|
|
|
October
2004
Apparitions True and FalseFATHER PETER JOSEPH As a prelude, I should state my own interest in Private Revelations. I have visited Paray-le-Monial (where Jesus showed His Sacred Heart to St Margaret Mary in the 17th century). I have visited Rue de Bac (where the Miraculous Medal was given to St Catherine Labouré in 1830). I have visited Lourdes, Knock, and Fatima; also the two Belgian towns where Our Lady appeared: Beauraing (1932-33) and Banneux (1933). I wear the Brown Scapular and the Miraculous Medal. I have conducted Holy Hours to celebrate the Feast of Divine Mercy since 1993. I think, from all this, you can see that I am not opposed to private revelations. But I am opposed to false revelations; I am opposed to dubious revelations; I am opposed to disapproved revelations; I am opposed to obsession with private revelations. I am opposed to all these things precisely because I do believe in genuine private revelations and their role in the life of the Church. The abundance of alleged messages and revelations in the past forty years makes ever more necessary the traditional caution and discernment of spirits. Amid today’s confusion and spiritual wasteland, many Catholics are seeking contact with the supernatural via new private revelations, regardless of whether or not they have been approved, or even whether or not they are in accordance with the Faith. Private revelations occur The Catechism Whom does the Catechism have in mind? Among others, Moslems and Mormons. Mohammed claimed that the Gospels misrepresent Christ, and Mormons believe there is a Third Testament. Sources of revelations Under the heading of God, I include God’s holy creatures, such as Our Lady or another Saint or an angel. Under man, I mean any human knowledge or skill or trickery or imagination or any human activity or machine or device causing anything to happen. Under the devil, I include the devil himself or any one of the other demons. The power of the devil It is knowledge of diabolical trickery which makes the Church cautious here. My next part on the power of the demons is taken from Father Jordan Aumann, a Dominican priest, who taught for many years at the Angelicum University in Rome. What the devils can and cannot do (1) Produce any kind of
truly supernatural phenomenon;
(2) Create a substance,
since only God can create;
(3) Bring a dead person
back to life, although they could produce the illusion of doing so;
(4) Make truly prophetic
predictions, since only God knows the future absolutely, and those to
whom He chooses to reveal a portion of it. However, the devil’s intelligent
conjecture about the future might appear to mere mortals a prophecy;
(5) Know the secrets of
a person’s mind and heart. However, their shrewd intelligence and observation
may enable them to deduce many things about a person.
But the devils can do the following: (1) Produce corporeal or
imaginative visions;
(2) Falsify ecstasy;
(3) Instantaneously cure
sicknesses that have been caused by diabolical influence;
(4) Produce the stigmata;
(5) Simulate miracles and the phenomena of
levitation and bilocation;(6) Make people or objects seem to disappear
by interfering with a person’s sight or line of vision;
(7) Cause a person to hear
sounds or voices;
(8) Cause a person to speak
in tongues;
(9) Declare a fact which is hidden or distant. Whatever nature or science
can cause, the devils too are able to cause, according to what God may
permit. See the Book of Exodus where the magicians and sorcerers of
Pharaoh were able to accomplish some of the prodigies wrought
by Moses and Aaron (Ex 7:11-12; 7:22; 8:7; 8:18-19; 9:11). Close to
200 A.D., Tertullian writes, "first of all, they [the demons] make
you ill; then to get a miracle out of it, they prescribe remedies either
completely novel, or contrary to those in use, and thereupon withdrawing
hurtful influence, they are supposed to have wrought a cure." (Apology
of the Christian religion, 22).
In the face of the fallen
angels’ power to deceive, it is no wonder that the Church is always
very slow to declare a miracle or message authentic.
The devil has superhuman
intelligence and is very clever, and to pretend that you can definitively
judge in favour of something’s authenticity, without help, is presumptuous.
To know if something is
false, it suffices to know that it says something contrary to the teaching
of the Church. Hence, it is easier to pronounce against visionaries
than in their favour. But the mere absence of doctrinal error is not
enough. There have to be other positive indications.
The following quotations
are from the final chapter of the rock-solid book Spiritual Theology
(Sheed & Ward 1980) by Dominican Father Jordan Aumann.
