AXES
Are the
Mary Apparitions
Fake?
Index – Click
to Navigate
INTRODUCTION
This book is about the Marian apparitions in the Catholic Church and why they cannot be accepted as having the right to tell us what to do and how we should live. We will see how it is best to pay no attention to them and despise their message. People find apparitions and the related miracles fascinating but the truth about them is just as interesting. For not it is enough to say that the Catholic Church boasts of having a faith that has not been added to since the apostles and that these things do not add to divine revelation. But they do for a miracle is a miracle and a revelation is a revelation. They are more convincing which tells us how bad the evidence of the apostles for Christianity was.
Some apparition sites honour vindictive visions. Read pages 208 and 209 of Everything You Know About God is Wrong, The Disinformation Guide to Religion, Edited by Russ Kick, The Disinformation Company, New York, 2007. There you will see that The Glories of Mary by St Alphonsus de Ligouri that the Virgin Mary was seen by people, who affirmed on oath, setting fire with torches to a house of immoral entertainment at Montevergine in 1611. Her arson resulted in the deaths of 1,500 people. Our Lady of Medous caused an epidemic of plague in 1648. The Church later changed the story to make it seem the Virgin had halted the epidemic. St Rita of Cascia prayed for God to kill her sons to stop them committing serious sin and it worked and she later became a nun and was famed for miracles and leaving a corpse that has been reported to move by itself since her death.
The Church itself teaches that most apparition claims are probably not from God. Apparitions such as Medjugorje and Garabandal have caused huge trouble for the Church as has many others. Clearly it is best not to pay much attention to apparitions at all!
FLYING LADY OF LORETO
The Virgin Mary supposedly flew her house in Nazareth Croatia from Nazareth
and from Illyria it went to Loreto. But excavations made by archaeologists in
the 1960s indicate that the stones were moved from Palestine Epirus Bethlehem Nazareth
The New Catholic Encyclopaedia under Loreto says that the
house of the Virgin was moved four times because it took that to find a place
where it would be venerated properly.
Surely the angels that carried it would not have got it so wrong so
often! Were they stupid? The stone and mortar are said to be from
The research of
a man called Chevalier in 1906 found that there was no evidence that the
house was ever in
LOURDES
The Virgin supposedly appeared to Bernadette Soubirous at
As for the allegedly proven miracles of healing at Lourdes which are 64
in number they are not as above suspicion as the evidence says and as one
would think (page 177, Believing in God).
Some of the people were examined too long before their alleged cure
and there is doubt about the diagnosis of others. The Abbe Fiamma was cured of hideous ulcers
on the skin in 1908. The healing was
reported to be instant but there is no proof that they were not healed
between the last examination the date of which is unknown and his dip in the
bath of holy water at
In a small book called Spiritual Healing we read that the famous
case of John Traynor’s cure from epilepsy and paralysis at
On the Channel 4 documentary of 1998, The Miracle Police, it was
revealed that the disease could have been tubercular or a strange infection
that burnt out for the reports and x-rays are capable of different
interpretations. The knee was not
examined properly between
A book published in 1957 called Eleven Lourdes Miracles by Dr D
J West showed that the healed people probably had not been diagnosed right
and it was not certain that the cures were triggered by
The Lourdes Medical Bureau has proclaimed some cures to be impossible
to explain. Other medical bodies have
checked its work and found explanations for them (page 150, Looking for a
Miracle). This is not surprising
for medicine requires a lot of interpreting and opinions. A woman was once found to be miraculously
free of a disease in one instance and yet some years later she died from it
so her being given the all clear was a mistake! The Encyclopaedia Britannica reported that
American doctors found the documentation in favour of 1976 inexplicable cure outlined
earlier to be equivocal and unscientific (page 151). It is strange that God says miracles are
signs meaning that he will ensure they are verified and then does little
about such false misleading claims.
Most people would believe them.
It is no wonder that the medical reports that verify healings that are
taken as miracles showing the Church should canonise people invoked for the
cures as saints are highly confidential in the
FATIMA
The Virgin Mary supposedly appeared six times to three children at
Fatima in
It is disturbing that she never mentioned the prophecy about a second
world war and a mysterious light that would be the sign that it was coming
until after both took place. Frauds
always give prophecies after the event.
