How the Church judges apparitions
- Scripture 1 Thess 5:19 to 21; 1 Jn 4:1
- Catechism CCC 66 to 67
- Benedict XVI Verbum Domini 14 (2010)
- Norms 25 February 1978; 17 May 2024
Why there can be no new revelation
Everything God wished to reveal he has revealed in his Son. Jesus Christ is the fullness of revelation, and no new public revelation is to be expected before he comes in glory (CCC 66, quoting Vatican II, Dei Verbum 4). The Catechism adds that the Church still grows, century by century, in understanding what has been given.
St John of the Cross puts it strongly, and both Benedict XVI and the 2024 Norms quote him. In giving us his Son, his only Word, the Father has said everything at once, and has nothing more to say. To ask God for some new vision is to fail to keep our eyes on Christ.
This is good news. No Catholic is missing something essential for lack of a message. The Scriptures, the Church’s teaching and the sacraments hold everything necessary for salvation and holiness.
What a private revelation is for
The Catechism says that some so-called private revelations have been recognised by the Church’s authority. They do not belong to the deposit of faith. Their role is not to improve or complete Christ’s definitive revelation, but to help people live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium, the sense of the faithful knows how to discern and welcome what in them is an authentic call of Christ or his saints. The Christian faith cannot accept “revelations” that claim to surpass or correct what Christ has given (CCC 67).
Benedict XVI gives the clearest short account in Verbum Domini 14:
- The value of a private revelation is essentially different from that of public revelation. Public revelation demands faith. In it God himself speaks.
- The test of truth is its orientation to Christ. If it leads away from him, it does not come from the Holy Spirit.
- Church approval essentially means three things: the message contains nothing contrary to faith and morals; it may lawfully be made public; and the faithful may give it their prudent adhesion.
- It can bring new emphases and forms of piety, and may have a prophetic character (1 Thess 5:19 to 21). So it should not be treated lightly.
- It is a help that is offered, and its use is not obligatory.
The norms of 1978
In November 1974 the plenary of the then Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith studied the problem of apparitions in an age of mass media and easy travel. Paul VI approved its norms on 24 February 1978, and they were dated the next day.
They had three steps. First, judge the event by positive and negative criteria. Next, if the result is favourable, allow some public devotion with great prudence, the formula being pro nunc nihil obstare, “for now nothing stands in the way”. Finally, in the light of time and of spiritual fruit, give a judgment on authenticity and supernatural character, if the case deserves it.
The usual final answers were constat de supernaturalitate (it is established as supernatural) and non constat de supernaturalitate (it is not established). Responsibility lay first with the local Ordinary, then if needed with the bishops’ conference, then with the Holy See, which could act on request or on its own initiative.
The 2024 Norms explain why these had to change. Waiting for a declaration of supernatural origin meant that very few cases ever reached a clear end. Their presentation says that since 1950 no more than six cases have been officially resolved, and that a judgment could take a long time, or be reversed years later.
The norms of 17 May 2024
The Norms for Proceeding in the Discernment of Alleged Supernatural Phenomena were issued by the Dicastery, approved by Pope Francis on 4 May 2024, and took effect on Pentecost, 19 May 2024. They entirely replace those of 1978 (Art. 27). They cover alleged apparitions and visions, locutions, writings and messages, phenomena of images, and physical phenomena.
Two lines matter most. As a general rule, the Church does not foresee giving a positive recognition of the divine origin of such events (Par. 11). And neither the bishop, nor the conference, nor the Dicastery will declare them supernatural, even with a nihil obstat, though the Pope can authorise a special procedure (Par. 23). Earlier judgments are not undone. But new cases now end in a pastoral conclusion.
