Avatar de l’utilisateur
Messages : 2146
Inscription : dim. 26 août 2018 11:43
Localisation : Couronne d'Aragon


#11 Message par InHocSignoVinces » jeu. 14 mai 2020 19:50

In order to understand the extreme positions already taken by Colombia's
priests, we may refer to an extremely disconcerting fact that has no precedent in
the history of Catholicism. The second general conference of the Latin
American bishops, held in Medellin, Colombia, and solemnly inaugurated by
the Pope at the Cathedral of Bogota on the eve of the Congress, was the
culmination of the program and the evident and concrete goal of these religious
events, i.e., to bring about an actual revolution in Latin America, without
violence or bloodshed, if possible.

In the religious field, one of the revolutionary aspects of this program, and
certainly not the least important, was our prelates'
overflowing, inconceivable,
surrendering ecumenism
at the Eucharistic Congress and the subsequent
Medellin LAMEC conference.

By means of a moving message, five non-Catholic "observers" (today's
name for wolves in sheep's clothing)
asked permission from the august assembly
to receive Holy Communion along with the bishops.
The names of these
soliciting observers were: David B. Reed, Anglican Bishop of Bogota; Prof.
Manfred K. Bahmann, a Lutheran from Buenos Aires; Br. Roberto Giscard, of
the Taize community; the Reverend Dana Green; and Dr. Kurtis F. Naylor.
Their apparently humble and moving supplication reads as follows: "The
conference being almost at an end, may we request the exceptional privilege of
communing, at least once, along with all our Christian brothers gathering
here. "

As grounds on which the "separated people" based their request, they
cited the Ecumenic Directory, No. 55, which states that the Church may allow a
separated brother to receive the Sacraments if there are sufficient reasons. It
also defines some cases of urgent need, and goes on to say that "we are being
pressed by the most urgent conceivable reason, that of charity. Hence, moved
by loyalty, we are discretely and confidentially addressing this Conference to
the presidency itself, asking it to take into account that the unity of faith about
the sacraments on which the Directory bases its doctrinal denial, is not lacking
on our part. We confess that the Eucharist is that certain and efficacious sign of
the personal presence of Christ, the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ,
the sacrament of His real presence."

In answer to this petition, Rafael Moya Garcia, right-hand man of Fr.
Enrique Maza, S.J., a prominent Mexican progressivist, commented that "the
presidency of the second Latin American Episcopal Conference could not and
did not want to reject this petition which undoubtedly opens new and promising
avenues toward the unity of all Christians."

To me, this incomprehensible fact is an appropriate consummation of the
second "Bogotazo" trying to revolutionize all Latin American structures.
Although they invoke fraternal charity to justify this fact, I cannot restrain my
just indignation, as a Catholic and as a priest, when faced with this outrageous
and sacrilegious political gesture by the Latin American prelates who, like new
Judases, betrayed their Master. This fact is not at all justified by the presence of
His Eminence Antonio Cardinal Samoré.

It is no longer time to be cautious. We may no longer be quiet in the face
of this dreadful abomination. We must clarify the above-mentioned fact
urgently, and then analyze it in order to draw logical and evident conclusions

To be continued...

Avatar de l’utilisateur
Messages : 2146
Inscription : dim. 26 août 2018 11:43
Localisation : Couronne d'Aragon


#12 Message par InHocSignoVinces » lun. 18 mai 2020 19:12

Who made the petition to the LAMEC prelates? What was asked, and
why? What are the theological and apostolic implications of the unbearable
concessions that the Latin American bishops granted these "separated
brothers" through their official proxies?

Sincere answers to these questions will provide a correct interpretation of
that fact and will simultaneously underline the shepherds' terrible responsibility
before God, conscience, parishioners, and history.
Because of incompetence,
cowardice, servility, lack of faith, or temporal interests, they not only betrayed
our Master and scandalized the flock, but also gave up the most precious
heritage we had received from our ancestors, our Catholic unity.

The petitioners were self-confessed heretics, that is, people who not only
do not accept, but also reject and repudiate much of the truth as revealed by
God, as stated by the Church's Magisterium and belonging to our Catholic
The churches or ecclesiastical communities to which they belong are but
branches that have been severed from the trunk of the only Church that Christ
built. Such branches differ considerably not only from us but also among each
other, because of their various origins, doctrines, and spiritual lives.

To be continued...

