Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Anσnymσus Posts Allowed => Topic started by: Änσnymσus on February 13, 2014, 10:46:54 PM
-
The Divine Mercy Devotion: Why Did the Holy Office Ban It? by Fr. Benedict Hughes, CMRI
In a past issue of The Reign of Mary, we published an article on false devotions (issue #128). That article can also be read on our web site (http://www.cmri.org/06- false-devotions-dangers-for-pious-souls.shtml). The point of the article was to explain the teachings of the Church on new devotions — teachings which caution against any superstition or novelty. Specifically, the famous decree of the Holy Office on the subject lamented the fact that “new forms of worship and devotion, often enough ridiculous, usually useless imitations or corruptions of similar ones which are already legitimately established, are in many places, especially in these recent days, being daily multiplied and propagated among the faithful, giving occasion to great astonishment and to bitter aspersion on the part of non-Catholics” (Holy Office, May 26, 1937; AAS 29-304).
In this excerpt, we can see that, in addition to rejecting new forms of devotion which are doctrinally questionable, there is grave concern about those which are “useless imitations or corruptions” of similar ones which have already been approved. Based on this reasoning, the Holy Office during the reigns of Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII forbade various new devotions, for example: devotion to the Sacred Head of Our Lord, devotion to the Annihilated Love of Jesus, the Rosary of the Most Sacred Wounds of Our Lord, devotion to the Merciful Love of Jesus, etc. Likely you have never heard of these new devotions, for the very reason that they were suppressed by the Church.
This then leads us to the question of the devotion called “the Divine Mercy.” This devotion is based on the purported revelations to Sr. Faustina Kowalska, who lived in the early 20th century in Cracow, Poland.
In a decree of the Holy Office dated March 6, 1959, we read the following: “The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, having examined the alleged visions and revelations of Sister Faustina Kowalska of the Institute of Our Lady of Mercy, who died in 1938 near Cracow, has decreed as follows: The distribution of pictures and writings which present the devotion to the Divine Mercy in the forms proposed by this Sister Faustina, should be forbidden…” (AAS 51-271). Incidentally, the decree was signed by Msgr. Hugh O’Flaherty as Notary of the Holy Office. He is the same monsignor portrayed in the movie “The Scarlet and the Black,” which tells the true story of his efforts to save more than 6,500 allied soldiers and Jews during the nαzι occupation in Rome during World War II. After the war he received numerous awards, including the U.S. Medal of Freedom. Msgr. O’Flaherty died in 1963.
Some may object to the acceptance of this decree of the Holy Office on the grounds that it was issued in 1959, during the time that the notorious modernist John XXIII was “pope.” But we do not believe this fact obscures the reality that those who worked in the Holy Office in those days before Vatican II, such as Cardinal Ottaviani, were well-trained and entirely orthodox prelates and theologians, who had been appointed by Pope Pius XII. (Similarly, we can quote from the decree of the Holy Office in 1962 against the writing of Teilhard de Chardin.) Eventually, this decree of 1959 rejecting the writings and devotion promoted by Sr. Faustina was reversed in April, 1978, due primarily to the efforts of the bishop of Cracow, Karol Wojtyla, who would be elected by the cardinals and become John Paul II some 6 months later.
Who Was Sister Faustina?
Born in 1905 in central Poland, Helena Kowalska was the 3rd of 10 children. Her desire to become a religious finally became a reality in 1925, as she entered the Congregation of Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy. Soon she began to experience the purported visions, during one of which, in 1931, she was instructed to have an image of Our Lord painted. You have likely seen this image, which is now everywhere to be found in Novus Ordo bookstores and religious goods shops. The image depicts Our Lord with rays of red and white light coming forth from His heart.
In 1933 she was transferred to a convent of the order in Vilnius. There she met a priest named Fr. Michael Sopocko, who became her spiritual director and an ardent proponent of her visions. He helped her to obtain the services of an artist and have the image painted, although she was not pleased with the result. There is some controversy over this, as the original painting is not now promoted. It has also been said that Fr. Sopocko vehemently opposed the propagation of any but the original painting.
Sr. Faustina died in a convent near Cracow on October 5, 1938. As we have stated above, the original decree banning this devotion in 1959 was reversed by the Vatican in 1978, due in no small measure to the efforts of the then- bishop of Cracow, Karol Wojtyla. He became an ardent promoter of the apparitions. In 1965 he commissioned a theologian, Prof. Ignacy Rozycki, to examine Sr. Faustina’s writings. In the same year Cardinal Wojtyla opened the informative process on her life, which is the beginning of the process toward eventual canonization. Eventually, as John Paul II, he proclaimed her a saint on April 30, 2000.
Why did the Church reject this Devotion?
One naturally wonders why the Church rejected this devotion. We do not know for certain the reasons behind the 1959 decision of the Holy Office, but we can cite several potential problems with the devotion.
There are theological problems with the messages. One reason for concern can be found in the wording of the messages. In 1934, Sr. Faustina began a diary in which she recounted her mystical experiences. Apparently, there were things in this diary that were theologically questionable. Modern defenders of the devotion attribute the problem to a faulty translation of the messages from the original Polish into Italian, for it was the Italian translation that was examined by theologians of the Holy Office. That argument, however, seems implausible.
If we look at the messages, we see that according to Sr. Faustina, Our Lord promises that those who go to confession and communion on the Sunday following Easter Sunday will obtain the remission of the guilt and the punishment of their sins: “On that day the very depths of My tender mercy are open. I pour out a whole ocean of graces upon those souls who approach the fount of My mercy. The soul that will go to Confession and receive Holy Communion shall obtain complete forgiveness of sins and punishment. On that day all the divine floodgates through which grace flows are opened” (Diary of Sr. Faustina, 699).
In an article in the National Catholic Reporter of August 30, 2002, the author (John L. Allen, Jr.), referred to the near 20-year ban (from the 1959 decree until the 1978 decree which reversed it) and admitted that there were theological problems with the message: “Officially, the 20-year ban is now attributed to misunderstandings created by a faulty Italian translation of the Diary, but in fact there were serious theological reservations — Faustinas claim that Jesus had promised a complete remission of sin for certain devotional acts that only the sacraments can offer, for example, or what Vatican evaluators felt to be an excessive focus on Faustina herself (http://tinyurl.com/ ncr-online-sr-faustina).
