Today, Lent Madness offers us a tough choice between Juan Diego and Frederick Douglass. Their respective stories and legacies are compelling yet only one will advance to the Elate Eight. To paraphrase a best-selling book: Eat, Pray, Vote. Unless you've already eaten. In which case, just pray and vote.
Yesterday, in a hotly contested battle, Molly Brant edged out Cuthbert 51% to 49% and will advance to face the winner of Bernard Mizecki vs. Jackson Kemper.
Oh, and don't forget to watch yet another exciting episode of Monday Madness. Tim and Scott mention a few folks (at least by town) who have been cast into the outer darkness for voting too many times from a single location and they reveal just who writes all the Monday Madness scripts (HINT: It's not Jimmy Fallon's talented stable of writers).
Juan Diego
Juan Diego, raised according to the Aztec pagan religion, showed an unusual and mystical sense of life even prior to hearing the Gospel from missionaries. It is said that before the famous apparition of the Virgin Mary, Juan Diego was a virtuous man who led such an exemplary life that people often asked him to intercede for them in prayer.
On December 9, 1531, Juan Diego experienced that apparition in which he asked the Virgin her name. She responded in his native language of Nahuatl, "Tlecuatlecupe," which means "the one who crushes the head of the serpent" (side note: the serpent was a very important symbol in Aztec religion! Coincidence?!?) "Tlecuatlecupe" when correctly pronounced, sounds very similar to "Guadalupe."
Thus, the Americas would have a new symbol of hope in La Virgen de Guadalupe.
Having carried out La Virgencita’s message (another popular name used for the Virgin of Guadalupe), Juan Diego lived out his life in a hut next to the church built in her honor. There he spent his days in prayer, extending hospitality to pilgrims visiting La Virgencita.
It is very possible that Juan Diego never fully understood the impact that his willingness to be a messenger had for his people. Because of Juan Diego, the Indigenous people of Mexico heard the clear message that they too were beloved children of God. The choice of a simple indigenous man as a messenger for the Virgin of Guadalupe meant that all people were important. Juan Diego’s witness to the appearance of La Virgen changed the face of the Church, opening the doors to all people regardless of nationality or social standing.
In his canonization homily, Pope John Paul II said, “In accepting the Christian message without forgoing his indigenous identity, Juan Diego discovered the profound truth of the new humanity, in which all are called to be children of God. Thus he facilitated the fruit meeting of two worlds and became the catalyst for the new Mexican identity, closely united to Our Lady of Guadalupe, whose mestizo face expresses her spiritual motherhood which embraces all Mexicans."
La Virgen de Guadalupe, is a powerful symbol that reminds the poorest of the poor, that they are loved and important in the eyes of God. This was an important message in a time when the conquistadores had convinced everyone that the Indigenous in the Americas were less than human.
How marvelous that Juan Diego a “nobody” in the eyes of the Aztec Empire and in the eyes of the conquistadores would be chosen to carry out such an important message and serve as a role model to all Christians!
NOTE: Juan Diego’s tilma with the imprinted image of La Virgen hangs in the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe. According to a study by Virgilio Elizondo, professor of Pastoral and Hispanic Theology at the University of Notre Dame, there have been many reports suggesting that the tilma is fake, possibly brought from Europe. Elizondo argues that if the tilma had been manufactured in Europe it would had not have lasted as long as it has. The tilma seems to be made from woven hemp, from a plant that is native to Mexico, explaining the tilma’s remarkable state of preservation.
Frederick Douglass
Throughout Frederick Douglass’ life, literature and Holy Scripture remained an ever-present force. After his escape from slavery, Douglass, who was born Frederick Augustus Washington Bailey, renamed himself after a character in Walter Scott’s The Lady of the Lake. His sense of mission was inspired by the prophetic words of Old Testament Scripture.
