Working document for Amazon synod is both a catch-all and a cover

It is rather unseemly that a coterie of mostly northern European churchmen are apparently using the pressing issues of a long-suffering local Church in the developing world to advance their pet project in ecclesial sociology.

Raoni Metuktire, chief of the Kayapo indigenous group in the Brazilian Amazon region, right, shows Pope Francis a map of the Amazon rainforest during a private audience at the Vatican May 27, 2019. The indigenous chief met with the pope to discuss the Synod of Bishops on the Amazon, which will be at the Vatican in October. (CNS photo/Vatican Media)

The working document for the upcoming special assembly of the synod of bishops for the Amazon region has caused quite a stir. Such documents can be concise agendae — little more than bullet points. The ecclesial subspecies of the genre tends to be a “kitchen sink” catch-all into which everything is crammed: so that no idea, suggestion, notion, or back-of-the-napkin scribble goes to waste, no matter how silly, half-baked, or otherwise egregious.

As far as these sorts of documents go, the one we got for the Amazon synod certainly is of the kitchen sink variety. It has all the bullet points: everything anyone could want, and more.

Working documents are wonky by design: usually meant to set an agenda and frame a conversation, rather than to inspire or even inform the broad public. This one does not make for pretty reading. Then, it is not meant to make for pretty reading. It is not a theological treatise. In this case, however, it is not a framework for discussion, either. Nor is it even a unified statement of intent.

Its purpose is twofold: to let everyone with a stake in the meeting be seen to have got his word in, edgewise; to provide cover for the one thing the organizers want. Still, there’s plenty of meat for the picking in the thing.

The document is long. Translated from the Portuguese original, the Spanish version of The Amazon: New Paths for the Church and Integral Ecology comes in at twenty-two thousand words, give or take, footnotes included. It is articulated in three parts: of four, nine, and eight chapters, respectively, over one hundred forty-nine numbered paragraphs. The major divisions are: “The voice of Amazonia”; “Integral Ecology: The Cry of the Earth and of the Poor”; “A Prophetic Church in Amazonia: Challenges and Hopes”.

Part I offers a thorough rehearsal of the Amazon region’s current conditions and circumstances, while the headings for Parts II and III pretty much say what’s in the box. Part II focuses on issues of pressing concern to the people and the physical territory. Part III deals with practical pastoral challenges facing the Church in the region, which is politically, socially, economically, and in terms of global ecology more significant than many — one might dare to say most — people living outside the region recognize.

The Amazon rain forest, through which the Amazon River cuts, produces oxygen and removes carbon dioxide from the whole planet’s air. That, alone, makes it an ecological — hence a strategic — key to security. “The Amazon River basin and the tropical forests that surround it nourish the soil and regulate, through the recycling of moisture, the cycles of water, energy and carbon at the planetary level,” the document’s Paragraph 9 rehearses. “The Amazon River alone casts 15% of the planet’s total fresh water into the Atlantic Ocean each year.” Those facts alone make the Amazon essential for global precipitation and weather patterns. Nevertheless, “[T]he Amazon is the second most vulnerable area of the planet, after the Arctic, in relation to climate change of anthropogenic origin.”

The Amazon basin also serves and sustains human communities of the most diverse and varied sizes, histories, and cultural and ethnographic composition, all of which face — in one way or another — serious and pressing dangers to their ways of life that result from irresponsible exploitation of the region’s natural resources.

Even before one delves into the nitty-gritty questions of indigenous peoples’ rights to their ancient lands and the threats to their ways of life, which the exploitation poses, the raw facts of the situation on the ground in the Amazon constitute a serious political problem for the area, which stretches over eight countries covering roughly a third of South America. “[L]ife in the Amazon,” reads Paragraph 14, “is threatened by environmental destruction and exploitation, by the systematic violation of the basic human rights of the Amazonian population.” Of particular concern is the violation of the rights of indigenous peoples, including their rights to territory, to self-determination, and basic political participation.

“According to the communities participating in this synodal listening,” the document goes on to say, “the threat to life comes from economic and political interests of the dominant sectors of society today, especially extractive companies, often in collusion, or with the permissiveness of local, national governments and traditional authorities (of the indigenous themselves).” In short: A good bit of what happens in Amazonia doesn’t even start in Amazonia, and what happens in Amazonia certainly does not stay in Amazonia.

