by Jonathan Ekene Ifeanyi
 |
| Our Lady of Fatima |
In the article, ‘Flee
from ALL Novus Ordo Apparitions’, written and published by Malachy Igwilo,
a Sedevacantist, we read the following (arranged and numbered by me):
1. “Apparitions are a hot topic among Traditionalists. I have,
unfortunately, seen the exaltation of private revelation over
public revelation too many times to count. Rather than study what the
Church teaches (in public revelation which ended with the death of the Apostle
St. John in 100 AD), they seek to quibble over what Our Lady of
(fill-in-the-blank) is alleged to have said to the seer (private revelation).
Note well that the term "private revelation" has nothing to do with
the number of people who witnessed the revelation, but rather that it never
needs to be accepted as authentic, unlike the Deposit of Faith which comes to
us from Christ and the Apostles (deemed "public revelation").”
2. “People who see authentic apparitions (i.e.
"seers") are usually children, because of their innocence and due to
the fact that visions usually occur in the saintly to whom God can act
more directly on the soul as they have grown close to the Almighty”.
3. “I will attempt to demonstrate Church teaching on apparitions, and
how we must not let devotion to them (even when approved by Holy Mother
Church), obfuscate what is really of the Faith. The apparitions most talked
about involve the appearances of the Mother of God, Mary.”
4. “My advice is to stay away from apparitions other than the nine
approved by the Church since the 16th century and prior to Vatican II.”
5. “No one must believe in any apparition; even those approved by the
Church. If you have a devotion to an approved apparition, please do NOT let it
become some kind of "dogma," and do not waste valuable time and
energy debating with others over the "true meaning." Instead, read
the approved theologians and learn about what the Church really teaches, since
we live in this time of near universal apostasy. As far as "new"
apparitions, my advice is to stay away.”
6. “Rather than obsess over unapproved apparitions (and we have no
hierarchy with authority to approve new apparitions since 1958 when the last
pope, Pius XII died) stick to the nine major apparitions that have the solemn
approbation of Church authority.”
Where does one start to refute all these nonsensical—if not
diabolical—assertions? Of course there are some truths in the article (the false
apparitions he listed for instance), but—just as the devil himself does—he mixes
them up with pure lies. (See the entire article: Flee from ALL Novus Ordo Apparitions)
I will address all the above assertions, starting from number
6, then number 2, then number 3; then I will treat 1, 4 and 5 together because
they are related.
Igwilo writes (in number 6 above): “Rather than obsess over unapproved apparitions (and we have no
hierarchy with authority to approve new apparitions since 1958 when the last
pope, Pius XII died) stick to the nine major apparitions that have the solemn
approbation of Church authority.”
Rubbish!
The Church is, first and foremost, a Church of God (a Church founded not by the
apostles but by Jesus Christ Himself), not a Church of man. Therefore whenever
there is any problem in the Church the number one person that would care most
about the problem is God Himself. (See The Apocalypse Chapters 2 and 3. In
Chapter 3 verse 15-16 for instance Jesus, intervening in the affairs of the
Church just as He still does today, said to the Church of Laodicea, one of the
early Churches established in the ancient city of Laodicea in the apostolic age:
“...I know thy works, that thou art
neither cold nor hot. I would thou wert cold, or hot. But because thou art
lukewarm, and neither cold, nor hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my
mouth”). God has been intervening in the happenings in His Church—sometimes
even when the problem seemed less serious—from the first century till now (and
we see the same intervention in the Old Testament). God often intervenes
through His messengers—the seers or “prophets”. St. Paul tells us that the
Church was built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, not just the
apostles alone. “Therefore you are
no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens of the saints and
members of God’s household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets,
with Christ Jesus Himself as the cornerstone.” (Eph. 2:19-20). Again,
writes St. Paul: “And God has appointed
in the church, first apostles, second prophets....." (1
Cor. 12:28). The prophets are the seers and they
play a very important role as well. It is quite stupid then, to pretend
as if God has been silent over all the terrible errors and heresies that have
engulfed the Church since 1958, and more stupid to say that even if God has
been intervening we should just ignore Him because after all His message,
unlike the Deposit of Faith which ended with the death of the apostles, is just
private revelation and therefore mustn't be believed—which is exactly what Igwilo
is saying.
Igwilo
of course does this just to “protect” his Sedevacantist position which some of
these apparitions seem to be threatening. He has actually been making a lot of
unfounded and provocative (some in fact heretical) assertions for quite some
time now but I've been ignoring him partly because he is terribly fanatical
(which is un-Catholic) and partly because he dishonestly talks absolute
nonsense most of the times. Consider the very title of the article itself, for
instance. What does he mean by “Novus Ordo apparitions”? Does “Novus Ordo” have
apparitions? Igwilo calls ALL the heavenly apparitions (particularly the true
ones) “Novus Ordo apparitions” because none of these apparitions supports his
Sedevacantist belief that all Vatican II popes are false popes, all Novus Ordo
sacraments invalid and all Novus Ordo priests and bishops invalidly ordained. Hence
he declares in the same article that all the miracles happening within Novus
Ordo (in particular Eucharistic miracles) are fake. The man has been committing
a lot of sacrileges against sacred priesthood and the sacraments and it’s just
beyond the scope of the present study to go into all that. However, may I
quickly remind the reader that to declare all the Sacraments of the Church
“invalid” or a validly ordained priest “invalid priest”—as the Sedevacantists
have done—is not just a sacrilege, it is also a heresy, similar to that of the
Donatists in the fourth and fifth centuries, because the three sacraments that
confer a character (namely Baptism, Confirmation and Holy Orders) cannot be
repeated. This principle was already established with respect to the sacrament
of baptism in the letter of Pope St. Stephen I to St. Cyprian condemning the
latter’s practice of re-baptizing heretics when receiving them into the Church.
