Roman Catholics have their stubbornness that aside from saying that those former Catholics who converted to the born again Christian faith (or what they perceive is the born again Christian faith) were just "misinformed" (They can try and tell that to priests and nuns who have left the system), they also insist that the Black Nazarene is justifiable because of the Ark of the Covenant. There is a huge difference between them considering the Ark of the Covenant vs. the Black Nazarene. This is committing the logical fallacy of categorical mistake.
Let us first take a look at the Ark of the Covenant in context to see if it fits in the justification of the Black Nazarene to be used for the parade. Joshua 3 talks about the Ark of the Covenant which we read the order of the procession. We read in verses 3-4 that the Levites were to bear it plus there is a space between the people and the Ark of the Covenant of 2,000 cubits or 914.4 meters. This is a huge contrast to all the chaos that happens because of the devotees during the Black Nazarene procession or just any idolatrous procession. I am afraid that every year, more and more people are dying without Christ during the entire riot. If they accuse me of hating Roman Catholics it is because of how the world defines love today. The truth is born again Christians love Roman Catholics enough to tell them the truth that they are lost and that they need to be saved.
Roman Catholics may also argue, "God told Moses to make images of cherubim, you are taking the Bible out of context." while they are the ones taking the Bible out of context. Note that after the images of the cherubim were made, Numbers 4:5-6 commands Moses to cover the Ark of the Covenant with it and they were to be hidden in the Holy of Holies. In further context, verse 15 also warns that the Ark of the Covenant was not meant to be touched at all. How the Jews treated the images were far different. The images of the cherubim were hidden unlike the idols of every religion that uses graven images in worship. You see pagan temples having the images of their gods and goddesses openly displayed and you have Roman Catholic parishes with their images of the people they pray to whether it would be Mary, any of the apostles, historical saints they claim to be their own, another Jesus or their canonizes saints widely displayed to be seen or the idols are even touched believing they have healing power. So much for saying that it is just mere representation and that they are not worshiping the image but the one being worshiped.
They may also use the incident in Joshua 7:6-7 to justify the Black Nazarene or any act of idolatry any further. In the claim of any idolater, they always say that they are not praying to the image but the one portrayed by the image which does not meet the category. The huge difference was that Joshua was not praying to the images or the ark but to God. The ark was not even meant to be an image to represent God. The Ark was to be later hidden from the public in contrast to Roman Catholic icons used for worship. People were affectionately touching the Black Nazarene, the were hoping to get some healing from it which is one good reason why I am so against it. Some Roman Catholics may have unintentionally revealed the powerlessness of their idol when they say that if the Black Nazarene is just a piece of wood, why go against it? Yes it is just a piece of wood but the deception is why I am against it. People are made to trust in a god that cannot walk, it has to be carried because it cannot walk (Jeremiah 10:3-5).
I am still amazed to how some Catholic apologists can say, "Well I do agree it is idolatry to worship the image in the place of the true God." As long as the folly of saying that they are not worshiping the image but the one portrayed by the image persists, it is like giving more liquor to the alcoholic beverages hoping that person would recover. Remember the incident of the Golden Calf? The people thought it was going to be a feast to the LORD but instead it became one huge ugly mess. It is also amazing how Roman Catholic apologetic sites and ministries may acknowledge the existence of Exodus 20:4-5 but you do not see those verses in the Roman Catholic version of the ten commandments. While I agree with some Catholic apologists that worshiping an image in God's place is idolatry but they are contradicting themselves with their actions.