The Friar
D. Friar Vital Maria Gonçalves was born on November 27, 1844 in the city of Fogo (PB)* in Brazil. At that time, the city of Fogo still belonged to the state of Pernambuco (PE). His parents were Antonio Golçalves de Oliveira and Antonia Albina de Albuquerque.
D. Friar Vital Maria Gonçalves was born on November 27, 1844 in the city of Fogo (PB)* in Brazil. At that time, the city of Fogo still belonged to the state of Pernambuco (PE). His parents were Antonio Golçalves de Oliveira and Antonia Albina de Albuquerque.
D. Vital was baptized on January 2, 1846 in the chapel
of Engenho Bonito, with the name of Antonio Gonçalves de Oliveira Junior, in
the city of Goiana (PE) by Father Francisco Santana.
On February 2, 1861 Friar Vital entered in the seminary
of Olinda (PE). On October 1, 1862 he went studying in the seminary of Saint
Sulpice in Paris, France, and on August 15, 1863 he received the habit of Saint
Francis and the name of Friar Vital Maria de (“from”) Pernambuco.
On October 19, 1864 he issued the temporary profession
in the Capuchin Order, continuing his studies at the Convent of Perpignan,
France.
On July 8, 1866 he received de Minor Orders in the
Capuchin Monastery of Toulouse, France. On June 6, 1868 the Friar Vital received
the diaconate and on August 2 of that year he was ordained priest at Immaculate
Conception Church of Matabiau, by D. Desprez, Archbishop of Toulouse, France.
On October, 1868 Friar Vital returned to Brazil where
he visited the cities of Recife, Itambé (PE) São Paulo (SP), Maceió (AL) and
Rio de Janeiro (RJ).
The Bishop
The Bishop
D. Friar Vital arrived in Recife on May 22, 1872 where he was received with a solemn Te Deum in the Church of the Holy Spirit. Two days later, on May 24, he festively entered in the Episcopal city of Olinda and took possession in the Cathedral of San Salvador, with the presence of D. Antonio de Macedo Costa, Bishop of the State of Pará.
Simple and humble as he was, Dom Vital asked to the
Soledad Palace where he would live to be prepared in the simplest way possible.
He also refused the slaves put at his service, always saying that all
Christians were equal for God. At that time, the slavery had not been abolished
in Brazil yet. He was always willing to meet anyone without distinction in his
own residence.
Many times his bed was just a simple mat; he slept
little and spent hours at night in deep prayer. Dom Vital also used to carry
with him, a cilice and an iron belt.
* Abbreviations of some mentioned states of Brazil:
AL: Alagoas;
BA: Bahia;
PA: Paraíba;
BA: Bahia;
PA: Paraíba;
PE: Pernambuco;
RJ: Rio de Janeiro;
SP: São Paulo;
RS: Rio Grande do Sul.
RS: Rio Grande do Sul.
The Persecution of D. Vital by Freemasonry
Note: the following text was extracted from the publication "Dom Vital e a Maçonaria (D. Vital and the Freemasonry)" of November/December 1981 in the Catholic magazine "Permanência".
In March 1872, shortly before being elected bishop D. Vital, there was a party of Freemasonry in commemoration of the Free Womb Law [law that gave freedom to all slaves who were born from that date], obtained by the Prime Minister of the Emperor, Chairman (head of government), the Viscount of Rio Branco, father of the Baron of Rio Branco, really capable man with a remarkable intelligence and also 33rd Degree of the Masonic Lodge in Lavradio street. One of the speakers of that party was a priest, Father Almeida Martins. The bishop of Rio de Janeiro, D. Pedro Maria de Lacerda, outraged, called him in particular to tell that he could not be a priest and a Mason at the same time. But the Father refused any weighting. So the Bishop suspended his orders. Freemasonry considered it as an attack and made a great meeting that was chaired by the Head of Government, the Viscount of Rio Branco. They decided to start a major campaign against the Church and to the campaign joined the Masons of a dissident wing. They collected funds and began the attacks. They founded numerous newspapers for the campaign: in Rio (de Janeiro), the newspaper "A Família" (The Family); in São Paulo state, the "Correio Paulistano" (Paulistian Mail); in Porto Alegre city, "O Maçon" (The Mason); in Pará state, the "Pelicano" (Pelican); in Ceará state, "A Fraternidade" (The Brotherhood); in Rio Grande do Norte state, "A Luz" (The Light); in Alagoas state, "The Labarum" and in Recife, "A Família Universal" (The Universal Family) and "A Verdade" (The Truth).
