Why did our lady not show her feet in Garabandal?

Sorry Frodo,you're incorrect about Our Lady of Kibeho too.

 

No, I don’t believe so.

I believe you are mistaking depictions of Our Lady for what the visionaries saw. She did indeed appear barefoot to the visionaries.

Our Lady of Guadalupe:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ca...opular-marian-devotions/our-lady-of-guadalupe

Kibeho

https://www.michaeljournal.org/arti...sages-of-our-lady-of-sorrows-in-kibeho-rwanda

Also, after a quick search it seems that (and it could be all, but I didn’t search all of them) others that were apparitions were also barefoot.

Banneux
https://www.piercedhearts.org/hearts_jesus_mary/apparitions/our_lady_poor.html

The rest that you list are either just depictions (Altoltling) or are depictions of visions where we have no record of the first hand account(Pillar).

Based on the above I have doubts that any approved apparitions took place where Our Lady’s feet were obscured the entire time.

 

Am I missing something here?

Neither the link to Gudalupe or Kibeho mentions our Lady's feet.

With regard to Guadalupe our Lady's image on the Tilda miraculously preserved until these times does not show her feet. So God performed a miracle showing our Lady's feet covered. Why would that be?

 

I agree with you garabandal. The Tilma is the image God wished to convey. If feet were to be considered a sign of authenticity then why would they not be shown?

Safe in the Refuge of the Immaculate Heart!

 

No, it’s mentioned there in both.

 

That’s a different debate, and one that isn’t worth interrupting my picnic I was just pointing out that these apparitions listed were of Our Lady barefoot.

 

Frodo, what is your problem ? You use words you cant prove, I'M SHOWING PICTURES OF STATUES FROM THE NET SHOWING NO FEET !

 

YOUR FIRST LINK ISNT THERE, THE OTHER TWO ARE RIDICULOUSLY LONG , POST THE SENTENCE , NOT 10 PAGES FOR ME TO READ.

 

Seriously Glenn?

 

The onus is on you to prove it. But ... here:

https://books.google.com/books?id=s...embling an anklet of precious stones,&f=false

Pro tip: search for feet or foot.

 

Rested her feet - it does not say her feet were bare or visible -- in fact an anklet of precious stones sounds like footwear of a Queen!!

 

... pierce with glitter... her feet were visible. Plus what is an anklet? It makes no sense to say an anklet if her feet were obscured. Clearly, from this account in the 17th century, her feet were shown.

 

Glenn, I noticed the tone of some of your postings is a bit rude. I think this is not a culture we should adopt on this forum. Besides, it doesn't add credibility to the so-called apparitions of Garabandal which you promote.

On this point, I've been thinking about it for a while now, and I more and more doubt that Garabandal relates to a heavenly apparition. It could be something much worse, even unbeknownst to Conchita et al. who may have good intentions.

 

Our Lady of Beauraing approved by the Church:

The Virgin Mary appeared as a beautiful lady in white walking above the bridge and the grotto by the convent with clouds covering her feet. The Virgin, with hands joined and turned toward the sky, carried a rosary hanging from her right arm. During the five last apparitions, she showed a heart of gold, surrounded by rays, on her chest.



So there you go - case closed!!

 

I did prove it with pictures.

 

Frank.my defense of my point sometimes is like talking to a brick wall. Someone tells me I'm wrong, like frodo, and I provide pictures from the internet to PROVE my point ,and yet they provide NONE,and they continue to argue,its alittle frustrating. BTW, my defense of Garabandal, has nothing to due with its validity, Conchita and her family love me,and my never ending defense of her and the apparitions. They loving call me " The Blessed Mother's Pit Bull". That I considered the greatest compliment I could ever receive. The Truth is the Truth, Garabandal is true, whether you like me or not, I'm fine with that.

 

Listen Glenn, how you can't tell the difference between a statue/picture that was made by an artist and the first hand accounts of the visionaries saying they saw Our Lady barefoot is frankly amazing. The facts prove you wrong in your assertions on Guadalupe, Kibeho, & Banneux - I don't have to.

It certainly doesn't bode well for your objectivity and credibility on other matters.

Honestly, I don't really care about this particular point in evaluating Garabandal. Frankly, there is ample proof against Garabandal besides having to ask the barefoot question (only 3 popes left..no wait... 4 popes.. well we do't know what the end of times means, Joey's new eyes... oh that meant heaven, etc.).

And really, I'm not concerned with arguing against the apparition. There isn't really anything objectionable from a doctrinal standpoint. I'm content with letting the events play out and hoping that the followers don't despair or lose the faith if they are disappointed.


But facts are funny things, and you don't get to make them up to suit your arguments. That was why I posted. With that I'm finished with the thread.

(Thanks to poster Garabandal who actually validated one of the apparitions that Glenn listed out of a dozen plus that were not).

 

I have not read through this whole thread but I want to add that I sent the following question to Michael O'Neill, The Miracle Hunter, in November 2017:

Many people believe that if Mary's feet are not visible at an apparition then the apparition is not truly of Mary. If you don't mind, what are your thoughts on this? And if you could be so kind to provide a list of approved apparitions in which Mary never exposed her feet, it there are any of course. Do you know if this is a consideration when the Church approves an apparition of Mary?​

The question was accepted. I wish I had the clip of the answer but Mr. O'Neill basically stated that there is no basis to believe that this is true.

