Scientist confirms inexplicable nature of Our Lady of Guadalupe image

Schultz

Taxiarches
Joined
Oct 17, 2002
Messages
6,690
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
45
Location
BaltiCORE, MD
Website
www.theidlegossip.com
No problem, ozgeorge!  My wife is fascinated with all things Mexican and especially things relating to OLoG. 

You are also absolutely right in how we must be careful in using cultural icons (no pun intended) to spread the Good News. 
 

lubeltri

Protokentarchos
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
3,794
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
40
Location
Archdiocese of Boston
It would be hard to overstate it! And not just for Mexicans. The Holy See named her Patroness of the Americas, which means that the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe has the rank of solemnity throughout North and South America.

The Knights of Columbus have a great devotion to OLG, and our Supreme Knight, Card Anderson, has led the way in promoting devotion to her.
 

Remie

High Elder
Joined
Oct 31, 2002
Messages
508
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Mexico
Hi, some comments are quite uncharitable and show a very poor knowledge of history.

Before the European landing in Mexico, there was no nation, there's no such a thing as an Indian or Aztec nation.

In the north of the country cannibalism and absolute barbarism prevailed, as well as nomadism. In the center it was a little bit better, we had city-states. Life was very primitive, in spite of the advanced astronomy and science, suffice it to say that the wheel hadn't been invented here.

The Indians were not a nation, they were a collection of nomads, tribes whose lifestyles were very cruel: children were sacrificed to demons, people were tortured to death to satisfy the needs of those false gods.

The fact that the Spanish came here was a blessing. They were cruel too, granted, but at least they preached a religion of love, the preached the word of God. The Indians had to be civilized, they weren't prepared for self rule, they were savages. The Spanish actually saved the lives of many and brought a Christian way of life (thigs were unfair here, poverty, lack of social equality, cruel punishments, inquisition: but it was like that everywhere in the world at that time).

The Hispanic founders of our country even gave us their blood for the foundation of a new nation and a new people. On the other side, for the average Anglo-Protestant conqueror in North America, materialism and economic development was their main intention, religion was a white issue and the vast majority of Indians were simply terminated.

The liberal and Communist historians, all imposed by the masonic lodges brought by Poinsett in the 1800's to destroy our Christian empire, created their own history and founded the ideology called "indigenism" which only divides the nation and insults all what is Christian.

I don't mean that the Spanish religious practices are holy, after all they do have the errors of Romanism, but we can't generalize. If there's false religious pity and unholy syncretism it isn't because of the Spanish. It's because the masonic and communist regimes expelled the Roman clergy, religion was no longer preached and "religious needs" could not be met, idolatry and paganism reappeared because faith was week and ignorance prevailed.

Our Lady of Guadalupe is revered by the Orthodox in Mexico, but we don't get involved in the issue of the apparitions. For both Orthodox and Catholics it's not obligatory to believe them. However, I do not trust who deny the apparitions, most of them are communist subjects (such as Guillermo Schulemburg, the former abbot of the RC Bassilica who was a puppet of the Mexican PRI government and an agent of the East German State).

I don't see any serious reason to say that "the image comes from the devil". This is absurd, some authors have analysed the meanings of each symbol in the image and I haven't seen any which could be seen as contradicting Orthodox doctrine.

This is a national symbol. It's a national symbol because it reconciled our Christian and Hispanic identity with our indigenous past and all what was positive in it. Only a Mexican can really understand this, so I am not against those who believe it's wrong to revere this icon. Is it our fault that Orthodoxy did not come first to our country?
 

LBK

Toumarches
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
0
Points
0
It goes to show just how powerful the image of OLoG is to Hispanic culture.  If this particular church is in an area where Hispanic gangs are the norm, it is very probable that the respect the gang members have for this image would lead them to not vandalize or otherwise bother the church or its members.
While I can now understand why the image of OLG was placed at an Orthodox church, I am relieved by the fact that the image has now been replaced with an Orthodox alternative.

In the city where I live, there is a truly beautiful Russian church built in traditional Novgorodian (11th-14thC) style. Green roof, blue cupola with gold stars, green belltower roof, gold crosses on the cupola, belltower, and the small gold onion dome over the apse above the altar. The walls, some 40 feet high, are painted white, as is the fence. An architectural and ecclesiastical gem. Yet, in the more than forty years since this church was built, and particularly in more recent years, according to the former warden of this church who is a very close friend of mine, and whose parents and grandparents helped build the church, there has been no instance of desecration or graffiti in all that time. Not one. Huge areas of lovely white walls for spraycan artists to do their stuff, yet it's been left well alone. I'm told it's because of the diligence of this church's patron saint and of the Mother of God. Sounds good enough to me!
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2003
Messages
321
Reaction score
0
Points
0
lubeltri said:
It would be hard to overstate it! And not just for Mexicans. The Holy See named her Patroness of the Americas, which means that the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe has the rank of solemnity throughout North and South America.

