Did you Know?

• When in Europe, Rizal often had to go on without food. Sometimes his funds took too long to arrive and he would run out of money. He often went out during mealtime and cursed his misfortunes, and then went back home with a straight face. He was too proud to let his landlady know he didn't have any money for food, and when he got back everyone assumed he had already eaten.
• Jose Rizal's sisters once suspected that Josephine Bracken, his love interest in Dapitan, was a spy from Spain.
• There is some speculation that Rizal's mother could have been the illegitimate child of  Lorenzo Alberto Alonso and Brigida Quintos.
• In 1895, Jose had a run-in with a Chinese who owned a small store -- a disagreement that ended with a lawsuit. This angered Rizal so much that he told his mother that he would never again buy anything from the Chinese. Interestingly enough, Rizal was also part Chinese.
• At age 2, Jose could already read and write. He grew up to speak and write 22 different languages including Japanese, English, German, Latin, Spanish, French, Chinese, English, etc. 
• During his exile in Dapitan, Jose Rizal won the lottery. He used half of the money he won to buy some land, and sent the rest of it to his father. 
• Rizal's first poem, “Sa Aking Mga Kababata," was written when he was 7 years old.
• To compensate for his small stature, Rizal turned to weight lifting to enhance his physique. Barbells made from cement were found in his home in Dapitan. 
• Rizal remained calm on the day he was executed. A Spanish surgeon took his pulse moments before he was sent to his death and found it within normal range. 
• Several monuments erected in honor of Jose Rizal can be found all over the world in places such as Madrid, Spain; Wilhelmsfeld, Germany; Jinjiang, Fujian, China; Chicago, Cherry Hill Township, San Diego, Seattle, U.S.A.; Mexico City, Mexico; Lima, Peru; Litomerice, Czech Republic; and Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
• There is a Dr. Jose Rizal Park in  1008 12th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington. It covers a generous land area of 9.6 acres (39,000 m²).
• Jose Rizal's Mi Ultimo Adios (My Last Farewell) is the most translated Filipino poem. Originally written in Spanish, the historical verse is now rendered in 38 other languages.
• In Madrid, Spain, there is a replica of Rizal's famous Luneta monument.

