What makes it interesting, IMO, is that we're talking about a alleged Marian apparition to the Orthodox/schismatic Orthodox camps. Usually, questioning such an apparition draws fire, not the other way around.
questioning such an apparition draws fire
Any alleged apparition happening among Catholics gets "questioned" quite thoroughly, and more often than not it gets rejected. By Catholics. If it gains any kind of following, the local Bishop (that's the office often translated as "overseer" in Protestant Bibles) gets involved, his word is considered final (because the authority and office he holds are from God) ... and his word is usually "NO". Far from drawing fire, we consider this inquisition normal, necessary, and laudable.
David can address how our brethren in the East handle such matters.
well these are the same folks ('ROCOR-V') who drugged a bishop for months eventually kidnapping him when, having been separated from the secretary who'd been drugging him and regained some sense of sober thought, he'd retired himself.
I'm a bit quick on the trigger when it comes to questioning these folks statements... that said as TRD mentions I probably should at least give them the benefit of the doubt with regard to actually beleiving the things they say...
What are you talking about? It is very prudent to question any and all alleged apparitions. What is being said, who is saying it? Does it contradict the truth? That's why certain alleged apparaitions, such as Bayside, New York end up being condemned.