Manifesto to the Nations
A Brazilian Bishop is Excommunicated
An Article from the New York Times
Published on Saturday, July 7, 1945
Rio de Janeiro, July 6
The Most Rev. Don Carlos Duarte da Costa, Catholic Bishop of Maura in Sao Paulo State, was excommunicated today, the Vatican asserting that he had violated canon law tenets by raising the pennon of rebellion and preaching discord to the faithful.
The Most Rev. Jaime de Barros Camara, Archbishop of Rio de Janeiro, authorized by the Vatican, circularized the excommunication in all the Brazilian churches.
Bishop Duarte has been regularly advocating the moulding of the present Catholic Church under more liberal foundations and doing away with practices which he said, worked when the church was
founded but which had no part in the modern world.
He has been called Communist and was once questioned by the police. He has been championing the abolition of celibacy. Priests, he has said, should be married and raise families. He has been
condemning the present status of priests as immoral.
The revision of the Brazilian laws on divorce, which the Catholic Church has fought regularly every time in the past when some lawmaker in Congress here brought up the matter for the Government to enact laws making divorce legal, was one of his favourite topics.
Apparently realizing that he was fighting a losing battle, he recently launched a campaign calling on priests to marry, leave the church and form a “national Christian church” in which all priests would
have wives and in which divorce would be allowed.
To a correspondent on the newspaper Globo in Sao Paulo, Bishop Duarte declared that today was founded the “Brazilian Catholic Church.” He added that it had many followers and would continue to
fight “Roman church fascism.”
He also said that he would continue to use priestly cassock and all his episcopal insignia, but would no longer use the title Bishop of Maura, “because now I am the Bishop of Rio de Janeiro.”
Rebel in Rio
An article from Time Magazine
Published on Monday, July 23, 1945
The Roman Catholic Church excommunicated one of its bishops last week. Said the bishop blandly: "I consider today one of the happiest days of my life."
It was not the first time Dom Carlos Duarte da Costa, onetime Bishop of Botucatu in Sao Paulo, had been in his church's black books. In 1934, he publicly refused to follow a papal nunciate's political instructions. He was thereupon quietly retired, given the honorary title of Bishop of Maura, no diocese. From the outside, Duarte took an increasingly critical view of what he considered his church's political leanings. He became increasingly outspoken and unpopular with his superiors.
Last May, 57-year-old Bishop Duarte gave newspaper interviews accusing Brazil's papal nunciate of Nazi-Fascist spying. He accused Rome of aiding and abetting Hitler. Finally he heretically announced plans to set up his own Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church, in which priests would be permitted to marry (and hold regular jobs in the lay world), confessions and rosaries would be abolished, bishops would be elected by popular vote. After that, his excommunication was inevitable.
Last
week Dom Carlos, calling himself "Bishop of Rio de Janeiro," told
reporters that he hopes soon to ordain ten married lawyers and
professional men as priests in his new church.
Meanwhile, in the tiny blue-walled chapel that is part of his unostentatious house in Rio's suburbs, he baptizes, marries, celebrates Mass daily. The Vatican appeared undisturbed by its latest rival.
Manifesto to the Nations:
Reading the newspaper of July 6
of this year, that a man, who was my equal, with the same power that I
have, a Bishop like me, Pastor of souls like I am, excommunicated me.
May it be known by the Brazilian public that, during the first few
centuries of the Church, no point of doctrine was ever decided by
decree of the Pope alone.
The Pope is simply the Bishop of Rome, like I was Bishop of Botucatu,
and later titular Bishop of Maura and now, by will of the people,
Bishop of Rio de Janeiro.
The Bishop of Rome, in the first four centuries of Christianity, never
took part in the troubles with the gnostics, montanists and chiliasts.
An excerpt from "Dominus Iesus": On the Unicity and Salvific
Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church , Article IV, ¶17,
published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
There does not exist, in historical records, copies of pontifical
dogmatic decrees in the first four centuries of the Church. Even in the
dispute of Paulo of Samosato about Christ, that took place in the
Eastern Church, provoking many and great synods, no Bishop of Rome
participated. I say "Bishop of Rome" and not "Pope", because this name
"Pope", which means "father", by decree of Gregory VII in the Roman
Synod of 1073, was arrogated to himself as an exclusive character,
while in the Greek Church, simple priests were popes, considered by the
faithful as being spiritual fathers. It was from that time on the Popes
considered themselves the Fathers of all Christians, that is to say
Popes. Gregory VII created this honorific for himself and his
successors in the Seat of Rome.
My brother in the episcopacy, Eugenio Pacelli, should remind himself
that the first collective manifestation of the Church of Christ was in
Jerusalem, presided over by James, Bishop of Jerusalem, and not by
Peter, nicknamed "Prince of the Apostles" by the Roman Church. The
Epistles of Saint Peter testify that this "principate" never existed
among the first Christians, the faith of Peter being equal to that of
the other Apostles, because they were all men like other men, all frail.
Until the fourth century the Church considered the mother of all
churches, and designated as such by the Eastern Bishops, was the Church
of Jerusalem.
In the first century the Christianity, the national Churches lived and
developed in complete autonomy, without being vassals to the Bishop of
Rome. I call to your attention to the testimony of Tertullian who said:
"Our many churches considered themselves as all belonging to one
church, the first of all founded by the Apostles and mother of the
rest. They are all holy and apostolic and, together, cannot be looked
upon as anything by a singe entity, whose message of Peace, whose
mutual brotherhood, whose bonds of charity unite all the faithful."
