Pacha Mamma at the Synod (Poll)

[porthos11]

Vico:

Weak as per the Catechism:

You are attempting to use the catechism to justify insulting those with an opposing point of view.

No, he is using “weak” in its proper sense, which is what St. Paul also used when warning against scandal. “Weak” here means those whose faith isn’t fully formed yet, and can easily fall away when faced with an obstacle (Gk. “skandalon”). We’ve already seen some of these “weak” folks on these forums alone, who have voiced second thoughts about entering the Church because of this nonsense. And our purported pastors will answer to God for the outcome of these souls.

“Weak” is not an insult, but a precise theological term used in both the Scriptures and the Magisterium.

 

[catholic03]

OK, here’s my explanation.

The Pachamama statue was on display inside a church because it was part of an exposition on the native Amazonian culture. It can be taken to represent nature, or even the Virgin Mother. It was not used for religious purposes.

Regarding the Pachamama being present at the closing synodal Mass, why not? It is an indigenous symbol that the Holy Father and his advisors have allowed to be present.

I replied no because I think it was a cultural display with no intent of idolatry. I trust Pope Francis.

This is a good explanation.

 

[vz71]

No

He called those with an opposing views weak.
Then he attempted to justify yourself using the catechism.
Now you are claiming he has used an unconventional definition of the words.

Do you also assume those reading are going to likewise claim a non-conventional definition?

It would seem more likely that he is trying to give himself an out should someone call on the insult.

 

[porthos11]

OK, here’s my explanation.

The Pachamama statue was on display inside a church because it was part of an exposition on the native Amazonian culture. It can be taken to represent nature, or even the Virgin Mother. It was not used for religious purposes.

Regarding the Pachamama being present at the closing synodal Mass, why not? It is an indigenous symbol that the Holy Father and his advisors have allowed to be present.

aroosi:

I replied no because I think it was a cultural display with no intent of idolatry. I trust Pope Francis.

This is a good explanation.

You can explain it all you want, but my continued mantra is from Fr. Mitch Pacwa: “Knock it off! We aren’t stupid! We’re not! This is an idol.”

If a prayer exists offering sacrifice to Pachamama from the primary sources themselves, if there is a hierarchy that exists that places Pachamama in its place among a pantheon of gods that has Jesus at the low tier, then intent be damned, that is an idol.

As for Pope Francis and his advisors, that’s between their consciences and God, but they will reap the rewards or consequences of what they have done.

And one more shot: That…thing… is NOT the Blessed Virgin! It is an INSULT to the Blessed Virgin to call that…thing…her!

 

[catholic03]

A representation of a young pregnant woman holding a baby in many indigenous cultures had often been seen as the Virgin Mother because it means that the culture can represent here in a way that’s comfortable for them.

I know that this pachamama does not represent our Holy Virgin Mother, but in the past during colonialsim when the indigenous were converted I’m sure it did.

 

[porthos11]

No, he didn’t. He said “Apprearances are significant to the weak.” He didn’t call anyone with opposing views weak. This is a precise, if simplified, statement of the Christian teaching of the sin of scandal.

You are reading into his words something he did not say.

 

[porthos11]

A representation of a young pregnant woman holding a baby in many indigenous cultures had often been seen as the Virgin Mother because it means that the culture can represent here in a way that’s comfortable for them.

I know that this pachamama does not represent our Holy Virgin Mother, but in the past during colonialsim when the indigenous were converted I’m sure it did.

We do not offer sacrifice to the Blessed Virgin. Sacrifice is offered to Pachamama. This thing is an abomination raised in the sanctuary of God.

That thing is NOT the Blessed Virgin.

 

[catholic03]

Just been looking at a video about this.

The Vatican says it represents fertility and life. Originally, they said it was a representation of Our Lady of the Amazon. But they have confirmed it instead represents fertility and life.

Sources within the synod say this is art and not an idol.

 

[vz71]

You are reading into his words something he did not say.

Don’t think so.
Those finding scandal in the ceremony surrounding this idol are primarily looking at the appearance. They can see what is going on, and have read the prayers used.

And it is these people specifically that were called weak.

 

[porthos11]

Just been looking at a video about this.

The Vatican says it represents fertility and life. Originally, they said it was a representation of Our Lady of the Amazon. But they have confirmed it instead represents fertility and life.

Sources within the synod say this is art and not an idol.

. . . . On the other hand, why would you believe the spin of Vatican communications officers (who are no doubt in damage control), over what the native believers REALLY say? At least the native believers are honest about what Pachamama really is, and the spin doctors really shot themselves in the foot by publishing the prayer to Pachamama, proving for all to see that its place in native belief is that of a god. And our Catholic shepherds allowed, at the very list, to that thing brought into God’s house.

So trust the Vatican spin doctors. . . .

 

[vz71]

The Vatican says it represents fertility and life. Originally, they said it was a representation of Our Lady of the Amazon. But they have confirmed it instead represents fertility and life.

So these people offered towards a symbol?
That doesn’t square with what we know of worship.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

The Pachamama statue was on display inside a church because it was part of an exposition on the native Amazonian culture… It was not used for religious purposes.

pachamama means earth/time goddess. Even if they had no intentions of bowing down to the little naked statues inside the Church, those little naked statues represented something evil that had previously been bowed down to out in the Vatican gardens and was then placed in the Holiest place of a Catholic church. There is only one God and we don’t put false gods or goddesses inside Catholic churches where the Real Presence is.

