Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Giovanni Berto on October 26, 2021, 08:19:34 PM
-
I have not been able to find much information about Bishop Castro Mayer and his Diocese of Campos.
How did he act after the Council in his diocese?
Some sources say that he allowed the willing Priests to say the New Mass, others say that he never allowed it under any circuмstances.
I read that he was retired only in 1981. What happened between 1969 and 1981? Was it an unique diocese, where real Catholicism existed after the Council? Did the new, modernist Bishop had to turn an entirely traditional diocese modernist from day to night?
It is strange to think that his flock abandoned the true religion as soon as his was retired, especially after all his resistance for more than ten years.
We know that his Priestly Union operated in a similar way to the SSPX, this is clear enough.
What I really want is information about the period between the Council and his retirement. There is surprisingly little information about it.
Sometimes I think that he was one of those who only acted after he had lost his position. I mean, he was a very discreet character until the 1980s. Would he be beside Abp. Lefevbre if the consecrations happened before his retirement?
It was very convenient for Abp. Lefevbre to have another Bishop with him in 1988, and we have no reason to doubt Bp. Castro Mayer intentions. I just want to know it he is really this hero that we hear about, or if he was a late-comer, who only had courage to show his face to the wolrd after he had (almost) nothing left to lose.
-
There is a good book written by Dr. David Allen White entitled "The Mouth of the Lion" which tells the story of Bp. Mayer, and Campos. If I remember correctly, the successor to Bp. Mayer was Bp. Licinio Rangel, who was consecrated by Bps. Tissier, de Gallaretta, and Williamson upon the death of Bp. De Castro. Shortly thereafter, I believe Rangel accepted a deal with Rome. Rangel's successor was Bp. Fernando Rifan. Someone can correct me if my info is inaccurate, but I think that's what happened in a nutshell.
-
As I know that you speak Portuguese, Permanência published a book about Mons. Castro Mayer named "O Pensamento de Dom Antônio de Castro Mayer" (The Outlook of Dom Antônio de Castro Mayer). I guess that's what you've looking for.
-
There is a good book written by Dr. David Allen White entitled "The Mouth of the Lion" which tells the story of Bp. Mayer, and Campos. If I remember correctly, the successor to Bp. Mayer was Bp. Licinio Rangel, who was consecrated by Bps. Tissier, de Gallaretta, and Williamson upon the death of Bp. De Castro. Shortly thereafter, I believe Rangel accepted a deal with Rome. Rangel's successor was Bp. Fernando Rifan. Someone can correct me if my info is inaccurate, but I think that's what happened in a nutshell.
Correctly. Mons. de Castro Mayer was not the principal consecrator of any bishop (but he was co-consecrator of the 4 bishops successors of Mons. Lefebvre) but he knew and taught every Campos' priest on that time. Bp. Licínio was a traditionalist and then started to soft and makes a deal with Rome and then is succeded by Dom Rifan, and today he's not even near what Mons. de Castro Mayer were.
Also, we can say that Dom Mayer was highly influenced by Dom Sigaud, another Brazilian bishop - from Diamantina - that led most of conservative priests from the V2 and created the Coetus Internationalis Patrum too.
-
There is a good book written by Dr. David Allen White entitled "The Mouth of the Lion" which tells the story of Bp. Mayer, and Campos. If I remember correctly, the successor to Bp. Mayer was Bp. Licinio Rangel, who was consecrated by Bps. Tissier, de Gallaretta, and Williamson upon the death of Bp. De Castro. Shortly thereafter, I believe Rangel accepted a deal with Rome. Rangel's successor was Bp. Fernando Rifan. Someone can correct me if my info is inaccurate, but I think that's what happened in a nutshell.
There's one key point Dr. White made in his book, "The Mouth of the Lion" that I disagree with.
He claimed Bp. Castro De Mayer disapproved of Plineo Correa de Oliveira and broke ties with him because he was anti-clerical.
Meaning, Plineo didn't think a religious order could run the activities of a Church militant organization.
In hindsight, we can say Dr. Plneo was right concerning the inability of clerics to lead Catholic militant action.
This was proven true when Pope Pius XI fatally disarmed the Cristeros and Action Francaise and more recently when the SSPX sold-out and allowed themselves to be de-masculinized in the battle against newChurch.
It's the lay Faithful who will fight the physical battles.
