| There are two kinds of revelations: (1) universal
revelations, which are contained in the Bible or in
the depositum of Apostolic tradition transmitted by
the Church. These ended with the preaching of the
Apostles and must be believed by all; (2) particular
or private revelations which are constantly
occurring among Christians (see CONTEMPLATION). When
the Church approves private revelations, she
declares only that there is nothing in them contrary
faith or good morals, and that they may be read
without danger or even with profit; no obligation is
thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them.
Speaking of such revelations as (e.g.) those of St.
Hildegard (approved in part by Eugenius III), St.
Bridget (by Boniface IX), and St. Catherine of Siena
(by Gregory XI) Benedict XIV says: "It is not
obligatory nor even possible to give them the assent
of Catholic faith, but only of human faith, in
conformity with the dictates of prudence, which
presents them to us as probable and worthy of pius
belief)" (De canon., III, liii, xxii, II).
Illusions connected with private revelations have
been explained in the article CONTEMPLATION. Some of
them are at first thought surprising. Thus a vision
of an historical scene (e.g., of the life or death
of Christ) is often only approximately accurate,
although the visionary may be unaware of this fact,
and he may be misled, if he believes in its absolute
historical fidelity. This error is quite natural,
being based on the assumption that, if the vision
comes from God, all its details (the landscape,
dress, words, actions, etc.) should be a faithful
reproduction of the historical past. This assumption
is not justified, for accuracy in secondary details
is not necessary; the main point is that the fact,
event, or communication revealed be strictly true.
It may be objected that the Bible contains
historical books, and that thus God may sometimes
wish to reveal certain facts in religious history to
us exactly. That doubtless is true, when there is
question of facts which are necessary or useful as a
basis for religion, in which case the revelation is
accompanied by proofs that guarantee its accuracy. A
vision need not guarantee its accuracy in every
detail. One should thus beware of concluding without
examination that revelations are to be rejected; the
prudent course is neither to believe nor to deny
them unless there is sufficient reason for so doing.
Much less should one suspect that the saints have
been always, or very often deceived in their vision.
On the contrary, such deception is rare, and as a
rule in unimportant matters only.
There are cases in which we can be certain that a
revelation is Divine. (1) God can give this
certainty to the person who receives the revelation
(at least during it), by granting an insight and an
evidence so compelling as to exclude all possibility
of doubt. We can find an analogy in the natural
order: our senses are subject to many illusions, and
yet we frequently perceive clearly that we have not
been deceived. (2) At times others can be equally
certain of the revelation thus vouchsafed. For
instance, the Prophets of the Old Testament gave
indubitable signs of their mission; otherwise they
would not have been believed. There were always
false prophets, who deceived some of the people but,
inasmuch as the faithful were counselled by Holy
Writ to distinguish the false from the true, it was
possible so to distinguish. One incontrovertible
proof is the working of a miracle, if it be wrought
for this purpose and circumstances show this to be
so. A prophecy realized is equally convincing, when
it is precise and cannot be the result of chance or
of a conjecture of the evil spirit.
Besides these rather rare means of forming an
opinion, there is another, but longer and more
intricate method: to discuss the reasons for and
against. Practically, this examination will often
give only a probability more or less great. It may
be also that the revelation can be regarded as
Divine in its broad outlines, but doubtful in minor
details. Concerning the revelations of Marie de
Agreda and Anne Catherine Emmerich, for example,
contradictory opinions have been expressed: some
believe unhesitatingly everything they contain, and
are annoyed when anyone does not share their
confidence; others give the revelations no credence
whatsoever (generally on a priori grounds); finally
there are many who are sympathetic, but do not know
what to reply when asked what degree of credibility
is to be attributed to the writings of these two
ecstatics. The truth seems to be between the two
extreme opinions indicated first. If there is
question of a particular fact related in these books
and not mentioned elsewhere, we cannot be certain
that it is true, especially in minor details. In
particular instances, these visionaries have been
mistaken: thus Marie de Agreda teaches, like her
contemporaries, the existence of crystal heavens,
and declares that one must believe everything she
says, although such an obligation exists only in the
case of the Holy Scriptures. In 1771 Clement XIV
forbade the continuation of her process of
beatification "on account of the book".
Catherine Emmerich has likewise given expression to
false or unlikely opinions: she regards the writings
of the pseudo-Dionysius as due to the Areopagite,
and says strange things about the terrestrial
Paradise, which, according to her, exists on an
inaccessible Mountain towards Tibet. If there be
question of the general statement of facts given in
these works, we can admit with probability that many
of them are true. For these two visionaries led
lives that were regarded as very holy. Competent
authorities have judged their ecstasies as divine.
It is therefore prudent to admit that they received
a special assistance from God, preserving them not
absolutely, but in the main, from error.