If we examine the authentic promises of the Sacred Heart, we do not find a similar wording, to the effect that all temporal punishment will be remitted for confession and Holy Communion received on a particular day. Of course, our Divine Lord could do just that if He so willed, but the problem is that this promise omits to mention the need for contrition and amendment of life.
Another theological novelty can be found in the writings of Canon Ignacy Rozycki, who had been appointed by Karol Wojtyla to examine the diary of Sr. Faustina. In his enthusiasm, he proclaims this devotion a “second baptism.” In other words, he is endorsing the same idea that on the feast of Divine Mercy one can obtain a complete remission of sins and all punishment due to them, just by performing devotional acts and receiving the sacraments' of Penance and the Holy Eucharist. But the terminology of a “second baptism” has always been used by the Church to refer only to the profession of perpetual vows in a religious institute approved by the Church.
Another potential reason for concern can be found in the image of Divine Mercy. As mentioned above, this picture is of Our Lord with His left hand at His heart, the other being elevated toward the viewer. From the Sacred Heart there emanate rays of white (signifying grace) and red (signifying the Blood of redemption). One objection is that the Sacred Heart itself is not seen. The rays emanate from Our Lord’s breast, but without picturing clearly His heart. Another problem is that with many of these images — indeed with the original picture — there are no wounds in Our Lord’s hands and feet, or they are so faint as to be not clearly visible. But we know from Sacred Scripture that Our Lord retained these wounds after His resurrection.
The image we are accustomed to seeing does have wounds that are faintly visible, but it is not the original; it is the work of an artist by the name of Adolf Hyla whose rendition became popular. His work, however, was vigorously rejected by Fr. Sopocka who worked with Sr. Faustina to have the original image painted by the artist Eugene Kazimirowski. Was part of the reason for Fr. Sopockas opposition to the Hyla painting the fact that he had posed for the image of Our Lord, dressed in alb and cincture? Be that as it may, the original image does not show the wounds in Our Lord’s hand, feet or side. Pope Pius XII commented on this omission in the case of crucifixes. After lamenting the errors of modern authors who wish to remove attention from the Passion of Christ and instead focus only on the glorified Christ, he states: they “have gone so far as to want to remove from the Churches images of the Divine Redeemer suffering on the cross” (Mediator Dei, 1947, par. 162). I believe these defects in the image (omission of the Sacred Heart and the wounds) are another reason for the suppression of the devotion.
A third reason, can be found in the wording of the 1937 decree of the Holy Office, warning against devotions which are “useless imitations or corruptions of similar ones which are already legitimately established.” Of course, the devotion to the Sacred Heart immediately comes to mind. Does not devotion to the Sacred Heart emphasize the infinite mercy of our Divine Redeemer? Why then is there a need for another devotion to focus on the divine mercy? Would that not merely serve to take attention away from devotion to the Sacred Heart?
Let us also call to mind how insistently the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus has been promoted by Holy Mother Church. The first Office and Mass to honor the Sacred Heart were written by St. John Eudes in the 17th century. In 1856 Pope Pius IX extended the feast to the entire Church. Pope Leo XIII consecrated the entire human race to the Sacred Heart in 1899, calling it the most important act of his pontificate. Pope Pius XI raised the feast of the Sacred Heart to a double of the first class — the highest rank possible. Pope Pius XII devoted an entire encyclical to this devotion (Haurietis Aquas, published in 1956). Everywhere in the Church there are devotions to the Sacred Heart, First Friday observances, etc. So another devotion to Our Lord, centering entirely on His mercy, would only seem to take attention away from a devotion, already universally recognized and observed, which centers on His love and mercy. Thus it appears to be an unnecessary repetition — a “useless imitation,” to quote the words of the decree.
We may never know for sure the exact reasoning of the consultors of the Holy Office for rejecting this devotion. It could have been for one, two, or all three of the reasons we have given, as well as others unknown to us. Be that as it may, the fact is that the devotion to the Divine Mercy, after having been suppressed by the Holy Office in 1959, is now widely promoted in the Conciliar Church, whereas the solid and divinely-willed devotion to the Sacred Heart is all but forgotten.
Let us then be cautious of new, unapproved devotions. Remove the image of Divine Mercy from your homes, if you have it displayed, and use, rather, the image of the Sacred Heart. Do not pray the chaplet of Divine Mercy or other devotions honoring this particular title. Instead pray the litany of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and other devotions to the Sacred Heart. Finally, be sure to often read and meditate on the Promises of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, for therein you will find all you need to understand the infinite love and mercy of Jesus.
-
I myself wanted to check out this devotion and read up on Sr Faustina. After reading her story after a google search I was a little disturbed. Here are some of the items about her that disturbed me.
* She wanted to join the Nuns but when her very poor parents rejected this idea she continued for years and put the idea out of her head....what person with a serious vocation just puts this out of her head for years.
* One night at a dance she got a very strong urge to go to Warsaw which she did at that very moment and left without her parents knowledge or blessing.....I thought this was very strange, for a young woman to travel just like that without even telling her parents.
*She joined a convent and while there she received her visions.
* She kept a diary and afaik kept it in point form describing each vision. Here are some from her diary in my own words.
* At one stage she was arguing with Our Lord something about penances she was doing while knitting (not exact description but this is from my memory of reading it and it is open to correction)....Who in Gods name argues with Our Lord during a divine vision. Just not possible and not reverend.
* She complained to Our Lord that there was no special saint attached to their convent and He supposedly said 'don't you know that the special saint is you'.......no humility.
Lastly the most one that struck me as disturbing, she was kneeling in front of a tabernacle in her chapel when Our Lord in the form of a Blessed Eucharist jumped out from the tabernacle and landed in her hands, she says in her humility she kept returning Him to the tabernacle and the Eucharist kept landing in her hands until eventually she realised that He wanted to be with her........ Sacrilege I think and not humble either.