(https://www.pliniocorreadeoliveira.com.br/wp-content/uploads/plinio-correa-de-oliveira-menino1-e1553347222153.jpg)
Plineo, always a Church Militant
-
He claimed Bp. Castro De Mayer disapproved of Plineo Correa de Oliveira and broke ties with him because he was anti-clerical.
Meaning, Plineo didn't think a religious order could run the activities of a Church militant organization.
In hindsight, we can say Dr. Plneo was right concerning the inability of clerics to lead Catholic militant action.
I mean, there's a good history that relates Mons. Castro Mayer saying "Plínio deceived me for 40 years". There were strange things in the TFP.
-
The Mouth of the Lion is a great book. Angelus Press used to carry it, but no more. It's hard to find now but worth the effort.
-
The Mouth of the Lion is a great book. Angelus Press used to carry it, but no more. It's hard to find now but worth the effort.
I second this.
I read this right before I went to the SSPX Seminary, and it really got me on the SSPX side. I know the SSPX wasn't in Campos per se, but they were both on the same team -- +ABL and Bp. de Castro Mayer. They were definitely the good guys in the fight against the Conciliar religion taking over. I wanted to be a part, even just a small part, of that good fight.
Of course both Campos and the SSPX didn't end well -- but that's beside the point. You fight with the good guys while they're good guys. You can never guarantee the future. Anyone could betray or fall from grace at any time -- including each and every one of us. We must all stay humble, and watch and pray. And remember that all graces and everything good comes only from God.
-
There's one key point Dr. White made in his book, "The Mouth of the Lion" that I disagree with.
He claimed Bp. Castro De Mayer disapproved of Plineo Correa de Oliveira and broke ties with him because he was anti-clerical.
Here is a letter from Bishop Castro De Meyer on TFP. He had previously worked with them for years. This is the Bishop's response to a mother who lost her son to the TFP cult. Bishop Meyer called the once-Catholic group an "anti-Catholic, anti-clerical heretical sect.
This letter was published in the Campos daily, La Folha de Manhspan in 1991; the original text, however, is dated 1984, two years after Bishop de Castro Mayer’s break with TFP. It appeared in Le Sel de la Terre, [no. 28, Spring 1999], in an article entitled “Docuмents sur la T.F.P”.
Dear XXXXX,
I owe a response to your grieving letter of September 24, which, as the postmark indicates, you sent me on September 25. [1991]
In this case, I can only offer the sole advice: pray, pray much, above all the Rosary or at least the five decades of the Rosary, asking the Virgin Mother, Mediatrix of all graces, to enlighten your son and make him see that TFP is an heretical sect because, in fact, although they do not say or write it, TFP lives and behaves in accord with a principle which fundamentally undermines the truth of Christianity, that is, of the Catholic Church.
In fact, it is de fide that Jesus Christ founded His Church — destined to maintain on earth the true worship of God and to lead souls toward eternal salvation — as an unequal society, composed of two classes: one which governs, teaches and sanctifies, composed of members of the clergy, and the other — the faithful — who receive the teaching, are governed and sanctified. This is a de fide dogma.
St. Pius X wrote that the Church is, in its very nature, an unequal society, meaning that it comprises two orders of persons: shepherds and flocks, those who belong to the various ranks of the Hierarchy and the faithful multitude. These two orders are so completely distinct that the Hierarchy alone has the right and authority to guide and govern the members to the Church’s ends, while the duty of the faithful is that of allowing themselves to be governed and to obediently follow the way given by the governing class (The Encyclical, “Vehementer”, February 11, 1906) [7].
And the entire history of the Church, as can be seen in the New Testament, attests to this truth as a fundamental dogma of the Church’s constitution. It was to the Apostles only that Jesus said: Go and teach all nations. Too, the Acts of the Apostles show us the life of the Church in the times following Jesus Christ.
Because of this, it is a heretical subversion to habitually follow a lay person, therefore, not a member of the Hierarchy— as the spokesman of orthodoxy. Thus, they do not look to what the Church says, what the Bishops say, rather what this or that one says…. Nor does it end there: this attitude — even if not openly avowed — actually positions the “leader” as the arbiter of orthodoxy, and is accompanied by a subtle but real mistrust of the hierarchy and of the clergy in general.