The six possible conclusions
| Nihil obstat | “Nothing stands in the way.” Many signs of the Holy Spirit’s action “in the midst of” the experience, and nothing particularly critical or risky so far. No certainty is expressed about supernatural authenticity. The bishop is encouraged to value it, and may even promote it, including by pilgrimage (Par. 17). Medjugorje has this. |
|---|---|
| Prae oculis habeatur | “Let it be kept in view.” Important positive signs, along with some confusion or risk. The bishop must discern carefully and talk with those involved. Doctrinal clarification may be needed (Par. 18). |
| Curatur | “It is under care.” Significant critical elements, but already widespread with verifiable fruits. A ban could upset people. The bishop does not encourage it, and looks for other expressions of devotion (Par. 19). |
| Sub mandato | “Under mandate.” The problem is not the phenomenon, which is rich in good, but people misusing it: for money, by immoral acts, or by working apart from the bishop. Pastoral leadership there passes to the bishop or to a delegate of the Holy See (Par. 20). |
| Prohibetur et obstruatur | “It is forbidden and blocked.” Very serious risks despite some good. The bishop publicly declares that adherence is not allowed, and offers teaching that explains why (Par. 21). |
| Declaratio de non supernaturalitate | A declaration that it is not supernatural. This needs concrete, proven facts, such as a seer’s admission of lying or credible proof of fabrication (Par. 22). |
Who decides
| The bishop | The diocesan bishop examines the case, in dialogue with his Episcopal Conference, and forms a judgment (Art. 1). He must not speak publicly for its authenticity, and must have no personal connection with it (Art. 3). He gathers first facts, and if there is no danger he may, after consulting the Dicastery, simply remain watchful (Art. 7). If not, he forms a commission with at least a theologian, a canonist and an expert suited to the case, all without any ties to the persons or events (Art. 8). He then sends the Dicastery a report and his own votum, proposing one of the six conclusions (Art. 18). |
|---|---|
| The Dicastery | It reviews the acts, weighs the moral and doctrinal elements, may ask for more, and in rare cases examines the matter anew. It then confirms or does not confirm the bishop’s proposal (Art. 20). It may step in at any stage on its own initiative (Art. 26), and it may return to a case later (Art. 22 §3). |
| Publication | The bishop, in agreement with the Dicastery, makes the judgment known clearly (Art. 21). With a nihil obstat he issues a decree stating the nature and limits of the permission, and takes care that no one reads it as approval of a supernatural origin (Art. 22). |
| Afterwards | Whatever the outcome, the bishop keeps watch (Art. 24). If a phenomenon spreads to other dioceses, each bishop may decide what is pastorally prudent in his own territory (Art. 7 §3). The Norms cite the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches beside the Latin code, so they are meant for all the Catholic Churches. |
The criteria
Positive (Art. 14)
- Good reputation of those involved and of the witnesses: balance of mind, honesty, moral uprightness, sincerity, humility, docility to Church authority, and a spirit of communion.
- Sound doctrine in the phenomenon and its messages.
- An unpredictable character, showing that it does not come from the initiative of the people involved.
- Fruits of Christian life: prayer, conversions, vocations, charity, sound devotion, all lasting, and all building up communion.
Negative (Art. 15)
- Manifest error about the event.
- Doctrinal errors, bearing in mind that a seer may have added human elements in good faith, even unconsciously.
- A sectarian spirit that divides the Church.
- An open pursuit of money, power, fame or recognition tied to the event.
- Gravely immoral actions by those involved or their followers.
- Psychological disturbance or collective hysteria that may have influenced it.
Using claimed supernatural experiences to control people or to abuse them is treated as of particular moral gravity (Art. 16). Deliberate deceit for profit calls for canonical penalties (Art. 25).
Why no Catholic is obliged to believe
The act of faith rests on God who reveals, and on what he has revealed in Christ and handed on in his Church. An apparition is not part of that. Even after a nihil obstat these phenomena do not become objects of faith, and the faithful need give no assent of faith to them (Norms, Par. 12). They are ways of knowing Christ better, and of giving oneself more generously to him.
So a Catholic may doubt Lourdes or Fatima without leaving the faith, though it would be wrong to mock what the Church has weighed and allowed, or to scorn those who find help there. And no one may bind another’s conscience with a message. No priest, seer or group can make a devotion from an apparition a condition of being a good Catholic.
