Clarifying, Arguing and Conjecturing – Folha de S. Paulo, July 23, 1969

by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

Anyone who read my latest article knows about the success of the Argentine TFP in its campaign against IDO-C and the “Prophetic Groups” carried out alongside the Brazilian TFP’s efforts.

This success has naturally caught the attention of The New York Times, which, in its July 12 edition, published a letter from Buenos Aires on the subject, containing some accurate and some false information.

Most of this information relates to the Argentine and Chilean TFPs. I don’t know if they will deny it; I will let readers know if they do.

The New York Times article also mentions the Brazilian TFP, which I want to correct immediately.

1. It is not true that the TFP exists only in Brazil, as the newspaper seems to suggest. Nor is it true that only branches of our organization are present in other South American countries where our ideals are emerging. The TFPs in Chile and Argentina are fully authorized entities with legal status under their respective countries’ laws and operate entirely independently. The Uruguayan Nucleo de Defensa de la Tradición, Familia y Propiedad (Center for the Defense of Tradition, Family, and Property), and similar organizations thriving in many other South American nations, enjoy the same independence. As expected in this era of increasingly close South American cooperation, collaboration among the various TFPs is friendly and diligent. However, they are not part of a legally established international federation.

2. I dismiss with a disdainful wave of the hand the abstruse hypothesis that the TFP has an “at least indirect” relationship with the murder of the young and ill-fated Fr. Henrique Pereira Neto, as The New York Times says. The TFP is above such a hypothesis, and that is all I have to say.

3. The New York Times also reports: “Several organization leaders in Chile were arrested while attempting to distribute copies of a book titled Frei, the Chilean Kerensky. The book accuses President Eduardo Frei Montalva of paving the way for a possible communist takeover.”

The book Frei, the Chilean Kerensky, was not authored by a member of the Chilean TFP, as the Times seems to imply. It was written by Mr. Fábio Vidigal Xavier da Silveira, a lawyer and farmer from Amparo. On January 8, I published an article in this column about him, including a summary of his work and its international impact.

According to the well-known Parisian newspaper Le Figaro (July 10 issue), the CCC is probably responsible for the murder of the unfortunate Father Henrique Pereira Neto. Per that newspaper, the CCC would be an extension of the “respectable integrist league ”Defense of Tradition, Family… and Property.”

I’m not authorized to defend the CCC, but it’s important to clarify that the TFP has no association with this or any other entity. Everyone reasonably informed in Brazil knows this.

I dedicated part of my latest article to discussing the interview His Eminence Cardinal Rossi gave to a São Paulo morning newspaper about TFP activities. With all due respect to the prelate, I listed all the objections his words suggested to me and didn’t hide my surprise at his claim that the existence of communist priests in Brazil is nothing more than an unlikely hypothesis, verifiable at most in one or two exceptional cases. It seems that, for His Eminence, a communist priest is such an unthinkable thing that it’s hard to believe.

When asked about my statement in the same newspaper, His Eminence neither refused to answer nor refuted my arguments. He simply repeated, almost verbatim, what he had already said. Repetition is one of the many rhetorical tools. Napoleon, who was not inclined to dialogue, said it was the best.

What can I do in the face of such repetition? Does His Eminence even doubt the existence of one or two communist priests? I confess I am disheartened because then His Eminence would not believe in the alarming infiltration of atheism into the Catholic ranks for similar reasons. Given His Excellency’s high hierarchical position, I wonder about his mindset regarding the resolutions at CNBB’s ongoing meeting, from which I would like to expect direct and effective measures against this evil.

The coincidence of events is remarkable, if not dramatic. Just before this notable gathering occurred, Catolicismo published a double issue—which the TFP distributes nationwide—drawing attention to Brazilians about the widespread and organized infiltration of atheism into the Church.

Two statements outside the TFP ranks merit careful consideration and highlight the same danger.

One was the article “Wake Up, Lord Bishops” (O Estado de S. Paulo, July 19, 1969), in which Gustavo Corção compellingly urges our prelates to heed the warning raised by Catolicismo.

The other was São Paulo’s Governor Abreu Sodré’s explicit reference to materialistic infiltration in the Church (Folha de S. Paulo, edition of the 19th of this month).

Finally, and most importantly, since I am allowed to repeat myself, I must recall the testimony of 1,600,368 Brazilians in the historic petition that the TFP launched in 1968, concerning the specific issue of infiltrating communist materialism into Catholic circles.

Considering all these testimonies, is it difficult to admit that such infiltration exists?

Will the CNBB defend the Brazilian nation against this significant threat by taking clear, strong, decisive actions to eliminate it? Or will it also consider the issue impossible from the start?

These are the questions I wait for answers to in prayer.