Skip to main content

Pachamama Exhortation: Is Pachamama Idolatry okay if it's called "tak[ing] up an Indigenous Symbol"?

We had the Pachamama Synod.

Do we now have the Pachamama exhortation?

At the Amazon Synod, Francis said that the pagan Pachamama idols that were bowed down to had no "idolatrous intentions."

It appears that Francis in his Amazon Synod exhortation Querida Amazonia section 79 doubled down that it is admissible to bow down to Pachamama idols if they are called "an indigenous symbol":

"[It] is possible to take up an indigenous symbol in some way, without considering it as idolatry."

This is like a Arian heretic saying:

It is possible to say Jesus is man in some way, without considering it as heresy.

It is aways important to take what someone is saying in the context of their "cosmic worldview" and their past use of ambiguous language.

Is Pachamama idolatry okay if it's called "tak[ing] up an indigenous symbol"?

In practice, Francis has explicitly shown everyone in October, with no apologies, what "tak[ing] up an indigenous symbol" looks like in the Vatican gardens.

It looks like bowing down to Pachamama idols in front of Francis in the Vatican gardens and then saying there was "no idolatrous intentions."

Here's an analogy to make it clearer:

Suppose someone takes something from  you without your permission, doesn't give it back and doesn't even apologize, but says they didn't have a "stealing intention." Then later they say it's "possible to take things without permission from you because that is an indigenous symbol in some way and you mustn't consider it stealing."

Is stealing okay if you call "taking from you without your permission an indigenous symbol"?

If you really are stealing or committing idolatry calling it an "indigenous symbol" or not of "idolatrous intentions" or not of "stealing intentions" doesn't magically stop the act from being stealing or idolatry.

It appears that Francis is so obviously in-your-face about this with his Pachamama exhortation that it's almost embarrassing to see almost all the Francis conservatives and Francis traditionalists missing it.

Is everyone going to forget what happened after the Amazon Synod Pachamama worshipping?

In October, LifeSiteNews reported that Francis confirmed that the idols that were prostrated before and worshipped in front of Francis in the Vatican gardens were images of the pagan goddess Pachamama:

"Pope Francis has... confirm[ed] suspicions that the ["Vatican 'Pachamama'"] statues were idols."

Moreover, the news outlet quotes Francis himself declaring the "pachamama" idols were recovered and may scandalously and sacrilegiously be "displayed... at the closing Mass of the Synod":

"I would like to say a word about the pachamama statues that were removed from the Church at Traspontina, which were there without idolatrous intentions... the Carabinieri... commander said, 'the display of the [idol] statues [will be] at the closing Mass of the Synod.' We'll see."

"I delegate the Secretary of State who will respond to this."

"This is good news, thank you."
(LifeSiteNews, "Full transcript of the Pope's comments on pagan 'Pachamama' statues" and "Pope calls statues 'Pachamama' and apologizes for their removal from church," October 25, 2019)

The LifeSiteNews article, also, revealed that former head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Cardinal Gerhard Muller on EWTN said:

"[A]ccording to the Law of God Himself - the First Commandment - idolism [idolatry] is a grave sin... to bring the idols into the Church was a grave sin, a crime against the Divine Law."

It is apparently beyond doubt that Francis is a explicit heretic in terms of the First Commandment.

Cardinal Muller said Francis actions are "a crime against Divine Law."

Even supposing that Francis's actions had no "idolatrous intentions" which can only be judged by a imperfect council, the very "bring[ing] [of] the idols into the Church" and now saying that he is open and apparently willing to commit the scandalous sacrilege of "display[ing]... the [Sachamama idol] statues at the closing Mass of the Synod" which is "a crime against" the First Commandment that means he is "knowingly corrupt[ing] the faith."

To understand the enormity of the grave heresy, crime and sin of Francis just imagine if Moses on seeing his people prostrating in front of the graven idols had said there was no "idolatrous intentions" so let's "display" the idols in God's Paschal liturgy.

St. Thomas Aquinas stated "idolatry is the most grievous sin" in which "heretics... knowingly corrupt the faith."