Regarding the Civil War, Douglass wrote, “Civil war was not a mere strife for territory and dominion, but a contest of civilization against barbarism.” After the Civil War, Douglass brought attention to the rise of lynchings in the Deep South and the ongoing racism that prevented the economic and social advancement of African Americans. He was also an outspoken advocate for female suffrage. Hours before his death Douglass stood alongside suffragist Susan B. Anthony and Methodist minister and physician Anna Howard Shaw as they rallied for women’s voting rights. Regarding the matter, Douglass once wrote in his newspaper The North Star, “Right is of no Sex — Truth is of no Color. God is the Father of us all, and we are all Brethren.”
Although Douglass spent much of his time traveling and giving speeches, he and his family called Washington D.C.’s Anacostia neighborhood home. It was there that he purchased 15 acres of land and built his 20-room home, which he called Cedar Hill. Although Douglass’ home offered a clear view of the U.S. Capitol building, he often retreated to a cabin behind his house, which he named “The Growlery.” There, Douglass, read, wrote, and “growled” when the mood called for it. Charles Dickens’ novel, The Bleak House, served as Douglass’ inspiration for his Growlery. Douglass’ dog, a mastiff, often kept him company when Douglass took to his cabin. Douglass also took great pleasure exercising with barbells.
Douglass’ eventual financial and relative vocational success was a far cry from his birth in the confines of slavery and reflects his dogged determination, his belief in the dignity of humankind — which he noted was rooted in his study of Holy Scripture — and his unwillingness to let evil win. That said, Douglass was not content to rest on his successes knowing that many African Americans with equal determination and faith faced unyielding resistance and violence. And in the face of strident criticism and danger, Douglass remained resolute: “I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others, rather than to be false, and to incur my own abhorrence.”
On June 19, 2013, a seven-foot statue of Douglass was unveiled in the U.S. Capitol building. The date of the statue’s dedication, known as Juneteenth, commemorates the arrival of the Emancipation Proclamation to the people of Texas.
Vote!
[poll id="128"]
142 comments on “Juan Diego vs. Frederick Douglass”
Having visited Mexico several times and witnessed their deep faith, I have to vote for Juan Diego.
tough choice, as it should be. Douglas, however, gets plenty of exposure while Diego is not as well known. The emphasis on poverty and the proclamation of the Gospel to indigenous people is obedience to the commandment of Jesus.
Douglas was a formidable character and I do not doubt his faith although his politics were certainly true to his times. When the chips are down - men are in charge.) Juan Diego was a quiet torch for Christ - bringing thousands to the Lord and giving the indigenous peoples of Latin America the courage to be truly the children of God. I vote for Juan Diego in his hut.
Top O The Morning! We vote for Saint Patrick today!
Another tough choice. Both spread the message that God's love and the worth of human beings is universal. I love Mexico City, and I have visited the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe and seen devout people walking on their knees to the church. It's an inspiring sight. My vote goes to Douglass because of his comment about the real significance of the Civil War, his retreat "the Growlery," and his statement about not suffering his "own abhorrence" for not being true to himself.
The second chapter of Colum McCann's 2013 novel, "Trans Atlantic" offers the most powerful insights (fictional or non) on Frederick Douglass that I have ever read, other than his autobiography.
I think this has been the hardest yet. Juan Diego is such an important figure to indigenous peoples - really, to all who have no "standing" in the world. This sentence alone would be enough to win my vote: "Juan Diego’s witness to the appearance of La Virgen changed the face of the Church, opening the doors to all people regardless of nationality or social standing." What better legacy could he have? Add to that his example of prayer and hospitality and it's hard to not vote for him.
So, having made my case for Juan Diego, I instead cast my vote for Frederick Douglass. His work for the rights of all people, including women, can never be forgotten. When I think of the multitudes born into slavery whose names are lost to the ages, I am in awe of this man whose very name represents the struggle against slavery. Douglass was not only a man of great faith, he is also a hero for all time.
And now, because you made me choose between these two great and faithful men, I must retire to my own growlery!