The most important secret of Fatima about Russia and the need for the
whole Church to consecrate the world to Mary and that Portugal will always
have the faith was hidden until 1942 (Fatima Revealed … and Discarded,
page 134). Hiding the secret was
dishonest for the people and the Church have a right to know everything to
see if the apparition should be believed or not. She could have made the visions up. Why reveal then and not before unless she
was inventing the messages? The Virgin
told the children she would see them for six consecutive months on the
thirteenth. But on one occasion she
did not appear for the children were in custody so she appeared on a later
day at Valinhos. The Lady was a
liar. She made a mistake in telling
Lucia what day the First World War would end and Lucia tried to make out that
she misremembered what she had been told.
The real Virgin would not have risked letting the children
forget. Lucia was making up the
messages and she was the leader of the trio.
Only part of the crowd, which could have been as large as 70,000 people
saw the famous solar miracle (page 78, The Evidence for Visions of the
Virgin Mary, page 173, Believing in God,) and there were few
written reports about it and no two people saw the same thing. Hysteria and tricks of the light, which are
inevitable if one stares at the sun, and outright lies to abet the campaign
against the anticlerical government explain everything. Moreover, since even Church approved visions
are optional for belief what right would the real Virgin have to ask people
to risk eye-damage by looking at the sun to act upon the evidence before the
evidence was granted? Apparitions are
supposed to remind Catholics about the truths of their faith and do not add
to that faith. Yet apparitions like
Fatima give new revelations about most people going to Hell for sexual sin
and about the need for the world to be saved by consecration to the
Immaculate Heart of Mary and gave prophecies.
La Salette and Medjugorje and Garabandal all made the same
mistake.
THE VIRGIN ZOOMS IN: ZEITOUN
The famous mass visions of Mary in Zeitoun in
But one must also remember that there were few convincing and clear
photos and no films of the visions (page 125, The Evidence for Visions of
the Virgin Mary) which make one think they were more subjective or
imaginative than commonly assumed.
The vision never said it was the Virgin Mary. It first appeared to Muslims, who also
revere the Virgin Mary, which indicates approval for the errors of Islam if it
is true that miracles back up the religions they happen to.
The vision has changed shape so much and did so many bizarre things
that it seems that it could have been one of those mysterious earthquake
lights which sometimes take the shape of a person by pure coincidence (page
186-7, Looking for a Miracle).
We can all interpret shapes by pure imagination and excitement that
seem to have a supernatural origin to us as beings from another plane of
reality. There was evidence that
seismic activity was far far greater than it should have been in that
area. The boast about Zeitoun is that
thousands saw Mary but Mary was never near the site. When Mary lets illusions be mistaken for
her who knows what is behind most of her apparitions? Perhaps the vision was
really one of those mysterious Egyptian goddesses instead of Mary? Occultists believe that Mary was a
manifestation of one of the pagan female gods. The Virgin made no effort to convert
Muslims which would suggest that she did not care what people made of
her. She was not the mother of the
dogmatic Jesus who said that he was the way in John’s Gospel without any hint
that those who did not know of him could be saved.
ROSA MYSTICA
In Montichiari,
The Virgin was dressed in purple and three swords stuck out of her
chest. The first sword was for priests
saying mass in a state of rebellion against God or mortal sin, the second stood
for the giving up of a religious vocation and the third stood for people
selling out on the true faith.
But God is infinitely good and must hate all sin infinitely so all sin
is mortal or infinitely evil. What
does she expect these priests to do when the Church says that we sin all the
time?
The Lady said three words, “Prayer, sacrifice or penance”. This alone contains a significant error for
sacrifice and penance are the same thing!
In July, Gilli had another vision.
Mary told her that she was sent by God to reveal a new form of
devotion to Mary that would increase vocations and saintliness in religious
orders. But the orders must have
prayed well at one time so this new remedy would be pointless. The Lady is denying that God is good for
quality not quantity would be what is important to him.
