From it’s opening to its close and beyond, LifeSiteNews has insisted that the female statue used for the Amazon Synod was  ‘pagan’; an ‘idol’; even ‘satanic’; the ‘goddess’ of an uncivilized, savage people.

They have also hinted at being complicit in the criminal theft and attempted destruction of the statues.

Pope Francis had described the image as a pregnant woman with her Son in her womb“.  And even after a quite different interpretation of the image has been brought into focus by Pope Francis and the synod participants, the folks over at Life Site, rather than acknowledge their error in rushing to rash judgment, have dug in their heels and employed deceit and dishonesty to continue their false narrative.

From Oct 4 and all throughout the synod the image displayed by Life Site has been the “pregnant woman with her Son in her womb”. (Pope Francis)


And even as Pope Francis is closing the synod with a prayer  invoking the Virgin Mary who he said had become “Queen of Amazonia”, not by “conquering” but  by “enculturating herself”,  Life Site is still displaying the image of the “pregnant woman with her Son in her womb”


Life Site continues to rail against the image as ‘pagan’ and justifying the criminal theft of the statues while displaying the actual statues used for the synod that have a Papal blessing attached to them, that show a “pregnant woman with her Son in her womb.”


It was only after Pope Francis, in his Angelus address of the following Sunday, entrusted to Our Lady, Queen of the Amazon, her ‘poorest’ children and the whole world…


… that Life Site changed it’s display from the “pregnant woman with her Son in her womb” to that of a barren figure, empty and void of life, in order to continue it’s narrative of denouncing the synod and defaming Pope Francis.


The good news is, Life Site is losing ‘popularity’, but more importantly, it is losing support. The blindness of its followers is caused by the darkness they employ; a blindness that is healed in the Light of the “pregnant woman with her Son in her womb”.






  1. I don’t understand why we are making a big deal out of this statue. I may or may not be a pagan symbol. Was it “worshiped” by the people who gave it to the pope? Heaven forbid we Catholics have to deal with “worshiping idols” again! Personally, if this image is not a pagan idol but it is supposed to be their version of the Blessed Mother, then I don’t find it flattering at all towards Mary. Isn’t the more important issue the fact that discussions are being held to allow for female deacons and married priests? Also, allowing deacons to preside over the Liturgy of the Eucharist? This all seems to be a silly diversion. While the masses are focused on a statue that was thrown into the Tiber, the presses may be at work behind the scenes publishing the new “norms” of the Church (Deaconess? Father and his Mrs.? Father and his gay lover?) Brace yourselves, people! One more thing — there is no apostrophe in its in your final paragraph. Please fix it.


    1. That the focus of the synod suddenly became a single item used in the opening ceremony by those determined to ‘prove’ it a pagan idol is sad indeed. The indigenous Catholic people of the Amazon do not consider it so. As was exhibited so dramatically by the Life Site News treatment of it between the opening and the closing of the synod, the difference between the pagan representation and the Catholic representation is the God-Child in the Womb. It is God that is being worshipped.

      The conclusion of the synod has been finalized and given to the Holy Father for his review. In it was the recommendation that the tribal elders who are already Ordained Deacons and serving the Catholic Amazonians in the remote areas of the rainforest, be admitted to the Priesthood so as to offer the Sacraments to the people they serve who presently are only able to confess and attend Mass once a year when a missionary Priest travels to their villages. Any ‘new Norms’, done in private or public, before implementation must be approved and promulgated by the Vicar of Christ who holds Jesus’ promise of the Holy Spirit that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church of which he is the visible head. I would recommend not holding your breath waiting for an end to celibacy (wasn’t even mentioned) or female Ordained ministry which also was never considered in the discussions, which have been recommended to be continued, on the role of women, including what the definition of ‘women Deacon’ would include and not include.

      Thank you for the grammatical correction. Article has been edited.

