Catholic Planet
[ Home | Articles | Poetry | Music | Theology | Resources | Links | Contact ]
Discernment of Private Revelation

Claims of Private Revelation: True or False?
An evaluation of the claimed messages and apparitions to Thomas Mac Smith
at Washington, Louisiana, and Ville Platte, and other locations

Return to the Main List

Dr. Thomas McVeigh 'Mac' Smith is a laicized former Catholic priest.
Source of this information, a news article in the online newspaper 'houma today' dated March 11, 2010.

"St. Hilary of Poitiers Church News…. Visting priest: Mac Smith, a laicized priest and healer from Little Rock, Ark., will be at St. Hilary at 4 p.m. March 13. Smith has a healing ministry that takes place every month at the Immaculate Conception Catholic Church in Washington."*

(*This city of Washington is in Louisiana, north of Lafayette, and northeast of New Orleans.)
See also:

At one time, Dr. Thomas "Mac" Smith was a counselor at a Christian Counseling Center in Little Rock, Arkansas. (I don't know if he is still a counselor there or not.)
Sources of this information:

The newsletter (from the group that promotes his claimed private revelation) with messages from June and July of 2008 contains a letter from "Barbara Johnson" dated October 5, 2008, with a mailing address in Ville Platte, Louisiana. In this letter, Mac Smith is referred to as Dr. Thomas McVeigh "Mac" Smith. Barbara Johnson states: "My doctor advised me to seek out Dr. Smith because of his Christian Counseling and he was also known as a Healer, Mystic, etc." She claims that she saw Jesus and Mary speaking to Dr. Smith after a Charismatic Healing Meeting. She then says: "As a Mystic, Visionary, and Healer myself, I know Dr. Smith is very dedicated and his gifts are of God."

Dr. Thomas McVeigh 'Mac' Smith is usually referred to as 'Thomas' in the text of many of the messages. His supporters usually refer to him as 'Mac Smith.' The nickname 'Mac' is apparently derived from his middle name, McVeigh. Mac Smith claims to receive frequent apparitions of the Virgin Mary, and messages from the Virgin Mary, God the Father, and Jesus.

In my humble and pious opinion as a faithful Roman Catholic theologian, the messages and claimed private revelations to Mac Smith contain ideas contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Faith, and cannot be from Heaven. A list of reasons and examples follows.

Worldly language and awkward expressions

The message of March 21, 2009 states: "This just makes my heart beat with joy…. Feast your eyes on experiences of me and my life, the Father's life with us and getting to know you…."

There are numerous similar examples in these message of odd language, awkward phrasings, incorrect grammar, worldly expressions, and run-on incoherent sentences. This type of fault is often found in the messages of false private revelations, but never found in the messages of true private revelations. The Virgin Mary, in true private revelation, speaks from Heaven, where she has the Beatific Vision of God. She cannot speak in any manner that is not both heavenly and perfect. Therefore, any type of flawed and worldly language is indicative of false private revelation.

Notice the awkward grammar in this sentence, attributed to Mary, 21 March 2009: "I am going to talk to you about all the things that you would like to hear and know some things you may have never known before." This type of poor phrasing would not be acceptable even in the writings of a student. It is absurd to claim that the perfect Queen of Heaven would speak in such a flawed manner.

Here is another example from the same message, 21 March 2009: "If they had love in their heart for a god as they see and keep pure with that, they would go to Heaven." Anyone who believes that the Virgin Mary would speak with such confused and faulty manner must have a low opinion of her. Such an obscure and distorted expression of belief is not found even among the least in the kingdom of Heaven, and certainly not in the Queen of Heaven. The Virgin Mary is also called the 'Seat of Wisdom.' But these messages are not wise.

Here is yet another example from the same message: "I worry about the Catholic Church -- it has so much, it has everything God has to give it -- but somehow it seems to be caving in. But don't believe that lie at all. The truth is I and the Heaven Father are just getting started, especially around this area." Notice the worldly language ("caving in," "just getting started," "around this area") and the odd claim that the Virgin Mary is worrying about the Church because it seems to be 'caving in.' Also, Mary would never exalt herself by saying "I and the Heavenly Father," as if she were equal to Him, even putting herself before Him, by saying "I" first. In many of these messages, 'Mary' speaks mainly about herself and the Father, with much less emphasis on Jesus and the Spirit.

Other examples of worldly language:

21 March 2009: "there's a whole cupful of these things…. Now is not a time to worry about who is concerned with what…. This is not being done any way in the world like this."

21 Sept 2009: "They got mad -- but that's no reason to leave the church. It's all jumbled up and it seems so confusing…."

18 July 2009: "You must know the rules of this Armada and it must roll quickly."

There are very many other examples of worldly language as well as odd and awkward phrasings in these messages.

24 Sept 2009: "Do not be concerned and concentrate on the diabolical confusion that is going on in your media or being told to you."

24 Sept 2009: "All the people who are into their idolatry and narcissism are no match for the antichrist who will have more brains in his left thumb than all of them put together."

28 Sept 2009: "The way man's attitude now is around this country and the world in the 'upper echelons', so called, is a godless narcissism, with the powerful seeking solutions to everything in the world…."

Does this really sound to you like the way that the all-perfect Virgin Mary would speak: "more brains in his left thumb…." Would the Queen of Heaven repeatedly speak about 'narcissism', a term from modern psychological theory based on Greek mythology? Would she be unable to express herself in proper grammar and with clarity of expression?

Or do you really think that the Virgin Mary would give a supernatural message from Heaven to tell people to eat popcorn:

18 July 2009: "If you can't fast because of a medical condition you may have a lunch as your main meal then just have popcorn -- this will get your souls out of danger quicker."

So, eating popcorn will get your soul out of danger? What?! The message of 22 June 2008 also mentions popcorn, claiming that eating popcorn for lunch is a type of fasting. These messages are nothing like the true private revelations accepted by the Church, such as Fatima, or La Salette, or Guadalupe, etc.

23 May 2009: "The Father is crazy about you and He won't give over a word an inch to Satan."

The Virgin Mary would never speak in such a worldly manner, using the word 'crazy' to refer to the love of God. Nor would she use confused phrasings like 'give over a word an inch'.

23 May 2009, a message supposedly from God the Father: "So what it all comes around to be is that Mary is the Holy Mother of God also your holy mother. No one needs to have toxic shame - toxic shame kills…. No way he [Satan] will stop the Pope. No way!"

Does this sound like the way that God the Father would speak? Worldly expressions like 'so what it all comes around to be' and 'toxic shame' and 'no way' are indicative of false private revelations because God always speaks in a heavenly manner.