The devotion was that the 13th day of every month would be
devoted to Mary and for that day specific prayers had to be said for 12 days
in preparation. The Lady went on to say
that the 13th day of July was to be dedicated to the veneration of
Mary under the title of the Mystical Rose.
The 13th day is an echo of
Gilli sought to learn if the Lady would do a miracle soon. The Lady said that the most obvious miracle
would be the sanctification of religious who had fallen into sin and
indifference. They would stop
offending Jesus. This implies that any
healing miracle in response to devotion to her must be false for it would be
a more obvious miracle than an alleged conversion. Does Mary not know that all false
apparitions result in some conversions?
The Church says that that God offers the grace of conversion at all
times and does what is best so they have to happen and do not prove that God
approves of the apparition. The
absurdity of the revelation shows that it came from Pierina herself and not
Mary.
Needless to say, the miracle never happened. The church is worse now that it has been
for years. Vocations to the religious
life are rare. It is no use to say
that it will happen for a miracle is needed to prove that the apparitions are
true and a miracle promised in a vision comes before one that is not. Would Mary come to try and avoid the
unavoidable? No way. And a minor apparition that few know of is
not trying. Why didn’t she come down
and go in style like she did at
Devotees say the promise was not broken for its fulfilment depended on
our compliance with her demands and so it was us who prevented it from being
done. But the Virgin must have been
sure that it would be visibly fulfilled when she gave it as a sign. To say, “This sign is the evidence for my
apparition but if it comes to pass or not depends on you”, is to offer
evidence that is not evidence and is to talk rubbish.
In the fourth apparition, Mary said that the Lord cannot look upon sins
of impurity and wants to punish them.
But she asked him to refrain once more. She also asked that these sins be atoned by
prayer and by penance.
How would God who wants only to do what is right, namely punish people,
do what must be wrong to please Mary?
Who is God in Heaven – him or her?
The sixth apparition proved that the apparitions were hoaxes for it
spoke of
On the feast of the Immaculate Conception, December 8th, the
seventh vision of Montichiari, took place.
Mary said, “I am the Immaculate Conception,” and called herself the
mother of God. She requested that the
Pope, Pius XII, declare an Hour of Grace for the World to be held every 8th
December at
The Virgin would not tell a secret which is holding back something that
might play an important role in determining if the visions came from God or not.
The long-awaited return of the Lady took place in April 1966 at
Fontanelle. It takes no genius to work
out how she came back to – that’s right, Pierina Gilli. The Lady blessed a spring. The Lady said that the sacraments had the
power to make a soul stained with sin beautiful again. So, God refuses to make peace with you
until you receive a priestly rite as if going to the priest is more important
than loving him! She asked for the
wheat of a chosen field to be turned into communion wafers. The wheat was to be taken to Paul VI. Paul VI was a disaster for the Church and
the real Mary would have chastised him instead of sending him a gift from a
field that did not even belong to her.
There is no evidence that Mary really appeared to this Lady. Cures attributed to the vision are less
impressive when the cured prayed to a lot of other supernatural beings too
and none of them were declared miraculous.
SAN DAMIANO
Mamma Rosa, Rosa Quattrini, allegedly saw the Virgin Mary from 1961 to
her death in 1981 in San Damiano. The
book, San Damiano (S di Maria, Marian Centre, Hungerford, Switzerland,
1983) has been consulted for this examination of her claims.
There were too many visions. God
would prefer you to live by faith when so few see visions which implies the
less visions a person has the better.
In the first apparition, the Lady came disguised as a normal peasant
girl and healed
If
It is interesting that the blossoms on two trees which appeared
suddenly could be explained without a miracle because the book admits one
pear tree did not have pear tree blossoms on it! (page 32). I think somebody moved the blossoms!
Two priests went to her pretending to be civilians but she told them
they were priests (page 42). It is not
said how we can be sure she did not know some natural way. Perhaps somebody saw one priest’s cassock
in the car and told her when she told him it was in the car?
