Dom Helder’s Three Remarkable Successes – Folha de S. Paulo, October 30, 1968
by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira
Brazilians who are confused and apprehensive about Dom Helder Câmara’s actions have even more reasons to feel that way. In fact, three events this week marked undeniable successes for him.
The first was launching his “Action, Justice, and Peace” initiative in Propriá, a town in the heart of an area of Sergipe seen as highly favorable for his movement’s growth.
Despite claiming his actions are peaceful, Dom Helder did not hesitate to warn at the ceremony that the government and country faced a deadline for violence: “If the government does not solve Brazil’s problem within five years, the looming violence will gain ground and no forces will be able to stop it,” he proclaimed. In other words, Brazil must humbly accept the reforms the fiery prelate demands, or he predicts violence will erupt.
To our knowledge, no one has come forward to raise any objections to the founder of “Action, Justice, and Peace,” not even a small one: Either Brazil is aware of the widespread extent of its suffering, or it is not. If it is, then what is the point of Dom Helder promoting people’s “awakening” with such fanfare? If it is not, then isn’t it precisely this “awakening” that could incite the violence Dom Helder warns about? After all, no one ultimately revolts against what they do not see or are unaware of.
Undoubtedly, the silence in which Dom Helder’s cry unabashedly echoed was a victory for him.
* * *
Another success for Dom Helder was the communiqué issued by the Central Committee of the National Conference of Bishops of Brazil at the end of its meeting. At one point, the document expresses joy because “everywhere, bishops and priests in Brazil” promote “movements aimed at helping the human and Christian advancement of our country’s immense marginalized masses.” This sentence clearly includes Dom Helder’s movement, among others.
After this initial praise, the episcopal body defends its movement, which has faced criticism here and there: “We are glad to see, and it is fair to proclaim that no personalism or desire for self-promotion inspires such movements, nor are they armed against people or institutions, nor do they aim to create commotion or rebellion. Their roots are pastoral. … And so, they are a force against violence (of structures and rebellion) and a (perhaps one of the last) forces in favor of peace.”
If the movements that bishops and priests promote “everywhere” deserve these words without restrictions, they clearly include Recife, its Archbishop Dom Helder, and the movement he founded.
In short, we cannot help but see in these texts a subtle yet clear praise, and an implicit but strong defense of “Action, Justice, and Peace” by Brazil’s highest church authority. This marks Dom Helder’s second achievement.
If our interpretation is wrong, if words no longer hold their natural meaning, and if CNBB’s Central Committee believes the opposite of what is written here and considers Dom Helder’s movement neither defensible nor praiseworthy, let them come forward and say so. Countless faithful will rejoice.
* * *
However, one might wonder, isn’t TFP also part of this overall praise?
No. The praise is clearly aimed at movements fostered by bishops and priests. The TFP is a civic organization with bishops and priests as friends, but it is led and operated by laypeople.
Furthermore, while the communiqué from CNBB’s Central Committee does not mention the TFP, a news item circulated by that body’s secretariat does not protect us from accusations and vilification (I am relying on this genuine text and disregarding some media outlets’ sensationalist and somewhat confusing news reports). The reader should remember that we have just successfully promoted a petition triggered by the scandalous writings of Fr. Comblin, a professor at the Theological Institute of Recife, which operates under Bishop Helder’s authority. Now read this news item distributed by the mentioned secretariat.
“Tradition, Family, and Property Society.” Bishop Vicente Scherer will present this matter. He discussed the history of “integralism” from its beginnings in the last century, showing that the TFP is part of this movement. One of the most serious issues with its activity is its interference in the life of the dioceses. After Bishop Scherer’s presentation, several bishops spoke to clarify the matter and share their own experiences. In the end, they decided to form a three-member commission to propose practical measures to the Central Committee.
This is a harsh attack. They allegedly showed at the Central Committee that our activities have several “serious aspects,” without giving us a chance to respond. What are these aspects? Only two were mentioned. One is our supposed connection with integrism (which is not the same as integralism, with which we also have nothing to do). The news report provides no evidence, contenting itself with accusations. The other is even more confusing: what are the so-called “interferences in the life of the dioceses”? How can anyone defend themselves against such claims? Despite all this vagueness, the public has learned that CNBB’s Central Committee has already decided, in principle, to take “practical measures” against the alleged evil. What measures? Let’s wait and see.
How can anyone fail to see that this strong rejection of the TFP impacts the million and a half Brazilians who signed our petition, whose outcry is ignored by the Central Committee? In fact, the Bishop’s Central Committee did not express any concern about leftist infiltration in Catholic circles. They are not worried about this evil but instead take action against the organization that dared to expose such infiltration. How can Father Comblin not celebrate? This Belgian priest’s victory over 1,500,000 Brazilians is an indirect win for Bishop Helder, who entrusted him with a position and never asked him to disavow it.
Finally, a melancholic and possibly off-topic question: when immorality infiltrates parts of the Catholic community and a bulletin published under CNBB’s auspices praises nudity and pornographic scenes in theater (cf. Boletim Telepax, no. 125); when a Catholic magazine defends homosexuality (cf. Vozes – Revista Católica de Cultura, September 1967, 792-803), and nuns are shown wearing inappropriate swimsuits (cf. O Cruzeiro, July 20, 1968), why does CNBB’s Central Committee remain silent about these issues while praising Dom Helder’s movement and criticizing the TFP?
This question might upset some readers, but there’s no need to get upset or offended. Resentment and anger are not valid reasons.