So when D. Vital arrived in Recife, he found active
masonic newspapers that every day tried to hit him with taunts and insults. The
bishop did not answer, of course. On July 27, they began to tease him. First
they announced that there would be a Mass of thanksgiving in a lodge. Because
of the secretive prohibition of the bishop, no priest dared to celebrate it.
They asked Masses for unrepentant deceased Masons and, of course, no priest
accepted. Finally, before the silence of the bishop who did not answer the
provocations in the days 22,23,24,25 and October 26, the newspaper “A Verdade”
published a series of articles against the Holy Eucharist, the virginity and the divine Motherhood of Our Lady and the Immaculate Conception. And to better
achieve the target, a religious catholic brotherhood (several were infiltrated
by Masons) elected the author of those articles as its president. Finally, on
November 21, Bishop Vital published a protest against the attacks on our dogmas
urging people to protest as well. Later he made a public sermon in the
cathedral, repeating the protest and accusing Freemasonry. The newspaper, to
mock him, published a list of affiliated priests and canons of the local
Freemasonry. The bishop called them one by one, in particular, and got the
publicly recantation of all and their outputs of the lodges, but two of them
did not do that. The newspaper then published the names of presidents,
secretaries and treasurers of catholic brotherhoods who also belonged to the
lodges. The bishop did the same, but he was countered by the obstinacy of
several brotherhoods who refused to abide him. Only two brotherhoods accepted
and the others refused or neither were to the interview. D. Vital tried with
mutual friends the submission of the brotherhoods to his (legitimate)
authority. He got nothing. Then he decided to send a first warning to canonical
vicars assistants of the brotherhoods to exhort the Masons brothers to renounce
Freemasonry or resign. The brotherhoods refused accepting this. He sent two
more warnings that were rejected. The bishop then launched an prohibition on
the brotherhoods "Santo Antônio" (St. Anthony) and "Espírito
Santo" (Holy Ghost), preventing the holding of Masses or any religious in
their chapels. Masons began to promote street riots. First they closed chapels,
churches and tabernacles stealing files or keys. D. Vital published a "Carta Pastoral Contra As Ciladas da Maçonaria" (Pastoral Letter Against the Wiles of Freemasonry). In it, in addition
to recounting the pernicious activities of the organization, he noted that
there is no difference between Freemasonry in Brazil and in Europe, which all
follow the same plans. He prohibited the reading of the newspaper "A
Verdade" and excommunicated the not abjured Freemasons.
Meanwhile, also the bishop of Belém city in Pará
state, D. Antonio Macedo Costa, was fighting Freemasonry. The news about it,
coming to Rio (de Janeiro), caused huge shock. The Government made a reunion,
after know that the brotherhoods had been interdicted and also because of the
Pastoral Letter. The Government itself, certainly its head, the Viscount of Rio
Branco and his Mason helpers, ordered to say to the brotherhoods that they
should appeal to the Central Government with a then current, "appeal to
the Crown", despite Brazilian law then say that in strictly religious
causes the bishops were submitted to the Pope and only to the Pope could be
presented appeals against his decisions. Nevertheless, one of the brotherhoods
had presented the appeal to the Government. The Emperor Pedro II, whose
mentality was liberal, did not like the bishop's attitude that in a letter to a
State Councillor, he pointed out the illegality of the use of Crown and said
simply that he had his duty and was a bishop only submitted to the Pope in
religious matters. Historians think that without support of the Emperor, the
Viscount of Rio Branco would have retreated, but with this support he moved on.