22 May 2009: "There are a lot of angels around here right now. It looks like a dove. All the angels, the legion of angels that are flying are like a big airplane, looks like a big airplane but they are like a dove. Now here comes the Holy Spirit…."

This is not the way that the Virgin Mary would speak about Angels. The Angels do not really have wings, so they are not "flying" "like a big airplane." This is a very simplistic and literalistic description, which shows no insight or wisdom as one would expect of the Virgin Mary. These comments sound like something an uneducated non-Catholic might say, not the holy and wise Blessed Virgin Mary.

Here are another couple of rambling messages with incorrect grammar and odd phrasings:

26 July 2009: "This country has a soil with murder on it: the people that took in slaves, the Indians…and those babies that have been aborted…. And I can assure you if He [God] just backed off of nature's laws we may not even be back for a while."

29 July 2009: "The ground of this country has been paved in blood of centuries. As you well know your Cajun heritage, as you well know the Native American's and the slavery and above all the biggest massacre - abortion."

So these messages refer to the mistreatment of Native Americans, called 'Indians' in the message of the 26th, and then corrected a few days later to 'Native Americans'. These messages equate this mistreatment with slavery, and then equate it to abortion. In addition, the phrasing is odd. The 'sentence' that begins with 'as you well know' is not really a grammatical sentence. It is as if the person giving the message does now know English. This occurs because the most common source of the messages of a false private revelation is fallen angels, who do not have any human language as their native language, and who lack the grace of God to assist them. On the other hand, the Virgin Mary has the Beatific Vision of God, and so she cannot err in the least in all that she says and does. These messages do not have the subtle yet profound wisdom of God. They are like so many other messages of false private revelations.

19 Sept 2009: "Everything is in the Divine plan, everything is moving, and everything is trying to get the glory of Heaven to the middle of the street and the pews of the church, to the bed and the table of the home."

The message starts out fine, saying 'everything is in the Divine plan.' But then it adds the obscure claim that everything is 'moving'. And next the same sentence continues to say that everything is trying to get the glory of Heaven to the street, the pews, the bed, and the table. This type of rambling message, with poorly constructed run-on sentences and incoherent assertions, is typical of false private revelations. True private revelations are marked by simple clear messages from the subtle yet profound wisdom of God. Although true messages, like Sacred Scripture, can sometimes be difficult to understand, the difficulty is found in the profound nature of what is said, and not in poor grammar and incoherent ramblings.

Errors on the nature of true spiritual love

24 Sept 2009: "Love is the perfect sacrifice -- not how much you love but how much you can give yourself is perfect with God."

The sentence starts out find, but then degrades into incoherency. The phrase 'give yourself is perfect with God' does not make any sense. And how much you love God and neighbor is certainly a part of the perfection of love, yet this message casts aside how much love we all have for God.

18 July 2009: "God has blest you with the gift of faith but we have to develop our faith through prayer, study, the Word of God, all vegetables, the greatest fruit of the Holy Spirit -- the commanding love."

Again, the sentence begins well enough, but suddenly we are talking about vegetables?? And 'love' is explained in an odd manner, not as the commandment to love God and neighbor, but as 'the commanding love,' substituting obedience for love. And of course the main problem with this emphasis on obedience is that it is not truly obedience to God, but in effect obedience to these messages of a claimed private revelation. That is why love of God is turned into some type of obedience in these messages, so that listeners will obey a claimed private revelation, rather than truly obeying God or His Church.

24 July 2008: "Tonight I come again to teach you about the love of the will of the Father. "

This message also makes the theological error of separating love of the will of God from the love of God Himself, and the error of setting the obedience above and in opposition to love of God Himself. Also, instead of referring to the will of God, these message only refer to the will of the Father. So love of God becomes the love of only the will of only the Father.

Distortion of Catholic devotion

The Seven Sorrows of the Virgin Mary are traditionally given as her sorrow:

1. at the prophecy of Simeon;
2. at the flight into Egypt;
3. having lost the Holy Child at Jerusalem;
4. meeting Jesus on his way to Calvary;
5. standing at the foot of the Cross;
6. Jesus being taken from the Cross;
7. at the burial of Christ.

This understanding of the seven sorrows is also found in the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy, Principles and Guidelines, n. 136, and in numerous other sources. The seven sorrows are events throughout the life of the Virgin Mary, not only at the Cross.

But the alleged messages to Mac Smith claim that the Seven Sorrows all occurred at the foot of the Cross (message of 21 March 2009).

Distortion of the Relationship of Jesus and Mary

False private revelations often confuse and distort the true relationship between Jesus and Mary. For example, the message of 21 March 2009 portrays Mary as saying: "I am going to talk to you through my son." This is a distortion because it reverses the roles of Jesus and Mary. Every teaching that Mary presents in a true private revelation is from Jesus; Mary leads us to Jesus, by speaking to us words from Him. Mary cannot speak to us through her Son because He is God. The Son of God speaks to us through Mary, and not the other way around. Mary is the mouthpiece of Jesus; but Jesus is not the mouthpiece of the Virgin Mary.

24 Sept 2009: "Believe in my healing through Jesus." Again, Jesus is portrayed as being the conduit through which we receive blessings from Mary. But this claim is the opposite of the truth. Mary is the conduit through which we receive blessings from Jesus, not the other way around.

23 May 2009, supposedly from Jesus: "I have come with my mother to let you know that she and I are one in the flesh. That she stands above every created creature…. We are so separately together in heart because of my divinity inside of me…. She has had some kind of orientation to Heaven."

Jesus and Mary are united in love. All the faithful in Heaven are united with the Most Holy Trinity in love. But the claim that Jesus and Mary are 'one in the flesh' is false. In the Gospels, Jesus uses the expression one flesh, but this refers to marriage: "For this reason, a man shall separate from father and mother, and he shall cling to his wife, and these two shall become one flesh." (Mt 19:5). Jesus and Mary are not married, and so they are not 'one in the flesh'.

Mary is not above all creation, because the human nature of Jesus is a created thing and is greater than the human nature of Mary. Also, the phrase 'created creature' is an odd redundant expression, since all creatures are created; that is what the term creature means.

The statement that Jesus and Mary 'are so separately together in heart because of my divinity inside of me' does not make sense when compared to Catholic teaching. Jesus has two natures, the Divine Nature and His human nature; His Divine Nature is not inside of Himself. The phrase 'so separately together in heart' is nonsense. The claim that Mary 'has had some kind of orientation to Heaven' is incoherent. These messages do not show the subtle yet profound wisdom of God. Instead, they show serious theological error, incoherent claims, and absurdities.

17 May 2009: "but the real food is my Immaculate Heart and the Sacred Heart of my Son. Fill your heart and your stomach with that and nothing can touch you and nothing will."

