Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Eyes of Guadalupe Image Hold Pro-Family Message, Expert Says
EWTN News ^ | 8/29/12

Posted on 08/30/2012 6:48:01 AM PDT by marshmallow

A Peruvian expert who has been studying the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico for 34 years, says the microscopic figures that appear in her eyes hold a powerful pro-life and pro-family message.

Jose Aste Tonsmann said the tiny images in the eyes include an entire Aztec family and are a sign from the Mother of God about the importance of life and the family at a time when both are under attack worldwide.

During a conference at the Theatrical and Social Cultural Institute in Lima, Tonsmann said a total of 13 figures can be seen in the eyes of Our Lady of Guadalupe.

The six figures that can be seen in area of the cornea are of an Indian who seated, an elderly man believed to be Bishop Juan de Zumarraga, his translator, Juan Gonzalez, St. Juan Diego, a black woman who may have been the bishop’s housekeeper and who was granted her freedom before his death, and a bearded man of European descent.

Tonsmann said the other seven figures that appear right in the center of Mary’s gaze appear to be “an Indian family.”

The young woman in center of the group looking down is the mother. At her side is the father who is wearing a hat and between them are their three children.

The other two figures appear to be an elderly couple and may be the grandparents. They are standing behind the others, and the elderly man is the only figure that appears just in the right eye.

Tonsmann said the diverse group of people that appear in Our Lady of Guadalupe’s eyes convey “a message against racism, something that is increasingly worse in today’s world.”

It is not a coincidence, he added, that only today’s technology has allowed the tiny images to.....

(Excerpt) Read more at ewtnnews.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; General Discusssion; History
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 08/30/2012 6:48:02 AM PDT by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Of course.....this is one heck of an impressive miracle of the blessed mother...


2 posted on 08/30/2012 6:51:53 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Would be interesting if the actual image were posted. Also a lot more believable, since the technology to “fake” such an image was unavailable at the time. Sounds like it wouldn’t be easy today.


3 posted on 08/30/2012 6:54:10 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

4 posted on 08/30/2012 6:55:28 AM PDT by evets (beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

I was hoping there would be a picture. But I guess it would be hard to see.


5 posted on 08/30/2012 6:55:56 AM PDT by defconw (IT'S ON NOW! ROMNEY/RYAN 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: defconw
Meanwhile, back in New Orleans...

6 posted on 08/30/2012 6:57:11 AM PDT by evets (beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: evets

Just as believable.


7 posted on 08/30/2012 7:01:00 AM PDT by ZX12R (FUBO GTFO 2012 !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: evets

Yes. I can see the face in that window! Interesting.


8 posted on 08/30/2012 7:03:01 AM PDT by Twinkie (Obamanation - where everything is free; but US!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: evets

LOL!


9 posted on 08/30/2012 7:03:03 AM PDT by defconw (IT'S ON NOW! ROMNEY/RYAN 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Jose Aste Tonsmann said the tiny images in the eyes include an entire Aztec family and are a sign from the Mother of God about the importance of life and the family at a time when both are under attack worldwide.

Wouldn't it be a sign at the time when the apparition occurred and the image was presented?

Not that God couldn't look ahead and say, "Someday, people are going to be so messed up that they're going to need a direct supernatural sign to help them recognize the value of natural family formation," and set it up centuries in advance.

Could there be anyone who would learn of this analysis and say, "Wow, it never occurred to me that families of children, parents, and grandparents would be something God considered positive! This changes everything!"?

10 posted on 08/30/2012 7:06:18 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Now a hit television series starring Judi Dench!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
A Peruvian expert who has been studying the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico for 34 years,

34 years spent on something with all the informational significance of a "picture" of Jesus on a piece of toast?


11 posted on 08/30/2012 7:21:18 AM PDT by Joseph Harrolds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Better picture of Her eyes here:

http://www.examiner.com/article/our-lady-of-guadalupe-completely-beyond-scientific-explanation

1. Juan Diego unfolding his tilma & wearing a native hat of the period

2. Bishop Zumarraga, staring at the tilma

3. An Aztec servant of the bishop sitting in the style of an Indian

4. A Spaniard of the bishop’s staff

5. A Spaniard who learned the indigenoous language & served as the bishop’s translator

6. A black African female servant girl — documentary evidence shows in fact, that the bishop did have an African female servant.

7. Seven members of an indigenous family — a mother carrying a baby on her back, a father, a grandmother and grandfather, and two young children.


