Reading St. Faustina's Diary

[sirach2v4]

As usual, I’m jumping the gun with this thread. I am reading the Kindle version of St. F’s diary. I’m only about 75 paragraphs into it; I don’t know if it’s worth going on. Is it really Faustina’s diary or somebody’s reworking of it (which it seems to be, by explicit admission in the introduction).

I’m troubled by the fact that, as stated in the introduction, it has been heavily edited, far beyond spelling checks and care in translation from the original Polish language.

Starting from the first paragraph, I am reeling because the diary is described as a private revelation that is meant for the whole world. I thought that the Church has stated that a private revelation is intended primarily for the person who receives it. When the Church teaches this, I simply don’t understand why it tramples it’s own doctrine by endorsing and promoting such fantastic allegations.

At one point St. Faustina talks about the possibility of her having delusions – seeing and talking to Jesus and Mary. She walks into a room and Jesus is standing there in the doorway, for example.

Already in so short a portion of the diary, she has what we would generally call mood swings. She’s filled with “ineffable” joy and then she’s depressed.

It is not an exaggeration on my part to say that she has a messiah complex, when she says she wants to suffer “in expiation” for the sins of the world – well, yeah, that’s what I thought only Jesus could and did do - already. I thought only Jesus could even do something like that.

She declares the importance of a painting in relation to nothing less than the eternal salvation of souls. People who meditate on this painting are supposed to have the inside track to heaven.

And, then, what the late St. John Paul II already did, St. Faustina revealed the message “from Jesus” that the Sunday after Easter is to be a special commemoration of “the” Divine Mercy.

I’m having trouble with the grandiosity of the statements in the diary. The nihil obstat and imprimatur on the diary do not imply an endorsement of any of the statements in the diary.

If Jesus has an “abyss” of mercy (of which I suppose I should be delighted and grateful) then why do we have to beg Jesus for that mercy (viz. the chaplet of The Divine Mercy)? It seems to be a contradiction, that if Jesus withholds His mercy, then it is by definition not an abyss, i.e. unlimited; it is in fact very much limited. This seems to be not a minor detail to me. Illogical arguments make my head spin.

 

[Stephen_says]

HI!

I don’t really have an answer your questions, but I wanted to show solidarity.

I tried reading the Diary over Lent, I thought it would be a good spiritual practice but, for many of the same reasons you mentioned, I couldn’t get through it.

It’s tough. I think private revelations are kind of like your favorite dessert. Everyone likes certain things. My sister doesn’t understand why I don’t like chocolate ice-cream as much as she does. Some people won’t understand why we are not as enamored with the Diary as they are, and that’s okay.

Many people tried to explain the Diary to me in nice, enticingly complex language, but I don’t think it’s worth it. I found that reading the Diary actually harmed my faith, so I stopped, and that’s okay.

PAX

 

[Don_Ruggero]

As usual, I’m jumping the gun with this thread. I am reading the Kindle version of St. F’s diary. I’m only about 75 paragraphs into it; I don’t know if it’s worth going on. Is it really Faustina’s diary or somebody’s reworking of it (which it seems to be, by explicit admission in the introduction).

I’m troubled by the fact that, as stated in the introduction, it has been heavily edited, far beyond spelling checks and care in translation from the original Polish language.

Starting from the first paragraph, I am reeling because the diary is described as a private revelation that is meant for the whole world. I thought that the Church has stated that a private revelation is intended primarily for the person who receives it. When the Church teaches this, I simply don’t understand why it tramples it’s own doctrine by endorsing and promoting such fantastic allegations.

The Church would never investigate, with all the resources such an investigation requires, a purported supernatural phenomenon that was to one person and had no purported implication beyond that person…that makes no sense. Do you have any idea how complex the theological commissions, even at the level of the diocesan inquiry, are that investigate mystical phenomenon of this nature? And the interdisciplinary experts these commissions require to carry out their mandate?

Private revelation is in distinction to public revelation, which closed with the death of the last apostle. There can be no addition to public revelation. Private revelation, on the other hand, are revelations to individuals who may eventually be canonised (such as Saint Catherine Laboure or Saint Bernadette Soubirous) or not (the visionaries of La Salette or Knock or Banneux or Beauraing). Indeed Paris, Lourdes, and Fatima are private revelations known around the Catholic world. They are not private in the sense of being limited to one or a handful of persons. Not at all.

Private revelation that has been judged credible of belief does not, in fact, “trample its own doctrine”…quite the contrary. It must have been judged by theologians to be in conformity with the Church’s teachings and the competent ecclesiastical authority would have to pronounce itself with a favourable verdict. The person reading something such as the Diary of Saint Faustina or the Revelations of Saint Bridget of Sweden, however, has a most serious obligation to read it while placing it in its proper theological context – that is the obligation of the reader.

At one point St. Faustina talks about the possibility of her having delusions – seeing and talking to Jesus and Mary. She walks into a room and Jesus is standing there in the doorway, for example.

Already in so short a portion of the diary, she has what we would generally call mood swings. She’s filled with “ineffable” joy and then she’s depressed.

It is not an exaggeration on my part to say that she has a messiah complex, when she says she wants to suffer “in expiation” for the sins of the world – well, yeah, that’s what I thought only Jesus could and did do - already. I thought only Jesus could even do something like that…

You are describing, in part, the vocation to being a victim soul. This is a phenomenon well known in the field of mystical theology. There is an entire sub-category of theology treating of the extraordinary phenomenon associated with mystical experience.

She declares the importance of a painting in relation to nothing less than the eternal salvation of souls. People who meditate on this painting are supposed to have the inside track to heaven.

And, then, what the late St. John Paul II already did, St. Faustina revealed the message “from Jesus” that the Sunday after Easter is to be a special commemoration of “the” Divine Mercy.

I’m having trouble with the grandiosity of the statements in the diary. The nihil obstat and imprimatur on the diary do not imply an endorsement of any of the statements in the diary.

If Jesus has an “abyss” of mercy (of which I suppose I should be delighted and grateful) then why do we have to beg Jesus for that mercy (viz. the chaplet of The Divine Mercy)? It seems to be a contradiction, that if Jesus withholds His mercy, then it is by definition not an abyss, i.e. unlimited; it is in fact very much limited. This seems to be not a minor detail to me. Illogical arguments make my head spin.

The nihil obstat and imprimatur on the diary indeed do not imply an endorsement of any of the statements in the diary…that determination was made by the Holy See, at the highest level, and the revelations to Saint Faustina were judged credible and worthy of belief before the completion of her cause for beatification. Actually, this particular series of revelations involved examination by the Holy See’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

All that said, not everyone is enriched by reading the writings of mystics, particularly if they lack the necessary foundation to contextualise and understand the writings according to the basic principles of theology and then to integrate them into one’s proper knowledge of the Catholic faith.

Also, if one is not a theologian, it is important to rely upon, beyond primary source material, such as the Saint’s own writings, upon sound secondary source material with commentary by a theological expert in the field of theology that is being considered.

Not everyone is going to be attracted to the various schools of spiritualities that constitute the Church’s patrimony. Perhaps you should look to another author who would be more suited to your taste. You may wish to speak with our spiritual director or regular confessor for suggestions.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

/…/I am reading the Kindle version of St. F’s diary. I’m only about 75 paragraphs into it; I don’t know if it’s worth going on. Is it really Faustina’s diary or somebody’s reworking of it (which it seems to be, by explicit admission in the introduction)/…/

Starting from the first paragraph, I am reeling because the diary is described as a private revelation that is meant for the whole world. I thought that the Church has stated that a private revelation is intended primarily for the person who receives it. When the Church teaches this, I simply don’t understand why it tramples it’s own doctrine by endorsing and promoting such fantastic allegations.

The Church would never investigate, with all the resources such an investigation requires, a purported supernatural phenomenon that was to one person and had no purported implication beyond that person…that makes no sense. Do you have any idea how complex the theological commissions, even at the level of the diocesan inquiry, are that investigate mystical phenomenon of this nature? And the interdisciplinary experts these commissions require to carry out their mandate?

Private revelation is in distinction to public revelation, which closed with the death of the last apostle. There can be no addition to public revelation. Private revelation, on the other hand, are revelations to individuals who may eventually be canonised (such as Saint Catherine Laboure or Saint Bernadette Soubirous) or not (the visionaries of La Salette or Knock or Banneux or Beauraing). Indeed Paris, Lourdes, and Fatima are private revelations known around the Catholic world. They are not private in the sense of being limited to one or a handful of persons. Not at all

Private revelation that has been judged credible of belief does not, in fact, “trample its own doctrine”…quite the contrary. It must have been judged by theologians to be in conformity with the Church’s teachings and the competent ecclesiastical authority would have to pronounce itself with a favourable verdict. The person reading something such as the Diary of Saint Faustina or the Revelations of Saint Bridget of Sweden, however, has a most serious obligation to read it while placing it in its proper theological context – that is the obligation of the reader

If one were to set out to read and study the writings of the Doctor of the Church, Saint Teresa of Avila and her work, Interior Castles, examining the heights of the mystical life and the transforming union, would need to read it through the lens of mystical theology, assisted by one the great mystical theologians of the 20th century such as Father Juan Arintero or Father Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, or even Father Adolph Tanqueray for example

At one point St. Faustina talks about the possibility of her having delusions – seeing and talking to Jesus and Mary. She walks into a room and Jesus is standing there in the doorway, for example

/…/

It is not an exaggeration on my part to say that she has a messiah complex, when she says she wants to suffer “in expiation” for the sins of the world – well, yeah, that’s what I thought only Jesus could and did do - already. I thought only Jesus could even do something like that

The saint hardly had a “messiah complex”. You are actually describing, in part, the vocation to being a victim soul. This is a phenomenon well known in the field of basic mystical theology. There is an entire sub-category of theology treating of the extraordinary phenomenon associated with mystical experience

She declares the importance of a painting in relation to nothing less than the eternal salvation of souls. People who meditate on this painting are supposed to have the inside track to heaven

And, then, what the late St. John Paul II already did, St. Faustina revealed the message “from Jesus” that the Sunday after Easter is to be a special commemoration of “the” Divine Mercy

I’m having trouble with the grandiosity of the statements in the diary. The nihil obstat and imprimatur on the diary do not imply an endorsement of any of the statements in the diary

If Jesus has an “abyss” of mercy (of which I suppose I should be delighted and grateful) then why do we have to beg Jesus for that mercy (viz. the chaplet of The Divine Mercy)? It seems to be a contradiction, that if Jesus withholds His mercy, then it is by definition not an abyss, i.e. unlimited; it is in fact very much limited. This seems to be not a minor detail to me. Illogical arguments make my head spin

The nihil obstat and imprimatur on the diary indeed do not imply an endorsement of any of the statements in the diary…that determination was made by the Holy See, at the highest level, and the revelations to Saint Faustina were judged credible and worthy of belief before the completion of her cause for beatification. Actually, this particular series of revelations involved examination by the Holy See’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

All that said, not everyone is enriched by reading the writings of mystics, particularly if they lack the necessary foundation to contextualise and understand the writings according to the basic principles of theology and then to integrate them into one’s proper knowledge of the Catholic faith

Also, if one is not a theologian, it is important to rely, beyond primary source material, such as the Saint’s own writings, upon sound secondary source material with commentary by a theological expert in the field of theology that is being considered

Not everyone is going to be attracted to the various schools of spiritualities that constitute the Church’s patrimony. Perhaps you should look to another author who would be more suited to your taste. You may wish to speak with our spiritual director or regular confessor for suggestions

 

[Sirach2]

Sirach 2v4, I spot-checked the Kindle paragraphs with my copy of the Diary, specifically those you mentioned that are prior to #75 – they are identical. The publisher is the Marian Press in Stockbridge, MA. This Order is dedicated to promoting the message, and is very much a Canonical Order in the Church.

Perhaps you have a bias against the work and it is influencing you to reject it. I would hope that you invoke the help of the Holy Spirit prior to reading it.

And, then, what the late St. John Paul II already did, St. Faustina revealed the message “from Jesus” that the Sunday after Easter is to be a special commemoration of “the” Divine Mercy.

St. John Paul II, being from Poland and familiar with her work many years prior to declaring her a saint, would never have instituted the Feast of Divine Mercy if he did not believe the command came from Our Lord Himself.

If Jesus has an “abyss” of mercy (of which I suppose I should be delighted and grateful) then why do we have to beg Jesus for that mercy (viz. the chaplet of The Divine Mercy)?

The Chaplet was requested by Our Lord primarily to assist those who are dying, but Jesus also told Faustina that other intentions for which [she and we] pray the Chaplet will obtain His benevolent favor. I’m thinking of two particular incidences where a severe storm was miraculously averted after Jesus instructed her to pray the chaplet.

In this respect, praying for the dying is a spiritual work of mercy in itself, and is no different than what we pray daily in the Hail Mary, “pray for us sinners now, and at the hour of our death.” Grace will attend the soul as it dies and obtain for them God’s mercy by repenting of their sins, and trusting in His mercy. It is not a guarantee, however, that all souls will cooperate with the prayed-for grace.

 

[Wannabe_Monk_16]

I simply don’t understand why it tramples it’s own doctrine by endorsing and promoting such fantastic allegations.

Which doctrine is supposedly being trampled because of St. Faustina’s diary?

At one point St. Faustina talks about the possibility of her having delusions – seeing and talking to Jesus and Mary. She walks into a room and Jesus is standing there in the doorway, for example.

Have you ever had a vision of Jesus? I haven’t, and if I had, I would be deeply troubled that I would have no idea if it were authentic, or a hallucination, or a diabolical trick.

Already in so short a portion of the diary, she has what we would generally call mood swings. She’s filled with “ineffable” joy and then she’s depressed.

If you continue reading, you will learn of the intimate relationship that St. Faustina has with Agnus Dei. Oscillating between this union and not can easily throw a human into these extremes.

It is not an exaggeration on my part to say that she has a messiah complex, when she says she wants to suffer “in expiation” for the sins of the world – well, yeah, that’s what I thought only Jesus could and did do - already. I thought only Jesus could even do something like that.

Have you heard of offering up your sufferings for the salvation of souls, or for the relief of those suffering in Purgatory? This a holy and mystical endeavor. St. Faustina is a chosen victim soul (similar to St. Gemma Galgani) whose sufferings serves a reparation needed for Christ’s Divine Justice

She declares the importance of a painting in relation to nothing less than the eternal salvation of souls. People who meditate on this painting are supposed to have the inside track to heaven.

I would almost equate this to venerating a crucifix.

And, then, what the late St. John Paul II already did, St. Faustina revealed the message “from Jesus” that the Sunday after Easter is to be a special commemoration of “the” Divine Mercy.

Your timeline / order seems a little faulty. St. John Paul the Great enacting this Feast BECAUSE of St. Faustina’s private revelations. Not the other way around.

I’m having trouble with the grandiosity of the statements in the diary. The nihil obstat and imprimatur on the diary do not imply an endorsement of any of the statements in the diary.

Please trust our Shepherds. Do you know the meanings behind these terms?
Nihil obstat = nothing hinders, essentially there is nothing in this article that damages the faith or morals of the Catholic Church
Imprimatur = let it be printed, please trust the successors of the Apostles.

If Jesus has an “abyss” of mercy (of which I suppose I should be delighted and grateful)

You should!

then why do we have to beg Jesus for that mercy (viz. the chaplet of The Divine Mercy)? {/QUOTE]

Free will seems to be the most logical answer here. Christ will not grant us something that we don’t ask for (assuming it is in line with His Will). Always ask for Mercy.
sirach2v4;14001772:

It seems to be a contradiction, that if Jesus withholds His mercy, then it is by definition not an abyss, i.e. unlimited; it is in fact very much limited.

I think God as omnipotent would be able to withhold something that is, in fact, unlimited. Your logic is a little faulty with his fact.

Please continue reading this diary. It is dense with spiritually beneficial nuggets. Like when Christ tells St. Faustina that it he thoroughly enjoys when she (and the rest of us as an extension) meditates on His sorrowful Passion.

 

[Sirach2]

Sirach2v4,
This is just an innuendo, so to speak, but you may be edified to see that two persons in the audience of the EWTN taping of the Divine Mercy Chaplet are clergy who have written beautifully about the Divine Mercy.

Father Michael Gaitley wears a light blue shirt in the film, prior to becoming a priest.

You can also see Father Don Calloway in priestly garb in the film. He had an awesome conversion from a life of deep sin.

 

[Techno2000]

It is not an exaggeration on my part to say that she has a messiah complex, when she says she wants to suffer “in expiation” for the sins of the world – well, yeah, that’s what I thought only Jesus could and did do - already. I thought only Jesus could even do something like that.

Now I rejoice in what I am suffering for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.

Colossians 1:24

 

[Wannabe_Monk_16]

Now I rejoice in what I am suffering for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.

Colossians 1:24

 

[sirach2v4]

Have you heard of offering up your sufferings for the salvation of souls, or for the relief of those suffering in Purgatory?

Thanks for reminding me. I seem to recall St. Faustina saying that she was surprised that the prayers she offered for some soul(s) in Purgatory were actually applied to some other soul(s).

I’m surprised, too. Who would have thought of such a thing happening or that it could happen? My bias (or handicap) is that I try to make sense of things, as much as I can.

Having said the two previous things, my prayer for the deceased is the standard “may these and all the faithful departed rest in peace, Amen.”

I think it was on Catholic Answers Live recently that someone pointed out exactly this, that we pray “only” for the* faithful* departed, because presumably the unfaithful departed are in hell and our prayers for them will not change anything. My intention in this prayer is for those who may be not-so-faithfully departed, sinners like myself, whose only hope is God’s mercy and forgiveness.

When St. Faustina writes that her prayers went for the benefit of* other* souls in purgatory than for whom she explicitly prayed, I just sort of mentally bail out, rationalizing that what she says is not infallible and not impeccable – unless I’m missing something.

I’m grateful for the preceding posts which explain the necessity of a theological approach to the Diary. The Church recognizes dogma, doctrine, theology and theological speculation as different levels of authority. Maybe mysticism which is the apparent genre of St. Faustina’s writing, is down there on the level of speculation - valid in those parts that agree with explicit dogma and doctrine.

 

[Sirach2]

Thanks for reminding me. I seem to recall St. Faustina saying that she was surprised that the prayers she offered for some soul(s) in Purgatory were actually applied to some other soul(s).

That is not opposed to reason, when you consider that those for whom she prayed may have already been released from purgatory and are no longer there, or else that in God’s merciful compassion, He applied the prayer to someone in very dire need of his grace. I think it’s best not to try and figure God out.

 

[Wannabe_Monk_16]

Thanks for reminding me. I seem to recall St. Faustina saying that she was surprised that the prayers she offered for some soul(s) in Purgatory were actually applied to some other soul(s).

True! NO prayer, NOT a single one is ever wasted! NONE! If a prayer wouldn’t help a particular soul for whatever reason, it is always redirected (Thank God) to someone in need.

I’m surprised, too. Who would have thought of such a thing happening or that it could happen? My bias (or handicap) is that I try to make sense of things, as much as I can.

Thank God you stay as humble as possible and do your best in understanding her diary. Again, it’s pretty spiritually dense, so it takes time and prayer to understand and benefit from it. Keep working at it! It’s great that you are reading it in the first place! Please continue to seek guidance from knowledgeable (many people smarter than me!) members of this forum.

My intention in this prayer is for those who may be not-so-faithfully departed, sinners like myself, whose only hope is God’s mercy and forgiveness.

Again, a very humble and genuine prayer that definitely appears to be in line with the will of Christ. I would guess this prayer would be answered.

When St. Faustina writes that her prayers went for the benefit of* other* souls in purgatory than for whom she explicitly prayed, I just sort of mentally bail out, rationalizing that what she says is not infallible and not impeccable – unless I’m missing something.

Don’t mean to get TOO technical for you, but I think impeccability is being without sin. What if God authentically revealed to her that this happened, like showed her the graces being redirected? Why do you mentally check out at this point…?

I’m grateful for the preceding posts which explain the necessity of a theological approach to the Diary. The Church recognizes dogma, doctrine, theology and theological speculation as different levels of authority. Maybe mysticism which is the apparent genre of St. Faustina’s writing, is down there on the level of speculation - valid in those parts that agree with explicit dogma and doctrine.

You should also remember that St. Faustina aggressively fought to keep herself humble and simple. She was extremely obedient to her spiritual directors. She was a sensitive soul who needed guidance, and she found it firmly within the confines of the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[Sirach2]

I earnestly hope that many will find powerful spiritual help in the Diary. I have some favorite passages that I use for my nightly examen. On the surface, it looks easy, but I am amazed at how many times during the day my thoughts are beset with intolerance. Often it is due to some passing annoyance that causes our “self” to grumble inwardly and find fault. Think about it! Isn’t that the number one failing of the ancient Israelites? They grumbled constantly! St. Faustina wrote Our Lord’s warning in #1760, “Shun murmurers like a plague.”

Passage #163 helps me focus:
“Help me, O Lord, that my eyes may be merciful, so that I may never suspect or judge from appearances, but look for what is beautiful in my neighbors’ souls.”

This, too, was one of St. Therese’s mottos, to praise God for the hidden virtue and beauty in others that was often masked by apparent or manifest failings to the contrary.

