I Need Help with Poem of the Man-God

[Lux_et_veritas]

Eliza10:

Arrrrgh!!!

You cut and pasted this letter again!!!
…
Did you really think I was asking to see this letter again???

No, I showed it to you because you refuse to answer the question as to whether you refute the Vatican’s position that the revelations are not of supernatural origin.

Aside from that, you indicated you did not have the full length letter from Ratzinger, (in spite of how many times I posted it), so I provided it again. You said in a previous post:

I don’t have the full length letter of Radzinger - like you - I have what was provided on the net.

Bottom line is that I believe you will not answer the question as to whether you will accept the Church’s position that these writings are not of supernatural origin, because you believe the Church is wrong. You don’t believe She has spoken. Yet, she has spoken when She told publishers of the disclaimer they would need to add (the underlined text). Cardinal Ratzinger did not specifically say that Catholics should not read it, but wanted to be absolutely certain that people did not take the locutions to be of supernatural origin. Yet, you are.

Diane, you must proscribe to the school-of-broken-record-debate. I am sick of seeing this letter reposted here - how many dozen times? No one has missed it! Its been discussed, but I guess you’ve missed the discussions?

So you are listening, but you are refusing to hear the Vatican’s position. We’re all set then. You acknowledge seeing the position of the Holy See as written in the May 11, 1993 letter by Bishop Boland (post 128 or 129), but you are choosing to disregard that position. That is, simply on whether the dictations and visions are of supernatural origin.

I don’t think its profitble to reasonable adult discussion to keep cutting and pasting the same old same old things, over and over and over again. Can you just cut that out of the debate?

How can I cut the Church’s position out of the debate. You are disputing whether the Church spoke, and she has spoken. Did the Holy See tell publishers to put stickers on books clarifying that the position of the Church is that the visions and dictations are not of supernatural origin just for kicks? Did the publishers comply?

As I have said, this letter quoting a 1960 statement is your theme song. We get it.

No, it is not mine anymore than the position I take on “the fall” being related to prideful disobedience, not lust

And we know, if L’Osservatore Romano makes a misstatement they will not be retracting it. Thats the traditon. And if the comment has been disproven, we can expect silence on the issue. Which there has been. Any comment on that??

Who is we? What proof do you have? Is this calumny and detraction you speak of the Holy See?

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Eliza10:

Maybe you misunderstood?? You asked me for more proof - it seems you wanted a direct quote from a full letter becaue the full letter from Bishop Danylak concerning Cardinal Radzingers coments was not enough? I told you that I had what you had - that is what is available on the net on the subject.

You misinterpreted that to mean I wanted to see the letter again that is on this thread a dozen times already.

It seems to me you have plenty of proof that the Church does not teach that Poem of the Man-God is detrimental to our faith and morals, but you don’t want to even consider any proof that does not support your hypothesis.

To protect yourself from having to consider an opposing viewpoint on this matter, you sidestep the evidence to be considered because the quote is not direct enough?

That is why I asked, isn’t the word of Bishop Danylak enough? Do you think he would publish a letter lying about the words of Cardinal Radzinger?

First of all, lets look at the different roles of Bishop Danylak, and Bishop Raymond Boland, and Cardinal Ratzinger in this whole scheme of things.

Bishop Danylak is a retired Bishop of Toronto. Even if he weren’t retired, he is still an ordinary bishop from Toronto. He feels strongly about Valtorta’s work - enough so that he simply sent a letter to EWTN…three years ago.

Bishop Raymond J. Boland is the local Ordinary for the diocese of Birmingham, Alabama. A Catholic from his diocese, Mr. Tony Colafrancesco, founder of Caritas, wrote to the CDF looking for support in favor of publishing Poem of the Man-God. When one writes a letter to the CDF, it gets separated into piles by country. His went into the USA pile. Cardinal Ratzinger then sent his letter, giving instructions to Bishop Boland for Mr. Colafrancesco. It didn’t tell him not to publish, but if it were published, the Church’s position must be clearly visible with a label.

If Ratzinger’s position is null and void as you seem to indicate, why didn’t Mr. Colafrancesco simply write to Bishop Danylak? No, he wrote to the CDF because that congregation had the authority to decide the issue.

Cardinal Ratzinger, as Prefect for the CDF, answered that letter through Bishop Boland and offered clarification pertaining to publishing of the works. Note that the bishop was instructed to inform the man of “the Church’s position” not “it’s opinion”.