The Virgin showed her approbation for the deceit of
In 1967, the Lady said, “I announce that everyone should get ready
large plastic water containers so that you can come and take plenty of water…
and get small basins ready. When this
terrible moment of discouragement comes
- because people have no heard my word, there will be many horrible
things – put this water into small basins and dip your face into them and you
will be safe!” (page 86). This
prophecy and warning is placed in a section called Purification and
Punishments. Obviously, it is saying
that the punishment was just around the corner – and years later it has still
not come. Face dipping is a bizarre
and crazy thing for the Virgin to command.
Devotees say the prophecy never came to pass for it was
conditional. But the Lady said when
the disaster comes and not if it comes.
Only false prophets make prophecies that are not clearly
conditional. It is a good excuse when
they fail.
Concerning the bearing of suffering out of love for God, the Virgin
declared that God will help us carry our crosses and reminds us to be patient
because we are only on earth a while and have all eternity to be happy (page
92). Why hurt people badly if you are
going to help them carry their burden?
And to console ourselves with the thought of Heaven is refusing to
love God for no selfish reason.
In 1969, those who had no faith were accused of having no remorse for
what they did wrong and of having no experience of loving God (page 92). But it is belief in God with its insistence
on loving God alone that does that. I
don’t like the stereotyping here.
In a 1970 message, the Lady said that Heaven is so great that “you will
not longer remember your time on this earth, or of what you have done and
suffered” (page 96). What is the use
of living and bleeding in this world when you will forget? The God of the Lady is a savage.
The Lady forgot that her prayers were supposed to be the most powerful
in Heaven where she was Queen when she said that the releasing of a soul from
Purgatory was the biggest favour she could do for you for that soul would
pray for you in Heaven (page 96). And
it is not her that lets souls out but God.
This contradicts the Catholic doctrine that Mary is the one who has
the most influence over God.
She approved of the devotion of the nine First Fridays with the related
promise of repentance and salvation from sin on one’s deathbed allowing one
to sin as they wished (page 97).
The Virgin said that she would be near her children to inspire them
(page 101). Who needs her if the Holy
Spirit exists? Would God let a woman
inspire us when he could do it himself?
This is the spiritualism that is savagely denounced in the Bible.
The sacramental associated with San Damiano, is the handkerchief. Mama Rosa claimed that when they are
blessed this strange blessing is taken away if they are ironed or cut! What a strange fussy superstitious view of
God she had.
The Catholic Church, despite the visions seen by others at the shrine
like the spinning sun and Jesus and Mary and the sudden blossoming of the
pear tree, knows that it is all fakery.
The pope refused to accept requests to do what the Lady wanted (page
124). The book explains that this was
merely because he wished to wait until the Church decided if the visions were
really of Mary but he could have supported the good fruits of the apparitions
which is not declaring them true or false.
He allows the messages of unauthenticated visions to be spread for the
sake of the fruits.
THE VIRGIN OF THE POOR
The Virgin Mary, calling herself the Virgin of the Poor, is reputed to
have manifested eight times in 1933 to eleven year old Mariette Beco at
Banneux in
The Lady looked exactly like the Virgin of Lourdes wearing white and a
blue sash with a golden rose on her visible foot and carrying a rosary.
The apparitions started after the child and her mother saw a strange
shape in the garden. It looked like
somebody wrapped up in a sheet to her mother though Mariette said that this
time that it looked like the Blessed Virgin and could even see it
smiling. The mother’s testimony shows
that there was a natural explanation for the shape when it did not look like
Mary and that the child only imagined that it was the Virgin smiling at
her. Natural illusions happen all the
time. Perhaps it was a joke played by
some child who was pretending to be a ghost and who was afraid to say when
stories of an apparition began to circulate.
It was thought that light was caused by a lamp in the house.
Mariette said that she did not know what the word nations meant when
the Virgin said that the spring was for all nations. But this is unlikely for a child who went
to school. When she was able to
remember the word she must have known for you cannot remember an unfamiliar
word.
The expression on the child’s face during the vision, her willingness
to endure rain and frost to have the vision and her standing by her story in
the face of much persecution during the apparitions have all been claimed to
mark the visions as true. But all
faces look peaceful at times even in the midst of pain. The child would have known that the more
physical discomfort she brought on herself the more likely people would
believe her. And to admit or hint that
the story was a fabrication would only draw worse persecution on her so she
knew she had to be totally convincing.
