Medjugorje

  • Thread starter Thread starter hockeyfighter21
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I went there in 1985 with my family for Easter. I think it is shameful for people to try to slander the visionaries and spread stories. Many people have developed a stronger devotion to Mary as a result of what is going on there. This is good.
 
Well the latest news from the Bishop there is that the following is now completely forbidden:
  • NO more retreats, spiritual exercises, conferences, foreign priests… without permission of the bishop
  • NO own or foreign priests may propagate NON-recognized ‘messages’ or ‘apparitions’
  • EVERY priest must show his ‘celebret’ before H.Mass
  • NO more H.Sacrament or adoration in ‘Oasis of Peace’; even NO permission to reside in whole diocese [not sure what that last part means]
  • NO services in the private church in Bijakovice; it is now closed.
  • NO mentioning of ‘seers’, apparitions, messages’ in parish bulletin;
  • NO mentioning of the word ‘sanctuary’ in Medjugorje
  • NO mentioning or comment of ‘messages’ or ‘apparitions’ on the 25th of the month via Marija Pavlovic
  • NO private ‘apparitions’ of Mirjana Dragicevic in ‘Cenacolo’ of Sr. Elvira
  • NO permission for ‘Kraljica Mira’(founder : Tomislav Vlasic) in Medjugorje or in whole diocese
  • NO ‘seers’ or others in the church to pray prayers from the ‘apparitions’
  • NO intentions during the rosary concerning ‘apparitions’ or ‘messages’
  • NO ‘seers’ in or around the church on anniversaries of ‘apparitions’ or ‘messages
I think this comes as pretty much the closest thing to an outright denunciation seen so far. wdtprs.com/blog/2009/09/medjugorje-news/
 
I have attended a TLM back in the indult days, but am not a regular. I have some beefs with the NO, but don’t believe them fatal.

The simple fact is that the bishop with DIRECT jurisdiction over Medjugore has done everything in his power to convey his judgement that the visions are NOT authentic. Rome has repeatedly refused to over-rule his judgement or step in and take over jurisdiction. I have seen nothing to indicate that this local bishop is anything less than a faithful shepherd. Obedience would seem to require that catholics stop coming.

I’ve also been to a Medjugore devotee conference back when I hadn’t made up my mind on the matter where one of the alleged seers spoke and had his daily vision. I found it quite distasteful the way they arranged the basket passing right after the alleged vision. It pretty closely conformed to every religious fraud stereotype I’m familiar with.

It also helps to know the history of the tensions between the Franciscans and the local bishop in the region as well as the history of abuses and scandal in the Franciscan Order in Yugoslavia (dating back to WWII). As usual, homework helps.
 
I read something clever about this, once:

Any miracles or graces which bear lasting, positive fruit resulting from pilgrimages to Medj. are the work of the Church in action: Catholics coming to pray together and being blessed by God.

The high-jinks at Medj, on the other hand, are in stark contrast to Fatima or Lourdes. If it was a pagan phenomenon you’d say it was a cult or a sham; a heavenly being appearing on demand to a ‘seer’ and saying something banal.
**
Actually, it reminds me of spiritualism; ‘spirits’ giving boring messages to people craving phenomena, resulting in a nice little earner for the guru.**

Also, it should be tested and probably has been, by the authorities: Has the ‘B.V.M’ predicted anything which subsequently came to pass or more importantly, which has not come to pass? Simple!

'Course, if you were really crafty, you wouldn’t make any predictions. That’s caught out more than one ‘guru’.
 
I followed it for a mounth or so becuase I know people who are really into, but after looking at it long enough, I don’t buy it…

There is just too much strangeness involved in it… if it is ever disproved by the Church, then I fear that some Catholics will stick with it and fall astray… I would hope that that would not happen… but if it is ever found to be true, I’ll look into it some more…

There is just too much vagueness in it and whatnot.
 
I’m not trying to hijack this thread, but I do have a few quick questions for anyone who may be knowledgeable.

The Vatican will make a decision on the authenticity of the apparition after the “action” stops, correct?

Has the Vatican been investigating since it began or is everything put on hold until afterword?

