Marian apparitions

[Ginger2]

The link doesn’t include letters from 2006. It icludes a 2008 statement about 2006 letters and investigations. There is a difference.

Anyway, thanks for your help. I really only wanted to know if there was anything more than common sense involved in these decisions.

 

[Theophorus]

The link doesn’t include letters from 2006. It icludes a 2008 statement about 2006 letters and investigations. There is a difference.

Anyway, thanks for your help. I really only wanted to know if there was anything more than common sense involved in these decisions.

If you are responding to me here, Ginger2 then I despair! I also ask you once again to actually look at the link I posted.

Same is true of Gallagher. She’s out carousing the night clubs and living the high life until she goes to “church” and then suddenly becomes a pious pauper! I think this was a no-brainer. What I object to is the church’s apparent indifference. It appears at first glance they didn’t want to give up a profitable entity and were trying to keep it alive by **keeping the false prophet in service **and only taking away a few privilages.

That’s what the RC tried to do.

I can only ‘congratulate’ you on being able to construct a straw-man scenario that you can then pick apart, and since genuine debate seems out of the question I will also say goodbye

 

[beehumble]

Thank you for that excellent resource, HCC. One that’s on the list was that of the case of Teresa Lopez. A priest who is a good friend of our family was involved in the investigation in Denver in 1990 of her false claims; he proved her plagiarism.

That list is inaccurate on that link. It says Garabandal is a negative decision (which sounds like it has been rejected) but it is not rejected. It is category 3 :3) non constat de supernaturalitate (it is not established supernatural) which means it has not been accepted OR rejected but is open pending any new information etc.

ODDLY, if one clicks on the words Negative Decision next to Garabandal, they are presented with a citation from EWTN (bottom of the linked page) which says it is category 3. (Negative decision is category 2)

List of apparitions: campus.udayton.edu/mary//resources/aprtable.html

Garabandal Negative Decision link takes one here (SEE BOTTOM OF PAGE where it quotes EWTN as saying Garabandal is category 3 - which means it is not rejected nor accepted but still awaiting more information and it means people can go there.)
campus.udayton.edu/mary/resources/garabandal_letters.html

 

[beehumble]

It is hard to say definitively that the Church has completely denounced one apparition or another because the cases go through a process. In some cases the local bishop has stated that he has found nothing supernatural in the messages and events and that has been enough to stop the ongoing occurrences. In other cases, the events continue(d) despite the bishop’s warnings and the Holy See has gotten involved.

This site maintains a thorough list on the status of most alleged and approved apparitions over the last 100 years:

campus.udayton.edu/mary//resources/aprtable.html

That list is inaccurate on that link. It says Garabandal is a negative decision (which sounds like it has been rejected) but it is not rejected. It is category 3 :3) non constat de supernaturalitate (it is not established supernatural) which means it has not been accepted OR rejected but is open pending any new information etc.

ODDLY, if one clicks on the words Negative Decision next to Garabandal, they are presented with a citation from EWTN (bottom of the linked page) which says it is category 3. (Negative decision is category 2)

List of apparitions: campus.udayton.edu/mary//resources/aprtable.html

Garabandal Negative Decision link takes one here (SEE BOTTOM OF PAGE where it quotes EWTN as saying Garabandal is category 3 - which means it is not rejected nor accepted but still awaiting more information and it means people can go there.)
campus.udayton.edu/mary/resources/garabandal_letters.html

 

[Robert_Burns]

Just a quick question…

Is there a claimed Marian apparition that has been denounced as a fraud by the RC? I know there are some the RC has affirmed as genuine and some they are not making decisions on. It is my understanding the ones they do not make a decision either way on are OK for Catholics to go to and venerate at their own descretion until such a decision dictates otherwise.

But are there any which the RC has proclaimed false?

BTW, I should clarify, I am speaking of something only the RC ruled on…not something that was discovered thru a blatant error in the claim.

Its actually not as difficult as it seems. Study the Actual Church approved Apparitions. In some cases it was a one time event. In most cases less than ten. In most false apparions there are hundreds of “Visits” with no tangible message other than keeping the “seer” or “seers” relevant. Then in addition - take a look at the behavior of the “Seer”

St Bernadette immediately entered a sequestered Religious order as did Sister Lucy from Fatima.

There will always pop up from time to time false Seers attempting to gain attention who fool some people to a point - but if the message is from GOD - there is absolutely nothing man can do to silence it. If its not - then there is nothing the false Seer can do to get it approved.

