CATHOLIC PROPHECY - FALSE CATHOLIC PROPHECIES

The Roman Catholic Church boasts about certain holy people and apparitions predicting the future. The Bible, which the Church says is God’s word, in Deuteronomy 18 has God saying that a prophet who predicts and is always right but who makes one error is a fake for he is not from God or speaking under divine inspiration. He has to be destroyed by the people. Yet the Catholic Church has canonised false prophets! Yet the Catholic Church doesn’t struggle very hard or sometimes it does nothing at all to silence false prophecy.
 
The Catholic publishing company TAN, published an extraordinary book on Catholic forecasts of the future. Written by Yves Dupont, the book is called Catholic Prophecy, the Coming Chastisement (Illinois, 1973).

The stigmatic nun, Elena Alello received a revelation in 1960 about a Third World War which would see Russia taking over Europe and the Virgin told her that all people on earth must be told about this for it is to happen soon (Please come Back to Me and My Son, page 20). This prophecy has failed and cannot be fulfilled now with the collapse of communism.

The manifestations to Sr Agnes Sasagawa in Akita, Japan indicated that communion in the hand was not approved by Heaven (ibid, 20). But the Church says its laws come first and it allows it. These apparitions and revelations stress that the Church will become an apostate ecumenical cult. Bishop Ita authenticated these revelations which does not stand for much for the Church nearest the time of the apostles was giving out communion in the hand.

The Irish visionary and stigmatist, Christina Gallagher of Mayo, has offered no proof or miracle that she really has had the experiences she said she had.

The absurd message of 1988 that has Mary telling Christina that when she cries with pain and because of Satan that Mary cries as well (page 34) is laughable for Mary would be having a nervous breakdown by now if that were true for she would be crying over everybody! Or does she single out Christina to cry about? What would that say about all the other apparitions in the world? Does Mary not care about these other visionaries or are they just fakes?

Contrary to what Jesus said about the need for us to judge fairly the Virgin says we must never judge for only God should (page 40).

On one occasion, Christina thought that Jesus had abandoned her and Jesus explained that he had to forsake her a bit because he had other little ones to help (page 47). This denies that God is all-powerful.

Gallagher believed that everything she foresaw about worldwide signs and warnings and punishments would happen before the twentieth century would end (page 53). The book was checked and approved by her and her heavenly visitors so this is a false prophecy. And it was simply untrue that 1992 was the year that suffering would peak for Ireland as she and her Jesus foretold (page 52).

Who knows – perhaps it is not Christina who makes the false prophecies but the historical Jesus? There is no way of proving that it isn’t Jesus when most of his appearances have told lies we have to mistrust him. They refute his infallibility and reliability.

 I don’t believe in apparitions that promise that God will prove his existence and the ugliness of sin to the whole world in a miracle (page 53). He should have done it long ago. Sin is his fault for he did not try hard enough to convert us.

On August 8th 1991, the Virgin told Christina about a sign she did at Medjugorje implying that she was appearing there.  We know for a fact that she is not. And on February 24, 1988, the Virgin recommends the messages of Medjugorje to Christina and admits that they are the same as the messages she gives to Christina (page 110). Mary told Christina she chose her for she knew little about religion (92, 93) and here we are told she had read the messages of Medjugorje. She could have used Medjugorje for ideas to make her own messages up. Mary told a nun through Christina that she could not appear to her for she knew too much unlike Christina for those who are bright are easily led astray by the Devil pretending to be the Virgin (92, 93). The Medjugorje visions are nowhere near as gruesome and spiritual as those of Christina. The Med Lady has a different outlook and personality because one or both of these Virgins is a hoax.

The healing miracles are interesting. One has a man cured of a possible tumour or abscess through an operation! (page 73). And why did none of the cured let their names be published?

