Problems with the Amsterdam visions and Ida Peerdeman
Ida
Peerdeman, the visionary from
Ida
goes on to relate how: “She was clad in white and wore a sash. She stood with
her arms lowered and the palms of her hands turned outwards toward me. I
thought it must be the Blessed Virgin and that it could not be anyone else. I
then said: ‘Are you Mary?’ She answered: ‘They will call me the Lady, Mother.’”
By this
time she had been joined by the others who heard her repeating what the Vision
had said to her, as the priest remarked: “Lady? Well, I never heard that
before. The Lady!”
Fr
Frehe was right to question such an appellation for Mary, for this title of
“the Lady,” rather than “our Lady,” for the Blessed Virgin, is indeed strange.
Ida then claimed that the Vision indicated with her fingers three numbers,
three, four and five successively, and told her that the five was for the fifth
of May, which was later taken as a prophecy of the date of the end of the war
in
The
second vision happened on
On
On
While
the sentiments of this prayer are admirable, the phrase “who once was Mary,” is
not. And even Ida herself was forced to acknowledge this: “I must admit that
the words ‘who once was Mary’ were very strange indeed. I said to myself
but surely you always are Mary. Afterwards, when I passed on the prayer to Fr.
Frehe, he said: ‘What on earth is this ‘who once was Mary?’ She can’t
have said this. She is and would always be Mary.’ ”
This
was also the view of the ecclesiastical authorities, who refused permission for
this phrase when the prayer was first printed. But apparently, “the Lady,” did
not approve of this and told Ida, “The words ‘who once was Mary’ must remain.
Tell the theologians that I am not satisfied with the change in the prayer.”
Later on, the full text of the prayer was approved, and Ida was then told:
“Tell your bishop that I am satisfied. The text of the prayer is now correct.”
On
Closer
examination of the picture reveals some further problematic details: the
visionary saw the “Lady” standing in the pose of Mary as seen on the Miraculous
Medal, that is with her arms down and palms to the front. She alleged that in
the middle of each hand she could see wounds or scars, from which three “rays”
shone, rays which apparently represented grace, redemption and peace. Ida also
reported that Mary said, “in this era the Father and the Son wish to send Mary,
the Lady of All Nations, as Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.” She was
again instructed to propagate the prayer using “modern methods.”[6]
The
first particular, of course, as pointed out above, is that devotion to “Our
Lady of the Cross,” is specifically forbidden, so there are problems with
having a representation of Mary with wounds in her hands, as if she was
crucified. Secondly, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that what we have here
is a “rival” to the picture painted for Sr Faustina in the thirties. She had
been instructed to have the well-known “Divine Mercy” image of Jesus painted,
the one which has Jesus standing with his right hand raised in blessing, while
his left touched his breast, from which point emerged two large rays, one red,
the other pale, representing blood and water respectively. Thus, instead of
this genuine picture and associated devotion of the Divine Mercy chaplet being
promoted, we have well-meaning, but regrettably misled, persons distributing
pictures of the Lady of All Nations—what better way to muddy the waters and
confuse people?
The call for a new Marian dogma was repeated on
The
new dogma will be the dogma of the Co-Redemptrix. I emphasize ‘
This
passage certainly seems to raise some problems: for one thing, is it credible
that the Blessed Virgin would refer to the Catholic Church as “the Church of
Rome. It makes her sound more like a Protestant. The announcement of the
“coming of the Holy Spirit” also seems rather inexact theologically, or at
least tending to cause confusion, given that the Holy Spirit “came” to the
young Church nearly 2,000 years ago. This exclusive future coming of the Spirit
is indicated as follows: “The Lady of All Peoples has now received the power to
come and drive out Satan. She comes; and it is to announce the Holy Spirit. It
is now, and only now, that the Holy
Spirit is to come upon this earth.”
This
last statement is pure heresy, and contradicts the whole traditional teaching
of the Church that the Holy Spirit “came upon the earth” at the time of
Pentecost. But perhaps in the light of the rise of some of the aberrations
associated with the “Charismatic” movement, it is not without interest.
That
there was ecclesiastical opposition to this idea of a new dogma is apparent
from this message to Ida on
Apart
from the fact that the tone of “Mary” in this passage is hard to associate with
the Mary of the Gospels or of Catholic tradition, it is extraordinarily
difficult to believe that she could possibly have said “Tell that to your
theologians,” a phrase repeated on a number of occasions. And the following
sentence is also replete with theological difficulty: “From my Lord and Master,
the Redeemer received his divinity.” This statement is verging on
heresy, if it is not actually heretical, and indeed it seems to be more akin to
Arianism, the belief that the Son was inferior to the Father, than to orthodox
Catholic belief. Jesus, as the Redeemer and Son of God, did not receive
his divinity from the Father: he is co-equal with the Father from all eternity.
