Tink wrote:...There's another example in my own, physical life where the Mandela Effect has happened, and it's creeping me out even more. It isn't hitting mainstream notice because it's confined to the Catholic world. It involves a dubious but extremely popular image of Jesus known as "The Divine Mercy" image. For about 75 years this image, and various renditions of it produced by various artists, always lacked the wounds of Christ in the hands and feet. That was one of the things that was most dubious about this Christ image, based on an alleged series of visions seen by a Polish nun, Sister Faustina Kowalska (died 1938). In all legitimate apparitions of Christ, and all artistic renderings of the adult Christ in whatever aspect, the wounds of His Crucifixion are always present. No exceptions. So that was one of the things that was weirdly wrong with this "Divine Mercy" image, along with the fact that it just doesn't look Catholic, doesn't look like a normal Jesus. While the order of nuns that Sr. Faustina had belonged to tried to introduce it to the public as a popular devotion, after a thorough investigation of Sr. Faustina's claims and writings the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office determined that Faustina's visions were not supernatural, there was no legitimacy to her claims, and banned the image, forbidding it to be displayed in any church, oratory, chapel or Catholic home. This remained in force until impostor anti-pope John Paul II pulled Sr. Faustina's writing (which had been on the Church's Index of Forbidden Books because it was so freaky [!], until impostor anti-pope Paul VI did away with the Index altogether) out of mothballs, and lifted the ban on the image and in the 1980's began promoting them both zealously. Ick.
Anyway, the other day I was talking on the phone to a Catholic friend of mine, who is really very devout and a very sweet, earnest man, but who is a big groupie of this "Divine Mercy" cult. I encouraged him to abandon it, and explained to him the devotion's dubious history and the problems with the image, including the absence of the wounds on the false Christ's hands and feet. "There are wounds on His hands and feet," my friend said. "No, there aren't," I argued. "I know this for a fact, that's one of the reasons the Church originally banned the picture." "But I'm looking at it right now," he said, "and there are wounds".
When we got off the phone, I went immediately to the internet to check pictures of the Divine Mercy image. Sure enough, absolutely all of them, everywhere, suddenly show the wounds. "Okay...," I thought, "okay... images on the internet can be tampered with; I'm not sure how every image on every divergent website everywhere can be altered all at once, but... maybe there's a way. It's just a trick of technology." I then searched my own house to see if I had any pamphlet or book or something with a Divine Mercy image in it, but I was at a loss there because at one point a few years ago I deliberately rid my home of any trace of it. I did, however, discover a tucked away Catholic goods catalog from 2005. Long before any internet tampering of the image occurred. I found a page selling something with the image on it. This picture in my old catalog now had wounds!! A few days later I went to church to attend Mass, but before taking my seat checked a couple of Divine Mercy renderings that are, lamentably, displayed there (the cult is very, very popular these days; people are fanatic about it), and suddenly these reproductions -- real life, right there in my church -- have the wounds!
Here's a photo of that infernal "Divine Mercy" image -- I entreat my fellow BNE-ers to not display it in their homes or place of prayer:
Here's a video showing who/ what that picture represents. It's not the cover picture shown here.
(Note: I will also be using portions of this same video for one of the Beatles threads I promised to get back to.)