 

[Boy_Wonder]

This is nuts. Faustina is a great saint. Her Diary changed my life, especially my understanding of how God loves us and desperately wants us to return love to him. Amazing, despite her many quirks. Sorry if she displeased the armchair Torquemada’s among us.

 

[Sirach2]

This is nuts. Faustina is a great saint. Her Diary changed my life, especially my understanding of how God loves us and desperately wants us to return love to him. Amazing, despite her many quirks. Sorry if she displeased the armchair Torquemada’s among us.

Yes, she is a great saint, indeed! The Order (MIC) has circulated a petition for the faithful to sign, naming her Doctor of the Church. One simple book, Story of a Soul, was all it took for St. Therese to be named, so I suspect this Diary will be the occasion for St. Faustina to be added to the ranks.
secure.marianweb.net/thedivinemercy.org/doctor/index.php?page=tdm-home

 

[sirach2v4]

Which doctrine is supposedly being trampled because of St. Faustina’s diary?

Entry 1: “You command Your Sacred Image to be painted / And reveal to us the inconceivable fount of mercy…”

Hasn’t this, God’s mercy, been revealed in the Gospels, indeed, the entire Bible? Can a painting do this – capture the Sacred Image?

Entry 7: “an invitation to a more perfect life”

Philosophical question: how does one improve on “perfect?” What is “more” perfect?

Entry 48: “[Jesus:] I promise that the soul that will venerate this image will not perish. I also promise victory over [its] enemies already here on earth, especially at the hour of death.”

I’ve never heard this before. The preceding comments suggest that St. Faustina’s diary is full of theology and I am not a theologian and have not studied it. I’ve read the Catechism and it didn’t say that veneration of the image of Divine Mercy will bring salvation (i.e. “not perish” ).

I have a Divine Mercy picture in my bedroom. A sister who was from the same order as St. Faustina gave it to my mom years ago. Yes, “Jesus, I trust in Thee” are words that I have often prayed. Is this now a new church doctrine, that venerating the image of Divine Mercy is some assurance of salvation? I never knew that.

This is why I started this thread. I know about the Kerygma, The Bible, the Church, the Sacraments…but now there’s more, I don’t know enough, I have to venerate the image of Divine Mercy… ? I guess I don’t know how to approach Christian mysticism or that I have to.

 

[quies]

This blurb mentions how this devotion was almost brought to an end…

 

[sirach2v4]

This blurb mentions how this devotion was almost brought to an end…

I read the blurb and it explains so little. It’s remarkable to see a power struggle unfold like this, theological politics.

 

[oldgraymare2]

For me, I found that I could read the diary in small increments only.

I personally don’t think that it is the kind of reading that one can read through like a normal book. There is so much to try an absorb in it. It’s almost overwhelming, at times. At least, it was for me.

Reading it did change my life too, in a very positive way.

I feel that the message that it gives us, gives us all hope, to see how much the Lord loves us, and how merciful He is towards us.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Entry 1: “You command Your Sacred Image to be painted / And reveal to us the inconceivable fount of mercy…”

Hasn’t this, God’s mercy, been revealed in the Gospels, indeed, the entire Bible? Can a painting do this – capture the Sacred Image?

Entry 7: “an invitation to a more perfect life”

Philosophical question: how does one improve on “perfect?” What is “more” perfect?

Entry 48: “[Jesus:] I promise that the soul that will venerate this image will not perish. I also promise victory over [its] enemies already here on earth, especially at the hour of death.”

I’ve never heard this before. The preceding comments suggest that St. Faustina’s diary is full of theology and I am not a theologian and have not studied it. I’ve read the Catechism and it didn’t say that veneration of the image of Divine Mercy will bring salvation (i.e. “not perish” ).

I have a Divine Mercy picture in my bedroom. A sister who was from the same order as St. Faustina gave it to my mom years ago. Yes, “Jesus, I trust in Thee” are words that I have often prayed. Is this now a new church doctrine, that venerating the image of Divine Mercy is some assurance of salvation? I never knew that.

This is why I started this thread. I know about the Kerygma, The Bible, the Church, the Sacraments…but now there’s more, I don’t know enough, I have to venerate the image of Divine Mercy… ? I guess I don’t know how to approach Christian mysticism or that I have to.

Since this devotion seems utterly unprecedented to you, I would also assume you have never heard of or practiced the devotion to the Sacred Heart, with the promises to Saint Margaret Mary (from the 17th century) concerning the nine First Fridays or regarding exposing an image of the Sacred Heart in the home either?