The label on the book was meant to make people aware that the Church does not see these private revelations as supernatural in origin.

Now, who is representing the Church here? It is not Bishop Danylak. He expressed an opinion and EWTN did come back with a response in August of 2005 to that opinion written by Bishop Danylak in 2005:

Bishop Roman Danylak is a retired Ukranian Rite Bishop of Toronto. He has a strong opinion in favor of Maria Valtorta’s “revelations,” but the arguments he uses are less than convincing. The target of the Bishop’s letter, is the answer of late EWTN Q&A expert, Dr. Bilton, to a question on Maria Valtorta. It reads as follows:

Full text: ewtn.org/vexperts/showmessage.asp?Pgnu=1&Pg=Forum12&recnu=1&number=445440

You see what is missing here? This is merely an exchange between a particular bishop who has an opinion, and EWTN. The Church is not involved here. It’s kind of like two lawyers talking outside the courtroom. They can talk all they want, but the judge has the final say. The judge spoke when he asked that labels be put on books warning Catholics that the “visions and dictations” are not of supernatural origin.

Now, if you continue to have a problem with the L’Osservatore Romano that Cardinal Ratzinger cites, then you really oughta take it up with him, don’t you think? Now that he’s Pope Benedict, I’d love to hear his take on it all now, even in light of Bishop Danylak’s statement.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

And, straight from bardstown.com/~brchrys/Imprmatur.htmBishop Danylaks website:

Cardinal Ratzinger in private letters has acknowledged that this work is free from errors in doctrine or morals. The Conference of Italian Bishops has acknowledged the same in its correspondence with the current editor, Dr. Emilio Pisani.

Private letters???

So, this is how the Church hands down decisions of this kind - through private correspondence?

God help us

 

[Tominellay]

Diane,
My apologies to you; having joined this discussion thread late, I overlooked your posting (#58) of the Bishop Boland letter, and made my own comments (#197) on the older CDF letter to Cardinal Siri…Thanks for your great posts - and your patience!

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

I asked, but have not heard, what Diane has to say about the fact explained by Bishop Danylak that it is common traditiion for official church authoriies to make wrong statements and when the wrong is pointed out to them they never publically retract it.

What Bishop Danylak is not telling you is that it is common tradition for all kinds of people to want to disagree with an authoritative decision. When they don’t get the retraction they would desire, then they begin to tell people of these private side chats. It seems strange for someone like Ratzinger, who is so well spoken, to not think that a good many people would need to know of his support for this, if it were there.

Private chit-chats should be completely disregarded as hear-say. There is no proof that Cardinal Ratzinger ever told anyone anything in private about this that did not match his earlier public statement.

Attributing such commentary to him is a very bad thing to do. Folks of Medjugorje tried that one and he (Ratzinger) came back with a letter that is now public (not a private chit-chat), as follows (from the Michael Davies book on Medjugorje: Medjugorje - Twenty One Years Later (sixth edition which is online in its entirety and endorsed by the man with jurisdiction - Bishop Ratzko Peric of the Mostar-Duvno Diocese).

On 28 July 1998 Cardinal Ratzinger wrote to a correspondent confirming that statements attributed to the Pope and to him in favour of Medjugorje had been “freely invented”. I possess a photocopy of this letter.

*Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger *

I-00120 CITTA DEL Vaticano

22 Juli 1998

Herrn …

00069 Trevignano Romano (RM)

Dear Mr. …

First of all, I have to apologize for answering your kind letter from 27th May only today. The burden (i.e. work load) of the last few weeks has been so heavy that I had to postpone my private correspondence again and again so that only now, as my vacation is about to begin, I can at last try to answer the more important letters.

I thank you very much for sending me the memorandum by Claus Peter Clausen, whom in fact I know as the author of the Schwarze Briefe (Black Letters). I can only say that the statements attributed to the Holy Father and me are freely invented.

With my best wishes for your manifold activities.

Josef Ratzinger

It is more than probable that the Holy Father was referring to Medjugorje in a speech reported in the 18 September 1996 edition of L’Osservatore Romano when he stated:

Some members of the People of God are not rooted firmly enough in the faith so that the sects, with their deceptive proselytism, mislead them to separate themselves from true communion in Christ. Within the Church community, the multiplication of supposed “apparitions” or “visions” is sowing confusion and reveals a certain lack of a solid basis to the faith and Christian life among her members.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Tominellay:

Diane,
My apologies to you; having joined this discussion thread late, I overlooked your posting (#58) of the Bishop Boland letter, and made my own comments (#197) on the older CDF letter to Cardinal Siri…Thanks for your great posts - and your patience!

