Canberra City News: MWBro Derek Robson

The mysterious world of Freemason Derek Robson. [Photo by Silas Brown]

Freemason with secrets to share

[Canberra culture August 25, 2011 at 9:21 am] by Kathryn Vukovljak

ONCE a secret society of mysterious passwords, unexplained symbols and obscure handshakes, the Freemasons are now revealing what goes on behind closed doors, according to Derek Robson, the newly elected Grand Master of the Freemasons in NSW and ACT.“We encourage men to live an ethical life; it’s not something to be hidden away,” he says.

“We’ve been told by past Grand Masters to ‘dare to be different’ and that ‘Freemasonry is good – let’s talk about it’. I want to promote open discussion.”

Derek, a former Australian Navy officer and now national secretary of the RSL, was installed as Grand Master in early August, something he describes as a huge honour, particularly as he is keen to “break down the veil of secrecy” surrounding the ancient men’s organisation.“We’re a worldwide fraternity, and although we’ve been called a secret society over the years, it’s time to reverse that,” says Derek, who’s been a Freemason since 1978.


“It’s not a secret society; it’s a society with secrets. And there’s nothing wrong with having secrets. Everyone has a PIN number that they don’t tell anyone else. For us it’s part of the mystique of the craft.”

Secrets such as Masonic passwords and handshakes date from biblical times, Derek says, when stonemasons and skilled artisans with differing dialects would use certain words and handshakes to identify themselves.

“We also use stonemasons’ tools as a visual way to remind us how to live a better life,” he says.

“Members are encouraged to allocate time to work, family, the Lodge and charitable acts. It’s important that no one thing becomes dominant in our lives, which is why we have the 24-inch ruler as one of our ‘tools’ – it reminds us to plan the 24 hours in the day.

“I particularly like the mallet, which represents taking action.”

Derek says there is some crossover between his work at the RSL and Freemasons. “The core values of care and the welfare of others are similar,” he says.

The only subjects banned in the Lodge are religion and politics, says Derek, and this is to encourage camaraderie and togetherness, and to protect the individual views of members.

“While we suggest themes for behaviour, there are no specific answers and members are encouraged to interpret themes to suit their own beliefs and what they want from their lives,” he says.

Freemason meetings are very simple, Derek says, and usually start out with administrative issues. “We also take part in 300-year-old rituals that we have to memorise,” he says.

“Then we close with a light supper, chat, speeches and toasts. There’s always a social aspect.”

Derek says there’s been a resurgence in interest in the Freemasons of late.

“Happily, we have more young men joining now than we’ve had in decades,” he says. “Our well-worn philosophy is that we make good men better, and people are attracted to that way of life.

“Anyone interested can just ask questions – we’ve taken away the mystery.”

Reading Shaped Rizal’s Political Consciousness

By Bryan Anthony C. Paraiso

Philippine Daily Inquirer 6:03 pm
Sunday, June 12th, 2011

(Editor’s Note: The author is the shrine curator of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines.)

MANILA, Philippines – MANY Filipino heroes, like Andres Bonifacio and Apolinario Mabini, assiduously collected and read books and pamphlets. But Jose Rizal stands out as the foremost bibliophile, his interests ranging from the literary to the scientific.

Even as a three-year-old, according to his elder sister Narcisa, Rizal was determined to learn his alphabet from the cartilla, memorizing the letters and their pronunciation within a day. He was deeply indebted to his mother, Teodora Alonso, who taught him simple prayers, folk songs and nursery rhymes

As a student at the Ateneo Municipal, he wrote, “By this time I began to devote myself in my leisure hours to the reading of novels, though years before I had already read ‘El Último Abencerraje,’ but I didn’t read it with ardor. Imagine a boy of twelve years reading the ‘Count of Monte Cristo,’ enjoying the sustained dialogues, and delighting in its beauties and following step by step its hero in his revenge.”

Rizal wrote to Dr. Ferdinand Blumentritt on Nov. 8, 1888, “In my town of only 5,000 to 6,000 inhabitants, there are some six small private libraries. Ours is the largest, consisting of more than one thousand volumes; the smallest may have twenty or thirty. The Indio, in general, is very fond of reading and studying…”

During trips to Europe, Rizal frequented the bookshops of Antonio Rosés, Pedro Vindel, Fernando Fe, and Cuevas in Madrid, tracking down rare Spanish books that detailed preHispanic Filipino culture and other ethnographic materials.