The laity and clergy elected their bishops, priests and deacons, this
system lasting until the twelfth century in the Gallic Church. The
faithful took part not only in the election of the bishops, priests and
deacons but also in the assemblies of the councils in true religious
democracies. In the election of the successor to Saint James, first
Bishop of Jerusalem, the Apostles took part as did disciples and
relatives of the Savior who were still alive, choosing Simeon so
testifies Eusebius, in Book III, chapter II. E. S. Clement, at the end
of the first century attests that this mode of proceeding was preserved
by mandate, and later the priests at Nicea describe this process as
being permanent.
Between the years 253 and 257, it was to Carthage that the Bishops of
Mauritania and Numidia resorted in solving the dispute over baptisms by
the heretics. The African Bishops were convened in council by Ciprian,
determining that the baptism conferred by heretics was not valid, which
decision was against the opinion of Stephen, Bishop of Rome. Besides,
says St. Augustine, in his Book II, chapter XV on Baptism, the Bishops
of the Orient and Occident "did not consider schismatic his African
Colleagues, remaining with them as a unity." Why did the notorious
opinion of Stephen not prevail? "Because the Church had not defined
itself in council", says St. Augustine, in his Book IV on Baptism.
Already at this time, Firmiliano, Bishop of Caesarea, doubted that the
anathemas of the Bishop of Rome had "Body and Soul", that they carried
much weight, Ciprian inputting the Bishop of Rome as being arrogant,
obsessed, impudent and heretical. "We judge no one and neither do we
segregate from our communion those who do not share our views. None of
us wants to subjugate one Bishop to another, not to subdue our
colleagues in order to obey a despotic terror - for any among the
Bishop is master of his own will and power and should not be judged by
nor should he himself judge others."
As can be verified by the public, the governing of the Church, in its
early days, rested in the union of the episcopacy and not in the hands
of the Bishop of Rome, as he was equal to the other Bishops.
The Bishop of Rome, gathering to himself secular and political
interests, placing them above the interests of Christ, is ipso facto
excommunicated by world public opinion, segregate from the true Church
of Christ. Taking advantage of secular control he, instead of
universalizing the government of the Catholic Church, made it Italian,
forgetting that Italy, Spain and Gaul Christianized themselves without
the aid of the Bishop of Rome. Their Churches were not bound to Rome by
any vigorous line of descent: they were her sisters, not daughters. The
Roman Pontificate was absolutely unknown to which, during the first six
hundred years, no Church was affiliated, except only the Saxons at the
end of the fourth century.
Excommunication
May it be known by the Brazilian public that the Bishop of Rome,
Eugenio Pacelli, has no authority to excommunicate me and in accord
with what I have made public, I am a more authentic Bishop of Rio de
Janeiro, as I was elected by popular acclamation of the Brazilian
people, than he, the Bishop of Rome, elected by Italian Cardinals.
Nor does the present century accept excommunication, a political tool
of the Middle Ages when the Bishop of Rome, seemingly oblivious to the
evangelical Magna Carta contained in the Sermon on the Mount, spewed
forth his hatred against emperors and kings, who did not submit to the
will of him who made of the Cross a weapon to bathe humanity in blood,
obligating Christ to curse him saying:
"Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, who close to men the
kingdom of heaven: for you neither enter yourselves, nor do you allow
those who would enter to go in" "Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees,
hypocrites, who, tender pretext of reciting long prayers, devour the
houses of widows; you will receive the greater condemnation." "Woe to
you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for you tithe mint and dill and
cumin, and neglect the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy,
and faith; these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.
You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!" "Woe to
you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, who cleanse the outside of a
cup and of a plate, but inside you are full of extortion and rapacity."
"Serpents, race of vipers, how can you escape condemnation to Hell?"
What a contrast between these fulminating accusations, between these
vehement invectives from Our Lord, and his attitude toward the biggest
sinners: the Samaritan woman. Mary Magdalene, the adulterous woman,
whom he forgives without a word of condemnation; with the criminals,
with the good thief, to whom he promised Paradise!
Because all sorts of weakness, of misery, humbly acknowledged and
confessed, attracts compassion and mercy from God. On the other hand,
pride elicits indignation.
Fascism
The good Brazilians know that I was excommunicated because, on
September 17, 1942, I sent the following telegram to His Excellency the
President of the Republic:
"In this moment in which Your Excellency decrees mobilization, I bring
you my embrace and unconditional solidarity, placing myself in the
service of the nation.
With general mobilization, calling all Brazilians to defend their
nation, I remember the need for another mobilization - a spiritual one,
so that there will not happen in Brazil what happened in France, having
their prelacies, parishes, convents, colleges, bishops, prelates,
priests, brother, nuns, foreigners and nationals,
Nazi-Fascist-Falangist partisans, withdrawn."
The crimes practiced by the clergy during the War are public knowledge.
They were unpunished because, the Nation knows, the Tribunal of
Security is composed of Fascists.
I was excommunicated because I prefaced the book The Soviet Power, by
the Dean of Canterbury, a book which pictures with fidelity, Russia as
it really is. A Russia which, I do say, does not inspire terror. A
Russia which was re-entering, to the assent of all free people the
concerto of independent nations. Russia, soldier in the service of the
democracies, against the totalitarian tyrants who, drunk on blood,
attacking the cultures, retarding thereby the march of civilization.