12 posted on 08/30/2012 7:29:04 AM PDT by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Ping


13 posted on 08/30/2012 7:35:31 AM PDT by Paratrooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

With billions of people being murdered, starved, aborted and corrupted as a result of hate, crime, tyranny, oppression, abortion and liberalism, I find it hard to believe that God would ignore those things and spend his time burning an image of Jesus into a tortilla.


14 posted on 08/30/2012 7:39:50 AM PDT by Bronco_Buster_FweetHyagh (I cling to guns and religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bronco_Buster_FweetHyagh
With billions of people being murdered, starved, aborted and corrupted as a result of hate, crime, tyranny, oppression, abortion and liberalism, I find it hard to believe that God would ignore those things and spend his time burning an image of Jesus into a tortilla.

With billions of people being murdered, starved, aborted and corrupted as a result of hate, crime, tyranny, oppression, abortion and liberalism, I find it hard to believe that Bronco_Buster_FweetHyagh would ignore those things and spend his time hijacking a Catholic thread.

15 posted on 08/30/2012 7:54:51 AM PDT by pegleg (Lies will seek you out, but the truth must be sought.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Seems like apophenia to me. Plus, the “enhanced”, retouched images are worthless as evidence. The JFK conspiracists do the same kinds of thing and find “images” of shooters on the grassy knoll.


16 posted on 08/30/2012 7:57:16 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
This has been proved before and links posted.

Science & the Virgin of Guadalupe [Catholic Caucus]
Mary, Mother of Life: Our Lady of Guadalupe (Catholic or Pro-Life Caucus)
Our Lady of Guadalupe - A Mother for us all
A WOMAN AND A DRAGON (Catholic Caucus)
The History of Our Lady of Guadalupe [Catholic Caucus]
Guadalupe: A Living Image (EWTN - Sunday, Sep. 26 at 10 pm) [Catholic Caucus]

Remembering Our Lady of Guadalupe
Catholic Caucus: Our Lady of Guadalupe: She Who Smashes the Serpent
Infamous Hollywood Screenwriter to Pen Film on Our Lady of Guadalupe - Patroness of the Unborn
"Basic Instinct" scribe Eszterhas eyes virgin
Our Lady of Guadalupe ‘completely beyond' scientific explanation, says researcher
Knights of Columbus Congress, Festival for Our Lady of Guadalupe (Catholic Caucus)
The (Miraculous) Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe [Catholic Caucus]
Remembering Our Lady of Guadalupe [Catholic Caucus]
Our Lady of Guadalupe Feast: December 12 [Repost]
Brief History of the Apparitions of Our Lady of Guadalupe [Catholic Caucus]

The History of Our Lady of Guadalupe [Ecumenical]
2 Questions related to Faith & Apologetics. A Feast day & Our Lady of Guadalupe [Catholic Caucus]
The Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe
Our Lady of Guadalupe called 'Mother Without Borders' in Los Angeles (Catholic Caucus)
Hernándo Cortés and Our Lady
Our Lady of Guadalupe, Patroness of the Church Militant (Catholic Caucus)
Scientists certify Our Lady of Guadalupe tilma
STRANGE LIGHT CLAIMED IN GUADALUPE IMAGE AFTER MEXICO CITY OKAYED ABORTION
STRANGE LIGHT CLAIMED IN GUADALUPE IMAGE AFTER MEXICO CITY OKAYED ABORTION -- posted on News Forum
The Story of Guadalupe: Hope for Our Violent World

Our Lady of Guadalupe: Protectress of the Unborn
Was Our Lady of Guadalupe Wrong?
METHODIST CHURCH DISPLAYS VIRGIN OF GUADALUPE
GUADALUPE DEVOTION IS CROSSING INTO PROTESTANT DENOMINATIONS
A Novena to Our Lady of Guadalupe
Relic From Guadalupe Tilma to Tour U.S.
The Amazing Truth of Our Lady of Guadalupe
Our Lady Of Guadalupe
Celebrating 470 years of an ongoing miracle, the apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe 1531
Science Stunned by Virgin of Guadalupe´s Eyes

17 posted on 08/30/2012 8:19:46 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Tell that to Jesus at the moment of your death. Don’t you realize what you are doing in dissing the Mother of God?


18 posted on 08/30/2012 8:22:48 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: pegleg

Touché. Point well taken


19 posted on 08/30/2012 10:10:51 AM PDT by Bronco_Buster_FweetHyagh (I cling to guns and religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

“Don’t you realize what you are doing in dissing the Mother of God?”

