Bayside Exposed

Prophecy of Marie Julie Jahenny, Briton Stigmatist (1891):

Marie-Julie Jahenny is an approved mystic of the Church.

Veronica Lueken is not.

Dear friends, I do not include the below article against the 'visions' of Bayside blithely or casually. In fact, I have family members that embraced it back in the 1980's and because they have accepted these 'visions' they have made life-long decisions to "stay in their (Conciliar) Churches" as the 'visions of Our Lady' said. They have never accepted Tradition because they first and exclusively accepted what they heard from Bayside. And those family members are good souls who simply believe what they were told and 'obediently' did it.

There was some good about the visits to Bayside though, it brought some in my family into contact with people who directed them to the SSPX (of the 1980's - the good days!) and thankfully, several souls in my family found Tradition at that time, of which I personally reaped the benefit of as well. We all know God can use anything to bring about some good. In my family's case, those that abandoned Bayside and found Tradition, much good came of it. For those that continued to embrace Bayside's 'messages' - they remained loyally in the Conciliar pews all their lives. By their fruits...

The purpose of including this article is the same as was previously done here about Medjugorje. It is to help see these 'apparitions' in the light of the Faith. I wish I could find a good article written by a good priest about Bayside but so far I have not. So I am using the article below, written by a layman, but one who has done much research in collecting and categorizing the most troublesome 'messages' from the Bayside 'seer' Veronica Lueken.

I am leaving out the beginning paragraph or so of the article below as the author expresses the great disgust he experienced in researching the 'messages' of Bayside. These are his private opinions and not necessary to point out the obvious errors found throughout the 'messages'. I personally don't like the sarcasm the author employs throughout the article nor am I advocating the author himself or his all of his commentary.

For your consideration...

[...]

A word about the messages: the messages of Bayside delivered by Veronica Lueken are divided up by month and year. Some months have one or two messages; others have over a dozen. Some messages were short, others very, very long and rambling. They begin in 1968 and go up to June, 1994, when Veronica died. The text of the messages are taken from a website called These Last Days Ministries, commonly known as TLDM.org, which is the largest internet repository of the messages of Veronica. Now, there is some sort of schism among Baysiders regarding this website; some purists claim that the webmaster of TLDM has incorrectly transcribed some of the messages - these folks suggest the only "authentic" version of them are found in some books. However, this opinion is not universal, and even if TLDM has not transcribed the messages with 100% accuracy, they are not that different from what is found in the books, which I also had access to and compared some of the more saucier passages to.

I have here simply categorized all the problems I see with the messages. Not everything is "heresy"; I am not making that accusation. Some of it is, but some of it is incorrect history, failed prophecies, weirdness or just plain stupidity. These all constitute "red flags" that should give pause to anyone evaluating the credibility of this apparition. According to my own personal standards of credibility, even one of these problems would be sufficient to cast doubt on the whole thing, but I understand others' standards may be different.

I have tried to create categories to make it easier to read. Within each category, the actual messages of Bayside (or descriptions of what the messages describe) appear in bold with the exact date appearing afterward for reference. My commentary follows each selection. I have researched many private apparitions over the years, true and false, notable and obscure - Medjugorje, Garabandal, Fatima, Pinckney, Emmitsburg, the "Army of Mary" - Bayside takes the cake as the absolute stupidest, most unbelievable and ridiculously ludicrous of them all.

I have created a table of contents for ease of browsing. For what its worth, enjoy.

1. Distracted, Absentminded Mary and Veronica
2. Bizarre Angelology
3. False/Failed Prophecies
4. Bad Grammar/Jesus and Our Lady Messing Up Their Words
5. Bayside Necessary for our Salvation?
6. Bad Theology
7. Frivolous Subject Matter
8. Simply Ridiculous
9. Television [omitted since the author quotes Vatican II in its defense]
10. Contradictions
11. Absurd Alleged Statistics about Satanism
12. Conclusion

Distracted, Absentminded Mary and Veronica

Mary frequently gets distracted during her apparitions. This is not unlike the absurd situation at Medjugorje where one of the visionaries, supposedly in an ecstasy, tried to explain her embarrassing flinching by saying that Mary looked as if she were going to drop the baby Jesus! Other times, the apparitions are described as being responsive to local temperature and conditions (Jesus wearing a cape because "it's very windy"). Here are some examples of Mary distracted at Bayside, or Veronica getting distracted during an alleged apparition:

Mary looks up and gets distracted by an airplane (June 18th, 1994)

You'd think Mary would not get distracted by shiny things in the sky.

"He [Jesus] has a beautiful golden - tinged robe about Him now. It’s pulled very tight, I don’t know if it’s because of the wind or what, but He’s pulling the gown about Him to prevent it from flying up, I guess. It looks very windy there." (June 18, 1994)

"And He has on a cape, an ecru, almost white-colored cape over His gown. It’s quite, it’s quite a bit chilly over here. That is why I would assume that Jesus is wearing His cape." (June 18, 1994)

Here, God the Son and His Mother depend upon Veronica to obtain a very trite piece of information for their records:

"Now you will continue, My child; look forward and find the other wheelchair, My child. It seems to be hidden. It is very necessary that you find that invalid, because we must have their name and address." (June 18, 1988)

Jesus and Mary need to get somebody's name and address!?

Mary tells Veronica to pray the Rosary. Veronica forgets Mary is coming back:

"I'm sorry, Our Lady. I had almost forgotten that You were coming back. I was so engrossed with the people in the infirm circle." (June 18, 1992)

You "forgot" that the Blessed Virgin Mother of God was returning to you?

Bizarre Angelology

Bayside has prompted devotions to questionable spiritual entities with no history in the Catholic Tradition. Ever heard of Tomdarius and Tusazeri? According to Veronica, St. Theresa encourages the faithful to interact with these strange beings, whatever they are:

Saint Theresa - "You know, my sister, many of the names. Will you give some this evening to others?"

Veronica - Yes. There's Tomdarius, Tusazeri…. He is my guardian angel, but he's quite a clown. He likes to circle around. And right now he’s turning and spinning again. He always does that when he sees me; he turns and spins. And now also, there's Razene and Nadina and many others.(Oct 1, 1988)

It has been a perennial discipline in the Catholic Church that spiritual beings are not to be summoned, communicated with, or invoked by name other than those whose names are specifically revealed in Scripture (Michael, Gabriel, Raphael). You simply don't know to whom you are speaking when you invoke Tusazeri. Tusazeri, explains Veronica, his not only her guardian angel, but one of the archangels:

"I ... have asked Our Lady if I could have permission to tell who Tusazeri is. Our Lady says I may. Tusazeri is one of the high archangels of Heaven who Jesus sent to be with me when Theresa started the Mission for Heaven in 1968. He was sent by Jesus to protect me in this work against satan. Many times I have forgotten to call upon him when there are difficulties" (Feb 1, 1973).

This would mean that Veronica, alone in all of Christian tradition, has an archangel - a "high archangel" - as her personal guardian angel, presumably of the same rank with Michael, Gabriel and Raphael, the only other "archangels" known to Tradition. What hubris.

In another place, Mary tells the faithful that they need no longer concern themselves with the work of evangelization in the world because this task has been entrusted exclusively to the angels!

“My child, you must not use the little strength you have to try to convert all upon earth. You will have to give this to the angels to do most of this work of conversion. (May 26, 1979).

The angels have many jobs in Scripture and Tradition, but evangelizing has always been the job of humans. As we shall see later, this withdrawal from active evangelization is part of the cultic exclusivity of Bayside, which encourages believers to simply withdraw among themselves and shun those who do not believe in the apparitions. And yet, on June 9, 1979, Jesus says through Veronica, "You cannot and must not break away and form your own groups."

After relating an angelic vision of St. Michael and the Archangels, Veronica is given this number to combat the forces of Satan:

Jesus: “All you will repeat, My child, are the numbers ‘77 3,’ ‘77 3,’ ‘77 3.’ Remember, My child, as Lucifer goes forward with his plan against the papacy watch for ‘77 3’!” (Sept. 28, 1979)

Repeat 77 3? Is this sound Catholic spirituality?

Veronica herself states that the initial apparitions were accompanied by bizarre supernatural phenomenon:

"On August 4, 1968, at about 5:30 a.m., Veronica was in the living room making preparations for the early morning Mass. Suddenly this same framed letter went floating across the living room, as though propelled by an unseen, unknown force, and crashed with a loud noise at Veronica's feet. This turned out to be a little much." ("Occulations from Heaven", pg. 5).

Is this how our Lord or the Holy Angels manifest themselves? Veronica's son Raymond, who was twelve years old in 1970, testified on tape on July 27, 1970 that the Lueken house was widely believed to be haunted by the neighbors due to some of these bizarre occurrences.

False/Failed Prophecies

There are many false prophecies as well. Now, Baysiders will inevitably say that the letter of these prophecies may not have been violated, but it is indisputable that these prophecies give the impression of certain things coming to pass that certainly did not pan out. For example:

"There will be one more most devastating plague upon you. That will come within the next six months, My children. You ask, My child, why is this allowed? My child, you have forgotten the real reason for all this: man will benefit from it in the end. (June 18, 1983).

Obviously there was no massive plague in late 1983, let alone a "devastating" plague that "that your scientists will not be able to explain nor stop", as Veronica says in the same message.

The Act of Contrition "will be cast from the books this coming year." (Oct. 6, 1988)

The Act of Contrition was never ejected from any official Catholic books, let alone in 1989.

"A Ball that is fast hurtling towards earth! It will be here within this century, if not sooner.’ For even the scientists have failed to recognize the speed of this Ball." (June 18, 1988)

Woops. That century ended on December 31st, 1999.