Avatar de l’utilisateur
Messages : 2146
Inscription : dim. 26 août 2018 11:43
Localisation : Couronne d'Aragon


#13 Message par InHocSignoVinces » sam. 23 mai 2020 15:34

With respect to the relations of the separated brothers with the Catholic
Church, Chapter 1 on the Ecumenism of Vatican II says:
Ever since the beginning there appeared schisms within this one and only
Church of God (cf. I Cor. 2:18- 19, Gal. 1 :6-9, 1 John 2: 18-19), but the apostle
repudiated them as seriously damnable. In the centuries that followed, new and
wider schisms arose; large communities seceded from the full communion of the
Catholic Church, sometimes because of the faults of men on both sides.
However, those who are now born within these communities and are nourished
by Christ's faith may not be blamed for the sin of secession, and the Catholic
Church embraces them with fraternal respect and love, for those who believe in
Christ and have been duly baptized enjoy a sort of communion, albeit imperfect,
with the Catholic Church. Certainly, various discrepancies standing between
them and the Catholic Church in structural, doctrinal, and disciplinary matters
are in the way of their full ecclesiastical communion, but the ecumenical
movement is trying to remove such obstacles. Since faith justified them by virtue
of their Baptism, they belong to Christ and fully deserve to be honored with the
name of Christians; hence, the sons of the Catholic Church correctly recognize
them to be brethren in the Lord.

In addition to the elements or goods that jointly compose and give life to
the Church itself, some and even many very valuable ones can be found outside
of the visible circle of the Catholic Church: the written Word of God, the life of
grace , faith, hope, charity, and other inner gifts of the Holy Spirit. All of these
things, which come from Christ and lead to Him, belong de jure to the only
Church of Christ.

In my opinion, these enigmatic words, which can be subject to disastrous
interpretations, are plainly incomprehensible.
Evidently, those who are now
born within these heretical or schismatic communities can or cannot be
personally guilty of their sad condition, in the same way that we are not
individually liable for Adam's sin, in which we are all born. In like manner,
those who suffer from hereditary diseases are not guilty of the vices from which
their parents became so terribly ill. Such reasoning, however, cannot efface the
fact that they were born in sad circumstances.
Similarly, the absence of personal
sin does not mean that those who are born into these sects should not be
separated from the trunk of the Church, through which we receive fruitful sap
from Christ's redemption. For how can they be nourished in Christ if they are
separated from the Christ-built trunk of the Church? Can Christ be divided into
It is all or nothing at all. Christianity requires a sincere acceptance of
the entire doctrine that God revealed.
One cannot be friend and foe at the same
time. The "separated" do not sincerely and faithfully believe in part of the
revealed and defined truth; they even attack, deny, and sneer at it. These
structural, doctrinal, and disciplinary discrepancies obstruct the way toward a
full ecclesiastical communion and, while they last, prevent the participation of
these individuals in the life of the Church. In exceptional cases, where they
adopt wrong attitudes in good faith and obey the moral law faithfully, we may
reasonably believe that they participate invisibly, but without our being able to
feel sure of this.
The words of Christ are peremptory: "He who believes shall be
saved; he who does not believe shall be condemned."

I cannot understand what this "sort of communion ... with the Catholic
that the Council mentions, consists of. There is no communion insofar
as doctrine, hierarchy, and sacraments are concerned.
The Council says that the
"separated brethren" belong to Christ by virtue of their Baptism,
to which I
object because the Church has always been distrustful of the validity of the
sects' baptismal rites.
That is why the members of those sects who converted to
Catholicism were sub conditione administered Catholic Baptism, a sacrament
which our Lord Jesus Christ instituted. The Church, therefore, was not sure of
their truly belonging to Christ. In fact, some of them do not even believe in
Christ's divinity. Their Christianity is mutilated, incoherent, and based on a
liberal examination and interpretation of the holy Scripture. The Catholic
Church recognizes them as "brethren in the Lord" because they have been
created by God and called by God to participate in the divine life that the
Incarnate Word brought to us, and not because she recognizes in them an
adoptive supernatural filiation, for in such a case they would not be separated
brethren, but sons of the Church.

To be continued...

