-Father David Lorange
A friend of mine offered me in-depth reflections about the topic of «public Revelation» and «private revelations». It was in reaction to my 2-part article about Marie-Paule Giguère or Mother Paul-Marie, the Foundress of the Army of Mary (see Part 1 and Part 2). The author of this essay is Father David Lorange, a member of the Army of Mary and the Community of the Lady of all Peoples. Furthermore, he’s one of the six men who became «priests» during the attempted ordination performed by Father Pierre Mastropietro, on June 1, 2007, at the Eucharistic and Marian Center Spiri-Maria, in Lac-Etchemin, Province of Québec. Father David and I met on a few occasions in the past, and we also developed a correspondence on different topics pertaining to this website, in the spirit of the Gospel, that is: cordiality, charity, mutual respect, and, crucially, humble and earnest truth-seeking and mystery-believing. Christians believe in Jesus Christ (the Redeemer) and the Trinity (Father, Son and Spirit). Paulians, as they identify themselves, while keeping the Christian faith, also believe that Marie-Paule is the Co-Redemptrix and that God has a feminine aspect, bringing the Trinity to the Quinternity (Father, Mother, Son, Daughter, Spirit) [note: the Mother is the Virgin Mary of Nazaret; the Daughter is Marie-Paule]. This implies a development in Revelation and doctrine. Is the very possibility of this development in contradiction with the Gospel and the Catholic Church’s teaching? Father David Lorange thinks not, despite the attempts by some theologians to declare that the Revelation is «closed»... The author takes the full and sole responsibility of his text and I’m happy to present him here on this blog as a guest writer.
July 25, 2015, Feast of Saint James, Apostle
What follows represent my humble research about the «teaching of the Church» on private revelations and their connection with public Revelation. I’m not infallible myself (of course!) and I don’t pretend to exhaust the subject. I hope, Glenn, that you and your readership will appreciate my honesty in presenting the magisterial teaching integrally, as best as I could.
There is a theological axiom, often heard of in recent times, to the point of even being used by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, in their Doctrinal Note concerning the Army of Mary (2001).
Here is the axiom:
«[Public] Revelation ended, or was completed or closed, with the death of the last Apostle.»
In all intellectual honesty and rigour, I tried to find a [Roman] magisterial statement supporting that axiom. The closest I found that resembles that axiom comes from a decree of the Holy Office, entitled Lamentabili, 3 July 1907, with the approval of Pope Saint Pius X.
That decree was aimed at the errors of modernism and rationalism. The context, which is worth noting, is a lack of faith toward public Revelation, not an excessive trust or belief in private revelations. Here is Proposition 21, one of the modernist errors condemned by the decree:
«Revelation, constituting the object of the Catholic faith,
was not completed with the Apostles.»
That’s the closest I found that resembles the axiom above-mentioned, concerning the «completeness or completion of Revelation with the Apostles». Not everything is «infallible» in a Church document, not even in a «dogmatic constitution» (much less in a decree from the Holy Office). And every expression needs to be interpreted in the proper context.
Before Lamentabili, I found nothing (of importance or expressed in strong words) about «Revelation completed or closed», neither in the Council of Trent (decree De canonicis Scripturis), nor the Council of Vatican I (dogmatic constitution Dei Filius). After Lamentabili, the most important magisterial document on the topic is the dogmatic constitution Dei Verbum, from the Second Vatican Council (18 November 1965). In there, we can find the idea or concept of «completion or fullness of Revelation», but also the evolution toward the «fullness of truth».