This was also defined by the Council of Trent, which declared an anathema
against those who maintained that the three sacraments that imprint an
indelible mark (namely Baptism, Confirmation and Holy orders) can be repeated
(Session VII, Canon 9, Denzinger [Dz.] 852). As far as Vatican II
mess is concerned, the true position every Catholic should take at this critical
time remains that of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. All recent apparitions that
warn of Vatican II errors are simply in line with Archbishop Lefebvre’s
position. (See: Is Novus Ordo Missae Invalid? Must priests who come to
Tradition be re-ordained?)
Again, Igwilo vomits (in number 2
above): “People who see
authentic apparitions (i.e. "seers") are usually children,
because of their innocence and due to the fact that visions usually occur
in the saintly to whom God can act
more directly on the soul as they have grown close to the Almighty”.
Nonsense! God can use anybody He
chooses to use—anybody He chooses to use.
God can act through anybody He chooses—anybody
He chooses. The Scripture flatly runs counter to Igwilo’s nonsensical
assertion:
“And it shall come to pass, in the last days, (saith the Lord), I will
pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall
prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream
dreams” (Acts 2:17; c.f. Joel 2:28).
Note:
“...your young men (not just children!) shall see visions”; note also, “the
last days”=Christian era. Even people who lack charity can also become God’s seers
or prophets, as we see in the case of Jonah (Jonah Chapters 1-4) and as stated
by St. Paul in First Corinthians 13. Hence St. Thomas Aquinas writes:
 |
| St. Thomas Aquinas |
“For prophecy like other gratuitous graces is given for the good of the Church, according to I Corinthians 12:7, "The
manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man unto profit"; and is not
directly intended to unite man's affections to God, which is the purpose of charity. Therefore prophecy can be without a good life, as regards the first root of
this goodness” (Summa Theologica, Q. 172, Art.4).
Hence, we hear Prophet Isaiah—sinful as he was—when he saw the Lord of
host:
“Woe is me, because I have held my peace; because I am a man of unclean
lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people that hath unclean lips, and I have
seen with my eyes the King the Lord of hosts.” (Isaiah
6:5)
In fact, it seems most times it is
even “unrighteous” and stubborn people that God uses (note also that our
criteria for measuring who is righteous or not is radically different from
God’s). The case of Saul (who was neither a child nor “righteous”) also comes
to mind, as we read:
“And Saul, as yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the
disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest, and asked him letters to
Damascus, to the Synagogues: that if he found any men and women of this way, he
might bring them bound to Jerusalem. And as he went on his journey, it came to
pass that he drew nigh to Damascus; and suddenly a light from heaven shined
round about him. And falling to the ground, he heard a voice saying to him:
Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? Who said: Who art thou, Lord? And he: “I
am Jesus whom thou persecutest. It is hard for thee to kick against the goad.
...” (Acts 9:1-5).
Therefore, it is FALSE to say that
“People who see
authentic apparitions (i.e. "seers") are usually children,
because of their innocence and due to the fact that visions usually occur
in the saintly to whom God can act more directly on the soul as they have grown
close to the Almighty.”
Again, Igwilo vomits (in number
3): “I will attempt to demonstrate Church
teaching on apparitions, and how we must not let devotion to them (even when
approved by Holy Mother Church), obfuscate what is really of the Faith. The
apparitions most talked about involve the appearances of the Mother of God,
Mary.”
Nonsense! True apparitions do not
“obfuscate” but rather STRENGTHEN our Faith as Catholics; they show us the
right path to follow when we are going astray.
Now numbers 1, 4 and 5 taken together: A private revelation “never needs to be accepted as authentic, unlike the Deposit of Faith
which comes to us from Christ and the Apostles (deemed "public
revelation")”?
To
start with, fundamental theology makes a distinction between “public
revelation” – the saving Good News which is intended for the entire human race
– and “private revelation”. The former is definitive, unsurpassable, universal,
and “closed” in the sense of the absolute supremacy and permanent normative
character of the Christ-event, which remains to produce new fruits of the
Spirit in the Church. Public revelation is the Deposit of Faith (Depositum Fidei) entrusted to the apostles by Christ and handed down to the
Church in the form of Sacred Scripture and Tradition. This kind of revelation
ended with the death of the apostles, is protected by the charism of
infallibility so the Church will not lose track of it, and must be believed by
all the faithful. While no new public revelation is to be expected before the
glorious Second Coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ, “private revelation” is deemed
not only possible but plausible.
