Recently, a friend of mine sent me a letter that was published on a R&R website. The author of the letter contends that the apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima and at La Salette were "works of the devil." I don't know if the accusations in the letter were ever answered, but I thought it would be prudent for me to reiterate the Church's teaching on apparitions, and where the author of the letter gets it all wrong.
Any regular reader of my blog knows that I am someone who does not give apparitions undue credence in the spiritual life. The faith is taught to us by the Church and we should base what we believe on Her teachings as properly understood. Reading the approved theologians will do more for you to understand the Faith than trying to discern the alleged sayings of an approved apparition.
Nevertheless, the letter was so blasphemous and fraught with errors, I felt compelled to make this response.
Only the following Marian apparitions have Church approval pre-Vatican II (there is currently no authority to pass judgement during the Great Apostasy), and notice how few there are; only ten (10):
1. Our Lady of Guadalupe (took place 1531; approved 1555)
2. Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal (took place 1830; approved 1837)
3. Our Lady of LaSalette (took place 1846; approved 1851)
4. Our Lady of Lourdes (took place 1858; approved 1862)
5. Our Lady of Knock (took place 1879; approved 1879)
6. Our Lady of Fatima (took place 1917; approved 1930 by the local bishop and in 1940 by Pope Pius XII)
7. Our Lady of the Good Event aka Our Lady of Quito (took place 1594-1634; approved 1611 while still taking place)
8. Our Lady of Hope (took place 1871; approved 1872)
9. Our Lady of Beauraing (took place 1932-1933; approved 1949)
10. Our Lady of Banneux (took place 1933; approved 1949)
There are seven cases where the Holy See and local Ordinary have not pronounced directly on the supernatural character of the apparition, yet have implicitly attested to their veracity by approving the public religious activity inspired by the apparition and/or authorizing liturgical veneration:
1. Our Lady of the Pillar (took place 40 AD while Mary was still alive; considered the first Marian apparition wherein Our Blessed Mother assisted the Apostle St. James the Greater)
2. Our Lady of Walsingham (took place 1061)
3. Our Lady of Mount Carmel (took place 1251)
4. Our Lady of the Watch (took place 1490)
5. Our Lady of Siluva (took place 1608)
6. Our Lady of Pellevoisin (took place 1876)
7. Our Lady of Zion (took place 1842)
Holy Mother Church has only given approval to 17 apparitions out of the countless millions reported to the Vatican. I have frequently wrote against those I label "Apparitionists:" They are people who exalt private revelations and apparitions whether approved by the Church (such as Our Lady of Fatima) or not (such as Our Lady of the Roses) over the teaching of the Church. They obsess over the alleged "true meanings" of messages (as if salvation depended on them), or even accept them to the exclusion of authentic Church doctrines in some area(s). The late "Fr." Gruner falls squarely in this category.
Personally, I don't think Traditionalists should concern themselves over private revelations. To make the terminology clear, "private revelation" has nothing to do with the number of persons that claim to have seen and/or experienced something. "Public Revelation" refers to the Divine Deposit of Revelation given to the Church for all human beings to believe, so that they may be saved. Public Revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle, St. John, in 100 AD. Private revelation refers to all communication by God (directly or indirectly) with humans after Public Revelation ended. I can't stress strongly enough that
You can reject any or all of the above Marian apparitions and you would not be a heretic, nor would you commit a sin.
This does not mean that private revelations are "useless." Obviously, if the Church approves something as worthy of belief, we can believe it without fear of sinning against faith or morals. God communicates to us for a reason. However, I refuse to get drawn into arguments over what a particular apparition or a particular revelation "really means." Moreover, it is by studying the approved theologians that we can learn the One True Faith and make our Catholic way the best we can through these most difficult times. To be certain, I believe in approved apparitions without making them the focus point of faith. I have devotion to Our Lady of Hope and Our Lady of Fatima. I wear the Five-fold Scapular, pray the Rosary daily, insert the "Fatima Prayer" at the end of each Rosary decade, and try to attend Mass every First Saturday of the month. These are great Catholic devotions all Traditionalists should try to maintain. I do not view "Consecrating Russia" as some panacea to the Great Apostasy. Nor will I quibble over specific sayings Our Lady is supposed to have said.
I will reproduce the letter exactly as it was sent to me, but in parts, so I may respond to the accusations. The letter will appear in red font. My response below it will be in black font.