«By this revelation then, the deepest truth about God and the salvation of man shines out for our sake in Christ, who is both the mediator and the fullness of all revelation.» (n. 2)
«The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass away and we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.» (n. 4)
«Therefore Christ the Lord in whom the full revelation of the supreme God is brought to completion /.../.» (n. 7)
«For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.» (n. 8)
«For the Lord Jesus was with His apostles as He had promised (see Matthew 28:20) and sent them the advocate Spirit who would lead them into the fullness of truth (see John 16:13).» (n. 20)
Afterward, I also found this passage from the dogmatic constitution Lumen gentium, again from the Second Vatican Council (21 November 1964):
«But when either the Roman Pontiff or the Body of Bishops together with him defines a judgment, they pronounce it in accordance with Revelation itself, which all are obliged to abide by and be in conformity with, that is, the Revelation which as written or orally handed down is transmitted in its entirety through the legitimate succession of bishops and especially in care of the Roman Pontiff himself, and which under the guiding light of the Spirit of truth is religiously preserved and faithfully expounded in the Church. The Roman Pontiff and the bishops, in view of their office and the importance of the matter, by fitting means diligently strive to inquire properly into that revelation and to give apt expression to its contents; but a new public revelation they do not accept [in French it says: receive] as pertaining to the divine deposit of faith.» (n. 25)
The context is the dogma of infallibility, promulgated by the Council Vatican I, with the dogmatic constitution Pastor aeternus (18 July 1870). The passage I underscored in Lumen gentium then refers to Pastor aeternus, especially the following sentence:
«For the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might make known new doctrine, but that by His assistance they might inviolably keep and faithfully expound the Revelation, the Deposit of Faith, delivered through the Apostles.» (chapter IV)
It means, according to me, that it is not the mission of the Pope to propose a new revelation, but to guard and to protect the deposit of faith. (I think Dei Verbum, n. 4, quoted previously, can be read in that light too.) At the same time, even the Pope must remain open to God’s intervention in human history.
In fact, every theologian worthy of the name will acknowledge this: the Mystery of God was progressively revealed through history and, consequently, our understanding or knowledge of that Mystery also evolved and deepened through history. George Weigel, in a column dated 27 August 2014, hammered that idea home, as we can see in the following quotes:
«The first Christians, pious Jews, were strict monotheists. That Christianity came to embrace the doctrine of the Holy Trinity ― indeed, that it put that doctrine at the center of its creed, along with its other key doctrine, the Incarnation ― is one of the great surprises of religious history. The two are linked. And that link is found, not in the abstract speculations of theologians, but in the historical experience of the Christian community.»
«We know the Trinity, not because we have reasoned our way to it, but because we have been touched by the Trinity’s entry into history.»
If the «Trinity’s entry into history» is true thanks to Jesus Christ (the Redeemer), why the «Quinternity’s entry into history» couldn’t be true as well, 2000 years later, thanks to Marie-Paule (the Co-Redemptrix)? We, as «pious Christians» who became the «first Paulians», believe so, in the «historical experience» of the Community of the Lady of all Peoples.
After Vatican II, here is what we have:
1. Catechism of the Catholic Church, nn. 65-67 (15 August 1997).
There, the Catechism quotes Heb 1:1-2, the oft-quoted passage from Saint John of the Cross and Dei Verbum (nn. 2 and 4). (Click on the link above to read those quotes.)
Based on these sources, the Catechism summarizes through the two subtitles:
― «God has said everything in his Word»
― «There will be no further Revelation»
We also have a specific mention of «private revelations», as a matter of secondary importance, in n. 67.
2. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, theological commentary about the «Third Part of the Secret of Fatima» (27 June 2000).
That commentary offers some reflections on «public Revelation and private revelations». Cardinal Ratzinger, based on the Catechism, speaks of the «definitiveness» and «completeness» of the public Revelation, in the line of the axiom quoted at the beginning of this study (indeed, it’s almost the axiom itself with a different wording):
«In Christ, God has said everything, that is, he has revealed himself completely, and therefore Revelation came to an end with the fulfilment of the mystery of Christ as enunciated in the New Testament.»
He also quotes Cardinal Prospero Lambertini (the future Pope Benedict XIV) and Flemish theologian E. Dhanis. Since Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger wrote a «theological commentary», we can assume he wrote it as a theologian himself.
3. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger), declaration Dominus Iesus, nn. 5-8 (6 August 2000).