Nor are the problems of recent vintage. For five centuries, greedy and unscrupulous foreign interlopers have stolen wealth, labor, and children from the peoples of Amazonia. They have raped the land and the people. They have murdered. They still do. There is no getting around this. The peoples of Amazonia have had more than enough, and are not having any more. The Church has not only a right to speak in their behalf, but a duty to stand with Amazonia’s woefully abused sons and daughters, many of whom are her own by adoption.

The leaders of the Church in the Amazon region are trying to hear — to make heard — the people who live there, to offer some sort of systematic response to the challenges that face them, and by extension, everyone. These are global issues in a very large local nutshell, about which the people most directly and immediately interested have often been the least heard and most deliberately ignored.

It’s not that many of the folks, who have complained of the document’s theological idiosyncrasies — not to mention doctrinal departures and apparent derelictions of dogma — are wrong. Cardinal Brandmüller told LifeSite and Kath.net the working document is a piece of heresy. “It is to be stated now with insistence,” Brandmüller wrote, “that the Instrumentum laboris contradicts the binding teaching of the Church in decisive points and thus has to be qualified as heretical.” Then again, these things usually are pretty awful. Brandmüller could well be overstating his case — even the most egregious statements in the document may be susceptible of an orthodox construction — but this one really is special, nonetheless.

The point is that the document is — to switch metaphors — a harvest, hence of wheat with the chaff. If some synod fathers are hoping for a vigorous general threshing, at least a few synod managers appear primarily interested in finding a particular stalk: the one that grew from the seed of optional celibacy, which they sowed early in the growing season.

The stalk made it to the threshing floor. Paragraph 129 calls for the promotion of “autochthonous vocations,” i.e. vocations among indigenous populations, in response to a genuine need for the sacraments in a part of the world where people might see a priest only a few times a year, and then if they’re lucky. Then, the document asks that the fathers — really, that the Holy Father — consider “the possibility of priestly ordination be studied for elderly people, preferably indigenous, respected and accepted by their community,” even if they are married with children. The reason given: “[T]o ensure the availability of the Sacraments that accompany and sustain the Christian life.”

A group of senior churchmen met in the second half of June to discuss the upcoming synod assembly, which is scheduled to take place in October of this year. Most of the people invited to attend that informal preparatory meeting were of German extraction, roughly of the so-called “progressive” wing in the Church, and more-or-less vocal in their willingness to entertain proposals for a change in Church discipline with respect to priestly celibacy. Some of the more sensational reporting couched the gathering as a sort of secret assembly or nocturnal council. In fact, there was nothing terribly secret about it. In any case the issue of relaxing the discipline is on the October agenda.

Wherever one stands on the question of mandatory celibacy for secular priests in the Latin Rite of the Church — this is not the place for a rehearsal of the arguments — it is still difficult not to sympathize with those, who discovered something unseemly in a coterie of mostly northern European churchmen appearing to use the legitimate and urgently pressing issues of a sorely tried and long-suffering local Church in the developing world to advance their pet project in ecclesial sociology.

Pope Francis, meanwhile, seems keen to grant any request the fathers might make in that direction. It isn’t that he didn’t mean what he said on the plane that was carrying him from Panama to Rome, i.e. that he is personally opposed to optional celibacy. He also said he would entertain requests for a change in the discipline. He might well grant such a request — limited and local, under special circumstances, in response to the gravest pastoral necessity, it goes without saying — and for him to acquiesce in despite of his own feelings would show he means what he says about synodal leadership cum petro et sub petro.


If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.


About Christopher R. Altieri 111 Articles
Christopher R. Altieri is a journalist, writer, and editor based in Rome, Italy. He spent more than a dozen years on the news desk at Vatican Radio. He holds the PhD from the Pontifical Gregorian University, and is the author of The Soul of a Nation: America as a Tradition of Inquiry and Nationhood.

34 Comments

  1. The Wall Street Journal rejected the following comment yesterday. The article was “Catholics Debate the Future of Priestly Celibacy: A shortage of priests has led to calls to ease rules that have governed the church for centuries”. The author is Francis X. Rocca. The moderator of the comments is not identified.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/catholics-debate-the-future-of-priestly-celibacy-11561652407?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=1

    rejected comment:

    BLOGS | JUN. 27, 2019
    Synod Doc is ‘Attack on the Foundations of the Faith,’ says Cardinal
    The instrumentum laboris “constitutes an attack on the foundations of the faith” in a way not thought possible before, says Cardinal Walter Brandmüller
    by Edward Pentin

    http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/cardinal-brandmueller-synod-document-is-attack-on-the-foundations-of-the-fa

    • If married clergy solved any problems then the Church Of England would be in a better condition than it currently is.