The Knights of Columbus have a great devotion to OLG, and our Supreme Knight, Card Anderson, has led the way in promoting devotion to her.
Actually, it has the rank of feast in the Americas.  Read here: http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/innews/699.shtml

Mexico and Guatemala celebrate it as a solemnity.
 

ozgeorge

Hoplitarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 2, 2004
Messages
16,379
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
54
Location
Australia
Website
www.greekorthodox.org.au
Mexican said:
This is a national symbol. It's a national symbol because it reconciled our Christian and Hispanic identity with our indigenous past and all what was positive in it. Only a Mexican can really understand this, so I am not against those who believe it's wrong to revere this icon. Is it our fault that Orthodoxy did not come first to our country?
Thank you for your post Mexican, and I realize I have only extracted a small portion of it here.
Given that the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is such an important image to Mexican cultural identity, I wonder how you feel about what I said in reply #159. As a Mexican, would you have felt insulted or patronized if Orthodox Missionaries had used the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Icons as a way of evangelizing Mexico? I think it is different if the Icon version comes from Mexican Orthodox Christians themselves rather than being used as a "brand name" by non-Mexican missionaries. Am I way off with this?
 

Papist

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
13,771
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
39
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
ozgeorge said:
Mexican said:
This is a national symbol. It's a national symbol because it reconciled our Christian and Hispanic identity with our indigenous past and all what was positive in it. Only a Mexican can really understand this, so I am not against those who believe it's wrong to revere this icon. Is it our fault that Orthodoxy did not come first to our country?
Thank you for your post Mexican, and I realize I have only extracted a small portion of it here.
Given that the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is such an important image to Mexican cultural identity, I wonder how you feel about what I said in reply #159. As a Mexican, would you have felt insulted or patronized if Orthodox Missionaries had used the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Icons as a way of evangelizing Mexico? I think it is different if the Icon version comes from Mexican Orthodox Christians themselves rather than being used as a "brand name" by non-Mexican missionaries. Am I way off with this?
As a hispanic Christain from New Mexico, the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is of extreme importance. I think its great that we choose to use this image to venerate our Lady. However, if some non-Catholic Group came into my area of the country and started to use the image as a way to convert Catholics to their religion, I would be furious. You see this kind of behavior in south america where protestant Churches will have statues of Mary (even though they don't venerate her) in order to give their churches a more Catholic feel so that it is easier to steel sheep from the Catholic Church.
 

ozgeorge

Hoplitarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 2, 2004
Messages
16,379
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
54
Location
Australia
Website
www.greekorthodox.org.au
Papist said:
ozgeorge said:
Mexican said:
This is a national symbol. It's a national symbol because it reconciled our Christian and Hispanic identity with our indigenous past and all what was positive in it. Only a Mexican can really understand this, so I am not against those who believe it's wrong to revere this icon. Is it our fault that Orthodoxy did not come first to our country?
Thank you for your post Mexican, and I realize I have only extracted a small portion of it here.
Given that the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is such an important image to Mexican cultural identity, I wonder how you feel about what I said in reply #159. As a Mexican, would you have felt insulted or patronized if Orthodox Missionaries had used the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Icons as a way of evangelizing Mexico? I think it is different if the Icon version comes from Mexican Orthodox Christians themselves rather than being used as a "brand name" by non-Mexican missionaries. Am I way off with this?
As a hispanic Christain from New Mexico, the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is of extreme importance. I think its great that we choose to use this image to venerate our Lady. However, if some non-Catholic Group came into my area of the country and started to use the image as a way to convert Catholics to their religion, I would be furious. You see this kind of behavior in south america where protestant Churches will have statues of Mary (even though they don't venerate her) in order to give their churches a more Catholic feel so that it is easier to steel sheep from the Catholic Church.
Is your objection to the Orthodox making Icons of  OL of Guadalupe because it is a Symbol of Roman Catholicism?
 