A canonised saint is no exception: canonisation itself gives no judgment on visions in the person’s life. The Norms cite the case of St Gemma Galgani (Par. 13).
How to read a message
- Begin with the Gospel. Read Scripture and the Catechism first, and the message after. If time is short, keep the Gospel.
- Find out the status. Look for the bishop’s or the Dicastery’s actual words, not a poster or a video. Words like “Vatican approved” are often wrong.
- Ask where it leads. The test of Benedict XVI is whether it leads toward Christ: to faith, hope, charity, the sacraments, and to your neighbour.
- Do not expect dictation. Cardinal Fernández explained in 2024 that a seer perceives something and tries as best he can to put it into words, and may not find the best ones. Such texts are not catechisms. The Norms admit that human elements or natural errors may be added in good faith.
- Read the whole, not a phrase. One sentence should not carry a doctrine. A strange phrase should be read in the light of the rest and of the Church’s teaching, and if it still conflicts, let it go.
- Keep the words modest. For an event not declared supernatural, say “alleged”, “reported”, “the seer said”.
- Obey your bishop. If he restricts a devotion, the restriction stands in his territory. Obedience is a surer road than any message.
Warning signs
None of these alone proves anything. Together, they call for great caution. They are drawn from the criteria above, from the Dicastery’s notes on particular cases, and from pastoral good sense.
- Dates for the end of the world, or for a coming disaster. Jesus himself says that no one knows the day (Mk 13:32). Fear is not the Gospel’s way of speaking.
- A claim to correct the Pope, the bishops or the Church’s teaching, or a claim that only this group is faithful.
- Refusal to obey the bishop, or a search for a friendlier one.
- Messages that say Mary has plans of her own, or give her a place that belongs to Christ alone (1 Tim 2:5 to 6). Mary always points to her Son.
- Messages that speak more of themselves than of God, and create a dependence on the next message.
- Instructions on details of daily or parish life, with threats if they are not followed.
- Money: costly objects, fundraising tied to a seer, and businesses that grow around a claim.
- Control: pressure on people’s choices about marriage, vocation or property, in the name of a vision. This is a grave matter, and it should be reported to the bishop.
- Secrets that are promised and always delayed, or a need to spread alarm.
- A seer treated as a guru, and a preference for gatherings around a seer over Mass, confession and parish life.
- Sensational material spread quickly online. The Norms ask bishops to prevent this kind of climate (Art. 3 §3).
The words people use
| “Approved” | For older cases such as Lourdes, a bishop did declare that the faithful may believe. For cases under the 2024 Norms the term is usually wrong: say nihil obstat. |
|---|---|
| Tradition | Many old shrines rest on a local memory with no inquiry. Devotion there is legitimate, but it is not a judgment that the event happened. As Cardinal Ratzinger pointed out in 1985, pilgrimages of ancient Christianity bore good fruit even when a modern critic might doubt the story attached to them. |
| Basilica, feast, Mass | These honour a church or a title of Mary. They are not, by themselves, rulings on a vision. |
| A papal visit | It honours the faithful and the place. It does not decide the question. |
| Healings | A cure is called a miracle only after medical study and a bishop’s judgment. Reports are only reports. |
| Under the new Norms | Examples published by the Dicastery in 2024 include letters on Chandavila in Spain, on Estelle Faguette at Pellevoisin in France, and on Maccio in Italy. Each one spells out what is praised and what needs care. They are worth reading to see the method at work. |
Read it rightly
The Church neither mocks nor rushes. St Paul says not to despise prophecies, and also to test everything (1 Thess 5:19 to 21). So treat a reported apparition as you would a letter from a friend of Christ: read it gladly if it brings you to him, and set it down if it does not. Whatever you decide, your salvation is in Christ and his Church, whose sacraments are always within reach, and whose Mother prays for you.
Sources: Catechism of the Catholic Church 66 to 67; Benedict XVI, Verbum Domini 14; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Norms of 25 February 1978; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Norms of 17 May 2024 (Par. and Art. refer to these); Note The Queen of Peace and its presentation; the Dicastery’s list of documents.