OTWOMD | Bluepanjeet.Net

Have you ever wondered how apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary are scrutinized and evaluated by the Catholic Church if it was indeed a Divine and Supernatural in origin or just a mere production of the creative human mind? Since the beginning of the 19th Century, the Apparitions of Our Lady proliferated all over the world with astonishing phenomenon that even science cannot explain. In this post, OTWOMD will try to disclose the criteria and standards used by the Catholic Church in order to approve an apparition as “supernatural” in origin or otherwise. This is a foretaste of the forth coming post about the reality and truth of the approved apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary that initiated devotions from the faithful. Journey with me with the Magisterium of the Catholic Church as we unveil the process of discerning certain apparitions that happened around the world.

“A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars…” Revelation 12:1

GUIDELINES IN DISCERNING APPARITIONS FROM
THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith elaborated, from 1974-1978, some new criteria for discerning apparitions and revelations, which were expounded in a normative text, which, for a long period, was only made available to the Ordinary [local bishop] who, confronted with the fact of an apparition, addressed himself to the Sacred Congregation. These standards govern the treatment of events after 1980 (notably Medjugorje), and they also brought about the resumption of certain previous investigations (those of Bonate and Garabandal, amongst others):

Preliminary Note: Origin and character of these norms.

At the time of the Annual Plenary Congregation during November 1974, the Fathers of this Sacred Congregation studied the problems relating to apparitions and supposed revelations, and the consequences which often result from these, and they arrived at the following conclusions:

1. Today more than formerly, the news of these apparitions is spread more quickly among the faithful thanks to the means of information (”mass media”); in addition, the ease of travel supports more frequent pilgrimages. Also, the ecclesiastical authority was itself brought to reconsider this subject.
2. Similarly, because of current instruments of knowledge, the contributions of science, and the requirement of a rigorous criticism, it is more difficult, if not impossible, to arrive as speedily as previously at judgements which conclude, as formerly happened, investigations into this matter (“constate de supernaturalitate, non constat de supernaturalitate”); and because of that, it is more difficult for the Ordinary to authorize or prohibit public worship or any other form of devotion of the faithful.

For these reasons, so that the devotion stirred up among the faithful by facts of this kind can appear as a disposition in full communion with the Church, and bear fruit, and so that the Church itself is able to ultimately distinguish the true nature of the facts, the Fathers consider that it is necessary to promote the following practice in regard to this matter.

So that the ecclesiastical authority is able to acquire more certainty on such or such an apparition or revelation, it will proceed in the following way:

• a) Initially, to judge the facts according to positive and negative criteria

• b) Then, if this examination appears favorable, to allow certain public demonstrations of cult and devotion, while continuing to investigate the facts with extreme prudence (which is equivalent to the formula: “for the moment, nothing is opposed to it”).

• c) Finally, after a certain time, and in the light of experience, (starting from a particular study of the spiritual fruits generated by the new devotion), to give a judgement on the authenticity of the supernatural character, if the case requires this.

Criteria of judgement, concerning the probability at least, of the character of the apparitions and supposed revelations.

A) Positive criteria:

• a) Moral certainty, or at least great probability, as to the existence of the fact, [revelation] acquired at the end of a serious investigation.

• b) Particular circumstances relating to the existence and the nature of the fact:

1. Personal qualities of the subject—in particular mental balance, honesty and rectitude of moral life, habitual sincerity and docility towards ecclesiastical authority, ability to return to the normal manner of a life of faith, etc. 2. With regard to the revelations, their conformity with theological doctrines and their spiritual veracity, their exemption from all error.

3. A healthy devotion and spiritual fruits which endure (in particular, the spirit of prayer, conversions, signs of charity, etc).

B) Negative criteria:

• a) A glaring error as to the facts.

• b) Doctrinal errors that one would attribute to God himself, or to the Blessed Virgin Mary, or the Holy Spirit in their manifestations (taking into account, however, the possibility that the subject may add something by their own activity—even if this is done unconsciously—of some purely human elements to an authentic supernatural revelation, these having nevertheless to remain free from any error in the natural order. Cf. St Ignatius, Spiritual Exercises, n. 336).

• c) An obvious pursuit of monetary gain in relation with the fact.

• d) Gravely immoral acts committed by the subject, or his associates, at the time of the facts, or on the occasion of these facts.

• E) Psychic disorders or psychopathic tendencies concerning the subject, which would exert an unquestionable influence on the allegedly supernatural facts, or indeed psychosis, mass hysteria, or other factors of the same kind.

It is important to consider these criteria, whether they are positive or negative, as indicative standards and not as final arguments, and to study them in their plurality and in relation with the other criteria.

