THE NEW POST-CONCILIAR OR MONTINIAN CHURCH, by THE REVEREND JOAQUIN SAENZ Y ARRIAGA, PH.D.

[InHocSignoVinces]

Despite the changes that legislation has imposed on government attitudes,
however, and despite the new mentality that has been introduced by prelates
and clergymen, the Catholic Church, its bishops and its priests, continue to
exercise a decisive influence over the underdeveloped sector of Latin America.


The Pope's trip, the previous gatherings of the LAMEC leaders and of the
Jesuits, the apostolic tours of Fr. Lombardi and his Society for a Better World,
and the entire program of the Congress definitely had a more social and political
character than a religious or Eucharistic one.


At the Argentinian Embassy in Rome on October 18, 1968, at a meeting
attended by His Eminence Antonio Cardinal Samoré, president of the
Pontifical Commission for Latin America, Msgr. Eduardo Pironio, Argentine
bishop and secretary of LAMEC, and Msgr. Giovanni Benelli, it was
disclaimed that there had been any tendency favoring violence at the recent
general meeting of the Latin American bishops in Medellin. According to His
Eminence, prelates, priests, and laymen voluntarily joined with the Pope, who,
when visiting Colombia last August, condemned violence as a means of
changing the political and socio-economic structures of Latin America.


This information from the Associated Press confirms that the
international comments were continuing to follow the idea that the Pope's trip
to South America was a political tour whose main purpose was to boldly change
the political and socio-economic structure of Latin America. It is evident,
however, that some of the bishops, priests, and laymen boldly surpassed the
Pope's program , in the belief that violence is not only unavoidable, but helpful.
The presence of certain bishops such as Helder Camara and Sergio Mendez
Arceo, Mexican priests such as Pedro Velazquez, Enrique Maza, Felipe
Pardinas, the Spanish refugee Ramon de Ertze Garamendi (present canon of
the Cathedral of Mexico), as well as the former French priest-worker, Fr.
Agustin Desobry, O.P., should suffice to demonstrate that the LAMEC
Conference was definitely infiltrated by advocates of violence.


To be continued...

[InHocSignoVinces]

A letter from the Brazilian Bishop Helder Camara to the mother of the
guerilla-priest Camilo Torres supports my accusation which is aimed solely at
unmasking subversion in disguise under cover of the apostolate. It reads as follows:

Recife,7/27/68
Mrs. Isabel Restrepo de Torres
Bogota, Colombia

Only yesterday did I receive your letter of July 9. Please try to understand
why I cannot accept your fraternal invitation.

I wish to stay in Bogota as modestly as possible . I will be there on my way
to Medellin, just in time to attend the opening of the second meeting of the Latin
American hierarchy, as well as the closing procession of the International
Eucharistic Congress.

Even in Medellin , I will do my utmost to avoid much attention. What is
important is teamwork and united effort. I am certain that Camilo understands,
approves, and blesses me from Heaven.

At Holy Mass I will always pray for you.

Your friend and admirer in Christ,
Helder Camara

This letter from the well-known, restless, and communizing Archbishop
of Recife, friend and fellow-traveler of the Bishop of Cuernavaca, shows the
former's intimate support, sympathy, and commitment to the cause of the late
guerilla-priest, the poor Camilo Torres. His tactics are based on concealment;
he wants "to stay in Bogota as modestly as possible;" he wants to do his utmost
"to avoid much attention." These precautionary tactics, however, are designed
to undertake a teamwork in Medellin; in other words, he wants to impose his
fighting methods on those very good prelates who are presiding and attending
the LAMEC gathering. These are artful and cunning Marxist tactics which
secretly undermine and destroy under the cover of programs of progress and
redemption. That is why Don Helder affirms in his letter that Camilo
"understands, approves, and blesses" him, if he is actually able to bless anyone
in his present state.


To be continued...

[InHocSignoVinces]

How, then, are we to correlate Cardinal Samoré's denial of pro-violent
tendencies at the recent conference in Medellin, with the regrettable violent
events that occurred a few weeks after the LAMEC meeting? The confidential
letter from the Archbishop of Recife to Camilo Torres' mother is the key to
understanding the game, in which His Eminence surely took no part.


What occurred in this subcontinent after the Eucharistic Congress and the
Medellin conference is extremely serious and revealing, for it represented one
of the worst periods of social and political turmoil in all of Latin America.
Looking from the outside, it cannot be doubted that the Vatican, the Jesuits,
many bishops, priests, and Catholic laymen who lead national and international
organizations, were convinced of the urgent need for a bold change of socioeconomic
and political structures in all of Latin America. The clergymen,
however, did not wish to suggest or to ask for these bold changes but rather to
lead the revolutionary movements either with, without, or against the respective
governments. This decision of those ecclesiastics, even if we deem it to be holy,
just, and apostolic , was, nevertheless, an order to use violence.