Before publish his Pastoral Letter, D. Vital had written to the Pope asking
what to do about the situation that he described. The Pope replied with a
"Breve" (short letter) dated May 29, approving the acts of D. Vital and giving him
powers to face the situation. Before the "use of the Crown" by the brotherhood, the Government sent a warning to D. Vital ordering him to lift the
ban on consequence of being sued. The bishop responded calmly and, after
presenting his respects to the Emperor and his respect for the Government, he
added that one must obey God rather than men and received on the same day, the
Government, the notice to suspend the interdict , and from the Pope, his
"Breve" approving their actions. Thus, as a bishop, he could not
comply with the notice. He (the Bishop) explained that it was not a
disobedience, but consciousness of duty. Then the bishop suspended the orders
of the Dean of the diocese that was a Mason and that refused to left
Freemasonry. The Masons then made a public show of support to the Dean. So they
invaded, vandalized and loot the chapel of the Jesuit College, which was full
of faithful who was celebrating the month of May. They broke the pulpit, the
confessionals, frames, images, beating on the faithful and stole valuables.
They disenable then the Catholic newspaper, "O Católico" (The
Catholic) and "A União" (The Union) assaulting employees. They
attacked the Jesuits, some of which were stabbed and one of whom died later.
After, they broke the Colégio Santa Dorotéia (Saint Dorothy School) and then
they went to the palace of the bishop. The bishop being warned, sent to
illuminate the whole palace and stood before the gang who was at the gate. They
did not dare to invade the palace and so they were gone. Only after that, the
police arrived. D. Vital published a "Breve", Quamquam Dolores communicating to the other bishops of
Brazil what happened and getting them all full support, especially the bishop
of Rio de Janeiro and the Bishop of Belém city in Pará state. The Government
sent a warning raising the interdict of the brotherhood, which is obviously
ridiculous, since no priest would accept it.
The Government canceled the payment of the salaries of priests who at that time were supported with public funds and also, they canceled the salaries of the seminary's teachers priests. Finally the Government ordered processing D. Vital for disobedience and contempt. Then came the order to arrest the bishop and send him to Rio de Janeiro to be tried by the Supreme Court. A judge, the Chief of Police and a police coronel went to the palace of Recife to arrest the bishop. When the judge entered the palace and knocked on the bishop's door, D. Vital came out fully vested, with miter and crosier, and so he was arrested. But when they reached the street, the police saw that the crowd was cheering the bishop and so the police men were afraid. They put him in a car and took him to the Navy Yard where he got stuck waiting for the ship that would take him to Rio de Janeiro. In Salvador, they carried him to other ship to come to Rio de Janeiro no being expected.
When he arrived in Rio de Janeiro, he was soon imprisoned at the arsenal, but with all due respect and comfort. It should be said that, everywhere in Recife, Salvador and Rio de Janeiro, multiplied the demonstrations of appreciation, protests and honor to him, by other bishops, clergy and the people. Then the Government asked the ambassador of Brazil in London, Marquis of Boulder, trying to get from the Pope a statement against the bishop. The ambassador, skillful and insinuating, told in his own way the facts and got from the Secretary of State, Cardinal Antonelli (whose future behavior would show up very strange) that he write to the Pope authorizing a letter to D. Vital, "Gesta tua non laudantur" (Your achievements are not appreciated) in that although praising the bishop, he censured him for having hurry in executing, overzealous, what the Pope had written before, and told him to lift the ban over the brotherhood now for only "after" try to eliminate the Masons within. The Baron and the Government were delighted with the outcome of the mission and immediately reported the fact, but D. Vital, perplexed, put the letter in his pocket and wrote to the Pope asking for explanations, presenting the facts and showing the drawbacks of what he was ordained, especially asked to say to the Pope (who until then, did not know nothing) that he, D. Vital, was arrested. And indeed, soon came the Pope's response sending to destroy the letter of Cardinal Antonelli.
Meanwhile, the government was frustrated because they wanted D. Vital to publish the letter received before; D. Vital, that wasn't a fool, kept save the letter, of course. After all, then came the process. He was summoned to defend himself in eight days and the bishop answered only with this phrase: " 'Jesus tacebat autem' (but Jesus was silent). Signed in my prison in Navy Yard of Rio de Janeiro. Frei Vital..." He was tried in a solemn session of the Supreme Court, that was full of people. Two Catholic Senators defended him, Zacarias de Goes and Candido Mendes de Almeida. But the whole defense was useless, since Freemasonry ruled the government. D. Vital was sentenced for four years in prison with hard labor. There is an interesting note: based on that law of "appeal to the Crown", D. Vital was the 163rd sued person, one of the two people condemned and the only one who fulfill the prison sentence. Also the Bishop of Belém city was sentenced to imprisonment.