Jesus spoke about the holy Eucharist, saying: "For my flesh is real food…." (Jn 6:56). But these messages claim that the Hearts of Jesus and Mary are real food, and even that you should fill 'your stomach' with this food of the heart of Mary AND the heart of Jesus. This type of distortion of doctrine is common in false private revelations.

Jesus is the Son of God. The one Divine Person of Jesus has both the Divine Nature and a human nature. His human nature is part of the one Divine Person of Jesus. But Mary is merely human, so her human nature (including her flesh, or body and blood) cannot be one with the flesh, or the body and blood, of Jesus. They are separate persons with separate human natures.

24 July 2008: "The Life Offering prayer and The Most Precious Blood of my Son and of myself and the combining of the Two Hearts all bring submission to the most Holy Trinity."

Devotion to the Precious Blood of Christ is an ancient devotion in the Church. But this devotion is NOT based on any claimed private revelation. But this message calls the Precious Blood "of my Son and of myself." The term myself refers to the Virgin Mary, since this message is supposedly from her. There is no basis in Catholic teaching or devotion for claiming that the Precious Blood is of Jesus AND Mary. Again, it is clear that these messages distort the proper relationship between Jesus and Mary, blurring the distinction between them and their respective roles. The use of the term 'Two Hearts' would not be a problem except for the claim of 'the combining' of the hearts of Jesus and Mary. This error is also seen in the odd assertion, quoted above, that Jesus and Mary are "one in the flesh". This type of substantial distortion of Catholic doctrine on Jesus and Mary is common in false private revelations, and is absent from true private revelations.

23 Oct 2009: "Only by the fire of the Holy Spirit can that happen as it happened to me when I conceived the Son of God into my flesh and my blood which we share."

The flesh and blood of Jesus Christ are part of His human nature as God Incarnate. The flesh and blood of Mary is merely human; she is not God Incarnate. The lack of distinction between the flesh and blood of Christ and that of Mary is a serious doctrinal error.

False claims about the Church

Do you really believe that the Virgin Mary thinks and speaks about the Church in this way:

21 March 2009: "I worry about the Catholic Church -- it has so much, it has everything God has to give it -- but somehow it seems to be caving in."

21 Sept 2009: "If people are not healed in the Catholic Church, it will fall - not the church but the people…. There is going to be bloodshed; there are going to be martyrs because that is the only way it seems that the church can really ever get itself straightened out."

23 July 2008: "It is time for the Catholic Church to become the Catholic Church again."

Remember that Mary is the mother of the Church and also the figure of the Church. Mary is like the Church, and the Church is like Mary. The Church is also the Body of Christ and the Bride of Christ. Do the above quoted messages sound like the words of the Virgin Mary about the one true Church? Not at all. This type of worldly thinking is not found in the Virgin Mary, Queen of Heaven. The Magisterium teaches that the Church is indefectible. The Church is, always has been, and always will be, one holy catholic and Apostolic Church, pure and undefiled, despite the sins of the members of the Church. The Church never ceased to be the Church, and so She does not need to 'become the Catholic Church again.'

27 July 2008: "It is very hard for a man to be a bishop, it is very hard. The higher up you get into the hierarchy of the Catholic Church the greater the responsibility and hence the greater the chance of losing your soul."

The hierarchy of the Church is based on the Sacrament of Holy Orders. A man is promoted from the lowest degree of ordination, deacon, to the next higher degree, priest, to the highest degree, Bishop. Then a Bishop might be promoted to Cardinal, or might be elected Pope (but the degree of ordination remains that of Bishop). Progression through the hierarchy, from deacon to priest to Bishop to Cardinal to Pope, does not cause a person to be more and more in danger of losing his soul. In fact, many past Popes have been canonized or beatified, and a number of Bishops were also Saints, for example: Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo. It is an offense against the Sacrament of Holy Orders, upon which the hierarchy of the Church is firmly based, to say that the higher up you get into the hierarchy, the greater the chance of losing your soul. The true Virgin Mary would never say such a thing about the Church, nor about the Sacrament of Holy Orders.

Denigration of the Intellect

16 July 2009: "You are called to holiness and holiness is the greatest measurement of your love of obedience to the will of God; your heart, your soul, not your intellect. The intellect gives us reasonable powers, which sets us above all the creatures on this earth. The angels are pure intellect except for one free will when they made the decision to go with God or to go with Lucifer, the Red Dragon."

There are a number of problems with the above quote. First, holiness is represented as a type of measurement, rather than as a full cooperation with grace, and love is represented only as love of obedience, rather than as the love of God and neighbor. Second, the gift of the intellect is denigrated. In truth, we love God with our free will because we know God with our intellect. The Beatific Vision of God in Heaven is a direct knowing of God with the intellect, and a full loving of God with the will. Instead, this message casts intellect aside, and represents love as mere obedience; but obedience without use of the intellect is blind obedience. Third, the soul has both the power of the intellect and of the free will, so it is foolish to say that we are called to use our souls but not our intellects. Fourth, angels are pure spirit, not pure intellect; if they were pure intellect they would be nothing other than intellect, and so they would not have free will. Fifth, the holy angels and the fallen angels have always had free will and have always exercised free will, since they were created, even to the present time. It is absurd to claim that angels only ever exercised free will once.

The same message later denigrates "logic, reason, knowledge" by listing these with "power, wealth -- that's no price…." Knowledge is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The Blessed Virgin Mary would never speak in such a disparaging way of knowledge, nor of the gifts of reason or intellect.

Similarly, the message of 17 July 2009 claims that "He [God] does not need our brains" but only our hearts.

And the message of 19 June 2008 says: "I do not need your minds, I need your heart."

Neither Jesus nor Mary would ever speak in this way, since both mind and heart are a gift from God. Jesus Himself said: "You shall love the Lord your God from all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your mind." (Mt 22:37). Therefore, Jesus would not say that He does not need your mind. And the true Virgin Mary only believes and teaches what Christ teaches, so neither would she ask for heart, but not mind.

24 Oct 2009: "This is the biggest problem in the United States -- your intellect."

This message is supposedly from the Virgin Mary. Does the Virgin Mary believe that the biggest problem in the U.S. is our intellect? Is the biggest problem not abortion? Or, speaking on a spiritual level, we could say that the biggest problem is a lack of love, faith, hope, and a lack of prayer. That we are intelligent is certainly not the biggest problem.

Attempt to Manipulate a Beatification

A holy Catholic girl, named Charlene Richard, died in her youth in 1959; her grave is in Louisiana and has been the site of some reported miracles. She has no cause for canonization at the current time (as far as I know). Now there is nothing wrong with some devout Catholics promoting a cause for canonization for her.

