"We're not stupid - this is an idol" - Fr. Mitch Pacwa

[Margaret_Ann]

On the matter of priests getting married one of my priests said that “he is the pope, he can do whatever he wants.”

Not so. That goes against Vatican I (1869-70) which laid down certain conditions on papal infallibility.

 

[AlbMagno]

He could certainly change the discipline so that popes can marry, speaking hypothetically.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

He couldn’t do that because a man must be at least a bishop in order to be elected pope. Bishops - East & West - are celibate. Therefore the pope must be celibate.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Bishops being celibate is still a matter of discipline. It can be changed. It would be imprudent, but it can be changed.

 

[Ammi]

Did the Pope conduct an investigation into the intentions of everyone involved in the pachamama being brought into the church and ceramonies?

When the Church makes an authoritative judgment about people’s intentions involved, it usually takes a careful process. The annulment tribunal is an example. The scrutiny involved in a marriage tribunal is incredible!

And either way, the statue was called a pachamama, by Francis, so it is wrong to bring the thing into a Church or used in religious ceremonies to begin with. Even if intentions are not to worship the object.

 

[Pat_Albertson]

Apparently, pachamama has been in the works for a long time now. Check out this youtube search: Pachamama for kids

Pachamama was around a long time before the synod, and I don’t mean Incan culture, I mean cartoons, articles, and other UN/bankster/Soros/global homo stuff. You can’t have cartoons months before without there having been weeks before that to prepare the cartoons. Don’t kid yourself, this was no surprise, everybody knew exactly what they were doing.

 

[blackforest]

Did the Pope conduct an investigation into the intentions of everyone involved in the pachamama being brought into the church and ceramonies?

I’m sure he’s in a better position to make an assessment on it than you or any lay people who didn’t attend.

Somebody actually involved in the synod corroborates what the Pope said. Redirecting...

I’m truncating a translation from Pedro Gabriel:

I want to clarify that contrary to what has been heard in Brazil, that is not a religious image, it was not the object of worship, it’s simply a symbol of the indigenous peoples that has been labeled as if it were an image of Pachamama, the Mother Earth. The indigenous peoples do not worship images of Mother Earth as we do with an image of Our Lady or the Blessed Sacrament. Therefore it was simply a religious symbol among many that are present in that church for those who want to see it. Therefore, this act was an act of violence, of disrespect and therefore cannot be approved by any of us. Would you like it if someone went to your church and took any of your religious symbols, be it a candle, or a cloth, would you like it? Of course not. Therefore we are clearly against this violent act and we also do not give too much importance to it.”

the statue was called a pachamama, by Francis,

That’s its name, yes. That doesn’t make it “wrong” to bring it into a church. Hindus worship a cow deity. Does that make it wrong to include a cow in a sanctuary manger scene?

 

[Alphard]

They always target kids first, because tgey are more vulnerable. Disgusting

 

[Ammi]

A cow, in the nativity scene, represents a cow.

The statues, in the incident, represent pachamama.

Pachamama has a history of pagan worship and prayers towards it. The name invokes the spirit behind the name.

If a nativity scene used a statue of a cow made by the Hindu religion, adorned with decor of honor, then it also would be wrong to be in the display.

 

[blackforest]

A cow, in the nativity scene, represents a cow.

The cow has a history of Hindu worship and prayer towards it.

Names only “invoke spirits behind the name” if you’re superstitious. I’m Catholic and don’t believe that “spirit,” so it’s moot to me.

Did you read my link about the cultural context? Did you read my link at all? (It’s a long read, and you responded to me too quickly to get through it all). A lot of Westerners are presuming themselves experts over a culture and set of beliefs when in reality there’s a lot of ignorance.

everyone involved who has been interviewed about the figure agrees that the statue is not pagan :

• The native woman and Fr. Rojas say it’s Our Lady of the Amazon; They have not attributed a pagan meaning to the figure;
• Dr. Ruffini, from the Vatican Dicastery of Communications, said in his first answer to the topic (albeit not acting in his official capacity at the time): “ I believe to try and see pagan symbols or to see… evil, it is not “
• Before him, Bishop David Guinea had also been asked about the meaning of the statue, and he replied: “ we don’t need to create any connections with the Virgin Mary or with a pagan element “
• Fr. Lopez, interviewed by Inés San Martín: “ Asked if it was part of a pagan ritual, the priest offered a flat “no.” “
• Br. Afonso Murad is clear that the figure is not a religious image and that it did not receive any kind of cult.

