During his pontificate, Pope Francis was accused of a number of heretical acts; one of which was the “Pachamama” controversy. A critical analysis of the entire saga suggests that the whole issue was a smear campaign that started before the event in question and was blown out of proportion by the conservative right; the “dubia” cardinals; Raymond Burke, Walter BrandMuller, and Gerhard Muller and Bishop Schneider, and prominent conservative media and media personalities like lifesite news, the Catholic Register, and Dr. Taylor Marshall among others. An issue described by Michael Lofton as an artificial scandal.
At the heart of the scandal were accusations of idol worship. It is important to state that what happened at the Vatican was far from anything that should be interpreted as an act of worship. Not even an act of veneration was performed on the image which was identified as our lady of the Amazon. Nevertheless, also due to the media hype the presence of the statue given the artificial scandal manufactured around it gave many good people the impression of an act of worship.
According to the Oxford language dictionary worship is “the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity”. There is a counter ‘unofficial’ definition of worship based on Deuteronomy 5:8-9 which specifically mentions “making” and “bowing down”. This definition of worship is widely adopted by our evangelical brothers and sisters and is the primary basis on which accusations of worship of the “Pachamama” are based.
The Oxford language dictionary definition of worship renders it as an act which belongs to the category of sentiments. It is reinforced by such practices like “praise and worship” characterized by singing of songs first in the category of lively songs followed by deep emotional sentimental songs which “lift” up the heart in “worship” of God. The definition based on Deuteronomy, with its emphasis on ‘making’ and ‘bowing’ down is also grossly insufficient even based on textual analysis alone. If the sentence is to make sense, the making, the bowing down, and the worshiping must all exist at the same time. Making alone is not sufficient, neither is making and bowing alone. I will not explore this further as there is sufficient volume of apologetics that deal the issue of statues and bowing down.
Historically, worship was an active task, one that was associated with the good and that was essential in achieving that good as opposed to an act belonging to the category of the sentiments. For some of us who still possess the vestiges of non-christianised worship from our ancestors five to six generations ago; Worship was a practical thing, mediated by sacrificial animals and animated by divine invocations. It was done for practical purposes, for the good of the community, for health and fertility, in supplications for rain, safety, food and victory in war, in thanksgiving for a good harvest, and for atonement of sins. Worship was an act whose consequences animated our communities positively when done rightly and negatively when not done properly. It was strictly bound to the common good and deemed essential for that good. It was an act which recognized the supremacy of the divine and our human limitations and dependency on the divine will. For our ancestors, the goal of worship was to keep the divine happy with us. Thus it was imperative to do all that the divine ordained because the entire livelihood of the community depended on the divine mood.
The entire history of the Jews as written in the Old Testament communicates this fact in a singular manner. That when Israel obeyed all that God said, they prospered and lived in peace but when they disobeyed they suffered misery. It is summarised in Joshua 2: 10-17. But described in detail in all the subsequent chapters of the book of Judges and ultimately in the entire old testament. The Prophet Isaiah (Is 42:24-25) laments that Israel suffers because of her disobedience to the divine command.
In the context of all of this, if we are to re-define worship. We could say to worship is to do all that the divine commands. This is how the concept of ‘worship’ first appears in the book of Genesis with Abraham sacrificing his son Isaac in obedience to God even while it might go against his sentiment. We can infer this definition in the defiance of Representative Marjorie Taylor Green in which she maintains in respect to the “Epstein Files” that she does not “worship” Trump. That she is bound first to do that which she believes is commanded by God (what is right) over doing what Trump wants her to do.
While acts of worship can be driven by fear of divine rage and punishment, we can also infer that worship is ultimately driven by trust in the divine since Worship is above all done so that the good might be achieved. Worship requires trust that the divine command will bring us to realize the good we desire in a way we can’t fully explain yet. In some stories of the Bible, this divine trust is obvious and even imperative. For example in their liberation and miraculous crossing of the red sea, the Israelites are given sufficient reason to trust in the power of God. We see that when commanding Israel to Worship God alone, Moses reminds them of this reason (Ex 20: 2) and obligation of Trust in God who has rescued them with a mighty hand. We can also infer that Adam, having been given so much, has an obligation to trust God as opposed to the serpent. The ultimate worship as an act of trust is shown in the passion of Christ in the garden of Gethsemane (see Matt 26:39-42). We can in summary define Worship as “an act of obedience and trust in the divine command” or in the active sense; “to do what the divine has ordered because we trust the divine ”.
