Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

Author Topic: Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer  (Read 9557 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Giovanni Berto

Re: Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer
« Reply #15 on: December 06, 2023, 01:55:57 PM »
I once read an interesting text about his deposition. I believe that it was part of the book by Dr. White.

It discoursed about some frictions that he had with the Modernist that they sent to replace him. It was nothing doctrinal, as a discussion at this point would be senseless, but I recall that the good bishop was even accused of stealing forniture.

The priests of Campos had an important apostolate in some portions of the country. This was before I discovered Tradition, but I believe that it was because of their presence that the SSPX only came to Brazil in 2003 or so.
Logged

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
Re: Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer
« Reply #16 on: December 06, 2023, 02:25:23 PM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on December 06, 2023, 01:52:18 PM
Yes, I've long wondered why they just left him alone and didn't force the issue.  I got the impression that he used some of their own principles against them.  I think I heard (just verbally ... haven't seen it in writing) that, when he was asked about it, he said something along the lines of, "Vatican II was a pastoral Council.  I am the pastor of my diocese, and I don't see a pastoral need for the New Mass here."  So he used the idea that V2 was pastoral and the notion of collegiality against them.  To have deposed him on those grounds would have meant ripping the facade off the "pastoral" ruse and also would have taken the teeth off their principles of collegiality.  But I can't confirm and only heard this from a source I cannot recall many years ago.

If true, love that touch. Delightful. :laugh1:
Logged

Offline 2Vermont

Re: Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer
« Reply #17 on: December 06, 2023, 05:01:24 PM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on December 06, 2023, 12:03:44 PM
Sure it is.  They got Bishop de Castro Mayer on a technicality when he turned 75 in 1981, which Montini had set forth as a mandatory retirement age.  There was no notion of being deposed due to his being Traditional (although I'm quite certain they were happy to see him go).  Montini ordered mandatory retirement at the age of 75 in 1966, and that provision also became part of the 1983 Code of Canon Law.  So they got Bishop de Castro Mayer on a legal technicality, but did not depose him for teaching "contrary to the faith", as they alleged of +Strickland.  And, the reasons Jorge gave for why +Strickland was teaching contrary to the faith was based on Bergoglio's "teaching" that the Deposit of Faith is not static but can change.  In other words, they deposed him for not being a Modernist.
OK, but then was he really forced?  Or did he just decide to retire when he got to that age?
Logged

Offline Plenus Venter

Re: Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer
« Reply #18 on: December 06, 2023, 06:53:07 PM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on December 06, 2023, 10:01:19 AM
By the time of the 1988 consecrations, he had become a sedevacantist.
This falsity, that Bishop de Castro Mayer became sedevacantist, is vigorously refuted by his fellow countryman, Bishop Thomas Aquinas, who accompanied him to the 1988 episcopal consecrations at Econe. I just can't find his words on this at the moment, I think it was in one of the letters to F&B from the monastery. I'll do my best to dig it up.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer
« Reply #19 on: December 07, 2023, 01:19:45 PM »
Quote from: Plenus Venter on December 06, 2023, 06:53:07 PM
This falsity, that Bishop de Castro Mayer became sedevacantist, is vigorously refuted by his fellow countryman, Bishop Thomas Aquinas, who accompanied him to the 1988 episcopal consecrations at Econe. I just can't find his words on this at the moment, I think it was in one of the letters to F&B from the monastery. I'll do my best to dig it up.

This is no falsity.  Several reliable witnesses attest to this, witnesses who were much closer to +de Castro Mayer at the time than Thomas Aquinas was.  Despite being his "countryman" by birth, he spent his days in France beginning around 1974.  He had gone to +de Castro Mayer's seminary first but then left due to his disapproval of the influence of TFP there (which he didn't care for), and then ended up in France, where's he's been ever since.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7
« previous next »