“Private revelation” is the revelation or
inspiration given by God
to individuals for their own benefit or for the profit of others, as St. Paul
tells us: “Now the manifestation of the
Spirit is given to everyone for profit.” (1 Cor. 12:7). Jesus’ or Marian apparitions are a species of private, not public,
revelation. Private revelation is an intimate form of communication. It doesn’t
reveal new things to the Church, rather all private revelation does
is help to make public revelation “present” to us today, and help guide us
in living out that public revelation. Unlike public revelation, no one
is bound to believe in private revelation—BUT
if a private revelation is authentic, then to withhold belief in it would be
tantamount to turning a deaf ear to God—which
is a sin. Such an act would result in the loss of spiritual goods, as St.
Thomas Aquinas teaches: “prophecy,
like other gratuitous graces, is given for the good of the Church.” (Summa,
SS – 172, 4). God always has a purpose for whatever He does, and if He reveals
something to us, we can be assured that He does so for our own good. Only a
foolish man—and I wonder if Igwilo is actually one—would ignore what the
infinite wisdom of God chooses to reveal.
An example of the benefits that have come to us through
private revelation can be found in the spiritual goods the Church has received
through these revelations over the course of nearly 2,000 years. To name just a
few: most of the Religious Orders, which have benefited the Church so much and
have produced so many saints, were founded by their respective religious
founders through private revelation or inspiration; prayers innumerable,
including the Holy Rosary, were given to us through private revelation; the
sixteen different Church approved Scapulars, including the Brown Scapular of
Mount Carmel, have all come to us through private revelation; devotion to the
Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, have come to us through
private revelation; the multiple chaplets, such as Our Sorrowful Mother
chaplet, the chaplet of the Angels, etc., all came to us through private
revelation. The Chaplet of St. Michael the Archangel for instance is a chaplet resulting from a private revelation by the Archangel Michael to a Portuguese Carmelite nun Antonia d'Astonaco. Both the private revelation
and the prayers taught by the Archangel in a vision were approved by Pope Pius IX in
1851. The list goes on and on and is almost endless. Judging from these
heavenly gifts alone, one can readily see how spiritually beneficial it has
been to follow God’s guiding Hand through the medium of private revelation.
Our Lord Himself calls people who don't pay attention to the prophets "foolish", as we read in Sacred Scripture: "O foolish, and slow of heart to believe in all things which the prophets have spoken." (Luke 24: 25).
St. Thomas Aquinas points out that “God sends
prophets to every generation, not to give a new doctrine but to remind the
faithful what they must do to save their souls.” (Summa Theologica, Q. 174
Art. 6).
Similarly,
even Vatican II peritus Prof. Karl
Rahner didn't deny the fact. Rahner admitted that “anyone who absolutely
rejects the possibility of special revelations offends against faith; and
anyone who denies that they may occur even since the apostolic age offends
against a doctrine which is theologically certain.” (Karl Rahner, Sacramentum Mundi, vol. 5, New York: Herder & Herder, 1970, 358.).
Rahner raises the question: From a theological standpoint,
what is the “essentially different character” of private revelations which
distinguishes them from the final and definitive revelatio publica? It
seems inadequate to give the usual answer which is basically negative: that
private revelation does not add to the deposit of faith, that it is not
obligatory to faith, that at most it merits “human faith” and not divine and
Catholic faith, and so forth. Rahner answered: Private revelations are
“essentially imperatives showing how Christianity should act in a concrete
historical situation”; they are “not new assertions but new commands.” (Rahner,
Visions and Prophecies, trans.
Charles Henkey & Richard Strachan (New York: Herder & Herder, 1963),
16, 20, 26.).
Private
revelations are NOT NEW ASSERTIONS but
NEW COMMANDS. Interesting. In other words Igwilo is saying (even
emphatically): “No one must believe God’s
new commands.”
What
quickly comes to my mind is the case of Zachary as recorded in the Gospel according
to St. Luke. Do you remember that apparition—then “unapproved”—of the Angel Gabriel
to Zachary? Do you remember Zachary’s punishment and why he was punished? Well in case you don’t (I know Igwilo is
bereft of biblical knowledge), I quote (the answer of Angel Gabriel to Zachary
when Zachary DISBELIEVED the message of God that was given to him):
“And the angel answering, said unto him:
I am Gabriel, who stand before God; and am sent to speak to thee and to bring
thee these good tidings. And behold, thou shalt be dumb, and shalt not be able
to speak until the day wherein these things shall come to pass, because thou
hast not believed my words, which shall be fulfilled in their time.” (Luke 1:19-20).
Although this case does not
directly apply to our situation, what is necessary to note here is the fact
that Zachary was punished just for not believing a heavenly message. He was
instantly punished for not believing a message (then “new”) that came from
heaven—not even a command from God this time around but a promise that was made
in his favour—namely that his “prayer is heard”, that Elizabeth (his wife)
“shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John” (Luke 1:13).
If Zachary was punished just for not believing, how much more
many people today who, like Igwilo, not only reject God’s commands but even go
about talking absolute rubbish about them—about what they don’t understand?
The
following extracts are taken from Karl Rahner’s thesis Visions and
Prophecies:
“…..The possibility of private revelation through visions and associated
auditory experiences is evident in principle for a Christian. God as a
free personal being can make Himself perceptible to the created spirit, not
only through His works, but also by his free personal word.
