We need to be careful to avoid sensationalism with apparitions. The Church has always had a strict process to weed out fake apparitions from true ones. This is why people get so involved in Medjugorje, Bayside, Garabandal, etc, they hear the Mother of God is giving a message and they follow blindly. Many Medjugorje followers use their subjective “experience” as proof, which is entirely Protestant. Stick with the tried and true. Stick with what the Church teaches, and be wary of searching for a phenomenon. Because we can be very easily swayed ...

Even apparitions that are approved by Church authority are considered private revelation and therefore no Catholic is required to believe in them.

Even so, it would be extremely rash and even sinful to reject those that the Church has universally endorsed and whose visionaries she has canonized, e.g. Lourdes to St. Bernadette, the Sacred Heart apparitions to St. Margaret Mary, etc.

An image of the Virgin Mary may have been captured on December 12, the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe. The image was snapped by Fr. Fernando Molina-Restrepo of the Transfiguration Catholic Church in Marietta, Georgia.
The image has hardly gained much attention, being reported on a few outlets and in Atlanta. Catholic Online learned of the apparition just today.
The image is captured on glass at the church hall and reveals Our Lady appears dressed as she was when she appeared before Juan Diego. There is a blue tint to her outer garment, which is also trimmed with gold. Her inner garments are pink in color. Her hands appear folded and her head looks bowed.
Parishioners said they were in the parish hall when the image appeared accompanied by the scent of roses. Victor Jose Alvarado told CBS News that parishioners started praying and singing at the sight. A sense of peace overcame everyone.
Critics have said the apparition is nothing more than a "faulty coating" on the window. If so, then how can they explain its sudden appearance, the smell of roses attested by the parishioners, and their sense of peace? A faulty coating would be present from early on and might not even escape the factory and it certainly wouldn't be installed. There's also the timing of the apparition to consider --the feast day of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
The apparition was not accompanied by any messages or visions, but it's no less powerful for being silent. Fr. Molina-Restrepo wrote to CBS, "We may never agree on why or how this image appeared on the window. The true gift to us will be in how we are inspired to be MORE: more forgiving, more accepting, more loving to those with whom we share our lives."
That's a message we can all agree on.

https://www.catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=66621

Nonsense. No one is required to accept any private revelation. When the Church approves a revelation, all they are saying is that something supernatural MAY have happened here.

Complete garbage.  No, the Church is not saying that something "MAY" have happened.  When the Church approves the revelations, the Church is stating that they are of God ... and that is why the Church is so cautious about approving them.  No, private revelation is not the same as public revelation.  Indeed, no theological conclusions are derived from it and nothing is "de fide" that comes from a private revelation, but one would be rash and sinful to reject those that have the public universal approbation of the Church and whose visionaries have been canonized.  It almost derives from the Church's infallibility.  Since the Church has widely promoted Fatima or Lourdes or the apparitions to St. Margaret Mary as if they were authentic and genuine, and these turned out to be fake, this would be a major black eye on the Church if they were in fact fakes or even diabolical.  No, the Church does not endorse the apparition as if it were Sacred Scripture, so that every word must be accepted as if it were divine, but to doubt that a revelation that was universally endorsed and promoted by the Church is authentic and of God would be rash and sinful.

Complete garbage.  No, the Church is not saying that something "MAY" have happened.  When the Church approves the revelations, the Church is stating that they are of God ... and that is why the Church is so cautious about approving them.  No, private revelation is not the same as public revelation.  Indeed, no theological conclusions are derived from it and nothing is "de fide" that comes from a private revelations, but one would be rash and sinful to reject those that have the public universal approbation of the Church and whose visionaries have been canonized.

But what does it mean to say they are "ofGod"? Does it mean that everything the person claiming to receive the revelation said is true? Certainly not. When it comes to Fatima for example, I have a very hard time believing that the children received revelation on future historical events, and it's laughable to see people go on and on about what the"Third Secret" might be. These things are speculative. Scripture and the Tradition of the Church are our foundation. If people would read Scripture daily and study the Fathers instead of superstitiously   focusing on private revelation/apparitions, maybe Catholics could actually defend the Faith( are you aware of the state of Catholic apologetics these days?)

Are you aware of your own apologetics? +26/-75

I don't much care what the wackos on Cathinfo think of me

That's a lot of wackos, a 3:1 rejection ratio, pretty much makes all of Cathinfo people wackos. Only liberal Novus Ordo's have come close to your record.

Well this place is more or less dominated by sedes and Feeneyites.( both wacko positions) Not many fellow SSPXers here. That's ok though. My reputation on an Internet forum means very little to me