Fascist Episcopacy
I was excommunicated because I denounced the "Hispanidad", the
Brazilian Episcopacy, united to the episcopate of the other American
nations, of the North, from the Center and of the South, preoccupied
with the situation of the Fascist Church after the War. It was the
falange in action. The organization consisted of a committee, a
conjunct of Fascist parties from Spain and Portugal, with government
support from Lisbon and Madrid. Raimundo Fernando Cuesta, Ambassador
from Spain to Brazil, was Chief. From Rio de Janeiro, Cuesta directed
all Falangist activities in South America. With his five secretaries,
aided by diplomatic passports, Cuesta kept in contact with all America,
organizing the movement that would end with the Iberian Empire, uniting
the dictators Salazar and Franco in order to devour the American
Nations, reestablishing thusly papal omnipotence. The Falangist organ
Nueva Espana, edited at Av. Araujo Porto Alegre, 70, in Rio de Janeiro
was responsible for sending news to Berlin, via the Spanish Embassy.
Falangist activities were made difficult by Brazil's state of war, so
the center of "Hispanidad" moved to Argentina. I closely followed the
car of the Spanish Embassy. It went to the Apostolic Nunciate and
stayed there hour after hour. The Brazilian people know I do not lie.
Soviet Union
I was excommunicated because I cited these words of my brother, Eugenio
Pacelli, in an article of mine in my magazine Mensageiro de N. Sra.
Menina. "In a war in which one of the belligerents is able to achieve a
complete victory with only bayonets and other means of irresistible
coercion, it is certain that said belligerent finds himself in a
position of power to dictate a peace imposed by force." My brother,
Eugenio Pacelli was referring to the Soviet Union.
The Shelving of Encyclicals
I was excommunicated because I believed it necessary to shelve the
encyclicals: Rerum Novarum, Quadragessimo Anno and Divini Redemptoris,
because they were all Fascist documents.
Not a Bishop
I know that my brother, Eugenio Pacelli, had word spread through the
whole world that I was not a Bishop. If he acted this way it was
because he is accustomed to lie and sought to destroy the schism just
started. He nevertheless knew that I was elected Bishop of Botucatu, on
July 4, 1924, and that I was consecrated Bishop in the Cathedral of Rio
de Janeiro on December 8, 1924, by Cardinal Dom Sebastian Leme da
Silveira Cimra. The Co-consecrators were: Dom Benedito Paulo Alves de
Souza, then Bishop of Espiritu Santo, and today Titular Bishop of
Orisa, and Dom Alberto Jose Gonzalves, Bishop of Ribeirao Preto,
recently deceased.
The Nuncio Gave Orders to Break a Sacred Statue
The representative of my brother, Eugenio Pacelli, in Brazil knew the
extraordinary occurrences associated with the Statue of Blessed Mary
"Bambina", bought from Milan by me so that the people of the Diocese
could venerate the infancy of the Blessed Virgin. This devotion has
been very dear to the people of Milan since the year 1735, due to
equally extraordinary occurrences, seen on the walls of the Sanctuary.
The Apostolic Nuncio to Brazil ordered the breaking of the image left
by me in Botucatu and also of the image I have myself. This order was
given to the Bishop of Sorocaba, apostolic administrator of the Diocese
of Botucatu. The intrigues of the Apostolic Nuncio caused me to leave
the Dioceses. A copy of this letter was made by Father Jose Kretz, who
mysteriously disappeared from the land of the living. The Church is
accustomed to act in this way then someone's life threatens her.
Fascism in Rumania
Intimidated by the Communist threat, the Greek Orthodox Church of
Rumania united herself to the Roman Church, that is to say, to Nazism.
The Archbishop and the Bishops, with one exception: Monsignor Fielder,
became agents of Hitler.
All the Parishes, monasteries, schools and the Catholic Press put
themselves at the service of Nazism and of Fascism.
In all the parishes there was an office of Fascism, obeying the orders
of an Italian priest nominated to the post by Mussolini: and in spite
of his moral conduct, he was promoted to Canon at the orders of
Mussolini. And one of the eight Catholic priests sent by Goebbels to
Rumania was named by the Metropolitan, honorary Adviser and Most
Reverend Dr. Sherer, supreme inspector of the Nazi priests, was
rewarded for his services by appointment as Honorary Canon of the
Metropolitan Cathedral. Monsignor Fielder had to resign his diocese
because of pressure from the Pope and was put under the watchful eye of
a Nazi German Prelate. My brother, Eugenio Pacelli, forgets the superb
impression he had of Monsignor Fielder when he said of him: "He is a
true saint: we are proud to have him as Bishop of Rumania."
At the request of Von Papen, my brother, Eugenio Pacelli, transferred
the Apostolic Nuncio of Rumania, Monsignor Valerio Valeri, a Nazi
fanatic, to Paris as Nuncio, from where he was obligated to retire by
demand of the people as soon as the Germans evacuated the city.
In Rumania, Monsignor Valerio Valeri was replaced with the elderly
Monsignor Andre Cassulo, who had as Secretary, Monsignor G. Sensi, son
of a Fascist senator, educated in the spirit of Fascist-ecclesiastical
supervision.
This policy of the Vatican throughout the entire world.
