 |
| The Last Supper, with Marx, Lenin, Mao, Castro, and others outside a Caracas school (2007) |
THE “D’ESCOTO CASE” AND THOSE WHO WANT TO WIPE OUT THE WORK DONE BY JOHN PAUL II AND BENEDICT XVI
Antonio Socci
Libero
September 7, 2014
In the era of Bergoglio, the Vatican has practically rehabilitated Liberation Theology, which came into existence in the 1960s and has caused untold disasters, mainly in Latin America, by fostering the Church’s subordination to Marxist thought.
Over the past months there have been startling occurrences, such as the “landing” of Gustavo Gutierrez (“the father” of Liberation Theology) in the Vatican itself. A year ago, “L'Osservatore Romano” published large extracts from one of his books praising his attacks against neo- liberalism. This summer there was another highly symbolic gesture, which went almost unnoticed, in relation to Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann.
DEEP RED
D’Escoto was the son of the Nicaraguan ambassador for the United States. Ordained to the priesthood in 1961 he became involved with Liberation Theology in October 1977, and publically declared his support for the Sandinista Front, a revolutionary group of Marxist inspiration, which took power in Nicaragua in 1979.
D’Escoto was the Foreign Minister in the Sandinista government from 1979 to 1990. In the same government-regime, the Jesuit Fernando Cardenal was the Minister of Education and his brother Ernest was the Minister of Culture.
John Paul II harshly condemned the three priests’ involvement with the Sandinista government. Immediately after his election Pope Wojtyla had previously thundered against Liberation Theology, and during his visit to Mexico in 1979 he stated: “The idea of Christ as a politician, a revolutionary, as a subversive from Nazareth, does not coincide with the catechesis of the Church.”
In 1983 John Paul went on a pastoral visit specifically to Nicaragua where he publically rebuked Father Ernesto Cardenal for his involvement with the government. This caused quite a stir and the Sandinista regime organized a public protest against the Pope during the celebration of Mass.
However Pope Wojtyla was not one to be intimidated and, from the altar he shouted louder than the protestors and raising the Crucifix high in the air, showed the only true King of the Universe.
Despite this public rebuke the three priests responded negatively and D’Escoto was suspended a divinis with the others in 1984.
The Sandinista government fell in 1990, but D’Escoto continued being involved with politics. In 2008 we even find him presiding over the annual session of the General Assembly at the United Nations. Once Bergoglio was elected, D’Escoto, ‘smelled the air’ and wrote to the new Pope asking for the end of his suspension “a divinis” so that he could begin again celebrating Mass.
The request was immediately granted.
On the 1st of August this year Bergoglio signed the revocation. As the Curia explained on the 4th August 2014 “times and contexts have changed and most of all, he has changed”. D’Escoto – they said – understood he had been wrong and the Pontiff recognized the sincerity of his amendment.”
Yes, indeed. The day after, (5th August) “La Prensa” of Managua reported some bombastic declarations made by D’Escoto himself on Nicaraguan TV, Channel 4.
The title of the report: “D’Escoto: Fidel Castro is chosen by God”. The priest and ex-minister, just readmitted to celebrating Mass by Bergoglio, declared: "The Vatican may silence everyone,(but) then God will make the stones speak, and they will spread his message. Yet God hasn’t done this - He chose the greatest Latin-American of all time: Fidel Castro."
According to “La Prensa”, D’Escoto, who is the current director for border issues and international relations for the Government of the President of Nicaragua, the Sandinista, Daniel Ortega” (hadn’t he abandoned politics?), also added: "It is through Fidel Castro that the Holy Spirit sends us the message. This message of Jesus, of the need to struggle to establish, firmly and irreversibly, the kingdom of God on this earth, which is His alternative to the empire". After this theological praise of the Cuban tyrant, who has been oppressing an entire population for decades with a communist dictatorship, D’Escoto then expressed his joy at Pope Francis’ revocation of his suspension.
ANNIHILATE THE GOOD
The kid-glove treatment Bergoglio used on the powerful and famous “companion” D’Escoto, contrasts with the iron-clad-fist used to hit a holy, humble religious - Father Stefano Manelli, Padre Pio’s spiritual son and founder of the Franciscans of the Immaculate. Father Manelli had written to the Pope too, but his letter wasn’t even taken into consideration.
His orthodox, disciplined religious family, full of vocations, has been annihilated by the will of Bergoglio himself, in so far as he had applied Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio on the liturgy. He was just too orthodox.
Father Manelli has never been disobedient to the Church, has never deviated from sound doctrine, has never thrown himself into politics like D’Escoto and has never praised Communist tyrants.
It is also no coincidence that it was Cardinal Braz de Aviz (Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes for Consecrated Religious Life and Societies of Apostolic Life) who signed the punitive measures. This Brazilian Cardinal – strangely enough, comes from Liberation Theology himself and in some of his interviews, referring to the Liberation Theology, said that it is not only “useful”, but even “necessary”. He added: “I remain convinced that something great anyway happened in the Church with that movement.”
Yes, in fact - a great disaster. Some “companions” in cardinal red today hold top places in the Vatican and are punishing those who have always been faithful to the Church.
Cardinal Braz de Aviz blithely snubbed the unforgettable condemnations of Liberation Theology made by Joseph Ratzinger (and John Paul II) with “Libertatis Nuntius” (1984) and “Libertatis Conscientia” (1986).
They think they they’ve won now: Wojtyla is dead and they believe Ratzinger has lost.
THE TWO GREAT ONES
Recently, Benedict XVI himself, in remembering John Paul, wrote:
“The first great challenge we faced was Liberation Theology which was spreading in Latin America. In both Europe and North America it was common opinion that it was all about sustaining the poor and therefore a cause that had to be approved without question. But this was wrong. The Christian Faith was used as a type of political force (…). Such a falsification of the Christian Faith needed to be opposed specifically out of love for the poor and for the service that has to be given to them.”
In 2013 one of the founders of Liberation Theology, Clodoveo Boff (the other Boff’s brother), and one of the few who truly learned his lesson (not like D’Escoto), said Ratzinger was right in what he had done thirty years ago (in Pope Wojtyla’s name):
“He defended the essential plan of Liberation Theology: commitment to the poor for the cause of the faith. At the same time, he criticized the Marxist influence. The Church – Clodoveo Boff noted- cannot start negotiations regarding the essence of the Faith: it is not like civil society where people can say what they want. We are bound to a Faith and if someone professes a different faith, they are automatically excluded from the Church. From the very beginning he had seen clearly the importance of placing Christ at the foundation of all theology (…). In the predominant speech of Liberation Theology, I became aware that faith in Christ appeared only in the background. The “anonymous Christian” by Karl Rahner was a great excuse to neglect Christ, prayer, the sacraments and mission,[whilst] concentrating on the transformation of social structures.”
Today, in the era of Bergoglio, we’re going back to Rahner, to that philosophy which has already done untold damage to the Jesuits and the Church. In this abysmal emptiness Catholics are again being tossed about here and there “by every wind of doctrine”, subordinate to every ideology and contaminated by any and all heresies.
A great darkness envelops Rome.
[Source. Translation: contributor Francesca Romana]
