a cuanto ella manda. Abomino de la Masonaria, como enigma que es de la Iglesia, y como Sociedad
prohibida por la Iglesia. Puede el Prelado Diocesano, como Autoridad Superior Eclesiastica hacer
publica esta manifastacion espon- tanea mia para reparar el escandalo que mis actos hayan podido
causar y para que Dios y los hombers me perdonen.

Manila 29 de Deciembre de 1896

Jose Rizal
 RETRACTION OF RIZAL
Me declaro catolica y en esta Religion en que naci y me eduque quiero vi- vir y morir. Me retracto de
todo corazon de cuanto en mis palabras, escri- tos, inpresos y conducta ha habido contrario a mi
calidad de hijo de la Iglesia. Creo y profeso cuanto ella enseña y me somento a cuanto Ella manda.
Abomino de la Masonaria, como enigma que es de la Iglesia, y como Sociedad prohibida por la misma
Iglesia.

Puede el Prelado diocesano, como Autoridad superior eclesiastica hacer publica esta manifastacion
espontanea mia, para reparar el escandalo que mis actos hayan podido causar, y para que Dios y los
hombers me perdonen.

Manila, 29 de Diciembre de 1896

Jose Rizal
 RETRACTION OF RIZAL
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.

Manila 29 of December of 1896

Jose Rizal
 RETRACTION OF RIZAL
Main issue: Whether or not Jose Rizal retracted in favor of the Catholic
Church.
ARGUMENTS:

1) NO. RIZAL DID NOT RETRACT – A number of historians

question the authenticity of the retraction document citing sever-
al inconsistencies from Rizal’s writing and even ideals. The
following are some of the observed variances from the “original”
document and that of Fr. Balaguer:

Instead of the words "mi cualidad" (with "u") which appear in the original and the
newspaper texts, the Jesuits’ copies have "mi calidad" (without "u").

The Jesuits’ copies of the retraction omit the word "Catolica" after the first "Iglesias"
which is found in the original and the newspaper texts.
 RETRACTION OF RIZAL
The Jesuits’ copies of the retraction add before the third "Iglesias" the word "misma"
which is not found in the original and the newspaper texts of the retraction.

With regards to paragraphing which immediately strikes the eye of the critical reader, Fr.
Balaguer’s text does not begin the second paragraph until the fifth sentences while the
original and the newspaper copies start the second paragraph immediately with the
second sentences.

Whereas the texts of the retraction in the original and the manila newspapers have only
four commas, the text of Fr. Balaguer’s copy has eleven commas.

The most important of all, Fr. Balaguer’s copy did not have the names of the witnesses
from the texts of the newspapers in Manila.
 RETRACTION OF RIZAL
Main issue: Whether or not Jose Rizal retracted in favor of the Catholic
Church.
ARGUMENTS:

1) YES. RIZAL RETRACTED – Rizal was Catholic when he died as a

consequence of his retraction. In fact he was buried in a Catholic
cemetery. The said document was alleged to be signed two years
before his execution. This was done along with his profession of
faith as a requirement to marry Josephine Bracken.