The next war will embroil many nations and be a war "to the finish" (June 18, 1994)

The "next war", at least from an American perspective, were the wars in Bosnia (1995) and Kosovo (1999), hardly a war "to the finish." Even if one ignored these conflicts and went on to the Afghan and Iraqi wars, these wars were nearly unilateral (not embroiling "many nations") and were certainly not "to the finish."

"Within two years or less, there will be a great crash of the market. The whole world's monetary systems will be paralyzed" (June 18, 1988).

Although there was an economic recession in the United States from 1990-1992, it was largely confined to the United States. The rest of the world was not effected, let alone paralyzed.

"Boris Yeltsin is the "man of sin"; no different from Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev." (June 18, 1992)

Boris Yeltsin is identified as the man of sin but no mention is made of Putin, who is extremely more dangerous and sinister. Veronica clearly did not see Putin coming.

"The Ball of Redemption hovers now in your atmosphere" (June 18, 1994)

Remember, the Ball of Redemption is supposed to be large enough to destroy 1/3 of the African continent. It is no small object. Apparently it has been hovering in our atmosphere since 1994. Undetected. These messages are very common. She was saying the same thing almost ten years earlier, though in a much more alarmist manner:

"The Eternal Father has the Ball poised in His hand; your end can come by day. It will come upon you quickly, and how many shall be prepared? Do you have your candles? Do you have your water, your canned food, and your blankets?" (Nov 5, 1985)

More false prophecy...

"Veronica, my child, announce to the world that the end approaches for your most illustrious President of the United States, and also, your Pope, John Paul II." (Nov. 1, 1985)

"The end approaches" for Reagan? Too bad he lived for twenty more years.

God is "getting ready" for the chastisement; John Paul II will be "exterminated" and replaced by the "despot", who is the Antichrist (Oct. 6, 1992)

Wait...the antichrist is the man of sin (2 Thess. 2:1-12), which Veronica above identified as Yeltsin. So JPII was supposed to be exterminated and replaced by...Yeltsin? Or is the man of sin now different from the antichrist? At any rate it doesn't matter, because John Paul II was certainly not "exterminated", nor replaced by a despot, unless the despot is the meek Joseph Ratzinger who was so despotic that he voluntarily resigned the papacy in 2013.

Veronica (er, I mean, the Virgin Mary) prophesied danger to John Paul II back in 1979, speaking of an attempt on his life and warning him not to travel abroad:

“You will send this message to John Paul II. He is in grave danger. I have asked him in the past to not make many trips away from his homeland—which is now the Seat of Peter in Rome (June 2, 1979).

John Paul was of course the victim of an assassination attempt in May, 1981. Too bad it happened right in St. Peter's Square, not "away from his homeland" as Bayside suggests. It is also amusing how Mary warns John Paul not to travel "away from his homeland", but immediately realizing that this would mean Poland, and that as Pope in Rome he is perpetually "away from his homeland", she has to qualify the statement by saying that John Paul II's "homeland" is actually the See of Rome.

Prophecies of the impending assassination of John Paul II were very common. Here is an example from 1983, Veronica narrating:

"I see a man. He's dressed as a cleric, the clergy. He has in his left hand a knife. It's a long knife - no, it's like a saber... I don't know ... he's pulling it out of his pants. It seems to be in his pant leg near his belt. And it's very long. And he's pulling it out with his left hand and starting to raise it, and with his right hand he has a revolver, a small gun - not a shotgun, a small gun. And he's screaming, and everything has become silent about him with the screams, "Death to the Pope! Death to the Pope!" (March 18, 1983)

Obviously this did not happen. Three years later, the warnings continue:

"You must pray for your Holy Father, the Pope. There will be another attempt upon his life. Yes, My child, though he means well, it would be best if he discards his habit of going to and fro. For it is upon one of these journeys that he will be destroyed." (May 17, 1986)

Whatever one thinks about John Paul II's international travels, he certainly was not "destroyed" on one. But as we shall see, predictions of John Paul's assassination were very common. Only five months later, Mary is predicting that he will be killed, not on one of his travels, but in Assisi during the interfaith prayer gatherings, and by communists:

"Tell the world, My child, in great haste that the Red Bear is planning to kill Our Holy Father, your Vicar on earth, John Paul II, when he meets with the nations in common prayer. You will not fully understand what I say to you, My child, but I repeat it again: Shout! Shout from the rooftops, until your words, the words from Heaven, reach the Holy Father in Rome. The Red Bear is planning to kill your Vicar, your Holy Father upon earth, John Paul II, when he meets with the nations in common prayer." (Sept 27, 1986)

These predictions of impending assassination were still being proclaimed in 1991, after communism had fallen.

"An attempt upon the life of your Vicar is planned: not in this year, but the next." (Nov, 26th, 1991)

Okay, they can always say that just because no assassination on John Paul II was attempted in 1992 does not mean one was not planned, but as we have seen, there is a constant reference to an impending destruction of John Paul II that leads one to believe in an imminent assassination. Of course, John Paul would reign in peace for another thirteen years. Another example of an implied assassination attempt that never materialized:

"there will be very soon another attempt upon his life. Only you can save him now, because, My children, in all factuality, We tell you: Without your prayers you will lose him within the next year" (Mar 18, 1989)

Back in 1984, we were apparently only days away from World War III:

"My child and My children, you do not understand how close you are on the brink to the Third World War, which could break out any day now." (June 18, 1984)

This seemed to be a common theme in 1984. For example:

"I warn you all now; You are approaching a terrible crisis, a crisis that will involve death. Blood shall flow from the streets of New York soon." (June 30, 1984)

"It has not started, My child, but there will be great confusion, and war shall break out in the western part of Germany." (June 30, 1984)

Apparently, the United States was secretly surrounded by a great army ready to invade:

"Your country, the United States of America, is in great danger for invasion. Already the plan is in motion. I warn you again: The United States of America is in great danger of invasion. You are surrounded now by the enemy." (June 30, 1984)

Notice that it says the U.S. was "surrounded." That's right - our country was surrounded. For this to be true, in June, 1984 we would have had to have hostile armies stationed along the Mexican border and stretched out all along the Canadian border, as well as at least some hostile naval forces on both our Pacific and Atlantic shorelines. Only then could we in any meaningful sense be "surrounded." Clearly this was not the case. But into 1986, Veronica is still suggesting that the United States is not only surrounded but also already invaded - covertly - by Russian spies!

"Russia, My children, is not entering where you can see them. They are infiltrating now into every side of your nation: north, south, east, and west - on the outer fringes and the inner fringes." (May 17, 1986)

Given the amount of people necessary to fully surrounded and infiltrate the United States, this must have been a massive number of people. Where were all these Russian spies?

In June 1986, we are only "hours" away from the next major war:

"The hourglass now is almost empty; days can be counted by hours." (June 18, 1986)

But by fall of that year, it was still "several months" off":

We can no longer protect them from what is to come about within the next several months. Yes, My child, there will be blood flowing in the streets of the United States. There will be carnage such as has never been seen before in the United States and Canada." (Sept 27, 1986)

But later in the same message, we are back to "days", similar to the language Veronica was using in 1984:

"You will watch as the days go by - I say not years, because this will all happen in days, My child and My children - you will watch as the days go by, the unfolding of the messages, dating from 1970." (Sept 27, 1986)

These messages of imminent war continued into the 1990s:

"Disseminate this message to the world as soon as possible! I your Mother, and Protectress of the world's children, do beg you now to repent of your sins against the teachings of the Eternal Father - sins of the flesh and the intellect. A great war will erupt suddenly, such as has not been seen from the beginning of creation. Countries shall disappear in moments from the face of the earth." (Oct 2nd, 1990)

Another imminent disastrous war prophesied on December 13, 1990.

Sometimes the imminent destruction is a natural disaster. In 1988 it was an earthquake in the U.S.:

"For the United States, a measure of punishment: there will be a great earthquake. This earthquake will be in a most unusual place, My child; but when it happens they will know that they are facing now an angry God... time is growing short." (Oct 1, 1988)

I suppose in all these cases the Baysiders can always say that these dire calamities would have happened had it not been for the prayers of the faithful Bayside devotees. It is very difficult to argue that something did not happen because of prayer; but it does demonstrate that the Bayside prophecies of future calamity did not come true despite being put forward as imminent; it also shows the non-verifiable nature of the Bayside messages.

Another false prophecy is that attack on the Empire State Building:

Jesus - "In those bags they are carrying all the implements of destruction."

Veronica - Oh! I can see now; they're pointing across the street, and I recognize the Empire State Building. Oh, no!

Jesus - My child, they will choose the Empire State Building to bring more notoriety to the world. (Oct 1, 1988)

Whoops. Too bad the actual terrorist attack came at the World Trade Center, not the Empire State Building. And the attack Veronica prophecies was by men setting bombs, not by airplanes. She says:

"Veronica - Well, I see two men. I don't know if they're Moslems. They have a different - colored skin, but they're not exactly black. Now they are walking through a building, and they're carrying with them, now, bags; but the bags are extra large, which makes it most suspicious. (Oct. 1, 1988).

There simply was never an attack on the Empire State Building such as she described.

How about missiles being smuggled into the United States from Nicaragua?