Finally the use of the Rosary beads in her devotion seems to replace the Rosary. Not what Our Lady set up the Rosary Beads for.
Strangely while I was reading this on the internet internally I was praying to my Guardian Angel to guard over me to receive the Truth. I was at home on my own while children and husband were out when a large bang like a stone hitting my utility window next to my kitchen/ dining room which I was in. I went and looked out and nobody was there. The bang was so loud I was expecting to see something or someone to have caused it. I am not superstitious at all but I got a creepy feeling and shut down the site. Never took interest in this again.
On another note. Here in Ireland they are holding a Divine Mercy Conference which attracts huge visitors and the keynote speaker is a Fr T Radcliffe who supports gαy marriage and communion for divorcees and has had his knuckles rapped by Benedict xvi more than once for his outrageous liberal views. Complaints to the Divine Mercy Conference have been ignored and it is especially good timing for the liberal pigs because this year we are having a referendum on gαy Marriage.
-
First of all this is a private revelation, not a part of the deposit of faith. No one is obligated to believe in it. The same thing applies to Fatima, Lourdes, etc...
-
* She wanted to join the Nuns but when her very poor parents rejected this idea she continued for years and put the idea out of her head....what person with a serious vocation just puts this out of her head for years.
It is common for someone with a vocation to sometimes try to put it out of their mind. There are saints who did far worse things and put holiness out of their minds for years and years. St Augustine had a prayer which said, "give me chastity and purity Lord, just not right now." Sometimes in discernment we don't know what God has in store for us. What is important is that she was faithfukl to her vocation.
-
* One night at a dance she got a very strong urge to go to Warsaw which she did at that very moment and left without her parents knowledge or blessing.....I thought this was very strange, for a young woman to travel just like that without even telling her parents.
It was in Warsaw that she found the convent that God was calling her to. Is leaving home without telling anybody something we would recommend to young people today? No. But in her case this appears to have been the result of an inspiration of the Holy Spirit. She found her vocation in Warsaw and she was faithful to that vocation. Would to God that were would be so faithful to our vocations.
-
*She joined a convent and while there she received her visions.
The Holy Spirit moves where it wills not where we tell it to go.
-
* She kept a diary and afaik kept it in point form describing each vision. Here are some from her diary in my own words.
She kept the diary in obedience to her superiors. Obedience to one's superiors in religous is a sign of holiness.
-
* At one stage she was arguing with Our Lord something about penances she was doing while knitting (not exact description but this is from my memory of reading it and it is open to correction)....Who in Gods name argues with Our Lord during a divine vision. Just not possible and not reverend.
Other saints have "argued" with God. St theresa of Avila once shook her fist at God and yelled at him.
-
* She complained to Our Lord that there was no special saint attached to their convent and He supposedly said 'don't you know that the special saint is you'.......no humility.
I don't know who you are but Cathinfo needs a saint attached to it. Maybe you could be that special saint if you live up to the holiness that God is calling you to.
-
Lastly the most one that struck me as disturbing, she was kneeling in front of a tabernacle in her chapel when Our Lord in the form of a Blessed Eucharist jumped out from the tabernacle and landed in her hands, she says in her humility she kept returning Him to the tabernacle and the Eucharist kept landing in her hands until eventually she realised that He wanted to be with her........ Sacrilege I think and not humble either.
Jesus is the Lord of the House. If he wants to come out of the tabernacle then he can come out of the tabernacle. I wish he would come out of the tabernacle like that for me. Whatever He does is holy. Humility is truth. If Jesus wants something we should seek to do what He wants the way He wants it done.
-
Finally the use of the Rosary beads in her devotion seems to replace the Rosary. Not what Our Lady set up the Rosary Beads for.
Our Lady set up the rosary beads at the behest of her Son. Once again who is in charge? Jesus and Mary or me? with my distorted idea of what Jesus and Mary want with "her" beads.
Of course this devotion of Divine Mercy does not replace the rosary and you are certainly under no obligation to follow it. It is not part of the deposit of faith. So you should go the way that you feel the Holy Spirit is leading you.
-
Strangely while I was reading this on the internet internally I was praying to my Guardian Angel to guard over me to receive the Truth. I was at home on my own while children and husband were out when a large bang like a stone hitting my utility window next to my kitchen/ dining room which I was in. I went and looked out and nobody was there. The bang was so loud I was expecting to see something or someone to have caused it. I am not superstitious at all but I got a creepy feeling and shut down the site. Never took interest in this again.
It could have been the Devil trying to get you away from the Divine Mercy. He knows his time is short and he will stop at nothing to distance you from Jesus and His mercy.
:devil2: :devil2: :devil2:
"Stay away from Jesus, his holy mother, and his Divine Mercy" says the Devil.
-
On another note. Here in Ireland they are holding a Divine Mercy Conference which attracts huge visitors and the keynote speaker is a Fr T Radcliffe who supports gαy marriage and communion for divorcees and has had his knuckles rapped by Benedict xvi more than once for his outrageous liberal views. Complaints to the Divine Mercy Conference have been ignored and it is especially good timing for the liberal pigs because this year we are having a referendum on gαy Marriage.
If he talks in favor of "gαy" marriage and "communion for divorced people who are remarried without having their first union annulled then I join you in complaining about this person. I say bring a pillow and make yourself comfortable as you sleep through such nonsense. But if he talks about the mercy of God then he is right. He sounds like somebody who is in a lot of need of God's mercy.
-
I will go with what The Holy Office decreed in 1959 under Cardinal Ottaviani instead of going with what the modernist-heretic-apostate Karol Wojtyla said after Vatican 2.
-
To the guest who did not find her story that strange I say that saints in times past have set aside their vocation through obedience or for whatever reason but they never let go of the desire. She did not go through a period of discernment but she lived as any young girl would have at her age. She says that she never bothered with thoughts of her vocation until that night at the dance.
Her disobedience to her parents is not usual for saints. Sr Rose of Lima begged her parents to allow her to join a convent. One day after planning her entrance to a convent by means of running away and joining with the help of her brother, she went to her chapel and prayed and when it came time for her to leave she was physically rooted to the spot and could not move until she decided that she would not disobey her parents. She never became a nun and she died a saint.
