Skip to comments.Whatever that was, it wasn’t a ‘stunt’ (Jiffy Pachamama Removal Service)
Posted on 10/22/2019 1:32:11 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
A few days ago men removed some female figurines (centerpieces for several weird ceremonies in Rome the last few weeks) from a church and tossed them into the Tiber River. Vatican spokesman Paolo Ruffini dismissed the act as a stunt. Regardless of how one assess this act, however, I think it not accurate to describe it as a mere stunt.
A stunt is a gesture that calls attention to a problem but does not itself solve the problem. For example, chaining oneself to a lamppost could call attention to the plight of the unjustly imprisoned but does not itself free the imprisoned. Standing on the corner with ones mouth duct-taped might call attention to the suffering of the voiceless but does not itself give them a voice. Such acts are stunts, good stunts or bad, but in the end, stunts. What the Tiber men did was different.
Removing these figures from a church and tossing them into the Tiber does not simply call attention to the problem of setting up such objects in a church it also removes the statues from the church and thus solves the problem of having them set up in a sacred place. Such an act, good act or bad, is more than a stunt, it is form of direct action against a problem.
The Vatican having ruled out the possibility that the nude statues might represent the Virgin Mary or Our Lady of the Amazon, it is disputed whether the figurines portray the Amazon pagan goddess Pachamama or (at least per a handful of Vaticanisti) merely some vague life force. It is not for me to opine on who or what the objects actually represent and if someone wants to argue that chanting to and bowing before figurines of naked women does not count as worshiping strange gods, well, who am I to say?
But a fuller assessment of the act of these two men does not rest solely on whether the figures are demonic or merely faddish. Canon 1210, addressing the dignity of Catholic holy places in general, states: Only those things which serve the exercise or promotion of worship, piety, or religion are permitted in a sacred place; anything not consonant with the holiness of the place is forbidden And Canon 1220 § 1, addressing churches specifically, states: All those responsible are to take care that in churches such cleanliness and beauty are preserved as befit a house of God and that whatever is inappropriate to the holiness of the place is excluded.
Theses canons, in my view, do not simply preclude the placement of obviously demonic or pagan artifacts in our churches, but rather, require those in charge of sacred places to set up objects that are positively conducive to Christian prayer and worship. If, as the Congregation for Divine worship stated in 1987(*), the mere fact that that some music is admittedly beautiful does not justify its performance in churches, then all the more so should church authorities be on guard against setting up objects widely and reasonably seen as representing pagan deities in Catholic sacred spaces. I suggest (and more to the point, the Code of Canon Law understands in, say, Canon 214), that the faithful have the right to trust that what they see in Catholic sacred places is actually there in service to the sacred and is not simply a gesture toward some form of political correctness or the latest cause du jour, to say nothing of it possibly being simply evil. Ignoring concerns about the proper use of sacred space with a shrug and a we dont really know what it is is to ignore the positive duties that Church leadership owes to the faithful.
As a man of law I am also a man of order and, as a rule, I hold that removing objects from private property is not an act of good order. But then, neither is setting up idols (whether to demons or to secular causes) in Catholic churches an act of good order. Over time the disregard of law by those in charge eventually brings about disregard of law by those subject to it. And that in turn can result in acts that are much more than mere stunts.
* See Cong. for Divine Worship (Mayer), excerpt from let. Qua in mentem quaedam normae quoad Concerti nelle chiesa revocantur (05 nov 1987), Communicationes 19 (1987) 179-181.
Go to original for many links.
Pachamama be swimmin' wit' de fishes, heh.
Pachamama - Pokemon... what’s in a word?
Chicken so good it’ll make you Pachamama!.......................
Interesting how the author fails to identify “some men” who perpetrated the implied dastardly deed. Presumably Catholics, they weren’t just random outsiders vandalizing a practically random place, they were parishioners clearing what they construed as vandalism out of _their_ place.
Over time the disregard of law by those in charge eventually brings about disregard of law by those subject to it.
Would that the Democrats could flash to this simple truth... Save us all a hell of a lot of trouble.
Please!! Stop using crude hate against Catholicism.
These are not idols.
They are art.
They are strictly used only in veneration and not worship!!!
These statues are used because the Apostles taught their use - passing by oral tradition from generation to generation by our Catholic leaders.
But as far as I know, no individuals or organizations have taken responsibility for this noble act of idol-removal.
Might it have been TFP?
Not in a homicidal way or anything... but it would be nice to see the men who allowed the statues in the sanctuary thrown into the Tiber also!
But this was a great day for someone to take action and defend the church.
Except that they really didn't, did they?
It matters what the statue represents, which is why the Ark of the Covenant was to be surmounted by golden cherubim, not golden Canaanite fertility demons.
Wow! I cant believe that the prissy Ralph Peters, who has protected Francis tooth and nail despite reservations, has gotten to the heart of the matter.
There are many traditionalists out there now saying that the act of these brave men (who may have been the dreaded Novus Ordo Catholics) was wrong, that they have resisted the Pope, that theyve committed all sorts of sins....I honestly dont know what these (admittedly, self-proclaimed) trads are all about.
What about the Faith? Who is going to defend the Faith? These men did.
You are mistaken. This was not an anti-Catholic removal of normal statues found in a church. It was a removal of pagan fertility goddess icons that were recently added.
Let them go diving in the Tiber to recover their precious tchotchkes.
Indeed, reading through Aquinas' writings on theft and robbery it is hard to justify this act.
However, if we believe the faithful are in a "just war" then these statues may be fair game..but I am very hesitant to declare war on Mother Church right now. Why? Because what is to stop the modernists from sacking Rome when we get a trad Pope?
Just as Deplorables get peeved when some leftist defaces Trump signs, if the tables were turned and some Jesuit dumped a St Pius X statue into the moat, we'd be hopping mad.
Now, we've given ammo to the opposition, you know "trads are thieves, shut them down, arrest these miscreants, blah blah blah..." and we've given tacit approval for the modernists to strike back when they're out of power.
There has to be a better way.
yup. I dont see a difference between the marian idols and the amazonian ones either
Just imagining them climbing out of the water, soaking wet. Literally dripping with the brotherly correction and guidance administered by their flock.
(you know I can be a troublemaker sometimes...)
“It matters what the statue represents, which is why the Ark of the Covenant was to be surmounted by golden cherubim, not golden Canaanite fertility demons. “
Appeal to Scripture as authority and not tradition - noted.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.