A “Locutionist” in Ireland
June 12, 2008, 6:34 am
Posted by Cathleen Kaveny
Deal Hudson writes about a woman who is receiving visions and other communications from heaven
Any bored historian of theology want to procrastinate for a moment and put private revelation in a broader theological context?
Robert Orsi who is the expert on devotions makes the important observation that the reason people flock to devotions is because of the lack of pastoring by the clergy. Orsi is only reporting the results of his research. People tell him these things.
As I see it if God appeared in such ways it would be at places like Auschwitz — Birkenau and the like. Or any one of these places. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/cclist.html
The following is a great tourist attraction.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/france/praise-the-lourdes/2008/04/25/1208743214462.html
Why the “scare quotes” in your headline? Is anything impossible for God?
Two of the three women Doctors of the Church claim to have received locutions. The other believe
a statue of Mary smiled at her.
No one has to believe in these phenomena, and ecclesial judgment traditionally errs on the side of suspicion. But suspicion is not sarcasm. When prelates are sarcastic about things like this, they tend to get a good lesson–a shower of roses in winter, or a little uncatechized girl who says she has met the Immaculate Conception.
St. John of the Cross’ sober advice: mystical phenomena can come from a number of different sources, including the devil, so don’t focus on them or trust them. If the locution or vision or feeling is from God, it will have a good effect on the soul at the time it is given, without the need for any action or special response.
Because I’m quoting Deal Hudson. That’s his term–it’s not one I’d encountered before in as a noun describing a person.
Have a nice day, Kathy.
No historical perspectives to add except that these types of things have been going on a long time, with perhaps Christina the Astonishing the stand-out example of those whose communications from the Almighty have taken rather bizarre forms:
http://saints.sqpn.com/saintc80.htm
It baffles me that such a common word in the history of Christian spirituality can be unknown to a professor of theology, an expert on ethics in the Catholic tradition. But these are our times.
I can understand the problem for the Catholic Church of recognizing “new” truths from private revelation, but it seems to me the idea that public revelation ended 2000 years ago does put a limitation on God’s power to act in the world.
What is the point of Jesus or Mary sending messages to individuals if the Church gives everyone permission not to believe the individuals who receive the messages?
Snarky reply deleted.
Here’s my question: I guess my problem does lie in the term. “Locutionist” strikes me as an odd word. Would any of the spiritual masters who were saints have defined themselves solely or primarily in terms of their open-ended ability to channel messages from God–and not merely from God, but from the whole celestial family? The Marian apparitions seem much more limited in scope. It’s one thing to be a saint who happens to receive apparitions or auditions from time to time, it’s something else to claim to have a direct, private, and somewhat open-ended channel of communication.
How often has this come up (legitimate or not) in the history of the Church? Joachim of Fiore didn’tfare very well.
Just the other day I was eating a hoagie and between the cheese and salami I noticed a perfect likeness of St. Mechtilde of Ubaldigor!
There is something about the willingness of Catholics (more women than man, methinks) to believe ALL and ANY of this nonsense. Has the Church over time made God so remote, stern and insulated from the faithful by layers of mediators, saints, etc. that God is no long felt to be someone with whom the average Catholic feels comfortable?
Cathleen, I don’t have a historical overview of these phenomena, and I hope someone provides one.
Until that time, I admit to being a skeptic about these things–and so is the Church, which spent many years arguing over St. Bernadette’s vision at Lourdes.
While I believe Kathy is right, that God may send a heavenly messenger with apparitions, visions and messages to comfort, inspire and encourage, it’s my understanding that those who are initially skeptical are not in danger of perdition simply for being skeptical.
I believe that one of the criteria for ascertaining whether a manifestation is legit is that it a) does not reveal anything that contradicts Scripture, nor b) add anything to Scripture that is necessary for salvation.
So I surmise that if you’re skeptical, you haven’t missed essential info.
Thanks, Jean.
