Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Pope, Pachamama, Politics, and the Periphery: Everything Is Connected
In a previous post, I characterized the currently ongoing Amazonian Synod as “one of the more bizarre (and potentially very destructive) events of the Francis pontificate.” Little did I know of the horrors that were about to occur when I wrote that.
On Friday, October 4, to get the festivities rolling, a “tree-planting” ceremony took place in the Vatican Gardens to consecrate the synod to St. Francis of Assisi. But what we got was a pagan ritual centered around the now infamous Pachamama.
This morning in the Vatican Gardens, Indigenous leaders of the Amazon offered up prayers for the Earth, in a ceremony where Pope Francis consecrated the upcoming Pan-Amazon Synod to St. Francis of Assisi #SinodoAmazonico pic.twitter.com/v9Ljy3q3Bh
— Catholic Sat (@CatholicSat) October 4, 2019
When journalists asked about the statue of the naked pregnant woman – who seems to be everywhere the pope is – the respondents couldn’t really explain who or what it is.
Robert Royal, at The Catholic Thing writes:
Everyone has by now seen the naked pregnant female figure, painted red, that has popped up in the Vatican gardens, before altars, and in a formal exhibition in the Carmelite Church a few hundred yards from St. Peter’s Square. No one has the come forward or been able to delve into the reality to say what, exactly, that figure and other indigenous objects mean.
Yes, she’s probably Pachamama, goddess of the earth or world/universe in some areas of the Amazon, fertility goddess in Peru, etc. To anyone who takes the First Commandment seriously, this is not kids playing with dolls, but the kind of idolatry or worship of “strange gods” that, from first to last, the Bible and our whole tradition warn against.
Idolatry and worshiping of strange gods at the Vatican – these fools are dancing with the devil – threatening their salvation and bringing grave scandal to the Church.
As if witnessing this blasphemy is not enough, they are also subjecting us to insults. Antonio Spadaro S.J., a priest who can be considered as one of the pope’s top spokesman (he is the Director of La Civiltà Cattolica, the Vatican weekly that is published with the approval of the pope) had this to say about the proceedings of the past week-and-a-half after having observed them “living from the inside”:
The interventions in the aula and in the groups are painting a large fresco in which everything is interconnected: faith and history, hope and geography, charity and politics. This is why the preemptive attacks aimed at the Synod, dressed up as a fundamentalist religiosity that does not disdain racist tones, come from groups that protect political-economic interests. The theological themes in the Synod aula are closely intertwined with the life of the people, geopolitical tensions, and care of the «common home».
Spadaro labels orthodox Catholics, who want nothing more from this synod than for the Holy Father to protect the faith, as fundamentalists, racists, and coming from groups that protect political-economic interests. It is quite telling that Spadaro’s report at the midway point of the synod contains not a single mention of Jesus Christ or evangelization. This is outrageous.
If anyone can be labeled racist at this synod it is retired Bishop Erwin Kräutler of Xingu, Brazil (assumed to be one who had great influence on writing the pre-synod working document), who, when commenting on the need for married priests said that the indigenous people are not smart enough to understand the concept of celibacy.
And as to political-economic interests, it was revealed yesterday that a large amount of funding for the key groups behind this spectacle has come from the pro-abortion, pro-LGBT Ford Foundation.
The six principle errors that Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider warned about in their jointly written statement before the synod began are being manifested before us:
- Implicit pantheism.
- Pagan superstitions as sources of Divine Revelation and alternative pathways for salvation.
- Intercultural dialogue instead of evangelization.
- An erroneous conception of sacramental ordination, postulating worship ministers of either sex to perform even shamanic rituals.
- An “integral ecology” that downgrades human dignity.
- A tribal collectivism that undermines personal uniqueness and freedom.
The Church under Francis, rather than being the source of salvation, is becoming just another woke NGO. Spadaro again:
The Amazon, which covers nine nations (Guyana, French Guyana, Suriname, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Brazil, Bolivia, Peru), is speaking from Rome. The periphery speaks form the center with the awareness that its experience is heard as a prophetic voice for the whole Church. And, precisely for this, it is judged by some as disturbing.
The ecological themes are experienced in a perspective of faith, as part of the social doctrine of the Church and in their close connections with the desire for justice. But they are framed in a perspective that goes well beyond the Amazon: the concern for salvation — the salus animarum — is deeply connected to that of the fate of planet Earth and all of humanity. From this mature experience it will be possible to point out «new paths» for the universal Church.
