On The Divine Mercy Devotion

Please review post

by Anonymous

Disclaimer: The following submission doesn’t necessarily represent the thoughts and opinions of the owner of this blog. They are purely those of the original author.

A lot of Catholics are not aware of the promotion of a devotion from Poland prior to the Helena Kowalski (Sister Faustina) “messages”.

The Mariavites were a group who were excommunicated from the the Catholic Church under Pops Saint Pius X.
In 1893, Feliksa Kozłowska, a Catholic nun, claimed to be receiving messages from Jesus.
She said that he had told her of a great scourge for sins of the priests, but that she should rely on his great mercy.
This false christ of Feliksa Kozłowska, whether a delusion, the devil’s cunning deception, or Communist infiltrator concoction, asked the “little mother” to unload all her sins on him and no confessions was asked for.
“I saw God’s justice aiming at the world to punish it and also his Mercy giving the doomed world it’s last chance of rescue in the veneration of the Most Holy Sacrament and in Mary’s help. After a moment of silence the Lord spoke: “To spread this worship I want to see a congregation of priests under the name of the Mariavites. Their motto is: For the greater glory of God and for the veneration of the Most Holy Virgin Mary. They will be under the protection of Our Lady of Perpetual Succour”
“I give all this work into your hands, you are to be it’s mistress and mother”.
She claims that Jesus helped her chose the priests of the new Mariavite order.
A very bad choice for this supposed “work of great mercy” , devotion allegedly from heaven, was a man who practised satanism with another priest, by the name of John Kowalski.
The little mother defended him and even revealed that she was having visions of him being born of her and related it to the Apocalypse. (The devil could well have done this and the Mariavite sect could well have begun for the devil the onset of the time of antichrist, and false mercy which Jesus Christ never preached)
The Mariavites tried hard to gain approval from Rome.
To the world they were seen as pious, religious group within the Church, who looked after the poor, adored the Blessed Sacrament and prayed and did penance.
However, as the petitioned Rome to ask for permission to found the group, Pope Pius X, shrewd Holy Father as he was, smelt a demonic rat, and warned them they could not found the new order of the Mariavites.
They tried going to Rome, and bringing him a gift of an embroidered rug, but still he was not going to approve.
He excommuncated them and issued an encyclical on the sect.
Later he was proved to be guided by the Holy Ghost as the sect became demonically perverted.
They set up John Kowakski (whim they called Saint Michael) as their Bishop and he and priests of the marivites began to have sexual relations with the nuns in their temple of love and mercy. That is what their church now consisted of, love, a perverted kind and forgiveness for all without contrition or confession.
Kowalski taught that sexual relations between them was what God wanted, and that they did not lose their virginity during the act (!)
The result was Mariavite children of the nuns and priests, which they kept in their schools.
Diabolical signs were manifest in the group, as their “nuns” (nones) began to have messages also.
One of them who was partaking in prayer, penances while having these sexual relations, claims she heard a voice telling her that nothing evil can happen while the Blessed Sacrament is venerated.
If it was, a probably was the devil, he revealed how much power God has given to the Blessed Virgin, and this is precisely why all these false devotions and sects take away from Our Lady’s true apparitions and devotions.
Our Lady’s true apparitions, approved by the Church, warns us to keep the Catholic faith, all the false ask for drastic innovations.
The Divine Mercy asked for changing the prayers on the Rosary beads, a false devotion , an all mercy Sunday in which you can have all sins forgiven without payment, (any day in Confessional with a true priest, is a day of mercy already!), asked for Communion in the hand “I desire to be in your hand” after falling on the floor?, asked Faustina to boast that shes the best, told her he would build another world for her if she wanted, when he told the Apostles not to even be of the world, appeared with no wounds of Christ yet they were seen by true saints etc.
Yet, can we even say Faustina wrote the diary, when it was completed not even in her handwriting? Should we acceptt something that has been condemned twice by the Catholic Church? And if JPII raised it again after it was forbidden, was a really because of a “faulty translation” as they would have you believe? No! because they never changed the “faulty translation” except for one ecumenical stickler”today bring me the heretics” became “today bring me the separated brethren”. !
JPII acted AGAINST the Church in promoting it while it stood condemned and he was ordered not to promote it
He also wanted ecumenism with the heretics of Plock, he also exalted a Mariavite who was the little mothers “spiritual adviser” Honorat Kominski, who got somehow back into the Catholic Church yet they still claimed he was one of them and produced letters of support, he also exalted many promoters of the Divine Mercy, not only Faustina, like Michael Sopocko , who was founding nuns for the order of the Divine Mercy, getting paintings done, giving out leaflets about the false Jesus while the Church had not yet approved it.
JPII also used false miracles to promote Faustina as a saint whom miracles worked through.

