Marian Apparitions, Part VI, More on Bayside Mary
John J. Delaney,
editor, A Woman Clothed With the Sun
Because the New York apparitions went on for 25
years, there is almost more material available than can be absorbed without
weeks and months of study. It used to be on the website “rosesfromheaven,” but
for some reason most of it has been removed. Another website, “tldm.org/Bayside”
carries some of the more important statements. Check out their Index to find
statements and directives by topic.
Mary had so many negative accusations against the
nuns, priests, Roman cardinals, and Vatican II, that she may have done more
damage than the Communists detractors. At a later date, when the apparitions at
Medjugorje began to be widely known, the Church would be arguing over which was
the real Mary. Medjugorje Mary and Bayside Mary could not have been more
different. Medjugorje Mary never mentioned the Pope at all. She was much more
ecumenical and far less theological.
Apparently Catholics who followed the Bayside
revelations began to panic when they realized that their parish and their
church was trying to modernize. They feared that their priests had been
corrupted and that the Mass, Communion, baptisms, etc., were not valid. “Mary”
had to assure them that they should stay put. The Mass was valid even if the
priest was a rogue.
Mary’s most amazing revelation was about the plot
against Pope Paul VI. Veronica was shown that he would be martyred. By March of ’72 the assassin had already been
chosen. By April 23 the pope would be removed from the seat of Peter unless
enough prayers go up. His replacement had been chosen. Forged documents would come out of Rome to
blame Paul and put him in a bad light. These conspirators wanted an international religion.
Pope Paul was imprisoned in chains, crying for help [6-8-72]. Apparently
all those rosaries had a good effect because as of May 30 he was still alive [bvm,
5-30], as he was in 1978. “666, Lucifer
and his agents, will make a concerted effort to dethrone the present Vicar
(9-28-78).”
The
status of women will not progress under Bayside Mary. The Apostle Paul showed
up to proclaim,
“Listen,
my child, how Satan has corrupted the word.” Veronica: And now he’s becoming
quite angry and pointing, jabbing with his finger the Book and saying, “Observe:
Women shall be meek in the presence of their husbands. We hear the call of ‘liberation’!
Whom shall woman be liberated to but satan! A man, as a figure of the Christ,
my child, shall be the head of his household. So it is from the Lord. “A woman
shall adorn herself not in pearls and braided hair, but in goodness and piety
and good example to her children. A woman will not expose her body as a pagan.
What manner of example has she given to her children? Woe to the parent who
brings scandal to her children! Woman, remove your arrogance! You are searching
in darkness. As a sign of reverence, you will cover your head. It is not that I
call it custom, My children; it is that the angels demand this in the presence
of the Sacrifice, Mass!” [March 22, 1975].
One of the weirdest directives calls
for women to wear blue berets as a sign of their submission: “They will wear the blue berets, for they
will not be above their husbands. They will do as they have done in the past in
honor of the Father; and in the path of the Father, they will listen to their
husbands and honor their husbands within the home. If they do thus, they will
receive honor from their children. The example in the homes is very, very poor.
So husbands, now, you will act with love to your wives, but you will keep them
in discipline. Many of them have lost their way.” [http://www.tldm.org/directives/d248.htm].
Here are some of the
Index entries regarding Woman/Women: (www.tldm.org/Bayside)
Asked to dress to ankles as example of
modesty ‘75: 8-21
Destroying your image before God and
man ‘74: 11-1
Jesus: “No woman shall stand in My
House to represent Me.” ‘75: 12-27
Must cover heads during prayer and the
Mass ‘72: 2-1; ‘74: 8-14, 11-23; ‘75: 3-18, 3-22, 9-6; ‘76: 5-29, 9-28, 12-7;
‘77: 11-19; ‘78: 7-15
Must not enter holy place of Sacrifice
‘74: 3-24, 11-1; ‘77: 7-15; ‘78: 9-13
Must not expose flesh ‘74: 7-15
Must not wear slacks ‘73: 6-8
Must return to her place; been misled
‘73: 7-25; ‘74: 3-24
Not to be on altar ‘77: 7-15; ‘87: 10-2
Not to be priests ‘88: 10-1
Satan has set her to rebel against her
destiny ‘74: 3-24
Seek to cast off role of mother,
housekeeper and woman ‘75: 3-18, 7-15
Shall not become a priest ‘76: 3-18,
12-7
Shall not wear shorts, slacks in the
presence of Jesus ‘74: 7-25
Who display nakedness will burn ‘71:
7-25, 11-20; ‘79: 6-2
Will wear prayer shawls, Blue Berets,
honor husbands ‘74: 4-13
Would regain glory by child-bearing
‘74: 3-24
Young, should be placed under guidance
of holy ones ‘75: 9-6
As for the disasters prophesied by Bayside Mary, the
Lady of Roses site has a version of the third prophecy of Fatima. Here are a
few statements from the page http://www.apparitionsofthevirginmary.com/fatima_3rd_secret.htm:
“A great chastisement will come up all mankind; not today or tomorrow, but in
the second half of the twentieth century . . . If mankind will not oppose these
evils [the manufacture and proliferation of deadly modern weapons], I will be
obliged to let fall my Son’s arm. If the chief rulers of the world and of the
Church will not actively oppose these evils, I will ask God my Father to visit
His justice upon mankind. Then will God punish mankind even more severely than
he did at the time of the Great Deluge. The great and powerful will die along
with the lowly and weak . . . There will be no escape. The good will die with
the wicked, the great with the lowly, the princes of the Church with the
faithful, the rulers of the nations with their people. Death will reign
everywhere, raised to triumph by erring men, the helpers of Satan who will be
the masters of the earth. . .”