      • Baloney!!! The Church of England is not the Church of Rome or of the East. It is a genuinely heretical community. The documents of the General Synod and the “ordination” of women is an example. You’re taking apples and oranges if you want to take the Anglican Communion and compare it to the Catholic Church. Go become a communicant in that group.

        People are starving for Sacraments. Something the C of E does not have. Celibacy in extremely priest poor areas is more important than the Sacraments? Maybe you should abstain from the Sacraments for 6 months or a year and see where your life in Christ actually is in that situation.

  2. Altieri quotes Amazonia: “Then, the document asks that the fathers — really, that the Holy Father — consider ‘the possibility of priestly ordination be studied for elderly people, preferably indigenous, respected and accepted by their community,’ even if they are married with children. The reason given: ‘[T]o ensure the availability of the Sacraments that accompany and sustain the Christian life.'”

    Quite APART FROM the issue of celibacy and children-—and even apart from how the whole Church would be affected by any wedge-issue “local” accommodation in priestly celibacy—-hanging over this proposal is the much larger and camouflaged, shall we say ground sloth, in the living room…

    In the current Mass–a liturgy proposed in the document to be seriously tinkered with–reference now is still made to MELCHISEDECH, the one to whom Abraham offered tithes…

    Who was Melchisedech? He was a decisive “type” prefiguring Christ because he came from OUTSIDE the clan, i.e., was not a blood-line elder, and who also had NO descendants in the clan.

    With Melchisedech, we see something about the divine origin of Christ as coming from the outside—-the Incarnation as from all eternity and gratuitously and self-donating into human history through the Virgin Mary, and NOT otherwise as from familiar local ancestry, say, the foster-father Joseph.

    So, now, in Amazonia the proposed ordination of (quickly trained, maybe smartphones rather than seminaries?) shamans, or perhaps elders BECAUSE they are “indigenous, respected and accepted by their community?”

    The non-indigenous TRANSCENDENCE of Christ–and therefore the unambiguous ALTER CHRISTUS of the ordained priest–what of these?

    What of these obscured dimensions of the “ritual” (sic Liturgy) in the perceptions of those assembled (not merely congregated) around and by the Eucharist–which not only “sustain[s] the Christian life” but sacramentally incorporates us into the very divine life of Christ? The mystical body of Christ? (Catechism: Real Presence n. 1374!)

    How will such muddle (yes?) really look in one generation, or two? How has it worked in Protestant Germany? Or Catholic Germany! Inculturation in reverse?

  3. Mr.Altieri’s essay shows the German organizers of “Amazonia Synod” as what they are: exploitaters raping the Church.

    The vast majority of German “Bishops” are not Christians. This is evidenced by one of their highest representatives, their former president of their conference, “Bishop” Robert Zollitsch, when he orchestrated their declaration of heresy on German television on Holy Saturday in 2009, for every German Catholic to hear, that Zollitsch and “his brother Bishops” DO NOT BELIEVE NOR TEACH that Jesus sacrificed himself on the cross to atone for our sins, and save us from that slavery.

    These “bishops” are the high administrators of the decadent, arrogant, post-Christian, parasitic clericalist cult, who are quite literally millionaire salaried employees of the German government.

    Here is one of their profanities, whispered into the ear of their hand-picked pontiff Francis, when they paraded him out on the balcony at St. Peter’s in 2013: “Remember the poor.”

    • Pope St. Pius X had to deal with the “Law of Separation” in France. Despite the French governments’ theft of the churches, it’s probably a better situation than the one you desribe in Germany.

  4. If being accused of heresy makes Bergoglio tilt his head back and laugh out loud…nothing induces that now famous look of maniacal glee like (blueprints in hand) the imminent destruction of the Catholic Church.

  5. The only good that can come out of INSTRUEMENTUM LABORIS is that its publication and subsequent application will put the defining stamp on the nature and content of the Bergoglian pontificate.
    There will be no more ambiguity.
    Roman Catholicism is in the advanced stages of deconstruction and we are in the hands of not one, but a legion of heretics in episcopal vesture. The contents of the document are an outrage of the highest order. It is an astonishing exhibition of theological, philosophical, sociological, anthropological and psychological disorientation. Along with A DOCUMENT ON HUMAN FRATERNITY FOR WORLD PEACE AND LIVING TOGETHER and AMORIS LAETITIA we have proof positive that the Bergoglian enterprise is entirely contrary to the perennial Magisterium of the Church. The “new paradigm” is not merely an adjusted mode of perspective and operation, it is a secular materialist ideology which does not rise to the level of a religious belief. It is a sham. A deception. A lie.
    It is heresy.

