The article on Garabandal, Garabandal: Believe the Miracles, published last week on Catholic Stand raised many interesting comments. These could be divided into two broad groups. On the one hand, some people were concerned about the fact that Garabandal had received a negative judgement by the local diocesan investigation. This pronouncement, one commentator implied, indicates that Garabandal is not worthy of attention or support.
On the other hand, some commentators took issue with the insistence that the visions of Garabandal should be interpreted in the light of settled Church teaching. In particular, one commentator insisted that the prophecies associated with Garabandal implied that Pope Francis was not the legitimate successor of St Peter.
A Misleading Dichotomy
That might seem like a nice clear dichotomy, on the face of it at least. On one side, people who support the institutional Church, Pope Francis, the teachings of the Council of Trent, etc., are cautious (or even dismissive) about Garabandal and its prophecies. On the other side, some people who accept Garabandal are critical of the current occupant of the chair of St Peter and interpret the prophecies to imply that he is a charlatan.
The ironic thing is that my article was written with the express purpose of taking a more balanced middle ground than either of these two positions. Firstly, the intention was to emphasize that the extraordinary, well-documented miracles of Garabandal (more abundant than any other apparition site in history) are clear evidence of its heavenly origin.
Secondly, it must be acknowledged that the investigations carried out by the diocese of Santander were neither professional nor impartial. This is not to be in dissent with the legitimate Church authority, but to exercise the duty of all the faithful to assist our leaders in discerning matters such as these with clarity and justice.
Thirdly, I wanted to insist that the prophecies of Garabandal be interpreted in the light of Church teaching, especially regarding the permanence and centrality of the Petrine ministry. All that we know of the visionaries, Conchita in particular, leads us to assert that they would want the prophecies to be interpreted in this way.
First Comment: Pope Francis is a Charlatan
A well-written and thoughtful comment regarded the locution received by Conchita in December 1962 to the effect that only three more popes remain. The commentator linked this prophecy to the writings of Servant of God, Luisa Piccarreta, in which she speaks of a chastisement, after which the Church of Christ appears to give way to something different – the Kingdom of God in which there will no longer be a papacy.
AN EDITED VERSION OF MY REPLY: Any prophecy needs to be interpreted in the light of Scripture, Tradition and the teachings of the Church. When Conchita heard “Only three popes remain”, we need to try to discern what this could mean in the light of Scripture and Tradition. In Matthew 16,18, Christ says: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”. The Church has always interpreted this to be a promise by Christ that the Church and the papacy will endure until the Second Coming.
Now the occurrence of the Warning and the Miracle will be major events in world history, but they are not the Second Coming. And the fact that there may or may not be a conditional chastisement after these events confirm that the world and the Church will persist for some time afterwards. So the Church is going to be around beyond the lifetime of Pope Francis and we can be confident that, after he dies, his successor will be elected to the See of Peter, and his successor after him.
Christ’s promise in Matthew’s Gospel makes clear that the papacy will be around after the Warning and Miracle, so we must try to interpret the locution Conchita received in this light. Evidently, it means that the prophesied events (Warning and Miracle) are going to occur AFTER THE TIME of these three popes. The third of these is Pope Benedict (since it was later clarified by Conchita that in addition to the three there would also be a very short pontificate, and this prophecy was fulfilled perfectly in the thirty-three-day reign of John Paul I).
In short, Conchita’s locution indicates that the events are upon us now, since we are in the period immediately after the pontificate of that third pope (but the facts that the events are upon us should not be cause for alarm or sensationalistic behaviour, but rather a motivation to repent and live the message of the Gospel). We cannot use this prophecy to come to the conclusion that anyone who comes after Pope Benedict is not a valid pope. I am sure that Conchita would be mortified if her locution was instrumentalised in this way by enemies of Pope Francis. Of course, there will be other popes! Christ has assured us of that. Shouldn’t we take Christ at his word?
