Philippine Institutions 100

“Rizal (No Longer) in a Box”

“The greatest achievements of art lie unfinished. To try and

complete them would be the greatest of obscenities… There is no

privileged ‘innocent’ point of access to a text.”

- David Jasper

Jose Rizal remains to be hugely lauded as one of the country’s most talented

people , and with good reason. The great wealth of information available that thoroughly

analyzed different facets of his life revealed a timeless fascination for our national hero.

Assertions on his religious orientation based on the content of his writings abound

because this sets the comprehensive backdrop to understanding his writings, specifically

his Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo.

It is true that he hates the Catholic religion’s gross implementation in the

Philippines. But in other less prominent writings, he still considers Roman Catholicism as

“the more perfect among other religions”. Even in his writing, Rizal refused to explicitly

state his personal religious preferences. This caused a plethora of quantitative and

qualitative studies in subsequent decades after his life, aiming to bridge the gaps and

predicting his spiritual inclinations.

In practice, Rizal still fostered some Roman Catholic attributes in his cause. But

he did not limit himself to that. He also embraced good things that he found in other

religious sects and removed Roman Catholic tenets which did not fit his idea of God and

religion. As a result, he actually promoted an individualistic or selective form of

spirituality we now commonly ascribe to Masonry. But even this cannot be 100%

confirmed, given that the analysis was made decades away from Rizal’s period of

existence. A researcher who has a personal hang-up against the Catholic Church may

emphasize or even exaggerate Rizal’s tirades and make it mean in the way he prefers it to

mean. Jose Rizal himself refused to place himself in a prescriptive box, so why should

we? In his letter to Pastells, he was quoted to be hammering this point: “My idea of the

infinite is imperfect and confused, considering the wonders of His works, the order that

governs them, their overwhelming magnificence and extent and the goodness that shines

through all of them.” Later in that same letter, he declared a resolution to “be silent” out

of fear of the unknown. Rizal himself acknowledged his limitations, though there are

some things we can pick up about his spirituality that permeated the bulk of his writings.

Suffice it to say that he favors universality over structured religion, among many other

things.

Intellect as a Pathway to Knowing God

What grieved Rizal the most was the fact that the concept of God most Filipinos

embraced during his time was anchored on blind faith and ignorance. The character of

Pilosopo Tasyo in Noli Me Tangere was given much leg room for monologues not more

or less, expressed Rizal’s fierce sentiments on the fact that his people during that time

were severely resigned to the status quo prescribed by flawed friars. Through Tasyo’s

character, he disagrees to believe in an inconsistent God who would break his own rules

of Nature just to make Himself known to his people. This idea was further supplemented

by the liberal students in El Filibusterismo, who further asserted that “ideas come through

the medium of nature.” Rizal truly dealt with God by using the faculties of his intellect,
refusing to be boxed in by practices which were not properly explained, much less

practice in purely good faith by those who were supposedly setting a good example ( i.e

friars).

Disenchantment to Roman Catholicism and Inundation to Superstition

In Noli Me Tangere, Rizal begun by saying that “ills were religious in nature” and

that he “wished the country’s health” on the matter. His writings possessed a radical

quality that had an attempt to shake his countrymen out of complacency. He proposed,

especially in the religious realm, a deviation from the conventional because the

conventional has produced a social cancer that hindered the country’s progress.

Clergy abuse was extensively depicted in both Noli Me Tangere and El

Filibusterismo, which probably was Rizal’s greatest source of disillusionment against

organized religion. A lot of friars who usurped lands to make themselves richer, gambled,

lustfully compromised their sworn vocations as celibates for God, betrayed the Sacrament

of Confession, lived extravagantly and blatantly abused their power in Rizal’s time. Rizal

fervently believed that religion must be practiced with much understanding, purity and

sincerity. He may not have hated the religion of Roman Catholicism per se, but more the

gross conduct with which the dominating clergy eroded whatever faith Rizal had in the

institution of Catholicism in the Philippines.

Since other Filipinos were not able to travel and learn extensively as Rizal had,

they were limited to the scant knowledge given to them about God and many things.

