While Mary, the mother of God, appears only briefly in the Bible, historical accounts
would have us believe that she is extremely active in the life of the Church, routinely
appearing to common people with messages of hope, courage, and faith.
And according to some, she even appears on pieces of toast and predicts future doom on
the Internet.
As Catholics, we know that God can and has spoken to people through visions, and so the
idea of the Blessed Mother speaking directly to people is not controversial in the least.
What IS controversial, is determining what is an authentic vision, and what is not.
How does the Church handle these situations, and how are the faithful to approach them?
This is Catholicism in Focus.
People claiming to have been visited by Mary is not an uncommon occurrence in the history of the Church.
According to the International Marian Institute at the University of Dayton, 386 cases of
apparent visions, from countries all around the world, were brought before the Church…
just in the last 120 years.
If nothing else, she is certainly racking up some frequent flyer miles.
Now, obviously, just because someone claims to have seen or spoken to Mary doesn’t mean
that it’s actually true.
As much as the Church hopes in the goodness of people, it also makes sure to do its due diligence.
In 1978, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a formal process for evaluating
and approving claims.
Beginning with the local Ordinary, three steps are to be followed: investigate the facts,
observe devotional practices, and render judgment.
In step one, investigating the facts, the local Ordinary begins by determining that
there is at least great probability that something miraculous has happened.
Witnesses are interviewed and the site is visited, each with the same question: what
do people believe happened?
If nothing miraculous is believed to have happened, there’s no use furthering the investigation.
Since so much depends on the reliability of the witnesses, the Ordinary must also determine
that those claiming to have received a revelation are of sound mind, are honest, sincere, and
upright in conduct, and are in fact in communion with and obedient to the Church.
If the miraculous event and witnesses appear to be reliable, the content of the revelation
is then scrutinized.
Is the message theologically sound?
Is it free from error?
If it contradicts what we already know to be True, it cannot be from God.
Finally, the effects of the vision must be evaluated for positive spiritual assets.
If something happened but it doesn’t make people more charitable, then it isn’t exactly
something worth promoting.
All told, if an apparition is to be moved on to the second step of the process, it must
be free from any glaring error in the facts of the event, errors in doctrine, evidence
of an obvious pursuit of monetary gain, gravely immoral acts committed by the subject, or
any psychological disorders.
Basically, before the Church is open to promoting a supernatural reason for an apparent apparition,
it must eliminate all natural ones.
If this appears to be the case, or there is at least no obvious reason why to discontinue
the process, the process moves to stage two, in which the Church permits certain public
demonstrations and devotions to exist among the public for further evaluation.
In many ways, it’s sort of a “wait and see” approach.
Because nothing has been determined to be outwardly demonic or detrimental to faith,
the Church neither promotes nor prohibits the practice.
It simply lets it run its course organically.
If the faithful do not take to it and devotion disappears, then there’s no more grounds
for evaluation; if it promotes negative spiritual effects and begins to cause problems for the
Church, it is easily suppressed.
But if it continues to grow, corresponding with greater virtues in those devoted to it…
then there might be something there.
At some point during this observation of the public, the local ordinary, usually in consultation
with the national bishops conference and Holy See, will determine that enough evidence has
been presented to make a decision, moving the process to its final step: rendering judgment.
Apparitions are either determined to be false, or are allowed to be acknowledged on a wider
basis, first for local veneration, then for public pilgrimages, and finally, for public veneration.
If sufficient evidence is found to issue the full support of the Church behind an apparition,
the local Ordinary approves the apparition for local veneration, or, in much more significant
cases, the Holy See can approve it for widespread liturgical veneration.
Today, there are 13 apparitions approved for local veneration and six apparitions approved
for widespread liturgical veneration: Guadalupe, Miraculous Medal, La Salette, Lourdes, Knock, and Fátima.
Which is great, you say, but what the heck does any of this mean?
Is Mary being sent to add to the Bible or give orders from heaven?
To answer this, we must turn to the “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation,” Dei
Verbum, to understand the nature of revelation in our world today:
Nothing new is coming from heaven.
What God is going to reveal has already been revealed, and so no apparition or message
from heaven will present something that can’t already be found in the deposit of faith.
That said, just because everything has been revealed doesn’t mean that the fullness
of that revelation has been realized.
The Catechism adds,
In this way, the Church leaves the door open to the possibility that God may continue to
speak to us supernaturally, reiterating and reminding us of what was taught before, in
order that we may come to understand what was previously hidden or misunderstood.
Because these encounters—often the apparition of an angel or saint—cannot add to the already
complete deposit of faith, the Church does not characterize them as new revelations,
universally binding and authoritative on the faithful, but rather “private revelations.”
The Catechism states, Throughout the ages, there have been so-called "private" revelations, some of which have
In other words, when you read on the internet that Our Lady has condemned a certain bishop
for their actions, predicted a future world disaster, or speaks of God in a way that is
not revealed in sacred scripture, you can be sure that it is not authentic and that
it bears no weight on the faithful.
Does any of that even sound like the Mary of Scripture?
Please… ignore it, and do not perpetuate this nonsense.
When it comes down to it, Marian apparitions are nothing more than reminders and words
of encouragement.
Those that are authentic are meant to inspire the faithful to trust in God, act more charitably,
and grow deeper in their commitment to Christ’s mission.
If, having gone on pilgrimage or prayed about a certain apparition, you find yourself unmoved,
confused, or at odds with what you experience, there is nothing to worry about; you aren’t
missing anything that isn’t already revealed, and you are not under any ecclesial authority
to have a devotion to it.
But if you do find yourself closer to God, then it has served its purpose and your devotion
to it is a blessing to us all.