Medjugorje - A True Confession

[FCEGM]

Diane, I want to thank you and the others who participate in this thread for presenting the truth in such a charitable manner. As with most participating here, I’ve seen friends become intensely involved with Medujugorje; while I’ve usually held my peace, I see now that this can no longer be the case and I ask for your prayers that I will be able to help them recognize that the beauty of their Catholic Faith cannot be supported by adherence to falsity.

A priest in California (if I mentioned his name you would recognize it - I believe he is not longer living in CA) who was/is very involved in Medujugorge was heard to say that when it came down to the Church’s decision re Medjugorje or “the Gospa”, they would go with with their experience. That tells you right away that disobedience is at the heart of the “message”.

 

[Kurt_G]

And all you guys said you were breaking for Lent, so I stopped keeping up!

It is good to discuss the necessity of obedience, with regard to Medj., since that appears to be the main point of disagreement among the faithful.

1. It is not possible to really counter the *negative *experiences of those like Diane, who are so close to it. It rings so true…
2. It also is not possible for me to discount the positive experiences of many others, myself included… they also seem true.
3. Therefore, for those who are interested enough to take a positon on Medj., I say go ahead and take one. Also, I think it is a good thing to share through the forum those experiences, as Diane and others are doing.

(It is, though, a one-sided issue for some of us, because we are not allowed, by forum rules, to share some “positive events” which have happened to us and for us.)

1. However, for some among us to insist that the issue is already closed, is simply incorrect. The events are still (to quote the CDF) “in need of further investigation”. This is straight from Holy Mother Church, and this is the basis upon which we claim no disobedience to the Church.
2. Diane gave so much to think about, with regard to a renegade undercurrent to the phenomenon, I discussed that with most of my Medj. friends. We all agreed: When the Church gives something more definite than has been given, or when the Church even says private pilgrimages are no longer allowed, we will travel a Lourdes/Fatima route, and leave out the Lourdes/Fatima/Medjugorje trips.

In other words, when the Church condemns the apparitions at Medjugorje, we will obey Holy Mother Church, because that is always the safest thing to do.

In the mean time, we understand that we are viewed by some as disobedient, but we still do not feel that way…

GOD BLESS US ALL!

 

[Teakafrog]

Just wanted to echo that this thread has been very informative, and I am glad it stayed within forum guidelines and was left open.
My experience with Medjugore is limited, I am a convert, and while I was researching the Church of course I found Medjugore info. At first I thought, wow, a contemporary apparition, maybe I can go there. But after more research and prayerful discernment, when I DID have an opportunity to go with a local group, I decided not to. I too feel it is not authentic. Fatima and Lourdes are totally different in spirit than this, and again, the only thing that really matters: OBEDIENCE. That is WHY I became Catholic, discovering that there IS a visible successor of Christ on earth, the Church. And since so far the Church, through her duly appointed Bishop has said it is not supernatural, I comply readily and joyfully. It is pretty much off my radar screen now. I concentrate on our Lord and Our Lady herself, who I can talk to any time I want without need of a ‘seer’. May Jesus return quickly!

 

[thistle]

Kurt G.:

And all you guys said you were breaking for Lent, so I stopped keeping up!

It is good to discuss the necessity of obedience, with regard to Medj., since that appears to be the main point of disagreement among the faithful.

1. It is not possible to really counter the *negative *experiences of those like Diane, who are so close to it. It rings so true…
2. It also is not possible for me to discount the positive experiences of many others, myself included… they also seem true.
3. Therefore, for those who are interested enough to take a positon on Medj., I say go ahead and take one. Also, I think it is a good thing to share through the forum those experiences, as Diane and others are doing.

(It is, though, a one-sided issue for some of us, because we are not allowed, by forum rules, to share some “positive events” which have happened to us and for us.)

1. However, for some among us to insist that the issue is already closed, is simply incorrect. The events are still (to quote the CDF) “in need of further investigation”. This is straight from Holy Mother Church, and this is the basis upon which we claim no disobedience to the Church.
2. Diane gave so much to think about, with regard to a renegade undercurrent to the phenomenon, I discussed that with most of my Medj. friends. We all agreed: **When the Church gives something more definite than has been given, or when the Church even says private pilgrimages are no longer allowed, we will travel a Lourdes/Fatima route, and leave out the Lourdes/Fatima/Medjugorje trips.

In other words, when the Church condemns the apparitions at Medjugorje, we will obey Holy Mother Church, because that is always the safest thing to do. **
In the mean time, we understand that we are viewed by some as disobedient, but we still do not feel that way…

GOD BLESS US ALL!

