The Apparitions at Garabandal

[MiKeEd]

Is anyone familiar with the apparitions of Our Lady at Garabandal?
garabandal.org/story.shtml

What are your thoughts on the messages? Do you believe that something otherworldly is soon to come?

From my research on the apparitions at Garabandal, I believe that the messages are authentic, speaking of God’s mercy and love He has for each of us, given to us by his greatest messenger- Mary.

 

[arnulf]

These apparitions are not approved by the church. The local bishop has judged they are not authentic.

 

[hawkeye]

MiKeEd:

Is anyone familiar with the apparitions of Our Lady at Garabandal?
garabandal.org/story.shtml

What are your thoughts on the messages? Do you believe that something otherworldly is soon to come?

From my research on the apparitions at Garabandal, I believe that the messages are authentic, speaking of God’s mercy and love He has for each of us, given to us by his greatest messenger- Mary.

My thoughts are that people ony quote half the Bishops statement, it was lost in the Spanish translation.
If you like check this out, garabandal.com/
If you click on the one"The Churches Position" is this not the truth ?

 

[rfk]

This subject has been discussed to death at Garabandal: The prophesey (sic)

The garabandal website is a heretical website. Garabandal has done GREAT DAMAGE to the Church. Six consecutive Bishops of Santander have condemned the visions.

People also advance the argument that Fatima was not approved immediately, or that St. Faustina and the Divine Mercy was banned for a while, to imply that they have the liberty to believe in Garabandal under the presumption that the Church’s approval will somehow “catch up later”, or that “Rome will intervene”.

Cardinal Seper, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith wrote in 1970 that:

However promoters of the Garabandal movement have tried to minimize the decisions and the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Santander. THIS SACRED CONGREGATION WANTS IT TO BE CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE BISHOP OF SANTANDER HAS BEEN AND CONTINUES TO BE THE ONLY ONE WITH COMPLETE JURISDICTION IN THIS MATTER AND THE HOLY SEE HAS NO INTENTION OF EXAMINING THIS QUESTION ANY FURTHER, since it holds that the examinations already carried out are sufficient as well as are the official declarations of the Bishop of Santander.

The devil has succeeded in catastrophically damaging the Church. We have countless earnest and devout Marian Catholics disregarding the Bishops to follow Garabandal and other banned apparitions. There is a real schism here!

The devil is destroying the mystical union of the faithful with the Body of Christ. He has lured Catholics to willfully disregard, and to intentionally disobey to the explicit decrees of the Bishops, the successors of the Apostles. Only through the Bishops does the power of divine grace come into the world.

 

[kerbear]

Karl Keating:

Proponents of Garabandal emphasize that it has not yet been condemned by the Church. But the Church, in the personage of two successive bishops of the Diocese of Santander, has said that “nothing supernatural” occurred at Garabandal.

What need is there for a formal condemnation when the Church has said “there is no there there”? If “nothing supernatural” happened at Garabandal, then there was no apparition. For there to be a real apparition, there must be some sort of supernatural intervention.

So what happened? There may have been hallucination, there may have been confusion, there may have been daydreaming, there may have been made-up stories. All such things are natural phenomena, not supernatural. But there was no authentic apparition.

In short, there is no reason to give the least credibility to Garabandal.

This is Karl’s post from another thread on the topic.

 

[MiKeEd]

The Church’s official and final decision on the apparitions at Garabandal will be found at this site if a decision is ever reached: garabandal.org/church.shtml. Authentic visionaries are usually obedient when the Church asks them to be. Until then, it is safe to believe what you want about Garabandal.

The documentary “San Sebastian de Garabandal: The Eyewitnesses”, which provides some footage of the actual events at Garabandal along with the full story, has given me every reason to believe in the apparitions authenticity. (garabandal.org/info/eyewtnss.shtml)

One thing I can assure you, when the illumination occurs, and I believe it will be soon, the apparitions at Garabandal will be approved. I know of at least one other message from Mary, other than the messages at Garabandal, where She has spoken about the “illumination” or “warning.” Here is a part of that message that was given May 5, 2004, “Time has come to prepare your heart to receive The Warning that will come.” -Mother of Mercy

Either way, if you are making every effort to do God’s Will and you trust in Him, you will make it through whatever may happen.

