For his birthday today, 65-year-old Cardinal Schönborn has given an interview to a friendly local church-news outlet. Kath.net is also friendly to the alleged Medjugorje apparitions, and in fact sells videos of the Cardinal’s recent “pilgrimage” there. In the interview, he confirmed a bit of news from a Petrus article that appeared here on January 12: that Pope Benedict will soon create a new commission to evaluate the controversial site of alleged apparitions.
My translation:
KATH.NET: In the past few days, you visited Pope Benedict XVI. Did you tell him about your positive experiences of Medjugorje? Did he express any opinion about it?
Cardinal Schönborn: It’s not customary to talk about audiences. But I can naturally say this much: that Medjugorje was a topic in Rome during those days, due to the public awareness of my pilgrimage. I reported about my impressions in Rome. And I am very confident that the Commission, which the Holy Father is setting up to examine the events of Medjugorje, is very good and will work very conscious of its responsibility, and that the result will certainly be good. And I am confident that it will proceed with great prudence and great sensitivity to a phenomenon that has attracted about 30 million pilgrims and brings very many good fruits, but certainly also some open questions.
As a skeptic about the phenomenon, I didn’t appreciate his recent highly publicized visit there, but I am glad to see the Cardinal acknowledge that there are some, ahem, questions to be examined.
It seems that the Cardinal inadvertently forced the pope’s hand in this by causing public scandal (simply put, a bishop or cardinal does NOT do what he did). What I’m afraid of is that a negative or no judgment would cause people to attack our Holy Father.
Although kath.net has been off before, so we will see if this indeed is the case.
What I’m afraid of is that a negative or no judgment would cause people to attack our Holy Father?
We, and the Church, must trust God. If the truth is known to the Church, then the faithful have a right to this truth. God will take care of the faithful, with the support of catechesis and much prayer.
It never ceases to amaze me how lay Catholics think they are so smart and pick and choose which Bishops to believe according to their own agenda. Aren’t these commonly called cafeteria Catholics? To fault Cardinal Schornborn because you don’t agree with him on Medjugorje is a slippery slope. Although Bishop Peric has jurisdiction over the visionaries when they are in Medjugorje, Cardinal Schornborn has jurisdiction over them when they are in his diocese, such as when Marija was there. As a Bishop, his position on Marija who professed to receive an apparition within his diocese counts as strongly as Bishop Peric’s position counts in Medjugorje. Both Bishop’s can’t be right but it is not us who get to choose, it’s the Vatican. So in the meantime, you can have an opinion, but stop disparaging the clergy because you don’t agree with them. It’s poor Catholic etiquette and poor Christian behavior.
Bishops are supposed to work together, Timothy. The Yugoslav bishops’ declaration, the authoritative document, has it right:
“the gathering of the faithful … requires the pastoral attention and care, first of all, of the local Bishop and then of the other bishops with him, so that in Medjugorje and all connected with it, a healthy devotion towards the Blessed Virgin Mary according to the teachings of the Church may be promoted.” (Bishops’ Conference statement at Zadar, 1991)
The local bishop takes the lead; the other bishops collaborate with him, etc.
Instead, we have a bishop in another country taking actions and making propaganda at odds with his brother bishops. Now *that* is poor Catholic etiquette and poor Christian behavior.
Dear Timothy:
I, and I believe probably some of the people you are critiquing, correct me if I’m wrong, are not faulting the Cardinal or anyone else for believing that there are supernatural apparitions at Medjugorje (some may thing they’re deceived — and that’s an allowable theological opinion as well). We are faulting him mostly for not following Church protocol or governance, which I have to follow as a priest and religious, and bishops and cardinals are even *more* obliged to follow. I have pointed out elsewhere that I have great respect for him and especially his work on the Catechism. He is a fellow religious, and I admire him greatly for many things. I have met him in person a few times, and I find him a gentleman. None of that, however, affects what he did.
But I must say, his position as Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna (or as a member of the CDF) does not give him more weight, because he does not have jurisdiction over that See. When he speaks on Medjugorje, he speaks as an individual in the Church. Yes, he gets the respect due to a Cardinal, but he is voicing his opinion. Not that of the CDF or the Vatican. There are certain ways documents are signed when they are official statements. None have been forthcoming from Rome, save from what I can see, some communiques supporting the bishop and his conference of bishops in their work.
The ordinary of the diocese is the shepherd of that See, and he is charged with determining such things, and he has set up his own commissions. He runs that diocese day-to-day.
”I am very confident that the Commission, which the Holy Father is setting up to examine the events of Medjugorje, is very good and will work very conscious of its responsibility, and that the result will certainly be good.”