(p.13)………..Therefore, anyone who absolutely rejects the possibility of special
revelations offends against faith; and anyone who denies that they may occur
even since the apostolic age offends against a doctrine which is theologically
certain. (p.16)
“…..[A]lthough they are “private”- [they] address the Church or major
parts of the Church through the visionary: private revelations recommending a
particular devotion, exhorting to penance, giving certain instructions, warning
against certain doctrines, recommending a spiritual doctrine or manner of life,
and so forth. Without any doubt in the course of the Church’s history
there have continually been private revelations of this kind, and they have
exercised great influence. They present not only psychological, but also
theological problems. Now when private revelations are discussed among Catholics
it is usually in terms of the psychology of such phenomena and hence of the
authenticity of the revelations and the truth of their content. We would
not contest or doubt the legitimacy of this approach. We shall ourselves
examine this problem at length. Nevertheless, we feel that it is one
sided. It has to be complemented by a theological approach.
(p.18,19)
“[This is why the Movement of Divine Innocence has always followed the
theological route.]
“…..[A]s the charism of the discerning of spirits in the Church is bound
up with ecclesiastical authority, it does not follow apriori that God will
impart the divine motion making known that He commands the Church, or parts of
it, to do a certain thing in the changing circumstances of history, solely
through members of the hierarchy. In principle the Holy Spirit can act
upon the Church through any one of her members to announce what He requires of
her, what command He lays upon her for the moment. It seems to us that
this is the essence of post-apostolic, prophetic, “private revelations”.
God inspiring a member of the Church with His imperative for the Church in a
concrete historical situation.” (p. 27)
Similarly, Father Paul Kramer writes, in his old article ‘Only She Can
Help You’:
“By and large there
seems to be prevalent an oversimplified understanding of the distinction
usually made between 'public revelation' and 'private revelation'. The concepts
are without doubt valid in themselves, but the terms are somewhat restrictive
and awkward and tend therefore to lead to an incomplete understanding of the
complexity of the subject matter that falls under these terms.
“What is commonly meant
by the term 'public revelation' is clear enough in so far as it has been well
explicated by theologians. The term denotes the official body of sacred
doctrine revealed by God to the Church for our salvation and set forth by the
magisterium of the Church as divinely revealed and thus to be believed with the
assent of Divine and Catholic faith. 'Private revelation', on the other hand,
in a general sense customarily refers to revelations made to persons that are
not strictly necessary for salvation and do not pertain to the Deposit of Faith
and therefore are accordingly to be evaluated and believed on human faith if
they are found to be worthy of belief. Such revelations generally are not
binding on the conscience of the faithful since salvation does not ultimately
depend on them.
“However, the fact that they are not to
be believed with the assent of Divine and Catholic faith does not necessarily
mean that they are always and everywhere completely optional for the individual
conscience to accept or reject. I remember reading a text of St. Alphonsus
Liguori in which it is explained that when a person receives a revelation from
God, that person is bound to believe and obey. The belief would not be an
assent of faith, but the obligation to believe would be a moral obligation
binding that person. When God speaks we have the moral obligation to listen,
believe and obey even if the revelation does not pertain to the Deposit of
Faith.”
Father Kramer continues: “In the Message of
Fatima Our Lady made specific requests: Some more or less general and others
particularly targeting specific sectors and individuals. The context of the
requests is not political or geopolitical but moral and spiritual; however,
there is a geopolitical dimension that touches upon such issues as war,
persecution of the Church, famine, oppression and the annihilation of entire
nations.
“The most basic and
important request per se is that "people must stop
offending God", because "God is already too much offended."
There are two great consequences of sinful humanity's rebellion against God:
Temporal punishment in this life such as war, famine and persecution of the
Church; and eternal punishment --- "You have seen Hell, where the souls of
poor sinners go."
“Our Lady states
plainly that the primary purpose of Her requests is to provide a remedy in
order to prevent souls from going to Hell, so She says, "To save them, God
wills to establish in the world devotion to My Immaculate Heart." By
establishing this particular devotion in the world, sinful humanity will
undergo conversion and stop offending God. The benefits of such conversion will
be both temporal and eternal: "If My requests are heeded Russia will be
converted and there will be peace." There will be peace and tranquillity
instead of war, destruction, hunger and oppression. The Church will be renewed
in the splendour of her traditions, the nations will convert to Christ and His
Church, while the financial and political domination of the powers of darkness
--- i.e., the Neo-Pagan, Masonic 'mystery of iniquity' (2 Thess. 2:7) --- will
be crushed under the heel of Her who is "terrible as an army set in battle
array." (Canticle 6:3, 9) Thus, the damnation of a multitude of souls
would be averted and their salvation secured --- accomplishing the principal
mission and duty of the Church as expressed in its supreme law: "Salus animarum suprema lex"
(Can. 1752).
