Open hostility to the Divine Mercy devotion

[Stanley]

Paul VI abolished the Index altogether in 1966. The acts of modernists are seen with deep suspicion by Catholics.

So you're deeply suspicious of the act o the modernist Pope John XXIII putting the writings on the Index?

Being suspicious is not an argument, it's a reason to investigate.

[drummerboy]

I believe what puts many trad Catholics off about the Divine Mercy devotion is the manner many NO Catholics just ooze with it.  Everything is Divine Mercy this and that and its the bees-knees.  The prime example that comes to my mind is Drew Mariani on Relevant Radio (I used to catch some of him on the way to work), pretty much everything can use a dash of Divine Mercy with that guy.  Then every day at 3:00 he does the chaplet with his assistant which is oozing with "passion." Then he wrote a book all about DV transforming peoples' lives!  Give it a break dude

[drummerboy]

Although I will say I have found the similarities between the Fatima prayers and the prayers of the Divine Mercy chaplet quite astounding in verbiage and sentiment.  A possible affirmation of the DM devotions heavenly origin?  I have never heard of a connection to, or even that St. Faustina had knowledge of, the Fatima visions and message.

http://static.lighthousecatholicmedia.org/assets/Fatima_Prayers.pdf

https://centrefordivinemercy.org/chaplet-of-divine-mercy

[Reader]

A few years ago, my aging mother went in for what should have been routine surgery but unfortunately, right after she came out to recovery, they discovered the surgeon had nicked an artery and she was bleeding very rapidly internally. It was looking so bleak that after a short time the hospital asked if we wanted the priest, and he was sent in to give last rites. I was praying Divine Mercy constantly as we watched them try to save her (we could see the whole thing; they never moved her out of her recovery room while they worked). All I can say is she somehow made it and nobody, including the doctors and hospital priest, really thought she would. Later that week the priest visited my mom in her room and was astonished, calling her a miracle.

I liked the Divine Mercy Chaplet before that incident, and became a bigger fan afterward.

[coffeeandcigarette]

The title of this thread is misleading. Loyalty to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and loyalty to the eternal teachings of the Church is important and cannot fairly be equated with "open hostility" to a novel devotion based on a private revelation. This is especially when that private revelation emphasizes the wonderfulness of the purported seer.

This is an excerpt from a longer article here:
https://cmri.org/articles-on-the-traditional-catholic-faith/the-divine-mercy-devotion-why-did-the-holy-office-ban-it/

In an article in the National Catholic Reporter of August 30, 2002, the author (John L. Allen, Jr.), referred to the near 20-year ban (from the 1959 decree until the 1978 decree which reversed it) and admitted that there were theological problems with the message: “Officially, the 20-year ban is now attributed to misunderstandings created by a faulty Italian translation of the Diary, but in fact there were serious theological reservations — Faustina’s claim that Jesus had promised a complete remission of sin for certain devotional acts that only the sacraments can offer, for example, or what Vatican evaluators felt to be an excessive focus on Faustina herself (http://tinyurl.com/ncr-online-sr-faustina).

If we examine the authentic promises of the Sacred Heart, we do not find a similar wording, to the effect that all temporal punishment will be remitted for confession and Holy Communion received on a particular day. Of course, our Divine Lord could do just that if He so willed, but the problem is that this promise omits to mention the need for contrition and amendment of life.

Another theological novelty can be found in the writings of Canon Ignacy Rozycki, who had been appointed by Karol Wojtyla to examine the diary of Sr. Faustina. In his enthusiasm, he proclaims this devotion a “second baptism.” In other words, he is endorsing the same idea that on the feast of Divine Mercy one can obtain a complete remission of sins and all punishment due to them, just by performing devotional acts and receiving the sacraments of Penance and the Holy Eucharist. But the terminology of a “second baptism” has always been used by the Church to refer only to the profession of perpetual vows in a religious institute approved by the Church.

Another potential reason for concern can be found in the image of Divine Mercy. As mentioned above, this picture is of Our Lord with His left hand at His heart, the other being elevated toward the viewer. From the Sacred Heart there emanate rays of white (signifying grace) and red (signifying the Blood of redemption). One objection is that the Sacred Heart itself is not seen. The rays emanate from Our Lord’s breast, but without picturing clearly His heart. Another problem is that with many of these images — indeed with the original picture — there are no wounds in Our Lord’s hands and feet, or they are so faint as to be not clearly visible. But we know from Sacred Scripture that Our Lord retained these wounds after His resurrection.

The image we are accustomed to seeing does have wounds that are faintly visible, but it is not the original; it is the work of an artist by the name of Adolf Hyla whose rendition became popular. His work, however, was vigorously rejected by Fr. Sopocka who worked with Sr. Faustina to have the original image painted by the artist Eugene Kazimirowski. Was part of the reason for Fr. Sopocka’s opposition to the Hyla painting the fact that he had posed for the image of Our Lord, dressed in alb and cincture? Be that as it may, the original image does not show the wounds in Our Lord’s hand, feet or side. Pope Pius XII commented on this omission in the case of crucifixes. After lamenting the errors of modern authors who wish to remove attention from the Passion of Christ and instead focus only on the glorified Christ, he states: they “have gone so far as to want to remove from the Churches images of the Divine Redeemer suffering on the cross” (Mediator Dei, 1947, par. 162). I believe these defects in the image (omission of the Sacred Heart and the wounds) are another reason for the suppression of the devotion.

Cardinal Ottaviani was the head of the Holy Office in 1959 when it issued the notification forbidding the distribution of “images and writings that promote devotion to Divine Mercy in the forms proposed by Sister Faustina.”

A third reason, can be found in the wording of the 1937 decree of the Holy Office, warning against devotions which are “useless imitations or corruptions of similar ones which are already legitimately established.” Of course, the devotion to the Sacred Heart immediately comes to mind. Does not devotion to the Sacred Heart emphasize the infinite mercy of our Divine Redeemer? Why then is there a need for another devotion to focus on the divine mercy? Would that not merely serve to take attention away from devotion to the Sacred Heart?

Let us also call to mind how insistently the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus has been promoted by Holy Mother Church. The first Office and Mass to honor the Sacred Heart were written by St. John Eudes in the 17th century. In 1856 Pope Pius IX extended the feast to the entire Church. Pope Leo XIII consecrated the entire human race to the Sacred Heart in 1899, calling it the most important act of his pontificate. Pope Pius XI raised the feast of the Sacred Heart to a double of the first class — the highest rank possible. Pope Pius XII devoted an entire encyclical to this devotion (Haurietis Aquas, published in 1956). Everywhere in the Church there are devotions to the Sacred Heart, First Friday observances, etc. So another devotion to Our Lord, centering entirely on His mercy, would only seem to take attention away from a devotion, already universally recognized and observed, which centers on His love and mercy. Thus it appears to be an unnecessary repetition — a “useless imitation,” to quote the words of the decree.

We may never know for sure the exact reasoning of the consultors of the Holy Office for rejecting this devotion. It could have been for one, two, or all three of the reasons we have given, as well as others unknown to us. Be that as it may, the fact is that the devotion to the Divine Mercy, after having been suppressed by the Holy Office in 1959, is now widely promoted in the Conciliar Church, whereas the solid and divinely-willed devotion to the Sacred Heart is all but forgotten.

Let us then be cautious of new, unapproved devotions. Remove the image of Divine Mercy from your homes, if you have it displayed, and use, rather, the image of the Sacred Heart. Do not pray the chaplet of Divine Mercy or other devotions honoring this particular title. Instead pray the litany of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and other devotions to the Sacred Heart. Finally, be sure to often read and meditate on the Promises of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, for therein you will find all you need to understand the infinite love and mercy of Jesus.

How is the title of this thread "misleading" when this has precisely been the experience I have observed?  This thread has nothing to do with the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

I don't really think you can call it "hostility" though, when we are simply agreeing with/differing to the position of multiple traditional Catholic churchmen. I mean, you wouldn't say "in traditional Catholicism there is open hostility toward abortion" would you? That would be weird. Hostility usually implies an unjust position against something or someone. In this case, it is not only completely legitimate, but obedient.

[andy]

The great thing about Catholicism is that there's a panoply of devotions, and we can pick and choose them as we go.  The Divine Mercy still isn't one of my "go-to" devotions, but I don't dislike it or oppose it anymore. 

Well, I consider this a very naive conclusion (from the first part):

Conclusion: People who dislike the Diary, devotion of the Divine Mercy, and St. Faustina do so not because it actually contains error, but because either 1) it's the “trad” thing to do, or 2) they don't like Bl. John Paul II, and if he liked her, it must be because she and her writings are heretical. Guilt by association. It's just as dishonest for a non-traditional Catholic to say that all who prefer the Tridentine Mass are schismatics based on their experience with Sedevacantists.

[Jayne]

I don't really think you can call it "hostility" though, when we are simply agreeing with/differing to the position of multiple traditional Catholic churchmen. I mean, you wouldn't say "in traditional Catholicism there is open hostility toward abortion" would you? That would be weird.

Abortion is an issue on which virtually all traditional Catholics agree.  It is one of the most evil (if not the most evil) acts possible to human beings.  There is no controversy in regard to this basic principle.  There would be nothing weird about saying  "in traditional Catholicism there is open hostility toward abortion".  That is an accurate description of the situation.

This is the opposite of Divine Mercy devotion.  Traditional Catholics can and do disagree on this question.  Both sides can make reasonable arguments. Sometimes those who disagree with the devotion show hostility to it, treating it as a threat to other worthy devotions.

Hostility usually implies an unjust position against something or someone. In this case, it is not only completely legitimate, but obedient.

I disagree that the word "hostility" usually implies an unjust position.  It refers to strong opposition (from a Latin root meaning enemy) and implies nothing about the reasons for the opposition.

Also, just who are you claiming that those who oppose Divine Mercy devotion are being obedient to?  Both sides of this issue see themselves as obeying Catholic teaching, so that is not a way to distinguish them.

[Miriam_M]

I don't share the animus that some others here have toward either the devotion or to Faustina herself.  I found the Polish movie about her interesting -- the untranslated one, with subtitles.  The script, cast, and direction were excellent.

I think there are rational arguments on both sides for the veracity of her private revelation. But what I find unsettling is what drummerboy mentioned in I think his Reply 31.  Conservative Catholics "took off" with this one, as if this devotion alone surpasses all other devotions and has a power the others do not.  It goes right along with the cultish nature of so much that surrounded the era of JP2 -- the singular adulation of him and his favorites within the Conservative Catholic movement. Such imbalance tends to backfire and divide. 

A confessor once gave me the Chaplet to say as my penance.  Of course I performed my penance immediately, but I  will tell you that I felt awkward when saying it, despite a lack of hostility to it, and when a confessor gives me a rosary to say instead, the effect is quite different.

That may or may not contribute to the discussion.

[drummerboy]

I don't share the animus that some others here have toward either the devotion or to Faustina herself.  I found the Polish movie about her interesting -- the untranslated one, with subtitles.  The script, cast, and direction were excellent.

I think there are rational arguments on both sides for the veracity of her private revelation. But what I find unsettling is what drummerboy mentioned in I think his Reply 31.  Conservative Catholics "took off" with this one, as if this devotion alone surpasses all other devotions and has a power the others do not.  It goes right along with the cultish nature of so much that surrounded the era of JP2 -- the singular adulation of him and his favorites within the Conservative Catholic movement. Such imbalance tends to backfire and divide. 

A confessor once gave me the Chaplet to say as my penance.  Of course I performed my penance immediately, but I  will tell you that I felt awkward when saying it, despite a lack of hostility to it, and when a confessor gives me a rosary to say instead, the effect is quite different.

That may or may not contribute to the discussion.

One problem I have encountered the very few times I have prayed it: what do you meditate on? To be fair, this could be applied to other chaplets, but it seems the Divine Mercy chaplet does little or nothing to arouse sentiments of sorrow for sin or acts of contrition, things normally affiliated with asking God for mercy.

[Jayne]

One problem I have encountered the very few times I have prayed it: what do you meditate on? To be fair, this could be applied to other chaplets, but it seems the Divine Mercy chaplet does little or nothing to arouse sentiments of sorrow for sin or acts of contrition, things normally affiliated with asking God for mercy.

I have not prayed this for a while, but, in the past, I typically meditated on the crucifixion. My person experience was good, in terms of sentiments it aroused.

[Kaesekopf]

The great thing about Catholicism is that there's a panoply of devotions, and we can pick and choose them as we go.  The Divine Mercy still isn't one of my "go-to" devotions, but I don't dislike it or oppose it anymore. 

Well, I consider this a very naive conclusion (from the first part):

Conclusion: People who dislike the Diary, devotion of the Divine Mercy, and St. Faustina do so not because it actually contains error, but because either 1) it's the “trad” thing to do, or 2) they don't like Bl. John Paul II, and if he liked her, it must be because she and her writings are heretical. Guilt by association. It's just as dishonest for a non-traditional Catholic to say that all who prefer the Tridentine Mass are schismatics based on their experience with Sedevacantists.

The great thing about articles is you too can write a response to the author explaining why she is wrong. 

[Kaesekopf]

Conservative Catholics "took off" with this one, as if this devotion alone surpasses all other devotions and has a power the others do not.  It goes right along with the cultish nature of so much that surrounded the era of JP2 -- the singular adulation of him and his favorites within the Conservative Catholic movement. Such imbalance tends to backfire and divide. 

To be fair, it's not like this trend is exclusive to conservative Catholics.  Some trads have the same emphasis and attachment to the rosary. 

[Kaesekopf]

One problem I have encountered the very few times I have prayed it: what do you meditate on? To be fair, this could be applied to other chaplets, but it seems the Divine Mercy chaplet does little or nothing to arouse sentiments of sorrow for sin or acts of contrition, things normally affiliated with asking God for mercy.

I would say the Passion.  The biggest "feature" of the chaplet, to me, is the "For the sake of His Sorrowful Passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world."  If the notion of the Passion doesn't arouse sorrow for sin, I'm not sure what would! 

[queen.saints]

 

A confessor once gave me the Chaplet to say as my penance.  Of course I performed my penance immediately, but I  will tell you that I felt awkward when saying it, despite a lack of hostility to it, and when a confessor gives me a rosary to say instead, the effect is quite different.

Once an FSSP priest gave that to me as a penance, so I just said I don’t know it (true) and he gave me a rosary instead.

[Wyo Wolverine]

I go to Adoration every Friday evening. I find the Divine Mercy and Eucharistic adoration similar, as far as what I'm trying to pray, and contemplate on. The Crucifixion, Eucharist, the sacrifice that Jesus did for me, etc.

BTW I can't recommend Eucharistic Adoration enough. For myself, I find it the most peaceful and distraction-less part of my week. It's one of the beautiful things of being a Catholic. I go to adoration on Friday from 7-8, and am usually by myself in the Holy Presence. I'll pray, mediate, read pious books.... Our church awhile back had 24/7 Adoration, but it closes up at 8pm now.