Heresy in Sr. Faustina's Diary
#1
See this.

Her diary contains at least one heresy; that is enough for Pope Pius XII to place it on the Index:
Quote:On October 2, 1936, she states that the “Lord Jesus” appeared to her and said, “Now, I know that it is not for the graces or gifts that you love Me, but because My Will is dearer to you than life. That is why I am uniting Myself with you so intimately as with no other creature.” (Divine Mercy in My Soul, The Diary of Sr. Faustina, Stockbridge, MA: Marian Press, 1987, p. 288)
So, more intimately than with the Immaculate Conception?

Quote:“From today on, do not fear God’s judgment, for you will not be judged.” (ibid., p. 168)
Who, besides Our Blessed Mother, can escape God's judgment?

These denigrations of our Blessed Mother, coupled with the Divine Mercy Chaplet hijacking her Rosary, make me really suspicious about that devotion.

Quote: “And the host came out of the Tabernacle and came to rest in my hands and I, with joy, placed it back in the Tabernacle. This was repeated a second time, and I did the same thing. Despite this, it happened a third time.” (ibid., p. 23) … “Oh, no, here it is again. I have to go put this back now.”
Seriously, what kind of silly vision is this?


Also, Pope Pius XII banned Sr. Faustina's image "in the forms proposed by" her (which were?). See this.

See AAS 51 [1959], p. 271:
"AAS 51:271" Wrote:NOTIFICAZIONE

Si rende noto che la Suprema Sacra Congregazione dei Sant'Offizio, prese in esame le asserite visioni e rivelazioni di Suor Faustina Kowalska, dell'Istituto di Nostra Signora della Misericordia, defunta nel 1938 presso Cracovia, ha stabilito quanto segue:

1. doversi proibire la diffusione delle immagini e degli scritti che presentano la devozione della Divina Misericordia nelle forme proposte dalla medesima Suor Faustina;

2. essere demandato alla prudenza dei Vescovi il compito di rimuovere le predette immagini, che eventualmente fossero già esposte al culto.  Dal Palazzo del S. Offizio, 6 marzo 1959.

Ugo O'Flaherty, Notare
"translation" Wrote:A notification of the Holy Office:

The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, having examined the alleged visions and revelations of Sister Faustina Kowalska of the Institute of Our Lady of Mercy, who died in 1933 near Cracow, has decreed as follows:

1. The distribution of pictures and writings which present the devotion to the Divine Mercy in the forms proposed by this Sister Faustina, should be forbidden;

2. It is left to the prudent discretion of the Bishops to remove such pictures which may have been already exposed for worship.

From the Holy Office, 6 March, 1959.

Ugo O'Flaherty, Notary
(source of translation)

_______________________________________________________________________________

And something that strikes me odd about the Chaplet of Divine Mercy is this prayer in it:
Quote: Eternal Father, I offer You the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Your dearly beloved Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world.
Only Christ, through His priests, can properly offer Christ in atonement. It seems improper, to say the least, for laypeople to say this prayer. It would seem to make sense only if this were a prayer in the Mass.
Reply
#2
Can we just stop already with this nonsense?! This is just blatant disregard for the Divine Authority of the Sovereign Pontiff, namely, in this case St. John Paul II. There is nothing heretical here. Our Lord is likely speaking to all humanity in the person of St. Faustina in the first case. The second was probably just a symbol of God's Love for His saint. The thrice occurrence is good evidence of this, and notice that she put our Lord back each time. Saint Faustina never once received Holy Communion on the hand when actually communicating as far as we know.
Reply
#3
Also there is nothing wrong with personally offering our Lord to the Father. It is always to be done in the spirit of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass though. The faithful at Mass offer our Lord's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity as does the priest but not in the same matter. We can spiritually offer the Masses being said at any time of the day to God. We don't have to be present to offer the Mass nor any other good work. There's a prayer in the Pieta prayerbook that offers all the good works of humanity to God including the presence of the Saints at Mass.
Reply
#4
I've seen one sedevacantist poster on Cathinfo who staunchly defended Sr Faustina, so I always assumed that even for trads who claim Pius XII was the last pope the chaplet is nothing bad. Unless the objections are against the Diary and not the Chaplet? I would have to read more on the topic but I think that the chaplet is pretty much OK? Yesterday I found a Divine Mercy Chaplet from the second half of the 19th century and it wasn't very much different.
Reply
#5
(06-23-2014, 06:43 AM)PolishTrad Wrote: Unless the objections are against the Diary and not the Chaplet?
Yes, I think more so against the diary than the chaplet. I can see why the diary was on the Index, but why was the image, "in the forms proposed by" her, banned?
Reply
#6
(06-23-2014, 04:42 AM)GodFirst Wrote: Can we just stop already with this nonsense?!
Can you please explain to me why her diary was on the Index, and why the image, "in the forms proposed by" her, was banned? Pope Pius XII et al. clearly had reasons.
(06-23-2014, 04:42 AM)GodFirst Wrote: This is just blatant disregard for the Divine Authority of the Sovereign Pontiff, namely, in this case St. John Paul II.
As the article says, "Pius XII put it on the Index; John XXIII issued two condemnations through the Holy Office about the spiritual danger this devotion presented to the faithful."
Reply
#7
This thread is really freaking me out! I say the chaplet every morning before the blessed sacrament. Am I offending God? Should I stop saying this? Should I confess this? My heart is about to explode in my chest!
Reply
#8
In an attempt to calm my emotions I will jokingly post. Should I just "Follow my conscience"?
Reply
#9
When I have more time I will study the issues with the Diary but regarding the image I don't understand why it was banned. On TIA website they say
Quote:Above, a majestic Jesus with the halo of divinity and a well-defined Sacred Heart gives a clear blessing; below, a worker-like Jesus without the proper halo or a heart makes a gesture more like a "hello" than a blessing
Seriously? So what. Jesus was a worker. We have like millions of images that depict Christ as King (which is very good of course!) so one image with 'simpler' Jesus will do nobody any harm.
Reply
#10
(06-23-2014, 01:12 PM)PolishTrad Wrote: When I have more time I will study the issues with the Diary but regarding the image I don't understand why it was banned. On TIA website they say
Quote:Above, a majestic Jesus with the halo of divinity and a well-defined Sacred Heart gives a clear blessing; below, a worker-like Jesus without the proper halo or a heart makes a gesture more like a "hello" than a blessing
Seriously? So what. Jesus was a worker. We have like millions of images that depict Christ as King (which is very good of course!) so one image with 'simpler' Jesus will do nobody any harm.

I had heard the devotion was banned due to faulty translations and Saint John Paul II resolved the translation issues. The article linked below is from the CMRI and refutes that. I do not have devotion to the Divine Mercy chaplet so I haven't looked into it any further than this.

[url=http://www.novusordowatch.org/divine-mercy.pdf][/url]
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)