{hightlights are mine}
PREFACE
1.
The
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is competent in questions
regarding the promotion and safeguarding of the teaching of faith and
morals.
It is also competent to examine difficulties regarding the proper
understanding of the faith, such as cases of pseudo-mysticism,
presumed apparitions, visions and messages attributed to supernatural
sources. In regard to these very delicate tasks, more than thirty
years ago this Dicastery prepared the Normae
de modo procedendi in diudicandis praesumptis apparitionibus ac
revelationibus.
This
document, formulated by the Members of the Plenary Session of the
Congregation, was approved by the Servant of God, Pope
Paul VI, on 24 February 1978, and subsequently issued on 25
February 1978. At that time the Norms were
sent to Bishops for their information, without, however, being
officially published, as the norms were given for the direct aid of
the Pastors of the Church.
2.
Over the years this document has been published in various works
treating these matters, in more than one language, without obtaining
the prior permission of this Dicastery. Today, it must be recognized
that the contents of these important norms are already in the public
domain. Therefore, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
believes it is now opportune to publish these Norms,
providing translations in the principle languages.
3.
In the
Ordinary Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on the Word of God held in
October 2008,
the issue of the problems stemming from the experience of
supernatural phenomena was
raised as a pastoral concern by some Bishops.
Their concern was recognized by the Holy Father, Benedict XVI, who
inserted the issue into the larger context of the economy of
salvation, in a significant passage of the Post-Synodal Apostolic
Exhortation, Verbum
Domini.
It is important to recall this teaching of the Pontiff, which is an
invitation to pay appropriate
attention
to these supernatural phenomena:
“In
all of this, the Church gives voice to her awareness that with Jesus
Christ she stands before the definitive word of God: he is ‘the
first and the last’ (Rev 1:17).
He has given creation and history their definitive meaning; and hence
we are called to live in time and in God’s creation within this
eschatological rhythm of the word; ‘thus the Christian
dispensation, since it is the new and definitive covenant, will never
pass away; and
no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious
manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ
(cf. 1
Tim 6:14
and Tit 2:13)’.
Indeed, as the Fathers noted during the Synod, the ‘uniqueness
of Christianity is manifested in the event which is Jesus Christ, the
culmination of revelation, the fulfilment of God’s promises and the
mediator of the encounter between man and God.
He who ‘has made God known’ (Jn 1:18)
is the one, definitive word given to mankind.’ Saint John of the
Cross expresses this truth magnificently: ‘Since
he has given us his Son, his only word (for he possesses no other),
he spoke everything at once in this sole word – and he has no more
to say… because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he
has spoken all at once by giving us this All who is his Son. Any
person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be
guilty not only of foolish behaviour but also of offending him, by
not fixing his eyes entirely on Christ and by living with the desire
for some other novelty’ (Ascent
of Mount Carmel,
II, 22).”
Bearing
this in mind, the Holy Father, Benedict
XVI, notes the following:
“Consequently
the Synod pointed to the need to ‘help
the faithful to distinguish the word of God from private revelations’
whose
role ‘is not to complete Christ’s definitive revelation, but to
help live more fully by it in a certain period of history.’
The value of private revelations is essentially different from that
of the one public revelation: the latter demands faith; in it God
himself speaks to us through human words and the mediation of the
living community of the Church. The
criterion for judging the truth of a private revelation is its
orientation to Christ himself. If it leads us away from him, then it
certainly does not come from the Holy Spirit, who guides us more
deeply into the Gospel, and not away from it.
Private revelation is an aid to this faith, and it demonstrates its
credibility precisely because it refers back to the one public
revelation. Ecclesiastical
approval of a private revelation essentially means that its message
contains nothing contrary to faith and morals; it
is licit to make it public and the faithful are authorized to give to
it their prudent adhesion. A
private revelation can introduce new emphases, give rise to new forms
of piety, or deepen older ones. It can have a certain prophetic
character (cf. 1
Th 5:19-21)
and can be a valuable aid for better understanding and living the
Gospel at a certain time;
consequently it should not be treated lightly. It
is a help which is proffered, but its use is not obligatory. In
any event, it must be a matter of nourishing faith, hope and love,
which are for everyone the permanent path of salvation.”1
4.