 

[hawkeye]

rfk:

This subject has been discussed to death at Garabandal: The prophesey (sic)

The garabandal website is a heretical website. Garabandal has done GREAT DAMAGE to the Church. Six consecutive Bishops of Santander have condemned the visions.

People also advance the argument that Fatima was not approved immediately, or that St. Faustina and the Divine Mercy was banned for a while, to imply that they have the liberty to believe in Garabandal under the presumption that the Church’s approval will somehow “catch up later”, or that “Rome will intervene”.

Cardinal Seper, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith wrote in 1970 that:

The devil has succeeded in catastrophically damaging the Church. We have countless earnest and devout Marian Catholics disregarding the Bishops to follow Garabandal and other banned apparitions. There is a real schism here!

The devil is destroying the mystical union of the faithful with the Body of Christ. He has lured Catholics to willfully disregard, and to intentionally disobey to the explicit decrees of the Bishops, the successors of the Apostles. Only through the Bishops does the power of divine grace come into the world.

Thanks for your comments, but where do you get the idea from that the Garabandal web-site is Heretical ?
I only want to seek the truth here,as half the truth is still a whole lie.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Jesus gave authority over His church to the Apostles and their successors – our current modern day Bishops. Even when a new apparitions had yet to be approved (St. Faustina and the Divine Mercy for example), the visions still instructed the person to obey the instructions of the church (priests, bishops, etc.). St. Faustina was never told by Jesus (the Son of God Himself) to disobey an instruction given by the church because that would undermine His own church. This is differerent from what appears to be the case at Garabandal as the instructions of the church and the bishop are being disregarded – which is a good indication that the apparitions are not from God but from the evil one who can come as an angel of light.

 

[hawkeye]

Anyway it’s best to forget about Garabandal, unless some new light is shed on it. I have as I said been a message junkie, but always keeping an open mind, like Bayside it’s not approved and we shouldn’t publish I suppose unapproved revelations.

Thats my last word on Garabandal :yawn:

 

[MiKeEd]

Sir Knight:

This is different from what appears to be the case at Garabandal as the instructions of the church and the bishop are being disregarded – which is a good indication that the apparitions are not from God but from the evil one who can come as an angel of light.

When did the visionaries disregard the instructions of the Church and the Bishops? I believe that is completely false. Read this carefully: garabandal.org/church.shtml!

And as far as the statement that the evil one can come as an angle of light (The Virgin Mary and St. Michael the Archangel in the case of Garabandal), I believe that the Miracle of The Host (garabandal.org/photos/1communion.shtml) proves that hypothesis to be completely false in this case. The evil one could never make a host appear on the tongue of a visionary, a symbol that is God himself, truly present! If you ever see the documentary San Sebastian de Garabandal: The Eyewitnesses, you would see many more reasons that prove the messages at Garabandal are authentic.

Let me ask the disbelievers of the apparitions at Garabandal this. Why would St. Padre Pio give one of his gloves, which he used to cover his stigmata’s with, to Conchita (one of the four visionaries at Garabandal) before he died? I believe this is just one more reason that reassures that the apparitions at Garabandal are authentic messages from God through the Blessed Virgin Mary.

 

[rfk]

MiKeEd:

When did the visionaries disregard the instructions of the Church and the Bishops? I believe that is completely false. Read this carefully: garabandal.org/church.shtml!

As I said above, garabandal.org is a heretical website, and thus none of their self-serving or slanted statements are to be trusted. Your photographs don’t convince me; the local Bishop had access to any and all documentation, yet condemned the so-called “apparition”. I might personally speculate that Satan can place bread on someone – he is the trickster and liar – but I am no theologian. I’ll trust the Bishop, successor to the Apostles, instead.

Oh, and by the way, do you think it is coincidental that you can also buy pilgrimage tour packages at the garabandal.org website? (Garabandal Pilgrimage Information ) Since pilgrimages are expressly forbidden, here is one example of disobedience.