So rather than taking the message of salvation through Jesus Christ to the peoples of the Amazon, Francis wants their pagan ways to be a prophetic voice for the Church. We learn from the Amazon that our concern for salvation comes not from knowing Jesus Christ and His Church but is rather connected to the fate of planet Earth.
These “new paths for the Church and for an integral ecology” – which are the focus of this synod – are summed up in one picture that has been displayed in the church of Santa Maria in Transpontina (yes, that is a woman holding a baby and suckling a capybara):
This whole thing is an abomination that I pray will be condemned by all orthodox bishops, priests, and laymen.
Published in Religion & Philosophy
@brianwatt Rich Raho and all the other Bergoglio sycophants are all in on this abomination. They no longer seem to worry about making their agenda public. Keep hammering them.
Unfortunately Pope Francis is not much more than a parish priest who’s afraid to offend anyone in the pews. His closest advisors are no more than a parish council that has gone completely off the rails, they see themselves as pope’s, a co-papacy if you like.
Like any parish priest who has a rich parishioner that has donated some hideous work of art to be displayed in the Church a decision must be made to hide it somewhere. I would suggest somewhere in the sewers of Rome, and that’s not the only thing that should find its’ way into the sewers of Rome.
Good insight Doug. Remember the case of Fr. Kalchik who took a stand against the blasphemy and heresy of the LGBT parish where he was assigned in Chicago? His parishioners burned the rainbow banners and Fr. Kalchik was sent packing by Cardinal Cupich.
The heterodox, progressive, feminist, ultramontanist, eco-liberation theologist sycophants that kowtow to Francis are putting on quite a spectacle for us. This synod is an abomination but it is good that it is in the light so that it can be exposed for the rot that it is. May it all be flushed down the sewer.
Scott, we on this side of the Tiber will welcome you to the fullness of truth, should you decide to cross. Sorry, but I do not think that the truth is on your side.
I think that I should say no more. I will continue to pray for God’s wisdom and guidance in your life, as you go through this difficult time.
Always good to keep in mind that faithfulness to the authority of Scripture is central to Reformation theology.
And therein lies the problem. Scripture may be authoritative and inerrant (which we Catholics believe), but authority resides in persons. And, without a Magisterium, authority becomes fully atomized in each individual — thus producing tens of thousands of denominations and counting.
I don’t want to start a religious war on Ricochet, so I suggest we all back off this subject. You’ll find some Catholics are a little tetchy what with this month’s events in Rome.
Why is that? And what do you mean by calling Scripture “authoritative” if it lacks authority because it’s not a person?
Well, maybe, if you insist.
I mean we agree that it is accurate and reliable and inerrant. But, clearly, it doesn’t speak for itself, or you and Jerry and Scott and I would all belong to the same Church professing the fullness of the truth. If there were no disputes about what it meant, we would not need an interpretative tradition (or, Tradition, if you will).
Scott has graciously conceded the terrible difficulties in the RC Church under Pope Francis. It used to be a punchline to say, “Is the Pope Catholic?” It isn’t anymore. He’s a revolutionary in a Body which rejects revolution as separating us from the fullness of truth and the faith of our fathers. I suggest if you want to make the case for the Protestant revolt, you start another thread.
I don’t understand (or do understand, but reject) that inference. I do speak for myself, and am frequently misunderstood.
I don’t think we need an interpretative tradition.
Yep. I find it very amusing, but I can have a pretty dark sense of humor. It’s sad.
I’m not interested in that. But I’m interested in discussing the logic of our respective positions as long as you are.
This is an interesting comment Jerry. I’ve never heard anyone make the argument that the fullness of truth is on the Protestant side – or maybe it is just specific to your church.
I certainly need wisdom and guidance, but not in the matter of where the truth resides. I already crossed the Tiber once, Jerry – there ain’t no going back – because once one gets the fullness of truth, one holds fast. Paul, in his first letter to Timothy writes:
Paul also wrote:
When Paul was writing about the church being the pillar and bulwark of truth, he was writing about the Catholic Church – that is a matter of history. And he admonished his brothers to not only hold fast to what they wrote, but also what they said – the traditions that were taught. Holy Mother Church, the Catholic Church, continues to be the pillar and bulwark of truth, with Christ as Her head, teaching from the authority of the Magisterium, Tradition, and Scripture. As our newest saint, St. John Henry Newman said:
As do the other however-many-Bible-churches there are that seem to misunderstand each other.
Nor, apparently, do the other however-many-Bible-churches there are that seem to misunderstand each other.
I’m sure Satan feels the same.
