Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Visions of Our Lady

Options
2

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Gareth37


    'Hail full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou amongst women.'

    Salutation of St. Elizabeth to the Virgin Mary and the wonderful canticle MAGNIFICAT in which Mary foretold that "the generations would call her blessed."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    As Anglicans we fully agree that the Virgin Mary is to be loved & adored by all, we just dont see the need to 'pray to her' (or worship her)! because we pray directly to God . . . I am not belitteling this RC practice, seeing as praying to the virgin Mary is one of the cornerstones o the Roman Catholic Church, but its also one of those differences between the Churches that makes our Christian Family all the more interesting and complex - if a little puzzling (to us Anglicans).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Since no one knows what Mary (or Jesus) looked like beyond vague descriptions in the Bible (Jesus seemingly had short curly hair like black wool) it is always a bit curious when people claim to have seen Mary.

    It seems, strangely, that instead of looking like a Palestinian Jewish woman from the 1st century these visions look or are described as being very similar to Renaissance paintings where Mary is represented by a 15th century Western European lady.


  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭djeddy


    Mary appeared as a native indian woman in guadalupe mexico,

    www.sancta.org/


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    djeddy wrote: »
    Mary appeared as a native indian woman in guadalupe mexico,

    www.sancta.org/

    Why would she appear as a native American woman?

    Doesn't the fact that the person saw a woman of their that ethnicity (I realise he was Spanish) suggest that the "vision" was a mistake/made up?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,398 ✭✭✭Phototoxin


    Camelot wrote: »
    As Anglicans we fully agree that the Virgin Mary is to be loved & adored by all, we just dont see the need to 'pray to her' (or worship her)! because we pray directly to God . . . I am not belitteling this RC practice, seeing as praying to the virgin Mary is one of the cornerstones o the Roman Catholic Church, but its also one of those differences between the Churches that makes our Christian Family all the more interesting and complex - if a little puzzling (to us Anglicans).


    prayer =/= worship. Why do so many protestants confuse the two. Prayer means asking. The catholic view is that they ask mary to harrass god on their behalf.

    However I see the wisdom in the protestant view of just doing it yourself as well. And imho too many catholics and a lot of the church places way too muhc empahsis on her.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,245 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    Phototoxin wrote: »
    Prayer means asking.

    I would have to disagree with this - at lease in part.


  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭djeddy


    Wicknight wrote: »
    Why would she appear as a native American woman?

    Doesn't the fact that the person saw a woman of their that ethnicity (I realise he was Spanish) suggest that the "vision" was a mistake/made up?

    I hope not


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Wicknight wrote: »
    (Jesus seemingly had short curly hair like black wool)

    OK, I'm probably going to regret this, but I'll bite. Where do you get the idea that he had short curly hair like black wool?


  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭djeddy


    Wicknight wrote: »
    Why would she appear as a native American woman?

    Doesn't the fact that the person saw a woman of their that ethnicity (I realise he was Spanish) suggest that the "vision" was a mistake/made up?

    (The visions look genuine)

    The Mystery in Our Lady's eyes


    "Bearded man" image in the right eye.
    According to many scientists who have inspected the image, it seems that in her eyes, in both of them and in the precise location as reflected by a live human eye, could be seen many figures that have been extensively analyzed and seem to correspond to the shape and size of human figures located in front of the image.

    In 1929, Alfonso Marcue, who was the official photographer of the old Basilica of Guadalupe in Mexico City, found what seemed to him to be a clear image of a bearded man reflected in the right eye of the Virgin. Initially he did not believe what was before his eyes. How could it be? A bearded man inside of the eyes of the Virgin?. After many inspections of many of his black and white photographs he had no doubts and decided to inform the authorities of the Basilica. He was told that time to keep complete silence about the discovery, which he did.
    More than 20 years later, on May 29, 1951, Jose Carlos Salinas Chavez, examining a good photograph of the face, rediscovers the image of what clearly appears to be a bearded man reflected in the right eye of the Virgin, and locates it on the left eye too.