Intervention of the competent local Authority

1. As, at the time of a presumed supernatural fact, worship or an ordinary form of devotion is born in a quasi spontaneous way among the faithful, the competent ecclesiastical Authority has the serious obligation to inform itself without delay and to carry out a diligent investigation.
2. At the legitimate request of the faithful (when they are in communion with their pastors and are not driven by a sectarian spirit), the competent ecclesiastical Authority can intervene to authorize and promote various forms of worship and devotion if, assuming the criteria given above having been applied, nothing is opposed to it. But there must be vigilance nevertheless, to ensure that the faithful do not regard this way of acting as an approval by the Church of the supernatural character of the event in question (cf. above, Preliminary Note, c).
3. By virtue of his doctrinal and pastoral duty, the competent ecclesiastical Authority can intervene immediately of his own authority, and he must do so in serious circumstances, for example, when it is a question of correcting or of preventing abuses in the exercise of worship or devotion, to condemn erroneous doctrines, to avoid the dangers of a false mysticism etc.
4. In doubtful cases, which do not involve the welfare of the Church, the competent ecclesiastical Authority may refrain from any judgement and any direct action (more especially as it can happen that, at the end of a certain time, the supposedly supernatural event can lapse from memory); but he should not remain less vigilant about the event, in such a way as to be in a position to intervene with swiftness and prudence, if that is necessary.

Other Authorities entitled to intervene

• The foremost authority to inquire and to intervene belongs to the local Ordinary.

• But the regional or national episcopal Conference may intervene:

a) If the local Ordinary, after having fulfilled the obligations which fall to him, resorts to them for a study of the event in its entirety.

b) If the event assumes national or regional importance.

• The Apostolic See can intervene, either at the request of Ordinary himself, or at the request of a qualified group of the faithful, or directly by virtue of the immediate right of universal jurisdiction of the Sovereign Pontiff (cf. above, IV).

Intervention of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

• a) The intervention of the Sacred Congregation can be agreed to be necessary either by the Ordinary, after he has fulfilled the obligations falling to him, or by a qualified group of the faithful. In this second case, vigilance is necessary so that the recourse to the Sacred Congregation is not motivated by suspect reasons (for example to force, in one way one or another, the Ordinary to modify his legitimate decisions, or to confirm the sectarian drift of a group, etc.)

• b) It belongs to the Sacred Congregation to intervene of its own accord in serious cases, in particular when the event affects a broad portion of the Church; but the Ordinary will always be consulted, as well as the episcopal Conference, if the situation requires it.

• It belongs to the Sacred Congregation to discern and approve the way of acting of the Ordinary, or, if it proves to be necessary, to carry out a new examination of the facts distinct from that which the Ordinary carried out; this new examination of the facts will be done either by the Sacred Congregation itself, or by a commission especially established for this purpose.

The present norms, defined in the plenary Congregation of this Sacred Congregation, were approved by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Paul VI, on February 24 1978.

At Rome, the Palace of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, February 27, 1978.

- Francis, Cardinal Seper, Prefect,
- Fr. Jerome Hamer, O.P., Secretary.

It is a question of avoiding a reading too strictly legal on the fact of the apparition. By taking into account various factors up to that point neglected or ignored, in particular the mechanisms of inculturation, the contribution of the social sciences makes it possible to locate the apparition in the historical and sociocultural context where it finds at the same time its roots and its application. This recent approach lays down new pastoral orientations which, without calling into question the traditional criteria of the discernment of the spirits, authorizes a calmer reading of the event and its integration, its insertion in the life of the ecclesial community: more and more, the basic community that is the parish, the communion which is the diocese, becomes the place and the test bench of the mariophanie; even when the latter remains a phenomenon of popular Christianity, it must itself respond to the expectations of the Church-communion, and not only of that of a limited section of the ecclesial community.

DISCERNING WHAT IS TRUE FROM FALSE APPARITIONS

Genuine apparitions rare

As Mgr Farges says in his celebrated study, Mystical Phenomena, “True Visions are rare, but visionaries are legion …” (p. 323). This could be said to be the guiding principle for this section of the website, that is that the great majority of reported visions are almost certainly false, and are due to human delusion, or illness, or malice, or, in the worst cases, to diabolical deception. As St. Paul pointed out, the devil is capable of disguising himself as an angel of light (2 Cor 11:14).