Today, several known historians would believe in the retraction after the presentation of
Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila, also known as the Katipunan and Rizal documents, which
consist of important primary sources of the Philippine revolutions purchased by the
government from Spain in the mid-1990s.
RETRACTION OF RIZAL
RETRACTION OF RIZAL
RETRACTION OF RIZAL
 KEY POINTS that STATED
THAT DOCTOR JOSE
RIZAL DID
NOT IN ANY WAY
Would Rizal just simply neglect all the writing he conceived with his hard work?
The same writings that brought him to the point of being executed.
RETRACT
NO
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY WAY RETRACT
The "project retraction" of the Spanish friars started from the very first day of
Rizal's exile in Dapitan, which was entrusted particularly by the Jesuit order headed
by Fr. Pablo Pastells, chief of the Jesuits in the Philippines in the 1890s, to Father
Sanchez, head of the Jesuit mission house in Dapitan. The latter was specifically
assigned to convincing Rizal to retract in exchange for his stay in the Jesuit Mission
House and, much later a condition before his marriage to Josephine Bracken in a
formal religious ceremony. Moreover, Father Sanchez who was his favorite teacher
from Ateneo convinced his former student about the allegations about the Catholic
religion and Spanish religion in the Philippines. The priest told him to retract in
exchange for a professorship, a hundred thousand pesos, and an estate (Laubach,
1936) however Rizal rejected the offer and chose to stay with his military guard
during the Dapitan exile, Lt. Luis Taviel de Andrade. Much later, he and Josephine
lived as husband and wife, without the benefit of a church wedding.
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY WAY RETRACT
Why would Rizal retract when he knows for a fact that even if he
signs the retraction paper he would still be executed? ---- (Rizal was
accused of participating in filibusterous propaganda where the
penalty as provided by the Spanish Code is death.) In the Spanish
regime, it was always proclaimed that Indios always retracted
before his execution. In the book of Austin Coates, he stated that
“The Spaniards publish the same thing about everyone who is
shot… Besides, nobody has ever seen this written declaration even
though several people would want to see it…. It is (always) in the
hands of the Archbishop.”
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY WAY RETRACT
Before his execution, Father Balaguer stated that he performed the
canonical marriage between Jose Rizal and Josephine Bracken with
the presence of one of Rizal’s sisters ---- 6:00 – 6:15 AM on
December 30, 1896. The three priests (Fr. Jose Vilaclara, Fr.
Estanislao March, and Fr. Vicente Balaguer) were said to be present
at that occurrence but only Father Balaguer was the only one who
could describe the said wedding. So, the question is: where were
the two priests, Father Villaclara and March that time to validate
the marriage happened, or was there even one at all?
Furthermore, it is said that there was no marriage certificate
presented to prove Father Balaguer’s statements.
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY WAY RETRACT
The two priests who accompanied Rizal to the execution site were Father
Estanislao, March, S.J., and Fr. Jose Vilaclara, S.J could have ordered a
Christian burial, but they did not hence they must have known that there
was no retraction. After a long search, Narcissa (Rizal’s sister) discovered
where her brother’s body was placed, it was secretly embedded in the old and
unused Paco Cemetery, the name of Jose Rizal was listed among those who
died impenitently. The entry of the book of burials of the interment of Rizal’s
body is not made on the page with those burials in which his dead body was
merely laid there without a coffin or even a sack. Narcissa asked the guards to
place a marble plaque designed by Doroteo Ongjungco containing Rizal’s
initials in reverse— “RPJ.”
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY WAY RETRACT
The church informed Rizal’s family (nine to eleven days after
Jose Rizal’s execution) regarding the retraction letter which
the church would supposedly present to the family and a mass
for the deceased would happen subsequently. However, the
mass never happened and there was no letter of retraction
presented. The family was told that the retraction letter had
been directed to the Archbishop’s palace and they would not
be able to see it.
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY WAY RETRACT
A year later, Josephine Bracken sailed back to her hometown,
which a year later (December 15, 1898), she (the widow of Jose re)
married a Filipino named Vicente Abad. The Roman Catholic
Cathedral in Hongkong dispensed the marriage certificate between
Bracken and Abad where there was no reference that Josephine
was a “Rizal” by marriage, or that she was the widow of Jose
Rizal. The legal register of Hong Kong stated that Josephine used
the last name “Bracken” instead of “Rizal” to be married to
Vicente Abad.
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY WAY RETRACT
There was litigation between Josephine Bracken and Jose
Maria Basa regarding the possession of Rizal’s literature
wherein a certification from the British Consulate from
Manila stated that she was Rizal’s widow (that would have
provided her claim) but she did not pursue it. In 1960, an
inquiry at the Cardinal-Bishopric of Manila for evidentiary
proof of a Rizal-Bracken marriage was not fruitful, or possibly,
the issue was simply ignored by the religious.
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY WAY RETRACT
There was an autobiography of Josephine Bracken that was
discovered which claimed her marriage to Jose Rizal was presented
in a matter of falsification where Bracken’s handwriting in the
document was no resemblance to her original one. Also, it was
arranged with evident errors which revealed that the primary
language of the author who wrote the autobiography of Bracken
that was discovered was Spanish thus proving that it was not
Josephine’s, and the document was manufactured and
disingenuous.
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
The retraction letter hasANY WAY five
originally RETRACT
copies (the missing one was
originally owned by Roman Roque who was known as the “master
forger howbeit, his copy per se was taken from him by the priests.”
• Lo Voz Esanola subsequently Diario de Manila had disputed the
letter on the very day of Rizal’s execution however the first stated
newspaper publisher is the only newspaper publishing who had
claimed that they had seen the original copy of the retraction letter
The newspaper publishing reported that “Still more; we have seen
and read his (Rizal’s) own hand-written retraction which he sent to
our dear and venerable Archbishop…”
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY WAY RETRACT
• The second text appeared in Barcelona, Spain, on February 14, 1897,
in the fortnightly magazine La Juventud; it came from an anonymous
writer who revealed himself fourteen years later as Fr. Balaguer.

• The original copy of the retraction paper that was found 39 years
later specifically on May 18, 1935, was discovered to be in the
archdiocesan archives by an archdiocesan archivist named Fr. Manuel
Garcia, C.M. The Archbishop Nozelada permitted Ricardo Pascual
Ph.D. to examine the said document and later concluded in his book,
“Rizal beyond the Grave” that the documents presented was a
forgery.
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY WAY
There are significant differences RETRACT
between the "original", the Manila
newspapers texts of the retraction (La Voz Esanola and Diario de Manila) on
the one hand, and the texts of the copies of Father Balaguer and Father Pio
Pi.
1. First, instead of the words "mi cualidad" (with "u") which appear in the
original and the newspaper texts, the Jesuits’ copies have "mi calidad"
(with "u").
2. Second, the Jesuits’ copies of the retraction omit the word "Catolica"
after the first "Iglesias" which is found in the original and the newspaper
texts.
3. Third, the Jesuits’ copies of the retraction add before the third "Iglesias"
the word "misma" which is not found in the original and the newspaper
texts of the retraction.
KEY POINTS THAT STATED THAT DOCTOR JOSE RIZAL DID NOT IN
ANY
4. Fourth, with regards to WAY RETRACT
paragraphing which immediately strikes the
eye of the critical reader, Fr. Balaguer’s text does not begin the second
paragraph until the fifth sentences while the original and the newspaper
copies start the second paragraph immediately with the second
sentences.
5. Fifth, whereas the texts of the retraction in the original and in the
Manila newspapers have only four commas, the text of Fr. Balaguer’s
copy has eleven commas.
6. Sixth, the most important of all, Fr. Balaguer’s copy did not have the
names of the witnesses from the texts of the newspapers in Manila.