Again:
“In order to bring it about that such benefits be merited, Our Lady has
made particular requests, so that the efficacious grace to bring about global
conversion and global peace can be secured; She has asked for the recitation of
the Rosary, the devotions of reparation (specifically the Five First Saturdays
devotions) to be promoted in the Church and practiced by the faithful. Sister
Lucy, quoting Our Lady, stated that '' 'The moment has come when God asks the
Holy Father to make, and to order that in union with him and at the same time
all the bishops of the world make, the Consecration of Russia to My Immaculate
Heart', promising to convert it because of this day of prayer and world-wide
reparation." "God", says Our Lady of Fatima, "is going to punish the
whole world by means of war, famine and persecution of the Church and the Holy
Father. To prevent it I shall come to ask for the Consecration of Russia to My
Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays. If they
attend to My requests, Russia will be converted and the world will have peace.
If not, Russia will spread its errors throughout the world, fomenting wars and
persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will
have much to suffer, and various nations will be annihilated." ”
Today
of course we have seen those errors of
“Old Russia” (i.e. Soviet Union) scattered all over the world (in the United
States and other western countries. Note, as Father Kramer points out, that “the movement that led to the establishment
of the USSR had already existed in Europe and America for a long time and its
roots are historically traced back many centuries. Now, two decades after the
formation of the constitutional democratic Russian Federation and the
restructuring of the former Soviet Union into a Commonwealth of Independent
States, that movement --- like a multi-headed hydra --- lives on even after the
scheduled decapitation of one of its masked heads. That movement is in fact
what St. Paul refers to as the "Mystery of Iniquity" (2 Thess. 2:7)
which "already operates" among us.”).”
“The modern phase of
the progression of that movement has its origin in the emergence of the
institution known as Freemasonry. Freemasonry is a religion, as is plainly
admitted in the letter of excommunication of the Grand Lodge of Uruguay by the
mother lodge of England. What that religion consists of is described by Albert Pike in his magnum
opus, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and
Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. Freemasonry is
described by Pike and all the authoritative writers of Masonry as 'the Ancient
Mysteries'. What this term denotes is a syncretic amalgamation of the ancient
pagan mysteries. The modern elaboration of the cosmology and metaphysics of the
Masonic Ancient Mysteries is set forth in the philosophical systems of Spinoza
and Hegel as is plainly evident in Pike's elaboration in Morals and Dogma, and the religious and
mystical elaboration of the sect has been acknowledged by Masonic luminaries to
be represented in the works of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. The 'sacred scriptures' of
Freemasonry are, as Pike declares in Morals and Dogma, the occult
pseudo-Jewish pantheistic writings of the Cabala, and principally the Book of
Zohar...”
But Our Lady will crush the Devil and his mystery
of iniquity. He goes on:
 |
| Father Paul Kramer |
“The radical
incompatibility between the religion of both the Old and the New Testament on
the one hand, and both the ancient mysteries of antiquity and the neo-pagan
'Ancient Mysteries' of Masonry on the other, is rooted in the essential
opposition and enmity between "the Woman and Her seed" (Gen. 3:15),
and the serpent and his seed. This statement is neither hyperbole nor allegory
--- Pike explains in his official work on Masonry that Freemasonry is a solar
cult, identifying the deities of ancient Egypt with those of Babylon and
Canaan. The 'god' of Freemasonry is, as set forth in Masonic ritual and
acknowledged by Pike, a mongrel deity known as 'Jabulon'. The name combines the
Hebrew name Yahweh with that of Baal, thus establishing the pantheistic dualism
that characterized the ancient religions, the gnosis that invaded and'
infiltrated into Judaism and Christianity, and which in turn survived in such
sects as Manicheism and Albigensianism (among others) and finally re-emerged
again in modern times as the Sect of Freemasonry, where the mask of ancient
Baal worship (i.e. Beelzebul, 'Prince of the Earth') is shed and the demonic
visage of the 'prince of this world' (John 12:31) is revealed at its
highest degrees in undisguised Luciferianism ---"Lucifer the
Light-bearer," exclaims Pike, "Doubt it not!" .” (See Father Kramer’s article here: Only She Can Help You)
Father Nicholas Gruner, talking about the same Fatima
apparition, writes (in his article, ‘The
Church's Obligation to Believe and Obey Our Lady of Fatima’):
“The next theological
position is that the Message of Fatima is not a private revelation, nor is it
part of the Deposit of Faith, but it nevertheless carries with it the solemn
obligation — before God and man — to believe it, to obey it as well as to
defend it and advance it to the extent of our power and possibilities.
“Even if the previously
outlined position that “Fatima is in the Bible” turns out not to be defined by
a future Pope at a future date; nevertheless, we are still obliged to believe
and obey the Fatima Message and requests.
“This third position is
a clear answer to the false statement that “Fatima is only a private
revelation”. As we shall see, this third position is based on Sacred Scripture
and on right reason.
“It shows that those who claim, even
people like Cardinal Ratzinger or Father Fox, that we (or the Pope or bishops
and priests) are not obliged to believe and obey Our Lady of Fatima are clearly
wrong.”