Sorry, if there’s an argument here I’m not quite following it. The only premise I can identify is that there’s a lot of disagreement on what the Bible says. I’m not sure how that’s getting us to the conclusion that we need an authoritative interpreter.
There is hope. There are brave and faithful Catholics in Rome. Several Pachamama wooden idols were taken from a church near the Vatican and tossed into the Tiber. Hallelujah!
Scott, I didn’t want to shift this thread to a theological argument about the Reformation. You made the claim, to a Protestant, that the “fullness of truth” is on your side, and I made a very short response.
I have gone deep into history. The Catholic Church went astray quite early. If you go deep into history, perhaps even to the 3rd Century, you find an early Catholicism, though the errors and deviations increased over time. If you go to the New Testament, you find something different.
No one believes you are inerrant. Not even you.
Oh, sure you do. You have a Protestant interpretative tradition in some variant or other, even if it’s one you’ve devised for yourself. You submit to no authority other than your own. This is the spirit of the “reformation,” is it not?
The logic is that Christ did not, would not leave us in the Age of the Church without a living voice of authority by which to settle disputes — a referee and steward. This is the Magisterium — the Deposit of Faith — which, btw, the Pope is commissioned to defend, not upturn.
When in doubt about what Scripture means, where do you go? Or do you never doubt?
Do you believe the church that Christ founded is one (as he and the Father are one), holy (sanctified by the living, breathing presence of the Holy Spirit), catholic (universal — Christ died for all), and apostolic (Peter was given the keys of the Kingdom and he and the successors of the apostles bind and loosen) Mystical Body? If not, there probably is no point to further discussion. We can’t even agree on the definition of “church.”
Discussion belongs on another post. Please stop hijacking this one.
Many years ago I spoke with a friend in the narthex after Mass about the likelihood of our kids’ generation being the first modern martyrs for the faith in the West…
God bless these men!
Time for the Jesuit order to be expunged or exorcised:
Prodigal Retriever@Mr_BrianWatt Replying to@bakerkylej@ProtecttheFaithand 2 othersThat you fail to see the pagan idol worship and the invitation of demons into Holy Mother Church shows that you have no business being in Holy Orders. Who are you really serving? The pagan Mother Earth or Christ…or another? Pray for your own soul.
Agree 100%.
Thomas Reese S.J., will not let that young whippersnapper Kyle J. Baker S.J. out-woke him (listen to his ridiculous question):
We’re gonna need some brave men to step up and guard the Vatican treasures, including the sacramental vessels. I’ve long thought Bergoglio had his Marxist eye on the treasury.
And who was that answering the question? Rasputin?
Sorry Jerry, your argument makes no sense to me. If you go to the New Testament, written by Catholics, you find the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church gave us the canon of Scripture. I’ll stick with all the great saints and doctors of the Church, and you can stick with your take on things. Cheers.
Sorry Saint Augustine, I’m not a philosopher so I can’t follow your argument. I’m a geologist and am trained to observe. And what I observe are a lot of Protestant ecclesial communions that have their own “definitive” interpretation of the Bible. You seem to be OK with that. I’m not – it totally undermines Christ’s prayer that we all be one.
Splendid.
I’ve no interest in hijacking. Ricochet has marvelous conversations that branch off of the original topic, and I’m not even pushing for that. I explained my motives here:
Indeed.
So your premise is that an inerrant authority speaking for itself would not be understood?
You’re quite right. I misspoke! I don’t think we need an infallible interpretive tradition.
No. That is entirely false.
That’s not logic as such. That is a conclusion, I think. What are its premises?
To prayer and back to scripture and to guidance from church tradition and whatever scholarship may cast light on the original meaning of the text.
Yes on most of it. Maybe all of it, depending on what you mean by “and he and the successors of the apostles bind and loosen.”
I had no argument there. I observed that your argument was unclear.
No, I’m not really ok with that.
There you go philosophizing again. I haven’t got a clue what you are talking about. It all sounds like gibberish to me. We aren’t going to get anywhere here. I’m tapping out with you, partner.
Now I haven’t a clue. That wasn’t philosophizing at all! Were you not trying to make an argument?
(Correction: I guess I was philosophizing. Asking about arguments is what Socrates does.)
Very well. Back to what we agree on, I suppose.
Yay for orthodoxy! Boo stupid current Vatican policy!
Throw the idols in the river! Actually, is that technically an act of vandalizing cultural artifacts? Maybe it’s not exactly ok.
Keep going, y’all. That part is particularly good.