Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
On the 13th of December, Catholics, particularly Hispanic Catholic,s will be celebrating the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Patroness of the Americas.
The story had its beginning in1531, when Mary was supposed to have appeared to a Mexican indian, Juan Diego, and given him a tilma which contained a miraculous image of herself.
This relic on display in a Mexican cathedral, is venerated till this day.
Unfortunately some problems have developed. The image had a crown of 12 stars. But in the late 1890's this crown disappeared.
No. Sorry. The story of the Virgin of Guadalupe is one of my favorite Catholic legends and I have several pieces of art that depict her. None of them show the crown. I attended a showing, recently, of Mexican and South/Central American art depicting the Virgin of Guadalupe. All the paintings were from the 1800's. None of them showed the crown. It doesn't matter to me. I love the story of a poor man being visited by the mother of Christ.
Her feast day is a wonderful time to visit a Catholic church in a Hispanic neighborhood. The atmosphere is joyful. A special Mass is celebrated. There are usually vendors selling flowers and food and people stream in and out of the church all day to lay flowers at the statue of the Virgin and say a prayer.
No. Sorry. The story of the Virgin of Guadalupe is one of my favorite Catholic legends and I have several pieces of art that depict her. None of them show the crown. I attended a showing, recently, of Mexican and South/Central American art depicting the Virgin of Guadalupe. All the paintings were from the 1800's. None of them showed the crown. It doesn't matter to me. I love the story of a poor man being visited by the mother of Christ.
Her feast day is a wonderful time to visit a Catholic church in a Hispanic neighborhood. The atmosphere is joyful. A special Mass is celebrated. There are usually vendors selling flowers and food and people stream in and out of the church all day to lay flowers at the statue of the Virgin and say a prayer.
RESPONSE:
Actually, the earlier images are generally no longer shown on Catholic websites. However, here is a website that shows some of the earlier ones and even dates a few of the,
Note that those after 1890 lack a crown. If you like I can research some earlier writers who have attested to the presence of Mary's crown on the tilma.
Note that those after 1890 lack a crown. If you like I can research some earlier writers who have attested to the presence of Mary's crown on the tilma.
No need. Thanks but I'm not particularly interested in whether or not the Virgin of Guadalupe has a crown. My interest in her is as a cultural icon within the Mexican-American community.
As I said.....I've seen pre-1890 paintings of the Virgin of Guadalupe that do not show a crown. If you're that interested, I suggest you search art/painting/museum sites and books. Religious sources (pro or anti) usually have a bias. Your last link certainly did.
Last edited by DewDropInn; 12-06-2015 at 03:14 PM..
I've done quite a bit of reading regarding the Guadalupe image. (I assume you know that this legend originated in Spain in the 1300's, years before the Francisican missionaries brought it to the New World).
If you are interested in the documentable history, rather than the more popular Catholic account, you may want to consult the following references:
(1) Poole, Stafford. Our Lady of Guadalupe: The Origins and Sources of a Mexican National Symbol, 1531-1797 (1995)The Reverend Stafford Poole, C.M., (born March 6, 1930)[1] is a Catholic priest and a research historian. He was formerly a professor of history at, and later served as President of, the former St. John's Seminary College . Additionally, he is known for his extensive writings about the history of the Catholic Church in Mexico and the devotion to the Virgin of Guadalupe. (see Wikipedia)
(2) D. A. Brading, Mexican Phoenix: Our Lady of Guadalupe, (Cambridge University Press, 2001,)
(3) On line you can find an extensive article on the Guadalupe history titled Historiography of the Apparition of Guadalupe by Daniel J. Castellano (2009-10) Historiography of the Apparition of Guadalupe
(4) Fr. Guillermo Schulenburg, former abbot of the Basilica of Guadalupe, 1996 interview with the Catholic magazine Ixthus, when he said that Juan Diego was "a symbol, not a reality."
(5) Huei tlamahuiçoltica and translated as "The Great Event") is the title of a 36-page tract published in 1649 by BachelorLuis Laso de la Vega, A copy of the above is in the New Your City Public Library. On the web there is a short article on this writing including a picture of its cover. Notice the crown on the image.
