Another fake bites the dust.
by: Joe Spagnolo
A MAN linked to Rockingham's world-famous weeping Virgin Mary statue - who says he sees the Virgin and displays the wounds of Christ - has been told to leave town.
Rockingham parish priest Finbarr Walsh gave Ron Jakeman his marching orders. Father Walsh, of Our Lady of Lourdes, has been a backer of Mr Jakeman.
Father Walsh, who consulted Catholic Archbishop Barry Hickey before ordering Mr Jakeman out, used to say the apparitions and stigmata were real, but now says they could be fake.
"I told him to leave. The (reason) is my business,'' Father Walsh told The Sunday Times. "But) it was serious or I wouldn't have thrown him out. He (Mr Jakeman) was a nuisance to the place ... a huge embarrassment.
"I told him to go back to Brisbane, but he might think he is entitled to come back. If he does we will see what happens.
"It was never proved he had the apparitions. We relied on his word. There was no outward evidence. Most of the messages were vague and wordy _ too many words and too little solid teaching in them.
"These people say they have these things (messages) in their minds and write them down. Whether or not they come from Our Lady (Virgin Mary) is another matter. There is probably some doubt now.
"They (stigmata) could easily be faked. You just don't know. He could make them up before showing them (his hands) to us.''
Mr Jakeman arrived in Rockingham from Brisbane about seven years ago when he teamed up with Patty Powell and her twin sister Eileen Giles to turn Ms Powell's house into the Family House of Prayer.
Mr Jakeman - a Queensland divorcee with three children - and Ms Powell are said to have met on the internet.
Mr Jakeman lived in a backyard granny flat at Ms Powell's house and a shrine was set up in the house to show off the Virgin Mary statue, which they say began ``weeping'' in 2002.
Ms Powell paid $150 for statue eight years earlier in Bangkok.
Thousands flock from around the world to see it every year.
It has raised more than $60,000 in donations, which Ms Powell says largely went to a Bangkok mission as well as other Christian operations, such as the Waturaliri School in East Timor and Crossroads Community in East Fremantle.
But Murdoch University scientists have identified the tears as a mixture of vegetable and rose oils and Bishop Hickey has said it was unlikely the phenomenon was a miracle.
While the weeping statue became the Family House of Prayer's main attraction, Mr Jakeman also gained notoriety when he claimed to have visions of the Virgin Mary and to have received messages from her while in the back yard.
Ms Giles also claimed to get messages.
Dozens of followers gathered at the house every week where they believed the Virgin Mary was appearing to Mr Jakeman. And a grotto was set up in the back yard, complete with footprints on a concrete slab, which the trio claimed belonged to the Virgin Mary.
Mr Jakeman also said he had wounds on his hands and feet, similar to those on the body of the crucified Christ.
Father Walsh said last year: "I have seen the wounds. They are not fake. He is getting the wounds of Jesus on his hands and feet.''
Mr Jakeman and Ms Powell could not be contacted for comment this week.
The Family House of Prayer's website calls him a ``visionary'' and posts his alleged messages from the Virgin Mary under the name I Am Nothing.
He also claims on the site that other miracles have occurred to Family House of Prayer visitors.
"People from all over the world have written to express their wondrous events of faith, which have occurred as a result of either visiting the statue or being touched with the oil. People have experienced remission of cancers and conversions of faith, reconciliation with family and spouses,'' he wrote
"Our Blessed Mother hears their sincere prayers and she is an intercessory for them to Jesus, Son of God and God the Son. She speaks with me regularly and that is another miracle. I, who had lost faith and turned away from God and embraced a secular and selfish life, have been granted a wonderful grace.''
The Sunday Times has received letters discrediting Mr Jakeman and Ms Powell.
They say the statue started weeping only after Mr Jakeman arrived in Rockingham.
Father Walsh said this week the statue stopped weeping shortly after Mr Jakeman left.