Superstition replaced the essence of true Roman Catholic faith, and it even reached a

point that religious favors were commercialized as seen in the mercenary quality of

buying indulgences in his two novels.

 Much as Rizal lambasted crooked members of the clergy who hid their hideous

selfish interests in the guise of serving God, he acknowledges the presence of the few

good apples in the rotten religious barrel. Rizal valued truly practicing Catholics who

knew the essence of their faith. In one of his letters, he even applauded the “example of

true Christian fraternity” that he saw in the friendship of a Catholic priest and Protestant

minister in Germany. In real life, Rizal exchanged confidences with Father Pastell and

had such high respect for Padre Burgos. In his novels, he provided a stark contrast to Fray

Salvi and Fray Damaso in the character of Padre Florentino. When his novels were

published and many friars were enraged, there was a certain Father Vicente Garcia who

defended Rizal’s writings and this has pleased Rizal when relatives informed him of it

while he was in Europe. Rizal was baptized a Catholic and was active in a Marian

Congregation up to the age of 21. Strangely, he had ridiculed the superstitious and impure

use of the Sacraments, scapularies and other excessive devotions in Noli and Fili. But he

maintained a soft spot for the Virgin Mary. Maria Clara was in many ways patterned after

the character of the mother of Jesus, and in one moment was made to pray fervently for

Ibarra at the height of conflict with the government and the church.

In a nutshell, Rizal has this to say about the Roman Catholic church: “She is an

institution more perfect than others but human to the end.” Compounded by the abuses

Rizal witnessed, his confidence in religion was reduced to treating it like any normal

cultural experience. After having been exposed to other cultures, he concluded that

“Religions, no matter what they are, should never make men enemies but good brothers.”
Head Knowledge of the Bible

Some critics claim that Rizal’s thoughts have some similarities to the Protestant

was of thinking. But these claims are refuted by Rizal himself. He would have been

preferred to be Catholic than Protestant. Protestants are hinged on Scriptural sources and

has numerous denominations. Rizal who had ample head knowledge but had the most

severe doubts on the contents and power of the Bible, could not have been a Protestant.

Rizal did make use of different Bible verses in Noli and Fili (from both the New and Old

Testament) to prove points and illustrate some concepts. He also possibly did this to spite

the friars who were pompous and lorded over others how much they know about God’s

word.

Monotheism, Conscience and Virtues Maintained

Ironically, Rizal adapted some salient Roman Catholic ideas or concepts. In fact,

he may have been a more genuine Catholic than those self-serving friars who ruled the

Philippines during his time. Sure, Rizal doubted the Sacraments, the Bible and some

aspects of Catholic doctrine. He also understandably doubted the infallibility of papal

powers (I bet anyone placed in his situation would have logically arrived at the same

conclusion!). But he truly admired people who were able to match their outward

devotions and actions with their chosen faith.

For one, he is disposed to penance or suffering of an individual to promote the

common good. “What are physical sufferings compared with moral sufferings? A life

which is not dedicated to a great ideal is useless.” Rizal also acknowledges that man is

inherently evil if left to fend for himself: “Resignation isn’t always a virtue; it is a crime

when it foments tyranny.” Opposing the gravity of self-love and suffering are
components of Roman Catholic belief. To be one with Christ’s cross and in loving others

is the main essence of it.

The Catholic faith (and Christian religions, in general) capitalizes on love as the

primary motivation for things. Catholics also place a premium on bearing fruit for God

by practicing commendable virtues. Rizal unknowingly promotes this in his fervent love

for his countrymen: “only love can achieve wondrous deeds; only virtue can save.”

Rizal believed in one God and agreed that through his conscience, God speaks.

He viewed talents as a stewardship, and aimed complete harmony of elements of body

and soul in the light of God’s will. He knew of man’s dignity but asserted the

“inadequacy of religions to capture God’s essence; an infinite degree of all the beautiful

and holy qualities that my mind can conceive…”

Rizal also believed in redemption in the face of horrendous sufferings, just as

Christians believed that Christ was resurrected to bring in moral redemption. Rizal

espoused integrity, sincerity, courage, purity and compassion, among many things. Rizal

had faith, hope and love- the three primary Catholic virtues. To borrow from his very

words: “The worst and cowardliest of men is always something more than a plant,

because he has soul and an intelligence, which however vitiated and brutalized they may

be, can me redeemed.”

