As readers of this blog will know, we believe and actively promote the Divine Messages found in the “Book of Truth”. Many people, who may not be completely aware of all the facts regarding these Messages, will question us: Why promote Messages which have not been officially approved by the Catholic Church? We will answer this difficult question in this article.
But first, a quick background regarding the “Book of Truth” for those who are not yet familiar. In a series of messages given to an Irish seer who goes by the anonymous name of “Maria Divine Mercy,” Jesus says that His Second Coming is close, and that it will happen in this generation. The messages, given to Maria on an almost daily basis beginning 8 November 2010, are found in this website and compiled in a 5-volume book entitled “The Book of Truth”. The messages contain prophecies of events leading up to the Second Coming of Jesus.
1330 Messages and 170 Crusade Prayers and 6 Litanies have been dictated over the course of 4 years, and compiled in the Book of Truth in five volumes. To date no other visionary or prophet in record history has been given an abundance of messages and prayers other than Maria Divine Mercy.
The Messages have spread throughout the world, published in book form in numerous languages, and likewise available in many different websites. Many “crusade prayer groups” have been formed, heeding the call of Jesus to prepare for His Second Coming through much prayers.
The Messages are unique in that Jesus says that “Maria Divine Mercy” is the final prophet in history whose role is to announce the Second Coming of Jesus which will happen in this generation. Jesus also says that the “Book of Truth” is the book on the End Times foretold to the prophet Daniel:
Then he said to me, “Do you know why I have come to you? I shall reveal to you what is written in the Book of Truth…” – Daniel 10: 18 – 21
And you, Daniel, keep these words secret and have the Book sealed until the appointed time of the end. Many will wander looking here and there. Wickedness will go on increasing.” – Daniel 12: 1 -11
Condemnation by the Archbishop of Dublin
On April 15, 2014, the Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, issued a condemnation of the “Book of Truth” in a formal statement, published in the official website of the Archdiocese:
Requests for clarification have been coming to the Archdiocese of Dublin concerning the authenticity of alleged visions and messages received by a person who calls herself “Maria Divine Mercy” and who may live in the Archdiocese of Dublin. Archbishop Diarmuid Martin wishes to state that these messages and alleged visions have no ecclesiastical approval and many of the texts are in contradiction with Catholic theology. These messages should not be promoted or made use of within Catholic Church associations.
Why then, should we still heed the messages of the Book of Truth if it has been apparently condemned by the Church?
Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing
A key component of the messages of the Book of Truth is a revelation by Jesus Christ that Freemasons have infiltrated the Church, and are currently occupying seats of great power and prominence. In the lead up to the Second Coming, this group of Freemason clergy, dressed up as “wolves in sheep’s clothing”, will lead the Church into error and into the greatest schism in its history. Jesus warns us, through the Book of Truth, to remain true to His teachings, even in the face of heretical teachings actively promoted by such high-ranking clergy. Jesus warns us that these apostate clergy will seek to justify sin, including grave sins such as homosexual acts and same sex marriage. Below is a message given to Maria Divine Mercy on February 15, 2013:
Marriage is not acceptable before My Altar if it is between two people of the same sex. Yet, they do this and insult Me. They beg Me to accept sin, by justifying offenses against the Commandments of My Father. They try to convince themselves that this is acceptable, before God, when this could never be.
All the Laws of God are made in Heaven. Sin is a sin, in the Eyes of God, and can never be justified by human interpretation.
Archbishop Martin: Active Promoter of Same Sex Marriage
Catholic bishops in Ireland, led by Archbishop Martin, are using Pope Francis’ teachings on marriage and family to promote homosexual couples as a new form of “family” in the upcoming World Meeting of Families, set to take place in Dublin on August 2018.
The event will focus on Pope Francis’ controversial 2016 Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (Joy of Love), highlighting the theme “The Gospel of the Family: Joy for the World.” Last September, dozens of Catholic clergy and lay scholars from around the world issued a Filial Correction to Pope Francis for “propagating heresy” in Amoris Laetitia.
A program to prepare families for the upcoming World Meeting of Families has already been released under the oversight of Dublin Archbishop Diarmuid Martin.
The six-part program titled “Amoris: Let’s talk Family! Let’s be Family!” contains explicit promotion of homosexual relationships as a form of family, saying that such relationships provide “mutual support” for active homosexuals.
