Visionaries

[faithbound]

What does the church say about visionaries, and are we to accept their visions as truth or do they need to go through some type of holy discernment

 

[JTP]

Private visions and apparitions, including the Church approved ones such as Lourdes and Fatima, are not part of the deposit of faith and belief in them is not necessary for salvation.

 

[MariaG]

At no time must I accept the words of from visionaries. But there is a process that the church goes through to let faithful Catholics know if what has been said is consistent with Catholic teachings. I can choose to believe but I am not bound to. For example, Our Lady of Fatima has been declared to be true visions of Mary. Medjugorie(spelling?) has yet to be declared as true visions. At this time, the faithful may go on to Medjugorie and honor Mary as per Catholic teachings, but no definitive pronouncement has yet to be made. I do not have to believe either of them are real. But the Church has pronounced Fatima to be true visions.

 

[Matt16_18]

**Catechism of the Catholic Church

67** Throughout the ages, there have been so-called “private” revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the *sensus fidelium * knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.

Christian faith cannot accept “revelations” that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such “revelations”.

 

[Matt16_18]

Sects that base themselves on “revelations” are numerous, e.g.:
Seventh Day Adventists (based on the “revelations” of Ellen Gould White)

**Muslims ** (Muhammad received “revelations” from the Angel “Gabriel”)

Mormons (The Book Of Mormon Another Testament Of Jesus Christ – based on “revelations” brought to Joseph Smith by the angel Moroni)

A Course in Miracles, channeled revelations from “Jesus” through Helen Schucman

 

[Amadeus]

Dear Matt 16-18:

If the Mormons had their “revelations” through the “angel” “Moroni,” shouldn’t they call themselves “Morons?”

(Sorry, I couldn’t resist this temptation! )

 

[Matt16_18]

Amadeus:

Dear Matt 16-18:

If the Mormons had their “revelations” through the “angel” “Moroni,” shouldn’t they call themselves “Morons?”

(Sorry, I couldn’t resist this temptation! )

It is kind of weird that an angel would be giving revelations to an American under the name “Moroni”, which to many Americans sounds like a nickname for little Moron.

 

[Shoshana]

Amadeus:

Dear Matt 16-18:

If the Mormons had their “revelations” through the “angel” “Moroni,” shouldn’t they call themselves “Morons?”

(Sorry, I couldn’t resist this temptation! )

Blessings,
Shoshana

 

[Steven_Merten]

I had friends who wanted me to go with them to Medjugorie. I told them that I did not have the time or money. I also told them that I already believe in Jesus. Why would I need to go ten thousand miles to possibly see miracles which confirms what I already believe. Would that not be somewhat like St. (doubting) Thomas?

Years later my friends told me about a ‘visonary’ coming to a local parish. I agreed to go with them.

The ‘visionary’ said that Mary was appearing to her right there in front of us. Afterwards they passed the basket to cover the ‘visionarys’ 'travel expenses. Then they passed out a pre zeroxed paper of what Mary had said. On the back of the paper was the ‘visonaries’ address. Just in case you did not have your check book with you that night, you could mail a check to cover the ‘visionaries’ 'travel expenses.

Then the ‘visionary’ then told us that Mary had told her that she would reappear the next day after the 9:00 and 11:00 Masses. We should tell our friends.

On the way home I mentioned to my friends, "I am sure if you write a big enough check to the ‘visionary’ for ‘travel expenses’, Mary would appear to the ‘visoinary’ right in your own living room. My friends were greatly offended by my statement.

Be very careful of this ‘visionary’ stuff. This whole visionary thing can be very dangerous for those Catholics who are hungry for such miracles.

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

 

[INAdoration]

I have been to Medjugorje (in 2002) and I can simply say that to go is to reaffirm your Catholic faith in a powerful way. Medjugorje is a place of great peace and Our Lady calls each person to a closer relationship with Jesus. You don’t have to believe the miracles or look for them. It is simply a tremendous experience to be at Mass with people from every different country praising God in every language and acknowledging His Presence. The Mass is so powerful there that it starts at 5pm and people have to be asked to leave the Church at 10pm (Mass is prefaced and followed by the entire Rosary and Veneration of the Cross or Adoration). There are many conversions there and also healings. You do not have to go, but it is very hard to leave once you do and come back to secular society to live your faith. It strengthens you to do this however.