Prized possessions

Noted historian Dr. Esteban de Ocampo indicated that, through these forays, the hero collected some 2,000 volumes. Rizal considered his collection important, and was angered by those who would steal his books: “Tell me if the book that was taken by a soldier had been returned already, and if not, what book it is. How good it is that while I economize money to buy books, anyone takes them away. You give me the temptation of buying everything in Germany with the certainty that there will be no lieutenant of the Civil Guard who understands them, but I will not do this for you, because you would not get any benefit…The books I have here are as many or more than what are there; see to it then that none will get lost, thanks that those gentlemen put up a library with involuntary donations.”

Unfortunately, Rizal’s valuable library, left in the care of his friend Jose Maria Basa in Hong Kong and sent back to the Philippines before World War II, was presumed to have been destroyed during the conflict.

In 1960, De Ocampo compiled a list of books and pamphlets collected by Rizal throughout his life. It appeared, from the list, that Rizal’s artistic and political preoccupations were shaped by the ideas and principles of Western thinkers.

Among the political theorists Rizal read was the British philosopher Herbert Spencer, whose atypical views on colonial reforms seemed to have been expounded in the hero’s second novel “El Filibusterismo.”

In “Man versus the State”, Spencer said, “In our days of active philanthropy, hosts of people eager to achieve benefits for their less fortunate fellows by the shortest methods, busily occupied in developing administrative arrangements of a kind proper to a lower type of society—are bringing about retrogression while aiming at progression. The normal difficulties in the way of advance are sufficiently great, and it is lamentable that they should be made greater. Hence, something well worth doing may be done, if philanthropists can be shown that they are in many cases insuring the future ill-being of men while eagerly pursuing their present well-being.”

Losing hope

Early on, Rizal was a firm advocate of assimilation with Spain through reforms. He gradually changed his views, as reflected in his letter to Blumentritt in June 1888: “I believe that it is already late; the majority of Filipinos have lost already the hope they have pinned on Spain! Now we await our fate from God and from ourselves, but never anymore from any Government!”

Consequently, in the Fili, published in 1891, Simon’s criticism of Basilio’s naïveté echoes Spencer’s trenchant remarks against colonial reforms: “You pool your efforts thinking to unite your country with rosy garlands and in reality you forge iron chains. You ask parity of rights, the Spanish way of life, and you do not realize that what you are asking is death, the destruction of your national identity, the disappearance of your homeland, the ratification of tyranny. . . What is to become of you? A people without a soul, a nation without freedom; everything in you will be borrowed, even your very defects. You ask for Hispanization and do not blush for shame when it is denied to you.”

The parallelism with Spencer’s views seemed to signify Rizal’s acceptance of the idea of an alternative form of governance for the Philippines, free from Spain’s “civilizing” involvement.

Though cautious, Rizal was not averse to the idea of revolution to effect extensive change. In June 1887, he said: “I can assure you that I have no desire to take part in conspiracies which seem to me too premature and risky. But if the government drives us to them, that is to say, when no other hope remains to us but to seek our destruction in war, when Filipinos would prefer to die rather than endure longer their misery, then I will also become a partisan of violent means.”

Getting ready

Rizal prepared for every possible event in the Philippines by reading and educating himself—from books on military history and strategy to politics, industry, and agriculture.

In April 1890, he wrote to Marcelo H. del Pilar: “I am assiduously studying the happenings in our country. I believe that nothing can redeem us except our brains: materialiter vel idealiter sumptum (materially or ideally considered). I still have faith in this belief of mine.”

Rizal’s passion for books contributed to the formation of his patriotic consciousness and, in due course, his literary voice as a political novelist.

Today, how many government officials have prepared for their leadership roles by educating themselves through books? With all the scandals besetting the country, perhaps they could learn from Rizal’s studiousness and selflessness: “…I do not aspire either for eternal fame or eternal renown; I do not aspire to equal others whose conditions, faculties, and circumstances could be and are in effect different from mine. My sole wish is to do what is possible, what is in my hands, the most necessary. I have glimpsed a little light and I believe that it is my duty to teach it to my countrymen.”

To know more about Rizal@150 and NHCP, visit www.nhcp.gov.ph.

Relevant by Conrado de Quiros

IT’S 10 days to Jose Rizal’s 150th birthday.