Oh sure, anyone who is skeptical of claims of seeing things in an “enhanced” image, is “dissing the Mother of God”. Get off your high horse. The only ones I am “dissing” are hucksters peddling this to an uncritical audience.


20 posted on 08/30/2012 11:33:01 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

then hit up those links above your comment showing the continual scientific validation of these images in her eyes.....

and then when you are done, you can, im sure, contact and show the oh-so-obvious to folks like you, the fakery, etc...of all of the research....

somehow, i think you will more likely continue to post here, with derogatory remarx, etc...its easier that way.


21 posted on 08/30/2012 3:45:21 PM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

Ok, I looked through the first five links, and there is no “scientific validation” demonstrated, just the same repeated assertions that appear in all the usual articles on the subject. Some of those assertions flat out admit that these images are only visible with “digital enhancement”.

Now, I’ve worked with digital graphics for years, and you can find nearly anything that you want to find with enough digital enhancement. That makes it an inherently less than reliable method. So, if you want me to believe that what is asserted to be found with this technique has been “scientifically validated”, then you’d better offer some more evidence than a testimonial from a Catholic writer who is promoting that assertion.

How about an article by a scientist, published in a scientific journal, which attests to the validity of the assertion? If it’s been continually scientifically validated, then you should have no trouble producing something like that, right?


22 posted on 08/30/2012 4:48:59 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: pegleg

“hijacking a Catholic thread”

It’s not a Catholic thread, it’s an open thread, since there are no caucus tags.


23 posted on 08/30/2012 4:51:48 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Studies conducted between 1751–2 and 1982
MC – in 1756 a prominent artist, Miguel Cabrera, published a report entitled “Maravilla Americana” containing the findings made by himself and six other painters in 1751 and 1752 from ocular and manual inspection.[24]
G – José Antonio Flores Gómez, an art restorer, discussed in a 2002 interview with the Mexican journal Proceso (magazine) certain technical issues relative to the tilma, on which he had worked in 1947 and 1973.[25]
PC – in 1979 Philip Callahan, biophysicist and USDA entomologist, specializing in Infrared imaging, took numerous infrared photographs of the front of the tilma. His findings, with photographs, were published in 1981.[26]
R – “Proceso” also published in 2002 an interview with José Sol Rosales, formerly director of the Center for the Conservation and Listing of Heritage Artifacts (Patrimonio Artístico Mueble) of the National Institute of Fine Arts (INBA) in México City. This interview was interspersed with extracts from a report R had written in 1982 of the findings he had made during his inspection of the tilma that year using raking and UV light, and – at low magnification – a stereo microscope of the type used for surgery.[27]

^ Cabrera, Miguel: “Maravilla Americana y conjunto de varias maravillas observadas con la direccíon de las reglas del arte de la pintura en la prodigiosa imagen de Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe, Mexico”, 1756, facs. ed. Mexico, 1977; summary in Brading, D.A.: “Mexican Phoenix: Our Lady of Guadalupe: Image and Tradition Across Five Centuries”, Cambridge University Press, 2001, pp. 169–172
^ Vera, Rodrigo: “un restaurador de la guadalupana expone detalles técnicos que desmitifican a la imagen”, Revista Proceso N° 1343, July 27, 2002, pp. 17–18, cf. [1]
^ Callahan, Philip: “The Tilma Under Infra-Red Radiation”, CARA Studies in Popular Devotion, Vol. II, Guadalupan Studies, No. III (March 1981, 45pp.), Washington, D.C.; cf. Leatham, Miguel (2001). “Indigenista Hermeneutics and the Historical Meaning of Our Lady of Guadalupe of Mexico”. Folklore Forum. Google Docs. pp. 34–5.
^ Vera, Rodrigo: “el análisis que ocultó el vaticano”, Revista Proceso N° 1333, May 18, 2002; cf. [2] and cf. idem, “manos humanas pintaron la guadalupana”, Revista Proceso N° 1332, May 11, 2002, cf. http://www.ecultura.gob.mx/patrimonio/index.php?lan=


24 posted on 08/30/2012 6:22:17 PM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

Well, I could have cut and paste a section from Wikipedia and a non-working link myself, but thanks.

Now, we know that these supposed images in the eyes were only recently detected, with advances in digital imagery. Therefore, all of these studies you cite could not have anything relevant to say on this matter, since the latest was made in 1982, years before these images were detected. So, where are all the recent scientific studies that have continually validated this assertion?