When the Lady approves of the Church though it only says an apparition
may have happened and puts a child through all that – the girl could have
died of pneumonia – for something that only might have happened then how
could she be the real Virgin Mary?
An unauthorised booklet, The Virgin of the Poor
says that the spring the Lady blessed did not appear miraculously for similar
springs were usual enough in the
The Lady told Mariette to tell the priest who wanted a sign, “Believe in
me and I will believe in you”. The
priest rightly noticed an error in this.
The Blessed Virgin cannot believe in anybody for she can see all in
God. Belief is evil where certainty is
possible. This creature was not the
blessed Mary but an illusion or a figment of the child’s imagination. What right had Mary to ask for belief in
the vision when the bishop had not scrutinised the vision yet? It is up to the bishop if a vision might be
believed.
The final vision saw the Virgin giving the child a secret. Secrets are proofs against authenticity and
especially ones that are not to be told to anybody else at all like hers.
Twenty miracles related to Banneux which were accepted by the Church commission
as proving the vision had taken place and naturally the Church pronounced the
vision real and from God in 1949. The
miracles did not involve amputated limbs being restored or anything like
that. They were just cures of diseases
which might never have existed in the first place. Thousands went to the place on pilgrimage
so it was inevitable that non-existent miracles would have ensued. Medicine made more mistakes then and some
pretty horrendous ones since. Not all
the accepted miracles can be attributed solely to Banneux for the healed
practised other devotions too.
THE
LIFE-OFFERING REVELATION
A Hungarian nun gave the world the life offering revelation from Jesus
and Mary. A booklet containing some of the messages can be obtained from
Divine Mercy Publications, Maryville, Skerries, Co
Page 3 of the booklet tells us that Mary promised that none of the
relations of the person who offers his or her life as dictated by the
apparitions will go to Hell even if it looks like they died hating God. This tells us that in families not covered
by the promise God must want the dying to pass away into Hell. The element of blackmail is
unmistakeable. It is those who lived
the best lives and are sinning on their deathbed that God should be saving.
Since, according to Roman doctrine, apparitions are based on human
faith and the danger of Hell is based on divine faith which is theologically
more certain it follows that any apparition that gives such assurance is
demonic or fraudulent for you cannot trust an unsure revelation more than a
sure one for the danger is too great if you are wrong.
The magic saving prayer of the Life-Offering was revealed in 1955.
Mary said that we can save as many souls as possible in some invisible
mystical way “through fervent prayer, through the practicing of love, through
meekness, humility and self-denial but above all through the patient
acceptance of sufferings” (page 7).
This is illogical for surely God would rather have a person who denied
themselves to help others than a sick person who lies in bed offering their
sickness to God. A person who is very
ill is more likely to feign submission to the will of God to console those
around her or him than a person practicing selflessness. And what is the use of a person suffering
to develop patience and compassion when he has already got them? When God cares only about our effort and
effort is love even if it does not succeed and the greatest love is that
which tries knowing that it will probably fail for it is the most altruistic
then God would not want us to suffer with patience but to fight to be patient
without success.
Another error appears on page 9.
Mary says that once you have paid for your sins by suffering you can
offer subsequent sufferings to God for the conversion of incorrigible
sinners. Surely it is more important
to do the latter first? Yet she says
these wrong priorities glorify God!
On page 16, the sinister practices of sacrificial love and total
commitment to God are commanded.
The revelation of St Bridget of Sweden that souls fell into Hell like
snowflakes fall in winter was rejected by Jesus according to our
Life-Offering visionary who said that if that were true God would not have
made man for the majority go to Hell (page 28). The visions reject the visions of Bridget
who was accepted as a true prophetess and visionary by the Church. And Jesus did not understand if that souls
were falling into Hell like snowflakes that does not mean that the majority
of people are going to Hell but only that a lot are. And if it does mean that then maybe there has
been a huge decline in the number of the damned since. Jesus said in the Bible that the road to
eternal loss is wide and the road to salvation is narrow and hard to
travel. He forgot that too it seems.