I’m not quite sure what you mean. Three Bishops Commissions have officially declared nothing supernatural is taking place in Medjugorie. How much more official and definite does it have to be? Rome is not involved and does not have to be involved as the apparitions have been declared false at local level. Official pilgimages are banned.
The Church will not ban any individual making a private trip anywhere. We are allowed to take holidays wherever we want, even to Medjugorie.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

I would pose some questions to those not on self-imposed penance of abstaining from the forums during lent (the rest can catch up when they get back), but first something to read in the historical archives of Medjugorje.

Way back on March 25, 1985, Bishop Zanic the former Ordinary of Mostar said the following in a letter to Fr. Tomislav Pervan, pastor of St. James Parish at the time:In the meantime, matters remain as they were, and a great disgrace is expected to befall the Church. Now, without any delay, after all this, I demand from you that you remove the “visionaries” from public display and put an end to their “visions” in the parish church. They have had “visions” in Mostar, and earlier in Sarajevo, Visoko and Dubrovnik. Let them now have them at their homes: people say that they had them at their homes during 1981.

In the same letter is this directive:In ten days the new statue of the Gospa in front of the main altar ought to be discreetly removed late one evening and replaced by the old one. You must stop talking about apparitions and also cease publicizing messages. The devotions that grew out of the “apparitions” and their messages must be eliminated, sales of souvenirs and printed material which propagate the “apparitions” must also stop. The faithful can go to the sacrament of reconciliation and attend Mass. I do not allow the other priests, especially Fathers Jozo Zovko, Tomislav Vlasic and Ljudevit Rupcic, to celebrate Mass for the faithful or to preach.

Questions to ponder (sorry about the spacing but the software does not seem to have a provision to add space after each entry).

1. 
   *]Did Bishop Zanic ever “lift” these directives?
   *]Did Bishop Peric, the successor of Bishop Zanic ever lift these directives?
   *]When the Franciscan priests moved the children to the Rectory, thus getting around the Bishops words to no longer have visions in the Church, was it respectful of the Bishop’s intent, or using a technical loophole because he did not specifically bar visions in the rectory? Would it have been respectful of the Bishop’s intent if they had gone to the roof of the Church, also not mentioned by the Bishop?
   *]Has either Bishop Zanic or Peric ever given permission for the “seers” to travel the world, having visions on demand any place, any time (assuming the above directive is still in effect, which I believe it has been all along)?
   *]When the Holy See says we may not travel to Medjugorje in systematic pilgrimages, organized by a parish or diocese, but may make private visits, what should we think when parishes or dioceses bring Medjugorje to the “pilgrims” where large crowds gather, and are often “graced” with a “seer” having “visions”…on demand.
   *]Is it following the Bishop’s intent to simply carry the “visions” from their home, where Bishop said they should have them, or is this deceitful behavior?
   *]Has Fr. Jozo Zovko been given permission to publicly preach concerning Medjugorje since this directive?
   
   Questions aimed at people following Medjugorje:
   
   1. 
      *]Has either Bishop Zanic or Bishop Peric ever lifted the directive to not promote Medjugorje messages?
      *]If this directive has not been lifted, how then, are the messages getting out, if not in disobedience to the local Ordinary of Mostar? Only the “seers” can convey the “messages” since no one else can hear them.
      *]If t his directive has not been lifted, how virtuous are Catholics who sell souveniers and other propoganda, or promote messages which are not suppose to be released in the first place?
      
      If all fruits should be counted, not just good fruits, should we not consider these things, as well?
      
      I have a deep respect for the position Catholic.com takes on anyone promoting messages or other propoganda concerning Medjugorje. It is respectful of the Bishop’s original intent, along with following the general guideline of not permitting promotion of unapproved private revelations.

 

[Kurt_G]

thistle:

… Three Bishops Commissions have officially declared nothing supernatural is taking place in Medjugorie. How much more official and definite does it have to be? Rome is not involved and does not have to be involved as the apparitions have been declared false at local level. Official pilgimages are banned…

Hello, thistle… I took the liberty to highlight a portion of your message to address in particular.

1. I would suggest that Rome most certainly is involved, as the commissions you mentioned all seem to submit to the CDF their findings. Why were there a “series” of commissions in the first place, thistle? I find it hard to believe the CDF did not suggest them. (But that could be assumption on my part.)
2. The commissions (to date) have never declared that “nothing supernatural is taking place.” (I suspect Diane and others here know this subtle difference, but I don’t expect you guys to help me make this case, because we are at the moment in disagreement.)
   Actually what was declared was more like “we cannot at this time determine that these events are supernatural.”
   Someone please challenge this, as I am open to being wrong on it, OK?
3. The more recent declarations involving Medj. have come from Rome, so they obviously are involved. Most recently, the 1998 letter which states these events are “still in need of further investigation”. So, if someone believes there is no need for further investigation, then he is in disagreement with the Church.