I am very skeptical, and not worried about being very skeptical. But lots of people aren’t as skeptical- as I am-Mr. Hudson, apparently.
I was just wondering if anyone has a broader take on the phenomenon.
“I can understand the problem for the Catholic Church of recognizing “new” truths from private revelation, but it seems to me the idea that public revelation ended 2000 years ago does put a limitation on God’s power to act in the world. ”
Hi, David, I don’t know that the church is trying to place limits on God in teaching this, but rather trying to convey as full and accurate a portrayal of Jesus and his saving role as possible. As I understand it, this belief is rooted in the notion that Jesus Christ is the completion, culmination and perfection of God’s revelation to us. To assert anything less than this would be to see Jesus as perhaps just another step along the way to understanding God’s will for us. i.e. Jesus as mere prophet and man of wisdom.
“What is the point of Jesus or Mary sending messages to individuals if the Church gives everyone permission not to believe the individuals who receive the messages?”
What the church teaches is that public revelation is complete. That’s not exactly the same as saying that we have “permisison not to believe” private revelation. Certainly, if private revelations claimed to reveal something essential that was not revealed before, we’d have, not only permission not to believe, but instruction to positively not believe.
My view of assessing private revelation is that it involves “discernment of spirits”. It’s analogous, perhaps, to the way by which Israel sorted out the false prophets from the true ones.
“Anne”, in the Deal Hudson interview, said a couple of things that really hit the right notes with me, and one of them was that God does this from time to time because the church through its official organs is falling short of its mission.
Is she genuine? I dunno. Istm that she said the right things, though.
Jim,
Well, Anne gets monthly messages from Jesus, and within the course of about a year (by my estimate) receives more of the words of Jesus than are contained in the Bible. If we were to unearth ancient documents that scholars believed might contain previously unknown words of Jesus, I for one would be most eager to read a translation. Yet you can go to the following link and read message after message allegedly from Jesus, and not find anything of particular interest.
http://www.directionforourtimes.com/messageEnglish.html
A couple of excerpts
Now, exactly how Jesus would speak and what he would say I don’t pretend to know, but the Jesus of the Gospels is a much more impressive speaker than we get in Anne’s locutions.
I agree that “locutionist” is odd. The suffix “-ist” suggests agency but I gather that it is not the woman speaks but that Jesus, Mary and others speak to her. I would prefer “locutionary” for one who receives locutions, parallel with “visionary”. But oddities are not easily made to quiesce, All English translators oddly call the natives of Thessalonica Thessalonians, whereas the French manage to speak of Thessaloniciens!
Hi, David, I’m not much a fan of the genre, but from the little I’ve been exposed to, that all seems about par for the course. Based on the passage you presented us, I didn’t see anything problematical about it, although Jesus as team-building middle-mgmt type is an image I don’t recollect from the Gospels.
FWIW, here’s one attempt at a broader context for visions and allocutions, by John Hardon SJ. He puts it in the larger context of mysticism, which certainly seems right. He has some interesting things to say about authentic vs. ersatz visionaries.
http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/vision.htm
There is an element of interior dialogue (‘locution’) involved in any form of prophecy, revelation or theological analysis.
This is in accord with Aquinas’ understanding of how revelation is received. He speaks of different kinds of lights. It is the divine light that illuminates the mind in such a way as to allow one to see the Divine purpose in normal course of events.
Revelation occurs in the mind as it interprets history and current events not the other was around. Consequently, prophecy, or revelation, even private revelation needs to be discerned by a community of faith as we are all subject to self-deception, delusion, and vainglory.
I see locutions and apparitions as acceptable forms of dialogue for the community of faith. For example I read some of Emerich’s work. In one, if I recall correctly, she identifies the serpent in the garden of Eden as an external manifestation of Eve’s will. I thought that this was an interesting exegesis.
