I thought this was very interesting. Our blessed mother has been busy trying to save our souls. God bless… Gary
That’s really Awesome!
Is there a map that shows which of these apparitions can be affirmed with actual evidence?
There are two that seem to be missing, at least at first glance:
• Our Lady of the Rosary appeared to St Dominic at Muret, near Toulouse, in the south of France, in 1213.
• Our Lady of Mount Carmel appeared to St Simon Stock in 1251, at Aylesford or possibly somewhere else in England.
These apparitions are said to have been the origin of the rosary and the brown scapular, respectively, according to the Dominicans in one case and the Carmelites in the other.
There must be an approved list of confirmed appearances. But I also know that there are so many more that are unconfirmed as well as unknown. About twenty three years ago she appeared in a mercy hospital window in Springfield ma. Where I live and saw her myself. Well that’s not on the map either. I have found a video on this. You decide for yourself. God bless… Gary
The map appears to be taken from the Miracle Hunter website. MiracleHunter.com
It’s pretty good for Marian apparitions. I have found it to be lacking regarding some alleged apparitions of Jesus.
You can find all the info you need about approvals etc. on there. An approval of an apparition generally signifies some sort of evidence of the supernatural was found. There are different levels of approvals.
An approval for faith expression just means you are allowed to pray and venerate and practice a devotion - it’s not a pronouncement on the apparition per se. Likewise when a person becomes a saint who says they had a private revelation, the Church is not taking a position on the alleged apparition, but you can venerate the saint.
Evidence is in the eye of the beholder.
The supporters of Conyers or Bayside claim evidence. All the others claim evidence, too.
Keep in mind National Geographic in general regards Catholicism itself as strictly a social phenomenon with no real evidence anyway. These are the same people who named Transgender as person of the year. For that, they do find evidence acceptable to them.
Let the reader beware.
Evidence for purposes of approving an apparition is considered by Church officials, and they make the decision, so at that point it’s not just in the “eye of the beholder”. It’s been through the equivalent of a court of law.
As I said above, Nat Geo didn’t compile this on their own, they pulled it from Miracle Hunter, which is most definitely a Catholic website, although I wouldn’t call it infallible simply because of the huge volume of information it’s trying to manage, and it’s also not an official website of the Church, it’s just run by a Catholic team.
To be quite honest, in the modern age there is only so far one can claim an apparition has appeared without any kind of picture or video evidence. Honestly, it’s not much different than spotting Elvis or Bigfoot . . . lots of stories and tales, but really just word-of-mouth from other folks. I used to believe in the Marian apparitions, but the more I went along and questioned the claims with honesty, the more it became apparent (at least to me) that at best, the apparitions were just pious reflections of the folks who claimed to see them. But I don’t think an actual visual, speaking Mary appeared to them. It was a difficult conclusion to reach, but at this point I don’t ever see myself believing in them again.
Well, the Church doesn’t require you to believe in them, so you’re free to not believe in them.
Other people will choose differently.
I personally am not all that interested in convincing any other Catholic that Mary or Jesus or a saint appeared in some approved apparition or one that was approved for faith expression. It’s the other person’s choice to make.
Does anyone know which is the oldest approved Marian apparition?
Have Biblical scholars given any idea at the year Mary was assumed into Heaven or how many years she lived after Jesus was crucified and resurrected?
I can’t speak for the Dominicans, but investigation of the Simon Stock vision (by Carmelites themselves) has cast doubt on its authenticity, and it no longer taught as fact.
The “approval” of Marian apparitions is a relatively recent development. For many centuries, Marian apparitions were “traditionally approved”, as in they were accepted generally by the pious in the region where they are said to have occurred.
The oldest Marian apparition is Our Lady of the Pillar, where Mary appeared to St. James the Great who was having trouble converting the people in the region which is now Spain. He became discouraged. Mary appeared to him on a pillar, to cheer him up and encourage him. Mary was still alive at this time (about 40 AD) and is said to have bilocated to visit James. Spain went on to become very Catholic. The current day cathedral of Zaragoza, Spain is built around the pillar where this is said to have happened.
There are legends that she appeared to several of the other Apostles as well.
I didn’t notice a dot in Spain which I thought was strange since Spain has a rich Catholic history.
Thanks for the info about Our Lady of the Pillar and St. James the Great.
I don’t think the map includes the “Traditionally Approved” apparitions, which also explains the absence of the alleged apparitions to St. Dominic and St. Simon Stock that Bartholomew mentioned were missing. There are lots and lots and lots of them.
Thank you, @angel12, I didn’t know that, but I can’t say I’m surprised. The earliest written account of St. Simon Stock’s vision is said to date no further back than around 1430, about 180 years after the event.
Angel is correct, but MiracleHunter still lists St. Simon Stock on the “traditionally approved” list of Marian apparitions.
It’s interesting that while they no longer teach the vision as fact and the historical evidence is lacking as Angel said, many Brown Scapulars still have the traditional picture on them of St. Simon Stock receiving the Scapular from Our Lady. (Although many have other pictures, and no picture is required so it’s just an optional thing.)
Sadly, the “demythologizing” is one of the factors that led me away from belief in these apparitions…when the Church itself allowed many of the traditional stories to be “debunked,” so to speak. If the Church can’t believe it, how can I ?
Well, the point of the Brown Scapular is not really whether St. Simon Stock received it personally from Our Lady or not. We have faith that she appreciates the devotion and protects us in any event. It is also quite possible that the order and its habit were divinely inspired - it must be blessed by God to have persisted so long when many other orders did not. So the apparition is kind of a “cool story, bro”.
Well you never know in life what things may happen to alter ones way of thinking and doing. We all have been given free will to choose what we may or not believe. Well I do respect your view, just don’t share it. Take care and God bless… Gary