I think that Sr Faustina was laying the groundwork or planting the idea of communion in the hand and she was endorsed by JPii after the devotion was banned......enough said.
I do not believe that she was genuine at all
-
I think the divine mercy devotion is from the devil. :devil2: . I prayed it a little when I was in the Novus Ordo because a Novus Ordo religious recommended me to pray it, but now that I am a traditional Catholic I will never pray it again, just like I will never pray the Luminous Mysteries again.
-
Obviously poche really likes the Divine Mercy devotion. Follower of Brother Stanley too?
-
First of all this is a private revelation, not a part of the deposit of faith. No one is obligated to believe in it. The same thing applies to Fatima, Lourdes, etc...
No comparison really...
Fatima, and Lourdes are approved by the Church.
Divine Mercy was condemmed by the Church.
JP2 and the apostate novus ordo church later gave their approval (which is worth nothing) to divine mercy.
-
Does anyone else think it's a little weird that the divine mercy image is Jesus with the colors of the Polish flag?
I do.
-
In relation to Divine Mercy, I've been to one last year, organised by a little church in surburb called Caufield. The participants were people who were totally devoted to try and be "good people" or those who need something - if you are in pain or have problems.
The person in-charge, she was a lady, she said that one year, an elderly lady asked for a new car although she's already got like 2 cars. Something bad happened to that elderly lady, she was involved in a car accident, god bless her soul.
The point is, there was a lot of veneration during divine mercy, kising of the picture, touching the promotion of that picture of Jesus.
I just did not turn up or attend any after that.
The whole point of the divine mercy, the main message was somehow lost in that picture.
From WIKI:
The devotion places EMPHASIS on the veneration of the Divine Mercy image which Faustina reported as a vision of Jesus while she was in her cell in the convent.[5] The image is displayed and venerated by Catholics on its own, and is solemnly blessed during Divine Mercy Sunday.[7] The devotion includes specific prayers such as the Chaplet of Divine Mercy.
God does not want to venerate an image, and call me traditional, if it aint in the bible or gospel, I don't think I will believe in it.
Question: Do we have a relationship with God or do we have a heart for our lord Jesus through veneration of a poster? Is that how it works?
Did Jesus not say, blessed are those of the pure hearted for they shall see God.
If in our heart, all we think about is an image, how is the heart pure, and how do we see god?
What defines purity of the heart?
God Bless.
-
The point is, there was a lot of veneration during divine mercy, kising of the picture, touching the promotion of that picture of Jesus.
From WIKI:
The devotion places EMPHASIS on the veneration of the Divine Mercy image which Faustina reported as a vision of Jesus while she was in her cell in the convent.[5] The image is displayed and venerated by Catholics on its own, and is solemnly blessed during Divine Mercy Sunday.[7] The devotion includes specific prayers such as the Chaplet of Divine Mercy.
God Bless.
When we venerate an image we are showing respect to the person whose picture the image represents. When we venerate the image of Jesus in His Divine Mercy it is Jesus who we are worshiping. Jesus is the second person of the Blessed Trinity. He is our God and Saviour. I would not hesitate to bow down in veneration to His image.
-
Question: Do we have a relationship with God or do we have a heart for our lord Jesus through veneration of a poster? Is that how it works?
I would bow down before the image of Jesus of my relationship with Jesus. Without Jesus life is not worth living.
-
What defines purity of the heart?
True purity of heart is to do good because of our love of God and not for whatever I may recieve from Him.
-
It may well be true, but it may just as well be diabolical.
People who are familiar with trickster demons know that they can take on just about any form, but are always incomplete. There is always something lacking. They've appeared as the person's parents or deceased children, but just a bit off. These people believe that God will not permit any demon to make a complete manifestation.
If it were me having visitations, first I'd be sure that I were undergoing a massive stroke. If that were not the case, I'd keep a weather eye out for missing bits.
-
The Divine Mercy Devotion: Why Did the Holy Office Ban It? by Fr. Benedict Hughes, CMRI
In a past issue of The Reign of Mary, we published an article on false devotions (issue #128). That article can also be read on our web site (http://www.cmri.org/06- false-devotions-dangers-for-pious-souls.shtml). The point of the article was to explain the teachings of the Church on new devotions — teachings which caution against any superstition or novelty. Specifically, the famous decree of the Holy Office on the subject lamented the fact that “new forms of worship and devotion, often enough ridiculous, usually useless imitations or corruptions of similar ones which are already legitimately established, are in many places, especially in these recent days, being daily multiplied and propagated among the faithful, giving occasion to great astonishment and to bitter aspersion on the part of non-Catholics” (Holy Office, May 26, 1937; AAS 29-304).
In this excerpt, we can see that, in addition to rejecting new forms of devotion which are doctrinally questionable, there is grave concern about those which are “useless imitations or corruptions” of similar ones which have already been approved. Based on this reasoning, the Holy Office during the reigns of Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII forbade various new devotions, for example: devotion to the Sacred Head of Our Lord, devotion to the Annihilated Love of Jesus, the Rosary of the Most Sacred Wounds of Our Lord, devotion to the Merciful Love of Jesus, etc. Likely you have never heard of these new devotions, for the very reason that they were suppressed by the Church.
This then leads us to the question of the devotion called “the Divine Mercy.” This devotion is based on the purported revelations to Sr. Faustina Kowalska, who lived in the early 20th century in Cracow, Poland.
In a decree of the Holy Office dated March 6, 1959, we read the following: “The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, having examined the alleged visions and revelations of Sister Faustina Kowalska of the Institute of Our Lady of Mercy, who died in 1938 near Cracow, has decreed as follows: The distribution of pictures and writings which present the devotion to the Divine Mercy in the forms proposed by this Sister Faustina, should be forbidden…” (AAS 51-271). Incidentally, the decree was signed by Msgr. Hugh O’Flaherty as Notary of the Holy Office. He is the same monsignor portrayed in the movie “The Scarlet and the Black,” which tells the true story of his efforts to save more than 6,500 allied soldiers and Jews during the nαzι occupation in Rome during World War II. After the war he received numerous awards, including the U.S. Medal of Freedom. Msgr. O’Flaherty died in 1963.
