Reports of Lightning Striking a Statue of St. Peter in Argentina (Confirmed)

UPDATE from recent visitor to the Sanctuary:

from Ben Carter, (@BCJCarter)
“THREAD ON THE ST. PETER STATUE – PROOF”
“My friend Carlos Caso-Rosendi set out today to the shrine from his home on Buenes Aries, & has sent out ths note & close-up photograph.”

Carlos as reported by Ben Carter, states that Cardinal Bergoglio (Pope Francis) was never Bishop over that area, in which is located the Sanctuary and statue. That is Buenos Aires province, but not the same diocese as Buenos Aires, the city.

Carlos states that the statue was struck by lightning, which damaged the right hand and the key of the Saint Peter statue (See the photo confirmation here). Ben Carter claims the Halo was destroyed also, but other sources with photo (below) show that the Halo was removed prior to the now confirmed lightning strike.

UPDATE from the Sanctuary:

per Steven O’Reilly (@S_OReilly_USA) on X/Twitter: he emailed the Sanctuary and received a reply. The translation of the reply was this:

“The interpretation of the facts that circulate through these media is not real, which is why the Sanctuary does not endorse or agree with them.”

Another report online included this photo, which shows the St. Peter statue without the Halo, but undamaged in its right hand and key. This appears to mean that the Halo was removed prior to the alleged Dec. 17th event.

New conclusion: I must now admit that I was wrong in saying that the statue was not struck by lightning. Note that the statue is low to the ground, against a building that is much higher AND per Carlos and Ben Carter despite a lightning rod 30 or 40 feet above the statue on top of the sanctuary dome.

However, the Sanctuary stated in an email to Steven O’Reilly that they do not agree with the interpretation, and I take the same position. We cannot use a lightning strike on a statue to conclude that the Roman Pontiff has erred gravely, or has lost his authority, or any other conclusion contrary to doctrine.

Original Article follows

Report

See the photo below. There are a few reports on this claim in social media. I could find no reports from any type of news organization. The claim is that lightning struck a statue of Saint Peter on 17 Dec 2023, the day before FS was released by Pope Francis. The photo shows a statue of Saint Peter with a staff in his left hand, a key in his right hand, and a halo. The alleged post-lightning strike version of the photo shows the key gone and the right hand obliterated. The halo is also gone.

Commentary

Update: I have confirmed from a local news source “El Norte” that there was a storm warning for the area of the Sanctuary on 17 Dec 2023, including warnings of “very strong electrical activity”.

The post-lighting strike photo appears to be fake, for the following reasons:
* None of the social media ports or discussion seem to have been posted on or just after the alleged date of the lightning strike, 17 Dec 2023.
* No news websites reported this event.
* Even if lightning had struck a statue, it would not remove the halo, without any damage to the head of the statue, and it would not likely leave the hand with the unusual shape and color shown.
* The Before and After photos differ in a few ways. The Before photos has a prominent shadow; the After photo has no shadow. The background of the After photo has a different coloring to the side of the building, possibly caused by photoshopping the statue image out of the After photo; the Before photo has a shadow showing the Key in the hand. The Before photo shows a graphic appearing to have been etched into the breast of the statue, just behind the Key; the After photo shows no trace of that marking.
* I could not find any picture of any statue of Saint Peter at the alleged location, the Sanctuary of Mary of the Rosary of Saint Nicolas, other than the alleged Before and After photos. Updated: thanks to a commenter below who confirmed the statue itself is real. See also this Wikipedia image of the Sanctuary. The statue is to the right of the entrance. However, this does not prove that the lightning strike was real.

* Lighting strikes the tops of buildings, but striking a statue near ground level, set into the side of a building is highly unlikely.
* Claims by the same social media sources that the Sanctuary confirmed the event, with a quoted statement, could not be verified.
* Claims that a priest confirmed the event cite a priest from France, not Argentina.
* The claim appears to have the purpose of discrediting Pope Francis and his document FS issued the day after the date of the alleged lightning strike.
* A search of a local online newspaper, “Diario El Norte is a newspaper from the city of San Nicolas de los Arroyos, Buenos Aires, Argentina”, showed many results for the Sanctuary and none for lightning striking one of its statues.

I’ve emailed the Sanctuary, asking about this claim. No response yet.

