Letter "Fratelli Tutti" of Francis
on Fraternity and Social
reproduction of the original
The main purpose of this reproduction of the long, tortuous, boring and
unenlightened Encyclical "Fratelli Tutti" (1) is to make it available
in a more manageable format in order to highlight and comment on the
serious theological absences and errors it contains.
The fundamental message of this Encyclical of Bergoglio-Francisco, in
which God has been displaced from his rightful central place and,
equally, the Christian Faith has been dispossessed of its importance,
can be summarized in a few words:
It is a call to bring
the world to a state of union, justice, peace and harmony by way of
endowing the planned New World Order with a feeling of fraternity
superior and more powerful than the faith of all religions, superior
even to the Christian Faith that Francis claims to profess. In essence,
a "mysticism of fraternity" to serve as the One World Religion above
The gravity of the situation is that nowhere in the Encyclical
(or, at least, not in a prominent place) are the following key truths
declared - which, undoubtedly, should have been pronounced in a
prominent place because the viability of the pretended project of
"universal fraternity" depends on them:
(1) About God:
(a) God is the only true source of Love
in any of its forms, including fraternal love.
(b) The permanent supernatural contact with God is the only thing that
can maintain "fraternal love" in a live and healthy state.
(c) "Good will" of man, without appeal to God, is worthless because it
on human weakness.
(d) Leaving God out of the central place that corresponds to Him is a
sure guarantee for the failure of any human project.
(2) About the only possible Savior of humanity, Jesus Christ:
(a) If man is not reconciled with God, who is Pure Love, it is impossible for man to be able to
reconcile with other human beings.
(b) The only Gate and the only Way to true Reconciliation with God is
Jesus Christ. Therefore, ...
(c) Justice and Peace cannot be achieved in this world except through
Jesus Christ, the Only Way.
(3) About organized religion:
(a) Organized religion is expected to
be a bridge between God and men. Therefore, if the Justice and Peace of
God has not reached men, the main responsible for the failure is
organized religion - with the Roman Catholic Hierarchy in a prominent
place - and not the economic, political and social institutions
of the world.
Without the recognition of these truths, the project of universal
fraternity promoted by the Vatican through Bergoglio-Francisco is not
only useless because it is destined to fail, but it is a great offense
God, a blasphemous act, for pretending - from a position of supposed
representatives of God - that Justice and Peace in this
world can be obtained without the help of God and, even worse, leaving
Him aside as if He were a decorative element.
If the only thing that can sustain Love and Reconciliation - God and
Jesus Christ - are not presented in the central place and as the only
possible foundation for harmony among the peoples of the Earth, then
the attempt to build a universal fraternity becomes an act as
blasphemous as the construction of the mythical Tower of Babel.
Because also the people of the Tower of Babel had "good will" and
desired "universal communion", just like Bergoglio and the other
advocates of a New World Order, but the height of the tower symbolized
- then as now - how high they wanted to go without God.
The conclusion, after a thorough analysis of the Encyclical, can be no
other: through it, Francis confirms
himself as the Apostle of a New World Religion for a New World Order.
Note: Apart from the
formatting (including highlights) and the insertion of our summaries
and comments, we have kept the original
text unchanged (1). Our
summaries and comments are highlighted in italics and blue.
Section headings are from the original. For further details on
formatting, see footnote (2)
of this document.
Sections in this Part
1: Introduction |
Without borders | Chapter 1 | Shattered dreams | The end of historical
consciousness | Lacking
a plan for everyone | A
“throwaway” world | Insufficiently
universal human rights | Conflict
and fear | Globalization
and progress without a shared roadmap | Pandemics
and other calamities
in history | An absence
of human dignity on the borders | The illusion of
| Shameless aggression
| Information without wisdom
| Forms of subjection and
of self-contempt | Hope
Commentaries to this Part 1 by The M+G+R Foundation
Summary of the
Francis tells us that his inspiration for the Encyclical was the
fraternal love preached by St. Francis of Assisi. Focusing on
interreligious dialogue, he refers to the visit of St. Francis of
Assisi to the Sultan of Egypt, as well as to the meetings of Francis
himself with an Orthodox patriarch and a great Muslim imam. Without at
any time speaking of the Fatherhood of God, he relies on the image of
St. Francis as "father of a fraternal society" and he himself proposes
"the rebirth of a universal aspiration to fraternity" and the dream of
"a single human family". With this in mind, the title could be
summarized as: "Francis projects himself as the father of a world
“FRATELLI TUTTI”. With these words, Saint Francis of Assisi
addressed his brothers and sisters
and proposed to them a way of life marked by the flavour of the Gospel. Of
the counsels Francis offered, I would like to select the one in which
he calls for a love that transcends the barriers of geography and
distance, and declares blessed all those who love their brother “as much when he is far away
from him as when he is with him”. In his simple and direct way,
Saint Francis expressed the essence of a fraternal openness that allows us to
acknowledge, appreciate and love each person, regardless of physical
proximity, regardless of where he or she was born or lives.
2. This saint
of fraternal love,
and joy, who inspired me to write the Encyclical Laudato Si’
, prompts me once more
to devote this new Encyclical to fraternity
and social friendship.
Francis felt himself a brother
the sun, the sea and the wind, yet he knew that he was even closer to
those of his own flesh. Wherever he went, he sowed seeds of peace and
walked alongside the poor, the abandoned, the infirm and the outcast,
the least of his brothers and sisters.
3 . There is an
episode in the life of Saint Francis that shows his openness of heart,
which knew no bounds and transcended differences of origin,
nationality, colour or religion. It was his visit to Sultan Malik-el-Kamil, in Egypt,
which entailed considerable hardship, given Francis’ poverty, his
scarce resources, the great distances to be traveled and their
differences of language, culture and
religion. That journey, undertaken at the time of the Crusades, further
demonstrated the breadth and grandeur of his love, which sought to
embrace everyone. Francis’ fidelity to his Lord was commensurate with
his love for his brothers and
sisters. Unconcerned for the
hardships and dangers involved, Francis went to meet the Sultan with
the same attitude that he instilled in his disciples: if they found
themselves “among the Saracens and other nonbelievers”, without
renouncing their own identity they were not to “engage in arguments or
disputes, but to be subject to every human creature for God’s
In the context of the times, this was an extraordinary recommendation.
We are impressed that some eight hundred years ago Saint Francis urged
that all forms of hostility or conflict be avoided and that a humble
and fraternal “subjection” be
shown to those who did not share his faith.
