- Status
L
LilyM
Guest
It is against forum policy to discuss Medj, besides which it’s been done to death. Although it would be good if the Vatican made a definitive statement, the rule is really they’re not supposed to do so until such time as the apparitions cease. Given how long they’ve been going on in Medj though, this may not be wise.
H
hawkeye
Guest
I think it’s the alleged messages from that place we aren’t allowed to post, and your right, it has been done to death.
N
Nickkname
Guest
Just to clarify the rule:
- Do not post material from unapproved private revelations.
N
Nickkname
Guest
I don’t mean any disrespect to the Exorcist, but, the Church cannot judge an appariton - as far as I know, so if I’m wrong, please correct me - until it has ceased. So we gotta wait it out. And not just wait but wait patiently and prayerfully. Let us open our hearts to the Spirit of Christ, so that when the Church dose give its judgment - whether through the local Bishop or through the Holy See - we may accept it. I really hope that when the judgment dose come, it won’t cause a schism or any such thing. Hmm…on that note, let us also pray for the unity of the Church! 
L
LutheranDK
Guest
People might read some kind of ulterior motive into these questions, but I assure everyone: There is none!
1:
When you accept the authority of Rome, can you then also say that something it might do is unwise? Because if the Roman-Catholic church is infallible, then it cannot do anything unwise, right?
2:
Indeed, a rule might dictate the way to proceed, but would not complying with the rule make the offending decree null and void? Id est - would a decree that the Medjugorje-“apparitions” are false be invalid, because the claimed “apparitions” have not yet ceased?
R
rpp
Guest
I do not believe this is correct.I don’t mean any disrespect to the Exorcist, but, the Church cannot judge an appariton - as far as I know, so if I’m wrong, please correct me - until it has ceased. So we gotta wait it out. And not just wait but wait patiently and prayerfully. Let us open our hearts to the Spirit of Christ, so that when the Church dose give its judgment - whether through the local Bishop or through the Holy See - we may accept it. I really hope that when the judgment dose come, it won’t cause a schism or any such thing. Hmm…on that note, let us also pray for the unity of the Church!
The article contains a brief summary of the various investigations that have been going on. It also mentions the status of the priest who is supporting the visionaries. These apparitions have been repeatedly ruled as not from God.
Having the CDF issue a ruling will be welcome to settle the issue once and for all.
I, for one, will welcome that. Even if this retired bishop wrong and the CDF approves it.
R
rpp
Guest
As for this thread.
I think the moderators will leave it open as long as discussion is limited to the article, not what the visionaries claim.
I think the moderators will leave it open as long as discussion is limited to the article, not what the visionaries claim.
J
jmcrae
Guest
They do dumb things all the time - read your newspaper or pretty much any web site out there. What they do not do is ever contradict the deposit of the Faith in such a way that the official teaching of the Church is substantially changed from what was given to us by Christ in the beginning. (We are always learning and refining our knowledge and understanding, of course. The Apostles didn’t know anything about the Bible, or about the Trinity, but these things don’t contradict or substantially change what they were teaching about Jesus at that time.)
I think that’s only if they want to rule them valid, in case something happens after the ruling that shows them not to be valid.
If there is already evidence that the apparitions are not valid, then there would be nothing to wait for - they could just go ahead and rule them to be not valid.
I suppose it’s trickier if they think some of the visions are valid, and some of them are not.
W
Walt_Oliver
Guest
Please stay on topic. Infallibility should be discussed in the Apologetics forum, not here. The topic is extremely limited in scope and, due to the controversial nature of these alleged revelations and apparitions, forum rules will be strictly enforced. Thank you for your cooperation.
L
LilyM
Guest
Just to clarify - I wasn’t saying it would be unwise for Rome to rule on Medj, on the contrary I’m saying it might be unwise for them to wait any longer, given how many people are involved/interested/convinced of the truth of the apparitions there.
V
vee8
Guest
If the Vatican is going to reach a decision soon on whether or not the apparitions are approved it is nice to hear. No matter what they say it will be nice to have an official statement on the subject.
