Not to travel? Defense of Luz de María against Countdown to the Kingdom
Felipe Pérez Martí
1. “Do Not Travel” and the Call to Avoid Large Gatherings
One of the most insistent points made by Countdown to the Kingdom is the criticism of Luz de María’s warnings not to travel and to avoid large crowds. For this reason I dedicate more time to it. Similarly, the last section, on UFOs, false mystics, and heterodox content, requires greater length. The most cited message on this first point is the one from November 5, 2024, attributed to the Blessed Virgin:
“Children of Mine, I call you not to travel at this time. Obey, little children, obey, unless you are returning to your homes. My little children: OBEY, THIS MOTHER. OBEY. Do not despise My calls. I do not cause you fear, but I warn you so that you may change spiritually and take the necessary measures in the face of all that is to come.”
The exhortation to “obey” is repeated with emphasis. In a later interview, Luz confirmed that the instruction referred to the present (“at this time”), that is, from November 2024 onward.
CDTK points out that, more than seven months later, there has been no widespread danger in traveling, and that these warnings have caused many people to cancel family plans, pilgrimages, and important Church events, including the 2025 Jubilee and the National Eucharistic Congress in the United States. They also mention later messages such as the one from June 18, 2025 (“the disease is in your midst. Protect yourselves, do not gather in crowds”) and the one from March 27, 2024 (“avoid large crowds… because terror is taking hold of the nations”).
Analysis and Response
This criticism from CDTK starts from an understandable premise, but it makes a fundamental error: it assumes that God speaks in His prophetic messages in the same way to all people, ignoring that the Lord addresses each soul according to its vocation, its spiritual state, and the concrete needs of its path — particularly of conversion — in these times that are undoubtedly apocalyptic. The heavenly calls seek to increase conversion more and more and to prepare souls for what is coming, especially for the purification that involves the Warning.
Let us remember the Gospel: Jesus said to Peter “come” and called him to walk on the water in the midst of the storm (Mt 14:28-29), while He indicated to the other apostles that they should remain in the boat. It was not a contradiction: it was the same Lord giving different instructions according to the mission, the grace, and the particular call of each one at that moment. This evangelical example illustrates a broader reality: in Sacred Scripture, especially in the New Testament, the faithful have always received the same texts, but each one receives and applies them according to their personal situation, their spiritual needs, and the moment they are living. The Fathers of the Church and the saints have taught that the Word of God is living and effective (Heb 4:12), and that the Holy Spirit makes it resonate personally in the heart of each believer. The same occurs with private revelations. God does not speak to everyone in an identical way nor with the same level of demand at every moment. To some He calls for greater prudence at a certain time; to others He invites them to go out with courage to evangelize or to pilgrimage. To pretend that a general message must be applied in the same way to all the faithful is to reduce the action of the Holy Spirit to a uniform manual.
Luz de María’s warnings (“do not travel at this time”, “avoid large crowds”) must be understood in this context. They are not an absolute and permanent prohibition for the whole Church, but a call to supernatural prudence in times of growing instability (wars that many of us already consider the beginning of the Third World War, diseases, terrorism, social unrest). Traveling in this context, especially to affected areas or near conflicts (as recently occurred with airspace closures in Venezuela, the Gulf of Mexico — today called the Gulf of the U.S. by some — and the Caribbean), carries real risks that did not exist in “normal” times. That some people have canceled pilgrimages or family gatherings out of excessive fear is not the fault of the message, but of a literal interpretation and lack of personal discernment.
In fact, the opposite case is not mentioned: many people have traveled when perhaps they should not have according to their own personal call. Some took advantage of the Jubilee to spend a large part of their savings on a trip to the Vatican and a tour of Europe (including Medjugorje, Fatima and Lourdes), when they could have obtained the same plenary indulgences and graces in their local cathedral and used the money saved for the needy — who have increased considerably due to unemployment and the crisis. Others have traveled for social boasting, pure tourism, or to seek human relationships that were not always aligned with God’s will (looking for a partner, business, etc.).
The local alternative would have been more fruitful for many: a retreat in their diocese, acts of charity with the money saved, greater intimacy with God through frequent visits to the Blessed Sacrament, daily Mass instead of only on Sundays, taking the Eucharist to the sick, visiting prisons or caring for the homeless. Something similar applies to the National Eucharistic Congress: not all who attended necessarily responded to a uniform call from God; some may have done so for spiritual tourism or mixed motives, while others would have made better use of that time and resources in their own parish or in nearby works of mercy.
