I only saw that video within the last several weeks and just assumed it was more recent without checking the date posted but the fact is that he did change suddenly his position. It was not over time. I don’t really see what it matters. He didn’t deceive his superiors to get holy orders. He studied part of his time in Avrille with the Dominicans and he has been fully involved in the resistance since up to about a week ago. 

Why might he try to take Resistance chapels with him? Hopefully he wouldn't want to do that. Are there that many in the Resistance in Brazil who are really sedevacantist, and will follow Fr. Rodrigo's lead?

It seems to me that perhaps one of the reasons for Bp. Faure's communication in the OP is to let everyone in the Resistance know that Father is no longer associated with the Resistance. That would necessarily include the Brazilian Resistance.

Bishop Faure hasn’t even spoken on this matter. 

Bishop Faure hasn’t even spoken on this matter.

My mistake. I should have said it was Bp. Aquinas who has provided the communication that's posted in the O.P.

Da Silva can no longer be trusted, either because of a liar or mental instability . They should find out what part of Brazil is located so that the faithful know where they should not attend mass .

Excuse my ignorance: Are those Franciscans minors or Capuchins? Who reordered them sub conditione? Who are they? 

Thanks! 

Bizarre pic.

Meanwhile, who is this Friar Gabriel?

I leave a link to the video where Father Rodrigo Da Silva explains his situation. It is in Portuguese only. Promise more explanatory videos.



Summary explanation of what I could understand:

He waited a prudential time to see the attitude of the bishops of the so-called "Resistance", especially Dom Tomas.

Before the appearance of the statement on his separation, he explains that on what has been said of acts of disobedience, he will not enter into personal questions, so he will not respond to these false accusations. He only explains why he adopted the Sedevacante position.

During his formation, he spoke with important priests of the so-called "resistance", especially those of sedevacatory position. This led him to speak with Dom Tomas about how he could not in conscience pray for a formal heretic like Bergoglio (he cites Dom Guéranger as a source and the classic explanations of the vacant See). Given that explanation, he claims not to get an answer from Dom Tomás. Days later appears the famous statement about his separation from the SAJM.

Then he goes on to quote the classic position of the sedevacantists, using Dom Guéranger and other authors who do not understand who they are because they are cited in Portuguese.

He continues with the incoherent position of the so-called "resistance" to resist and recognize, criticizes the attitude of bishops who wish to collaborate with sedevacantist priests and then oppress them or try to impose their position. In addition to talking about the incompetence of the bishops in the management of the SAJM (for this he recommends reading articles from LA SAPINIERE, and from sedevacantist priests of what he claims to be "resistance".

At the moment he directs the chapel of San Pablo (Brazil), that happened to his hands and maintained by some lay people that went with him (something more than 20 people). He was also joined by 4 Franciscan friars coming from modernism and the Conceptionist Franciscan friars (number 3), also from modernism, who after being with FSSPX and a year with Dom Tomás, left. In addition, there is a Carmelite nun coming out of modernism (it is not cloistered).


I wonder: What do the bishops hide? 

The 'spirit of pride' of our age, also affects many priests/bishops of tradition, as this situation proves.  Let us pray for ALL the traditional priests/bishops, because they will have a LOT to answer for on judgement day.  Traditionalism could have peace but for their lust for power and control.