Violence came in the most serious and bloody conflicts of college students
in Uruguay, Brazil, and Mexico. The Bolivian President, General René
Barrientos, announced to the nation and the world that the guerillas had
reappeared on the Bolivian scene. In Costa Rica, banana laborers set fire to the
fields and premises, and in Argentina, the number of violent and bloody clashes
between workers and soldiers increased dramatically. In Panamá and Peru, the
presidents were overthrown by a coup d'etat; it is interesting to note that
General Velasco of Peru attempted to justify his coup on the basis of an urgent
need to change structures. Later on we will comment on the speech given by the
Cardinal-Archbishop of Lima before the Pope at the Cathedral of Bogota, on
the day that the Latin American Episcopal Conference was inaugurated.


The immediate and particular causes of these revolutionary events and
their external manifestations have varied, depending on the social, political,
and economic problems of each individual country. Nevertheless, the
coincidence of time and objectives among all of them indicates a common factor
and demonstrates the direct or indirect influence of the participants at Bogota
and Medellín.


In the face of these facts and pronouncements, we may not doubt that
Catholics and progressive clergymen feel themselves pre-destined to bring
about the change of structures that the poor and underdeveloped Latin
American countries require.


In an article published in Hermosillo, Sonora , on January 1, 1971, by Fr.
Jose Esteban Sarmiento, one of the unconditional followers of Msgr. Quintero,
already famous for his cunning progressivism, the following concepts of the
"new theology" are voiced:

In yesterday's commentary we were not quite in agreement with
interclassicism, namely , the philosophical position of those who, accepting the
world as something already made, without possibility of change, believe that the
only thing to do is to do nothing. The acceptance of one's role in this human
drama, even if it be that of a wretch, would be for them the ideal goal as it
signifies the submission of the human will to that of the divine, which , they say,
comprises perfect sanctity.

We do not deny or doubt the above nor do we affirm it to be the precise
bourgeois position. We do believe, however, that the world in which we live is
not a world already made and that it is within the sense of history and Providence
that we make it and continuously improve it.

Within this world that is in the process of being built in the material,
scientific , technical, social, and human spheres, there are antagonistic classes
which are not only different but opposed to each other. This fact has penetrated
all of human history to the extent that some people are always on the bottom and
become alienated as a result of abuse by those on top.

Acceptance of the fact, however , that there are struggling classes or classes
that can start their struggle at any moment, does not imply acceptance of class
struggle as a method. The Church rejects such struggle, and it must do so if this
struggle is inspired by hate and revenge and if its sole goal is to unshackle
violence. Once hate is removed, however, class struggle inspired by love for one's
neighbor, rich or poor, must be accepted, because one fights for love too.

If one loves the poor, words do not suffice and must be replaced by a true
effort to liberate them. If one does not love, one will not do anything to transform
the "system" which generates evil for so many people. Love and battle can go
together. Because of love, one fights against those who want to maintain the
system, against those who, because of self-interest, reject change, and against
rich and privileged people who drop their privilege only when they lose the fight.

That is why, from a Christian standpoint, one must not fight against
persons but against evil actions. We must all love one another, but we are also
obliged to reject and even to hate evil. Moreover, it is deeds which are evil, for, in
this world, differences do not arise so much from differences in talent as from sin.
Rich people and oppressed people exist because of injustice, avarice, and
arrogance; poor people exist because of oppression, vice, and irresponsibility.

The fight for love is the fight against sin in which one must not recognize
allegiances. Should we tolerate oppressive exploiters just because they are
Catholics? No; our duty is to denounce injustice, even at the risk of losing the
protection they are willing to pay for the complacent silence of the Church. If the
price be that of forgetting the poor, the Church's prosperity serves no useful
purpose.

The struggle, however, must not be a violent one. The Church condemns
the desperate violence of the poor as much as the institutional violence of the
rich. In this struggle it is love that matters. The revolution of hate attempts to
settle everything by means of an intense social cataclysm. The revolution of love ,
however , whose manifesto is the Gospel, is perhaps slower. but it has been
pushing forward for almost two thousand years, and is now the only sign of
freedom and hope.

Here we have a typical "progressivist" sermon which includes unheard-of
statements that are apparently contradictory and openly subversive. They do
not agree with "interclassicism," but later they implicitly say that it is necessary
to eliminate all social classes. The world has not been completely made but
must continue to be made in a constant "becoming" in which its builders are
men, not God.


The goal of this constant evolution is a classless society. This is the
meaning of "history and Providence." I would rather say that this is the
meaning of Marxist dialectics and of that giddy illusion of all Communists and
their progressivist confrères. They do this by means of sophistic reasoning, for
the world has already been made, not by us, but by God. In this world, we men
must work to improve our spiritual condition and to save our souls, which is a
great personal task; then, and only then, must we attempt to improve our
material condition, always keeping in mind the law of life by which "thou shalt
earn thy bread by the sweat of thy brow."


We must not forget, however, the words of St. Pius X: "It is in conformity
with the order established by God that in human society there be rulers and the
ruled, masters and workers, rich and poor, wise and unwise, noblemen and
plebeians." (Pontifical Doctrines, Social Documents, Madrid, 1959, p. 464).


The classes are not inherently antagonistic; they have been made so by the
Communist revolution which the ecclesiastical progressivists have joined as
fellow travelers. Moreover, to make "love" an inspiration for this fight is plain
celestial music. The Communist struggle is never made for the sake of love, nor
with sprinkling holy water, with episcopal smiles, or with "compromising"
phrases uttered from pulpits or written in newspapers, but rather with hate,
rifles, machine guns, bombs, blood, fire, and destruction.