Thanks Glenn for your list of apparitions, I don't remember Mr. O'Neill taking the time to do that.

Frodo and others, instead of just posting links to disproof part of Glenn's statement could you possibly post the pertinent part of the link along with the link. Thank you.

Frank Marcus and others, rather than simply stating that you do not believe that the apparitions of Our Lady of Garabandal are not from heaven, can you please state why you believe this to be true.

Personally, I do believe that the apparitions/messages of Our Lady of Garabandal are from heaven and may, in fact, be very crucial to the Triumph of Our Lady's Immaculate Heart.

In addition, I appreciate Glenn's time and effort in defending and promoting Our Lady of Garabandal along with anyone else who has promoted this apparition. Glenn is always willing to have a debate with someone who has done their homework in regard to the apparition and/or answering questions from anyone who wants to learn more about the apparition. It looks like it can be a very tiring job but he has been doing this for over 20 years.

I hope I have not intruded into this debate too much because like I said, I have not gone through every post on this thread but I do think that many here need to take a step back and reconsider their approach.

 

Putting aside the "foot issue", lets talk about your lack of facts about Garabandal. Conchita NEVER said there were only 3 popes left. More Internet misquotes. Let me also address the misquoted and misunderstood prophecy about the popes. Conchita said after the death of JohnXXIII , there would be 4 more popes ,until the end of THE times,(NOT the end of all time ) meaning a new era begins. This is the era we are now in ( after the 4 popes Paul VI, JP I, JP II, Benedict ) it is now that we will experience the WARNING & MIRACLE .



Albrecht Weber, the author of the book “The Finger of God“, had become involved in Garabandal in 1963 and became friendly with Conchita. On November 14, 1965, the day after the last apparition of Our Lady in Garabandal, Mr. Weber interviewed Conchita at her home in the presence of her mother. There was also present with Mr. Weber an interpreter. During that interview, it came out that when Conchita had spoken, on the very day that Pope John XXIII died, of “Three more Popes and then would come the end of the times,” her mother had asked her several questions.
In response to one of her mother’s questions, Conchita responded that Our Lady had actually said that there would be FOUR MORE POPES but that She was not counting one of them. When Conchita’s mother heard that she strictly forbade Conchita to repeat that again as her mother feared there would be erroneous interpretations and much gossip. People might wrongly believe that one of the Popes might be false or bad, etc. During that conversation with her mother, Conchita also said that Our Lady had told her that one of the Popes would have a very short reign.

So I guess you'll find fault with these FACTS too.

 

Our Lady of La Salette wore rose edged slippers http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-the-story-of-our-lady-of-la-salette/

Also, I couldn't find the source, but one time I copied the description that Melanie gave our how Our Lady appeared to her because it was so beautiful. Here is part of her description

The eyes of the majestic Mary appeared thousands of times more beautiful than the rarest brilliants, diamonds and precious stones. They shone like two suns. They were soft, softness itself, as clear as a mirror. In her eyes, you could see Paradise.
The clothing of the Most Holy Virgin was silver white and quite brilliant. It was quite intangible. It was made up of light and glory, sparkling and dazzling. There is no expression nor comparison to be found on earth. The Most Holy Virgin had a yellow pinafore. What am I saying, yellow? She had a pinafore more brilliant than several suns put together. It was not a tangible material. It was composed of glory and this glory was scintillating and ravishingly beautiful.
She appeared to me like a good Mother, full of kindness, amiability, full of love for us, of compassion and mercy. The crown of roses, which she had placed on her head was so beautiful, so brilliant, that it defies imagination. The different colored roses were not of this earth; it was a joining together of flowers which crowned the head of the Most Holy Virgin. But the roses kept changing and replacing each other, and then, from the heart of each rose, there shone a beautiful entrancing light, which gave the roses a shimmering beauty. From the crown of roses there seemed to arise golden branches and a number of little flowers mingled with the shining ones. The whole thing formed a most beautiful diadem, which alone shone brighter than our earth’s sun.
Her shoes (since they must be called shoes) were white, but a silvery brilliant white. There were roses around them. These roses were dazzlingly beautiful, and from the heart of each rose there shone forth a flame of very beautiful and pleasing light. On her shoes there was a buckle of gold, not the gold of this earth, but rather the gold of paradise.
The Holy Virgin was crying nearly the whole time she was speaking to me. Her tears flowed gently, one by one, down to her knees, then, like sparks of light, they disappeared. They were glittering and full of love. I would have liked to comfort her and stop her tears. But it seemed to me that She needed the tears to show better her love forgotten by men. I would have liked to throw myself into her arms and say to her, “My kind Mother, do not cry! I want to love you for all men on earth.” The tears of our sweet Mother, far from lessening her air of majesty as Queen, seemed, on the contrary, to embellish her, to make her more beautiful, more powerful, more filled with love, more maternal, more ravishing. If I could have wiped away her tears, it would have made my heart leap with compassion and love.”