Vatican Removes Jesus, Keffiyeh Scarf, and Manger From Nativity Scene
It is common to remove Jesus from the nativity until midnight on Christmas Eve, but removing the manger isn’t common. Hopefully the scarf doesn’t come back.
The Vatican removed Jesus, the keffiyeh scarf, and the manger from a Nativity scene.
BEFORE I CONTINUE: A few reports say the Vatican removed the entire scene. Most outlets also report that they only removed Jesus, the scarf, and the manger.
It is tradition to present the entire scene to the pope. Then, they remove baby Jesus until December 24th.
I do not know if it is common for the Vatican only to remove Jesus or remove Jesus and the manger. I know my church has an empty manger.
Why am I saying all this? Because details matter, especially since the Vatican won’t say anything.
OK, so, when the Nativity scene came out, Jews and Catholics lashed out, especially since the scarf has long been a symbol of Palestinian revolts and hatred toward Israel.
The Catholic News Agency spoke with Johny Andonia, the man who led the project:
Speaking to CNA by phone from Cyprus, where he has an art residency until May, Andonia said he did not expect the scale of the reaction to the keffiyeh, which he also signed off on, after it was approved by people at the Vatican during the Nativity’s installation on Dec. 5.
“It came about in a spontaneous way, actually, because we learned that the child baby Jesus has to be covered or even absent until the 24th of December, and [the on-the-ground coordinator] suggested to cover it with a keffiyeh,” the artist said on Dec. 13.
“And they said no, no, not to cover him. And then he asked, can I put it then under [the child Jesus] and the people … in charge at that time accepted laying the keffiyeh under the baby Jesus, and this is how it came about.”
The Vatican approved of the scarf. I highly doubt the people there didn’t know of the scarf’s significance. Of course, Andonia played it down:
Andonia said he does not agree with commentary from some quarters that the keffiyeh indicates violence or the eradication of others. “It’s only about recognition,” he said. “This keffiyeh represents the people who had presented the Nativity scene.”
Well, in my initial post about the Nativity scene, I provided a history of the keffiyeh scarf. Yeah, it’s always been a symbol of revolts. Yasser Arafat popularized it in the 1960s.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“So if you troublemakers are going to complain, we just won’t let you have any Jesus at all.”
Currently: The mountain of BS pilled up since Francis became pope.
Me: So glad to be protestant.
I wonder what would have happened if Pope John Paull II had been pope at the time of Martin Luther.
There probably wouldn’t have been a Reformation at that time. It was the awfulness of Pope Leo and the many offices below him that stirred it up.
Bending a knee to Muslims is a huge mistake.
“This keffiyeh represents the people who had presented the Nativity scene.”
WTF? Can someone take a stab (pun intended) at what he means by this? Whatever the potential meaning, it’s either nonsense or a lie.
According to the left, Mary, Joseph, the Three Kings, Shepherds, Angel, donkeys and sheep were all Palestinian refugees.
There was no Palestine at that time, the Romans really F ed up naming the area and driving Jews from their homeland.
It just occurred to me that Israel should treat Pales the same way Romans treated Jews. That might be poetic justice.
Reminds me of this:
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOVP.NJoALy3DOP6gjQ1Caw0J9wHgFo%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=9b257516aa5e792ba947dc52a7ac851fd6e954f1ac9b870f69a2700ff82fd4f4&ipo=videos
Which is particularly appropriate today, given the comparative nature of the superbly advanced Israeli civilization vs. the backward nature of the Hamasniks.
Link is bad; try this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc7HmhrgTuQ&themeRefresh=1
That Is forbidden by Jewish law.
Or Sages of the past stated that we must be an example to the other nations.
Jewish terrorism Has been forbidden and Israel prosecutes those who commit terrorism against Palestinians.
Israel’s restraint in conducting the Gaza war has been remarkable.
No, it isn’t forbidden by Jewish law. But it is forbidden by Israeli law, which is the law that actually governs the country and is enforced by its aggressively secular courts.
You mean massacre them wholesale and then sell the survivors into slavery? You can’t do that nowadays.
I assumed this was a reference to the design artists (“on the ground coordinator”) whose allegiance remains curiously unexplored by this article.
Instead of removing Jesus, they would do better to just remove the pope.
Sometimes G-d gets to choose the pope and other times the cardinals prevent that.
At times in history, there were two or more simultaneous rival popes, so the truth of your claim is undeniable.
There was one brief period where there were 4.
I hope the Lord feels the need to discuss this matter with this Pope, in person, and soon.
I am not Catholic, but I respect the Church the position of The Pope and recognize its power. I have been rather disappointed in this particular occupant of the position. He has not done a good job.
You are much more kind than I am. I’m reminded of the Star Trek TNG episode “Conspiracy”
“ Following a meeting with a fellow captain, the strange behavior of high-ranking officers leads Jean-Luc Picard (Patrick Stewart) and the crew of the Enterprise to uncover a conspiracy of senior Starfleet officers possessed by parasitic aliens who are preparing to invade the United Federation of Planets.”
