Is there a sinister connection between Charismatic Renewal and Medjugorje?

[Lepanto]

It’s my understanding that 4 bishops of Medjugore, each in succession, have condemned the apparitions.

The Vatican usually goes with what the local bishop says. That’s why JP2 did not visit Medjugore when he was visitng the region some years ago.

I don’t have any sources to cite – a friend told me this.

 

[goblue32]

It’s my understanding that 4 bishops of Medjugore, each in succession, have condemned the apparitions.

The Vatican usually goes with what the local bishop says. That’s why JP2 did not visit Medjugore when he was visitng the region some years ago.

I don’t have any sources to cite – a friend told me this.

Is there something official from the Vatican that states that Medjugore is not approved?

The reason that I ask is because I was reading a book about the history of Marian apparitions, and it was saying that the Vatican didn’t have a stance. It was neither approved or condemned. And I believe I heard on the CA radio program (about a yr. ago) is the same, and that one can believe, or not believe because the church doesn’t have an offical position. But if the Vatican say’s ‘no’, that’s the end of the story.

 

[Shoshana]

It’s my understanding that 4 bishops of Medjugore, each in succession, have condemned the apparitions.

The Vatican usually goes with what the local bishop says. That’s why JP2 did not visit Medjugore when he was visitng the region some years ago.

I don’t have any sources to cite – a friend told me this.

The Vatican is taking it over from the local bishops.

spiritdaily.net/medjruling.htm

 

[Joe_Kelley]

. .
The Vatican usually goes with what the local bishop says. That’s why JP2 did not visit Medjugore when he was visiting the region some years ago. . …

It was my understanding that the Pope could never visit a site while the investigation is ongoing. A visit would be tantamount to approval.

 

[Schultzz]

It’s my understanding that 4 bishops of Medjugore, each in succession, have condemned the apparitions.

The Vatican usually goes with what the local bishop says. That’s why JP2 did not visit Medjugore when he was visitng the region some years ago.

I don’t have any sources to cite – a friend told me this.

The original Bishop originally supported the apparition but when comments were made concerning the stance the Bishop took on another matter, the “message” mentioned something that went against what the Bishop was trying to do. That is when the Bishop started to change his opinion of the site. I don’t understand why “the message” would go against the local authority. Why would Our Lady go against the Bishop? He was a loving and devout follower of Her. Was this particular message translated incorrectly? Was it not the real message? I don’t know. But the original Bishop and his successors have given doubts as to the authenticity of the apparitions most likely based on the initial bishop’s decision. The responsibility then went to a committee, then it was given to the Vatican itself. The Church has not made a definitive judgement on the authenticity except through the original Bishop. Over 50,000 people have visited Medjugorje, over 5,000 Bishops, Priests, Religious, have visited and celebrated Mass there. Supernatural events have been recorded there many times. Lives have been changed, people have received hope, many still have prayer groups which say the Rosary faithfully. There have been some negative things written and said about Medjugorge. Yes there has been much money made by everyone involved, yet thousands still flock there. Although the site has not yet been approved by the Magisterium,
and official pilgrimages are forbidden, private pilgrimages are NOT forbidden, and the local Bishop DOES provide priests and clergy to accomodate the needs of the faithful. The church has not said that whatever occurs there is against church doctrine. If it were, the magisterium would be much more vigorous in protecting the faithful. People pray, and attend mass and internalize the initial message to pray, fast, do penance, go to confession and receive holy communion, repent and save their souls. Everything that has been said before at other apparition sites, some of which have been approved and some which haven’t. Whatever the final outcome is, I will be obedient. I have seen much good come from this place, yet I am sure that Holy Mother Church will be quite thorough in the exhaustive process by which it investigates before rendering its verdict. It still remains very controversial.

 

[Graing]

The Vatican is taking it over from the local bishops.

spiritdaily.net/medjruling.htm

A quick review of Spirit Daily will inform you that it has a bias where Medjugorge is concerned. I did not see a link to an official Vatican statement with regards to authority.

The reason that the Vatican has not ruled on Medjugorge is because the apparitions have not stopped. There have been thousands upon thousands of apparitions. The continuance of such things on the part of the seers (in conflict with the directive given by the local authority - the bishop of Mostar-Dunvo) precludes official Vatican comment for or against.

In such a case, the authority regarding such a phenomenon lies with the bishop. I have seen nothing from Rome to say this has been circumvented.

Please see the official site of the diocese for the opinion in authority at this time:

cbismo.com/index.php?mod=vijest&vijest=101

I believe we are straying off subject, but there is too much misinformation (on both sides of the Medj argument) and not enough obedience to the authority of the church (the bishop in this case) going around lately.

 

[Lepanto]

The reason that the Vatican has not ruled on Medjugorge is because the apparitions have not stopped. There have been thousands upon thousands of apparitions.