My Imprisonment
On the sixth of July, 1944, my house was surrounded by agents of the
police and, on the following day, I was taken prisoner by order of the
government of the Republic, at the request of the Apostolic Nuncio and
of the Archbishop of Rio de Janeiro in a conspiracy with a group of
Brazilian Fascists.
I was destined for the Fortress of Santa Cruz. However, I was sent to
Belo Horizonte where I was registered as a Communist and then sent
under house arrest to the town of Bonfim, to the estate of Minas
Gerais, with a guard at the doors and investigators inside the house.
There I stayed until the sixth of September, 1944, when, bowing to
pressure from the Brazilian Associated Press and the Embassies of the
United States, Mexico and England, the Brazilian government released me.
Here I would like to express my gratitude to the Brazilian Associated
Press, and in particular its illustrious President Herbert Moses, and
also the Embassies of the United States, England and Mexico.
The Decline of the Roman Church
I was therefore excommunicated because I did not submit to the Fascist
policies of my brother, Eugenio Pacelli. The good Brazilians separated
themselves from the Roman Church because they do not accept being part
of a Fascist church.
The public cannot ignore that the Roman Church, since the moment it was
no longer persecuted, preferred the indignity of Christians to the
dignity of Christianity. Today the Christianity of the Roman Church has
a track record so sad that sincere Christians find themselves obliged
to look to the Gospels for their most intimate spiritual nurture rather
than the words of their ministers.
The Church of Christ is not the one directed by men of the Roman
Church, who have forgotten the supernatural character of the Church's
mission on earth, allowing human passions and the barbaric instincts of
man that dominated human nature deform Christian principles.
The decline, then, of the Roman Church proceeds from men and not from
its evangelical principles, where we find the solution for all the
social evils.
Men of dignity, intent upon the restoration of a better world, must
return to the Christian principles of the first centuries. With its
meddling in politics and with its religious intolerance the Roman
Church will only earn the scorn of Humanity.
In this War, the Roman Church allied herself with Nazi-Fascism because
she, the Roman Church, is Fascist in structure, in her pontifical
encyclicals, herself complete in her Fascism, that is Catholic
solidarity. She places her economic interests above the spiritual
well-being of souls and, in so doing, becoming the ultimate defender of
capitalism and imperialism.
The Church, in the early days, appeared fluid becoming crystallized
through its precise dogmas. Through the power of absolutism these
dogmas disintegrated, forming an all too dense conjunct, obliging
mankind to retrocede, to give up their individual beliefs and notions,
and to follow a more limited narrow-minded system of thought.
The Church comes out of the catacombs to persecute Christians with her
dogmas and laws. The schism is nothing more than the effect of
religious intolerance. Persecutions, anathemas, and excommunication are
not able to restore union, broken by specific circumstances. The
disaggregation of Catholics takes place by the force of condensation of
a hierarchy giving absolute power to its chief. The infallibility of
the Pope presages the funeral of the Roman Church. There no longer
exists in the world today a place for the monarchy of the Papacy.
An excess of religious practices tires man, placing him within an
intolerant dogmatism taking away his freedom and forcing him to think
with the heads of his religious leaders, leading humanity to
revolutions and wars.
From this constraint and coercion is born the solidarity of mankind.
Was it not from Judaism that Christianity and Mohamedanism were born?
Excessive Pressure Suffocates
Among the laws of psychology, physics and chemistry, there exists a
better analogy and even an identity. Physical science would not be
clear and complete without this comparison. Physical movements are also
mechanics. Religious movements are also mechanics, at least in
criterion. The passage of physical matter through three stages, solid,
liquid and gaseous can be translated into alternative operations of
rarefaction and condensation, it is one of the most important facts. It
exists also in biology, psychology, sociology, and cosmosociology,
because the laws of mechanics are general, and there is no abyss
between the world of matter and the spiritual world.
In chemistry heat aids in the combination of different substances,
there operates condensation. However, if the heat is excessive the
result is to the contrary, dissociation takes place. The same thing
happens in psychology, sociology, and cosmosociology. Persecution and
suffering unite, but if the pressure is excessive, if it suffocates, if
the common misfortune is total, dissension arises, bring about
dissolution and destruction.
This is what is now happening with the Roman Church. She defends the
rights of private ownership of property in order to keep its enormous
estates, forgetting that the laws of nature are immutable and eternal.
In its defense of private ownership of land the Church goes against the
laws of nature, casting aside the natural economic rights of man and
the solid basis of social justice.
Violation of Natural Rights
Our society places its foundation in the violation of these rights. The
same thing happens with morality, rights and the state. Thence, the
social plight, the revolutions and the wars. The inequitable
distribution of riches has always been the motive of the economic
crises, as the masses are not permitted to take part in the feast of
nature, perpetuating therefore a permanent poverty crisis in the world.
From life's equal rights comes equal rights which every human being
needs to satisfy. This right gives every individual the right to
exercise his human activities, to achieve an end, this is what we call
constitutional rights or political rights.
These constitutional rights can be divided into three categories. Some
refer to equal rights of existence - personal guarantees, self defense,
inviolability of the domicile, freedom of residency and locomotion -
all conditions necessary for the exercise of human activities; others
call attention to the more spiritual activities - freedom of speech,
worship, of learning, not including the freedom of thought or
conscience as these are purely subjective, internal and because of
this, not to be coerced orlimited others, finally, refer to
characteristically economic activities.