4. Francis did
not wage a war of words aimed at imposing doctrines; he simply spread
the love of God
He understood that “God
is love and those who abide in love abide in God
” (1 Jn
In this way, he [Saint Francis of Assisi]
became a father
to all and
inspired the vision of a fraternal
Indeed, “only the man who approaches others, not to
draw them into his own life, but to help them become ever more fully
themselves, can truly be called a father
In the world of that time, bristling with watchtowers and defensive
walls, cities were a theatre of brutal wars between powerful families
, even as poverty
was spreading through the countryside. Yet there Francis was able to
welcome true peace into his heart and free himself of the desire to
wield power over others. He became one of the poor and sought to live
in harmony with all. Francis has inspired these pages.
5. Issues of
and social friendship
have always been
a concern of mine. In recent years, I have spoken of them repeatedly
and in different settings. In this Encyclical, I have sought to bring
together many of those statements and to situate them in a broader
context of reflection. In the preparation of Laudato Si’
, I had a source of
inspiration in my brother Bartholomew,
the Orthodox Patriarch,
spoken forcefully of our need to care for creation. In this case, I
have felt particularly encouraged by the Grand Imam Ahmad Al-Tayyeb,
whom I met in Abu Dhabi, where we declared that “God has created
all human beings equal
in rights, duties and dignity, and has
called them to live together as brothers and sisters
was no mere diplomatic gesture, but a reflection born of dialogue and
common commitment. The present Encyclical takes up and develops some of
the great themes raised in the Document that we both signed. I have
also incorporated, along with my own thoughts, a number of letters,
documents and considerations that I have received from many individuals
and groups throughout the world.
following pages do not claim to offer a complete teaching on fraternal love,
but rather to
consider its universal scope,
its openness to every man and woman.
I offer this social Encyclical as a modest contribution to continued
reflection, in the hope that in the face of present-day attempts to
eliminate or ignore others, we may prove capable of responding with a
new vision of fraternity
and social friendship
that will not
remain at the level of words. Although I have written it from the Christian
convictions that inspire and sustain me, I have sought to make this
reflection an invitation to dialogue among all people of good will.
7. As I was
writing this letter, the Covid-19
pandemic unexpectedly erupted, exposing our false securities. Aside
from the different ways that various countries responded to the crisis,
their inability to work together became quite evident. For all our
hyper-connectivity, we witnessed a fragmentation that made it more
difficult to resolve problems that affect us all. Anyone who thinks
that the only lesson to be learned was the need to improve what we were
already doing, or to refine existing systems and regulations, is
8. It is my
desire that, in this our time, by acknowledging the dignity of each
human person, we can contribute to the
rebirth of a universal aspiration to fraternity. Fraternity
between all men and
women. “Here we have a splendid secret that shows us how to dream and
to turn our life into a wonderful adventure. No one can face life in
isolation… We need a community that supports and helps us, in which we
can help one another to keep looking ahead. How important it is to
dream together… By ourselves, we risk seeing mirages, things that are
not there. Dreams, on the other hand, are built together”. Let us
dream, then, as a single human family
as fellow travelers sharing the same flesh, as children of the same
earth which is our common home, each of us bringing the richness of his
or her beliefs
and convictions, each of us with his or her own voice, brothers and sisters
CLOUDS OVER A CLOSED WORLD
Francis makes a tour of the injustices that plague the world today.
According to his analysis, he is implying, by omission, that the
problem does not have a spiritual root and that the Catholic Hierarchy
(or the Church as a whole) bears no responsibility for such injustices,
but that they are to be attributed to individualism and, mostly, to
political and economic issues, including:
"narrow nationalisms", the selfishness of economic powers, an erroneous
"model of globalization", "transnational economic powers", certain
destructive ideologies, a lack of "historical consciousness", "cultural
colonization", a confrontation-based approach to politics, a culture of
"short-sighted culture, bereft of a shared vision", the "obsession with
reducing labor costs", certain "economic rules", "a profit-based
economic model", "certain, primarily economic, interests", "the
temptation to build a culture of walls", "the lack of an equitable
distribution of natural resources", "the shared passion to create a
community of belonging and solidarity", "neoliberalism", "the dogmatic
formulae of prevailing economic theory".
Although here he is making an analysis of the situation and not yet
describing in detail the solution, he is already implying that the
solution he has in mind is a "project of fraternity", with hardly any
mention of recourse to God and the Christian Faith except anecdotally.
claiming to carry out an exhaustive analysis or to study every aspect
of our present-day experience, I intend simply to consider certain trends in our world that hinder the
development of universal fraternity.
decades, it seemed that the world had learned a lesson from its many
wars and disasters, and was slowly moving towards various forms of
integration. For example, there was the dream of a united Europe
, capable of
acknowledging its shared roots and rejoicing in its rich diversity. We
think of “the firm conviction of the founders
of the European Union, who envisioned a future based on the capacity to
work together in bridging divisions and in fostering peace and
fellowship between all the peoples of this continent”. There was
also a growing desire for integration
in Latin America
, and several steps were taken in this
direction. In some countries and regions, attempts at reconciliation
and rapprochement proved fruitful, while others showed great promise.
11. Our own
days, however, seem to be showing signs of a certain regression.
Ancient conflicts thought long buried are breaking out anew, while
instances of a myopic, extremist, resentful and aggressive nationalism are on the
rise. In some countries, a concept of popular and national unity
influenced by various ideologies
is creating new forms of selfishness and a loss of the social sense
under the guise of defending national
interests. Once more we are being reminded that “each new
generation must take up the struggles and attainments of past
generations, while setting its sights even higher. This is the path.
Goodness, together with love, justice and solidarity, are not achieved
once and for all; they have to be realized each day. It is not possible
to settle for what was achieved in the past and complacently enjoy it,
as if we could somehow disregard the fact that many of our brothers and sisters still endure
situations that cry out for our attention”.
12. “Opening up
to the world” is an expression that has been co-opted by the economic and financial
sector and is
now used exclusively of openness to foreign
or to the freedom of economic
to invest without obstacles or complications in all
countries. Local conflicts and disregard for the common good are
exploited by the global economy
in order to impose a single cultural
. This culture
unifies the world, but divides persons and nations, for “as society
becomes ever more globalized
it makes us neighbours, but does not make us brothers
”. We are more alone than
ever in an increasingly massified world that promotes individual interests
and weakens the
communitarian dimension of life. Indeed, there are markets where
individuals become mere consumers or bystanders. As a rule, the advance
of this kind of globalism
strengthens the identity of the more powerful, who can protect
themselves, but it tends to diminish the identity of the weaker and
poorer regions, making them more vulnerable and dependent. In this way,
increasingly fragile in the face of transnational
that operate with the principle of “divide and
The end of
13. As a
result, there is a growing loss of the sense of history, which leads to
even further breakup. A kind of “deconstructionism”, whereby human
freedom claims to create everything starting from zero, is making
headway in today’s culture.