“As early as 1556, Francisco de Bustamante, head of the Colony's Franciscans, delivered a sermon before the Viceroy and members of the Royal Audience. In that sermon, disparaging the holy origins of the picture and contradicting Archbishop Alonso de Montúfar's [office 1551-72] sermon of two days before, Bustamante stated: "The devotion that has been growing in a chapel dedicated to Our Lady, called of Guadalupe, in this city is greatly harmful for the natives, because it makes them believe that the image painted by Marcos the Indian is in any way miraculous."
1. A painting not a miraculous tilma, is being described.
2. There is no mention of the mention of Juan Diego in the trial account. (That story was invented later).
3. It is not mentioned here, by the bishop had a copy of the painting made which he sent to King Phillip II of Spain. (Does it have a crown?)
4. It wasn’t until over a 100 years from the alleged miracle that the first printed account appeared titled Imagen de la Virgen Maria, Madre de Dios de Guadalupe, published in 1648 by Miguel Sanchez a priest of Mexico City.
No need. Thanks but I'm not particularly interested in whether or not the Virgin of Guadalupe has a crown. My interest in her is as a cultural icon within the Mexican-American community.
As I said.....I've seen pre-1890 paintings of the Virgin of Guadalupe that do not show a crown. If you're that interested, I suggest you search art/painting/museum sites and books. Religious sources (pro or anti) usually have a bias. Your last link certainly did.
RESPONSE:
Please evidence how you determined that these paintings without a crown were pre-1890.
Historiography of the Apparition of Guadalupe - Daniel J. Castellano (2009-10)
Chapter II Guadalupe according to Luis Lasso de la Vega – Description of the Image
Lasso de la Vega's subsequent description of the image closely matches that of Sánchez. (1) From foot to crown, the image of the Virgin is six and a half spans tall. (2) Her face is noble and slightly dark. (3) Her hands are joined over the chest, from where the waist begins. (4) Her belt is mulberry (morado) in color. (5) Only her right foot is slightly uncovered. (6) Her gown (Sánchez: "tunic") is colored rose and vermilion (Sánchez: "carmine"); and embroidered with flowers in gold. (7) She has a golden brooch hanging from her neck, surrounded by black rays, and with a cross in the middle.
Please evidence how you determined that these paintings without a crown were pre-1890.
I didn't. They were dated by art experts.
As I said....my interest is in the Virgin of Guadalupe as a cultural icon within the Mexican-American/Chicano community. Whether or not she's wearing a disappearing crown is of little to no interest to me. Neither are anti-Catholic conspiracy theories...if that's what this is all about.
>>As I said....my interest is in the Virgin of Guadalupe as a cultural icon within the Mexican-American/Chicano community. Whether or not she's wearing a disappearing crown is of little to no interest to me. Neither are anti-Catholic conspiracy theories...if that's what this is all about.
<<
RESPONSE:
If the miraculous incurruptible tilma corrupted so badly that it had to be replaced and the artist overlooked the crown, I would judge that fact to be rather significant, wouldn't you?
No conspiracy theories. Just documentable historical facts. If you dispute such, please present your evidence.
The official documents of the Spanish government have strong evidential value.
“As early as 1556, Francisco de Bustamante, head of the Colony's Franciscans, delivered a sermon before the Viceroy and members of the Royal Audience. In that sermon, disparaging the holy origins of the picture and contradicting Archbishop Alonso de Montúfar's [office 1551-72] sermon of two days before, Bustamante stated: "The devotion that has been growing in a chapel dedicated to Our Lady, called of Guadalupe, in this city is greatly harmful for the natives, because it makes them believe that the image painted by Marcos the Indian is in any way miraculous."
“The report of this 1556 inquiry is the most extensive documentation concerning the Virgin of Guadalupe from the 16th century, and significantly, it makes no mention of Juan Diego, the miraculous apparition, or any other element from the legend. But if the miracle story did have currency at that time, it seems strange that it would have been omitted from this report.”
If I recall correctly, the report notes of Bishop Montufar are a part of the record. They can be found in The Historiography of the Apparition of Guadalupe by Daniel J. Castellano (2009-10)
Unfortunately, some Catholics' belief systems are not supported by the facts of history no matter how well documented.
Last edited by Aristotle's Child; 12-09-2015 at 09:28 AM..
Reason: quotations
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.