"My child, let the world know that Nicaragua is a center point for the capitulation of the United States of America and Canada. Already there are plans afoot, and in the making, with missiles and all dire instruments of destruction. These plans are being formulated from Nicaragua, to go into Mexico, and thereupon into the United States." (June 18, 1987)

No doubt this message, dated from 1987, was influenced by the unfolding Iran-Contra scandal. It is a prime example of how Bayside messages constantly play to the contemporary headlines but have little objective value. There was not, nor has there ever been, evidence of any missiles being moved into America from Nicaragua. Furthermore, the contention that Nicaragua is the "center point" for the capitulation is laughable.

In an example of a prophecy gone bad, Veronica prophesies in 1987 that communism is gradually swallowing all the nations of the earth:

"Pray that the world does not descend upon you in the form of the Bear. For he is roaming throughout the world, and gradually the nations are falling." (June 18, 1987)

Too bad the collapse of the Soviet bloc and the fall of communism began only twenty-two months after this message was delivered. If the nations were supposed to gradually fall to communism, why didn't our Lady mention that communism itself was about to fall in less than two years? It can always be posited that the prayers of the Baysiders staved off the communist take-over; but note, the prophecy does not say that prayers will stop the nations from falling to the communist bear; it says that the nations are falling, and we are to pray that we do not fall with them. The fall of the nations to communism is taken as a given.

Here the death of Sister Lucia of Fatima is pronounced as imminent:

"Lucy still remains upon earth. She will be here but for a short while longer." (Oct 2, 1987)

This message was given in 1987. Lucy in fact lived for eighteen more years. [Even supposing there was a fake Sr. Lucy, which I tend to think was the case, that could have/should have been clarified here if these messages are authentic. - The Catacombs]

In the following message, the Antichrist is said to be alive and operating in the United States in 1971:

“The man of perdition is in your country. He is now gathering many disciples within your country." (Aug. 5, 1971)

He is not just alive in 1971, but already powerful enough to be gathering disciples. This means the Antichrist must have at least been an adult in 1971. If we were to say thirty years old at least, that would make him 73 years old today. If the conquest of the world about to be undertaken by a 73 year old man?

Bad Grammar/Jesus and Our Lady Messing Up Their Words

Many times, the grammar of Jesus and Mary is just horrible. They say words that don't exist, use words in improper contexts, and sometimes, when Veronica messes up and says a wrong word, she goes back and tries to fabricate an explanation in order to preserve the farce.

"I could repeat over and over the Message from Heaven of the past years. But I say to you: murders abound, immorality abounds... all the immunisms of humanism, lesbianism...homosexuals roaming. " (Apr. 14, 1984).

All the immunisms? What?

"Do not feel, parents, that you are doing unjustment to your children (June 18, 1994)

What kind of word is "unjustment"?

"Do not misunderstand, and do not discalculate the power of satan." (Sept 27, 1986)

Discalculate!? That word doesn't even exist.

"Modernism! That's what stymies mankind, modernism!" (Nov 1, 1985)

While I appreciate her condemnation of Modernism, I question where our Lord would use the verb "stymies." Maybe. But, that is not as bizarre as:

Jesus again: "The Eternal Father knew that once satan came into the world and was released from hell with all his demons, he expected many to fall to his cajolery's" (Oct 5, 1985)

Cajoler's!? Cajolery's!? For real? I am sorry; I cannot believe that Jesus Christ would use the word "cajolery." I may be wrong here, but our Lord seems to be using a vocabulary that is extraordinarily colloquial - I mean, to an absurd degree.

We see Jesus also is bad at math, as well. In a warning delivered to Veronica, Jesus slips up and has to qualify His math:

"Therefore, I warn you now as your God: You will stop your intricacies within My Church. You will stop experimenting. I gave you the rules to follow many years ago, two thousand years approximately" (June 18th 1986).

Aside from the weird grammar of "stop your intricacies" (intricacies is a plural noun and usually when you say 'Stop your x" the word in question is a verb), we see Jesus having to qualify His math. "Two thousand years...approximately"!? What happened was when Veronica said 2,000 years in 1986, she quickly realized that this would bring us back to 14 BC, clearly too soon for Jesus to have given any rules at all, so she adds the word "approximately" to the end of her statement to correct the embarrassing error.

Another example of an "oops" moment is when St. Therese is speaking with Veronica and calls her "my child." Now, there is nothing wrong with a saint calling a person "my child", but Veronica seems to notice after speaking that Therese calling her "child" might be confusing because St. Therese is younger than Veronica, so she puts the following correction into the mouth of St. Therese in which Therese has to explain that she is actually older in "earth-years" than she appears:

“Veronica, my child—I call you ‘my child’ because Our Lady calls you ‘My child.’ I am many earth-years older than you now, but I always will be even a child to the Eternal Father. (Oct. 2, 1979)

This is another demonstration of how Veronica uses feels compelled to have Jesus, Mary and the saints "correct" themselves when she makes embarrassing errors or, as in this case, statements that are just confusing.

"My child and My children, I shall not give a long, dissentive discord with you this evening" (Nov 1, 1985)

And what is a "dissentive discord"? "Dissentive" means "disagreeing" or "inconsistent." "Discord" means disharmony or strife. Clearly, Veronica meant to say "discourse" instead of "discord", and I don't know what instead of "dissentive" - maybe "descriptive" or "deductive"? Who knows. It reminds me of the old Oswald Bates' skits from In Living Color with the guy using all sorts of big words incorrectly. Clearly not the voice of an inerrant God speaking here.

"And My good children, you do not pray for your priests. You do not pay - I say the word 'pay', for them - in other words, ransom them from purgatory. Ransom them even from hell." (June 18, 1982)

Clearly, Veronica meant to have Our Lady say "pray"; this is obvious from the context of the preceding statement. But she accidentally said "pay", which prompts a clumsy explanation about how we need to "pay." And how do you ransom a priest from hell? Maybe she means ransom them from being on the path to hell? This is just weird. Here is another example of a mess up:

"There are many armors worn by My children that will protect them from these satanists. I know that those who are satirists—I call them satirists, My child" (Nov 1, 1985)

Satirists? Clearly Veronica misspoke. But Jesus cannot misspeak. Therefore she needs to find a quick explanation for her mess up. One more example:

Jesus: "My child and My children, do not become as Lot's wife, who had to look back and be turned to a pillar of stone—salt it was, My child, not stone; it was salt." (Nov 1, 1985)

Pillar of stone? Woops. No way out of this one.

"And if a priest or a minister even has the dare to blaspheme himself and tell you that don't worry about sinning, because one day you will even be a god" (June 18, 1982).

"Even has the dare"? Does anybody use the word dare in that way?

"I have asked you for the salvation of all souls. For mankind there will be no peace without prayer and penance and atonement. A great catastrophe is approaching your country, North America" (Oct. 6, 1980).

"Your country, North America"? Jesus needs to go back to third grade to learn the difference between a continent and a country.

“My child and My children of the world—and I call you My children of the world because I have repeated numerous times in the past that the messages from Heaven are for all mankind. (Aug 4, 1979).

Upon realizing that "children of the world" is a biblical phrase not for believers but for unbelievers (Luke 16:8, 24:20) Mary has to quickly correct herself to explain why she addresses the faithful with a title the Bible uses for the unbeliever.

"[Y]ou have been allowed to proceed in error because of your vain satisfaction, seeking of body pleasures, and because you have replaced your God with idols—humanism, idolism, destruction! (Aug. 15, 1971).

Idolism? I presume she means "idolatry."

"I see a great explosive, forceful sight, and I hear a voice cry out: “CATACLISIUM! CATACLYSM! CATACLIST!” Then I see great bodies of land sinking; the water just seems to swallow them up." (July 1, 1971)

...no comment...

In the following excerpt, we see that Mary is speaking, but Veronica slips and has Mary refer to the Church as "My Church", which causes Veronica to interject and state that it was actually Jesus, not Mary, who was speaking the last sentence:

Mary: “There will be much suffering for those who stand to defend My Son’s House. This can never be destroyed, for the foundation is solid. The foundation is My Son, but many now dishonor Him in His House. Blind man of self-gratification, blind man who pursues after his own heart his lust—you call the hand of the Father heavily upon you! “This condition did not arrive overnight, or this year, or two years. This has been well planned.”

Jesus – “Confusion, delusion! O mournful heresy! Whatever will We do with you? Satan is now banding his disciples within My Church.”

Veronica – This is Jesus. (June 17, 1971)

If we look beyond the names of who is supposed to be talking and realize how this actually sounded when it was being delivered, it is easy to see that Veronica slipped up and forgot who was speaking. By having the speaker say "My Church", Veronica had to quickly clarify that it was now Jesus who was speaking. This is another example of how sometimes Veronica cannot keep track of who is supposed to be talking and has to offer retroactive clarifications when embarrassing or inaccurate statements are made. Mary called the Church "My Church", at which point she had to go back and clarify that it was actually Jesus speaking, which was then entered into the transcript of this locution.

Bayside Necessary for Salvation?

At Medjugorje, Mary once stated that adherence to the Medjugorje messages was necessary for one to the "approved" by God. Similarly, Veronica states through Mary that it is necessary for salvation to read all of the Bayside messages:

"That is why I say, and I say again: you must read all of the messages given from Heaven through the past years, or you will not be saved. Much is being overlooked due to the quantity of messages" (Oct 6, 1988)

Did you hear that? You will not be saved if you do not read all the Bayside messages. This is nonsense and heresy. But beside this, Veronica also insinuates to her followers that they must shun their closest friends, become recluses, and only open their house and home to fellow Baysiders and shrine workers:

"I ask you to be retired from the world, for they will come as angels of light and try to approach you, also. Bar your doors to all but your immediate family and your closest Shrine workers...You must bar your doors to all but your immediate family and closest associates, for the souls of whom come to knock upon your doors are most likely evil. (June 19, 1987)

"O My children, listen to Me now: your children, protect them. Bar your doors to all but your immediate family and your closest workers within the circle of light. I tell you again this for reason" (June 18, 1981).