I can’t say nefarious forces have taken over the Vatican, but . . .
Muslims have taken over Africa the same way Muhammad did, lots of murder.
He has definitely been the signature pope for the Age of Biden.
So it’s basically just a barn with people now?
Quite the fall from John Paul II and Benedict to where we are now.
Well, it’s no longer a nativity scene without Jesus. But if you put a miniature pope in it, you could still say, “Hi there, Joseph Aloisius Ratzinger. Happy Holidays.”
Well, the nativity isn’t until Christmas Eve/Day, so you’re right.
But, it is a “nativity scene” in the broad sense because it’s a movement through time – where Mary and Joseph travel to Bethlehem, then the Christ Child is born, then the Wise Men/Kings come to visit on Epiphany.
Not sure whether you are confused about the current occupant, or just wishing for Benedict XVI to still occupy the Papal throne.
A barn with the right people called by God.
Sister Mary Magdalene raps Francis across the knuckles with her ruler.
“You’ve been a b-a-a-d boy!”
The Vatican removed Jesus a long time ago
Your hatred and bigotry of Catholics is not strong enough. You need to try harder.
No, they didn’t but they have increasingly become fixated on other things. The new breed exemplified by the Jesuit Pope wants to modernize The Church to appeal to more people which is causing a schism taking the form of an increasing number of Catholics attending traditional Latin Mass.
I hope when it’s back the keffiyeh is used as a diaper.
Cartoon of Joe Biden, keffiyeh diaper, pieces as wet wipes and Biden counting his money.
No mention of that scarf pattern in the bible? Why create confusion?
Is the pope Catholic? Probably not any more.
I suspect Pope Francis has been a closet Episcopalian for a while. Perhaps he’s finally coming out of the closet. It would explain a lot.
No, he is a social justice Jesuit and that was known at the time. The clutch of behind the scenes rulers at The Vatican installed him. There is great turmoil in The Vatican as to the direction of Catholicism and a large number of the faithful are not pleased.
If there was no revolt among the Catholics worldwide at this attempt to insert social justice and legitimize terrorists with no tie to the Holy Land then you can bet that the terrorist scarf would remain.
because we learned that the child baby Jesus has to be covered or even absent until the 24th of December
How to tell me you’re not even Roman Catholic without saying you’re not Roman Catholic. Why would you need to hire an artist to coordinate the display. It’s a friggin’ “Manger Scene” and you could get one from any street vendor in Rome (or Jerusalem, or half a million other places) that would be accurate.
(No, a lot of those would not have the baby Jesus separable from the manger just because then you have to carve two things, and there’s one more thing to lose every year when you box things up. In which case, the scene is missing the manger AND the infant Son until Christmas Eve.)
And thank you, Mary, for pointing out the bit about not having the baby Jesus present until Christmas.
And for all those Americans who don’t get this at all, CHRISTMAS is not now until 25 December. ADVENT is now until Christmas Day, then comes the 12 days of Christmas (until Epiphany on 6 January).
I may have misjudged in thinking it was the pope behind the scene, which is why I didn’t argue with Milhouse about it.
However the Pope has been very consistent on the following
1. Desire for the developed Western World to lose the armament and technological superiority it currently has (He openly wishes to see the Western Arms Industry eliminated)
2. Anti-Capitalism
3. He has been very consistently hostile to Jews and Israel being both pro-Hamas and pro-Pius XII being made a saint
4. General supporter of incitement against white people. Any of you remember his desire to await results instead of jump to conclusion in the now proven hoax of genocide by the Church in Canada (now proven wrong) instead apologizing and siding with the bigots who made an anti-Catholic Pogrom in the name of Justin Castro?
I could go on with many many other things but the pope is not owed an apology when his underlings correctly interpret what he wants and he is forced to change course by backlash over trying to write the Jews out of Catholicism despite the bible being the story of the Jewish People……..
Nope no apology needed.
You have bought the Communist/mainstream media (repetition) claims about Eugenio Pacelli. You owe an apology for buying into that bravo sierra.
To p[ace the pope in context if Mussolini had caught Badoglio plotting to trick the Fascist Grand Council into eliminating enough of his power for Badoglio to take over Badoglio would have faced a firing squad or been hanged or worst been tortured to death.
Badoglio is not considered a hero in modern Italy he is considered the paragon of mediocrity.
To call someone cowardly at best is harsh but in context
Pope could have done so much more if he had followed Badoglio out of Rome and to the safety of allied lines and started preaching against Hitler (something Pius XI actually intended to do and had written a speech to read out and scheduled when he would do so).
This is discussing a bare minimum of risk that would have caused a lot of gain.
Then there are the points when the pope could have very easily tipped world opinion with very high risk (in contrast to the no risk taken following Badoglio in relocating would have done) for example if he had followed up the heroism of Catholics in the Polish Home Army by publishing and denouncing the genocide the Polish Government in Exile brought to his attention and provided proof of.