According to the new redemptors, it is the "system" and the "structures"
which impede them from helping the poor; in actuality, however, it is they
themselves who are unwilling to spare a meal, a walk, a cigarette, or the least bit
of help for them. For them, the "system" includes the government, the
constitution, the laws, the courts, the police , the army, our institutions,
nationalism, and love of country; these, then, are the obstacles that must be
destroyed to establish a classless society of the proletariat dictatorship. The rest
of Fr. Sarmiento's article is verbiage taken from the sermons of a novice
seminarian.


Taking these arguments into consideration, we do not believe it
contemptuous to affirm that His Holiness' trip to Latin America was designed
to concretely apply his opinions and doctrine, as stated in the Populorum
Progressio.


To be continued...

[InHocSignoVinces]

PROPAGANDA DURING THE EUCHARISTIC CONGRESS


Besides the official propaganda distributed to the pilgrims by the central
office, there was subversive propaganda which circulated publicly and
profusely. Copies of the Communist newspaper United Front (Frente Unido) ,
were sold at every corner. The founder of this newspaper was the infamous
guerilla-priest, Fr. Camilo Torres Restrepo, and its editor was Mr. German
Guzman Campos. Three pictures stood out on the front page, that of Paul VI in
the middle, with Camilo Torres on one side and "Che" Guevara, the notorious
guerilla leader killed in Bolivia, on the other.


Three thoughts by Christ, Camilo, and "Che" Guevara, summarize the
message of the newspaper:


CHRIST

1. Christ, my leader, taught .. "I have not come to the world to bring
peace, bur war. Only the violent will enter the kingdom of heaven. "

According to these statements, which falsify Christ's Gospel, the goals of
Christianity are violent revolution and war.


CAMILO

2. The worst ballast for the Colombian Church is to have wealth and
political power, which compel it to base its decisions on human, rather than
divine, wisdom . . .
It is very difficult to serve two masters: God and mammon. . .
The Colombian clergy is the most reactionary in the world, even more
so than that of Spain . It becomes evident that the only progressivist churches of
the world are the poor ones.

3. Let me tell you , even if it sounds ridiculous , that a true revolutionary is
led by true feelings of love. It is impossible to conceive of a real revolutionary
without this quality. Perhaps this is one of the leader's great dramas , in which he
must add a cool mind to his passionate spirit in order to make painful decisions
without tightening a muscle.
Our vanguard revolutionaries must idealize their love for the people
and its most sacred causes, so as to make it unique and indivisible.
The leaders of the revolution have children who, when they begin to
babble, are unable to name their fathers, women who must take part in this great
sacrifice of their lives so as to bring about the revolution to its destiny and no
friends outside of their fellow revolutionaries. There can be no life outside of the
revolution.


"CHÉ"

At the end of the page, we read this astonishing synthesis of progressivist
thinking:

The duty of every Christian is to be a revolutionary ... the duty of every
revolutionary is to make the revolution! The duty, then, of every Latin American
Christian is to work for immediate revolution. Some say it should be violent,
others, peaceful. But everyone agrees that today one cannot be a good Catholic if
one does not fight for the revolution in his own way.

On the following page we read:

The message of Inti Peredo: THE BOLIVIAN GUERILLAS ARE NOT
DEAD. They have just started.

Inti Peredo, political commissary of the Bolivian National Liberation
Army which its founder, "Ché" Guevara, defined in his diary as a growing
political and revolutionary force, has just released a piece of information
designed to let the people of Bolivia and the world know that the guerilla
movement in Bolivia is not dead, thereby refuting all allegations coming from
revisionists, traitors, pseudo-revolutionaries, and pro-imperialists, about the
supposed failure of the revolutionary road chosen by "Ché" and the fighters who
died with him. For the benefit of the readers of United Front, we are publishing
fragments of this transcendental message:

The Bolivian guerillas are not dead; they have just started!
The Bolivian guerillas are marching steadily, and we do not hesitate
to forecast their brilliant final success which will establish SOCIALISM in
Latin America.

From the beginning, our country has lived through a revolutionary
experience whose continental consequences are unimaginable. The
beginning of our fight, however, was accompanied by a tragic setback in
the irreparable loss of our friend, comrade, and commander, Ernesto
"Ché" Guevara, together with many other fighters. They who constituted
the purest and noblest part of generations of our continent, did not hesitate
for a moment to offer their lives on the altar of human redemption.

But all these painful episodes, far from intimidating us, fortify our
revolutionary consciousness, strengthen and increase our decision to fight,
and enable us to produce, in the crucible of war, new fighters and leaders
who wiII render glorious honor and homage to the fallen.

We know why we are fighting. We are not making war for the sake of
war, nor are we deluded visionaries. We trust human beings as such, and
we are not fighting to satisfy personal or party ambitions. Our sale and
final goal is the liberation of Latin America, which is not only our continent,
but also our fatherland, temporarily divided into twenty republics.

We are convinced that the dream of Bolivia and "Ché" to politically
and geographically unify Latin America can only be fulfilled by means of
an armed struggle, which is the only worthy, honest, glorious, and
irreversible way of motivating people. There is no other purer way than
armed combat, of which guerilla warfare is the most efficient.