Avatar de l’utilisateur
Messages : 2146
Inscription : dim. 26 août 2018 11:43
Localisation : Couronne d'Aragon


#14 Message par InHocSignoVinces » ven. 29 mai 2020 17:04

I am not denying the possibility that an exceptional few of these
"separated brethren" may become justified through Jesus Christ, i.e. , that they
receive sanctifying grace, infused theological virtues, and other inner gifts from
the Holy Spirit. De internis non judicat Ecclesia; only God penetrates the
intimacy of souls. However possible these rare and isolated cases may be, they
cannot serve as an argument to discard the Catholic affirmation that outside of
the Catholic Church there is no salvation.

In facie ecclesiae, before the visible church, those who requested that
unheard-of privilege in Medellin were heretics.

What, then, did those gentlemen ask of our venerable prelates? Nothing
less than taking the Most Holy Sacrament without being and without wanting to
become Catholics.
Had their petition been sincere, they would have applied for
a full conversion to our Catholic Faith, since their supplication itself shows us
that they knew perfectly well the Holy Church's requisites to receive the
In their demand they implicitly avow that they are not members of
the Church and that they do not even intend to become such, but, nevertheless,
they asked permission to commune or to can celebrate with our bishops, in spite
of not deserving it, as the above circumstances show.

The apostle Paul requires that man prepare himself properly in order to
be worthy of this august Sacrament,
for he who eats and drinks of the body and
blood of our Lord without deserving it,
judicium sibi manducat et bibit, eats and
drinks his own judgment.
Were those petitioners personally pure, and exempt
from deadly sins? A well-known , non-Catholic Mexican newspaper
commentator rightly affirms that the LAMEC prelates' concession implies their
acceptance of the thesis of the Bishop of Cuernavaca, according to which one
may receive Holy Communion in the state of mortal sin, and without grace,
confession, or even being a Catholic (!!)

To be continued...

Avatar de l’utilisateur
Messages : 2146
Inscription : dim. 26 août 2018 11:43
Localisation : Couronne d'Aragon


#15 Message par InHocSignoVinces » ven. 05 juin 2020 16:23

Ecumenism was the reason that the "separated brethren" gave for their
absurd request:
"May we suggest [they do not affirm it to be so, they just
suggest] that we are being pressed by the most urgent conceivable reason, that
of charity."
Evidently this suggestion does not refer to charity with respect to
God, but to charity with respect to human beings.
Is charity for human beings
conceivable, however, when it is not based on charity for God?
Moreover, can
there be charity for God on the part of those who, being so close to the truth, do
not even move to approach it? They do not get closer to the truth nor do they
accept it, but they actually deny it and secretly intend to fight it. These
Protestant ministers, by not publicly and sincerely renouncing their errors in
order to accept the integrity of revealed truth, are really telling us that they
intend to fight the dogmas of our religion that they do not accept, with the goal
of converting Latin American Catholics to their beliefs.

On the other hand, even if we were to avow, and it would be a big avowal,
that these "observers" have the same beliefs that we Catholics have with respect
to the Sacraments, this would not be enough ground to declare them ready to
receive Christ's body and blood, not symbolically, but really and truly. For, in
order to duly receive the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, one not only needs to
be in a state of grace but also to confess his sins, if he is conscious of them. Did
the "separated brethren" qualify?

Having studied the request of the so-called "Protestant pastors" in depth,
I do not believe it imprudent to affirm that they were not sincere. They did not
ask for Communion because they believed in it or because they wanted to give
public testimony to the truth of our Catholic Faith, but because they wanted a
license , a passport, and an endorsement from our prelates in order to continue
proselytizing our simple and ill-prepared Latin American people. They were in
a position of everything to gain and nothing to lose or sacrifice; in fact, they
made great strides toward eliminating our people's legitimate and healthy
resistance to their preaching.

In the theological field, the gracious concession of our venerable
LAMEC bishops seems to be a profanation and a politically-inspired sacrilege,
designed to fit in with the ecumenical movement whereby we gave up
everything without receiving anything in exchange.
As the Protestant writer of
the Mexican newspaper Excelsior remarks, it also signifies an implicit
acceptance of the strange thesis of bishops from Cuernavaca and Torreon,
according to which one does not need sacramental confession to duly receive
Communion, even if one's soul is not in the state of grace. Theologically
speaking, then, we are in error, but this has been disregarded for political
reasons by our venerable prelates.