There appears to be no doubt that Francis is as Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales says is "explicitly a heretic" in terms of the First Commandment who must by the "Church... [be] declar[ed]... deprived of his Apostlic See":

"The Pope... when he is explicitly a heretic... the Church must either deprive him or as some say declare him deprived of his Apostlic See."
(The Catholic Controversy by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

It is now sheer madness if Cardinal Muller and the other faithful Catholic cardinals do not convene an imperfect council to "declare" Francis "deprived of his Apostlic See" after he is given canonical due process and allowed the opportunity to recant and, also, to investigate the validity of the Francis conclave and the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI which Bishop Rene Gracida has called for.

The greatest Doctor of the Church St. Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologiae in "3. Whether idolatry is the gravest of sins?" condemned Francis when he wrote the sin against the First Commandment idolatry is the "most grievous sin" especially when "heretics... knowingly corrupt the faith":

"[I]dolatry is the most grievous sin... heretics, if they knowingly corrupt the faith they have received, from sinning more grievously than idolaters who sin through ignorance... Idolatry presupposes internal unbelief... Idolatry includes a grievous blasphemy."
(Newadvent.org, Summa Theologiae: Idolatry (Secunda Secundea Partis, Q. 94)

Finally, this is a warning to myself and all Catholics, but especially to Cardinal Muller and all the cardinals who believe the Catholic faith.

Our God given faith united with our free will actions as well as our non-actions determine if we go to Heaven or Hell.

God is looking at you right now.

Your actions or non-actions may determine not just rather you fail to do God's will in this ultimate crisis of the Church, but rather you may spend eternity with the all-loving God or spend eternity with the all-hating Satan and his demons one of whom is Pachamama.

"For all the gods of the Gentiles [heathens] are devils."
- Douay-Rheims, Psalms 96:5

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Exorcist Fr. Ripperger is asking everyone to say this Prayer until the Election is Resolved"

A good friend of the Catholic Monitor got this from a group message. She said "exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger is asking everyone to say this prayer until the election is resolved": Prayer of Command In His Name and by the power of His Cross and Blood, I ask Jesus to bind any evil spirits, forces and powers of the earth, air, fire, or water, of the netherworld and the satanic forces of nature.  By the power of the Holy Spirit and by His authority, I ask Jesus Christ to break any curses, hexes, or spells and send them back to where they came from, if it be His Holy Will.  I beseech Thee Lord Jesus to protect us by pouring Thy Precious Blood on us (my family, etc.), which Thou hast shed for us and I ask Thee to command that any departing spirits leave quietly, without disturbance, and go straight to Thy Cross to dispose of as Thou sees fit.  I ask Thee to bind any demonic interaction, interplay, or communications.  I place N. (Person, place or thing) under the protectio

High-profile Lawyer Barnes: Amy Coney Barrett would be a Disaster

High-profile trial lawyer Robert Barnes who deals in civil, criminal and constitutional law reported on Twitter that Amy Coney Barrett would be a disaster. The Barnes Twitter report shows that Coney Barrett has " sid[ed] with the government on the lockdowns, on uncompensated takings, on excusing First Amendment infringements & Fourth Amendment violations... [and] exclaimed the benefits of Jacobson, the decision that green-lit forced vaccines & carved out an emergency exception to Constitutional protection in "public health" or "emergency" cases used to justify forced sterilizations & detention camps... [and] hid behind precedent... to prohibit pro-life activists from exercising their free speech ." The Avvo.com lawyer directory reports that attorney "Robert Barnes embraces the challenge to defend the little guy and stand up for what is right. This is why he left the prestigious Yale Law School, whom publicly stated their unwill

If Kamala Harris' Father is part White & part Jamaican African and her Mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black?

  Is Joe Biden's running mate really Black? If Kamala Harris' father is part white and part Jamaican African and her mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black? Reason.com tries to figure it out: Kamala Harris, Joe Biden's pick to be the Democratic Party's vice-presidential nominee, is the daughter of an Indian immigrant mother and a Jamaican immigrant father. Her father, as I understand it, has ancestors of both European and African origin. [Welcome new Volokh readers. FYI, I've been working on a book on the American Law of Race, with this forthcoming article the first relevant output. My own opinion is that Ms. Harris should be deemed American, period, but there is no such box on government forms, and if you decline to state your race, someone will decide for you… First things first. There is no multiracial or mixed-race category in American law in any jurisdiction. Nor is there an Indian category. So Harris cannot be legally Indian, nor can she b