The one thing it leaves in its wake is the drive to limitless
consumption and expressions of empty individualism.
Concern about this led me to offer the young some advice. “If someone
tells young people to ignore their history, to reject the experiences
of their elders, to look down on the past and to look forward to a
future that he himself holds out, doesn’t it then become easy to draw
them along so that they only do what he tells them? He needs the young
to be shallow, uprooted and distrustful, so that they can trust only in
his promises and act according to his plans. That is how various ideologies operate: they
destroy (or deconstruct) all differences so that they can reign
unopposed. To do so, however, they need young people who have no use
for history, who spurn the spiritual and human riches inherited from
past generations, and are ignorant of everything that came before
14. These are
the new forms of cultural colonization
Let us not forget that “peoples that abandon their tradition and,
either from a craze to mimic others or to foment violence, or from
unpardonable negligence or apathy, allow others to rob their very soul,
end up losing not only their spiritual identity but also their moral
consistency and, in the end, their intellectual, economic and political
independence”. One effective way to weaken historical
consciousness, critical thinking, the struggle for justice and the
processes of integration is to empty great words of their meaning or to
manipulate them. Nowadays, what do certain words like democracy,
freedom, justice or unity really mean? They have been bent and shaped
to serve as tools for domination, as meaningless tags that can be used
to justify any action.
plan for everyone
15. The best
way to dominate and gain control over people is to spread despair and
discouragement, even under the guise of defending certain values.
Today, in many countries, hyperbole, extremism and polarization have
become political tools.
Employing a strategy of ridicule, suspicion and relentless criticism,
in a variety of ways one denies the right of others to exist or to have
an opinion. Their share of the truth and their values are rejected and,
as a result, the life of society is impoverished and subjected to the
hubris of the powerful. Political life
no longer has to do with healthy debates about long-term plans to
improve people’s lives and to advance the common good, but only with
slick marketing techniques primarily aimed at discrediting others. In
this craven exchange of charges and counter-charges, debate degenerates
into a permanent state of disagreement and confrontation.
16. Amid the fray of conflicting interests, where
victory consists in eliminating one’s opponents, how is it possible to
raise our sights to recognize our neighbours or to help those who have
fallen along the way? A plan that
would set great goals for the development of our entire human
family nowadays sounds like madness. We are growing ever more distant
from one another, while the slow and demanding march towards an
increasingly united and just world
is suffering a new and dramatic setback.
17. To care for
the world in which we live means to care for ourselves. Yet we need to
think of ourselves more and more as a single family dwelling in a
common home. Such care does not interest those economic powers
that demand quick
profits. Often the voices raised in defence of the environment are
silenced or ridiculed, using apparently reasonable arguments that are
merely a screen for special interests
In this shallow, short-sighted culture
that we have created, bereft of a
, “it is foreseeable that, once certain resources
have been depleted, the scene will be set for new wars, albeit under
the guise of noble claims”.
18. Some parts
of our human family, it appears, can be readily sacrificed for the sake
of others considered worthy of a carefree existence. Ultimately,
“persons are no longer seen as a paramount value to be cared for and
respected, especially when they are poor and disabled, ‘not yet useful’
– like the unborn, or ‘no longer needed’ – like the elderly. We have
grown indifferent to all kinds of wastefulness, starting with the waste
of food, which is deplorable in the extreme”.
19. A decline in the birthrate, which
leads to the aging of the population, together with the relegation of the elderly to a sad
and lonely existence, is a subtle way of stating that it is all about
us, that our individual concerns
are the only thing that matters. In this way, “what is thrown away are
not only food and dispensable objects, but often human beings
themselves”. We have seen what happened with the elderly in certain
places in our world as a result of the coronavirus. They did not have
to die that way. Yet something similar had long been occurring during
heat waves and in other situations: older people found themselves
cruelly abandoned. We fail to realize that, by isolating the elderly and leaving them in the
care of others without the closeness and concern of family members, we
disfigure and impoverish the family itself. We also end up depriving
young people of a necessary connection to their roots and a wisdom that
the young cannot achieve on their own.
20. This way of
discarding others can take a variety of forms, such as an obsession
with reducing labour costs
with no concern for its grave consequences, since the unemployment that
it directly generates leads to the expansion of poverty. In
addition, a readiness to discard others finds expression in vicious
attitudes that we thought long past, such as racism, which retreats underground
only to keep reemerging. Instances of racism continue to shame us, for
they show that our supposed social progress is not as real or
definitive as we think.
21. Some economic rules
have proved effective
for growth, but not for integral human development. Wealth has
increased, but together with inequality, with the result that “new
forms of poverty are emerging”. The claim that the modern world has
reduced poverty is made by measuring poverty with criteria from the
past that do not correspond to present-day realities. In other times,
for example, lack of access to electric energy was not considered a
sign of poverty, nor was it a source of hardship. Poverty must always
be understood and gauged in the context of the actual opportunities
available in each concrete historical period.
universal human rights
frequently becomes clear that, in practice, human rights are not equal for all.
Respect for those rights “is the preliminary condition for a country’s
social and economic development.
When the dignity of the human person is respected, and his or her
rights recognized and guaranteed, creativity and interdependence
thrive, and the creativity of the human personality is released through
actions that further the common good”. Yet, “by closely observing
our contemporary societies, we see numerous contradictions that lead us
to wonder whether the equal dignity of all human beings, solemnly
proclaimed seventy years ago, is truly recognized, respected, protected
and promoted in every situation. In today’s world, many forms of
injustice persist, fed by reductive anthropological visions and by a
profit-based economic model
that does not hesitate to exploit, discard and even kill human beings.
While one part of humanity lives in opulence, another part sees its own
dignity denied, scorned or trampled upon, and its fundamental rights
discarded or violated”. What does this tell us about the equality
of rights grounded in innate human dignity?
