Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Private Revelations  (Read 762 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Cantarella

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7782
  • Reputation: +4577/-579
  • Gender: Female
Private Revelations
« on: December 03, 2013, 11:17:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What is the Catholic teaching on the veracity of private revelations?

    Is one free to not believe on revelations made to saints? Or even more so, to not be fond of particular saints?

    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.


    Offline soulguard

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1698
    • Reputation: +4/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Private Revelations
    « Reply #1 on: December 03, 2013, 11:23:34 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • We are not obliged to believe someone else's private revelations, but many of us do. Unless there is some reason why the revelation should be believed by all the church, such as proof, then it ends where it starts - as a simple event regarding one person and no body else.
    Some of the greatest saints had no private revelations.


    Offline Dolores

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1068
    • Reputation: +539/-39
    • Gender: Female
    Private Revelations
    « Reply #2 on: December 03, 2013, 12:08:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Cantarella
    What is the Catholic teaching on the veracity of private revelations?

    Is one free to not believe on revelations made to saints? Or even more so, to not be fond of particular saints?



    One is free not to believe both private and public revelations, even ones as momentous as Fatima.  Not that I am suggesting that people reject Fatima, I'm only saying belief in it is not required by Church teaching.  When the Church investigates such phenomena, the most it was say is that the event is "worthy of belief."  It will never bind the faithful to believe.  The Church may, however, bind the faithful to reject certain revelations.

    In terms of Saints, I think that all the faithful have an obligation to give their assent to canonizations, but I do not believe anyone is required to have a particular devotion or fondness to this or that Saint.

    Offline Anthony Benedict

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 533
    • Reputation: +510/-4
    • Gender: Male
    Private Revelations
    « Reply #3 on: December 03, 2013, 12:15:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • My own understanding as a non-expert is that distinctions are, as always, in order. Certain Saints renowned for their learning and/or heroic sanctity and sagacity (St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross most prominently) have left a rich literary treasury of mystical theology, as has St. Alphonsus. Those particular writings and the incidents they narrate, may be taken with much higher confidence than a one-off "special message" by some other Saint, I would suggest. Especially so inasmuch as their works were heavily analyzed by the Church and reputable Church scholars, over centuries, long before our time.

    I would think that one interested in bettering his own prayer life and his understanding of the deeper matters of mystical theology would be on safe ground using St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross and other Doctors of the Church in the matter, as well as the writings of those long-approved by the Church such as St. Margaret Mary and any legitimate, properly vetted biographies of St. Catherine Laboure, St. Bernadette and the three children of Fatima (although entire publishing industries have sprung up regarding Fatima, taking all kinds of interpretive positions which contradict each other.)

    There is much popular nonsense out there as well, of course. That includes anything regarding modern "apparitions" (Medj, Akita and a host of other post-Vatican II "claims" against which hard scientific evidence stands, despite their popularity among the incautious.)

    The single best work that takes on the entire issue in a systematic fashion is Fr. Adolphus Tanqueray's The Spiritual Life, published in the 1920s originally, and available, I am told, from TAN today. It is Thomistic and uses St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, St. Alphonsus and other accepted mystics as references constantly. Using such a reputable, sound, common sense but thorough guide as that is the only way to assure oneself that he is not wasting his time on nonsense, mere pious legend or rank sentimentality.

    A final note: It is tragic that the overzealous pietists have so clogged up the true story of St. Pius of Pietrelcina with their bogus imaginary tales about what he was alleged to have said or done or saw or thought on just about every conceivable issue. He was undoubtedly a mystic and one of the great Saints of the entire post-Vatican One era. His message to one and all was very clear and very tough when it needed to be.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8276/-692
    • Gender: Male
    Private Revelations
    « Reply #4 on: December 05, 2013, 03:14:48 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Cantarella
    What is the Catholic teaching on the veracity of private revelations?

    Is one free to not believe on revelations made to saints? Or even more so, to not be fond of particular saints?



    Time and again, it comes down to the maxim that Apostolic Revelation ended with the death of St. John the Apostle.  

    However, we are given in Scripture that we should not despise prophesy, that we should test everything, and hold on to that which is good (cf. I Thes. v. 19-21).  

    So, how do we know the difference between a 'new revelation' and good prophesy?  We have to test it.  Generally, that means submitting it to Holy Mother Church for investigation.  

    But it doesn't have to mean that.  When Our Blessed Mother appears to a person and shows them their sins and tells them what they should do with their life, there might not be a whole lot to test there.  If She says "Pray the Rosary, do penance for your sins, and don't gossip," how does that qualify for having to submit it to the Church for investigation?  

    But if She says "I want a chapel built here" that could be a different matter.  Which reminds me:  Our Lady used to ask for a chapel to be built where she appears but when was the last time THAT happened?  1917?  That alone says an important message.  

    The bottom line is, it becomes a concern for the Church when the message is intended for OTHER people.

    'Revealations' made to the saints are worthy of our belief to the extent that the Church says they are.  But the Church isn't going to have us believing something NEW.  Even if it's the Pope proclaiming it -- we are not bound to believe things that are in conflict with established doctrine.

    As for not being 'fond of' particular saints, I'll restrict myself to comment on pre-Vat.II saints.  I would go so far as to say that if there are any saints that you find are not to your liking, then you really ought to find out what that is that makes them seem so,  Because the Church has given them to us for our instruction, and it is a lot more likely that there is something about a particular saint that addresses our own weakness -- some virtue that saint had that is the antithesis of our own vice, and that is why we are not so at ease with the saint in question.

    In this way, the lives of the saints can be guidebooks for us to learn from, and to make ourselves become more holy by imitation of their virtues.  A virtue, by the way, is a good habit, a habitual practice that has become part of our character, a thing that naturally leads us to holiness.  Chivalry, keeping your mouth closed while chewing, saying "thank you" when someone is polite to you, cleaning up your own mess...

    An example is good manners.  If a man is always in the habit of holding a door open for a lady, he will do it without thinking.  He might even bow, and doff his hat as she passes by.  There was a time when such manners were universal.  But now, 'thanks' to "WOMEN'S LIBERATION" it has become more rare.  Therefore, it is this plague of 'liberation' which is not liberation at all but women's denigration, that has become a kind of cancer on our society, and it is up to individuals to combat it one person at a time.  I highly doubt you can find for me one saint in the history of the Church who was wont to NOT hold a door open for the next person coming through the doorway.

    I have only given worldly examples here because that is the easiest to understand.  

    When it comes to spiritual and religious matters, it is more abstract, and more challenging.  And when you find a saint you "don't like" it's probably because of some spiritual virtue that even perhaps you have not been able to perceive in the saint.  

    I think a good example is Blessed Anne de Guigne.  I have known others to think that she just seemed like a spoiled brat.  But that is looking very superficially at her character.  Her VIRTUE was her immediate assent to God's will.  Once she saw clearly what it was God expected of her, she would drop everything and go directly to that goal.  Therefore, those of us who are wont to procrastinate and delay in our assent to the will of God will find her to be a little uncomfortable, and we might even look for reasons to be critical of her.   So one such person who just can't seem to let go of looking at impure images of women, for example, is a typical case of one who would find some manner of repugnance with Blessed Anne.  

    That's just one example.  This post is already too long for most readers so I don't want to wear them out.    :wink:



    (Like for SeanJohnson, who thinks I'm the most boring person he's ever met on the Internet because I don't have anything original to say.  HAHAHAHAHA)


    .
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.