Apparitions Exposed!

Can a born again Christian be a member of a cult and be involved in idol worship? I once thought this was an impossibility until it happened to me. Now I understand why Jesus warned us that, in the end times, there would be an appearance of great signs and miracles that would deceive even the elect, if possible. I confess I have been seduced by signs and miracles associated with apparitions of Mary, and I offer my testimony so others may be warned and delivered.

Until recently I was serving as Director of Public Relations for the Queen of Peace Center in Dallas, Texas. This non-profit organization disseminates information and messages from Marian apparitions in Medjugorje and around the world. I co-authored a full page ad that was published in the June 25, 1993, Dallas Morning News at a cost of $10,000. This add announced "Mary's" prescription for peace and listed locations of her recent appearances. It also listed phone numbers to call for up-to-day recorded messages of Mary's latest apparitions, such as the one in Dallas (214) 233-MARY. I once thought it was special to be the only non-Catholic on the Queen of Peace board . . . that is, until I met Mike Gendron and his wife, Jane.

Neighbors and close friends of mine knew I was seriously contemplating becoming Roman Catholic. They told me that Mike had been a Roman Catholic for 37 years and was now a pastor at a non-denominational church in the Dallas area. They said he understood many of the issues involved in being Roman Catholic and could help me with my decision. I looked forward to meeting both Mike and his wife, not for my sake, but for theirs. I felt certain the information I had collected about "Our Lady's apparitions" in Medjugorje would surely lead them back home to the "true" (Roman Catholic) church. Providentially it appeared, I attended a Queen of Peace board meeting the night before we met and asked the board to pray for this lost pastor and his wife, who had fallen away. When I arrived at their door the next morning, I first introduced myself, before returning to my car for the large stack of books and newspapers I had brought to persuade them. The materials would help explain what was happening in Medjugorje and how the Virgin Mary would help change their lives.

After we met, they showed me a film titled Catholicism: Crisis of Faith. This film lovingly and objectively contrasted how the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church contradicts the teachings of the Sacred Scriptures. Mike would stop the film after each segment for my questions and comments. Initially, I was argumentative and felt uneasy and rather adamant about what I was witnessing. Mike realized he had forgotten to pray before starting the film and asked if we could ask God to make His truth clear, and that all deception would be exposed. After the prayer my whole countenance changed.

Each question I asked, Mike validated his answers using Vatican II documents and an official Roman Catholic catechism. It was amazing to me how Roman Catholic teaching contradicts the very Word of God. Question after question, he would bring the Bible over to me and knell to show me verses in context. His servant's demeanor and patient, understanding heart helped in unraveling falsehood after falsehood. There wasn't a question I could have asked him that would have provoked anger. As a reflection of our Lord, this man allowed Jesus to pull the scales away from my eyes.

There were three things in the film and our discussion that were most alarming to me. First, a church in South America has Mary placed on a crucifix rather than Christ. It reminded me of my visit to Our Lady of Guadeloupe Cathedral in downtown Dallas where Mary is positioned as the focal point at the alter and the crucifix is placed in another part of the church. These two scenes made me realize idolatry is practiced within the church.

Second, the Roman Catholic Catechism by Rev. William Cogan, now in its 44th year of print, has altered the 10 commandments of God. The 2nd commandment given to Moses reads, "You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or in the earth beneath or in the water under the earth" (Exodus 20:4). The Roman Catholics have deleted this commandment but still came up with ten by splitting the 10th one into two separate commands. "You shall not covet your neighbor's good; and you shall not covet your neighbor's wife" (Exodus 20:17). I was reminded of the scriptural warnings for those who add to or subtract from the Bible.

Third, Mike told me the only place in the Bible in which the queen of heaven was referred to was in the Book of Jeremiah. He encouraged me to study the passage and it would expose another false doctrine concerning Mary. Anyone who is familiar with the prayers and meditations of the rosary can tell you that in one of the mysteries Christ supposedly crowned Mary the queen of heaven after she was assumed into heaven. Neither of these events have scriptural validity, but I had decided to blindly accept these doctrines because all of the other meditations on the life of Christ were verified by Scripture.

After returning home, I looked in the Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible for the passage in Jeremiah 44. Here, the Lord was angered by the wickedness of the people choosing to serve other gods. The people refused to listen to the Lord. Instead, they would "burn sacrifices to the Queen of Heaven and pour out libations to her." The woman "made for her sacrificial cakes in her image and poured out libations to her?" (Jeremiah 44:17, 19).