That is why, as long as there be an honest man in Latin America, the
guerillas will not die, and armed struggle will develop vigorously until such
time that all the people will awaken and rise up in arms against their
common enemy - U.S. imperialism.


To be continued...

To be continued...

[InHocSignoVinces]

The Bolivian guerillas are not dead but have just begun .... For us,
guerilla warfare is a form of prolonged combat that people use to take
power, and whose essential feature is to control the duration.

The first stage of any guerilla struggle consists in surviving until it
can root itself in the people , particularly among the peasants. Starting from
this nucleus, its power will renew itself until it reaches such a degree of
development that it becomes an invincible force ....

In our case, the budding guerilla was not able to surpass this first
stage, but other buds will sprout and reach complete development, until
the enemy is completely crushed.

From this circumstantial fact, our critics drew the conclusion that it
is the way which is wrong. They refuse to pay attention to or to analyze the
causes that provoked our partial and temporary defeat, for to do so would
mean that they would have to judge themselves ....

They watched our fight from afar, and, above all, they isolated it,
refused to aid it, and spread anti-guerilla propaganda in the hearts of their
militant followers. Then, to feign "anti-imperialism," they issued two
communiques of "solidarity" with the guerillas. In actuality, however,
they limited their solidarity to empty talk about their polite moral support
of a small group of "romantic dreamers."

The Bolivian Communist Party leaders talk about getting the party
ready to take power by using all known methods. All people must
participate in the takeover of power, and , since they must be prepared for
that, one must not talk to them about "using all known methods" when one
is preparing a takeover. When the party or a group plans a takeover of
power, it chooses a particular way; to do otherwise is not to take itself
seriously.

They graciously pretend to give up the guerilla way because of its
first defeat, but they promote the "democratic" or "reformist" way, in
spite of the continuous failures of the latter. Let us discard the electoral
problem! No true revolutionary can believe that this is the way to take
control of Bolivia or any other Latin American country.

. . . We are not against people fighting for their economic recovery,
but we are sure that this could be much more fruitfully and effectively
achieved if they were to face a government that has been intimidated and
weakened by the actions of a guerilla nucleus ...

It is this guerilla nucleus that shows the people, by means of facts,
that it is possible to face the might of imperialism and its puppets, and not
only to face it but to defeat it.

People, especially peasants, do not support anything that they do not
believe to exist. To expect their support for a non-existing armed struggle
is to play a game, the way some theoreticians of armed struggle do when
they demand massive support beforehand. The peasants will effectively
support a guerilla nucleus when it shows strength, and only then.

That is why, at the first stage, the goal of the guerillas is to become
strong and to survive in the field of operations, none of which is possible
without an uninterrupted flow of aid from the cities. In our case, this aid
was refused to us by the political forces which knew of the existence of our
movement.

... Some people think we are disbanding, They are fooling
themselves. We are reorganizing our regiments to fight in the mountains,
because we firmly believe that this is the only way to liberate our country
and Latin America from the clutches of Yankee imperialism.

We do not seek to create a political party. but an armed force
capable of facing and defeating the army, which is the main supporting
tool of the existing regime.

Neither will we become the armed instrument of any political
party....

We are fully convinced that guerilla warfare is not an auxiliary tool
of any other "superior form of struggle ." On the contrary , as international
experience has borne out, we believe that it will govern and direct the
emancipation of all our people .

. . . No single group or political party can fulfill the task of liberating
our people . In this we agree with the left wing. We need a broad, anti-imperialistic
front. The question is how to set it up ....

Our brief experience has shown us that much more has been
accomplished in a few months of armed struggle than in many years of
sitting at round tables .

. . The sectarianism of the vanguards is also shown by their desire
to subordinate the guerilla leadership to the political. One might ask: to
whose political leadership? ...

Are they, by chance, trying to divide the conflict into a military and
peaceful struggle and to subordinate the former to the latter? ... Or are
they intending to use the armed conflict merely as a pressure device for the
benefit of the "political struggle" in the cities? ... We prefer a unique,
military-political leadership , taking into account that the conduct of
guerilla warfare must be the responsibility of the most capable
revolutionary squadrons.

The conflict in the cities must assist the guerilla action. Therefore,
the guerillas cannot be led from the cities. It is the guerillas themselves
who must lead; to do otherwise is to condemn them to ignorance , inaction,
and failure. It is the struggle itself that will progressively create its leaders.
The real leaders of the people will arise in the midst of the struggle, and no
one who is a true revolutionary may request the leadership or be afraid of
being deprived thereof.

Throughout the world, the forces of national liberation are dealing
heavy blows to their common enemy: imperialism. The cruel Vietnamese
war, despite its militarization and stabilization of the United States'
economy so as to prevent a crisis, is creating a serious problem for that
country. All the Yankee military might is already impotent to stop that
glorious people under arms.

The struggle of our Vietnamese brethren is the struggle of all the
revolutionaries of the world. They are fighting for and with us, who must
create a second Vietnam, thus fulfilling the legacy of our heroic Ernesto
''Che'' Guevara.