reference: http://thelifeandworksofrizal.blogspot.com/p/trivia.html

BY TEOFILO H. MONTEMAYOR

JOSE RIZAL, the national hero of the Philippines and pride of the Malayan race, was born on June 19, 1861, in the town of Calamba, Laguna. He was the seventh child in a family of 11 children (2 boys and 9 girls). Both his parents were educated and belonged to distinguished families. His father, Francisco Mercado Rizal, an industrious farmer whom Rizal called "a model of fathers," came from Biñan, Laguna; while his mother, Teodora Alonzo y Quintos, a highly cultured and accomplished woman whom Rizal called "loving and prudent mother," was born in Meisic, Sta. Cruz, Manila. At the age of 3, he learned the alphabet from his mother; at 5, while learning to read and write, he already showed inclinations to be an artist. He astounded his family and relatives by his pencil drawings and sketches and by his moldings of clay. At the age 8, he wrote a Tagalog poem, "Sa Aking Mga Kabata," the theme of which revolves on the love of one’s language. In 1877, at the age of 16, he obtained his Bachelor of Arts degree with an average of "excellent" from the Ateneo Municipal de Manila. In the same year, he enrolled in Philosophy and Letters at the University of Santo Tomas, while at the same time took courses leading to the degree of surveyor and expert assessor at the Ateneo. He finished the latter course on March 21, 1877 and passed the Surveyor’s examination on May 21, 1878; but because of his age, 17, he was not granted license to practice the profession until December 30, 1881. In 1878, he enrolled in medicine at the University of Santo Tomas but had to stop in his studies when he felt that the Filipino students were being discriminated upon by their Dominican tutors.  On May 3, 1882, he sailed for Spain where he continued his studies at the Universidad Central de Madrid. On June 21, 1884, at the age of 23, he was conferred the degree of Licentiate in Medicine and on June 19,1885, at the age of 24, he finished his course in Philosophy and Letters with a grade of "excellent."  Having traveled extensively in Europe, America and Asia, he mastered 22 languages. These include Arabic, Catalan, Chinese, English, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Latin, Malayan, Portuguese, Russian, Sanskrit, Spanish, Tagalog, and other native dialects. A versatile genius, he was an architect, artists, businessman, cartoonist, educator, economist, ethnologist, scientific farmer, historian, inventor, journalist, linguist, musician, mythologist, nationalist, naturalist, novelist, opthalmic surgeon, poet, propagandist, psychologist, scientist, sculptor, sociologist, and theologian. He was an expert swordsman and a good shot. In the hope of securing political and social reforms for his country and at the same time educate his countrymen, Rizal, the greatest apostle of Filipino nationalism, published, while in Europe, several works with highly nationalistic and revolutionary tendencies. In March 1887, his daring book, NOLI ME TANGERE, a satirical novel exposing the arrogance and despotism of the Spanish clergy, was published in Berlin; in 1890 he reprinted in Paris, Morga’s SUCCESSOS DE LAS ISLAS FILIPINAS with his annotations to prove that the Filipinos had a civilization worthy to be proud of even long before the Spaniards set foot on Philippine soil; on September 18, 1891, EL FILIBUSTERISMO, his second novel and a sequel to the NOLI and more revolutionary and tragic than the latter, was printed in Ghent. Because of his fearless exposures of the injustices committed by the civil and clerical officials, Rizal provoked the animosity of those in power. This led himself, his relatives and countrymen into trouble with the Spanish officials of the country. As a consequence, he and those who had contacts with him, were shadowed; the authorities were not only finding faults but even fabricating charges to pin him down. Thus, he was imprisoned in Fort Santiago from July 6, 1892 to July 15, 1892 on a charge that anti-friar pamphlets were found in the luggage of his sister Lucia who arrive with him from Hong Kong. While a political exile in Dapitan, he engaged in agriculture, fishing and business; he maintained and operated a hospital; he conducted classes- taught his pupils the English and Spanish languages, the arts. The sciences, vocational courses including agriculture, surveying, sculpturing, and painting, as well as the art of self defense; he did some researches and collected specimens; he entered into correspondence with renowned men of letters and sciences abroad; and with the help of his pupils, he constructed water dam and a relief map of Mindanao - both considered remarkable engineering feats. His sincerity and friendliness won for him the trust and confidence of even those assigned to guard him; his good manners and warm personality were found irresistible by women of all races with whom he had personal contacts; his intelligence and humility gained for him the respect and admiration of prominent men of other nations; while his undaunted courage and determination to uplift the welfare of his people were feared by his enemies. When the Philippine Revolution started on August 26, 1896, his enemies lost no time in pressing him down. They were able to enlist witnesses that linked him with the revolt and these were never allowed to be confronted by him. Thus, from November 3, 1986, to the date of his execution, he was again committed to Fort Santiago. In his prison cell, he wrote an untitled poem, now known as "Ultimo Adios" which is considered a masterpiece and a living document expressing not only the hero’s great love of country but also that of all Filipinos. After a mock trial, he was convicted of rebellion, sedition and of forming illegal association. In the cold morning of December 30, 1896, Rizal, a man whose 35 years of life had been packed with varied activities which proved that the Filipino has capacity to equal if not excel even those who treat him as a slave, was shot at Bagumbayan Field.

One hundred and fifteen years after Jose Rizal was executed by the Spanish colonial regime, controversy still rages as to whether he was a reformist or a revolutionary.
Rizal is immensely influential to generations of Filipinos.  How he is viewed can help define the course of our history.

In his Rizal Day Lecture on Dec. 30, 1969, titled “Veneration Without Understanding,” the historian Renato Constantino noted it was American Governor General William Howard Taft who in 1901 suggested to the Philippine Commission the naming of a national hero for Filipinos.

Subsequently, the US-sponsored commission passed Act No. 346 which set the anniversary of Rizal’s death as a “day of observance.”
Constantino cites Theodore Friend in his  book, “Between Two Empires,” as saying that Taft “with other American colonial officials and some conservative Filipinos chose him (Rizal)  a model hero over other contestants—Aguinaldo too militant, Bonifacio too radical, Mabini unregenerate.”