We can see then, that our current “sentiment” based definition of worship is a poor and even fallacious caricature of what worship really is. A definition that impoverishes the concept of worship.
We can in part blame the transition of the meaning of the word worship from its practical aspect to its sentimental counterpart to the success of Christianity and the sacrifice of Jesus (the ultimate Sacrificial lamb) which ended the old practice of worship mediated by sacrificial animals. But we can also see the origins of the poverty of our current definitions of worship in the current belief in science as being capable of providing all remedies and explanations, many of which were previously ascribed only to the divine. This ‘modern’ world view destroyed the once prevalent cause-effect relationship between worship and the good. That is caused people to stop perceiving that good came from worshiping God and bad from failure to worship him.
In the context of this new definition, and in the context of the New Testament, we can define Worship as doing that which Christ asked us to do. This includes; the breaking of bread (the sacrifice of the mass) (Lk 22:19, 1 Cor 11:26-32), evangelisation (Mk 16:15), and keeping the commands (Mk 5:17, Mk 10:17-22). The breaking of bread is significant because it also signifies the ultimate sacrificial worship of God by Jesus which also enables us to Worship God; by obtaining for us the grace to do that which God commands. In the context of the Church (which is the foundation of Truth 1 Tim 3:15), worshiping God means doing all the Church commands1. At the individual level worshiping means doing all that God asks of us to do as guided by the Holy Spirit. We can refer here to the advice of St Paul who reminds us to let our worship be our holy and perfect lives (Rm 12:1). We can say therefore that all actions aligned with the good performed in the vocations which God has called each of us constitutes acts of worship. The Priest and Bishop worship God in executing their office. The teacher, in teaching, the cantor in his praise of God, and the cleaner in his labor. Each in the state that God has called them and that the Holy Spirit has permitted them to understand.
When we revisit the issue of the “Pachamama” and idol worship in general. We can see that strictly speaking idol worship is impossible since idols are incapable of giving commands. When people bow down to idols or “worship” them, it is done because of the entity who has commanded that action. A judgment of worship must therefore examine that command, its intent, purpose and its end. There are many cultures where bowing down or kneeling is an act of reverence rather than Worship. In my culture for example it is not uncommon to find two women kneeling before each other while exchanging greetings for an extended period of time.
The “Pachamama” scandal was an artificial scandal which did not involve anything close to the meaning of worship. But even in the case that it had involved acts proximate to worship such as bowing or kneeling, a judgment of worship demanded a thorough analysis of the circumstances and intent of those who could have ordered such an act since only in those circumstances could a judgment of worship be made.
- The commandments of the Church; to attend mass on Sundays and Holy days of obligation, receive the sacraments; and Holy Communion and Confession at least once a year, fast and abstain on days of fasting and abstinence unless exceptions permit. ↩︎
Well, this is quite a defence. It’s a deep analysis of true worship, it’s origin and end.
And based on that it is evident that the event in discussion couldn’t have been an act of worship. Now, the puzzle for the observer is; if he wasn’t worshipping, which we agree he wasn’t, what was he doing?
I take it that you mean the ‘Pachamama’ which was supposed to represent our lady of the Amazon. In one of his responses after the ‘controversy’, Pope Francis highlighted that no culture is perfect and no culture is completely bad. Every culture needs Christianization. Wherever the Church goes she must identify all the good in the cultures of those peoples and use that as a springboard to evangelization. We can see this with St Paul in the Areopagus who is able to identify the Worship of the most high God in a pagan temple. The ‘Pachamama’ was at the event for ‘cultural’ purposes. Note, I used it in quote, since the statue was identified as our lady of the Amazon. Follow the link in the first paragraph under ‘artificial scandal’ for more information.