Let Us Follow Christ, Not Catholic Stand
In reply, the commentator wrote back respectfully to say that our duty is to follow Christ, not the opinions of Catholic Stand columnists. In the commentator’s opinion, the writings of Luisa Piccaretta show clearly that the papacy will end in history and something else will take its place.
My response: The litmus test for genuine mysticism is whether or not it is in line with Church teaching and respectful of a proper authority in the Church. Catherine of Siena is a great example. Sr Faustina’s works were held in suspicion until they were evaluated properly and seen to be completely in line with perennial Church teaching which stated that mercy is the greatest attribute of God, bar none.
If Luisa Piccaretta is a genuine mystic, then she will not make a claim that goes against pronouncements of ecumenical councils such as the Second Vatican Council. Lumen Gentium (Chapter III) states:
This Sacred Council, following closely in the footsteps of the First Vatican Council, with that Council teaches and declares that Jesus Christ, the eternal Shepherd, established His holy Church, having sent forth the apostles as He Himself had been sent by the Father; and He willed that their successors, namely the bishops, should be shepherds in His Church even to the consummation of the world. And in order that the episcopate itself might be one and undivided, He placed Blessed Peter over the other apostles, and instituted in him a permanent and visible source and foundation of unity of faith and communion. And all this teaching about the institution, the perpetuity, the meaning and reason for the sacred primacy of the Roman Pontiff and of his infallible magisterium, this Sacred Council again proposes to be firmly believed by all the faithful.
Luisa’s writings can be interpreted so that they are compatible with the above, without speculating on any end to the papacy. For those who deny also the legitimacy of Vatican Two, please note that this pronouncement is fully in line with previous pronouncements of ecumenical councils. The Church will remain until the consummation of the world built on the foundations of the twelve apostles and held together in unity by the successor of Peter. The Church (not Catholic Stand) teaches that this grounding of the Church upon the successor of Peter will be perpetual until the end if time. Yes, a crisis in the papacy could happen (as has happened before) and we could be without a pope for a short time, but we are guaranteed by the Holy Spirit that any such crisis will be temporary.
The Negative Evaluation of Garabandal by the Local Diocese
One commentator, who had a good knowledge of the Council of Trent’s treatment of private revelations, felt that the negative pronouncement of the local ordinary (bishop of Santander) should be taken as the final word on Garabandal.
My reply: Certainly, we should have respect for the local ordinaries, but a pronouncement of this sort is not official Church teaching. It must be re-examined and held up to the light of day. In 1958 or so, the Holy Office in Rome made a negative judgement on Sr Faustina’s visions and banned the Divine Mercy Devotion. Their decision was based on a faulty translation of Sr Faustina’s diaries.
So were the faithful supposed to just accept that decision forevermore, because the Holy office had the “proper authority”? No! That condemnation was based on faulty reporting of Sr Faustina’s writings and also some prejudiced judgements on the part of certain officials in the Holy Office.
Thanks to St John Paul II (and others) the issue was re-examined and Faustina was vindicated. Not just vindicated but canonised! And when John Paul completed the ceremony in Rome in 2000, he said that he had just carried out the most important act in his pontificate.
In Garabandal, Unstoppable Waterfall, Fr. José Luis Saavedra speaks very respectfully and eloquently about this diocesan investigation and he argues convincingly that it was not carried out systematically or with impartiality.
In fact, he shows very clearly that the testimony of a key witness, Fr Laffineur, was effectively FALSIFIED by the commission. They twisted his words around and when he refused to sign the statement, the diocesan officials signed it for him with his initials. In later years, this false testimony was quoted by the diocese as evidence against Garabandal.
The local bishop has a primary responsibility, but the laity must speak out to assist him, especially if he is seen to be failing in his responsibility. Respecting the authority of a bishop to discern the validity of an apparition does not mean that ordinary priests and the laity must be silent and refuse to participate in the process. In fact, canon law states that we have a duty to do so:
According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, [the faithful] have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors . . . CANON 212§3
For too long in the Church, we have failed to see that we can offer constructive criticism of a bishop or his behaviour whilst maintaining proper respect for his authority. For too long there has been slavish deference to bishops whose behaviour and judgements were in contradiction of the Gospel. Think of people like Theodore McCarrick (and many others) whose judgements and actions were not challenged by people because they feared that they were going against the authority of a bishop.