Filipinos chose himThe rationale for naming Rizal as the Filipinos’ national hero by the American administration was articulated by US Governor General W. Cameron Forbes in his book, “The Philippine Islands,” also cited by Constantino.  Forbes wrote:
“It is eminently proper that Rizal should have become the acknowledged national hero of the Philippine people. Rizal never advocated independence, nor did he advocate armed resistance to the government. He urged reform from within by publicity, by public education, and appeal to the public conscience.”
But in truth it was the Filipinos and not the Americans who first chose Rizal as their national hero.  It was revolutionary President Emilio Aguinaldo of the First Philippine Republic—not Taft and the Second Philippine Commission—who first designated Rizal as a national hero.


First monumentOn Dec. 20, 1898, while the First Philippine Republic was still in control of all of the Philippine archipelago, except US-occupied Manila, Aguinaldo promulgated a decree proclaiming Dec. 30 as a “national day of mourning in memory of Rizal and other victims of Spanish tyranny.”

While not only Rizal but “other victims of Spanish tyranny” were to be honored, the fact that it was on his death anniversary that the celebration was to be held showed that Rizal was the center of the celebration, just two years after his death.
The first official observance of Rizal Day was held on Dec. 30, 1898, in Manila.  Simultaneously in rites in Daet, Camarines Sur province, the first Rizal monument was unveiled.  The statue, which still exists today, was erected through the voluntary contributions of revolutionary leaders and nationalistic townspeople.

Thereafter, practically all Filipino towns would bloom with Rizal monuments and their main streets named after Rizal as a spontaneous expression of our people’s recognition and reverence of Rizal as their primary national idol. He was, at that point, generally acknowledged as the inspiration, if not instigator, of national independence and unity.
Independence was proclaimed by Filipinos themselves in Kawit, Cavite province, six months earlier on June 12, 1898, ending three and a half centuries of Spanish rule.  The US then still had to consolidate its occupation of the entire archipelago.


Started as reformistTrue, like most revolutionaries in world history, Rizal started out as a reformist.  Together with Graciano Lopez Jaena, Marcelo H. del Pilar, Antonio Luna and Mariano Ponce, he founded in 1899 the newspaper La Solidaridad, which became in Madrid the Filipinos’ mouthpiece in demanding reforms in Spain’s governance of the Philippines.
The “propagandists” at first advocated the elevation of Filipinos from the status of subjects to citizens of Spain, with equal rights. They asked for representation of the Philippines in the Spanish Cortes, or Parliament.  This by itself was revolutionary because when a slave demands to be equal to his master, it is a revolution. But it was still short of the demand for national independence.
But in history, reformists ultimately morph into revolutionaries and separatists when their demands for reform, justice and equality are rejected.
Thus, in their Declaration of Independence, the US founding fathers stressed that before taking up arms, they had peaceably petitioned for reforms.


Parallel livesRizal was among the first of the Propagandists (as the Reformists were then called) to realize that Solidaridad was not getting anywhere in its media campaign for reforms.  He took a leave from the newspaper to devote his time to writing a novel (“El Filibusterismo”) that would more dramatically denounce the tyranny of the Spanish regime, and thus arouse the fury and ignite the latent nationalism of the Filipinos into the conflagration of revolution.
His first novel, “Noli Me Tangere,” which had caused a stir and made him the “enemy” of Spanish colonialists, depicts the futility of seeking reforms through education as such efforts would only be frustrated and sabotaged by the government and its crafty mentors, the friars.

In “El Filibusterismo,” the hero/reformist Ibarra morphs into the terrorist/revolutionary/separatist Simoun. A tight parallel could be drawn between the real life of Rizal and the fictional life of Ibarra-turned-Simoun.
Mabini, an erudite lawyer and scholar, correctly read the real message of Rizal’s novels.  In his book, “The Philippine Revolution,” Mabini, a Manila correspondent of the Madrid-based Solidaridad and dubbed as the “Brains of the Revolution,” wrote:
“… Rizal in particular gave two pieces of advice … the first, he served notice on the Spaniards that if the Spanish government, in order to please the friars, remained deaf to the demands of the Filipino people, the latter would have recourse in desperation to violent means and seek independence as relief for their sorrows; and in the second, he warned the Filipinos that, if they should take up their country’s course motivated by personal hatred and ambition, they would, far from helping it, only make it suffer all the more.”
Mabini cited Elias, the radical peasant of Rizal’s novels, who advocated independence through revolutionary violence, as the model rebel leader.