The Interpretation of the Lighting Strike

The social media posts promoting this claim give a particular interpretation, that God caused the lightning to strike a Statue of Saint Peter in Argentina as a way to discredit Pope Francis and particularly his document issued the next day. Some interpretations go into detail, noting that the Key of Saint Peter and his Halo are gone, but the Shepherd’s staff remains. This is said to be due to Pope Francis being a shepherd without the authority or holiness of Saint Peter.

My interpretation is as follows. Natural events are not a sign from God. If there is an eclipse of the sun or moon, if there is an earthquake or tidal way or volcanic eruption, these are merely natural events that occur from time to time. Consider what Moses said about such signs:

[Numbers]
{16:28} And Moses said: “By this shall you know that the Lord has sent me to do all that you discern, and that I have not brought these things out of my own heart:
{16:29} If these men pass away by the common death of men, or if they will be visited by a scourge, of a kind by which others are often visited, then the Lord did not send me.
{16:30} But if the Lord accomplishes something new, so that the earth opens its mouth and swallows them whole, along with everything that belongs to them, and they descend alive into the underworld, then you shall know that they have blasphemed the Lord.”
{16:31} Therefore, as soon as he had ceased to speak, the earth broke open under their feet.
{16:32} And opening its mouth, it devoured them with their tabernacles and their entire substance.

The common scourge of nature, are not sent by the Lord. No such thing would be a sign from God, not even in favor of Moses. Signs are when “the Lord accomplishes something new”, for example, when there is a miracle, such as at Fatima (the miracle of the Sun), or, in another example, a miracle of the Eucharist.

Regarding Popes, we are given clear doctrines from the Lord Jesus, confirmed infallibly in the correct interpretation by the Magisterium:

{16:18} And I say to you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.
{16:19} And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall release on earth shall be released, even in heaven.”

{22:32} But I have prayed for you, so that your faith may not fail, and so that you, once converted, may confirm your brothers.”

{21:15} Then, when they had dined, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.”
{21:16} He said to him again: “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.”
{21:17} He said to him a third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was very grieved that he had asked him a third time, “Do you love me?” And so he said to him: “Lord, you know all things. You know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my sheep.

Then the interpretation is clear from later magisterial teachings, that the Church is indefectible, and that Peter and his successors have the charism of truth and never-failing faith. [See this article for sources.

Absolutely nothing should be concluded from an alleged lightning strike anywhere. When lightning reportedly struck the Vatican at the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, this was not a sign of the anger of God. Such an idea is superstitious and pagan. Lighting often strikes tall buildings.

According to Vatican I, each and every Roman Pontiff has the same authority given to Saint Peter by Christ. We do not look to signs from nature to determine if we should accept the authority of a successor of Peter, nor to determine if we, God forbid, should refuse submission to any Pope — which is the grave sin of schism and carries the penalty of automatic excommunication.

God teaches and guides His people through His Church, established by Christ, and founded on Peter and his successors. To ignore or contradict the authority, teaching, and guidance of any Pope, on the excuse of a lightning strike or other natural event, is gravely sinful. Christ did not teach any such thing.

[Matthew 16]
{16:1} And Pharisees and Sadducees approached him to test him, and they asked him to show them a sign from heaven.
{16:2} But he responded by saying to them: “When evening arrives, you say, ‘It will be calm, for the sky is red,’
{16:3} and in the morning, ‘Today there will be a storm, for the sky is red and gloomy.’ So then, you know how to judge the appearance of the sky, but you are unable to know the signs of the times?
{16:4} An evil and adulterous generation seeks a sign. And a sign shall not be given to it, except the sign of the prophet Jonah.” And leaving them behind, he went away.

The appearance of the sky is a sign of the approaching WEATHER!! It is not a sign about the Church. The signs of the times are the increasing sinfulness of society, and the sign of Jonah was the death of Christ and His resurrection on the third day. The death and resurrection of Christ is our sign. The words of Christ and His Church is our teacher and guide.

Ronald L Conte Jr

This entry was posted in commentary. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Reports of Lightning Striking a Statue of St. Peter in Argentina (Confirmed)

  1. BERTRAND JOST says:

    It seems that my comment from yesterday did not go through. You will notice that everyone is using the same picture of the “after” event. So there seems to be only one picture available which is suspicious. If you compare the before and after pic, you will notice that the cornice behind the statue is way above the head on the “before” pic but is at the level of the shoulder on the after pic. There is also an apparent brick on the wall behind the status that is not at the same location on the before and after picture. So i favor a forgery at this point. So until we have other pics showing a clear different angle, we cannot consider that this sole picture is authentic. also, yes, the statue exists at that church of Our Lady of the Rosary of San Nicolás. If you google it, you will see the picture of the church. The statue is on the right hand side of the entrance. You can easily zoom the pic and see it.