It’s customary during Rizal Day and other occasions that have to do with Rizal for speakers and writers to wrack their brains to find some way of relating him to our times. Or to (re)discover his relevance to today, as it is often put. This particular column is no exception. But I doubt if I’ll have to wrack my brains to do it.

The reason for that is that his relevance to today is more than obvious, it is ponderous. It leaps out at us. His times do not just hold echoes for ours, they parallel ours, in quite uncanny ways. Enough to make you wonder how far we’ve really gone from when Rizal was born.

Then there were the friars who were the fountainhead of wretched beliefs, which they spread in the name of religion. They were the ones who violently opposed the education of the indios on the ground that they would become too big for their breeches. They particularly reserved their scorn for those who went abroad in search of it (the indios bravos), deeming them to be potential polluters of the public mind when they came home.
Though a Catholic, Rizal was also a Mason, and subscribed to its philosophy of humanism and rationalism. Much as Martin Luther railed against the priests and bishops of his time, who distinguished themselves more for vice than for virtue, Rizal railed against the friars of his time, who distinguished themselves more for heathen cruelty than Christian charity.

Today there are the priests and bishops who are the fountainhead of wretched beliefs, which they spread in the name of religion. They are the ones who violently oppose any form of contraception on the ground that God wants people to overpopulate the planet. They particularly reserve their scorn for the President whom they regard as lesser than her mother for being a little less subservient to the Church, deeming him deserving of excommunication if he doesn’t mend his ways.

Can Rizal’s relevance in this respect be so hard to see? Now as then we are compelled to rail against those who do not see the immorality of defending electoral fraud but see the morality of encouraging people to produce more mouths than they can possibly feed. Fortunately, we don’t have to be Masons to do that today, for we live in more enlightened times. Or do we?

Then there was corruption of epic proportions in government. The governor generals did not particularly relish the idea of being shipped off to this godforsaken place and spent their tenure amassing as much wealth as they could with which to retire comfortably back home. There were exceptions, those who were reform-minded, but they were few and far between.

Since the governor generals had to be audited before they left the colony at the end of their terms, they had to amass enough to bribe the auditors, or oidores, with while leaving themselves with enough to make up for their pains. The only limit to plunder was a scale sufficient to stoke the overtaxed indios to rebelliousness. Malasakit, or concern, for the welfare of the ruled was virtually nonexistent, the rule for the most part being for the rulers to make hay while the sun shone.

Rizal believed that given the opportunity, or the reins of government, the indios would prove themselves better rulers. Contrary to what the Spaniards propagated, which was that the indios were naturally inferior, it was in their genes, Rizal advocated that all that was the product of history, specifically colonial rule, and with education, there were no limits to what they could do.

Today Filipinos have gotten educated, quite apart from independent, and have taken over government. But our rulers continue to look upon their tenure not unlike the way the Spanish governor generals did theirs: as an opportunity to make hay while the sun shines, the presidential term in particular being fixed to only one term. Malasakit, or concern, for the country has been on long-term leave, if not permanently absent, the country having experienced mind-boggling corruption particularly during the despotic rules of Ferdinand Marcos and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and the brief, but benighted, one of Joseph Estrada. Which has left it biting the dust of its neighbors. Enough to make you wonder if it’s really in our genes.

Then there was a handful of ilustrados who were not really illustrious, who dreamed only of becoming part of Spanish society at home or in Spain, and a teeming mass of Filipinos who dreamed only of their rulers becoming a little kinder, there was no future other than under Spanish yoke. There was no sense of country simply because there was no country to begin with, there was only a colony. Rizal himself would not postulate an independent Philippines—it was left to Bonifacio to do that. But he had a strong sense of a separate people, with its own identity and destiny.

Today there is a handful of intelligentsia who are not really intelligent, who dream only of becoming part of American society at home or in America, and a teeming mass of Filipinos who dream only of finding work abroad, there’s precious little future other than under the heel of poverty. Filipinos in general have no sense of country even though they have a country called the Philippines, one that once showed the most tremendous promise. The rulers themselves cannot postulate independence, the essence of their foreign policy being the protection of American, and not Philippine, interests. It has been left to the youth, many of whom have been killed for being communists, subversives and seditious elements, to insist that we are a separate people, who can forge our own destiny if we put our mind, and soul, to it.

One hundred and fifty years after he was born, Rizal remains as relevant as ever.