It is my firm hope that the official publication of the Norms
regarding the manner of proceeding in the discernment of presumed
apparitions or revelations can
aid the Pastors of the Catholic Church in
their difficult task of discerning presumed
apparitions, revelations, messages or, more generally, extraordinary
phenomena of presumed supernatural origin. At the same time it
is hoped that this text might be useful to theologians and experts in
this field of the lived experience of the Church, whose delicacy
requires an ever-more thorough consideration.
William
Card. Levada
Prefect
Prefect
THE CHARACTER OF THE PRESUMED APPARITIONS OR REVELATIONS OF THE COMPETENT ECCLESIASTICAL AUTHORITY OF THE SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
SACRED
CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
NORMS
REGARDING THE MANNER OF PROCEEDING
PRELIMINARY
NOTE
Origin
and character of these norms
During
the annual Plenary Session in November 1974, the Fathers of this
Sacred Congregation examined the problems relative to presumed
apparitions and to the revelations often connected with them and
reached the following conclusions:
1.
Today, more than in the past, news of these apparitions is diffused
rapidly among the faithful thanks to the means of information (mass
media). Moreover, the ease of going from one place to another
fosters frequent pilgrimages, so that Ecclesiastical Authority should
discern quickly about the merits of such matters.
2.
On the other hand, modern mentality and the requirements of critical
scientific investigation render it more difficult, if not almost
impossible, to achieve with the required speed the judgments that in
the past concluded the investigation of such matters (constat de
supernaturalitate, non constat de supernaturalitate)
and that offered to the Ordinaries the possibility of authorizing or
prohibiting public cult or other forms of devotion among the
faithful.
For
these reasons, in order that the devotion stirred among the faithful
as a result of facts of this sort might manifest itself in full
communion with the Church, and bear fruits by which the Church
herself might later discern the true nature of the facts, the Fathers
judged that in this matter the following procedure should be
promoted.
When
Ecclesiastical Authority is informed of a presumed apparition or
revelation, it will be its responsibility:
a)
first, to judge the fact according to positive and negative criteria
(cf.infra, no. I);
b)
then, if this examination results in a favorable conclusion, to
permit some public manifestation of cult or of devotion, overseeing
this with great prudence (equivalent to the formula, “for now,
nothing stands in the way”) (pro nunc nihil obstare).
c)
finally, in light of time passed and of experience, with special
regard to the fecundity of spiritual fruit generated from this new
devotion, to express a judgment regarding the authenticity and
supernatural character if the case so merits.
I.
CRITERIA FOR JUDGING, AT LEAST WITH PROBABILITY
A) Positive
Criteria:
a)
Moral certitude, or at least great probability of the existence
of the fact, acquired by means of a serious investigation;
b)
Particular circumstances relative to the existence and to the nature
of the fact, that is to say:
1.
Personal qualities of the subject or of the subjects (in particular,
psychological equilibrium, honesty
and rectitude of moral life, sincerity and habitual docility towards
Ecclesiastical Authority, the capacity to return to a normal
regimen of a life of faith, etc.);
2.
As regards revelation: true
theological and spiritual doctrine and immune from error;
3.
Healthy devotion and abundant and
constant spiritual fruit (for example, spirit of prayer,
conversion, testimonies of charity, etc.).