No problem

 

[allhers]

Tominellay:

Diane knows what she is talking about; her posts are factual and well-stated…Bravo Mike, too!

 

[allhers]

…as for Medjugorje…go to
www.ewtn.com
place your cursor over Faith—(upper right hand corner), then lay it over Catholic Q&A, then go over to Faith FAQ’s and click on it, then click on Blessed Virgin Mary, then click on Medjugorje.
They tell you what the Church says about it and the Poem Man God on that site. Someone else already posted a link to that one earlier though…

 

[trustmc]

Eliza10:

Honestly Mike, don’t you think you and Diane are only seeing the fruit you want to see? I dont’ think I am following qualified obediance.

I think you think any appeals to the emotion are mature. It seems to me you think any appeal to emotion is immature. That all decisions of faith are feeling-free.

Am I correct?

You are incorrect. You can have mature appeals to emotion and immature appeals to emotion. You have an immature appeal to emotion as you clearly have used them to justify your defense of Valtorta with them.
Eliza 10:

I am side-stepping this argument because I feel unqualified to comment on it. And I think you are too. As I what is said in the book takes more than a skim to grasp. And you haven’t read it at all. You are not in a position to comment on what the book said about this because you never read it or even saw a paragraph from the book on the subject.

You must not recall my original post where I wrote that I read the book up until I got to the part where Eve was depicted having sex with the serpent, which made me put away the book for good. I have since thrown it away with the trash.

Mike

 

[trustmc]

Eliza10:

I asked, but have not heard, what Diane has to say about the fact explained by Bishop Danylak that it is common traditiion for official church authoriies to make wrong statements and when the wrong is pointed out to them they never publically retract it.

Since you missed my first rebutle regarding Bishop Danylak’s letter, here it is again. He wrote, and you quote:

Unfortunately one of the failings of the offices of the Church is the fact that these offices do not make formal retractions of their own accusations when it has been brought to their attention that they have made mistakes. This is a common failing of bishops and pastors and of many in authority.

Now tell me again where the good Bishop says that when offical agencies of the Church, such as the CDF and L’Osservatore Romano, “never publically retract” wrong statements? He clearly says that “one of the failings of the offices of the Church” to make formal retractions is, in fact, “a common failing of bishops and pastors and of many in authority.” Does he attribute such failure to the CDC and L’Osservatore Romano?

Since you will likely not answer this, I’ll do it for you: No! Go back and reread the letter.

You have read way too much in the Bishop’s statement. The CDF and L’Osservatore Romano are not “offices of the Church.” They are agencies. Bishops, priests and deacons are offices. So according to this Bishop, even Valtorta’s champions among the clergy can’t be trusted, which is why agencies like the CDF exist to correct an errant bishop or theologian.

Please stop distorting the Bishop’s words above to make the obviously false claim that the Church’s agencies don’t post retractions when they make errors. Padre Pio’s writings were eventually approved by the CDF even after the many cautious statements made by the same agency. That fact has been repeated many times on this thread. Did you miss them as well? Obviously the CDF has and will retract statements that are incorrect – your own jumping to conclusions not withstanding. But so far after so many decades of investigation it has stuck to its original dismissal of Valtorta’s work.

You may want to read post #169 if you haven’t already for a more elaborate rebutle to your misuse of the Bishop’s own words. Diane doesn’t have to say anything further about the letter that I haven’t already said there and here.

Mike

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

I’d like to direct another comment to those who are clinging to the Poem of the Man-God.

If at some point, you come to realize that the Church has spoken and that she did not speak favorable of these works, ultimately deciding that these writings are not of supernatural origin, please remember that the Poem should not make up the basis of one’s Catholicism. Every hour spent on Poem of the Man-God is one hour less someone can spend learning about the truths of Catholicism. Every week spent reading the Poem, is one week less of time spent studying the Fathers or Doctors of the Church, much of which is not difficult to read. This says nothing of the lost time that could be spent in the bible.

The Church is rich in works. For the philosophically minded, there are the great works of Aquinas, Augustine and others. For those looking to increase in holiness, there are the works of St. Frances de Sales, St. Francis of Asissi, St. Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, St. John Vianney (Cur d’ars), St. Theresa Lisieux, and Mother Theresa. For those wanting to understand Catholicism better, and shed the ignorance born out of shallow catechesis and RCIA, there is the CCC, the new compendium of the CCC which is due out right after the first of the year. Other theologians have written solid catechetical texts, including Fr. John A. Hardon. He also has many theology books written with simplicity. There is also the deeply spiritual theology and writings of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI.