The context of this document is the moral and religious relativism of contemporary society (again, a lack of faith toward public Revelation). Here, the affirmation of «the definitiveness and the completeness of the public Revelation» possibly reaches its pinnacle. The whole section begins as follows:
«As a remedy for this relativistic mentality, which is becoming ever more common, it is necessary above all to reassert the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ.» (n. 5)
But the document itself concedes:
«Therefore, the words, deeds, and entire historical event of Jesus, though limited as human realities, have nevertheless the divine Person of the Incarnate Word, “true God and true man” as their subject. For this reason, they possess in themselves the definitiveness and completeness of the revelation of God’s salvific ways, even if the depth of the divine mystery in itself remains transcendent and inexhaustible.» (n. 6)
Among the chief references are Dei Verbum and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. But there is also an important quote pertaining to our subject, from the encyclical Redemptoris missio of Pope Saint John Paul II (7 December 1990), that previously slipped my notice in my research.
«God’s revelation becomes definitive and complete through his only-begotten Son: “In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom he also created the world.” (Heb 1:1-2; cf. Jn 14:6) In this definitive Word of his revelation, God has made himself known in the fullest possible way. He has revealed to mankind who he is. This definitive self-revelation of God is the fundamental reason why the Church is missionary by her very nature. She cannot do other than proclaim the Gospel, that is, the fullness of the truth which God has enabled us to know about himself.» (n. 5)
4. Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger), post-synodal apostolic exhortation Verbum Domini, n. 14 (30 September 2010).
Finally, n. 14 of that document summarizes all of the above, especially making reference to Dei Verbum, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Saint John of the Cross and the theological commentary about Fatima of 2000.
It’s interesting to note that the Doctrinal Note of the Canadian Bishops was asked by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger on 29 February 2000. Because of the lack of unanimity (2 votes against and 1 abstention), that Note needed to receive Rome’s recognitio, which came on 10 August 2001, and then it was published on 15 August 2001. Coincidentally, in that same period (the summer of 2000), were published the theological commentary on Fatima and Dominus Iesus, both documents of Cardinal Ratzinger.
I also want to observe that the specific theme of «private revelations» arises explicitly only in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the theological commentary (Joseph Ratzinger) and Verbum Domini (Benedict XVI). I find that corpus of [Roman] magisterial statements on that topic rather thin. Not only, but the topic of private revelations is also in great part a subject open to debate among theologians.
[In 1978, the Vatican issued norms for the discernment of private revelations. These norms were made public in 2011, with a preface.]
Before I quote some theologians, I just want to give my personal evaluation of our fashionable theological axiom (used in the Doctrinal Note):
«[Public] Revelation ended, or was completed or closed, with the death of the last Apostle.»
This is only a theological axiom, not an infallible dogmatic statement. I even found one theologian, on Internet, criticizing this axiom, especially «the death of the last Apostle claim» (click here).
For me, that phrase can be used mistakenly (like in the Doctrinal Note) as a radicalization of the theme of «the definitiveness and the completeness of the public Revelation» in Jesus Christ. I personally understand the «definitiveness» and «completeness» of the Revelation of Jesus like this: Christ’s Revelation is superior to the revelations and inspirations contained in the Old Testament, and also in the other religions; it also gives all that is sufficient and necessary for our salvation; it reveals us the Most Blessed Trinity: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Concerning the following quotes, I want to underscore some nuances:
«/.../ we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ» (Dei Verbum, n. 4)
«In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he [God] spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word ― and he has no more to say [y no tiene más que hablar] /.../ because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the all who is his Son. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behaviour but also of offending him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty.» (Saint John of the Cross, quoted by the Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 65)
With the supreme revelation in Jesus, we should not «await», or «desire» a new revelation, or «question» God, because the Gospel is «sufficent» and «necessary» for salvation. But God keeps his supreme liberty of initiative in the realm of revelation and advancement of his Plan of Love for humanity. The Church, here, ought to be humble, because she’s only a means to reach God. The Church (bishops, cardinals, even a pope) must resist the temptation to control God.
