Bringing you the "Good News" of Jesus Christ and His Church While PROMOTING CATHOLIC Apologetic Support groups loyal to the Holy Father and Church's magisterium
Home About
What's New? Resources The Church Family Life Mass and
Ask A Catholic
Knowledge base
AskACatholic Disclaimer
Search the
AskACatholic Database
Donate and
Support our work
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
New Questions
Cool Catholic Videos
About Saints
Disciplines and Practices for distinct Church seasons
Purgatory and Indulgences
About the Holy Mass
About Mary
Searching and Confused
Contemplating becoming a Catholic or Coming home
Homosexual and Gender Issues
Life, Dating, and Family
No Salvation Outside the Church
Sacred Scripture
non-Catholic Cults
Justification and Salvation
The Pope and Papacy
The Sacraments
Relationships and Marriage situations
Specific people, organizations and events
Doctrine and Teachings
Specific Practices
Church Internals
Church History

Kaylie Alioto wrote:

Hi, guys —

I am very stumped after I got into a debate with a Protestant. I will literally copy exactly what she said:

"Some say the first apparition of Mary was in 40 A.D. Mary was supposedly alive, wasn't she? . . . and even so, the apparition of Moses and Elijah can't be the similar to Mary's apparitions. They called it the Transfiguration. It's proof that Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Also, they didn't talk to the Apostles but to Jesus, who is God. You know no one shall see the face of God.

The Bible is very clear. Messages are given to prophets. The ones who carry messages are angels. That's why angel is angel because it means the messenger of the Most High . . . in Hebrew. Jesus is also clear in Revelation that He will not give any new revelation to any human or even angels. Jesus is also very clear in saying:

"If any one called themselves prophet after Messiah/the time after Him then it's the work of the devil." (Matthew 24:4-5, Matthew 24:24-25)

Prophets are those who get angelic messages from God. If children in any apparition meet angels and Mary and receive messages, it makes them like a prophet because they are carrying Heavenly messages. These are things that the Prophets and Jesus clearly said would not happen.

That's why we know Muhammad is definitely a false Prophet because his teachings contradict the Bible. The Revelation is the last revelation and it says this clearly in the Bible. The apparitions of Mary can't be similar to those in the Bible because they would violate the meaning and facts which happened in biblical times.

The point then is the Marian apparitions can't be true because they violate the meaning of the apparition that God gives us in the Bible.

Any apparition that is approved by the (RCC) Roman Catholic Church proves that the Church is accepting something that violates the meaning of the apparition from God in the Scriptures.

  • This results in half truths which are lies and, therefore, how can I believe in RCC if they give half truths?

In fact, based on my research, the first approved apparition was in Guadalupe. It was the Middle Ages, a time when all superstition came alive. If Mary was to be a messenger, she would have been one before the Middle Ages. She would have done it when Jerusalem was attacked by the Romans.

In fact, she didn't so as the Bible says, there will be no more revelation after Biblical revelation . . . which makes Marian apparitions not valid.

I'm really questioning my faith now.


  { How can Marian apparitions approved by the Church be valid if they contradict the Word of God? }

Bob replied:


Don't be confused by your friend, who frankly is wrong in every respect. She is a fundamentalist and has gravely wrong conceptions about:

  • the Bible
  • Revelation, and
  • magisterial authority.

In short, she is ignorant. I mean that in a charitable way. If she knew the truth she would not be spewing such falsities.

Your friend claims to use the Scriptures alone as the source of truth and revelation, yet she rejects the authority by which we have the canon of Scripture. She uses her arguments speciously, such as claiming that Moses and Elijah only spoke to Jesus because he was God.

  • Where does it say that in the Bible? <It doesn't.>

The fact is, Jesus is the Man-God. Yes, fully human in every respect, and what he did on earth was proper to a man. He was a model for us to emulate in every respect. There is not one thing that Jesus did that was not possible for us. Ponder that for a moment.

  • Miracles? He told his disciples they would do even greater ones.
  • Resurrection? — also for us.
  • Suffering and persecution? — also for us.

Yes, Jesus is God, but he was/is a friend to the disciples, a brother to His family, of which we all are part. A Son to a wonderful Mother that He shared with us. He is family. She needs to rethink her whole view of Scripture and the family of God.

Christ gave us His Church. Founded it on an Apostle named especially by Him — Peter. Just like God gave the special persons connected with His Covenants a new name: (Abram-Abraham, Jacob-Israel, Simon-Peter). This new naming gave Peter (and his office) a vital role in the New Covenant. She rejects the Pope, so she rejects Jesus' appointee. There are many other errors she is lost in, because Protestantism has lost the truth about the:

  • Magisterium
  • Mary
  • the Saints, and
  • other 'fundamentals' of the faith.

Marian apparitions have happened in history because God wants them to happen. He wants Mary to have an integral role in salvation history, just as He wants you and I to play a part in His plan.

Your friend will tell you that nothing can be added to the saving work of Christ, and that is true if you look at the intrinsic worth of what Christ accomplished; but the truth is, God deigns to make what His other family members do relevant and important — because it brings Him greater glory!! Think about that.

  • If you had several children, wouldn't you want them each to be succeed?
  • Even if they were handicapped and limited?

God has only one begotten Son, but we are His children by adoption and He therefore wants us to be part of His Plan. We bring Light and Salt to the world. We are channels of grace. We pray for each other. We love, not because we are equal to God, but because God made it possible for us to do so in His Grace, and actually desires us to do so. That said, Mary is the perfect example of this. No one is closer to Jesus (except the Father and Holy Spirit) besides Mary. No one has greater love for all of God's children than the Mother who was entrusted to that family. Mary is our Mother.

Your friend is missing God's greatest gift. She is lost in arguments over what can and cannot be possible in terms of apparitions, and missing the bigger picture. Nothing Mary has ever said in any apparition contradicts the faith because she is with God and knows the truth.

If there are errors, it is when humans have put their own take on things. Your friend dismisses the possibility of apparitions and therefore all the content of what she said.

Her premise is that no more prophetic revelation can take place after the close of the Apostolic Age and the Catholic Church has a similar view. What happens in apparitions are not considered binding revelation but when approved are open to acceptance by the faithful, for they are found not to contradict the faith.

In other words, you are free to believe in them if you want, but you are not bound to believe in them. The Church reviews the content, the integrity, the character, circumstances, and other relevant data and information to discern if the apparitions are really something cloaked in evil.

If the evidence supports authenticity of an apparition(s), the Church may give her approval so the faithful know that they have researched them well enough to find them not a danger to the faith but let's be clear, apparitions are possible, despite what you friend believes based on her misreading of the Bible.

You should study the differences between Catholicism and Fundamentalism.

A good book written almost 30 years ago called Catholicism and Fundamentalism by Karl Keating would be a good start. You will see the distortions and misconceptions of fundamentalists laid out in detail, with hundreds of Scripture quotations to back up our faith. We need to know our faith before we can share it effectively, and not be thrown into confusion and error.

Do some homework and you will be confident, happy, and able to share the faith in charity and truth.


Bob Kirby

Similar issues . . .

[Related posting]|[Related posting]|[Related posting]|[Related posting]|[Related posting]
[Related posting]|[Related posting]|[Related posting]|[Related posting]|[Related posting]

Please report any and all typos or grammatical errors.
Suggestions for this web page and the web site can be sent to Mike Humphrey
© 2012 Panoramic Sites
The Early Church Fathers Church Fathers on the Primacy of Peter. The Early Church Fathers on the Catholic Church and the term Catholic. The Early Church Fathers on the importance of the Roman Catholic Church centered in Rome.