Mary Apparitions

[jencsus30]

Thanks again for all of the sites and information! It really wracks my brains

And i am SO SORRY about putting this in the wrong category! I am kind of new here so I dont really know where everything goes. Sorry! I dont know how to change it to the right place but as soon as I do i will. Does anyone know how to?

God Bless You All!
jen

 

[matahari]

On Medjugorje the fact that one of the seers apparently was able to meet with HHJP2 for some twenty minutes for a meeting surely only confuses the faithful on the correct position and perhaps bolsters the seers’ feeling of not having to obey their bishop because they are led to also believe that Pope JP2 corresponded with his Polish friends about Medjugorje.

God Bless!

---

Surely we may ask questions about background of dispute ?

For example is it true that during WW2 Medugorje and roundabout were deserted by their secular Clergy?
And that the Franciscans stayed to minister to the local Catholics
That there was killing of over 30 of the Franciscans by the Communists
That when the War was over the Secular Clergy returned
That the people wanted the ministry of the Franciscans and not the Secular Clergy
That this caused anger on the part of the Secular Clergy
That the Bishop of Mostar was originally favourable to the vision
That He was called to the Office of the Commissar
That the following day he announced that nothing supernatural was going on at Medugorje
That that has been the official position since ?
…

 

[ac_claire]

---

Surely we may ask questions about background of dispute ?

For example is it true that during WW2 Medugorje and roundabout were deserted by their secular Clergy?
And that the Franciscans stayed to minister to the local Catholics
That there was killing of over 30 of the Franciscans by the Communists
That when the War was over the Secular Clergy returned
That the people wanted the ministry of the Franciscans and not the Secular Clergy
That this caused anger on the part of the Secular Clergy
That the Bishop of Mostar was originally favourable to the vision
That He was called to the Office of the Commissar
That the following day he announced that nothing supernatural was going on at Medugorje
That that has been the official position since ?
…

That’s been the official position of both bishops who have served since the visions began. There’s no doubt a very complicated political/religious history of the area, but we are not to use that as an excuse to second-guess the consistent judgements of those in authority. In the history of the Church, Our Lady has never before encouraged her children to act as rebels for her sake. The apparitions themselves and the publication of the “messages” are still going on in direct disobedience to what the bishop requested.

All you need to know is that these visions are not approved by the Church and can therefore be damaging to your faith.

 

[matahari]

All you need to know is that these visions are not approved by the Church and can therefore be damaging to your faith.

---

Not YET approved by the Church
Isn’t it normal Church practise that apparitions are not pronounced upon till they have ended ? So no pronouncement yet.
One or more Commissions set up by the local Bishop were disbanded because they were 'loaded dice ’ with ’ those already against ’
Catholics have voted with their feet
How many millions of pilgrims have been greatly blessed ?
Many vocations after visit
Thousands of Priests have been there
Many Bishops have travelled incognito

when I made a Pilgrimage there 15 years ago there was a African Bishop travelling as a Priest.

Now if you were to say "Keep out of night clubs and dens of iniquity
Avoid drugs or alcohol or whatever then I might agree with you

Perhaps we might be told " On what grounds the Bishop is against these visions"
apart from the fact that He doesn’t appear to have control of the Franciscans who have always been faithful to their flock…

 

[bmadamsberry]

But it also does not mean that the apparitions are not happening. The Church has not made a ruling one way or the other, becuase it can’t until it is over. The best way to approach it is to make an informed decision, reading both sides of the argument (which may lead one to believe or to disbelieve). Then, when/if the church makes a judgement, you change your position to fit that of the church’s.

 

[Tominellay]

---

Not YET approved by the Church
Isn’t it normal Church practise that apparitions are not pronounced upon till they have ended ? So no pronouncement yet.
One or more Commissions set up by the local Bishop were disbanded because they were 'loaded dice ’ with ’ those already against ’
Catholics have voted with their feet
How many millions of pilgrims have been greatly blessed ?
Many vocations after visit
Thousands of Priests have been there
Many Bishops have travelled incognito

when I made a Pilgrimage there 15 years ago there was a African Bishop travelling as a Priest.

Now if you were to say "Keep out of night clubs and dens of iniquity
Avoid drugs or alcohol or whatever then I might agree with you

Perhaps we might be told " On what grounds the Bishop is against these visions"
apart from the fact that He doesn’t appear to have control of the Franciscans who have always been faithful to their flock…

The current judgement of the Church regarding Medjugorje is “non constat de supernaturalitate”. This means that the evidence does not indicate a supernatural origin for the events at Medjugorje. This is the judgement reached by the bishops of then-Yugoslavia (not a Commission), and announced in 1991. If another investigation turns up additional evidence, it’s possible there could be a different result and a different judgement formula. Your claim of a “loaded” commission is unfounded; can you name the people on the commission? As to the grounds on which the bishop opposes the visions, you might read what he has said and written about them, and which he has stated clearly and responsibly.

 

[DeusVeritas]

They can’t approve Medjugorje because it’s still going on. They cannot approve a vision until it is over. I agree to be prudent, but I think that to totally steer clear of an appirition (not even read pro stuff about it) would be taking it a little far. Read both sides is my advice.