    "Bearded man".
    Since then, many people had the opportunity to inspect closely the eyes of the Virgin on the tilma, including more than 20 physicians, ophthalmologists.
    The first one, on March 27, 1956, was Dr. Javier Torroella Bueno, MDS, a prestigious ophthalmologist. In what is the first report on the eyes of the image issued by a physician, he certifies what seems to be the presence of the triple reflection (Samson-Purkinje effect) characteristic of all live human eyes and states that the resulting images are located exactly where they are supossed to be according to such effect, and also that the distortion of the images agree with the curvature of the cornea.
    The same year another ophthalmologist, Dr. Rafael Torrija Lavoignet, examined the eyes of the image with an ophthalmoscope in great detail. He observed the apparent human figure in the corneas of both eyes, with the location and distortion of a normal human eye and specially noted a unique appearance of the eyes: they look strangely "alive" when examined.
    Many other examinations by ophthalmologists have been done of the eyes of the image on the tilma after these first ones. With more or less details all agree with the conclusions of the ones mentioned above.



    According to Dr. Tonsmann, from left to right we can see "the Indian", "bishop Zumarraga", the "translator", "Juan Diego showing the tilma" and below "the family".
    A new and interesting kind of analysis of the eyes started in 1979, when Dr. Jose Aste Tonsmann, Ph D, graduated from Cornell University, while working in IBM scanned at very high resolutions a very good photograph, taken from the original, of the face on the tilma. After filtering and processing the digitized images of the eyes to eliminate "noise" and enhance them, he reports he made some astonishing discoveries: not only the "human bust" was clearly present in both eyes, but another human figures were seen as reflected in the eyes too.
    Dr. Aste Tonsmann published his last studies on the eyes on the tilma in the book "El Secreto de sus Ojos", with complete details and photographs of his work . Perhaps one of the most interesting aspects of the studies is his conclusion that Our Lady of Guadalupe not only left us her miraculous image as proof of her apparition but some important messages too. These messages were hidden in the eyes on the image until our times, when new technologies would allow them to be discovered, when they are most necessary.
    That would be the case with the image of a family in the center of the Virgin's eye, in times when families are under serious attack in our modern world. The image of various human figures that seem to constitute a family, including various children and a baby carried in the woman's back as used in the 16th century, appears in the center of the pupil, as shown in this great image of the right eye highlighting the family, generously provided by Dr. Tonsmann.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭wolfsbane


    kelly1 said:
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wolfsbane
    Hmm. So 1846 saw the loosing of Lucifer on the earth?
    "In the year 1864 Lucifer, together with a great number of devils, will be loosed from hell; little by little they will abolish the faith, and that even in persons consecrated to God; they will so blind them, that without a special grace, these persons will take on the spirit of these evil angels; a number of religious houses will lose the faith entirely and cause many souls to be damned.

    There is no doubt that there has been serious apostasy in the Church. The apostasy is certaily biblical and there was also something about Satan being loosed was there not?
    The issue is, Was Satan loosed in 1846? Obviously not, since the world did not go into a marked change for the worse. The releasing of Satan in Revelation marks a short period of intense violence against the Church, cumulating in Christ's utter destruction of him and all who are wicked:
    Revelation 20:7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea. 9 They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them. 10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

    In short, the prophesy given by the apparition was a false prophecy. That marks either the person who claimed to have seen it as a liar, or the apparition itself a demonic manifestation.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wolfsbane
    And it was Mary who gave the sabbath, not God?
    I gave you six days to work, I kept the seventh for myself, and no one wishes to grant it to me.

    I assumed Mary was quoting Dueteronomy. Of course God gave the sabbath.
    OK, I'll agree that is a possibility - but very unclear.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wolfsbane
    And some new revelation about the identity of Antichrist:
    "It will be at this time that the Antichrist will be born of a Hebrew nun, a false virgin who will be in communication with the ancient serpent, master of impurity; his father will be a bishop (Ev.). [We spell out the word "bishop" here. In the French text appear only the first two letters of évèque, the French word for bishop, but there is little doubt that this is the word they stand for, because in Mélanie's first draft of the message the whole word is spelled out.]

    "At birth he will vomit blasphemies, he will have teeth; in a word, this will be the devil incarnate; he will utter terrifying cries, he will work wonders, he will live only on impurities. He will have brothers who, although not incarnate devils like himself, will be children of evil; at the age of twelve, they will be noted for the valiant victories they will win; soon they will each be at the head of armies, assisted by legions from hell.