I just find it strange that this has gone on for so long. Is there an objective source where I can read some of the things Mary has supposedly said? My grandmother gets some sort of medjugorje magazine and I think they publish different “messages” in it. However, the few times I read through it, I didn’t really see anything that I though was worth saying. Does anyone else think it seems that Mary is just running her mouth? That wasn’t meant to offend anyone- I wouldn’t trash talk our Blessed Mother, I’m just skeptical I guess…
 
kib said:
I’m not trying to hijack this thread, but I do have a few quick questions for anyone who may be knowledgeable.

The Vatican will make a decision on the authenticity of the apparition after the “action” stops, correct?

Has the Vatican been investigating since it began or is everything put on hold until afterword?

I just find it strange that this has gone on for so long. Is there an objective source where I can read some of the things Mary has supposedly said? My grandmother gets some sort of medjugorje magazine and I think they publish different “messages” in it. However, the few times I read through it, I didn’t really see anything that I though was worth saying. Does anyone else think it seems that Mary is just running her mouth? That wasn’t meant to offend anyone- I wouldn’t trash talk our Blessed Mother, I’m just skeptical I guess…
Click to expand...
I know I read somewhere that it’s actually not a point of fact that the Church only rules on apparitions after the apparitions have ceased. It’s an oft-repeated rule, but apparently it doesn’t appear in any official church documentation. It might make a fun project to try and dig up where (if anywhere) the Church ever stated such a criteria.

Anyway, no I don’t think you’re being disrespectful at all in your statements. It’s a fact, the “messages” from the apparition have been almost identical for years now, month after month. Fatima and Lourdes, when Our Lady had something to say it was something that was recorded by the seers and it was meaningful.
 
This is a very interesting interesting website: Medjugorje without mask Read the English pages
 
wraithx said:
Well the latest news from the Bishop there is that the following is now completely forbidden:
  • NO more retreats, spiritual exercises, conferences, foreign priests… without permission of the bishop
  • NO own or foreign priests may propagate NON-recognized ‘messages’ or ‘apparitions’
  • EVERY priest must show his ‘celebret’ before H.Mass
  • NO more H.Sacrament or adoration in ‘Oasis of Peace’; even NO permission to reside in whole diocese [not sure what that last part means]
  • NO services in the private church in Bijakovice; it is now closed.
  • NO mentioning of ‘seers’, apparitions, messages’ in parish bulletin;
  • NO mentioning of the word ‘sanctuary’ in Medjugorje
  • NO mentioning or comment of ‘messages’ or ‘apparitions’ on the 25th of the month via Marija Pavlovic
  • NO private ‘apparitions’ of Mirjana Dragicevic in ‘Cenacolo’ of Sr. Elvira
  • NO permission for ‘Kraljica Mira’(founder : Tomislav Vlasic) in Medjugorje or in whole diocese
  • NO ‘seers’ or others in the church to pray prayers from the ‘apparitions’
  • NO intentions during the rosary concerning ‘apparitions’ or ‘messages’
  • NO ‘seers’ in or around the church on anniversaries of ‘apparitions’ or ‘messages
I think this comes as pretty much the closest thing to an outright denunciation seen so far. wdtprs.com/blog/2009/09/medjugorje-news/
Click to expand...
This is very good. The bishop must distance the apparition from the particular church.

And we will soon if Medjugorje passes this test of obedience to the Church.

As St. Cyprian said: “It must be understood that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop and he is not in the Church who is not with the bishop.”
 
ac_claire said:
I know I read somewhere that it’s actually not a point of fact that the Church only rules on apparitions after the apparitions have ceased. It’s an oft-repeated rule, but apparently it doesn’t appear in any official church documentation. It might make a fun project to try and dig up where (if anywhere) the Church ever stated such a criteria.

Anyway, no I don’t think you’re being disrespectful at all in your statements. It’s a fact, the “messages” from the apparition have been almost identical for years now, month after month. Fatima and Lourdes, when Our Lady had something to say it was something that was recorded by the seers and it was meaningful.
Click to expand...
I haven’t seen such a rule either. However, it was not the case of Betania it was approved before it ended. The seer was not.
 
kib said:
I’m not trying to hijack this thread, but I do have a few quick questions for anyone who may be knowledgeable.

The Vatican will make a decision on the authenticity of the apparition after the “action” stops, correct?

