The last words of the Beautiful Lady in white, who appeared to the Carmelite Sister Teresita Castillo in 1948, were: “I am Mary, Mediatrix of All Grace.”
The Committee formed by the Apostolic Administrator of Lipa in 1951, Bishop Rufini Santos, ruled that the apparitions were not authentic. On November 12, 2009, then Archbishop Ramon Arguelles lifted the ban.
The April 11, 1951 Decree of Archbishop Santos Et Al, was Null and Void
Can. 125 – 1. Actus positus ex vi ab extrinaseco personae illata, cui ipsa nequamquam resistere potuit, pro infecto abitur.
2.Actus positus ex metu gravi, iniuste incusso, aut ex dolo, valet, nisi aliud iure caveatur; sed potest per cententiam iudicis rescindi, sive ad instantiam partis laesae eiusve in iure successorum sive ex officio.
Can. 125 – 1. An act placed out of grave fear, inflicted on a person from without, which the person was not able to resist in any way, is considered as never to have taken place.
2. An act placed out of grave fear, unjustly inflicted, or out of malice is valid unless the law provides otherwise. It can be rescinded, however, through the sentence of a judge, either at the insistance of the injured party or of the party’s successor’s in law, or ex-officio.
(coercion – noun: the action or practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats.)
(duress, noun: the action or practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats) “confessions extracted under duress” synonyms: coercion, compulsion, force, pressure, pressurization, intimidation, threats, constraint, enforcement exaction; informal arm twisting “their confessions were extracted under duress constraint illegally exercised to force someone to perform an act ex vi defined by Lewis and Short: (with might, strength, physical or mental, force, vigor, power, energy, virtue (cf. robur)
The signatures of the Bishops on the April 11, 1951 decree have been demonstrated beyond all shadow of doubt to have been obtained by coercion – by threat of excommunication. The coercion was therefore of a nature that constitutes force or duress as properly and commonly understood and defined. Therefore, according to Canon 125 1. it was an “actus positus ex vi, and therefore, pro infecto habeture – and therefore never to have taken place. As such, a decree which is held pro infecto is totally null and utterly void, and therefore is incapable of being validly confirmed because it is a juridical nullity.
Hypothetically, if the signatures had been obtained ‘ex metu gravi, iniuste incusso, aut ex dolo’ (our of grave fear, unjustly inflicted, or out of malice) that would constitute undue influence, and the Archbishop of Lipa would have the authority to rescind the decree in in accordance with the provision of canon 125 2.
Therefore the overturning of the decree by Archbishop Arguelles is valid beyond all shadow of doubt.
From all the above considerations, it is patent that the April 11, 1951 Decree was canonically null and void; it had never received any juridical confirmation by Pope Pius XII, and it was legitimately struck down by the subsequent decree of approval of the Archbishop of Lipa, S.E.R. Monsignor Ramon Arguelles.
The CDF has resorted to a desperate act of fraud in order to uphold the 1951 decree, which according to canon 125 must be held ‘pro infecto’ – and therefore canonically never to have existed.
Note: A search of the AAS documents from 1951 to 1958 confirms that Pius XII never issued any ‘definitive confirmation’ of the April 11, 1951 decree of Cardinal Santos et al. Previous searches of the Lipa archdiocese archives also produced nothing.