Preaching revolutionIn his prophetic essay, “The Philippines a Century Hence,” Rizal more explicitly expressed his stand.  He warned that “if equitable laws and sincere and liberal reforms” were denied by the Spanish government, “the Philippines one day will declare herself inevitably and unmistakably independent … after staining herself and the Mother Country with her own blood.”

In a proclamation addressed to “Our Dear Mother Country, Spain,” Rizal was even bolder.  He thundered: “When a people is gagged; when its dignity, honor and all its liberties are trampled; when it no longer has any recourse against the tyranny of its oppressors; when its complaints, petitions and groans are not attended to … then …! then …! it has left no other remedy but to take down with delirious hand from the infernal altars the bloody and suicidal dagger of revolution!”


Declaration of independenceAnother major revolutionary who believed Rizal was preaching revolution was Bonifacio.  He was one of those present at the founding of the La Liga Filipina organized by Rizal on July 3, 1892, a week after his return  from Hong Kong, in spite of the warning that he might be killed or imprisoned by the Spaniards.  The constitution of the La Liga Filipina was in actuality a separatist document, a virtual declaration of independence.
The purposes of the League of Filipinos were: “To unite the whole archipelago into one compact; Mutual protection in every case of trouble and need; Defense against every violence and injustice; Development of education, agriculture and commerce; Study and implementation of reforms.” These purposes would be carried out by a Filipino Supreme Council, provincial councils and popular councils.
In effect, Rizal was proposing a separate government.  In the indictment of treason against the Spanish regime, the formation of the Liga was one of the charges against him.
Within three days after the founding of the Liga, Rizal was arrested and exiled to Dapitan.  The authorities correctly apprehended that Rizal had transgressed the bounds of reformism, stepping into the dangerous grounds of revolution.


Peaceful means pointlessIndeed, his exile was the blow that convinced the followers of Rizal that seeking reforms through peaceful means was pointless.
On the night of July 7, 1892, Bonifacio and other members of the Liga formed the Katipunan society (Kataastaasang Kagalanggalangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan), with independence through armed revolution as its main objective.  Rizal was made honorary chair and his name was used as a password by members of the secret society.  He was, if not their actual leader, their spiritual leader.
Four years later, with the Katipunan membership having grown by leaps and bounds, no doubt due in part to the general belief that Rizal was behind the movement, Bonifacio sent Dr. Pio Valenzuela, a member of the supreme council, to Dapitan to get Rizal’s “approval” for the start of the uprising.

The decision to consult Rizal was made collectively during a secret conclave in bancas of 60 Katipuneros on May 6, 1896, in the then remote sitio of Ugong, north of the Pasig River.  Present were Bonifacio, the KKK supremo, and Aguinaldo, who led the revolution successfully for a time after the assassination of Bonifacio.


‘So the seed grows’Rizal and Valenzuela conversed conspiratorially in a shady nook away from Rizal’s house on June 21, 1896. According to an account by Arturo E. Valenzuela Jr., based on the memoirs of his grandfather Pio, Rizal was elated by the news of the Katipunan’s existence, and murmured, “So the seed grows,” ecstatic that the seed of revolution he had sown was sprouting.

Historian Teodoro A. Agoncillo, in his book “History of the Filipino People,” noted that Rizal, in his talk with Valenzuela, gave no objection to armed revolution, but only cautioned that if an insurrection was to be staged, all efforts should be exerted to gather sufficient arms in order to ensure success and avoid unnecessary casualties and sufferings of civilians and insurrectionists.
He also suggested that Antonio Luna, a reformist who had studied military science in Spain, be recruited as a military leader of the revolution.
“It is obvious,” observed Agoncillo, “that Rizal was not against revolution itself but was only against it in the absence of preparation and arms on the part of the rebels.”

