Canon Law, the Book of Truth and Bishops’ statements

AM+DG

“Application of Church Law Regarding the Bishops’ Statements against the Book of Truth

A number of bishops around the world have spoken out publicly against the Book of Truth. Most of them have instructed the flock within their respective dioceses, in regard to the Book of Truth, not to disseminate information, that leaflets and messages are to be disposed of, that the messages are not to be discussed or taken seriously etc, etc……

It must be immediately pointed out that no Bishop, Archbishop or Cardinal has conducted a commission of inquiry into Maria Divine Mercy’s messages. There has been no official investigation at all.

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, has admitted in his statement that he does not know if Maria Divine Mercy is under his jurisdiction when he says in his statement that ‘Maria Divine Mercy may live in the Archdiocese of Dublin’. So it is not possible that he has conducted an official and comprehensive inquiry into the messages in the Book of Truth. The only statement from a bishop on a given private revelation that has the weight to override the Church’s general guidelines, is a statement by the local ordinary after he has conducted an official, fully fledged and completed commission of enquiry. Any statements issued by a bishop or archbishop before the enquiry is completed amounts to being merely an expression of his personal opinion. Normally the commissions are not completed until many years after the phenomena have finished, and generally not until the major prophecies given in the messages have occurred.

This means that all of these bishops and archbishops have been merely expressing their own personal opinions on the Book of Truth, opinions that carry no more weight or authority than being their personal opinions.

Given the fact that their statements are premised only on their personal opinions, it is not possible them to override the Church Canon Law regarding what Catholics can do or believe in relation to any private revelation which is yet to be finally approved by the Church.

 

We have a very closely analogous example….. the apparitions of Our Blessed Mother in Medjugorje.

The Parish of Medjugorje is in the Diocese of Mostar, in Bosnia.

The bishop of Mostar, Bishop Ratco Peric has been at all times, since being appointed bishop there, opposed to Medjugorje apparitions, and stated that they are ‘constat de non supernaturalitate,’ ie ‘they are not supernatural’. However Bishop Peric was not involved in any commission of enquiry on the Apparitions in Medjugorje when he made that statement.

Bishop Gilbert Aubrey of Bishop of Saint-Denis de la Reunion, being aware of the statement of Bishop Peric, wrote to the Vatican on January 1, 1998, asking what his position on Medjugorje should be, in the guidance of his flock.

The Holy See’s Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith answered May 26, 1998, through its Secretary Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone.

He wrote, ‘What Bishop Peric said in his letter to the Secretary General of “Famille Chretienne”, declaring: “My conviction and my position is not only ‘non constat de supernaturalitate,’ but likewise, ‘constat de non supernaturalitate’ of the apparitions or revelations in Medjugorje”, should be considered the expression of the personal conviction of the Bishop of Mostar which he has the right to express as Ordinary of the place, but which is and remains his personal opinion.’

 

What is the actual Church Law (Canon Law) regarding yet to be approved apparition sites?

Ecclesiastical permission is not required for publication of revelations, visions, miracles or for the frequenting of non-recognized places of apparitions.

A decree of the “Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine and the Faith ” was published in the “Official Acts of the Holy See” (A.A.S.) 58/16, dated December 29, 1966.

Articles 1399 and 2318 of Canon Law are abrogated by this decree.

This decree of abrogation was approved October 14, 1966 by His Holiness the Sovereign Pontiff Paul Vl, who ordered at the same time its publication.

This approval by the Holy Father took place during an audience accorded to His Eminence Cardinal Ottaviani, Pro-Prefect for the “Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine and the Faith.”

The decree was made in Rome, November 15, 1966. It bears the signatures of:

     A. Cardinal Ottaviani, Pro-Prefect

     P. Parente, Secretary

The decree took effect three months after its publication, hence on March 29, 1967.

Canon 1399

The Canon 1399 forbade by right the publication of certain books such as those that deal with revelations, visions, prophecies and miracles.

This Canon has been repealed. This means that as far as these publications are concerned, the prohibition is lifted as to their being bound by ecclesiastical law.

This means that henceforth: Catholics are permitted without need of Imprimatur, or of Nihil Obstat, or any other permission, to publish accounts of revelations, visions, prophecies and miracles. Of course these publications must not put in danger the Faith or the Morals: this is the general rule which every Catholic must follow in all his actions, even journalists, especially journalists.

There is hence no longer any prohibition concerning the narrative of seers, be they recognized or not by Ecclesiastical Authority.