In the pastoral field it simplifies the task of our "separated brethren" to
proselytize among our Catholic people. Our simple and unknowing people, on
seeing the Protestant ministers concelebrating or receiving Communion with
our Catholic bishops, logically concluded that we are all one and the same, that
Catholics and Protestants are already united, and that any way may be chosen
to go to Heaven. They are also led to such conclusions by the teachings of the
"separated ones," by the multiple changes they see in the Catholic Church , and
by the "new post-Conciliar teaching" of the priests, which the people do not
understand. Apostolically speaking, then, the concession of the LAMEC
bishops of Medellin efficaciously contributed to the Protestantization of Latin
America or to the establishment of "religious pluralism," according to the signs
of the times.

To be continued...

Avatar de l’utilisateur
Messages : 2146
Inscription : dim. 26 août 2018 11:43
Localisation : Couronne d'Aragon


#16 Message par InHocSignoVinces » sam. 13 juin 2020 20:27

Chapter II


Pope Paul VI, in the announcement of his coming to Colombia to attend
the 39th International Eucharistic Congress, to be held in Bogota from August
18-28, 1968, said the following:
Most beloved sons and daughters:

We wish to announce to this audience that, God willing, we will go to
Colombia next August to attend the closing of the International Eucharistic
Congress and to start the general conference of the Latin American Episcopate,
sincerely lamenting that we are unable to accept the kind invitations that other
countries of that continent have sent us.

What is the meaning of the Pope's trips? They mean that the ways of the
world are open to his ministry; they indicate a wider circulation of charity; and
they evidence the unity and catholicity of the Church.

By means of our trip to Bogota we wish to unequivocally give testimony of
the Faith to all of the Church in the triple sanctifying virtue of the Eucharist: a
reminder of His Redeeming Passion, the real wonder of Christ's sacramental
presence, and the promise of His final coming.

We are also pleased that this religious affirmation is taking place in our
most beloved Latin America, where faith is reviving great social charity and
where we anticipate growing civil justice and greater Christian prosperity.
Henceforth, we extend our apostolic blessing to all you wholehearted
of the immense Latin American world.

In this address of Paul VI, in which he announced, Urbi et Orbi, his
intention to fly to Latin America to participate in the 39th International
Eucharistic Congress, the Pope is declaring his intentions which, in addition to
the customary goals of his Pontifical trips (to show the world that all paths are
open to his pastoral ministry, to spread charity, and to give witness to the unity
and catholicity of the Church), the Pope came to Bogota to attest to the
aforementioned triple sanctifying virtue of the Eucharist. In keeping with the
objectives and guidelines of previous international Eucharistic congresses, His
Holiness wanted his presence and his words to intensify Eucharistic life in Latin
America, for it is mainly through the Eucharist, unfailing source of all sanctity,
that the most precious fruits of Christ's redemption come to us. According to
these words, the Pope seemed to have definite Eucharistic, and not political or
social, goals in mind for the forthcoming Congress. Nevertheless, this brings to
our attention something which we must henceforth keep in mind that the Pope
did not mention sacrifice, without which the Eucharist would not exist in the

The circumstances His Holiness mentioned, that "this religious
should take place in Latin America, wherein the Pontiff saw a
growing civil justice and a greater Christian prosperity, do not seem to have
changed the specific finality of all these international meetings, which have
always been solemn and public ratifications of our Eucharistic beliefs and of
the fundamental dogmas of our Catholic faith: the Sacrificial Eucharist, the
Eucharistic Sacrament, and the real Eucharistic Presence of Christ in the
consecrated species.

Nevertheless, the appointment of Cardinal Lercaro, former Archbishop
of Bologna, as papal legate to the Congress, made many observers, Italian and
otherwise, afraid that the great event was going to have an end quite different
from the one being proclaimed by the media and the invitations.
Just as the
document which John F. Kennedy signed in Bogota to establish an "Alliance
for Progress,"
was a crafty plan to establish socialism in Latin America, said
document almost literally coinciding with the Populorum Progressio of Paul VI,
the International Eucharistic Congress could be the start, the beginning of that
continental revolution that would bring rapid and audacious "structural"
changes to all the Latin American countries, thereby putting an end to their

To be continued...

Avatar de l’utilisateur
Messages : 2146
Inscription : dim. 26 août 2018 11:43
Localisation : Couronne d'Aragon


#17 Message par InHocSignoVinces » sam. 20 juin 2020 18:45

The Pope's letter to Cardinal Lercaro reads as follows:
Most eminent Giacomo Cardinal Lercaro, Legato a Látere:

We have decided to commit to you the task of representing us as a legate at
the 39th International Eucharistic Congress which will take place next month in
Bogota, Colombia, with the certainty that this Congress, the first one since the
will benefit from your magisterial authority and your apostolic zeal.