I view Emerich’s work (or visions) as a midrash (to borrow the Hebrew phrase) of the Biblical texts and stories. Not much different than that which is done in the Spiritual Exercises of Ignatius of Loyola. Perfectly legitimate but subject to discernment. Ignatius states that it is perfectly obvious that Jesus appeared first to his mother even though the Biblical texts don’t state that. They don’t state it because it was simply presumed, at least according to Ignatius.
I consider Dostoevsky’s ‘poem’, The Grand Inquisitor, in the Brother’s Karamazov prophetic. Dostoevsky was very anti-Western and pretty rooted in the Christianity of the Russian Orthodox church. Dostoevsky has the Inquisitor, who is a Cardinal in France, yell at Jesus that he (Jesus) may NOT give any further revelation as we (the Catholic Church) have stated quite clearly that revelation closed after the death of the first apostle. Revelation is now a closed book and Jesus may not now interfere in the work of the Church.
Jim,
Analyzing this . . .
I would say that the Jesus of the Gospels would never say “ridiculously lavish.” Also, what Jesus appears to be saying here is that he is (can afford to be?) so generous because so many do not take what he has to give. Consequently, he has so much more to give. It seems strange to have Jesus say he does what he does because so many reject him. Would he not give lavishly if everyone accepted him?
If I were a locutionist, I would have rendered it something like the following: “Many reject me, but to those who accept me I give in abundance.” Also, I wouldn’t have Jesus saying, “I, Jesus Christ . . . .”
The word locutionist doesn’t appear to be in dictionaries, as far as I can tell, and it does not come up in a search of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. Based on a bit of Googling, it looks like a word used mainly among devotees of apparitions and the like that have not been approved by the Church. The first name that comes up is “Little Mary,” who seems to have complied with a request of her bishop to stop publishing messages from Jesus and Mary after about 12 years of doing so.
The fullest recent Vatican statement on private revelations is in connection with the so-called “Third Secret of Fatima.” It can be found toward the end of the material found at: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000626_message-fatima_en.html
Thanks, Joe, that’s extremely helpful. The word “locutionist” isn’t in the Catholic Encyclopedia, either.
I thank you, Joseph, for that statement.
I ask a favor from anyone reading this: Tell me whether or not you consider the following books to be credible or not:
1) _Apparitions, Healings, and Weeping Madonnas_ by Lisa Schwebel
2) _The Cult of the Virgin Mary_ by Michael Carroll
3) _Bernadette of Lourdes_ by Therese Taylor
I would like to know more about this general subject, so any suggestions you can give will help me.
Also, I hope that I do not cause a thread of its own right to begin now, but this article and the subsequent comments help me to recall one parishioner’s comments as the Church celebrated the Feast of the Birth of Mary on September 8. This parishioner told me that Maria Valtorta said in some volume or another in _The Poem of the Man-God_ that Jesus told Maria that the Birth of Mary was on another day. It took all my inner fortitude to refrain from asking what other erroneous things Maria Valtorta claims that the Church does. I know that the feast of the Birth of Mary has to do with the anniversary of a church dedication, but I was struck by someone quoting someone else about an error in the Church’s way of doing things, especially when a similar person can spend much time defending the Church for what we teach on other matters.
The Vatican in 1995 expressed concerns about the writings of Vassula Ryden, who I think falls into the category of “locutionist”.
Locutionist might also describe Adrienne Von Speyr, von Baltasar’s inspired and inspiring associate.
Besides appearances in Catholic circles, the phenomenon happens a lot outside. “Channeling” is not at all unusual in some circles; I used to be on a list where at least three participants channeled Mary Magdalene, or claimed to. My favorite example is Wm Butler Yeats, who produced A Vision by automatic writing. At least he produced some great poetry based on this work, including The Second Coming.
Did anybody else notice that “her first marriage ended in divorce”? I am curious if this means she does not receive the Eucharist, since she apparently leads Eucharistic devotions.