Signs of the divine spirit "The following characteristics
are general signs of the divine spirit:
1. Truth. God is truth and cannot inspire anything but truth in a soul. If a person believed to be inspired by God, therefore, maintains opinions that are manifestly against revealed truth, the infallible teaching of the Church, or proven theology or philosophy or science, it must be concluded that the individual is deluded by the devil or is the victim of excessive imagination or faulty reasoning. 2. Gravity. God is never the cause of things that are useless, futile, frivolous, or impertinent. When his spirit moves a soul it is always for something serious and beneficial. 3. Enlightenment. Although one may not always understand the meaning of an inspiration from God, the effect of any divine movement or impulse is always enlightenment and certitude rather than darkness and confusion. This is true both for the effects on the individual who receives the inspiration and its effects on others. 4. Docility. Souls that are moved by the spirit of God accept cheerfully the advice and counsel of their directors or others who have authority over them. This spirit of obedience, docility, and submission is one of the clearest signs that a particular inspiration or movement is from God. This is especially true in the case of the educated, who have a greater tendency to be attached to their own opinions. 5. Discretion. The spirit of God makes the soul discreet, prudent, and thoughtful in all its actions. There is nothing of precipitation, lightness, exaggeration, or impetuosity; all is well balanced, edifying, serious, and full of calmness and peace. 6. Humility. The Holy Spirit always fills the soul with sentiments of humility and self-effacement. The loftier the communications from on high, the more profoundly the soul inclines to the abyss of its own nothingness. Mary said, ‘I am the servant of the Lord. Let it be done to me as you say’ (Lk 1:38). 7. Peace. St. Paul speaks frequently of the peace that comes from God (Rom 15:33, Phil 4:9), and Jesus mentions peace as one of the manifestations of his spirit (Jn 14:27). This is a quality that always accompanies communications from God; the soul experiences a profound and stable serenity in the depths of its spirit." (pp. 402-3) Fr Aumann mentions other
signs also: Confidence in God, Flexibility of will, Purity of intention,
Patience in suffering, Self-abnegation, Simplicity, Liberty of spirit.
Signs of the diabolical spirit "…[S]ince the devil
may disguise himself as a good spirit and even cause what appears to
be authentic mystical phenomena, it is helpful to mention briefly the
various signs of the diabolical spirit.
1. Spirit of falsity. The devil is the father of lies, but he cleverly conceals his deceit by half-truths and pseudo-mystical phenomena. 2. Morbid curiosity. This is characteristic of those who eagerly seek out the esoteric aspects of mystical phenomena or have a fascination for the occult or preternatural. 3. Confusion, anxiety,
and deep depression.
4. Obstinacy. One
of the surest signs of a diabolical spirit.
5. Constant indiscretion and a restless spirit. Those who constantly go to extremes, as in penitential exercises or apostolic activity, or neglect their primary obligations to do some personally chosen work. 6. Spirit of pride and vanity. Very anxious to publicize their gifts of grace and mystical experiences. 7. False humility. This is the disguise for their pride and self-love.8. Despair, lack of confidence, and discouragement. A chronic characteristic that alternates with presumption, vain security, and unfounded optimism." (p. 412) Fr Aumann mentions other
signs also: Impatience in suffering and stubborn resentment; Uncontrolled
passions and strong inclination to sensuality, usually under the guise
of mystical union; Hypocrisy, simulation, and duplicity; Excessive attachment
to sensible consolations, particularly in their practice of prayer;
Lack of deep devotion to Jesus and Mary; Scrupulous adherence to the
letter of the law and fanatical zeal in promoting a cause.
Signs of the human spirit "The human spirit is
always inclined to its own satisfactions; it is a friend of pleasure
and an enemy of suffering of any kind. It readily inclines to anything
that is compatible with its own temperament, its personal tastes and
caprices, or the satisfaction of self-love. It will not hear of humiliations,
penance, renunciation, or mortification. If any director or confessor
goes against its inclinations, he is immediately branded as inept and
incompetent. It seeks success, honors, applause, and pastimes. It is
always a great promoter of anything that will arouse admiration or notoriety.
In a word, the human spirit neither understands nor cares for anything
except its own egoism.