All the more reason is it permitted for Catholics to frequent places of Apparitions, even those not recognized by the Ordinaries of the diocese or by the Holy Father: Granted that the Catholic visitors who frequent these places must respect the Faith and the Morals. However, they are not subject to any ecclesiastical discipline, not even for their public prayers.

Permission is required only for the celebration of Holy Mass or any other religious service.

Canon 2318

Canon 2318 carried penalties against those who violated the laws of censure and prohibition.

This Canon is abrogated since 1966. None can incur ecclesiastical censure for frequenting places of Apparitions even those not recognized by the Ordinaries of dioceses or by the Holy Father.

Also, “those who would have incurred the censures treated in Canon 2318 will be like absolved by the very fact of the abrogation of this Canon.” (Cardinal Ottaviani)

 

In Summary

In relation to Private Revelations yet to be approved by the Catholic Church, by Canon Law, the faithful are free to believe in, disseminate information on, pray the prayers relating to, as well as visit shrines associated with them.

No ecclesiastical authority can override the Canon Law relating to Private Revelation, because prior to the administration and completion of an official commission of enquiry on the given Private Revelation, it is only possible that the given bishop/archbishop be acting on his own private opinion when he makes any statement on it.

Private opinion carries no jurisdictional authority.

There have been many supernatural occurrences in relation to the Book of Truth that must be addressed and explained in natural terms, if these messages are to be dismissed as being ‘Not of God’.

I have observed that all of the bishops and archbishops who have issued statements regarding the Book of Truth, have displayed that their research has been seriously incomplete, prior to expressing their respective personal opinions, opinions that are now seen clearly to be premature and defective.

It is reprehensible for the archbishops and bishops to be issuing instructions in relation to the Book of Truth, with the implication that they have given due attention to the matter, and that they are operating fully within Canon Law.

 

Regarding Bishop Alminaza’s Statement

In relation to the bishop of San Carlos, Bishop Gerardo Alminaza’s statement on the Book of Truth, he has mentioned the Book of Truth prophecy of Pope Benedict’s resignation but either does not believe that this prophecy was given, or places absolutely no importance on prophecy. Because indeed this prophecy came true precisely one year to the day, almost to the very hour before it happened. This prophecy which had massive significance given historical nature of the event, is very sloppily made reference to by the bishop and then essentially dismissed and ignored as having any importance.

Given all of the miracles, mystical events, along with prophecies that have come true, in relation to the Book of Truth, his lack of reference to them, demonstrates that his research on the Book of Truth is seriously flawed by its lack of gathering all of the available information on matters which are critical to reaching a decision on whether or not the phenomenon of the Book of Truth is supernatural.

See the Bishop’s statement here: http://cbcpnews.net/cbcpnews/bishop-warns-catholics-of-the-book-of-truth/

ADDENDUM 

1. In practical terms,

if a bishop or archbishop has adopted a negative personal opinion on any given private revelation he is able to say no to any request for activities, in relation to it, on Catholic Church property (only) within his diocese. And we must be obedient to that. The same applies to a parish priest in relation to his parish.

However he cannot forbid us in relation to any activities in our homes, on secular premises, on the internet, or in relation to our belief in that given private revelation.

 

2. The author of this document..

has been a Marian speaker for 28 years, having spoken in hundreds of towns and parishes all over his own country of Australia, as well as in 13 other countries in various parts of the world.

He is a fully qualified science and mathematics secondary school teacher and is intimately familiar with Church teaching as per the Catechism of the Catholic Church. He has a strong sense of what it is to be truly Catholic, which comes from the fact that he was born in the early 50’s to traditional Catholic parents, and brought up to love and serve, the Lord. He served as an altar boy in the pre-Vatican II Church for some time.

His memories of the total reverence towards, and sense of, the Lord’s Presence in the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar, that was practised by priests, altar boys and attendees at Sunday Mass, remains etched in his memory forever.”

 

Comment by Remnant Survivor:

This is a very powerful article. It gives us power in the face of persecution. It sets forth very distinctly our rights and where we stand. It also sets forth our obligations and our freedom to believe. If we are confronted, we can explain the Church Law. There is no need to fear – just respect the priests’/bishops’ statements regarding Church Property and Church activities. That means if the priest says not to leave any literature in the church, we have to obey and respect his wishes.We can evangelize, spread information anywhere else – at home, in the shops, on street corners etc. The blessings will flow if we are obedient.