 

[Redeemerslove]

faithbound:

What does the church say about visionaries, and are we to accept their visions as truth or do they need to go through some type of holy discernment

As with many questions about the Catholic Faith, I refer you to the official teaching instrument of the Catholic Church: The Catechism of the Catholic Church.

67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called “private” revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.

Private revelation, means revelation that doesn’t come from the Apostles. In other words, someone in their private room has a “vision,” or even in public. But this revelation is given only to them, or to a small grou: This is a private revelation.

The two types of revelation are public and private. The last public revelation stopped with the death of the last Apostle. No more revelation about Jesus Christ, new teaching about the Gospel, or new doctrine that was not previously known.

After the death of the last Apostle, we have private revelation. That is some people recieve visions, voices or similar matter on which God speaks to us in our present times. No, no doctrine can be changed, no new revelations about the Gospel given to us through these private events.

They are simply something like: “Pray for people who are going to hell, because of sexual sins,” as our lady said at a couple Church approved apparitions. Nothing new here, because:

1. People may have been going to hell because of sexual sins for centuries.
2. Sex outside of marriage has always been a sin.
3. We are called to pray always, in the Gospels.

The statement only says something new in that “many people are going to hell.” But even this can be said to be nothing new, because, “Narrow is the road and few are those who find it.”

So what do we gain from private revelations?

This is what we gain to “help live more fully by [the Gospel] in a certain period of history.” Private revelations help us to conform ourselves more closely to the Gospel, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church says.

Here is a search engine to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It might be a good idea to buy a hard copy for yourself. But, this search engine is still irreplacable, regardless.
reference.va.mondosearch.com/cgi-bin/MsmMask.exe?mask=MssSearch.msk&CFGNAME=MssFind.cfg

 

[asquared]

this has been discussed amply on other threads, complete with websites. I wouldn’t go across the street to see a Medjugoure (sp?) visionary. the local bishop is the one designated by the Church to investigate apparitions, and he has in this case declared the visions to have no basis in truth. nuf said. Bernadette, Sr. Lucia, the visionaries of Knock etc. did not make world tours and market books and tapes for fundraising purposes.

 

[Redeemerslove]

asquared:

this has been discussed amply on other threads, complete with websites. I wouldn’t go across the street to see a Medjugoure (sp?) visionary. the local bishop is the one designated by the Church to investigate apparitions, and he has in this case declared the visions to have no basis in truth. nuf said. Bernadette, Sr. Lucia, the visionaries of Knock etc. did not make world tours and market books and tapes for fundraising purposes.

This is incorrect. Here is a link to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faiths statement about Bishop Peric’s decision on the Apparitions.

ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFAUBRY.HTM

I will highlight:

In your letter of January 1, 1998, you submitted to this Dicastery several questions about the position of the Holy See and of the Bishop of Mostar in regard to the so called apparitions of Medjugorje, private pilgrimages and the pastoral care of the faithful who go there.

What Bishop Peric said in his letter to the Secretary General of “Famille Chretienne”, declaring: “My conviction and my position is not only ‘non constat de supernaturalitate,’ but likewise, ‘constat de non supernaturalitate’ of the apparitions or revelations in Medjugorje”, should be considered the expression of the personal conviction of the Bishop of Mostar which he has the right to express as Ordinary of the place, but which is and remains his personal opinion.

In short, the bishop of Mostar is only expressing his personal opinion which is not binding on anyone, even his diocese.

 

[rfk]

As people have discussed, there is a distinction between public revelation and private revelation. The public revelation consists of the Apostolic Tradition and Scriptures, guided by the teaching authority of the Church. This Deposit of Faith contains all necessary truth for salvation.

Private revelations, however, can have great value in highlighting and reinforcing specific aspects of faith. They don’t introduce new truths, but sometimes they help us to appreciate the timeless truth from a new perspective.

Private revelations have included devotions that attained widespread adoption within the Church. The Rosary, the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the feast of Corpus Christi, and Divine Mercy Sunday all stemmed from private revelations.

