I call your attention to these very pertinent irregularities of this decree:
(1). it carries signatures of no Cardinals or members of the Sacred Congregation, but only that of its notary, Luigi Castellano.
(2). There is no mention of the date on which the Holy Office presumably met to vote this piece of legislation.
(3). There is no reference to its ever having been submitted to Pope Benedict XV for final approval.
(4). The decree forbids all discussion of the Secret and specifies penalties to be imposed on transgressors, but no censure whatever is attached to the work itself, as would be expected in the circumstances.
(5). There is not even a prohibition against possessing, reading or distributing it!
Notice that it wasn't until after Pope Pius X died in 1914 that those who detested the messages of La Sallette began to attack Melanie Calvet from the Vatican: Here is a quote from L'Osservatore Romano, under the Pontificate of Pope Saint Pius X, on 25th December, 1904,:
"Melanie revealed her Secret at the time which was indicated to her, although she knew that such an action would draw towards her the wrath of those who having lost all moral sense were attached to the chariot of the Masonic sect".
So the attacks against the veracity of Melanie Calvet have been of a Masonic origin, and surely continued on that way.
"The Secret itself is placed on the Index in 1923, and books on the Index are still forbidden. You might want to brush up on exactly what Pope Paul VI said about the Index. It remains as a moral guide for Catholics. What was once immoral cannot later become moral."
I know what Paul VI said, he said the Index of Prohibited Books was now officially suppressed, and all ecclesiatical penalities for reading such no longer have the force of law in the Church. He also stated, (paraphrase), "Persons are still obliged to take normal percautions against doctrinal error". There are no longer any ecclesiatical penalties for reading books that formerly appeared on the now abolished Index.
"Solange Hertz is not a valid interpreter of the Holy Office. In any case, their Decree is quite clear, and needs no interpretation. It forbids all discussion and dissemination of the Secret."
Solange Hertz is one of the brightest and best Catholic historians and apologists alive today. She writes brilliant defenses for the Catholic Church against Protestants and new-age attackers. According to Solange Hertz, the decree, (which I have not seen in full myself), does not forbid the reading, possession or distributing of this 1879 brochure on La Salette, but only the discussing of it.
The signatures of Cardinals are not needed for canonical effect. All that is necessary is a notary. Check with a canon lawyer if you don't believe me."
The lack of signatures by Cardinals is extremely unusual, but that was only one of several irregularities of this decree, as I noted above. It seems to me that the single sentence within the whole prophesy, "Rome will lose faith and become the seat of the antichrist", is the whole issue for the La Salette detractors. This intimidates them to the core because they feel it means the Pope, forgetting it probably refers to the people of Rome.
For me the real issue is to look at the whole of the prophesies of La Salette and see for myself if they have come to pass. I think any honest Catholic who knows the faith will be forced to admit that many of them have indeed come to pass, and that we live in the midst of others of them in this very day.
Among other things, the La Sallette prophesy speaks of:
people neglecting prayer,
churches will be locked up,
religious orders will break away,
astonishing wonders will take place on the earth and in the air,
evil books will be abundant,
The seasons will be altered
people will have great power over nature,
a false light will illumine the world,
the Pope will suffer a great deal,
homicides, hate, jealousy, lies and dissension would be seen without love for country or family,
All the civil governments will have one and the same plan, which will be to abolish and do away with every religious principle, to make way for materialism, atheism,
the devil will resort to all this evil tricks to introduce sinners in to religious orders, for disorder and the love of carnal pleasures will be spread all over the earth.
France, Italy, Spain and England will be at war.
The earth will be struck by calamities of all kinds (in addition to plague and famine which will be widespread).
People will think of nothing but amusement.
Nothing of what you list is an "irregularity". You simply don't understand how Church law works. Fr. Feeney was excommunicated by a similar decree signed simply by a notary. It was a real excommunication.
Notice that it wasn't until after Pope Pius X died in 1914 that those who detested the messages of La Sallette began to attack Melanie Calvet from the Vatican
The first books about the Secret were condemned in the pontificate of Leo XIII, with additional ones in the time of St. Pius X. Go back and look at the dates on the Index of Prohibited Books.
Here is a quote from L'Osservatore Romano, under the Pontificate of Pope Saint Pius X, on 25th December, 1904,:
The quote, if genuine, refers to the true original secret which is approved by the Church (though still not published), and not Melanie's false concoction published in 1878.