May the Church still enjoy your valuable experience for many long years
in this new phase of your life, rich in doctrinal accomplishments and in
experiences acquired through the faithful exercise of your sacerdotal and
pastoral duties. Your appointment as legate to Bogota publicly confirms our
feelings and special deference toward you.

The "red" Cardinal, as the former Archbishop of Bologna is called
worldwide, was given this important appointment as legate a latere. His open
sympathy or "Christian understanding" toward Communism, his democratic
rapprochement to the needy classes, his not always discrete cooperation with
Marxist activities in his diocese, and his efforts to eliminate or to soften the
Church's ancient sternness and intolerable condemnations against atheistic
Marxism, had turned this cardinal whom Paul VI appointed as his legate in
Bogota into one of the leading representatives of "religious progressivism."

Neither must one forget his radical liturgical reform, which practically effaced
all ancient rites and ceremonies of the pre-Conciliar Church, in order to
eliminate all prejudices and to ensure that the people would fervently accept the
new ideas and the new religion.

The letter from Pope Paul VI to the Cardinal is more than a simple
appointment, as its text goes beyond the ordinary forms used in these occasions.
The Pope appoints Lercaro as his legate, feeling sure that this Congress will
benefit from his magisterial authority and his apostolic zeal.
Apart from the
cardinal's background of open accommodation to Marxism and his liberality in
destroying the multi-centennial venerable rites in which the Catholic Church's
wisdom and holiness, under the light of the Holy Spirit, had crystallized
Catholic worship, we do not know of any other merits by which he deserved to
be so solemnly proclaimed master and apostle of Latin America and of the
whole world.
What contribution did the Pope expect from the wisdom and
apostolic zeal of the former Archbishop of Bologna?

As if the above praises were not enough, the Pope ends his letter by
hoping that the Church may "still enjoy your valuable experience for many long
years in this new phase of your life, which is rich in doctrinal accomplishments
and in experiences acquired through the faithful exercise of your sacerdotal
and pastoral duties."

In this magnificent eulogy, His Holiness avows that advanced age is no
obstacle for cardinals, bishops, and priests to render service to God, the
Church, and the salvation of souls,
thereby contradicting his post-Conciliar
politics and his famous Motu Proprio on the age of cardinals.
In fact, what he
had affirmed of Cardinal Lercaro could be applied, on identical grounds, to all
the venerable prelates who, because of the unpardonable sin of age, had been
removed from their sees, in spite of the valuable experience they had acquired
through the exercise of their sacerdotal and pastoral duties.
No sign of special
deference came from Christ's Vicar, however, for those dismissed pastors who
have been deprived of both office and benefits, committed to their parishioners'
charity in their old age and poverty, and who look like a living picture of the
Church of the past.


Avatar de l’utilisateur
Messages : 2146
Inscription : dim. 26 août 2018 11:43
Localisation : Couronne d'Aragon


#18 Message par InHocSignoVinces » mer. 01 juil. 2020 18:10


One of the circumstances that was especially brought to the attention of
many foreigners attending the thirty-ninth International Eucharistic Congress,
was the complete collaboration and perfect harmony between civil and
ecclesiastical authorities, the former giving full support to the latter for the
celebration of this internationally significant event. It is no exaggeration to say
that everybody, from the president of the republic down to the lowest
Colombian soldier, was at the disposal of the promoters and organizers of the

This was paradoxical, inasmuch as the "Maritainian" opinions which
have invaded the Church reject all concordats or privileges, as well as all sorts
of cooperation with governments, so that the Church might be able to develop
its apostolic work in a more independent way.