The first two groups of rights are based upon political rights. The
last one is based upon the fundamental, natural rights of man, the
theoretical aspirations and practices of individualism, whose point of
origin is the affirmation of the natural rights of the individual, as
much political as economic, constituting the basis of a society justly
organized upon a true social justice.
The economic rights of the individual refer to the attainment of the
economic means necessary to satisfy human wants through commerce.
To the denial of economic rights we owe the failure of the so-called
"Manchesterian" liberalism, of classical liberalism, of purely
political liberalism, causing all the hopes put on the various
Constitutions to be frustrated.
These Constitutions profess to guarantee the natural rights but
actually negate them recognizing the private ownership of the elements
of nature and with this negate the equal right of life. Hence the
intervention of the State in the social order, in obrarian legislation
and the negating of liberty offending the dignity of the force which
produces the riches.
The equal rights of every man in the exercise of his economic activity
are derived from the natural economic rights. This is what we call
production.
The production of economic resources, capital, takes place in four
specific manners:
- Transporting the raw material, such as ore, fish, industry, hunting to a new location;
- Producing as in agriculture;
- Transforming as in industry;
- Exchanging as in the various forms of commerce, where trading activities produce a value.
The goal of production is the satisfaction of human needs and when
these needs are met, the production phase should cease.
Human activity, when directed to the production of economic resources
is called work. The equal right to work, then, is the first of the
natural economic rights.
Equal Right to Work
This right covers all four forms of production including, consequently,
commerce. So free trade results from a natural right, a right as
essential as freedom of speech or of worship; the restrictions imposed
upon free trade constitute as much a violation of natural rights as the
denial of the right of self defense, so the social consequences are the
same.
The equal right to work is not to be confused with the right to choose
one’s work, trade or profession, as
state many professions; the second is insignificant but the first one
belongs to every individual, and the right is the most sacred of all.
One must not confuse this equal right to work with the right to work
made available by the state. The state is an abstract form of social
organization, which executes its task or performs its proposals. The
state should not go beyond the responsibilities for which society has
granted it the power of acting. The equal right to work comes from
nature, therefore, preceding the organization of the state itself, and
as such man has rights equal to the right of the use of the land.
Taking this right of way is the same as killing him, taking away from
him the means for his sustenance, and the state that proceeds thusly
commits robbery.
The Masses Live in Poverty
There is, then, a hierarchy of natural right:
2)The right to work;
3)The right to use of the natural resources of the earth.
Whoever denies the third one
denies the others. Let it be understood, the equal right to the use of
the land is the second of the natural economic rights of the individual.
Consequently, what we see is that societies and their organizations,
even civilization itself, have denied this right to men, denying them
also the others. Consequently, without political rights to the land
itself, liberty becomes nothing more than a fiction. In this way a
minority enslaves an entire mass of humanity. Man deprived of the right
to the use of the land, is obliged to rent it bringing about the "Law
of Bronze" of the minimum wage, that is to say, man is reduced to a
subsistence wage, a slave wage, and as slaves, the masses live in
poverty always dependent upon the owners of the plantations. Slavery of
man is the slavery of the earth. When the land itself is not enslaved
or monopolized, then physical slavery is imposed, because it is in
these condition that the work can be exploited in favor of the
privileged classes. How was the modern laboring class formed? With the
monopoly of the land which implies a gradual despoliation of rights, in
the use of the natural elements, to the ever-increasing detriment of
the classes. We see today huge fortunes side by side with the hungry
masses that throw away today's civilization in an attempt to reconquer
their rights to live in society.
Capitalism, provoking this tremendous crisis, appropriates for itself
the elements of nature, reducing all to private property, and thereby
beginning its own downfall.
The objective of economic activities is to satisfy needs and wants with
the results of said activities. This right to have at one's disposition
constitutes the essence of the legitimate right of ownership in its
juridic form, the power of revindication.
Here arises a third natural economic right, which is the right of
absolute ownership over the fruits of labor.
Infraction of Equal Rights
This right of ownership is a logical extension of the equal right to
work, assisted and completed by the equal right of use of the land. The
foundation of the right of ownership is moral law itself, which gives
the product to the producer, the fruit of labor to the laborer. No one
can participate in the ownership of the fruits of our labor because if
someone did, he would have ownership of the fruits of his labor, and
also rights over the fruits of the labor of others, and these rights
would no longer be equal; disequality being the characteristic of the
enslaved. The things produced by labor are the property of the producer
by natural right, and consequently is not limited as to how he may
consume, give, or bequeath them. Any limitation as to this ability of
disposition, which does not proceed from the greater right of the
members of the group as a whole, is an infraction of the equal rights
of each of the members and, thusly, an infraction of natural rights.
Civilization that Dies
The controversy that exists between those who affirm that property is a
natural right and those who deny it arises as a result of the
difference in interpretation of the word property. For some the word
property includes the land and that which is produced in the land. For
others all that is created by God is for all men and the word property
is a creation of the law and not a natural right.
Only after establishing this distinction can a logical and just
reconciliation be made between the two viewpoints, clearing up the
confusion.
Why are things not produced by man not legitimate material or property?
- No one owns titles over them as all titles come from God. When man talks about the rightful titles of things not the result of man's own work, it is merely a metaphor because land cannot be apprehended by man. In reality, man can only do his work on the land or deprive others of its fruits. As it is, the land is an equal property, "possessed" by all men, having all, equal need of it for their work, livelihood and sustenance. When man takes a property as his own he is, therefore, taking possession of that which already belongs to all.