This is why we believe we are not being disobedient. This is why we believe the multitude of priests and bishops from around the world who go to Medj. are not being disobedient.
This is why we believe the bishop next door in Split was not being disobedient with his many trips there, for example.

Diane’s research is pretty solid, to me. I wouldn’t even attempt to challenge it. All I am suggesting is that the issue is certainly not officially settled by the Church.
Is Medj. in the ICU with regard to status? Maybe… but Medj. is not dead yet. That’s all I am trying to say.

GOD BLESS US ALL!

 

[maryj]

so someone take a stab at this please…what do you think I should do with medj. memorabilia I have in my home that was brought to me by my aunt? Keep, get rid of them? Oh the statues are so beautiful!!!

 

[setter]

maryj:

so someone take a stab at this please…what do you think I should do with medj. memorabilia I have in my home that was brought to me by my aunt? Keep, get rid of them? Oh the statues are so beautiful!!!

You can in all good conscience keep them around to enjoy and spiritually edify until the Church makes a definitive ruling on the authenticity of these alleged spiritual phenomenon. The Church has not yet made a final definitive ruling (despite what some have contended) and if they do (which likely they will because of the international scope of these alleged apparitions) this will not occur will not until such phenomemon has ceased.

 

[setter]

FCEGM:

Diane, I want to thank you and the others who participate in this thread for presenting the truth in such a charitable manner. As with most participating here, I’ve seen friends become intensely involved with Medujugorje; while I’ve usually held my peace, I see now that this can no longer be the case and I ask for your prayers that I will be able to help them recognize that the beauty of their Catholic Faith cannot be supported by adherence to falsity.

A priest in California (if I mentioned his name you would recognize it - I believe he is not longer living in CA) who was/is very involved in Medujugorge was heard to say that when it came down to the Church’s decision re Medjugorje or “the Gospa”, they would go with with their experience. That tells you right away that disobedience is at the heart of the "message".

First off, I will state that I am neither pro or con regarding the alleged apparitions at Medjugorje. But I do have to interject when the above poster makes such a blatantly erroneous extrapolation that based on one person’s expressed intent to pledge sentimental allegiance above submission and obedience to Church authority, as thereby direct evidence that ‘disobedience is at the heart of the “message”’, is ridiculous. As the poster has indicated, her own personal bias has usurped reason and logic.

 

[Tominellay]

For any investigation of the supernatural origin of an event, the burden of proof rests on the event: the Church doesn’t presume an alleged apparition to be of supernatural origin. A judgement of non constat means that the supernatural origin of a phenomenon is not proved. The Declaration of Zadar says “…it cannot be affirmed …” The words affirm and determine are not equivalents. On investigation, these apparitions were not proved to be of supernatural origin, and it cannot be maintained to be true that the apparitions are of supernatural origin.

 

[Kurt_G]

Tominellay:

For any investigation of the supernatural origin of an event, the burden of proof rests on the event: the Church doesn’t presume an alleged apparition to be of supernatural origin. A judgement of non constat means that the supernatural origin of a phenomenon is not proved. The Declaration of Zadar says “…it cannot be affirmed …” The words affirm and determine are not equivalents. On investigation, these apparitions were not proved to be of supernatural origin, and it cannot be maintained to be true that the apparitions are of supernatural origin.

Tom, thanks for these comments, which I also believe to be a correct interpretation. (In other words, I think you are right!)

I guess I’m hangin’ around here only to insist that the Church’s position on Medj. is that the events are worthy of continued investigations. If someone disagrees with that statement, don’t take it up with us Medj. supporters, take it up with the CDF. That’s all I was trying to say…

God Bless Us All!

 

[FCEGM]

setter:

. . .But I do have to interject when the above poster makes such a blatantly erroneous extrapolation that based on one person’s expressed intent to pledge sentimental allegiance above submission and obedience to Church authority, as thereby direct evidence that ‘disobedience is at the heart of the “message”’, is ridiculous. . .

Not when his remarks were met with thunderous applause by a packed-house of aficionados.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Hello all

Can we all go back to my post, #223? For some reason, I feel that my questions are being ignored, yet they are pivotal questions.

