Former Vatican Exorcist says Vatican will reject Medjugorje

[benedictgal]

There are quite a few bishops and priests who have been disobedient to the teaching authority of the Church, for example, in counseling their people that artificial contraception is ok.

Bishop Gemma can predict that the Vatican will rule against the apparitions, but I don’t see the Holy Father making any moves, do you? In fact, John Paul II the Great was very much in favor of pilgrimages to Medj. He would have gone himself, but couldn’t because he was Pope and was not allowed to make a ruling on it until after the apparitions had ceased.

I will certainly obey Holy Mother Church if she makes a statement on this matter. It seems absurd to criticize the messages from our Lady (even if they turned out to be declared false) because there is nothing in these messages that is not in the Gospel. Pray and fast. What’s the problem?

I’ve never been to Medj., nor do I have any plans, but I don’t see the harm. The other Marian sites, Lourdes, and Fatima, are not so different.

Actually, I beg to differ with your last statement. Lourdes and Fatima had bona fide miracles attached to them: the healing waters of Lourdes and the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima.

In each Marian apparition (at least the ones approved by the Church), the Blessed Mother has stressed fideility to Christ and His Church. As far back as Guadalupe, she has also asked that a Church be built at the site and that the seer consult with the Church (in this case, the bishop of the region where the apparition occurred) in order to authenticate the supernatural events.

St. Juan Diego brought roses blooming in winter as his proof. St. Bernadette dug up the spring of miraculous water. The three Fatima children (and several thousand people) witnessed the miracle of the sun. The two young seers at LaSallette were grilled and grilled about what they saw. All four locations have a church built on the site of the apparitions.

To my knowledge, none of this has happened at Medjagorie, none whatsoever. Of course, there is the standard message of fasting and prayer, but, didn’t Garabandal have that as well?

St. Paul urges us to test all things. The former Vatican exorcist is simply following St. Paul’s advice. So is the Vatican.

Remember, too, that the devil can quote scripture, and twist it, as Jesus showed us during His temptation.

The bottom line is that we must trust that the Holy Spirit is guiding the Vatican in every decision. After all, I still believe that the Holy Spirit played a major role in the election of Joseph Ratzinger as our Pope.

 

[LilyM]

Actually, about 95% of Catholics would be excommunicated for receiving the Sacrament unworthily, since this is the estimated number of those who use contraception or are sterilized.

So, our churches would be nearly empty, if we booted out all those who disobey. So sad, but true.

95% is a gross overexaggeration - after all there are a lot of children, for whom such things aren’t an issue, at least some who are celibate and thus unconcerned as well, a lot who are beyond childbearing age who wouldn’t have been sterilised and aren’t using contraception etc etc. Not to mention those who may have done such for a time and then had a change of heart and repented (as did my own parents).

Besides which, sad as it is that anyone would be out of communion over such things, it is hardly relevant to the issue of Medj.

 

[sacredcello]

95% is a gross overexaggeration - after all there are a lot of children, for whom such things aren’t an issue, at least some who are celibate and thus unconcerned as well, a lot who are beyond childbearing age who wouldn’t have been sterilised and aren’t using contraception etc etc. Not to mention those who may have done such for a time and then had a change of heart and repented (as did my own parents).

Besides which, sad as it is that anyone would be out of communion over such things, it is hardly relevant to the issue of Medj.

The subject in this thread had turned to the matter of obedience to the teaching authority of the Church.

I should have made the distinction that 95% of all married catholics of childbearing age (and unmarried who are sexually active – and about 90% of them are who come for marriage prep classes – dissent from Church teaching. These are what the statisticians who have studied the issue are saying. It’s not a gross exaggeration.

 

[sacredcello]

The bottom line is that we must trust that the Holy Spirit is guiding the Vatican in every decision. After all, I still believe that the Holy Spirit played a major role in the election of Joseph Ratzinger as our Pope.

Yes, I’m right there with you. And our Holy Father has made no statement against Medjugorje. In fact, our previous Pope John Paul II was very much in favor of pilgrimages to Medj.