- Because its appropriation infringes upon the equal right of all to its use snatching it from those who do not have possession and giving it to the sole holders of the land.
- Because the appropriation of things that are not produced by man, the natural elements, incringes inevitably upon the legitimate property rights of those who work to produce. This appropriation serves to tear away from others part of the fruits of their labor – labor to sustain their life, a part which tends to increase until they are stripped of everything, of land, of all the fruits of their labor except for what is indispensable for sustaining life and thereby creating the proletariat, creating the so-called "social problem."
- For its inevitable consequences, which are slavery and poverty. If it is licit to appropriate one piece of land as the exclusive property of an individual, he would also have the "right" to all the other pieces, and consequently the whole planet itself. This would result that a few men could own the entire planet, where all the others would have to live. The property holders could deny to all others a place in the planet to work and to live, condemning them to die. This would create the right of life and death over the destitute and would give the owners power to impose upon the less fortunate any condition of life and to appropriate unjustly that which is needed by all to live, namely the land.
This lack of distinction between what is and what is not the proper
material of private property, in addition to frustrating the
recognition of the other natural rights, condemns inexorably the masses
to poverty and suffering and obliges the employment of force (1) by the
dominators, to subjugate the vanquished and (2) by the dispossessed to
rebel and recapture their rights. This is the real crisis of the
civilization that dies.
The Confusion of Leo XIII
From this confusion came the phrase "social function of property" by
which Leo XII made no distinction between legitimate and illegitimate
property, making the mistake of affirming that "which is bought as just
property is also just property" in defense of private property. Much
later Plus XI in his encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, made affirmations
destroying the basis of legitimate property, leaving it to the
politicians instead of making it a firm principle linked directly to
the moral law and thereby independent of the will and maneuvering of
men.
Both pontiffs, talking about property in general, have their thoughts
turned to the ownership of land and by property is intended not just
the land of the rural areas, but also that of the cities, mines,
hydroelectric plants and all the natural elements.
And the expression "social function of property" is an ambiguous
expression of confused thought.
The question of private property is the most import of all because
until it is resolved, the world will continue to belong to the few.
That is why those encyclicals should be shelved
– they are Fascist.
The New Civilization
Since all natural rights are equal to proclaim "the social function of
property" is equivalent to recognizing the equal right of all men to
the use of the land, which is the second of his natural economic
rights, incompatible with the right of private property over the land.
The result of this confusion is that the natural right of property of
each individual over the fruits of his labor seems not to be ethical,
with a need of conciliation between them. From these attempts at
conciliation are born diverse combinations and proposals for the
construction of a new society - the civilization that is fast
approaching. Reviewing these proposals we can approach the following
conclusion:
- Parceling the land and creating a larger number of small property owners;
- Give the land to those who work it;
- Periodically dividing the
land among all members of society, maintaining this property.
How can one resolve the
conflict between the natural right of property of all men and the right
of private property?
With the nationalization of the land, the state assumes full ownership,
with the land being owned collectively.
The ones presently holding the land would continue doing so, receiving
exclusive and permanent possession of it, even keeping the title of
owner being able to dispose "intervivos" or "mortis causa" as it has
been until now; although in reality they would only be renters of the
nation, renters in the form of only one income tax paid to the nation
in a proportional value of the land, meaning to the privilege of its
use. And as all the improvements made on the property by the renter are
results of his work and of his capital, his legal property, the income
tax over the value of the land should accompany the suppression of all
the income taxes over that which is the result of his labor.
Man: The Citizen of the World
From the nationalization of the land of all countries and the abolition
of all economic privileges and monopolies would come, in fact, the
internationalization of natural resources, solving, in this manner,
besides other very important problems, the sensitive question of raw
materials. The economic sphere of each human would be, then, the entire
earth, and each human being would feel, in fact would be a citizen o
the world. This doctrine is compatible with the highest level of
civilization and can be applied without problems. The only
transformation would be the change of ownership, individual ownership
of the land would be recast into common or public ownership. The state
of things would agree perfectly with the moral law, all men would be
equally free and the land occupied and cultivated in complete
subordination to the law of equal freedom for all. From this point and
with the abolition of all monopolies, the social income would grow and
the state would have the opportunity and possibility to realize,
gradually, the ideals of socialism, which are inherent tendencies of
the human spirit: these ideals being fully conciliated with individual
freedom. With the realization of these ideals, peace would be a
permanent benefit. Civilization would reach heights never before
thought possible. Humanity would be elevated to the culmination of
Christianity and the Reign of God would descend upon the Earth. Such is
the Power of Truth and Justice.
Brazilian Catholic and Apostolic Church
The movement coming into being now in Brazil, and possibly branching
out into other nations of the American continent and other continents,
has as its purpose the centralization of the person of Christ, in an
effort to achieve harmony and concord among religions, allowing the
absolute guarantee of civil, political, philosophical and religious
liberty, not permitting any person to be questioned under any pretext
with respect to his beliefs with the end of conditioning or limiting
his rights or duties. Within wide educational and scientific freedom
the activity of thought would be allowed ot develop the fullest of its
capacity.
Divorce is permitted within the Gospel. Ecclesiastical celibacy is
abolished being against the law of nature. It rejects as absurd
auricular confession. It permits the clergy to have civil or military
professions. All official correspondence is in the vernacular language.