Even though he’s a Doctor of the Church, Saint John of the Cross is also a man with human fallibility. I agree with him that we must be detached from the desire of some new vision or revelation. But I won’t buy a radicalization of «[God] has no more to say». No theologian, no Doctor of the Church, no Pope, nor any other man can muzzle God and say to him: «You have no more to say! You said everything!» For me, God has again spoken to humankind through his Daughter (Marie-Paule), like he did through his Son (Jesus Christ). Of course, at the time of Saint John of the Cross, God possessed only one Word, the Son: the Daughter was not yet sent or manifested.
When the Catechism says: «God has said everything in his Word», we must understand «everything» necessary for our salvation. And when it says: «There will be no further Revelation», it modifies, wrongly I think, Dei Verbum’s «we now await no further new public revelation». «We don’t await» does not equal «There won’t be».
After Jesus, the subsequent private revelations will refer back to him and the Gospel, but the door remains open to my eyes to Marie-Paule’s Revelation (which is unique after Jesus’ Revelation) about the Immaculate and the Quinternity (that is, the Feminine in God), and about the regeneration of souls and the resurrection during the terrestrial Kingdom.
The Catechism (n. 67) says it’s not the role of private revelations to «improve» or «complete» or «surpass» or «correct» the public Revelation culminating in Christ. I want to observe that n. 67 is written in small print, which indicates «observations of an historical or apologetic nature, or supplementary doctrinal explanations» (CCC, n. 20), but surely not is a definitory and infallible statement of the Magisterium. Because, in fact, if imprudently we radicalize this God-has-no-more-to-say approach, I want to ask, in all humility and honesty: how should we understand this passage from the Gospel:
«I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now. But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you. Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.» (John 16:12-15)
Marie-Paule and Life of Love do refer back to Jesus and the Gospel (being totally impregnated with Jesus and filled with the Gospel), they do not contradict the Bible but, on the contrary, are therein contained in embryo (whatever says the Doctrinal Note). Marie-Paule, as the Daughter, does belong to the Father and to the Son («he [the Spirit of truth] will take from what is mine /.../ everything that the Father has is mine»). The feminine complement brought by Marie-Paule to the work of Jesus Christ in no way abolishes the Gospel, but yes, it does bring some sort of fulfillment (Matthew 5:17).
When the Doctrinal Note says:
«The presumed private revelations, upon which members of the Army of Mary stake their claim, do not merely urge Catholics to follow the Gospel more faithfully; they include spurious new doctrines that are without foundation in Scripture or Tradition.»
For me, the underscored part is simply an error or a lie.
Furthermore, we understand that we are living the Time of the Apocalypse, time entrusted to the Woman. Apocalypse = Revelation. At the Three Fountains in Rome, the Immaculate said to Bruno Cornacchiola in 1947: «I am the Virgin of the Revelation.» All modern apparitions of Mary, in our eyes, are a preparation to the «personal presence of Mary on earth» in Mother Paul-Marie. The heart or crux of the Book of Revelation is:
«A great sign appeared in the sky, a Woman!» (Revelation 12:1)
Thanks to her, we now know the Quinternity!
«At the time when you hear the seventh angel blow his trumpet, the mystery of God shall be fulfilled, as he promised to his servants the prophets.» (Revelation 10:7)
[Raoul Auclair demonstrated the «eschatological» or apocalyptic aspect of all modern Marian epiphanies, which established the role of the Woman and explained the times we are living: (using the symbolisms of the Apocalypse) the Great Prostitute (Western Christianity having apostatized faith), the Beast of the Sea (communist Russia and the Eastern Bloc) and the Beast of the Earth (Antichrist) mystically AGAINST the Woman (the Lady of all Peoples, the Co-Redemptrix, Marie-Paule).]
More than once quoted by Marie-Paule, here is a declaration from Sister Lúcia of Fátima:
«She [Mary] told me that, the other means scorned by men having been exhausted, she was giving us, trembling, a powerful (ultimate) anchor of salvation which is THE MOST HOLY VIRGIN MARY IN PERSON.» (see for example: Marie-Paule, The White Book IV, The Covenant between Heaven and Earth, p. 57).
