The Three Possibilities

First, we need to outline three possible terms:

–   Contstat de supernaturalitate (Approval)

o   The “event” is deemed as being supernatural in origin by the competent authority. When this happens, the faithful have greater freedom to safely accept the event as having happened. An example of this would be the apparitions of the Blessed Mother at Guadalupe, Lourdes, and Fatima.

–   Non constat de supernaturalitate (Doubt)

o   The “event” is deemed as undetermined. In other words, there is not enough evidence to say one way or the other. This is the status of the alleged apparitions at Medjugorje and Garabandal.

–   Constat de non supernaturalitate (Rejection)

o   The “event” is deemed as not supernatural in origin. In other words, the alleged apparitions were not from God, the Blessed Mother, or the Saints. An example of this would be the “Lady of All Nations” alleged apparitions.

How to Judge the Alleged Apparition

The CDF gives both positive and negative criteria for investigating an event. These different criteria should not be taken individually or out of context. The Church is very careful when examining miracles and apparitions. They take their time to assure that the miracle or apparition is genuine. The criteria must be applied cumulatively, in context, with all the other evidence.

Positive Criteria

In order to provide approval for an alleged apparition, the bishop should have “moral certitude” after serious investigation or at least “great probability of the existence of the fact.” He must also determine that the particular circumstances corroborate the alleged apparition.

These particular circumstances include the personal qualities of the alleged visionary, conformity with public revelation (free of error), and good spiritual fruit. In other words, the alleged visionary ought to be of sound mind, have a solid moral life, and a sincerity and fidelity to the competent authority. The CDF also includes this: “the capacity to return to a normal regimen of a life of faith (CDF, 1.A.b.1).” In other words, is he or she attempted to use the event for their own benefit through money or fame, or are they humbly seeking to return to the normal rhythm of life?

Negative Criteria

If there are errors which are clear through examination of the event or evidence of a desire to profit or gain from the event, then this counts against the legitimacy of the alleged apparition. Further, there cannot be doctrinal errors attributed to God, the Blessed Virgin Mary, or to some saint, “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 (CDF, I.B.b)”

Parallel to the positive criteria, it would not speak well to the legitimacy of the event if the subject has a psychological disorder or psychopathic tendencies. Further, there cannot be gravely immoral acts committed by the subject or his or her followers when the event took place or in connection to it.

Who Judges the Alleged Apparition?

The competent authority is usually the local ordinary (the bishop in his diocese). If he is unsure, then he can turn the case over to the national bishops’ conference. And if they are in doubt, the case can go to the Apostolic See (the Vatican), if the alleged apparition affects a large part of the Church.

The CDF wrote that the bishop has a serious duty of investigating presumed supernatural activity. The bishop is also called to prevent abuses, condemn errors, and avoid the dangers of a false or unseemly mysticism. In other words, as he is investigating, he can approve devotion before the event itself is approved.

Often times, even if the bishop is doubtful of an alleged apparition In doubtful cases that clearly do not put the good of the Church at risk, the competent authority is to “refrain from any judgement and from any direct action (because it can also happen that, after a certain period of time, the presumed supernatural fact falls into oblivion) … (CDF, II.4).”

At any rate, the CDF does allow the bishop to permit a public devotion to an alleged apparition after a favorable conclusion, “overseeing this with great prudence (CDF, Pre.2.b).” After some time, he can express judgement regarding the authenticity and supernatural character of the event. Importantly, the CDF also warns the faithful that the approval to practice a devotion is NOT approval of the supernatural nature of the fact on the part of the Church.

What Do We Do

No one is required to believe in a private revelation, and it is not required in any way for salvation. However, if the Church has given approval with a ruling of Constat de Supernaturalite, we should feel free to give our own personal assent to these alleged apparitions. In fact, the Church can be so certain that these feasts become part of our liturgical life. In such cases (Lourdes, Fatima, Guadalupe, etc.), we can safely pray with the mind and heart of the Church, even as we are skeptical of other private revelations until they have been investigated by the competent Church authority.

One word of caution: if you do not know what the Church teaches on Faith and Morals, on a basic level, do not allow yourself to get sucked into alleged private revelations. I have seen many faithful Catholics become obsessed with this private revelation or that, whether approved or not. Let us focus on our Lord and His Church and draw deeply, first, from the well of public revelation in Scripture and Tradition, guided and guarded by the Magisterium.