The fruit of these apparitions are the conversions about which volumes have been written. The pastor of our church is one.

 

[Nickkname]

Hopefully if the Vatican does pronounce against Medj, people will learn not to put more faith in apparitions - be they approved or not - than in the Vatican.

I don’t think that will ever happen. There are a lot of dumb people in the Church. No offense meant to my fellow Catholics.

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

The subject in this thread had turned to the matter of obedience to the teaching authority of the Church.

I should have made the distinction that 95% of all married catholics of childbearing age (and unmarried who are sexually active – and about 90% of them are who come for marriage prep classes – dissent from Church teaching. These are what the statisticians who have studied the issue are saying. It’s not a gross exaggeration.

This is illogical to the argument.

Didn’t your mother ever something to the effect of, “If all the kids at school jumped off a cliff, would you do it, too?”

If Holy Mother Church asks you to believe her, will you? Or will you follow all the other “kids” and jump off the cliff?

Two wrongs never make a right, whatever type of disobedience those wrongs take.

 

[Adonis33]

The subject in this thread had turned to the matter of obedience to the teaching authority of the Church.

I should have made the distinction that 95% of all married catholics of childbearing age (and unmarried who are sexually active – and about 90% of them are who come for marriage prep classes – dissent from Church teaching. These are what the statisticians who have studied the issue are saying. It’s not a gross exaggeration.

Although unfortunate, irrelevant to the topic of this thread.

 

[Adonis33]

Yes, I’m right there with you. And our Holy Father has made no statement against Medjugorje. In fact, our previous Pope John Paul II was very much in favor of pilgrimages to Medj.

The fruit of these apparitions are the conversions about which volumes have been written. The pastor of our church is one.

We have a former lead exorcist stating that he believes something diabolical is going on, and a commission that found no evidence of anything supernatural happening in Medj.

it’s nice that some people may have found their faith at this place, people have found faith by seeing Mary in tortilla’s, the bottom of skillets and the side of buildings as well.

What was it that the Bishop said in the article you disagree with?

 

[allhers]

I found this on EWTN, it says that the Church has not suppressed discussion of Medjugorje…
Here is how I found it.
Go to www.ewtn.com
then on the upper left hand corner put your cursor to hover over where it says faith,
then hover over Catholic Q&A,
then click on Faith FAQs,
then click on General Questions (not covered elsewhere), that is at the bottom of that page.
Then click on
Mary, Various FAQs,
then click on Medjugorje
This is at the very bottom last few paragraphs.
Do the decisions of the Church amount to an obligation to believe in the intellect that Medjugorje is not supernatural? The answer is no. First, even private revelations approved by Rome bind the faithful to accept them only based upon reasonableness, not faith. Pope Benedict XIV stated, Although an assent of Catholic faith may not be given to revelations thus approved, still, an assent of human faith, made according to the rules of prudence, is due them; for according to these rules such revelations are probable and worthy of pious credence. [Benedict XIV, De Serv. Dei Beatif.]

This means that once a private revelation has achieved Papal approbation it is unreasonable, i.e. imprudent but not against the faith, to not accept it as authentic. The contrary would also be true. If Rome judged a private revelation to not be supernatural, the reasonable person would be satisfied with that conclusion. Would they sin if they did not accept it? They might sin by imprudence, rash judgement or the like, but not against the faith or the obedience they owed the Holy Father. Catholics must always, however, following the external precepts imposed by the Church in such matters, that is, what they may or may not do, as opposed to what they think.

As far as theological judgements made at the local level, therefore, the standard could not be any higher, and is certainly lower. The issue of Medjugorje, therefore, cannot be resolved solely on the basis of the local Church’s finding that there is no evidence to date of supernaturality. This is even more clear in light of the statement of Archbishop Bertone that the Bishop of Mostar’s 1998 statement that it is certainly “not supernatural” is his own personal opinion. Others are therefore entitled to their personal opinions, also.

