What Is Wrong with Faustina Kowalska’s Divine Mercy Devotion?
This is a shame Gloria.TV - I love your work and enjoy all your videos... but now you are in need of humility to start speaking out when this has had clear church approval, its easy to rip apart any and every approved apparition if we want to, we should respect the Church decision here.
I am a traditional Catholic and have no attachment to this devotion but am only saddened to see Gloria.TV take …More
This is a shame Gloria.TV - I love your work and enjoy all your videos... but now you are in need of humility to start speaking out when this has had clear church approval, its easy to rip apart any and every approved apparition if we want to, we should respect the Church decision here.
I am a traditional Catholic and have no attachment to this devotion but am only saddened to see Gloria.TV take this route, I still fully support GLoria.TV think you're fantastic, but the criterion for discernment of private revelations never takes such a silly mock and rip apart approach to discernment, going through ever point you can rip yours apart just as much as follows (thank God for Mother Church to conclude the matter):
"Forbidden"
This is misleading, showing absolutely no information that this devotion is now explicitly "approved" with a Canonised saint and Feast Day. Practically all other private apparitions pass through this period which the criterion for discernment wishes to test the visionary - St Padre Pio was "Forbidden". So this argument is exposed as unfair.
Odd image.
This isn't a devotion to the sacred Heart it's a devotion to the Ressurected Lord walking through the door to the Apostles on Whitsun when he asked them to touch his side. Traditionally Whitsun was a major feast lead up by an octave after Easter and this providentially prepared to somewhat maintain solemnity when the Novus Ordo church would obliterate the octave and whitsun devotion. The whole point of this devotion is the Blood and Water which Christ shed which is why they shine like rays, he is described as the light that illuminates the world.
Contains the claim that we can expect an unconditional mercy without the cross.
This is a lie - the prayer literally says "FOR THE SAKE OF HIS SORROWFUL PASSION" and goes on to beg for Mercy... - how more explicit is the condition FOR THE SAKE of the cross to then ask for Mercy? I wonder do you have the humility to say "good point here, I stand corrected"? So who is actually making the flase claim here?
"The central error of the Divine Mercy is that it promises lots of spiritual rewards with no penance and reparation."
The entire devotion is based on offering the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in "atonement" for our sins, the condition of Christ's Mercy clearly is given that it must be accompanied "with acts of Mercy" by the soul. St Faustina was shown numerous souls in hell, shown purgatory. The focus here is to offer the passion of Our Lord in atonement for the sins of the world, something God told St Catherine of Siena is the only possible attonment, and again in Fatima. So you infact are writing a "central error" here
"Wait a minute, Our Lord united Himself more intimately with Sr. Faustina than with any other creature?"
Our Lord said there is no one born of a man holier than St John the Baptist. For the protest this is a great opportunity to throw something without listening deeper...and it seems the same for you. In like manner with Our Lord's word's in the gospel, it is clear in the diary including subsequent lessons from The Blessed Virgin, that Our Lord was not including The Blessed Virgin here. Criterion for Discernment given to bishops clearly permits a poetic dialogue with God, advising not to take every word literally. You however are doing this to just rip apart. St Catherine of Sienna, St Veronica, Ven Maria of Agreda, all were told comments on a level of being more intimately united or holier than anyone else. Upon seeing St Faustina on the last day... what humility will your soul experience with the veneration owed to her compared to the voice of your mockery of her put to so many other souls!
"Two years later, Second World War started."
LOL I always love your puns... gotta laugh... but again still, a spirit of mockery and sarcasm, not a spirit of discernment, especially far from how this is guided by the Church since the Council of Trent's guidance on discerning private revelation. Thankfully the Church lays out guidelines that are not the sneering, jeering type...however they always are the ones who attack those saints with spiritual gifts as we so often see by other religious enrapped with a spiritual envy and persecuting the saintly...
“From today on, do not fear God’s judgment, for you will not be judged.” In reality, nobody but Our Lady is free from the general and particular judgment."
In Fatima Our Lady told Jactina and Francisco they were going to Heaven. St Catherine of Sienna dictates God the Father telling her all her sins will be forgotten and not judged. This does not say "you will not experience the particular or general judgement", this could be read like St Catherine of Sienna that her sins will be forgotten on the day of Judgement. It is again open to poetic interpretation so easy prey to rip apart, so could we do with St Catherine of Sienna or so many saints.
" the consecrated host jumped out of the Tabernacle three times and placed itself in her hands, so that she had to open the Tabernacle and place it back." This was in the 1920s well before communion in the hand was even a thing! To compare a mystical experience to the modernist sacrilege of taking communion in the hands is a false dichotomy. This was a vision and mystical experience does not necessarily mean a real host went to her, this was a time when communion in the hand was known as possible but forbidden largely due to the vast amount of people who could spread particles, among many other reasons, even though communion in the hand was permitted in the early church. Her having a vision of holding the host, were it a real host that means the angelic choir would have governed the entire transmission of the host as it was in a context of an apparition, so the protection of particles would have been governed. St Barbara is depicted holding the chalice and host, and i'm blanking on that famous saint whos depicted grabbing the monstrance and chasing away soldiers with it. Even I would be scandelised if I saw a lay man let alone woman doing that now, i'd personally sit there and die if communists come and kill us during mass rather than grab the monstrance, would be petrified of getting shot then suffering that one in purgatory. We are understandably scandelized by abuse left right and centre but please dont juxtapose todays mess to a mystical experience a hundred years ago.