Fr Rene Laurentin was impressed by her and even quoted her messages in his books with approval. He did not put her in the section for apparitions without credibility in his book (page 82). That says a lot about him. She was approved by the Ukrainian visionary, Josyp Terelya, who heard her name called in a heavenly locution. Little did he know that he refuted his own visions in doing so. Christina had visions of Padre Pio who she named as one of her special protectors. What business has a heavenly power sending Pio as a saint when he was not canonised by the Church? Visions are inferior to the Church and visions say that for they command obedience to the Vatican. The Church allows devotion to people to find out if they are saints but says it is up to her to decide if they are. And for the Church to authenticate them would be automatically to declare Pio to be a saint.

In 1990, Jesus told Christina that the three sins annoying him most at that time as abortion, sacrificing babies to the devil and sexual abuse of children. Jesus complained that the faith was dying and being corrupted in the Church so that the true Catholics were uncommon. Why did the corruption of the faith not bother him most? It is supposed to be a worse sin than abortion for it can lead to abortion and those other things.

It is unfair that the Catholic Church censures apparitions that are heretical and forbids them and allows belief in unauthenticated visions. If a vision is not authenticated and is believed then one may be saying God did something he never did and that is a heresy! One should not believe but still avail of and heed the messages and check everything and pray in relation to the vision until it is authenticated. Modern visions imply the Church is right to do these things which proves what they are.

There is a book of revelations called The Way of Divine Love. Sr Josefa Mendenez wrote them as they were dictated by Jesus to her. The German edition of her account of visions and messages dropped her revelation that Mary made Jesus a robe when he was a child and the robe fitted him even when he grew for it grew itself by the power of God. Jesus asked the visionary to hate her evil flesh and consider it cursed. That was struck out too. This palming off a fraud as somebody who made no doctrinal mistakes was noted by Catholicism’s greatest modern theologian, Karl Rahner (page 40, Objections to Roman Catholicism). The visionary reported as well that the Devil appeared in the shape of Jesus and Mary and she could not tell the difference. So what she had to do was ask the apparition to praise God and if it was the Devil it could not do it. This is illogical for the Devil could insincerely praise. Does she think the Devil would not have led the Jews of the gospels to praise God for enabling them to get Jesus crucified? The Devil will give a bad criterion for seeing which apparition is from God or him so that he will be able to fool. Her apparitions were all of the Devil if they were not hallucinations or lies.

The important mystic and stigmatic, St Catherine of Siena, said that the Virgin told her that the Immaculate Conception was untrue (page 38, Objections to Roman Catholicism). Nowadays, her devotees say she misunderstood Mary. So Mary did not know that her visionary did not understand? That’s too much. Worse, Catherine is supposed to have given physical evidence for her claims in the form of the stigmata.

It is known now that the vision of Mary to St Simon Stock to reveal the devotion of the scapular and the Sabbatine Privilege to him is a dubious legend (page 24).

The famous saint, Vincent Ferrer, who has the honour of being the most powerful miracle-worker in the Church having performed a staggering 40,000 miracles supported the Clementine Roman Catholic Church. This was a breakaway Church led by a line of antipopes and was headquartered in Avignon in France. He allegedly raised 28 persons to life. He beat Jesus Christ for miracles. It is madness to hold that Jesus on earth did so few miracles and this man then does more for it was more important to verify Jesus than Ferrer. Some would say it was Jesus working through Ferrer so it does not matter. But it is better for Jesus to do miracles personally instead of through an intermediary and especially when there is no evidence from apostolic revelation that Catholic doctrine is true and that for all we know it could be Buddha doing the miracles. Ferrer was once favoured by a vision of the evil and fanatical blood-letter, St Dominic (Raised from the Dead, page 165). Here we have a saint doing miracles that verify the teaching of the Church but a Church with a false head and so a counterfeit of the true Church! Ferrer’s miracles cannot be evidence for the true faith. The Church says that a saint is not always right but is always holy and sincere. But what is the use of God doing miracles to verify sincerity and not the saint’s opinions? You don’t even need to know who is a saint to get help from the saints. Why has the Church not got Mormon and Protestant and Jehovah’s Witness saints?

The two mystics, Ferrer and St Catherine of Siena did not agree on who the true pope was (The Emancipation of a Freethinker, page 228) which shows what a farce Catholic miracles sometimes are. The Church claims them as authenticating her brand of religion while they happen outside her and are interpreted as supporting the wrong Church.