[The Immaculate-Mother (the Virgin Mary) was giving us the Immaculate-Daughter (Marie-Paule).]
[The origin of Sister Lúcia’s declaration is an interview by Father Augustine Fuentes on December 26, 1957, at her convent in Coimbra, Portugal.]
[Events led Marie-Paule to be in contact with many other mystics (like Marthe Robin or don Stefano Gobbi), who received messages that tended to confirm the reality that she was the «personal presence of Mary on earth». We don’t say she is the reincarnation of the Virgin Mary. More accurately, we say that the Virgin Mary is the incarnation of the Immaculate (as Mother) and Marie-Paule is the reincarnation of the Immaculate (as Daugther). Both the Mother and the Daughter are the Immaculate, like both the Father and the Son are God. But we maintain the distinction between the Persons. We continue to be «strict monotheists» but from «Trinitarian monotheists», we became «Quinternitarian monotheists».]
In her writings, Mother Paul-Marie offers reflections on the theme of «private revelations». I would summarize in 5 key ideas:
1. Everything, in the «public Revelation», was at first «private revelations»: God communicated privately to Adam and Eve, to Abraham, to the Patriarchs, to Moses, to the Prophets, to Saint Joseph (Matthew 2:13.19-20), to the Virgin Mary (Luke 1:26-38), even to Jesus himself (John 15:15). Later, through the Church’s authority, those revelations became «public, mandatory, universal, Catholic Revelation» [the deposit of faith].
2. Some mystics received a special charisma with immediate evidence of God’s revelations (for example Joan of Arc), or sometimes the charisma is so purified that the human aspect cannot slipped through (I believed it’s the case of Mother Paul-Marie). These are more exceptional cases.
[Joan of Arc, condemned by Bishop Pierre Cauchon, said that she would be damned if she would deny her voices or her mission; she believed in the apparitions to her of Saint Michel the Archangel as firmly as in the mystery of Redemption. Some theologians conclude that such mystics have to believe with supernatural and divine faith in the authority of God manifesting himself. Cf. Jacques Maritain, quoted in our paper Le Royaume: «Sainte Jeanne dʼArc et les révélations privées» (Le Royaume, n. 149, mai-juin 2001, p. 16).]
3. With the mind open to supernatural realities, we have a certain duty or obligation to believe authentic private revelations, as beneficiary or as witness, according to Saint Paul:
«Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophetic utterances. Test everything; retain what is good.» (1 Thessalonians 5:19-21)
Based on Saint Paul, I think it’s not quite true when we hear that we are not obliged to believe private revelations (when deemed authentic).
[If Pope Gregory XI didn’t pay attention to Saint Catherine of Siena, the papacy would have remained in Avignon, and the Devil might have succeeded in destroying the Church or seriously jeopardizing her. Actually, the Lord preserved the Church through the private revelations to Catherine. Saint Joan of Arc preserved royalty in France, which contributed also to preserve the Church. Both women were prefigurations of Mother Paul-Marie who saved the Church at an incomparably higher level (through the Church of John). And why Popes visited the sites of Marian apparitions and even instituted liturgical feasts in their honor?]
4. God reveals himself to the childlike, the little, the humble, the simple, the pure of heart.
«I give praise to you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for although you have hidden these things from the wise and the learned you have revealed them to the childlike.» (Matthew 11:25; Luke 10:21)
5. Persecution, trials, suffering + love, charity, forgiveness = a strong sign of authenticity.
A few times, Marie-Paule also quoted theologians about the theme of private revelations (I only have the French references, as quoted in our paper Le Royaume):
1. Cornelio Del Zotto, o.f.m.
Cf. article «L’éternelle Immaculée Conception» (Le Royaume, n. 98, mars-avril 1994, pp. 4-5; cf. p. 11).
2. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, o.p.
Cf. article «La théologie doit céder le pas aux affaires de mon Fils» (Le Royaume, n. 100, juillet-août 1994, p. 6).
3. Gabriel M. Roschini, o.s.m.
Cf. article «La pédagogie divine: splendeur de simplicité» (Le Royaume, n. 113, september-octobre 1996, p. 8).