There is a visceral anticlericalism in TFP: everything that comes from the clergy is prejudicially received. Basically, it holds that all priests are ignorant, not very zealous or interesting, and have other such qualities. Well, then, keeping in mind the divine Constitution of the Church which was instituted by Jesus Christ, TFP’s habitual anti-clericalism, latent, makes it an heretical sect, and therefore, as I have said, is animated by a principle contrary to the dogma established by Jesus Christ in the constitution of His Church.
Nevertheless, TFP had a healthy beginning. There was a certain evolution of the apostolate carried out by the bi-weekly newspaper of the Marian Congregation of St. Cecelia, titled, O Legionario. As a serious and well intentioned movement, it sought to strengthen the intellectual and religious formation of the members of that Congregation and, consequently, of the bi-weekly’s readers. It was influential throughout Brazil. That was the era of [its] obedience to Monsignors Duarte and Leme.
I accompanied and approved its apostolate, also when it began to stray into an anticlerical spirit, which began by its consolidating its position and then reversing it by putting the clergy in tow behind a charismatic layman, with his monopoly on orthodoxy. Perhaps I gave it support beyond a licit point. I retracted it only when it became clear to me that my warnings were not being taken into consideration. They had become useless.
It is just to observe that the straying of certain members of the hierarchy …explains the TFP scandal, but it doesn’t justify the positions they came to take. Even less so, those of their leader, Plinio.
At this time, as I said at the beginning of this letter, the remedy is prayer. First, because without prayer nothing is obtained: Ask, Our Lord says, and you shall receive. It is necessary to pray, because charismatic fervor produces a certain fanaticism: individuals become incapable of seeing objective reality, of perceiving even fundamental errors, because of this inversion of following a lay person instead of the legitimate Shepherds of the Holy Church. So much more so when, as I have observed, members of the Hierarchy unfortunately and frequently utter words and take positions which any Catholic can see are dissonant from doctrine and from the guidance of the Church of the ages…..
I ask Our Lord that he grant you, and your entire family, a holy and happy Christmas and many years filled with God’s grace.
I ask that you pray for me, Servant in Christ-Jesus,
Antonio de Castro Mayer, Bishop Emeritus of Campos
-
https://ephesians511blog.com/2013/09/28/america-needs-fatima-a-cult-using-the-fatima-name/ (https://ephesians511blog.com/2013/09/28/america-needs-fatima-a-cult-using-the-fatima-name/)
Fidelity, the monthly organ of the highly conservative Ultra-Montanists, criticized Tradition, Family, and Property in its May 1989 issue. Writer Thomas Case noted that, in the mid-1970s, TFP had been repeatedly accused by the Brazilian authorities of “inducement to flight, reckless transfer, and concealment of minors”–and this despite TFP’s own slavish devotion to the military regime.
Young men were alleged to have been deceitfully recruited by TFP, to be trained in their academies as “warrior monks” for the cause. According to the Brazilian government, TFP sought to obtain legal guardianship over the minor children of parents dedicated to TFP and then turned their sons against them
-
As I know that you speak Portuguese, Permanência published a book about Mons. Castro Mayer named "O Pensamento de Dom Antônio de Castro Mayer" (The Outlook of Dom Antônio de Castro Mayer). I guess that's what you've looking for.
That's a collection of pastoral letters and articles in various journals like his Boletim Diocesano, Monitor Campista, Heri et Hodie, ordered by topics, more than 300 pages. Including a few pages of mostly colored photos, all about FSSPX, de Castro in Ecône, Lefebvre in Campos dos Goytacazes.
It's not historiography but historical docuмents.
-
(https://www.pliniocorreadeoliveira.com.br/wp-content/uploads/plinio-correa-de-oliveira-menino1-e1553347222153.jpg)
Plineo, always a Church Militant
The false God of TIA-guru Atila Sinke Guimaraes. Blasphemer Atila prefers him over the flame in Moses' burning bush.
-
Here is a letter from Bishop Castro De Meyer on TFP. He had previously worked with them for years. This is the Bishop's response to a mother who lost her son to the TFP cult. Bishop Meyer called the once-Catholic group an "anti-Catholic, anti-clerical heretical sect.
This letter was published in the Campos daily, La Folha de Manhspan in 1991; the original text, however, is dated 1984, two years after Bishop de Castro Mayer’s break with TFP. It appeared in Le Sel de la Terre, [no. 28, Spring 1999], in an article entitled “Docuмents sur la T.F.P”.
