The Issue At Hand

[kafka]

There is nothing wrong with avoiding private revelation. If one is not sure about a particular one they are best to avoid. Especially since there are so many false private revelations in the world today.

I've noticed some people have stated they rely on their "gut feeling" when judging private revelations. I disagree with this. For a private revelation to be true it must meet some sort of criteria. Here are some taught to me by a theologian:

True private revelations contain no theological errors, nor any doctrines contrary to Church teaching.
True private revelations are fallible. Everything God says is infallible but the person recieving the revelation misunderstand it, or the person may make an error in recording it.
True private revelations tend not to exalt the one receiving them.
True private revelations have purpose, and they often show knowledge of the future.

Also true private revelations tend to be simple in message, contain the subtle wisdom in Heaven, and reflect Tradition, Scripture, and Magisterium.


Here are some criteria for false private revelations:

Exaltation of the Seer
Frequent Reference to Evil
False claims about the future
Long, rambling, uninformative . . .
Blaming specific groups for the problems in the Church and the world
False doctrines and distortions of doctrine
False miraculous healings

[Didymus]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1443724' date='Jan 9 2008, 02:46 PM']Several things about this quote.
What is the source? Was this quote from a bull, encyclical, apostolic letter, etc.? Can you give this quote in the original Latin so that we can make sure the translation is accurate?[/quote]

what the hell dude, the quote wasn't just pulled from any ancient archives. It's a popular enough quote that we'd know about it if it had any translation errors.

this is rediculous...

[kafka]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1443726' date='Jan 9 2008, 02:51 PM']what the hell dude, the quote wasn't just pulled from any ancient archives. It's a popular enough quote that we'd know about it if it had any translation errors.

this is rediculous...[/quote]

agreed. Though forgive him he is a bit younger.

[Maggyie]

I read once from someone (Fulton Sheen?) about how in the 20th century there was a lot of running around from place to place, with people looking for supernatural appearences of Mary, here, there and everywhere, spending a lot of money on plane fare for "pilgramages" etc, and all the while there was the Lord of Lords and King of Kings waiting neglected in the tabernacle at the parish church around the corner.

Which is not of course what "Mary" (if it genuinely is her) would want at all.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1443730' date='Jan 9 2008, 12:57 PM']I read once from someone (Fulton Sheen?) about how in the 20th century there was a lot of running around from place to place, with people looking for supernatural appearences of Mary, here, there and everywhere, spending a lot of money on plane fare for "pilgramages" etc, and all the while there was the Lord of Lords and King of Kings waiting neglected in the tabernacle at the parish church around the corner.

Which is not of course what "Mary" (if it genuinely is her) would want at all.[/quote]something good to remember

[kafka]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1443730' date='Jan 9 2008, 02:57 PM']I read once from someone (Fulton Sheen?) about how in the 20th century there was a lot of running around from place to place, with people looking for supernatural appearences of Mary, here, there and everywhere, spending a lot of money on plane fare for "pilgramages" etc, and all the while there was the Lord of Lords and King of Kings waiting neglected in the tabernacle at the parish church around the corner.

Which is not of course what "Mary" (if it genuinely is her) would want at all.[/quote]

True, but the 20th century was horrific, spiritually bankrupt, and there was a lot of suffering. A lot of people live there Faith simply so who can blaim them for taking pilgrimages and looking for answers at some of these apparitions.

That said though, there are people who make there own little religion out of the apparitions, but that is an extreme.

[Ash Wednesday]

The Church doesn't really say anything or make any final conclusions about ANY apparitions until after they stop. It's just protocol and common sense.

I soooooooo agree with Didymus on people turning apparitions into their own religion. I have often wryly referred to it as "The Gospel According to Fatima."

I believe in all of the approved apparitions. The jury is still out on Medjugorje as far as I'm concerned, though. I would love for them to be true and I used to believe them but now I'm not so sure. I'm not really going to get into that since there's a thread about it on the debate board. I respect people's opinions either way. I haven't ruled out visiting though. I don't doubt that visiting pilgrims experience Jesus and Mary (I separate this from the apparitions themselves). Seek and ye shall find, after all. God doesn't disappoint people who seek him.