Contrary to the way our enemies and the pseudo-revolutionaries
depict it , the thesis of creating several Vietnams is neither whimsical nor
the fruit of a warlike mentality, but one which corresponds to the reality
that imperialism will never give up its positions voluntarily. And in our
continent, through its department, the Organization of American States, it
will push its lackeys in the various countries to join forces to crush any
rebellions of the people.

This lis} the epoch of continental revolution . ..

We have lost one battle , and in it fell the top leader of the oppressed,
Commander Ernesto "Che" Guevara.

But the guerillas are one, and we will never stop, for we who fought
beside "Che" do not know the meaning of the word "surrender." His blood
and that of the fighters who shed their blood on the Bolivian countryside
will germinate the seed of liberation and convert our continent into a
volcano of fire and destruction against imperialism.

This will be the victorious Vietnam which the romantic, visionary,
and heroic "Che" dreamed and loved.

To achieve these ideals we are ready to win or die.
To achieve these ideals our Cuban comrades died.
To achieve these ideals our Peruvian comrades died.
To achieve these ideals our Argentinian comrades died .
To achieve these ideals our Bolivian comrades died.

All honor and glory to Tania , Joaquin , Pablo Chang, Moises
Guevara, Jorge Vasquez, Aniceto Reynaga, Antonio Jimenez, Coco
Pereda, and to all those who fell bearing arms ....

Let not imperialism and its lackeys sing of victory , because the war
has not ended; it has just begun. Let us return to the mountains! Once
again, our cry of VICTORY OR DEATH will shake Bolivia!

Undoubtedly, this document has capital importance for the purpose of
understanding and evaluating the internationally planned program of intense
Communistic subversion in Latin America, Those who still believe the
Communist menace to be a myth, something no longer in existence, or a
product of feverish and sickly minds, will perhaps open their eyes to the real,
imminent and most active danger faced by all Latin American countries,
especially Mexico. To quote Inti Peredo: "The ... guerillas are not dead, they
have just started! ... [w]e do not hesitate to forecast their brilliant final success
[and that of the revolutionary forces] which will establish SOCIALISM IN
LATIN AMERICA."


According to the document which we have just analyzed, the guerilla
warfare of "Che" Guevara was a revolutionary experience whose continental
consequences are still unpredictable. The forces of subversion do not deem it to
have been a failure or a decisive triumph of the free world but, on the contrary,
a fruitful experience for the militants of international Communism. ''Che'' will
become a martyr and a world hero of revolutionary socialism.


To be continued...

[InHocSignoVinces]

I believe that one of the most powerful and frightful weapons of the Latin
American guerillas is their mysticism which unfortunately, the free world no
longer has, for those in charge of fomenting and preserving it for future
generations have been most active in fighting and destroying it. What would we
give for that same firmness, unity, and fearlessness in our own Catholic youth?
Unfortunately, the combat spirit of that glorious Mexican Catholic Youth for
Action (ACJM) of the time of Fr. Berguend is already over! It pains me to say
that it was the bishops who killed the old spirit in order to create a new, flexible,
accommodating, and compromising ACJM.


Inti Peredo said: " ... [All] these painful episodes, far from intimidating
us, fortify our revolutionary consciousness, strengthen and increase our
decision to fight, and enable us to produce, in the tough crucible of war, new
fighters and leaders who will render glorious honor and homage to the fallen."
If only those of us who believe in God and fight for freedom were to speak like
this!


When Inti Peredo compares the attitude of the active, militant guerillas
who face death, with that of the urban Communists who sympathize with the
former and aid them to some extent while avoiding danger , he makes an
observation that we can apply to our own people. Many there are who say they
are enemies of Communism and cautiously aid those who fight ideological,
moral, social, and political subversion, but how few are those who dare to
participate in the battle and to jeopardize, if not their lives, at least their social
position, economic interests, and comfortsl


Inti Peredo's document must be deeply studied and understood, so as to
assure us of a legitimate defense.


On the other hand, the most upsetting and embarrassing document for the
Church in its struggle between liberty and slavery is the one published in that
same issue of United Front (Frente Unido) , which was widely circulated in
Bogota at the time of the International Eucharistic Congress. We have read it
before because Excelsior had previously published it in Mexico. It deserves to
be reproduced:

THE APOSTOLIC NUNCIO TO CUBA SPEAKS

Monsignor Cesare Zacchi, Apostolic Nuncio to Cuba, is a post-Conciliar
bishop: young , tall, congenial, and with an unobtrusive intellectual manner.

Between 1959 and 1960, entire communities of priests and nuns
abandoned Havana and other cities, either as a protest to alleged restrictions to
freedom of worship (their migration performing the function of stimulating a
political crisis, anyway) or because of governmental requests, in the face of
indisputable evidence of their involvement in counter-revolutionary activities.
Since 1959, and even after the Bay of Pigs invasion, deposits of weapons were
discovered behind main altars. In the years which followed, priests were involved
in almost every disclosed conspiracy, including one in which several Franciscans
took part in a plot to murder the prime minister (some of them are still in prison).
The government, in turn, modified numerous ecclesiastical privileges in the past
nine years: priests were forbidden to wear their garb in public following the
manner of the Mexican Revolution; vast church properties were confiscated (the
wound has still not healed); and religious school teaching has been constrained.