Fr. Shawn,
I would recommend first-person accounts that are thought credible, such as St. Teresa of Avila’s autobiography and her Foundations, the Dialogues of St. Catherine of Siena, and Julian of Norwich’s Revelations (aka Showings).
An intriguing case of mystical phenomena in our own time, celebrated, questioned, currently disputed, is Medjugorje. This was the CDF’s decidedly non-committal response to an inquiry: http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFAUBRY.HTM
Another was the Bayside apparitions (this account seems really overblown in the expression of its judgments but I can’t find a better one at the moment): http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/bayside_false_apparitions.html
In my opinion there are two common possible errors that can be made by believers in response to these phenomena. (People who actually experience such things, or people who are close to them, probably have a lot more possible errors!) But for most of us there are probably two possibilities: incredulity and guilibility. I think I understand aspects of what could be in the background of the overly credulous: a tendency towards an apocalyptic worldview, a vivid imagination, dissatisfaction with life in general, scruples, unresolved childhood anger, etc., as well as, sometimes, a real longing to be touched by the supernatural.
At the risk of oversimplifying (enormously), I think of incredulity as being almost philosophical in origin, as though the Kantian scheme of the universe has taken over modern thought, even modern religious thought, and has placed an impermeable firmament between God and the world.
St. Teresa of Avila resisted writing down her locutions and visions. She did it under obedience and said it was extremely repugnant to her. But at one point she said that while she understood why “the doctors” were afraid of the phenomena leading people astray, she thought that it would be equally bad if people thought that God couldn’t do these things.
I guess that’s where I stand. I’m extremely skeptical in individual cases. I believe wholeheartedly only in Lourdes and Guadalupe, and that’s mostly because of the criterion, “By their fruits you shall know them.” A much less objectively (much more, subjectively) compelling reason is, they accord with my sense of who Mary is and what she would do and say. I like very much the way Mary knows how to reason with prelates :) and her preference for the simple and the child.
At the same time, I believe very much in the general principle of the permeability of the firmament, and that the usual vehicles for celestial-terrestrial travel are grace, faith and praise, and that these are possible.
I find the messages very compelling and revealing a side of Jesus that makes it much easier for me to connect with Him and begin to comprehend how to have a personal relationship with Him. The above excerpts portray a picture of a Christ that desires personal intimacy with me.
The church teaching is that public revelation ended with the Apostles. However, from time to time in history, God allows private revelationto help people in a particular time or a particular way. Who can argue against the fact that if there was ever a time that needed a little extra help it would be this one?
Her Website shows she is coming to Chicago in July for a Eucharistic Day of Renewal and youth rally July 11th and 12th. It also says that her first marriage was anulled.
I am going to go see her. Here is the link to the event:
http://www.directionforourtimes.com/event.html
For those interested in some of the more bizarre spiritual experiences in the Catholic tradition Bernard McGinn’s volume on the 14th century German mystics considers some of the women mystics of the day whose experiences were decidedly out-of-the-ordinary. It’s in his great work “The Presence of God”, vol.3, “The Harvest of Mysticism in Medieval Germany”.
Note: “weird” spirituality is likely to become a matter of practical concern if John McCain shows he is serious about Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana as a possible running mate. Jindal has written about his experience as an exorcist. He said it happened when a student at Brown University;; Go to:
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/bobby_jindals_dance_with_the_d.php
I find it interesting that such phenomena happen conspicuously in the Church in turbulent times, Or maybe we just become more interested in them.. Is this merely wishful thinking that the transcendent sometimes invades this poor old world? Or are these purported events just the product of hysteria? Or what? There’s no way to tell really.
Also consider the maid who was told by and angel that she was to become the Mother of God.
Kathy,
I thank you for the suggestions. I am familiar with the “first person” titles you mentioned. I should have qualified my request asking specifically for analysis-related titles such as what I listed. Perhaps I should be curious to see if such analysts seek strictly to demystify all such types of spiritual events.