The
fiftieth apparition to Ida took place on
Quite
apart from the above points, the whole tone of many of the messages, as well as
their general “visionary” content, is very suspect. We are presented with a
“Mary” who seems totally at odds with the figure who has revealed herself in
her approved apparitions. Fifty-six visions were claimed by Ida between 1945
and 1959, a period of fourteen years, and both of these figures are contrary to
what we would expect, since, most approved apparitions have been in single
figures, and over quite a short space of time, days, weeks or possibly months,
but certainly not years.
This
series of visions have a repetitive and even bizarre quality, which can only be
fully appreciated by reading them in their entirety, but the following excerpts
and explanations of them will surely make this point clear. There is a
disjointed quality about them, as though they were the ramblings of someone
with mental problems, which clearly differentiates them from the messages given
during the approved apparitions. Again and again, the “Lady” keeps coming back
to the necessity of propagating the picture and the prayer, in a way which
smacks more of desperation and intimidation than of a genuine heavenly intervention.
The
first thing to note about many of these alleged visions, is how closely they
correspond to Msgr Farges’ outline of a false apparition. The idea of the
Vision appearing out of a very bright light is a constantly recurring theme. An
instance of this is the beginning of the twenty-seventh vision which says: “A
bright, a dazzling light preceded the Lady.” The twenty-eighth vision is even
more explicit in this respect: “There was a bright light. From the centre of
the light the Voice was heard. ‘Here I am once more.’ And I saw the Lady
standing in the light.” Similarly, the same pattern is found in the
twenty-ninth vision, (
All of
this is very suspicious, and this view is definitely confirmed by the following
further examples, the first from the thirty-first vision, (
There
is a degree of what might be described as a “liberal” streak in the utterances
of the Lady, as for example in the following quote from the fourth vision (29
August 1945), in which Ida saw the Pope, as she heard: “Broad views, more
socialized. That must be the goal. Different trends of opinion incline toward a
good socialism. That is good, but on the condition that what is done be done
under the direction of the Church.”
Given
the teachings of the various Popes on the dangers associated with “socialism”
it is hard to see how a “good socialism” could possibly be encouraged by Our
Lady.
Or what
about this complaint from the message of the twenty-fourth vision, (
Surely
it is hard to imagine Mary complaining about priests sacrificing themselves to
go to the missions? On the other hand, it is easy to conceive of the devil
having such a grievance.[11]
Another
disturbing aspect of these visions concerns the Lady’s repeated appeals that
the messages be related directly to the Pope, something which is prominent in
the history of false visions and seers. During the forty-first vision, (
Or
again, during the forty-third vision, (
Then
there is the image presented of the Lady as rather an aggressive individual, as
the following passages make clear. For instance, the twentieth vision, (
These
are not the only examples of this sort of thing. The twenty-fifth vision, (
Thus we
have a “Lady” who acts more like a boxer than the Mother of God.
Some of
these messages, though, are merely grotesque, as this example, from the
twenty-third vision, (
Our
Lady putting her foot on
There
is also the question of those parts of the messages which it is claimed are
“prophetic.” The first thing to say about these is that we have no proof that
they were genuine prophecies in the first place, that is we don’t know how
accurately they were set down and at what times. But apart from that, on
examination, these “prophecies” are not so marvelous after all. For example, on
This
seems like a valid prophesy of Vatican II and its aftermath. But it is clear that this could be little
better than an educated guess, or a conjecture of the devil.
Similarly,
in the message of 18-19 February 1958, the Lady apparently informed Ida of the
death of Pope Pius XII, which was to take place in the month of October that
year. This actually took place on 9 October,
but the Pope had been ailing for some time and this prophecy can be quite
easily unexplained as another satanic conjecture. In any case, the next “prophecy” from the
Lady, which follows on from this was clearly wrong. After telling Ida not to be
perturbed by this news, she went on to say: “his successor will promulgate the
dogma.”[16] This is
a clear case of a false prophecy, since John XIII did not do this, thus clearly
indicating that the messages of the Lady of All Nations are false.
There
is also a strong apocalyptic streak to the messages: for example, the Lady is
reported as saying, during the tenth vision, on
All
this reaches something of a climax in the forty-sixth vision, (
The
theme of the necessity of the proclamation of the “dogma” recurs frequently,
and culminates in the following statement, given during the fifty-first vision,
on
This is
all very well, but unfortunately, it flatly contradicts the messages genuinely
given by Our Lady at Fatima, and particularly the principle that peace for the
world will only come following the Triumph of Mary’s Immaculate Heart, as she
made clear on 13 July 1917, when, amongst other things, she told the children
that: “In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will
consecrate
There
was no mention of the necessity of any “dogma” being promulgated at
A later
series of alleged visions involving Ida are claimed for the period from the
late 1950s until the 1980s, the so-called “Eucharistic experiences.” They seem
to follow the same basic pattern as the earlier visions, but they do also have
some strange elements and so it is worth looking at them in more detail.
Certainly, she seems to have seen a very “bright light” around the altar on a
number of occasions while she was in church, and also reported that the Sacred
Host seemed to have become bigger, whilst it was on her tongue, and even come
alive, such that, “it resembled a living fish in its movements.”
And other times she claimed that “living
water” seem to be flowing in her mouth.
On the 31 May 1964, while receiving Holy Communion, she was allegedly
told to: “Go and speak with you Bishop,” and exactly a year later, on 31 May
1965 she claimed that a voice said to her: “Go to Pope Paul and tell him in the
name of the Lady of all Nations: This is the last warning before the end of the
Council. The Church of Rome is in danger of a schism. … Warn your priests. Let them put a stop to those false theories
about the Eucharist, sacraments, doctrine, marriage and family-planning. They are being led astray by the spirit of
untruth—by Satan—and confused by the ideas of modernism. … Do what the Lord has
demanded of you—in sending Me, the Lady or Mother of all Nations. You are the
Pope who has been selected for this work. Let the Nations say the prayer before
my picture and the Holy Spirit will come!”[20]
Once
again we are seeing a characteristic of false apparitions in this direct appeal
to the Pope, to say nothing of the gross incongruity of our Lady speaking of
“family-planning.” In fact the whole tone of the message, with its talk of the
“Church of Rome,” is satanic rather than divine.
On
Again,
it is extremely difficult to believe that this “robotic” type of message can
possibly be genuine, and in general, accepting the
[1] Courtenay Bartholomew, A
Scientist Researches Mary Mother of All Nations, Queenship Publishing
Company,
[2] Bartholomew, A Scientist Researches Mary Mother of All Nations, pp. 176-77.
[3] Ibid., pp. 176-77.
[4] Ibid., pp. 178-79.
[5] Theotokos: A Theological Encyclopedia of the Blessed Virgin Mary, s.v. “Devotions Forbidden.”
[6] Bartholomew, A Scientist Researches Mary Mother of All Nations, pp. 179-80.
[7] Bartholomew, A Scientist Researches Mary Mother of All Nations, p. 181. Emphasis in original. This text, as given in The Messages of the Lady of All Nations, ed. Josef Künzli, (Miriam-Verlag, Jestetten, 1987), p. 80, also uses the phrase “Church of Rome.” Unfortunately, the English translation is not very clear in other respects.
[8] Bartholomew, A Scientist Researches Mary Mother of All Nations, p. 182; Raoul Auclair, The Lady of All Peoples, trans. E. Massecar, (L’Armée de Marie, Inc., Quebec, 1978), pp. 194-95.
[9] Bartholomew, A Scientist Researches Mary Mother of All Nations, pp. 183-84.
[10] Auclair, The Lady of All Peoples, pp. 113, 119, 121, 127, 131.
[11] Auclair, The Lady of All Peoples, p. 48. Regarding this mention of “good socialism,” the alternative translation in, Künzli The Messages of the Lady of All Nations, p. 16, has, “There are various movements showing a trend to socialism, which is good, ...”
[12] Auclair, The Lady of All Peoples, pp. 160, 165, 168.
[13] Ibid., pp. 88, 109.
[14] Ibid., p. 100.
[15] Ibid., p. 158.
[16] Ibid., p. 221.
[17] Ibid., pp. 66, 89, 116, 178. No doubt if there are any followers of the Lady of all Nations still around in 2053, then of course they will claim that she was actually referring to that year!
[18] Ibid.,
p. 196.
[19] Kondor, Fatima in Lucia's own words, p. 162; see also Martins & Fox, Documents on Fatima, p. 402.
[20] Josef
Künzli, Eucharistic Experiences, (Miriam-Verlag,
Jestetten, 1987), pp. 150-59.
[21] Künzli, Eucharistic Experiences, pp. 161-62.