In an email to The Sunday Times last year, Mr Jakeman said: "If people wish to speak badly then I cannot stop them doing so.
"In general, people will have a mindset or opinion, which is based on whatever their perceptions at the time are.''
Archbishop Hickey yesterday distanced himself from the Rockingham scandal and said he doubted the miracles were real.
"It's a matter between him (Father Walsh) and Ron,'' he said. ``It's not about his visions or stigmata or anything like that.
"It is nothing that involved me. There is no reason whatsoever why I should be involved at all.
"People can say what they like on private websites. It hasn't got my seal of approval so people can make their own judgments about that.
"I have always said that I would love to believe what's going on (with the apparitions and the weeping statue), but in my position I have to accept that there might be human intervention - even if it's not obvious.''
STORY
Weeping Mary Man Expelled
Weeping Mary Man Expelled
Devotion to the souls in Purgatory contains in itself all the works of mercy, which supernaturalized by a spirit of faith, should merit us Heaven. de Sales
-
KevinSymonds
- Posts: 887
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:38 am
-
KevinSymonds
- Posts: 887
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:38 am
I'll take the priest at his word. Sometimes clerics just can't tell people some things without exposing someone's sin.
Maybe the man is a homosexual and hit on the priest or a fellow parishioner?
Maybe he fornicated or adulterated with a woman from the parish?
Who knows? Either way, the priest is not able to divulge that information unless it is to the Bishop.
-KJS
Maybe the man is a homosexual and hit on the priest or a fellow parishioner?
Maybe he fornicated or adulterated with a woman from the parish?
Who knows? Either way, the priest is not able to divulge that information unless it is to the Bishop.
-KJS
Analysis of the ‘Statement by the Catholic Archbishop of Perth’
about his Investigation into the ‘Weeping’ Statue of Rockingham
By
Frank Calneggia
about his Investigation into the ‘Weeping’ Statue of Rockingham
By
Frank Calneggia
Devotion to the souls in Purgatory contains in itself all the works of mercy, which supernaturalized by a spirit of faith, should merit us Heaven. de Sales
sadly the article couldnt be found when i clicked the link...shame the internet only has them for a small time being.
sadly also theres more talk about this in our parish...just takes one person to spread a flyer or word of mouth and kapowww sheeesh
marie
sadly also theres more talk about this in our parish...just takes one person to spread a flyer or word of mouth and kapowww sheeesh
marie
"He who followeth Me, walketh not in darkness." sayeth the Lord
I found the cached copy.
Archbishop withdraws ‘weeping statue’ - not safe to declare its ‘tears’ divine
Archbishop Barry Hickey
The Archbishop of Perth, Archbishop Barry Hickey, has withdrawn the “weeping statue” of the Virgin Mary “from public veneration within the churches and other Church properties within the Archdiocese”.
This follows the investigation by a commission of inquiry into whether the weeping statue was miraculous or could be “explained by other means”.
The commission resolved that it was not safe to conclude that the weeping was of divine origin.
Archbishop Hickey says the findings do not mean that people’s experiences were not genuine.
“Their experiences are valid,” he said.
“Our Lady answers prayers and if they are praying with great love and devotion then Our Lady will hear their prayers and that explains the conversions and healings and renewed faith.
“It is not a proof that the weeping is miraculous, but it is a proof that Mary answers prayers.
“So it has done no harm for people to pray in front of the statue because they are praying to Mary and not just because an extraordinary event happened. That extraordinary event may lead them to pray, but it’s the prayer that does the job.”
Archbishop Hickey said he did not regret statements he made, when the statue was first reported in the media, that the sight of Mary “weeping” moved him.
“I can understand people falling on their knees and praying, but that doesn’t mean to say that it is authentic,” he said.
“I felt that it touched me at that time and I allowed it to continue because no investigation had taken place and it might have lasted just a few days, a week or two. But it didn’t; it lasted a long time, so long that I felt that there should be an investigation.”