I mention another author now: Vincentian Father Stafford Poole has written two books on the matter of Our Lady of Guadalupe. The second of the series, _The Guadalupan Controversies in Mexico_ , has been a gripping read so far.
“What is the point of Jesus or Mary sending messages to individuals if the Church gives everyone permission not to believe the individuals who receive the messages?”
Well, we all have our charisms. The Spirit confers prophetic wisdom, which can be a blessing to those it is shared with. But the Church rightly leaves the reception or rejection of such wisdom to people’s conscience. If divine authority were ascribed to all who speak in the name of God’s Spirit the biblical revelation would soon be overgrown by a gnostic jungle.
I am shocked when I meet Irish priests who are deep into visionary interests, studying the seers of Medjugorje as they pursue their daily colloquies with the BVM on Irish soil. Of course this represents a huge crisis of faith and theology. The abandonment of the horizons of Vatican II has exacted a terrible price from the Church.
Ann
I have read McGinn as well. Let’s not forget, however, that Meister Eckhart and Marguerite Porete each emerged in this period as well. Both of whom provoked strong attraction and reaction and in the case of Porete a violent one.
We mustn’t paint too broad a brush and dismiss too categorically.
One difference between today and five hundred years ago is the background of capitalism. Maybe I”m too influenced by the scandals of American televangelists, but I would like a closer look not merely at the content of the messages, but at audited financial statements, before coming to a conclusion on any matter like this. Maybe it’s not just capitalism. It’s human nature.
Money changers in the temple. Selling indulgences. Tammy Faye Baker.
Cathleen, I agree that if there are folks out there truly receiving messages from God or the saints, they’re going to have a rough time being heard over the crazies and the craven. Like Oral Roberts who said he saw a giant Jesus who was going to kill him if he didn’t get enough people calling in (and giving donations to his flagging ministry).
I think faith in the elocutionists/visionaries or whatever we’re calling them sometimes requires time to pass. These experiences invite us to study and reflect–as Kathy seems to have done–on whether what has been said stands up to the scrutiny of the Church and fits with what we already know about the message-bringer.
Julian of Norwich’s revelations played–and continues to play–a large part in my own religious development, though it was a long time before I could believe that she wasn’t simply writing an inspired sermon, using a fictional illness and visions as a framework for her theology.
I don’t have the impression, I guess, that we’re that far from God anyway. A good Thomist sees the natural law as a participation in the mind of God, speculative intellect has its ground and goal in God. Grace is a share in God’s own nature.
What does it matter, whether she’s actually communicating with God, if she’s merely saying what’s orthodox?
Well, most people who say what the Church say aren’t claiming to have an unmediated access to the truth.
What she says gains or loses special authority because of her claims to special access. People buy what she sells because of access. Take another look at the website.
In my view no one has a better handle on this phenomena than Robert Orsi. His book “Between heaven and Earth” is a good place to start. However, you slice it Lourdes, medjugorje, Santiago de Compostela, etc. are enormously profitable. They make every tourist brochure. I admire Theresa of Avila but no one is infallible. Pilgrimages have always been big money makers. God is Spirit and Life and s/he is right here. If we want to know Jesus go directly to the Sermon on the Mount and the Magnificat.
But I do not condemn people who flock to these events. They are seeking what the clergy neglects to give. In too many cases.
These phenomena are examples of the enormous lack of leadership in the hierarchy. Parishes are monuments to representation of the hierarchy, most often lacking the spirit of the gospel.
http://www.catholicnews.com/
Perhaps of utmost importance is that pilgrimages and shrines did not appear until the 4th century in Christian history. At the time when Christianity declined. When the church of the martyrs was over and when Christians started to make each other martyrs. With so much corruption and people becoming Christians for political or safety reasons, the need to try to find Christianity elsewhere arose because they knew it was not around them.
The truth is that shrines and pilgrimages depict the emptiness of Christianity. And the poor are certainly not the visitors there.