"You will have now, My child and My children, additional torment and irritation from the followers of 666 and the church of satan. There are many who come as angels of light among you. I have asked all of the immediate workers within the confines of the circle of light to confine themselves to their homes, allowing only the entrance of their immediate families and the close workers within the circle for reason! For the souls of whom knock upon your door will be evil. Do not test My words, My children" (Oct. 6, 1980).

"I have asked you, also, to bar your doors to all but your immediate family and the close workers of the circle. Allow no one within your home for reason. You are now on a list for extinction. (Oct. 6, 1980).

This is cultic in its exclusivity, a far cry from the universality of the true Faith. Not only are we to not let anybody in our house, but we are not to go out onto the streets. Here, Mary forbids followers of Bayside from going out and promises the aid of the angel "Tusazeri" and St. Theresa:

"Be careful, My child, that you do not leave your home for any reason alone; that you do not allow entrance to your home on ground level. And I will send forth from Heaven an army of angels. Tusazeri shall guide you, and I shall have, with the permission of the Eternal Father, Theresa to assist you in the Mission" (Oct. 6, 1980).

Bad Theology

Many of Bayside's messages are rife with theological error, especially in the earlier messages. The whole apparitions exist within the context of an errant cosmology. In this lengthy quote from 1970, we see Veronic Lueken's faulty and naive cosmology contains several errors concerning the Trinity, the nature of Original Sin and the nature of the body-soul relationship:

"In the distant heavens, there lived a most loving Spirit. First there was God, a God of love. Knowing love must be shared to be the fullest joy, He sort of subdivided Himself into a Family. For once even a spirit must share life eternal to reach the fullest degree of peace and joy. For love is in giving. He gave Himself to beget a Son and Holy Spirit. Even friendship exists between spirits, for our Father placed the angels to be a heavenly world, the light of love reflected from the Father, giving them all light sublime. Being so sensitive, He wanted this love to be given freely, not under obligation, so His angels and heavenly spirits were given a free will. Our Father's love outshone the darkness of disobedience. But the darkness soon reached the light, for Luciel, the most beloved of the angels, chose to forget this love of his Father and seek to covet the crown of authority. Our Father cried, the Trinity cried, and Michael fought for those who loved and shooed the fallen angels out to wander, the most despised of beings, living in the fires enkindled with [their?] evil desires. Heart-saddened over His loss, our Father sought to ease the pain of this loss by creating more family and calling him man. Placed in another land called earth, the loving heart of our Father knew the loss of loneliness and gave His earthly child a companion, Eve. All was paradise, a joy to our heavenly Father. But unknown to Him and His trusting heart was a snake in the grass starting to wreck His Heaven on earth. A devious plan took form. It was the battle of majesty between good and evil. All-trusting Blessed Father has ... [words unclear] to trusting Lucifer, who was that snake in the grass, that His new children would forever be faithful and true, not prey to the blandishments to a fallen angel. Lucifer whispered to Eve to eat of the tree of life [knowledge?] placed in the garden by the Blessed Father. This tree was a monument to the very weaknesses that got Lucifer kicked out of Heaven, a warning for watchfulness: avoid the fruits of this tree that would be so appealing to the body, but would sicken and kill the soul. Lucifer was really puffed up with his own importance and figured that here were candidates for establishing his own kingdom. Not Heaven on earth, but hell on earth! So many things beautiful to the eye have been man's downfall, and forbidden fruit the most tempting. The serpent's ... [words unclear] whispered on Eve proved the adage "out of sight, out of mind." Finding the deed more joyful than the awaited punishment that might lie ahead, since the wrath of our Father had not as yet descended, Adam would just have to share this newfound delight. With Lucifer's glib tongue, the delight grew sweeter by the moment. Using the oldest of feminine wiles, plus a few new tricks thrown in by the most obliging Lucifer, Adam was a cooked, literally, pigeon. No longer could our Father spare the children the sorrows of the tree of life, for they were now with a free will that could only be strengthened by love and asking forgiveness of the Father. So life began in earnest. Man would have to earn his way back to Heaven, or join Lucifer in his kingdom--the choice is his to make. On the left would stand Lucifer, and on the right all Heaven. By now the devilish creature has many helpers, but Heaven has the best of fortifications, the power of God. Lucifer pampers the body, Heaven will nourish the soul. Leaving the shackle of this body behind, we will fly off to eternity with joy, or find an eternity of misery burning forever in the very desires that brought us to this miserable end with Lucifer. Jesus tells us to keep out of that darkness and always in Heaven's light" (Tape Transcript, August, 1970, p. 5-6).

A few things here: Veronica specifically says that in the beginning was only God the Father, which she calls the "Spirit." Then, at some later point, "He sort of subdivided Himself into a family." This is a very fundamental Trinitarian heresy, as God has always been Trinity from eternity past; there was never a time when He decided to "subdivide Himself." Furthermore, Veronica says that God "gave Himself to beget a Son and Holy Spirit; of course, only the Son is begotten by the Father, not the Holy Spirit. Original sin is repeatedly said to consist in eating from the Tree of Life - a major error, as it is actually the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil that our first parents eat from. Finally, in a statement reminiscent of Neo-Platonist Manicheaism, she states that "eternity with joy" consists in "leaving the shackle of the body behind", as if we would not be reunited forever with our bodies in the Resurrection. Are these sorts of blatant errors compatible with an authentic revelation of God?

Here's another example from 1969, which states that death does not exist:

"The word "death" should be removed from the dictionary, for there is no such state as death, only the exit from our body shell, for the real "you" is housed in the temporary housing for the soul or spirit, the human body casing, which we shed, so to say, on our trip to the Kingdom, in the company of the Heavenly guardians, the angels or the saints or another inhabitant of Heaven whom our Father chooses to send us to escort us home. (1969)

"Remember, My children, in the days ahead, your great comfort is the knowledge that there is no death" (June 18, 1980).

This is Manichean dualism. The "real you" is the soul or spirit, the body is simply a "shell" or a "casing." This is also a great example of how far out some of Veronica's earliest messages were.

Here is a further example of Manichaean dualism, in which the world is said to be "satan" which is contrasted with God's world, which is Paradise:

"Remember, do not become a worshiper of the creature, but of the Creator; for the creature is the world, and the world is satan. The Creator is your God, and His world is the Kingdom of Paradise" (June 18, 1980).

On the contrary, "The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof" (Ps. 24:1). There is a sense in which the world is said to be under the power of Satan (cf. 1 John 5:19, Luke 4:6); Veronica even uses this language further on in the same message. But it is extremely theologically inaccurate to say "the world is satan", especially in contrast to a spiritual Paradise.

One of the most serious theological errors comes from a message of August 14, 1979 concerning the salvation of those in other religions:

“Do not judge your brothers and sisters who have not been converted. For My Father’s House, My Son has repeated over and over: remember always that My Father’s House—there are many rooms in the Mansion, signifying faiths and creeds. However, the Eternal Father, the beatific vision, is reserved for the Roman Catholic following. This it has been deemed by the Eternal Father since the beginning of time" (Aug 14. 1979).

This is very problematic. The "many mansions" verse that the Blessed Virgin cites here (John 14:2) has always been understood by Tradition to refer to heaven; heaven is, after all, "my Father's House" and where Jesus "goes" after His Ascension. And yet the rooms of heaven are said here by the Virgin to refer to "faiths and creeds"? Yet she goes on to say that the beatific vision is reserved for Catholics alone - "Roman Catholics" as she incorrectly states, referring to Catholics of the Roman Rite. Essentially, Bayside seems to be teaching that there is a distinction between heaven and the beatific vision, as if persons of many faiths and creeds can go to heaven, but within heaven, only Catholics experience the beatific vision. This is a grave theological error; the beatific vision is what heaven consists of. One cannot go to heaven but not experience the beatific vision.

In the next passage, we read that babies born of surrogate mothers do not have souls, a gross error, since every human being who comes into existence has a soul, regardless of the manner of his coming into the world. But let's see what Veronica says:

"We will not have test tube babies, for they are not born with a soul. They can only, then, be called a ’thing,’ a 'creature' unknown. Is this what you want, My children? Is this what you want of these children you bear for another? To give them as though you were machines, manufacturing them for another?" (June 6, 1987)

In a vision of Hell, Veronica records:

"Now I hear the voices pleading for mercy, but a loud voice booms back: "Too late, too late. You had your chance!" (June 18, 1993)

Those in Hell whose wills are fixed on evil are incapable of pleading for mercy, since to sincerely plead for mercy requires God's grace and a desire for the good. This is why the wicked in Revelation did not repent even when confronted with God's frightening judgments: "And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood...Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts" (cf. Rev. 9:20-21). Souls in Hell can neither repent nor ask for mercy.

"There will be tribulations set upon the world before My Son returns to gather His own. Yes, in time many will be removed from the earth. However, there will be a tribulation before that moment." (Oct. 6, 1992)

Apparently, Veronica is not aware that the Rapture is not a Catholic doctrine.