St Catherine of Siena was a laywoman, a humble third order Dominican. She was not afraid to challenge bishops and popes whose judgements on Church matters (such as the proper residence of the successor of Peter) were clearly deficient. I am sure that lots of people complained to Catherine that she did not show proper deference to pronouncements from bishops, but we know now that she was absolutely right to challenge these errors.
Similarly, the diocesan investigations of Garabandal need to be reconsidered. No one in the Church can argue credibly that we are compelled to accept slavishly an unprofessional investigation. Respect for a bishop’s authority and person, yes. Slavish acceptance of error, no.
Summary of the Previous Article
- The events at Garabandal were surely of supernatural origin because the miracles that happened there cannot be explained by any other means.
- They were surely of heavenly and not demonic origin because of the clear respect for the Eucharist, the Rosary, proper authority in the Church, and the lives of Christian witness of the visionaries.
- The fact that Garabandal has more miracles than all other apparition sites is an indication that we should take its message very seriously and respond to it with urgency.
- The message of Garabandal is basically that of the Gospel: repent and believe, be devoted to the Eucharist and to prayer.
- Any other interpretations of Garabandal (the end of the papacy, the illegitimacy of Pope Francis, etc.) are not in line with Church teaching regarding the perpetuity of the Petrine ministry in the Church. This is not the opinion of a Catholic Stand columnist but the mind of the Church united around the successors of the apostles under Peter.
For a more comprehensive treatment of this subject, please see the author’s blog.
22 thoughts on “Garabandal Miracles: Responding to Comments”
Medjugorje, It has been read and ends with the same thing: “The declaration of the bishop of Santander that in Garabandal “there are no signs of supernaturality” is the most explicit message that has been made from the Spanish episcopate in recent years.”
ALL the bishops did NOT have a positive thing to say about Garabandal. It doesn’t need to go to Rome as ALL the bishops spoke in effect as one. No supernaturality is to be found.
The bishop of Santander, Manuel Sánchez Monge in 2022 has stated regarding the extraordinary events of Garabandal that “my position, like that of my predecessors, is that Rome’s assessment remains valid: ‘There are no signs of supernaturality.’”
So how can the author say : ~ The events at Garabandal were surely of supernatural origin because the miracles that happened there cannot be explained by any other means.”
Like his predecessors- ALL bishops since 1961 said nothing supernatural can be found. And as this latest bishop Monge actually stated ‘ROME’S assessment remains valid : no signs of supernaturality.
The whole article needs to be read…..
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.catholicnewsagency.com/amp/news/252598/spanish-bishop-makes-statement-on-alleged-apparitions-at-garabandal
Anonymous writes, “. . .to emphasize that the extraordinary, well-documented miracles of Garabandal (more abundant than any other apparition site in history) are clear evidence of its heavenly origin.”
The only event at Garabandal called a miracle was that of the visible Communion. The levitations, the “visionaries” being made light to each other and extremely heavy to others, the “falling onto the jagged rocks until we could hear their bones crack” and more, were what the investigating doctors termed “naturally unexplainable.” Yes, more abundant than any other apparition site – or at least any other that I have heard of. All of this paranormal activity seems like evidence of its heavenly origin, but the certainty of its being supernatural is a gift. In over five years living in the area during nineteen visits, I have met no one who denies that these “unexplainable” events took place. But many of the eye-witnesses, including members of the families of the young girls, were uncertain of their origin and/or importance.
I read, “One commentator, who had a good knowledge of the Council of Trent’s treatment of private revelations, felt that the negative pronouncement of the local ordinary (bishop of Santander) should be taken as the final word on Garabandal.”