Some may object to the acceptance of this decree of the Holy Office on the grounds that it was issued in 1959, during the time that the notorious modernist John XXIII was “pope.” But we do not believe this fact obscures the reality that those who worked in the Holy Office in those days before Vatican II, such as Cardinal Ottaviani, were well-trained and entirely orthodox prelates and theologians, who had been appointed by Pope Pius XII. (Similarly, we can quote from the decree of the Holy Office in 1962 against the writing of Teilhard de Chardin.) Eventually, this decree of 1959 rejecting the writings and devotion promoted by Sr. Faustina was reversed in April, 1978, due primarily to the efforts of the bishop of Cracow, Karol Wojtyla, who would be elected by the cardinals and become John Paul II some 6 months later.
Who Was Sister Faustina?
Born in 1905 in central Poland, Helena Kowalska was the 3rd of 10 children. Her desire to become a religious finally became a reality in 1925, as she entered the Congregation of Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy. Soon she began to experience the purported visions, during one of which, in 1931, she was instructed to have an image of Our Lord painted. You have likely seen this image, which is now everywhere to be found in Novus Ordo bookstores and religious goods shops. The image depicts Our Lord with rays of red and white light coming forth from His heart.
In 1933 she was transferred to a convent of the order in Vilnius. There she met a priest named Fr. Michael Sopocko, who became her spiritual director and an ardent proponent of her visions. He helped her to obtain the services of an artist and have the image painted, although she was not pleased with the result. There is some controversy over this, as the original painting is not now promoted. It has also been said that Fr. Sopocko vehemently opposed the propagation of any but the original painting.
Sr. Faustina died in a convent near Cracow on October 5, 1938. As we have stated above, the original decree banning this devotion in 1959 was reversed by the Vatican in 1978, due in no small measure to the efforts of the then- bishop of Cracow, Karol Wojtyla. He became an ardent promoter of the apparitions. In 1965 he commissioned a theologian, Prof. Ignacy Rozycki, to examine Sr. Faustina’s writings. In the same year Cardinal Wojtyla opened the informative process on her life, which is the beginning of the process toward eventual canonization. Eventually, as John Paul II, he proclaimed her a saint on April 30, 2000.
Why did the Church reject this Devotion?
One naturally wonders why the Church rejected this devotion. We do not know for certain the reasons behind the 1959 decision of the Holy Office, but we can cite several potential problems with the devotion.
There are theological problems with the messages. One reason for concern can be found in the wording of the messages. In 1934, Sr. Faustina began a diary in which she recounted her mystical experiences. Apparently, there were things in this diary that were theologically questionable. Modern defenders of the devotion attribute the problem to a faulty translation of the messages from the original Polish into Italian, for it was the Italian translation that was examined by theologians of the Holy Office. That argument, however, seems implausible.
If we look at the messages, we see that according to Sr. Faustina, Our Lord promises that those who go to confession and communion on the Sunday following Easter Sunday will obtain the remission of the guilt and the punishment of their sins: “On that day the very depths of My tender mercy are open. I pour out a whole ocean of graces upon those souls who approach the fount of My mercy. The soul that will go to Confession and receive Holy Communion shall obtain complete forgiveness of sins and punishment. On that day all the divine floodgates through which grace flows are opened” (Diary of Sr. Faustina, 699).
In an article in the National Catholic Reporter of August 30, 2002, the author (John L. Allen, Jr.), referred to the near 20-year ban (from the 1959 decree until the 1978 decree which reversed it) and admitted that there were theological problems with the message: “Officially, the 20-year ban is now attributed to misunderstandings created by a faulty Italian translation of the Diary, but in fact there were serious theological reservations — Faustinas claim that Jesus had promised a complete remission of sin for certain devotional acts that only the sacraments can offer, for example, or what Vatican evaluators felt to be an excessive focus on Faustina herself (http://tinyurl.com/ ncr-online-sr-faustina).
If we examine the authentic promises of the Sacred Heart, we do not find a similar wording, to the effect that all temporal punishment will be remitted for confession and Holy Communion received on a particular day. Of course, our Divine Lord could do just that if He so willed, but the problem is that this promise omits to mention the need for contrition and amendment of life.
Another theological novelty can be found in the writings of Canon Ignacy Rozycki, who had been appointed by Karol Wojtyla to examine the diary of Sr. Faustina. In his enthusiasm, he proclaims this devotion a “second baptism.” In other words, he is endorsing the same idea that on the feast of Divine Mercy one can obtain a complete remission of sins and all punishment due to them, just by performing devotional acts and receiving the sacraments' of Penance and the Holy Eucharist. But the terminology of a “second baptism” has always been used by the Church to refer only to the profession of perpetual vows in a religious institute approved by the Church.
Another potential reason for concern can be found in the image of Divine Mercy. As mentioned above, this picture is of Our Lord with His left hand at His heart, the other being elevated toward the viewer. From the Sacred Heart there emanate rays of white (signifying grace) and red (signifying the Blood of redemption). One objection is that the Sacred Heart itself is not seen. The rays emanate from Our Lord’s breast, but without picturing clearly His heart. Another problem is that with many of these images — indeed with the original picture — there are no wounds in Our Lord’s hands and feet, or they are so faint as to be not clearly visible. But we know from Sacred Scripture that Our Lord retained these wounds after His resurrection.
The image we are accustomed to seeing does have wounds that are faintly visible, but it is not the original; it is the work of an artist by the name of Adolf Hyla whose rendition became popular. His work, however, was vigorously rejected by Fr. Sopocka who worked with Sr. Faustina to have the original image painted by the artist Eugene Kazimirowski. Was part of the reason for Fr. Sopockas opposition to the Hyla painting the fact that he had posed for the image of Our Lord, dressed in alb and cincture? Be that as it may, the original image does not show the wounds in Our Lord’s hand, feet or side. Pope Pius XII commented on this omission in the case of crucifixes. After lamenting the errors of modern authors who wish to remove attention from the Passion of Christ and instead focus only on the glorified Christ, he states: they “have gone so far as to want to remove from the Churches images of the Divine Redeemer suffering on the cross” (Mediator Dei, 1947, par. 162). I believe these defects in the image (omission of the Sacred Heart and the wounds) are another reason for the suppression of the devotion.