Breaking myself away from the Roman Church in order to reestablish the
Church of Christ in its purity, correcting its errors. I am trying to
centralize the figure of Christ for all Christians as their model and
intercessor with God and Father. The true Christ is this according to
the Gospel of St. John:
"In the beginning
was the
Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. Through Him all
things were made and none of the things that were made without Him. In
Him was life, and the life was the light of humankind. And the light
shines in the darkness and the darkness does not contain it. There was
a man send by God whose name was John. He came as a witness to five
testimony of the light so that all people would believe through him. He
was not the light, but came to give testimony concerning the light. The
true light was that which illumines all humankind that come to this
world. He was in the world and the world was made by Him, and the world
did not understand Him. He came to His own, but they did not receive
Him, He gave the power to become the children of God. These are those
who believe in his Name and are not born of blood nor of the desire of
the flesh, nor of the will of men. And the Word was made flesh and
dwelt among us and we say his glory that of the Only-Begotten Son of
The Father, full of grace and truth."
The Catholic Apostolic Church of Brazil is a religious society, which
has for its foundation the teachings of the Old and New Testament. It
is Catholic because it professes the Christian faith which is diffused
throughout all the world, through all Christians, considering as
brother, in Christ all those who love and respect Christ as God, as
Man, as Philosopher. It is Apostolic because it is a true successor of
the Apostles and all the functions practiced by me are valid and licit.
It is Brazilian because it is national because it separated itself from
the Roman Church not recognizing as Chief the Chief of the Roman
Church, considering its Chief to be the National Episcopate, thereby
protecting the traditional beliefs and customs of our land.
In all the national territory there will be ecclesiastical
circumscriptions called dioceses subject to the governing and
administration of a diocesan Bishop, with wide jurisdiction, empowered
to create parishes, chaplaincies and other religious organizations
within his legislative jurisdiction.
The bishops are elected by the religious communities of each diocese
being confirmed by the clergy and by the national episcopate in
accordance with the ritual adopted by the Catholic Apostolic Church of
Brazil, which is the same ritual used by the Roman Church with its
Pontificate, so that there will be no doubt as to the validity of the
episcopal consecration and of the ordinations of Deacons and
Presbyters. The bishops are autonomous within their dioceses,
consulting, however, their brothers in the episcopate whenever there is
an issue of general interest to the State or the Nation. If the Issues
concern only the State, a council will be convened with the bishops of
the State. When however the issues are of concern for the entire
Nation, a council will be convened with all the bishops of the Nation.
The Brazilian Church returns, then, to the early days of Christianity,
that is, of an evangelical brotherhood trying to love and help each
other, mutually, as it was done in the beginning, becoming one body
with its bishop, presbyters and deacon in a truly Christian communism.
The dioceses will be administered in conformity with the Constitution
and Civil Code of the country with its adjustment foreseen in its
already established juridical personality. The ecclesiastical hierarchy
is this: Deacons, Presbyters and Bishops. The Brazilian Catholic
Apostolic Church does not agree with auricular confession, a stimulant
for immorality. It does not accept clerical celibacy because it is
against nature being prescribed by Pope Gregory VII in the year 1074.
Occasionally the priests even popes, cardinal and bishops lived in
concubinage, scattering children all over the place. Brazil is full of
children of missionaries. I know of colleagues in the episcopate of
priests and friars that are living in illicit union.
The Brazilian Church does not want to fill Brazil with parasites. For
this reason, its priests must have a civil or military occupation. On
the eighth of this month I ordained a factory worker in S. Miguel, in
the State of S. Paulo.
Divorce
The Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church permits divorce within the
Gospel.
Saint Matthew tells us in Chapter 5: 27 - 32: "You know it was said in
olden time: Do not commit adultery. But I say to you: Whoever looks
covetously upon a woman has already committed adultery with her in his
heart. If, then, your right eye causes you scandal, tear it out and
throw it away, for it is better to lose a member of your body than to
have your entire body go to Hell. It was also said: Whoever would
abandon his wife, must give her a letter of divorce. But I say to you:
Whoever divorces his wife, if not for adultery, makes her an adulteress
and whoever taker her commits adultery."
Elsewhere in Saint Matthew, Chapter XIX: 3 - 9, he tell us: "Is it lawful to divorce
one's wife for any reason?"
He responded, "Have you not heard
that
the Creator of Mankind in the beginning created a man and a woman and
said: for this shall a man leave his father and mother to unite himself
with his wife, and the two shall be as on flesh? So they are no longer
two but one flesh; and so, then, what God joins together, man must not
separate." "Why, then,"
insisted the people. "Did Moses
command that
one fives his wife a letter of divorce, and demands her to be gone?" Jesus
responded, "Because
of the hardness of your hearts Moses permitted you to divorce your
wife, but in the beginning it was not so. I say to you now, whoever
divorces his wife, except for adultery, and marries another commits
adultery and whoever marries the divorced one commits adultery also."
This is the evangelical doctrine in its purity.
In the beginnings of Christianity, in this time of transition the woman
was enslaved among all the peoples and the laws of the Jews, the
Romans, the Barbarians all permitted the repudiation of divorce.
What did Christianity think? The fathers of the Church, the teachers of
the age, were not in agreement with the indissolubility of marriage.
Some say that the New Testament was not against the law of Moses, which
permitted divorce and that Jesus himself allowed divorce at least in
the case of adultery of the woman.