It was also paradoxical that the purple robes of the cardinals, the flaring
cassocks of bishops and monsignors, the religious habits, the aggiornated
dresses of nuns, and the uniforms of Catholic pupils clashed and mixed with the
uniforms of generals, soldiers, policemen, and traffic officials. Beside the Pope
stood the president of the republic, beside the cardinals, the secretaries of
government and high-ranking officers of the Colombian army.
I wondered:
could this Congress of so many cardinals, bishops and religious, including the
Pope himself, have been possible without the union, harmony, and endorsement
of the government?
Could the visit and declarations of the Rev. Father Pedro
Arrupe, S.J., have been possible? Without those old established structures that
they had audaciously decided to demolish, could the ecclesiastics, the venerable
members of LAMEC, and the worldwide progressivists have had this brilliant
occasion to start the fire of revolution that they had boldly decreed for Latin

It was the prevailing oligarchy, which many think must be eliminated in
order to establish real Christianity, that made the Congress possible by ensuring
its splendor and safety in spite of a restless milieu, where it seemed that the
ghost of Camilo Torres was sinisterly reflected on the Colombian Andes. It was
the same rich exploiters who, by means of generous gifts, paid for the large
expenditures involved in the preparation, organization, and realization of all
the acts of that Congress.

The following quotation from a medical report by Dr. Juan Mendoza
Vega describes a single item of the large disbursements the Colombian
government had to make in order to appropriately prepare the country to host
so many thousands of people coming from various regions and countries:

The International Eucharistic Congress is a public health emergency for
Bogota and for the whole country. Last January, the Department of Public
Health appointed a special committee with the aim of forecasting the sanitary
problems the Congress would entail, to the extent that such forecast is
scientifically possible, in order to take effective preventive steps in advance.

The secretary himself presides over it and its six divisions, each of which
has subdivisions that are responsible for a total of nineteen aspects of the
potential health problem. Starting in January, the whole team began to elaborate
a general services plan; afterwards, several weeks were devoted to the financing
of ten million pesos for the purchase of ambulances, medical appliances, and
other supplies which are to be distributed to hospitals once the Congress is over.

Now, taking into account the government's constant untiring support of
the hierarchy, clergy, and lay organizations of the Congress, again I ask:
the planning and celebration of this event have been possible without this aid? If
the government and the wealthy classes had not contributed generously, could
the Pope and the hierarchy have even thought about undertaking such a vast

To be continued...

Avatar de l’utilisateur
Messages : 2146
Inscription : dim. 26 août 2018 11:43
Localisation : Couronne d'Aragon


#19 Message par InHocSignoVinces » mer. 08 juil. 2020 12:13


Various comments were issued about the Pope's projected visit to
America. The Eucharistic idea did not appear very convincing, especially after
the legate was appointed. The Osservatore Romano, official organ of the
Vatican, tried to deny a prevailing opinion that the Congress and the Pope's
visit were a long-range political gesture. This is the UPI text issued at the
Vatican on August 20, as it appeared in the El Tiempo of Bogota on August 21,
Reply of the Vatican to Leftist Groups' Criticism.
Vatican City, August 20
(UPl)- Today the Vatican replied to leftist criticism about the forthcoming
Pope's trip, stressing that the tour is religious and not political.

It appears as if political and social definitions, instead of a religious
message, are to be expected from the Pope, says the Osservatore Romano, official
organ of the Vatican today.

It deplores the wide publicity given by the left-wing press to the criticism
made of a Pontiff's first trip to Latin America.

The Vatican newspaper points out that, instead of concentrating on giving
journalistic information about extreme situations, eccentricities, and polemic
dissidences within the Latin American Catholic Church, it is essential to link the
Pope's tour to the local bishops' constant efforts toward renovation and pastoral

As a reply to the charge that the Pope is indifferent to the penury of
millions of Latin Americans , it points out that the Pope, in his last Sunday
sermon, called for an end to social injustice, idle privilege , and dreadful poverty.

It also mentions previous socially concerned papal documents, such as the
recent and controversial encyclical on birth control.

"In his constant and firm pastoral teachings, Paul VI has never evaded
these problems,"
according to the Vatican newspaper in answer to left-wing
attacks, including that of L'Unita, official organ of the Italian Communist Party.
which says that the Pope's trip could not be of any help to relieve Latin
American poverty.

The Pontiff keeps on preparing his three-day trip to the world's most
Catholic continent
. . .

Vatican sources stated today that the texts of the speeches Paul VI will
deliver at the 39th International Eucharistic Congress and at the Latin American
Episcopal Conference (LAMEC) on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday are already
complete, together with their translations into the leading languages.