Papist

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
13,771
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
39
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
ozgeorge said:
Papist said:
ozgeorge said:
Mexican said:
This is a national symbol. It's a national symbol because it reconciled our Christian and Hispanic identity with our indigenous past and all what was positive in it. Only a Mexican can really understand this, so I am not against those who believe it's wrong to revere this icon. Is it our fault that Orthodoxy did not come first to our country?
Thank you for your post Mexican, and I realize I have only extracted a small portion of it here.
Given that the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is such an important image to Mexican cultural identity, I wonder how you feel about what I said in reply #159. As a Mexican, would you have felt insulted or patronized if Orthodox Missionaries had used the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Icons as a way of evangelizing Mexico? I think it is different if the Icon version comes from Mexican Orthodox Christians themselves rather than being used as a "brand name" by non-Mexican missionaries. Am I way off with this?
As a hispanic Christain from New Mexico, the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is of extreme importance. I think its great that we choose to use this image to venerate our Lady. However, if some non-Catholic Group came into my area of the country and started to use the image as a way to convert Catholics to their religion, I would be furious. You see this kind of behavior in south america where protestant Churches will have statues of Mary (even though they don't venerate her) in order to give their churches a more Catholic feel so that it is easier to steel sheep from the Catholic Church.
Is your objection to the Orthodox making Icons of  OL of Guadalupe because it is a Symbol of Roman Catholicism?
It depends on how it would be used I suppose. If it were used to try and take Catholics out of the Church then it would bother me. However, The Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church share so much in common when it comes to the veneration of Our Lady that in a sense I would be pleased to see EOs honoring Our Lady of Guadalupe. Its kind of a complicated situation.
 

JoeS2

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
1,675
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
80
Location
Abington, PA USA
Andrew21091 said:
I don't see any problem with having the painting in the Monastery of St. Anthony in Mexico. I don't think it has to be removed. I don't see the Russian Church running to remove all the heretical paintings from Christ the Savior Cathedral or any other church for that matter which have absolutely no Orthodox origin same with some paintings I've seen in Serbia also. And their are a ton of churches that have Davinci's Last Supper in it; where is that in Orthodox tradition? Our Lady of Guadalupe is a symbol for the Mexican people and if they want to keep it then fine if it brings them closer to God.
Excellent post Andrew.  Yes, the Icon of OLofG is in the main Orthodox Cathedral in Mexico City and I believe in other Orthodox churches in Mexico as well.  If this brings one closer to God how can this be wrong???
 

Zenovia

High Elder
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
777
Reaction score
0
Points
0
John Larocque said:
If you read the link I posted earlier, the stories on the supernatural origins of the painting appeared many years after the introduction of the image. Looked at it from that point of view, it's a pious image that took on an "apparitional" meaning after the fact. The same can be said for the origins of the Dominican rosary. A pious custom that became blessed, I think decades, after the fact, with a story ascribed to St. Dominic. The online 1913 Catholic encyclopedia actually has very good (non-supernatural) descriptions of a great many Catholic customs, largely from Jesuit Herbert Thurston. Much of this phenomenon is an expression of "popular catholicism" that later (theologically modified) was made acceptable practice for believers. The brown scapular is another pious devotion - the church had to invent an entire theology that said it was not, in fact, a "ticket to heaven" notwithstanding the legendary promise associated with it. The St. Benedict is another popular sacramental with legendary promises associated with it.

Having an Italian on the seat of Peter helped give an official imprimatur to a lot of Marian devotions which were popular in places like Italy, Spain or Poland.

Anyway, to get back to the main topic, I personally do not believe there is anything supernatural in character to the Guadalupe image. There's nothing wrong with it, but I don't believe there's a Juan Diego, any more than I subscribe to the legends associated with the origins of the rosary. The problem is that if you have sympathetic people in the higher ups of the church, it tends to push the skeptics to the side, which is why (for me) Juan Diego's canonization is problematic, because it canonizes the entire legend associated with the image.
So you believe then that all the Native Americans in Central and South America gave up their pagan faiths and their human sacrifices for the faith  of the hated Spaniards, without it being a movement of the Holy Spirit?  Interesting!  ::)
 

Wilma

Jr. Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
43
Website
corazonortodoxo.blogspot.com
Saint Paul used a pagan temple to preach the Lord's word. Why can't the Holy Theotokos use elements of the indians' believes to preach her Son's word? I'm not saying the Virgin of the Guadalupe is or not real, as I don't think I can discern that. I'm saying that if a pagan group was moved to believe in the Holy Trinity, the devil couldn't have something to do with it....or at least his plan went very wrong. :angel:
 

theistgal

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Sunny Southern Cal
Wakin' up a lot of old threads here, Wilma!

