Trevignano, seer deserts prayer for the first time but not the followers

Trevignano, seer deserts prayer for the first time but not the followers

Like every third of the month at 3pm yesterday it was expected that the supposed seer of Trevignano, Mrs. Gisella, fell into mystical ecstasy and came into contact with the Madonna, reported what he had told her, perhaps also some doctrinal news and innovations, given the Easter period. In reality, however, yesterday she wasn't there to pray at the Campo delle Rose, but only her faithful were there. How come? Because compared to the past there has been something new and that is the Roman Catholic Church has established that it is not a supernatural phenomenon, in short the Church, through its bishop has said that these are not apparitions recognized by the Church. We have dealt with this strange case on several occasions, for example here (retrieve the article).

The bishop of Civita Castellana Marco Salvi declared: “After a suitable period of careful discernment and listening to the testimonies coming from the territory and making use of a Commission of experts made up of a Mariologist, a theologian, a canonist, a psychologist and the external consultancy of some specialists, considered the figure of Mary in the tradition of the Church and in the living faith of the people of God, the diocese has decreed the non-supernaturality of the facts in question (Constat de non supernaturalitate). Furthermore, in the document Mrs. Gisella is considered “unreliable and self-referential”.

And it was time for this official position from the Vatican to arrive after years of waiting. That the phenomenon was false was self-evident and also of low level. Think for example of the so-called “miracle of the gnocchi” which – according to the protagonists – consisted in the miraculous multiplication of gnocchi in Mrs. Gisella's fridge which aped the multiplication of loaves and fish on Lake Tiberias.

The technically contested points were: “a) The gaps in the testimony of Gisella Cardia who, despite being under oath before God, did not report to the Commission elements that she herself had made known in television interviews; b) the internal contradictions in the testimony of Cardia, who resolutely denies having the task, at the time of writing the alleged supernatural messages and their dissemination, of understanding them (she transcribes and does not interpret) only to then, in some cases, proceed to their explanation in order to overcome the objective criticisms of bizarreness and non-compliance with the Catholic faith; c) the open contradiction between Cardia's testimony and that of Bishop Emeritus Romano Rossi regarding the alleged tearing of a statuette of the Virgin in the latter's hands, which he categorically and adamant denies; d) the non-concordance of the testimonies of Cardia and her husband Gianni Cardia with what is reported by other witnesses regarding the development of the facts: see, for example, the different position with respect to Don Francesco Asti who, according to the alleged visionary, would have recognized, present the bishop, the supernatural nature of the phenomenon, something decisively denied by Don Asti himself; e) even if the testimony of the alleged visionary and her husband is in conflict, in many cases, with external witnesses, in different passages of the interviews the narrative of the two spouses is totally coincident. It is known that when reporting a fact, different sources read and report the same event with different emphasis: the fact that they are almost identical narratives leaves doubts about their authenticity”.

So this time the saint, as many now call her, preferred not to further provoke the Church and to obey and submit to the bishop. “There Mrs. Gisella Cardia he will not be present at the prayer on April 3, 2024 to actively demonstrate his communion with the Catholic Church. In doing so, in fact, she hopes to be able to open a new dialogue with the bishop. She therefore asks all the faithful to accompany this delicate moment with prayer, meaning that her journey does not stop but on the contrary continues in obedience to the voice of the Spirit who invites us to a time of silence and prayer”. The danger of this strategy is that the former visionary seeks only to accredit herself as a valid interlocutor for the ecclesiastical authorities, “opening a new dialogue”, as she herself states in the statement. The reason for this negotiation is not known, probably Mrs. Gisella wants to obtain something and not leave empty-handed after so much effort. We'll see. In the meantime, at least, this farce has been temporarily put to an end also because now, after the bishop's pronouncement, there are even more tools to intervene legally.