Dear XXXXX,
I owe a response to your grieving letter of September 24, which, as the postmark indicates, you sent me on September 25. [1991]
In this case, I can only offer the sole advice: pray, pray much, above all the Rosary or at least the five decades of the Rosary, asking the Virgin Mother, Mediatrix of all graces, to enlighten your son and make him see that TFP is an heretical sect because, in fact, although they do not say or write it, TFP lives and behaves in accord with a principle which fundamentally undermines the truth of Christianity, that is, of the Catholic Church.
In fact, it is de fide that Jesus Christ founded His Church — destined to maintain on earth the true worship of God and to lead souls toward eternal salvation — as an unequal society, composed of two classes: one which governs, teaches and sanctifies, composed of members of the clergy, and the other — the faithful — who receive the teaching, are governed and sanctified. This is a de fide dogma.
St. Pius X wrote that the Church is, in its very nature, an unequal society, meaning that it comprises two orders of persons: shepherds and flocks, those who belong to the various ranks of the Hierarchy and the faithful multitude. These two orders are so completely distinct that the Hierarchy alone has the right and authority to guide and govern the members to the Church’s ends, while the duty of the faithful is that of allowing themselves to be governed and to obediently follow the way given by the governing class (The Encyclical, “Vehementer”, February 11, 1906) [7].
And the entire history of the Church, as can be seen in the New Testament, attests to this truth as a fundamental dogma of the Church’s constitution. It was to the Apostles only that Jesus said: Go and teach all nations. Too, the Acts of the Apostles show us the life of the Church in the times following Jesus Christ.
Because of this, it is a heretical subversion to habitually follow a lay person, therefore, not a member of the Hierarchy— as the spokesman of orthodoxy. Thus, they do not look to what the Church says, what the Bishops say, rather what this or that one says…. Nor does it end there: this attitude — even if not openly avowed — actually positions the “leader” as the arbiter of orthodoxy, and is accompanied by a subtle but real mistrust of the hierarchy and of the clergy in general.
There is a visceral anticlericalism in TFP: everything that comes from the clergy is prejudicially received. Basically, it holds that all priests are ignorant, not very zealous or interesting, and have other such qualities. Well, then, keeping in mind the divine Constitution of the Church which was instituted by Jesus Christ, TFP’s habitual anti-clericalism, latent, makes it an heretical sect, and therefore, as I have said, is animated by a principle contrary to the dogma established by Jesus Christ in the constitution of His Church.
Nevertheless, TFP had a healthy beginning. There was a certain evolution of the apostolate carried out by the bi-weekly newspaper of the Marian Congregation of St. Cecelia, titled, O Legionario. As a serious and well intentioned movement, it sought to strengthen the intellectual and religious formation of the members of that Congregation and, consequently, of the bi-weekly’s readers. It was influential throughout Brazil. That was the era of [its] obedience to Monsignors Duarte and Leme.
I accompanied and approved its apostolate, also when it began to stray into an anticlerical spirit, which began by its consolidating its position and then reversing it by putting the clergy in tow behind a charismatic layman, with his monopoly on orthodoxy. Perhaps I gave it support beyond a licit point. I retracted it only when it became clear to me that my warnings were not being taken into consideration. They had become useless.
It is just to observe that the straying of certain members of the hierarchy …explains the TFP scandal, but it doesn’t justify the positions they came to take. Even less so, those of their leader, Plinio.
At this time, as I said at the beginning of this letter, the remedy is prayer. First, because without prayer nothing is obtained: Ask, Our Lord says, and you shall receive. It is necessary to pray, because charismatic fervor produces a certain fanaticism: individuals become incapable of seeing objective reality, of perceiving even fundamental errors, because of this inversion of following a lay person instead of the legitimate Shepherds of the Holy Church. So much more so when, as I have observed, members of the Hierarchy unfortunately and frequently utter words and take positions which any Catholic can see are dissonant from doctrine and from the guidance of the Church of the ages…..
I ask Our Lord that he grant you, and your entire family, a holy and happy Christmas and many years filled with God’s grace.