      Liked by 1 person

    1. The issue is not over what the statue is called but who the statue represents. LifeSite insists the statue is an idol and the ceremony that took place in the Vatican Gardens was a pagan ritual when Pope Francis has stated that there was no idolatry with the statue called “Ave Maria, Our Lady of the Amazon” by the indigenous woman who presented it to him for his papal blessing.

      But there is a bigger issue at stake: the person, Office, and authority of the Vicar of Christ and those who oppose him. There are those who judge the Vicar of Christ with their own biases, and challenge his authority accordingly, and there are those who seek to understand his words and method of teaching in light of his person, culture, education, and experience.

      Belonging to the latter, I have written two articles (with 2 more planned for a series of 4) for WPI that attempt to place the ‘Catholic Pachamama’ in its proper context. I hope you read them along with the other fine articles on the topic written by other contributors to WPI.


      “A quick internet search reveals multiple Latin American ‘pachamama’ in varying shapes, sizes, colors, ethnicities, and descriptions. There is no ‘one size fits all’, but every spirituality, be it pagan or New Age, has their own version, yet none resemble the Pachamama displayed at the Pan-Amazon synod in Rome last month.
      Those are different from the ones displayed in the actual provenance of the statue: an item found in tourist shops in Manaus, Brazil.

      Yet even this popular souvenir is different from the ones criminal thieves stole from the Church of Santa Maria in Traspontina.
      The difference is telling:”




  2. Toni V.
    Very good article but the one WPI published is a more excellent one.
    You had mentioned Blessed Dun Scotus in your Pachamama article in WPI and I believe it is the key why the “naked statue” can be honored as Our Lady, Queen of Amazonia as Pope Francis rightly affirmed the Woman Tribal Leader after discerning their hearts & ceremonial worship at the Vatican Gardens.
    Why Blessed Dun Scotus? Because the Mystery of Incarnation is not a Plan B.
    Even if Adam & Eve did not fall, Jesus as King of Kings will still come, but ofcourse the Wisdom of God knew beforehand that no creature can ascend to Heaven without God showing them the way. And the Way to Heaven to God’s Kingdom which is a Priestly Kingdom is written in Genesis1:1. The Hebrew word “Bereshit” is the last vision given to Sis. Lucia, if you are familiar with that image, it is the Hebrew Tetragrammaton of Genesis1:1.
    The Hebrew word “Bereshit” means “The Son of the Almighty God offered His life freely on the Cross and the graces flows thru the sea.” (Mary is the sea or Miryam, the Mediatrix of All Graces)
    The Last Vision of Sis. Lucia, depicted the image of Jesus on the Cross with Our Lady on the side and the word “Mercy & Graces” on the right side. Because the “Way of the Cross” is the only way for a man to enter God’s Kingdom, there’s no other way.
    Back to Pachamama, if Eve did not fall into serpent touch, Blessed Scotus said the generation will continue, the Logos will still come and will be incarnated to a Woman. The Pachamama in naked form is the exact representation of the Theotokos if the Fall did not happen, as God will not clothe Adam & Eve with any garments.
    In one of your exchanges with WPI, @Sofia is suggesting to ask the view of the true artist if he really attributed the art depiction to Our Lady. This will be good, but the fact that Woman Tribal Leader already culturally embraced the naked image as representation of Theotokos, then who are we to judge and criticize their “faith expression”. As scriptures clearly revealed, “God looks in the heart not in appearance”. When the Amazonian worship Jesus in the womb and venerate Our Lady in Her nakedness, it may not be acceptable to modern man but definitely to God it is pleasing as God had no malice.
    We have inherited a fallen nature and we are living in a world dominated by malice, and very few can look at a naked person with the dignity God had given to them, as St.JP2 said “the problem with pornography is that, it only shows a little”. I hope you click in Christopher West video on “naked shamelessness”.
    God bless…looking forward to your article incorporating the teachings of Blessed Scotus and St.Kolbe to Pachamama.
    My Jesus mercy. S&IhMMP4us.Amen


    1. Thanks for the great reply. It is because of our fallen nature that some cannot conceive of a naked pregnant female image being holy, sacred, and presented for worship – not for who she is but for Whom she carries in her womb. Yet this is the predestined image, in the pre-Creation mind of God, of the Woman of Gen 3:15.


