The Guadalupan Controversies in Mexico (review)

Stafford Poole's new book makes a sequel to his 1995 Our Lady of Guadalupe: The Origins and Sources of a Mexican National Symbol, 1531-1797 (University of Arizona Press, Tucson). In that volume he traced the early history of the Mexican devotion to Our Lady of Guadalupe, elucidating the lack of historical records for the devotion's foundation story before its 1648 publication, and outlining early opposition to the apparition tradition. (In the foundation story, the Virgin appears four times, in 1531, to an Indian neophyte named Juan Diego, sending him to the bishop, Juan de Zumárraga, to request that a shrine be built for her and leaving her image imprinted on his cloak.) The Guadalupan Controversies summarizes that early period and then follows the story through 2002, when John Paul II canonized Juan Diego. Poole reviews the Guadalupan literature, pro- and anti-apparitionist, scholarly and not, that appeared throughout the period, but focuses on two key moments: the movement by Mexican churchman in the late nineteenth century to have Rome authorize a coronation of the image and approve a new proper Mass and Office, and the movement, a century later, for the beatification and canonization of Juan Diego.

Both make sordid tales. The movements arose not from surges of popular devotion but from ambitious, elite priests skilled at self-promotion, back-biting, and fudging and misrepresenting history. For the coronation controversy Poole digs up detailed records of the actions and career paths of a colorful cast of characters; their efforts are ultimately successful but leave a trail of recrimination and ruined careers. The primary victim in this round is the distinguished historian Joaquín García Icazbalceta. Researching his biography of Zumárraga, García Icazbalceta found no evidence of his subject's supposed role in the Guadalupan event. A devout Catholic, García Icazbalceta chose simply to say nothing about the matter in his book, but was soon called to task by pro-apparitionists. In a private letter to the archbishop of Mexico he detailed the absence of the apparition in the sixteenth-century historical record. One of the actors in the coronation drama stole a copy of this letter and published it; García Icazbalceta was then so vilified that he quit writing history. His letter remains an excellent summary of the evidence; Poole translates it into English in an appendix.

Reluctant Vatican officials faced another onslaught from Mexico in the late twentieth century, now surrounding Juan Diego's historicity and holiness. The recentness of the events and Poole's own involvement make this an even more engrossing story than that of the coronation. The primary victim now is Monsignor Guillermo Schulenburg Prado, abbot of the basilica of Guadalupe, who was pilloried in the Mexican press and obliged to leave his post after stating that Juan Diego was a symbol, not a historical personage. Poole joined Schulenburg and some other Mexican priests and scholars in petitioning the Vatican to delay the canonization, and found his own research vilified. (At Poole's request I wrote to Vatican officials explaining that my own investigations of indigenous Mexican Christianity contradict the apparition tradition.) The opponents were never allowed to defend their position in Rome; Juan Diego became a saint on July 30, 2002.

Poole writes as a priest who tried to prevent an embarrassing canonization and promote devotion to Christ and the Virgin over devotion to a fictional character and an old painting—sympathetic though he is to the Mexican people's love for Guadalupe. He also writes careful, thorough, evidence-based history. Unlike García Icazbalceta, Poole kept writing in the face of criticism, and his book is a valuable record of some crucial events in Mexican Church history.