The fact that these dire prophecies did not come
to pass is a flashing sign that these apparitions are bogus. But there is
another that speaks directly to me about Mary’s veracity. She stated:
“Do not abandon My Son any longer by rejecting His Church. Do not judge
My Son's Church by man. The foundation is My Son, Jesus. And though the walls
may develop cracks, the foundation is solid. Will you not remain and patch
these cracks, My children? We do not wish that you break apart into small
groups of discord. No schisms must take place in My Son’s Church. For all who
are baptized a Roman Catholic must die Roman Catholics to enter Heaven. A
rejection of the papacy, a rejection of the Faith because of human reasoning
shall not be accepted by the Eternal Father in Heaven. Remain faithful and true
forever unto the end.” – Our Lady, November 20,
1979 [http://www.tldm.org/directives/d265.htm].
Evangelical churches are full of ex-Catholics like
myself. The Church got us halfway to God, which we appreciate, but we didn’t
learn to pray, to read the Bible, and to go directly to God with our sins and
needs. All of us can say without a shadow of doubt, we are not bound for hell
and we are not going back to the Catholic Church. I could understand if my
mother, or some priest, or the Pope himself made that statement, but for the
real Mary to say that? No way. Bayside Mary is a fraud.
Remember that the first Mary appeared as a 14 year
old Native Mexican Indian. She can appear as anything, including a lovely Caucasian
woman. Demons and/or aliens can appear as your relative, a saint, Jesus or Mary
(compare my series on the Gulf Breeze Six, where “Mary” comes through a Ouija
Board). The real Mary would really uphold the Bible and not
just the dogmas of the traditional Catholic Church. That means no statues!
[First Commandment] No goddesses. Aliens and demons love to make dire
predictions to promote fear and terror and to create an environment of control.
Demons are the accusers of the brethren [Rev. 12:10]. Jesus Christ is only the
mediator between man and God [1 Tim. 2:5].
Such a nice idea! Sweet Mother Mary. But remember
that the New Testament tells us that Lucifer is the “ruler of the kingdom of
the air” [Eph. 2:2]. He is the great dragon who deceives the whole world. He is
the shape-shifting prince of liars. If devotion to Mary truly leads the
believer to Christ, then so be it. If Mary, statues, medals, fear, and
condemnation replace Christ in the heart and in the Church, she is a fraud.
Hello Janet, I hope you've had a pleasant Christmas.
ReplyDeleteWhilst reading these quotations/ pronouncements of Bayside Mary, I kept wondering more about the human agency behind them. The actual content is more suited to the politics of someone in conflict with their society. For example, the protestations against female flesh sound like the anguish experienced and voiced by a Conservative generation faced with the 'permissive society.'
Lueken may well have resented the rising hemlines and overt sexualisation of 70s culture. In fact it'd be intriguing to see how closely her politics coincided with Bayside Mary's. In interviews, I wonder if she demonstrated any paranoid thinking?
Taking a philosophical view, BM's pronunciations run counter to respect for women and they also run counter to what might be expected from a darker source. For instance, why would evil seek to ensure women are restricted to extreme modesty?
However, if Lueken was an old-fashioned conservative beholden to the view that men are in charge and 'women should be grateful,' these views would be exactly what we'd expect. Something in the quotations suggests low-intellect and an absence of compassion. Again, these can be the human traits of small-minded people.
Labouré's alleged experience is much more interesting and plausible, but as you've pointed out, why the need for icons/medallions? Months ago, I downloaded a copy of Father Aladel's book and couldn't motivate myself to read the dense text. The extent and content of the Labouré prophecies failed to raise my intrigue enough to plod through the book and various websites are too garish and basic to provide them (and horrible!).