A third reason, can be found in the wording of the 1937 decree of the Holy Office, warning against devotions which are “useless imitations or corruptions of similar ones which are already legitimately established.” Of course, the devotion to the Sacred Heart immediately comes to mind. Does not devotion to the Sacred Heart emphasize the infinite mercy of our Divine Redeemer? Why then is there a need for another devotion to focus on the divine mercy? Would that not merely serve to take attention away from devotion to the Sacred Heart?
Let us also call to mind how insistently the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus has been promoted by Holy Mother Church. The first Office and Mass to honor the Sacred Heart were written by St. John Eudes in the 17th century. In 1856 Pope Pius IX extended the feast to the entire Church. Pope Leo XIII consecrated the entire human race to the Sacred Heart in 1899, calling it the most important act of his pontificate. Pope Pius XI raised the feast of the Sacred Heart to a double of the first class — the highest rank possible. Pope Pius XII devoted an entire encyclical to this devotion (Haurietis Aquas, published in 1956). Everywhere in the Church there are devotions to the Sacred Heart, First Friday observances, etc. So another devotion to Our Lord, centering entirely on His mercy, would only seem to take attention away from a devotion, already universally recognized and observed, which centers on His love and mercy. Thus it appears to be an unnecessary repetition — a “useless imitation,” to quote the words of the decree.
We may never know for sure the exact reasoning of the consultors of the Holy Office for rejecting this devotion. It could have been for one, two, or all three of the reasons we have given, as well as others unknown to us. Be that as it may, the fact is that the devotion to the Divine Mercy, after having been suppressed by the Holy Office in 1959, is now widely promoted in the Conciliar Church, whereas the solid and divinely-willed devotion to the Sacred Heart is all but forgotten.
Let us then be cautious of new, unapproved devotions. Remove the image of Divine Mercy from your homes, if you have it displayed, and use, rather, the image of the Sacred Heart. Do not pray the chaplet of Divine Mercy or other devotions honoring this particular title. Instead pray the litany of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and other devotions to the Sacred Heart. Finally, be sure to often read and meditate on the Promises of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, for therein you will find all you need to understand the infinite love and mercy of Jesus.
Thank you for posting this.
-
I kissed and prayed with St. Faustina's relics a few weeks ago. My Dad left the Church long ago and keeps a Rosary that belonged to my great Grandmother. A nun and I prayed for my Fathers conversion.
I haven't been praying the Chaplet daily like I was, but I'm going to start again. It's very powerful.
-
I kissed and prayed with St. Faustina's relics a few weeks ago. My Dad left the Church long ago and keeps a Rosary that belonged to my great Grandmother. A nun and I prayed for my Fathers conversion.
I haven't been praying the Chaplet daily like I was, but I'm going to start again. It's very powerful.
Maybe you can go to Medjugorie too.
-
The Divine Mercy Devotion: Why Did the Holy Office Ban It? by Fr. Benedict Hughes, CMRI
In a past issue of The Reign of Mary, we published an article on false devotions (issue #128). That article can also be read on our web site (http://www.cmri.org/06- false-devotions-dangers-for-pious-souls.shtml). The point of the article was to explain the teachings of the Church on new devotions — teachings which caution against any superstition or novelty. Specifically, the famous decree of the Holy Office on the subject lamented the fact that “new forms of worship and devotion, often enough ridiculous, usually useless imitations or corruptions of similar ones which are already legitimately established, are in many places, especially in these recent days, being daily multiplied and propagated among the faithful, giving occasion to great astonishment and to bitter aspersion on the part of non-Catholics” (Holy Office, May 26, 1937; AAS 29-304).
In this excerpt, we can see that, in addition to rejecting new forms of devotion which are doctrinally questionable, there is grave concern about those which are “useless imitations or corruptions” of similar ones which have already been approved. Based on this reasoning, the Holy Office during the reigns of Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII forbade various new devotions, for example: devotion to the Sacred Head of Our Lord, devotion to the Annihilated Love of Jesus, the Rosary of the Most Sacred Wounds of Our Lord, devotion to the Merciful Love of Jesus, etc. Likely you have never heard of these new devotions, for the very reason that they were suppressed by the Church.
This then leads us to the question of the devotion called “the Divine Mercy.” This devotion is based on the purported revelations to Sr. Faustina Kowalska, who lived in the early 20th century in Cracow, Poland.
In a decree of the Holy Office dated March 6, 1959, we read the following: “The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, having examined the alleged visions and revelations of Sister Faustina Kowalska of the Institute of Our Lady of Mercy, who died in 1938 near Cracow, has decreed as follows: The distribution of pictures and writings which present the devotion to the Divine Mercy in the forms proposed by this Sister Faustina, should be forbidden…” (AAS 51-271). Incidentally, the decree was signed by Msgr. Hugh O’Flaherty as Notary of the Holy Office. He is the same monsignor portrayed in the movie “The Scarlet and the Black,” which tells the true story of his efforts to save more than 6,500 allied soldiers and Jews during the nαzι occupation in Rome during World War II. After the war he received numerous awards, including the U.S. Medal of Freedom. Msgr. O’Flaherty died in 1963.
Some may object to the acceptance of this decree of the Holy Office on the grounds that it was issued in 1959, during the time that the notorious modernist John XXIII was “pope.” But we do not believe this fact obscures the reality that those who worked in the Holy Office in those days before Vatican II, such as Cardinal Ottaviani, were well-trained and entirely orthodox prelates and theologians, who had been appointed by Pope Pius XII. (Similarly, we can quote from the decree of the Holy Office in 1962 against the writing of Teilhard de Chardin.) Eventually, this decree of 1959 rejecting the writings and devotion promoted by Sr. Faustina was reversed in April, 1978, due primarily to the efforts of the bishop of Cracow, Karol Wojtyla, who would be elected by the cardinals and become John Paul II some 6 months later.
Who Was Sister Faustina?