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:8smRI13FgrgJ:www.amursu.ru/religio/news/Malta_conference.doc+pilgrimages+and+shrines+are+a+fourth+century+phenomenon&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us
Dear Cathleen,
“People buy what she sells because of access. Take another look at the website.”
I did. She sells her books, but there is something different here. She also gives them away for free on the website if you want to download them in .pdf format. Here are links for what she calls the volumes:
http://www.directionforourtimes.com/onlinevolumes.html
Also, here is a link for the Heaven Speaks series of books that talks to all kinds of people like:
Victims of Clerical Abuse, Soldiers, Those with depression, about Stress, Addictions, Suicide, Those who do not know Jesus, financial concerns, divorce, abortion, etc., etc.
http://www.directionforourtimes.com/onlinelibrary.html
Whether the messages are real or inspired, I think if people began to read and meditate on some of these, we would see some improvements. Try just downloading and reading the book on Stress. We would probably all benefit from sitting in front of a Tabernacle in silence with those messages and reflecting on our lives…
Bryan
Here is the first message from the Stress book which can be downloaded for free on her site. How many problems would cease if people took this to heart???
August 9, 2005
Jesus
My children, why do yu hurry so? Why do
you feel you must move so quickly through
your days? This is not the way I intended
the children of God to live. You may tell Me
that you have many things to do. I respond
to you by saying that you are trying to do
too much. You will not be holy if you move
so quickly. I want My beloved apostles to
move more slowly and thoughtfully
through their days. I want you to make
decisions on what I am asking you to do
and what you are busying yourself with
that is not from Me. I want your way of life
to change and I am asking you to make
this change now. In the next week, think
about each activity and decide, with Me, if
it is something I want you to do or something
you want to do. My dearest apostles,
I ask that you begin to remove activities
that do not further My will. I want more
time in silence, as you know. I want more
time with families, without noise blocking
you from each other. I want prayer, yes, but
also conversations that are not hurried
and stressed between husbands and wives,
brothers and sisters, and parents and children.
These are the souls I have decided
you will walk through your life with and
you have obligations to them. If you are too
busy with your own will, you are not seeing
to Mine and you are missing opportunities
both to learn from others and to assist others
in learning about Me. If you do not pay
heed to Me, who will? In order for the
Renewal to come, My beloved apostles must
begin to seek only heaven’s will in their
days. And I am talking to you and calling
you My apostle. Do not look to someone else
or assume I am speaking to others. I am
speaking to you.
Good for her, Bryan. That makes a difference to me.
… so the score here seems to be, Bryan accepts it as genuine and helpful; Professor Kaveny, possibly not :-).
That’s about the way it usually plays out. I’d say, no harm, no foul.
Hans Selye, who coined the word stress and, in 1956, published his book The Stress of Life, would be gratified to know that Heaven has bought into the concept and is offering helpful advice on the topic.
The true identity of “Anne” is an open secret, if you search the web, and even Deal Hudson reveals it in response to comments following his article. She is a writer (author of a young adult novel) and speaker.
Goodness! You can go to http://drbookspan.com/ for the best advice in the world on helping your knees. Bar none. He is losing Billions. He should have a shrine.
Google gives things away for free. So does Microsoft etc. Give me a break. it is just good marketing. The only one who has nothing for free is the Catholic theological Association of America. CTSA They are just simply unconscious
http://drbookspan.com/
Looking at the titles on her website, I have to express some misgivings. Those self identified as afflicted are her audience. I’d be happier if some of the books were addressed to the happily married, loving families, etc.
But then, I don’t like self help books generally. They tend to reinforce labels –why buy a diet book unless you think you are overweight — and offer usually pelagian solutions. Do this, and your life will be better. So I may be more suspicious than others.
If her books go against type, it would be terrific. “You are doing a great job with the gifts God has given you” to the stressed, or other encouragements to gratitude and satisfaction.