When it mattered, he did not support the rights of women. When the 15th Amendment (regarding voting rights) was being debated, Douglass abandoned the women and supported voting rights only for men (of color). Does not in any way denigrate his efforts on behalf of slaves and men of color, which were brave and of monumental significance ~ it does, though, counter any assumption that he worked for the rights of all people.
Tough choice, but the following made my decision clear: Women's Suffrage, Anna Howard Shaw, and The Growlery.
Today, just for today, I must choose. On all other days, I can honor and be inspired by both these remarkable men who saw a glimpse of the way God sees us all as expressions of Godself. For today I will go with Juan Diego. This is in honor of people I have encountered in Nicaragua. For Jubilee House Community who empowers women and men to create Organic, fair trade growing, spinning, and someday weaving cooperatives in cotton, coffee and in millions of sesame seeds; who listens to their needs and finds a way to offer health care. And for Jenny Atlee and the Friendship office of the Americas. Her book, "The Red Thread" tell an excruciating story of US involvement in the Contra wars that destroyed the lives of indigenous people in Honduras. She now works with accompaniment projects to support the work of justice and peace organizations in Honduras. And, sadly, nothing much has changed in Honduras. She says that the US support for militarization of corrupt police is only increasing, that the native population are having their farmland taken away so that multi-national corporations can grow monoculture crops in tropical fruit and palm oil. This so that I can have frozen mangoes in plastic bags out of season. And I never have to think of where they came from or who suffered to make my life comfortable. May I be moved by a vision of Our Lady with the face of peoples everywhere to let go of my privilege that takes away their meager existence.
Thank you for this, Susan. As usual, your writing moves me. I well remember how much that trip meant to you and I thank you for sharing your awareness and compassion for people in Central America. Though I voted for Frederick Douglass, I honor Juan Diego and the peoples with whom I now live!
Writing from Jubilee House Community -- thanks for the kind words! I voted for Douglass because I have always admired his pro-justice work and because I find the adoration of the Virgen de Guadalupe teeteringly close to idolatry for me. But I agree with many of the comments here that both Douglass and Juan Diego are inspiring men from whose faith and lives we can learn so much.
What makes Juan Diego simple? Because he was native? Poor? Seems like an unnecessary adjective. Faithful, open, mystic - yes. Simple - no. He seems complex to me.
I wish I could vote for both of these saints....each worthy of the Golden Halo. But I went with Frederick Douglass as he seemed more accessible to our times, still relevant.
Reviewing their bios here, I was disappointed to see Mr Douglas' credentials for sainthood included his dog's breed and his favorite form of exercise. FD would definitely get my vote for the saint I'd most like to have dinner with, but I have to go with Juan Diego for the golden halo.
Of course they're in there: This round is "Quirks and Quotes!"
Too bad he didn't have a wise cat sitting on his desk, imparting wisdom through her very being!
In deciding how to vote I sometimes read the bios and the comments and then just go about my day for a while. Some aspect of something I read keeps popping up in my thoughts and that guides my vote. So it will be today.
Hard to choose, but Mr. Douglass gets my vote!
Juan Diego and I will always be good friends, as I've known him all my life. However, today I'm voting for Frederick Douglass, in large part because of this description: "That said, Douglass was not content to rest on his successes knowing that many African Americans with equal determination and faith faced unyielding resistance and violence. " Such a good example for the US today, when many African Americans of determination and faith find themselves trapped, and blamed for their barriers.
I thing she is the patron saint of my state, California. And I thing the best evangelism comes from the people themselves.
Fredrick Douglas also worked for women's rights. He gets my vote.
He did, but he pulled his punches. I think that Frederick Douglass believed that we are all brethren, but he was also a politician. Women like Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton fought for abolition and women’s rights. He fought with them for both causes until 1867 when he broke with them over the fight for the Fifteenth Amendment, the post-Civil War voting rights amendment. The women argued that that was the moment to push for explicit protection of voting rights for women and people of color. Douglass chose a narrower path, supporting only voting rights for people (men) of color. The women felt, justifiably, betrayed. That rift never really healed.