Holy Bible - Saint John 5:43 - I am come in the name of my Father, and you receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him you will receive.
Church approval of apparitions is not infallible.
Reply: The use of St. John 5:43 is disingenuous. The Blessed Mother never comes in her own name, and Fatima is not of Satanic origin. Sounding like Feeneyites,-- "It's not infallible!"-- the fact remains that Pope Pius XII, a true pope, approved Fatima as "worthy of belief" in 1940. Such approval is not ex cathedra and, as I stated above, no one is required to believe in any private revelation--even those with papal approval. You can deny Fatima without committing sin. However, to ascribe demonic origin to an apparition with papal approval is blasphemous.
If something comes from Satan, it must be (in whole or in part) heretical, evil, or both. The ultimate goal of the devil is to deceive the faithful and to lead souls to Hell. If the pope says a private revelation is from God, it cannot be demonic in origin. Pope Leo XIII teaches:
" In defining the limits of the obedience owed to the pastors of souls, but most of all to the authority of the Roman Pontiff, it must not be supposed that it is only to be yielded in relation to dogmas of which the obstinate denial cannot be disjoined from the crime of heresy. Nay, further, it is not enough sincerely and firmly to assent to doctrines which, though not defined by any solemn pronouncement of the Church, are by her proposed to belief, as divinely revealed, in her common and universal teaching, and which the [1870] Vatican Council declared are to be believed “with Catholic and divine faith.” But this likewise must be reckoned amongst the duties of Christians, that they allow themselves to be ruled and directed by the authority and leadership of bishops, and, above all, of the Apostolic See."
(See Sapientiae Christianae, para. #24; Emphasis mine).
In following the pope's approbation, one can be certain he is acting correctly without fear of evil or heresy. If the purpose of "demonic Fatima" is to damn souls (which can be the only goal for which the devil works), the Holy Ghost would prevent the Holy Father from approving it. Therefore, Fatima is NOT of demonic origin--and that is certain. That should end it, but the reasons advanced against Fatima need to be answered.
The false apparitions of the devil in in Fatima, Portugal.
1) An angel cannot administer Holy Communion.
From the Roman Catechism / Catechism of Pope St.Pius V:
PART II : THE SACRAMENTS.
The Ministers of the Sacraments.
But although God is the author and dispenser of the Sacraments, He nevertheless willed that they should be administered in His Church by men, not by Angels. To constitute a Sacrament, as the unbroken tradition of the Fathers testifies, matter and form are not more necessary than is the ministry of men.
Reply: Again, like the R&R and Feeneyites, a part of a Catechism is twisted out of context. As the writer is no doubt R&R (as he is sending his missive to an R&R website), most people in the R&R and Vatican II sect think of a "minister" of a sacrament as the local janitor who calls himself the "Eucharistic Minister" and hands out the Novus Bogus cracker. In the Roman Catechism (i.e., The Catechism of the Council of Trent), the "minister of the sacrament" is the one capable of confecting the sacrament.
For any sacrament to be valid there must be (a) proper minister, (b) proper matter, (c) proper form, (d) proper intention of the minister, and (e) no obex (invalidating impediment) on the part of the recipient.
Right below the section the author cites, the Catechism makes clear, "Since the ministers of the sacraments represent in the discharge of their sacred functions, not their own, but the Person of Christ, be they good or bad, they validly perform and confer the Sacraments, provided they make use of the matter and form always observed in the Catholic Church according to the institution of Christ, and provided they intend to do what the Church does in their administration." (pg. 155)
Christ made men priests, not angels. Priests confect the Holy Eucharist, not angels. However, angels can bring the Eucharist to people in extraordinary circumstances. Many saints have had angels bring them Communion. Here's but one account correctly noted from a Vatican II sect website:
"St. Pascal Baylon was a Franciscan lay brother who lived in 16th century Spain. As a young adolescent, he looked after his father’s sheep on the mountainside. While there he could not attend Holy Mass, something he loved to do as he longed to receive Jesus in the Eucharist. From where he was with the sheep he could hear the bell ring during Mass and this meant it was the time of the consecration of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus. Pascal would then fall on his knees in adoration knowing that Jesus in the Sacred Host was being elevated for the congregation to adore. The young man had an ardent love of the Eucharist, and when he was able, he would spend hours on his knees before the tabernacle. God was aware of the great love that Pascal had for Him.
During those times when his work prevented him from attending at Mass, the Lord sent an angel to give him Holy Communion." (See https://www.myfirstholycommunion.com/portfolio-view/angels/).