And, there are loads of encyclicals, apostolic letters, decisions, councils, etc. available online:

newadvent.org/library/

Church Fathers:

newadvent.org/fathers/

 

[Kurt_G]

allhers:

…as for Medjugorje…go to
www.ewtn.com
place your cursor over Faith—(upper right hand corner), then lay it over Catholic Q&A, then go over to Faith FAQ’s and click on it, then click on Blessed Virgin Mary, then click on Medjugorje.
They tell you what the Church says about it and the Poem Man God on that site. Someone else already posted a link to that one earlier though…

Such a long thread to walk into, I missed where Medj. was first mentioned. Anyway, thanks, allhers, for proper directions to ewtn’s site… it’s just what one would expect - fair and a little lengthy. May I condense the part about Medj.?

1. Pilgrimages to Medj. may not be sponsored by a parish or diocese, or a clergy member taking an active role in organizing.
2. Pilgrimages to Medj. may be organized and sponsored by a private lay individuals.
3. Clergy (priests as well as bishops) may attend as spiritual leaders for private pilgrimages. And of course, many clergy do.

And now, my humble personal opinion on Medj.:

If you don’t like praying the rosary a lot (6 languages all together in groups of hundreds at a time)…

If you don’t like Stations of the Cross while meditating on Jesus’ passion and climbing a mountain barefoot…

If you don’t like seeing hundreds of people going to confession, in many, many languages…

If you don’t like severely over-packed daily masses in St. James, your choice of a different language every hour…

If you don’t like concelebrated masses virtually every day all year long, with priests and even some bishops, from truly all over God’s earth…

If you don’t like Eucharistic Adoration with people from age 2 to 92 packing aisles, concrete floors, and side door entrances to meditate, adore our Lord, sing together in 7 languages (latin included) along with easily prompted melodies with soft violins, flute, etc.

If you don’t like waking up each morning feeling like God has freshened you for another day of wonderful worship and prayer…

If you don’t want to see and feel yourself as a child of the same Mother our Lord Jesus Christ has…

then don’t go to Medjugorje.

On the other hand, if you want any of these things, by all means go… I will stop going only when Holy Mother Church tells me I may no longer go…

God Bless Us All!

 

[Tominellay]

Kurt G.,
Happily, you can do all those things at a Catholic retreat center in the diocese in which you live…but absent the “hook” of an alleged Marian appearance…So, what’s the real reason you’d go to Medjugorje?

 

[JimG]

An interesting article about private revelations:

“To keep a sane view of private revelation, you must know first and above all that you do not have to accept any private revelation whatsoever, nor are you bound to it in any way except to that which already reflects the truths of Scripture and Tradition. Pope Benedict XIV (1675-1758) stated, “No private revelation is ever to be believed with Catholic faith.” This refers even to those “approved” by the Church.”

Source: This Rock magazine, June 1998 catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9806fea3.asp

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Thanks for posting that. It was an interesting read. I like how the author gets into the discernment process, which is what I’ve been trying to explain for three pages now (from the link in the above post). Number 3 is definitely rampant with regards to Medjugorje.

The whole private revelation scene can be a veritable zoo. Obviously, not every claim to divine inspiration is de facto authored by God. Simple criteria can be applied by anyone to any purported revelation. Some of these are straightforward: alignment with the gospel and Church teaching, the lifestyle and integrity of the seer or locutionist, submission to ecclesial authorities, proclaiming Christ’s Lordship, and depicting a God who loves the world. I find people continually tripping up for want of other essential though less obvious criteria. I’ll list a few of these:

1. Syncretism. Some sources are a hybrid of pagan, secular, and Christian ideas. The other day I picked up a booklet entitled something like Mary Speaks to the World and containing the following “quotation” from Mary: “I want to encourage you to continue to place your trust in God, whomever you conceive him to be.” Such a statement can’t be reconciled with Christian teaching. God is God, and “whomever I conceive him to be” must be conformed to the truth of his being, not to my preferences. Here we see a pagan idea wedded to a Christian figure.

2. Hidden agenda. Other messages are strongly ideological, promoting an agenda that reflects the anger and dissatisfaction of certain interest groups in today’s Church, such as “messages” in which Mary demands exterior formalism and reduces every problem in the Church to the absence of Communion on the tongue, women wearing veils in church, and the Latin Mass. What is most disturbing is the claim that the Blessed Mother is lambasting the Church’s change in discipline.