In judging of revelations or visions we may
proceed in this manner: (1) get detailed information
about the person who believes himself thus favored;
(2) also about the fact of the revelation and the
circumstances attending it. To prove that a
revelation is Divine (at least in its general
outlines), the method of exclusion is sometimes
employed. It consists in proving that neither the
demon nor the ecstatic's own ideas have interfered
(at least on important points) with God's action,
and that no one has retouched the revelation after
its occurrence. This method differs from the
preceding one only in the manner of arranging the
information obtained, but it is not so convenient.
To judge revelations or visions, we must be
acquainted with the character of the person favoured
with them from a triple point of view: natural,
ascetical, and mystical. (For those who have been
beatified or canonized, this inquiry has been
already made by the Church.) Our inquiry into the
visionary's character might be pursued as follows:
What are his natural qualities or defects, from a
physical, intellectual, and especially moral
standpoint? If the information is favourable (if the
person is of sound judgment, calm imagination; if
his acts are dictated by reason and not by
enthusiasm, etc.), many causes of illusion are
thereby excluded. However, a momentary aberration is
still possible.
How has the person been educated? Can the
knowledge of the visionary have been derived from
books or from conversations with theologians?
What are the virtues exhibited before and after
the revelation? Has he made progress in holiness and
especially in humility? The tree can be judged by
its fruits.
What extraordinary graces of union with God have
been received? The greater they are the greater the
probability in favour of the revelation, at least in
the main.
Has the person had other revelations that have
been judged Divine? Has he made any predictions that
have been clearly realized?
Has he been subjected to heavy trials? It is
almost impossible for extraordinary favours to be
conferred without heavy crosses; for both are marks
of God's friendship, and each is a preparation for
the other.
Does he practice the following rules: fear
deception; be open with your director; do not desire
to have revelations?
Our information concerning a revelation
considered in itself or concerning the circumstances
that accompanied it might be secured as follows:
Is there an authentic account, in which nothing
has been added, suppressed, or corrected?
Does the revelation agree with the teaching of
the Church or with the recognized facts of history
or natural science?
Does it teach nothing contrary to good morals,
and is it unaccompanied by any indecent action? The
commandments of God are addressed to everyone
without exception. More than once the demon has
persuaded false visionaries that they were chosen
souls, and that God loved them so much as to
dispense them from the burdensome restrictions
imposed on ordinary mortals. On the contrary, the
effect of Divine visitations is to remove us more
and more from the life of sense, and make us more
rigorous towards ourselves.
Is the reaching helpful towards the obtaining of
eternal salvation? In spiritism we find the spirits
evoked treat only of trifles. They reply to idle
questions, or descend to providing amusement for an
assembly (e.g., by moving furniture about); deceased
relatives or the great philosophers are interrogated
and their replies are woefully commonplace. A
revelation is also suspect if its aim is to decide a
disputed question in theology, history, astronomy,
etc. Eternal salvation is the only thing of
importance in the eyes of God. "In all other
matters", says St. John of the Cross, "He
wishes men to have recourse to human means" (Montee,
II, xxii). Finally, a revelation is suspect if it is
commonplace, telling only what is to be found in
every book. It is then probable that the visionary
is unconsciously repeating what he has learnt by
reading.
After examining all the circumstances
accompanying the vision (the attitudes, acts, words,
etc.), do we find that the dignity and seriousness
which become the Divine Majesty? The spirits evoked
by Spiritists often speak in a trivial manner.
Spiritists try to explain this by pretending that
the spirits are not demons, but the souls of the
departed who have retained all their vices; absurd
or unbecoming replies are given by deceased persons
who are still liars, or libertines, frivolous or
mystifiers, etc. But if that be so, communications
with these degraded beings is evidently dangerous.
In Protestant "revivals" assembled crowds
bewail their sins, but in a strange, exaggerated
way, as if frenzied or intoxicated. It must be
admitted that they are inspired by a good principle:
a very ardent sentiment of the love of God and of
repentance. But to this is added another element
that cannot be regarded as Divine: a neuropathic
enthusiasm, which is contagious and sometimes
develops so far as to produce convulsions or
repugnant contortions. Sometimes a kind of unknown
language is spoken, but it consists in reality of a
succession of meaningless sounds.
What sentiments of peace, or, on the other hand,
of disturbance, are experienced during or after the
revelations? Here is the rule as formulated by St.
Catherine of Siena and St. Ignatius: "With
persons of good will [it is only of such that we are
here treating] the action of the good spirit [God or
His Angels] is characterized by the production of
peace, joy, security, courage; except perhaps at the
first moment." Note the restriction. The Bible
often mentions this disturbance at the first moment
of the revelation; the Blessed Virgin experienced it
when the Angel Gabriel appeared to her. The action
of the demon produces quite the contrary effect:
"With persons of good will he produces, except
perhaps at the first moment, disturbance, sorrow,
discouragement, perturbation, gloom." In a word
the action of Satan encounters a mysterious
resistance of the soul.