The fact here is that any message from God imposes an obligation upon us. We must believe it because it is from God. Hence
St. Paul says: “Extinguish not the
spirit. Despise not prophesy. But prove all things; hold fast that which is
good.” (I Thess. 5:19-21). Father
Gruner quotes Bishop Graber of Regensburg, Germany, “who points out that there is a third kind of revelation and that is
what he called "public prophetic revelation". And that is distinct
from private revelation and distinct from the deposit of faith. Not to believe
what God revealed just because “it is not...” is enough for God to send you to
hell.” (See Father Gruner’s article: The Church'’s Obligation to Believe and Obey Our Lady of Fatima)
Also, even in the case of unapproved apparition which does
not contradict but in fact promotes the Catholic Faith—which has important
message for the whole Church we are also morally bound to believe and proclaim
it. Hence, on the controversial Garabandal message, (which was endorsed even by
Great Padre Pio): During his 2001 interview (published in The Fatima Crusader: Summer 2001, Issue 67) Father
Gruner said, in one of his answers to his interviewer:
“...But the fact is,
cardinals and bishops opposing each other is mentioned in the 1963 version of
the Secret published in Neues Europa. From the following account, we know that
Cardinal Ottaviani encouraged the publication of that 1963 version when asked
whether it should be published or not. We know that the Cardinal had a very dry
personality and was pretty much indifferent to most apparitions. However, when
asked by a priest in 1964 about whether the 1963 Neues Europa version of the
Third Secret should be published, Cardinal Ottaviani exclaimed very
emphatically, “Publish 10,000 copies! Publish 20,000 copies! Publish 30,000
copies!”
“Then we have the
testimony of Father Malachi Martin telling us that the message of Garabandal
contains the Third Secret or parts of the Third Secret. Malachi Martin, who
knew the Third Secret because he read it himself, and who read the message of
Garabandal, says that because the Vatican chose not to release the Third Secret
in 1960, Our Lady appeared at Garabandal in 1961 and gave us the Third Secret.
What is in the Garabandal message? The Garabandal message says, among other
things, that many cardinals, bishops, and priests are on the road to hell and
taking many more souls with them.”
Father Gruner was then asked by the interviewer: “But why should we talk about Garabandal in The Fatima Crusader when it is not an approved apparition?”
Answer:
 |
| Father Nicholas Gruner |
“A very good, valid question. But I must point out to our
readers that although the apparitions themselves are not approved, the Bishop
of Garabandal — that is, the Bishop of Santander — said that the message itself
is not contrary to the Catholic Faith, that there’s nothing in the message that
could be taken as being contrary to the Catholic Faith. So, when you have
Malachi Martin saying that the message of Garabandal contains the Third Secret
or parts of the Third Secret – and he said that on the Art Bell Radio Show just
before he died – and the message of Garabandal does say that many cardinals,
bishops and priests are going to hell and taking many more souls with them,
then it all ties in with everything else we know about the Third Secret – that
one-third of the clergy (it may not only mean one-third of the Catholic priests
but also can mean one-third of the bishops and one-third of the cardinals
themselves) are working to undermine the Catholic Faith.”
Please
note that our intention here is not to argue in favour of Garabandal or against
it. The important point to note here, rather, is Father Gruner’s argument that
there is nothing wrong about talking publicly about any unapproved apparition
provided the apparition in question doesn't contradict the Catholic Faith.
Also,
for those who say we should stop talking about Fatima simply because it is not
part of the “Deposit of Faith”—those who subtly attack Fatima even while
masquerading as “children of Mary”, Cardinal Ottavianni’s words: “Publish 10,000 copies! Publish 20,000
copies! Publish 30,000 copies!” should equally be considered! (And in case
you don’t know Cardinal Ottaviani, know him here: Modern History Sourcebook: The Ottaviani Intervention,
1969)
Igwilo seems to believe that any message not yet approved by
Rome is fake—or at least must not be believed and discussed. Hear him: “...we have no hierarchy with authority to
approve new apparitions since 1958 when the last pope, Pius XII died...” Well
in the message of Sister Josefa Menendez (not yet approved by Rome), we see
Cardinal Pacelli (future Pope Pius XII) contradicting this mentality. In 1938
the substance of Josefa’s message, under the title of Un Appel à l’Amour, was published in Toulouse by the Apostleship of
Prayer. Cardinal Pacelli didn’t just endorse Josefa’s message only, he wrote
the very forward of recommendation in the form of a letter. Why did he do that?
Why did he support—even publicly—a
message not yet “approved by Rome”?
The
truth is this: It is wrong to say that Sister Josefa (for instance) hasn’t been
approved by the Church simply because Rome hasn’t endorsed her. As Father John
Flader said, “Sister Josefa and her writings have been approved by the Church
and, what is more, her cause of beatification has been opened.” Of course what
Father Flader means here is that the diocese of
Poitiers, France, has opened the diocesan process for the cause of canonization
of Sister Josefa (that was on November 30, 1948). The authenticity of Josefa’s account is attested to by her superior and
her spiritual director Father Boyer, OP. And The Way of Divine Love, Josefa’s heavenly messages published in Milwaukee in
1972, bears the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur of that archdiocese. Strictly
speaking, it is people like these—namely her spiritual director, her superior, and
her local bishop, and NOT Rome—that are the key players as far as her “approval” is
concerned. I will return to this point.