B) Negative
Criteria:
a)
Manifest error concerning
the fact.
b)
Doctrinal errors attributed to God
himself, or to the Blessed Virgin Mary, or to some saint in
their manifestations, taking into account however the possibility
that the subject might have added, even unconsciously, purely human
elements or some error of the natural order to an authentic
supernatural revelation (cf. Saint Ignatius, Exercises,
no. 336).
c)
Evidence of a search for profit or
gain strictly connected to the fact.
d)
Gravely immoral acts committed by
the subject or his or her followers when the fact occurred or
in connection with it.
e)
Psychological disorder or
psychopathic tendencies in the subject, that with certainty
influenced on the presumed supernatural fact, or psychosis,
collective hysteria or other things of this kind.
It
is to be noted that these criteria, be they positive or negative, are
not peremptory but rather indicative, and they should be applied
cumulatively or with some mutual convergence.
II.
INTERVENTION
1.
If, on the occasion of a presumed supernatural fact, there arises in
a spontaneous way among the faithful a certain cult or some devotion,
the competent Ecclesiastical
Authority has the serious duty of looking into it without delay and
of diligently watching over it.
2.
If the faithful request it legitimately (that is, in communion with
the Pastors, and not prompted by a sectarian spirit), the competent
Ecclesiastical Authority can
intervene to permit or promote some form of cult or devotion, if,
after the application of the above criteria, nothing stands in the
way. They must be careful that the faithful not interpret this
practice as approval of the supernatural nature of the fact on the
part of the Church (cf. Preliminary note c).
3.
By reason of its doctrinal and pastoral task, the
competent Authority can intervene motu
proprio and indeed
must do so in grave circumstances, for example in order to
correct or prevent abuses in the exercise of cult and devotion, to
condemn erroneous doctrine, to avoid the dangers of a false or
unseemly mysticism, etc.
4.
In doubtful cases that clearly do
not put the good of the Church at risk, the competent Ecclesiastical
Authority is to refrain from any judgment and from any direct action
(because it can also happen that, after a certain period of time, the
presumed supernatural fact falls into oblivion); it must not however
cease from being vigilant by intervening if necessary, with
promptness and prudence.
III.
AUTHORITIES COMPETENT TO
INTERVENE
1.
Above all, the duty of vigilance and intervention falls to the
Ordinary of the place.
2.
The regional or national Conference
of Bishops can intervene:
a)
If the Ordinary of the place, having done his part, turns to it to
judge the matter with greater certainty;
b)
If the matter pertains to the national or regional level; always,
however, with the prior consent of the Ordinary of the place.
3.
The Apostolic See can intervene
if asked either by the Ordinary himself, by a qualified group of the
faithful, or even directly by reason of the universal jurisdiction of
the Supreme Pontiff (cf. infra, no. IV).
IV.
ON THE INTERVENTION
1.
a) The intervention of the Sacred
Congregation can be requested either by the Ordinary, after he
has done his part, or by a qualified group of the faithful. In this
second case, care must be taken that recourse to the Sacred
Congregation not be motivated by suspect reasons (for example, in
order to compel the Ordinary to modify his own legitimate decisions,
to support some sectarian group, etc.).
b)
It is up to the Sacred Congregation
to intervene motu
proprio in graver
cases, especially if the matter affects the larger part of the
Church, always after having consulted the Ordinary and even, if the
situation requires, the Conference of Bishops.
2.
It is up to the Sacred Congregation to judge and approve the
Ordinary’s way of proceeding or, in so far as it be possible
and fitting, to initiate a new
examination of the matter, distinct from that undertaken by
the Ordinary and carried out either by the Sacred Congregation itself
or by a special Commission.
The
Present Norms, deliberated in the Plenary Session of this Sacred
Congregation, were approved by the Supreme Pontiff, Paul VI on 24
February 1978.
In
Rome, from the palace of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith, 25 February 1978.
Francis
Cardinal Šeper (prefect)
1
Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Verbum
Domini, on the Word of God in the life and mission of the
Church, 30 September 2010, n. 14: AAS102 (2010) 695-696.
See also those passages of the Catechism for the Catholic
Church dedicated to this topic (nn. 66-67).
No comments:
Post a Comment