It is not that the Jubilee held in the Vatican or the Eucharistic Congress were bad from the point of view of the heavenly call through Luz de María. But we should not judge them as if we were not in a different context from the “normal” times of the past.
Furthermore, CDTK does not take into account that massive events like this also carry a real risk of contagion of diseases, including new or unknown ones, just as the messages from Heaven warn. Criticizing heavenly prudence while promoting attendance at concentrations of tens of thousands of people reveals an incomplete vision of discernment.
Beyond the technical causes, these types of incidents oblige us to look at the spiritual dimension of the problem. When ideological criteria (such as “diversity, equity and inclusion” or DEI policies) are prioritized over competence, experience, and the real safety of people, a disorder is being introduced, on purpose, that opens the door to evil. The devil does not need to cause every accident directly; it is enough for him to promote a culture of pride and lies that sacrifices truth and prudence in the name of human agendas.
As Jesus says, “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy” (Jn 10:10). In this sense, the inclusion of underqualified personnel for ideological reasons, instead of merit, can be seen as a manifestation of the evil side of the spiritual conflict we are living. The risk of accidents through this path of incompetence must also be seen as part of that spiritual conflict: the devil seeks more accidents, greater chaos, and less socio-economic efficiency. However, the prayer, fasting, and conversion of those who heard the message from Heaven — and who, instead of traveling, chose to remain in prayer and works of mercy — have contributed to mitigating possible disasters.
True obedience does not consist in blindly obeying a website nor in rejecting every heavenly warning for fear of seeming exaggerated. It is to discern with humility, prayer, and the fear of God, always seeking the balance between trust in Providence and the supernatural prudence that Heaven asks of us at every moment of our lives.
God does not call us to live with paralyzing fear, but neither with reckless imprudence. To some He calls to walk on the waters (Peter); to others, to remain in the boat in the midst of the storm. Both responses can be obedient, according to the particular will that the Lord has for each soul. We must not box God into these messages. One is not omniscient as He is. The prophetic messages alluded to, therefore, cannot be disqualified by narrow and limited judgments.
Criticism of CDTK’s Double Standard
It is especially striking —and highly revealing— that Countdown to the Kingdom demands of Luz de María a level of precision and “safety” that it does not demand of other voices it promotes.
For years they published and defended messages from other alleged seers containing very concrete eschatological details and strong calls to prepare refuges and face tribulation. Detailed timelines and warnings about the coming trials, the Warning, and the need for radical preparation have been published without accusations of fostering “irrational fear” or a “bunker mentality.”
Yet when Luz de María issues a maternal call to prudence in the face of real and growing risks —armed conflicts, airspace closures, rising air fatalities, and health threats— they immediately accuse her of generating “irrational fear.”
This double standard is not only inconsistent; it reveals a biased and restrictive approach that, rather than seeking equitable discernment, appears aimed at selectively disqualifying a messenger who, by Heaven’s decision, has a particularly prominent role in these apocalyptic times, especially in urgent calls to conversion and in the revelation of certain secrets at moments determined by God.
Felipe Pérez Martí
I’m not sure if you were involved in the preparation of the recent CDTK document criticizing Luz de María de Bonilla.
In any case, I wanted to let you know that I have written a detailed defense of her messages. I am forwarding you the message I sent to Daniel O’Connor and Mark Mallett.It might be of interest to you.
Best regards and blessings, in Jesus and Mary, with my great appreciation for you and your family,
Felipe Pérez Martí
P.S. I also sent them the defense I wrote about a year ago in a similar context:
https://www.quehacer.wiki/wiki/Luz_de_Mar%C3%ADa_de_Bonilla:_Discernment_in_the_Face_of_Accusations_Against_Her
Felipe Pérez Martí
I have not received any response from you.
My request remains simple and direct: please speak personally with Luz de María de Bonilla to clarify the issues raised in your statement.
Are you willing to do this? It is a basic step of fraternal charity and the path clearly indicated by Our Lord in Matthew 18:15-17.
Please remember that we are speaking about two of the most important prophetic voices of these times: Fr. Michel Rodrigue and Luz de María de Bonilla. Your decision to publicly disqualify them, without first engaging in a direct and private conversation, gives the impression that you are positioning yourselves above them — almost as if you were competing with the very messengers God has sent.
Recall what happened when the mother of James and John asked Jesus for the first places for her sons (Mt 20:20-28). The other apostles became indignant, and Jesus had to correct them all: “Whoever wants to be first must be your slave — just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve” (Mt 20:27-28).