One thing in common about authentic private revelation is the emphasis is always on God, not on the person receiving the revelation. In fact, many Catholics couldn’t tell you the name of the Saints who originated those devotions, but they do know the devotion.

It is easy to fall into trap of wanting to believe so desperately in miracles or private visions to the point that otherwise obedient and devout Catholics “fall” for bogus “visions”.

In all cases, the most prudent thing to do is to listen to the local Bishop’s judgment. It is always the local Bishop, as Ordinary of the diocese, who has the responsibility and authority to discern the validity of a vision. Never has Rome overruled the local Bishop.

 

[rfk]

INAdoration:

I have been to Medjugorje (in 2002) and I can simply say that to go is to reaffirm your Catholic faith in a powerful way.

First, I’d like to say that I believe many sincere, devout Catholics have gone to Medjugorje, and while they were there they experienced a sincere spiritual awakening. I have members of my own family who say that it changed them.

However, I would like to make a distinction between the sincere people making the trip, versus the so-called “visionaries” who have become wealthy by creating an entire tourist industry.

I personally believe that a week spent in a local retreat center under the guidance of a good spiritual director could be just as effective, without the airfare. It would also have the advantage of not promoting the continuing disobedience within the Church.

INAdoration:

Medjugorje is a place of great peace … There are many conversions there and also healings.

See, that isn’t what the local Bishop has to say about it at all.
Bishop Ratko Perić:

There exists a problem in this diocese of Mostar-Duvno which in recent years has practically precipitated into a schism. At least eight Franciscan priests, who have rebelled against the decision of the Holy See to transfer a certain number of parishes administered by the Franciscans to the diocesan priests, have been expelled from the Franciscan Order and suspended ‘a divinis’. In spite of this, they have occupied at least five parishes through force, and continue to exercise sacred functions. They invalidly assist at marriages, hear confessions without canonical faculties and invalidly confer the sacrament of confirmation. Three years ago they even invited a deacon of the Old-Catholic Church who falsely presented himself as a bishop, to preside at a confirmation and he “confirmed” about 800 young people in three parishes.

Where are the “fruits” here? Doesn’t sound very genuine to me.
Bishop Ratko Perić:

There are at least 6 or 7 religious or quasi-religious communities, just initiating or already established, some of diocesan right, some not, which have arbitrarily been installed in Medjugorje without the permission of the local Diocesan authorities. These communities are more a sign of disobedience than a real charisma of obedience in this Church!

Redeemerslove:

This is incorrect. …In short, the bishop of Mostar is only expressing his personal opinion which is not binding on anyone, even his diocese.

You are misrepresenting what is said in the letter. You are focusing upon the distinction between ‘non constat de supernaturalitate’ versus ‘constat de non supernaturalitate’. However, the letter also states “pilgrimages to Medjugorje, which are conducted privately, this Congregation points out that they are permitted on condition that they are not regarded as an authentification of events”. In fact, the Declaration on Medjugorje voted on by 19 Yugoslavian Bishops forbid ascribing a supernatural nature to the apparitions, forbid any reference to calling it a Marian shrine, forbid any Church-sponsored pilgrimages.

Just because the Church can’t forbid a Catholic from travelling freely, if they do so privately and they do not state that anything supernatural is going on, has been completely distorted by the Medjugorje tourist industry into some kind of permission that implies the “visions” are legitimate. The Church has forbidden anyone from stating the visions are legitimately supernatural. Yet, still the thirsty souls line up to make the visionaries wealthy.

 

[rfk]

Bishop Ratko Perić:

The Church, from the local to supreme level, from the beginning to this very day, has clearly and constantly repeated: Non constat de supernaturalitate! No to pilgrimages that would ascribe a supernatural nature to the apparitions, no shrine of the Madonna, no authentic messages nor revelations, no true visions!

In fact, the EWTN letter you quote was written in 1998. If you want to read the current Bishop statement on Medjugorje, dated February 2004, read his entire letter at cbismo.hr/DHTMLFiles/Opsirnije.asp?P=7

Since the website there is unreliable, a mirrored copy of the document is at unitypublishing.com/Newsletter/BishopPeric2004.htm

Any reasonable person who reads the Bishop’s letter can not possibly have any doubt in their mind that the Bishop highly disapproves.

