The Fourth Part of Our Series on Private Revelation

From MARY MOTHER OF THE SON:

***

Walking the Tightrope

I mention all the above because it’s easy for us to assume that all claims of private revelation are not merely false but fake, or to assume that because somebody has some facts wrong or is a morally dubious character (like Jacob), God can’t possibly be involved with them. Our default setting for claims of private revelation isn’t “evaluate” but “reject.” But the reality is that some claims are true, and therefore, while it’s necessary to be cautious when faced with claims of private revelation, it’s also possible to be too cautious. If we aren’t cautious enough we can find ourselves relieved of our cash, or crushed with heartache. But if we unthinkingly reject all claims of private revelation, we might find ourselves mocking St. Bernadette Soubirous, persecuting the children at Fatima, or taking part in the judicial murder of St. Joan of Arc.

To the recipient of authentic private revelation, such a phenomenon inevitably feels rare, so rare that people who experience it seldom discuss it with others for fear of looking like fools or nuts. But even a quick informal survey of the people around you will show that experiences that bear all the earmarks of private revelation are, in fact, amazingly common. That’s why huge numbers of people will, if they feel safe enough to discuss it, testify to it in stories that often begin along the lines of, “You know, I had something weird happen to me once, too. If you promise you won’t laugh at me, I’ll tell you about it. . . .”

This is only to be expected, since private revelation is, by its nature, addressed to each particular human person in a way designed to get his or her attention. Indeed, it can well be argued that any person who has had a moment in his or her life when God revealed himself as a living reality has experienced private revelation in the sense the Church means it. This need not entail apparitions, miracles, or dancing suns. It need only entail an encounter with the living God. One need not even be a believer for it to happen—as the experiences of Carrel and Zola both attest.

Because authentic private revelation is always an encounter with the living God, it can be an overwhelmingly powerful experience and can often constitute the central spiritual event of a person’s life. For many, it’s a kind of “soul anchor” to which a person clings in moments of confusion and doubt, saying, “I don’t know much, but I do know God showed himself to me that day.” For the faithful recipient of authentic private revelation, the thought of ignoring or disobeying the revelation is akin to blaspheming the Holy Spirit, a fundamental violation of conscience so profound as to be a form of spiritual suicide.

But therein lies the difficulty: For when the most sacred experience of a person’s life is roughly manhandled by people who assume it to be the product of delusion, hunger for Mammon, or demonic deception, the results can be explosive and painful. The Church must therefore strike a balance between respectful treatment of real private revelation and clear rejection of false revelation.

Which Brings Us Back to Marian Apparitions

The vast majority of private revelation is so private that nobody beside the recipient and his or her family, close friends or spiritual director have ever heard of it. Such revelation should still be discerned as best as possible, since a false private revelation, even if it only destroys one life, has still destroyed one life too many.[1] However, in addition to private revelation confined to an individual or a small circle of people, God also sees fit now and then to vouchsafe a private revelation that has a wider area of impact. St. Joan of Arc is one example of a person whose revelations had such an impact. Hers changed the course of European history.[2]

Another example is Marian apparitions, which have also tended to have a broad impact on the Church and the world and which, like all private revelation claims, fall into only three categories: fake, false, or genuine. If we were Protestants, that would pose an enormous logistical problem: How do you figure out which is which at a distance of thousands of miles and with only the mainstream media and the rumor mill to supply you with evidence? The head spins just thinking about it!

Happily, however, Catholics do not have to rely on their private judgment alone in evaluating claims of private revelation. The Church has a reliable process (and a network of theologians and investigators from various disciplines) to evaluate such claims. The most sensible approach to the whole matter is to follow the lead of the Church.

Basically, the Church pursues a common sense course. It looks at the alleged visionary and asks questions like:

1. What are his natural qualities or defects, from a physical, intellectual, and especially moral standpoint? If the information is favorable (if the person is of sound judgment, calm imagination; if his acts are dictated by reason and not by enthusiasm, etc.), many causes of illusion are thereby excluded. However, a momentary aberration is still possible.
2. How has the person been educated? Can the knowledge of the visionary have been derived from books or from conversations with theologians?
3. What are the virtues exhibited before and after the revelation? Has he made progress in holiness and especially in humility? The tree can be judged by its fruits.
4. What extraordinary graces of union with God have been received? The greater they are the greater the probability in favor of the revelation, at least in the main.
5. Has the person had other revelations that have been judged Divine? Has he made any predictions that have been clearly realized?
6. Has he been subjected to heavy trials? It is almost impossible for extraordinary favors to be conferred without heavy crosses; for both are marks of God’s friendship, and each is a preparation for the other.
7. Does he practice the following rules: fear deception; be open with your director; do not desire to have revelations?[3]

In addition to weighing the character of the alleged visionary, of course, the Church is obliged to weigh the character of the alleged visions, again with various common sense criteria:

