12 October 1892

Manila
From: Fr. Pablo Pastells
To: Jose Rizal

Father Pastells goes into lengthy philosophic-religious disquisitions – Sends him a booklet, Contemptus Mundi – Reminds him of his Ateneo days at Manila.

* * *

Manila, 12 October 1892
DR. JOSE RIZAL

MY MOST BELOVED IN CHRIST DON JOSE,

I received your very affectionate letter of 1st September last. In it I admired the brilliant endowments of you privileged genius and the adorned phrases that naturally slide from your correct and well-made pen; yet I could not help but exclaim upon reading it: What a pity that such an excellent young man had not lavished his talents on the defense of better causes! How much better it would have been for him to have imitated the skillful polemicist Sarda, spreading among his compatriots the lofty redeeming ideas of the Catholic religion, the only true religion, and of the only legitimate Mother Country of the Philippine Archipelago, the noble Spain! . . . Oh, and how the precious natural faculties of my dear friend would have gone up in weight had he supported such doctrines in the Noli me tangere, El Filibusterismo, and his Anotaciones a la Historia de Morga, and his other writings!

Then jure meritoque[1] for his works Rizal would have achieved immortal laurels and his name would have been borne on the wings of fame throughout the world and extolled by good men and his memory blessed by future generations. However, unfortunately for us and to the greatest detriment of the good cause, this holy coffer fell into the Philistines, as another man would say, and he has not been rescued yet.

There was a critical period in the story of his youth that decided his departure for abroad. He went away from the Philippines personally embittered and resentful for reasons or motives that I do not wish nor can I now judge. The thorn that he carried stuck in his heart irritated and intoxicated his mind, leaving deep scars in all his faculties, and creating prejudices which were rooted by remembrances and feelings of his own dignity which in his opinion had been wounded. That exaggerated self-judgment and this extreme self-esteem finally prepared him to cross the great bridge of inconsequence or to take the great leap or great fall in Germany that submerged him into the deep abyss of prevarication, separated him from the Catholic religion and Spanish nationality, and raised the standard of filibusterismo.

This, in fact, was foreseen by the foreign enemies of our religion and our mother country and since then they worked ceaselessly with the greatest perseverance and skill to muddle his clear intelligence with reformist and separatist doctrines, inoculating his already wounded heart with sectarian viruses; and you having drank unwarily the lethal poison that they offered you in a golden cup, the inevitable happened. A certain Austrian professor, very friendly with you, had already predicted, namely, that the Protestants took possession of you and shortly after the Freemasons, the result of the first captivity being Mr. Rizal of the Noli me tangere and of the second, Mr. Rizal of El Filibusterismo. Here is, my most beloved Pepe, the explanation in a few words of the generating cause of your present adversity. If I could erase those premises with the blood of my veins, do not doubt, my dear friend, that I would be the first one who will work with the most ardor to save you from their worst consequences. In what a bad position are you in! Believe me. Draw near with sincerity to better trees so that better shade may henceforth shelter you. Foreign heretics sowed in your soul those bad winds from which you are now reaping tempests. And how dark and cloudy is the weather that is glimpsed for you in the future!

Ah, my dear child! For this sole reason and not for another and for the great confidence and affection that I have for you, never —

God save me — with the intention of reproaching you in the least, did I dare write — perhaps with a certain indiscretion or disrespect towards you — Father Obach these words: “Tell him to set aside the foolishness of wishing to look at his affairs through the prism of his judgment and self-esteem: Nemo judex in causa propria.”[2]

You interpreted the meaning of the phrase perfectly, paying more attention to its substance than to its literary style. In the same sense, taking for granted in advance what is aforesaid in this letter, I wished by means of a simple hint to exhort you to stop now your stubbornness of desiring to emancipate the Filipinos from the gentle yoke of the Catholic religion and the Spanish nation, advocating and propagating among them the spurious doctrines of reform and separatism that only a wounded self-esteem (which I call a misunderstood sentiment of personal dignity) that adulterates your own judgment, could suggest to you. Because such stubbornness, even granting you the greatest good faith in the world and you have acted at the impulse of a mistaken conscience and even dispensing still with the moral responsibility consequently incurred by voluntary act, does not cease to be in itself at least a great madness or blind fanaticism.

