It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The angel of light
THIS CASE IS CLEAR EXAMPLE THAT SHOWS THAT NO BISHOP HAS AUTHORITY TO CERTIFY OR DISCREDIT A VISION,
Canon Law and the Obligation of Obedience by the Faithful
As the bishops are entrusted with the responsibilities of discerning and ruling on apparitions as stemming from the nature of their office, so there are fundamental responsibilities on the part of the members of the diocese. First, they are to obey their bishops when the latter act as Christ's representatives (canon 212), that is, when they teach formally or establish binding discipline as pastors of a particular church. This obedience owed to the bishops in their capacity as leaders of particular churches is intended to promote the common good. Canon 753 also speaks of the "religious assent" owed to the bishops' teaching authority, which means a special quality of respect and gratitude, along with critical awareness and good will. Hence, there should be intelligent obedience to ecclesiastical authority in the matter of alleged apparitions.
In 1882, Christ revealed to the stigmatist, Marie Julie Jahenny of La Fraudais, France that:
"During the time of the approach of the punishments announced at La Salette, an unlimited amount of FALSE REVELATIONS will arise from hell like a swarm of flies; a last attempt of Satan to choke and destroy the belief in the TRUE REVELATIONS by false ones."
The first responsibility of the faithful is to remain firmly established in the faith, in the sacraments and in communion with the Pope and bishops. Any Catholic who gives their primary attention to alleged private revelation at the expense of Sacred Scripture, the teaching of the Church (especially the Catechism), sacramental practice, prayer and fidelity to Church authority is off course. The running after spiritual phenomena, such as alleged revelations, is condemned by St. John of the Cross as spiritual avarice. This means that pious souls who would be repulsed by crude materialistic greed think nothing of being greedy to know revelations and prophecies. An exclusive, or even a predominant attention to these matters (especially apocalyptic ones), cannot help but produce an unbalanced spirituality. Should the Church condemn some favorite alleged revelation such a person may find themselves believing more in it than in the supernatural authority of the Church. The devil will have succeeded in what he had set out to do.
The second responsibility is to have regard, in the first place, for those private revelations and apparitions approved by the Church. Within a balanced practice of the faith the edifying content of approved private revelations can be a motive for deeper piety and fidelity to the Gospel. God has chosen to give guidance to the Church in particular eras in this way and we would, as I noted above, be imprudent to disregard altogether what are credibly His prophetic interventions in the life of His Church.
Finally, there are many other private revelations that have not received Church approval. The Second Vatican Council urges us to discern the Spirit in the case of such extraordinary graces [Lumen gentium 12], which means being neither gullible or incredulous, but subjecting them to all relevant theological and human tests of credibility. Clearly, in this the judgment of the local bishop is the key element of such a discernment as I noted above. Often enough, unfortunately, the laity are left to make this determination themselves, relying on the testimony of the events, the judgment of holy and orthodox priests and common sense. It must always be kept in mind that however credible and reasonable such revelations seem to be, God would never ask one to separate oneself from the faith and discipline of the Church to follow it.
By the way the MIRACLE OF THE COMMUNION in the mouth of the Child WAS FILMED ENTIRELY BY PRESS MEDIA,
OF COURSE, later it was found that HE HAD PROFITED ALOT, IN PERSONAL ECONOMIC ASPECTS, of the collection in the basilica along many years, he built a personal capital stolen donations and so HE WAS GUILTY OF CORRUPTION ACTS IN ADMINISTRATING IT.
The angel of light
This only statement lead me TO BE SURE THAT YOU CAN'T BE MEMBER OF ANY RELIGIOUS CATHOLIC ORDER, So you are a complete FAKE.