Instead, I place my trust in the local Bishop and the Holy See. Six consecutive Bishops of Santander have condemned the visions. I know that excessive quoting is discouraged in this forum, but this issue just will not go away. The next two messages quote both the Holy See and the local Bishop.

 

[rfk]

Cardinal Seper, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith wrote in 1970 that:

SACRA CONGREGATIO
PRO DOCTRINA FIDEI
PROTo N. 1065/64 Roma, 21 april 1970.

Piazza del S. Uffizio, 11.

Your Excellency:

This office has received your letter of April 8, 1970, in which you expressed justifiable apprehension about the diffusion of the Garabandal movement in your Archdiocese and in which you asked for clear and reliable guidelines from the Holy See for dealing with this phenomenon.

The Holy See shares your preoccupation about the manifest and increasing confusion due to the diffusion of this movement among the faithful and desires with this letter to clarify its position on the matter.

This Sacred Congregation, despite requets from various bishops and faithful, has always refused to define the supernatural character of the events of Garabandal. After the definitive negative judgement issued by the Curia of Santander, this Sacred Congregation, after attentive examination of the proceedings forwarded to this office, has often praised the prudence that characterized the method followed in the examination, but has still decided to leave the direct responsability for the matter to the local Ordinary.

The Holy See has always held that the conclusions and dispositions of the Bishop of Santander were sufficiently secure guidelines for the bishops, in order to dissuade people from participating in pilgrimages and other acts of devotion that are based on claims connected with or founded on the presumed apparitions and messages of Garabandal. On March 10, 1969, this Sacred Congregation wrote a letter to this effect to the bishop of Santander who had also asked for a more explicit declaration of the Holy See in the matter.

However, promoters of the Garabandal movement have tried to minimize the decisions and the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Santander. This Sacred Congregation wants it to be clearly understood that the Bishop of Santander has been and continues to be the only one with complete jurisdiction in this matter and the Holy See has no intention of examining this question any further since it holds that the examinations already carried out are sufficient as well as are the official declarations of the Bishop of Santander… There is no truth to the statement that the Holy See has named an «Official Papal Private Investigator of Garabandal» and affirmations attributed to this anonymous personage to the extent that «the verification of the Garabandal apparitions lies completely in the hands of the Holy Father Pope Paul VI» and other such expressions that aim at undermining the authority of the decisions of the Bishop of Santander are completely unfounded.

In order to reply to certain doubts that you expressed in your letter, this Sacred Congregation wishes to assert that the Holy See has never aproved, even indirectly, the Garabandal movement, that it has never encouraged or blessed Garabandal promoters or centers. Rather, the Holy

See deplores the fact that certain persons and institutions persist in fomenting the movement in obvious contradiction with the dispositions of ecclesiastical authority, and thus disseminate confusion among the people, especially among the simple and defenceless.

From what has been said so far, you will easily realize that, though this Sacred Congregation certainly agrees with the contents of the note of May 10, 1969 (as published in various countries and especially in the French magazine, La Documentation Catholique, Sep. 21, 1969; n. 1.547, p. 821), it must say that it is inexact to attribute the part of the text that deals with the lack of supernatural character of the events of Garabandal to the Sacred Congregation, wich has always striven to abstain from any direct declaration on the question, precisely because it. did not consider it necessary to do so after the clear and express decisions of the Bishop of Santander. This is the genuine meaning of the letter written on January 21, 1970, by the Most Reverend Paul Philippe, Secretary of this Sacred Congregation, to the editor in chief of La Documentation Catholique.

In order to contribute further to your pastoral action in this matter, this office is enclosing other essential documents already published in other countries such as Spain, i. e. the two official notices of the Bishop of Santander, two letters of the Sacred Congregation to the same Bishop, and a letter to the Apostolic Delegate to Mexico.

This office hopes in this letter to have clarified a question that concerns not just your Archdiocese but also other dioceses.

With sentiments of deepest esteem and cordial respect, I am

Devotedly yours,

FRANC., Card. Seper. Praef.

PAUL PHILIPPE,
Secretary.
His Excellency
Most Rev. PHILIP M. HANNAN.