The bishop was taken to the Fortress of St. John (in Urca) in which he entered in March 21, 1874 to serve the sentence in which it was converted by the emperor to simple imprisonment without hard labor, before he begins to serve, for instance of the Princess Isabel, who admired Dom Vital. D. Macedo Costa, on the other hand, was jailed in Ilha das Cobras (Snake Island).
While they fulfilled their prison sentences, the Government persecuted the Catholic leaders of Recife, jailing several others and expelling the Jesuits of Pernambuco State. Even arrested, D. Vital wrote and had published a letter, "A Maçonaria e os Jesuítas" (Freemasonry and the Jesuits), with 139 pages, in which he defended the Jesuits and attacked the Freemasonry. In the fortress, he was visited by a crowd of faithful and clergy, including foreign bishops. This was followed by numerous petitions to the Emperor, with thousands of signatures calling for the release of the bishops.
Princess Isabel herself, went to the fortress to visit him and, with her help, D. Vital could call to the fortress, the seminarians from Recife who were ready to be ordained by the bishop there. The Pope began to protest and wrote to the Emperor of Brazil asking him to free the bishops, stating that the bishops did what they should do. The Emperor seemed not give much importance to the Pope's letter, but the Duque of Caxias proposed to the Emperor an amnesty. The Emperor hesitated. For political reasons, the Viscount of Rio Branco fell and the Duque of Caxias was named to succeed him in office. He accepted on the condition of granting amnesty to the bishops. Finally, the Emperor had to accept, and on September 17, 1875, he decreed an amnesty that freed D. Vital and the other prisoners.
Then on October D. Vital went to Rome
where he was received with joy and paternally by Pius IX (Pope, used to call
him "Mio Caro Olinda" [in italian: my dear Olinda]) but, when he
visited Cardinal Antonelli, the Cardinal told him the words: "Didn't I
written to Your Excellency imposing you to lift the ban and publish my
letter?". D. Macedo Soares, moreover, told that the presence of D. Vital
in Rome caused annoyances in some "groups". D. Vital responded asking
precise instructions and Antonelli gave him. In another meeting in the next day
with Pius IX, D. Vital showed to the Pope what Cardinal Antonelli had given him
and the Pope was astonished. Pius IX asked for a report by D. Vital and he
delivered to him days later, showing that the letter of D. Antonelli
contradicted the previous "Breve" (letter).
Pius IX assembled a commission of cardinals and theologians to whom D. Vital made a written and oral statement. However, had attended hostile people. The impression we have left is that Cardinal Antonelli, if he was not a Mason, he was at least liberal and disliked D. Vital. Finally the Pope kissing Dom Vital, expressed his support and published the encyclical "Exortae" condemning again Freemasonry and supporting the Brazilian bishops but at the same time, Cardinal Antonelli, authorized by the Pope, cabled to the Nuncio in Brazil ordering him to suspend the prohibitions over the brotherhoods without requiring prior removal of the Masons. Well ... In any case, there was the reiteration of the condemnation of the Masons. Well ... We had to live with this, at least at that time ... After all, today would be worse.
The Government canceled the payment of the salaries of priests who at that time were supported with public funds and also, they canceled the salaries of the seminary's teachers priests. Finally the Government ordered processing D. Vital for disobedience and contempt. Then came the order to arrest the bishop and send him to Rio de Janeiro to be tried by the Supreme Court. A judge, the Chief of Police and a police coronel went to the palace of Recife to arrest the bishop. When the judge entered the palace and knocked on the bishop's door, D. Vital came out fully vested, with miter and crosier, and so he was arrested. But when they reached the street, the police saw that the crowd was cheering the bishop and so the police men were afraid. They put him in a car and took him to the Navy Yard where he got stuck waiting for the ship that would take him to Rio de Janeiro. In Salvador, they carried him to other ship to come to Rio de Janeiro no being expected.