So as far as I am concerned , I leave the question of whether or not an apparition is good to the Magisterium.

pax

 

[Hesychios]

Father Benedict Groeschel wrote a marvelous book on the subject, and I think every discussion about apparitions is better informed after taking what he had to say in mind.

One thing that stands out in my recollection (I no longer have the book handy) is that the overwhelming majority of claimed apparitions are really not. The numbers of claimants run into the hundreds but the public is hardly aware of most of them. If one didn’t know this one might assume that the number of reported apparitions was quite small (and the percentage of non-approved ones was only some portion of that) and those two assumptions would make the likelihood of an apparition one experiences or knows about seem all the more probable.

In other words, one might think “it hardly ever happens, it happened to me, it must be real!”

For some reason or another a few of these get more legs than the rest, and do receive a popular following to some degree, but that does not make them any more genuine.

The actual number of approved sightings is very very small compared to the number of reported ones.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Brother Hesychios,

SO GREAT to hear you’re back from China and that the Lord protected you overseas. Thanks be to God you’re home! Drop me an IM and let me know how your new job is working out!

Blessings!

Father Benedict Groeschel wrote a marvelous book on the subject, and I think every discussion about apparitions is better informed after taking what he had to say in mind.

One thing that stands out in my recollection (I no longer have the book handy) is that the overwhelming majority of claimed apparitions are really not. The numbers of claimants run into the hundreds but the public is hardly aware of most of them. If one didn’t know this one might assume that the number of reported apparitions was quite small (and the percentage of non-approved ones was only some portion of that) and those two assumptions would make the likelihood of an apparition one experiences or knows about seem all the more probable.

In other words, one might think “it hardly ever happens, it happened to me, it must be real!”

For some reason or another a few of these get more legs than the rest, and do receive a popular following to some degree, but that does not make them any more genuine.

The actual number of approved sightings is very very small compared to the number of reported ones.

 

[Ginger2]

Its actually not as difficult as it seems. Study the Actual Church approved Apparitions. In some cases it was a one time event. In most cases less than ten. In most false apparions there are hundreds of “Visits” with no tangible message other than keeping the “seer” or “seers” relevant. Then in addition - take a look at the behavior of the “Seer”

St Bernadette immediately entered a sequestered Religious order as did Sister Lucy from Fatima.

There will always pop up from time to time false Seers attempting to gain attention who fool some people to a point - but if the message is from GOD - there is absolutely nothing man can do to silence it. If its not - then there is nothing the false Seer can do to get it approved.

So as far as I am concerned , I leave the question of whether or not an apparition is good to the Magisterium.

pax

My question was not whether or not the apparition is true or not, it is whether or not any had been officially denounced without obvious errors, like the two mentioned earlier. Obviously the RC is not going to hesitate to denounce as false those who criticize the RC.

If all false prophets were that easy to spot the Bible wouldn’t warn us to test and prove all things. We wouldn’t need to as it would be obvious to believers and the only ones being fooled would be those who are perishing and want to be fooled - there are people who like beliving in things that are not real because it makes them “feel good” inside.

I’ve heard people say they knew “it” was from God because it was so beautiful or it felt so good. but even satan masquerades as an angel of light.

I had a spiritual guide tell me she had never in all her years encountered an evil spirit.

I asked how she could know since the Bible warns even satan masquerades as an angel of light - she had no answer to that.

I am not questioning approved apparitions (mostly because it would set everyone on the defence and I’d never get answers - just criticisms)
I am asking about the denounced because that will indirectly tell me a lot about the approved.

If anyone comes up with anything, I’m still open to seeing it. Thanks,

Ginger

 

[Ginger2]

COLOR=“Navy”]2 Cor. 11: 13-15: “For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.”

Just thought I should post the entire passage. real apparitions and false prophets will appear as apostles of Christ. They will appear good and beautiful like an angel of God. They will appear as ministers of righteousness.

That is why it can be difficult (impossible for those not unsaved) to spot the enemy.

Ginger

 

[johnthebaptist1]

I believe in apparitions.
I have read Apparirions in Malta and heve read the 30 different ones were are Lady

tell,s the person what she said,and I do beleive ,that what Our Lady say is true ,Even

if it is not approvied by the RC Church. IT,s my heart that makes me beleive if is true

or not. But IF OUR LADY say this things than I beleive no matter what other say.

May OUR LADY help thoss who don,t beleive.