[Didymus]

same here. I've wanted to go with different groups a few times, i just didn't have the cash. My own spiritual director goes like every other year or so.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1443730' date='Jan 9 2008, 03:57 PM']I read once from someone (Fulton Sheen?) about how in the 20th century there was a lot of running around from place to place, with people looking for supernatural appearences of Mary, here, there and everywhere, spending a lot of money on plane fare for "pilgramages" etc, and all the while there was the Lord of Lords and King of Kings waiting neglected in the tabernacle at the parish church around the corner.

Which is not of course what "Mary" (if it genuinely is her) would want at all.[/quote]

I agree, perspective and prudence is needed here, and in all things considered. Though I do know of people whose lives as far as how they lived as a local Catholic were radically changed for the better after going on pilgrimmages abroad. I have no problem with the idea of pilgrimmages if it strengthens their faith lives at home and gives them a new perspective. I do have a problem with it when people let this stuff overtake the gospel, rather than supplement it.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1443726' date='Jan 9 2008, 03:51 PM']what the hell dude, the quote wasn't just pulled from any ancient archives.[/quote]

LOL!

[prose]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1443724' date='Jan 9 2008, 01:46 PM']Several things about this quote.
What is the source? Was this quote from a bull, encyclical, apostolic letter, etc.? Can you give this quote in the original Latin so that we can make sure the translation is accurate?[/quote]



So... Let me get this straight. You are claiming now that you are fluent enough in latin to translate ancient writings and be sure the translation is correct???

I wish I could do that as a teenager!!

[Socrates]

There seems to be a lot of unnecessary confusion here over this quote.

It must be understood that Pope Urban VIII was speaking in that quote of private revelations [i]approved[/i] by the Church to be worthy of belief.
The Church does not [i]require[/i] Catholics to believe in [i]any[/i] private revelations, not Lourdes, not Fatima, not Guadalupe.
However, the Church has declared these and others to be worthy of belief - that is, that their message does not contradict Catholic truth, and that Catholics may safely believe in their message.
It is of such revelations that the Pope was speaking - not of any and all purported private revelations.

If he was speaking of all "private revelations," that would mean that it would be better that we believe [i]anybody[/i] claiming to personally receive revelations from God, the Blessed Virgin, or other saints. That, of course, would be absurd and dangerous, and is obviously not what he was saying - especially as many "private revelations" are patently false and contrary to the Catholic Faith. (Bayside and the "Balls of Redemption," anyone?)

The Medjugore apparitions have [i]not[/i] been approved by the Church, and in fact have been condemned by the local bishop. I believe them to be a load of b.s. myself, but I'm not going to get into that here - there's a lengthy thread on the topic in the debate table if anyone cares to dig it up.

Furthermore, the Pope was not defining dogma here or speaking [i]Ex Cathedra[/i], but giving prudential judgment, which is not infallible or binding.

Edited January 10, 2008 by Socrates

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1443726' date='Jan 9 2008, 01:51 PM']what the hell dude, the quote wasn't just pulled from any ancient archives. It's a popular enough quote that we'd know about it if it had any translation errors.

this is rediculous...[/quote]

Google the quote. The first thing that comes up is this thread. Next in line is a list of several sites that support Medjugorie (sp?) which all quote it but never give the name of an encyclical or a letter or book containing the quote or anything. Then there is a google book comes up as [i]Wrapped in Grey[/i], but according to its title page, is actually entitled [i]The Catholic Answer Book 4[/i] edited by Reverend Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Ph.D., S.T.D. with the following on pp. 96-97:

[quote]Q. I am very skeptical about the apparitions at Medgiugorje, as well as apparitions that are allegedly occurring all over the world. But the mindset of those who "preach" these apparitions seems to coincide with a quote that was allegedly made by Pope Urban VII: "In cases which allegedly concern private revelation, it is better to believe, for if you believe and it was proven true, you will be happy that you believed because our Holy Mother Church asked it. If you believe and it should be proven false, you will receive all the blessings as if it had been proven true, because you believed it to be true." Three things seem wrong with this statement: (1) My understanding is that the Church does not prove an apparition to be true. (2) The Church permits us to have a devotion to an approved apparition but does not ask us to believe in it. (3) If one were to believe every private revelation, there would be a danger of believing errors, as some apparitions are false, and the blessings would be dubious. Did Urban VII actually make this statement, and, if so, was he right?
A. I have never seen this supposed quotation of Pope Urban, but it does not ring true because the arguments you set forth are precisely and accurate summary of the Church's attitude toward all alleged apparitions. And even if it were a correct quote, it would be no more than a particular Pope's private and pious opinion.
To summarize, I would say that the Church always operates from what we might call a "hermeneutic of suspicion" in regard to any and all would-be private revelations.
Therefore, the burden of proof is on the person claiming an authentic religious experience, and even should the evidence be convincing, the Church never asks us to believe, but merely allows us to do so.[/quote]

From the fact that this is the only reliable and published source, at least online, of the quote. If someone can find me another published source written by a person who is does not propagate the Medgiugorje apparitions, especially in Latin.