Therefore, there is nothing against the faith about the Fatima children receiving Holy Communion from an angel.
2) Who gave the falsely claimed to be an angel a consecrated host and consecrated chalice?
No Angel can do a consecration.
Reply: In no account I've ever read is it claimed the angel CONSECRATED the Host. He adored a Host already consecrated (perhaps by a priest or by Christ Himself).
3) Francisco and Jacinta had not received their first Holy Communion nor prepared for it.
The Parish Priest could not be bypassed.
Were they three in a state of sanctifying grace before receiving the false holy communion, which was without any notice? Did they need to go to Confession?
Reply: Who says, "the parish priest cannot be bypassed"? Like Home Aloners who feel every provision of every Canon must be observed even when impossible--this is mere discipline. God can certainly bypass a parish priest. "Did they need to go to Confession?" it is asked. If God allowed them to receive Holy Communion, we can be sure they were not burdened by mortal sin.
True apparitions are rare supernatural events, so why be surprised if they come with other supernatural acts by God?
4) The fasting law of the Church before reception of Holy Communion was to fast from midnight before receiving Holy Communion under pain of mortal sin.
Did they not eat anything from midnight? Did their parents send them starving to do their work? On a previous occasion they ate in the morning and went out.
Reply: God is expected by the writer to be bound by His ecclesiastical law such that He can't make an exception to it. Pope Pius XII mitigated the Eucharistic Fast to three hours in 1957. When in danger of death, Holy Viaticum can be received without any fast. So God made an exception for the children of Fatima.
5) Holy Communion could only be administered in the form of bread and not in the form of wine because that is what was mandated by the Church.
Lucia received the falsely claimed to be holy communion in the form of bread. Francisco and Jacinta received the falsely claimed to be holy communion in the form of wine.
Reply: Merely disciplinary. Christ is received whole and entire under either Species. According to theologian Ott, "The Whole Christ is present under each of the two Species." (See Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, [1955], pg. 385).
6) Francisco did not know what he received.
Only Francisco, not having heard the angel, had a question to ask. "Lucia," he said, "I know the angel gave you Holy Communion, but what was it that he gave to Jacinta and me? "That was Communion, too, Francisco. Didn't you see the blood that dropped into the chalice from the Host?"
Reply: In the Eastern Rites, babies receive baptism, first Communion, and Confirmation all at once. Confirmation is more commonly referred to as Chrismation. A golden spoon pours a couple of drops of the Precious Blood on the tongue of the newly baptized infant to swallow. He receives First Communion, even though he obviously doesn't know it and will not remember it. Why did God or the Blessed Mother not teach the children of Fatima about Holy Communion before they received It? Who knows? However, it doesn't go against faith or morals in the least.
7) To administer Holy Communion licitly in the Roman Rite the Rite to administer Holy Communion had to be used.
Only the Pope has the authority from GOD to create a new rite for the administering of Sacraments.
The Council of Trent, "Canon 13. If anyone says that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, accustomed to be used in the administration of the sacraments, may be despised or omitted by the ministers without sin and at their pleasure, or may be changed by any pastor of the churches to other new ones, let him be anathema."
Only these words could be said for the administering of Holy Communion:
Corpus Dómini nostri Iesu Christi custódiat ánimam tuam in vitam ætérnam. Amen.
The falsely claimed to be an angel said this before giving what was not Holy Communion: "Take and drink the body and blood of Jesus Christ, horribly outraged by ungrateful men. Repair their crimes and console your God."
Reply: The Canon from Trent forbids the ministers (priests and bishops) to change Rites, not the pope who has authority from God. Yet, the writer would have us believe God Himself can't make an exception?
8) No Holy Communion Paten kept.
God protected Himself in the Eucharist from profanation, so no paten would be necessary in this case.
9) Father Manuel Marques Ferreira Parish Priest of Lucia after interrogations told Lucia that the visions were a deception from the devil and not Our Lady. Father Ferreira vehemently denied any possibility of the apparitions being true.
Reply: Father was a mere parish priest and the approval of Pope Pius XII overrules his judgement.
10) Lucia was disobedient to her Parents and the Parish Priest.
GOD will never work through those who are disobedient. One of the biggest warning signs of a false apparition is if the purported visionaries are disobedient to the Church authorities.