"It is sometimes difficult
in practice to judge whether given manifestations proceed from the
devil or from a purely human and egoistic spirit, but it is always
relatively easy to distinguish between these two and the spirit of God.
It will be possible in most cases, therefore, to determine that a given
spirit could not possibly be from God and that it must be combatted,
even if one is not sure whether it is in fact from the devil or the
human ego." (p. 413)
Some norms for discernment "The following norms
are offered as guides for the spiritual director in the discernment
of spirits so far as they pertain to revelations and prophecies:
1. Any revelation contrary to dogma or morals must be rejected as false. God does not contradict himself, 2. Any revelation contrary to the common teaching of theologians or purporting to settle an argument among the schools of theology is gravely suspect. 3. If some detail or other in a revelation is false, it is not necessary to reject the entire revelation; the remainder may be authentic. 4. The fact that a prophecy is fulfilled is not of itself a conclusive proof that the revelation was from God; it could have been the mere unfolding of natural causes or the result of a superior natural knowledge on the part of the seer. 5. Revelations concerning merely curious or useless matters should be rejected as not divine. The same is to be said of those that are detailed, lengthy, and filled with a superfluity of proofs and reasons. Divine revelations are generally brief, clear, and precise. 6. The person who receives the revelation should be examined carefully, especially as to temperament and character. If the person is humble, well balanced, discreet, evidently advanced in virtue, and enjoys good mental and physical health, there is good reason to proceed further and to examine the revelation itself. But if the individual is exhausted with excessive mortifications, suffers nervous affliction, is subject to periods of great exhaustion or great depression, or is eager to divulge the revelation, there is cause for serious doubt." (p. 430) Curiosity
Is the information useful
for the salvation of souls? If it is merely to satisfy curiosity it
is unlikely to be of divine origin. Some seeming seers act like mediums,
give information on births, marriages, legal processes, diseases, political
events, etc. God does not run an Inquiry Office. Some are very clever
at observing, or very intuitive, and can work with little things. At
séances, furniture is often pushed about, or a spirit moves a
person’s hand to write messages, etc. God has never done these things
in any approved revelation.
Curiosity sticks out in
people who claim to tell you what was the ultimate fate of Princess
Diana, Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, etc. We’d all love to know who’s
in Heaven and who isn’t! A lady I heard of claims to know where every
deceased person is: funnily enough everyone’s either in Purgatory or
Heaven! I suppose it would do harm to business and popularity to tell
people that certain relatives are in Hell! Actually, anyone who pronounces
on famous people is immediately to be disbelieved.
Also suspect are revelations
that merely give truisms and platitudes.
Why does the devil do it? Catholics ought be very
cautious in giving credence to visions and messages before they
have received approbation from the Church. The devil has raised up many
false mystics in recent years. People ask: "Why would the devil
be behind a revelation which encourages people to pray and fast and
do penance? That would be Satan divided against himself."
Fair question. Why would
he do it?
Answer: For a number
of reasons: to distract people from the genuine private revelations;
to lead them into exercises not blessed as such by God; to bring private
revelations into complete disrepute; to cause disenchantment and even
a crisis of faith when a seer is later plainly seen to be false; and,
worst of all, subtly to lead some people out of the Church altogether.
The devil is willing to lose a lot, if he can gain in the long run.
The devil rejoices when
Catholics reject the tried and true means of spiritual growth to chase
after the extraordinary and the unapproved. The Church is extremely
careful before approving a private revelation, for she knows how "even
Satan disguises himself as an angel of light" (2 Cor 11:14). She
must avoid both credulity and unfounded scepticism. "Do not quench
the Spirit, do not despise prophesying, but test everything," directs
St Paul (1 Thess 5:19-21). And St John warns, "Beloved, do not
believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are of
God" (1 Jn 4:1). Some spirits are quite easy to discern; others
very difficult. Priests in particular must be examples of prudence and
obedience in this area.
