www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Mark of Shiva?

Dear Odo,

I read with interest your question and later postings, particularly these:

"What was the Eastern reaction to the Holy Father having having the mark placed on his brow? Also, was there a reaction to the bare breasted women reading the Gospels at the same mass? (I'm not trying to start a fight, just wanted to know what the Eastern Catholics thought of it.)"

"Why is it Catholics always try to smooth over something the Pope did even when it is in contrast to Traditional Catholic teaching? The sign of the cross is not a culture thing but we do that as well, it's a Christian thing, just as the mark of Shiva is a pagan thing."

Based on them I have a couple of questions.

Why is it that you think that explanations that differ from yours is trying to "smooth over something the Pope did? Could it not be that the posters simply have an explanation that differs from what you assume to be the facts in a situation?

Can you demonstrate that any part of Alex's explanation of the mark of greeting and respect is not true? It is not enough to simply change the ground of the discussion from the mark in question to what you perceive to be the (mis?) behavior of Catholoics.

Here's why I ask.

From your quote at the head of this post, it appears that you have a stand about the legitimacy of the Pope's action. Yet you say you simply want the reaction of the Eastern Catholics here.

What purpose does that request serve? Are the Eastern Catholics expected to support the opinion that you put forward? Are they less than orthodox if they see the Pope's behavior in a different light? Will they be condemned as less than traditional Catholics if the answer is different?

Frankly, I'm confused about why you asked the question.

Thanks for hearing me out.

Steve

Don't worry, Edward, I'm here.

What everyone has said here about "Aarthi" is true to the best of my knowledge. It is not something we do, because Christians in our part of the country have always been a rather significant minority, especially Syrian Christians. But it is done in parts of India where such is the tradition.

As some of you may know, the different marks on the foreheads of the devout Hindus represent different castes or even devotion to particular gods. Hence, without seeing the Holy Father's forehead, I don't think anyone can really say whether that's the "Mark of Shiva" or anything else. For all you know, it could just be a cross. Rrovide some picture of the mark on the Pope's head itself, so that we can also see it, and I'll find out if it is indeed the "Mark of Shiva".

Odo,

I looked at the website you referenced to support your claims.

Just a quick look at their arguments against Catholicism as well as their position that Catholics are not Christians should be enough to tell us that they:

1) Do not have a working understanding of what the Church has always held and taught
2) This is an anti-Catholic website
3) Everything they claim as a �fact� about Catholicism should be treated with suspicion.

Your assertions have no merit unless you can prove the following with legitimate documentation:

1) That the action (if it happened) you are complaining about is indeed what you say it is (that is, not merely cultural but a real pagan blessing and that the Gospel at a Catholic Mass was in fact proclaimed in the manner you claim).
2) That the Holy Father knew that this woman would inflict such a blessing (this is assuming you can prove it was actually pagan and not cultural) and embraced it willingly and with full knowledge of what it was.

It appears that Alex�s contribution to this thread is accurate. A quick internet search of the terms �aarti� and �catholic� yielded the following on the Catholic Information Network [cin.org] website:

Q: Someone in the schismatic group the Society of St. Pius X told me that when the pope was in India he had his forehead anointed by a Hindu "priestess of Shiva" and that there is a photo to prove it. Is this true?

A: There is a photo of the pope having his forehead anointed by an Indian woman, but she was a Catholic, not a Hindu priestess! She was giving the pope a traditional Indian form of greeting known as "Aarti," which has no more religious significance than a handshake in western culture or giving someone a wreath of flowers as a welcome in Hawaii.

A letter dated November 22, 1994 from the Pontifical Council for Social Communications explains the custom and its role in Indian society:

"Indian Catholics . . . use 'Aarti' when a child returns home after receiving First Holy Communion, and when a newly married couple are received by their respective families. Nowadays, 'Aarti' is often performed to greet the principal celebrant at an important liturgical event, as it was on the occasion shown in the photograph. On such occasions, 'Aarti' is usually offered by a Catholic married lady, and certainly not by a 'priestess of Shiva' as has been alleged."