Another piece of evidence I would like to put forth for this quote not being authentic is that, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, one of the things which Urban VIII (the Pope to whom this quote is usually attributed) did was, "He reserved the beatification of saints to the Holy See and in a Bull, dated 30 October, 1625, forbade the representation with the halo of sanctity of persons not beatified or canonized, the placing of lamps, tablets, etc., before their sepulchres, and the printing of their alleged miracles or revelations." (cf. Catholic Enyclopeida, article Urban VIII: [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15218b.htm)"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15218b.htm)[/url]

[quote name='prose' post='1443760' date='Jan 9 2008, 03:21 PM']

So... Let me get this straight. You are claiming now that you are fluent enough in latin to translate ancient writings and be sure the translation is correct???

I wish I could do that as a teenager!!

[/quote]

No, but as a second year Latin student, I could probably give it a shot [i]if[/i] the quote were ever found in its original Latin which I highly doubt it ever will since it is probably spurious.

Edited January 10, 2008 by StThomasMore

[Catholictothecore]

Look, unless you know exactly what to look for, it's pretty hard to find a ancient latin text online, even through google.

[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Private_Revelation.asp"]link here. [/url] I know it's not in the great language, but it is from the CCC.

What I derive this to mean is that there is no harm in believing. Some of us, many of us, do believe. I personally think we are living in the last 20 years of civilization as we know it. Don't forget that the world can very easily change over night. The night from 9/10 to 9/11, 2001 springs to mind.

As for obeying a "gut feeling"...maybe that's too crude a phrase. The Scripture often speaks of one individual "being driven." I know that many times throughout the course of my life, I have made a decision, often life changing, based on prayer and a "gut feeling." I've learned to trust it. I even picked my major in school based on it When I don't have complete confidence, it doesn't seem to work out to well. To me, that says something. So, maybe that's what these "revelations" are. God pouring out his grace on some people who just want to be near him, the same as those who don't believe it. I personally think that it's requires more faith to believe than not to. Why is that so hard to accept?

What Abram and the "gut feeling" he had that said "Leave this land of your fathers?" What about Abraham's servent who had been sent to find a wife for Issac? When he didn't know what to do, he prayed "Dear Lord, let the one who offers me water, and who offers to water the camels as well, be the one for my masters son." He followed a "gut feeling," and through it, God fulfilled a pretty "flattering" promise to Abram that went along the lines of "I shall make you a father to many nations."

What about David and the "gut feeling" he had that inspired him to offer his sling, his person, and his life and death, to the service of King Saul, a man of whom God had already spoken to Samuel with these words "Why do you still mourn for Saul, whom I have rejected as king of Israel?" And, what about Solomon, who had the "gut feeling" to pray for wisdom when the Lord asked him which gift he would have of God?

And how about the "gut feeling" that made Peter, Andrew, James, John, Phillip, Bartholomew, Mathew, Thomas, James the Lesser, Simon the Zealot, Jude and Judas, follow Christ. Even Judas followed Christ, and what happened to him, sadly, was...neccesary. His betrayal, that is, not his suicide, nor his despair.

What about the "gut feeling" that told men of God, even to the days of Karol Wjotyla, living in Nazi occupied Poland, to be a saint.

While it is true that not every gut feeling is the movement of the Spirit, I think it is safe to say that some most definitely are.

Edited January 10, 2008 by Catholictothecore

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Catholictothecore' post='1443917' date='Jan 9 2008, 11:26 PM']Look, unless you know exactly what to look for, it's pretty hard to find a ancient latin text online, even through google.[/quote]

Yes, I understand that. But what I'm looking for is not necessarily a 17th Century Latin text. I'm looking for a source for that quote, even in English. If a source were found in Latin that would add a great deal of credibility to the quote and would help prove that it is no spurious, but it is not strictly necessary to have it in Latin. What you (and everyone else who has used that quote) has given is the name of the Pope who allegedly made that quote. No mention of where the quote can be found in a primary source (such as a document or letter) or a secondary source (such as a book about private revelation not written by a fanatic). Basically the point I'm trying to get at is that the quote which you based your original post on is unsourced, and therefore suspect to being spurious.