[Appeared on C de Quiros' Philippine Daily Inquirer column: There's the rub, June 9, 2011]

TIVOLI 2011: 7 April

Tivoli 2011 - to support masoniCare's Flood Victims Appeal


Lodge Thespian & masoniCare invite you to attend Tivoli 2011 to be held on Thursday, April 7 at the Sydney Masonic Centre from 6.30pm.

Tickets are $40 per person which includes a complimentary drink on arrival.

Tivoli 2011 will raise money for the masoniCare Flood Victims Appeal and will feature a fantastic line-up of entertainers.

Rizal in Dapitan

by Manuel L. Quezon III

(from an article, 1996)

The following extract is taken from Luis Serrano’s translation (from Tagalog) of the “controversial” memoirs of Dr. Pio Valenzuela, recounting the conversation he had, as emissary of the Katipunan, with Rizal on June 21, 1896, at Dapitan. Valenzuela’s memoirs conflict with the testimony he gave on October 6, 1896, when he was captured and interrogated by the Spaniards, in which he said Rizal vehemently refused to have anything to do with the Katipunan or a revolution. But his memoirs, and testimony he gave at court (he was cross-examined by Vicente Sotto, who had been sued for libel by a former Katipunero) in 1917, after the Spanish era, said that Rizal really favored a revolution but not just yet; some historians explain the discrepancy as Valenuela’s attempt to not implicate Rizal after his capture. The Rizal in Valenzuela’s memoirs is the Rizal I choose to admire.

Rizal: You have to use all precautions to prevent the discovery of the association.

Valenzuela: And if the precautions fail?

R: You, the principal chiefs, must see that the resolutions of the Katipunan are faithfully complied with; you are duty-bound to avail yourselves of all means to prevent the shedding of blood. When the generals do not command, the soldiers stay still.

V: The case of the Katipunan is different; if the generals do not give orders, the soldiers will order the soldiers. If the Katipunan is discovered, the revolution will inevitably break out…

R: Does the association count with its membership many persons in high society in Manila and in the provinces?

V: Unfortunately, no; in Manila and the provinces, there are about a hundred from the middle class; the rest are poor.

R: There is no other remedy but to attract to your association all the rich and influential persons of Manila and the provinces. You may also avail yourselves of Antonio Luna who is a very intelligent man, and who has free access to the homes of wealthy Filipinos. Luna, at the same time, can direct the campaign in case hostilities break out.

V: What shall we do if we fail to attract these aristocratic people to the Katipunan?

R: These Filipinos will be your worst enemies if you commit the imprudence of attacking the Spaniards without the necessary preparation. When they see you without arms, they will go over to the side of Spain and persecute you; and being Filipinos and rich too, they will win over your soldiers with their money.

V: And what are we to do then?

R: See to it that these persons are at least neutral -that they help neither the Spaniards nor the Filipinos.

V: Neutrals (sic)? By what means can we make them neutrals?

R: That is difficult to answer now. The means are born of circumstances and events…

The doctor invited me to talk on the beach, and upon arriving at a certain place he pointed to a spot in the sea where the boat to take him to a foreign land may drop anchor. Later, we returned to his house and during the walk the following conversation took place between us:

Rizal: Tell our countrymen that, at the same time that we are preparing for a war against Spain, I desire to see college established in Japan which will be converted later into a university for Filipino youths. I shall be greatly pleased to be the director of said college.

Valenzuela: I shall bear in mind all what you say and counsel, but I believe you would rather direct the revolution than manage the college.

R: I am ready for both.

V: As soon as we have arms and munitions we shall try to take you out of Dapitan before the revolution starts in order that the Spaniards may not get to you and shoot you.

R: As soon as you obtain arms, start the war against Spain right away; do not bother about me for I will know how to get out of here by any craft with the help of the Moros. When it comes to the redemption of the country, you must not look behind for just one man.

V: If the revolution breaks out before schedule and you are still in Dapitan, the Spaniards will hold you and have you shot.

R: To die and conquer is pleasant; but to die and be conquered is painful.

This is a Rizal far different from the one a Fr. Alfeo Nudas, S.J. chooses to proclaim as great; the Rizal who wrote, from prison, that “I have recommended study and the civic virtues, without which no redemption is possible. I have also written… that reforms, if they are to bear fruit, must come from above, for reforms that come from below are upheavals both violent and transitory… I cannot do less but condemn, as I do condemn, this ridiculous and barbarous uprising, plotted behind my back, which both dishonors us Filipinos and discredits those who might have taken our part. I abominate the crimes for which it is responsible and will have no part in it. With all my heart I am sorry for those who have rashly allowed themselves to be deceived. Let them, then, return to their homes, and may God pardon those who have acted in bad faith.”