25 posted on 08/30/2012 6:48:32 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

oh im sorry, i havent received my monthly subscription to Our Lady of Guadualupe Peer Reviews Only magazine...

seriously?

wikipedia or not, they are four studies done over the years showing no signs of fakery....

so far, on your side, you have produced zero evidence scientifcally, that it is a fake of any sort...nice try though...


26 posted on 08/30/2012 7:00:44 PM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

plus the last two sources again, show imaging testing, and showing no fakes, nothing....

show me the science that showed it to be faked?

again, ive provided science sources, you have provided nothing...

PC – in 1979 Philip Callahan, biophysicist and USDA entomologist, specializing in Infrared imaging, took numerous infrared photographs of the front of the tilma. His findings, with photographs, were published in 1981.[26]
R – “Proceso” also published in 2002 an interview with José Sol Rosales, formerly director of the Center for the Conservation and Listing of Heritage Artifacts (Patrimonio Artístico Mueble) of the National Institute of Fine Arts (INBA) in México City. This interview was interspersed with extracts from a report R had written in 1982 of the findings he had made during his inspection of the tilma that year using raking and UV light, and – at low magnification – a stereo microscope of the type used for surgery.[27]


27 posted on 08/30/2012 7:03:15 PM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

“oh im sorry, i havent received my monthly subscription to Our Lady of Guadualupe Peer Reviews Only magazine...

seriously?”

You’re the one who claimed that the images in the eyes, which I am skeptical about, have been continually scientifically validated. I’m sorry if I assumed that you said that because you knew it to be true, having seen such scientific studies, and not just repeating other peoples’ claims without verifying them yourself.

“wikipedia or not, they are four studies done over the years showing no signs of fakery....”

Well, now you are moving the goalposts. I never said a word on this thread about the tilma being a fake. I only said that I thought the people claiming to see the images were displaying apophenia, seeing things that they wanted to see in what was essentially random noise. This is a well known phenomenon that has nothing to do with fakery, since it is completely unintentional.

The studies that you cite have absolutely nothing to do with this question. I can say that with certainty, not even having bothered to read them, since the images in the eyes were first “discovered” in the 90’s, and your latest study was conducted in the early 80’s. So, you have still produced not a single study that actually speaks to the question at hand.

“so far, on your side, you have produced zero evidence scientifcally, that it is a fake of any sort...nice try though...”

I don’t need to produce any evidence. I am not making any extraordinary assertion that requires evidence to back it up. The people claiming that there are miraculous images in the eyes are the ones making the extraordinary assertion, so it is they who you should be asking to produce evidence. I’ve searched for it myself and could not find it, and apparently, you have not been able to find such evidence either. So, why should we keep believing the claim when neither of us can find any evidence to support it?


28 posted on 08/31/2012 6:36:46 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

“plus the last two sources again, show imaging testing, and showing no fakes, nothing....”

Again, those two studies have nothing to do with the question of the images in the eyes, since they were done before the images were “discovered”. Still, why don’t we actually look at what those studies revealed, instead of just assuming?

“Summary conclusions (”contra” indicates a contrary finding)

(2) Ground, or Primer: R asserted (MC and PC contra) by ocular examination that the tilma was primed, though with primer “applied irregularly.” R does not clarify whether his observed “irregular” application entails that majorly the entire tilma was primed, or just certain areas – such as those areas of the tilma extrinsic to the image – where PC agrees had later additions. MC, alternatively, observed that the image had soaked through to the reverse of the tilma.[28]”

So, study R, the second study you cited, asserted from his analysis that the image was painted on top of a primer coat, though the primer appeared to be applied irregularly. Hmm that doesn’t sound like he found zero evidence of fakery does it?

“(4) Brush-work: R suggested (PC contra) there was some visible brushwork on the original image, but at best in only one minute area of the image (”her eyes, including the irises, have outlines, apparently applied by a brush”).”

Again, R, your second study, asserted signs of brushwork on the image, specifically in the area of the eyes, which is exactly the area that I am questioning.

“(7) Binding Medium: R provisionally identified the pigments and binding medium (distemper) as consistent with 16th c. methods of painting sargas (MC, PC contra for different reasons), but the color values and luminosity are exceptional.”

The R study also found pigments and binding medium consistent with human methods of painting common at the time that the tilma would have likely been painting, if it was a fake. Now, that certainly can not be claimed as finding no signs of fakery.

So, the studies that you cite yourself don’t even state the things that you claim that they state. Yet, I am just supposed to take you at your word that there are other, mysteriously unavailable studies that confirm the supposed images in the eyes? Sorry, but I am still skeptical.


29 posted on 08/31/2012 6:50:09 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson