Should we all take Private Revelations seriously?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Krisdun
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Krisdun

Guest
Some private revelations can be quite frightening especially to those who suffer from anxiety or are particularly sensitive.
 
You’ve just answered your question. They were intended solely for the one who received them. I am certain that the Church approves them with some trepidation, as they know the faithful ; what they are capable of and what they are wont to do with such.

The rest of us are well advised to study the Gospels and the hope that is within them. As our Lord said,
“It is enough!”
Click to expand...
 
I ignore almost all of them. If they don’t add to your spiritual life, I suggest you do the same.
 
We should never take private revelations as on a level equal to, or any way close to, public revelation.

Judge them by their fruits. Do they result in persons reading the Catechism more, going to Mass and Confession more, spiritual and corporal acts of Mercy, acts of evangelism?

Or do they try to draw people more deeply into this particular private revelation?
 
We have the option of paying attention to them or not. When we die we won’t be asked “were you devoted enough to Our Lady of Fatima?” or something similar.

If they do scare you, I recommend looking at some of the happier ones, like the Sacred Heart, Divine Mercy and Our Lady of Pontmains. But don’t feel obliged to.
 
Were the Sacred Heart and Divine Mercy not private revelations? They seem to be accepted by most Catholics…although perhaps not all?
 
Last edited:
.
There are fake “private” revelations.
So I don’t pay attention to them unless they are approved by the Church.
But Catholics are free to give them heed–though they should not
pay attention if they speak against the truths of the faith. Obvious instances of this are the private revelations of the founder of Mormonism or Muhammed, but modern “seers” too go against the faith, and have even been publicly rejected by the Church,
 
Last edited:
The words of Jesus to the saints (outside the Bible,) are private revelations. But the image of Blood and water flowing from the Heart of Jesus illustrates an act in Public Revelation.
 
Krisdun said:
Were the Sacred Heart and Divine Mercy not private revelations? They seem to be accepted by most Catholics…although perhaps not all?
Click to expand...
Yes they’re private revelations. I was just suggesting them as private revelations that don’t include the frightening elements that Fatima does for instance.
 
Well, private revelations can be intended for more than just those who received them. I think I read somewhere that Jesus told St Margaret Mary that he wanted France consecrated to the Sacred Heart. At Fatima, Our Lady wanted Russia consecrated, etc. Jesus told St Faustina that He wanted a Feast of Mercy to be established in the Church, and so it was done. The wishes and mandates of private revelations aren’t necessary for salvation, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t helpful for us, even VERY helpful. And in some cases, ignoring them seemed to have lead to disastrous consequences. In the case of the Sacred Heart, the consecration of France wasn’t done. 100 years later, the French Revolution occurred. Some Catholics see a connection. At Fatima, what Our Lady wished for wasn’t done. Then WW2 happened… I’m sure there are other examples

“Despise not prophecies.” Thessalonians 5:20
 
Trying2overcome said:
“Despise not prophecies.” Thessalonians 5:20
Click to expand...
That’s assuming they’re genuine prophecies. The jury is out on that. Saying “well, Mary said she wanted this” or “Jesus said He wanted that…” doesn’t help, because for that to have impact the person already has to believe that Jesus or Mary really communicated that.

I mean, yeah, if we all agree that Jesus said something, then there would be no argument.
 
Last edited:
Well, I don’t know many private or public revelations. But, I do find Fatima helpful and appropriate, especially for Catholics like me who for a period of time were influenced by feel good movements and tempted by ideas like universal salvation. So, again Fatima was pivotal in my spiritual growth.

Again, to me the miracle of Fatima was that it occurred in 1917 but it’s message only makes sense in a post seventies post-modernist feel good world. The primary revelation of Fatima is the acknowledgment of Hell, and more importantly a call to prayer. Well, in 1917 the message may not have had so much force where people were more prone to acknowledge hell. But to me the miracle and the value is in foreseeing a period where many Christians don’t acknowledge Hell and many Christians are influenced by atheist and their false judgement of God that if there is a Hell God can’t be good, or other atheistic arguments Christians are influenced by that essentially it is better to be atheist than believe in Hell. Again, these are all false arguments but they would come later in History than 1917.

So, for Fatima to foresee this problem and for it to be communicated to children who wouldn’t know the philosophical implications and for it to be a call to prayer, to me that is helpful and beneficial and not frightening. Again, for me the ultimate implication of Fatima is to pray.
 
Gonna revise my earlier statement and say there are a few I’m aware of where I’d call myself an agnostic. Most I actively disbelieve* and think they do more spiritual harm than good.

One mans opinion, but I really think they’re not helpful 95% of the time.
  • by disbelieve, I don’t mean the person reporting it was necessarily lying. I mean I don’t believe they were intended as something for the general population as opposed to the individual who claims they saw/heard it
 
Last edited:
Krisdun said:
Some private revelations can be quite frightening especially to those who suffer from anxiety or are particularly sensitive.
Click to expand...
Your post is Exhibit A as to why private revelations should not be propagated around like they currently are, in my opinion, particularly the “end times” variety which often involves people making dubious assertions that are often not approved by the Church.

If a person is scared by reading about or watching videos on private revelations, then they need to stop doing that. It’s like reading about or watching videos on exorcism. Some people can handle it, some people can’t. A lot of separating the wheat from the chaff is often necessary. Either way, reading and watching such things is not necessary to be a Catholic.
 
Last edited:
I find the Our Lady of Pontmains and Sacred Heart private revelations very much influenced me to have more trust. Especially the former. It’s my favorite Marian apparition with La Salette being a near second.

But when it comes to private revelation, for me, it’s all about Divine Mercy. When I was converting and struggling with scrupulosity and convinced I was going to hell, that devotion and message helped me so much it’s hard to put it into words. I’ll admit I say the Divine Mercy chaplet more than the Rosary.
 
Last edited:
You have to use discernment. Test everything, keep what is good.
 
I can imagine if anyone had a private revelation they would have a tough time trying to convince anyone of its validity. In the case of Fátima and Lourdes (Akita too) many other associated miracles occurred that were witnessed by many people which obviously convinced the Church they were real. In other cases such as Saint Faustina and the Divine Mercy it must have been much more difficult to judge as there was no ‘public’ miraculous sign or event associated with it but it has subsequently become very popular among Catholics nonetheless.
 
Krisdun said:
I can imagine if anyone had a private revelation they would have a tough time trying to convince anyone of its validity.
Click to expand...
The visionaries generally only have to “convince” people like their bishops or confessors or others to whom they have been specifically told to deliver a message. Those visionaries whose private revelations were approved were usually not going on youtube preaching to the whole world. The priests and bishops are better at evaluating this sort of thing than lay people, many of whom are overly suggestible or are looking for a “public miraculous sign” which might not be present.
 
I think even a bishop or confessor would have a tough time believing a new apparition or vision.
 
God grants them, at His discretion and for His purposes. They’re always meant to benefit the receiver and advance God’s ultimate plans in some way large or small, but also, in some cases, to encourage and possibly edify the rest of us. I can’t help but believe that was the intention with the experiences of St Teresa of Avila and St John of the Cross, for examples.

And not all reported PR’s are from Him, of course.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top