Thank you, Kim, for the distinction. It does not affect my vote, which was already for Juan Diego, but it's important to look at the nuances. Appreciate you highlighting the point at which Douglass ended his support for all people.
This was so hard! But the Growlery edged me over to Douglass, as Dickens is one of my favorite authors and Bleak House my absolute favorite Dickens novel.
It amuses me a little that so-called educated Americans know so little about Mexico. Without Juan Diego neither Central nor South America is Christian. Full stop.
I voted for both Diego and Douglass in the first round, so this is really hard. Pitted against each other though I have to vote for Douglass. What a brave and intelligent man!
While I don't discount Juan Diego's faithfulness, I know a lot more of Frederick Douglass through my research for an article on the Dred Scott decision. Alas, I tried to get that article published during the 150th anniversary year of the decision (2007), but the editors, even though they loved my article, all had already published articles on Dred Scott! Unfortunately, I was never able to get it published. Frederick Douglass believed that the Dred Scott decision, while denying African-Americans freedom and justice, would stir people to strive for that freedom -- black and white! He therefore called it a "beacon of light"! We still need that beacon of light today! Therefore, I voted for Frederick Douglass!
In case you were wondering about JD's global influence here is what Pew has to say about it:
http://www.pewforum.org/2011/12/19/global-christianity-exec/
Thank you. And I did the quiz and failed..... So much to learn.
A difficult choice. I went with Juan Diego because I think he represents a broader community: The Children of God. Mr. Douglas is vitally important to the American experience which can certainly be generalized to all oppressed persons. However, Juan Diego's message is to me even deeper: Whether oppressed or free, we are all first God's own.
Just plain couldn't choose today. Two ordinary men who became extraordinary. Though their areas of concern were slightly different, they both ministered to those of lesser standing in their parts of the world, bringing God's love in different ways.
Glad each already has his Golden Halo!
This was a hard one. I voted for Douglass as a needed voice in America today.
I voted for the one who wrote, and published in his newspaper, Right is of no Sex — Truth is of no Color.
Frederick Douglass by a nose...
Dear God -- and the rest of you -- this was soooooo hard. Frederick Douglass has been one of my heroes for more than half a century -- since I read about him in a summer library program in Ottawa, Il. He has colored my life and my writing. But now I live in CA and Our Lady of Guadalupe is all around me and precious to many, including me. I went for Mr. Douglass, but part of my heart feels reeeaaalllly torn up. I would tell my gardening guru Juan Diego how sorry I am, if I could muster up the Spanish.
I voted for Fredrick for two reasons:
1] so he can have a chance to defeat Molly later
&
2] because he was smart enough to realize that the opposition to the 15th Amendment would only increase if women's suffrage was included and then neither group would be able to vote. And as someone who has actually been to Selma, Ala. (home of the National Voting Rights Museum) & a past unit co-leader in the LWV, I would point out that it took about a century to fully enact the 15th! (And contrary to what some of the members of SCOTUS think we still need the Voting Rights Act of 1965.)
Voting trivia: Oregon, the birthplace of voter petition initiated ballot measures & vote-by-mail ballots, has become the first state where those citizens 18 & older who have DMV-issued driver's licenses/IDs will have to opt out of being registered to vote. (If you think not registering to vote will keep your name out of the jury pool it won't since most states get the names of citizens 18 & older from the DMV for use in issuing jury duty summons.)
Anyone who is interested in just how much Douglass "loved women", might want to read "Douglass' Women" by Jewell Parker Rhodes . . . a novel, but based on historical research . . . about his wife (who was free black woman who bought his freedom with her hard work) and his rich mistress (who was white). . . .
Just sayin' . . . an admirable man in some ways, but no saint.
FFI: http://jewellparkerrhodes.com/books/douglass-women/
If sainthood is restricted to people who never sinned, never erred, never gave in to their baser instincts or the cravings of the flesh, then I think we'll have to throw all of them out. AFAIK there was only One who never sinned.