It can be taken to represent nature, or even the Virgin Mother.

A representation of a young pregnant woman holding a baby in many indigenous cultures had often been seen as the Virgin Mother because it means that the culture can represent here in a way that’s comfortable for them.

I know that this pachamama does not represent our Holy Virgin Mother, but in the past during colonialsim when the indigenous were converted I’m sure it did.

Yes, there are images of our Blessed Mother with child in almost all cultures but NEVER naked.

Even in the past this little “p” idol that is an idol of mother earth, never represented the Blessed Mother.

There are several images that the people of the Amazon did have that represented the Blessed Mother, one being Our Lady of Guadalupe (1531AD), another Our Lady of Nazareth (started in 1793 AD) and then Our Lady of the Amazon (2013), which a young women painted and explicitly stated the clothing she chose was to represent the modesty of the Blessed Virgin.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

G1 - 'Nossa Senhora da Amazônia é a flor da vitória-régia', diz designer - notícias em Amazonas

 

[porthos11]

porthos11:

Bishop Schneider, Cardinal Mueller, and Father Pacwa.

All of these men are true followers of Christ who serve Him and His Church, giving God all that they can. They are men of God.

Yeah, and here is where you and I differ.

They may be ordained and configured to Christ. I am less sure about them being men of God and true followers of Christ.

A true follower of Christ would have upheld the First Commandment, the primordial commandment before the other nine.

This is a time when laity can no longer swallow any swill their bishops feed them. We have more resources than ever before to know what the Church truly teaches so that we can be on guard against wolves in shepherds’ clothing.

 

[catholic03]

I am less sure about them being men of God and true followers of Christ.

I was saying that the men you listed were men of God.

Just like our pope and the other Cardinals.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

that he does (e.g. a prayer to mother nature). We should have no quarrel with this prayer. If the Italian bishops published it then I trust them.

We should have a horrible quarrel with this prayer. We don’t pray to the earth or mother earth.

I follow along the lines in the video from Father Pacwa as far as the prayer goes, that it probably was not the Bishops that put that prayer in there but probably some someone on a committee in charge of that booklet for the Amazon event.

Whoever put it there, should not have and we should never pray to mother earth. Hopefully the Italian bishops will speak out and correct the issue.

 

[Vico]

…
Those finding scandal in the ceremony surrounding this idol are primarily looking at the appearance. They can see what is going on, and have read the prayers used.

And it is these people specifically that were called weak.

porthos11:

No

He called those with an opposing views weak.
Then he attempted to justify yourself using the catechism.
Now you are claiming he has used an unconventional definition of the words.

Do you also assume those reading are going to likewise claim a non-conventional definition?

It would seem more likely that he is trying to give himself an out should someone call on the insult.

Remember that I expressed that the proper issue is scandal. Weakness is proneness to scandal.

St. Thomas Aquinas in, Summa Theologiae > Second Part of the Second Part, Question 43, Art. 1, states:

Scandal is, therefore, fittingly defined as “something less rightly done or said, that occasions another’s spiritual downfall.”

Reply to Objection 2. A thing is said to be less right, not because something else surpasses it in rectitude, but because it has some lack of rectitude, either through being evil in itself, such as sin, or through having an appearance of evil. Thus, for instance, if a man were to “sit at meat in the idol’s temple” (1 Corinthians 8:10), though this is not sinful in itself, provided it be done with no evil intention, yet, since it has a certain appearance of evil, and a semblance of worshipping the idol, it might occasion another man’s spiritual downfall. Hence the Apostle says (1 Thessalonians 5:22): “From all appearance of evil refrain yourselves.” Scandal is therefore fittingly described as something done “less rightly,” so as to comprise both whatever is sinful in itself, and all that has an appearance of evil.

Reply to Objection 5. “Weakness” denotes proneness to scandal; while “offense” signifies resentment against the person who commits a sin, which resentment may be sometimes without spiritual downfall; and “scandal” is the stumbling that results in downfall.

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3043.htm

 

[Vico]

Vico:

I did not vote. Pachamama * does not exist.

Yeah, this reminds me of what the Jesuit superior general said recently;
“The devil exists as a symbolic reality, not as a personal reality.”

Except that the fallen angels exist, including the first, the devil, whereas there is only one real God – The Most Holy Trinity.

 

[Frankie65]

The Vatican says it represents fertility and life. Originally, they said it was a representation of Our Lady of the Amazon. But they have confirmed it instead represents fertility and life.

Let’s try to picture 100 years ago a spokesman at the Vatican saying a pagan statue represents fertility and life.
Cue exploding brain

 

[Vico]

catholic03:

The Vatican says it represents fertility and life. Originally, they said it was a representation of Our Lady of the Amazon. But they have confirmed it instead represents fertility and life.

So these people offered towards a symbol?
That doesn’t square with what we know of worship.

The Catholic Church defended veneration of icons and it continues every day to incense and bow to icons. Perhaps you mean something else but veneration is a type of worship, and is not adoration.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

I did not vote. Pachamama * does not exist.

Catechism 2112:

“The first commandment condemns polytheism . It requires man neither to believe in, nor to venerate, other divinities than the one true God.”

How does pagan demon revered by the indigenous people of the Andes = P…ama does not exist?

Pachamama as a goddess is a false god.