Just a general reminder…the mods have been generous in keeping this thread open and it is fully dependent on everyone keeping a civil tone. Thanks so much for keeping this in mind.

 

[Kurt_G]

Lux_et_veritas:

Hello all

Can we all go back to my post, #223? For some reason, I feel that my questions are being ignored, yet they are pivotal questions.

Just a general reminder…the mods have been generous in keeping this thread open and it is fully dependent on everyone keeping a civil tone. Thanks so much for keeping this in mind.

Diane, at least I addressed them! I mentioned that your post was pretty solid, and I for one, could not begin to challenge it…

I would only mention (and keep mentioning if need be) that the whole phenomenon, as far as the Church is concerned, is still open to investigation.

Those who insist to call us disobedient, and who insist that the Church has closed the case, might look a little closer at the true facts.
(But you present a very commendable case for your position, I must say! The reasons I disagree with you are very personal and private, not because I discount any of your evidence.)
Do you really think the “mods” are watching this thread?

GOD BLESS US ALL!

 

[Catherine_Grant]

Kurt G.:

Do you really think the “mods” are watching this thread?

 

[Tominellay]

Hi, Catherine!!!

Lux,
Of course, your questions in #223 are certainly pivotal…my answers are the same as yours!

Kurt G.,
You mentioned in an earlier post that Medjugorje may be in ICU…I think you can see that its supporters are in a precarious situation. In an earlier-than-that post you mentioned a Medjugorje “without apparitions” (Feb. 22), in a scenario in which the Church would not address the apparitions (further).

On the cbismo web site for the Mostar Diocese, one can find news and updates from the diocese concerning Medjugorje. These past few months there were articles regarding pastoral assignments in the diocese, the non-publication of the promised biographies of Mary by the visionaries, Bishop Peric’s talk in Maynooth, etc…In the meantime, CDF has been quiet, and is allowing the non constat judgement to stand.

We’re approaching the 20th anniversary of the Mostar Diocese’s negative judgement, and the 15th anniversary of the Bishops Conference’s negative judgement…As Diane has noted, no directives have changed, either.

 

[maryj]

[/quote]

TOO Funny!!!

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Kurt G.:

Diane, at least I addressed them! I mentioned that your post was pretty solid, and I for one, could not begin to challenge it…

I would only mention (and keep mentioning if need be) that the whole phenomenon, as far as the Church is concerned, is still open to investigation.

** Those who insist to call us disobedient, and who insist that the Church has closed the case, might look a little closer at the true facts.

**(But you present a very commendable case for your position, I must say! The reasons I disagree with you are very personal and private, not because I discount any of your evidence.)
Do you really think the “mods” are watching this thread?

GOD BLESS US ALL!

Hi Kurt,

If the Bishop ordered the messages to not be published, then how do you get them, if not through an act of disobedience to the local Bishop on the part of “seers”?

If the Bishop ordered that the publication of materials supporting the apparitions cease, then how is it not an act of disobedience on the part of any person who, fully knowledgeable about the order, continues to write books, magazines and produce websites which publish messages (which are not suppose to be released) as authentic, with no disclaimers whatsoever?

Innocent Catholics, since March 25, 1985, have continued to be drawn in to Medjugorje through a litany of disobedient acts on the part of the “seers” and on the part of those closest to them, who had the ability to discourage the publications and material which was ordered to be ceased (most notably the Franciscan priests who take a vow of obedience, which is not some kind of symbolic gesture, but truly something they will be judged by He who cannot be fooled).

** What must the Blessed Mother, the absolute model of obedience, humility, and charity, think of these kinds of acts done in the name of the Queen of Peace? Does it take humility or pride to say, “I’m going to keep publishing messages in spite of the Bishop’s orders”? It is clearly disobedient so lets move to charity. Are they showing charity toward’s their bishop through their disobedient acts? The grace of God will not lead one into prideful acts. Only the self and the devil can do that. God’s grace is purely visible when one makes an act of humility, and an act of charity, and an act of obedience. That is a measure of true grace. It is why it ranks high on the list for critiera concerning discernment of apparitions.**

This is no light matter. And “seers” parading around the United States, invited and sponsored by parishes, using parish property only leads more innocent Catholics, who know nothing of these directives, into participating in activities that have no business taking place, especially on Church property because it gives credibility to the claims of the “seers”, making it appear as if it is sanctioned by the Catholic Church. This is highly deceptive on the part of organizers who are fully aware of those 1985 directives. Deception is not evidence of God’s grace in the activity. Once again, only the self and the devil are capable of this.

