In his regional catalog of humanoid observations from northeastern France and Luxembourg, published in the ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit for October 1986, Raoul Robé reports that in 1932 in Metz, France, there was an "apparition of the Blessed Virgin to a nun of the convent", according to "L. Blaise, Alonso."
Bless Virgin appearance to a nun of the convent. (Ref. L. Blaise, Alonso).
Points to consider:
In the "Dictionnaire des "'apparitions' de la Vierge Marie" by René Laurentin and Patrick Sbalchiero (Fayard, 2007), one reads that in Metz, from 1932 to 1935, "The 'Blessed Virgin appears several times' to a cloistered nun":
Mentions of this are also on religious websites:
I still do not know what "Blessed Virgin apparitions" would have to do intrinsically with UFO occupants or UFOs, except that some ufologists argue that thone ones prove the falsity of the others, or that some ufologist are convinced that it would be "the same phenomenon".
What is quite incomprehensible, too, is the fact that catalogs, which are meant to be exhaustive, include a certain number of apparitions of the Virgin, but they omit almost all of them. Here for example, we have, for Lorraine alone:
Saint Gérard de Toul.
Saxon-Sion (Meurthe-et-Moselle), in 963,
Second half of the XVIth sentury to the Prince of Orange-Nassau.
Toul, 1284.
Nancy, in MAy 1525 to a young girl born mute, who revered speech during the "apparition",
Nancy from November 20, 1870. to 1872 to several believers.
L’Hôpital, on July 7, juillet 1872, from July 11 to 16, 1872, and on July 7, 1877, to Clémentine Girsch.
Rimling, Spring 1873.
Betting, March 10, 1873.
Bettwiler, 1873.
Biding, March 10, 1873, to Catherine Filljung.
Bouxières-aux-Dames, March 11, 1936, to Adeline Pietcquin and Gabrielle Hanus.
Dugny-sur-Meuse, on August 17 and 18, 1951, to Alfred Marzinette and a cement factory worker.
Ferdrupt, from March 2 to April 20, 1928, to Marcelle George and Madeleine Hingray.
Guising, March 15, 1873, to y young female villager.
Holving, August 15, 2009, to Anne-Marie Schmitt.
Hoste, April 1799, to several people. Miracle cures are alleged.
Metz, November 9, 1870, àto an 8-year-old girl,
Metz, 1932 to 1935, to a nun.
Ortoncourt, June 18, 1940, and November 27, 1942, to Jeanne-Marie Tachet.
Source: at http://jpsnyers.blogspot.com/2013/07/les-apparitions-de-la-vierge-en-lorraine.html
Which makes us a minimum of 20 appearances. Raoul Robé's catalog lists only 8 for the entire north-east of France and Luxembourg - much more than Lorraine.
I find the same pattern in another skeptical catalog, which also includes "ghost stories". If all were to be included, there would be an incredibly larger number.
It will be understood that it is a matter of "making examples": ghosts, "Blessed Virgin", beinf unreal, such reports can be cataloged "side by side" with those of UFO occupants, it would be the "same phenomenon", which would be of the order of invention, of illusion.
The problem for me is that this is a "holistic" approach to things; no case is deepened, no reflection or research is conducted, there is just a kind of very incomplete inventory of very brief summaries, the sources are often cryptic ("L. Blaise, Alonso", who knows who and what it is? Who? When? Where? How?). Who would be satisifed in evaluating a case really related to the question of the occupants of UFOs with such vague data?
I am the last to challenge the existence of hoaxes, misconceptions, belief-based inventions, whether religious or "alien". But can it be said that this is the central and unique problem? Should we not rather correctly document cases and do as much research and case-by-case verifications as possible? This is the approach I am trying to follow.
So for this case, I see a complete lack of data, a total absence of details. Many websites and books "specialized" in "apparitions of the virgin" report this case, but the only information is, each time, "Metz 1932 - The Virgin Mary appeared several times to a cloistered nun from 1932 to 1935."
Will I quote Daniel Costelle's book, "Apparitions à Fatima" (Presses du Chatelet, 2007) where we find "Metz 1932 and 1935" (instead of "1932 to 1935") with as an introduction to this case and others, "I have documented myself on these French appearances, I will quote several, and if readers have information about them, I would be very grateful to them to communicate it to me." Me too!
What would "skeptics" say about an alleged extraterrestrial encounter where:
No precise day is given.
No place is specified.
No witness name is known.
The alleged witness is a signle witness.
The alleged witness is conviced in advance of the reaily of what he claims he saw.
The alleged witness has repeated sightings.
Nothing is known about the witness (age, psychological health...) except that the witness is female and a firm believer.
No description at all, even short, of what the witness saw is given.
Not a word is said on what happened except that it was "an apparition of the Blessed Virgin".
No information on the visibility conditions (inside, outside; day, night; light, distance, duration etc.) is given.
One does not know at all how the report was made known.
No primary source is found.
No investigation was made.
The "competent authority" (the Church) oes not consider the report valid.
The best expert on the matter says: "please send me information about it if you have any because I found none."
List of issues:
Id:
Topic:
Severity:
Date noted:
Raised by:
Noted by:
Description:
Proposal:
Status:
-
Evaluation:
Totally insufficient data, not UFO-related.
Sources references:
* = Source I checked.
? = Source I am told about but could not check yet. Help appreciated.
[rr1] * "Catalogue régional des observations d'humanoïdes du nord-est de la France et du Luxembourg", by Raoul Robé, in the ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit (LDLN), France, October 1986.