Premature launchIndeed, Bonifacio and his council took pains to implement Rizal’s advice, contacting Luna and informing him of Rizal’s wish.  Unfortunately, Luna turned down the invitation.  He later joined the revolutionary army in the war against the United States.
Two months after Valenzuela’s meeting with Rizal, on Aug. 19, the Katipunan was betrayed to Tondo parish priest Fr. Mariano Gil, prompting the authorities to round up suspected members of the secret society.  This forced Bonifacio to prematurely launch the uprising on Aug. 22 in Pugadlawin through the unsheathing of bolos and the tearing of cedulas (residence certificate).

This turn of events cut short Bonifacio’s efforts to implement Rizal’s advice to make full preparations before launching a revolution.  He had, as a matter of fact, written several rich Filipinos to support the Katipunan, although many refused him and even threatened to expose the plot.

If it were not for the betrayal of the KKK by the wife of one of two quarreling members of the Katipunan to a priest who violated the sanctity of the confessional, the revolution could have been launched at a more propitious time.


Rizal’s intentionThose who claim that Rizal was against revolution point out that he was on his way to Cuba to work as a military doctor in the Cuban revolution when the Katipunan revolution broke out.  Rizal’s detractors claim he was trying to flee from involvement in the revolution.
In his book, “Dr. Pio Valenzuela and the Katipunan,” Arturo Valenzuela Jr. narrates that during the conversation between his grandfather Pio and Rizal, the latter had felt impelled to disclose that a year earlier, in June 1895, he had written Governor General Ramon Blanco, applying to serve as a doctor in the Cuban revolution.
“My intention,” Rizal whispered to Pio, “…is to study the war in a practical way, to go through the Cuban soldiery and find something to remedy the bad situation in our country. Then after a time, I would return to our native land when necessity arises.”  In short, he was preparing himself for the revolution.
Rizal received the permission of Blanco on July 30, two weeks after Valenzuela had left.  Austin Coates, in his excellent biography of Rizal, said he was at first reluctant to leave.  But because of the prodding of his family, Rizal departed Dapitan on the steamer España on July 3.  He had no knowledge that the revolution would break out in two weeks.
On arrival in Manila, still on exile, he was kept under ship arrest in a Spanish cruiser on Manila Bay for a month, until he sailed on the Isla de Panay for Cuba.  Thus he had no news of the revolution. On Sept. 28, a day off Port Said, he was arrested by the ship’s captain, taken to Barcelona, Spain, where he was incarcerated and returned to Manila on Dec. 3.


Questioned manifestoMuch is made by the detractors of Rizal of his “Manifesto” to the Filipino people dated Dec. 15, 1896, while he was already imprisoned at Fort Santiago. In the “Manifesto,” Rizal denied responsibility for the revolution, claiming he had opposed it from the very beginning because he had believed in its “impossibility.”
This was a half-truth as we have seen. Valenzuela’s recollection showed that initially Rizal was opposed to the revolution but when told that the movement could no longer be stopped, he gave advice as to how it could have better chances of success.  He suggested that rich Filipinos be tapped to finance the purchase of more arms.
Besides, Rizal never betrayed his knowledge of the plot to the authorities, making him at the very least an accomplice, while his positive advice to the revolutionaries to gather more arms made him a co-conspirator.


For defense attorneyThe “Manifesto,” intended for the use of his defense attorney in his trial, must also be viewed from the circumstance of its writing.  Not only did he face a death sentence, Rizal must have also been thinking of trying to save his family from further persecution.
His beloved brother Paciano had already been tortured almost to death in Fort Santiago by the authorities in a vain attempt to make him implicate Rizal.  More important to him than his life was the safety and security of his family. This made him return to the Philippines in July 1892 despite his foreboding that he would lose his life in the process.
Any document signed under such circumstances must lack credibility or veracity. In fact, the Spanish government never released it, not believing in its truthfulness.  Instead, the government convicted him of treason for advocating independence and of sedition for inciting an armed revolution.