© 2019, Anthony Stine. All rights reserved. You may reuse or copy this post by giving credit and providing a link.

Comments

  1. PureHeartCulture (@culture_heart)

    You appear to be confusing two different people with similar sounding last names. Faustina Kowalska died on ‎5 October 1938. She was a nun in the Congregation of the Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy. She was not associated with the Mariavite movement and could not have been the woman discussed in the encyclical “TRIBUS CIRCITER.” That woman is Feliksa Kozłowska.
    She died in 1921. They have similar looking / sounding last names but are not the same person.
    The Mariavite movement was later led by Jan Maria Michał Kowalski. Also a similar looking / sounding last name but still distinct people / messages.

     
  2. Magladhur

    What is wrong with the Divine Mercy devotion?

    First, when this devotion fell under the attention of Pius XII, he was concerned not with the prayers of the devotion, but with the circumstances of the so-called apparitions to Sr. Faustina and their content. That is, he was concerned with what Our Lord supposedly told Sr. Faustina and what he told her to make public.

    Pius XII, then, placed this devotion, including the apparitions and the writings of Sr. Faustina on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (Index of Prohibited Books). That list no longer exists, since it was formally abolished on June 14, 1966, by Paul VI. On the one hand, it is unfortunate that it no longer exists. But, on the other hand, if that list were to exist today it would be so vast that it would fill this room. Practically everything that is written today has something objectionable to the Catholic Faith.

    John Paul II endorses the divine Mercy devotion
    JPII supported the thrice-condemned devotion

    So, Pius XII put the writings of Sr. Faustina on the Index of Prohibited Books. That meant that he considered that their content would lead Catholics astray or in the wrong direction.

    Next, came other prohibitions made by Pope John XXIII. Twice in his pontificate, the Holy Office issued condemnations of the Divine Mercy writings.

    Today the Holy Office is called Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. But before it was called the Holy Office of the Inquisition. Its name has changed over several years.

    This Office – placed under the direct control of the Pope – is responsible for maintaining the purity of the doctrine and, therefore, it watches over the dissemination of different documents in the Church.

    If the Pope wants to correct the faithful on a particular topic, he usually does this through the Holy Office. So, the proclamations, declarations and documents issued by the Holy Office may be seen as coming from the Pope himself.

    Not once, but twice under Pope John XXIII, this particular devotion was condemned through the Holy Office. The first condemnation was in a plenary meeting held on November 19, 1958. The declaration from the Holy Office issued these three statements about this devotion:

    1. There is no evidence of the supernatural origin of these revelations. This means that the members of the Holy Office examined the content and decided that there was nothing there to indicate the apparitions were supernatural. In an authentic apparition – Our Lady of Lourdes or Our Lady of Fatima, for example – you can look at the content and affirm it can not be definitively said they are of divine origin, but there is enough evidence to say that it is possibly so. On the other hand, in the Divine Mercy apparitions, they said definitively that there is no evidence whatsoever that they are supernatural. This translates, “We do not think that these apparitions come from God.”

    2. No feast of Divine Mercy should be instituted. Why? Because if it is based on apparitions that are not clearly coming from God, then it would be rash and temerarious to institute a feast in the Church based on something that is a false apparition.

    3. It is forbidden to disseminate writings propagating this devotion under the form received by Sr. Faustina, as well as the image typical of it. So, it was forbidden to even publish the image of Our Lord as Divine Mercy.

    Now, you have all seen this image, even if in passing, and you would know and recognize it. It shows a strange picture of Jesus that makes me uneasy. I cannot really tell you why. I do not like it. I don’t like the face, I don’t like the gesture, I don’t like the posture, I don’t like anything. This was my first impression of this image. I don’t want it around because it is, for lack of a better term, creepy to me when I look at it.

    The image shows multicolored rays, I think they are red, white and blue, coming from His chest region – no heart, just these rays. You have all seen this. Well, that was the image that was forbidden to be published or spread.