J
joeybaggz
Guest
This sounds almost like a tabloid story, reported simply to tittilate or antagonize. Until something concrete occurs, I would view this with a shrug. And since any discussion of this article can in reality add nothing to the Medujore event, I vote to shut this thread down.
L
Linda_Marie
Guest
I’d like to have a ruling on this soon. I have a friend who is heavily into these apparitions and I fear for her. She is a faithful Catholic and our Sacristan so I hope she will accept the Church’s ruling and not trot out some story about other apparitions which were condemned and later approved as a reason to continue to believe in it.
J
Jordan_Francis
Guest
Medj. has always been very inspirational for my grandparents, of whom this region is their native land. My grandmother in particular, an extremely faithful Catholic woman, holds these apparitions in very high esteem and has several sacramentals from the site.
She has minimal education, and I don’t think she knows any specifics other than that she believes the Virgin appeared in the land of her people.
If the CDF rules against this, I hope no one tells us her. I don’t think she will understand and I think she will be hurt.
She has minimal education, and I don’t think she knows any specifics other than that she believes the Virgin appeared in the land of her people.
If the CDF rules against this, I hope no one tells us her. I don’t think she will understand and I think she will be hurt.
T
thistle
Guest
If the Church knows its a fraud it most certainly does not have to wait until it all ceases. The local Bishops (in three separate commissions over the years) ruled there was no evidence of any supernatural happenings and that the visionaries were fake.I don’t mean any disrespect to the Exorcist, but, the Church cannot judge an appariton - as far as I know, so if I’m wrong, please correct me - until it has ceased. So we gotta wait it out. And not just wait but wait patiently and prayerfully. Let us open our hearts to the Spirit of Christ, so that when the Church dose give its judgment - whether through the local Bishop or through the Holy See - we may accept it. I really hope that when the judgment dose come, it won’t cause a schism or any such thing. Hmm…on that note, let us also pray for the unity of the Church!
Pope Benedict XVI, while still Cardinal Ratzinger, said Medjugorie was a hoax.
A simple test of things like that is their fruit and unfortunately the single largest fruit (a rotten one) is that it has divided Catholics bitterly. Anything like that cannot come from God who wants unity.
M
MrS
Guest
Quite true. Additionally, if the Church believes that there were no apparitions, then they in fact have “ceased”, and a formal declaration would be expected.
I fear, however, that a declaration either way will also cause a division. There are many fine clergy and devoted laity who believe they have, and believe they have not, occured.
Perhaps we should instead turn any attention to Lourdes, Fatima, Akita, Knock, etc.
.
J
Jimdandy
Guest
Cardinal Ratzinger DID NOT SAY THAT!!
Catholics are free to believe or not believe in apparitions
EVEN if they are “äpproved”
satan would NEVER be behind something so pure and beautiful as Our Lady leading God’s children to His Son.
T
thistle
Guest
He DID say it is a hoax but I’ll have to search for the source on the hoax quote and I don’t have time at the moment. However, for those who say Cardinal Ratzinger and Pope John Paul II endorsed Medjugorie this is untrue.
In 1998 after the Clausen memo was published stating that both Cardinal Ratizinger and Pope John Paul II were in favour of Medjugorie this was rejected and in response, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote on July 22, 1998: “Thank you for sending the Claus Peter Clausen’s memo. He is well known to me as the publisher of the Schwatzer Brief . I can only say in response that the quotes endorsing Medjugorje attributed to me and the Holy Father have been made up out of thin air.”
L
LilyM
Guest
Catholics are NOT free to believe in apparitions that the Church disapproves - for example by saying that there is nothing supernatural to them, as it has done in certain cases, and may do in Medj.
As for Medj being ‘pure and beautiful’ there has been an awful lot of disobedience to Church authorities on the part of some of the clergy and laity who support it -the ‘seers’, for example, are still publishing ‘messages from Our Lady’ in direct defiance of the Bishop’s order not to do so. Such could indeed come from Satan, who I am sure would like nothing better than for laity and clergy to be ignoring legitimate instructions from Church authorities.
- Status