Haunting poemRizal’s real feelings about the revolution and its separatist aim can more truly be gleaned from his haunting poem, “My Last Farewell,” which was written by him just hours before his execution, and intended only for the eyes of his countrymen and not for his judges.
In that final epic poem, he devoted a paean of praise for the revolutionaries.
After gladly offering his life to his country in the first stanza—“had it been a life more brilliant, more fine, more fulfilled, even so it is to you, I would have given it, willingly to you”—he wrote:Others are giving you their lives on fields of battle,Fighting joyfully without hesitation or thought for theConsequence,How it takes place is not important.  Cypress, laurel or lily,Scaffold or battlefield, in combat or cruel martyrdom,It is the same when what is asked of you is for your countryAnd your home.(Translation from Spanish by Austin Coates, author of “Rizal: Filipino Nationalist and Martyr.”)


Icon of allRizal is an icon and a martyr for independence and freedom not just of Filipinos but of all the oppressed peoples in history who have hungered, struggled and fought for liberty, dignity, enlightenment, and social and economic justice.  He richly deserves the highest berth in our pantheon of heroes.  All other nationalist Filipino heroes stand proud beside him.
There is no need to pit our heroes against each other for they stand equally on the hallowed ground of patriotism and nationalism.
By Manuel F. Almario ContributorPhilippine Daily Inquirer

Legacy

Rizal was a contemporary of Gandhi, Tagore and Sun Yat Sen who also advocated liberty through peaceful means rather than by violent revolution. Coinciding with the appearance of those other leaders, Rizal from an early age had been enunciating in poems, tracts and plays, ideas all his own of modern nationhood as a practical possibility in Asia. In the Noli he stated that if European civilization had nothing better to offer, colonialism in Asia was doomed.

Though popularly mentioned, especially on blogs, there is no evidence to suggest that Gandhi or Nehru may have corresponded with Rizal, neither have they mentioned him in any of their memmoirs or letters. 

As a political figure, José Rizal was the founder of La Liga Filipina, a civic organization that subsequently gave birth to the Katipunan led byAndrés Bonifacio,, a secret society which would start the Philippine Revolution against Spain that eventually laid the foundation of theFirst Philippine Republic under Emilio Aguinaldo. He was a proponent of achieving Philippine self-government peacefully through institutional reform rather than through violent revolution, and would only support "violent means" as a last resort. Rizal believed that the only justification for national liberation and self-government was the restoration of the dignity of the people, saying "Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow?"

Rizal, through his reading of Morga and other western historians, knew of the genial image of Spain's early relations with his people. In his writings, he showed the disparity between the early colonialists and those of his day, with the latter's injustices giving rise to Gomburza and the Philippine Revolution of 1896. The English biographer, Austin Coates, and writer, Benedict Anderson, believe that Rizal gave the Philippine revolution a genuinely national character; and that Rizal's patriotism and his standing as one of Asia's first intellectuals have inspired others of the importance of a national identity to nation-building.

Several titles were bestowed on him: "the First Filipino", "Greatest Man of the Brown Race", among others. The Order of the Knights of Rizal, a civic and patriotic organization, boasts of dozens of chapters all over the globe . There are some remote-area religious sects who claim him as a sublimation of Christ. In September 1903, he was canonised as a saint in the Iglesia Filipina Independiente, however it was revoked in the 1950s.

During his exile, he became a noted biologist, having discovered rare animal species, notably the Philippine Gliding Lizard. He sent specimens secretly to Europe and even proposed a binomial name for the creature (which is still used today).

http://www.ask.com/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Rizal#Legacy

Upon the outbreak of the Philippine Revolution in 1896, Valenzuela surrendered to the Spanish authorities and testified in military court that Rizal had strongly condemned an armed struggle for independence when Valenzuela asked for his support. Rizal had even refused him entry to his house. Bonifacio, in turn, had openly denounced him as a coward for his refusal.

But years later, Valenzuela testified that Rizal had been favorable to an uprising as long as the Filipinos were well-prepared, and well-supplied with arms. Rizal had suggested that the Katipunan get wealthy and influential Filipino members of society on their side, or at least ensure they would stay neutral. Rizal had even suggested his friend Antonio Luna to lead the revolutionary forces since he had studied military science. In the event that the Katipunan was discovered prematurely, they should fight rather than allow themselves to be killed. Valenzuela said to historian Teodoro Agoncillo that he had lied to the Spanish military authorities about Rizal's true stance toward a revolution in an attempt to exculpate him.