When he arrived in Rio de Janeiro, he was soon imprisoned at the arsenal, but with all due respect and comfort. It should be said that, everywhere in Recife, Salvador and Rio de Janeiro, multiplied the demonstrations of appreciation, protests and honor to him, by other bishops, clergy and the people. Then the Government asked the ambassador of Brazil in London, Marquis of Boulder, trying to get from the Pope a statement against the bishop. The ambassador, skillful and insinuating, told in his own way the facts and got from the Secretary of State, Cardinal Antonelli (whose future behavior would show up very strange) that he write to the Pope authorizing a letter to D. Vital, "Gesta tua non laudantur" (Your achievements are not appreciated) in that although praising the bishop, he censured him for having hurry in executing, overzealous, what the Pope had written before, and told him to lift the ban over the brotherhood now for only "after" try to eliminate the Masons within. The Baron and the Government were delighted with the outcome of the mission and immediately reported the fact, but D. Vital, perplexed, put the letter in his pocket and wrote to the Pope asking for explanations, presenting the facts and showing the drawbacks of what he was ordained, especially asked to say to the Pope (who until then, did not know nothing) that he, D. Vital, was arrested. And indeed, soon came the Pope's response sending to destroy the letter of Cardinal Antonelli.
Meanwhile, the government was frustrated because they wanted D. Vital to publish the letter received before; D. Vital, that wasn't a fool, kept save the letter, of course. After all, then came the process. He was summoned to defend himself in eight days and the bishop answered only with this phrase: " 'Jesus tacebat autem' (but Jesus was silent). Signed in my prison in Navy Yard of Rio de Janeiro. Frei Vital..." He was tried in a solemn session of the Supreme Court, that was full of people. Two Catholic Senators defended him, Zacarias de Goes and Candido Mendes de Almeida. But the whole defense was useless, since Freemasonry ruled the government. D. Vital was sentenced for four years in prison with hard labor. There is an interesting note: based on that law of "appeal to the Crown", D. Vital was the 163rd sued person, one of the two people condemned and the only one who fulfill the prison sentence. Also the Bishop of Belém city was sentenced to imprisonment.
The bishop was taken to the Fortress of St. John (in Urca) in which he entered in March 21, 1874 to serve the sentence in which it was converted by the emperor to simple imprisonment without hard labor, before he begins to serve, for instance of the Princess Isabel, who admired Dom Vital. D. Macedo Costa, on the other hand, was jailed in Ilha das Cobras (Snake Island).
While they fulfilled their prison sentences, the Government persecuted the Catholic leaders of Recife, jailing several others and expelling the Jesuits of Pernambuco State. Even arrested, D. Vital wrote and had published a letter, "A Maçonaria e os Jesuítas" (Freemasonry and the Jesuits), with 139 pages, in which he defended the Jesuits and attacked the Freemasonry. In the fortress, he was visited by a crowd of faithful and clergy, including foreign bishops. This was followed by numerous petitions to the Emperor, with thousands of signatures calling for the release of the bishops.
Princess Isabel herself, went to the fortress to visit him and, with her help, D. Vital could call to the fortress, the seminarians from Recife who were ready to be ordained by the bishop there. The Pope began to protest and wrote to the Emperor of Brazil asking him to free the bishops, stating that the bishops did what they should do. The Emperor seemed not give much importance to the Pope's letter, but the Duque of Caxias proposed to the Emperor an amnesty. The Emperor hesitated. For political reasons, the Viscount of Rio Branco fell and the Duque of Caxias was named to succeed him in office. He accepted on the condition of granting amnesty to the bishops. Finally, the Emperor had to accept, and on September 17, 1875, he decreed an amnesty that freed D. Vital and the other prisoners.
Pius IX |
Pius IX assembled a commission of cardinals and theologians to whom D. Vital made a written and oral statement. However, had attended hostile people. The impression we have left is that Cardinal Antonelli, if he was not a Mason, he was at least liberal and disliked D. Vital. Finally the Pope kissing Dom Vital, expressed his support and published the encyclical "Exortae" condemning again Freemasonry and supporting the Brazilian bishops but at the same time, Cardinal Antonelli, authorized by the Pope, cabled to the Nuncio in Brazil ordering him to suspend the prohibitions over the brotherhoods without requiring prior removal of the Masons. Well ... In any case, there was the reiteration of the condemnation of the Masons. Well ... We had to live with this, at least at that time ... After all, today would be worse.