Here, we see Veronica, in a moment of sloppiness, assert that Purgatory is eternal:

"There is no way other than straight through to Heaven, hell, or purgatory. There isn't a soul upon earth that can say, `I will be here forever.' For the only place that exists, My children, forever, is Heaven, hell, or purgatory." (Oct. 2, 1989)

Even Veronica's followers caught the falsity in this message and confronted her about it. The Blessed Virgin Mary subsequently had to offer a "clarification" of this message a week later. On October 8, 1989, Mary asked Veronica to write a clarification, which stated:

"When Our Lady spoke about Heaven, hell, and purgatory in the message, She was especially addressing the clergy, as some have lost the reality of the existence of hell. But they have especially lost the reality of the existence of purgatory. Thus She chose to use the word "forever," as this is earth's time, meaning till the end of time, or till the day of the final judgment. The intention being to impress upon the clergy the fact that purgatory does exist, and there are souls who will be in purgatory till the end of time. Naturally, at the end of the world there will no longer be a need for purgatory, and it will cease to exist. "Heaven and hell are forever" in the sense of the eternal, so naturally, they shall exist without end."

Good clarification. Too bad purgatory was said to be "forever" in the same sense that heaven and hell are forever. The distinction "Mary" tries to make to cover this embarrassing error is completely arbitrary. We are used to clarifications from the Vatican Press Office, but from the Blessed Virgin?

"every single soul that is upon the earth today alive and those who have also been aborted, were brought into the world through the intercession of the Holy Spirit (Oct 1, 1988)

Intercession of the Holy Spirit? Nowhere in Catholic tradition is the creation of human life said to be a product of the "intercession" of any of the three Persons of the Trinity, let alone the Spirit. This is not heretical so much as weird. But, even more weird is the kingdom of the spirit people:

"The distant Kingdom is inhabited by people, live people, in spirit form. Awaken all people of the earth to the reality of Heaven, for to know them is to love them." (Dec. 11, 1969)

Not sure what to make of that one.

In this one we see Veronica makes the Virgin Mary and not Jesus to be the Judge of mankind. I think she forgot who was supposed to be speaking:

Mary: “Life is eternal. Your body will die, but your living entity will continue over beyond the veil. My children, I repeat: there is no death; you live on. Once you leave your body, with full knowledge you live on, and come to Us for judgment. (Oct. 6, 1979)

Here we see the Blessed Virgin Mary conferring a priestly blessing, despite the fact that she has authority to give such a blessing because she is not a priest:

"Now Our Lady is turning to Her left, our right, as She's moving slowly across the sky now. Now She's bending over and making the sign of the cross: In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Our Lady - "I bless you all, My children, as the Eternal Father blesses you in the Son and the Holy Ghost. Remember, My children, the Trinity. Always try to understand the power of God in the Trinity." (Nov. 1, 1985)

This occurs again in another apparition the following year:

"And Jesus has mentioned something to Her about blessing - that I heard ... it was blessing. And oh, Our Lady is now raising the crucifix on Her Rosary and making the sign of the cross: In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (June 18, 1986)

This is also done in the apparition of June 18, 1984.

Furthermore, we see an exaltation of the role of sacramentals far beyond their real importance:

Sacramentals must never be removed; "at no cost you must remove from your bodies your crucifix, the St. Benedict medal, and your Scapulars" (Oct 6, 1992).

This passage has led Baysiders to deduce that they must wear a crucifix, a scapular and a St. Benedict medal simultaneously at all times or else risk immediate attack by the devil. They are attributed an almost magical efficacy. While we do not deny the importance of sacramentals as signs of faith and as true means of grace, this is extremely excessive. This is mandated as absolutely essential to every human being on earth:

"Make it known to the world, that they must all, every single individual on earth, must at this time, wear a sacramental: the St. Benedict medal, the brown Scapular; a crucifix, blessed by a holy priest."(June 6, 1987)

"Jesus: All who pray the Rosary and wear My Scapular shall be saved. All who place the crucifix upon their front doors shall be saved like the passing of the lamb." (June 18, 1984).

"all who wear their scapulars and the Rosary will be saved. But all those who cast them aside as superstition shall be lost." (June 30, 1984) [Dear friends, we know that even in false apparations truth must be mixed with error or no Catholic would be tempted to believe in them. Hence we see here and too in Medjugorje, for example, the promotion of the Rosary, fasting, Confession, receiving Holy Communion, and other  devotions. - The Catacombs]

Sacramentals such as scapulars and Benedict medals are signs of special devotion or consecration; they are not spiritual bullet-proof vests that are mandated to be worn by every Catholic even, let alone "every single individual on earth", let alone in such a way that they can be compared to the blood of the Passover Lamb (or, "the passing of the lamb", as Jesus incorrectly says here). In the next passage, the importance of the Scapular and the Rosary are emphasized, but Mary adds the Bayside "Our Lady of the Roses" emblem and suggests that it is indispensible:

"My children, you must always wear a medal, your armor about your neck. And the best armor of all is the Scapular, the Rosary, the St. Benedict medal; and, also your newest armor: Our Lady of the Roses, Mary Help of Mothers. My child and My children, I tell you this because you cannot do without any of them." (May 17, 1986)

The Bayside emblem is put on par with the Rosary and the Scapular! And the believer is told "you cannot do without any of them." Is this not extraordinarily presumptuous? Not even the Brown Scapular or the Miraculous Medal are said to be absolutely indispensable.

Now let's watch Jesus change His mind:

"He is going across the sky now. He changed his mind about something; He had stopped short and was looking down this way, and then He just turned over to the left, and said: "Follow Me!" (June 18, 1988).

Yes, she said our Lord "changed His mind" about something. This is pitifully bad theology. Here we see more bad theology as Veronica states that angels have genders, as well as ages, and that there is such a thing as "baby angels":

"the lights now are coming out - I know they're angels. They're all different ages and different sizes, but I do believe it registers their age. These are all, I know, guardian angels. They are dressed in the most beautiful pastel shades of blue and pink and white.And I feel that the blue stands for the masculine angel, if there is such a thing; and the pink also for the feminine angels; and the whites are for babies. They are - there are hundreds of them all about the trees. Oh, I'm sure you must see them. They are so clear, they're almost human - like in appearance, except for the translucency of their faces. They are so beautiful. " (Oct 1, 1988)

Let us remember Catholic Tradition that gender is related to one's physical body; it is a way of being human. Angels by definition cannot have a gender because they do not have physical bodies. This is why angels in art are often displayed as androgynous. And to speak of the "age" of angels or whether there can be "baby" angels is even more ludicrous.

"Now, My children, I want you all to make a firm Act of Contrition, for those who die now in the outer world about you. An Act of Contrition for all those who are unable to say it, for themselves" (June 18, 1987)

While we can certainly do penance on behalf of other people, we cannot be contrite on behalf of others; contrition is a personal act expression sorrow for particular sins. We can do penance for others, but not repent for them. This is bad theology.

The angels, too, are subject to this bad theology. St. Michael is described as having "anxiety" and expresses impatience with the Virgin:

"Michael is standing there. He looks like quite stern. I don't know just what is passing between them, but he is waiting for Our Lady's signal. Our Lady said to Michael - I heard Her say, "In one moment. Your anxiety, Michael, I can well understand." (May 17, 1986)

Here is an interesting statement by Mary. She promises that one day, she will appear at Bayside and compel the bishop to belief:

"One day, My child, the waters will come up at Bayside, and I will appear over the old church building. Your Bishop then cannot deny My Appearances" (May 17, 1986).

If this is true, it is an affirmation of the fact that the bishop does, in fact, deny the Bayside apparitions - otherwise, how could Mary say that one day he would "no longer" deny them? And if he does in fact deny them, then the faithful are to regard them as condemned, for the bishop has final say in matters of private revelation within his own diocese.

Here, in a shocking departure from tradition and Catholic theology, Jesus refers to the Bible as the cornerstone of the Church. This takes place in the context of an apparition of the Four Evangelists:

"[The Evangelists are] holding up what looks like pens. They're very strange - looking pens; they look like a feather with just a point on the end. And they're writing - each one of them has a book, and they're writing in the books. Now Jesus is nodding."You have taken that correctly, My child. That is the manner in which the Book of life and love was written for you. I say for you, because it was to be established as the cornerstone of My Church - let us say that, My child, the cornerstone of My Church is the Book of life and love, that you call the Bible." (May 17, 1986)

The cornerstone of the Church is the Bible? That sounds awfully Protestant. And unbiblical, since the Bible says of the Church that "the cornerstone is Christ Jesus himself" (Eph. 2:22). Speaking of Protestantism, Veronica seems to buy into the Protestant narrative about the United States as the godly City on a Hill. Look at this comment of the Blessed Virgin:

“O My children, how happy were the days when I could look down from Heaven upon you and find that America was so beautiful—a Christian nation, devout, pious, and following the road as given by the Eternal Father, through My Son and the Holy Spirit of light. And now the light has been darkened. (Dec. 24, 1979)

Because America has never been a Catholic nation - certainly not at the time of its founding or in the "happy" old days. How could a country founded on Protestant Deism be referred to as "devout, pious, and following the road as given by the Eternal Father"? This could only be true if one presumes the truth of the Protestant narrative about the founding of this country, which Veronica apparently does.

Those in heaven are said to possess the theological virtue of faith, including Jesus Christ Himself:

Jesus: "But I assure you, My children, We, in Heaven, have great faith that you, Our children, who hear Our words, will act upon them and help to recover as many of your brothers and sisters as you can throughout the world." (June 18, 1986)

Now this is actual heresy. Faith is a theological virtue proper to viators, those of us here on earth on our pilgrimage of faith, those who "see through a glass darkly" (1 Cor. 13:12). Faith exists because our knowledge is partial due to our creatureliness. But when we attain heaven and the beatific vision, faith will pass away as it terminates in knowledge. Nobody in heaven has faith, especially God, who is pure act and possesses supreme knowledge. To assert that those in heaven have "faith", even Jesus Christ, is a shocking ignorance of Catholic theology, offensive to pious ears, and heretical.