On occasion God does grant “visions” to those who could be regarded as “sinners,” as is clear from the Old Testament accounts of Balaam (Num 22-13) and Belshazzar (Dan 5:5), and even in the case of Paul, before his conversion as detailed in the New Testament. In Church history too there are occasional accounts of such events, for example the apparition of Mary seen by Alphonse Ratisbonne in Rome in 1842. But these are exceptional, and the great majority of such visions or apparitions have been the privilege of either young children or holy men and women.

There is no “track record” of Mary, or Jesus, or the saints, appearing to adult individuals of a mediocre, or worse, spiritual level. As Mgr Farges puts it: “Amongst sinners … visions are always very rare, and therefore must always seem suspect and attributable to illusion or the devil, unless there is a proof to the contrary ” The category of “sinner” is, unfortunately, that which applies to most of us, and thus we must conclude that genuine apparitions or visions are extremely rare.

Definition of visions and apparitions

It’s useful to define what is meant by visions or apparitions so as to have a better understanding of what they involve. For the purposes of this website the basic difference between a “vision” and an “apparition,” in Catholic terms, can be understood as follows: in a vision God produces a concept or image without there necessarily being anything external to the viewer, whereas in an apparition God apparently causes something external to the viewer to be perceived through the senses, which act normally even if the “seer” is in an ecstatic state.

Broadly speaking it is probably accurate to say that in the history of the Church, visions have been granted to saints and other holy people who have advanced some way in spiritual terms. This is because they have reached the stage where God can act more directly on the soul, and so produce visions and ecstasies of a more interior nature.

The approved Marian apparitions on the other hand seem to be of a more “exterior” kind, and have been experienced by those who can be regarded as spiritual “novices.” This distinction between “visions” and “apparitions” has been followed here, although some writers see apparitions as special cases of visions. The term “visionary,” at least in English, seems to have acquired a negative sense, that is a description of a false “seer,” and so has not been used here in discussing the approved Marian apparitions. However there have been criticisms of this approach.

Possible problems with apparitions - hallucinations

With the more “exterior” Marian apparitions it seems that the main dangers are illusion and hallucination. It would be a case of illusion if the visionary thought that a physical object was acting in an apparition-like manner, as in the case of those who think they have seen statues of Mary moving. Some of the people of Knock in 1879 initially thought that the apparition of Mary they could see by the church was a collection of new statues ordered by the parish priest and left outside.

This was the natural initial conclusion to come to but it was incorrect because one of those present tried to kiss one of the “statues” and found nothing there. Hallucinations on the other hand are usually due to some disorder of the brain, either organic or drug induced, which leads to the production of images that can be regarded as having different levels of “reality” for the individual. “Hallucinations” may also possibly have a diabolic origin.

Hallucinations can thus be reckoned as pathological occurrences in which an inward image is falsely projected by the mind but regarded as real. Normally the senses receive outward stimulations and pass these to the brain where they are processed. But in certain abnormal and morbid states this process is reversed and images arising in the brain, for whatever reason, are projected outwardly and perceived by the individual as real objects.

Thus people suffering from hallucinations can believe they are seeing things which are not real, or hearing imaginary voices, and so on. It is something like the difference between a camera and a slide projector. The camera captures an image on the film, through its lens, of an external object, whereas the slide projector outwardly projects an image from the photographic slide onto a screen.Thus hallucinations and normal vision are complete opposites.

This explains how hypnotists are able to deceive their subjects into believing that they are really seeing imaginary objects. They are able to influence the imagination such that it produces images, sounds, smells, etc., which are felt to be real by the subject. This also indicates that hallucinations can be governed by the will, either that of the individual, or someone else, such as a hypnotist.

And if the wills of individuals can be influenced by other people to produce hallucinatory states then that principle also extends to the devil. However, it always needs to be borne in mind that hallucinations can also be produced artificially by drugs or by excessive emotional excitement, and that perhaps these are more likely causes than direct diabolical influence.

Distinguishing between hallucinations and genuine apparitions

Mgr Farges points to an important way of distinguishing between hallucinations and genuine apparitions. In the case of an hallucination, in general it only gradually becomes visible with increasing clearness, appearing firstly only as “a vague light, then a hazy white spot, and it is in this mist that little by little the contours of the picture are traced, with its details and colours, which before becoming fixed, pass through different phases and transformations.”

For a genuine apparition though the object appears and disappears in a more fully formed manner. It may gradually fade away, but it retains it distinctive characteristics. In other words there is an indistinct, hazy, quality to hallucinations, although this does not mean that they can be confused with dreams. Dreams are conjured up by the imagination when the exterior senses have been dulled by sleep, (cf. Ecclesiasticus/Sirach 34:1-8).

But dreams do show clearly the way that the mind can produce very vivid imagery, and so the step from this sort of internal production of images, to the external production of hallucinations is a logical one.