In your case, it is even more serious. It is not simply wanting to be first; it is effectively excluding two of the main prophetic voices while keeping others. Of the Twelve Apostles, it would be as if you decided to stay and to set aside all the rest of them and only keep the seventy lesser disciples.
You have your own timeline of the end times. Fr. Michel and Luz de María also have theirs. Does this mean you consider your discernment superior to theirs? Did God the Father assign you this role instead of them?
As we all know, this impasse is only one example of the much larger spiritual battle unfolding in these apocalyptic times — the battle between God and the evil one. By refusing to speak directly with Luz de María and by publicly removing or disqualifying two of the most significant messengers Heaven has sent, you risk placing yourselves on the wrong side of that conflict.
Let me repeat what I wrote in the document:“Let us remember that the evil one always mixes truth with error in order to confuse and divide: he uses the greater part of his hook with authentic bait, in order to better catch the unwary. The 90% of what he says may be true, but that remaining 10% is so serious that it determines the character of the entire message and can lead to damnation.Precisely for this reason, when a site that has disseminated many authentic messages decides to remove or disqualify two of the most significant messengers of these times — Luz de María de Bonilla and Fr. Michel Rodrigue — a serious concern arises. My warning is fraternal: that Countdown to the Kingdom does not unwittingly become an instrument that favors the division and confusion the evil one seeks. On the contrary, I invite you to return to the path of humble and balanced discernment, so that you may continue to be a useful instrument of God in the dissemination of prophecies for these apocalyptic times.”
This is my final fraternal call before proceeding to the next step with witnesses, as indicated by Our Lord.
I remain available for a direct and charitable conversation.
Best regards and blessings,
in Jesus and Mary,Felipe Pérez Martí
Felipe Pérez Martí
As I promised, I am now proceeding to the second stage of the path indicated by Our Lord in Matthew 18:15-17. I am formally asking you, in the presence of witnesses, to correct the public disqualifications you have made against Luz de María de Bonilla.
Some of the people I invited as witnesses — those who were already involved in the previous situation with Fr. Michel Rodrigue — have declined to participate visibly. I have therefore omitted their names and will simply inform them of this message and of any reply you may give. Several expressed that they believe it is no longer worthwhile and that “everyone has their own opinion and has moved on.”
I respect their decision, but I cannot do the same. This is not a matter on which we can simply “agree to disagree.” We are dealing with the credibility of two of the most important prophetic voices that Heaven has raised up in these decisive times. The responsibility involved is immense.
When a platform that has done so much good in spreading prophetic messages publicly removes or disqualifies two of the most significant messengers without first engaging in a proper, fraternal, and private conversation, it causes serious confusion and division among the faithful.
As far as I know (and I may be mistaken), both Christine Watkins and Peter Bannister distanced themselves from CDTK for reasons closely related to this kind of approach.
I also wish to point out something quite extraordinary — and, to my knowledge, unique in the history of private revelations. As explained publicly by Xavier Ayral:
- Fr. Michel Rodrigue has received messages from Heaven affirming that Luz de María is an authentic messenger.
- Luz de María has likewise received confirmation from Heaven regarding the authenticity of Fr. Michel’s mission.
When such a strong mutual confirmation occurs, it should be seen as a special grace from God to strengthen His instruments during times of intense spiritual attack and division. It is as if Heaven were saying: “These are Mine — and I confirm one through the other.”
In my opinion, this is powerful additional evidence that Fr. Michel and Luz de María are not only authentic, but among the main prophets God has raised up for these end times. They provide some of the strongest and most detailed messages about the Warning, the Tribulation, the Refuges, and the coming Era of Peace.
True prophets have always been heavily attacked, just as Jesus foretold: “Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you…” (Mt 5:11). These attacks come both from outside the Church and from within.
Again, In matters of this gravity, we cannot simply “agree to disagree.” What is needed is real dialogue and an honest exchange of ideas. In fact, some form of conflict-resolution mechanism is necessary to minimize the divisions that will inevitably arise among the faithful and within the Church as a whole in these times of confusion and lies instigated by the evil one.
That is why I am proceeding to the second stage with witnesses. I have already informed them of all my previous messages to you. I will wait one or two more days for your reply.
All I am asking is that you speak directly and privately with Luz de María (and, if possible, also with Fr. Michel, so that I may withdraw my public statements regarding his case as well). The rest I leave in the hands of God. I am convinced that this simple act of fraternal dialogue can bring about the unity and clarity we so urgently need in these times.
I remain fully available for that conversation.
Best regards and blessings,
in Jesus and Mary,Felipe Pérez Martí