4. Robert Ernst
This last theologian is particularly important, because Marie-Paule quotes him many times and lengthily. Robert Ernst is the author of the book Y a-t-il encore des révélations? [literally, Are There Still Revelations?], published in 1958. It was Father Veilleux, Marie-Paule’s spiritual director, who gave her that book. That is reported in Life of Love, volume II, chapter 53. That chapter, where Marie-Paule also comments the thought of Saint John of the Cross, is important for our topic and a must-read.
Then, very long quotes of Robert Ernst are provided in the following article:
«Qu’est-ce que l’Armée de Marie?» (Le Royaume, n. 24, septembre 1984, pp. 8, 10-11).
That article (containing these quotes) was later published in the brochure n. 4 L’Armée de Marie et la Dame de tous les Peuples (cf. pp. 25-26, 32-36 in French).
Finally, in Life of Love, Appendix IV (pp. 15-16 in French), of which the English version exists but is not yet published, we can find other very long quotes of Robert Ernst. It’d be nice to quote that theologian lengthily, but I will for now limit myself to this passage:
«But on the other hand, a prophet or person endowed with a charism can never take advantage of obedience as a reason for denying the truth of what he has been given by God to see or to repeat ― and for that matter, no one can ever do so who is convinced, by reason of the facts of personal experience, of the authenticity of a revelation. In this case, the one privileged with a charism, or his witness, is under the obligation to be ready to suffer any penalty, even excommunication, rather than to act contrary to his conviction, or to tell a lie.» (Robert Ernst)
Also, Robert Ernst says that the judgment of the Church (either the local Bishop or the Holy See) in matters of private revelations is not infallible, and thus can be mistaken. Interpreting God’s language isn’t easy, it first requires an humble attitude of faith and patience, attentiveness to events, a childlike trust. Only later, we do finally understand.
That’s it Glenn!
Of course, in this essay of mine, I haven’t quoted in extenso all the references I gave you (also because I don’t have all the English translations), but they exemplify what I said earlier: that the topic of private revelations «is also in great part a subject open to debate among theologians». If we are seekers of truth, which I believe you and I are, we must get to the bottom of things and not remain superficial.
When we look at the entire life of Mother Paul-Marie, endlessly punctuated with trials, at all the charisms and celestial indications which constantly proved right subsequently by events, at the intensity of purification of those charisms (where the «human» was absent, which prevents me to speak of «self-fulfilling prophesies»), not to mention miraculous healings through her which are not illusions or human interpretations;
when we see all the serious priests who supported her during her life, all the providential events conducting Marie-Paule and the Work through incredible adversities from top religious authorities, the total lack of justice and truth in the manoeuvres of late Cardinal Louis-Albert Vachon ― God rest his soul ― and other religious authorities toward the Army of Mary, and the total lack of authentic theological dialogue with Marc Bosquart;
when we consider how Marie-Paule lived her life without understanding it and obeying all the time, despite the contradiction of different authorities; how coherent was the progression of her mystical life and the evolution of the Work, in the build-up of a complex reality in which all the elements fall into place and that no human imagination could invent or ever conceive; how innumerable fruits of conversion and spirituality that Work has done (even my own conversion-vocation and your own conversion or «reversion» back to religious Catholic practice);
when we finally contemplate the infinite charity and love Marie-Paule constantly had for everyone, even the enemies, and the way she lived her suffering, especially during her 5-year long agony;
and when we understand she was mystically abandoned by everyone (as prophetically foretold: «You will be alone to the very end, without the support of the religious authority»), even by her Paulian followers, from top apostles to simple disciples who had difficulty to understand her Spirit, and nonetheless she continues mystically and divinely to keep the Work on an even keel (because humanly speaking that Work should have died long long ago);
well, I can only make an act of faith, hope and love, saying, with the Centurion (just upon seeing the way she suffered and died, and even before any glorious manifestation which would affix the seal of confirmation):
«Truly this woman was the Daughter of God!»
(cf. Mark 15:39)
-Father David Lorange
-Father David Lorange