It is also possible that hallucinations may be induced by autosuggestion, as Mgr Farges points out: “Under the influence of violent emotion, of a desire or a fear which maddens, it is possible to see or hear what is hoped for or feared, and by repetition of the crises, facility to reproduce the vision at will may be acquired …” In other words a person may develop the ability to produce hallucinations, at will as it were. But in all this they cannot go beyond the contents of their own imagination, and thus hallucinations are often repetitive.

Collective hallucinations differ from genuine collective apparitions in that they normally result from an extremely heightened emotional state, shared by a group of people who often are subject to “waves” of emotion which lead to imitation. Thus, in the past, there have been reports of exhausted shipwreck survivors sharing “visions” of other boats, or dry land, and so on.

However, while sharing similar fantasies, these unfortunate people have still experienced different hallucinations, unlike the seers of genuine apparitions, who have, almost invariably, seen the same details, usually with very minor variations. Similarly genuine seers are normally in a calm and unexcited state, although they may be in some form of ecstasy, and the question of hallucinations brought about by emotional extremes does not arise.

Conclusion: genuine apparitions from God

Thus a true vision or apparition comes from God, but a hallucination comes from the individual’s own imagination or is caused by some bodily or mental disorder, or, more seriously, by the devil. So while a highly suggestible and unbalanced individual might be subject to some sort of hallucination, usually there are be clear signs to indicate this, that is moral defects are present.

The seers of the approved Marian apparitions have generally been regarded as very level headed and unexcitable, and thus unlikely to be subject to hallucinations. Similarly, there are good textual accounts of these apparitions indicating that they do not contradict Church teaching or dogma, another positive point regarding their authenticity, although the Church itself has not rushed into proclaiming their truthfulness, taking time to evaluate all the evidence.

In most of the Marian apparitions we are dealing with simple people or children, who although not advanced “spiritually,” were usually uncorrupted by the world, and so able to see things hidden from other people. This was the case with Pontmain in 1871 where the apparition of Mary in the sky was only seen by young children, who were not in ecstasy, while the adults present saw nothing.

Knock is the exception to this in that most of those who went to the church on 21 August 1879, and saw the apparition, were adults, albeit undoubtedly simple and unsophisticated country people with a childlike faith. Although Juan Diego, the seer of Guadalupe, was an adult, he had only been baptised a few years previously and so was, in spiritual terms, a child.

Verifying true apparitions: prophecy and miracles

The question arises as to how certain we can be that an apparition really comes from God. In the Old Testament period, Prophets such as Elijah appeared and claimed to speak in the name of God, apparently proving this by miraculous signs accepted by the people. These signs were necessary because of the presence of false prophets, and so a process of discernment was needed. Likewise, Christ proved the divine nature of his person and mission by performing miracles.

This is the view of the French spiritual writer, Poulain, on how much credibility we should give to revelations and visions generally, and, by extension, this also applies to Marian apparitions: “When a miracle is performed, and it is stated that it is worked with this intention, [as a sign] or when circumstances show this to be the case, it is an undeniable proof of the divine nature of the revelation. A prophecy fulfilled, will be the equivalent of a miracle if it was couched in definite language and could not have been the result of chance or a conjecture of the Devil.”

The miraculous healings at Lourdes seem to fulfil this criteria, while at Fatima, there was both a fulfilled prophecy and miraculous sign in the foretelling and actuality of the “miracle of the sun.” This indicates that these Marian apparitions really did come from God and so we can be morally certain they are worthy of belief.

Characteristics of genuine apparitions

Regarding the approved Marian apparitions dealt with on this website, from the time of Guadalupe onwards, they have been chosen on the basis that they involve Mary visually appearing and giving a definite message, either spoken or in some symbolic form, to a seer or seers. In addition elements such as Episcopal approval and the development of a relatively extensive cult, as well as wider ecclesiastical and Papal approval, have all been taken as indicating the genuineness of particular apparitions.

In practice this comes down to the nine major approved apparitions of the modern era, between Guadalupe and Beauraing and Banneux in the 1930s. The others are Rue du Bac in 1830; La Salette in 1846; Lourdes in 1858; Pontmain in 1871; Knock in 1879; and Fatima in 1917. This means that not every possibly authentic Marian “event” is included here, because in some cases the people involved did not see Mary in the way that seers involved in the major recognised apparitions saw her, or such apparitions simply have not made a big enough impact on the Church.

NINE MAJOR APPROVED APPARITIONS OF THE VIRGIN MARY

These are the nine major approved Marian apparitions of modern times, based on their acceptance by the Church and the importance they have assumed over time.

