To call St. Francis, St. Catherine, St. Teresa of Avila and others deluded psychics -- "plani" or "prelest" -- is the sort of vomitous garbage that rots from the center of Hell.
Was that deluded psychics, or was it deluded psychotics?
Those words were strong, and that section was not the reason that I posted the article. My main point in posting the article was to point out that there is not one single Orthodox calendar. In the Orthodox Church, in order for public services (Vespers, Matins, Liturgy) to be served for a saint's feast and in order to dedicate a temple in honor of a particular saint, that saint must be acknowledged by one's bishop to be a saint, but there is no Orthodoxy-wide calendar that sets the standard.
The absence of a saint on a diocesan or national local Church calendar list does not mean that someone is not a saint -- in general, once a saint is recognized by one local Church, he tends to gradually be accepted as such by other local Churches, even if he is not on the official calendar. There are, of course exceptions and controversies. And private veneration of saints not officially recognized by anyone is of course common -- it is how local veneration of a saint starts. One is not an Orthodox saint until one is first privately and locally venerated spontaneously.
This means that calendars and lists both extensively overlap and differ from location to location. That was the main point of posting the link.
It is true, however, that the "mystic" turn that the Roman church took after the Schism is one that appears to us Orthodox to be a sharp and distintive one that we cannot relate to. This was discussed at length on a thread some months ago between Orthodox and Catholics. It is a definite problem with regard to any idea of future union between Orthodoxy and Catholicism.
The author is correct that the individuals listed would never have been declared saints had they been in the Orthodox church.