Vatican delegate: Every indication Medjugorje will be recognized, perhaps later this year

[DignumEtJustum]

It’s my understanding that some of what has been suggested at Medjugorje has gone against the teachings and beliefs of the Church (I haven’t followed it enough to know specifically what). How this can all of a sudden be reconciled with the Church is beyond me. I’m not buying it until something more substantial is announced, and even then we don’t need to believe in Medjugorje anymore than we need to believe in any of the other approved apparitions. On top of that, “CRUX” has never been a news source I’ve come to much trust. It was previously owned by the secular Boston Globe and while it is now “owned” (despite claiming to be independent) by the Knights of Columbus, it is still as far as I know essentially the exact same publication.

 

[Joe_5859]

Either way, I trust the Church.

ICXC NIKA

I’ve been seeing news reports for years saying that the decision on Medjugorje could be coming any time now. I’ll believe it when I see it. And when I see it, I’ll accept it.

 

[1Lord1Faith]

The pastoral care team was there to look at the pastoral care needed .

The pastoral care team were not there investigating the claims.

Two very seperate issues of two very seperate offices of the Vatican.

We must be accurate. We must seek accuracy in what we read , esp where this place is concerned. A pastoral care team doesn’t make decisions or announce pending decisions on apparition claims.

But the papal envoy can apparently contribute to the study before the decision is made. I don’t think the gap between this papal envoy and the determination of the alleged apparitions is as wide as you think.

The mission entrusted to Hoser was not to determine the veracity of the alleged apparitions, and he has said it has a “supplementary character” to the study made by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which was led by Italian Cardinal Camillo Ruini.

…

“My mission was not to make a judgement on Medjugorje, but to evaluate whether the pastoral ministry was proper and consistent with the doctrine and teaching of the Church; and effective and well organized. I concluded that this is the case,” the archbishop said.

…

Koser said there were still “canonical-administrative” problems at the site - especially with relations with the local bishop - “but in my opinion, they are solvable.”

The archbishop said the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has provided all the documentation surrounding the alleged apparitions to the Secretariat of State, who are now working on it.

 

[ProdigalSun]

I found this part of the Crux article very interesting.
*
“Specifically, I think it’s possible to recognize the authenticity of the first [seven] apparitions as proposed by the Ruini commission,” Hoser said. “Besides, it is difficult to get another verdict, because it’s difficult to believe that six seers will lie for 36 years. What they say has been consistent. They are not mentally incompetent. A strong argument for the authenticity of the apparitions is their faithfulness to the doctrine of the Church.”

He said if the apparitions are recognized, it will be a “huge stimulus” for Medjugorje.

“In any event, this movement will not stop and should not be stopped, because of the good fruit that grows out of it,” Hoser said. “It is one of the most alive places of prayer and conversion in Europe - and has a healthy spirituality.”*

 

[Joe_5859]

I found this part of the Crux article very interesting.
*
“Specifically, I think it’s possible to recognize the authenticity of the first [seven] apparitions as proposed by the Ruini commission,” Hoser said. “Besides, it is difficult to get another verdict, because it’s difficult to believe that six seers will lie for 36 years. What they say has been consistent. They are not mentally incompetent. A strong argument for the authenticity of the apparitions is their faithfulness to the doctrine of the Church.”

He said if the apparitions are recognized, it will be a “huge stimulus” for Medjugorje.

“In any event, this movement will not stop and should not be stopped, because of the good fruit that grows out of it,” Hoser said. “It is one of the most alive places of prayer and conversion in Europe - and has a healthy spirituality.”*

Pope Francis had previously alluded to a distinction between the first 7 apparitions and the thousands that came after. I admit, that was a possibility I had never considered: looking separately at two distinct phases and potentially rendering a different judgment on each. That’s just part of the reason I’m glad it’s not up to me.

 

[ProdigalSun]

Pope Francis had previously alluded to a distinction between the first 7 apparitions and the thousands that came after. I admit, that was a possibility I had never considered: looking separately at two distinct phases and potentially rendering a different judgment on each. That’s just part of the reason I’m glad it’s not up to me.

Yes it is certainly an interesting comment by Hoser. I have a feeling that many CAF members will be surprised/dismayed by how this medjugorje issue is concluded.

Let us all pray that truth and justice prevail and that the will of God is fulfilled.

 

[GEddie]

Yes it is certainly an interesting comment by Hoser. I have a feeling that many CAF members will be surprised/dismayed by how this medjugorje issue is concluded.

Let us all pray that truth and justice prevail and that the will of God is fulfilled.

Or, rather, that everybody accepts the will of God.

ICXC NIKA

 

[ProdigalSun]

Or, rather, that everybody accepts the will of God.

ICXC NIKA

Yes, that too! Whatever mey come:thumbsup:

 

[ProdigalSun]

It’s my understanding that some of what has been suggested at Medjugorje has** gone against the teachings and beliefs of the Church** (I haven’t followed it enough to know specifically what). How this can all of a sudden be reconciled with the Church is beyond me. I’m not buying it until something more substantial is announced, and even then we don’t need to believe in Medjugorje anymore than we need to believe in any of the other approved apparitions. On top of that, “CRUX” has never been a news source I’ve come to much trust. It was previously owned by the secular Boston Globe and while it is now “owned” (despite claiming to be independent) by the Knights of Columbus, it is still as far as I know essentially the exact same publication.

Which beliefs of the Church has "medjugorje " gone against? Please explain? I didn’t know that the Crux was owned by KofC, that is interesting!

 

[Roseeurekacross]

But the papal envoy can apparently contribute to the study before the decision is made. I don’t think the gap between this papal envoy and the determination of the alleged apparitions is as wide as you think.

Don Ruggero answered that question very well.