However, the messages of Mac Smith repeatedly use her name and her alleged sanctity as a way to promote their false private revelations. He and his group of followers at times have met at her grave. The messages even encourage adherents of Mac Smith to make claims that miracles have occurred and to report them in an attempt to obtain her beatification.

22 May 2009: "I want any miracle out here written and attributed to Charlene. The reason is because Charlene is having an abnormal way of obtaining beatification, so we must bring the evidence."

18 July 2009: "Yesterday at Charlene's grave there were two miracles and these miracles should be reported. From now on I want a sheet passed to everyone that is there to get them to write down either there or at home any type of healing or miracle that they received. We must get her beatified as soon as possible…."

The Virgin Mary would never speak in such a worldly manner, telling people to hand out sheets of paper and saying that we must 'get her beatified.' And if true miracles actually had occurred, she certainly would not need to give a supernatural message in order to tell people that a miracle had occurred.

Neither would she interfere in the Church's process of canonization of an alleged Saint in this way. Currently, there is not even a process of canonization open. Yet this message gives the impression of encouraging people to manipulate this process of the Church's decision-making in order to obtain a desired result. Also, Mary would not declare someone to be a Saint prior to a declaration by the Church.

23 Oct 2009: "But I do say this that she now has more than enough documented miracles to be a Saint, so again I say she is a Saint."

Charlene has not been canonized by the Church, and currently has no cause for canonization. Mary would never precede the Church in judgment, proclaiming someone to be a Saint before the Church even began to consider the case.

Lost Sheep

19 Sept 2009: "Many people are worried today. They are worried because they don't appreciate the lilies of the field; the lilies of the field that Jesus said are so beautiful, so perfectly made that not even Solomon in all his glory could not equal a lily of the field. Yet do you not think that you are more important than a lily, or a lost sheep?"

Notice the grammatical error of a double negative "not even Solomon…could not equal". Errors such as this are not found in the speech of the perfect Virgin Mary; her words are wise and are without errors of any kind.

More importantly, the above quote typifies a common feature in false private revelation. A message takes one or more verses from Scripture and plays with the wording, making changes and combining elements of different verses in various ways. But the combination and the changes either do not make any theological sense, or they contradict the passages from which they are drawn.

The messages starts with an assertion that many people today are worried; true enough. But are people worried because they don't appreciate lilies? Not at all. Jesus used the example of the lilies to teach us that we should not worry about clothing, and the example of the birds to teach us that we should not worry about food. It does not make sense to say that people are worried in general because they don't appreciate lilies; this application of that verse is nonsensical. The message further misinterprets the example of lilies by speaking as if the lilies were being compared to Solomon, when in fact Jesus was comparing the lilies to the clothing and adornment of Solomon, not to the man, not to the glory of his virtue and wisdom, not to the glory of his kingdom. Saying that Solomon, who was a figure of Christ and of the Church, was less than a lily is theologically false. Jesus was speaking about clothing, not about the person of Solomon. And any individual human person is greater than any flower.

The message then ends by trying to combine the parable of Christ about lost sheep with the parable in which lilies and birds teach us not to worry about clothing and food. This combination does not make sense. Jesus was not using lilies as an example to say which is more important, a man or a flower. Neither did he use lost sheep as an example in order to say that we are more important than lost sheep. This message shows a profound lack of understanding of Sacred Scripture, and so this message cannot be from the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Lack of Knowledge about the Future

In a number of places in various messages, Mary is portrayed as speaking about the future as if she does not know what will happen, or as if God Himself does not know or has not decided what will happen. The true Virgin Mary in Heaven has the Beatific Vision of God, and so she cannot be ignorant of any truth, even about future events. And God is all-knowing; it is never true that God does not know or has not decided what will happen in the future. God knows the whole future with absolute certitude, and to claim otherwise is to deny that God is all-knowing. Although we each have free will, God knows all of our future free will decisions with absolute certitude.

25 Sept 2009: "There will be a war. This war can be reduced or eliminated through prayer."

This type of prediction cannot be wrong. If there is a war, it is claimed as a fulfillment of this prediction. If there is no war, then it is claimed that the war was eliminated by prayer. But the problem here is not the power of prayer, but the portrayal of Mary as if she does not know what will happen. There are other passages that speak about the future with an ignorance and uncertainty that is incompatible with the Beatific Vision of God.

25 Sept 2009: "He [the antichrist] may not come for hundreds of years, but that's not important."

21 Sept 2009: "If people are not healed in the Catholic Church it will fall - not the church but the people."

16 July 2009: "The next seven years -- if something doesn't happen by then -- will be of the utmost importance to the salvation plan of God the Father. God the Father's mercy is so great that He is waiting as long as He can for the most evil souls on this earth to change their wills to Him."

These messages and others speak as if Mary does not know the future, and they even speak as if God does not know the future. But the Church teaches that God is all-knowing and that Mary has the Beatific Vision of God in Heaven. The Beatific Vision allows all of the faithful in Heaven to know future events with certitude.

25 Sept 2009: "Do not listen to people who say they know the day the world is going to end. Not even my Son, the Son of God knows that, only the Father. As a matter of fact only the Father now knows anything significantly that is going to happen…."

28 Sept 2009, after speaking about the antichrist: "Of course, this may not happen for 500 years. We in heaven never ask God 'when?' Not even Jesus asks God the Father 'when?' Even He said He didn't know."

Jesus said that no one knows the day or the hour of His Return, not even the Son, but only the Father (Mt 24:36). He said this because His human mind is finite, and does not contain all knowledge. Jesus is all-knowing in His infinite Divine Nature, but not in His finite human mind. But the above message contains serious theological errors. First, it is not true that the Son and the Spirit do not know the day and hour of the Return of Jesus. All Three Persons have the same Divine Nature, so it is not possible that any one Person knows something that the other Persons do not know. If that were true, then only the Father would be all-knowing, and only the Father would be God. For God is all-knowing. Since the Son and the Spirit are co-equal with the Father in Divinity, and since the Three Persons are the One Divine Nature, they all have the same knowledge. Second, the claim that only the Father knows the various significant future events that are going to occur is false for the same reason. This claim goes beyond a mere misunderstanding of the words of Jesus in Matthew 24:36, to boldly assert the heresy that the Son and the Spirit are lacking in knowledge of many different significant future events. This claim is a heresy because it implies that the Son and the Spirit are not all-knowing.

Bizarre Conspiracy Theories

25 Sept 2009: "Now you are seeing an army of them all coming together for power: the illuminati, the masons, the one world order, the satanists, The mafia. You may be surprised that I know these terms."

28 Sept 2009: "The masons, the illuminati, the one world order, all these organizations that have been set up through time, come together to form a god."

