The Life and Works of Jose Rizal

Metacognitive Reading Report # 1

Name: James Brian R. Ventura Date: May 26, 2019

1. Three (3) Things that I significantly learned from the readings

Firstly, I wasn’t aware of who authored the Rizal Law, I simply knew that it simply
existed for the sake of keeping his legacy alive for future generations. And little did I know
that there was a deeper story before it actually got implemented today. I discovered that it
was condemned by the Catholic church because of how Rizal portrayed friars in hos novels.
This was significant to me because it is indeed controversial in the sense that Rizal wanted
to expose how some members of the church abused their power and authority to the
common folk. It entailed the hypocrisy of the teachings and doctrines they try to instill to
the people. Until now, there are still cases of that nature and it reminds all of us that ideals
are only as good as they spoken, it is the actions themselves that truly show the nature of
principles and other established concepts of morality.

The second thing that I learned is how important this course of action was taken by Senator
Recto. His intent of having the Rizal bill passed in congress, it has definitely opened a
series of debates and questioning regarding the integrity of the bill. There was a bold
opposition by the Catholic Church, proclaiming that there was a significant amount of
hearsay directed towards them in Rizal’s works. Although it is quite understandable that
the church was attacked in a figurative sense, but it doesn’t completely match the literal
and physical damages of the abused victims. Rizal’s intent was to expose the wrongdoings
of those who are in power, I realized that it was only done to denounce inequality and
injustice in the religion’s hierarchy at that time. I believe that he was simply trying to
emancipate the collective consciousness of the people from the manipulative abusers
during that time.

And lastly, I learned that words are very powerful. It could either mend a broken soul, or
provoke opposition. In this context, Rizal has clearly done both. He inspired his nation to
become more patriotic and loyal to our homeland, but with that arose the ire of those who
have been completely hit by the figurative ammunition of his words.

2. Three (3) Things that are still unclear to me

It was still unclear to me as to what exactly Rizal meant behind this phrase that was
mentioned by Cavanna in one of his arguments, “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” ([Philippine Hierarchy] 1956, 4 par. 6).

Another is how confusing it would be if other members of the church were to read the
entire scope of Rizal’s novels, because if an abridged version were to exist only one side
of the story would be understood.

The arguments made by the opposing representatives of the church were quite inconsistent
and confusing for me, it somehow incited hypocrisy and denial.

3. I used to think that….

Having the Rizal Law imposed was simply to have the youth learn about the works of Rizal
and his life story. But that is absolutely not the case. The context behind his works
transcends to the civic consciousness of Filipinos. It’s not about him, but rather it shows
how important it is to look after our homeland. The stories he wrote are merely instruments
to amplify the self-discovery of his readers and take that new-found spirit of patriotism into
 doing something significant for the country. His works epitomize the reflection of the life
of Filipinos back then, raw and unfiltered, which is why it was controversial for everyone
especially to the Catholic church.

4. Three (3) questions that I want to ask about the readings

In correlation to the things that have left me a vague impression, these questions arose from
my mind:

1.) If the church was so determined to have the bill dispelled, what would they do if
members were to participate in reading the full context of Rizal’s works for the sake of
education and enlightenment?
2.) And were there any further arguments that supported this during the trial of this bill?
3.) What would’ve been the impact to society if the bill wasn’t ultimately approved in
congress?