3. Anti-hierarchy. Other messages are not only critical of the Church hierarchy-and I’m not elevating the hierarchy above critique-but actually deny Church authorities their delegated responsibility of shepherding God’s people. When this succeeds in turning people away from the guidance of pope, bishops, priests, and spiritual directors, there’s no longer any objective means of safeguarding the Christian life. That’s dangerous. Religious experience without theological objectivity is an accident waiting to happen.

4. Common sense. Some purported private revelations just seem to be ridiculous, plain and simple. I can’t recall the exact details, but somewhere out there there’s a set of messages detailing a future disaster for Canada. To survive, one is required to swallow a piece of paper upon which these or similar words are written: “Christ, save me.” Doing so will save that person from the impending repercussions of the disaster. Give me a break!

Continued in next post…

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

5. Freedom to respond. Some messages invite a response from believers. I love what Mary is reputed to be saying at the end of locutions at some apparition sites, even after the most sobering of messages: “Thank you for responding to my call.” Other “revelations,” on the other hand, resort to emotional blackmail. I have in mind a pamphlet that put into the mouth of Christ these words: “Those people, who brawl against my religion and cast slurs on this Sacred Letter, shall be forsaken by me.”

6. The messenger. Every message hinges upon the authenticity of the messenger. Who was the person directly involved, and what was his spiritual, psychological, and moral state at the time of the revelation? On the positive side, Sr. Faustina’s authenticity and the beautiful devotions begotten by her life are watertight, almost beyond question. On the other side, there is the case of Maria Valtorta, author of The Poem of the Man-God. Her personal life raises serious questions. In the words of Fr. Benedict Groeschel, who happens to be a trained psychologist: “Miss Valtorta was a very devout and intelligent person. She spent the last ten years of her life in complete catatonic schizophrenia, unable to speak to anyone. This disease came on her gradually. It’s important to realize that the progress of a disease like that may take many years before the acute symptoms occur. Although this book is interesting to read and has a certain poetic beauty to it, Cardinal Ratzinger referred to it as ‘a lump of theological absurdities.’”

Ratzinger and Groeschel are nobody’s fools. I’m aware of the unjust scarlet letter associated with mental illness. Still, we are irresponsible to ourselves if we discount these facts. Likewise, we do well to note, says Groeschel, that The Poem of the Man-God was on the list of “forbidden books and has never been given papal approval, contrary to popular belief.” A challenge, therefore, should be issued to the “uncritical ease” with which this book and others like it have made deep inroads into Catholic living.

Some might object to such challenges on the grounds that they’ve experienced an inspiration from God through The Poem of the Man-God. Yet* anything* can inspire faith: music, art, sports, a starry night, literature, relationships, preaching, suffering, prayer, family gatherings, science, the Eucharist, gardening, religious books, a child playing, and the newspaper. Faith can be inspired from private revelation even if it is from a source that is imperfect or indeed highly suspect. Ultimately the question is not one of inspiration but of credibility and authority a person gives to a revelation. Ask yourself this question: “How do I quote these books?” Daily Bible reading might be kept, but what in fact has happened is a transference of authority from the Bible to the private revelation. Some Catholics have created a “Fifth Gospel” or a parallel bible. No book or personality should eclipse the living Christ of the Gospels.

 

[allhers]

Kurt G.:

Such a long thread to walk into, I missed where Medj. was first mentioned. Anyway, thanks, allhers, for proper directions to ewtn’s site… it’s just what one would expect - fair and a little lengthy. May I condense the part about Medj.?

1. Pilgrimages to Medj. may not be sponsored by a parish or diocese, or a clergy member taking an active role in organizing.
2. Pilgrimages to Medj. may be organized and sponsored by a private lay individuals.
3. Clergy (priests as well as bishops) may attend as spiritual leaders for private pilgrimages. And of course, many clergy do.

And now, my humble personal opinion on Medj.:

If you don’t like praying the rosary a lot (6 languages all together in groups of hundreds at a time)…

If you don’t like Stations of the Cross while meditating on Jesus’ passion and climbing a mountain barefoot…

If you don’t like seeing hundreds of people going to confession, in many, many languages…

If you don’t like severely over-packed daily masses in St. James, your choice of a different language every hour…

If you don’t like concelebrated masses virtually every day all year long, with priests and even some bishops, from truly all over God’s earth…

If you don’t like Eucharistic Adoration with people from age 2 to 92 packing aisles, concrete floors, and side door entrances to meditate, adore our Lord, sing together in 7 languages (latin included) along with easily prompted melodies with soft violins, flute, etc.