    On March 6, 1959, the Holy Office issued a second decree on the order of Pope John XXIII. It forbade, once again, spreading the images of Divine Mercy and the writings of Sr. Faustina propagating this devotion. It also stated that it was up to the bishops to decide how they were going to remove the images that had already been displayed for public honor.

    I do not need to say much more about these declarations. Two Popes strongly warned the faithful of a danger in this devotion. 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. Not much more needs to be said on that.

    Principal error: It presents an unconditional mercy

    Let me present you with a parallel thought.

    Our Lord with a halo displaying His Sacred Heart
    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

    A halo-less Jesus with no heart gives off the rays of the divine mercy devotionConsider the true image of Christ Our Savior. Probably the most symbolically rich and accurate representation of Him, besides the Crucifix, is the image of the Sacred Heart, because the image of Our Lord with the Sacred Heart summarizes the whole theology of Redemption.

    They pierced His Hands, His Feet and His Sacred Heart; the crown of thorns encircles the Heart, which burns with love for man. This was the price He paid, the sacrifice He made for our redemption. He offered Himself because of His burning love for us despite the fact we are ungrateful creatures who rebelled against our Creator. Think about it. He created us and then we nailed Him to a cross even though He was God and completely innocent of any guilt. So, the Sacred Heart encapsulates all this.

    In the images of the Sacred Heart, He points to this symbolic font of love and mercy for us. The devotions to the Sacred Heart always suppose reparation for our sins. We are sinners, we must make reparation. Despite the promises from Our Lord and the fact that He paid an infinite price for our Redemption, we must make reparation. We should always do penance for our sins and make various kinds of reparation.

    Now, consider the image of Our Lord representing the Divine Mercy. It is an imitation of the Sacred Heart without the heart. When you pay attention, you notice that in the image there is no heart. There are simply rays coming out of a point above His waist. This symbolizes the error of the Divine Mercy devotion. It preaches that we can expect an unconditional mercy with no price to be paid whatsoever, with no obligations whatsoever. This is not the message of Christ.

    Christ is merciful. Time and time again, His mercy pardons our repeated sins in the Sacrament of Penance, always taking us back no matter how bad our sins are. And what happens in the Sacrament of Penance? The very name of the Sacrament tells us exactly what happens: to be effective the Sacrament supposes penance. Not only are you there at the Sacrament recognizing your full submission to the Church and your dependence on the Sacraments for forgiveness, but you walk out of the confessional with an imposed penance.

    You are also often reminded from this pulpit that you must not only fulfill that penance, but you must continually do penance, your own penance. You don’t just say a decade of the Rosary and say, “Well, I’ve done my penance. Now, I can go merrily on my way.” You must always have the spirit of penance for your past sins; you must live with it.

    The central error of the Divine Mercy is that it promises lots of spiritual rewards with no requirement of penance, no mention of reparation, no mention of any condition.

    Unfortunately, this corresponds very much with what Pope John Paul II wrote in the Encyclical Dives in misericordia. I do not recommend reading it to any of you, except the most prepared, because it has many misleading things. It re-echoes this mercy with no price, gifts from heaven with no requirements, God’s mercy with no mention of penance or reparation for sin whatsoever.

    Anticipating that encyclical Pope John Paul II already in 1978, the very first year of his pontificate, set in motion the canonization of Sr. Faustina and the institution of a Divine Mercy Sunday feast. As I said before, both Sr. Faustina’s writings and the very idea of having a Divine Mercy feast day had been prohibited and condemned by two previous Popes.

    Presumption in Sr. Faustina’s writings

    The writings of the Polish Sr. Faustina herself, published in English in 2007, pose cause for concern. The work has 640 pages and transcribes frequent supposed apparitions and messages from Our Lord.

    Faustina, John Paul II, and the divine Mercy devotion
    A new “save-yourself-without-effort” devotion

    This long thread of statements supposedly from Our Lord to Sr. Faustina has some things that would make a correct-thinking Catholic very uneasy, to say the least. I will exemplify by taking a few quotes from her writings.

    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)

    How can we believe that Our Lord has united Himself more intimately with Sr. Faustina than with the Blessed Virgin Mary? At first, we might read this and think, “Oh, that’s beautiful.“ But later it may hit you, “Wait a minute, Our Lord united Himself more intimately with Sr. Faustina than with any other creature? Our Lady was the Immaculate Conception, but she was also His creature, she was created by Him as the rest of us were, albeit with the greatest exalted position free from original sin from the very beginning.”