Not that there's anything wrong with that.  8)

Just funny how these old threads I poured over two, three, four+ years ago are suddenly popping back up!
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
306
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
67
Location
Some where south of the Mason Dixon Line
Schultz said:
stashko said:
I don't buy it ,,the Ascticism that the blessed saints practice isn't to appease an angry God Or Goddess but to disipline themselfs in taking control over their body that there spirit may rule it...

the mexicans and tourists that go there will punish them selfs silly ,by doing all kinds of sever torcher thinking there Pagan Goddess will grant there prayers and grant whatever their seeking by this abuse........
And you, of course, have the clairvoyance of an elder to know what is in the heart of "the mexicans and tourists that go there"?  What proof do you have that they do these things out of a desire to "appeace an angry God Or Goddess" and not out of some sort of a desire to bring their bodies in line with the spirit, ala St. Paul?

Until you can present some proof of your accusations, you, my friend, are just bearing false witness...or maybe just baring your omnipresent anti-Catholic sentiments once again?
Thank you sir !  Well put.

Viking
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
306
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
67
Location
Some where south of the Mason Dixon Line
stashko said:
PeterTheAleut said:
stashko said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Athanasios said:
stashko said:
I just can't believe that the Blessed Theotokos would appear  as a Indian Pagan Goddess or resembles one just to convert the Indians to Christianity..
She didn't come as a pagan goddess, she appeared as an young Indian woman. She did lead the Indian population away from their snake gods and human sacrifice.

stashko said:
The people torture them selfs by walking on there knees to that shrine some times for miles ..
And Eastern Orthodoxy has never been known for any sort of above average asceticism.
Careful.  Sounds like clairvoyance.  Dabbling in stuff like this sounds troublesome to me.  Nutty actually.

Viking
Like living life at the top of a pole (our pole sitters, a.k.a. stylites) or kneeling on a rock for 1000 consecutive nights, even through the debilitating pain of injuries suffered during a vicious robbery that left him almost dead (St. Seraphim of Sarov).  Yes, stashko, I think our own Tradition has examples of the extreme asceticism you just ridiculed. ;)

I don't buy it ,,the Ascticism that the blessed saints practice isn't to appease an angry God Or Goddess but to disipline themselfs in taking control over their body that there spirit may rule it...

the mexicans and tourists that go there will punish them selfs silly ,by doing all kinds of sever torcher thinking there Pagan Goddess will grant there prayers and grant whatever their seeking by this abuse........
How do you know their motivations?  Have you been blessed with the gift of telepathy?

  No! ...


Second Sight though,,, this is what i call it, I can tell things  like who will die also other things that my car was going to be hit i knew in what area and what part of the car was going to be damaged be fore it all happened... ...
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
306
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
67
Location
Some where south of the Mason Dixon Line
converted viking said:
stashko said:
PeterTheAleut said:
stashko said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Athanasios said:
stashko said:
I just can't believe that the Blessed Theotokos would appear  as a Indian Pagan Goddess or resembles one just to convert the Indians to Christianity..
She didn't come as a pagan goddess, she appeared as an young Indian woman. She did lead the Indian population away from their snake gods and human sacrifice.

stashko said:
The people torture them selfs by walking on there knees to that shrine some times for miles ..
And Eastern Orthodoxy has never been known for any sort of above average asceticism.
Careful.  Sounds like clairvoyance.  Dabbling in stuff like this sounds troublesome to me.  Nutty actually.

Viking
Like living life at the top of a pole (our pole sitters, a.k.a. stylites) or kneeling on a rock for 1000 consecutive nights, even through the debilitating pain of injuries suffered during a vicious robbery that left him almost dead (St. Seraphim of Sarov).  Yes, stashko, I think our own Tradition has examples of the extreme asceticism you just ridiculed. ;)

I don't buy it ,,the Ascticism that the blessed saints practice isn't to appease an angry God Or Goddess but to disipline themselfs in taking control over their body that there spirit may rule it...

the mexicans and tourists that go there will punish them selfs silly ,by doing all kinds of sever torcher thinking there Pagan Goddess will grant there prayers and grant whatever their seeking by this abuse........
How do you know their motivations?  Have you been blessed with the gift of telepathy?

  No! ...


Second Sight though,,, this is what i call it, I can tell things  like who will die also other things that my car was going to be hit i knew in what area and what part of the car was going to be damaged be fore it all happened... ...

Meant to put this here.  Careful.  Sounds like clairvoyance.  Dabbling in stuff like this sounds troublesome to me.  Nutty actually.

Viking
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2003
Messages
321
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ag_vn said:
What is the position of the Orthodox Church on the veneration of this image?