1. Is there an authentic account, in which nothing has been added, suppressed, or corrected?
2. Is the revelation consistent with the teaching of the Church or with the recognized facts of history or natural science?
3. Does it teach nothing contrary to good morals, and is it unaccompanied by any indecent action?
4. Is the teaching helpful towards obtaining eternal salvation?
5. After examining all the circumstances accompanying the vision (the attitudes, acts, words, etc.), do we find the dignity and seriousness which become the Divine Majesty?
6. What sentiments of peace, or, on the other hand, of disturbance, are experienced during or after the revelations?
7. It often happens that the revelation inspires an exterior work—for instance, the establishment of a new devotion, the foundation of a new religious congregation or association, the revision of the constitutions of a congregation, etc., the building of a church or the creation of a pilgrimage, the reformation of the lax spirit in a certain body, the preaching of a new spirituality, etc. In these cases the value of the proposed work must be carefully examined; is it good in itself, useful, filling a need, not injurious to other works, etc.?
8. Have the revelations been subjected to the tests of time, investigation, and discussion?
9. If any work has been begun as a result of the revelation, has it produced great spiritual fruit?
10. Have the Pope and the bishops believed this to be so, and have they assisted the progress of the work?[4]

Additional questions can be asked based on the particular circumstance of a particular private revelation, but you get the idea. The Church is quite patient, thorough, and painstaking in verifying claims of private revelation. Claims of Marian apparitions or miracles judged by the Church to be fake or false (as, for example, in Bayside, New York) should be shunned. Claims that are still under investigation by the Church should be regarded with a skeptical eye but a willingness to defer to the Church’s verdict, should it come. Apparitions determined to be genuine by the Church may, if you like, become an aid to your devotions.[5]

The phrase “if you like” surprises many people because it’s widely supposed that believing in Our Lady of Lourdes, Guadalupe, Fatima, or some other approved apparition is as necessary for a Catholic as believing the Creed. It’s not. Private revelation—even a spectacular private revelation at Fatima, where the sun danced in the sky before the stunned eyes of 70,000 witnesses—is still private and therefore not binding on the Catholic faithful, as public revelation is. All Church approval means is that the private revelation is regarded, after study and investigation, to be “worthy of belief.” That’s an odd-sounding idea, particularly to Evangelicals trained to believe that all communications from God to his people are made only with the public and mandatory character of the Bible. But it’s nonetheless a wise and sound attitude that reflects the freedom God gives his people.

To say that the apparition of Mary at Fatima and the things she requested there are “worthy of belief” means just that. They have been tested and investigated by the Church according to the general criteria above, and found to be salutary and credible objects of faith. Catholics may be obliged to believe in such miracles only to the extent their wits and individual consciences require, but the Church (which is the authoritative guide, not the micro-managing chaperone, of Catholic life) will not compel anyone to adopt Fatima, Guadalupe, or even the Rosary as a part—significant or otherwise—of their spiritual life. Obviously, Catholics who believe fervently in these miracles and their benefits for the faithful will speak in glowing and encouraging ways about them. Pope Leo XIII, for example, is known as the pope of the Rosary because of his many exhortations to pray it, and St. John Paul II’s devotion to Mary and Fatima was a well-known part of his pontificate. Just as Catholics are most edified by some friends and not others, and are kindled in fervency by some prayers and not others, so they also find themselves drawn or not drawn to various Marian apparitions and devotions. The secret is to understand that these things are not matters of law, compulsion, and dogmatic minimalism; they are matters of hearts alive within a family. For the Church does not function according to the principle “that which is not forbidden is compulsory.”

Some Catholics use their “family freedom” to develop an intense devotion to Church-approved private revelations of Mary. They are grateful at the way in which, through her, God has broken into our barren world and shown them his love and power. For many, many people the private revelations at Fatima, Knock, or Lourdes are a living link between this world and the next and a tremendous aid to faith in Jesus Christ. Such events serve many as “evidence of things not seen” and help them apply themselves to the truth of Scripture and the grace of the sacraments with renewed vigor. The hearts of such people are deeply invested in these apparitions.

Other Catholics, for whatever reason, don’t have a particularly strong (or any) devotion to a miracle or an apparition. Some of them are persuaded these apparitions actually occurred. They believe the message of these apparitions and take seriously the fact that the wonders often associated with them have solid evidence backing them up. But the apparitions don’t “grab” them or sound a special chord in their hearts. So they find inspiration in other things to help focus their love of God.

As long as these Catholics respect each other, then they all follow St. Paul’s godly advice in Romans 14:5–6, which I shall paraphrase here: “Let every one be fully convinced in his own mind. He who honors Our Lady of Guadalupe does so in honor of the Lord. He who honors the Lord in some other way, does so in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God.” But when Catholics try to cast doubt on the quality of somebody else’s faith because of a disagreement over an approved private revelation, they are overstepping their bounds and judging their brothers and sisters in a way condemned by our Lord. Again, to quote Paul:

Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God; for it is written,

“As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me,/and every tongue shall give praise to God.” So each of us shall give account of himself to God (Rom. 14:10–12).

The final part is tomorrow.

---

[1] I recommend Fr. Benedict Groeschel’s concise and practical A Still, Small Voice: A Practical Guide on Reported Revelations (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1993) to anybody who feels a personal need to discern a possible private revelation. Also, there’s a handy little article on “Private Revelations” in the online Catholic Encyclopedia. Link available as of June 22, 2023.

[2] For an accurate, albeit novelized, account of her astounding story, see Mark Twain’s Joan of Arc: Personal Recollections (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1989).

[3] Excerpted from “Private Revelations,” Catholic Encyclopedia.

[4] Ibid.

[5] See Appendix for a discussion of the major Church-approved apparitions.