OUR LADY OF BEAURAING
Mary appeared at the Belgian
The reality of the apparitions was contested by the famous sceptical
priest, Fr. Herbert Thurston, S.J.. He
“wrote of Beauraing almost as soon as the apparitions were recorded”
according to the booklet, Our Lady of Beauraing consulted by the
author.
Thirty-three visions occurred inside five weeks. There were five young witnesses.
They were tested with burning matches and with a penknife and were
found insensible during an apparition.
But the fear of being found out can make one resist the temptation to
react. You don’t feel pain when you
are excited.
The Lady said she was the immaculate Virgin, the mother of God and the
Queen of Heaven. A secret was confided
to the three youngest children. All of
these titles are in conflict with reason.
God would be evil if he kept Mary immaculate – free from all sin – and
did not do the same for us. The Bible
does not say that Jesus was God in person.
And Mary could not be queen of Heaven if God is perfect for she would
have to have authority to be queen but if God is perfect and the creator and
sustainer of all this could not be.
One child saw the apparition’s golden heart which the rest who were
having the vision did not see. Three
of them did not see it for the first time until the following day and they
all saw it together later. This
strikes one as odd – as if miscommunication between the visionaries had taken
place and then later they agreed to say they all saw the heart. Could you imagine the Virgin behaving so
oddly and failing to be clear?
The booklet says that the Church approved two cures in 1949. Miss Marie Van Laer’s cure “from a serious
disease, deemed incurable, and of a tubercular nature, or more probably
staphylococcus, in the region of the cervical vertebra and in the right leg,
which had progressed to the final stage, has been immediately and finally
cured on the 24th June, 1933, on the day after a pilgrimage made
to Beauraing for the purpose of obtaining a cure (page 22). A Mrs Acar-Group was cured after arriving
home from a pilgrimage (page 22).
These ladies had many people praying for them to different people and
so undoubtedly had come into contact with many relics. So, there is no proof that their cure was
connected with Beauraing. When they
were not even there when healed it is unlikely that the miracles happened to
authenticate it. The Virgin was asked
during the apparitions by Albert to cure a young girl with a bone disease
(21). She did not answer but merely
smiled. Albert was being crafty
here. He said the smile must mean the
Lady would cure her so that if the cure did not happen the apparition would
not blamed but his interpretation of her behaviour would be. He was being careful in case the cure would
not happen – he saw nothing at all.
And the girl had to wait for her cure until the February after (page
21). And it was not officially
accepted. It would have been if the
Lady had smiled to say yes – the most likely interpretation of her
behaviour. The Virgin would not
promise a miracle that won’t and can’t be accepted when she has ones accepted
later that she never specifically promised.
The apparitions cannot be from God when the cures were not authenticated
and official before the acceptance of the apparitions. The cures would be the nearest you can get
to evidence for the supernatural and are better than mere testimony. But the church put the cart before the
horse in its own dishonest way. This shows
unfair prejudice in favour of the visions in the Church.
KNOCK
In Knock, Co
Mayo, on the 21st of August 1879 the Virgin Mary flanked by
Beirne stated
that the Virgin’s crown was somewhat yellow.
A real miracle would have had a gold crown.
There is a
serious problem as to why the vision was only witnessed by the family and
friends of the first visionary though there were plenty of other people in
Knock. Did she know that there was
something odd about the whole thing that made her afraid to go to unbiased
people?
Another
interesting point is that Mary Beirne could have moulded the perception of
the others of what was seen at the gable for she quickly took on a leadership
role and was the first to suggest it was the Virgin Mary (page 206, The Cult of the Virgin Mary). She seems to have been behind the
acceptance by the witnesses that the bishop was
Knock cannot be
from God because the first commission was careless and did not ask the right
questions or work out why the witnesses were sometimes contradicting one
another (page 66, The Cult of the Virgin Mary). God would do better than that. The first commission is the most important
one. They did not try to explain why
there was a dispute about if there was a Lamb there or not or if there were
glittering stars or if the crown was somewhat yellow or gold or if there were
angels flying about or if there was a cross on the altar that appeared in the
vision with the Lamb standing on it.