He said had it come and gone he would have said that it was just a wonderful happening and left it at that, but having had the investigation there are now other explanations and it couldn’t be said to be a miracle.
“In a way I’m sad, I wish it had come through all the tests,” Archbishop Hickey said. “But it hasn’t, so I have to be effective about the matter and say that the last six months have been wonderful, but now is the time to return the statue to its owner.”
Our Lady continues to answer prayers whether there was a statue or not.
The Archbishop said there may be many in the community who did not accept the commission’s findings and continued to believe they had witnessed a miracle.
“People can continue to believe in it certainly and I can’t stop them,” he said.
“But if they want me to expose it in one of the churches or church buildings then I have to say no.
“There are claims of miraculous events around the world in private homes and we don’t do anything about that. But for a statue to continue to be in a church available to the faithful after this investigation then I really am not able to do that.”
He said it was not wrong for people to believe, but he had a responsibility to consider whether the evidence of the investigation is convincing enough to allow the statue to be made public.
Unfortunately, this had not been shown to be the case.
Archbishop Hickey said that scientific examination of the statue - including magnification, X-rays and a CT scan - had revealed no evidence of internal interference as the cavity was dry and empty.
Factors which led to the commission’s decision included:
• The weeping stopped when the statue was dried and retained by the Commission for testing from December 10 to 14.
• The weeping stopped when the statue was again dried by Perth Auxiliary Bishop Donald Sproxton and held in isolation by the parish priest of Our Lady of Lourdes, Rockingham, Fr Finbarr Walsh, at Archbishop Hickey’s request, for a month from January 9.
• Analysis of the ‘tears’ showed that they were not one substance, but two, which had been mixed.
• In other circumstances, it had been shown that it was possible to create the impression of weeping statues by means of external application of oil.
For these reasons, and in keeping with the Church’s traditional prudence and reservation concerning matters purporting to be miraculous, he had accepted the Commission’s advice.
The Archbishop commended the priests and people of the Rockingham Parish for their hospitality to the thousands of people who visited their church while the statue was available for veneration.
“Along with many other priests who made themselves available for the sacrament of Reconciliation, they gave generously of their time without thought of personal reward in the best traditions of Christian hospitality,” he said.
He also pointed out that at no stage did the Church seek donations from people visiting the statue.
Donations that were spontaneously offered had been fully accounted for and had been directed to works of mercy in the slums of Bangkok.
He added that many people had pointed to the conversions and renewed faith that have accompanied visits to the statue as proof of its authenticity.
“These are the fruits of prayer for which we give thanks to God,” he said.
“They are gifts of God through Mary’s prayerful intercession, but are not necessarily proof that these events are miraculous. Catholic faith in the goodness of God and his Blessed Mother does not depend on particular extraordinary events.”
The statue was first reported to have wept on March 19 last year, the solemnity of St Joseph, and then again over the four days from Holy Thursday to Easter Sunday, and a third time on June 22, the solemnity of Corpus Christi.
The process began again on August 15 and continued unabated until the statue was handed over for investigation on December 10, 2002.
It became widely known around the world after a report in the Perth archdiocesan newspaper, The Record, on September 5, 2002.
Archbishop withdraws ‘weeping statue’ - not safe to declare its ‘tears’ divine
Archbishop Barry Hickey
The Archbishop of Perth, Archbishop Barry Hickey, has withdrawn the “weeping statue” of the Virgin Mary “from public veneration within the churches and other Church properties within the Archdiocese”.
This follows the investigation by a commission of inquiry into whether the weeping statue was miraculous or could be “explained by other means”.
The commission resolved that it was not safe to conclude that the weeping was of divine origin.
Archbishop Hickey says the findings do not mean that people’s experiences were not genuine.
“Their experiences are valid,” he said.
“Our Lady answers prayers and if they are praying with great love and devotion then Our Lady will hear their prayers and that explains the conversions and healings and renewed faith.
“It is not a proof that the weeping is miraculous, but it is a proof that Mary answers prayers.