Now then, limiting to these matters the proverb Nemo judex in causa propria, which is pertinent to the case, I say: That you cannot be guided with respect to them by the prism of self-judgment and self-esteem for the reason that these are obstructed and adulterated by erroneous principles and inordinate inclinations.

A modern author has very well said that truth is to intellect what light is to polarization. Polarization as you know very well is phenomenon of the reflection or refraction of light by which light is diminished or augmented or extinguished according to the angle it forms and the refracting medium or isotropy upon which the ray of light falls.

Light, continues the said author, is not to blame for what happens to it when it is subjected to the experiences of polarization whose law Brewster proved so brilliantly.

The sane then happens to truth and to good faith when they go through the refracting medium of certain intellects and hearts: There takes place a kind of spiritual polarization by virtue of which truth and good faith diminish or disappear and error and bad faith reach the maximum intensity according to the angle from which things are seen. And has not your intellect suffered from such angles of reflection or refraction of ideas, at least a kind of spiritual polarization that does not let you see the truth such as they are in themselves?

What happens to the intellect happens also to the senses, which in order that they may function rightly, it is necessary that the object, medium of transmission, and the subject or animated organ should be in proper conditions. Furthermore, just as the will still loves the bad under the concept of the good, so also the intellect though it may err, always errs under the appearance of the truth.

For this reason, the truths in every science should be derived from their first principles, which are evidently true though indemonstrable, in order to pass from them, by demonstrations reasoning has its laws and it is composed and discomposed according to the strictest rules of logic and method; but as in this entanglement of truths, at times not most difficult to understand, man proceeds by way of faculty to action, from here it follows that there is something that determines the power or cognitive faculty on the act itself of cognition. Intelligence is determined by what is perceived by the senses according to what Aristotle says, Nihil est intellectu quod prius non fuerit in sensibus,[3] and for this reason it is said that mind is an attribute of the soul that in its decisions and acts externally depends on the senses. Giving the value that corresponds to the rest of the senses in their external influence so that the mind may be able to elaborate its ideas, the best medium for their transmission is the word. For this reason the professor is the great prop or factor of our intelligence, so much so that a great many times we would not know fully the truths without the written word in the book or the spoken words of the professor. From this is deduced that never shall we be able to know in this life all the truths that can form all its knowable points of view; because, as it is desired that understanding be a power, it needs something that determines it, so that it may be converted into an act, and working within limits and successively, by gradation and occasionally, it cannot know successively any objects with perfection. From this is derived that aphorism that should be applied to our faculties as well as to the senses: Pluribus intentus minor est ad singula sensus.[4] For this reason, though our knowledge may be relatively very vast, for having acted on them profitably many times, our intellect, however, speaking absolutely, is extremely limited in extent as in scope and never shall we know in this world all the objects with objective and subjective evidence that, on our strength of the objective, is produced in our soul. Therefore, however learned we may be, we shall never be so learned that we shall not need to make use of the knowledge of others… From all of which I infer that in many of the truths we have to abide, and in fact we do abide, not by our own criterion or judgment but by the criterion or judgment of others. And if this is a fact and a manifest truth in scientific and artistic matters, it is even more so in moral and historical matters in which external authority comes to constitute a true criterion that draws from our soul an assent of certitude which is in reality infallible. So you see, my dear friend, how many times one’s own criterion is a little blind person who has to let himself be led by the lantern of another or by the locomotive of foreign ownership, and even if one cannot digest with the neighbor’s stomach, he can however think and discuss, taking advantage of the fruit of the ideas and of the ratiocination of others; and it is not offending God nor disdaining His most precious gifts to recognize humbly how limited are our faculties, and well may one commiserate with one who is ignorant in his own house and sensible at the same time for helping himself with the light, guidance, and good counsel of his friendly neighbor. It is a great truth that the Great Father of families has given to each one of His children during his pilgrimage in this life his corresponding lantern or own judgment; but it may also happened that this lamp as a result of the poor oil that our disinherited forefathers provided us throw little light and that on account of our indolence, its glass gets soiled or the wick gets wet, or its content is spilled and we prefer then fugacious and phosphorescent light that dazzles us suddenly, afterwards leaving us in the middle of the road in a terrible and desolate gloom.