In other words, the “it’s clearly pagan” hypothesis has been refuted every step of the way. The fact that this accusation was not abandoned, but rather was stubbornly clung to, demonstrates that those who revile this figure are not concerned with the truth, but with pushing a narrative.

I couldn’t agree more.

 

[Ammi]

If that’s true, then Pope Francis was wrong to call it pachamama. Pachamama is the name of the idol.

It would be akin to naming a cow in a nativity scene Kamadhenu. The name invokes the thing which the object represents.

Incidentally…

“Kamadhenu is regarded as a form of Devi (the Hindu Divine Mother) and is closely related to the fertile Mother Earth (Prithvi), who is often described as a cow in Sanskrit.”

So if a Christian put a skirt on a cow in a nativity scene and called the cow “Prithvi”, would that be okay?

 

[Ammi]

So you have a native woman, and a priest, calling it “Our Lady of the Amazon” and then a Bishop saying, “we don’t need to create any connections with the Virgin Mary…”.

… and Francis calling it pachamama.

Not very clear understanding even from first hand reports.

 

[blackforest]

Despite the contradictions, there is universal agreement that it is not a pagan idol. That’s largely the point of the article.

 

[Ammi]

Not true.

Many Cardinals, Bishops, priests, and Lay Cats called it an idol of pachamama.

And yes, these are people who weren’t involved, because they considered it wrong. Whether intentions to worship were present or not.

Those involved are unable to relate what it is… they each say something different. As though she is whoever someone desires her to be.

That is unstable and gives cause for doubt about the formal approval of the way it has been used in itself.

 

[blackforest]

Not true.

Many Cardinals, Bishops, priests, and Lay Cats called it an idol of pachamama.

And yes, these are people who weren’t involved,

That was also the point of the article - those who were there and present and directly experienced in the matter know that it wasn’t an idol.

I’ve given up on convincing those who’ve already chosen what to believe, however, as no amount of evidence seems to sway them. Muting.

 

[Crocus]

It seems very clear that those promoting contrary opinions on this thread have not read the article. It answered all my questions.

I highly recommend, if only to clear one’s conscience.

Our Lady of the Amazon: solving the contradictions - Where Peter Is

 

[MagdalenaRita]

I want to clarify that contrary to what has been heard in Brazil, that is not a religious image, it was not the object of worship**, it’s simply a symbol of the indigenous peoples** that has been labeled as if it were an image of Pachamama, the Mother Earth. The indigenous peoples do not worship images of Mother Earth as we do with an image of Our Lady or the Blessed Sacrament. Therefore it was simply a religious symbol among many that are present in that church for those who want to see it. Therefore, this act was an act of violence, of disrespect and therefore cannot be approved by any of us. Would you like it if someone went to your church and took any of your religious symbols, be it a candle, or a cloth, would you like it? Of course not. Therefore we are clearly against this violent act and we also do not give too much importance to it.”

Pedro Gabriel (actually Brother Afonso Murad) kind of contradicts himself a little bit here, doesn’t he?

and this is a little bothersome from your link to Pedro Gabriel. Do we worship images of Our Lady?

The indigenous peoples do not worship images of Mother Earth as we do with an image of Our Lady

 

[Vico]

… Do we worship images of Our Lady? …

Yes. Worship has two forms: adoration or latria (for God alone) and veneration or dulia (not for God).

Catholic Encyclopedia

A further distinction is made between dulia in the absolute sense, the honour paid to persons, and dulia in the relative sense, the honour paid to inanimate objects, such as images and relics. With regard to the saints, dulia includes veneration and invocation; the former being the honour paid directly to them, the latter having primarily in view the petitioner’s advantage.

Pace, E. (1909). Dulia. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05188b.htm

 

[Ammi]

Then why doesnt Francis say he made a mistake by calling it a pachamama statue?

The person who is suppose to represent the most trusted words said it is a pachamama.

 

[Crocus]

@Ammi
Why would you even ask that when you read and understand the entire article that explains all that? (Remember the reference to “italics?”)

No? Let me help.

Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni said the pope used the word as a means to identify the statues because that is the way they have become known in the Italian media and not as a reference to the goddess.”