You demand do you,from who, Francis? The church has indeed always been wise and prudent,but the churchmen in there now are any thing but. So Laddie who is going to approve,you? I realize that there are many "popes" on this forum,is guess you must be one of them.
Evidently, richie, you don't demand any proof other than the claims of Dawn Marie herself, which is all that we have. Talk about gullible and naive.
Only you DM groupies are acting like "popes". As has been pointed out myriad times, the default position of the Church is one of SKEPTICISM. We are simply adopting the default position of the Church, whereas you are the one acting like a pope and declaring these fake visions/locutions to be legitimate.
Yes ladie the default position is one of skepticism if you don't want to believe it good for you,and peace be to you,but don't caluminate and defame and drag through the mud some one just because you don't believe in what that person is saying,simply say I don't believe it and move on.
If I choose to believe it what is that to you?Hmm?
I have treated on only the most basic of considerations one should have to determine if her visions are worth of belief. Fr. Most, summarizes nicely St. John of the Cross's method:
Further Points to be Checked
1. Do we have an entirely authentic text? Some things have been suppressed or corrected in some cases. There may also have been additions.
2. Is the teaching in full accord with the teachings of the Church and with the certain conclusions of history and of science? If free from all errors, this need not prove it is of divine origin. But also, since there can be mixtures in private revelations, one false teaching need not lead us to conclude that all points are false.
3.Is there a revelation of the vices and sins of others? This does not always prove a revelation is false, but calls for careful checking. Some Saints have had a knowledge of the secrets of hearts, which helped in reforming souls: St. Joseph of Cupertino, St Catherine of Siena, St. John Vianney. St. John of the Cross, in Ascent II. 26 warns that satan at times will make false revelations of the sins of others. Further, sometimes seeming knowledge is only the result of imagination.
4. Is the information useful for salvation of souls? If it is merely to satisfy curiosity it is unlikely to be of divine origin. Some seeming seers act like mediums, give information on births, marriages, legal processes, diseases, political events etc. God does not run an Inquiry Office. Some are very clever at observing and can work with little things. Seances often push furniture about and cause vibrations in musical instruments etc. God does not do these things. Also suspect are revelations that merely give truisms.
A large abundance of revelations taken alone does not disprove. We have cases like this in St. Bridget, St. Gertrude, St. Frances of Rome, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Margaret Mary, St. Ignatius and others.
5. Is all in accord with the dignity and gravity of the Divine Majesty? Some alleged revelations descend into vulgar speech. If there is neurotic exaltation and crowds weeping over their sins as at revivals, it is at least suspect. Satan at times appears taking repulsive shapes. On the other hand, St. Frances of Rome once saw 6 devils in the form of 6 beautiful doves--when she saw through it, they changed to crows and tried to harm her. Satan at times takes on the appearance of Christ Himself.
6. Are there sentiments of peace or disquiet? St. Ignatius considers this sign important. The good Spirit may cause momentary disquiet, but then brings peace. It is the opposite with satan. But the peace alone will not prove the words are divine.
7. Revelations to direct princes or clergy are suspect: Mary of Agreda kept up correspondence with Philip IV of Spain for 20 years. The King divided his sheets of paper into two columns so she could comment in the opposite column. But the comments are mostly commonplace, with general advice anyone could have given. She had no comments on the King's relaxed morality and his culpable carelessness on things for which he was responsible.
This is enough for me. I choose not to comment on the character of the visionary because it is not necessary.
But, let's say I did believe she was telling the truth and the messages were from the BVM. A good reading of Book II of Ascent of Mount Carmel would tell me her Spiritual Director advised her poorly, and her letter of September 2015 tells me she should quickly run (rather than embrace and expand) from this role as visionary because it is destroying her.
Whether true or not, by her actions St. John of the Cross would say she is in trouble.
Topic: The Seer Responds to Bishop Fellay (Read 19156 times)