17 May 2009: "This is almost an unforgivable sin, because the people who are very much involved in this - from the Satanic classes, the Masons, the One World Order, the Illuminati - have nothing on their minds but owning people and souls…."

The masons (or freemasons) were a pseudo-religious organization of stone workers whose political power briefly threatened the Church in Europe a few hundred years ago. Currently, this group has little or no power. Some true messages of the Virgin Mary (such as to Fr. Gobbi) use the term 'masons' as a figure of speech, representing any persons who wish to chisel away at the stones of the Church, i.e. the teachings of the Church. But any claimed messages that speak of masons as a literal organization, one that is supposedly threatening the Church at the present time, are baseless conspiracy theories from false private revelations.

The terms 'illuminati' also refers to a conspiracy theory. A few centuries ago, there was a small secret organization called the illuminati, but they never attained much power. The current use of the term is baseless; there is no powerful group called the Illuminati that is threatening to harm the Church or to take over the world.

The term 'one world order' is also often found in false private revelations, and like the other terms mentioned above is basically a reference to a conspiracy theory. A reasonable person might use a similar term to criticize modern social trends, which tend to take root and spread worldwide. But as the term is used in false private revelations, it refers to a literal conspiracy of a supposed small secret powerful group, always portrayed as if they were about to take over the world. This type of claim is baseless and unreasonable. This idea has no place in the Catholic Christian faith, nor in the minds of any reasonable persons.

As if the use of these terms was not sufficiently unreasonable, this message takes the same conspiracy theory to even greater heights of absurdity, claiming that the illuminati, the masons, the one world order, Satanists, and the mafia are all working together, as one organization. Do you really believe that this type of message is consistent with the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Do you really believe that this type of message could be from God or Mary or Heaven at all?

The Path to Salvation

28 Sept 2009: "Be part of my heart, the private way to salvation decreed by God the Father…. I ask you to please seek out the Armada as a way of triumphant prayer as a community. This has been given to me by God the Father with His full authority to implement all over the world."

The path to salvation is not private, but public. The Church offers salvation, publicly, to all persons who are willing to walk the path.

The above quote also typifies a problem throughout these messages. Mary is portrayed as speaking mainly about herself, and about the Father. She says that God the Father gave to her, with His full authority; she does not mention the Son or the Spirit. Throughout these messages, the Son and the Spirit are mentioned much less often than Mary and the Father. 'Mary' also speaks about the group formed around this particular claimed private revelation more than she speaks about Christ. The group is exalted as if it were very important; this approach, puffing up the ego of adherents, is common in false private revelations. Finally, it is also common for a false private revelation to present its messages as revealing a special path to salvation, found only in private revelation. But this approach is contrary to the teaching of the Church that private revelation is never essential to salvation (CCC, n. 67).

False claims about the tribulation

The message of 21 Sept 2009 claims that the Virgin Mary said: "The apocalypse can last 200 years or it can last 2 minutes and I told everyone there as I tell you now don't be concerned where you were breathing yesterday or tomorrow if you and your conscience are breathing right now, that is where your last breath will go before the throne of God."

First, notice the odd, rambling, and somewhat incoherent nature of this sentence. This message does not have the subtle yet profound wisdom of the Virgin Mary. Second, the tribulation (which is also called the apocalypse) is described in detail in Sacred Scripture: "And they shall trample upon the Holy City for forty-two months. And I will present my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy for one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth." (Rev 11:2-3). If the apocalypse lasted for 2 minutes, or for any time shorter than stated in Scripture, then Scripture would be false; this is not possible. The message quoted above contradicts Sacred Scripture by claiming that the apocalypse can be shorter than foretold by God's infallible Sacred Scripture. The same message also implies that God does not know how long the apocalypse will last. To the contrary, God is all-knowing; He knows the whole future with absolute certainty. And the true Virgin Mary in Heaven, who has the Beatific Vision of God, also knows the future. She would not say that the apocalypse could be 200 years or 2 minutes.

14 Jan 2009: "Remember everything that is contained in Scripture must be fulfilled itself before we talk about end times and those kinds of subjects."

This claim is false because Scripture itself speaks about the end times in many passages. So it is self-contradictory to claim that everything contained in Scripture, which includes the end times, must be fulfilled before we can talk about the end times. Also, Jesus Himself spoke about the end times in His eschatological discourse (Mt 24, Mk 13, Lk 21). So whoever says that we cannot talk about the end times yet is telling people to ignore what Christ Himself taught in the Gospels.

One of the adherents and promoters of the claimed private revelation to Mac Smith, named Sheila Miller, writes the following:

"If you read Revelation 13, you will realize it is speaking of our present day government. The creature being our President that everyone is worshiping; the seven heads being the different organizations such as the United Nations and others. Obviously, we cannot rise up and fight the government physically but Our Lady has formed this Armada to fight spiritually. Just as in Revelation 13 the creature received his power from the dragon, so has the present day creature and we know who the dragon is." (from the newsletter of Mac Smith with the April, May, and June messages of 2009)

The 13th chapter of Revelation is about the Antichrist and his kingdom. The kingdom is the beast with seven heads and ten horns. The Antichrist is one of the seven heads. The dragon is Satan.

[Revelation 13]
{13:1} And I saw a beast ascending from the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon its horns were ten diadems, and upon its heads were names of blasphemy.
{13:2} And the beast that I saw was similar to a leopard, and its feet were like the feet of a bear, and its mouth was like the mouth of a lion. And the dragon gave his own power and great authority to it.
{13:3} And I saw that one of its heads seemed to be slain unto death, but his deadly wound was healed. And the entire world was in wonder following the beast.
{13:4} And they worshiped the dragon, who gave authority to the beast. And they worshiped the beast, saying: "Who is like the beast? And who would be able to fight with it?"

This same chapter also contains the well-known verse about the number 666, which represents the Antichrist.
See my article: The Antichrist is Not in the World Today

The interpretation given to chapter 13 of Revelation by Sheila is false. It is absurd to claim that President Obama is the 'creature,' by which term she obviously means the beast of revelation. The Saints have understood the beast with seven heads and ten horns to be the kingdom of the Antichrist (e.g. St. Irenaeus, see the article link above). The term 'the beast' is also used in Revelation to refer to the ruler of that kingdom, the Antichrist (Rev 19:19-20). It is not true that President Obama is being worshiped by anyone. Neither is it true that the Antichrist is in the world today. So it is foolish to claim that the beast, which is the kingdom of the Antichrist, is now in the world. Also, the events of Revelation 13 occur after the earlier events of Revelation, very severe events of the tribulation, which have not occurred yet. So Revelation 13 cannot be referring to the present time. And although we might criticize the United Nations for some of its failures or misguided policies, it is a ridiculous exaggeration to claim that the U.N. is part of the beast of revelation. Only a person with a profound ignorance of Roman Catholic eschatology could make such a baseless and ridiculous set of claims.