Ultimately we literally can rip appart every single approved apparition with this method of nit-pick mockery. St Bernadette rolling about eating grass, St Veronica saying she had her last judgement already, Fatima saying the visionaries are already going to heaven ahead of particular judgment. Please have some humility rather than dig heels approach I'm right you're wrong... if Satan hates this devotion it is sad to be on the same side of that. Its at least more humble and sanctified to remain silent if the church has explicityl approved it rather than mock it with sarcasm. Gloria TV you are great and a prayer for you tonight in Trad Mass. Much love from London.
I am a traditional Catholic and have no attachment to this devotion but am only saddened to see Gloria.TV take this route, I still fully support GLoria.TV think you're fantastic, but the criterion for discernment of private revelations never takes such a silly mock and rip apart approach to discernment, going through ever point you can rip yours apart just as much as follows (thank God for Mother Church to conclude the matter):
"Forbidden"
This is misleading, showing absolutely no information that this devotion is now explicitly "approved" with a Canonised saint and Feast Day. Practically all other private apparitions pass through this period which the criterion for discernment wishes to test the visionary - St Padre Pio was "Forbidden". So this argument is exposed as unfair.
Odd image.
This isn't a devotion to the sacred Heart it's a devotion to the Ressurected Lord walking through the door to the Apostles on Whitsun when he asked them to touch his side. Traditionally Whitsun was a major feast lead up by an octave after Easter and this providentially prepared to somewhat maintain solemnity when the Novus Ordo church would obliterate the octave and whitsun devotion. The whole point of this devotion is the Blood and Water which Christ shed which is why they shine like rays, he is described as the light that illuminates the world.
Contains the claim that we can expect an unconditional mercy without the cross.
This is a lie - the prayer literally says "FOR THE SAKE OF HIS SORROWFUL PASSION" and goes on to beg for Mercy... - how more explicit is the condition FOR THE SAKE of the cross to then ask for Mercy? I wonder do you have the humility to say "good point here, I stand corrected"? So who is actually making the flase claim here?
"The central error of the Divine Mercy is that it promises lots of spiritual rewards with no penance and reparation."
The entire devotion is based on offering the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in "atonement" for our sins, the condition of Christ's Mercy clearly is given that it must be accompanied "with acts of Mercy" by the soul. St Faustina was shown numerous souls in hell, shown purgatory. The focus here is to offer the passion of Our Lord in atonement for the sins of the world, something God told St Catherine of Siena is the only possible attonment, and again in Fatima. So you infact are writing a "central error" here
"Wait a minute, Our Lord united Himself more intimately with Sr. Faustina than with any other creature?"
Our Lord said there is no one born of a man holier than St John the Baptist. For the protest this is a great opportunity to throw something without listening deeper...and it seems the same for you. In like manner with Our Lord's word's in the gospel, it is clear in the diary including subsequent lessons from The Blessed Virgin, that Our Lord was not including The Blessed Virgin here. Criterion for Discernment given to bishops clearly permits a poetic dialogue with God, advising not to take every word literally. You however are doing this to just rip apart. St Catherine of Sienna, St Veronica, Ven Maria of Agreda, all were told comments on a level of being more intimately united or holier than anyone else. Upon seeing St Faustina on the last day... what humility will your soul experience with the veneration owed to her compared to the voice of your mockery of her put to so many other souls!
"Two years later, Second World War started."
LOL I always love your puns... gotta laugh... but again still, a spirit of mockery and sarcasm, not a spirit of discernment, especially far from how this is guided by the Church since the Council of Trent's guidance on discerning private revelation. Thankfully the Church lays out guidelines that are not the sneering, jeering type...however they always are the ones who attack those saints with spiritual gifts as we so often see by other religious enrapped with a spiritual envy and persecuting the saintly...
“From today on, do not fear God’s judgment, for you will not be judged.” In reality, nobody but Our Lady is free from the general and particular judgment."
In Fatima Our Lady told Jactina and Francisco they were going to Heaven. St Catherine of Sienna dictates God the Father telling her all her sins will be forgotten and not judged. This does not say "you will not experience the particular or general judgement", this could be read like St Catherine of Sienna that her sins will be forgotten on the day of Judgement. It is again open to poetic interpretation so easy prey to rip apart, so could we do with St Catherine of Sienna or so many saints.
" the consecrated host jumped out of the Tabernacle three times and placed itself in her hands, so that she had to open the Tabernacle and place it back." This was in the 1920s well before communion in the hand was even a thing! To compare a mystical experience to the modernist sacrilege of taking communion in the hands is a false dichotomy. This was a vision and mystical experience does not necessarily mean a real host went to her, this was a time when communion in the hand was known as possible but forbidden largely due to the vast amount of people who could spread particles, among many other reasons, even though communion in the hand was permitted in the early church. Her having a vision of holding the host, were it a real host that means the angelic choir would have governed the entire transmission of the host as it was in a context of an apparition, so the protection of particles would have been governed. St Barbara is depicted holding the chalice and host, and i'm blanking on that famous saint whos depicted grabbing the monstrance and chasing away soldiers with it. Even I would be scandelised if I saw a lay man let alone woman doing that now, i'd personally sit there and die if communists come and kill us during mass rather than grab the monstrance, would be petrified of getting shot then suffering that one in purgatory. We are understandably scandelized by abuse left right and centre but please dont juxtapose todays mess to a mystical experience a hundred years ago.
Ultimately we literally can rip appart every single approved apparition with this method of nit-pick mockery. St Bernadette rolling about eating grass, St Veronica saying she had her last judgement already, Fatima saying the visionaries are already going to heaven ahead of particular judgment. Please have some humility rather than dig heels approach I'm right you're wrong... if Satan hates this devotion it is sad to be on the same side of that. Its at least more humble and sanctified to remain silent if the church has explicityl approved it rather than mock it with sarcasm. Gloria TV you are great and a prayer for you tonight in Trad Mass. Much love from London.