“So it has done no harm for people to pray in front of the statue because they are praying to Mary and not just because an extraordinary event happened. That extraordinary event may lead them to pray, but it’s the prayer that does the job.”
Archbishop Hickey said he did not regret statements he made, when the statue was first reported in the media, that the sight of Mary “weeping” moved him.
“I can understand people falling on their knees and praying, but that doesn’t mean to say that it is authentic,” he said.
“I felt that it touched me at that time and I allowed it to continue because no investigation had taken place and it might have lasted just a few days, a week or two. But it didn’t; it lasted a long time, so long that I felt that there should be an investigation.”
He said had it come and gone he would have said that it was just a wonderful happening and left it at that, but having had the investigation there are now other explanations and it couldn’t be said to be a miracle.
“In a way I’m sad, I wish it had come through all the tests,” Archbishop Hickey said. “But it hasn’t, so I have to be effective about the matter and say that the last six months have been wonderful, but now is the time to return the statue to its owner.”
Our Lady continues to answer prayers whether there was a statue or not.
The Archbishop said there may be many in the community who did not accept the commission’s findings and continued to believe they had witnessed a miracle.
“People can continue to believe in it certainly and I can’t stop them,” he said.
“But if they want me to expose it in one of the churches or church buildings then I have to say no.
“There are claims of miraculous events around the world in private homes and we don’t do anything about that. But for a statue to continue to be in a church available to the faithful after this investigation then I really am not able to do that.”
He said it was not wrong for people to believe, but he had a responsibility to consider whether the evidence of the investigation is convincing enough to allow the statue to be made public.
Unfortunately, this had not been shown to be the case.
Archbishop Hickey said that scientific examination of the statue - including magnification, X-rays and a CT scan - had revealed no evidence of internal interference as the cavity was dry and empty.
Factors which led to the commission’s decision included:
• The weeping stopped when the statue was dried and retained by the Commission for testing from December 10 to 14.
• The weeping stopped when the statue was again dried by Perth Auxiliary Bishop Donald Sproxton and held in isolation by the parish priest of Our Lady of Lourdes, Rockingham, Fr Finbarr Walsh, at Archbishop Hickey’s request, for a month from January 9.
• Analysis of the ‘tears’ showed that they were not one substance, but two, which had been mixed.
• In other circumstances, it had been shown that it was possible to create the impression of weeping statues by means of external application of oil.
For these reasons, and in keeping with the Church’s traditional prudence and reservation concerning matters purporting to be miraculous, he had accepted the Commission’s advice.
The Archbishop commended the priests and people of the Rockingham Parish for their hospitality to the thousands of people who visited their church while the statue was available for veneration.
“Along with many other priests who made themselves available for the sacrament of Reconciliation, they gave generously of their time without thought of personal reward in the best traditions of Christian hospitality,” he said.
He also pointed out that at no stage did the Church seek donations from people visiting the statue.
Donations that were spontaneously offered had been fully accounted for and had been directed to works of mercy in the slums of Bangkok.
He added that many people had pointed to the conversions and renewed faith that have accompanied visits to the statue as proof of its authenticity.
“These are the fruits of prayer for which we give thanks to God,” he said.
“They are gifts of God through Mary’s prayerful intercession, but are not necessarily proof that these events are miraculous. Catholic faith in the goodness of God and his Blessed Mother does not depend on particular extraordinary events.”
The statue was first reported to have wept on March 19 last year, the solemnity of St Joseph, and then again over the four days from Holy Thursday to Easter Sunday, and a third time on June 22, the solemnity of Corpus Christi.
The process began again on August 15 and continued unabated until the statue was handed over for investigation on December 10, 2002.
It became widely known around the world after a report in the Perth archdiocesan newspaper, The Record, on September 5, 2002.
Devotion to the souls in Purgatory contains in itself all the works of mercy, which supernaturalized by a spirit of faith, should merit us Heaven. de Sales