Is the Guadalupe image venerated as an Icon by Orthodox believers in Mexico?
Although it is depicted in the Antiochian monastery of St. Anthony the Great in Mexico, I'm not sure that it is actually venerated as an icon by the Orthodox there.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8135007@N03/2249351542/sizes/m/in/set-72157603790788629/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8135007@N03/2261240877/sizes/m/in/set-72157603790788629/
In addition to the above mentioned links, here are photos of other Orthodox parishes in Mexico which have an image of Our Lady of Guadalupe:

Cathedral of the Ascension of Our Lord (OCA) :  https://www.flickr.com/photos/eltb/3093991475/sizes/z/  and  https://www.flickr.com/photos/eltb/3094869886/sizes/l

Saint George Antiochian Orthodox Cathedral: https://www.flickr.com/photos/eltb/3945582032/sizes/z/

Saints Peter and Paul Antiochian Orthodox Cathedral: http://photos.wikimapia.org/p/00/03/45/47/68_big.jpg

Protection of the Mother of God Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchal parish): http://web.archive.org/web/20091027033458/http://mx.geocities.com/iglesiaortmex/imagenes/reales/018.jpg
 

LBK

Toumarches
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Every Orthodox church, sadly, has images within it which are uncanonical. Your post simply proves that mistakes in what is hung or painted in Orthodox churches continue to be made. It bears repeating that the mere presence of such images in churches does not automatically mean they are suitable for veneration.
 

Irish45

Sr. Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2010
Messages
158
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I've been under the impression that Christianity has always allowed cultures to retain traditions that are no against the Gospel.  Was not Athanasius of Alexandria one of the first to truly use Hellenistic philosophy and rhetoric in his writings to DEFEND the faith?  Just because something isn't born out of the Church doesn't mean it diminishes the Church.  In fact, it often can enhance it.  Obviously as a Catholic I think the imagine is born out of the Church, but I understand why Orthodox Christians would be guarded against such an imagine being used for worship and prayer.  The real question that needs to be asked is "Does this image detract or enhance the Gospel?"  If I were looking at this form an Orthodox perspective I think it has more potential to enhance the Gospel as long it is the image alone and not the apparition.  In other words, the cultural aspect of the image would be useful but not the spiritual aspect of the image. 

Having said that, I am a Catholic and I cherish and adore both the Image and the message. 
 

LBK

Toumarches
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Irish45 said:
I've been under the impression that Christianity has always allowed cultures to retain traditions that are no against the Gospel.  Was not Athanasius of Alexandria one of the first to truly use Hellenistic philosophy and rhetoric in his writings to DEFEND the faith?  Just because something isn't born out of the Church doesn't mean it diminishes the Church.  In fact, it often can enhance it.  Obviously as a Catholic I think the imagine is born out of the Church, but I understand why Orthodox Christians would be guarded against such an imagine being used for worship and prayer.  The real question that needs to be asked is "Does this image detract or enhance the Gospel?"  If I were looking at this form an Orthodox perspective I think it has more potential to enhance the Gospel as long it is the image alone and not the apparition.  In other words, the cultural aspect of the image would be useful but not the spiritual aspect of the image.  

Having said that, I am a Catholic and I cherish and adore both the Image and the message.  
True iconography is, at its core and essence, about the spiritual. Cultural considerations must always be secondary.
 

Irish45

Sr. Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2010
Messages
158
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I suppose this is where my ignorance comes into play because I do not view this as an Icon.  I can see Orthodox Christians having more issues with the image if it is regarded as an Icon. 

LBK said:
Irish45 said:
I've been under the impression that Christianity has always allowed cultures to retain traditions that are no against the Gospel.  Was not Athanasius of Alexandria one of the first to truly use Hellenistic philosophy and rhetoric in his writings to DEFEND the faith?  Just because something isn't born out of the Church doesn't mean it diminishes the Church.  In fact, it often can enhance it.  Obviously as a Catholic I think the imagine is born out of the Church, but I understand why Orthodox Christians would be guarded against such an imagine being used for worship and prayer.  The real question that needs to be asked is "Does this image detract or enhance the Gospel?"  If I were looking at this form an Orthodox perspective I think it has more potential to enhance the Gospel as long it is the image alone and not the apparition.  In other words, the cultural aspect of the image would be useful but not the spiritual aspect of the image.  

Having said that, I am a Catholic and I cherish and adore both the Image and the message.  
True iconography is, at its core and essence, about the spiritual. Cultural considerations must always be secondary.
 
Top