There is a lot more to critique but even for Orthodox Christians who do not require miracles to be sainted to be a saint does not mean not a nazi, or not genocidal, or there are reasons why you did as you did it means you are an example to future generations and whatever flaws you have pale in comparison to the ways the example you set should be followed.
Think about how much harder it would have been for the Nazis to gain collaborators if Pius XII had declared it to be a sin? Or how many lives could have been saved it the Arrow Cross in Hungary had failed to rally support both against Horthy and for Hitler (Hungary was not an easy campaign)? It isn’t just the civilians how many Russian soldiers died invading Hungary? Would Horthy have been able to rally support for stopping the trains to Aushwitz faster with early overt papal support directed at the public instead of the pope just addressing Horthy after multiple others including neutral Sweden had done so?
Don Juan of Austria said no paradise for cowards.
I am not that harsh but certainly no sainthood for cowards. There are reasons why the discussion antagonizes Jews (and frankly many orthodox Christians who didn’t see much action on their behalf from the pope when they needed it most).
John Paul II is the ultimate contrast in the way he actively fought communism with every tool in his arsenal.
Again this isn’t about was he a Nazi, it is should he be a saint?
The current pope is without doubt wrong in thinking he should be. Cowardice isn’t a mortal sin, but it is disqualifying for sainthood.
Pius wasn’t concerned for his own safety; he was concerned about the safety of all Catholics under Nazi control, and it was his duty to be concerned about that. His first duty was to his own people, and openly denouncing Hitler could easily have resulted in their persecution.
How would Hitler have been more hostile to Catholics from conquered countries kill the ghosts? In Poland he did exactly as he said he would and set about the extermination of middle and upper class Poles in order to try to create a race of slaves (he killed somewhere between 1 out of 5 to 1 out of 4 Poles).
Hitler never judged Catholic populations by the actions of the Pope he only ever judged them by race (so 100% good for Bavarians 100% negative for Poles).
Again sainthood isn’t about “is the person evil” it is about “is this the example in that situation of what we would want as an ideal”.
Whatever the case for and against and if it is fair to judge him when you or I may have done the same there is no case he was the ideal. Pius XI had already figured out there was no reasoning with Hitler and was preparing to issue a full and total denunciation which he had actually written and scheduled a date for before his death.
In addition plenty of Catholic priests gave their lives in defiance of Hitler all over Europe.
I do not think he was Hitler’s Pope I think he was afraid when it mattered most and when Catholics most needed to hear the truth from their pontiff, which disqualifies him from being a saint even without the no miracles issue.
@Danny then all Catholics seen as loyal to the Pope would have been enemies of the state. And the Pope’s critics would complain about something else. There were no good options.
Hitler did see people with loyalty to the vatical as disloyal historically and did order a full scale Nazi takeover of all Catholic institutions and did crack down on and eliminate the autonomy of all Catholic organizations in both Bavaria and Austria right down to birdwatchers. Pius XI saw extreme leaders all across Europe yet it was Hitler he had written a full and total denouncement of and scheduled his session for reading it. There are very good reasons for that.
The common German view of Italian occupation troops in Greeks is they had a laziness and motivation epidemic and had more love for their Greek girlfriends than motivation to hunt partisans that allowed partisan forces to thrive.
In contrast Italian soldiers in Greece viewed Germans as barbarians who created partisans with their savage brutality and with their unjustifiable food requisitions leaving Greeks hungry.
The Pope of course is not responsible for the Greek Orthodox Church but listing concerns Italians had about Germans could have easily demoralized a few Bavarian or Austrian troops into changing sides? Greeks resistance gladly took defectors.
To support someone as a saint is to declare the example is one all future generations should admire and emulate and attempt to go farther than.
Now it would seem absurd to compare the pope to a teenage girl but…..
Oriana Falaci saw 5 Italian divisions convert themselves into partisans and go into the mountains leaving Italy completely helpless in the face of a German invasion.
The world would not have expected a teenage girl to do anything besides praying for her nation to be liberated.
Oriana Fallaci instead joined the Italian resistance and did her extremely minor but honorable part risking her life to help liberate her nation.
Europe was full of heroes. While I will not go as far as claiming Pius XII was a villain and as I made it clear in the original post in no way do I feel “Hitler’s Pope” is a fair statement being a saint is an incomparably bigger deal than just being a hero or heroine like Oriana Fallaci.
Trying to refute Hitler’s Pope by making him a saint just debases sainthood. A better way to refute it would be by pointing out the power of Germany, the impression of German invulnerability Pius XII had, Pius XII not realizing that what the Germans sent into Italy was everything Germany could spare so thinking there could be major responses against Italian civilians like what happened in the Balkans and Eastern Europe…..he was wrong and his speaking out would have made a difference but showing what was going through his mind and why he was wrong does eliminate the idea of Hitler’s Pope.
It also eliminates it without debasing sainthood.
I probably would have made the same mistakes….I do not expect to become a saint.