If you don’t like waking up each morning feeling like God has freshened you for another day of wonderful worship and prayer…

If you don’t want to see and feel yourself as a child of the same Mother our Lord Jesus Christ has…

then don’t go to Medjugorje.

On the other hand, if you want any of these things, by all means go… I will stop going only when Holy Mother Church tells me I may no longer go…

God Bless Us All!

Glad you found it, even though, it is the upper LEFT hand corner, and I have never been there, but, it sounds beautiful, the last time I was at Adoration here, there were three of us.

 

[allhers]

Once again, it isn’t Lux, (Diane) who is misunderstanding.
Perhaps the reason the very letter that you don’t want reposted is the one you ought to read over and over until you get it Eliza.
No one is misunderstanding what you are saying, and in fact, I, as a casual observer of these postings can see that you are about the only one that believes what you are saying (and pio) and you don’t agree with what he posts. Strange isn’t it?

 

[Kurt_G]

Tominellay:

Kurt G.,
Happily, you can do all those things at a Catholic retreat center in the diocese in which you live…but absent the “hook” of an alleged Marian appearance…So, what’s the real reason you’d go to Medjugorje?

Hello, Tominellay. The real reason to go to Medj? The sidewalk pizza is out of this world!
OK, that’s true, but it’s not the real reason. The real reason is the same reason I would go to mass as often as I can, right here at home… to be with other believers, and worship as a community, as we see in early Church history. Are pilgrimages necessary for our salvation? Of course not. We go to Lourdes and Fatima too, by the way, and also have wonderful experiences there, although secular things are a little busier in both places.
The first time I went, it was because my wife was going, it would be her birthday while she was gone, so I went too. Now I go to pray, side by side, with other Catholic faithful from around the world.
Example: On the last trip, as we began our assent of Cross Mountain for our meditation with Stations of the Cross, we noticed 3 people waiting at the bottom. They asked to join us, as they were waiting on an English speaking group to team with. Two were women from London, and the other was a bishop from Malawi. On our return, we watched a group of 30 men and women from Korea, beginning their ascent at Station 1, all barefoot, with 2 men carrying a large wooden cross.

Yes, Tominellay, I know in my mind that all of us on earth are united together in Jesus our Lord, especially in our Eucharist. But I guess I have some “Thomas” in me, and it helps me to see phsysically what I already know in my mind to be the spiritual reality.

must run, pls allow another post a litttle later.

 

[Kurt_G]

Tominellay:

Kurt G.,
Happily, you can do all those things at a Catholic retreat center in the diocese in which you live…but absent the “hook” of an alleged Marian appearance…So, what’s the real reason you’d go to Medjugorje?

I don’t wish to change the direction of this thread, just want to finish answering Tominellay’s question about Medj…

Many of us who go to Medj. come back on “fire”, wanting and planning how to reproduce the prayerful conditions of that place in our own communities.

You might say “Look around a little, you already have retreats, adoration, and more”.
I would respond, “We are familiar with, and participate in what’s available here. But what’s so bad about wanting to help make what we do have, even more inspiring, more holy?”

Tom, several of us help with retreats in the deanery of our diocese, and see much of God’s grace flow from them, so we are familiar with what is available in our diocese. On our last trip, 20 out of 30 of us were already very active retreat planners and participants, and local supporters of Eucharistic Adoration. In fact, several Medj. pilgrims have come home and helped increase Eucharistic Adoration in our home parishes. We do not discuss Medj. in public at Church, because we know we may not. We do not think ourselves holier than others for having gone, because you never know how holy other people are. But am I myself closer to Jesus Christ now than before I went to Medj.? Yes, without a doubt. So Mary, for me, had a way of carrying me closer to Jesus, not further away.

Tom, separate and apart from any apparitions, somehow Medj. has been transformed into the Christian prayer capital of the world, whether I or you like it or not…

Even If the Church would finally say the apparitions are not authentic, I would hope they leave the door open for people from around the world to assemble there… to convert, to confess, to pray together, to adore together. Because that is what is going on there now, and that is our reason for continuing to go.

Do some people go just for apparations, and never even set foot inside St. James (if they can squeeze in)? I suppose so, but that is not what Medjugorje is about for us, Tom.

God Bless Us All…