This is one of the myths that unfortunately many Catholic’s believe. There is no such thing as waiting for an apparition to be over before a judgement can be made by the Church. And in this case two Bishops have already pronounced a negative judgement in the case of Medjugorje. Thus, the Church has spoken. Once a Bishop makes a formal judgement concerning the apparition that is the end of it.

**But just as I was very ignorant in the past ** of what was the process in judging an apparition to be of supernatural origin or not of supernatural origin. There are millions of other Catholic’s who still remain ignorant concerning this.

Here is an excerpt from the EWTN website concerning the judgements that can be made concerning an apparition that you can find at ewtn.com/expert/answers/apparitions.htm

The decision of the local bishop should be one of the following: 1) constat de supernaturalitate (established as supernatural), 2) constat de non supernaturalitate (established as not supernatural); or 3) **non constat de supernaturalitate ** (not established as supernatural).

In the case of Medjugorje two local Bishops have made a negative judgement on this apparition. You can read Bishop Ratco Peric’s decision on Medjugorje in its entirety at his website below.

cbismo.com/index.php?mod=vijest&vijest=287

Quotes from Bishop Ratco Peric from the linked to webpage: **“Why do I as the local bishop not accept the “visions” at Medjugorje as worthy of credence?”

“The “visions” have not however been recognized by the Church, so no-one is any way bound to believe in them.”

“when three ecclesiastical commissions of inquiry into the events at Medjugorje lawfully constituted on the direction of Bishop Zanic, the local bishop, and the Conference of Bishops [of the former Yugoslavia] in 1991 confirmed that they could find no proof that there had been “supernatural visions and messages”? How could the Church, which is the pillar and support of the truth, recognize such more than questionable “visions” under pressure from such petitioners?”**

I hope this helps to clear things up.

PS: Hoping this doesn’t end up as another one thousand posts thread that ends up getting locked because some just refuse to believe the truth and will instead insist that the myths in how an apparition is to be judged is the truth when it isn’t.

 

[LynnGM]

Back to approved apparitions…

To recap, the following are approved: Walsingham, Rue de Bac (Mirauclous Medal), Lourdes, Knock, Fatima, Beauring, Banneux

Not so sure about these apparitions: Siluva (Lithuania), Pontmain, Akita, Rwanda, Nicaragua. Can someone clarify?

I** am also going to include a miraculous category, in that various material items are considered miraculous and have approval by the church- Czestohowa, Loreto, Syracuse Italy**.

Feel free to correct me.

PS- OP, stay away from the unapproved apparitions! Garabandal has been condemned and it’s not looking good for Medjugorje.

 

[puzzleannie]

links from Catholicity to sites that discuss Marian apparitions
catholicity.com/links/124/

 

[Michael_Saint]

Additionally, there’s absolutely no proof that JP II ever went to Medjugorje. That hearsay only comes from Medj. supporters and travel agents. In fact, JP II did travel to Bosnia after the war ended, but conspicuously did NOT visit Medjugorje when he had the most logical opportunity to (if he was such the supporter as alleged)

Keep in mind, JP2 was also a “supporter” of Father Marcial Maciel, so even if JP2 believed in it, it proves nothing. A future saint and one of the great theologians of our time, but a little too willing to believe in some people and things. B16 disagreed, but as Prefect for the CDF under JP2, there is nothing much he could do about either until he became Pope.

 

[Michael_Saint]

---

Surely we may ask questions about background of dispute ?

For example is it true that during WW2 Medugorje and roundabout were deserted by their secular Clergy?
And that the Franciscans stayed to minister to the local Catholics
That there was killing of over 30 of the Franciscans by the Communists
That when the War was over the Secular Clergy returned
That the people wanted the ministry of the Franciscans and not the Secular Clergy
That this caused anger on the part of the Secular Clergy
That the Bishop of Mostar was originally favourable to the vision
That He was called to the Office of the Commissar
That the following day he announced that nothing supernatural was going on at Medugorje
That that has been the official position since ?
…

The Catholic response to this? Your bishop can order all kinds of things for political and self-serving reasons, and you still have to obey him. Church history is rife with examples of it (ie. the expulsion of the Jesuits on numerous occasions - who obeyed, by the way). That is the dangerous thing about Medjugorje - its supporters think that if their own bishop can be “disobeyed” if it can be shown that any of his decisions are at all “questionable”. A dangerous precedent.

 

[Michael_Saint]

How many millions of pilgrims have been greatly blessed ?
Many vocations after visit
Thousands of Priests have been there
Many Bishops have travelled incognito

" On what grounds the Bishop is against these visions"
apart from the fact that He doesn’t appear to have control of the Franciscans who have always been faithful to their flock…

Any place that has as many Masses and Confessions and Prayer as Medjugorje will no doubt also be a place where many healings and miracles take place, and where many will receive vocations. God can turn anything (even demonic activity) to good.

The Franciscans may have always been “faithful to the flock” (which includes, I suppose, participating in the Yugoslavian genocides in the 1940s), but they have not always been “faithful to the bishops” or to the Holy Father, Paul VI, who asked them back in the 70s to start being obedient.