The above text of the UPI dispatch from Vatican City clearly shows that
in both Europe and America the Pope's trip was considered to be a socioeconomic
and political tour, instead of a pious and exclusively religious
peregrination. There were other circumstances that seemed to justify such
predictions, such as: the intense propaganda coming from Fr. Ricardo
Lombardi, S.J., whose ideas of redemption are well-known; the meeting of the
General of the Jesuit Order with the Latin American provincials and the
ratified documents emerging therefrom; and the Pope's social ideas, as
contained in his many speeches and, above all , in his encyclical Populorum

By means of these predictions, the leftists pressed the Pope to openly
condemn prevailing injustice in all of Latin America, in favor of progress and a
more equitable distribution of wealth, to quickly and effectively eliminate the
dreadful poverty, famine, and underdevelopment. In this manner, the Church
became ideologically bound to and engaged with leftist forces that, for a long
time, had been planning Castroite subversion, chaos, and propaganda
throughout Latin America.
In turn, the leftists sought the Pope's benevolent
approval for the redeeming activity of the guerillas.

We real Catholics also feared the Pope's visit. What was the Pope going to
say in his numerous speeches? What was his legate going to tell us? What would
Helder Camara, Sergio Mendez Arceo and other similar prelates tell us? What
would the prelates of the Latin American Episcopal Conference decide? The
prelude was not too reassuring. In the powder keg of Latin America, the voice
of the Catholic hierarchy could be the fuse that would explode the bomb.

To be continued...

Avatar de l’utilisateur
Messages : 2146
Inscription : dim. 26 août 2018 11:43
Localisation : Couronne d'Aragon


#20 Message par InHocSignoVinces » mer. 15 juil. 2020 11:51

"It is essential ," the Vatican newspaper said, "to link the Pope's tour to
the local bishops' constant efforts toward renovation and pastoral
Given the vague and wide meaning of these two words,
renovation and pastoral, it was not easy to ascertain the meaning of the Pope's
tour and to link it to the local bishops' constant efforts.
If, from the onset of the
Council, we study the episcopal activity, the documents issued, and the
ratifications rendered by the conferences,
we must conclude that our prelates
disregarded some of Christ's spiritual gospel and His high interest in the
salvation of souls, in order to dedicate themselves to the material welfare of our

In his address of August 17, Paul VI had said: "It pleases us that this
religious affirmation should take place in our beloved Latin America, where
the faith is reviving a great social charity and where we anticipate a growing
civil justice and a larger Christian prosperity."
These words clearly explain the
link between the Pope's tour and the local bishops' efforts toward renovation and
pastoral coordination.

The Pope came to Latin America to endorse, orient, and promote the
pastoral efforts of the bishops who, having realized that the evangelizing and
pastoral work of previous centuries was a failure, wanted to effectively remedy
the huge and most urgent needs of our indigent and underdeveloped poor
classes, so as to begin a new evangelization of Latin America by means of
complete rectification of the past.

Nobody believes the Pope to be indifferent to the indigence of millions of
Latin Americans. In fact, His Holiness has called for an end to social injustice
in more than one of his speeches. What really surprises me is the Vatican
newspaper's definition of "social injustice:"
"idle privilege" on the one hand
and "dreadful misery" on the other. This is the impressive way by which
demagogues or the ignorant are accustomed to describe Latin American
underdevelopment: a Latin America comprised of two social classes, the unjust,
oppressive, and merciless, rich oligarchy, and the starved , oppressed,
underdeveloped masses who are seen as too feeble to put an end to their
"dreadful misery."

This regrettable situation results from several centuries of slavery, during
which the underdeveloped people have been victimized by some merciless
exploiters. The Church of colonial times, as well as the Church after
independence, was, unfortunately , associated with this caste of soulless tyrants.
The wrongs of this ignominious past must be confessed by means of a mea culpa
of deep repentance, and effaced by means of redeeming actions.

L'Unita, official organ of the Italian Communist Party, knowingly lied
when it affirmed that the Pope's tour could not be of any help to relieve misery
and poverty in Latin American countries.
It knew that the Latin American
bishops and clergymen were already engaged in an immense venture designed to
change the political and social structures that exist today in those countries.
"idle privilege" had to be eliminated and the "dreadful misery" had to be
replaced by audaciously implanting new structures, liquidating the ignominious
and shameful past.
The Pope's tour was supposed to have reinforced the
bishops' efforts toward "renovation" and "pastoral coordination."

To be continued...


Revenir à « Texts in English »

Qui est en ligne ?

Utilisateurs parcourant ce forum : Aucun utilisateur inscrit et 0 invité