[beata_virgo_maria]

False apparitions can be quite dangerous. I feel really uncomfortable with Medj. It sometimes feels like I'm the only one who doesn't follow it in some of my circles of Catholic friends. I know some people who had conversions there and it's really awkward how if you say that you don't follow it, they can take it like your personally attacking their faith. I think it's good to remember that JESUS does the converting, and while people, saints, and the Blessed Mother can intercede and play a big role, they are not the core of our faith, Christ is.

[HollyDolly]

I don't know when and if it will be approved.20years or whatever is a long time for such revelations.
I would like to go to Rome and Lourdes someday,and maybe even Santiago de Compestello,the shrine of St.James
in Spain,but that's about it.

People should spend more time reading the messages of Jesus in the New Testament and following His teachings than running off to Medjugore.Jesus is the one who saves us and came to give us eternal lifethrough his death and resurrection.

[prose]

[quote name='beata_virgo_maria' post='1444085' date='Jan 10 2008, 12:53 PM']False apparitions can be quite dangerous. I feel really uncomfortable with Medj. It sometimes feels like I'm the only one who doesn't follow it in some of my circles of Catholic friends. I know some people who had conversions there and it's really awkward how if you say that you don't follow it, they can take it like your personally attacking their faith. I think it's good to remember that JESUS does the converting, and while people, saints, and the Blessed Mother can intercede and play a big role, they are not the core of our faith, Christ is.[/quote]

I feel that way too. I don't NOT believe, I just don't know what to think, so I go about my faith life without following what is going on there.

Doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

[Deb]

[quote name='HollyDolly' post='1444156' date='Jan 10 2008, 04:04 PM'] I don't know when and if it will be approved.20years or whatever is a long time for such revelations.
I would like to go to Rome and Lourdes someday,and maybe even Santiago de Compestello,the shrine of St.James
in Spain,but that's about it.

People should spend more time reading the messages of Jesus in the New Testament and following His teachings than running off to Medjugore.Jesus is the one who saves us and came to give us eternal lifethrough his death and resurrection.[/quote]

I find it quite humorous that you would like to go to Rome, Lourdes, Santiago and the Shrine of St. James but, you think others should spend more time reading the messages of Jesus than running off to Medjugorje. For me, If Pope John Paul II believed in Medjugorje, then so can I. The people who seem to have the strongest feelings against Medjugorje are always the ones who have never been there. I have never heard anyone who has been there talk about what a bunch of bull it was.
I was pushed, pulled and prodded (and had my way paid by a Seminarian) to get me there. I didn't want anything to do with Mary, Jesus or God. Now, I will run off to Medjugorje again, of my own free will, where I can go to mass, confession, adoration, stations of the cross, say the rosary etc every single day, ALL DAY, with others from all over the country and the world. I can even read the Gospel while there and all the way there and back.
Medjugorje is not some vacation hot spot. It is where you can go for praise and prayer and worship 24/7. It is where you can sit at a cafe and talk to brothers and sisters and priests and bishops. If you want to be with religious, this is the place to go.

[Deb]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1443730' date='Jan 9 2008, 02:57 PM']I read once from someone (Fulton Sheen?) about how in the 20th century there was a lot of running around from place to place, with people looking for supernatural appearences of Mary, here, there and everywhere, spending a lot of money on plane fare for "pilgramages" etc, and all the while there was the Lord of Lords and King of Kings waiting neglected in the tabernacle at the parish church around the corner.

Which is not of course what "Mary" (if it genuinely is her) would want at all.[/quote]

Jesus may have been neglected in his parish but not in mine We just celebrated the tenth anniversary of perpetual adoration. Mary wants to spread the practice of adoration to everyone in the world. Here is Mary's message of 09/25/95:
Dear Children! Today I invite you to fall in love with the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar. Adore Him, little children, in your Parishes and in this way you will be united with the entire world. [b]Jesus[/b] will become your friend and you will not talk of Him like someone whom you barely know. Unity with Him will be a joy for you and you will become witnesses to the love of [b]Jesus[/b] that He has for every creature. Little children, when you adore [b]Jesus[/b] you are also close to me. Thank you for having responded to my call. ”