The Blessed Virgin Mary is also apparently unaware of the definition of a martyr. In a message from 1983, Mary asserts that Pope John Paul I was poisoned and that his death constituted a "martyrdom":

"...remember well what had happened in Rome to John, Pope John, whose reign lasted 33 days. O My child, it is history now, but it is placed in the book that lists the disasters in mankind. He received the horror and martyrdom by drinking from a glass. It was a champagne glass given to him by a now deceased member of the clergy" (May 21, 1983).

I'm not sure that someone who is poisoned and doesn't even know they are being assassinated can be a martyr. Part of being a martyr is willingly laying down one's life for the faith. If you are just sipping a glass of champagne and don't realize it is poison, where is the will to die for Christ that is essential to martyrdom?

In the following message of June, 1983, Jesus has been talking for awhile about a coming chastisement. Veronica apparently forgets that Jesus is supposed to be the one talking and our Lord starts talking in the third person about Himself, which prompts Veronica to immediately put an awkward correction in the mouth of Christ to clarify His relation within the Trinity:

"My child and My children, I beg of you, through the Trinity - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and I am in God, I was in God, and I always will be in God" (June 18, 1983).

Look at this one:

"Communion in the hand has not been, and will not be, accepted by Heaven. This is a sacrilege in the eyes of the Eternal Father, and must not be continued, for you only add to your punishment when you continue on in the ways that have been found to be unpleasing to the Eternal Father. (June 30, 1984)

I don't approve of communion in the hand, but to say it has "never" been accepted by heaven cannot be true, since it was practiced widely in the Early Church. Sure, one could say it was not practiced in the same way in the Early Church as it is today, but Bayside does not make that distinction.

"You must now assume a great responsibility for the salvation of your children’s souls. Do not expect this to come from Rome, for Rome now is under great attack. 666, satan—Lucifer and his hordes of demons now are in control of Rome" (May 23, 1979).

If Lucifer and his demons "are in control of Rome" and we must not expect any spiritual direction to come from Rome, has not the promise to Peter become null and void? We must be careful here; it is one thing to say that Satan has infiltrated the Church, that there are those in the hierarchy under his control, but to say that Satan is "in control" of Rome stretches what most orthodox Catholics are comfortable with regarding the Traditional understanding of the Roman Pontiff.

In a message from 1979, Veronica Lueken exhibits her shocking ignorance of the sacrament of Holy Orders with this diatribe against the permanent diaconate:

"Why are you now planning to take married men, making them what you call deacons, to give the sanctity and holiness, the grace in marriage to My sheep? What right have you to change the rules and the direction? Understand well: when I appointed the Apostles there were no names given as cardinals or bishops; but Peter was the first Pope, the leader, and would you say not that the Apostles were the first bishops? And after that they chose from out of multitudes, seven whom you call deacons and listed as deacons, but they were truly priests at that time. But you do not need the procedure now. If you are willing to ask the Eternal Father, and if you do not give yourselves over to doctrines of demons, you will have priests sufficient to carry out the ministry. But what do you do now? You will seek to make instant priests, against the will of the Eternal Father! You will delude others to think that your deacons can take the Sacraments and give them as in the priesthood! A priest, My children, is a chosen man of God. A true legally-ordained priest is far superior than any man, as he represents Me in the Godhead" (May 23, 1979).

Veronica appears ignorant that deacons were married in the Early Church. She also errantly presumes that deacons were "truly priests"; whether she means they were priests before they were deacons or that the deacons carried out the function of priests I do not know, but either way she is theologically and historically incorrect. It is true that deacons can administer certain sacraments, and this has always been the case. Her ignorance of history and sacramental theology is blatantly obvious here.

As further evidence of her confusion over sacramental theology, look at this statement from Jesus:

“All baptized Roman Catholics must die as baptized Roman Catholics, or they shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven!” (June 9, 1979)

Baptism confers an indelible mark that can never be effaced. It is impossible for a baptized Catholic to die as anything but a baptized Catholic. What is the purpose of this warning? It is impossible to become "unbaptized." It is also questionable the manner in which she uses the term "Roman Catholics" since it in its technical definition it applies to those Catholics of the Roman Rite only. Jesus is apparently thinking of "the Church" only in terms of the Roman Rite.

"Disobedience to your Vicar [the Pope] will not be tolerated by the Eternal Father in matters of faith and morals." (Sept. 28, 1979)

But disobedience in things other than faith and morals is not problematic? What about the pope's ordinary jurisdiction? Speaking of the pope:

“You will stand with the Holy Father and render him no more sorrow. You who have been his disobedient children, you will stop plunging the knife into his heart! He is Our Vicar. He is Our father and yours on earth, to guide you" (June 17, 1971)

Would Mary really refer to the pope as "Our Father"? This is weird, since all popes have referred to Mary as their Mother. And why would Mary call him "Our Vicar"? He is the Vicar of Christ, not the Vicar of Mary.

"Our lawfully ordained, blessed priests will always have the power to bring My Son in physical Body to you. The trappings, as such, My child, placed on the procedure by man are as nothing, for you will live in the spirit, not in the aspect of worldliness and decoration. All that has been destroyed and removed in My Son’s House are but symbols" (Oct 6, 1971).

In this passage, Mary attempts to console the faithful about the liturgical destruction of the early 1970's by stating that the trappings of the liturgy and the altar are "as nothing" and just "worldliness and decoration." It is as if she is saying, "Don't worry about the ceremonies of the liturgy; what matters is that the Mass is valid. Everything else is simple decoration." This is contrary to what the Church has taught at the Council of Trent in Session XXII:

Look also how St. Francis of Assisi refers to the mere "decorations" of the Mass:

Is this heresy? Perhaps not. But it is a form of liturgical minimalism that has proven to be extremely destructive to Catholic faith and worship and can hardly have come from Heaven.

"Gather your brothers and sisters—do not lose one—and build a strong link to Us. Yes, ransom these souls whom Lucifer has bought." (Sept. 21, 1971).

In no way has Catholic theology - even among the various schools of thought on how Christ redeems man - ever suggested that Lucifer "bought" mankind. It is Christ who "bought" us at a great price (1 Cor. 6:20), who "purchased" us with His blood (Col. 1:14) and who pays; Christ is the one who buys mankind; Lucifer has never "bought" mankind.

"You will teach the children that We are truly living peoples, that We live in the heavens, just a short distance from the farthest star" (July 1, 1971).

Veronica Lueken's heaven is located entirely within this universe, just a short distance from the farthest star, and not far from Never-Neverland. Hopefully a discussion on the fact that heaven cannot be located within this physical universe is not necessary. Heaven cannot be a place with a physical location within Creation.

God the Father: "Many Rosaries must be said to lighten My heart." (Apr. 7, 1971)

In Catholic Tradition, we sometimes speak by way of analogy about "comforting" the Sacred Heart of Jesus by our company during our Holy Hours, drawing a parallel between the Apostles who left Him in the Garden of Gethsemane and our own time spent with Him in adoration. Of course, this is analogical language; Jesus is not "lonely" and He does not "need" our comfort. Speaking, however, about God the Father as needing our rosaries to "lighten" His heart is extremely bizarre. Even if it is only meant by an analogy, it is an analogy that find no place in the Church's traditional spirituality.

In this next passage, Veronica has our Lady specifically teach that the indelible mark of baptism can be lost:

“Each man on earth who has been baptized and set himself up as a follower of My Son in infancy has received the mark of the cross upon him. He can in his lifetime cast this away and be branded with the mark of the beast" (Dec. 31, 1972).

Of course, baptized people can lose their salvation. But she does not say this. She says that the "mark" impressed at baptism can be cast away. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

"Incorporated into Christ by Baptism, the person baptized is configured to Christ. Baptism seals the Christian with the indelible spiritual mark (character) of his belonging to Christ. No sin can erase this mark, even if sin prevents Baptism from bearing the fruits of salvation" (CCC 1272).

Frivolous Subject Matter

According to Catholic Tradition, eternal salvation is the primary purpose that God sends private revelations to individuals. The Catholic Encyclopedia notes that a revelation is suspect if the visionary seems to be answering idle speculations or settling disputed questions in matters of history, theology or astronomy. Yet we see just this in Bayside, where the content of the messages contains some extreme banalities.

Flying saucers are "transports from hell." There is no life on other planets. (June 18, 1992)

Is this really the sort of information we could expect God or His Mother to wish to communicate to us? The nature of flying saucers? I hope there is one coming up about what Sasquatch sightings really are.

"I want the people to know that when I was crucified the nails were placed through My palms, but I was also tied by skin - like rope about My wrists to the cross. And as I walked to My death, I carried not the full cross but only a cross - beam across My shoulders, and I found at the edge of town on a high hill the other part of what was to be My crucifixion plank." (June 17, 1989)

That was very nice of Jesus to come from Heaven to explain to us the vicinity from which He obtained the boards He was crucified on. I had always wondered about that.

"Now Jesus is looking down. He has on His burgundy - colored cape, with the tie, a golden tie, on it. But He has on the slippers. I'm trying to look at them. They're made of an animal - type of skin. Yes, that's what they are. Jesus nodded His head. They're made like leather, a leather." (June 18, 1988)

Why this obsession with the nature of Jesus' shoes? This is actually stressed again and again in many of the messages. For example:

"And it's a little windy up there this evening, because I can see Jesus's feet now. He does have on sandals. They're made of a brown leather-like quality. I can't explain it. It looks almost like a thong, just one piece of strapping down through His toes, and one across His instep. And His feet are bare. He has no socks on, or anything; His feet are really bare. But...He is smiling. He thinks this is funny." (June 18, 1987) "

And...