The only cynical reason that springs to mind is a wily conspiracy to profit her church through sales of the medals. This isn't an idea I particularly hold; it seems to be a possibly genuine series of visions.
Again, thanks for the long, thoughtful comment. Any chance you could offer a name to call you?
ReplyDeleteIt took me a while to get back to responding, but I was quite busy and also wanted to think things over. First, you are totally right in your well-stated reflection about the conservative mentality in conflict with a permissive society. The suggestion is that the whole Bayside scenario is the ravings of a crazy old lady, and yes it sounds like that. I know the culture. I have been in Evangelical churches since 1965 and they have the same attitudes towards women for the same Scriptural reasons. These attitudes are thousands of years old. They only just began to be broken down after WWII. More progress was made in the 70's and 80's, but the resolution will not come before the return of Christ because of the clear Scriptures about women in the New Testament. Paul or someone writing under his name fixed us good, nailing us all to the first century with no recourse for growth or change. Good church people, whether Catholic or Protestant, firmly believe that the Holy Spirit dictated those words about us and our submission and there is no wiggle room. You can't grow out of it without admitting that God did not dictate everything in the Book. Most Christians cannot make that leap without throwing out the whole program, which is regrettable, because there are growth passages in the Bible. You just have to know where to look and be flexible about "tension" in the Scriptures.
I loved your thoughts, but I have to disagree that the Evil One would have nothing to gain in Mary's anachronistic program (backed up by Paul, Theresa, and others) about women. a) Times were changing fast at that point, and the demands made on women and the severity of the tone would frighten many women on the fence to retreat from moving towards responsibility outside the home. b)For other women, it would be so restrictive, they would leave the Church altogether rather than suffer the humiliating and degrading statements made about a woman's place. It's one thing for Paul to say what he said in Roman times when persecution meant life or death, but for him to come say that today in the tone that he allegedly said it, that is not a Paul I want to spend eternity with. I can be patient with my churchy brethren when they make such statements, but if BM's heaven were how it really is, I wouldn't be so comfortable there.
As for whether any of these apparitions are just imaginary or are a conspiratorial concoction, that is always possible, but I don't think so. I can't prove it. After all, any story about aliens, demons, angels, visions of Jesus (as with Theresa of Avila), divine promises and callings (as with my case), etc etc etc they are all anecdotal and none can be proven. Yet the information behind them is some of the most important that we need to know in any lifetime in any age. Whether we want to deal with these issues or not, we will all die and these issues will be waiting for us on the other side. One way or another.
I think the important question is, IF these visitations are real, what does it mean? If it's really Mary, what does that mean for non-Catholics? If they are NOT Mary, what does that mean for mankind and our interaction with spiritual entities?
You have me intrigued about Catherine Laboure. Now I want to see what more is out there about her. :o )
Thanks for your comments. In a rather unavoidable way, second-guessing the motivations of an ‘Evil One’ could be compared to the old discussion about how many angels can dance on a pin. By this I mean we can each conjure rational explanations for why an evil influence might take one course of action above another. In the case of BM’s conception of Heaven, I agree it isn’t a place one would look forward to arriving in.
ReplyDelete‘As for whether any of these apparitions are just imaginary or are a conspiratorial concoction, that is always possible, but I don't think so. I can't prove it. After all, any story about aliens, demons, angels, visions of Jesus (as with Theresa of Avila), divine promises and callings (as with my case), etc etc etc they are all anecdotal and none can be proven.’
I tend to share this view insofar as I’m prepared to hold on to the possibility that all apparitions are psychologically-based. In that light, there’d be no external instrumental force or intelligence and, whilst being truthful reports, they’d be hallucinatory.
At the same time, it seems that there might well be an outside agency (or agencies) being instrumental in many of these incidents. So far, the evidence is suggestive of multiple-agents, with multiple origins, being active in niche areas of human experience for multiple reasons. That’s quite a mouthful of a sentence and yet the breadth of possibility we’re thinking about is out beyond the boundaries of mere words.
‘I think the important question is, IF these visitations are real, what does it mean? If it's really Mary, what does that mean for non-Catholics? If they are NOT Mary, what does that mean for mankind and our interaction with spiritual entities?’
Big question indeed. If there’s a *real* Mary, who/what are the imposters? Where is the consistency in message? Where is the signal in the noise? If there isn’t a *real* Mary, what agency is seeking to appeal to the sensibilities of a religious audience…and why?
What a lot of deep thinking for the first day of the New Year! With that in mind, Happy New Year and best wishes.
Kandi, I am so sorry that this did not get published when you wrote it. I thought it was already on the site. Found out today that it was not.
DeleteHope you enjoy the latest posts. JS
Thank you for taking the time to write these!
