1

Daza, Lindsay Mae D. Reflection Paper

“Veneration Without Understanding” by Renato Constantino

The article Veneration Without Understanding by Renato Constantino is all about doubts
and arguments about what a real hero possesses and mostly Rizal’s status as the national hero
of the Filipino people. Prof. Renato Constantino discussed bravely to disclose the real Rizal and
the truth of his heroism correcting the shallow minds of other historians. The author manifests a
fair understanding, a combination of knowledge in our history and some other achievements or
failures made by Rizal. With a clear point in questioning Rizal’s credibility as the National Hero of
our country. These are some that I would like to highlight from the article:

“The Philippine Revolution has always been overshadowed by the omnipresent figure and
the towering reputation of Rizal. Because Rizal took no part in that Revolution and in fact
repudiated it, the general regard for our Revolution is not as high as it otherwise would be. On
the other hand, because we refuse to analyze the significance of his repudiation, our
understanding of Rizal and of his role in our national development remains superficial. This is a
disservice to the event, to the man, and to
ourselves.”

“We have magnified Rizal’s significance for too long. It is time to examine his limitations
and profit from his weaknesses just as we have learned from the strength of his character and his
virtues. His weaknesses were the weaknesses of his society. His wavering and his repudiation of
mass action should be studied as a product of the society that nurtured him.”

“The public image that the American desired for a Filipino national hero was quite clear.
They favored a hero who would not run against the grain of American colonial policy. We must
take these acts of the Americans in furtherance of a Rizal cult in the light of their initial policies
which required the passage of the Sedition Law prohibiting the display of the Filipino flag. The
heroes who advocated independence were therefore ignored. For to have encouraged a
 2

movement to revere Bonifacio or Mabini would not have been consistent with American colonial
policy.”

But the article can’t be thoroughly certain of the absolute truth of the past. For some truths
we read from the book, some are from articles and some we heard from our ancestors but there
will always be a hole and missing somewhere in the story that can never be filled. Same goes to
the information we know about our proclaimed national hero, Dr. Jose P. Rizal. Therefore, I am
opposing from the article.

For the article may spilled some facts but I and other Filipinos can think of hundred
reasons why Rizal deserved to have the title of being a National Hero. Rizal never had a chance
to explain or clear his name from the issues thrown at him. Just like all of us, Rizal is a person
that can have a hole or part that is questionable for everyone. And despite the struggles, barriers,
and obstacles. Rizal had his own goal. And every man seeks it in different ways. The article
seeks it, that our national hero was not the leader of our Revolution. And my reflection paper
opposes to it.

Historians cannot deny that Rizal played a major part in the country’s struggle for reforms
and independence. His writings, particularly the Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo were
viewed as the guiding force for other patriots to rally for the country’s freedom. While mostly
believed that Rizal dedicated his life and labor for the cause of the revolution and venerated him
to a certain extent. Rizal had other nationalistic interests such as the reform. He aspired for a
peaceful revolution that could be achieved through the sociopolitical and cultural transformation
of all Filipinos. That attitude was deeply rooted in his patriotism, for he wrote “… love of country is
never effaced once it has penetrated the heart, because it carries with it a divine stamp which
renders it eternal and imperishable … Of all loves, that of country is the greatest, the most heroic.

This is also the history that has been taught to us. “Pen is mightier than the sword”. For
Rizal, violence or armed revolution only as a last resort and considered the restoration of the
people’s dignity as a justification means of achieving national liberation and self-rule. On the
other hand, Filipinos are also grateful to Andres Bonifacio’s legacy, his advocacy and leadership
to an armed revolution.
 3

Rizal’s weakness for this matter was his failure to fully understand his people. I guess
that this is the point of Prof. Renato maybe Rizal played so much for independence but he
declined the revolution. Reading other sources Rizal did opposed it but he thinks that repudiating
the revolution because reforms had higher chance to be successful and should come from
above. Not to degrade both of their decisions, it just so wrong to decline Rizal as our National
Hero because of his agenda and thinking. Rizal’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.

It is us, who Constantino has been talking about in his title, people who are used to adore
Rizal until they have understood the true essence of being a national hero.

“Rizal was NOT an actual leader of the Philippine Revolution” does it written in the criteria
for the National hero to be a leader of a revolution? When we research the word “National Hero”
here in the Philippines here are the summarized criteria:

A hero is a person who is admired and acknowledged for their courage, outstanding
achievements, and noble qualities; and who has had a transformative effect on Philippines. A
National Hero is someone who has made significant positive contributions to the growth and
development of society, and represents all of us.