Examples of visionaries judged to be false Some individuals have been
pronounced against by name, e.g., Vassula Ryden, and the Little Pebble,
William Kamm. Vassula has been condemned twice by the Holy Office (the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), on the grounds that her
revelations do not come from God, and because they contain errors against
the Faith. You hear people say: "But her writings are so spiritual
and so beautiful!" I agree; possibly 99% of Vassula’s messages
are in conformity with the Catholic Faith—but that is just how the devil
operates to deceive pious Catholics. It is the 1% that does harm. A
poison apple is mostly good apple—but will harm you nevertheless. The
devil knows he cannot mislead devout Catholics with outright heresy,
but he can appeal to their piety and then subtly plant errors within.
In any case, there has been
no approved revelation in the history of the Church where God took someone’s
hand and gave messages by writing with their pen. But you do
find handwriting messages given at séances—and séances
are condemned by the Church as a practice of the occult against the
law of God.
I have seen one pious magazine
defending Vassula by saying that Cardinal Ratzinger never signed the
statement against her printed in L’Osservatore Romano.
A man I know sent them the official statement from Acta Apostolicae
Sedis, the official Vatican gazette, which has the Cardinal’s signature
at the bottom, along with the Bishop Secretary of the Congregation for
the Doctrine of the Faith. Unfortunately, the editor of the magazine
had neither the humility nor the honesty to print a correction in the
next issue.
Another example: the alleged
apparitions in Garabandal in northern Spain, in which four young girls
alleged that the Virgin Mary appeared to them from 1961-1965. The response
of successive bishops of the diocese of Santander has been uniformly
negative, and the present Bishop Vilaplaua has concurred with this verdict.
Despite this, there are a number of active associations supporting Garabandal.
A simple case of disobedience to lawful authority.
This is only one of a countless
number. There’s Montichiari in Italy (1947), Necedah in the United States
(1949), Palmar de Troya in Spain (1968), Bayside in the U.S. (1970),
Dozule in France (1972), and hundreds of others - to say nothing of
all the alleged visionaries and locutionists past and present, such
as the Irish lady, Christina Gallagher, and many another poor deluded
souls. Mrs Gallagher’s messages, in part, read like a frantic worried
woman lamenting the state of the world. There are plenty of frantic
worried people, lamenting the state of the world, who are good Catholics
- but the Blessed Virgin from Heaven does not talk like them, in such
a human, earthly, fretful fashion. To attribute such talk to Our Lady
is an insult.
"Have visions; will
travel" - such publicity seekers are not to be believed. Genuine
visionaries fly from publicity. They do not go around with photographers
and camera crews. They submit to investigation by Church authorities;
but they do not have publicity agents.
The authority to judge and the duty to obey No private individual has
the authority to judge definitively and officially which private revelations
are true and which are not.
The authority to rule on
the genuineness of a private revelation rests first with the local
Bishop.
The apparitions of Lourdes,
Knock, Fatima, Beauraing, Banneux - to name only a few - were approved
by the local Bishops. The Popes of the time never issued any
judgement on them. The current canonical practice is that the local
Bishop must appoint a committee to investigate and rule on any private
revelation (if he thinks it worthy of investigation), but the Holy See
may intervene if necessary or if the Bishops ask it to. Alternatively,
he may ask the Episcopal Conference of his country to assist in the
investigation and judgement.
It is forbidden, as well
as sinful, to propagate private revelations which have received a negative
judgement from the local Bishop, the conference of Bishops, or the Vatican’s
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Some people say, "I’m
going to follow it until the Pope says it’s false." This is a useless
guide for action in this matter - very rarely does the Pope make a pronouncement
for or against a revelation.
As for statements attributed
to the Pope (e.g., "I heard that the Pope told Mrs Smith after
Mass in his private chapel that he believes in Garabandal and Bayside;"
"The Pope told Jack that he could go ahead and print that condemned
book") - no one is entitled to act on such gossip. The Church is
governed by publicly promulgated statements - not by hearsay and personal
communications.
The Popes may choose to
show their approval of certain revelations, after the decision
of a local Bishop or conference of Bishops, by speaking of them, or
by placing a new feast in the liturgical calendar, or by visiting the
places intrinsically connected with them (e.g., Guadalupe, Paray-le-Monial,
Rue de Bac, Lourdes, Knock, Fatima, Beauraing, Banneux).
