Download Life and Works of Rizal and more Summaries Contemporary History in PDF only on Docsity!
RA 1425 - The Rizal Law
● Enacted in 1956, RA 1425 mandates the inclusion of José Rizal’s Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo in the curriculum of all public and private schools, colleges, and universities in the Philippines. ● Aims to promote patriotism, nationalism, and appreciation of Rizal’s contributions to Philippine history. ● Declares Rizal’s life and works as a source of inspiration for national unity and identity.
SB 438 - The Original Proposed Rizal Law by Sen. Claro M. Recto
● Proposed in 1950, SB 438 was stricter than RA 1425. ● Required the unexpurgated versions of Rizal’s Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo to be used as textbooks, ensuring that students read them as they were originally written, without modifications or omissions. ● Authored by Senator Claro M. Recto, a nationalist who emphasized the importance of Rizal’s writings in shaping critical thinking and a deeper understanding of colonial history.
1. Key Arguments of Stakeholders
A. Opposition Senators
● Claimed the bill undermined academic freedom by dictating specific texts for schools. ● Argued it might create religious discord, as Rizal’s works criticized the clergy and the Roman Catholic Church. ● Feared it might provoke backlash from Catholic voters.
B. Supported Senators
● Advocated for the inclusion of Rizal’s works to instill nationalism and pride in Filipino heritage. ● Emphasized the relevance of Rizal’s critiques of colonialism and oppression to understanding current socio-political issues. ● Highlighted Rizal as a symbol of resistance and reform.
C. Roman Catholic Opposition
● Strongly resisted the original version, claiming that Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo attacked Catholic doctrines and portrayed priests in a negative light. ● Feared the texts might lead to a decline in Catholic faith among Filipino youth. ● Campaigned for the exclusion of Rizal’s writings or for their expurgation (removal of “offensive” passages).
To Prevent a Senate Crisis: Sen. Laurel’s Revised Version
● To appease opposition and avoid a legislative deadlock, Senator José P. Laurel crafted a compromise: ● Allowed the use of expurgated versions in schools (removing offensive passages against the Catholic Church). ● Made the reading of Rizal’s works optional for students whose faith might be “disturbed,” granting exemptions upon written parental request. ● The revised version struck a balance, preserving the intent of fostering patriotism while respecting religious sensitivities.
- Differences and Similarities Between SB 438 and RA 1425
Differences :
- Text Versions:
● SB 438: Mandated unexpurgated versions of Rizal’s novels. ● RA 1425: Allowed for expurgated versions to be used in some cases.
- Flexibility:
● SB 438: Strictly required the novels to be taught. ● RA 1425: Provided exemptions for students with religious concerns.
- Focus:
● SB 438: Solely emphasized the novels. ● RA 1425: Broadened to include Rizal’s life and other works.
Similarities :
● Both aimed to instill patriotism and promote awareness of Rizal’s contributions. ● Both sought to integrate Rizal’s ideas and values into the education system.
1. Introduction to RA 1425 and SB 438
● RA 1425, known as the Rizal Law, mandates the teaching of Rizal’s life, works, and writings, especially Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, in all schools in the Philippines. ● SB 438, the original proposed Rizal Law authored by Sen. Claro M. Recto in 1950, required the unexpurgated versions of Rizal’s novels to be taught. ● Both aimed to instill nationalism, patriotism, and awareness of Rizal’s contributions to the fight against colonialism.
2. Arguments of Stakeholders
● The Rizal Law remains a cornerstone of education in the Philippines, fostering critical thinking and national pride. ● It balances the promotion of nationalism with respect for religious freedom and diversity.
6. Reflection and Modern Relevance
● Discuss how Rizal’s works inspire resistance against oppression and the importance of historical awareness in addressing present-day issues. ● Share your personal perspective: “Do you think the compromise weakened or strengthened the law’s impact?”