"And I can see Jesus' feet now as He's coming down closer. He has on sandals. They're made of some kind of animal skin. They're a brown color, but they just have two straps; one across near the toes, and one across the ankle area - two straps. I don't know how they stay on." (June 18, 1986)

Stop!

The manner of our Lord's shoes are not the only thing Veronica finds worthy of reporting. Here we see her describing the sort of weaving his clothes are made of:

"And there coming through the light is Jesus. Oh He's just beautiful! He has on the most magnificent robe. It's cut quite differently than He wore the last apparition time. But it is a beautiful robe, all of a classic type of weave. It's - it almost looks like it comes from the foreign country, the robe." (Oct 1, 1988)

Again, a bizarre obsession with the clothes of Jesus. It's nice to know that our Lord wears a "classic weave." In another message, Jesus is strangely insistent that Veronica correct certain false notions about the appearance of the crown of thorns and states that it was more of a basket:

"He's tapping His forehead. Oh, He wants me to tell you, as He told me this afternoon, that I must tell the world that when He was crucified ... they have a false notion about His crown of thorns. The crown of thorns were placed in a basket - weave cap and then placed on His head, and He was pummeled and hammered with sticks and a sledge hammer to get it down on His head; and that drove the terrible spikes of the thorns into His head. It seems that His murderers could not find gloves at the time to handle the thorns. So they thought to take their implements and place these terrible thorn weeds inside of the basket - weave hat. And that is what Jesus wore when He was crucified." (Sept 27, 1986)

Jesus wants us to know that the thorns were inside a basket and that it was actually a basket of thorns that was forced on his head? What possible purpose if there for including this detail which is of no practical significance? Is this not a prime example of the seer's preoccupation with externals or frivolities of the apparition. Why is it of such importance that our traditional "false notion about His crown of thorns" be corrected by a private apparition?

Here we see that Jesus thinks we need to know about UFOs and demons, which prompts the obvious question of why spiritual beings need to ride in machines to get from here to there:

"While We speak of agents of hell, My child, I also wish that you make it known that there are no vehicles coming from other planets—extraterrestrial vehicles. No, My child and My children; they are agents of hell in transport. Now you may ask, why must they be transported if they are spirits? Ah, My child, this you may not understand. These are not ordinary spirits; these are the demons from hell: satan's cohorts, and satan himself. He is also on one of the transports.There is a reason they must use the transports. I will not go into it at this time, for I am sure it would befog the mind of any scientist should I give this knowledge to them before they are ready for it." (Nov 1, 1985)

Satan himself is on one of the transports!? Satan personally is riding around in a UFO? Is this really relevant to our salvation?

Simply Ridiculous

Occasionally we run into stories that are simply ridiculous. Consider this tale of Veronica learning some sort of "lesson" about not taking off holy medals by gagging on dog biscuits:

"I noticed that my dog had been eating a lot of bones and things and left little slivers on the floor. But they were only tiny little slivers. I say this for a reason. But my dog liked these milk bones. They were a sort of a pinkish brown color, if you know your dog . He's a poodle and he loved milk bones. So he gets those. However, I was sweeping up the floor, with some popcorn that Arthur had dropped, when all of a sudden I said, "Gee, what in the world am I eating? What am I eating?" But in the beginning, I had a feeling I was going to choke, so I opened my mouth. There - what was in my mouth, what was in my mouth but two large chunks of dog biscuit! Now, I'm not eating dog biscuits. So I said, "Ah-hah! He's still after me." And I said, "And I know what it is." Because you see, Our Lady let me go through this so I'd learn a stern lesson. And She wants everyone to know about this. And anyone that doubts this, I'll prove it to them. Because my husband came running in, and I said, " They're trying to choke me or something". "So what is it?" says Arthur. I said, "Dog biscuits in my mouth, big pieces!" "How did they get there?" "I don't know", I said, "but then I think I know. So I ran right in, got my St. Benedict medal out of my purse that I had forgotten to put on in all the excitement, and also the Scapular. And I assure you I don't care if they have to tack it to my nose the next time! I'm not taking off my Scapular and my St. Benedict medal for anyone, including your crucifix, also" (Oct, 6, 1992)

This foolish story goes back to the excessive importance attached to sacramentals. In the following passage, we see our Lady stating that she has been "through purgatory and through hell":

"I want you to stress, My child, the existence of hell and purgatory. It has been forgotten by many. Even the priests in My Son's churches have overlooked this essential knowledge. In fact, some now mock it as being untrue. My child and my children of the world, please believe Me. I have been through purgatory. I have been through hell. And I tell you all: please, do penance for your brothers and sisters who do not have the way." (June 18, 1990)

Perhaps this is a metaphorical way of saying "I have suffered", but since our Lady and our Lord have perfect knowledge, they would never use such sloppy language. Our Lady could have never had a purgative experience since she had no sin, let alone an experience of suffering punitive punishment in some kind of hell-like experience. This is why theologians teach that not even Christ, for all his suffering, experienced the pains of the damned - unless you are a Balthasarian heretic.

How about this passage where our Lord Jesus warns of a Communist coup in the United States and talks about "ruffians" and people who will be "mowed down" with "submachine guns":

Veronica - "I see a road. It looks like a normal country road, but it leads to a city, a great city. I would say from the buildings that the city looks like New York. But I see there are very sinister - looking characters walking down the road nonchalantly but carrying bags. Within those bags there are submachine guns."

- "Yes, My child! I see murder ahead now, My child, in your city of New York. Many shall be mowed down. It is an attack by a communist nation. No, My child, you do not need to know at this time the name of this nation, for it will soon be known when the captors are picked up. The Federal Bureau of Investigation will hear of this, My child, and they will try to stop them. These interlopers upon the serenity of the United States have dark skins. They are not from this nation, but they come from a presently warring nation. It is their object to destroy all and cause chaos in the city of New York. With their plans there will be bombs placed in strategic places and many shall die at the hands of these ruffians." (Oct 1, 1988)

Now, one might say that this has been fulfilled in the September 11th attacks or the 1993 World Trade Center attacks, which involved bombs and attackers with "dark skins." But our Lord specifically says that these attackers come from "a Communist nation" and that "submachine guns' are involved. This is just absurd. I don't know what else to say.

Here is an absurd message warning about AIDS in the blood supply:

"My children, that you guard yourselves well against this plague. If you must have a form of operation requiring transfusions, I would suggest that you have a member of your family donate this blood; for the other has been grossly - I say grossly - contaminated and will cause many deaths" (Oct 6, 1988).

Blood has been screened for HIV in the United States since 1985. Contamination from blood transfusions world wide account for only 5-10% of infections. This is simply a falsehood, and further more, not at all relevant to the message of eternal salvation, which all legitimate private revelations concern themselves with.

Another absurdity unique to Bayside is the belief that Pope Paul VI was kidnapped or murdered and replaced with a look-alike "impostor" pope. This is said to have happened sometime around 1973:

"Some ecclesiastics in the highest positions of the hierarchy, being infiltrators or having fallen from grace, drugged the good Pope, censored his mail, forged his documents, and finally staged an impostor to complete their sinister plan." (Oct 3rd, 1991)

About Jesus borrowing citations from American presidents:

"I do not understand their fear of Russia. There is nothing to fear but fear itself" (Oct 2, 1987)

I'm not positive, but I am pretty sure that when Jesus speaks through a seer, He does not quote Franklin Delano Roosevelt's 1933 inaugural address.

And...

Did you know that the Virgin Mary has a charming little nickname for St. Michael the Archangel? According to two separate locutions by Veronica, she calls him "golden boy" because of his blond hair:

"Michael is very difficult to describe. He is so huge! A real warrior of Heaven. But I cannot see his features; there's something about Michael that his features are unexplainable, like the spirit. But he does look gorgeous. His hair I do see. His hair is a golden color. That is why Our Lady names him, `Golden Boy'." (May 17, 1986) "

His hair is a golden color. I know for many years, Our Lady has referred to him as "Our Golden Boy." (Nov 1, 1985)

Did you also know that Jesus refers to time on earth as "earth-years"? Look at these three passages:

"My heart is so lightened with joy at the numbers of wonderful souls who have come here this evening to honor the Eternal Father when He sent Me sixteen earth - years ago, down upon earth, to try to stop the crisis in the Church, and the chaos that is going throughout all the countries of the world" (June 18, 1986)

...later, in the same apparition, Jesus says:

"To this day, to your earth - year of 1986, you have not been given, My children, the full secrets as given to the children at Fatima" (June 18, 1986)

Mary speaks this way as well: "You cannot count your earth-years as being long any longer." (Sept 27, 1986)

I know that with the Lord a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day, but seriously, is there any precedent anywhere in the entire Catholic Tradition of our Lord referring to our 365 day year as an "earth-year"? It makes Him sound like an extra-terrestrial. This is not proof that Bayside is wrong; it is evidence that it is just bizarre, and very common, especially in the first decade of messages.