I ask that you pray for me, Servant in Christ-Jesus,
Antonio de Castro Mayer, Bishop Emeritus of Campos
Is the basic “anti-clerical”accusation that Plineo needed to let the Bishops and Apostolic allies of the SSPX lead the counter-Revolution against newChurch?
:jester:
Well, well... that didn’t work out as planned... did it?
-
Is the basic “anti-clerical”accusation that Plineo needed to let the Bishops and Apostolic allies of the SSPX lead the counter-Revolution against newChurch?
:jester:
Well, well... that didn’t work out as planned... did it?
Incred, I agree it didn't work out. Plinio may have begun with the best intentions, but his plan deteriorated into a cult of personality with Plinio's slaves worshiping him:
1. his slaves praying to him in a mockery of the Ave Maria
2. his slaves consecrating themselves to Plinio in a mockery of the Louis de Monfort's Consecration to Mary
3. his slaves laying on the floor on their faces and making a public confession to him, a layman
4. Slave # 11, Atila G. head of TIA, preferring time spent with Plinio to time spent with God as Moses did (as Marion pointed out)
All of this is well-docuмented and easily accessible by using the search function on this site.
-
Incred, I agree it didn't work out. Plinio may have begun with the best intentions, but his plan deteriorated into a cult of personality with Plinio's slaves worshiping him:
1. his slaves praying to him in a mockery of the Ave Maria
2. his slaves consecrating themselves to Plinio in a mockery of the Louis de Monfort's Consecration to Mary
3. his slaves laying on the floor on their faces and making a public confession to him, a layman
4. Slave # 11, Atila G. head of TIA, preferring time spent with Plinio to time spent with God as Moses did (as Marion pointed out)
All of this is well-docuмented and easily accessible by using the search function on this site.
I think you’re just repeating old calumnies against them.
And how easy it would be for those who view them as a competitive threat (e.g. SSPX) to gin-up such allegations.
When one examines both Plineo’s and Atila’s writings, we see that they represent cutting-edge Catholic thinking.
For example, Plineo’s book “Dialogue” or Atila’s dissertations proving that the theology underpinning the Vatican docuмents was not Catholic.
Going back to the anti-clerical charge, in 2021, we find the SSPX beholden to newChuch jurisdictions and accepting the vax.
While one of the few groups leading and promoting the Holy Rosary on an international scale... is TFP.
Even the resistance Bishops (+W, Zendejas, Thomas, Faure and even Vigano have failed us in leadership...
by giving us lip service instead of ordaining more catacomb priests.
Dr. Plineo was right to say they cannot lead and manage the battle.
-
On topic, I have just found this on the Campos Administration website.
Google translation from Portuguese:
"Note, however, that in the time of Dom Antônio's episcopate, who preferred and celebrated the Mass in the old rite, from 1969 (when the New Mass was promulgated) until 1981 (when Dom Antônio became emeritus), there was in the diocese of Campos, parishes and churches where the Mass of Saint Pius V was celebrated, alongside parishes and churches where the Mass of Paul VI was celebrated, with the permission of the Diocesan Bishop, who preserved, and even appointed as parish priests, priests who only celebrated in the new rite."
Modernists are often also big liars, but if this is true, it speaks a lot in disfavour of Bp. Castro Mayer.
-
I think you’re just repeating old calumnies against them.
calumny
noun
- A false statement maliciously made to injure another's reputation.
I posted a letter from Bishop Castro de Meyer. Are you accusing the good bishop of lying?
The topic of this thread is Bishop Castro De Meyer, so I posted a letter written by the good Bishop to a grieving mother who was one of many who lost their young teenage sons to the TFP Plinio- worshiping cult. Their sons were trafficked to other countries, their sons were turned against their parents, taught by TFP that "My parents are the genesis of my revolution."
The other post was in regard to civil charges against TFP for their criminal cнιℓd тrαffιcking (not child sex trafficking, just cнιℓd тrαffιcking).
Facts are facts. Facts are not calumny.
-
When one examines both Plineo’s and Atila’s writings, we see that they represent cutting-edge Catholic thinking.
You may think that Plinio being more "divine" than Almighty God is cutting-edge; I call it heresy:
"The great Moses with his burning bush on the top of Sinai does not make me jealous. For if he were there with God for 40 days, I have been with Dr. Plinio for 33 years. And in this relationship I see, perhaps, more of the divine presence than he before the sacred bush."
https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/Internet_Files/F142_Defense_Eng.pdf (https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/Internet_Files/F142_Defense_Eng.pdf)
originally on p. 36
now changed to p. 37
-
On topic, I have just found this on the Campos Administration website.