We must dot our I 's and cross our T’s with accuracy and precision. The results of not doing that can be so damaging, publicly.

 

[DignumEtJustum]

Which beliefs of the Church has "medjugorje " gone against? Please explain?

I don’t know off hand but this is why it hasn’t been approved.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

cruxnow.com/global-church/2017/08/19/vatican-delegate-every-indication-medjugorje-will-recognized-perhaps-later-year/

Nope. No way.
Ain’t gonna happen…

 

[otjm]

Archbishop Hoser indicates that CONFESSIONS and PIETY by lay persons are genuine. That is it.

The “phenomenon” has been determined NOT AUTHENTIC for the upteenth time

There are three findings possible in apparitions:

constat de supernaturalitate (“It is evident to be of supernatural origin”)

non constat de supernaturalitate’’ (“It is not evident to be of supernatural origin”)

Some say Constat de non supernaturalitate’’ (“It is evident to be of non-supernatural origin”)

is also an option, however, because ‘‘NC’’ mentions only the first two options, this option is not probable.

NC is Normae Congrigationis, issued in 1978 by the CDF.

I don’t have a dog in the fight. However, it is my recollection that the matter was removed from the diocese years (decades?) ago, and I don’t recall any official decision of the diocese. There certainly was a whole lot of heat, without a whole lot of clarity as to what was going on; most certainly the then bishop got into it with some local priests.

If the matter was removed by the Vatican (again, that is my recollection) then that would presume either there was no official determination, or for reasons known to the Vatican, that decision was not accepted.

And assuming my memory is correct, there has been no official determination that the visions were not authentic - the status being it was still under investigation.

Since it appears that the Vatican considers it is still in charge of the matter and not the original bishop or any subsequent bishop of that diocese, and since their (the Vatican’s) position seems to be that a formal decision has not been made, then perhaps we can all relax and let the Vatican do its work.

And I have absolutely no question whatsoever, that no matter whether it says “Yes” or “No”, someone, and likely a whole bunch of someones, are going to have a nuclear meltdown as this has seemed to be mired in controversy from the get go.

It might help if we all recall that no apparition is a matter of necessity to the Church, and that no one is required to spend one iota of time concerning it if it is approved; and should it not be approved, then we need to concern ourselves with other matters.

 

[Joe_5859]

Which beliefs of the Church has "medjugorje " gone against? Please explain? I didn’t know that the Crux was owned by KofC, that is interesting!

Crux isn’t “owned” by the Knights of Columbus. Their website says: “We’re an independent Catholic news site, operated in partnership with the Knights of Columbus.”

My understanding is that by “partnership”, it means the Knights support them financially while not exercising editorial control over their content. That’s not their only source of income, though. They also sell advertisements on their site. But that wouldn’t be enough to keep them going.

 

[ProdigalSun]

There are three findings possible in apparitions:

constat de supernaturalitate (“It is evident to be of supernatural origin”)

non constat de supernaturalitate’’ (“It is not evident to be of supernatural origin”)

Some say Constat de non supernaturalitate’’ (“It is evident to be of non-supernatural origin”)

is also an option, however, because ‘‘NC’’ mentions only the first two options, this option is not probable.

NC is Normae Congrigationis, issued in 1978 by the CDF.

I don’t have a dog in the fight. However, it is my recollection that the matter was removed from the diocese years (decades?) ago, and I don’t recall any official decision of the diocese. There certainly was a whole lot of heat, without a whole lot of clarity as to what was going on; most certainly the then bishop got into it with some local priests.

If the matter was removed by the Vatican (again, that is my recollection) then that would presume either there was no official determination, or for reasons known to the Vatican, that decision was not accepted.

And assuming my memory is correct, there has been no official determination that the visions were not authentic - the status being it was still under investigation.

Since it appears that the Vatican considers it is still in charge of the matter and not the original bishop or any subsequent bishop of that diocese, and since their (the Vatican’s) position seems to be that a formal decision has not been made, then perhaps we can all relax and let the Vatican do its work.

And I have absolutely no question whatsoever, that no matter whether it says “Yes” or “No”, someone, and likely a whole bunch of someones, are going to have a nuclear meltdown as this has seemed to be mired in controversy from the get go.

It might help if we all recall that no apparition is a matter of necessity to the Church, and that no one is required to spend one iota of time concerning it if it is approved; and should it not be approved, then we need to concern ourselves with other matters.

This is right on the mark otjm, thank you for the clarity!

 

[ProdigalSun]

Crux isn’t “owned” by the Knights of Columbus. Their website says: “We’re an independent Catholic news site, operated in partnership with the Knights of Columbus.”

My understanding is that by “partnership”, it means the Knights support them financially while not exercising editorial control over their content. That’s not their only source of income, though. They also sell advertisements on their site. But that wouldn’t be enough to keep them going.

OK, thank you!

 

[GEddie]

Had Medjugorje been disapproved, the Holy Church would not still.be working on it.

I’m prepared to accept the verdict however it goes. Are all of you who oppose it, prepared to do the same?

ICXC NIKA

 

[ProdigalSun]

I don’t know off hand but this is why it hasn’t been approved.

This is incorrect. It has not been approved for many reasons the biggest of which is that the phenom is still under investigation. Until such time as the next pronouncement comes which the Bishop Hoser believes may come later this year.

I will wait and see, because as someone posted here as rightly said that there has been a decision coming for the last 25 years!

Peace:thumbsup:

 

[ProdigalSun]

Nope. No way.
Ain’t gonna happen…

Are you sure about that? What happens if it is approved? Maybe in degrees or completely. what happens then?

 

[ProdigalSun]

Had Medjugorje been disapproved, the Holy Church would not still.be working on it.

I’m prepared to accept the verdict however it goes. Are all of you who oppose it, prepared to do the same?

ICXC NIKA