Since his arrival in Havana in 1960, Monsignor Zacchi has had to face this
complicated dispute. The Church maintained a humble and stubborn stance,
considering itself persecuted. while the government refused to deem it innocent
and dissociated from its former protectors, the members of the large oligarchy
which had been thrown out of the country, and considered it to be an accomplice
of the designing United States interventionists. The Nuncio himself avows that
this situation had (and has) little to do with the problem of religious expression
itself. Catholic worship has never been prohibited in Cuba. Even in 1961 after
the invasion, Father Pardiñas, Chaplain of the Rebel Army, celebrated a field
Mass for thousands of believers at the civic plaza in Havana.

The last issue of Charity Almanac, a Catholic magazine that has been
published in Havana for 84 years without interruption, indicates that 200
churches, 15 male religious communities, and 16 feminine orders are
functioning normally in this country. In the province of Havana alone, there are
three medical care centers (two of which are foundling homes) and four hospitals
under the control of religious orders, as well as three Catholic book stores.

Fr. Hilario Chaurrondo, C.M., editor of the Almanac, writes in the same
issue:

The priests are working harder, taking care of six or seven churches.
Catechetical schools are flourishing and finishing schools are being organized.
The liturgical movement is comforting; now. almost everyone prays aloud and
knows what he is praying.

To be continued...

[InHocSignoVinces]

Fidel Castro's New Attitude


Until last year, the hierarchy consisted of the two Archbishops of Havana
and Santiago de Cuba, and four bishops. At the end of 1967, the Vatican
appointed bishops for three more auxiliary dioceses without consulting the
government, which accepted the appointees. Moreover, during this time,
Monsignor Zacchi was anointed Bishop of Zelia. Dignitaries of the Canadian
Church came to Havana for the formalities, which took place at the 400-year-old
cathedral. The government provided cars and various other facilities for the
visitors and the Nuncio to travel over the country. Thus, almost forgotten
pictures were seen again in Cuba: Fidel Castro at a party, surrounded by
bishops and archbishops of the Cuban dioceses, and church prelates riding in
Soviet-made military jeeps through the countryside.


Since freedom of worship is not involved, the clash between the Cuban
clergy and the revolutionary government is political, rather than religious. It is
the Church's millenary wisdom which speaks when Zacchi says that the Church
must accommodate to all kinds of systems in order to save souls and lead the
flock. This is the thesis which the Nuncio is applying in Cuba, with positive
results for the Vatican, insofar as its goals, to remain and to preach, are
concerned.


I asked Monsignor Zacchi if this orientation comes from specific
guidelines provided by the Vatican Council. "Not at all," he answered. "It
came before the Council, although it coincides, to some extent, with what the
Council decided."


I then asked him if he considers himself as a neutral third party, as an
arbiter in the quarrel between Church and government. He does not deny it. "I
am not impartial, of course, but, because of my diplomatic position, I am in
touch with governmental spheres, whereas such contacts are still forbidden to
Church officials. Therefore, I have unwillingly become a sort of voice of the
Church before the government. At the same time, I advise the hierarchy as to
what I believe to be the regime's opinion on these problems."


Question: "Have the grounds for the government's distrust of the Church
and clergy disappeared?"

Answer: "The emigration of dissidents to the United States relieved some
of the pressure being exerted on the clergy. Since the worms [counterrevolutionaries]
were the main link between clergy and society, their political
ideas were unavoidably adopted by them. The clergy, therefore, usually got a
distorted picture of the revolutionary movement. As these persons began to
leave, the priests began to get in touch with other Catholics, and, as a result,
they are now able to judge things from a different viewpoint." (The italics in
this section, concerning Monsignor Zacchi have been added by the author.)

Question: "Does this mean that the clergy is in the process of becoming
integrated?"

Answer: "No, we are still far from that possibility, but, on the other hand,
some priests have changed their minds, partially as a result of certain
governmental acts of tolerance. For example, some priests who had emigrated
for political reasons have been allowed to return and work at their parishes."

Question: "What improvements, then, do you see in the situation?"

Answer: " In the past few years, both parties have realized some basic
changes in their convictions. The Church has realized that the revolution is
irreversible. A few years ago, the priests considered it to be temporary, that any
moment conditions would change and the atheistic, socialistic regime would
turn out to be but a nightmare of the past. But now, socialism has been
institutionalized, and the revolution has proven to be perpetual. In this
stabilized situation, the Church has had to plan how to enter the new society.
The government, in turn, has detected this new mentality. Through the Nuncio
it speaks with the Church or at least gets first-hand information about how it is
currently thinking. This is the beginning of mutual confidence. Many things can
improve if the Cuban Church realizes that this is its country, and if the
government becomes aware of the Church's willingness to work together with
it...

Question: "Can you easily see Fidel Castro when you deem it necessary?"
(It has been said that the Nuncio and Castro are personal friends but
nevertheless, Monsignor Zacchi is cautious.)

Answer: "I last talked to him two years ago when he came to a reception at
my residence. Last year he accepted another invitation but cancelled his visit
because of the outbreak of the Middle East war. As you may know, he seldom
visits Western embassies , and the Vatican may be no exception; there are,
however, other channels to reach the governmental level"

(On one hand, the answers of this subtle, new-style, diplomatic Bishop are
quite sincere with respect to the revolutionary fact itself.)