    And now are we expected to believe that Our Lord told Sr. Faustina that He is more united to her than anybody else, even the Blessed Virgin Mary, and certainly more than all the other Saints? This affirmation smacks of pride in itself, let alone the assertion that it came from Heaven.

    This type of presumption is present in many other cases.

    Our Lord supposedly addressed Sr. Faustina on May 23, 1937, with these words: “Beloved pearl of My Heart.” What bothers me about this is that it is pure saccharin. Look how Our Lady speaks to Sr. Lucia or to St. Bernadette. It is not as “beloved pearl of My Heart.” It is impossible to imagine Our Lord stooping to saccharin language. Our Lord is Christ the King, Creator of the universe, and ruler of all that is. He does not say things like “beloved pearl of My Heart.”

    Let me continue. Then, He said: “I see your love so pure; purer than that of the angels, and all the more so because you keep fighting. For your sake, I bless the world.” (ibid., p. 400) First of all, except for the Blessed Virgin Mary, we are not free from original sin and, therefore, we are not capable of a love purer than the angels.

    Nazi soldiers march on Warsaw
    Nazi soldiers invaded Poland after Sr. Faustina announced a blessed world – above, they are marching on Warsaw

    As for blessing the world, that might be fine. If we had one real saint in the world, then the Lord will give us blessings for that one real saint. This is not my objection.

    My objection is that this revelation was in 1937; the world was on the verge of World War II, which Sr. Lucy had already been forewarned of by Our Lady at Fatima: if Russia is not consecrated, and man does not convert, then this big disaster will befall mankind for their evil ways and their sins.

    At that moment, we were about to see that disaster descend from Heaven, yet Our Lord tells Sr. Faustina, “For your sake, I am going to bless the world.” Was World War II a blessing on the world? Since her native Poland did not go unscathed by the German invasion, it does not seem likely that He actually blessed the world.

    Another example: Sr. Faustina claimed that Our Lord told her that she was exempt from judgment, every judgment – particular judgment and the general judgment. On February 4, 1935, she already claimed to hear this voice in her soul, “From today on, do not fear God’s judgment, for you will not be judged.” (ibid., p. 168)

    Now, nobody but the Blessed Virgin, as far as I know, is free from the general and particular judgment. St. Thomas Aquinas, according to the pious story, had to genuflect in Purgatory before going to Heaven. I don’t know if this is fact, but it is a lesson for us that nobody is exempt from any kind of judgment.

    And add to these examples the preposterous affirmation that the Host jumped out of the Tabernacle three times and placed itself in her hands, so that she had to open up the Tabernacle and place it back herself: “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) It makes it sound like a hamster that has gotten out of its cage. “Oh, no, here it is again. I have to go put this back now.”

    How many times has the Church declared that the hands of a priest are consecrated to handle the Sacred Species, and what kind of lesson would you be giving to the world by this example of the Host leaping into her hands so that she had to place it back in the Tabernacle herself?

    Our Lord does not contradict His Church by word or by gesture. And this would be a little bit by both. She related what happened, but the gesture itself would be Our Lord contradicting the Real Presence and everything it represents.

    A lack of Catholic spirit

    In short, the whole Divine Mercy devotion does not represent a Catholic spirit. The Catholic spirit is one of making constant reparation in penance for our sins, of praying for the graces of God, for the mercy of God in this life.

    Let me close by saying that it is the background of this devotion that is questionable. You do not just institute a particular devotion with its own feast day based on something that has been condemned for very good reasons in the recent past.

    When you look at the prayers of the Divine Mercy devotions, they are perfectly orthodox. There is nothing heretical or presumptuous in these prayers. But just remember the reason why it has been condemned and why we do not recognize Divine Mercy Sunday is because of its past, not because of the content of the prayers.

    It is very important to know this, because it is one of many things that were brought back in modern times that were condemned in the past. And this is not a case of the Church changing her mind. It is a case of a representative of the Church doing something he should not be doing.
    https://www.traditioninaction.org/polemics/F_07_DM_01.htm

     
  3. robill

    I think this could use much more clarification and is not a complete revealing of the truth. I don’t know who wrote this however, not knowing the author or certain references of these issues leaves this to be a smear piece and vague. Ave Maria!

     

Please comment