TESTIMONY Pg. 2:
But, apart from these theological reasons, what I wish to underline here is this: a poor young woman, unversed in theology, declares that she is receiving messages from God, and these may be very rich in doctrine.
The works of an imaginary visionary are poor, barren and inconsistent. However, the message that Mother Eugenia says the Father entrusted to her is fertile. There is a harmonious interaction of two different characters which tends to confirm its authenticity. On the one hand, it is presented as something traditionally held by the Church, without any suspicious innovations, for it incessantly repeats that everything has already been said in Christ's revelation about His Father, and that everything is in the Gospel. But on the other hand, it declares that this great truth, concerning knowledge of the Father, needs to be re-considered, studied deeply and experienced.
Does not the disproportion between the weakness of the instrument, in capable of discovering a doctrine of this nature by itself, and the depth of the message being conveyed, reveal that a superior, supernatural, divine cause has intervened to entrust the sister with this message?
I cannot see how, humanly speaking, one could explain the nun's discovery of an idea, the originality and fecundity of which the theologians conducting the enquiry were able to perceive only gradually.
Another fact seems to me equally significant: when Sister Eugenia made it known that she had been receiving apparitions of the Father, the investigating theologians replied that apparitions of the Father were in themselves impossible and that they had never occurred before in history. The sister held out against these objections, declaring simply:"The Father told me to describe what I saw. He asks His sons, the theologians , to search". The nun never changed her testimony in anyway. She maintained her statements over many months. It was not until January 1934 that the theologians discovered in St. Thomas Aquinas himself the answer to their objections.
The answer given by the great doctor of the Church about the distinction between apparitions and mission was enlightening. It removed the obstacle which was paralysing the whole enquiry. Challenged by wise theologians, the uneducated little nun proved to be right. How, humanly speaking, could we explain, in this case too, the nun's insight wisdom and perseverance? A false visionary would have tried to adapt herself to the theologians' explanations. The nun, however, held her ground. These are the additional reasons why her testimony seems trustworthy to us.
In any case, what I find worthy of note is her reserved attitude towards the miraculous aspects of the case. While false visionaries give pride to place extraordinary phenomena and even see nothing but these, Mother Eugenia, in the contrary, puts them second, as proofs, as means. There is not state of exaltation, but there is a balance of values which makes a favourable impression.
I will refer only briefly to the theologians' enquiry. The Reverend Fathers Albert and Auguste Valencin are highly esteemed for their philosophical and theological authority and for their deep knowledge of the spiritual life. Their intervention was required in other, similar enquiries. We know that they acted with great circumspection, and that is why we selected them for this work.
We are grateful for their devoted and conscientious collaboration. Their testimony in favour of the sister and of a supernatural explanation of the facts as a whole is all the more remarkable as they delayed their judgement for a long time, being at first hostile and sceptical, and then hesitant. Little by little, they became convinced, after raising all kinds of objections and imposing hard tests on the nun.
CONCLUSIONS:
Following the dictates of my soul and my conscience and with the keenest sense of my responsibility to the Church, I declare that supernatural and divine intervention seems to me the only logical and satisfactory explanation of the facts.
Isolated from all the surrounding features of the case, these essential facts seem to me to be noble,lofty and supernaturally rich: that a humble nun has called souls to true devotion to the Father, such as Jesus taught and the Church has enshrined in its liturgy. There is nothing alarming in this, only something that is very simple and in accordance with solid doctrine.
The miraculous facts which accompany this message could be separated from the main event and its value would still be preserved in its entirety. For doctrinal reasons, the Church will declare whether the idea of a special feast can be considered separately from this particular case involving the sister.
I believe that the fundamental proof of the authenticity of the nun's mission is shown by the way in which she puts into practice in her life the beautiful doctrine which she was apparently destined to remind us of.
I deem it proper to let her continue her work. I believe that the hand of God is in all this. After ten years of research, reflection and prayer, I bless the Father for having deigned to choose my diocese as the place for such touching manifestations of His love.
+ Alexandre Caillot, Bishop of Grenoble.