Reply: This assertion has nothing to support it. These alleged instances are not enumerated and no details are given. Pope Pius XII had all the facts and did not find the children of Fatima to have been disobedient.
11) Our Lady who is GOD's most humblest child would never say that only she can help you. This is blasphemy to GOD. Saint John 2:5 His mother saith to the waiters: Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye.
Reply: That Mary has no power independent of God to save us, CONCEDED. God is telling us we must go through His Mother as the means He has chosen to save us. Her Rosary. Her scapular. All leading to God.
12) This has to be confirmed:
De Almeida claimed to have witnessed the whole event, but Judah Ruah, standing next to him, said he saw nothing at all. When asked why, he replied, “because nothing strange happened to the sun. But when I saw all those people kneeling I understood something to be happening and so I photographed them instead.” – On October 13 1917.
Sun:
Spiritual beings may appear to do things miraculous in our eyes, is by what is called fascination or bewitching, which may be conceived possible in two different ways, either by making such impressions upon the organs of our senses, as if the real material object that naturally could make them were present and acting on them, or by taking upon themselves the outward appearances of the things which they wish to represent.
The devil can perform an appearance of a miracle. For example, in Exodus, Moses changes his staff into a snake before the Pharaoh and his court. Then the Pharaoh tells his priests to do the same. In the sight of all, the staff is changed into a snake by the pagan priest. How did this happen? It must be remembered that an angel can move at very high speed, faster than light itself, and so he can substitute, more quickly than our eyes can discern, one thing for something else. Consequently there was an appearance of a miracle done by the pagan priests, but not a true one.
Spiritual beings, both good and bad, have a very great power in acting upon our internal senses, by altering and moving the humours of the body, so as to raise many ideas in our imagination, and affections in our appetite, will not be called in question by any who profess the Christian religion.
Reply: Offering as "proof" something yet to be confirmed is far from "compelling." Pope Pius XII claimed to have seen the "Miracle of the Sun" no less than four times. According to the Fatima visionaries, Mary had said there would be a miracle October 13, 1917, so that people would come to believe. Thousands had gathered at the site of the visions, and the sun "danced," reportedly drying instantaneously the rain-soaked land and spectators. Pius XII wrote, "I have seen the 'miracle of the sun,' this is the pure truth."
The papal note says that at 4 p.m. on Oct. 30, 1950, during his "habitual walk in the Vatican Gardens, reading and studying," having arrived to the statue of Our Lady of Lourdes, "toward the top of the hill […] I was awestruck by a phenomenon that before now I had never seen."
"The sun, which was still quite high, looked like a pale, opaque sphere, entirely surrounded by a luminous circle,” he recounted. And one could look at the sun, "without the slightest bother. There was a very light little cloud in front of it."
The Holy Father’s note goes on to describe "the opaque sphere" that "moved outward slightly, either spinning, or moving from left to right and vice versa. But within the sphere, you could see marked movements with total clarity and without interruption." (See https://zenit.org/articles/pius-xii-saw-miracle-of-the-sun/)
As a priest, the future pope celebrated his First Mass on April 3, 1899, at the altar of the icon of The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, under her title Salus Populi Romani in the Basilica of St. Mary Major. Fr. Pacelli was consecrated a bishop the same day the Blessed Mother appeared at Fatima. As Pope, in 1940, he approved the Fatima apparitions as "worthy of belief," and in 1942, consecrated the entire world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. (I refuse to get bogged down in argumentation over the "true meanings" of private revelations, and therefore will not argue with those whom assert he should have specifically consecrated Russia, as was the hallmark of "Fr." Gruner).
Divine revelation has already been given by GOD for His greater glory and the salvation of men. Nothing can be added nor taken away from it. GOD will not send any new "messages for the world".
'World "peace"' (false peace) is a freemasonic concept to bring in the Antichrist. Trying to make "peace", which is false peace, without being one with GOD through His Catholic Church.
1 Thessalonians 5
2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord shall so come as a thief in the night.
3 For when they shall say: Peace and security; then shall sudden destruction come upon them, as the pains upon her that is with child, and they shall not escape.
6 Therefore, let us not sleep, as others do: but let us watch, and be sober.
GOD JESUS did not come to bring world peace.
Saint John 16:33 These things I have spoken to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you shall have distress. But have confidence. I have overcome the world.
Reply: That nothing can be added to the Divine Deposit of Revelation, CONCEDED. That God cannot communicate further with human beings to give them helps for salvation, DENIED. The Rosary and the Sacred Heart devotions are both products of private revelations. The message of Fatima is peace through Catholicism, not false "Bergoglian peace."