The letter, by Archbishop John P. Foley, president of the pontifical council, went on to note: "Use of the 'Aarti' ceremonial by Indian Catholics is no more the worship of a heathen deity than is the decoration of a Christmas tree by American Christians a return to the pagan rituals of Northern Europe."

Your schismatic friend in the Society of St. Pius X should check his facts before spreading such malicious gossip about the holy father (cf. Acts 23:1-5). He was simply about to say Mass and received the traditional Indian form of greeting for the celebrant.

I politely suggest to Odo that in the future he check his facts before making false accusations. I also highly recommend that he not look to those outside the Church for a proper understanding of what the Church believes.

Admin

"He was simply about to say Mass and received the traditional Indian form of greeting for the celebrant."

Administrator et al,

This leads me to another form of greeting, one that is done when one of our hierarchs enters a temple. I am referring to the greeting with bread and salt. Where does this tradition come from? Was this formerly a non-Christian tradition picked up and adopted (baptized) later by us?

Joe Thur

Dear Cantor Joe,

Yes, indeed, the practice of greeting with bread and salt - the life that springs from the earth and its symbol of vivacity - salt.

It was done for centuries in the Indo-Eurpean cultures of antiquity as symbols of mother Earth and the Earth goddess.

As a matter of fact, if the Eastern Slavs were not Christians, most of the holidays would remain in tact together with their rituals and special foods - Kutya for example.

And did you know that kolbassa is taken from the pagan ritual of worshipping the boar-god?

The boar was feared by the pagan Slavs (who were afraid of forests to begin with.

They worshipped it, as did the Scots who displayed the boar on their original King's Royal banner before it was supplanted by the lion.

The ham kolbassa was made as an offering during the ritual of worshiop of the boar. After the offering, it was considered "divine property" and people ate it as a form of "communion."

As late as the 17th century, Orthodox Patriarchs wrote letters to the Kozaks censuring them for continuing to maintain certain pagan carryovers, such as . . . the eating of kolbassa.

The Patriarchs especially objected to the Kozaks' bringing kolbassa to Church for Pascha to be blessed - this literally drove them bananas, especially since the boar cult was often performed around the time of Pascha.

Again, the icon corner and many other of our traditions are carried over from the pre-Christian period. Met. Ilarion Ohienko wrote most of these up in his "Pre-Christian traditions of the Ukrainian People" which is, alas, in Ukrainian only.

I don't know about you, but I, for one, am glad the Orthodox Kozaks disobeyed the Patriarchs!

The "black earth" theology is also related, some say, to the Black Madonnas. I prayed before a beautiful miraculous Black Madonna "of the Pillar" at the Cathedral of Chartres last year around this time (sniff . . .).

The Mother of God is depicted as a type of fruitful black earth (Chornozem?) from which came forth the Wheat Stalk Who is Christ - an obvious Eucharistic symbol.

Alex

It's kinda funny to see some traditionalist sites (I totally respect the traditionalist catholics and their defense of the Latin tradition) critisizing and ridiculing JPII in that way, I think they are too strict and uncharitable (specially those of the SSPX).

About the opinion of the Eastern Church when the Pope received the Shiva thing, I don't know, but I do know about that time when the Pope kissed the Koran.
I used to discuss very much these things with my friend who is an hellenic Turk (Orthodox of course). She clearly disagreed with the conduct of the Pope (and the E. Patriarch too) in their actitude toward the muslims. She always told me that Islam was a false religion, that their book was a fraud, and of course it has never been an inspired book. Then, you should NOT kiss it (because it also offends the Christians). She also said that the EP had kissed the Koran too, when he met some muslim leaders in Turkey and he received a copy of it (anyway I can't prove this).
As for myself, I wouldn't pay so much atention to that. It was only a way to be thankful and kind with a present.