What the Church permits: As the already cited statements note, Catholics may go to Medjugorje. Such pilgrimages may even include priests acting as chaplains, as opposed to officially sponsoring them. Also, the Church has not suppressed discussion of Medjugorje, therefore, it is allowed. Common sense, however, says that Catholics on both sides of the Medjugorje issue should exercise prudence and charity in speaking of others who believe differently. Medjugorje is not a litmus test of orthodoxy, though every Catholic will have a moral obligation to accept the judgement of Rome, in the manner Pope Benedict explained, should it ever be rendered.

 

[LilyM]

I found this on EWTN, it says that the Church has not suppressed discussion of Medjugorje…

What the Church permits: As the already cited statements note, Catholics may go to Medjugorje. Such pilgrimages may even include priests acting as chaplains, as opposed to officially sponsoring them. Also, the Church has not suppressed discussion of Medjugorje, therefore, it is allowed. Common sense, however, says that Catholics on both sides of the Medjugorje issue should exercise prudence and charity in speaking of others who believe differently. Medjugorje is not a litmus test of orthodoxy, though every Catholic will have a moral obligation to accept the judgement of Rome, in the manner Pope Benedict explained, should it ever be rendered.

I think you’re confused here. No-one in this thread has suggested that the CHURCH has suppressed discussion of Medjugorje.

Rather it is the moderators of CAF, who, for prudential reasons, have placed some limits on the discussion on CAF of ANY unapproved private revelation, including Medj.

The mods here are perfectly entitled to permit or ban the discussion of certain issues as forum policy. They have also, for example, banned certain types of discussion of candidates in the upcoming US elections. For many of the same reasons - such discussion tends to degenerate into bitterness and slanging very quickly.

 

[allhers]

I think you’re confused here. No-one in this thread has suggested that the CHURCH has suppressed discussion of Medjugorje.

Rather it is the moderators of CAF, who, for prudential reasons, have placed some limits on the discussion on CAF of ANY unapproved private revelation, including Medj.

The mods here are perfectly entitled to permit or ban the discussion of certain issues as forum policy. They have also, for example, banned certain types of discussion of candidates in the upcoming US elections. For many of the same reasons - such discussion tends to degenerate into bitterness and slanging very quickly.

Well then that is probably why it is even more important that people go to the website that I posted in my last post (post # 49) because at the very bottom of it, it says this:

St. Augustine probably gave the simpliest and most helpful rule for all matters of the Church’s life when he said :
In necessary things unity,
in undecided things freedom,
and in all things charity.
(AND in no way do I disagree with the moderators of this forum)

 

[Bill_Cherry]

Yeah? Well,The info on this subject was one of the persuasive arguments for me. But, I’m not even in RCIA,yet. So, what do I know? I mean no offense. I believe in submission to authority & all that.But,still,I must admit…I fell in love with Mary first!:clapping:

 

[allhers]

My my, I found this too.
…The Gemma statement went on to say that the Church already has spoken through the Bishop of Mostar – whose authority, in fact, has been stripped. That bishop long has been antagonistic to Medjugorje but his diocese lost authority over Medjugorje in 1986, rendering the idea that he speaks for the Church as another inaccuracy expressed in the Petrus interview by Gemma himself, who also erroneously stated that pilgrimages are not allowed there (despite official Vatican statements to the contrary; it has twice stated through its press office that while official parish pilgrimages are not allowed until there is Church approval, unofficial ones are allowed, including those with priests. The Cardinal of Sarajevo, who is the country’s highest ecclesiastic authority, has repeated this).

Might Medjugorje one day be rejected?