    I don't know about this. Does it contradict Scripture?
    It goes beyond the Scripture. It also seems a tad ridiculous, the work of a superstitious mind: At birth he will vomit blasphemies, he will have teeth; live only on impurities.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wolfsbane
    You really believe this is of God, Noel?

    I'm keeping an open mind.
    Good. You will then feel free to check out my claim that it is a false prophecy, since 1846 was not the advent of Satan.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭wolfsbane


    Gareth37 wrote: »
    But the Catholic Church accepts Our Lady and Our Lady's Rosary, something that kept faith alive in this country? :confused:
    My point would be that the faith which it kept alive was not the faith of the New Testament church.

    Nowhere there do we find the Christians praying to Mary, saying the Rosary, worshiping with altars and priests, incense, images, priestly robes, mitres, etc. Those are the marks of the pagan religions, which the Roman church gradually imported.

    Was God obliged to accept this worship? No, for He makes it clear that any church that turns from the way and refuses to repent will be cast off. His church will continue with those who hold to His doctrine and precepts: See His message to the churches of Asia in Revelation chapters 2 and 3:
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%202-3;&version=50;


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    wolfsbane wrote: »
    .....worshiping with altars and priests, incense, images, priestly robes, mitres, etc. Those are the marks of the pagan religions, which the Roman church gradually imported.
    You should try reading Revelations again!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    OK, I'm probably going to regret this, but I'll bite. Where do you get the idea that he had short curly hair like black wool?

    it was mentioned on this forum by a Christian poster a while back about the nonsense of the western paintings, but I can't remember the Biblical references used to back it up.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    djeddy wrote: »
    (The visions look genuine)

    I'm not following ... what "image" are they referring to that has a reflection in the eyes?


  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭djeddy


    Wicknight wrote: »
    I'm not following ... what "image" are they referring to that has a reflection in the eyes?


    They are talking about the image of an indian woman and child,also other people,

    The picture of them is on the website

    www.sancta.org/intro.html - 8k


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    djeddy wrote: »
    They are talking about the image of an indian woman and child,also other people,

    The picture of them is on the website

    www.sancta.org/intro.html - 8k

    Seems more a case of "Man in the Moon", or the faces on Mars, than anything else.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_in_the_Moon

    face-on-mars.jpg

    I can see a gun to the right and side of the "bearded man" and to the right the face of a lizard.

    Also the painting is of a European lady, when the claim was that she appeared as a native American.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭wolfsbane


    kelly1 said:
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wolfsbane
    .....worshiping with altars and priests, incense, images, priestly robes, mitres, etc. Those are the marks of the pagan religions, which the Roman church gradually imported.

    You should try reading Revelations again!

    You are confusing the symbolic language used of heaven with the actual practices of the RCC on earth. The RCC has set up a priesthood, altars, incense, etc. that were unknown in the NT church.

    They did so in rebellion against the plain teaching of the apostles that ALL Christans are priests, that the only altar we have is Jesus Christ's presence in heaven for us, and the only incense God accepts now is the prayers of the people of God.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 857 ✭✭✭Sofa_King Good


    Gareth37 wrote: »
    I think that it is about time that we recorded a list of the visions of Our Lady, the mother of Jesus, throughout the world.

    In accordance with scripture she has converted many.

    Lourdes
    Medjugorje
    Knock
    Fatima
    Cairns


    Keep adding to the list.

    Peckham


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Gareth37


    Peckham

    That was a funny episode. Im afriad the Peckham one was a crying statue, not a vision. And the Catholic Church never did ratify it so I think there is a good chance that it may have been false :D


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    wolfsbane wrote: »
    You are confusing the symbolic language used of heaven with the actual practices of the RCC on earth.

    Do you not think that's an odd thing for a Creationist to say?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭wolfsbane


    AtomicHorror said:
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wolfsbane
    You are confusing the symbolic language used of heaven with the actual practices of the RCC on earth.

    Do you not think that's an odd thing for a Creationist to say?
    No. I know of no Creationist argument based on what goes on in heaven. It's all about what has happened on earth.


