The Amazon Synod and National Sovereignty
By Fernando Oliveira Diniz
It happened. Brazil, a state that declares itself secular, has been drawn into an international imbroglio of a religious nature that could cost its sovereignty over the Amazon.
The threat is not coming from the military powers of Russia or China, but from the institutional strength of a state with a meager .44 km² of territory and a population estimated at 1,000 inhabitants.
There was a time when Brazil had nothing to fear from the Vatican. But the latter is now under the influence of the most articulate and virulent Left on the planet, one which has the deadliest weapon yet discovered: the ability to move people’s consciences.
It is a fait accompli. Under Francis’ power, the Synod on the Amazon will be held in Rome between October 6 and 29.
What orientation will this Synod have? Looking at the team of organizers, its predominant trend will be Liberation Theology. This can give rise to an international orchestration involving the Vatican, the UN, the European Union and NGOs from around the world, which would cry out for an internationalization of the Amazon.
It would be the launching of a new catechesis in which catechizing would be secondary and even superfluous, because according to this catechesis, the Indians already live the beatitudes: they have no private property, profit or competition. Why have a homeland if the real thing would be to establish tribal collectivism?
We would therefore be faced with a communist-inspired “New Church” where property is heresy, the owner a heretic, and life in the wild is the full realization of the human ideal.
Anyone interested in learning about the ultimate designs of this Indigenist theology can read the book, Indigenous Tribalism, a Communist-Missionary Ideal for the 21st Century. Written in 1977 by the renowned president of the TFP National Council, Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira, the book predicted this onslaught by the new missiology and clearly enunciated the theses that will be sustained (even more radically) at the October 2019 Synod, and pave the way to request an internationalization of the Amazon.
At the time, this book was a best seller in Brazil, having gone through nine editions for a total of 82,000 copies. Caravans of TFP volunteers spread it in 2,963 cities throughout the country.
It was reprinted in 2008 with a second part in which journalists Nelson Ramos Barretto and Paulo Henrique Chaves tell about what they saw in the Raposa-Serra do Sol reservation in Roraima and researched in the states of Mato Grosso and Santa Catarina. They transcribe revealing interviews with various personalities and confirm, point by point, all the theses sustained by Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira back in 1977.
An expressive feedback on the scope of this book came from Minister Marco Aurélio de Mello of the Federal Supreme Court, who in his dissenting opinion on the controversial demarcation of indigenous lands in the Raposa-Serra do Sol reservation stated:
“It is also worth noting that Professor Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira, author of Indigenous Tribalism – a Communist-Missionary Ideal for Brazil in the 21st Century, writing about the drafting of the 1988 Constitution, warned: ‘If the Draft Constitution is adopted with such a hypertrophied conception of the rights of Indians it will pave the way the way for the recognition of the various indigenous groupings as having a sovereignty diminutae rationis, a self-determination, according to the consecrated expression (Projeto de Constituição angustia o País (Draft Constitution Anguishes the Country), Editora Vera Cruz, São Paulo, 1987, p.282, and page 119 of the mentioned work). Those were prophetic words also bearing in mind the fact that in September 2007 Brazil concurred, in the General Assembly of the United Nations, with the approval of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” (cf. 700, April 2009).
Brazil was warned. We can now hope that, with all due respect to ecclesiastical authorities, Brazilian diplomacy will make patently clear to the Vatican and Synod Fathers, with all necessary firmness, that Brazil will not accept pressure from any government or international organization to allow unwarranted interference in the governance of its territory.
According to Catholic doctrine, it is not the Church’s mission to defend a threatened biome (as Most Rev. Erwin Krütler, bishop emeritus of Xingu, in the state of Pará, has done — cf. O Estado de S. Paulo, Feb. 10, 2019), to define whether or not it is superfluous to supervise NGOs, or to know whether the government has or not changed the demarcation of indigenous areas. Nor is it up to the bishops to supervise and check if the government complies or not with the Constitution.
What the Brazilian State absolutely cannot accept is to give up the country’s sovereignty over the Amazon. It has every right and a compelling duty to guarantee Brazilian territorial integrity.
Finally, a reflection imposes itself.
Fortunately, we can expect from the current administration an effective policy to defend the integrity of our territory. This would have been unthinkable if the Workers’ Party (PT) were still in power. It would have supported the Synod on the Amazon in its quest to dismantle Brazil.