The messages of Mac Smith sometimes agree with the errors expressed by Sheila above, and sometimes contradict her. Several of the messages say that the antichrist has not arrived yet, and that the time of the tribulation has not begun yet. Sheila's claim that now is the time of Revelation 13 necessarily implies that we are in the midst of the tribulation, in its last part. The message of 11 June 2009 would seem to agree, stating: "I told you to look into the book of Matthew 24, Revelation 12, 13, & 14; we are now in that time. How long that will be I do not know -- only the Father knows." However, other messages make the contradictory claim that the antichrist is not in the world yet, and that he might not arrive for hundreds of years.

25 Sept 2009: "He [the antichrist] may not come for hundreds of years, but that's not important."

28 Sept 2009: "The formation of this god who will be the antichrist, who is not here yet…. Of course, this may not happen for 500 years."

Other messages also state that the antichrist has not yet arrived. But the claim that we are now in the time period described in Revelation 12, 13, 14, would imply, if it were true, that the antichrist has arrived. It is contradictory to say that the antichrist's kingdom has arrived, and even to claim that the world is worshiping the beast, and yet to say that there is no antichrist yet. And it is absurd to say both that the events of Revelation 12, 13, 14 are now unfolding, but that the antichrist will not arrive for maybe 500 years.

The so-called Soaking Prayer

17 July 2009: "To teach them about our souls - how our souls can pray and see and hear and feel - how the Holy Spirit can come down all the way through a person's body through their mind to the very depth of their soul through soaking prayer then that graces comes back up through the body to be healed."

The teaching of the Catholic Faith is that the Holy Spirit directly affects our souls; this direct affect on the soul is called grace. The claim that the Holy Spirit gets to our souls by going through the body, then through the mind, finally to reach the soul is contrary to Catholic teaching. And the claim that graces have to somehow move back up through the body is similarly false and absurd. Also, God effects grace in the soul directly. If God were to heal the body miraculously, that effect would not be grace.

This so-called soaking prayer was allegedly given to Mac Smith in his claimed private revelations. It is described as if it were a Sacrament:
(The following quotes were taken from the newsletter containing messages from April, May, and June.)

"It is an annointing [sic]…. In Baptism, we became Christians. In Confirmation we became apostles. After Jesus ascended into heaven, the apostles had a hunger for souls. Only after Pentecost could the apostles interpret the mind of God. Everything became clear. When we receive the laying on of hands in soaking prayer, we become empowered to pass the anointing on to others…. We are the burros that carry the H. S. to others…."

There are a number of serious problems with the above quoted claims. First, it is sacrilegious to refer to the Holy Spirit as "the H. S." Second, the Holy Spirit does not need to be carried to others as if on a burro (a type of donkey). We cooperate with the graces we receive from the Holy Spirit in works of prayer, self-denial, and mercy toward others. We do not carry the Holy Spirit as if He were a burden carried by a donkey. Third, the above quoted message attempts to disassociate the event of Pentecost from the Sacrament of Confirmation, and to claim that 'soaking prayer,' nor Confirmation, is a continuation of Pentecost. The Church teaches otherwise:

1288 "From that time on the apostles, in fulfillment of Christ's will, imparted to the newly baptized by the laying on of hands the gift of the Spirit that completes the grace of Baptism. For this reason in the Letter to the Hebrews the doctrine concerning Baptism and the laying on of hands is listed among the first elements of Christian instruction. The imposition of hands is rightly recognized by the Catholic tradition as the origin of the sacrament of Confirmation, which in a certain way perpetuates the grace of Pentecost in the Church." (Catechism of the Catholic Church quoting Pope Paul VI).

Fourth, the laying on of hands is a part of the Sacrament of Confirmation, and of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. In particular, the laying on of hands of the Sacrament of Holy Orders empowers the ordained priest, and especially the ordained Bishop, to perform the laying on of hands on other persons. But the so-called 'soaking prayer' is presented as if it were a Sacrament. It is received by the laying on of hands, like Confirmation and Holy Orders. It is said to be associated with, and to be a continuation of, Pentecost -- which is correct to say about Confirmation, but not about a form of prayer from a private revelation. It is said that you can only receive the ability of 'soaking prayer' from the laying on of hands from someone else, which again makes it seem like the Sacrament of Holy Orders, which can only be received from a Bishop who himself previously received the laying on of hands in the Sacrament of Holy Orders. This Sacrament began with Christ; He Himself established the Sacrament of Holy Orders, transmitted with the laying on of hands. But who established the laying on of hands of 'soaking prayer'? It was not Christ, and it was not the Church. This idea is solely found in claimed private revelation, and not in Tradition or Scripture or Magisterium. Who performed the laying on of hands on Mac Smith so that he might pass it on to others? No one. It is an empty gesture, a false Sacrament, a lie to make him and his claimed private revelation seem different and important.

Fifth, it is absurd to claim that a form of prayer, from a private revelation almost 2000 years after Pentecost, is somehow now a continuation of Pentecost. The section that says: "Only after Pentecost could the apostles interpret the mind of God. Everything became clear. When we receive the laying on of hands in soaking prayer…." implies that persons need soaking prayer to understand the Christian Faith. Yet it is a new form of prayer. Was the Church without understanding until 'soaking prayer' came alone? Or is the Church founded on private revelation, so that a form of prayer from private revelation is the way to understand and interpret the Faith? Only a foolish person would believe such claims.

But there are still more problems with this 'soaking prayer.'

It is described in worldly language, which could not possibly come from Jesus or Mary. More importantly, the description of the way that this prayer supposedly works is contrary to a proper understanding of the grace of God.

"It goes through a person like a laser. It is an infusion that goes through the brain, through the whole body, into the soul. It keeps going and going through the person."

Neither Jesus or Mary would compare prayer to a laser; this is worldly language. More importantly, true prayer is an act of the free will and intellect, a knowing choice, in cooperation with grace. Grace is the direct effect on the soul of the presence of God. So it is not true that grace must go through the brain, and through the body, to get to the soul. This type of claim shows a very poor understanding of grace and of the human person.

"Soaking prayer is like an IV - drop by drop going into the body that you can't see…."

Prayer is not like in IV (intravenous fluid) because prayer is active; it is a knowing free choice in cooperation with grace. But an IV drip is something that you receive passively, without doing anything. The description of soaking prayer shows a poor understanding of the nature of prayer itself. The concept of free will in cooperation with grace is absent from this description.

"The Healing Spirit descends and transmits healing grace and life through the brain and then the self."