  3. I think your recent article with WPI contradicted your first article wherein the “naked statue” was attributed to the Theotokos and then in your recent article you atributed the naked statue to Immaculate Conception.
    I think the Theotokos and Immaculate Conception are not the same. The Immaculate Conception portrays St.Anne and Mary in her womb.

    And, the Dogma of IC had not settled the question of St.Thomas, when was the “redeeming grace” of Christ applied to Mary, the dogma only stated “preserved” at the first instant of conception. By using the word “preserved” and not “sanctified” it only means, the sanctification happen before the “first instant of conception”…So, when was the sancitfication occurs?


    1. At Lourdes, when Bernadette asked the ‘lovely lady’ what her name was, per instructions of the parish priest, Our Lady did not say she was ‘Theotokos”, she said her name was ‘Immaculate Conception’. Saint Maximillian Kolbe spent a lifetime delving into this mystery and may have discovered the deeper meaning of the Blessed Mother’s role in salvation history than what had previously been thought. Our Lady has many titles that describe her mission in life (bringing all her children to her Son, Jesus) but the question of the ‘essence of her being’ has yet to be declared by the Church. Maximilian Kolbe extending the Franciscan theology on Mary may have found the key.


      1. Thanks Toni for the reply,
        St.Kolbe did find the answer when he teaches the word “quasi-incarnation”. The mystery why Mary said “I AM” the Immaculate Conception which Fr.Gaitley also stated by saying the word “I AM” , Mary somehow was attributing herself to a Divine Character a complete contrast to Her humility. This title is an exaltation of Mary’s glorified state in Heaven.
        I love to relate Mary and Wisdom in Proverbs8:22 & Sirach24:12, because it is the answer to this mystery.
        When Mary said “I am the Immaculate Conception”, She is not speaking in an earthly realm….Mama Mary is speaking the “heavenly state of Her being”, not for St.Bernadette to understand but for the Church to understand that when Mama Mary was assumed into Heaven, God crowned Her with glories and divinity as Sovereign Queen. When Mary appeared to St.Bernadette, the one speaking is no longer the earthly Mary but the Sovereign Queen whose state of being was perfectly, completely and mystically united to the Holy Spirit the Spirit of Created Wisdom in Proverbs8:22.
        Hope I deliver to you the message, that it is no longer Mama Mary who speak to St..Bernadette but it is the Holy Spirit that is residing or resting in the Immaculate Heart of Mary is the one speaking, the Holy Spirit the Spirit of Created Wisdom also the Spirit of Truth is the one speaking and letting the Church know that Mary’s perfect divinization was already completed, and that’s why the Dogma of Mary’s Assumption had to follow to be proclaim after IC.

        Hope you can also answer my very important question as this is St.Thomas difficulty during his time. When was the “redeeming grace of Christ” applied to Mama Mary as Dogma of IC stated “preserved at the first instant of conception.
        1. Is the marital act between St.Joachim and St.Anne sanctified too by the blood of Christ to remove concupiscence to prevent satan malice to influence their marital act?Yes.
        2. Is the seed coming from St.Joachim also was sanctified to preserved Mary’s humanity to support St.JP2 teaching on Mary’s perennial enmity with Satan is absolute, meaning right at the very seed of St.Joachim, Satan had not touch Mary’s existence.

        The answer to this two question was given by St.John of Damascus when he said “St.Joachim has poured out a “spotless seed” and St.Anne womb was sanctified”. but the question is how? The answer can be found in the writing of the two mystics namely Blessed Emmerich and St.Bridget of Sweden.

        Thank you and God bless. S&IHMMP4us.Amen


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s