23. Similarly, the organization of societies
worldwide is still far from reflecting clearly that women possess the
same dignity and identical rights as men. We say one thing with words,
but our decisions and reality tell another story. Indeed, “doubly poor
are those women who endure situations of exclusion, mistreatment and
violence, since they are frequently less able to defend their
also recognize that “even though the
has adopted numerous agreements aimed at
in all its
forms, and has launched various strategies to combat this phenomenon,
millions of people today – children, women and men of all ages – are
deprived of freedom and forced to live in conditions akin to slavery…
Today, as in the past, slavery is rooted in a notion of the human
person that allows him or her to be treated as an object… Whether by
coercion, or deception, or by physical or psychological duress, human
persons created in the image and likeness of God
of their freedom, sold and reduced to being the property of others.
They are treated as means to an end… [Criminal
] are skilled in using modern means of communication as
a way of luring young men and women in various parts of the world”.
A perversion that exceeds all limits when it subjugates women
and then forces them to abort.
An abomination that goes to the length of kidnapping persons for the
sake of selling their organs. Trafficking in persons and other
contemporary forms of enslavement
are a worldwide problem that needs to be taken seriously by humanity as
a whole: “since criminal organizations
employ global networks to achieve their goals, efforts to eliminate
this phenomenon also demand a common and, indeed, a global effort on
the part of various sectors of society
25. War, terrorist attacks, racial or
religious persecution, and
many other affronts to human dignity are judged differently, depending
on how convenient it proves for certain, primarily economic, interests. What is true as
long as it is convenient for someone
in power stops being true once it becomes inconvenient. These
situations of violence, sad to say, “have become so common as to
constitute a real ‘third world war’ fought piecemeal”.
26. This should
not be surprising, if we realize that we no longer have common horizons
that unite us; indeed, the first victim of every war is “the human
family’s innate vocation to fraternity”.
As a result, “every threatening situation breeds mistrust and leads
people to withdraw into their own safety zone”. Our world is
trapped in a strange contradiction: we believe that we can “ensure
stability and peace through a false sense of security sustained by a
mentality of fear and mistrust”.
Paradoxically, we have certain ancestral fears that technological
development has not succeeded in eliminating; indeed, those fears have
been able to hide and spread behind new
technologies. Today too, outside the ancient town walls lies the
abyss, the territory of the unknown, the wilderness. Whatever comes
from there cannot be trusted, for it is unknown, unfamiliar, not part
of the village. It is the territory of the “barbarian”, from whom we
must defend ourselves at all costs. As a result, new walls are erected
for self-preservation, the outside world ceases to exist and leaves
only “my” world, to the point that others, no longer considered human
beings possessed of an inalienable dignity, become only “them”. Once
more, we encounter “the temptation to build a culture of walls, to raise walls,
walls in the heart, walls on the land, in order to prevent this
encounter with other cultures,
with other people. And those who raise walls will end up as slaves
within the very walls they have built. They are left without horizons,
for they lack this interchange with others”.
loneliness, fear and insecurity experienced by those who feel abandoned by the system
fertile terrain for various “mafias”. These flourish because they claim
to be defenders of the forgotten, often by providing various forms of
assistance even as they pursue their criminal
. There also exists a typically “mafioso” pedagogy
that, by appealing to a false communitarian mystique, creates bonds of
dependency and fealty from which it is very difficult to break free.
and progress without a shared roadmap
29. With the Grand Imam Ahmad Al-Tayyeb
, we do
not ignore the positive advances made in the areas of science,
technology, medicine, industry and welfare, above all in developed
countries. Nonetheless, “we wish to emphasize that, together with these
historical advances, great and valued as they are, there exists a moral
deterioration that influences international action and a weakening of spiritual values and
This contributes to a general feeling of
isolation and desperation”. We see “outbreaks of tension and a buildup
of arms and ammunition in a global context dominated by uncertainty,
disillusionment, fear of the future, and controlled by narrow economic interests
”. We can
point to “major political crises
situations of injustice and the lack of an equitable distribution of
natural resources… In the face of such crises that result in the deaths
of millions of children – emaciated from poverty and hunger – there is
an unacceptable silence on the international level”. This panorama,
for all its undeniable advances, does not appear to lead to a more
30. In today’s
world, the sense of belonging to a
single human family is fading, and the dream of working together
for justice and peace seems an outdated utopia. What reigns instead is
a cool, comfortable and globalized indifference, born of deep
disillusionment concealed behind a deceptive illusion: thinking that we
are all-powerful, while failing to realize that we are all in the same
boat. This illusion, unmindful of the great fraternal values, leads to “a sort
of cynicism. For that is the temptation we face if we go down the road
of disenchantment and disappointment… Isolation and withdrawal into one’s own interests are never the
way to restore hope and bring about renewal. Rather, it is closeness;
it is the culture of encounter.
Isolation, no; closeness, yes. Culture
clash, no; culture of encounter,
31. In this
world that races ahead, yet lacks a
shared roadmap, we increasingly sense that “the gap between
concern for one’s personal well-being and the prosperity of the larger
human family seems to be stretching to the point of complete division
between individuals and human community… It is one thing to feel forced
to live together, but something entirely different to value the
richness and beauty of those seeds of common life that need to be
sought out and cultivated”. Technology is constantly advancing, yet
“how wonderful it would be if the growth of scientific and
technological innovation could come with more equality and social
inclusion. How wonderful would it be, even as we discover faraway
planets, to rediscover the needs of the brothers and sisters who orbit
other calamities in history
32. True, a
worldwide tragedy like the Covid-19
pandemic momentarily revived the
sense that we are a global community, all in the same boat,
where one person’s problems are the problems of all. Once more we
realized that no one is saved alone; we can only be saved together. As
I said in those days, “the storm has exposed our vulnerability and
uncovered those false and superfluous certainties around which we
constructed our daily schedules, our projects, our habits and
priorities… Amid this storm, the façade of those stereotypes
with which we camouflaged our egos, always worrying about appearances,
has fallen away, revealing once more the ineluctable and blessed
awareness that we are part of one another, that we are brothers and sisters of one
33. The world
was relentlessly moving towards an economy
that, thanks to technological progress, sought to reduce “human costs”;
there were those who would have had us believe that freedom of the market was sufficient
to keep everything secure. Yet the brutal and unforeseen blow of this
uncontrolled pandemic forced us to recover our concern for human
beings, for everyone, rather than for the benefit of a few. Today we
can recognize that “we fed ourselves on dreams of splendour and
grandeur, and ended up consuming distraction, insularity and solitude.