What relevance does the above-cited Council of Trent statement have in this case? Much that is misleading or deceptive has been published about Garabandal. This is an example. Anonymous needs to be more careful about whom he cites and the “commentator” seems not to know, or worse, chooses not to include that: Since 1961, nine men serving as bishop or apostolic administrator of Santander have made a total of twelve statements on Garabandal. Only one of those statements, that by Bishop E. Beitia in 1962, was definitively negative. On 4/8/1965, he published a second statement saying that it wasn’t certain whether the apparitions were of supernatural origin or not. (Declaraciones Oficiales De La Jerarquia Sobre Garabandal, Santander Chancery 1970). That is the position of the present Bishop, Manuel Monje given on 6/24/2015. (Saavedra, J., Garabandal Mensaje de Esperanza, p.6). This, “no consta de la sobrenaturalidad” isn’t negative, but neutral. It is the position that the Church takes on all apparitions before saying “yes” or “no.” Because it is easier for the Church to pronounce negatively than positively, the fact that Garabandal has gone more than sixty years without being proven false is very positive. I know of no other presently unapproved apparition that has lasted that long without a definitive negative judgement. Church authorities have indicated that it would not be ruled upon soon; their list of positive statements or actions is long (appendix IV in A Walk to Garabandal).
Yes, on hearing the bells in the village ring for the death of Pope John XXIII, Conchita remarked to her mother, “Ya solamente quedan tres.” (“Noe only three more [popes] remain”) But immediately, in answer to her mother’s question, she responded. “Solamente quedan . . .(Only three more popes remain until the end times). Conchita didn’t say anything about how many popes remain until the end of the world, or until the end of time.
The fact that the “visionaries” could read minds and foretell the future was further evidence that the paranormal events witnessed at Garabandal were not of demonic origin. These are two things the Devil can’t do. The Bishop’s Commission quickly ruled out demonic influence because they observed the happy, healthy state of the young girls. The devil’s work brings about the opposite.
C-Marie re: “apparitions not needed if one truly believes in Jesus’ presence in the Holy Eucharist at every Mass.” 1) Jesus is also present in the tabernacle or exposed on the altar after Mass. 2) It seems like God doesn’t agree with C-Marie. If we never needed help, why would He send His mother or others to be seen by Juan Diego, Bernadette, Lucia, Jacinta and others? He sent His mother and St. Michael to Garabandal to warn us that we should pay more importance to the Eucharist, and that if we didn’t amend our lives, He would send a horrible chastisement about which Conchita remarks on BBC’s “After the Visions,” that if it happens, it would be better that her children had never been born. 3) The second great commandment obliges us to love our neighbor. Garabandal has provided the best means for me to do this. It is a conversion story. After our Garabandal Association presented the Garabandal story to some five hundred people at St. Charles Church in San Carlos California, the pastor made it known that many times as many people as normal went to confession that weekend. About two years ago, Anglican Bishop Gavin Ashenden, the former chaplain to the Queen of England converted to Catholicism. One can read on-line how his interest in looking deeper into the Catholic Church came from watching a film on the apparitions of the Virgin Mary to four girls in Garabandal, Spain.
Ed Kelly – Our Lord The Holy Spirit is with You!! Excellently written! Thank You!
Hello,
Much of Garabandal Prophecies did not come from the Blessed Mother but from locutions that Cochita, Mari Loli had on different occasions. How these two girls understood and interpreted those “interior dialogues” is to be studied and interpreted not with the current situation but how Conchita could have understood with the situation and condition of that time.
@EDWARD BENET, MAY 24, AD2021 AT 3:11 PM
“Hi MyronM, it should be able to accept comments now. Please try again. Your input is always welcome.”
