5 MONTHS AND 20 DAYS BEFORE THE CLOSING OF VATICAN II

“MANY CARDINALS, MANY BISHOPS, AND MANY PRIESTS ARE ON THE ROAD TO PERDITION AND ARE TAKING MANY SOULS WITH THEM. LESS AND LESS …
Live Mike
Alex A
And the Church's decision[s] on the authenticity of alleged Garabandal apparitions?
Live Mike
Garabandal has never been condemned by the Bishops of Santander.
There are 3 official forms of declaration by the Church authorities:
1. Approbation “Constat de supernaturalitate” It is certain to be supernatural
2. Condemnation “Constat de non supernaturalitate” It is certain to be non-supernatural
(the non-supernaturality is proven, it is evident to be of non-supernatural origin, it is …More
Garabandal has never been condemned by the Bishops of Santander.

There are 3 official forms of declaration by the Church authorities:
1. Approbation “Constat de supernaturalitate” It is certain to be supernatural
2. Condemnation “Constat de non supernaturalitate” It is certain to be non-supernatural
(the non-supernaturality is proven, it is evident to be of non-supernatural origin, it is established not supernatural)
3. Neither Approbation nor Condemnation “Non constat de supernaturalitate" It is NOT CERTAIN to be supernatural (essentially "we're not sure") This is the official position of the Bishops of Santander on Garabandal. The "alleged appearances" are yet to receive approval by the Church, pending new results or the reconvening of the case.

Why so number 3? Because in January of 1966 Conchita was invited to the Vatican by Cardinal Ottavini (Head of the Holy Office - CDF) for an interview / interrogation during which Conchita declared the future date of the Miracle to take place above the Pines in Garabandal. Therefore, prudence dictates that the Church must wait for the date to come to pass before making any further official declarations. So we wait. Incidentally, in a letter dated 3 March 1962 in which Padre Pio wrote to the girls of Garabandal he stated, "they will believe when it is too late."


Although two committees convened by the bishops of Santander declared that there were no phenomena capable of authenticating the facts as undoubtedly supernatural, they did not condemn the message. In this regard, the first commission stated, "We find nothing in need of ecclesiastical censure or condemnation, neither in the doctrine nor in the spiritual recommendations supposedly addressed to the faithful." Bishop Juan Antonio del Val, who called for a second commission, and later upon retiring from office stated that, "the message of Garabandal was important and theologically correct."
The second commission called for by Bishop Juan Antonio del Val Gallo has never been officially closed.

Bishop Juan Antonio del Val Gallo (December 1971 to August 1991)
Although he did not believe in Garabandal when he took office as Bishop, he showed an open mind in contrast to his two predecessors. As a canon of the Cathedral of Sandander in 1961, he was a member of the original commission but resigned for the way they carried out their affairs. He is the only Bishop of Santander who has seen the visionaries in ecstasy. After a pastoral visit in 1977, he lifted the bans of his predecessors regarding spreading the message of the apparitions and priests celebrating Mass in the place in which they allegedly took place. He also allowed the filming of a documentary about them and instituted the first interdisciplinary Episcopal Commission that took up the case.
Around 1981, he began to believe in the events. In 1983, he gave Dr. Luis Morales of the original commission, who had also come to believe in the apparitions, permission to lecture in the largest auditorium of Santander in defense of the events of Garabandal. In 1987, he instituted a new investigation of the apparitions and lifted the ban for priests to visit the site, allowing them to celebrate Mass in the village church with the pastor's permission.
What is the Catholic Church's Official Position on Garabandal? Bishop Juan Antonio del Val Gallo, …

Archbishop Carlos Osoro Sierra, Arzobispo de Oviedo (Apostolic Administrator, July 2006 to September 2007)
He inaugurated a new attitude in the hierarchy toward Garabandal, following the positive steps that had been taken by Bishop del Val.

Bishop Manuel Sánchez Monge (30th May, 2015, until present day)
Although in these notes, for the time being, the bishops do not find anything supernatural about the alleged apparitions (a question that remains open to revision in light of new information or in light of a better scientific study of existing information), they have said nothing against the content thereof (“we have not found anything deserving ecclesiastical censure or condemnation either in the doctrine or in the spiritual recommendations that have been published”) and this was and is precisely their role as a Church that instructs.
__________
Live Mike
@Alex A Do you really think those who would bury the Third Secret of Fatima in defiance of Our Lady's express order and then silence Sister Lucia would soon after, suddenly embrace the same message in a brief updated form given in Garabandal? To that question, this thinker gives a resounding OF COURSE NOT!
jac05
Shocking truth, hidden in the Church by bad ghosts, under rug swept. Hidden so called private (I call helpful) revelations is another massive disaster, mistake. Satan hates them much more than the Bible and one of them is A.K. Emmerich. When they see what disasters have done to our souls, they will regret, they became high priests.