Approved private revelations that turned out to be wrong?

[MarcusAndreas]

People seem to hurl around private revelations as though they were dogma, but does anyone know of any examples of private revelations that were approved at the time but turned out to be wrong somehow?

[adrift]

Originally Posted by MarcusAndreas

People seem to hurl around private revelations as though they were dogma, but does anyone know of any examples of private revelations that were approved at the time but turned out to be wrong somehow?

An interesting question, to my knowledge the answer is no. It should also be noted that the approval of a revelation is not infallible and can be wrong.

[midori_]

Can't think of any.

You also have to remember that there's a difference between actual approval of something-- like declaring a private apparition "constat de supernaturalitate", for example-- and giving, say, a book of private revelations a Nihil Obstat-- which is merely a testament that there's nothing in it that would be damaging to one's faith or morals. Or an Imprimatur, which is basically a bishop's permission to allow something to be printed.

[lelhajj]

i have my doubts about the novena that is prayed to the Jesus Blood of Jesus Christ. Is it approved by the Vatican? I read some comments where it says that this novena is dubious since it says that the antichrist in on this earth now. anybody knows if it is approved or not?

[Corki]

Originally Posted by lelhajj

i have my doubts about the novena that is prayed to the Jesus Blood of Jesus Christ. Is it approved by the Vatican? I read some comments where it says that this novena is dubious since it says that the antichrist in on this earth now. anybody knows if it is approved or not?

Did this novena come from private revelation? To whom?

[Joe 5859]

I heard Dr. Mark Miravalle (Mariologist extraordinaire) say that there has never been an instance where an approved apparition was later condemned. On the other hand, there are a few examples of apparitions that were initially condemned but were eventually approved.

So far, I haven't come across anything to prove otherwise.

[midori_]

Originally Posted by Corki

Did this novena come from private revelation? To whom?

A quick Google search suggests that lehajj might be thinking of Barnabas Nwoye of Nigeria.

The devotion to the Precious Blood has been around for ages. No problems there with having a devotion to the Precious Blood.

Whether or not Barnabas' messages/version/interpretation of the Precious Blood Devotion are credible or worthy of belief is still being investigated:
http://www.catholicrevelations.org/P...us%20nwoye.htm

although theologians aren't too impressed with him:
http://www.catholicplanet.com/apparitions/false33.htm

Interestingly enough, while digging around, I found this cool site of 20th/21st c. Marian unapproved apparitions:
http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_...d_apparitions/

where you can clearly see at a glance how many apparitions received "no decisions" at all, versus how many were definitely "established not supernatural". Compare all those to the 15 that were "established supernatural" in all of history, or to the list at:

http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_...ons/index.html

where it breaks it up by "traditionally approved" versus "Vatican approved" versus "Bishop-approved", etc. But it does show how stingy the Church is with its approval.

So it's good to take your private revelations with a grain of salt. No one's required to believe any of that. But if we totally disregarded private revelations, think of all the great Catholic literary and devotional works that we'd lose in the process...

Being able to cite Catechism is awesome: it's clearly spelled out, it's official, there's no question about it. But sometimes, being able to relate something from St. Gertrude or St. Theresa or St. Catherine sticks in your memory more and has a greater impact.

[puzzleannie]

Originally Posted by MarcusAndreas

People seem to hurl around private revelations as though they were dogma, but does anyone know of any examples of private revelations that were approved at the time but turned out to be wrong somehow?

no I don't know of any private revelation that has been approved by one pope and later declared false by another pope. Do you?
you won't find people on this forum slinging unapproved private revelations around because it is forbidden by forum rules to promote them.

[Julia Mae]

I agree with everything said here. Esp about the site with the apparition lists and approvals, very handy and if you follow the links you get to the Bishops or Vatican statements and other info. It's quite well done, I think, though not perfect, of course.

One thing, though, is that these revelations are so often open to interpretation. That's probably one reason no one is required to believe them. I think it's possible that an interpretation of a revelation might have later been altered.

[purplesunshine]

Time also tends to twist meanings as with the whole 3rd mystery of Fatima conspirict nonsense.

[SophiaLector]

Nope! :-)

The Church has a history of being pretty thorough. Which is why the process of declaring apparitions and revelations "worthy of belief" is so in-depth and why it is such a loooooong process to get someone canonized sometimes. There's a lot involved.

As a further plug for great Mother Church, I've noticed that lots of Protestant groups have had to retract their "visions" and "revelations" because they fell flat. And there's the little fact that they also have no Incorruptibles... but that may be because they don't typically dig up their holiest loved ones for examination after death. :-)

[FaithInTheLord]

Incorruptible? What are you referring to I have never heard of this?

Digging up bodies for examination?