The Virgin Mary allegedly appeared six times in 1917 in Fatima and made the sun spin. She gave lots of revelations.
Most of the revelations were not made known until over two decades later by Lucia who was then the only surviving visionary. The Church however had decided that the apparitions were genuine before that time. Had she been an honest woman all would have been relayed to the Church investigation at the start instead of getting them to decide that the visions were genuine and from God without knowing all the facts. The miracles, if real, then serve only to warn us that miracles are the machinations of some evil or deceiving force.
The accounts of the spinning sun are surprisingly few and often contradictory and many present that day saw nothing. A collective hallucination or people needing to see the miracle (for their Church was unjustly treated by the ruling atheist government and they needed assurance) made them imagine it explains it sufficiently for the sun did not move that day. Apparitions condemned by the Church as fraud have been claimed by thousands of witnesses to have nevertheless caused the sun to spin - and those who had to get medical care after hurting their eyes when they thought the sun was moving are often forgotten. Vatican experts including the former Cardinal Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI, have expressed scepticism about many of the claims made by Lucia for and about Fatima.
Apparition site where the Virgin Mary supposedly appeared a great deal during the 1960’s. The apparitions were not from God for he could easily have picked visionaries who would never deny that they saw the Virgin like the Garabandal visionaries did. Visionary Marie Loli died denying seeing the Virgin. The apparitions have been condemned by all the bishops of the area who denied, in their official capacity, that the visions were supernatural or from God. They have been condemned not once but several times. Garabandal however was accompanied with many testimonies that miracles really happened and still the Church rejects the idea that any miracle took place. There are times when no matter how good the testimony is there is better evidence that the testimony is wrong. The mess at Garabandal warns about how little faith we should put in miracle testimonies.

St Bernadette allegedly saw the Blessed Virgin Mary at Lourdes in 1858. There was nothing the apparition did or said that indicated that it was not a demon in disguise - assuming Bernadette wasn't lying and was the subject of some preternatural experience. The fact that the apparition wanted sickly Bernadette and the people to ingest dirty water though the area was a grotto used as dump full of hospital waste and rotting animal flesh proves that it was an evil force. No apparition that hasn’t been checked out by the Church - which takes years - has the right to command things like that. Even Catholic doctrine recognises an apparition commanding what is harmful to be inauthentic, that is, not from God. It is most likely to be a hallucination and that those who presented evidence to the contrary were only seeing what they wanted to see though they vehemently denied it.
Some who were there during Bernadette's visions were shocked at her pale dead appearance. During the first vision Jean Abadie, her friend thought she was dead though she was kneeling.
Bernadette talked about seeing something white in the shape of a girl. Called it aquero meaning that thing.
In 1860, Bernadette was still calling the apparition that thing aquero.
Of extreme significance is what she said to the Jesuit Pere Langlade in 1863. He asked her if she had seen the Blessed Virgin. Her reply was that she did not say she seen the Blessed Virgin but she seen the apparition.
Whatever the apparitions were, they were not from God.
The miracle spring had always been there though not at all times. The apparition told Bernadette about the spring. The obstructions were cleared and it has run constantly since. The spring is cited as a miracle even though it is not.
The alleged miracle cures of Lourdes are not very convincing when examined objectively. Largely they are based on misdiagnoses.

A town in the former Yugoslavia where the Virgin Mary has allegedly being appearing since 1981. It is one of the most powerful religious recruitment scams ever.

The apparition pretends to support the Catholic Church while causing and inviting dissent from the authority of the local bishop. This contradicts the foundational Roman dogma that you have to be with the legitimately appointed bishop to be part of the Church and protect the purity of its doctrine. To oppose the successor of the apostles is to oppose Christ who gave him the authority to represent him in the one true Church. Even if a bishop is stubborn and stupid he must be obeyed. If we didn’t have to obey people who we thought were wrong there would be no such thing as authority and no need for it. The Church says that as Jesus gave his authority to the bishops, no apparition can challenge their authority. If one does, it is a false apparition.