Archbishop of New Orleans.
(enclosures)

 

[rfk]

On October 11, 1996 the new bishop, Jose Vilaplana, again placed his prohibition on the alleged apparitions and said it is final.

"Some people have been coming directly to the Diocese of Santander (Spain) asking about the alleged apparitions of Garabandal and especially for the answer about the position of the hierarchy of the Church concerning these apparitions.

I need to communicate that:

1. *]All the bishops of the diocese since 1961 through 1970 agreed that there was no supernatural validity for the apparitions.
   *]In the month of December of 1977 Bishop Dal Val of Santander, in union with his predecessors, stated that in the six years of being bishop of Santander there were no new phenomena.
   *]The same bishop, Dal Val, let a few years go by to allow the confusion or fanaticism to settle down, and then he initiated a commission to examine the apparitions in more depth. The conclusion of the commission agreed with the findings of the previous bishops. That there was no supernatural validity to such apparitions.
   *]At the time of the conclusions of the study, in 1991, I was installed bishop in the diocese. So during my visit to Rome, as limina visit which happened in the same year, I presented to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith the study and I asked for pastoral direction concerning this case.
   *]On Nov. 28, 1992, the Congregation sent me an answer saying that after examining the documentation, there was no need for direct intervention (by the Vatican) to take away the jurisdiction of the ordinary bishop of Santander in this case. Such a right belongs to the ordinary. Previous declarations of the Holy See agree in this finding. In the same letter they suggested that if I find it necessary to publish a declaration, that I reconfirm that there was no supernatural validity in the alleged apparitions, and this will make a unanimous position with my predecessors.
   *]Given that the declarations of my predecessors who studied the case have been clear and unanimous, I don’t find it necessary to have a new public declaration that would raise notoriety about something which happened so long ago. However, I find it necessary to rewrite this report as a direct answer to the people who ask for direction concerning this question, which is now final: *]I agree with [and] I accept the decision of my predecessors and the direction of the Holy See.
   *]In reference to the Eucharistic celebration in Garabandal, following the decision of my predecessors, I ruled that Masses can be celebrated only in the parish church and there will be no references to the alleged apparitions and visiting priests who want to say Mass must have approval from the pastor, who has my authorization. It’s my wish that this information is helpful to you.

1. 
   

   My regards in Christ,

   Jose Vilaplana

   Bishop of Santander

   Oct. 11, 1996

 

[MiKeEd]

rfk:

As I said above, garabandal.org is a heretical website, and thus none of their self-serving or slanted statements are to be trusted.

Your “opinion” is that garabandal.org is a heretical website.

rfk:

Your photographs don’t convince me; the local Bishop had access to any and all documentation, yet condemned the so-called “apparition”.

The eyewitnesses’ photographs that you are referring to are authentic as are the video clips that you probably haven’t seen. If you watched the documentary you would understand why most people, who have seen the video, would believe the authenticity of the photos and the eyewitness accounts.

rfk:

I’ll trust the Bishop, successor to the Apostles, instead.

Have you met any of these bishops that were against the apparitions? They may be the ones that are being influenced by someone other that God. The evil one would love nothing more than to have his biggest adversary’s (Mary’s) messages disapproved by the Church. After all, Our Lady has talked about praying for the leaders in the church because many of them will fall and bring many souls with them.

I’ll trust a Saint (St. Pio that is), the evidence I have seen and researched, and my heart. This is not the only time that Our Mother has given a message about the “warning.” Just be prepared for when it happens, don’t be afraid, and trust in God.

 

[justme]

MiKeEd:

I’ll trust a Saint (St. Pio that is), the evidence I have seen and researched, and my heart. This is not the only time that Our Mother has given a message about the “warning.” Just be prepared for when it happens, don’t be afraid, and trust in God.

Saints are not infallible.

And did St Pio tell you that Garabandal is true? Or did you just hear that he said it?

 

[rfk]

MiKeEd:

Have you met any of these bishops that were against the apparitions? They may be the ones …I’ll trust a Saint (St. Pio that is), the evidence I have seen and researched, and my heart…

Well, there is the crux of the issue. You reject the Bishops.