And yet the Spaniards, as Fr. de la Costa (another Jesuit) once wrote, refused to release this “reasoned” condemnation of the revolution on the grounds that (as the Spanish Judge Advocate General commented) “Dr. Jose Rizal limits himself to criticizing the present insurrectionary movement as premature… as far as Rizal is concerned, the whole question is one of opportunity, not of principles and objectives… a message of this sort, far from promoting peace, is likely to stimulate for the future the spirit of rebellion.”

An individual’s choice of heroes, one’s decision to admire -and venerate- a particular character out of the past, says a lot about that person. What is even more interesting is that one’s choice of which particular facets to emulate in a hero -and, people being what they are, which facets to suppress or simply gloss over, since they are incompatible with one’s preconceptions, biases, or goals- reveals a great deal, too.

But reveals nothing about the true nature of the hero.

“I do not mean to say that our freedom must be won at the point of the sword. The sword now counts for very little in the destinies of our time, but do I say that we must win our freedom by deserving it, by improving the mind and enhancing the dignity of the individual loving what is just, what is good, what is great to the point of dying for it. When a people reach these heights, God provides the weapon, and the idols and the tyrants fall, like a house of cards, and freedom shines in the first dawn.” — Jose Rizal, FILI (1891)

Lodge Jose Rizal Installation (13 November 2010)

By RWBro Bruce Quirk [reposted from District 32 website]

With large numbers expected, the members of Lodge Jose’ Rizal took great care in setting up the Festive Board at the Castle Hill Masonic Centre to achieve maximum capacity and their expectations were realized when all of the one hundred and sixty places set out were filled for the First Installation Ceremony and Banquet of Lodge Jose’ Rizal where VW Bro Emmanuel [Manny] Maniago was to Install VW Bro Fidencio [Fidel] Pamplona as Worshipful Master of this young and vibrant Lodge, Lodge Jose’ Rizal No 1045. 

The members and their wives arrived early on the Saturday afternoon to complete the final touches of the festive board and organize the food and as the hour approached the Centre became a flurry of activity and excited chatter as more, more, and still more arrived to both witness, take part in, and enjoy the first Installation Ceremony of Lodge Jose’ Rizal.  

The Lodge tyled at 6pm sharp and after the usual business was dispatched, all visitors were admitted including many large Faternals including a very large delegation from ‘The Cedars’ who have been keen supporters of Lodge Rose’ Rizal since it’s concept. As the Lodge was raised to the Third Degree, the Entered Apprentices and Fellow Crafts were respectively retired, many of which were members of Lodge Horizons and all were greeted and became acquainted with the RGC for Region Three, RW Bro Nigel Hamilton. At the same time, a large contingent of  Grand Lodge Officers were assembling under the care and direction of The Grand Director of Ceremonies, VW Bro Antoine Georges, who was assisted by VW Bro Peter Miller, Grand Steward. As seven o’clock approached and a photo opportunity taken, the Grand Lodge Delegation assembled and after an alarm was sounded and duly responded to, the Grand Lodge Delegation was led into the Lodge Room by The Grand Director VW Bro Georges, headed by MW Bro Raymond Barry Brooke PGM and all were warmly received by the Installing Master VW Bro Manny Maniago. 

With the Grand Lodge Officers seated and made comfortable and notice papers distributed, the officers of the Lodge divested themselves of their insignia of office and all Master Masons were retired and the ceremony of Installation began, commencing with the second presentation of the Worshipful Master Elect, by his sponsors W Bro Jacinto 'Jack'  Sta Maria and W Bro Rolando 'Rolly' Manarang.

The ceremony that followed was a joy to watch and a pleasure to listen to as the age old ceremony of Installation unfolded and soon VW Bro Fidel Pamplona became The Worshipful Master of Lodge Jose’ Rizal No 1045 at Lodge Jose’ Rizal’s first Installation ceremony.  