Private
revelation, however, is not free from danger, for the devil is active in this
arena too and has deceived many. To be free from being deceived therefore, it
is necessary to distinguish authentic revelation (that which comes from God)
from unauthentic revelation (that which comes from the devil or from man
himself). But those who have the gift of discernment can always—by God’s
enlightenment—discern. Some like Igwilo who think that this discernment must necessarily be done by Rome are
greatly mistaken. Igwilo lists in his article only nine private revelations “ever
approved” by Rome since the sixteenth century and then decrees that all the
rest not yet approved must not be believed. It is simply not true that only
nine private revelations have been approved by the Church since the sixteenth
century. (See
for instance, CATHOLIC CHURCH APPROVED APPARITIONS but don’t let Faustina and co to distract your
attention. And What are the approved apparitions of Mary in the Roman
Catholic Church?)
Now
as for his belief in “Rome’s approval”, Igwilo fails to understand—in his
massive ignorance—that the Church herself has no providential protection in the
area of private revelation, to start with. When it comes to private revelation,
the key player is the local bishop. If the local bishop does not approve, it is
not good to say: let us wait for Rome to speak. Normally Rome respects the
local bishop, and is highly unlikely to reverse his decision. Even if Rome did
reverse it, we would have no guarantee because, as we said, the providential protection promised to the Church does not cover private
revelations. God Himself made it so, and He knows the reason why He made it so.
Now apart from the nine apparitions listed by Igwilo, there are simply many
others that have been approved by bishops around the world. It is erroneous to
say that they are false simply because they haven’t been approved by Rome, or
that even if they are true they must not be believed simply because Rome hasn't
approved them—the very impression Igwilo
gives. In fact, whenever we say that the Church (whether Rome or a local
bishop) has approved a particular private revelation what we are really saying
is that that private revelation in question has been studied and found to be free
of error and has something good for the Church. Because the message is coming
either directly from God (who really owns the Church) or from the devil (who is
an enemy of the Church), the Church’s duty is to pay attention and discern the
message in question to see if it tallies with Her doctrine or not. If it doesn't
, then the Church condemns it. But if it does—like in the case of Fatima
for instance—then the Church has an obligation to obey precisely because the
message is coming from God who is above all and owns all. Failure to obey on
the part of the Church can bring terrible disasters to the Church and to the
world (even as we’re now witnessing in the case of Fatima which has been
ignored).
It
is equally erroneous to say that some other private revelations not yet approved
by local bishops are false simply because they haven’t been approved—the local
bishops even in the approved ones could as well be in error because the same
“providential protection” doesn't cover them. Moreover some bishops—many in
fact—are pretty indifferent towards private revelations and can allow that to
influence them while making judgement.
As
Rahner rightly stated:
“…..[A]s the charism of the discerning of spirits in the Church is bound
up with ecclesiastical authority, it does not follow apriori that God will
impart the divine motion making known that He commands the Church, or parts of
it, to do a certain thing in the changing circumstances of history, solely
through members of the hierarchy. In principle the Holy Spirit can act upon
the Church through any one of her members to announce what He requires of her,
what command He lays upon her for the moment. It seems to us that this is
the essence of post-apostolic, prophetic, “private revelations”. God
inspiring a member of the Church with His imperative for the Church in a
concrete historical situation.”
What
does it mean to “discern?” The word “discern” has a Greek origin, meaning “to
separate out” of the spirits. Discernment uncovers the deception that casts
doubts on Catholic doctrines. It unmasks the lie of temptation, whose object
appears to be good, a 'delight to the eyes' and desirable, [Gen. 3:6] when in
reality its fruit is death. According to the Catholic Encyclopaedia:
“Discernment of spirits" is the term given to the judgment whereby it is possible to determine
from what spirit the impulses of
the soul emanate, and it is easy to understand the importance of
this judgment both for self-direction and the direction of others.
Now this judgment may be formed in two ways. In the first case the
discernment is made by means of an intuitive light which infallibly discovers the quality of the
movement; it is then a gift of God,
a grace gratis data, vouchsafed mainly for the benefit of our
neighbour (1 Corinthians 12:10). This charisma or gift was granted in the
early Church and in the course of the lives of the saints as, for example, St. Phlip Neri.
Second, discernment of spirits may be obtained through study and
reflection. It is then an acquired human knowledge, more or less perfect, but very useful
in the direction of souls. It is procured, always, of course, with
the assistance of grace, by the reading of the Holy Bible, of works on theology and asceticism,
of autobiographies, and the correspondence of the most
distinguished ascetics. The necessity of self-direction and of
directing others, when one had charge of souls, produced documents, preserved
in spiritual libraries, from the perusal of which one may see that the discernment of
spirits is a science that has always flourished in the Church.”(htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05028b.htm).
Before
I conclude, let us never forget that recent apparitions have repeatedly warned
of the danger that faces humanity at this time, and implore the world to
understand that man’s salvation is indeed at risk; that salvation is at risk
not only for Catholics who mess up the Church but also for Protestants and
non-Catholics who reject the Immaculate Heart of Mary. In one of the messages
(approved by the local bishop) Jesus said, for instance, “My Mother must be received; My Mother must be listened to in the
totality of her messages. Man must discover the wealth that She brings the
Christians...”