  6. If it were not for the tragic events affecting our Church a bit of humor might perhaps be welcome. I refer to Roberto De Mattei’s repudiation of the Amazonia Instrumentum Laboris posted on Rorate Caeli showing the Pope regaled as Native. Amazonia was thoroughly repudiated by De Mattei in his article. Yes Altieri is right it is a cover as is Beaulieu that it entails more. That the Synod envisions so called viri probati including shamans other tribal elders all Animists without intensive training and continued presence of missionary priest catechists tells the full story – Pope Francis is determined, no longer by stealth to repudiate Christ. Amazonia is the prototype of an earthly Church, as in Flannery O’Connor’s premonition of a Church of Christ Without Christ. Apostolic Tradition celebrated today the Solemnity of Apostles Peter and Paul is where we must stand. Faith is supplemented by the Real Presence of Christ in daily Eucharist. He remains with us until the next reception of his Body and Blood. We on our part must keep that reality in mind since it is the most powerful aid for the faithful and the continued source of strength. That requires a conscious effort of interior contemplation even while engaged in activities. The Church as predicted by Benedict XVI to become a small remnant of faithful was premonition. Perhaps not realizing it’s imminence. Foreboding became a reality with the rigging as E Pentin named it of the Family Synod. The Pope had an air of messianic righteousness mocking, condemning traditional prelates. With the many highly credentialed Cardinals and Bishops now citing heresy, at least intentionally propagated error [the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming even if heresy does not meet canonical standards] the line of spiritual combat is clearly drawn. The Antichrist type occupant of the Chair of Peter cannot be favored by silent complicity. Rather loyalty to Christ and Apostolic Tradition compels Resistance.

  7. Sounds like Europeans patting natives on the head again claiming to be the protectors and true voice of these poor, innocent, child-like savages.

    • Very true. Condescending in so many ways.

      “Oh, well they are so primitive and backwards they can’t be expected to adhere to something that has been in effect the world over for centuries.”

  8. This document, along with all the other lies, scandals and machinations, proves that many in the hierarchy think the Church and her sacred doctrine is their political playground for them to manipulate (and the laity are morons along for the ride). These hierarchy are so ungodly. I pray for them, but with great difficulty. I know it’s a sin (and I pray God helps and forgives me), but I actually hate many of our shepherds.

  9. Here’s what people need to do. Bishops in particular, but laity can join in.

    They have tried the dubia – no response
    Various outlier clerics have tried to claim Francis is a heretic, etc.
    Burke and some others even tried writing their own little encyclicals of correction
    None of it works, so what is needed is a broad public shaming.

    Bishops should write letters to the Pope everytime he does something stupid. These will be called “Holy Father, I don’t understand” letters.

    They don’t have to threaten, or cajole, or fraternally correct.
    They just have to honestly state their confusion. It should be easier to get 30 or 40 bishops to write a letter to Pope Francis saying “Holy Father, I don’t understand” In the case of the Amazon synod, they would say something like “holy father I don’t understand the Amazon Synod – some aspects are confusing and appear to be pagan, (or whatever) They can state authentic Catholic teaching, point out the theological inconsistencies with catholic teaching, and then ask Pope Francis to explain.

    He will ignore it.

    Then, the authors can go to the media, and release the letter. Over time, at least everyone will be on record as not understanding what the hell he is doing, and requesting clarification, giving him full power to correct – if he can. This will show the world that the bishops are on record as being uncomfortable with what he is doing, or at least a significant portion of them are.

    All these “Holy Father, I don’t understand” letters can be collected on a website that will then serve as a repository of all the potential theological and practical mistakes the Pope is making.

    They can start with Amoris Laetitia. They can write such letters when the pope appears to endorse contraception in a plane interview. Anything that confuses the faithful should be taken seriuosly, and bishops should request clarification, over and over and over and over again. it does not matter if he does not respond

    Bishops should write individually, or collectively, but should make it clear they dont understand how his teaching there should be construed. They can put it in the form of an official dubia if they like. Or just a simple letter, sent to the Pope.

    The net effect, once these are made public, is to make clear to the public that Pope Francis is confusing everyone. Bishops will be on the record as requesting clarification, because this or that statement or document or synod prep document does not make sense.

