@Maria delos Angeles. @adeste fideles. @ LA VOIX DIEU MAGAZINE. ~ Here's an interesting one for you! ~
A Pope who at the last moment will reverse his Policies and make a solemn appeal to the Clergy. But he will not be obeyed; on the contrary, an assembly of Bishops will demand even greater freedom, declaring that they will no longer obey the Pope! ~ Maria Julie Jahenny. The Prophecies of La Fraudais, page 34. Tenet Books.

@Liam Ronan Someone with common sense at last. Try telling the many proponents of unapproved/doubtful/patently false/condemned apparitions on GTV that this is the case. You won't be popular. Trust me. As I understand it in this case, the bishop neither approved or disapproved the alleged locutions, but instructed the Community not to make them public. In this it appears they disobeyed the local Ordinary, using the only-too-eager for sensation brigade LifeSiteNews - which has become a massive dubious private revelation hub. So maybe this move will force the local Ordinary to form a Commission to examine these alleged messages and either approve/condemn them.

I have listen to the entire message and "analyze it" a bit through comparison with St. Catherine of Siena's "The Dialogue'.
Things believable: "My Jesus" - in Dialogue God the Father often says "My Truth, My Word, My Only-begotten Son, etc."
Things hard to believe: A lot less eloquent than Dialogue; repeating himself couple of times; and one error - calling pride of Satan "infinite" - this better be wrong translation, because God makes no mistakes; mentioning many, many apparitions around the world which are supposed to be true. And so on. Given that, approval/disapproval by the authorities would be good.

@Maria delos Angeles It's not that one set of people "gets it" later than the other set. Both have different roles. Sr Lucia of Fatima always said she was the messenger, not the interpreter of the Fatima apparitions. She received the apparitions first, and believed them, but it was not her role to declare them as worthy of credence, for the universal Church. Our Lady appeared to three simple, humble, unlettered children. Initially, the 'authorities' (i.e. the local Ordinary) was cautious, but to the best of my knowledge did not issue any kind of condemnation. If I remember rightly, he sent a priest (maybe more than one) to be present at the apparitions so he could get reports on what had happened. Some clergy interviewed the children and believed them, some didn't - but these were just clergy passing through, not any priests with any authority in the matter. Anyway, eventually, after investigations, the bishop declared the apparitions worthy of credence, and the rest is history. It's not that he was playing 'catch-up', he was faithfully fulfilling his role of investigating an alleged supernatural occurrence in his diocese.
Read the 'Norms regarding the Manner of Proceeding in the Discernment of Presumed Apparitions or Revelations'. Norms regarding the manner of proceedings in the discernment of presumed apparitions or revelations This instruction was sent to bishops throughout the world in 1978 and you will note lists "sincerity and habitual docility towards Ecclesiastical Authority" as one of the positive signs that the alleged phenomena is genuine. We have a local alleged 'seer' around here (I'm not going to name them, I don't want to give them any publicity) and although their writings were condemned by the local Ordinary and the CDF years ago, carries on amassing a fortune in money and property, and disobeying all and sundry.

@Liam Ronan I don't know what happened but this post had the comments removed yesterday. Today they've been restored, but I can't find one you wrote on LifeSiteNews - but anyway, yes, I couldn't agree more. As I said on another post the other day: "I fear the problem is that pro-life, pro-marriage and pro-family issues just don't bring the money in these days, so LSN is having to resort to sensationalist clickbait in order to grab the attention of the 'signs and wonders' brigade. My other beef is that John Henry-Westen never seems to interview alleged 'seers/mystics', or talks about alleged apparitions with self-appointed 'experts' in a critical sense. He gives the impression that he accepts them all without question. There was even one instance when, to the best of my knowledge, he interviewed an alleged 'mystic' who had been 'disallowed' by his local Bishop, and yet Westen never raised that issue.

The timing of this was interesting for me. Actually it came to light right on the heels of "presumed" Cardinal Nichols in shutting down the Triduum Masses in my diocese in blatant betrayal of the good the true and the beautiful. Something of the sense of desolation ensued. Then as if God closes one door and opens another, this crops up out of the blue, and confirms what I already know, the Church has been captured at the higher levels, and interiorly, yes, it is consoling because it confirms me in the faith. If you look at that priests' countenance it is open and sincere, I see no hint of malice or pride in him; and looks courageous.

@Maria delos Angeles You can't see pride in anyone else, because you can't see it in yourself. I too am adversely affected by Cardinal Nichols' decision about the Easter Triduum. I seem to recall that St Padre Pio had unjust sanctions levelled against him, but he didn't complain, he offered them up in union with the sufferings of Christ, for the salvation of others. I also seem to recall that Christ was unjustly crucified, but He didn't complain, He offered His suffering and death for our salvation. There is also a Fatima connection here. When sufferings occur, do what St Jacinta asked of you - offer them this way: 'O Jesus, this is for love of You, for the conversion of sinners and in reparation for the offenses committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary', instead of making snide comments about the validity of Cardinal Nichols' ordination, which you have no authority to do. I remind you that you have previously claimed on Gloria TV to have had some kind of spiritual communion with Bob Marley and other deceased souls. People can draw their own conclusions as to your level of spiritual discernment.

@English Catholic I was not being snide about Fr Nichols, and I am not trying to be authoritative, merely state what I think is a moot point. If Bergoglio is not and never was Pope, which I believe he is not nor ever was - then Nichols, raised by him would be invalidated cardinalate except unless grandfathered in by Ecclesia Supplet. I would not be the one to ultimately decide that. I will say that I have been sent a list by someone in the know - of what appears to be all the career moves Nichols has ever made in the whole of his career, and that I can see he has been on the wrong side of every issue. In which case, he would be out.

Estimable @Liam Ronan igualmente le digo, sea cuidadoso! No caer en lo que dice la Palabra de Dios: “colar el mosquito y tragar el camello (más de diez años tragando camellos y nada han reflexionado la mayoría!) hay un dejo de hipocresía en esa actitud. Esa Misión recibió profecías y no las publicó, ahora no es cuestión de fe pues salta a la vista la evidencia, lo único que está haciendo el sacerdote es dar el último llamado de advertencia que han recibido y claro está que se requiere valor pues de inmediato quien denuncie sufre la represalia del usurpador. Mucho ayuda el que no estorba, no conviene poner en duda al sacerdote del video, deje esto en manos de Dios. Bendiciones a todos.