We gorged ourselves on networking, and lost the taste of fraternity. We looked for quick and
safe results, only to find ourselves overwhelmed by impatience and
anxiety. Prisoners of a virtual reality, we lost the taste and flavour
of the truly real”. The pain, uncertainty and fear, and the
realization of our own limitations, brought on by the pandemic have only made it all
the more urgent that we rethink our styles of life, our relationships,
the organization of our societies and, above all, the meaning of our
everything is connected, it is hard to imagine that this global
disaster is unrelated to our way of approaching reality, our claim to
be absolute masters of our own lives and of all that exists. I do not
want to speak of divine retribution, nor would it be sufficient to say
that the harm we do to nature is itself the punishment for our
offences. The world is itself crying
out in rebellion. We are reminded of the well-known verse of the
poet Virgil that evokes the “tears of things”, the misfortunes of life
35. All too
quickly, however, we forget the lessons of history, “the teacher of
life”. Once this health crisis passes, our worst response would be
to plunge even more deeply into feverish consumerism and new forms of
egotistic self-preservation. God willing,
after all this, we will think no longer in terms of “them” and “those”,
but only “us”. If only this may prove not to be just another tragedy of
history from which we learned nothing. If only we might keep in mind
all those elderly persons who died for lack of respirators, partly as a
result of the dismantling, year after year, of healthcare systems. If only this
immense sorrow may not prove useless, but enable us to take a step
forward towards a new style of life. If only we might rediscover once
for all that we need one another, and that in this way our human family
can experience a rebirth, with all its faces, all its hands and all its
voices, beyond the walls that we have erected.
36. Unless we
recover the shared passion to create a community of belonging and
solidarity worthy of our time, our energy and our resources, the global
illusion that misled us will collapse and leave many in the grip of
anguish and emptiness. Nor should we naively refuse to recognize that
“obsession with a consumerist
, above all when few people are capable of maintaining
it, can only lead to violence and mutual destruction”. The notion
of “every man for himself” will rapidly degenerate into a free-for-all
that would prove worse than any pandemic.
An absence of
human dignity on the borders
37. Certain populist political regimes,
as well as certain liberal economic
approaches, maintain that an influx of migrants is to be prevented at all
costs. Arguments are also made for the propriety of limiting aid to
poor countries, so that they can hit rock bottom and find themselves
forced to take austerity measures. One fails to realize that behind
such statements, abstract and hard to support, great numbers of lives
are at stake. Many migrants have fled from war, persecution and natural
catastrophes. Others, rightly, “are seeking opportunities for
themselves and their families. They dream of a better future and they
want to create the conditions for achieving it”.
“are attracted by Western culture,
sometimes with unrealistic expectations that expose them to grave
disappointments. Unscrupulous traffickers, frequently linked to drug
cartels or arms cartels, exploit the weakness of migrants, who too often experience
violence, trafficking, psychological and physical abuse and untold
sufferings on their journey”. Those who emigrate “experience
separation from their place of origin, and often a cultural and religious uprooting as well. Fragmentation is
also felt by the communities they leave behind, which lose their most
vigorous and enterprising elements, and by families, especially when
one or both of the parents
migrates, leaving the children in the country of origin”. For this
reason, “there is also a need to reaffirm the right not to emigrate,
that is, to remain in one’s homeland”.
39. Then too,
“in some host countries, migration
causes fear and alarm, often fomented and exploited for political purposes. This can lead to
a xenophobic mentality, as people close in on themselves, and it needs
to be addressed decisively”. Migrants
are not seen as entitled like others to participate in the life of
society, and it is forgotten that they possess the same intrinsic
dignity as any person. Hence they ought to be “agents in their own
redemption”. No one will ever openly deny that they are human
beings, yet in practice, by our decisions and the way we treat them, we
can show that we consider them less worthy, less important, less human.
this way of thinking and acting is unacceptable, since it sets certain political preferences above deep
convictions of our faith:
the inalienable dignity of each human person regardless of origin, race
or religion, and the supreme law of fraternal
40. “Migrations, more than ever before,
will play a pivotal role in the future of our world”. At present,
however, migration is affected by the “loss of that sense of
responsibility for our brothers and
sisters on which every civil society is based”. Europe, for
example, seriously risks taking this path. Nonetheless, “aided by its
great cultural and religious heritage, it has the means to defend
the centrality of the human person and to find the right balance
between its twofold moral responsibility to protect the rights of its
citizens and to assure assistance and acceptance to migrants”.
41. I realize
that some people are hesitant and fearful with regard to migrants
. I consider this part of
our natural instinct of self-defence. Yet it is also true that an
individual and a people are only fruitful and productive if they are
able to develop a creative openness to others. I ask everyone to move
beyond those primal reactions because “there is a problem when doubts
and fears condition our way of thinking and acting to the point of
making us intolerant, closed and perhaps even – without realizing it –
racist. In this way, fear deprives us of the desire and the ability to
encounter the other”.
enough, while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the
rise, distances are otherwise shrinking or disappearing to the point
that the right to privacy
scarcely exists. Everything has become a kind of spectacle to be
examined and inspected, and people’s lives are now under constant
surveillance. Digital communication
wants to bring everything out into the open; people’s lives are combed
over, laid bare and bandied about, often anonymously. Respect for
others disintegrates, and even as we dismiss, ignore or keep others
distant, we can shamelessly peer into every detail of their lives.
43. Digital campaigns of hatred and destruction
for their part, are not – as some would have us believe – a positive
form of mutual support, but simply an association of individuals united
against a perceived common enemy. “Digital media can also expose people
to the risk of addiction, isolation and a gradual loss of contact with
concrete reality, blocking the development of authentic interpersonal
relationships”. They lack the physical gestures, facial
expressions, moments of silence, body language and even the smells, the
trembling of hands, the blushes and perspiration that speak to us and
are a part of human communication. Digital
, which do not demand the slow and gradual
cultivation of friendships
stable interaction or the building of a consensus that matures over
time, have the appearance of sociability. Yet they do not really build
community; instead, they tend to disguise and expand the very individualism
that finds expression
in xenophobia and in contempt for the vulnerable. Digital connectivity
is not enough to build bridges. It is not capable of uniting humanity.
44. Even as
individuals maintain their comfortable consumerist
isolation, they can choose a form of constant and febrile
bonding that encourages remarkable hostility, insults, abuse,
defamation and verbal violence destructive of others, and this with a
lack of restraint that could not exist in physical contact without
tearing us all apart. Social aggression has found unparalleled room for
expansion through computers and
45. This has
now given free rein to ideologies. Things that until a few years ago
could not be said by anyone without risking the loss of universal
respect can now be said with impunity, and in the crudest of terms,
even by some political figures.