Born in 1905 in central Poland, Helena Kowalska was the 3rd of 10 children. Her desire to become a religious finally became a reality in 1925, as she entered the Congregation of Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy. Soon she began to experience the purported visions, during one of which, in 1931, she was instructed to have an image of Our Lord painted. You have likely seen this image, which is now everywhere to be found in Novus Ordo bookstores and religious goods shops. The image depicts Our Lord with rays of red and white light coming forth from His heart.
In 1933 she was transferred to a convent of the order in Vilnius. There she met a priest named Fr. Michael Sopocko, who became her spiritual director and an ardent proponent of her visions. He helped her to obtain the services of an artist and have the image painted, although she was not pleased with the result. There is some controversy over this, as the original painting is not now promoted. It has also been said that Fr. Sopocko vehemently opposed the propagation of any but the original painting.
Sr. Faustina died in a convent near Cracow on October 5, 1938. As we have stated above, the original decree banning this devotion in 1959 was reversed by the Vatican in 1978, due in no small measure to the efforts of the then- bishop of Cracow, Karol Wojtyla. He became an ardent promoter of the apparitions. In 1965 he commissioned a theologian, Prof. Ignacy Rozycki, to examine Sr. Faustina’s writings. In the same year Cardinal Wojtyla opened the informative process on her life, which is the beginning of the process toward eventual canonization. Eventually, as John Paul II, he proclaimed her a saint on April 30, 2000.
Why did the Church reject this Devotion?
One naturally wonders why the Church rejected this devotion. We do not know for certain the reasons behind the 1959 decision of the Holy Office, but we can cite several potential problems with the devotion.
There are theological problems with the messages. One reason for concern can be found in the wording of the messages. In 1934, Sr. Faustina began a diary in which she recounted her mystical experiences. Apparently, there were things in this diary that were theologically questionable. Modern defenders of the devotion attribute the problem to a faulty translation of the messages from the original Polish into Italian, for it was the Italian translation that was examined by theologians of the Holy Office. That argument, however, seems implausible.
If we look at the messages, we see that according to Sr. Faustina, Our Lord promises that those who go to confession and communion on the Sunday following Easter Sunday will obtain the remission of the guilt and the punishment of their sins: “On that day the very depths of My tender mercy are open. I pour out a whole ocean of graces upon those souls who approach the fount of My mercy. The soul that will go to Confession and receive Holy Communion shall obtain complete forgiveness of sins and punishment. On that day all the divine floodgates through which grace flows are opened” (Diary of Sr. Faustina, 699).
In an article in the National Catholic Reporter of August 30, 2002, the author (John L. Allen, Jr.), referred to the near 20-year ban (from the 1959 decree until the 1978 decree which reversed it) and admitted that there were theological problems with the message: “Officially, the 20-year ban is now attributed to misunderstandings created by a faulty Italian translation of the Diary, but in fact there were serious theological reservations — Faustinas claim that Jesus had promised a complete remission of sin for certain devotional acts that only the sacraments can offer, for example, or what Vatican evaluators felt to be an excessive focus on Faustina herself (http://tinyurl.com/ ncr-online-sr-faustina).
If we examine the authentic promises of the Sacred Heart, we do not find a similar wording, to the effect that all temporal punishment will be remitted for confession and Holy Communion received on a particular day. Of course, our Divine Lord could do just that if He so willed, but the problem is that this promise omits to mention the need for contrition and amendment of life.
Another theological novelty can be found in the writings of Canon Ignacy Rozycki, who had been appointed by Karol Wojtyla to examine the diary of Sr. Faustina. In his enthusiasm, he proclaims this devotion a “second baptism.” In other words, he is endorsing the same idea that on the feast of Divine Mercy one can obtain a complete remission of sins and all punishment due to them, just by performing devotional acts and receiving the sacraments' of Penance and the Holy Eucharist. But the terminology of a “second baptism” has always been used by the Church to refer only to the profession of perpetual vows in a religious institute approved by the Church.
Another potential reason for concern can be found in the image of Divine Mercy. As mentioned above, this picture is of Our Lord with His left hand at His heart, the other being elevated toward the viewer. From the Sacred Heart there emanate rays of white (signifying grace) and red (signifying the Blood of redemption). One objection is that the Sacred Heart itself is not seen. The rays emanate from Our Lord’s breast, but without picturing clearly His heart. Another problem is that with many of these images — indeed with the original picture — there are no wounds in Our Lord’s hands and feet, or they are so faint as to be not clearly visible. But we know from Sacred Scripture that Our Lord retained these wounds after His resurrection.
The image we are accustomed to seeing does have wounds that are faintly visible, but it is not the original; it is the work of an artist by the name of Adolf Hyla whose rendition became popular. His work, however, was vigorously rejected by Fr. Sopocka who worked with Sr. Faustina to have the original image painted by the artist Eugene Kazimirowski. Was part of the reason for Fr. Sopockas opposition to the Hyla painting the fact that he had posed for the image of Our Lord, dressed in alb and cincture? Be that as it may, the original image does not show the wounds in Our Lord’s hand, feet or side. Pope Pius XII commented on this omission in the case of crucifixes. After lamenting the errors of modern authors who wish to remove attention from the Passion of Christ and instead focus only on the glorified Christ, he states: they “have gone so far as to want to remove from the Churches images of the Divine Redeemer suffering on the cross” (Mediator Dei, 1947, par. 162). I believe these defects in the image (omission of the Sacred Heart and the wounds) are another reason for the suppression of the devotion.
A third reason, can be found in the wording of the 1937 decree of the Holy Office, warning against devotions which are “useless imitations or corruptions of similar ones which are already legitimately established.” Of course, the devotion to the Sacred Heart immediately comes to mind. Does not devotion to the Sacred Heart emphasize the infinite mercy of our Divine Redeemer? Why then is there a need for another devotion to focus on the divine mercy? Would that not merely serve to take attention away from devotion to the Sacred Heart?