Before his execution, Rizal wrote a proclamation denouncing the revolution. But as noted by historian Floro Quibuyen, his final poem Mi ultimo adios contains a stanza which equates his coming execution and the rebels then dying in battle as fundamentally the same, as both are dying for their country.

Retraction controversy

Several historians report that Rizal retracted his anti-Catholic ideas through a document which stated: "I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications and conduct have been contrary to my character as a son of the Catholic Church."However, there are doubts of its authenticity given that there is no certificate of Rizal's Catholic marriage to Josephine Bracken. Also there is an allegation that the retraction document was a forgery.

After analyzing six major documents of Rizal, Ricardo Pascual concluded that the retraction document, said to have been discovered in 1935, was not in Rizal's handwriting. Senator Rafael Palma, a former President of the University of the Philippines and a prominent Mason, argued that a retraction is not in keeping with Rizal's character and mature beliefs. He called the retraction story a "pious fraud." Others who deny the retraction are Frank Laubach, a Protestant minister; Austin Coates, a British writer; and Ricardo Manapat, director of the National Archives.

Those who affirm the authenticity of Rizal's retraction are prominent Philippine historians such as Nick Joaquin, Nicolas Zafra of UP León María Guerrero III, Gregorio Zaide, Guillermo Gómez Rivera, Ambeth Ocampo, John Schumacher, Antonio Molina, Paul Dumol and Austin Craig.^[24] They take the retraction document as authentic, having been judged as such by a foremost expert on the writings of Rizal, Teodoro Kalaw (a 33rd degree Mason) and "handwriting experts...known and recognized in our courts of justice", H. Otley Beyer and Dr. José I. Del Rosario, both of UP.

Historians also refer to 11 eyewitnesses when Rizal wrote his retraction, signed a Catholic prayer book, and recited Catholic prayers, and the multitude who saw him kiss the crucifix before his execution. A great grand nephew of Rizal, Fr. Marciano Guzman, cites that Rizal's 4confessions were certified by 5 eyewitnesses, 10 qualified witnesses, 7 newspapers, and 12 historians and writers including Aglipayan bishops, Masons and anti-clericals. One witness was the head of the Spanish Supreme Court at the time of his notarized declaration and was highly esteemed by Rizal for his integrity.

Because of what he sees as the strength these direct evidence have in the light of the historical method, in contrast with merely circumstantial evidence, UP professor emeritus of history Nicolas Zafra called the retraction "a plain unadorned fact of history." Guzmán attributes the denial of retraction to "the blatant disbelief and stubbornness" of some Masons.

Supporters see in the retraction Rizal's "moral courage...to recognize his mistakes," his reversion to the "true faith", and thus his "unfading glory,"and a return to the "ideals of his fathers" which "did not diminish his stature as a great patriot; on the contrary, it increased that stature to greatness." On the other hand, senator Jose Diokno stated, "Surely whether Rizal died as a Catholic or an apostate adds or detracts nothing from his greatness as a Filipino... Catholic or Mason, Rizal is still Rizal - the hero who courted death 'to prove to those who deny our patriotism that we know how to die for our duty and our beliefs'."


http://www.ask.com/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Rizal#Retraction_controversy

