METHODIST CHURCH DISPLAYS VIRGIN OF GUADALUPE

The Chicago Tribune reports that when some members of Amor de Dios United Methodist Church in an area called Little Village elected to move a statue of the Virgin of Guadalupe into the sanctuary last year, "the icon spawned an exodus."

Turned off by the introduction of a Roman Catholic tradition to a Protestant congregation, most of the church's 15 founding parishioners drifted away. To them, venerating the Virgin Mary and reciting the rosary did not belong in a Methodist church.

But this is part of a trend nationwide: mainline Protestant churches and even some evangelical ones (in places like California, with a strong Mexican populace) are accepting the veneration of statues, which for decades has been misinterpreted as idolatry. Pastors of other Hispanic Methodist congregations objected too. Meanwhile, and curiously,

Roman Catholics in the neighborhood fret that the church might be selling itself as something it was not.

"Rev. Jose Landaverde allowed the statue to stay," reports the newspaper. "He says he sees no harm in embracing a tradition--the Virgin is an unofficial national symbol of Mexico--that might bring people closer to God. 'It's coming from the people, which is the real presence of the Holy Spirit,' said Landaverde, 31, a student pastor from Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary. 'You cannot bring theological debates to the people when they need spiritual assistance.'"

The Tribune reports that this month, parishioners celebrated their first novena in honor of the Virgin of Guadalupe by parading the two-foot-high statue around the neighborhood, singing songs and reciting the rosary. "About two dozen parishioners weathered the chill each night to deliver the statue to a different living room, where it was surrounded by garland, twinkling lights, roses and poinsettias. On Sunday, parishioners will commence the traditional Feast Day for the Virgin of Guadalupe and, through prayers, mariachi music, drama and dancing, pay homage. 'The Virgin understands our suffering and she accompanies us everywhere we go,' said church member Oscar Hernandez, who grew up Roman Catholic in El Salvador but now considers himself a Methodist. 'We don't want to take away the faith that this community has, but we want to nourish it.'"

The parish council discerned that something was missing--the Virgin of Guadalupe.

"Since I was little, it's always been right to have the Virgin Mary in the church," said Olivia Serrato, 40, one of the original parishioners who decided to stay after the Virgin was introduced. "It's now a great honor to bring the Virgin Mary to my Methodist church. Before I didn't feel complete."

" Why do you ask? What difference does it make to you, what I believe?"

I don't know why Council of Trent would ask the question. As to what difference it makes what you believe, well to me its interesting to hear what other people believe and if they are in error about what the Orthodox or in most cases the Romans believe it is appropriate to point that out and try to correct the misapprehension.

I'm interested in what you believe because I come at the Faith from such a different place than protestants do. I believe what the Church everywhere believed for at least 1500 years. Things have changed rather dramatically in the West since the Protestant Revolution in the 1500s. Things didn't change, or at least didn't change much, in the East. Coming out of that religious heritage, I am oftentimes bewildered by what various protestant groups profess to believe and proclaim as the original Christian Faith. In the meantime, you should know that so far as the Orthodox are concerned, you are quite free to believe whatever you want and we won't call you names for that.

Well, it appears to be more than curiosity.

I sense a liberal dose of judgment that is intermixed.

Protestants should not be proclaiming that their religion is somehow original. I do not think that, but I am not representative of all protestants nor even some of them. I am a individual who has developed beliefs over a period of years and I don't necessarily follow any particular dogma or religion in it's entirety.

It is rare indeed that I even discuss it. The topic is too volatile, because of identity or a sense of group think that I find uncomfortable and therefore avoid like the plague.

So please don't assume that I am representative of the Protestant sect. The UMC has been responsible for my training, but that's about where it ends.

However, I was and remain concerned that this particular church has allowed this icon into the sanctuary. It is very unusual and not a good idea.

This is the only reason I posted on this thread, but I have been defending my beliefs ever since.

What is wrong with that picture?

"Well, it appears to be more than curiosity.

I sense a liberal dose of judgment that is intermixed."

In all honesty I am just curious. The only real theological discussions I have ever had with protestants have been with Anglicans, probably because there is quite a bit of common ground there, at least with people like some of the people on these Free Republic threads. A group of Romans and Orthodox once had a very long discussion with some conservative Presbyterians here mostly about "Original Sin", Pelagianism and Araminianism which I found theologically very interesting and I think they found interesting what the Church in the East thought about this very fundamental issue. Most other protestants come at the Faith neither from a patristic point of view like the Orthodox or a scholastic one like the Romans, but rather from some variation of Sola Scriptura. Because of that deeply held and practiced way of thinking about Christianity, veneration of icons and other parts of both the dogma of the original Church and of the Holy Tradition, practices and beliefs which are virtually the sine qua nons of my existence as an Orthodox Christian, are rejected (though I am sure its not because the beliefs are Orthodox) and Christianity looked at in what appears to me to be a very individualistic way which often leads those Christians into beliefs and practices which are antithetical to what the Church as a Eucharistic community held to be correct for most of its earthly existence. Am I being judgmental? In a sense I suppose I am. To me the ancient Faith is the best way to advance in theosis both individually and communally for everyone in the world. I think it would be great if everyone adhered to it. But if people don't want to, well God respects our Free Will, who would I be to scorn your choices made by you for you? The Orthodox view on this, generally, is as a young friend of mine who is a convert from fundamental protestantism once said,"Orthodox are always happy to learn about your beliefs and tell you about theirs. If you are interested in Orthodoxy, great, they talk some more. If not, great, but stay and have another cup of cafe and a piece of baklava."

" However, I was and remain concerned that this particular church has allowed this icon into the sanctuary. It is very unusual and not a good idea.

This is the only reason I posted on this thread, but I have been defending my beliefs ever since.

What is wrong with that picture?"

As you are a Methodist, I think it is perfectly consistent for you to express astonishment at the placement of an icon in one of your churches. If I found an Orthodox Church without icons, I'd be off to the bishop or metropolitan so fast it would make your head spin. You commented that Romans worship icons. Some correction followed which is appropriate because you were misinformed. Then came the challenges to defend what we might call iconoclasm. To me, that is also fair. Faith and practice and dogma, to Romans and Orthodox are extremely important and we have reasons why we believe what we believe and do what we do. The assumption is that protestants have reasons for their beliefs and practices also. Discussing them is what we do among ourselves. The discussions we have had here have been mostly quite enlightening for both Romans and Orthodox and those discussions usually come about in the form of a challenge to defend a point of doctrine or practice. Its not an offensive thing, its just something we do to learn. This is an ancient practice in the East. One of the early Church Fathers once complained that he couldn't get his daily errands done in Constantinople because the butcher and the shoe maker were more interested in arguing fine points about the nature of Christ or the procession of the Holy Spirit than they were in doing their jobs! There really is nothing wrong with the picture at all if you understand where we are coming from. God Bless! Now, how about that cup of cafe, gliko and a piece of baklava?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.