Hi Edward, I posted my reply to your article [CatholicStand on May 11, 2021] on your blog:
https://www.immaculatemother.org/post/what-really-happened-in-garabandal-sixty-years-ago
On March 19, 2020, Conchita was asked if she could offer some words of advice in this difficult time that the world and the Church are going through. She answered:
“God is separating us from the values of this world. In the silence of the Church or in our home, we can now do an examination of conscience so that we can purify whatever prevents us from hearing the Voice of God clearly. We can honestly ask God to tell us what He wants from us today and continue to do so every day. And spend as much time as possible with God in church or somewhere in your home or where you find silence. He is all we need.”
People often misinterpret prophecy. I have never believed that Conchita’s locution meant there would only be three Popes until the end of time. Rather I understood, as you suggest, that it only suggested a new era would occur after the passage of the three Popes.
I have met Conchita, and I can assure your readers she is completely genuine, and has never attempted to use the grand blessing given to her so long ago for any sort of personal aggrandizement. Neither did I find Joey Lomangino to misuse the great blessings provided to him by association with the events (even if he did not get physical sight before his death). I would never override a final decision of the Church on the matter, but all I can say is that it was through Garabandal that my spiritual life was renewed. I wait, as I still believe.
Hello,
Much of Garabandal Prophecies did not come from the Blessed Mother but from locutions that Cochita, Mari Loli had on different occasions. How these two girls understood and interpreted those “interior dialogues” is to be studied and interpreted not with the current situation but how Conchita could have understood with the situation and condition of that time.
https://radiomaria.us/may-22-2021/ – interesting talk by Rev.Fr . Joseph Iannunzi on how errors in theological terms can come in , thus the need for caution , how we have to take things in context too , not literally as such – these talks being with regard to the Divine Will writings .
Thank God that we do have The Church to go by , in guiding us by the Holy Spirit who knows our limitations as to how much we are ready to to take in , without going astray .
Why is Fr. Iannuzi Pro- Vassula when the Church investigation said No?
Came across these discussions , through the link at Spirit Daily – having become interested in the Divine Will writings of Luisa ( still very much a neophyte in same ) , very little familiarity with Garabandal , mostly as someone who has some angst in what is perceived as the unfair criticism against Pope Francis , in the the lack of trust and love he rightly deserves , some of the reasons seem clearer .
The Mission of Papacy to help bring forth the fuller Reign of the Holy Spirit in hearts and nations – The Apostles and Bl.Mother identified as The Church at the Pentecost .
The prophecy about the three Popes , seen in that light – how the Popes of the future ,
more fully in line with the mission of The Spirit , through The Mother ? no longer to be counted as separate , but flowing in that one Petrine Mission and focus of The Church –
as in the theme of the Divine Will ..
Interesting how the Pope Emer. had put up a statue of St.Hannibale at the Vatican ..
and the other ill reputed statue incident – many might have missed the symbolism
( even if only allowed in Providence , with no initiative from the Holy Father ) – meant as the human will striving and laboring to serve the Divine Will ..
The reluctance to approve Garabandal can be seen as legitimate enough under the circumstances – since many could misunderstand same , to cause more problems of lack of trust and unneeded fears than any real benefit from same .
Yet , our Holy Father advocating the needed means for The Church at large – including the Rosary devotions from shrines world over – let us be grateful enough and not allow the pebble of ill will and fear to blind us !
‘ Let Thy Will be done ‘ – God’s Will , to bring us what we truly need , for the eternal well being of all , including through a Holy Father who knows how to live in same more fully and to help lead others into same !
Blessings !
Excellent, thank you.
Dear Edward, I have been wanting to send you a comment on the previous article for the past few days, but there has been a technical hurdle. Can you point me to another page where you post?
Hi MyronM, it should be able to accept comments now. Please try again. Your input is always welcome.
Thank you Donald Link. I was under the understanding that the St. Gallens Group had actively promoted Jorge Bergoglio prior to his election, which they did, but perhaps only privately among themselves, which, if conducted in that way, would not make it a political act, per se.
So, Pope Francis is genuinely elected, and God gave to the Cardinals whom they desired, to be Pope. How well they knew him and knew of him, and know him now, God knows.