Alleged apparitions.

Let’s not assume that they are actual apparitions until the Church officially says so. Until then they are alleged apparitions.

 

[Graing]

Alleged apparitions.

Let’s not assume that they are actual apparitions until the Church officially says so. Until then they are alleged apparitions.

Absolutely agreed.

Please see the link I posted earlier as the bishop of Mostar-Duvno goes into a great bit of detail on the subject.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

As a Charismatic member of the clergy, who has been to Medjugorje twice, when I was told by a bishop whom I asked to be our spiritual leader on another trip there, that the church did not approve of it and discourages clergy from going there, I dropped plans for another trip there on the spot. Incidentally, the bishop is Charismatic. Foremost in all of our minds should be obedience to the Magisterium. To quote St. Padre Pio, “Obedience, in all things obedience.”
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[thecoach]

As a Charismatic member of the clergy, who has been to Medjugorje twice, when I was told by a bishop whom I asked to be our spiritual leader on another trip there, that the church did not approve of it and discourages clergy from going there, I dropped plans for another trip there on the spot. Incidentally, the bishop is Charismatic. Foremost in all of our minds should be obedience to the Magisterium. To quote St. Padre Pio, “Obedience, in all things obedience.”
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

But since others are offering information that there is no official stance as of yet, what that Bishop told you would be in error. Lives transformed, people returning to God, yes, something sinister indeed is going on there! Sheesh.

 

[Lepanto]

Lives transformed, people returning to God

But you can do that in front of your local blessed sacrament tabernacle.

The burden of proof of Medjugorje lies with the so-called seers. The Church only declares them authentic or not.

It’s a bad idea to run off to every claimed apparition site, especially since the Church has only approved a handful of the thousands of apparition sites that have been claimed around the world.

 

[thecoach]

But you can do that in front of your local blessed sacrament tabernacle.

The burden of proof of Medjugorje lies with the so-called seers. The Church only declares them authentic or not.

It’s a bad idea to run off to every claimed apparition site, especially since the Church has only approved a handful of the thousands of apparition sites that have been claimed around the world.

Does not the fruit speak for itself? What difference if it is front of your tabernacle or at Medj?

 

[Tominellay]

But since others are offering information that there is no official stance as of yet, what that Bishop told you would be in error.

“Others” are offering silly information. In fact, the Church says non constat de supernaturalitate…

 

[thecoach]

“Others” are offering silly information. In fact, the Church says non constat de supernaturalitate…

Really? It is offered by posters right here on this thread. DO you have any documentation that the Vatican has already declared something on this?

 

[Graing]

Does not the fruit speak for itself? What difference if it is front of your tabernacle or at Medj?

Please see my link further up this thread. It is an official link to the diocese of Mostar-Duvno. The bishop has authority until the Vatican says otherwise or until the seers cease and the Vatican can make a pronouncement.

I don’t understand what is so difficult about being obedient. There are Fatima and Lourdes if you want to follow a Marian devotion / site. They are approved (and even they are not required I might add).

And speaking of fruits, be careful to fully research if you are interested in fruits. There has been much disobedience by clergy in Mostar-Duvno around Medjugorje. Some of the disobedience is very serious and I won’t repeat the offenses here. Needless to say, there is likely some rotten fruit involved.

In the end, if you are obedient to the Church, you have nothing to fear.

 

[thecoach]

:banghead:

 

[Tominellay]

Really? It is offered by posters right here on this thread. DO you have any documentation that the Vatican has already declared something on this?

You might read the Zadar Declaration of 1991; it’s a statement of the Church’s position of non constat. Rome respects this decision. Look it up.

 

[thecoach]

You might read the Zadar Declaration of 1991; it’s a statement of the Church’s position of non constat. Rome respects this decision. Look it up.

doesnt non constat mean not certain? SO what is this supposed to prove?

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

But since others are offering information that there is no official stance as of yet, what that Bishop told you would be in error. Lives transformed, people returning to God, yes, something sinister indeed is going on there! Sheesh.

The bishop of Mostar, the diocese in which Medjugorje is located has officially stated that the apparitions are not authentic. The approval of the local ordinary is the first step for the Church to look into it. Since he has officially not approved it, that is as far as it goes. Can he or another bishop later change this decision, obviously yes. but until then, "Obedience, in all things, obedience.’>
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[Tominellay]

doesnt non constat mean not certain? SO what is this supposed to prove?

The Church uses three formulae in assessing the authenticity of alleged apparitions.
“Constat de supernaturalitate” is a positive statement.
“Non constat de supernaturalitate” is a negative statement.
“Constat de non supernaturalitate” is a negative statement.

The Latin word “non” makes the negative statements negative.

The logic is that the two negative statements are not identical to each other, but each is an opposite of the positive statement.