Rizal, the Romantic

There were at least nine women linked with Rizal; namely Segunda Katigbak, Leonor Valenzuela, Leonor Rivera, Consuelo Ortiga, O-Sei San, Gertrude Beckette, Nelly Boustead, Suzanne Jacoby and Josephine Bracken. These women might have been beguiled by his intelligence, charm and wit. Segunda Katigbak and Leonor ValenzuelaSegunda Katigbak was her puppy love. Unfortunately, his first love was engaged to be married to a town mate- Manuel Luz. After his admiration for a short girl in the person of Segunda, then came Leonor Valenzuela, a tall girl from Pagsanjan. Rizal send her love notes written in invisible ink, that could only be deciphered over the warmth of the lamp or candle. He visited her on the eve of his departure to Spain and bade her a last goodbye. Leonor Rivera Leonor Rivera, his sweetheart for 11 years played the greatest influence in keeping him from falling in love with other women during his travel. Unfortunately, Leonor’s mother disapproved of her daughter’s relationship with Rizal, who was then a known filibustero. She hid from Leonor all letters sent to her sweetheart. Leonor believing that Rizal had already forgotten her, sadly consented her to marry the Englishman Henry Kipping, her mother’s choice. Consuelo Ortiga Consuelo Ortiga y Rey, the prettier of Don Pablo Ortiga’s daughters, fell in love with him. He dedicated to her A la Senorita C.O. y R., which became one of his best poems. The Ortiga's residence in Madrid was frequented by Rizal and his compatriots. He probably fell in love with her and Consuelo apparently asked him for romantic verses. He suddenly backed out before the relationship turned into a serious romance, because he wanted to remain loyal to Leonor Rivera and he did not want to destroy hid friendship with Eduardo de Lete who was madly in love with Consuelo. O Sei San O Sei San, a Japanese samurai’s daughter taught Rizal the Japanese art of painting known as su-mie. She also helped Rizal improve his knowledge of Japanese language. If Rizal was a man without a patriotic mission, he would have married this lovely and intelligent woman and lived a stable and happy life with her in Japan because Spanish legation there offered him a lucrative job. Gertrude Beckett While Rizal was in London annotating the Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, he boarded in the house of the Beckett family, within walking distance of the British Museum. Gertrude, a blue-eyed and buxom girl was the oldest of the three Beckett daughters. She fell in love with Rizal. Tottie helped him in his painting and sculpture. But Rizal suddenly left London for Paris to avoid Gertrude, who was seriously in love with him. Before leaving London, he was able to finish the group carving of the Beckett sisters. He gave the group carving to Gertrude as a sign of their brief relationship. Nellie BousteadRizal having lost Leonor Rivera, entertained the thought of courting other ladies. While a guest of the Boustead family at their residence in the resort city of Biarritz, he had befriended the two pretty daughters of his host, Eduardo Boustead. Rizal used to fence with the sisters at the studio of Juan Luna. Antonio Luna, Juan’s brother and also a frequent visitor of the Bousteads, courted Nellie but she was deeply infatuated with Rizal. In a party held by Filipinos in Madrid, a drunken Antonio Luna uttered unsavory remarks against Nellie Boustead. This prompted Rizal to challenge Luna into a duel. Fortunately, Luna apologized to Rizal, thus averting tragedy for the compatriots. Their love affair unfortunately did not end in marriage. It failed because Rizal refused to be converted to the Protestant faith, as Nellie demanded and Nellie’s mother did not like a physician without enough paying clientele to be a son-in-law. The lovers, however, parted as good friends when Rizal left Europe. Suzanne Jacoby In 1890, Rizal moved to Brussels because of the high cost of living in Paris. In Brussels, he lived in the boarding house of the two Jacoby sisters. In time, they fell deeply in love with each other. Suzanne cried when Rizal left Brussels and wrote him when he was in Madrid. Josephine Bracken In the last days of February 1895, while still in Dapitan, Rizal met an 18-year old petite Irish girl, with bold blue eyes, brown hair and a happy disposition. She was Josephine Bracken, the adopted daughter of George Taufer from Hong Kong, who came to Dapitan to seek Rizal for eye treatment. Rizal was physically attracted to her. His loneliness and boredom must have taken the measure of him and what could be a better diversion that to fall in love again. But the Rizal sisters suspected Josephine as an agent of the friars and they considered her as a threat to Rizal’s security. Rizal asked Josephine to marry him, but she was not yet ready to make a decision due to her responsibility to the blind Taufer. Since Taufer’s blindness was untreatable, he left for Hon Kong on March 1895. Josephine stayed with Rizal’s family in Manila. Upon her return to Dapitan, Rizal tried to arrange with Father Antonio Obach for their marriage. However, the priest wanted a retraction as a precondition before marrying them. Rizal upon the advice of his family and friends and with Josephine’s consent took her as his wife even without the Church blessings. Josephine later give birth prematurely to a stillborn baby, a result of some incidence, which might have shocked or frightened her http://www.joserizal.ph/lv01.html