To be continued...

[InHocSignoVinces]

Question: "You have lived in Cuba long enough to see all the stages of a
revolution now entering its adult age. In the beginning , you saw the condition of
this country under the previous regimes. Do you think things have improved,
and that the people have benefited by the revolution?"

Answer: "The people have experienced radical changes in their material
condition, so much so that they now have a standard of living which they did
not have previously. Redistribution of wealth and social justice now prevail, in
contrast to the past."

Question: "Do you think a Catholic must be an integral part of the
revolution?"

Answer: "I affirm this all the time. Catholics must join the mass
organizations of the society in which they live. They must cooperate in
voluntary works, join the militias,join sport and cultural organizations, and also
be active in student movements and professional entities. This will naturally
promote mutual influences, with the result that certain Catholic ideals and
concepts of life will penetrate the concepts of the revolution. Thus, the
revolution will become truly representative of all the forms of feeling in this
nation. "

Question: "Would you accept a young Catholic joining the Communist
party?"

Answer: "Well, here there is only one party, the Communist party, and its
cadres perform important concrete functions designed to carry out social change.
I see no inconvenience in a Catholic accepting the Marxist economic theories
for the practical purpose of this activity within a revolutionary cadre."

Question: "What about the contradiction, in such a case, between
dialectic materialism and Christian concepts concerning certain processes and
their origins, between free will and determinism, and between certain
collectivistic approaches and religion-endorsed individualism?"

Answer: "I think that for practical purposes those contradictions would
not be at stake but would only be subject to theoretical discussion. A Catholic
thus integrated would of course always maintain certain reserves with respect to
specific demands." This answer notably defines the Nuncio's new viewpoint
with respect to the giddy process of the revolution.

Question: "As you know, Fidel Castro was educated at a Jesuit school and
was a Catholic while an adolescent. Taking into account his present behavior,
would you consider him to be a Christian?"

Answer: "Of course he is not an ideological Christian, for he has declared
himself a Marxist-Leninist, but I do consider him to be ethically Christian."

The above statements of the Nuncio to Havana, which have been
published in Excelsior from Mexico and United Front from Bogota, are
indisputable evidence of the Vatican's regretful turnabout toward the socialist
and communizing left wing. They also explain the real meaning of the change of
structures which was mentioned so often in Bogota and Medellin and appears
so frequently in episcopal documents and in spontaneous statements of
progressivistic lay leaders, such as Alvarez leaza and Alejandro Aviles.
Communism and its preceding stage, socialism, which the previous Popes had
deemed to be intrinsically evil, incompatible with Catholic doctrine, and
dreadful monsters from Hell, have been revised and subtly revalued according
to new Conciliary views. The progressivist ecclesiastics have willingly agreed to
dialogue about salvation with the representatives of the sinister might of Hell.
Peaceful coexistence between love and hate, truth and error, liberty and
slavery, plunder, spoils, firing squads, legalized crime, misfortune, ruin,
inexpressible suffering, desperation, and the death of uncountable past and
present victims of Communism in Cuba and throughout the world, has,
according to this diplomat of the Vatican, been put into practice in the Cuba of
Fidel Castro.


To be continued...

[InHocSignoVinces]

What did Monsignor Zacchi really say? The following are the principal
points covered by the questions and answers above:

1. The 1959 and 1960 exodus of priests and religious from Cuba was due
to their disagreement with the new regime and to their counter-revolutionary
activities, not to religious persecution. Besides, their migration was intended to
provoke a political crisis.

2. Caches of weapons were found behind main altars.
It is curious to notice the lack of perspicacity of the alleged
conspirators who unanimously chose temples and main altars as hiding places
for their weapons. Of course, we think the Castro government ought to have
widely disclosed what the material evidence was.

What an eloquent argument to annihilate the reactionary forces! We
also believe that the Cuban patriots, provided they found a more convenient
hiding place, were exercising their legitimate right in hiding weapons they
intended to use to resist international Communism's bloody tyranny.

3. The Nuncio admitted that Fidel's government has imposed severe
restrictions on Church activities, among which the prohibition of religious
school teaching was not the least. But these are just peccata minuscula!

4. The position of the Nuncio, since his arrival in 1960, was extremely
delicate, as he found himself caught between two equally intransigent rivals, the
Church and the government. The Church felt it was being persecuted, while the
government considered the Church to be guilty and allied with its former
sponsors, the rich , the oligarchs, and the imperialists.

This has always been the pretext of those who persecute the Church.
When Calles1 expelled bishops, shot priests, profaned temples, sent Catholics to
jail, etc., he was supported by statutes he himself had enacted, and whose
practical goal was to destroy the Catholic religion of Mexico. He said, " I do not
persecute religion; I persecute rebel clergymen who do not abide by the law."
He failed to say that the law denied religion , the Church, and the clergy.

As a matter of fact, it was Cuban ecclesiastics like Archbishop Perez
Cerantes of Santiago de Cuba, who not only saved the lives of Fidel Castro and
the handful of plotters accompanying him, but also rendered possible the
Communist revolution. These ecclesiastics thought they were aiding liberators
while, in fact, they were aiding Communism. When Castro triumphed, the
Osservatore Romano congratulated the Cuban people on behalf of the Vatican.