God bless, C-Marie
Your point is well taken. I can honestly say that I had no opinion of PF before his election, probably because I had still not completely absorbed Pope Benedict’s resignation. I do realize from history that we do not always get what we expect in a Pope though with communication and record keeping today, that should seem to be less of a consideration. The next conclave should be most interesting and your concerns regarding the appearance of internal politics may well be an issue.
Pingback: SVNDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit
A comment. If Francis is not a legitimate Pope, which appears to be true due to his political election, that does not mean at all, that the Petrine office is illegitimate nor that it is no longer existing, but that the present holder was not elected according the precepts set up by John Paul II.
Conchita comes across as honest and sincere. The words at Garabandal might or might not come to pass, but our lives must needs be based on God’s Son and our Father’s mercy and His Love for us all, shown us by the indwelling Holy Spirit, perhpas rather than apparitions.
Apparitions are not needed if one truly believes in Jesus’ presence in the Holy Eucharist at every Mass, if our priests teach the Word of God clearly without worldliness, if we the faithful spend some of our lives daily with God our Father.
There is no greater miracle than the Consecration of the bread and wine. It is the only miracle that Jesus did which had and has, no outward sign that anything has taken place. Thinking on that makes it even more wondrous indeed, in a way.
Every other miracle, persons, one or more, saw physically, or knew interiorly, yet the Holy Eucharist consecration takes place by Christ’s words being prayed and the Holy Spirit responding.
It is most interesting that the believers with St. Peter, saw that the Holy Spirit fell on Cornelius and his household and they heard them praying in tongues. What did they see, as they said it was just as the Holy Spirit had fallen upon themselves. Tongues of fire? Probably. Plenty of miracles available if prayer is constant.
How many Popes would declare as St. Peter did when he told both Ananias and Sapphira they were going to die for their lie?? The Church has been given a wealth of gifts, but few are made use of. The Holy Spirit awaits.
God bless, C-Marie
A clarification appears in order regarding the legitimacy of the election of PF. The precepts set by Pope John Paul II do not carry with it a penalty for material non-compliance. Both tradition and experience demonstrate that a Pope can not authoritatively bind successor actions in matters of discipline if they choose to go in a different direction. As far as the actions of the conclave, as long as they are not violative of moral strictures, they are valid. Example, depriving Cardinals over age 80 from voting was established by Paul VI but can be changed backed without affecting the validity of the election. As far as machinations that could be termed political, history is replete with such elections. Standouts are the Borgias and the Medicis and there are others previous to them. In addition, the performance of Pontiffs after election does not invalidate. Pius IX started as liberal minded and turned quite conservative. Finally as to the validity of apparitions; the first test as to whether they , properly and accurately reported, are in contradiction to Church teaching is both proper and logical. The matter of Medjugorie, which has been under study for decades, illustrates the care with which the Church approaches these matters.
C-Marie, You write, “Apparitions are not needed if one truly believes in Jesus’ presence in the Holy Eucharist at every Mass, . . .” If this were phrased a different way, I might agree. Expanding on your comment, it seems like some apparitions (like Garabandal) wouldn’t be necessary if we all did what God wanted of us – keep His commandments. But trusting that God knows what He is doing, it seems like He saw a need to correct us, to intervene in an extraordinary way at Garabandal. God has given me, and from your statement, you, the certainty of his real presence in the Eucharist. My certainty that Garabandal is supernatural is also His gift. The God that I know can neither deceive nor be deceived. He hasn’t done so yet. In Appendix IV of my book “A Walk to Garabandal,” I devote twenty-three pages to the long list of Church authorities who have reacted positively to Garabandal. I will send you a copy of this if you wish. There are other (approved apparitions) where God’s motives seem different. Nuestra Senora de la Luz (Our Lady of Light) across the Pena Sagra Ridge from Garabandal is a case in point and a favorite of mine. This topic; your comment and my response might be better suited to a conversation than to a comment and response. Ed Kelly