A rendering of the Diocese of Orange's Our Lady of La Vang Shrine. Image courtesy of Torrence Architects
Posted on 11/25/2018 7:06:58 AM PST by marshmallow
A rendering of the Diocese of Orange's Our Lady of La Vang Shrine. Image courtesy of Torrence Architects
GARDEN GROVE, Calif. (RNS) — Like most Vietnamese-American Catholics, Elysabeth Nguyen grew up hearing stories of Our Lady of La Vang, who is said to have saved her people from persecution.
The Marian apparition is said to have appeared in the late 1700s to a group of Catholics fleeing persecution in Vietnam. She then became a centerpiece of Catholic faith in the country, and after the fall of Saigon in 1975 — when more than a million Vietnamese became refugees — her intercession was credited with sparing the lives of her devotees. Churches named for the La Vang virgin are now thought to be as numerous in the United States as those dedicated to the apparitions at Fatima or Lourdes.
Now Nguyen and a group of Vietnamese-American Catholics in Orange County, Calif., home to the largest Vietnamese Catholic community outside Vietnam, are leading the development of the United States’ first major stand-alone shrine to Our Lady of La Vang.
The multi-million-dollar shrine, located at the Catholic Diocese of Orange’s Christ Cathedral in Garden Grove, will offer the 100,000 Vietnamese-American Catholics in the diocese a gathering place and, its builders expect, an international pilgrimage site. The diocese broke ground on the project in October.
“To have a shrine here reminds them of the homeland, of how grateful they are to be here, and the fruits and blessings they’ve had since coming to this country,” said Nguyen, project manager for the La Vang Shrine Committee with the Diocese of Orange.
(Excerpt) Read more at religionnews.com ...
“Are you saying you don’t make errors??”
I don’t make many - precisely because I actually care about the truth, facts, precision and accuracy.
“If you, or anyone else, is kneeling before a “statue” and praying to it, or to the image it represents, that is worship.”
Since no one is praying to the statue no one is worshiping it. Hence, no idolatry.
“You don’t like that definition is clear....but that’s what it is.”
I like the definition just fine although I freely admit it’s incomplete. Your definition proves we are not engaging in idolatry because we are not praying to any statue.
“I’d expect every Roman Catholic to deny it. For them to admit it would an admission of idolatry.”
You’re own definition proves we are not doing what you false accuse us of doing. We don’t pray to statues. Hence, according to your own definition, no idolatry is taking place.
“Mormons refuse to admit their error as well.”
Anti-Catholics refuse to admit their errors as well. The difference is that according to your definition we aren’t doing what you accuse us of doing. That means - according to your own standard - you’re in error because you are falsely accusing us.
You won’t admit your error, however.
Right?
Thanks for posting.
And may the iconoclasts receive the grace of repentance and conversion.
Our Lady of La Vang, pray for them
Christ, have mercy on them.
You don’t even see the errors in this post you made.
“You don’t even see the errors in this post you made.”
And you do see your errors, right?
Remember, we don’t pray to statues. Thus, you were wrong. That’s not my error. That’s yours.
You keep making the error....keep looking.
“You keep making the error....keep looking.”
You keep making the error - and others have pointed it out to you not just me. Even people who are not Catholic point out the error you’re making and you still choose to make it.
It’s right there in front of your face. You’re disappointing me, vlad.
“It’s right there in front of your face. You’re disappointing me, vlad.”
Others have pointed out your errors. Are you disappointed with them too?
My position on the Roman Catholic worship of Mary, in all its forms, is not in error as it is in contradiction of the very book Roman Catholics claim to have given everyone.
It the worshipped or prayed to Mary or saints, yes
There is but One mediator between God and man... Christ Jesus
?
Should be if they worshipped or prayed to saints, yes. It was an answer to your question Sorry for the typo
They were Catholics. They venerated saints. They worshipped God. They were not idolators
Radical Protestants have this thing about Saints and the Virgin Mary. I get it.
But that doesn’t make Christians who disagree with you idolators.
That is insulting and untrue.
You Catholics play a great game of semantics regarding veneration versus where ship. However, we are to pray to no one but God. Do you do you know that you pray to Mary and the saints?
American chrstianity is comes largely from the Cromwellian roundhead tradition.
I take it you are one of those right wing atheists who support historical chrstianity for pragmatic and civilizational reasons?
In other words, you're a liberal.
I think you would be more comfortable in Mecca or Medina.
I prefer Jerusalem under David and Solomon. I doubt you'd enjoy it there, though.
What are you doing on an American conservative forum???
And just like the liberal you are, you "tolerate" everyone except for rednecks.
“Scripture does not change.....however, Roman Catholicism has, does and will change.”
God, in Scripture, commanded statues to be made for the Temple.
Now you're just being dishonest, like most Catholics/Orthodox. The commandment to build statues for the Beit HaMiqdash has absolutely nothing to do with chrstianity, and for chrstians to defend their religion by appealing to a book they insist has been "superseded" is abominable.
Right and wrong are defined by G-d. When G-d forbids killing, it is wrong to kill. When He commands killing, it is wrong to refrain from doing so (oh my, sounds like islam!!!). When He commands statues, they must be made. When they are forbidden, they are forbidden. The statues in the Beit HaMiqdash are not a grant of permission for the religious use of statues in other contexts. In fact, for centuries the Israelites venerated Moses' brazen serpent. Merely venerating it was idolatry, so it was destroyed.
The religion of which you claim to be a "fulfillment" was actually much closer to islam than to chrstianity.
You seem to be obsessed with the beliefs of others—which is strange.
No, he merely believes his religious beliefs are exclusively true. There was a time when conservatives would have understood that, but it appears ecumania, in the name of "western civilization," has pushed traditional understandings aside.
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.