    Francis has used his office to ignore the confusion he has caused, and to ignore people who have asked questions. So far, the number asking questions has been pretty small. But I suspect this is primarily because Bishops, being faithful to their requirement to obey the Pope, do not want to seem to be in conflict with him. However, asking a question is not arguing with the Pope. Nor is it refusing to follow his direction.

    The advantage of this is that all the confusing things Francis has done can be the subject of a letter to the Pope – simply saying “Holy Father, I don’t understand”. This is not disrespectful, it does not challenge his authority, it merely asks for clarification.

    In addition, academics can send such letters, theologians can do so, Bishops, and also lay people. Canon lawyers can do so. In legal terms, it is building a record, so that these matters are open, and the Pope will have to pay a price in terms of his legacy, and in terms of public opinion, if he wants to igmore all the requests for clarification.

    If what the pope is sneakily doing cannot be thwarted, and if he tries to do shady things on the sly, like the Amazon synod, at least we can go on record and show that confusion is King right now, and there are a huge number of areas of confusion.

    The Pope can ignore, them, but at least they can make a permanent record of the confusion he is causing.

    • I was horrified to see that the response of the authorities was “We can’t interfere, it’s their culture.” Where’s somebody with the guts of General Sir William Napier, regarding suttee?

  10. And this “small remnant” may very well be destined to be a Church in the catacombs, an underground church, a home church.

    How can one be in communion with apostasy?

    One might say, “Well nothing has changed at my parish (American, local).” But is such a reality theoretically/fundamentally possible after the implementation of this synod and subsequent changes not simply to the priesthood but theology and the Eucharist in the Amazon and yes Amazonian Deutschland?

    The perversity of this synod is in this: it would make the Apostolic Faith “remote,” a “remote” Church.

  11. Some of the heretical statements can be stated in an orthodox way? What a trope! If some of the heretical statements in the document can be stated in an orthodox way, why are they not so stated? Could it be because the drafters of the document are deliberately being ambiguous to disguise their true intentions? Isn’t that typically the way revolutionaries operate until they gain sufficient power to show their true colors? Let’s stop kidding ourselves. The church is under assault from within by some ungodly men aided from the outside, and it is time to put up or shut up. This kind of fence sitting will no longer do! History wil judge us harshly if we sit by and allow our mother the church to be converted into a God-forsaken socio-political organization.

    • I agree with Patrick. After all, one of the two remaining Dubia cardinals characterized this latest Bergoglian foray into the theological Twilight Zone as “apostasy,” not just heresy. While the latter may admit of orthodox interpretation, the former may not.

  12. Remember what you have been told over and over that nothing has (or will evidently)change in matters of faith and morals. These suggestions are only suggestions you know. Besides, the pope has the authority to do whatever he pleases. Isn’t that right? These suggestions will merely be incorporated into one place-we want to be democratic, don’t we?

  13. Mr Altieri is a good writer, but he often is too polite in his assessment and criticism of obnoxiously unorthodox or even heretical documents produced under the Francis pontificate. I’m reminded of the quote attributed to Edmund Burke, “To speak of atrocious crime in mild language is treason to virtue.” Mr. Altieri, the time for mild language is long past; please use your considerable skills to expose and combat the atrocious crimes being perpetrated by unfaithful clerics against Holy Mother Church. Into the battle, all good and virtuous men!

  14. “Cardinal Brandmüller told LifeSite and Kath.net the working document is a piece of heresy. ‘It is to be stated now with insistence,’ Brandmüller wrote, ‘that the Instrumentum laboris contradicts the binding teaching of the Church in decisive points and thus has to be qualified as heretical.’ Then again, these things usually are pretty awful. Brandmüller could well be overstating his case — even the most egregious statements in the document may be susceptible of an orthodox construction — but this one really is special, nonetheless.”

    This part of Altieri’s “analysis” could have been written by the poet John Ashbery. It is not simply “mild” but a great example of doing/undoing. Some might call this a “balanced view.” Is this “analysis” even a “view” or simply an undoing after all?

    Here’s my analysis: kudos to Cardinal Brandmüller… and Edward Pentin.

    • All in this church belonged to the earth, returned to the earth. All was dead (Anne Catherine Emmerich). Blessed Catherine envisioned a false church superimposed upon the true. What is eerily consistent in the Amazonia paradigm is the return to historical worship of the physical world the domain of The Prince of this World. With it the ordained order of nature is subject to human caprice. The Holy Eucharist the nemesis of this New Order is the Rampart they seek to destroy. With Him we live or die.