Before the Lodge was closed in the Third Degree, the usual announcements and proclamations were given in the South, the Herald on the night being W Bro Duncan Muir. The Third Working Tools were delivered by Bro Alfredo 'Fred' Sese and in resuming in the Second Degree, all fellow crafts were re admitted, an entered apprentice almost slipping by unnoticed but was quickly retired and after the usual announcements and proclamations given in the West the second Working Tools were presented by Bro Manuel 'Manny' Santos. The Lodge was closed in the second degree and the Lodge was resumed in the First Degree and all Masons were admitted and after the announcements and fanfare in the South the First Degree working tools were presented by Bro Israel 'Izzy'  de Guzman. A beautiful rendition of ‘What a Wonderful World’ was then sung by Bro Edward Banting which, on completion, drew loud acclamation from all in the Lodge Room. The presentation of the Warrant or Charter, the book of Constitutions and the By Laws as well as the codifications and decisions of the ritual committee was then presented before the new Worshipful Master of Lodge Jose’ Rizal invested his Officers for the ensuing year. The three closing addresses were then given, The Address to The Master delivered by Bro Micvi 'Mick' Fidel, the address to the Wardens, by Bro Antonio 'Tony' Saputil, and the address to the Brethren by W Bro Rolando 'Rolly' Manarang, and in closing the ceremony, a beautiful rendition of Amazing Grace was sung by Bro Daniel Vincent Placido. The Installing Master VW Bro Maniago then, with some reluctance, told the newly installed Master VW Bro Pamplona that the ceremony of Installation was complete and in handing him the keys of the Castle Hill Masonic Centre told him that Lodge Jose’ Rizal was now under his complete control. 

 VW Bro Pamplona immediately gave welcome to the Representative of The United Grand Lodge of New South Wales and the ACT and in response Most Worshipful Brother Raymond Barry Brooke related the long association he had had with both the Newly Installed Master and the Installing Master during his term as The Most Worshipful Grand Master, where they had traveled together all over the State to attend the wide and varied Lodge Functions including Lodge Dedications, Balls, the laying of Foundation Stones Installations and many more. MW Bro Brooke then asked the Grand Director to present Bros Mario Baylon Jnr. Jose’ Elizes, and Robert Maneze and duly presented them with their Master Mason’s Certificates [affiliation certificates]. Before retiring from the Lodge Room MW Bro Brooke gave an enlightening and inspiring address which motivated many of the Brethren present into trying harder to achieve greater. MW Bro Brooke then indicated his desire to retire and both he and the Grand Lodge Delegation left the Lodge Room to disrobe and to join the Ladies and were soon joined by the Brethren from the Lodge Room. 

Somehow one hundred and sixty found a seat and sat down for the Installation Banquet in a Banquet hall that eighty was the recognized maximum number and soon all were enjoying beautiful food prepared with great care and expertise by the Ladies and in response to the toast to the United Grand Lodge of New South Wales and the ACT. MW Bro Brooke gave recognition to the vigor and success of Lodge Jose’ Rizal in it’s short term of existence and in wishing them well, complimented them on their twenty five percent increase in numbers. In proposing the toast to The Worshipful Master and his Officers, in closing W Bro Ronaldo Manarang recited these words of great wisdom --- ‘Learn from Yesterday, Live for to-day and Dream of Tomorrow’, and said how proud he was to be the one who initiated the Newly Re Installed Master some years ago and he wished them well. In response to the toast to the Ladies and visitors proposed by W Bro Russell Dobson, and the Worshipful Master of Lodge Woronora, W Bro Luis 'Louie' Reyes.

The hour was late when the Junior Warden's toast was given but no one cared as all had had shared a thoroughly enjoyable evening with a thriving Lodge that is really going forward, carried by good officers, supported by keen members and have the unceasing devotion of their Ladies, may it long continue and be an example for all Lodges to take heed.     

http://www.masonicregions.org.au/page28302734.aspx

Renato Constantino’s false choices

Newsstand column by John Nery
Philippine Daily Inquirer  [First Posted 04:40:00 06/15/2010]


The classic critique of Rizal, whose 149th birthday we mark on Saturday, has itself become venerable. Renato Constantino’s “Veneration without Understanding” was the astounding Rizal Day Lecture of 1969, over 40 years ago. In my view, it does not fare as well as any of Rizal’s key writings. But it continues to be a popular read, and is sometimes used to punctuate, or even stop, a discussion. Everything that a genuine nationalist ought to know about Rizal, I can remember a friend saying, is in Constantino.