It often happens that the revelation inspires an
exterior work - for instance, the establishment of a
new devotion, the foundation of a new religious
congregation or association, the revision of the
constitutions of a congregation, etc., the building
of a church or the creation of a pilgrimage, the
reformation of the lax spirit in a certain body, the
preaching of a new spirituality, etc. In these cases
the value of the proposed work must be carefully
examined; is it good in itself, useful, filling a
need, not injurious to other works, etc.?
Have the revelations been subjected to the tests
of time and discussion?
If any work has been begun as a result of the
revelation, has it produced great spiritual fruit?
Have the sovereign pontiffs and the bishops believed
this to be so, and have they assisted the progress
of the work? This is very well illustrated in the
cases of the Scapular of Mount Carmel, the devotion
to the Sacred Heart, the miraculous medal. These are
the signs that enable us to judge with probability
if a revelation is Divine. In the case of certain
persons very closely united to God, the slow study
of these signs has been sometimes aided or replaced
by a supernatural intuition; this is what is known
as the infused gift of the discernment of spirits.
As regards the rules of conduct, the two
principal have been explained in the article on
CONTEMPLATION, namely
if the revelation leads solely to the love of God
and the saints, the director may provisionally
regard it as Divine;
at the beginning the visionary should do his best
to repulse the revelation quietly. He should not
desire to receive it, otherwise he will be exposing
himself to the risk of being deceived. Here are some
further rules:
the director must be content to proceed slowly,
not to express astonishment, to treat the person
gently. If he were to be harsh or distrustful, he
would intimidate the soul he is directing, and
incline it to conceal important details from him;
he must be very careful to urge the soul to make
progress in the way of sanctity. He will point out
that the only value of the visions is in the
spiritual fruit that they produce;
he will pray fervently, and have the subject he
is directing pray, that the necessary light may be
granted. God cannot fail to make known the true path
to those who ask Him humbly. If on the contrary a
person confided solely in his natural prudence, he
would expose himself to punishment for his
self-sufficiency;
the visionary should be perfectly calm and
patient if his superiors do not allow him to carry
out the enterprises that he deems inspired by Heaven
or revealed. One who, when confronted with this
opposition, becomes impatient or discouraged, shows
that he has very little confidence in the power of
God and is but little conformed to His will. If God
wishes the project to succeed, He can make the
obstacles suddenly disappear at the time appointed
by Him. A very striking example of this divine delay
is to be found in the life of St. Juliana, the
Cistercian prioress of Mont-Cornillon, near Liege
(1192- 1258). It is to her that the institution of
the feast of the Blessed Sacrament is due. All of
her life was passed in awaiting the hour of God,
which she was never to see, for it came only more
than a century after the beginning of the
revelations.
As regards inspirations ordinarily, those who
have not passed the period of tranquility or a
complete union, must beware of the idea that they
hear supernatural words; unless the evidence is
irresistible, they should attribute them to the
activity of their own imaginations. But they may at
least experience inspirations or impulses more or
less strong, which seem to point out to them how to
act in difficult circumstances. This is a minor form
of revelation. The same line of conduct should be
followed as in the latter case. We must not accept
them blindly and against the dictates of reason, but
weigh the reasons for and against, consult a prudent
director, and decide only after applying the rules
for the discernment of spirits. The attitude of
reserve that has just been laid down does not apply
to the simple, sudden and illuminating views of
faith, which enables one to understand in a higher
manner not novelties, but the truths admitted by the
Church. Such enlightenment cannot have any evil
result. It is on the contrary a very precious grace,
which should be very carefully welcomed and
utilized.
Consult the writings of ST. TERESA AND ST. JOHN
OF THE CROSS, passim; PHILIP OF THE BLESSED TRINITY,
Summa theologica mysticae (Lyons, 1656), pt. II, tr.
iii; DE VALLGORNERA, Mystica Theologia (Barcelona,
1662), Q. ii, disp. 5; LOPEZ DE EZQUERRA, Lucerna
Mystica (Venice, 1692), tr. v; AMORT, De
revelationibus (Augsburg, 1744); BENEDICT XIV, De
servorum Dei canonizatione (Rome, 1767), l.III, c.
liii; SCARAMELLI, Direttorio mistico (Venice, 1754),
tr.iv; SCHRAM, Institutiones theologicae mysticae
(Augsburg, 1777), pt. II, c. iv; ST. LIGUORI, Homo
apostolicus (Venice, 1782), append.i, n. 19; RIBET,
La mystique divine, II (Paris, 1879); POULAIN, Des
graces d'oraison (5th ed., Paris, 1909), tr. The
Graces of Interior Prayer (London, 1910).
AUG. POULAIN
|