  15. “All in this church belonged to the earth, returned to the earth. All was dead (Anne Catherine Emmerich). Blessed Catherine envisioned a false church superimposed upon the true.”

    The Ignatian “God in all things” becomes “God is all things”…and this is where we are really. This is a planned, programmatic papacy…everything was in a briefcase long before the “Buona sera!”

    Will this be sold as another “development” of Eucharistic theology and that nothing has really changed?

    Will Bergoglio “accompany” Amazonian infanticide and the abandonment (or burial alive) of handicapped youth in the jungle even in their teens? Will he denounce Muwaji’s law as “pharisaical” and lacking “mercy” and respect for other cultures?

    The Prince of this World does NOT love humanity…

    Is there any “novelty” or “surprise” implemented in this Amazon synod that allows for a theoretical/theological “nothing has changed” at someone’s local parish (in America, for example)? I am speaking here about superimpositions as “newly realized” coexistences in Eucharistic and Trinitarian theology for a start…not only about the priesthood…

  16. Thank you for this seemingly balanced view on this topic . Some of the talk and such on this topic seems almost reminiscent of our Lord walking into the life of the Gerasene demoniacs .There were the pigs at the head waters of the lake , the water source of those who thought they were ritually pure and the demon infested causing terror in the area .
    Holy Father has already asked for and blessed persons to come up with alternative energy sources and access to power in places deprived of same .
    Training those in the community in the region , in leadership roles , to be now working with The Lord , to use their skills , more in the ministry of deliverance, seems almost like our Lord telling the healed demoniac to return home . Using the present world wide access to true faith , to be set free from errors inherent in theirs – seems like a workable area that can be looked into , thus to also may be help free The Church too from the debt of negligences in these areas in the
    past .
    Thus , for example, the Holy Father , possibly seeing the ornate , elaborate and expensive works , in places such as the Vatican museums, his own Italian heritage too , might be pained and deeply longing to make reparations for negligences of the indigent in the past . Would be good to also ponder as to how when those naked pictures were allowed , The Church had the truth that , in instances such as the Transfiguration , no one appeared naked but were clothed in light . Would it even be that those images speak more of the nakedness and greed of atleast some human hearts of the time, like in the case when our Lord was robbed of His clothing , during The Passion !
    Thus , the Holy Father now trying to clothe the naked, the nakedness of the earth ,
    nakedness without faith , in many , including the distant relatives of these people may be , such as in China . The good in the plans succeeding can also be put to good use , in such other lands as well, to help bring the Godly wisdom and healing
    needed , for the human family itself .
    May the prayers and blessings of many , for the Spirit to take charge of our hearts bring the true freedom to work with The Lord in all our lands .

    ,

  17. Considering the warnings the Holy Father has given often enough about the powers of evil and in consideration of his name sake, St.Francis , who chose to give away the expensive clothes at his father’ shop to the poor , hope he would make a bold move to may be get rid off all pagan objects in the Vatican museums , under the good guidance
    of those in the ministry of exorcism . He was bold enough to state how yoga does not bring one closer to God and may be thus giving a note of caution as well on such matters .
    https://sacredmattersmagazine.com/the-sacred-and-the-secular-in-the-vatican-museum/
    The above article mentions how such objects did not find a place there till about 500 years ago .
    Israel has the holocaust museum – in a somber setting , to be seen with an attitude of sorrow and prayers for the departed and for the perpetrators for the human evil, thus to help bring good out of it . Such a concept of seeing the pagan objects too , may be even using same as occasion to help the visitors , in ministry
    of deliverance , with prayers for generational healing and such – the example of which also could help families to be wary of same in homes and help to bring The Church together a bit more, including with the Orthodox , to thus also help in the endeavor in dealing with pagan cultures such as of the Amazon .
    Then again, considering how many holy persons have been around these objects , giving praise to God for the ways The Church has been blessed in The Spirit and in The Precious Blood , to do away with powers of evil in places related to these objects and the objects themselves too may be , they can be seen in a different light as well .
    ‘ Bring them to Me ‘ our Lord tell us about all sinners too – to His mercy ,to receive same in the light of the poverty of spirit of seeing the neediness for same , in us all , to be thus joined in the asking and thanking .

  18. Has Rome considered the idea of sending missionaries to the Amazon? Call me old fashioned and a little naive, but from the earliest days of the Church, isn’t that how the job got done?

2 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. SATVRDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit
  2. That Amazin’ Amazon Synod! | The Catholic Cyber Militiaman

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.


*