To many Protestants, “Marian apparitions” and appearances of the other saints are all either frauds or demonic occurrences.* If this describes how you feel, consider this–this view is both (1) Bibically untenable and (2) calls into question every small “o” orthodox opinion Protestants hold.
*To be fair, Got Questions takes a more tempered view, allowing for the possibility of appearances, but warning we must compare what is taught by these alleged saints by the Scriptures.
1. Post-death appearances occur in the Scriptures and early Jewish writings. We have the appearance of Elijah and Moses on the mount of transfiguration, the two witnesses in Revelation are often considered the same two men by Protestant theologians, and the early Jewish writing 2 Maccabees speaks of an appearance of Onias (a deceased high priest) and Jeremiah in a “vision.” In short, to say every appearance after death is demonic contradicts the Scriptures and forces an extra-biblical hermeneutic upon the Scriptures (i.e. unless the appearance is recorded in the Scriptures, it is demonic by default).
2. Protestants, like the Orthodox, have largely the same Christological doctrine and Biblical Canon (sans some Old Testament books). Both the Canon and Christological doctrine we have in common was hammered out in the fourth century. We must be careful to reiterate it is not that the beliefs we share did not precede this period of time, as they are Apostolic teachings given to the Apostles by God Himself. Nevertheless, the terminology we use to describe it (i.e. Trinity, Godhead, Hypostasis, essence, substance, etcetera) are all terms that are used in formulations from between the third and fourth centuries. We, both Protestants and Orthodox, are comfortable with these formulations and have stuck with them for 1700 years because they are the best we can come up with.
That being said, the same men whom we trust to have accurately hammered out the Christological details in creedal statements and theological treatises–many of the same men of whom were the first to agree upon a 27 book New Testament that both Orthodox and Protestants share–had no problem believing in appearances of Mary and the other saints. For example, in the third century Saint Gregory the Wonderworker devised a Trinitarian Creedal statement (“…There is a perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty, neither divided nor estranged. Wherefore there is nothing either created or in servitude in the Trinity…”). This creedal statement was, allegedly, given to him by no other than Mary herself. This story is not passed down to us in some medieval “lives of the saints,” but by another pivotal Trinitarian apologist from the century subsequent, Saint Gregory of Nyssa.
The earliest appearance of a saint after death we have is that of Polycarp, the associate of the Apostle John. It is documented for us in the Martyrdom of Polycarp, a writing that liberal textual-critics date to the mid second century.
The above should not be taken as license to believe every single story about an appearance of a saint. In fact, there are demons who masquerade as saints, angels of light, and etcetera. However, what we do have is proof that apparitions are part of Christian history and the Scriptures, and cannot be handwaved away outright as demonic in all circumstances. If we do that, we put our shared Scriptures and doctrines into question.
Orthodox Christian Theology 
Can Protestants be trusted here? With nearly 30,000 denominations or splinter groups, it is hard to have confidence in Protestants.
Well, with that many one of them may be right!
The Orthodox Church believes Mary can appear in the Orthodox Church, but because of the sin against God of Filioquism papism and the innovations of Rome since 1013-1014, 1054 AD, and especially since the great sin of the Fourth Crusade against Constantinople in 1204 AD, the blessed Mother of God grieves over the heresies and schisms of the bishops of Rome, who need to return to the true faith and heal the schism. She is waiting for them to repent and return to Christ in Orthodoxy.
A few Protestants may protest that the saints are unresurrected and thus cannot show up here. But then that would have to apply to Moses and Elijah, as well.
I think you’ll find that most Protestants are fine with apparitions as long as the message they impart is dogmatically orthodox and prophetically accurate to the last detail.
But I’m guessing RC’s and EO’s would basically agree to these same ground rules. You don’t accept Joseph Smith’s visions, do you? The apparitions which appeared to him would have to be considered either fraudulent or demonic (provided he was not delusional, the third option, mirroring C. S. Lewis’s famous “trilemma”).
Since I assume you do not accept the Immaculate Conception, you must of necessity reject the authenticity of Lourdes. So, in your view, was Bernadette psychotic or a liar? Or perhaps you feel she encountered a demon?
I think the Got Questions article was good, because it allowed for apparitions but said they must be tested against the Scriptures. I do believe that the Theotokos, or any saint, would ascribe all glory to God–or give personal advice with whatever insight they have from being partakers of the divine nature. The RC appearances do go beyond this.
Good article. I think as a former Protestant I can relate to the use of Scripture as your guide, but now as a convert to Catholicism I can rely on the full deposit of the faith. Also the magisterial teaching office of the Church gives guidance to which apparitions are approved for belief.
You’re right, Rodney.
And if you were a Mormon, you could rely on an even “fuller deposit of the faith.”
Keep up the search for the fullest deposit possible. Some Pentecostals add all sorts of things!
(Me, I’m sticking with divine revelation as originally given,)
All the best in your diligent quest.
Sorry, that was a bit snarky on my part.
It’s just that we Protestants feel that WE have the “full deposit of the faith.”
So, in our view, you have added to the deposit…a definite no-no.
fair enough–i agree with your view of material sufficiency, i disagree with your interpretive views which I believe requires tradition
Whose tradition does it require? (The church’s tradition? Which church?)
Whereever that it may be reasonably inferred there is consensus on an issue.
One’s own “personal interpretive scheme” must reign…of necessity. You’re the only one inside your brain, Craig. In the end, it’s your responsibility and yours alone. No one can shoulder it for you.
You had a reasonable rationale for converting to EO, I assume. You didn’t just make a pie chart of all the denominations and spin an arrow!
Craig–
Reasonably inferred by whom?
In your recent post concerning early Christian prayers to saints, you stated:
“In light of the preceding, any reasonable person would conclude that, without definitive grounds to object to the practice of praying to the saints, they must be accepted. To not do so ultimately belies an unreasonable approach to Christianity itself.”
Of course, the fact that there is no clear description of the practice in Scripture is definitive enough grounds to advise great caution.
As I believe I said there, it is possible to surmise an early acceptance of prayer FOR the dead, of speculation that the saints pray for us (and gratitude there unto), and perhaps even of asking the saints for their prayers. What there is absolutely NO evidence for is addressing the holy departed in god-like honorifics or expecting that the saints themselves might directly grant requests.
And I shouldn’t need to remind you that “no evidence” and “consensus” are not exactly equivalent! You, in fact, seem to acknowledge as much but that you submit to the superior wisdom of your mentors in the faith. (So much for “reasonable.”)
Therefore, it seems you are rejecting both reason AND consensus. So why on earth do you appeal to them?
Hi, neighborhood friendly protestant here. Just wondered, how often do these kind of apparitions occur?
Almost never. It is believed that generally only the extremely devout, those canonized as saints, ever see a real apparition. Most apparitions are of a demonic nature and even saints have been deceived by false apparitions. None of us should be seeking for them as this reflects spiritual pride. Saint anthony from the 4th century gave a simple rule–real apparitions leave zero confusion. Apparently anything demonic leaves you questioning in some way.
God bless
Thanks. That’s the exact conclusion I would’ve come to had you been like “all the time” or something similar.
Hey Craig,
Do you think you could do an article or discussion about the Dormition/Assumption of the Theotokos?Here’s White vs. Sungenis on the topic: https://youtu.be/IuEhodbM-Mk
Thanks for the article about the White vs. Madrid debate concerning icons and saints. I really enjoyed it.