Tertulian, Saint Ambrose and Saint Epiphany were of this opinion and
allowed divorce. On the other side, Saint Jerome, Saint Chrysostom,
particularly Saint Augustime, proclaimed the indissolubility of the
marriage bond.
In the year 325, at the Council of Nicaea composed of 318 priests, no
one stood up against divorce. It was at precisely this time that
Fabiola divorced her husband, who was guilty of adultery, and then
remarried. She had in her favor these words: "It is better to marry
than to burn." And Fabiola lived with the aura of sanctity.
Divorce is a necessity for the moralization of the Brazilian family.
The consequence of divorce is the same as that of celibacy. Because of
no divorce there is disquite (legal separation), which amounts to the
legal approval of prostitution. Because the priests are not permitted
to marry, many live concubinage.
The Religious and Political Question
After the crimes perpetrated by the Vatican in this war, it is no
longer possible for the world to take seriously this organization of
perjurers and deceivers who, century after century, continues lying and
deceiving humanity, from its list of Popes, which includes Popes who
never existed, to its martyrology, the calendar of saints, with stock
actions, all well-authenticated. No, this cannot continue. Unless the
people of today wish of those who bequeathed to us this waste and
enormous absurdity, for having lived in an age of fabricated saints, to
exploit the naive.
The blood of our brothers does not permit Humanity to continue to be
suffocated and chained by men who represent, at this time, the priestly
pontiff of the old law - of the crucifixion of Christ. Those who were
redeemed by Christ and who redeemed us with their blood in the
battlefields, victims of those who claimed to be representatives of
Christ on earth, do not permit us to be cowards in such a time when we
must restore our nation.
And to restore our nation, it is necessary that the religious question
be resolved. We press this question not only as matter of piousness or
religiosity, but as essentially a political and economic issue. For the
Roman Church ceased being the religion of Christ when it left the
catacombs to become an Empire whose monarch dominates the consciences
of the people in order to more easily tyrannize Humanity with his
temporal dominion. It is a crime to fold
one’s arms in indifference, thereby
delaying the march of humanity in the direction of the complete triumph
of Liberty. Clerical meddling in the governing of nations should no
longer be possible. The Pope is a monarch or a leader of a religion.
If, by treaty he is considered monarch, he should limit himself to his
diplomatic representation never, however, going beyond the nomination
of bishops. If he is a religious leader he should lose his diplomatic
representation. Humanity does not allow him to be both. Choose!
In Brazil, in the electoral campaign now underway there is the great
patriot. Rui Barbosa, who recognizes "A Free Church in a Free State."
All for God. All for Christ. All for the Homeland. And to all of Brazil
my blessings in the Name of God the Father, God the Son, and God the
Holy Spirit.
Sao Paulo. 18 August 1945
+Dom Carlos Duarte Costa
Bishop of Rio de Janeiro
Supremo
Tribunal Federal
Freedom of Religious Worship - MS1114
On September 27, 1948, the Catholic Apostolic Church of Brazil was closed by virtue of legal action of the Courts of the Brazilian Republic. And Doctor Haroldo Teixeira Valladão, on July 7, 1948, published the decision in the official Federal gazette of September 25, 1948.
On November 30, 1948, Archbishop Carlos Duarte Costa entered
in the Federal Court of Appeals and with a Writ of Mandamus petitioned
for Judges Carpenter Luiz and Benjamin requiring the reopening
of the Catholic Apostolic Church of Brazil.
The Brazilian government, through their intermediary of the Minister of Justice, Dr. Agamenon Magalhães, on September 22, 1948, said, “… it is not intention of the Government to submit the heads, or fiduciary offices of the Catholic Apostolic Church of Brazil to any constraint in its freedom of worship while it uses vestments, insignia, badges, and different rites than that of the Roman Catholic Church.”
Report by Minister Lafayette de Andrada, November 1948:
Brought to a Dom Carlos Duarte Costa, Bishop Founder and head of Catholic Church Brasileira in Rio de Janeiro, former Bishop of Maura's Roman Catholic Church in order to be assured you and your church the components of the free exercise of their religious worship in public places and temples, and activities in schools maintained by the Association of Our Lady, once stopped by the police, characterizing the fact is the second alleged, violation of law and a net guaranteed by the Constitution, that is, freedom of worshing religious.Because the opinion of the General Counsel of the Republic, approved by the President, has banned the cult of the Brazilian Catholic Church in public places, for they consider that no cult of the Church which causes confusion to its religious practices, canonicals and emblems with the existing external ceremonies of the Roman Catholic Church, and is an imitation of these, therefore it violates the freedom of the latter church, which should be avoided in favor of public policy.
Decision: Dismissed, 1 vote against
Report by: Minister Lafayette de Andrada. 11/17/1948
Publication: Archivo Judicial Review, v. CI/6-15, (Jan. to Mar. 1952)
Terms of Use
The contents of this web site represent copyrighted material. You, the web site visitor and all others reading this material, are not authorized to copy, distribute, display, perform, print or store this information, including no derivative works, in any form whatsoever without prior written permission of the author(s) of this website.
The contents of this website subject to this copyright notice include all pages, page contents, attachments and appendages whether displayed, produced or published in 'htm', 'html', 'pdf', 'php', 'doc', jpg, jpeg, gif or any other digitally produced format. Canadian citizens are subject to the terms of this copyright by treaty with the laws of the United States of America.
The author(s) of this web site will seek the identity and prosecution of any violator of this copyright.