Patrick Hill was known to have added a lot to his original description
when he was interviewed in 1897.
The book, The
Apparition at Knock, A Survey of Facts and Evidence by Fr Michael Walsh is a
good read. Page 20 tells us that the figures
seemed to move out and then backwards according to Patrick Hill’s
testimony. That is what something
being projected from a machine would do.
Some but not all the witnesses said the figures moved, but it is a
very easy thing to imagine. Bridget Trench
said they didn’t move (page 29). Page
47 has top witness Mary Beirne saying the vision of Mary had a yellow
whiteness. She didn’t see the vision’s
feet but Bridget Trench said they were visible and tried to touch them (page
29). She also said that the images
seemed to retreat into the wall when approached – maybe that was an
illusion. When you are far off a
projected image it is easier to think it is three dimensional but when you
get close it is easier to see that it is on the wall. She added that she saw attempts to recreate
the vision using slides but there was no comparison (page 50). In 1936, she said she couldn’t remember
seeing a lamb on the altar (page 52).
She stated that close up the images seemed painted on the wall (page
62).
The apparition
led to people picking the cement out of the Church wall and putting it in
danger of collapsing (page 89). Would
the Virgin knowing people would do this have appeared at Knock and caused the
desecration of a Church? Strangely it
got so bad that the stones were being pulled out before anything was done
about it. Apparitions of lights on the
gable and even of the Virgin herself were seen after the vision but the
Church dismissed those stories.
How could God give us fifteen modern witnesses to a miracle when he only gave us a handful of obscure and legendary witnesses to the resurrection? Why is Knock more believable than the resurrection of Jesus though the latter is essential for belief?
The vast majority of believing Catholics believe in their faith because of the alleged miracles of Lourdes and Fatima and often because of the Turin Shroud. This must be dangerous and sinful. They are basing too much on private revelations. They are supposed to base their faith on the resurrection of Jesus not apparitions. But they don't. The resurrection is not a sign for them for they have less interest in it than in the apparitions and visions. They can't even give good believable reasons for holding the resurrection to be fact. If they saw the resurrection as a sign and as good evidence for the authenticity of the Christian faith they would not be building their faith on private revelations. The private revelations have bad fruits no matter how good these fruits look.
It is foolish to believe that the private revelations are really from God.
BOOKS CONSULTED
Ballinspittle,
Moving Statues and Faith, Tim Ryan and Jurek Kirakowski, Mercier Press,
Beauraing and
Other Apparitions, Fr Herbert Thurston, Burns, Oates & Washbourne,
Believing in
God, PJ McGrath,
Bernadette of
Biblical
Exegesis and Church Doctrine, Raymond E Brown, Paulist Press,
Catholic
Prophecy, The Coming Chastisement Yves Dupont, TAN,
Comparative Miracles, Fr Robert D Smith, B. Herder Book Co,
Counterfeit Miracles, BB Warfield, The Banner of Truth Trust,
Cults and
Fanatics, Colin & Damon Wilson,
Divine Mercy in
My Soul, Sr M Faustina Kowalska, Marian Press,
Eleven
Everything You Know About God is Wrong, The Disinformation Guide to Religion, Edited by Russ Kick, The Disinformation Company, New York, 2007
Evidence of
Satan in the Modern
From Fasting
Saints to Anorexic Girls, Walter Vandereycken and Ron van Deth, Athlone
Press,
Fatima in
Lucia’s own Words, Sr Lucia, Postulation Centre,
Fatima
Revealed…And Discarded, Brother Michael of the Holy Trinity, Augustine,
From the
Visions of the Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich, Topic Newspapers,