  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭djeddy


    Wicknight wrote: »
    Seems more a case of "Man in the Moon", or the faces on Mars, than anything else.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_in_the_Moon

    face-on-mars.jpg

    I can see a gun to the right and side of the "bearded man" and to the right the face of a lizard.

    Also the painting is of a European lady, when the claim was that she appeared as a native American.

    The real image of mary is not a painting,

    To me she looks like a native indian woman

    In one of the pictures you have what looks like a woman with a child also some more people



    The Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe as a Pictograph




    The Image of Our Lady is actually an Aztec
    Pictograph which was read and understood
    quickly by the Aztec Indians.

    1. THE LADY STOOD IN FRONT OF
    THE SUN
    She was greater than the dreaded
    Huitzilopochtli, their sun-god of war.

    2. HER FOOT RESTED ON THE
    CRESCENT MOON
    She had clearly crushed Quetzalcoatl,
    the feathered serpent moon-
    god.

    3. THE STARS STREWN ACROSS THE
    MANTLE
    She was greater than the stars of heaven which they worshipped. She
    was a virgin and the Queen of the heavens for Virgo rests over her
    womb and the northern crown upon her head. She appeared on
    December 12, 1531 and the stars that she wore are the constellations of
    the stars that appeared in the sky that day!

    4. THE BLUE‑GREEN HUE OF HER MANTLE
    She was a Queen because she wears the color of royalty.

    5. THE BLACK CROSS ON THE BROOCH AT HER NECK
    Her God was that of the Spanish Missionaries, Jesus Christ her son who
    died on the cross for all mankind.

    6. THE BLACK BELT
    She was with child because she wore the Aztec Maternity Belt.

    7. THE FOUR PETAL FLOWER OVER THE WOMB
    She was the Mother of God because the flower was a special symbol
    of life, movement and deity-the center of the universe.

    8. HER HANDS ARE JOINED IN PRAYER
    She was not God but clearly there was one greater than Her and she
    pointed her finger to the cross on her brooch.

    9. THE DESIGN ON HER ROSE COLORED GARMENT
    She is the Queen of the Earth because she is wearing a contour map of
    Mexico telling the Indians exactly where the apparition took place.

    The Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe and Science

    1. The image to this date, cannot be explained by science.

    2. The image shows no sign of deterioration after 450 years!
    The tilma or cloak of Saint Juan Diego on which the image of Our Lady
    has been imprinted, is a coarse fabric made from the threads of the
    maguey cactus. This fiber disintegrates within 20-60 years!

    3. There is no under sketch, no sizing and no protective over-varnish on the
    image.

    4. Microscopic examination revealed that there were no brush strokes.

    5. The image seems to increase in size and change colors due to an
    unknown property of the surface and substance of which it is made.

    6. According to Kodak of Mexico, the image is smooth and feels like a
    modern day photograph. (Produced 300 years before the invention of
    photography.)

    7. The image has consistently defied exact reproduction, whether by brush
    or camera.

    8. Several images can be seen reflected in the eyes of the Virgin. It is
    believed to be the images of Juan Diego, Bishop Juan de Zumarraga,
    Juan Gonzales, the interpreter and others.

    9. The distortion and place of the images are identical to what is produced
    in the normal eye which is impossible to obtain on a flat surface.

    10. The stars on Our Lady's Mantle coincide with the constellations in the
    sky on December 12, 1531. All who have scientifically examined the
    image of Our Lady over the centuries confess that its properties are
    absolutely unique and so inexplicable in human terms that the image can
    only be supernatural!


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,107 ✭✭✭ironingbored


    Camelot wrote: »
    Whatever happened to the 'moving statues' of the virgin mary?

    They moved elsewhere....?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    djeddy wrote: »
    The real image of mary is not a painting,

    it looks like a painting to me ... ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭djeddy


    Wicknight wrote: »
    it looks like a painting to me ... ?

    According to Kodak of Mexico, the image is smooth and feels like a
    modern day photograph. (Produced 300 years before the invention of
    photography


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1




  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭djeddy




  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭djeddy


    This is a short film clip from a film made about our lady of guadalupe mexico


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZvPIz0COdk


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭djeddy


    They moved elsewhere....?


    I guessed they stoped moving:D


Advertisement