And bear in mind, my dear Rizal, that in the darkness of this life, we need in addition another lantern to guide us; we need a supernatural light to provide us with light and point us like a bright beacon the reefs of this life and the port of salvation. Habemus, St. Peter tells us, firmiorem propheticum sermonem, cui benefacitis attendentes quasi lucernae lucenti in caliginoso loco, donec dies elucescat, et Lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris; hoc primum intelligentis, quod omnis prophetia Scriptura propia interpretatione non fit. Non enim voluntate humana allata est aliquando prophetia: sed Spiritu Sancto inspirati, locuti sunt sancti Dei homines.[5]

Even clearer and more refulgent than that of the lantern with which Jesus Christ illumines us: Mutifarium, multisque modis, St. Paul tells us, olim Deus locuens patribus in prophetis, novissime diebus istis locutus est nobis in Filio.[6] Consequently, we have besides the lantern of our own judgment, which frequently is uncertain, two other lanterns fed by the oil of external authority and correlative of the two orders of truths or diverse knowledge with which human intelligence is illumined, one natural and the other supernatural or revealed. This aforesaid double order of knowledge is distinct not only in the principle from which it is derived but also in the object that it pursues. In the principle, because in the first we know by means of straight natural reason and in the second by means of divine faith. In the object, because besides these things that can be reached by means of natural reason it proposed to us the belief in the mysteries hidden in God which cannot be known except through divine revelation. Such are the mysteries God reveals to the humble who voluntarily submit their own judgment out of reasonable respect for the faith and which He hides from the learned who are infatuated with their knowledge, who do not recognize other horizons than those their limited human knowledge can reach by themselves.

I have said that the gift of our faith subjecting our own judgments to revealed truths is reasonable. In fact as a man depends entirely on God as his Creator and Lord, created reason is subject for everything to be uncreated truth; we are obliged consequently by means of our faith to render full tribute or gift our intellect and will to revealing God. This faith which is the beginning of our justification and salvation is a supernatural virtue by means of which, aided (as you know very well) by divine grace and God’s aspiration, we believe as true all the truths revealed by Jesus Christ, not by virtue of the intrinsic truth of things, known by the light of natural reason but by virtue of the authority of the same revealing God who cannot deceive Himself nor deceive us. And so that this faith may be rational God wished that to the internal aids of the Holy Ghost be joined the external and irrefutable arguments of His revelation that theologians call Motives of Credibility, namely, divine deeds done by the infinite omnipotence and wisdom of God in confirmation of those revealed truths and as most certain signs of divine revelation adapted to every kind of intelligence. For which reason, Moses, as well as the prophets and above all Jesus Christ, performed numerous and most patent miracles and made prophecies, and we read that the apostles, obeying God’s mandate, went out to preach everywhere, the Lord cooperating and confirming their words with the miracles.

All the truths revealed by God constitute the material object of faith. The formal object of faith is formed by the authority of the same revealing God who by virtue of his infinite wisdom and kindliness cannot deceive himself nor deceive us.

Notwithstanding, even if faith may exceed reason, there cannot exists between the two any true disagreement, because God himself who reveals the mysteries and infuses faith has endowed the human soul with the light of reason. It is thus that God cannot deny Himself to Himself, consequently one truth cannot contradict another truth. In case then that some apparent contradiction may exist, it should be attributed rather to the fact that the dogmas of the faith have not been understood nor expounded in accordance with the mind of the Church or rather to the fact that the ravings of opinions have been considered axioms of reason. Consequently, a priori, any child who has learned the dogmas of the faith, with the torch of his faith can reject as false whatever proposition is evidently contrary to these dogmas. Here indeed comes fittingly that blow that Jesus Christ dealt the wise and prudent persons of this world: Ita pater quoniam sic fuit placitum ante te: abscondisti enim haec a sapientibus et prudentibus et revelasti ea parvulis.[7]
This faith in revelation has been like the standard raised by Jesus Christ and his Church before the face of the nations in order to attract all men in this manner to Him, to the understanding of supernatural truth, to the observance of the divine law, and to eternal salvation. And in this sense, it must be sad that revelation is necessary, inasmuch as God in His infinite kindliness ordained man for a supernatural end, namely, to share in the divine possessions that surpass entirely the intelligence of the human mind; since neither eye saw nor heard nor in the heart of man will ever penetrate what God has prepared for those who love Him.