Mullingar, undated
Garabandal, a
Message for the World, Ave Maria Publications, Middleton, Co
Introduction to
the Devout Life, St Francis de Sales, Burns Oates and Washbourne Limited,
Looking for a
Miracle, Joe Nickell, Prometheus Books,
Miracles in
Dispute, Ernst and Marie-Luise Keller, SCM,
Miracles,
Ronald A Knox, Catholic Truth Society,
Mother of
Nations, Joan Ashton, Veritas,
New Catholic
Encyclopedia, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book
Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
Objections to
Roman Catholicism, Edited by Michael de la Bedoyere, Constable,
Our Lady of
Beauraing, Rev J.A. Shields, M.A., D.C.L., M.H. Gill and Son, Ltd.,
Padre Pio,
Patrick O Donovan, Catholic Truth Society,
Please Come
Back to Me and My Son R Vincnet,
Powers of
Darkness, Powers of Light, John Cornwell,
Rosa Mystica,
Franz Speckbacher, Divine Mercy Publications,
San Damiano, S
di Maria, The Marian Centre, Hungerford, 1983
Spiritual
Healing, Martin Daulby and Caroline Mathison, Geddes & Grosset, New
St Catherine
Laboure of the Miraculous Medal, Fr Joseph I Dirvin C.M., Tan,
The Apparition
at Knock, A Survey of Facts and Evidence, Fr Michael Walsh, St Jarlath’s
College, Tuam, Co Galway, 1959
The Apparitions
of the Blessed Virgin Mary Today, Rene Laurentin, Veritas,
The Appearances
of the Blessed Virgin Mary at the Grotto of Lourdes, JB Estrade, Art &
Book Company Ltd, Westminster, 1912
The
Autobiography of St Margaret Mary, TAN,
The Book of
Miracles, Stuart Gordon, Headline,
The Cult of the
Virgin Mary, Michael P Carroll,
The Evidence
for Visions of the Virgin Mary, Kevin McClure Aquarian Press, Wellingborough,
Northamptonshire, 1985
The Exaltation
of the Virgin Mary, by Rev S.G. Poyntz, M.A., B.D., Association for Promoting
Christian Knowledge, Dublin, 1955
The Holy Shroud
and Four Visions, Rev Patrick O Connell and Rev Charles Carty, TAN,
The Holy Shroud
and the Visions of Maria Valtorta, Msgr Vincenzo Celli, Kolbe Publications
Inc.,
The
Incorruptibles, Joan Carroll Cruz, Tan,
The Medjugorje
Deception, E Michael Jones, Fidelity Press,
The Physical
Phenomena of Mysticism, Fr Herbert Thurston, Burns, Oates & Washbourne,
The Sceptical
Occultist, Terry White, Century,
The Supernatural
A-Z, James Randi, Headline Books,
The Thunder of
Justice, Ted and Maureen Flynn, MAXCOL,
The Turin
Shroud is Genuine, Rodney Hoare, Souvenir Press,
The Two Divine
Promises, Fr Roman Hoppe, TAN,
The Virgin of
the Poor, Damian Walne and Joan Flory, CTS,
The Way of
Divine Love, Sr Josefa Mendenez, TAN,
The Wonder of Guadalupe,
Francis Johnson, Augustine,
To the Priests,
Our Lady’s Beloved Sons, Fr Gobbi, The Marian Movement of Priests, St Paul’s
Press, Athlone, 1991
THE WEB
The Most Dangerous False Apparition in the World
www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/Garabandal2.html
False Visions Which Followed Knock
Critique: “Poem
of the Man-God” Medugorje’s Gospel by Brother James,
http://members.lycos.co.uk/jloughnan/critique.htm
Saints Preserve Us!
www.forteantimes.com/articles/159_saintspreserved.shtml
PRIVATE REVELATION: UNRAVELLING MEDJUGORJE by Carey Winters
www.geocities.com/militantis/medjugorje.html
This excellent
site outlines the errors of famous Catholic visionaries such as Anne
Catherine Emmerich and Marie de Agreda which they said their visions told
them. But it puts these errors down to
the visionaries misunderstanding. This
excuse itself accuses God of being slack!
It points out that when Satan speaks, in the experience of the Church,
he states 99% of the truth that God has revealed and 1 % untruth because
every little error helps his cause. In
the Church’s experience, that is the way it seems to be which means Carey and
the Church should not be accepting the visions of Emmerich and Agreda. The former stated that there was a
terrestrial paradise near
BIBLE QUOTATIONS FROM:
The Amplified
Bible
09/09/07