ReplyDeleteI too was raised Catholic, went to Catholic school. Had one particular nun as a teacher who was very much into these apparitions. She taught us all about not only the church-approved ones like Fatima and Lourdes, but also the non-approved ones like Medjugorje, which was new at the time. The topic terrorized me, with all the dire predictions. These appearances were supposed to be a wonderous thing, but why did they fill me with such a sense of dread?
Now I'm older, I've been looking into this topic. Like you, I have more questions than answers.
I do not understand the Catholic Church's position on these. On one hand, they say the era of public revelation ended in the 1st century. They say these are private revelations, they can not add anything to church doctrine, nor can they go against the teaching of the church. The church only approves a small fraction of all apparitions reported. And Catholics are not required to believe in them.
Ok fine, but it seems to me that quite ALOT of Church teaching has come from these visions and apparitions. Unless I'm mistaken, there's the rosary, medals, scapular (The medals and scapular isn't a huge deal in the church, but the rosary is). There are the concepts like the Immaculate Conception, Assumption of Mary, Immaculate Heart, Sacred Heart of Jesus, that I believe grew out of these visions. They gave us new prayers, icons, paintings, etc. My Parish was named Immaculate Conception and had a copy of the Guadalupe painting featured promenantly (strange for an Irish parish) So it seems these have had a huge effect on the church even though it's not supposed to be that way.
And then with the apparitions themselves. I haven't read all of the messages, but from the ones I have read, why does it seem like this entity never introduces herself as "Mary, mother of Jesus"? Instead gives a different grandiose titles at each apparition, followed by statements that lead the visionary to assume she is the biblical Mary? If you look at the progression of the apparitions, it seems like little by little she nudges the church to raise her rank and give more devotion to her? Why are there always new devotions? What's wrong the old ones, or the way Jesus taught us to pray in the Gospels?
We know that some of the apparitions are false. So if we know that some entity can appear and pretend to be Mary, then how do we know that ANY of the apparitions are really real? Like you, I would hate to be wrong about this, But one frequent theme from these messages is 'Satan is in the church at the highest ranks, you must do as I say to stop him!' Doing as she says means more devotion to her. Now for arguments sake, lets say none of the apparitions are the true Mary, they are all posers-- if that is the case, then whoever this entity is, he/she has been slowly nudging the church into worshiping her under the excuse of stopping Satan and other calamities.. there's a scary thought!
Again, I hope I'm wrong, and I hope the people in the Church who know more about these things than I take that into consideration when evaluating these apparitions.
Tony, I am so glad that you found some comfort in these writings. May I encourage you to subscribe to the blog because there is more Catholic commentary to come. I would not have any Catholic or Protestant leave their faith or doubt God's presence in their lives over these blogs. When Jesus Christ was here with us on earth He made it clear that we are not to fear humans, who can only kill the body, but to fear the one who had the power to kill the soul. He taught us that the devil, whatever that entity really is, was alive and well and in the business of deception. He/she/it has always been in the midst of the church just as the tree was in the middle of the Garden of Eden and as Judas was in the midst of the disciples. Our job is to learn to recognize such things. I would love to honor Mary more than we Protestants do, but as you say, the titles get more and more grandiose. By our era, she is literally a goddess.
ReplyDeleteYou are very correct in pointing out all the doctrines in the Cath Church that come from the revelations of the saints. I think we can include the cleansing fires of Purgatory.
Lately I've been reading about St Theresa. She was often accused of being deceived by demons, even by the churchmen around her. No one ever prayed harder to be delivered from deception. She had a few visions of Mary and Joseph. Saintly interactions with other deceased saints, which apparently was quite common, is another conundrum. Since the living saints are not holding spooky seances, I suppose there is little harm in it, but it's another opportunity for deception and new doctrines. There are so many therapists out there who are talking to spirits through their clients. Those spirits are saying that there is no God. Well, in their section of the universe, maybe there isn't because they totally missed out on God.
Oh yes, Purgatory!
ReplyDeleteThese apparitions cause rifts in the Church also. There are a number of very devout believers in these things. They believe in the unapproved ones as well, so they question the motives of the clergy for condemning certain apparitions or when the third secret of Fatima was finally released, a number of them suspected it was either forged or part of it was withheld because it didn't say what they wanted it to say.
Your St Theresa story gets to the heart of what I struggle with. We humans are prone to accept things that jive with our pre-existing beliefs. If She or anyone is having visions that are possibly demonic in origin, but they sound the right notes. It will be difficult for the visionary to reject them as such. I guess if we found ourselves in that situation, what chance do we have of realizing the deception? If you have "Mary" and "Joseph" telling you one thing and the local bishop telling you another, who are most people going to listen to? I guess it's good to be skeptical of these things