‘Even in the devotion to, or in the reception of the Eucharist: the faithful are only truly united to Christ and to his Mystical Body, the Church, through the Bishops. Cut off from the Bishops not even devotion to the Eucharist itself can unite the faithful to the Mystical Body of Christ.’ [Pope John Paul II, Ecclesia de Eucharistia 2003, Chap 4, part 39]

Church law clearly gives the local Bishop – successor to the Apostles – the authority to determine whether apparitions, visions, and the like are supernatural or not.

Our duty as a Catholic is clear. We are required to obey the Church in matters of dogma, and we are required to have submission of will to the teaching authority of the Church. If you reject the judgment of 6 successive bishops plus the Holy See simply because you “know better” in “your heart”, then you are implicitly part of the schism that is greatly damaging our Church. I believe this schism is directly the work of Satan.

I could care less what photographs and movies are showing, because even if they are not of this world that does not necessarily mean they are from the Blessed Mother or Jesus Christ.

From the vatican document, “The Gift of Authority”:

1. The Spirit of Christ endows each bishop with the pastoral authority needed for the effective exercise of episcope within a local church. This authority necessarily includes responsibility for making and implementing the decisions that are required to fulfil the office of a bishop for the sake of koinonia. Its binding nature is implicit in the bishop’s task of teaching the faith through the proclamation and explanation of the Word of God, of providing for the celebration of the sacraments, and of maintaining the Church in holiness and truth. Decisions taken by the bishop in performing this task have an authority which the faithful have a duty to receive and accept (cf. Authority in the Church II, 17). By their sensus fidei the faithful are able in conscience both to recognise God at work in the bishop’s exercise of authority, and also to respond to it as believers. This is what motivates their obedience, an obedience of freedom and not slavery.

 

[MiKeEd]

justme:

And did St Pio tell you that Garabandal is true? Or did you just hear that he said it?

If Saint Pio didn’t believe that the apparitions were true than why would he give one of his gloves to Conchita before he died??? And I did hear this information. I haven’t been blessed to have had the opportunity to speak with St. Pio myself. I heard this factual information from my mom, who heard it from Conchita’s good friend.

It sounds to me like you don’t have a lot of knowledge on the apparitions at Garabandal. The lack of knowledge on any issue is what creates the debate even when there is visible truth present.

I would just love to know one thing. If these other worldly events that occurred at Garabandal were demonically influenced, then why are all the visionaries still devout Catholics who go above and beyond the average practicing Catholic. Also, why have so many of the Garabandal prophecies come true??? The only things being demonically influenced are the rejections of authentic messages by Our Blessed Virgin Mary!

 

[system]

I am completely confused. I just noticed that there is another thread about apparations (“The apparitions of Garabandal,” which seems far more explosive in content) that remains opens…why the discrimination against the Medjugorje thread?

 

[MiKeEd]

I don’t have an answer to that. I think they all should be open for discussion.

 

[Sir_Knight]

MiKeEd, you are missing the point here. The individuals associated with EVERY single APPROVED apparition were instructed to remain obedient to all lawful church authority prior to the apparition being approved.

In this particular case, lawful church authority rests with the Holy See and the local bishop who have forbidden pilgrimages. Yet, they are running pilgrimages. This alone points to the apparitions as not being from God.

Name me one other apparition which is presently approved but prior to it’s approval lawful church authority was disobeyed.

I am not aware of a single one EXCEPT for this one – an indication that Satan is trying to divide and confuse the faithful.

Recall what Jesus said in scripture – a kingdom divided against itself can not stand. Jesus said that His church would last forever and He gave full authority to his Apostles and their successors (the Pope and his Bishops). Christ would never contradict that authority because He would then be dividing His church against itself.

And in the past, this was always the case. Prior to new apparitions being approved by the church, the Bishops were ALWAYS obeyed in their rulings EXCEPT for here!

Why do you think that this apparition is different from the rest and is causing division within the church by promoting disobedience to the bishop?

Hint: Maybe it isn’t a valid apparition.

If you don’t like that answer, I am open to hearing another reason.