The apparitions in La Salette were another work of the devil.
“She wept all the while she spoke to us,” said Maxim.
”How long have I suffered for you!”
This contradicts Divine Revelation.
Our Lady can never be sad. She can never cry nor suffer. She is one with GOD in Heaven in perfect happiness for eternity.
Apocalypse 21
3 And I heard a great voice from the throne, saying: Behold the tabernacle of God with men: and he will dwell with them. And they shall be his people: and God himself with them shall be their God.
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes: and death shall be no more. Nor mourning, nor crying, nor sorrow shall be any more, for the former things are passed away.
Reply: Mary was weeping, and seen in that state, to convey a powerful message. It is metaphorical not literal. Likewise, the Bible says of God how He had "regret" which is impossible for an omniscient and omnibenevolent Being; it implies wishing to have acted otherwise.
It must be noted that the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office prohibited the so-called "Secret of La Salette" from being disseminated and discussed. It shows the vigilance of Holy Mother Church in protecting Her children. Here is the text of the Decree as published in 1915 with full approval of Pope Benedict XV:
"THE SUPREME SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICE DECREE CONCERNING THE COMMONLY CALLED "SECRET OF LA SALETTE."
It has come to the attention of this Supreme Congregation that certain ones are not lacking, even from among the ecclesiastic assemblage who, responses and decisions of this Holy Congregation itself having been disregarded, do proceed to discuss and examine through books, small works and articles edited in periodicals, whether signed or without a name, concerning the so-called Secret of La Salette, its diverse forms and its relevance to present and future times; and, this not only without permission of the Ordinaries, but, also against their ban. So that these abuses which oppose true piety and greatly wound ecclesiastical authority might be curbed, the same Sacred Congregation orders all the faithful of any region not to discuss or investigate under any pretext, neither through books, or little works or articles, whether signed or unsigned, or in any other way of any kind, about the mentioned subject. Whoever, indeed, violates this precept of the Holy Office, if they are priests, are deprived of all dignity and suspended by the local ordinary from hearing sacramental confessions and from offering Mass: and, if they are lay people, they are not permitted to the sacraments until they repent. Moreover, let people be subject to the sanctions given both by Pope Leo XIII through the Constitution of the offices and responsibilities against those who publish books dealing with religious things without legitimate permission of superiors and by Urban VIII through the decree "Sanctissimus Dominus Noster" given on 13th March 1625 against those who publish asserted revelations without the permission of ordinaries. However, this decree does not forbid devotion towards the Blessed Virgin under the title of Reconciliatrix commonly of La Salette.
Given at Rome on 21st December, 1915.
Aloisius Castellano, S. R. and U. I. Notary."
From the Roman Catechism decreed by St. Pope Pius V:
Signs Of The General Judgment
- The Sacred Scriptures inform us that the general judgment will be preceded by these three principal signs: the preaching of the Gospel throughout the world, a falling away from the faith, and the coming of Antichrist.
- Gospel preached throughout the world. (St. Matthew 24:14)
- Apostasy (St. Luke 18:8) and Revolt (2 Thessalonians 2:3)
- Katechon taken out of the way (2 Thessalonians 2:7)
- Manifest reign of the Antichrist (Three and half years) (The False Prophet of the end times will be the main instrument of satan to bring in the Antichrist)
- Final Coming of GOD JESUS CHRIST who will kill the Antichrist, destroy the world by fire and conduct the General Judgment.
- The Kingdom of GOD in its full flight for eternity. The New Heaven and Earth, the Heavenly Jerusalem for the elect forever. The heavenly liturgy forever and ever. Greater than any liturgy on earth.
Eternal torments in the fires of hell for the reprobates forever and ever as long as GOD is GOD which is forever and ever and ever.
The Apostasy has been and is here and so is the revolt inside and outside of the Catholic Church. It has been and is there to see in plain sight. After the gospel going to the end of the world comes the only one apostasy. The gospel has gone to the ends of the world. The apostasy has been and continues to go on now. Sacrileges to the Most Holy Eucharist and all the other Sacraments are going on in a massive scale inside the Church. Most Catholics do not know the basic catechism. The revolt is here in plain sight to see. It is lawlessness inside and outside the Church to make way for the man of sin and lawlessness the Antichrist.