    • Whitney says:

      It’s the same statue it’s just taking it a different angle and the first one with the Halo intact is taken at eye level and the second one is taken from below. In your house, look at a bookshelf at eye level. And then kneel down and look up at the same shelf you’ll see the same shift.

  2. Jessica says:

    In pic one, the hand is below the shoulder. In pic two, the hand is above the shoulder. Also, the staff is of different lengths in each pic.

  3. blah says:

    Agree it looks dubious for the following reasons:
    1. Lightning would have shattered the thing to bits.
    2. No signs of high-energy contact (no burns, smoke, etc).
    3. Looks like an inspired act of vandalism.

    But your reasoning:
    1. Your strongest one (weather) you refute yourself.
    2. About natural signs not being from God — absolute balderdash.
    3. Lightning not likely to strike a lower, non-extreme point of a structure — agree.

    Someone local needs to go have a look. Especially at the back of the head, where the halo would be mounted, to see if it was cut off or knocked off by a vandal.

  4. andrewhollandweb says:

    “The post-lighting strike photo appears to be fake, for the following reasons:”

    APPEARS? The Spanish speaking sources I saw said it was confirmed, but one source said the priest confirmed and another that a bishop confirmed.

    Many waited on this for days. I saw a lnother report that 13 people in Buenos Aires died from lightning strikes on the 16th so it was an extremely powerful deadly storm.

  5. Gruntledlark says:

    Author: your 4th bullet point is absolute nonsense. Two pictures of the same subject taken at different times of the day, probably at different seasons of the year, with different cameras using different lenses from similar but different angles accounts for every one of your silly “anomalies”.

  6. Jorge Bizarro says:

    Dear webmaster… I was struck by this sentence in this article “My interpretation is as follows. Natural events are not a sign from God. If there is an eclipse of the sun or moon, if there is an earthquake or tidal way or volcanic eruption, these are merely natural events that occur from time to time.” It seems to be contradicted by Luke 21, 25 and this one is appallingly straight forward on ‘sign’ matters: Revelation 12, 1 “And a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed in the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head.”

    • Ron Conte says:

      Merely natural events are not signs from God. The great sign in Revelation is a supernatural, i.e. miraculous sign, an image of a woman clothed with the sun, etc., which represents Mary and also the Church.

    • blah says:

      True this. The claim made by the author of the site is an opinion, and a very easily refuted one at that.

  7. Jovi says:

    The news was reported by the Telegram channel “The Pope’s Pearls” : it seemed to be fake, given that no news could be found on the web, but the event has just been confirmed by the Reverend Father Justo Lofeudo, a priest who is certainly a Bergoglian.

    https://popehead.substack.com/p/andrea-cionci-buenos-aires-lightning

    • Ron Conte says:

      That priest is not from Argentina, but from France. And he does not seem to be associated with the Sanctuary where the lightning strike was said to have occurred.

  8. G S says:

    Facebook in Columbia reported it 6 days ago as authentic.

    https://x.com/t_anka_linija_/status/1740527313916203151?s=46

    • Ron Conte says:

      That is not an official website; it is not associated with the Santuario Maria del Rosario de San Nicolás in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

    • G S says:

      Sure, but did you translate the text? It’s a secular news outlet, 1 week ago, attributing the photo to the same priest that Pope Head did.

      I have no doubt now the priest is real. Combined with the photo of the exterior of the building showing the statue is there, I think the only question is why a French priest is in Argentina. Maybe he has family members?

      As for the claims of Photoshopping… different angles, different times of day, different cameras at a minimum. If the background perfectly aligned, that would be proof of photoshopping.

  9. G S says:

    An image of the alleged church’s exterior was found. The statue is quite real.

    https://x.com/t_anka_linija_/status/1740542676649529411?s=46

  10. gjsman says:

    A photo of the exterior of the building was found. The statue is quite real.

    https://x.com/t_anka_linija_/status/1740542676649529411?s=46

Comments are closed.