Roma Locuta Est

March 20, 2026 (Steven O’Reilly) – Given the all the smoke generated by the revelation of a picture showing Fr. Robert Prevost (now Pope Leo XIV) apparently kneeling before a pachamama statue (See LIFESITENEWS), I thought I would jot down a few words on the matter.  Assuming the picture actually depicts what is claimed for it — and I don’t necessarily dispute it; what conclusion should we draw?

Per LifeSite’s reporting on Fr. Murr’s research, this all occurred at a theological symposium in an Augustinian “ecotheology” program. The caption to the picture, as translated by the LifeSiteNews article, reads as follows:

“Celebration of the Rite of Pachamama (Mother Earth), which is an agricultural rite offered by the cultures of the South-Andean region in Peru and Bolivia.”

Unlike the lame attempts of the Francis-apologists during the pontificate of Pope Francis to explain away the pachamama scandal as Marian devotion of some kind, there does not appear to be any way to contort oneself to claim this is some sort of Catholic devotion present in this case. Again, this is assuming all that is claimed for the picture is true.  Accepting all of this arguendo, this does appear to be a case, objectively speaking, a matter of idolatry.

Fr. John Hardon in his Catholic Dictionary, page 264, writes in part on Idolatry (emphasis added):

…”Literally “the worship of idols,” it is giving divine honors to a creature…Idolatry is always gravely sinful. Even under threat of death or without interiorly believing in the idol, a Christian may not give divine honors to a creature, thereby violating the duty of professing faith in God.”

Only God knows Fr. Prevost’s subjective intent, but I am confident he didn’t accept pachamama as a real deity. What seems more likely to me, is this was some long-ago version of a woke, DEI-like, ecological seminar session, where participants are goaded into stupid actions by a ‘struggle-session’ leader, and participants complying from a mindless, lemming-like, follow-the-group dynamic. That is not said to excuse it.

Yes, it was 30 years ago–but I’d be cautious about making that a defense of Fr. Prevost.  First, it is not like he was a young undergrad college student at a wild, frat-house kegger that got out of control one Saturday night. He was, after all, a very highly educated, Augustinian priest, high up in the order, who ought to have known better. He had been a priest at this point for almost 20 years!  One would hope and expect any priest, or any layman for that matter–but especially a priest, would have had the common sense, the religious sense, and the Catholic sense to stay seated, walk out, or better yet–stand up and protest: “Hey, c’mon folks, what the actual heck are you doing here–knock it off!”

In addition, the “it was 30 years ago” defense may be a dangerous one to rely on for another reason. Frankly, given Father-and-later Bishop Prevost worked in Latin America over many years, it wouldn’t surprise me if there might be similar pictures from other symposia, or similar gatherings–or at leaset possibly the firsthand recollections of other participants at them.  Who knows?  More may follow.  I don’t know that…but, I wouldn’t bet against it.

This pachamama story is bad, and disappointing. It just feeds into a larger narrative of a grave problem in the Church. For the last several or more decades many Catholics have often wondered at times where is the common sense, religious sense, and Catholic sense in so many of our priests, and bishops, and at times, even our popes?  The Church’s pastors in all too many instances seem to have obscured, and even lost, the sense that Christ is the Way, the Truth, the Life (cf John 14:6); and that the Catholic Church is the one, true Church founded by Christ.

The pachamama story here, and particularly the pachamama scandal under Pope Francis, are scandalous. So, I don’t think it should be minimized.

The Neo-Sedevacantist “So-What”?

But, still at the same time…we must understand the extremes to where some folks want to take this story.  For them, what is their practical “so what” and takeaway?  What is the practical meaning some folks seem to be taking from the story?

LifeSiteNews, as is its knee-jerk reaction to everything under the sun, is launching another petition.  In this instance, LifeSite issued a new petition calling on Pope Leo XIV to condemn pachamama worship (see Petition here).  Frankly, I now roll my eyes every time LifeSite issues a new petition. The website effectively leans Benepapist and neo-sedevacantist, along with other schismatic tendencies, in my opinion. So, I won’t support LifeSite’s attempt to build a mailing list for more fundraising.

However, separately, it wouldn’t be a bad idea for Pope Leo XIV to address this pachamama thing, or any other rituals for local ‘deities’ that are done under the cover of  ‘respect for the native culture or the ecological landscape’–and put an end to it.