Page 24 of the document, under the section “The Christian Vision for the Family,” contains a picture of two lesbians on a bridge clinging intimately to one another. The photo shows a young woman in a sleeveless top being embraced by another young woman who is standing behind her. Tattooed onto one of the woman’s hands is an eye-catching “gay-pride” rainbow flag.
The text immediately above the photo reads: “While the Church upholds the ideal of marriage as a permanent commitment between a man and a woman, other unions exist which provide mutual support to the couple. Pope Francis encourages us never to exclude but to accompany these couples also, with love, care and support.”
The promotion of homosexuality at the World Meeting of Families by Irish bishops appears to be deliberate.
On October 13, Bishop Brendan Leahy of Limerick said homosexual couples must be welcomed at the World Meeting of Families. Leahy, speaking to reporters after his diocese launched the pro-homosexual preparation program, said it would be a missed opportunity if the Church failed to embrace “family” in all its variety.
Prior to this, in October last year, Archbishop Martin said Catholic bishops must not “allow ourselves to be become entangled in trying to produce definitions of the family,” because different cultural values mean family “cannot be defined simply.
Who are we to believe in?
When you read the “official” condemnation of the “Book of Truth” by the Archbishop of Dublin, therefore, it will be very good to consider this within the context of the facts which have demonstrated thus far in this article:
- Jesus in the Book of Truth has warned that heretical clergy in the end times will actively promote sin, including same sex marriages.
- The Archbishop of Dublin, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, is one of the known liberals in the Catholic Church, and is currently actively promoting same sex marriages. This is a fact that we have clearly demonstrated in this article.
- The same archbishop, who is championing same sex marriages, has condemned the “Book of Truth”, which explicitly warns us against Freemason clergy who actively justify sin, including same sex marriages.
Ask yourself then: Who should I believe in? The Archbishop who condemned the “Book of Truth”, and who is currently advocating same sex marriage (contrary to the clear teachings of the Church”? Or Jesus in the “Book of Truth”, who warns us to watch out for Freemason clergy who will actively promote sin, same sex marriages, and other teachings contrary to the teachings of the Church?
Many approved apparitions were initially condemned by the Church
It must be noted that many of the great apparitions and devotions which today are almost universally embraced by the Catholic world were initially met with skepticism and outright condemnation. Their eventual approval came many, many years after the end of the actual apparitions – and only after much persecution and disapproval by elements within the Church. We should not be easily swayed, therefore, by attacks on the “Book of Truth” made by elements within the Church, since the same thing happened before with Lourdes, Fatima, La Salette, and many others. The Church clergy is, after all, comprised of human beings – clergy who could also err in judgement and discernment from time to time.
The parish priest of Lourdes at the time of the apparitions, Fr. Peyramale, was initially highly-skeptical of the apparitions to St. Bernadette, and only had a change of heart after witnessing numerous miraculous healings. The official approval of Lourdes by the local bishop was made four years after the end of the apparitions.
The Fatima apparitions were declared authentic and supernatural in nature by the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima on October of 1930 – a full thirteen years after the end of the apparitions. Even then, despite the official recognition, many high-ranking Church clergy attacked and tried to suppress the Fatima message and apparitions.
The modernist Belgian Jesuit, Fr. Edouard Dhanis, in 1944 began a most insidious assault on Fatima, questioning its authenticity through two published, long articles on the subject. Father Dhanis refused to study the official Fatima archives or consult other documents made available to him by the Bishop of Leiria. He also refused to go to the Carmel of Coimbra, to interrogate Sister Lucy himself.
Fr. Dhanis’ work became the reference for the adversaries of Fatima, and in progressivist circles he emerged as the leading “expert” on the subject. Various bishops, such as Mexican Archbishop Manuel Pio Lopez defended Father Fuentes, arguing “that he had preached nothing that would contradict the message of Fatima.” The Archbishop of Guadalajara, Cardinal José Garibi y Rivera, also came to Fr. Fuentes defense.
The Vatican itself suppressed the Fatima message, forbidding Sr. Lucy to release the Third Secret of Fatima, and completely silencing her. Despite Our Lady’s specific request that the Third Secret be released to the world no later than 1960, the Vatican announced that the Third Secret would not be released and would probably “remain, forever, under absolute seal.”
In addition to the Vatican’s refusal to reveal the Third Secret as requested by Our Lady, 1960 also marked the silencing of the last surviving Fatima seer, Sr. Lucy. It became increasingly difficult to see Sister Lucy, and for years no more of her writings were published. She was forbidden not only to reveal the Secret but also to speak about the Third Secret at all. She could not, from 1960 forward, receive any visitors except close relatives.