Nor should we forget that “there are huge economic interests operating in the
digital world, capable of exercising forms of control as subtle as they
are invasive, creating mechanisms for the manipulation of consciences
and of the democratic process. The way many [digital] platforms
work often ends up favouring encounter between persons who think alike,
shielding them from debate. These closed circuits facilitate the spread
of fake news and false information, fomenting prejudice and hate”.
46. We should
also recognize that destructive forms of fanaticism are at times found
among religious believers, including Christians
too “can be caught up in networks of verbal violence through the internet
and the various forums of
digital communication. Even in Catholic
limits can be overstepped, defamation and slander can become
commonplace, and all ethical standards and respect for the good name of
others can be abandoned”. How can this contribute to the fraternity
that our common Father
asks of us?
47. True wisdom
demands an encounter with reality. Today, however, everything can be
created, disguised and altered. A direct encounter even with the
fringes of reality can thus prove intolerable. A mechanism of selection
then comes into play, whereby I can immediately separate likes from
dislikes, what I consider attractive from what I deem distasteful. In
the same way, we can choose the people with whom we wish to share our
world. Persons or situations we find unpleasant or disagreeable are
simply deleted in today’s virtual
networks; a virtual circle is then created, isolating us from
the real world in which we are living.
48. The ability
to sit down and listen to others, typical of interpersonal encounters,
is paradigmatic of the welcoming attitude shown by those who transcend
narcissism and accept others, caring for them and welcoming them into
their lives. Yet “today’s world is largely a deaf world… At times, the frantic pace of the modern world
prevents us from listening attentively to what another person is
saying. Halfway through, we interrupt him and want to contradict what
he has not even finished saying. We must not lose our ability to
listen”. Saint Francis “heard the voice of God, he heard
voice of the poor, he heard the voice of the infirm and he heard the
voice of nature. He made of them a way of life. My desire is that the
seed that Saint Francis planted may grow in the hearts of many”.
49. As silence
and careful listening disappear, replaced by a frenzy of texting, this
basic structure of sage human communication is at risk. A new lifestyle is emerging, where we
create only what we want and exclude all that we cannot control or know
instantly and superficially. This process, by its intrinsic logic,
blocks the kind of serene reflection that could lead us to a shared
seek the truth in dialogue, in relaxed conversation or in passionate
debate. To do so calls for perseverance; it entails moments of silence
and suffering, yet it can patiently embrace the broader experience of
individuals and peoples. The flood of
at our fingertips does not make for greater wisdom.
Wisdom is not born of quick searches on the internet
nor is it a mass of unverified dat
a. That is not
the way to mature in the encounter with truth. Conversations revolve
only around the latest data; they become merely horizontal and
cumulative. We fail to keep our attention focused, to penetrate to the
heart of matters, and to recognize what is essential to give meaning to
our lives. Freedom thus becomes an illusion that we are peddled, easily
confused with the ability to navigate the internet. The process of
, be it
local or universal, can only be undertaken by spirits that are free and
open to authentic encounters.
subjection and of self-contempt
51. Certain economically prosperous countries
tend to be proposed as cultural models
for less developed countries; instead, each of those countries should
be helped to grow in its own distinct way and to develop its capacity
for innovation while respecting the values of its proper culture. A shallow and pathetic
desire to imitate others leads to copying and consuming in place of
creating, and fosters low national self-esteem. In the affluent sectors
of many poor countries, and at times in those who have recently emerged
from poverty, there is a resistance to native ways of thinking and
acting, and a tendency to look down on one’s own cultural identity, as if it were the
sole cause of every ill.
self-esteem is an easy way to dominate others. Behind these trends that
tend to level our world, there flourish powerful interests that take
advantage of such low self-esteem, while attempting, through the media
and networks, to create a new culture
in the service of the elite.
This plays into the opportunism of financial speculators and raiders,
and the poor always end up the losers. Then too, ignoring the culture of their people has led to
the inability of many political
leaders to devise an effective development plan that could be
freely accepted and sustained over time.
53. We forget
that “there is no worse form of alienation than to feel uprooted,
belonging to no one. A land will be fruitful, and its people bear fruit
and give birth to the future, only to the extent that it can foster a
sense of belonging among its members, create bonds of integration
between generations and different communities, and avoid all that makes
us insensitive to others and leads to further alienation”.
these dark clouds, which may not be ignored, I would like in the
following pages to take up and discuss many new paths of hope. For God continues
sow abundant seeds of goodness in our human family. The recent pandemic enabled us to recognize and
appreciate once more all those around us who, in the midst of fear,
responded by putting their lives on the line. We began to realize that
our lives are interwoven with and sustained by ordinary people
valiantly shaping the decisive events of our shared history: doctors,
nurses, pharmacists, storekeepers and supermarket workers, cleaning
personnel, caretakers, transport workers, men and women working to
provide essential services and public safety, volunteers, priests and
religious… They understood that no one is saved alone.
55. I invite everyone to renewed hope
for hope “speaks to us of something deeply rooted in every human heart,
independently of our circumstances and historical conditioning. Hope
speaks to us of a thirst, an aspiration, a longing for a life of
fulfillment, a desire to achieve great things, things that fill our
heart and lift our spirit to lofty realities like truth, goodness and
beauty, justice and love… Hope is bold; it can look beyond personal
convenience, the petty securities and compensations which limit our
horizon, and it can open us up to grand ideals that make life more
beautiful and worthwhile”. Let us
continue, then, to advance along the
paths of hope.
(by The M+G+R Foundation)
Commentary on Paragraph 2.
of fraternal love, simplicity
and joy, who inspired me ...
is the place of God in this fraternity? So far he has not explained it.
God is absent in the important first words of the Encyclical.
fraternity so "open" that it is disconnected from the Faith? That is
what it seems to be suggesting. The rest of the Encyclical confirms it.
Commentary on Paragraph 4.
not wage a war of words aimed at imposing doctrines; he simply ...
So far, God has not
appeared as Father - an unjustifiable omission because it is logical to
expect "brothers" to have a common Father. Instead, some human beings
appear as a father figure.
The quote from St. John - "God is love and those who abide in love
abide in God" - goes in the right direction (God is the true source of
Fraternal Love), but instead of embracing it as a key piece of the
Encyclical, it remains an anecdotal quote.