All Christians who are in a state of sanctifying grace have the presence of the Holy Spirit within them. There is no need for the Holy Spirit to descend each time that we need actual grace; for the Spirit of God dwells within us. But this so-called soaking prayer is described as if there were no sanctifying grace, and no continual presence of the Spirit. Also, it is foolish to claim that grace is transmitted through the brain. Grace occurs in our souls because we have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit gives our souls grace directly, not through the brain, not through the body.

False Claim about the Three Days of Darkness

18 May 2009: "It's good to store up food but during these 3 days of darkness you won't want to eat, you won't need to eat because all that there will be is Heaven on Earth. I am not saying that it is going to happen now but I do believe that this thinking needs to be corrected."

Again, notice that 'Mary' shows complete ignorance about the future. The true Blessed Virgin Mary has the Beatific Vision of God, and so she has knowledge directly from God, including knowledge of His plan for the future. But these messages show no such knowledge at all.

Concerning the Three Days of Darkness predicted by many of the Saints and mystics of the Church, none of these holy persons have said that we will not need to eat. Padre Pio, who is now a canonized Saint, received a private revelation from God about the Three Days of Darkness:

"Pray with outstretched arms, or prostrate on the ground, in order that many souls may be saved. Do not go outside the house. Provide yourself with sufficient food. The powers of nature shall be moved and a rain of fire shall make people tremble with fear. Have courage! I am in the midst of you."

Notice that this private revelation to Saint Pio instructs people to "Provide yourself with sufficient food." But the message to Mac Smith say the opposite, even claiming that we will not need to eat at all. Whom are you going to believe, Saint Pio or Mac Smith?

Furthermore, Padre Pio, with all the Saints and mystics of the Church who have ever spoken on this subject, describes those three days as very terrible, as if Hell has been unleashed on earth. Here is another quote from Saint Pio about the Three Days of Darkness:

"They shall pray incessantly, and they shall not be disappointed in Me. I shall gather My elect. Hell will believe itself to be in possession of the entire earth, but I shall reclaim it."

The idea that those three days of darkness are 'Heaven on Earth' is contrary to what all of the Saints and mystics have taught.

False Messages attributed to the Father

A message supposedly from God the Father says: "I Am the Lord your God, no other gods come before Me." This is a badly worded rephrasing of the Scripture passage: "I am the Lord your God, who led you away from the land of Egypt, from the house of servitude. You shall not have strange gods in my sight." (Deut 5:6-7). When it is rephrased as 'no other gods come before Me,' it sounds as if there are other gods, but they just can't go before God the Father. Our true Father in Heaven would never make such a mistake. And there are other obvious errors in the same message.

21 June 2008: "I will be coming here until My plan has been fulfilled. I will be coming to each place that there is an apparition. If these apparitions are not allowed to be heard aloud I will not come to that place."

God the Father is everywhere. He does not go to one place, and then not go to another place. The omnipresence of God is one of the most basic teachings of the Christian Faith. And yet this message portrays God the Father as if He were not everywhere.

This message is from a fallen angel, pretending to be God the Father. The fallen angel will go to one place, but not to another place, depending on whether or not his false apparitions are accepted.

21 June 2008: "I love every soul, even Lucifer, but he made his choice. He wanted to be God, like so many people do in politics and economics in this country. I AM GOD!"

Do you really think that God the Father would become angry and shout "I AM GOD!" ?? This is not the way that our true Father in Heaven speaks or acts. Also, neither holy angels, nor fallen angels, have souls; angels are spirit. The word soul only refers to created persons who have a body and a soul; the soul is the 'form' of the body. The Father would not make such a basic theological error as to claim that angels have souls. Neither would the Father give a supernatural apparition and message in order to proclaim that He loves Lucifer (Satan). The fallen angel who gave this false message 'loves' Satan. Also, it is an extreme exaggeration to compare the fall of the angels, by which a very large number of angels became devils, to the sins of politics and economics.

The closing of the message also does not make sense, since it portrays the Father as giving a blessing "in the name of Myself, My Son, and The Holy Spirit." God the Father does not need to give a blessing by invoking Himself and the other Persons of the Trinity in this way.

All of the above errors indicate that this message is not from God the Father, but from a fallen angel. And, in my opinion, this is the source of all the messages to Mac Smith: fallen angels pretending to be Mary, and the Father, and Jesus. Fallen angels are also the source of the various false signs and wonders surrounding these claimed private revelations, such as various lights and images that are seen.

Now read this next message and ask yourself if God the Father would speak in such a disjointed an odd manner:

26 July 2008: "I am you Eternal Father. I embrace this whole area with my arms. I have created every life that exist, that has existed and that will exist. But when you come to the type of healing that you will get here and other places where my son goes he will be sitting down. I could heal him to stand up but he sits down and he is just now realizing that's Me sitting in the chair of mercy. When you come here you come to the throne of God."

The whole section about 'my son' apparently refers to Mac Smith, not to Jesus. So Mac Smith is the one sitting down, and then the Father supposedly says that Mac Smith is "just now realizing that's Me sitting in the chair of mercy." Does that not imply that Mac Smith is the Father? But if 'my son' refers to Jesus, it still makes no sense, since Jesus cannot 'just now realize' anything. Jesus is God, and God is all-knowing.

Also, in a number of these messages 'the Father' speaks as if he alone were God, as in this next message:

27 July 2008: "I am your Father. I am the only God."

But the Father is only one Person of the Three Persons who are God.
Then the same message takes the statement of God to Moses in Sacred Scripture:

{3:14} God said to Moses, "I AM WHO AM." He said: "Thus shall you say to the sons of Israel: 'HE WHO IS has sent me to you.' "

and badly rephrases it, into an incoherent expression, as: "I AM that I AM. I am always AM." This rephrasing is theologically and grammatically incoherent.

Other odd claims

In one message, 'Mary' claims that heaven has 'new dimensions'.

16 June 2008: "because of the new dimensions of Heaven I can stand beside all of you at one time."

There is nothing like this idea in Tradition or Scripture or Magisterium, and private revelation cannot add any new truths on faith or morals to the Sacred Deposit of Faith. Therefore, this cannot be true. Mary does not appear in true private revelations in order to reveal truths not found in Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, or the teachings of the Magisterium. In true private revelations, Mary only reinforces what is already taught. Not so in this claimed private revelation, where all manner of new teachings, some very bizarre, are supposedly taught by Mary.

In the same message, 'Mary' suggests taking some flower petals, blessed by this claimed private revelation, and drinking it.

16 June 2008: "Once in awhile put a petal of the rose into your coffee or tea and drink it. It may even heal something that you don't know needs to be healed."

