So how does the National Catholic Reporter celebrate the feast of St. Juan Diego? Why of course by linking to articles denying that he ever existed.
Yes a nice way to start a day. Commit heresy. The First Vatican Council defined the limited circumstances when a Pope is exercises his charism of infallibility. Canonization of saints by the Pope uses the very language used to define something that all the faithful must believe. The pope states “we declare and define that Blessed N., is a saint” (example) which triggers the Church’s gift of infallibility. So to deny that Juan Diego is a saint is also to deny the First Vatican Council on papal infallibility. An ex cathedra statement requires an assent of faith. Anyone who denies thus teachings, or who obstinately doubts these teachings are in heresy and thereby automatically excommunicated as per Canon law.
Spirit of Vatican II types seem to forget Lumen Gentium discussion of the four levels of Church teaching. Yeah I know reading the actual documents is a bit much.
Up to the time that St. Juan Diego was canonized certainly there could be historical arguments about the actual existence of this man. So for the NCReporter’s to continue to imply that he did not exist is heresy – or at least one more added to the heap for them.
Anne Rice in her last book in the Vampire Chronicles involved St. Juan Diego in the plot. At one point the Vampire Lestat reads an article about him since he has a subscription to the National Catholic Reporter (figures). So questions of his existence are part of the novel and it is obvious that Anne Rice was swayed by this dissident rag. Lestat ponders the intersection of papal infallibility and a non-existent saint and imagines Juan Diego popping into Heaven upon the Pope’s proclamation. Well at least the Vampire Lestat seems to have a higher regard for papal infallibility than the National Catholic Reporter.
Maybe NCR is just anti-Indian?
Oh, but prior to her (Mrs. Rice’s) reversion, I think. She was an atheist, after all. Anyway, what else would a vampire read? This doesn’t say much (that’s positive) for the NCR…
If one wants to doubt St. Diego, then it would seem to follow that one would have no respect for Our Lady of Guadalupe, and on and on. Not a path I’d want to follow.
Well, I knew the NCR folks doubt the existence of Jesus, so this comes as no surprise.
If it makes you feel better, I go to a public university, and the textbooks all talk of Juan Diego as a real person, though they question whether the apparition was real or not. I mean, we have his freaking death certificate and all.
Religious skeptics never cease to amaze. Even their secular counterparts are willing to admit the obvious.
I have no idea if Juan was a real person or not and no reason to believe he was not. I did not know that Saints were required to be real. Given the number of them and the remoteness of their origins, it raises interesting questions.
Do you think the Pope somehow is miraculously able to divine the truth of Juan’s existence during the canonization process or does his canonization of Juan actually create an alternative reality that might not have previously existed? Neat. I hope it’s not just another “the Emperor has no clothes” situation where everybody is required to pretend and you’re chastising NCR for not being appropriately hypocritical.
Poole’s article is a lot of bilge (and gossip). Sounds like somebody with a grudge, upset because his contentions are being ignored. And he’s wrong.
He states that there isn’t any evidence that Juan Diego existed for a hundred years or more after the event. In fact there is a manuscript of the primitive accounts of the apparition to Juan Diego, the Nican Mopohua, written in the native language, that can be reliably dated back to ca. 1556, that is, twenty-five years after the apparitions. It was found, of all places, at the New York Public Library (just a few miles from where I live). I don’t know if Poole knew of this or the manuscript hadn’t been found yet when he wrote, but yes, there is good evidence Juan Diego existed.
One of the NCR articles called canonization a “quasi-infallible” act. Isn’t that like being a little bit pregnant?
In a contest between in NCR and the Catholic faithful of Mexico, I’m going to go with the Mexicans.
The NCR folks must have been in a quandry about this. On one hand, it was an opportunity to disclaim a proclamation of the hierarchy. On they other, they critiqued belief in Our Lady of Guadaloupe, Queen of Mexico, beloved by the oppressed people of Mexico. The same people with whom the NCR claims comradeship and for whom the NCR fights for justice.
I wouldn’t want to be a part of that editorial board meeting.
I wouldn’t want to be a part of that editorial board meeting…
No conflict there at all. The “peasants” of the Third World are not their true object of concern, just something they can use to advance the socialist agenda.
My devotion to Our Lady of Guadalupe and to St. Juan Diego are unshakable. I will be at the Basilica in Mexico City later this month. I’ll be sure to say a prayer for those who have doubts about St. Juan Diego.