5. The Nuncio , although a diplomat, cannot be an impartial observer or
an arbiter of this kind of dispute. Even though he is a diplomat, he is, above all,
a Catholic , a priest, a bishop. His diplomatic status is that of a representative of
the Pope, of the Vicar of Jesus Christ, and head of the Catholic Church. When
he affirms that he is impartial, he ceases to be a diplomat, because he ceases to
be a Catholic and a representative of the Pope. "He who is not with Me, is
against Me," said Christ.

6. Worship has never been prohibited in Cuba. Avowing this to be true
for argument's sake, it does not mean that the Catholic Church may take
liberties in the performance of its highest, divinely prescribed duties. We have
already seen that governmental restrictions have enslaved the silent Church in
Cuba, as in all Communist countries. If the Nuncio contends that the present
condition of the Church in Cuba had and has little to do with religious
expression, namely with the freedom of the Church on that island, it means that,
despite his diplomatic status, His Excellency has not realized what the real
condition of the Catholic Church in this country is. Perhaps he believes Cuba to
be a peaceful paradise where progressivist religion enjoys complete freedom
because he is judging in accordance with the diplomatic privileges the Castroite
tyranny graciously awards him. The same applies to Hungary, Poland, and
other Communist-ruled countries.

That famous field Mass celebrated by the ill-famed chaplain of the
rebel army, Father Pardinas, was the last hoax Fidel and his men used to try to
conceal their Communist ideology and their links with the Soviets from the
Cuban people and the world.

7. To help deceive us and to justify the Papal Nuncio's scandalous
statements beforehand, the journalist quotes precise figures he takes from the
newest issue of Charity Almanac, a Catholic magazine that has been published
on the island for 84 years:

Presently, there are 210 churches, 15 male religious communities, and 16
feminine ones. In Havana alone, there are three medical care centers.
Catechetical schools are flourishing and finishing schools are being organized.
The liturgical movement is comforting; three new bishops have been appointed
by the Vatican with the consent of the government. To facilitate the celebration
of the consecration of the Nuncio, the government provided army jars and jeeps
for the nunciature, so that the consecrating Canadian bishops could be at ease
during their stay in Cuba.

We cannot help admiring the candor of this journalist who, without
any further examination, accepts figures provided by Castro's police and
research sources. Is it possible he knows nothing about the subtle, deceitful
tactics Communists use to paralyze their enemies' defense and to turn such
defense into unconditional support of their own goals? In spite of his efforts to
use smooth expressions, the Papal Nuncio is not able to convince us that the
Cuban Church has not been or is not being persecuted. His is a surrendering
attitude.


To be continued...


1 Plutarco Elias Calles. Masonic President of Mexico from 1924 to 1928, was a
nominal Catholic, who, like most Marrano Jews, openly practiced Catholicism but
secretly practiced Talmudic Judaism . Marrano Jews also conspire to overthrow
Christianity and Christian culture in order to establish a New World Order which, in
reality, is the old Babylonian pagan world order imparted to the Pharisees during the
Babylonian Captivity.

[InHocSignoVinces]

8. "I have unwillingly become a sort of voice of the Church before the
government," says the Nuncio. "At the same time, I advise the hierarchy as to
what I believe to be the regime's opinion on these problems." Thus, the role of
the Nuncio is that of a receiving and transmitting radio station. He conveys the
Church 's wishes to Fidel, and the regime's replies to the bishops. In this way,
the Communist government, through minimal concessions, gets a most
important information office, that of the Nuncio. It is thus understandable how
Fidel and the Nuncio can sit at the same banquet tables. What would we have
thought of Patriarch Perez, if he had accepted the role of an intermediary
between Calles and the Mexican Catholic bishops and people, during the
fateful days of religious persecution?


9. The Nuncio says that the emigration of the dissidents to the United
States relieved some of the pressure being exerted on the clergy, and that the
worms living in Cuba constituted the clergy's main link with Cuban society. He
further states that, as a result, the clergy almost always got deformed pictures of
the revolutionary process, and that, as these people began to leave , the priests
began to get in touch with a different kind of Catholic, with the end result that
they were now able to judge from a different viewpoint.

History will record the Nuncio's shameful words as degrading evidence
of a most abject servility. Is it possible for the Pope's representative to label as "worms" the faithful Catholics and former benefactors of the Church, whose only crime was not to accept Communism? We may conclude with this example that the same priests who today dine at the tables of the wealthy and receive
their generous aid for their apostolic works and their personal benefit, may
tomorrow be associated with their benefactors' enemies, who will insult them
and call them worms.


According to the Pope's official representative, before those miserable
"worms" emigrated, the clergy had wrong ideas and could not evaluate the
revolutionary process correctly because of the pressure exerted by their stupid
parishioners. Now, on the other hand, having been brainwashed and freed from
the obscurantist pressure of the "worms," they judge things from a different
standpoint and not only resign themselves to bow to the beneficial yoke of
Communism, but also efficaciously cooperate in the fulfillment of the
Communist program. They are not yet integrated, but it is certain that some
priests have changed their way of thinking, partly as a result of Castro's
scattered and opportune generous acts.


To be continued...