The reader is advised that some types of flowers are poisonous. And it is not the practice of Catholic Christians to eat rose petals to obtain healing. For healing, Catholic Christians have recourse to doctors and medicine, as well as to prayer and the Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick. Eating flower petals is not the path to the healing of anything. Do not follow this advice.

21 July 2008: "I can say that the Light is the only thing that God sees in this darkness."

To the contrary, God is all knowing and all seeing.

19 Oct 2009: "In this time, I know, of financial crisis, miracles will happen to families. There is no one who has more money than my Father. He is very wealthy and He is willing to give you these things."

Here God the Father is described as being very wealthy. Does this refer, perhaps, to some type of spiritual 'wealth'? No, it is literal: "There is no one who has more money than my Father." Now I ask you, do you really believe that Jesus or Mary would ever describe God the Father as having more money than anyone else? This message is preying on people who are in a financial crisis, encouraging them to believe in a false private revelation because of the claim that the God the Father has more money than anyone and that He will give them some money. But here is what Sacred Scripture says about money:

{10:23} And Jesus, looking around, said to his disciples, "How difficult it is for those who have riches to enter into the kingdom of God!"
{10:24} And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus, answering again, said to them: "Little sons, how difficult it is for those who trust in money to enter into the kingdom of God!

{16:13} No servant is able to serve two lords. For either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will cling to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon."
{16:14} But the Pharisees, who were greedy, were listening to all these things. And they ridiculed him.

Theological Error on Hell

24 July 2008: "When I say war I don't mean war between nations, I mean war between Heaven and Hell."

Hell is a place of punishment prepared by God for the devil and his angels. Hell is like a prison, and the devils are prisoners, not wardens or guards. There is never any war or battle between Heaven and Hell because both are places created by God, the one place for reward, and the other place for punishment. Jesus said: "Then he shall also say, to those who will be on his left: 'Depart from me, you accursed ones, into the eternal fire, which was prepared for the devil and his angels.' " (Mt 25:41) Jesus even visited Hell as well as Purgatory, before He opened the gates of Heaven, between His death and Resurrection. All these places are created and controlled by God: Heaven, Purgatory, Hell.

Misuse of an Approved Devotion

These messages frequently mention the devotion to the Most Precious Blood of Christ. However, the messages use this holy, ancient, approved devotion in order to promote an unapproved claimed private revelation. The messages also distort this devotion. In one message, as previously noted, the Precious Blood is said to be of Jesus AND of Mary. In another message, this claim is made:

27 July 2008: "Now is the time for the Precious Blood to come upon this world. Now is the time the most Precious Blood will be sacrificed in this world."

The Precious Blood of Jesus was shed on the Cross, in order to obtain our salvation. The claim that 'now is the time' does not make sense, since it was nearly 2000 years ago that Jesus shed His Precious Blood. And His Precious Body and Blood have been in the world, as the most holy Eucharist, since that time. There is no new event that is needed for His Precious Blood to arrive in the world; His Body and Blood has already arrived by the Incarnation, and the Crucifixion, and the Eucharist. The sacrifice that gained our salvation already occurred on the Cross, and that sacrifice is also found in the sacrifice of the Mass. No other sacrifice of the Precious Blood is needed. Private revelation is not needed for salvation. And true devotion to the Precious Blood is not dependent on any claimed private revelation.

Association with another false private revelation

The claimed private revelation to Barnabas Nwoye (of Nigeria) is similar to the claimed private revelation to Mac Smith in that both attempt to convince people that a set of alleged apparitions and messages are true by promoting the Precious Blood of Christ. Barnabas' messages are promoted in a deceitful manner, under the guise of promoting devotion to the Precious Blood of Christ. When a leader in the Church agrees that devotion to the Precious Blood of Christ is a good and holy devotion, which of course it is, they treat this approval for the devotion as if it implied approval for the claimed private revelation to Barnabas. No such approval has been given by the local Bishop, nor by the Holy See. A Bishop did give his approval only to two simple prayers associated with this devotion. And now the promoters of these alleged apparitions are falsely claiming that the private revelation itself is approved. Such is not the case.

The messages to Mac Smith repeatedly refer to the messages to Barnabas Nwoye of Nigeria, without mentioning his name. They refer to another set of apparitions, which promotes the Precious Blood, and which is located in Nigeria. This narrows the possibilities down to only one: Barnabas Nwoye.

23 Oct 2009: "This ministry was created by God to join with the Most Precious Blood ministry and apparitions in Nigeria, Africa which has now been approved by the Vatican. So you see all I have to do is go down through Latin America and over to Ghana and to Nigeria and we will be with one already approved."

The claim that the apparitions to Barnabas are approved is factually false. The Vatican has issued no such approval for his claimed private revelation, nor has the local Bishop given his approval. The only type of approval is an imprimatur (permission to publish) which only applies to two brief prayers; it is not difficult to get an imprimatur for a prayer. So the above quoted message is a lie. And therefore, the above quoted message cannot be from the Virgin Mary, nor from Heaven at all.

These messages to Mac Smith repeatedly speak about the apparitions and messages to Barnabas as if they were a true private revelations from Heaven. And yet the content of these two sets of messages is contradictory. The messages to Barnabas repeatedly speak about the Antichrist as if he were in the world today, and as if following the special devotions offered by Barnabas were essential to obtain protection from the Antichrist. But the messages to Mac Smith explicitly say that the Antichrist is not in the world today, and that he might not arrive for hundreds of years. Both of these claims cannot be true. Either the Antichrist is in the world today, or he is not. Mac Smith's messages say that he is not; Barnabas' messages say that he is. But the messages to Mac Smith also claim that the messages to Barnabas are true. This type of inherent contradiction cannot possibly exist in true private revelations from the Virgin Mary. She never lies. And she has the Beatific Vision of God, so she cannot speak a single falsehood, not even inadvertently. Therefore, these messages to Mac Smith are not from the Virgin Mary, are not from God, and are not from Heaven at all.
See this review of the false private revelations of Barnabas Nwoye:


This claimed private revelation contains a number of serious doctrinal errors, distortion of the roles of Jesus and Mary, eschatological errors, the promotion of false private revelations, inherent contradictions, incoherent assertions, and worldly language expressed in poor grammar and rambling sentences. The messages also promote this claimed private revelation as if it were essential to the mission of the Church, essential to salvation, and essential to understand the doctrine of the Church. To the contrary, even true private revelation is not essential in any of the aforementioned ways. The above examples should be sufficient to show that the claimed private revelations to Mac Smith cannot be from the Virgin Mary, nor from God or Heaven at all.

by Ronald L. Conte Jr.
March 24, 2010

 This Web site copyright by Catholic Planet. All articles, poetry, and music are copyrighted by their respective authors.