Is Pope Francis being unfairly put to the test?

[pulchraesamicamea]

There was a very clear statement it was not the Virgin Mary from the get go. Pope Francis also explained what the Synod was about and consecrated the Synod to St Francis of Assisi. Hardly a pagan act.

The Korean Catholics have an allowed civil ritual called “jeasa”. First, Koreans all cleanse themselves in a confession. Then, they put various fruits and foods on a table, with a cross and a picture of the ancestor on the table. Then all family members, including Catholics and non-Catholics, bow to the ancestors.

This is considered a civil ceremony and not a religious one. I have no idea what the Pacamama situation is but if it is considered civil, they must have been allowed to bow on it for civil reasons (that is, bowing to a symbolic object or of reverence of motherhood, for example).

We had a controversy 200 years ago about the rituals, too. The Church has allowed the practice and Korean Catholics still continue to make this civil practice every traditional holiday.

Then, again, people should not be prostrating before them.

I know this might look idolatry to you, but it’s not.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[umamibella]

Inculturation. We have it here too in Australia, and on the Islands. Saturday nights AFL grandfinal began, as it always does with a welcome to country. The Indigenous owners of the particular region the AFL is being played on do a welcome to country to welcome everyone and remind them who came first and who are the traditional owners. Its laden with tradition and ceremony that goes back over 50 000 years. It looks like idoltary and worship of pagan gods, but its not
Understanding indigenous culture is the key here. Rather then putting western values on whats going on.

 

[pulchraesamicamea]

I see. We had a whole controversy in China and Korea about these rituals, and with a lot of studying and examination the Pope allowed it as a civil practice.

 

[umamibella]

I will post up the welcome to country from Saturday night if I can find it on its own without the attached footy match

 

[pulchraesamicamea]

Chinese Rites controversy - Wikipedia

more information:

Also:

The Rites controversy continued to hamper Church efforts to gain converts in China. In 1939, a few weeks after his election to the papacy, Pope Pius XII ordered the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples to relax certain aspects of Clement XI’s and Benedict XIV’s decrees.[38][39] After the Apostolic Vicars had received guarantees from the Manchukuo Government that confirmed the mere “civil” characteristics of the so-called “Chinese rites”, the Holy See released, on 8 December 1939, a new decree, known as Plane Compertum , stating that,

• Catholics are permitted to be present at ceremonies in honor of Confucius in Confucian temples or in schools;
• Erection of an image of Confucius or tablet with his name on is permitted in Catholic schools.
• Catholic magistrates and students are permitted to passively attend public ceremonies which have the appearance of superstition.
• It is licit and unobjectionable for head inclinations and other manifestations of civil observance before the deceased or their images.
• The oath on the Chinese rites, which was prescribed by Benedict XIV, is not fully in accord with recent regulations and is superfluous.

 

[John9]

Too many “mini”popes” and armchair theologians

Exactly. Thank you.

 

[ReaderT]

ReaderT:

Then, again, people should not be prostrating before them.

Are you sure thats what they were doing, did they make an announcement that is what they were doing?

Yes. I posted a video. You can see with your own eyes that they are prostrating.

Definition of prostrate (verb): “to lay oneself flat on the ground face downward”

It was not about a pagan deity, please read their intention.

It was very much about a pagan deity. It was a prayer to a pagan deity. It named a pagan deity. It worshipped a pagan deity:

“Pachamama of these places, drink and eat this offering at will, so that this land may be fruitful.
Pachamama, good mother, Be propitious! Be propitious! Let the…”

Please show me where Pope Francis agreed

1. I said “Pacwa said these are Pachamama idols”
2. You said “The pope disagreed with him”
3. I said: “Please show me where the Pope voiced disagreement with Pacwa” (i.e. provide me a source)

I’m still waiting for you to do #3

The vatican should not need to clarify a clear media stunt. Let the movie producer clarify it.

You think the Vatican would stay silent when a reporter creates a totally false, world-shaking scandalous statement? No correction from them? They’re just going to let this one slide? They’ve corrected smaller things, but not this?

It was clearly doctored, watch it.

Actually it sounds quite clear in Spanish: “Lo que tenemos que hacer es una ley de convivencia civil.”

 

[ReaderT]

I know this might look idolatry to you, but it’s not.

Bowing doesn’t always signify “worship”, but if they’re bowing before an idol of Pachamama (or Zeus, or Baal, or Odin) like in the Amazon Synod, that is absolutely forbidden.

 

[Maximian]

It is up to us to open our hearts

It’s got nothing to do with our hearts. If something is wrong, it’s wrong and the Church has made it very clear what is, and is not, wrong.

As the Act of Contrition says, we are not only called not to sin, but to avoid the near occasion of sin. Im sure we all recognize why.

 

[umamibella]

Yes. I posted a video. You can see with your own eyes that they are prostrating.

Definition of prostrate (verb): “to lay oneself flat on the ground face downward”

It might be best to read a description from them about what they were doing rather then interpreting it according to your own norms in your own culture.

You said “The pope disagreed with him

Of course the Pope disagreed and actually made a statement on what they were. But let me ask you , do you really believe the Pope, the man chosen by God, His representative on earth, would allow false gods to be included in any way at all.

You think the Vatican would stay silent when a reporter creates a totally false, world-shaking scandalous statement? No correction from them? They’re just going to let this one slide? They’ve corrected smaller things, but not this?

Why blame the Pope for something he did not do or create. That is a false dichotomy

Actually it sounds quite clear in Spanish: “Lo que tenemos que hacer es una ley de convivencia civil.”

Did you miss the edited patches, watch how the released film skips. Thats because it is edited.

We are going to have to agree to disagree with the interpretation of all these things.

 

[ReaderT]

It might be best to read a description from them about what they were doing rather then interpreting it according to your own norms in your own culture.

I will interpret it according to the Bible, which says you can’t bend a knee before a false god for any reason: “I have reserved 7,000 in Israel, all whose knees have not bowed to Baal, and every mouth that has not kissed him (1 Kings 19:18).”

But let me ask you , do you really believe the Pope, the man chosen by God, His representative on earth, would allow false gods to be included in any way at all.

One Pope was a heretic anathematized at the Sixth Ecumenical Council, so yes, popes can be gravely wrong.

Also, I’m not Catholic, so I don’t believe the Pope is “God’s chosen representative on earth”.

Did you miss the edited patches, watch how the released film skips. Thats because it is edited.

The sentence I typed “Lo que tenemos … convivencia civil” is not the edited part, though, it is straight. You can see here (starting at 0:11):

Why blame the Pope for something he did not do or create. That is a false dichotomy

He did do it, though - see the video above. He said the “convivencia civil” part plainly.

 

[TotvsTvvs]

I think the Pope’s response was perfectly accetable, based on the full context he gave. The director cut out the most important part of the Pope’s response and that’s what made it cause confusion.

 

[KMC]

You are right. Pope Francis IS vague in a number of areas. I don’t recall these kinds of controversies with Pope Benedict or Pope JP2.

When bishops, priests and theologians are left scratching their heads as to the orthodoxy of a particular statement, it is fair to say “its vague” or “it needs explaining.” The need for clarity is not just for Catholics, but also for the non-Catholics we are evangelizing to.

Needing clarity is not “unfairly” putting Pope Francis to the test…its his job to provide clear teaching.