There are no longer any ecclesiatical penalties for reading books that formerly appeared on the now abolished Index.
It will be immoral to read evil books until the end of time.
According to Solange Hertz, the decree, (which I have not seen in full myself)
How can you claim that? I gave you the text of the decree in my Post 159.
As to its posession, the Decree notes the secret is under a ban (more precisely, the Holy Office forbade what you mention in 1880). If it is already under a ban, there is hardly reason to reban it when condemning its further dissemination.
It seems to me that the single sentence within the whole prophesy, "Rome will lose faith and become the seat of the antichrist", is the whole issue for the La Salette detractors. This intimidates them to the core because they feel it means the Pope, forgetting it probably refers to the people of Rome.
As well it should, since it is a quote of Martin Luther, ably refuted by St. Peter Canisius.
Who could dare deny any of this? And many of these prophesies, dealing with flight, advanced science, high technology and seasons being altered were unimaginable in 1879
I take it you've never read Jules Verne?
Anyway, here is the judgement of one Cardinal about this secret.
"In order to answer your question Monseigneur, I have just read the two pamphlets concerning which you desire to know my opinion. It is absolutely unfavourable. The authors of previous publications, to do with this secret, were condemned, if not because of the secret itself, at least because of the scope and the consequences they gave it. A similar fate awaits this present publication." I. - It seems, in fact, that we do not have here the secret handed by the Bishop of Grenoble's envoys to HH Pope Pius IX in 1851. In its present form, it was written by Milanie Calvat, but on various occasions and in successive fragments, and seems rather to be the result of a personal composition than an exact repetition of the original text given to Pius IX, and which is said to be no longer in the Vatican.
"II. - As it stands, this secret has no value other than as Milanie Calvat's personal statement, supported by the signature of two bishops from around Naples. Milanie seems to have been sincerely pious, but she may have been deluded, and it seems that her 'mission', instead of extending to our period, ended with the Church's recognition of the reality of the Apparition.
"III. - What is certain, according to a well informed author, is that the first versions of the secret were less developed than the last; it is probable, therefore, that under the influence of the setting in which her life ended, Milanie amplified the first form of the writing she had had sent to the Pope; for certain, we do not have here an official copy of the secret handed to Pius IX. Only the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office could, with the Pope's consent, seek out the original and so determine, against the original contents, its true authority.
"IV. - The nature of this secret, as we read it today, is so strange, arranged in such a confused manner, containing particular allusions to politics, it seems to favour, in such a very precise way, the errors of the ancient millenarists - in that it announces a renovation to be accomplished in time and on earth, unlike the teaching of the true religion about the general resurrection at the end of the world, and about the eternal happiness of the elect - that one necessarily hesitates to ascribe it a heavenly origin. Finally, and more especially, the commentator has taken such liberty in evaluating and judging the Catholic hierarchy, in all its degrees, that one wonders what basis there is for the severity of his words, which would not be out of place in the pages of a newspaper most hostile to the Christian faith. One also wonders how he allies the true piety he professes with the harshness he displays towards persons worthy of every respect.
"What aggravates the rashness of these judgements is that they are, on several occasions, given in a form that is both mocking and insulting, which is belied by the character and dignity of the persons the author sees fit to denounce.
"The holy pope Pius IX, venerable cardinals such as Mgr Perraud, Mgr Lugon and Mgr Sevin, bishops like Mgr Maurin of Grenoble, and all his predecessors down to Mgr Ginoulhiac, of such learned memory: all are included in the hurtful reproaches, which the commentator dares to attribute in the first place to the Most Blessed Virgin Herself!
"And all this is written and published, offered and distributed for those who would like to find in these pages food for their curiosity. Would they learn charity and love by learning to despise the legitimate authority of the priesthood? For, the remarkable thing is that this Christian, this Catholic, seems to savour a sort of enjoyment in scourging the leaders of holy Church, those whom he mocks in calling them 'our princes'
"You will not, therefore be surprised, Monseigneur, if I condemn these two pamphlets by Dr Mariavi, if I rebuke their spirit and their character, and if I advise the faithful not to read them.
"With my affectionate respect,
A., cardinal de Cabrihres
Bishop of Montpellier.(Le Hidec, Les secrets de La Salette, p. 164-167)