Both the revolution and writings of Rizal helped our way out to achieve freedom. Rizal
didn’t want to risk the people who are involved in a battle that they don’t have a chance of
winning. I admire Bonifacio and other men involved in the revolution for their braveness to stand
up against the Spaniards to attain our freedom.

“American favored a hero who would not run against the grain of American colonial
policy.” Whom to blame for this? Why would this be included in Constantino’s article. Filipinos
chose him (Rizal) a model hero over other contestants— “Aguinaldo too militant, Bonifacio too
radical, Mabini unregenerate.” Filipino’s chose him. It was the Filipinos and not the
Americans who first chose Rizal as their national hero. It was revolutionary President
 4

Emilio Aguinaldo of the First Philippine Republic—not Taft and the Second Philippine
Commission—who first designated Rizal. “ (Inquirer, 2021)

We just can’t attack Rizal from that point of view, People voted for him despite of his
weaknesses. People are aware of Rizal, Aguinaldo, Bonifacio and Mabini. And in their eyes
Rizal outstands other candidates for National hero.

Americans are fond of Aguinaldo too, but since Rizal started as reformist that makes Constantino
doubt. Clarifying that doubt, at first reformist advocated the elevation of Filipinos from the status
of subjects to citizens of Spain, with equal rights. But when he realizes he is not getting the
justice, he took a leave and write novels. Discussing the tyranny of Spaniards. Clearly, he fought
against the Spaniards, those who claim that Rizal was trying to flee from involvement in the
revolution.” Can be answered by this “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.” (Inquirer,2021).

Rizal’s way of protesting against Spaniards may not be a way for him to declare as
national hero. According to what I have read, the National Commission for Culture and the Arts,
there is no proclamation, executive order or law that has been passed by any Filipino historical
figure that he is a national hero. It was also stated that December 30, 1898 was the day of
national mourning honoring Jose Rizal and also the other Filipino victims of Philippine
Revolution. Though Rizal’s achievements can also be a factor in considering as national hero,
some fellow Filipinos also deserve to be recognized as well. The National Commission for
Culture and Arts also stated that “Even Jose Rizal, considered as the greatest among the Filipino
heroes, was not explicitly proclaimed as a national hero. The position he now holds in Philippine
history is a tribute to the continued veneration or acclamation of the people in recognition of his
contribution to the significant social transformation that took place in our country,” This statement
shows the equality among other Filipinos that fought for our country a long time ago. It just shows
that even though Rizal’s contributions have a great impact in Philippine history, they should not
forget that there also other reasons or factors to consider in declaring a National Hero.
 5

Rizal’s intellectual excellence deserved the way for the winning of the name for the
natives of the land and the title “National Hero”. The article must not blame Rizal for being the
Philippine national hero because they are not in the position of Dr. Jose Rizal who thought of
changing the lives of the Filipinos and it lacks that leaves so many questionable points. Rizal
never thought of the consequence but instead, he continued to fight because he trusts himself
that he could make a change out of his intelligence and his pen.

What Rizal’s main purpose is for liberty, without abuses, the country was a peaceful
country and all are working for the purpose of country’s progress and not the independence
which means to stand as one country.

Constantino mention of how we are blinded by our adoration of how great Rizal and a
martyr because he died for our country through execution by the Spaniards. He sees it as a
problem while most of us sees pride, a fight and dies for something much better than
impermanent grandness. A bloodshed without viewpoint.

I have noticed that the article is powerful. First off, the readers are reminded that everybody
ought to have a resilient and deep understanding of what characteristics make a true hero.
Second, Filipinos should have a more profound sense and level of comprehension in deciding a
genuine hero. Lastly, everybody can be a hero in light of the fact that Rizal should not be the
main premise of deciding the Philippine national objectives. I just can’t agree the way it degrades
Rizal and the writer passed on to the readers the thoughts of Rizal as an American supported
hero.
 6

REFERENCES:

Constantino, Renato. “Veneration without Understanding.” Journal of Contemporary Asia, vol. 1,

Contributor, Manuel F. Almario. “Rizal: 'Amboy' or Home-Made Hero?” INQUIRER.net, 31 Dec.

Contributor, Manuel F. Almario. “Rizal: 'Amboy' or Home-Made Hero?” INQUIRER.net, 31 Dec.