And believe, my beloved Mr. Rizal, that there is no act of man on earth that is really deserving of eternal life except that which is clothed in the habit of living faith that by another name is called habitual charity, Faith without charity is dead, and faith and hope in God without the same charity cannot obtain eternal life for you for whose acquisition we have been created in this world. Consequently, this is the will of God, our own sanctification and as its abiding fruit, eternal life.

You tell me that sometimes you also pray. Who prays hopes, and who hopes in God, believes in God. If this hope is supernatural, your faith is also supernatural. You say that it does not occur to you to ask for anything. Ask Him for the supernatural gift of faith, of hope and of charity, and of the ultimate perseverance in these virtues, and thus the will of God will be done in you, for thus He tells us in behalf of St. Paul: Haec est voluntas Dei sanctificatio vestra. Deus vult homines salvos fieri et ad agnitionem veritatis venire.[8] Obey it, my dear Rizal, for it is the most holy will of God, procuring in all earnestness your own sanctification and eternal salvation. There are many who do not obey the most holy will of God. With them God himself will justify his ire on Judgment Day, and then indeed God will have his way after all in spite of the regrets of His enemies. In God there are two wills: One antecedent and the other consequent. With the antecedent will He wants us all saved; with the consequent will He gives to each one after this life his just reward. While we are on the way, let us work to win the game for heaven with our own merits aided by divine grace; for the house will come and then no one can deserve it because the end of our merits had already arrived. The graces God grants mortals are sufficient or efficacious according to whether man profits from them or not. Let us make use then of the talents that God has given us while we live, because our course or career being ended, having arrived already at the limit of this life, the disillusionment would be irremediable if we had to sing at that sad hour the eternal public recantation. The ergo eravimus[9] of the condemned.

The new man in us must vanquish the old man with all his erroneous judgments and inordinate inclinations; let us work, as St. Ignatius says in his book of Holy Exercises, until he is overthrown…This self-esteem and self-judgment of the old man that is sought to be knocked down has certainly not been given to us by God but we have inherited them from our first parents as fruit of their original fall. There I send you the little golden booklet, Contemptus Mundi or Contemptus sui. Read it often, especially when you find yourself desolate or upset; and believe me that to wherever page you may turn by chance, you will see there indicated the remedy for your ills; be guided by the light of this lantern; nourish yourself with the sap of its doctrine, and run swiftly aided by this locomotive towards the place of eternal peace and happiness that I ask God for you, interpreting faithfully by it the most holy will of God; not the peace of the godless who says, Pax, pax, et not erat pax,[10] but the true peace of the children of God.

Count me as your sincere friend, especially at the present hour when you are sucking the bitter cup of deportation.

I should like to enlarge on some more considerations especially to refute your ideas on separatism for whose triumph you believe yourself sent almost by God when you say: “I consider myself fortunate to be able to suffer a little for a cause that I believe sacred; I do not remember having committed any act that humiliates me before my conscience; I admit that at the beginning I was grieved by the change of my fortune but afterwards I consoled myself by thinking of other men more just and more worthy who have suffered much greater injustices, and as no one can make everything run here on earth in accordance with his desires, one must resign one’s self. And I believe moreover that when a thing is undertaken, its success is more assured the more one suffers for it. If this is fanaticism, may God forgive me for it, for my poor judgment does not see it thus.” And in another place further down, you add: “I have planned to be useful to my fellowmen and to my country; I have wished to combat old errors and abuses; the forest that I would like to clean was very old; what is strange if the reptiles should whistle upon seeing themselves disturbed in their burrows, if the rocks should leap and crush me in their fall? It was an old muddy pit; what is strange if in stirring it, I catch a fever that may kill me? Am I mistaken? It is possible, but let my good faith and disinterestedness serve as my justification.”

All of which deserves a careful reply, but in order not to prolong the present letter, I promise you, God willing, a reply by the next mail.

You know how dear you are to your friend and former director of the congregation.

PABLO PASTELLS

03-761 [Reformists]