But, for the neosedevacantists, the “so what” seems to be that this incident will be used as just another indication that Leo XIV is not a true pope, and that he is an antipope.  John-Henry Westen at Lifesitenews is engaging in breathless reporting of this matter.  His site has already become something of a Benepapist, neo-sedevacantist friendly site–so expect that continue.

Then there are the pearl clutching, shrill-lady types who on their podcasts have already declared Leo XIV is an antipope before this latest revelation. For others, if Leo XIV was not already an antipope for them, this new story will make him ineligible to be a pope, in their minds. In sum, it is unfortunate that this new story will only feed the “Sede Inc.” beast, so to speak.  Just another tank of gas for another 100 miles of click-bait content and donations. Unfortunately, this will only serve to harden their hearts and minds in their current error, as well as draw others to their side.

Roma Locuta Est has several articles that make the case against the neo-sedevacantist claims:

1. The Narci-Schism of Dr. Mazza and the neo-sedevacantists
2. John-Henry Westen is wrong on the possibility either Francis or Leo are anti-popes
3. Dr. Mazza: A Semivacantist?

The neo-sedevacantists (Barnhardt, Mazza, etc.) and adjacents (e.g., Westen, etc.) will certainly try to make much of this latest Prevost story, and have already done so.

But what is the reality?  Does anything in this story make Leo XIV an antipope?  The answer is “no.”  The Catholic Church has had many men with questionable lives before and after they had become true popes. Some historical perspective is required.

But let’s take a clear example from the Old Testament that might serve as an analogy for us.  When Moses had gone up to Mt. Sinai to converse with the Lord and had not returned for some time, the Israelites asked Aaron to fashion a golden calf for the Israelites to worship, and to which they could offer up sacrifices. As found in Exodus 32:

And the people seeing that Moses delayed to come down from the mount, gathering together against Aaron, said: Arise, make us gods, that may go before us: for as to this Moses, the man that brought us out of the land of Egypt, we know not what has befallen him. And Aaron said to them: Take the golden earrings from the ears of your wives, and your sons and daughters, and bring them to me. And the people did what he had commanded, bringing the earrings to Aaron. And when he had received them, he fashioned them by founders’ work, and made of them a molten calf. And they said: These are thy gods, O Israel, that have brought thee out of the land of Egypt. And when Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it, and made proclamation by a crier’s voice, saying: To morrow is the solemnity of the Lord. And rising in the morning, they offered holocausts, and peace victims, and the people sat down to eat, and drink, and they rose up to play.

Exodus 32:1-6

Aaron made the golden calf, an idol, as requested. Yet, despite this sin of idolatry, Aaron was not disqualified from being consecrated High Priest (cf Exodus. 40, Leviticus 8). While a high priest is not the pope, the positions are analogous.  Aaron’s fault was far, far worse than what Fr. Prevost’s is alleged to have been, yet God had Moses consecrate Aaron High Priest. Therefore, while the neo-sedevacantists will try to make hay of this new pachamama story, there is nothing in it that would make Leo XIV an antipope.

Remember that when you hear the neo-sedevacantist’s breathless, pearl clutching, shrill commentary. Remain calm, take a deep breath, and “Don’t Panic.”

Conclusion

To repeat, this new pachamama story is disappointing. It just feeds into a larger narrative of a grave problem in the Church. For the last several or more decades many Catholics have often wondered at times where is the common sense, religious sense, and Catholic sense in so many of our priests, bishops, cardinals, and at times, even our popes?  The Church’s pastors in all too many instances seem to have obscured, and even lost, the sense that Christ is the Way, the Truth, the Life (cf John 14:6); and that the Catholic Church is the one, true Church founded by Christ. Let us pray God will grant us the priests, bishops, and popes who can restore that clarity, purpose, and mission.

Steven O’Reilly is a graduate of the University of Dallas and the Georgia Institute of Technology. A former intelligence officer, he and his wife, Margaret, live near Atlanta. He has written apologetic articles, and is author of Book I of the Pia Fidelis trilogy, The Two Kingdoms; and of Valid? The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. He writes for Roma Locuta Est He can be contacted at StevenOReilly@AOL.com. Follow on Twitter: @S_OReilly_USA.