The Church teaches that that the headship of the Pope means he has authority to teach faith and morals to the bishops, lay down canon law for the whole Church, and give them a large level of independence from him. The bishop does not have to seek the pope's approval for every priestly diocesan appointment for example. The Medjugorian claim that the Vatican has to investigate the apparitions as the bishop is incompetent is just an excuse for getting around the fact that he has the right to condemn the visions.

If miraculous, then the Medjugorje visions support opposition to the Catholic Church and the Virgin Mary who we cannot know without the Church. The excellent book by Michael Davies, Medjugorje After 15 Years, explains that the Vatican left the decision about the apparitions to the bishop and that his negative verdict was official not just his private opinion as lying supporters say (page 84). The bishop has banned official pilgrimages there and what can be more official than that?

It is also a lie that the Church will reconsider its conclusion that the apparitions are not from God (page 87).

Vicka the visionary was proven on a widely seen film clip to be faking the miraculous ecstasy that comes over her during a vision (page 10) for she leapt back when she thought she was going to get prodded in the eyes despite the visionaries claiming that pricks and attacks like that and sound being blasted into their ears does not bother them during ecstasy. She tried to cover this up with an absurd story that she thought the Virgin was going to drop the baby Jesus and she was leaping to catch him but she jumped AWAY from the vision. This supersedes the testimony of the likes of Professor Henri Joyeaux that there is something supernatural about the ecstasy for the camera does not lie. This clip can be viewed on the website

Consider the following message from Mary given July 21, 1982  "The best fast is on bread and water. Through fasting and prayer, one can stop wars, one can suspend the laws of nature. Charity cannot replace fasting. Those who are not able to fast can sometime replace it with prayer, charity, and a confession; but everyone, except the sick, must fast." To say that it is better to go on bread and water than to volunteer to dole out soup to the homeless is disgraceful.
The Lourdes Medical Bureau rejected all the alleged miracles of healing at Medjugorje as false (page 60). The real Mary would not give cause for division and doubt. She would not appear if her appearing would bring them about. To reply that God has strange ways means we are left with little hope of telling true revelations from Heaven apart from fake ones and is unacceptable. Mary would appear in a diocese where the bishop wasn’t likely to oppose the visions too much so that he might relent and accept them so that excludes the diocese Medjugorje belongs to.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, November 1996
Regarding the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, the Congregation states:
The Interpretation given by some individuals to a Decision approved by Paul VI on 14 October 1966 and promulgated on 15 November of that year, in virtue of which writings and messages resulting from alleged revelations could be freely circulated in the Church, is absolutely groundless. This decision actually referred to the "abolition of the Index of Forbidden Books" and determined that --- after the relevant censures were lifted --- the moral obligation still remained of not circulating or reading those writings which endanger faith and morals.
In should be recalled however that with regard to the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, canon 623 #1 of the current Code remains in force: "the Pastors of the Church have the … right to demand that writings to be published by the Christian faithful which touch upon faith or morals be submitted to their judgment".

Alleged supernatural revelations and writings concerning them are submitted in first instance to the judgment of the diocesan Bishop, and, in particular cases, to the judgment of the Episcopal Conference and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Any apparition that breaks this rule, and the Medjugorje Virgin commands that her messages be distributed as they are received, is not a Catholic apparition or concerned about Catholic orthodoxy. The bishops are the official Catholic teachers not apparitions. The vast majority of modern visions break the rule and so are themselves disobedient apparitions.
The apparition never mentioned the fact that miracles are not for propaganda but for showing how loving God is. A God who makes the sun spin is showing off and out to make propaganda. The apparition never condemns the attitude of the huge percentage of pilgrims who are there primarily to experience a miracle. The Church says that seeking miracles makes God look bad and shows that your faith is flawed and probably fake.


No Copyright