God’s justice and mercy are also touched on in his writings. In El Fili, Father

Florentino consoled a dying Elias with these words: “No. God is justice. He cannot

abandon His cause, the cause of liberty, without which no justice is possible.”
The Dilemma in Interpreting Artistic Texts in a Spiritual Context

Author Sallie TeSelle depicts the novel in this way: “The novel is about man

experiencing. Its generic subject matter is man- the caverns and corners of the human

spirit, the relations of men and women in society, the question and clash of man with

cosmic powers… The dramatic assumes no common world; refracted into numerous

points of views of or alternatives… is par excellence an art of the possible, not of the

actual.”

No one can perfectly capture Rizal’s spirituality. At best, we can only draw

parallels of what it could have been. Rizal may have been clear about the specific things

that he hates, but he has not completely demarcated his exact religious preferences in his

novels. Jurij Lotman (“Structure of the Artistic Text”) may provide some explanation of

why this is so: “An idea in art is always a model, for it reconstructs an image of reality…

The language acts as a sort of code, through which the receiver deciphers the meaning of

the message that interests him.” Another author, David Jasper agrees that there are no

certainties in literary interpretation: “Literary criticism has eroded certainties and faith in

the word.”

Lotman discussed three main proponents of an artistic text: expression,

demarcation and structure, Rizal’s novels had such eloquent and crystal clear expression

and structure, but the vagueness of his exact spiritual preference rendered his works

lacking in demarcation. Lotman defines demarcation as that which “opposes all

materially embodied signs not entering into its composition.”

This lack of demarcation and the inherent “noise” in decoding Rizal’s writings

makes any well-meaning researcher incapable of fully recreating Jose Rizal’s spiritual
profile. “The relation between writer and reader creates additional alternative

possibilities.”

Rizal Out of the Box

One previous PI 100 student claims that Rizal’s thoughts are markedly Protestant.

Another claims that Rizal is a mason, based on his formation of La Liga Filipino. I view

Rizal from a different light: through the retained traces of Catholicism in him that

remained in his life and writings despite his castigation and grievances to the same. All of

us may actually posses a grain of truth each, in the same way that artists painting the

same landscape tend to portray it in different ways because of the different angles they

chose to position themselves. Even Jose Rizal himself viewed Truth in that same

metaphor.

Perhaps the actual identification of Rizal’s specific religious orientation must not

be focused on as much as in the spirit with which Rizal penned his masterpieces.

Had he been alive today, he may have appreciated open-mindedness in the face of

differing religious views. Instead of argumentation, he might have been inclined to link

elbows with those who truly practice their faith, regardless of religious orientation. He

might have been appalled that some even went as far as worshipping him in obscure parts

of the country. But much closer to his heart are sincerely seeking individuals who

promote love, progress, peace, nationalism and faith and are anchored by natural and

intellectual means.

There’s no real need to choose which group he belongs to as far as religion is

concerned. People must resist placing Rizal in a box or forced to place a period on issues

where Rizal may have purposely placed a comma or question mark. “The fiction alone is
freed from the lying demands and conventions of life and its religions, and keeps true to

nature and the ultimate demands of what is true and good.” (David Jasper)

References:

Hessel, Eugene. The Religious Thought of Jose Rizal: Its Context and Theological

Significance. Manila: Philippine Education Co., 1961.

The National Gospel: or Highlights of Rizal’s Thoughts and Teachings. Manila: The

Spirit of 1896, 1961.

De Ocampo, Esteban. Rizal Cathechism. Manila: E.A de Ocampo, 1956.

Pascual, Ricardo. The Religion of Rizal. Quezon City: Philippine Historical Association,

1959.

Jasper, David. The Study of Literature and Religion, an Introduction second edition.

Macmillan Academic and Professional Ltd., 1989, 1992.

TeSelle, Sallie. Literature and the Christian Life. Yale University Press,1966.

Jurij, Lotman. The Structure of the Artistic Text. University of Michigan, 1977(English

Translation Copyright) .