August 2, 2023

Most Reverend Pablo Virgilio David
President
Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines

Your Excellency,

I write to you in relation to the directives from The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) asking the bishops of the Philippines to “dissuade’ any activities that run counter to the church’s official ruling on the alleged Marian apparitions in Lipa.” (from the CBCP news online published July 30, 2023).

Cardinal Luis Ladaria, the Prefect of the DDF “reiterated the Vatican’s 1951 decision that the alleged Lipa apparitions have ‘no supernatural origin and character.’”

The decision of the then Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1951 is still in force. I notice however that it is a decision about the apparitions of Our Lady. I think that in essence what the CDF is saying is that Our Lady did not really appear in Lipa. However, I think that it is possible that even if Our Lady did not truly appear in Lipa, historical events evolved such that a devotion to Our Lady Mediatrix of All Grace started and developed in the place and the surrounding region and it has spread to other countries.

Many devotions to Our Lady also started and developed in a similar way. In Caysasay, devotion to Our Lady of Caysasay developed simply from the finding of her image. In Manaoag, in Antipolo, devotion also centered on the image of Our Lady. In these places, devotions to her are not based on apparitions. These are simply developments of popular piety.

I find it rather odd that bishops or priests will tell the faithful, “Don’t pray to Our Lady Mediatrix of All Grace. That’s wrong. That’s a heresy.” Will we say that to the devotees of Our Lady of Caysasay? Or Manaoag? Or Antipolo?

Or will we insist, “The devotion to Mary Mediatrix of All Grace is based on ‘an apparition that does not have supernatural origin”? The faithful can reply, “Fine, she did not appear, but we still want to use that title. Anyway, it is one of her titles. Vatican II also calls her ‘Mediatrix.””

Can we also tell the faithful, “Don’t celebrate the Mass of Our Lady Mediatrix of Grace.”

They can answer, “But there is a Mass in the Collection of Masses of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother and Mediatrix of Grace (no. 30 of the Collection). Why can’t we celebrate that Mass. It’s from the Vatican. And this devotion already began in Belgium. In 1921 the Holy See approved for that country a feast day of Our Lady Mediatrix of All Graces.”

My sense is that there is something amiss in telling our faithful not to do something to which they have all the right to do. We might be missing out on the sensus fidelium here.

There are theologians and reports that say that the title “Mediatrix of All Grace” is erroneous and heretical. The alleged correct title is “Mediatrix of All Graces.”

There is a difference between the title in the singular and the plural because there are two meanings involved and they are different in the singular and the plural.

We can note that the title “Mass of Our Lady Mediatrix of Grace” in the Collection of Masses of Our Lady is in the singular while the title of the feast in Belgium is in the plural.

Theologically, when the title is rendered in the singular, it refers to God Himself. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “Grace is first and foremost the gift of the Spirit who justifies and sanctifies us.” (no. 2003) God is Grace himself. God is one. And so, the Grace who is God is singular. “Grace” is foremost the uncreated gift.

“Graces” means the created gifts God gives us: actual graces, charisms, blessings, etc. Graces in the plural means the created graces.

When we say “All Grace” we are referring to the simplicity of God’s essence. We mean the same when we say that God is All-Knowing, Almighty, All-merciful. God is All Grace. God is simple and so, his essence is the same as his attributes.

And Mary brought Jesus into the world. Since Jesus is All Grace, then Mary is the channel, the Mediatrix of All Grace.

For your information, I accompanied Teresita Castillo, the alleged “seer” of Our Lady in Lipa in the last years of her life. I can attest to the holiness of her life. She did not talk to me about the apparitions since she was told to keep quiet about them. But she once broke her silence when she was interviewed by June Keithley. But after that she refused to speak again about those events. Everything that happened to her in those days and afterwards, gave her the greatest pain in her heart. She was very simple and humble. Our Lady told her that in her life she will suffer greatly. And it became true. For the last decades of her life, she suffered tremendous pains in her back which eventually made her almost immobile, and she could hardly speak. But her greatest pain was not being able to live as a Carmelite nun which was what she believed was her vocation. She was asked to leave the monastery.

When she claimed that Our Lady was giving her messages and that she could “see” her, she was subjected to psychological and psychiatric examinations in UST. Fr. Angel de Blas, OP, examined her and in his report, he stated that Teresita was of sound mind and that she did not suffer from any psychological or psychiatric illness. Another psychiatrist also gave the same judgment.

Fr. Jose Syquia claims that the “visions” of Teresita are of diabolical origin. Basing himself on the declaration that the origin of the visions is not supernatural then their origin must be “preternatural” and that source can only be the fallen angel, “The only other explanation would be that not only was there a natural cause behind the said apparitions but a preternatural one as well. The preternatural world is the world of the fallen angels, pure spirits without grace.” (Boletin Eclesiastico de Filipinas, Vol XVIII, nos. 927 and 928, p. 802)

I find this reasoning difficult to believe. One, it falls into the fallacy of the false disjunction. If the origin of the apparitions is not supernatural (from God) then it can only come from the devil. This is false because they can also be from natural causes (hallucinations, imaginations, etc.) And two, I think the devil will not tell the seer very good spiritual things to do like to pray the Rosary, to meditate on the Mysteries, to pray for China, to bear the cross, etc. Nor will the devil set up a whole story that will end up promoting devotion to Mary.

I am praying for God’s will to shine and prevail in our lives. I think some things in the Church do not change the Creed, Scriptures, the Ten Commandments, … there are some things in the Church that do change. The Church has been celebrating the Tridentine Mass for centuries and now we have the Novus Ordo. For some decades the CDF proscribed the Diary of Sister Faustina and banned the image of the Divine Mercy. And now both have a worldwide devotion.

I understand your position. You are obligated to communicate the directive from the DDF to the bishops. But I think we can only go as far as “dissuading” the people and not “giving approval” to official activities. But I think we cannot stop them from praying to Our Lady in Lipa and celebrating the Mass of Our Lady Mediatrix of Grace if they want. They have the right to do so.

Yours in Christ,

[Signed]
Fr. Cecilio L. Magsino
Professor at the University of Asia and the Pacific
A Priest of Opus Dei

---

Source: Facebook post by the Devoto ng Mama Mary Mediatrix of All Grace