While John Paul II was highly favorable toward the apparitions, even encouraging pilgrimages, and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger rescued the site from local condemnation, it is not clear how Benedict will act now that he is pontiff. We will adhere to whatever the Vatican decides. Thus far, it has decided nothing. When such an announcement comes, it will be through the Vatican press office from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Meanwhile, another priest highlighted in The Vatican’s Exorcists – the famed Father Gabriele Amorth, of Rome (who performed exorcisms with John Paul II) – has visited Medjugorje and described it as both an authentic apparition and (ironically) a “fortress against Satan” [our italics].
source: spiritdaily.com/gemma.htm

 

[Jimdandy]

My my, I found this too.
…The Gemma statement went on to say that the Church already has spoken through the Bishop of Mostar – whose authority, in fact, has been stripped. That bishop long has been antagonistic to Medjugorje but his diocese lost authority over Medjugorje in 1986, rendering the idea that he speaks for the Church as another inaccuracy expressed in the Petrus interview by Gemma himself, who also erroneously stated that pilgrimages are not allowed there (despite official Vatican statements to the contrary; it has twice stated through its press office that while official parish pilgrimages are not allowed until there is Church approval, unofficial ones are allowed, including those with priests.

Meanwhile, another priest highlighted in The Vatican’s Exorcists – the famed Father Gabriele Amorth, of Rome (who performed exorcisms with John Paul II) – has visited Medjugorje and described it as both an authentic apparition and (ironically) a “fortress against Satan” [our italics].
source: spiritdaily.com/gemma.htm

:byzsoc: :amen: :signofcross:

 

[allhers]

Yeah? Well,The info on this subject was one of the persuasive arguments for me. But, I’m not even in RCIA,yet. So, what do I know? I mean no offense. I believe in submission to authority & all that.But,still,I must admit…I fell in love with Mary first!:clapping:

Then she lead you right to Jesus didn’t she?

 

[sacredcello]

Besides which, sad as it is that anyone would be out of communion over such things, it is hardly relevant to the issue of Medj.

Another reason I brought this up is that during the 1960’s there were bishops, priests and laypeople everywhere who were predicting that the Vatican was going to change its teaching on sex and morality. They stirred up such a fervor with the people, that everyone was stunned by the publication of Humanae Vitae in 1968. So, the Church didn’t pronounce that it was ok to use birth control after all!!! Sadly, because so many theologians, bishops, etc., had told everyone what they expected the Holy Father to do, the people refused to listen to Pope Paul VI when he did speak on the matter. It is a beautiful encyclical, but hardly anyone read it, or accepted it. Sadly, my own future father-in-law who is a Eucharistic minister at his church, is still in a state of disagreement with the Church on this issue, and has not confessed honestly about his own use of contraception, and he continues to spread the news that John Paul II was a bad pope because he upheld the teaching against contraception. That is what happens when you speculate about what the Holy Father is going to teach us.

Shame on all of the Catholics in this forum who are “more Catholic than the Pope.” The Body of Christ is still bearing the wounds from the sin of the previous generation in its widespread, yet erroneous speculation.

 

[Holly3278]

Let the Lord’s will be done.

 

[sacredcello]

This is illogical to the argument.

Didn’t your mother ever something to the effect of, “If all the kids at school jumped off a cliff, would you do it, too?”

If Holy Mother Church asks you to believe her, will you? Or will you follow all the other “kids” and jump off the cliff?

Two wrongs never make a right, whatever type of disobedience those wrongs take.

Actually, it’s not at all illogical. The previous generation speculated that the Vatican was going to change its teaching on sex and morality. A whole generation of people were angered when the Church upheld its teaching with the publication of Humanae Vitae in 1968, and many are still angry today that the Church teaches the whole truth.

No one knows what the Vatican is going to pronounce about Medj. , but if the apparitions are true, then what about those who have hardened their hearts to the messages?

If it turns out they were false, there is no harm in having prayed and fasted, as the very simple messages have suggested.

 

[sacredcello]

Remember, too, that the devil can quote scripture, and twist it, as Jesus showed us during His temptation.

Have any of the messages quoted scripture??? I don’t believe they have.

The messages from Our Lady are very much like the Gospel, in that the she encourages us to pray and fast, but there are no direct scripture quotations, as far as I have seen.

 

[Jimdandy]

There are none so blind as those that will not see.

But I love them and pray for them daily.