Has the Vatican been investigating since it began or is everything put on hold until afterword?
Click to expand...
While we wait for Rome to give a final decision, we should probably stick with the local bishop on the issue. On the other hand, how will Rome make a decision, when the visions end isn’t the world supposed to end? 😃
 
GeorgeSword said:
While we wait for Rome to give a final decision, we should probably stick with the local bishop on the issue. On the other hand, how will Rome make a decision, when the visions end isn’t the world supposed to end? 😃
Click to expand...
Rome does not always give a “final decision” as the authority resides with the local bishop who, as pointed out, is the Church.

If the local bishop rules, then it is not proper to say, “we will wait for Rome” becuase Rome may never reply. Until Rome says something, if it ever does, one must be obeident to the local bishop whose jurisdiction the apparition occurs in as he is the authority.
 
This is really interesting. Does anyone know of a reliable web resource to read up on how the church handles supposed apparitions? Is there any info in the catechism?
 
After reading those for and against it, I have to comment. I myself do not believe because I’m going by the local Bishop and my own feelings of discernment, since the Vatican has not yet commented and I am free to do so.

However, since the decision is neither one way or the other, I have to caution everyone here:

To those of you that 100% believe this - you must also take into account it may not be true. Satan can do many great works and even produce good fruits from those works only to decieve in the end. He does this to gain our trust in something that appears holy but is not. And he does not care how much times goes by in the process. To me, the mere fact that many have been at times violently divided regarding this apparition and refuse to hear the other’s side is proof enough - for now - that I should not believe it. I’ve heard people on Catholic radio shows absolutely close their minds to the fact that this may not be true - to the extent that they were so angry that I could not believe an apparition would make someone so volatile.

To those of you who do not believe it: likewise, since there is no decision one way or the other, there is always the possibility that in the end it may be approved, and if so, we’ll have to defend our sometimes hostile view to those that do believe. And we’ll also have to accept the final decision whether we believe it or not, as only the Church has the power to loose and bind. We have to be faithful to the Church ultimately following the Truth as Jesus promised. So if in the end the Pope throws us a curveball and ultimately decides it’s authentic, we need to either accept with dignity or apologize, depending on how we treated those who felt differently. (The last part of the sentence goes for both sides whichever way it ends.)

To everyone: just bear with the Church on this. Listen to the Bishop and quietly discern for yourself. Hold no hostility to others, even if they seem to you outright liars. You’re only human and you could be wrong.

Remember, I don’t believe this. However, if the Pope in the end declares it a valid apparition, who am I do disagree? I’m only human as well.

God Bless,
Snert
 
Snerticus said:
To everyone: just bear with the Church on this. Listen to the Bishop and quietly discern for yourself. Hold no hostility to others, even if they seem to you outright liars. You’re only human and you could be wrong.

Remember, I don’t believe this. However, if the Pope in the end declares it a valid apparition, who am I do disagree? I’m only human as well.

God Bless,
Snert
Click to expand...
Why that’s downright Un-American of you!

And I mean that in the best possible sense! 👍
 
even if the pope declares any private revelation worthy of belief, it is not required that individual catholics believe it. catholics are not even bound to believe in fatima if they do not wish. one does not need to apologize if they dont believe that medjugorje were true after it receives approval because it is a private revelation. there may be a misconception that we must believe in private revelations (fatima, lourdes, guadalupe). the catholic church teaches that PUBLIC revelation ended with the death of the last apostle. more information on this can be found in the “ask an apologist” forum. i personally dont need any private revelations to follow catholic church teaching. i will say that medjugorje does not seem to fall in line with the other appartions and it most likely will never be approved, especially in light of controversies surrounding it as well as the local bishop in charge of the medjugorje area.
 
hockeyfighter21 said:
even if the pope declares any private revelation worthy of belief, it is not required that individual catholics believe it. catholics are not even bound to believe in fatima if they do not wish. one does not need to apologize if they dont believe that medjugorje were true after it receives approval because it is a private revelation. there may be a misconception that we must believe in private revelations (fatima, lourdes, guadalupe). the catholic church teaches that PUBLIC revelation ended with the death of the last apostle. more information on this can be found in the “ask an apologist” forum. i personally dont need any private revelations to follow catholic church teaching. i will say that medjugorje does not seem to fall in line with the other appartions and it most likely will never be approved, especially in light of controversies surrounding it as well as the local bishop in charge of the medjugorje area.
Click to expand...
Thank you for making this point.

Apparitions play no role in my spirituality, I may believe that some did happen but they do not affect my spiritual life in any way.

These are extra and not required to be believed in.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top