The Apparitions of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico

Mary appeared four times to Juan Diego in 1531 at Tepeyac hill near Mexico City. She proclaimed herself the spiritual mother of all mankind and left her miraculous image on Juan Diego’s outer garment, his tilma. To this day Mexicans have a great devotion to Our Lady of Guadalupe.

The Apparitions at Rue du Bac, Paris, France

Mary appeared to Catherine Labouré, in the chapel of the Daughters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul, at Rue du Bac in Paris, three times in 1830. She showed her the design of the the medal of the Immaculate Conception, the “Miraculous Medal.” This medal, when propagated, helped to renew devotion to Our Lady, both in France and eventually around the world.

The Apparition at La Salette, France

Mary appeared to two children, Maximin Giraud, aged 11, and Mélanie Calvat, aged 14, in 1846, one afternoon while they were looking after the animals high up on the mountain. She appealed for penance and an end to Sabbath breaking and blasphemy in the region. This apparition is credited with a major revival of Catholicism in the area.

The Apparitions at Lourdes, France

Mary appeared to Bernadette Soubirous, aged 14, a total of eighteen times at Lourdes in southern France, at the Grotto of Massabielle. She asked for penance and prayer for the conversion of sinners, and described herself as the “the Immaculate Conception.” Lourdes is most famous for the miraculous spring which has been responsible for many cures accepted by the Church.

The Apparition at Pontmain, France

Mary appeared in the sky over the small town of Pontmain in north-western France to a group of young children for about three hours in January 1871, as the Franco-Prussian war was threatening the area. Her message appeared on a banner under her feet, and encouraged prayer while emphasising Jesus’ love and concern. The village was spared invasion.

The Apparition at Knock, Ireland

Mary appeared at Knock, a small village in Count Mayo, Ireland in August 1879. A number of villagers of diverse ages saw a silent apparition, which lasted about three hours, outside the gable end of the local church. They saw three figures, Mary, Joseph, and St John the Apostle, as well as a lamb on an altar and angels.

The Apparitions at Fatima, Portugal

Three children, Lucia de Santos, aged 10, and her two cousins, Francisco Marto, aged 9, and Jacinta Marto, aged 7, saw Mary six
times between May and October 1917. She described herself as “Our Lady of the Rosary,” while urging prayer, and particularly the rosary, as well as penance for the conversion of sinners, and the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart.

The Apparitions at Beauraing, Belgium

Mary appeared thirty-three times to a group of children in the winter of 1932-33 at Beauraing in Belgium, in a convent garden near a hawthorn tree. She described herself as “the Immaculate Virgin” and “Mother of God, Queen of Heaven,” while calling for prayer for the conversion of sinners.

The Apparitions at Banneux, Belgium

Mary appeared eight times to Mariette Beco, aged 11, outside the family home at Banneux, a small village, in Belgium. She described herself as the “Virgin of the Poor,” and promised to intercede for the poor, the sick and the suffering.

(Ed’s note: so next time, before you believe in apparitions make sure that it is approved by the Catholic Church. Many apparitions have already been proven false because of the disobedience of the major personalities towards the Church’s Authority. One important characteristic of an authentic visionary is humility. It is only logical that when a person sees the Mother of God who is the model of humility par excellence, one would be humble in accepting what history befalls on them. These characteristic is very evident among the three Children of Fatima, Bernadette of Lourdes, Catherine Laboure of the Miraculous Medal and Teresing Castillo of the Lipa apparitions: they all obeyed what the church sanctioned on them even if it means the incredulity of the Church towards the Phenomenon. Worthy to note, the visionary of the Agoo Apparition, Judiel Nieva is now a Transverstite Businessman err woman who dresses himself as the Virgin Mary. The mother of God would never choose a servant that would lead many astray.)

_________________________________________________________________________
Sources: Theotokos.Org

• Joachim Bouflet & Philippe Boutry, Un signe dans le ciel, (Grasset, Paris, 1997), pp. 396-99
• Mgr. Albert Farges, Mystical Phenomena,(Burns, Oates & Washbourne, London, 1926)
• Rev. Michael Walsh, The Apparition at Knock, (St Jarlath’s College, Tuam, 1959)
• R. Garrigou-Lagrange, The Three Ages of the Interior Life, Vol. 2,(B. Herder Book Co., St Louis, 1948)
• A. Tanquery, The Spiritual Life, A Treatise on Ascetical and Mystical Theology, (Desclée, Belgium, 1950)
• A. Poulain, The Graces of Interior Prayer,(Kegan Paul, London, 1912)

If you like this post, Press the Button!