The Fatima persecution story is no different from the Church-approved apparitions of Our Lady of La Salette which occurred in 1846. Five years after the end of the apparitions in 1851, the local bishop, Msgr. Philibert de Bruillard, declared the apparitions authentic. However, Msgr. Bruillard eventually resigned, and in 1852, Msgr. Ginoulhiac, who was skeptical of the apparitions, was installed as the new bishop. This led to violent attacks on the reality of the miracle of La Salette by opponents of the apparitions from within the Church. They even asserted that the “beautiful lady” was a young woman named Lamerliere, which story gave rise to a widely advertised suit for slander.
St. Padre Pio was initially condemned by the Church
St. Padre Pio, who received the stigmata of Christ in 1918 and bore it for fifty years until his death, is one of the most beloved of saints today. So many books have been written about him documenting his saintly life, his numerous miracles, as well as his God-given supernatural abilities such as bi-location. And yet, let us not forget that during his time, Padre Pio, was actually severely criticized and condemned by many elements within the Church hierarchy.
Because of the unusual abilities Padre Pio was said to possess, the Holy See instituted investigations of the holy priest. The local bishop, P. Gagliardi, did not believe Padre Pio’s miracles, suggesting that his Capuchin brothers were making a display out of the monk to gain financial advantage. When Pius XI became pope in 1922, the Vatican became even more doubtful of Padre Pio, and initiated numerous investigations.
The Vatican subsequently imposed severe sanctions on Padre Pio to reduce publicity about him: it forbade him from saying Mass in public, blessing people, answering letters, showing his stigmata publicly, and communicating with Padre Benedetto, his spiritual director. Padre Pio was to be relocated to another convent in northern Italy.
The Church’s Condemnation and Persecution of St. Faustina and the Divine Mercy Devotion
St. Faustina, the polish nun and mystic canonized by St. John Paul II on April 30, 2000, is likewise one of the most beloved modern-day saints. Her apparitions of Jesus Christ inspired the Catholic devotion to the Divine Mercy and earned her the title of “Apostle of Divine Mercy”. The Divine Mercy devotion has spread throughout the whole world and is currently celebrated by the Church every “Divine Mercy Sunday” – the first Sunday after Easter. St. John Paul II, it must be remembered, died on Divine Mercy Sunday.
And yet, what many perhaps do not know is that 21 years after the death of St. Faustina in 1938, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, the head of the “Holy Office” (now known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), issued a formal condemnation of St. Faustina. On March 6, 1959, the Holy Office issued a notification that forbade circulation of “images and writings that promote devotion to Divine Mercy in the forms proposed by Sister Faustina”.
The ban remained in place for almost two decades. Meanwhile, Archbishop Karol Wojtyła of Kraków began in 1965, with the approval of the head of the Holy Office, the informative process on Faustina’s life and virtues. Then, on 15 April 1978, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a new notification, signed by the Prefect and the Secretary of the Congregation, that rescinded the previous one, reversing the ban on circulation of Faustina’s work.
Initial Condemnation by the Church Does Not Necessarily Mean An Apparition or Devotion is Not Authentic
As can be seen in all of the instances above – Fatima, Lourdes, La Salette, Padre Pio, St. Faustina and many others – it does not necessarily follow that an apparition or private revelation is not authentic if the institutional Church initially condemns it. In fact, the opposite is true – many of the greatest private revelations and devotions, as can be seen above, were initially opposed and condemned by the institutional Church. It was only after many many years – several decades in fact – that these private revelations and devotions were eventually recognized for their supernatural character.
The fact is that, throughout history, God has always communicated to His people through “private revelations”. Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Noah, Daniel, Revelation as revealed to St. John – all of these are private revelations no different from those happening today. If we simply ignore these modern-day prophecies without, at the very least, studying them and sincerely asking the Lord for the grace of discernment, we will be no different from the people during the time of Noah. They jeered Noah and scorned his prophesied Great Flood – and ultimately paid the price (Luke 17:26-30).
What then should be our attitude towards non-approved private revelations, such as those contained in the “Book of Truth”? In the “Graces and Mercy” prayer book, Pope Urban VIII (1623-44) is quoted as saying:
In cases which concern private revelation, it is better to believe than not to believe, for, if you believe, and it is proven true, you will be happy that you have believed, because our Holy Mother asked it. If you believe, and it should be proven false, you will receive all blessings as if it had been true, because you believed it to be true.
by Paul Simeon, Veritas Vincit