Continuously, we are going to see how Francis consciously excludes God
from the center of his discourse in order to make his message appealing
even to atheists and agnostics, which makes us doubt Francis' own faith
[see Matthew 5:14-16 and Luke 12:8-9].
Commentary on Paragraph 5.
human fraternity and social friendship have always been a
concern of mine.
For the first time,
he uses a quote where God appears in the central place he deserves: God
is the Creator and it is God who "has called us to live together as
brothers and sisters," but he still does not call him Father! Brothers
and sisters without a Father?
In the rest of the Encyclical, although he occasionally quotes God, he
does not approach the subject as being a call from God, but simply as a
call from a religious leader to "good will" independently of religions.
In other words, Francis is presented, subtly, as a Holy Father. Because, so far, the example
he has presented is that of Francis
of Assisi as "a father to all, who inspired the vision of a fraternal
society" and, precisely, Bergoglio has chosen to call himself Francis.
Back to paragraph
Commentary on Paragraph 6. The
following pages do not claim to offer a complete teaching on fraternal love, ...
He is confirming
his concept of fraternity: disconnected from God and disconnected from the Faith.
Good will of man, without appealing to the guidance of the Holy Spirit
is sterile and doomed to failure, as the misery of human history
Commentary on Paragraph 8. It
desire that, in this our time, by acknowledging the dignity of each
human person, ...
Here God does not
appear as the inspirer of this "universal aspiration to fraternity".
Then, what difference is there with
those peoples who tried to build the mythical Tower of Babel? They too
aspired to "one humanity".
Commentary on Paragraph 10.
decades, it seemed that the world had learned a lesson from its many
wars and disasters, ...
integration is not necessarily a good measure of progress. Ever since
the European Union was born as an economic and political project, they
have tried to endow it with "a common soul", but anyone who lives in
the European Union knows that such a thing is a fiction that has never
One thing that would be progress is, for example, for Christians to
really appreciate the example of Don
Bosco, who showed that, in the midst of a fragmented and anti-clerical Italy,
one can work constructively for God and for society without depending
on a political unit.
Commentary on Paragraph 12.
to the world” is an expression that has been co-opted by the economic ...
By stating that we
have to choose between a "bad" globalism ("the advance of this kind of
globalism") and a "good" globalism (that "makes us brothers"), he is
subtly saying that Globalism is necessary, that it has to be, that there
cannot be a non-Globalism. It is a confirmed fact that Francis is an
apostle of Globalism (also called New World Order). He simply wants his
He is talking about politics. Was it Jesus' mission to tell the Roman
Empire that it should remain united to "solve the injustices of the
world"? Did Jesus plan to tell Caesar that he should endow the Empire
with a "common soul"? No, it was the other way around: when the Empire
began to decline, it was Emperor
Constantine who wanted to appropriate Christianity as a "soul" to
politically unite an Empire that was dismembering. Now Francis is
attempting the same thing that Emperor Constantine attempted.
Commentary on Paragraph 14.
the new forms of cultural colonization.
Let us not forget that ...
"historical conscience" would be to remember that the Christianity of
the first three centuries was so morally sound and so successful in
spreading to all corners of the world, in spite of suffering continuous
and severe persecutions, that it proved that it did not need to be
united to an Empire in order to prosper. From the moment the leaders of Christianity allied
themselves with the Empire, Christianity began its moral decline.
Commentary on Paragraph 17. To
the world in which we live means to care for ourselves. ...
God has given us "a
shared vision", but not a political project like that of Bergoglio and
his allies. God's "project" is salvation through the sacrifice of Jesus
Christ on the Cross as an opportunity for everyone who wants to embrace
it. Welcoming in charity others who
do not share the same Faith does not mean diluting our religion so much
(as Bergoglio does) that others come to believe that our Faith is not important.
The "united world" of which Bergoglio speaks is a political plan, the
project of Babel. The proof is that he does not place God at the center
of the plan. The world cannot be truly united except through God. "Let
us put God at the center of our lives" is what a Christian leader
should be preaching, because only then, as a "side effect," will the
world be in peace and harmony (which does not necessarily mean
Commentary on Paragraph 21.
Some economic rules have
for growth, but ...
this chapter, he makes an analysis of the injustices of the world of
our time and speaks of causes such as "economic rules", it would be
good for Francis to recognize the great responsibility of
the Hierarchy of the Church for having allowed us to arrive at this
The powers Jesus gave to his Church are supernatural and excellent. If they
had been used as God intended, we would not have arrived at the present
situation. Where has the Hierarchy of the Church been for the last
seventeen hundred years? Allied with the
temporal powers of the world.
Francis' constant reference to "unfair politics" and "ineffective
economic rules" means that, by omission, he is evading the
responsibility that the Hierarchy of the Church has had (and has) in
history, attributing responsibility primarily to the powers of the
Commentary on Paragraph 24. We
also recognize that “even though the
international community ...
He continues to
describe the injustices of our time. Previous comment applies.
The "international community" (in reality, the rulers) has a
responsibility but, where is the power of prayer of the Church so that
God will grant the necessary spiritual guidance to the governments (no
matter what sign they are) so that these misfortunes do not happen?
Logically, it is more difficult for the people of the Church of Christ
to pray properly if they are not well
instructed by the Hierarchy of the Church.
Commentary on Paragraph 28.
loneliness, fear and insecurity experienced by those who feel abandoned by the system
The biggest problem is not when people
feel abandoned by "the system". The problem is when, because of the
lack of correct Evangelization, they feel - wrongly - abandoned by God. A soul truly united to God
can prevail in peace even when everything around it is destruction.
That peace is the one that spreads outwards and is able to change the
environment and society (i.e. "the system"). That Peace is what true
evangelizers have to teach, not the peace that comes from politics
Commentary on Paragraph 29.
With the Grand Imam Ahmad Al-Tayyeb,
not ignore the positive advances ...
For the first time,
he makes ONE mention of the spiritual dimension of the situation ("a
weakening of spiritual values"), which seems barely an anecdote in the
midst of a speech full of references to political and economic causes, without any self-criticism to acknowledge
the responsibility of organized religion. Interestingly, he
points out the "weakening of responsibility" but does not realize that
this applies to himself and to the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy over which
he nominally presides.
His abundant references to economic and political causes such as
"narrow economic interests" and "major political crises" confirm that
his hope is for a solution that does not come through God, but through
a supposed cleansing of the economic and political powers according to
human parameters of "good will" and "solidarity".
Commentary on Paragraphs 32 to 36.
worldwide tragedy like the Covid-19
pandemic momentarily revived ... Unless we
recover the shared passion to create a community ...