 

[ac_claire]

This is one of the myths that unfortunately many Catholic’s believe. There is no such thing as waiting for an apparition to be over before a judgement can be made by the Church.

You know, you’re right I’ve never heard this authoritatively…I think I’ve just heard it repeated often enough online that I just sort of started believing it without question. Thanks for sharing these points.

 

[DeusVeritas]

You know, you’re right I’ve never heard this authoritatively…I think I’ve just heard it repeated often enough online that I just sort of started believing it without question. Thanks for sharing these points.

You’re very welcome. I too was in the very same boat as you when I re-verted back to the faith but knew very little concerning apparitions. When you see over and over the same thing repeated about “waiting for an apparition to end before the process of investigating it can begin” you start to think 'Hey, if so many people are saying this (even some apologists unfortunately) then it must be a part of Catholic teaching.

But, alas it is not. So, I will repeat like a parrot the truth that “It is a myth that an apparition has to end before the ‘Church’ can make a judgement on it.”

There should be a list created of “False Catholic Myths being passed as Catholic truth on the Net”… God knows it is needed in order to separate the truth from the fiction.

 

[treeleaf]

In every single case of approved private revelation/apparitions where this issue has come up, the Blessed Mother has emphasized that obedience to the local Church authorities comes first. Christ did the same in his appearance to St. Faustina.

Maybe that has a lot to do with their approval.

 

[bmadamsberry]

The current judgement of the Church regarding Medjugorje is “non constat de supernaturalitate”. This means that the evidence does not indicate a supernatural origin for the events at Medjugorje. This is the judgement reached by the bishops of then-Yugoslavia (not a Commission), and announced in 1991. If another investigation turns up additional evidence, it’s possible there could be a different result and a different judgement formula. Your claim of a “loaded” commission is unfounded; can you name the people on the commission? As to the grounds on which the bishop opposes the visions, you might read what he has said and written about them, and which he has stated clearly and responsibly.

Actually, it means that it is not established as supernatural. This is set apart from constat de non supernaturalitate, which means that it is established as not supernatural. There is a huge difference. In the first, the Church means that they cannot decide one way or the other (it is not established, or non constat). The other means it is not supernatural (non supernaturalitate).

 

[Tominellay]

Actually, it means that it is not established as supernatural. This is set apart from constat de non supernaturalitate, which means that it is established as not supernatural. There is a huge difference. In the first, the Church means that they cannot decide one way or the other (it is not established, or non constat). The other means it is not supernatural (non supernaturalitate).

When the Church rules on the authenticity of an alleged apparition, she uses three judgement formulae. “Non constat de supernaturalitate” is a judgement formula, not a declaration of indecision. Although “non constat de supernaturalitate” and “constat de non supernaturalitate” are different from each other, each is an opposite of “constat de supernaturalitate”. Each is a negative formula.

The Church doesn’t assume an alleged apparition is authentic; the burden of proof is on the alleged apparition. A judgement of “non constat” means the evidence does not authenticate the alleged apparition. An earlier assertion that Medjugorje is “not YET approved” is specious: perhaps no other evidence can ever be produced that will authenticate the claims.

 

[bmadamsberry]

Verdicts

At the end of the investigative process, the committee may submit to the bishop(s) one of the following verdicts or conjectural judgements: constat de supernaturalitate (the event shows all the signs of being an authentic or a truly miraculous intervention from heaven); constat de non supernaturalitate (the alleged apparition is clearly not miraculous or there are not sufficient signs manifesting it to be so); non constat de supernaturalitate (it is not evident whether or not the alleged apparition is authentic). The latter is not a negative pronouncement. It might be a real apparition, it might not be. That’s, in essance, what the Church is saying. They are saying that there is not enough evidence is decide one way or the other.

 

[Tominellay]

Verdicts

At the end of the investigative process, the committee may submit to the bishop(s) one of the following verdicts or conjectural judgements: constat de supernaturalitate (the event shows all the signs of being an authentic or a truly miraculous intervention from heaven); constat de non supernaturalitate (the alleged apparition is clearly not miraculous or there are not sufficient signs manifesting it to be so); non constat de supernaturalitate (it is not evident whether or not the alleged apparition is authentic). The latter is not a negative pronouncement. It might be a real apparition, it might not be. That’s, in essance, what the Church is saying. They are saying that there is not enough evidence is decide one way or the other.

That’s not what the Latin says, nor what the logic says…

 

[ac_claire]

ac claire;5291104:

In every single case of approved private revelation/apparitions where this issue has come up, the Blessed Mother has emphasized that obedience to the local Church authorities comes first. Christ did the same in his appearance to St. Faustina.

Maybe that has a lot to do with their approval.

Yeah, of course it does and that’s the point. No authentic messenger from Heaven is going to try to undermind the authority of the Church or try to set it against itself.

You need to trust the Church more than any private revelation. And only trust a private revelation if it’s been authenticated or approved by the Church. You miss that and you’re playing with fire and leaving yourself open to deception and attack.