In many of the messages, Mary directs Veronica to take a series of photographs. The photographs would then be examined for various signs or evidences of supernatural messages, including dates and clues to interpreting the messages. For example:

"Now, My child, for reasons that you are not to give out, I wish at this time that you take three photographs. They are very, very important, My child. They will contain a date for the next catastrophe." (June 18, 1986)

This practice in many of the messages is called "reading the photographs" (May 26, 1979). It is very common and appears at the end of more than half of the Bayside messages. If Mary and Jesus come from heaven to deliver messages to mankind, why this recourse to asking Veronica to take photographs and then interpret them for additional revelations? Seems kind of esoteric, and definitely unprecedented. A particular photograph from 1979 is given special prominence, as it allegedly predicts the exact hour of the Great Chastisement:

“I ask that the photograph given from Heaven, Jacinta 1972 be propagated, made known worldwide; for within this photograph lies the date, the month, the hour, the year of the coming Chastisement. Search it well, My children; for those who are given the grace will find the answer to the puzzle: ‘Jacinta of Fatima—Jacinta 1972.’ (Oct. 6, 1979)

I don't even know what to do with this one:

“You must understand that the forces of evil are cunning in their trickery. They will not expose themselves to you in their true light. They work behind a screen. My child and My children, I will explain this to you more simply. Do not be deceived by the mushrooming centers that house diabolical agents from hell that are now encased in a human body" (June 14, 1979).

Mushrooming centers that house diabolical agents from hell encased in human bodies!? What!?

Here we see a 1979 vision of a terrorist attack that is laughably stereotypical:

"And now coming out of the sky, I see a very comical-looking figure. I think he’s comical; then again he’s kind of frightening. His face is extremely fat, and his teeth are huge. But he looks like an Oriental of some kind. He’s smiling in a very strange way. I notice he has—he’s short and has like a stubby type of body. But he’s grinning in a very evil-looking way. As he stands with his hands behind him, he’s looking about now and it looks as though he’s waiting for something. Oh, my goodness! Now he’s bringing out from behind his back what appears to be a long tapered candle. And he’s reaching up now. The candle has a light on it; it looks like he’s about to touch the wick on the bomb. It looks like a bomb, but it looks like the world with a wick sticking out of it. Oh, my goodness! He’s a very—I don’t know who he is; I don’t recognize him. But he’s an Oriental and has very large teeth; and the grin, even, the way he’s grinning makes his teeth very—kind of prominent. But he has—I must say he gives you a feeling of fright because his smile is very evil. Now I can’t see him. It’s as though a veil is being placed over the scene" (July 25, 1979).

A fat oriental with a big grin and big teeth? You mean like, this stereotypical grinning, buck-toothed Asian? Complete with the Yosemite-Sam bomb and smoking wick. This is laughable.

Here we are warned against mind control technology being developed by the governments of the world which will take over the minds of children:

“Do not allow your children to be taken from you in spirit. The forces of evil, of darkness, are increasing in their intensity. You will find now that there has been developed in your scientific world a manner of mind control through scientific machinery and human mind-manipulation. In this manner will the governing bodies of many nations seek to control your children, and in that manner control the parent." (Dec. 24, 1979)

Here is a fairly unorthodox description of the Blessed Mother. Look at how she refers to herself and her activity in the world:

“I have roamed the nations, and I am still walking your earth, My children. I will never stop until My Son returns with Me." (Dec. 25, 1971)

“I have roamed, My child, the nations of the world. My tears have fallen in every land. I have come to rest here in hope." (Nov. 1, 1971)

Where is Mary, or any saint, described as "roaming the nations" or "walking the earth?" This is very unorthodox language; saints, especially the Blessed Virgin, are always referred to as residing in heaven and interceding from heaven. There is one who is described in Scripture as "roaming about" the world and "walking to and fro" upon it, but it is not Mary or any saint (cf. 1 Pet. 5:8, Job 1:7). See also the message of May 30, 1971 for our Lady "wandering" the world.


“I have arrived much earlier, My child, than expected, for I am busy in all parts of the world. There is much turmoil." (May 30, 1971).

Mary had to change her plans and arrive early because world events messed up her schedule!

Contradictions

Veronica was allegedly told by Mary that all other apparitions happening concurrently were false and should be avoided:

"My child and My children, I want to tell you also at this time: You are not to concern yourself with other words and writings of apparitions in various places. I can tell you, My children, unfortunately there are those are caught up in the excitement of the times and My appearance at your site. However, you cannot become involved, My child or My children, with any of these apparitions; it is best to ignore them." (Mar 18, 1989).

Yet, in 1986 Mary told Veronica:

"Yes, My child, I am going about the world appearing in various places, and I have reason for all" (May 17, 1986)

Regarding the setting of dates for eschatological events, Jesus tells Veronica:

"Do not speculate on the dates, but be prepared. My Mother has spent countless years among you, preparing you. If you are not ready now, then you will never be ready!" (June 18, 1980)

A few sentences later in the same message, Jesus says:

"My children, you will read and re read the messages from Heaven given through My Mother to you. Read them well, for much has been over looked in the past. You will receive great knowledge, and you will be able then to know the day, the hour of the tribulation."

It is difficult to understand in what sense we are to "not speculate on dates" when we are subsequently told that if we reread the messages we will find "great knowledge" to figure out the day and even the hour of tribulation. If we can know the day and the hour, how are we to not speculate on dates? This has led to the absurd practice of Baysiders examining the messages and photographs of Bayside for cryptic messages about the time of the Tribulation and Great Warning. For example, see here.

Absurd Statistics about Alleged Satanism

An interesting aspect of Bayside is the continual claims of a vast Satanic conspiracy throughout the United States. While we certainly do not deny a network of evil operating behind the scenes, the vast numbers and outrageous claims made by Veronica regarding organized Satanic cult activity is simply beyond belief. For example:

"There are over 10,000, now, cults in the United States and Canada alone. Many children have been slain by them in sacrifice to satan." (June 17, 1989).

"Already, there are five thousand or more now in the United States and Canada, and people ask: 'Where have my children disappeared to?'" (June 18, 1988)

"My child and My children, at this time in the United States of America and Canada, there can be counted, at least, nine thousand satanic cults." (June 18, 1987)

"Jesus: "My child and My children, need I repeat to you all of the abominations being committed upon the earth now? I can also repeat to you that in some of these horrible, excruciatingly painful cults that are growing up fast in your country and other countries about the world, they have even gone so far as to dab now in cannibalism, the eating of human flesh as a sacrifice to satan. That is why, My children, so many cannot be found who are missing—mostly, My children, young children. Mothers have cried, their hearts torn with anguish when their children disappear from the streets. Your police do not investigate fully. Sending out photographs of the missing children, this is of little help when they fall into the clutches of the satanists, for they do not remain about long. Their bodies are often cremated on pyres to satan." (Nov 1, 1985)

While it is undeniable that Satanism exists, is it realistic to posit that most children who are missing are taken by Satanists and sacrificed? Is 10,000 Satanic cults a realistic number? Veronica's teachings here reflect the Satanic panic of the 70s and 80s more than empirical evidence. A famous 1988 study by America sociologist David Finklehor found only 36 cases of Satanic ritual abuse in the whole country (these numbers were even questioned because his criterion were so broad). Two famous Satanic murder trials - the McMartin preschool trial and the Adolfo Constanzo murders - failed to produce any evidence of Satanic inspiration. A 1996 study of 12,000 reported cases of Satanic abuse revealed that not a single one was corroborated or even consider sufficiently factual. In fact, no evidence has ever been brought forward corroborating a single act of Satanic murder, despite extensive investigation. The simple fact is that the "10,000 cults" of Veronica with their extensive murders do not exist.

By late 1987, her statements about Satanism had grown more exotic, claiming that a Satanic cult was running "rampant" in America, greater than all the other cults in the whole world:

"There is another force rampant in your country, the United States of America: it is a satanic cult that has taken precedence over all cults in the world" (Oct 2, 1987)

Again, the Satanic ritual abuse scare was in its heyday around the late 1980s. Veronica is pulling fears and anxieties from the contemporary press in order to make her messages relevant. Without denying the existence of Satanism, it is a known fact that the fears of the late 80's and 90's about massive underground Satanic cults were fictitious and more based in fantasy. Here we see Veronica describing a Satanic ritual in lurid detail. The description is absurd and almost cartoonish; the high priest of Satan even has a three pronged pitch fork:

"I see a lot of people gathered there. Now I would say about fifteen, or maybe seventeen, I'm count... no, thirteen, there are thirteen people. Now they're all standing in a circle. And in the middle of that circle is a man. He's dressed with horns on his head, like satan, and he has a black cape which is red inside. And he's turning about and he's holding a spear in his hand. It has three prongs on it. And he's dipping these prongs now into a boiling big kettle. I believe it's water boiling... he's heating up. And now he's placing - after putting water, he dips his fork, this big fork, into the water, and then places it on top of the hot coals and they sizzle. (Veronica gasps.) And now he's going over... and there's a man tied, just like Jesus was, to a post (Veronica gasps again)... and he's taking this horrible, horrible thing in his hand and he's burning the skin of the man... I can hear his screams, the man is screaming... he's burning the prongs of the pitchfork on the man's back.

Now Our Lady knows that I am getting dreadfully ill. It's a horrible sight. Now - ohh! Now one of the - there's a woman there, she - her eyes are glassy, like she's drugged or something - now she's going over to the man and she's taking a - it's a long knife, like a hunting knife, and cutting him in his back. And then - oh my... oh no! Then there's another woman - they're all dressed in black canes with red on the interior - there's another woman, she's going over... and - oh no! They - she has - oh, she has a chalice in her hands and she's placing it underneath the drops of blood that are coming out of the gash she's made in the man's back. And they're all laughing, like they're hysterically insane. They're all laughing." (March 18, 1983).

All that's missing from this description is the red tights.

Conclusion

If you somehow read through this entire thing and still have absolutely no doubts about Bayside whatsoever, I don't know what to tell you. At that point I would probably suggest you take a step back and examine the very definition and concept of "credibility."