What, exactly, did Constantino say, in the courageous, cobweb-clearing lecture that perhaps best reflects his approach to history? He says Filipinos who hold Rizal up as the ideal hero do not understand that he was, in truth, a counter-revolutionary—and therefore insufficiently nationalistic. “Rizal repudiated the one act which really synthesized our nationalist aspiration, and yet we consider him a nationalist leader.” That “one act” is the revolution of 1896.

In rereading Constantino’s “Veneration” yet again, however, I found myself struck by the profusion of false choices he presents to the reader (or the shell-shocked member of his original audience). His critique is based, not only on a Marxist reading of history and nationalism (for instance: “The exposure of his weaknesses and limitations will also mean our liberation, for he has, to a certain extent become part of the superstructure that supports present consciousness”) but also, and tellingly, on a rhetoric of false dichotomies.

A Marxist reading of Rizal is not necessarily impossible; E. San Juan Jr. has written incisively on Rizal’s writings from just such a perspective. For instance, in his post-2001 riposte to Constantino entitled “Understanding Rizal without Veneration,” San Juan wrote: “As I have tried to argue in previous essays, Rizal displayed an astute dialectical materialist sensibility. One revealing example of concrete geopolitical analysis is the short piece on Madrid and its milieu excerpted in Palma’s ‘The Pride of the Malay Race’ (pp. 60-62).” (I took a peek at the previously unpublished piece, originally written in French, in the Ozaeta translation; it is an intriguing read.)

But an argument anchored on false choices is not only deceiving; it fosters a new misunderstanding. In 1969 (and again in 1979, when he published the lecture as one chapter in “Dissent and Counter-Consciousness”), Constantino may have been moved by a genuine desire to offer a corrective to the hero-worship of Rizal. But a corrective based on false logic can work only if it itself is based on false consciousness; in other words, if a reader or an auditor did not know any better.

Right at the start, “Veneration” offers a false choice between revolutionary leader and national hero. “In the histories of many nations, the national revolution represents a peak of achievement,” Constantino writes. “It is not to be wondered at, therefore, that almost always the leader of that revolution becomes the principal hero of his people.” He then offers mostly martial examples: Washington, Lenin (writing in 2010, I am tempted to ask, of the Soviet what?), Bolivar, Sun Yat-sen, Mao, Ho Chi Minh. But if we take a closer look at his phrasing, we find that he has in fact qualified his sweeping statement: thus, “many nations,” not all; “almost always,” not always. If he admits exceptions, then his starting assumption that a country’s “principal hero” is the leader that scaled the peak of that revolutionary achievement is not exceptional. In other words, if there are exceptions to this apparent rule, why take Rizal to task for being yet another exception?

It seems to me that the rhetorical objective of this first false choice is to imply that the Philippines, by choosing Rizal as its preeminent hero, is less of a nation. “In our case, our national hero was not the leader of our Revolution. In fact, he repudiated that Revolution.”

Constantino’s main proof for this repudiation is the famous Manifesto of Dec. 15, 1896, which Rizal prepared as part of his legal defense. (It was actually written five days before, Rizal scholar Floro Quibuyen reminds us in “A Nation Aborted.”) It is a controversial read, because as foremost Rizal biographer Leon Ma. Guerrero has noted, apropos of the Manifesto, “There can be no argument that he was against Bonifacio’s Revolution.” But again the nationalist historian offers us a false choice: Either Rizal was for the revolution, or his words “were treasonous in the light of the Filipinos’ struggle against Spain.”

But in fact there was a third alternative. The Judge Advocate General refused to publish the Manifesto, which would surely have been read by the revolutionaries, because Rizal “limits himself to condemning the present rebellious movement as premature and because he considers its success impossible at this time, but suggesting between the lines that the independence dreamed of can be achieved. For Rizal it is a question of opportunity, not of principles or objectives. His manifesto can be condensed into these words: ‘Faced with the proofs of defeat, lay down your arms, my countrymen; I shall lead you to the Promised Land on a later day’.” (Guerrero’s translation)

This reading of Rizal’s statement from the Spanish perspective, which Constantino did not acknowledge or advert to in his lecture, shows the fundamental flaw behind his historical approach. In using “historical forces unleashed by social development” to situate Rizal’s “treason”, he fails to reckon with the actual, life-or-death context in which Rizal wrote. Indeed, he fails to see Rizal the way the revolutionaries themselves, beginning with Bonifacio, saw him. Shouldn’t their understanding serve as the standard for ours?