What lesson is he
teaching us here? Why does he talk so much and say so little? What the Coronavirus Crisis has taught us is not a
lesson in solidarity, but a consolidation of the power of obedience to
governments and official "experts" through the culture of fear - a very
timely form of power to accelerate the fulfillment of the plans of a New World Order.
God is above all and rules the Universe. If He has allowed the disease
and the Covid-19 Crisis it is not a punishment, because God does not punish, but He certainly
must have a purpose (or more than one) in
allowing it. Francis' way of expressing himself by leaving God on the
sidelines - by saying "The world (in Spanish, he says 'The Reality') is
itself crying out in rebellion" and by resorting as an explanatory aid
to the poet Virgil rather than to God - reveals the extent to which
Bergoglio separates God from reality.
Commentary on Paragraphs 37 to 41.
Certain populist political regimes,
as well as ... I realize
that some people are hesitant and fearful with regard to migrants. ...
The problem is not
immigration. The problem is massive
and disorderly immigration. To overlook that distinction, as
Francis and others like him do, is totally counterproductive.
Massive and unconditionally supported (i.e., "anyway") immigration
fosters hatred towards immigrants and leads to the political, economic
and social destruction of the host countries, which then cannot care
either for the immigrants or for their own citizens. Charity is
necessary, but exercised within appropriate channels to be effective.
Commentary on Paragraphs 42 and 43.
enough, while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the
rise, ... Digital campaigns of hatred
for their part, ...
In this first
chapter of the Encyclical, Francis wants to cover, with his long
analysis, all social injustices and aspects of social degradation. In
this case, the problems related to digital communication. That is all
very well. The problem is that when it comes to providing a solution to
all these problems, he does not approach it from the perspective of the
Christian Faith he claims to profess, with God at the center of
everything, but his solution for everything is "fraternity".
Commentary on Paragraphs 44 to 46.
individuals maintain their comfortable consumerist
isolation, ... We should
also recognize that destructive forms of fanaticism ...
In short and
without so many detours: the Internet is a space where immediacy and
global communication makes destructive behaviors have a faster and more
far-reaching effect. If society is spiritually and morally sick because
of the failure of those responsible for Evangelization, this global
space (Internet and the hyper-connected world through "smart" phones)
makes the disease more visible and with wider and more immediate
For the first time in the entire Encyclical, God appears as the "common
Father" (but without being the center of the argument) - an omission we
have already claimed since the Introduction. Bergoglio's strategy is
evident: he wants to avoid as much as possible theological reasoning
involving God and the Faith so as not to lose the audience of other
religions or of agnostics and atheists (besides, he himself does not
seem to trust God very much).
The problem is that he has so far removed God from his discourse that
his listeners must be asking themselves: Why is it necessary to believe in God or in
the Christian Faith if the Catholic leader himself proposes to solve
the world's problems from a practically atheistic perspective?
Commentary on Paragraphs 47 to 50.
demands an encounter with reality. ... Together, we can
seek the truth in dialogue, ...
of information and stimuli prevents people from cultivating and
maintaining a healthy relationship with God. That is what Bergoglio
should be saying in a nutshell instead of abounding with so
Maintaining a constant and healthy relationship with God is vital
because God is the true source of Love. Fraternal love is inspired by
God and, without His Guidance, any fraternity one wants to create will
be like the Tower of Babel. Authentic fraternity cannot be understood
without God, no matter how much Francis insists on keeping Him on the
Commentary on Paragraphs 51 to 53.
tend to be proposed ... We
that “there is no worse form of alienation than to feel uprooted, ...
What does Francis
want to teach us? This boring journey of his through the first chapter
of the Encyclical, full of so many unnecessary words and digressions,
is not enriching us with new knowledge about the injustices of today's
world. These are things we already know. Nor is he providing us with a
theological analysis that could enlighten us.
What he does want to sell us is his perspective on what he believes are
the causes of injustice and what the solution is: essentially, he tells
us that the causes are political, economic and cultural, not spiritual,
not related to the failure of organized religion in its main function
(which is to help us to be united to God) and he is ready to conclude
that the solution to all these problems is his Universal Fraternity.
Commentary on Paragraphs 54 and 55.
these dark clouds, which may not be ignored, ... I invite everyone to renewed hope,
for hope “speaks to us of something ...
Hope? Simply hope?
Should not he say hope in God?
Is this a Christian leader or an atheist speaking?
The question is very simple: Without God man is worse than an animal
and is doomed to self-destruction. Without God there is no hope. The
fraternity of the new Tower of Babel will not save us. God will save us.
PART 2 and subsequent parts of
this Annotated Reproduction of the Encyclical:
The M+G+R Foundation)
(1) Original and
official source: Text
of the Encyclical Letter "Fratelli Tutti" in English on the Vatican
(2) Notes on formatting:
* Our summaries and commentaries
(The M+G+R Foundation) are the
in italics and blue color.
* Section headings are from the original.
* We have highlighted in bold
the key words related to "fraternity", "brothers", "father", "united
world", "globalism", "economy", "culture" and similar, as well as other
key words that can serve as points of reference to be able to make a
visual follow-up of the text.
* And in bold
the occurrences of the words "God", "Faith", "Jesus", "Gospel",
"Bible", "Christian", "Catholic" and the like.
* Numbers in square brackets such as  are from the original and
correspond to quotations that the reader can find at the foot of the
original Vatican document.
En Español: Carta
Encíclica "Fratelli Tutti" - El manifiesto de la Nueva
Official date of publication of
the Encyclical by the Vatican: October 3, 2020
Publication of this Annotated
Reproduction of the Encyclical: March 10, 2021
Revised on July 26, 2021
© Copyright 2021 by The M+G+R Foundation.
All rights reserved. However, you may
freely reproduce and distribute this document as long as: (1)
Appropriate credit is given as to its source; (2) No changes are made
in the text without prior written consent; and (3) No charge is made
The M+G+R Foundation
Us || Frequently
Asked Questions || Disclaimer
INTRODUCTION to DOMAIN
HOME PAGE - Español
HOME PAGE - Portugues
Our Research Department
Please Note: If the above dated image does not appear
on this document, it means that you are not viewing the original
document from our servers. Should you have reason to doubt the
authenticity of the document, we recommend that you access our server
again and click on the "Refresh" or "Reload" button of your Browser to
view the original document.
If you wish to contact The M+G+R Foundation, please
access our Contact Page and follow the