D. Vital visited different places and friends in
France and Italy. When he was back to Recife, he sought to restore the closed
institutions, especially the Seminar and tried to recover the resources denied
by the Government. After all, he obtained resources and reopened the seminary.
He made pastoral visits, but his health, always precarious, weakened him and he
had to return to Europe to treat himself, helped by Princess Isabel. From
France he wrote to the Pope asking him to accept his resignation. The Pope
asked him to wait and treat his disease. In Brazil climbed to the Government
one of the most spiteful Masons, Saldanha Marinho. Pius IX died in February
1878 and soon after, also died D. Vital at 33 years old in Paris. His body was
buried in the crypt of the Franciscans in Versailles, where later was moved to
Recife. He is buried in the Basilica of Our Lady of Penha, in Recife.
It was ended with a little melancholy this beautiful page of our Catholic history, but it was not his fault (D. Vital) neither of Brazilian Catholics. Except on one point: we must saying that today (1981) for infinite shame of Brazilian Catholics, the dioceses of Olinda and Recide are stained with an (marxist) individual (is he still a bishop?), Dom Helder Camara, representative of those Brazilian priests whose emptiness had been noticed by Gustavo Corção (a tradicionalist Catholic writer), according to our article published in the number 148-149. Those ecclesiastics (like D. Helder), with a pretext of which they call "option for the poor", do not hide and every day publishes their affinities and sympathies with the worst, most grotesque and stupid byproduct of Freemasonry, which is communism, intrinsically perverse, so explicitly condemned by Pius XI. They found in communism, it seems, a terrible solution for the spiritual emptiness in which they live. There, in sympathy with the agitators and subversives, in the temporal activism that has no time for the "moralism" they could finally find meaning in their lives. And if what we say seems excessive, remember that this is what they say every day.
Permanência's note: All the informations above were taken from the book "D. Vital - Um Grande Brasileiro" (D. Vital - A Great Brazilian). Written by Friar Felix Olivola O.F.M. - Edição da Imprensa Universitária (Edition of the University Press), Recife, 1967.
Beatification and Canonization
Everything began in 1931 with the arrival of Friar
Felix Olivola, Capuchin from Lucca in Italy, to the Convent of Our Lady of
Penha, after he had contact with the story of Dom Vital. After this the friar
began working in the cause and wrote a biography entitled "Um Grande
Brasileiro" (A Great Brazilian) a successful book with three editions.
In 1933 in the First National Eucharistic Congress
happened in Salvador-BA, Frei Felix asked Cardinal Sebastiao Leme to speak up
about Dom Vital. So the bishops signed a petition that was sent to Pius XI.
In 1948 Frei Felix went to Rome with the intention of
initiating the process of beatification but he died during the travel to Italy.
So, the Capuchins gave segment to the work of Friar Felix.
On July 4, 2001 in the 123rd anniversary of the death of Dom Vital, the diocesan phase of the process was finally completed. Then the minutes of the process went to Rome being delivered to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, from where the Capuchins are waiting for the pronouncement of the Holy See.
Frei Jociel, vice-postulator of the cause of beatification made a report and an important observation that can prove the martyrdom of D. Vital: "The process of D. Vital was opened in the 1940s but the cause stood for a long time. In the 1990s, D. Jose Cardoso decided to reopen the case. The documentation was collected and everything was done according to the requirements of the Holy See. In 2001 it was delivered to the Vatican. We are in the last phase writing a "Positio" and expecting he be recognized as a martyr. The poisoning may be established with the exhumation and specific tests", he explained.
Detail of the interior of the Basilica of Our Lady of Penha in Recife By: Archdiocese of Olinda and Recife |
"Ask us the sacrifice of our rooms; ask us the sacrifice of our faculties; ask us the sacrifice of our health; ask us the blood of our veins... But for God's sake do not ask us the sacrifice of our consciousness, because we will never do. 'Sic nos Deus adjuvet' (So God help us). Never!"
D. Vital, Bishop of Olinda
Coat of D. Vital |
D. Vital, pray for us!
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário