part one is here
part three is here
(NOTE FROM CHERYL: I've disabled the ability for comments on this article but do suggest that the lively conversation be taken to Dr. Bowring's site www.twoheartspress.com where Dr. Bowring will be able to more directly answer questions etc. Thanks! Blessings, Cheryl)
Dr. Kelly Bowring is a Catholic theologian, author, and popular speaker. He received his doctorate from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas (Rome) and his licentiate from the Dominican House and the John Paul II Institute (Washington DC) while working at the US Bishops Office. He has a Masters from Franciscan University of Steubenville (Ohio). He has the Church’s mandatum to teach theology. Dr. Bowring has been a dean, chair, and professor of theology at the Graduate School of Theology at St. Charles Seminary, Southern Catholic College, and St. Mary’s College of Ave Maria University. He and his wife, Diana, have eight children and live in Atlanta, GA.
Cheryl: Dr. Bowring, would you please respond to the 7 points Mark Miravalle makes against the Maria Divine Mercy revelations starting with her revelation about the legitimacy of the pope elected after Benedict? (Due to limited space Dr. Bowring’s answers have been edited; for further information please visit Dr. Bowring’s website http://twoheartspress.com/.)
Dr.
Bowring: About Pope Francis, he [Miravalle] claims, “The message directly
contradicts Catholic teaching as to the legitimacy of a validly elected Pope.”
This is simply not true. Pope Paul IV’s Papal Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio teaches that if anyone was a heretic
before the Papal election, he could not be a valid Pope, even if he is
(validly) elected unanimously by the Cardinals. As well, Canon 188.4 (1917 Code
of Canon Law) states that if a cleric (pope, bishop, etc.) becomes a heretic,
he loses his office, without any declaration, by operation of law. While this
does not prove MDM is authentic; it does establish that her message is
plausible and thus, that Miravalle’s assessment is rightly dismissible from the
start.
Cheryl: Miravalle’s
second point that the Maria Divine Mercy contain heresy.
Dr.
Bowring: Miravalle claims the messages
contain “the heresy known as Millenarianism.” It is true that the Church has
condemned the heresy of Millenarianism, a belief that Christ will come again to
reign physically for a thousand years.
But,
in the Book of Revelation (20:1), it does speak of an end-time thousand year
period of peace. This period of “a thousand years” is symbolic, biblical
language for a long period, but not necessarily a literal thousand year period
of time. Christ’s second coming is a “returning” insofar as He will manifest
Himself to this world in a glorious way, will establish a new Eucharistic
Reign, and will bring His Will and His Kingdom to this world is a fuller way
that is spiritual, not physical. The messages of MDM concur as much and thus on
this point remain in good standing.
Cheryl: Miravalle’s
next two points say that the revelations are false because they dismiss the
need for church approval and because the seer remains anonymous. Please speak
to these points.
Dr.
Bowring: The messages are not saying the
Church’s authority is not important, in fact they state the opposite, but that
whether the Church approves them is not important only because these messages
will unfold and occur before the Church has time to assess, evaluate, and approve
them. This does not in any way make the messages themselves false.
It
is commonly known that MDM lives in Ireland and has been in contact with her
Bishop. He knows who she is and what she is reportedly receiving. Given the
seriousness of her messages and the significant influence they are having on
the faithful, it seems obvious that either the Irish Bishops (who have
immediate jurisdiction over validating MDM) or the CDF (who have universal
jurisdiction) should make some clear and public statement in regard to these
messages. For some reason, they have chosen not to do so to date, which allows
for the faithful to continue to read and spread them.
As
of today, MDM’s messages are not condemned by any official Church authority
with jurisdiction to do so, though certainly they have not received Church
recognition either (which is a much more time-delayed process anyway). The fact
that they have not makes it such that the Catholic faithful are permitted to
read and spread these messages, and they are still permitted to do so even
while some Catholic commentators (and even Bishops) have given their own
negative opinion about the messages.
On
the other hand, several of her prophecies have been fulfilled, and her messages
are congruent to the other related legitimate sources of prophecy being given
in these times. So, in summary, at this point, the Church faithful may read and spread MDM’s reported messages
and pray her prayers.
Cheryl: What
about the theological errors that Miravalle mentions?
Dr.
Bowring: If true, theological errors would be enough to unauthenticate MDM in
one swoop. But, Miravalle fails to establish any actual examples of doctrinal
errors. I have examined all the messages and have not found them to establish a
single error in her reported messages.
Cheryl: And then
there’s the issues of the mid-2011 message in which a time-frame was mentioned
but then did not prove true.
Dr.
Bowring: The problem with this point of his evaluation is that it does not
prove an “error” or establish a “falsity.” The phrase “a few months” is
non-specific and thus leaves open the possibility of an undetermined amount of
time. If her messages had said a specific date or moment in time and then that
time passed without the prophecy occurring, then one might be able to propose
that an error has occurred. But, this is not the case here. Additionally, one
must also remember that prophecy has a conditional aspect which includes the
possibility of a divine delay in its fulfillment, especially due to God’s
mercy.
Cheryl:
Something that really caught my attention, especially because of my own
research in the past few years, was Miravalle’s mention of an “absence of the
authentic Christian fruits of spiritual peace, joy, and trust, and charity;
and, in their place, manifestations of greater fear, anxiety, and dominant
negativity.” Please speak to that.
Dr.
Bowring: What about the serious and dramatic prophetic messages of La Salette,
Garabandal, or even Medjugorje (as related to the 10 Secrets)? Would Miravalle
then say the same about these other reported messages? Of course not. The
reported messages of MDM, if they are true, come as the final and thus
understandably most detailed and serious of all of God’s warnings to humanity
about the times we are living in. If they are the last heavenly warnings, as
they claim they are, then it makes sense that they are the most detailed and
serious.
But,
having read all of the messages of MDM myself, I find them while serious to be
precisely contained in the context of “spiritual peace, joy and trust, and
charity.”
Cheryl: I want
to thank you for your generous time and ask that you offer a closing thought to
what I believe is the most controversial—and maybe inflammatory—message from
MDM about the pope elected after Benedict?
Dr.
Bowring: We must be cautious and
continue to discern with prayer and docility to the Church and the Holy Spirit.
Time will make things more clear in this delicate matter, as to whether MDM’s
messages deserve repudiation because she is in doctrinal error, her messages
are inauthentic, or she is eventually rightly condemned by the Church (by those
who have proper jurisdiction to do so officially). Otherwise, her prophecies
will continue to validate themselves as events unfold and they come true.
In
the meantime, ecclesiastical law requires that the faithful must presume we
have a valid Pope, unless the Church’s highest authority formally declares
otherwise (just how they would do this remains unclear as there is no
precedent). So, one may consider the possibility that an “anti-pope” could
potentially come from a valid conclave, and this does not constitute a
false or “heretical” position as a Catholic.
Thus,
it is actually possible to remain faithful to the Magisterium AND consider that
the messages of MDM are authentic, and that the Pope plausibly might be the
false prophet, and even that the Church herself states that this IS at least
possible, and all the while remaining faithful to the Church and to the Pope.