Let us also call to mind how insistently the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus has been promoted by Holy Mother Church. The first Office and Mass to honor the Sacred Heart were written by St. John Eudes in the 17th century. In 1856 Pope Pius IX extended the feast to the entire Church. Pope Leo XIII consecrated the entire human race to the Sacred Heart in 1899, calling it the most important act of his pontificate. Pope Pius XI raised the feast of the Sacred Heart to a double of the first class — the highest rank possible. Pope Pius XII devoted an entire encyclical to this devotion (Haurietis Aquas, published in 1956). Everywhere in the Church there are devotions to the Sacred Heart, First Friday observances, etc. So another devotion to Our Lord, centering entirely on His mercy, would only seem to take attention away from a devotion, already universally recognized and observed, which centers on His love and mercy. Thus it appears to be an unnecessary repetition — a “useless imitation,” to quote the words of the decree.
We may never know for sure the exact reasoning of the consultors of the Holy Office for rejecting this devotion. It could have been for one, two, or all three of the reasons we have given, as well as others unknown to us. Be that as it may, the fact is that the devotion to the Divine Mercy, after having been suppressed by the Holy Office in 1959, is now widely promoted in the Conciliar Church, whereas the solid and divinely-willed devotion to the Sacred Heart is all but forgotten.
Let us then be cautious of new, unapproved devotions. Remove the image of Divine Mercy from your homes, if you have it displayed, and use, rather, the image of the Sacred Heart. Do not pray the chaplet of Divine Mercy or other devotions honoring this particular title. Instead pray the litany of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and other devotions to the Sacred Heart. Finally, be sure to often read and meditate on the Promises of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, for therein you will find all you need to understand the infinite love and mercy of Jesus.
Thank you for posting this.
You're welcome!
-
It may well be true, but it may just as well be diabolical.
People who are familiar with trickster demons know that they can take on just about any form, but are always incomplete. There is always something lacking. They've appeared as the person's parents or deceased children, but just a bit off. These people believe that God will not permit any demon to make a complete manifestation.
If it were me having visitations, first I'd be sure that I were undergoing a massive stroke. If that were not the case, I'd keep a weather eye out for missing bits.
If you are humble and obedient to your spiritual director then you have nothing to worry about.
-
We have many chaplets like St Michael. Some even have their own beads.
The luminous mysteries is a chaplet like other chaplets it is not mandated. It is optional.
There is only one true Rosary and that is the one that Our Lady gave to us via St Dominic.
-
There is nothing wrong with praying the Divine Mercy chaplet.
For me personally when I look at sacred heart picture it makes me think of my sins. I want to make Jesus and Mary happy.
When I look at Divine Mercy picture. It makes me think of the Ascension.
I have always had a special connection to the Sacred Heart and Immaculate Heart of Mary thanks to my Grandmom and Pop pop.
Viva Cristo Rey
-
If you stick with what is traditional and approved by the true Catholic Church before Vat2, and not approved by the Novus Ordo Church, you will be safe.
If you go with the novelties you will not, or may not, be safe.
Stay safe!
-
After Fatima, there was peace (WWI ended).
After Faustina, there was war (WWII began).
And actually, right after Faustina's conjurings of Rainbow Jesus, 7 days before Christmas, Bergoglio was born.
-
I kissed and prayed with St. Faustina's relics a few weeks ago. My Dad left the Church long ago and keeps a Rosary that belonged to my great Grandmother. A nun and I prayed for my Fathers conversion.
I haven't been praying the Chaplet daily like I was, but I'm going to start again. It's very powerful.
Maybe you can go to Medjugorie too.
:laugh2:
:applause:
-PFT
Everyone knows how I feel about the "Divine Mercy" devotion already, though.
Should you have forgotten, here...
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Dubious-Devotions-Mentions-Divine-Mercy
-
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Dubious-Devotions-Mentions-Divine-Mercy
there it is.
-
After Fatima, there was peace (WWI ended).
After Faustina, there was war (WWII began).
And actually, right after Faustina's conjurings of Rainbow Jesus, 7 days before Christmas, Bergoglio was born.
Same thing with medjugorjie, or however you spell it. They said "Queen of peace", but war and genocide broke out not long after the 'apparitions' began...its something to consider.
-
Apparently the Resistance believes in teh Divine Mercy. Fr Hewko was alleged to have invoked the intercession of St Faustina.
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Fr-Hewko-in-favor-of-the-Divine-Mercy
-
It's a misunderstanding. Fr. Hewko said this on the feast day of Sts. Faustinus & Jovita Feb. 15.
I hardly think that Fr. Hewko favors the Divine Mercy devotion.
-
We have many chaplets like St Michael. Some even have their own beads.
The luminous mysteries is a chaplet like other chaplets it is not mandated. It is optional.
There is only one true Rosary and that is the one that Our Lady gave to us via St Dominic.
Luminous mysteries are JP2 novelties.
I will pass.
-
LOL at all this stuff. Faustina is legit, some of you folks just want to crusade against something. Medjugorjie a fraud, yeah sure. The Divine Mercy, no. Some of you probably rail against it because it was espoused by JPII, and for that reason alone.
Prayed with Faustina's relics a few weeks ago.
I agree the luminous mysteries are no go, and that the Rosary was perfect as given to us, and complimented by St. Louis de Montfort and the Fatima prayers.
-
LOL at all this stuff. Faustina is legit, some of you folks just want to crusade against something. Medjugorjie a fraud, yeah sure. The Divine Mercy, no. Some of you probably rail against it because it was espoused by JPII, and for that reason alone.
Prayed with Faustina's relics a few weeks ago.
I agree the luminous mysteries are no go, and that the Rosary was perfect as given to us, and complimented by St. Louis de Montfort and the Fatima prayers.
LOL at this. You just want to crusade against Medjugorjie and luminous mysteries.
-
Yes, I am kind of bumping this thread. I've been wondering about Divine Mercy and the resistance toward it by traditionalists.
Still learning.....
Memorare
-
St. Faustina and the Feast of the Divine Mercy may be legit however the chaplet was not "canonized".
My experience with the chaplet was that it invited charismatic spirits into my life (bad). Since I've been praying exclusively the Holy Rosary my family has grown in virtue. I don't know why this is but it's what has happened. We're sticking with the Rosary.