So now it becomes a question of obedience.

 

[faithbound]

I’m just wondering why the Pope does’nt know about these revelations given to visionaries. I’m thinking, and I may be going out on a limb here but would’nt Jesus let his vicar know whats going on with these visionaries?

 

[Della]

faithbound:

I’m just wondering why the Pope does’nt know about these revelations given to visionaries. I’m thinking, and I may be going out on a limb here but would’nt Jesus let his vicar know whats going on with these visionaries?

What makes you think the pope doesn’t know about the “revelations” given to the “visionaries”? Because he makes no statements about it doesn’t mean he is uninformed. It is the duty and responsibility of the local bishop to decide if what is happening in his diocese is authentically spiritual or not. The pope usually doesn’t intervene nor overstep the authority of the local bishop in these matters.

 

[Redeemerslove]

rfk:

In fact, the EWTN letter you quote was written in 1998. If you want to read the current Bishop statement on Medjugorje, dated February 2004, read his entire letter at cbismo.hr/DHTMLFiles/Opsirnije.asp?P=7

Since the website there is unreliable, a mirrored copy of the document is at unitypublishing.com/Newsletter/BishopPeric2004.htm

Any reasonable person who reads the Bishop’s letter can not possibly have any doubt in their mind that the Bishop highly disapproves.

So now it becomes a question of obedience.

Wrong. As the CDF explicitly stated, it was his person opinion. Who has higher authority, the CDF who’s documents are approved by the Holy Father, or Bishop Peric?

I think the agency with higher authority is clear. Bishop Peric is offering his “personal opinion,” according to the CDF. Nice try Bishop Peric, you have been trumped.

 

[Redeemerslove]

rfk:

First, I’d like to say that I believe many sincere, devout Catholics have gone to Medjugorje, and while they were there they experienced a sincere spiritual awakening. I have members of my own family who say that it changed them.

However, I would like to make a distinction between the sincere people making the trip, versus the so-called “visionaries” who have become wealthy by creating an entire tourist industry.

I personally believe that a week spent in a local retreat center under the guidance of a good spiritual director could be just as effective, without the airfare. It would also have the advantage of not promoting the continuing disobedience within the Church.

See, that isn’t what the local Bishop has to say about it at all.

Where are the “fruits” here? Doesn’t sound very genuine to me.

You are misrepresenting what is said in the letter. You are focusing upon the distinction between ‘non constat de supernaturalitate’ versus ‘constat de non supernaturalitate’

I don’t care what the Bishop says, that’s not the point. The statements of the bishop about these events…do…not…matter…in…the…least. Because what he said is personal opinion…not authoritative opinion…not an official opinion, but personal opinion. The Holy Father has many personal opinions as well, but that doesn’t make them binding on Catholics for belief.

Do you have any clue what the difference between a personal opinion (what a person thinks privately), and an authoritative opinion (what a person professes as the Catholic Truth) is? The Pope may have ten thousand personal opinions, but that doesn’t make them dogma, nor even ordinary Magisterial doctrine.

However, the letter also states “pilgrimages to Medjugorje, which are conducted privately, this Congregation points out that they are permitted on condition that they are not regarded as an authentification of events”. In fact, the Declaration on Medjugorje voted on by 19 Yugoslavian Bishops forbid ascribing a supernatural nature to the apparitions, forbid any reference to calling it a Marian shrine, forbid any Church-sponsored pilgrimages.

Any Catholic worth their salt, knows that allowing pilgrimages does not equal approval.

Just because the Church can’t forbid a Catholic from travelling freely, if they do so privately and they do not state that anything supernatural is going on, has been completely distorted by the Medjugorje tourist industry into some kind of permission that implies the “visions” are legitimate. The Church has forbidden anyone from stating the visions are legitimately supernatural. Yet, still the thirsty souls line up to make the visionaries wealthy.

You assume alot. I will not say whether the visions are authentic or not, in this I defer to the Magisterium. But I will say that your aspersions are not fitting for a Catholic. Repent and go to confession.