In Hebrew the word for queen has reference to "the heavenly handiwork" or "the stars of heaven." The reference might be to Ishtar, the goddess of love and fertility, who is identified with the Venus Star and is actually entitled "Mistress of Heaven." (The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, p. 975)

My head was spinning and filled with questions after reading this. Doesn't Mary usually appear with stars for her crown? Who then is the woman in Revelation 12:3-6? And most importantly, why would the Roman Catholic Church give the mother of Jesus the title of a pagan goddess? Had I been promoting the ministry of a pagan goddess whose messages were inconsistent with the Bible? Indeed her messages do contradict the Bible. In fact, she speaks of another gospel, another plan of salvation that nullifies and opposes the all sufficient sacrifice of Jesus. The apparition of Fatima said, "You have seen Hell where the souls of poor sinners go, so save them, God wishes to establish in the world, devotion to my Immaculate Heart." The apostle Paul condemned anyone, even an angel from heaven, who would dare preach a different way to be saved other than through the life, death, and resurrection of Christ (Galatians 1:6-10).

As for the woman described in Revelation, she is not Mary, the mother of Jesus, but God's chosen people, the Jews. When the passage in chapter 12 is read in context with the rest of the book, and Genesis 37:9-10, this clearly refers to the nation Israel. God fulfills His promise to the Jews, by protecting them in the desert during 3 1/2 years of tribulation.

I later realized my prayers to Mary and the saints, the reciting of rosaries and chaplets of divine mercy, and the wearing of Marian medals and scapulars had taken my focus off of Jesus. I had allowed doctrines of the Roman Catholic church to do the very thing Saint Paul warned against, "But I am afraid, lest as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds should be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ." (2 Cor. 11:3).

Recently, a person whom I love dearly, and who has a "Marian devotion" asked me, "Why are you bothering the people who are already good people instead of worrying about those who are lost?" The answer came to me the other evening as the Lord continues to guide me through His sacred Word. Saint Paul wrote that "Satan masquerades as an angel of light" (2 Corinthians 11:14). We know the mother of Jesus would never oppose her Son, and since the apparitions do just that, they could very well be Satan masquerading as Mary. Saint Paul also wrote, "Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them . . . everything exposed by the light becomes visible" (Ephesians 5:11-14). Therefore, I feel called to expose these attempts by the evil one to divert people's devotion away from Jesus. The most authoritative way to do this is with the light of God's Holy Word. My new test for truthfulness is -- if it does not agree with the Scriptures then it must be rejected.

Now that I have torn down the altar in my bedroom, where I knelt and prayed to St. Anthony of Padua each night, and now that I have placed my rosaries, scapular and medals away, I have found a new freedom. The truth really does set people free! I have found special peace in knowing Jesus alone is my Savior, and not co-redemptrix with His mother. The Holy Spirit continues to lead me into all truth and is now the only teacher I need (1 John 2:27).

To all my precious friends who I have encouraged to seek Mary and to obey the misleading messages of her apparitions, I pray these Scriptures would minister to you -- "And it came about while He said these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, 'Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts at which you nursed.' But He said, 'On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the Word of God and observe it." (Luke 11:27-28)

This article was submitted by a former Director for a "Mary, Queen of Peace Center."

So much to say!

The first thing is that, to be as objective as I can be, both sides have an expanding and contracting definition of their membership.

PNSN says her side follows the word of God. Of course, the reality is that the various groups on her side follow their interpretation of God's word, One group can characterize others as following "a damnable heresy", but they will close ranks to say they follow God's word while the Catholics don't.

Similarly, while we admit that nailing down all the aspects of Catholic teaching is very hard, we will say that such and such a person, while Catholic, is not teaching Catholic doctrine.

But the way the non-Catholics band together top proclaim their allegiance to god's word disguises the reality that they differ enough to call one another heretics. The inescapable conclusion is that PNSN follows as interpretation of God's word and does NOT admit it, and we Catholics follow an interpretation and DO admit it.

Most non-Catholics say something like "councils can err." But this means that the individual or denomination must interpret the interpretations of others, just like Catholics.

So this often uttered cry of "Sola Scriptura" is not as crisp and clear as it may sound. Neither is our professed allegiance to the Magisterium.

HOWEVER, we make no bones of this. Right now I'm in a little discussion on Facebook about how to assess the authority of encyclicals and when various teachings are merely prudential and when they are authoritative.

Non-Catholics, do not make these distinctions and therefore look at the prudential parts of the Popes encyclicals and think them as binding as the more theoretical parts.
---

Now this shows that it takes hard work to understand the teachings/views of those with whom one disagrees. Those who seek understanding will do the work, and will be open to being told that their construction of a text or a teaching is wrong. But those who want to win cheap points prefer victory to truth. Nearly all the RF conversations about the Real Presence are excellent examples of this. I'm not sure I have ever heard one of my antagonists give an account of the Real Presence or of transubstantiation that would survive five minutes of questioning among those who believe and study the teaching.

