Disconcerting Disconcert – Folha de S. Paulo, April 26, 1977

 

by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

 

For reasons I will explain below, I have refrained until now from commenting on the shocking accusations by Most Rev. Geraldo de Proença Sigaud, Archbishop of Diamantina, against Dom Pedro Casaldáliga, Bishop of São Félix do Araguaia, and Dom Tomás Balduino, Bishop of Goiás Velho.

I also did not comment on the timely statement by Dom José Pedro Costa, Archbishop Apostolic Administrator of Uberaba, regarding communist infiltration in the Church.

However, the period of silence I had imposed on myself has now ended, so I will speak with my usual frankness.

Regarding Bishop Pedro Casaldáliga’s doctrinal position, what I have to say is fully covered in my recent study, “The Church Facing the Escalating Communist Threat.” I was the first to publicize the restless prelate’s rhymes in our country. The work is now in its third edition, with 46,000 copies available throughout Brazil. Incidentally, I have not received a single defense of the prelate’s doctrinal position from any corner of the country. I have received only a few exaggerated interjections without any argumentation.

Given such wide publicity, it is not my place to revisit all of this here.

As for Bishop Tomás Balduino, for the time being, I know little more than what I stated in my book (p. 30).

All that remains is for me to say something about the gesture Archbishop Sigaud made.

I worked with him for many years, not so long ago, and came to appreciate his intelligence and culture firsthand. This is enough to gauge how much conclusive force he must have put into both the selection of the documents he presented to the Apostolic Nunciature and the arguments he must have used.

Regarding Dom Sigaud’s stance, I can only say that I see it as a harmonious continuation of the noble and lofty fearlessness I have witnessed in him.

It is a pity that, for the time being, there has been almost no publicity in São Paulo for the lucid, intelligently nuanced, precise, and episcopally courageous text of the Coadjutor Archbishop of Uberaba. Any Brazilian who follows the contemporary tragedy of the Church in Brazil with Catholic eyes and heart can only feel admiration and gratitude for His Excellency’s frank and timely intervention.

That said, let us move on to another aspect of the topic, which I will not avoid: the CNBB.

As of this writing, on Wednesday, the CNBB has not yet had time to issue its expected and indispensable statement regarding Bishop José Pedro Costa’s pronouncement.

The overall atmosphere from the episcopal body regarding Dom Sigaud’s courageous stance is surprising, bordering on bewilderment. “What, so there are communist bishops? And how dare a bishop say this about two colleagues?” This is what I sense in the CNBB’s statements.

I confess that what I find most disconcerting about this whole episode is precisely the disconcert itself.

How could the CNBB ignore the serious and dangerous communist infiltration not only among the Catholic laity but also within the clergy? Is it possible that the CNBB has ignored or forgotten the message the TFP sent to Paul VI during his 1968 trip to Medellin, which made him aware of their “cry of anguish…from the depths of their souls, seeing the communist danger grow thanks to the continuous agitation of a minority of clergy and laity who incense certain bishops with the Machiavellian plan of forming with them “a politburo to dictatorially rule the entire Church in Brazil”?”

The TFP message added that the leftist move aimed to channel “the Church’s invaluable support into an extensive communist agitation that would overthrow the government and dissolve the Armed Forces … to silence the discontented through terror or expel them from the country. This would end up, as happened in Cuba, with the confiscation of rural and urban properties, as well as industrial and commercial enterprises. Has the CNBB forgotten this message, which was widely reported in the press?”

Did the CNBB also forget that, during a 58-day campaign, TFP volunteers collected 1,600,368 signatures nationwide for this message to Paul VI (the largest petition in our history), including fifteen archbishops and bishops, five ministers of state, two state governors, two army marshals, two air force marshals, five admirals, eight generals, two senators, two vice-governors, twelve state secretaries, numerous magistrates, university professors, federal and state deputies, mayors, and city councilmen?

How can we explain that the CNBB forgot that in 1968, nineteen archbishops and bishops—including Dom Geraldo de Proença Sigaud and the illustrious Bishop of Campos, Dom Antônio de Castro Mayer—sent a message to the late President Costa e Silva, from which I highlight this excerpt: “Statements by clergy and laypeople … give the impression that leftist and subversive tendencies … constitute a widespread opinion among bishops, priests, and laypeople. This impression is caused in part by multiple leftist statements emanating from Catholic circles, by these pronouncements’ strident and demagogic character, and finally by the sensationalist coverage that a considerable part of the press gives them” (cf. Catolicismo, Campos, nos. 212-214, August-October 1968). This message—like that of the TFP before it—has since been widely disseminated in the country’s main media outlets.

I spoke of Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer, that prelate with privileged intelligence and culture and dazzlingly fearless public action, who is gaining renown among anticommunists worldwide as the Athanasius of the 20th century. In 1972, he published the Pastoral Letter on Cursillos in Christianity, in which he documented (pp. 77-101) serious symptoms of communist infiltration in this lay organization, which the CNBB had approved and vigorously promoted. Ninety-two thousand six hundred copies of the work were sold in Brazil alone. Its impact was so great, even within Cursillista ranks, that the once-flourishing organization withered and dwindled to its current state. Has the CNBB forgotten or ignored all this?

Could the CNBB be unaware of the sad document issued by its Regional Sul II (the episcopal body of the state of Paraná), which, predicting a communist victory in Brazil in 1976, urged its brothers in the episcopate to collaborate with the red regime, even if it persecuted the Church? I published this document in my book The Church Facing the Escalating Communist Threat (pp. 87-95). Some 46,000 Brazilians now own and have read the alarming document from Regional Sul II.

Why, then, is the CNBB so disconcerted by Bishop Sigaud’s claim that Bishops Casaldáliga and Tomás Balduíno are communists?

I conclude with a brief explanation.

When addressing Bishops Casaldáliga and Balduino, Bishop Sigaud made no mention of my publication on the subject. I dismiss the idea that this was motivated by pettiness, which I have never seen in him throughout our years of acquaintance.

There must have been other reasons. Out of respect for them, I decided not to intervene in the matter until my silence became inexplicable to the countless friends who honor me with their trust across Brazil.

Thus pressed, I’ve finally spoken up only after much pressure.

How could I refuse to extend this kindness to those so deserving of it?