Even should the local Bishop
mistakenly disapprove of a genuine revelation, obedience to the Church
remains paramount. It is a sin to propagate a private revelation disobediently,
but it can never be a sin not to propagate one. This applies
both to claimed seers and to followers. In fact, if an alleged visionary
disobeys a legitimate order from the Bishop, and claims God’s backing
for the action, this is a sure sign that the message is not from God.
Even if a genuine private revelation has been given, not even God
Himself would want or command a seer to spread it against a lawful decree
of a Bishop to desist. In fact, there are occasions in the life
of St Teresa of Jesus of Avila (died 1582) and St Margaret Mary (died
1690) and Sr Josefa Menendez (died 1923) where Our Lord gave them a
directive, but then their superior forbade it. What did they do? They
obeyed their human superior on earth. What did Our Lord then tell them?
-‘You were right to obey my representative.’
On one occasion, the Sacred
Heart of Jesus told St Margaret Mary to do something, but her Superior
did not approve. When He came again, she asked Him about this, and He
replied: "…not only do I desire that you should do what your
Superior commands, but also that you should do nothing of all that I
order without their consent. I love obedience, and without it no one
can please me" [Autobiography of St Margaret Mary].
Spiritual writers have an
axiom: A Superior may or may not be inspired by God in his command,
but you are always inspired in obeying. (Of course, we’re not talking
about where a Superior commands a sin; and, as I said above, it is not
a sin to drop a private revelation).
Satan may really promote
good things for a while, provided that he gains in the long run. The
revelations of Necedah, Wisconsin, seemed to have good fruits, yet were
false. Rosaries were said to change to gold. Similarly for Bayside.
But disobedience showed them false. St Margaret Mary was told by Our
Lord: "Listen, My daughter, and do not lightly believe and trust
every spirit, for Satan is angry and will try to deceive you. So do
nothing without the approval of those who guide you. Being thus under
the authority of obedience, his efforts against you will be in vain,
for he has no power over the obedient" [Autobiography].
After error itself, the
mark of a false mystic is wilfulness and disobedience. I love this quote
from Saint Faustina Kowalska: "Satan can even clothe himself
in a cloak of humility, but he does not know how to wear the cloak of
obedience." (Diary, par. 939). Genuine mystics, like
Saint Pio of Pietrelcina (Padre Pio), are models of obedience. They
never pretend to set up Christ against His Church.
Everyone is free to have
an opinion, but all have to submit to the judgement of the Church with
practical obedience. What I mean is: you are still free to disagree
(the Bishop is not infallible in this matter), but you owe him practical
obedience, that is, you may not act against the decree; you
may not propagate a revelation that the Bishop has judged negatively,
or continue to say publicly that you regard it as genuine. Remember,
a Church commission may give a negative verdict for reasons which it
cannot state publicly, e.g., it may have found out things against the
character of the seer, but will not say so publicly, even though this
would justify the decision and help people to accept it.
If a so-called message is
judged not authentic for doctrinal reasons, then you are not
free to defend such messages, because then you will be defending error.
Vassula Ryden is an example of this: the judgement against her was for
false doctrine in her writings. How and why pious Catholics defended
her after the negative judgement by the Holy See’s Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith is beyond me. Her whole case is black-and-white.
Apart from unorthodoxy, her alleged messages, which are meant to be
handwritten by Our Lord Himself, contain mistakes in English spelling
and grammar!
Can you say publicly that
an approved revelation is not genuine? Yes, if you want to. The Church
never orders you to accept any private revelation. But any such disagreement
should be voiced respectfully.
Caution never does harm The simple fact is that
most claimed revelations are false. It is extremely foolish, therefore,
to devote oneself to propagating a disapproved or dubious message, which
might actually come from the Father of Lies. If one day you see its
falsity for yourself, you will regret it enormously, and be unable to
undo the harm done to others. On the other hand, there are more than
enough approved messages to spread, if you want to spread them. It is
better to keep to what is countenanced by the Church, than to go it
alone and risk being a dupe of the devil.
Fr Peter Joseph of Wagga
Wagga, Australia, has a doctorate in dogmatic theology from the Pontifical
Gregorian University, Rome, is the editor of the revised version of
Archbishop Sheehan’s "Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine" (Saint
Austin Press 2001) and is currently the Chancellor of the Maronite Diocese
of Australia
|