Google translation from Portuguese:
"Note, however, that in the time of Dom Antônio's episcopate, who preferred and celebrated the Mass in the old rite, from 1969 (when the New Mass was promulgated) until 1981 (when Dom Antônio became emeritus), there was in the diocese of Campos, parishes and churches where the Mass of Saint Pius V was celebrated, alongside parishes and churches where the Mass of Paul VI was celebrated, with the permission of the Diocesan Bishop, who preserved, and even appointed as parish priests, priests who only celebrated in the new rite."
Modernists are often also big liars, but if this is true, it speaks a lot in disfavour of Bp. Castro Mayer.
Perhaps you could check further to find out IF it is true prior to posting an attack on Bishop Meyer (who was a close friend of Bishop Williamson) making this speculation doubtful.
-
Tradition In Action, which is a TFP mouthpiece, although there is a contrived distance between the two, accuses Archbishop Lefebvre (it has Guérard des Lauriers making the claim) of saying a Novus Ordo, which is unlikely and bizarre given how the first saying of an early form of it shocked him to the core, or having a personal Masonic brass band, or that the Archbishop was invalidly ordained by +Achille Liénart.
Now the present Personal Administration of St John Vianney which continues the work of Abp Mayer, is headed by Bishop Rifan who has been pictured concelebrating a Novus Ordo with Pope Francis. And +Rifan has concelebrated Novus Ordos a few times. Pope Francis might ask the heads of FSSP or ICKSP if they will be good boys like +Rifan and concelebrate a Novus Ordo with him.
-
Perhaps you could check further to find out IF it is true prior to posting an attack on Bishop Meyer (who was a close friend of Bishop Williamson) making this speculation doubtful.
Posting something I found online and saying that it could not be true is not exactly an attack on anybody. It is merely a report.
I have also found this citation from Dr. David Allen White's book. It seems to confirm the citation I posted earlier:
"Almost all parishes throughout the diocese had preserved the Tridentine Mass. "
If "almost all" preserved, it can only be assumed that some did not preserve. In other words, New Mass was celebrated on his diocese.
I don't think that it invalidates his work. It is perfectly understandable, given the situation that he was in. How can you prohibit a Priest from saying the Mass that the Pope says, without turning your diocese into a schismatic group?
Leading a Priestly Society is very different from leading a diocesis.
Anyway, facts are facts, and Dr. David Allen White is more trustworthy than the current Campos leaders.
-
Now the present Personal Administration of St John Vianney which continues the work of Abp Mayer, is headed by Bishop Rifan who has been pictured concelebrating a Novus Ordo with Pope Francis. And +Rifan has concelebrated Novus Ordos a few times. Pope Francis might ask the heads of FSSP or ICKSP if they will be good boys like +Rifan and concelebrate a Novus Ordo with him.
Not only, +Rifan also concelebrated masses of an event of Rotary Club (some know the roots of this "club") which is terrible and goes against even himself of almost 25 years ago.
-
Tradition In Action, which is a TFP mouthpiece, although there is a contrived distance between the two, accuses Archbishop Lefebvre (it has Guérard des Lauriers making the claim) of saying a Novus Ordo, which is unlikely and bizarre given how the first saying of an early form of it shocked him to the core, or having a personal Masonic brass band, or that the Archbishop was invalidly ordained by +Achille Liénart.
Now the present Personal Administration of St John Vianney which continues the work of Abp Mayer, is headed by Bishop Rifan who has been pictured concelebrating a Novus Ordo with Pope Francis. And +Rifan has concelebrated Novus Ordos a few times. Pope Francis might ask the heads of FSSP or ICKSP if they will be good boys like +Rifan and concelebrate a Novus Ordo with him.
Why do you think the differences between TFP and TIA are contrived?
From what I’ve learned their differences are well docuмented and substantial (e.g., Atila’s “Defense”).
TFP accepts Consiliarism and TIA does not.
TFP would never publicly acknowledge that the docuмents of Vatican II were based on non-Catholic theology.
Whereas, TIA is founded on this notion. It was the key connection between Plineo and Atila.