Truth is not even buried in the websites of supporters who promote the messages, pilgrimages, and other things ordered to be halted. It is plainly absent. This too is a fruit. One would never know that the pilgrimages being arranged are not suppose to give authentication to the events, especially when the publish messages as if they were authentic - messages that are not even suppose to be published.

Anyone reading this thread, no longer has the luxury of being uninformed about the directives laid out by the local Bishops of Mostar-Duvno in March of 1985. How can anyone who knows of this, continue to view those messages and buy that stuff and go to these parishes that sponsor “seers” knowing of these directives? And, if anyone wishes to hide behind the notion that since nothing is published to answer my questions in post 223, then you may want to consider the obligation we all have to inform our consciences and write to Bishop Peric to find out the latest status. Pose those questions to him directly and ask with humility in the spirit of truth. If you find the answers and can still reconcile reading those messages, then you have made an informed decision to blow off the man whose job it is to discern authenticity of the apparitions. His email address is available on his website. Since I must sign off someone else can provide that web address again.

 

[setter]

puzzleannie:

People who travel there in good faith, with good intentions and with no idea of working against church authority may certainly have worthwhile spiritual experiences, due to their own faith and piety, but that does not validate the visions or the visionaries.

I find it interesting that according to this faithful Roman Catholic theologian, “The ‘sensus fidelium,’ i.e. the mind of the faithful, has clearly given approval to this apparition.”:

Claims of Private Revelation: True or False?
An Evaluation of the messages and apparitions at Medjugorje

1. Approved by the ‘sensus fidelium’ (mind of the faithful)

The claims of private revelation to the visionaries of Medjugorje is different from many of the other claims. These apparitions have continued for many years. Very many dioceses and parishes have sent pilgrims to Medjugorje. Very many Bishops and Priests support and approve of these pilgrimages. The ‘sensus fidelium,’ i.e. the mind of the faithful, has clearly given approval to this apparition.

“Throughout the ages, there have been so-called ‘private’ revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.” (CCC, n. 67)

The number of faithful Catholics who have visited Medjugorje, and left convinced that the Virgin Mary truly has appeared there is perhaps in the millions. No other apparition of the Virgin Mary in the history of the Church has been so thoroughly approved by the ‘sensus fidelium.’

Summary

Despite the opposition of a relatively small number of Catholics, and of the local Bishop, the apparitions and messages of Medjugorje have been widely accepted by the faithful. In my humble and pious opinion as a faithful Roman Catholic theologian, the claims of private revelation to the visionaries of Medjugorje are reliable and trustworthy.

by Ronald L. Conte Jr.
Oct. 7, 2005

catholicplanet.com/apparitions/true08.htm

 

[setter]

Lux_et_veritas:

Anyone reading this thread, no longer has the luxury of being uninformed about the directives laid out by the local Bishops of Mostar-Duvno in March of 1985.

By way of counterpoint, I find it interesting that this faithful Roman Catholic theologian concludes “The opposition of the local Bishop is not definitive.”:

Claims of Private Revelation: True or False?
An Evaluation of the messages and apparitions at Medjugorje

In my humble and pious opinion as a faithful Roman Catholic theologian, the claim that the messages and apparitions to the six visionaries of Medjugorje are private revelation is trustworthy and reliable. A list of reasons and examples follows.

1. The opposition of the local Bishop is not definitive.

The approval or disapproval of the local Bishop, concerning a claim to private revelation, is not infallible. In fact, even the Holy See does not and cannot rule infallibly on claims of private revelation. Nor has the Holy See ruled against Medjugorje using the fallible temporal authority of the Church.

Take, for example, the false claim of private revelation to Ida Peerdeman of Amsterdam. A number of Bishops in succession gave their disapproval. But another Bishop, more recently gave approval (even though this claim of private revelation is clearly false). One can see from this example that Bishops can be mistaken when evaluating private revelation.

Furthermore, the position of one local Bishop is not binding on all of the faithful worldwide. Pope John Paul II permitted and even encouraged pilgrimages to Medjugorje (see #4 above). Most dioceses in the world, and very many Bishops and parish priests, permit and encourage such pilgrimages. Many Bishops and priests have themselves visited Medjugorje.

Summary

Despite the opposition of a relatively small number of Catholics, and of the local Bishop, the apparitions and messages of Medjugorje have been widely accepted by the faithful. In my humble and pious opinion as a faithful Roman Catholic theologian, the claims of private revelation to the visionaries of Medjugorje are reliable and trustworthy.

by Ronald L. Conte Jr.
Oct. 7, 2005

catholicplanet.com/apparitions/true08.htm