Reply: He doesn't see the Vatican II sect is not the Catholic Church. Not surprising after seeing his take on Fatima and La Salette.
There is no earthly restoration after the apostasy in the end times. This is absolutely clear in Sacred Scripture and clearly taught by the Church through the Catechism of St. Pope Pius V. GOD JESUS CHRIST who is victory himself has kept the final victory that will take place personally for Him. His Final Coming is at hand. It is He who alone will restore His Kingdom which is His Catholic Church.
The false apparitions which so many are trapped in are contrary to Divine Revelation which is the only infallible source and are a huge deception which is to catch unawares of the coming of the Antichrist hoping for world “peace” for a period of time which is a false freemasonic concept.
Reply: That certain aspects of Fatima cannot be understood, CONCEDED. Yet, papal approval of an apparition does not mean every statement ascribed to it is true, or recorded accurately. I don't understand what "Portugal will always retain the dogma of faith" allegedly means. Portugal is just as pagan as all other formerly Catholic countries. Yet, simply because we don't understand all things ascribed to a private revelation, doesn't mean we can't learn from those parts that are clear: do penance, pray the rosary, wear the scapular, make the Five First Saturdays, venerate the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Can God permit a respite, or "period of peace" before things go even worse? I'm sure He could without violation of His Revelation. We don't know exactly what was meant, or if it was recorded accurately.
St. Matthew 24: in 24 shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect.
St. Vincent Ferrer (In relation to the end times):
masters and teachers no longer care for study of the Bible, but prefer the study of the poets and other profane works.
Masses and attending such and administering and receiving sacraments without the permission of the Church is a grave sacrilege, a sin of grave matter. Done with full knowledge and free will it is a mortal sin. Anyone who dies in one unrepented mortal sin will be cast by GOD into the eternal fires of hell forever.
From the Roman Catechism decreed by St. Pope Pius V:
I know that on that rock is built the Church. Whoever will eat the lamb outside this house is profane; whoever is not in the ark of Noah shall perish in the flood.
There can be no circumstance where masses can be offered or sacraments can be administered without the permission of the Church no matter how evil, unjust and wicked a Pope may be. This is against Divine Ordinance. The solution is only in the legal structures of the Church.
Note: Protestants are never Christians.
Reply: Now who is doing the "work of the devil"? He rips into approved apparitions in order to tell us that we are to remain in the Vatican II sect--the creation of Satan. Yes, a pope can be "evil, unjust, and wicked," but NEVER a heretic.
According to Wernz-Vidal: "Those capable of being validly elected are all who are not prohibited by divine law or by an invalidating ecclesiastical law… Those who are barred as incapable of being validly elected are all women, children who have not reached the age of reason; also, those afflicted with habitual insanity, the unbaptized, heretics, schismatics…" (Jus Canonicum 1:415; Emphasis mine).
Doctor of the Church St Alphonsus Liguori: "If ever a pope, as a private person, should fall into heresy, he would at once fall from the pontificate."Oeuvres Completes 9:232.
Theologian Iragui: "...theologians commonly concede that the Roman Pontiff, if he should fall into manifest heresy, would no longer be a member of the Church, and therefore could neither be called its visible head."
(See Manuale Theologiae Dogmaticae. Madrid: Ediciones Studium [1959], pg. 371).
Conclusion
I have frequently wrote against those I label "Apparitionists:" They are people who exalt private revelations and apparitions whether approved by the Church (such as Our Lady of Fatima and Our Lady of Lourdes) or not (such as Our Lady of the Roses or Garabandal) over the teaching of the Church. It should be painfully apparent how placing these apparitions over doctrine will inevitably lead people into error (usually by being trapped in the falsehood of the Vatican II sect). People also fail to learn the Faith because they want to know the "true meaning" of the "Third Secret," or how some alleged saying of the Blessed Mother squares with the Bible.
Now, we have the sorry example of another opposite error: claiming that approved apparitions are the work of the devil. If there is a true pope, when he approves an apparition as "worthy of belief," we cannot declare it the work of Satan. You can choose not to believe at all, but that's foolish. The pope is protected by the Holy Ghost from giving error and evil to the Church. Error and evil is all the devil works for, so that nothing that comes from the devil can ever have papal approval; the Holy Ghost would prohibit it. With such a hard line against Fatima and La Salette, isn't it interesting that the author of the letter doesn't go after Medjugorje? Bergoglio allows pilgrimages there. Enough said.