What they argue against is not what we teach, and so the arguments they bring are usually utterly irrelevant.

metmom says: The Catholic teaching that one has to eat and drink the literal, actual flesh and blood of Jesus .....

I say that the words "literal" appear only in poorly written explanations and I am not aware of "actual" being used anywhere. "Real" and "substantial" are used and they are by no means synonyms of "literal" or "actual". At this point, instead of seeking understanding, the non-catholics start talking about the DAFFYNITIONARY.

This demonstrates that rather than argue against what we actually teach, our opponents prefer to win an argument against some kind of shadow, so long as they can appear to be winners.

There is the incredibly vast array of falsehoods presented as truth. metmom, I'm sorry, but you win here. You stated repeatedly and firmly that the Catholic Church did not permit married priests and you made much of it. You were firm and didactic right up until you were proved wrong. Then the question became unimportant.

Now you are repeating the old falsehood: yet not one Catholic is ever sure that they are going to make it to heaven.

IF you were as well catechized as you insist, you would know that both the Little Flower and Dominic comforted those around them as they did that they would be able to do more for them once they died and were in heaven than they could before they died.

I simply do not understand how somebody who can so readily, firmly, and repeatedly assert what is not so can still claim to be concerned about the truth. If you won't take care with the truth you can see, as John did not say, can we count on you to take care about unseen truths? How can we reasonably conclude that you and your cohorts care about the victory of the truth when so many untruths, easily ascertainable untruths, are put forth as gospel?
---

So now we come to my latest theme and my current opinion about the futility of the RF:

There really are metaphysical and theological similarities between some sorts of non-Catholicism and Islam, especially Islam since the Wahabists (I think that's whom I mean -- the gang that said that Avicenna and Averroes were heretics) seized control. In addition I detect congruences in piety, argument, and even courtesy

- courtesy: I wish PNSN a blessed Sunday. Among adversaries when peace is sought, a courtesy is met with a courtesy, for example an expression of thanks or reciprocation. PNSN answers, "ALL my days are blessed."

The immediate and obvious conclusion is that courtesy is wasted and welcome only as an opportunity to score a point.

- An argument using simple syllogisms renders PNSN's assertion absurd. She responds not with reason but with a rejection of any reasoning done according to "one's own understanding." Of course the diagnostic is that proper reasoning will lead to conclusions she favors.

But what is more important is that there is not one sort of reason, but two sorts which are distinguished not by their method but by their conclusion. In Catholic thought, if there were an error in reasoning or assumption, these would be tracked down. If there were no error, then we would have to change our opinion.

-The piety of Islam and of many non-Catholics incorporates hostility and discourtesy.

- The theology of Islam and of many non-Catholics assumes a God who can create a rational creature and destine it to eternal torment and still be good. The will of God is utterly inscrutable and never to be questioned and it has no room for freedom of any kind. Only God is free. This requires a redefinition of responsibility and of other concepts.

Finally in answer to the imponderable of the relationship between God and goodness, many non-Catholics will not rest in the mystery that goodness, truth, beauty, justice, etc are of the essence of God. God can command man to do evil, cause him to do evil, and punish him for the evil he does and still be called just BECAUSE "justice" is defined as whatever God does.

Our metaphysics assumes that the image of God which is man is a true image, since God can do nothing against he own nature, and his nature is truth.

Since that image, we hold, is bound up with reason, we can, to some extent, understand justice, as we can respond to beauty and make beautiful things and do just deeds.

But the critical point here is that real conversation beyond "a frank exchange of views" is simply made impossible by the metaphysics of these non-Catholics. As I wrote in an earlier post, just as it is noble for a Muslim to kill a kaffir in warfare but unforgivable for a kaffir to kill a Muslim, so incredible and relentless mockery, insult, discourtesy, and sophistry is virtuous when done by a non-Catholic, but forever wrong and culpable is done by a Catholic.

The only standard for reason, justice, courtesy -- for anything whatsoever is the faith of the one committing the act.

I could go on , for example,about what I call "affiliative truth." For example, roamer_1's account of the attributes of civilization receives kudos and thanks from people who could not possibly have assessed the data. They have already decided that he is right (and I wrong) NOT on the basis of historical evidence but because I am a Catholic and roamer_1 is not.

On that I pretty much rest my case.

I hope all of you are blessed, every day and in a special way this Holy Week and Eastertide.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.