See, for instance: New Officially Approved Marian Apparitions Come with Dire Warnings from Jesus Including Startling Prescriptions for Protestants and Evangelicals
In the message of Sister Ana Ali (approved by her local
bishop) Jesus said: “I give my merciful
warnings Myself and through my Most Holy Mother” (Divine Appeal 189, 26
July 1988). Again, “My Church will be
obfuscated. The souls consecrated to me hurls torrents of blasphemies and lies
against the Church. Many of them have rejected me and they only believe in
malicious work.” (Divine Appeal 172, 29 June, 1988).
Anyone
who calls himself a Catholic must therefore be worried about all these
warnings. As we see in Cardinal Pacelli, future Pope Pius XII who, while
serving as Vatican Secretary of State during the reign of Pope Pius XI—having
certainly read the Third Secret of Fatima even before Sister Lucy committed it
to paper, in his capacity as the pope’s Secretary of State—made the following
astonishing prophecy about the coming upheaval in the Church:
 |
| Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) |
“I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s
messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which
menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the
Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology, and Her soul... I hear all around me
innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame
of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her
historical past.”
Pope
Pius XII’s biographer, Monsignor Roche noted (in his Pie XII Devant L’Histoire) that at this moment in the conversation,
according to a Count Galeazzi, ‘the gaze of the Pope, seen through the lenses
of his glasses, became supernatural, and there emanated from his tall and
slender body an irresistible mystical force.’ Monsignor Pacelli then said (in
answer to an objection from a curial Cardinal):
“A day will come when
the civilised world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter
doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our
Churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits
them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, ‘Where
have they taken Him?’’’ (Roche, Pie XII Devant L’Histoire, pp. 52-53 in The Devil’s Final Battle, Terryville,
Connecticut: The Missionary Association, 2002, p. 34.).
To say the least, just as theologians have an obligation to
believe more articles of the Faith, so do all who know of any true private
revelation have a greater obligation to believe it, and to obey it.
In 1931, Sister Lucy was in
Rianjo, Spain, praying for the conversion of Europe, Portugal, Spain, of Russia
and the world, and Our Lord spoke to her as she was praying. He said:
“You console Me a great deal by asking Me for the conversion of those
poor nations. Ask it also of My Mother, frequently saying, Sweet Heart of Mary,
be the salvation of Russia, Spain, Portugal, Europe and the whole world.”
He dictated another prayer at the
same time.
“By Your pure and Immaculate Conception O Mary, obtain for me the
conversion of Russia, Spain, Portugal, Europe and the entire world.”
After He dictated these two
prayers, Our Lord then gave one of the most terrifying prophesies and rebukes
that He has ever given in our time. He said:
“Make it known to My ministers that given they follow the example of the
King of France in delaying the execution of My command, that they will follow
him into misfortune. It will never be too late to have recourse to Jesus and
Mary.”
What is
Our Lord saying here? He says: “Make it known”. Make it known to whom? To “My ministers”. Which
ministers particularly? To the bishops and to the Holy
Father because it is the Pope and the bishops who have, like the King of France,
been given a command to personally fulfil. “Make
it known to My ministers, that given that they follow the example of the King
of France ...” Who is the King of
France that Our Lord is referring to? That requires a little
explanation. The King of France referred to: Louis XIV, XV, XVI, and the Kings
subsequent to them, even King Louis XVII, the poor young king.
In 1689, the Sacred Heart of Jesus
gave a command to the King of France to consecrate France, not the world, not
Russia, but France, to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. On the 17th of June, this
command was given, and the Kings of France and their confessors thought they
knew better than God and they chose to ignore the Sacred Heart.
The confessors in question were Jesuit
confessors. The Jesuit order was particularly punished by its suppression 60 to
70 years after that because they did not obey the command of the Sacred Heart.
And what
happened to the Kings of France? One hundred years later to
the day, on the 17th of June, 1789, the king was stripped of his power by the
Third Estate and four years later his head was chopped off on the guillotine. “Make it known to My ministers, that given
they follow the example of the King of France, in delaying the execution
of My command that they will follow him into misfortune.
It will never be too late to have recourse to Jesus and Mary.”
When Sister Lucy asked Our Lord in 1936, “Why will You not
convert Russia without the Pope making that consecration?” Jesus answered: “Because I want My whole Church to recognise
that consecration as a triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, so that later
on My Church will extend Her veneration and put the devotion to this Immaculate
Heart beside the devotion to My Sacred Heart.” And Sister Lucy, upon
receiving this reply, said “But, my God, the Holy Father probably won’t believe
me unless You, Yourself move him with a special inspiration.” And Our Lord
answered: “Pray a great deal for the Holy
Father. He will do it but it will be late.”
Subsequent private revelations that have surfaced since then
are all about the same Fatima Message—that is, they all merely confirm the
message of Fatima which is yet to be obeyed by the whole Church. As far as these
apparitions are concerned, most Sedevacantists I’ve encountered simply behave
like Satan’s agents. They claim to be “children of Mary” even while forbidding
their members from believing Our Lady’s heavenly messages or at least from
taking them seriously—all in the name of being “faithful” to “what is really of
the Faith.”
If Igwilo doesn’t know anything about apparitions (and he
certainly doesn't), he should meet those who know (and I personally know some,
most of them even uneducated) to enlighten him instead of coming out publicly
to talk rubbish and deceive people—which is unacceptable.