Good? How can the Cardinal be certain of a good outcome before the commission has even started? Unless, of course, he means ‘good’, as in, the result will be an exposition of the truth, which is of course ‘good’. But I suspect Medjugorje proponents will interpret this as a victory before the commission even begins.
Timothy,
I completely agree with you. While I do not advocate any kind of unhealthy clericalism, lay Catholics need to recognize that the bishops are the ones who have the authority to oversee the Church. This doesn’t mean the bishops aren’t free to go on personal pilgrimages to wherever they desire, nor does it mean that we, as lay Catholics, are justified in criticizing them as though we’re political pundits trying to create a drama out of the curia or the college of bishops.
The bishops and the Pope will work to make an official decision on Medjugorje. In the meantime, to nitpick at individual bishops with a prideful, know-it-all, holier than thou attitude is in poor taste, and unbecoming of Catholics loyal to the Church.
Good? How can the Cardinal be certain of a good outcome before the commission has even started? Unless, of course, he means ‘good’, as in, the result will be an exposition of the truth, which is of course ‘good’. But I suspect Medjugorje proponents will interpret this as a victory before the commission even begins.
“Good” is related to truth, which is always good in itself.
Unfortunately, I think the Cardinal sowed more confusion among supporters, with this line. Given the solid doctrinal case against authenticity compiled by the Diocese, I think it is more likely that man will walk on Jupiter before it is every deemed worthy of belief.
The Church has to find error with the bishop’s case. “Feelings” and positive experiences are not anywhere near the top of the discernment of spirit measures used.
People have good feelings at a Joel Olsteen event, but this doesn’t make the religion he advances as wholly truthful and worthy of following.
People can have positive experiences with new age practices and many who have come out know very well, that those “good feelings” were not the fruits that they thought they were.
The Holy See will be first concerned with “events”, then with fruits. What the bishop discusses in his most recent statements concern events.
Seriously, print this latest study out (released in English on January 6, 2010 on the diocesan site), and go over it with pencil and highlighter. Read it through more than once. There are serious issues surrounding events. The bishop establishes not only credibility problems with some of the “seers” but moral lapses surrounding the phenomena (using documentation from proponents in some instances to prove his case!)
Questionable Games Surrounding the ‘Great Sign’
If I can suggest a parallel, this is like recounting the votes in the Franken-Coleman election. It wasn’t over until a recount showed that Franken won. Likewise, there will be investigations of Medjugorje until one declares the apparitions to be of supernatural origin. The first alleged apparition was in 1981. The public ministry of Jesus was three years; these alleged visionaries have been in nearly continuous contact with the Blessed Mother for nearly 30 years in private revelation.
Likewise, there will be investigations of Medjugorje until one declares the apparitions to be of supernatural origin.
Pardon me for asking this, but has God granted you extraordinary powers to know that that they will e deemed of supernatural origin?
If I misunderstood your statement, please forgive me.
Secondly, this isn’t even close to being qualified for a recount. With all of the data supplied by the diocese – It’s more like Medjugorje having 5 minutes left on the clock in a football game and being down by 37 points.
The Holy See will back the local bishop (subsidiarity), unless they find error in the facts as he presents them or in his application Church teaching.
His studies are available on the web and I’ve not seen anyone with even modestly reasonable, qualifiable objections to his studies and statements. All I have seen are general attacks on the bishop from people who sound like they haven’t read a thing he has written (as opposed to reading what he says filtered through promoter commentaries).
I definitely think that there is too much emphasis on what the Cardinal did and what the Bishop has said. What is extremely evident that all of this “discussion” is not going to influence the Holy Spirit, the Pope, or Rome in any declaration soon. There is certainly a great lack of recognizing the “fruits” of what has been taking place. Having been there 17 times, heard many heart moving confessions, presided and preached at Mass(es) there I find that something “positive” is taking place. I don’t get wrapped up in if I see the sun spinning or the smell of roses, etc. which I have experienced more than once. I never had a devotion to the Mother of God until I first went there. As a result it has deepened my priesthood tremendously and endowed me with some extraordinary gifts. The late great PJPII was also very moved by the “fruits” and even told the visionary Mirjana to “protect Medjugorje” and that it is the second chapter to Fatima. God has a plan and in control. . .we are only “in control of being out of control.”
Dear Father Buchlein,
I too witnessed all of the good fruits that you mention. I lived there from Nov 80 – Feb 83 (before, during, and after). I was with the religious order of Franciscans responsible for St. James parish until illness brought me back to the US during my novitiate year.
There is no doubt in my mind that we have suffered over 40 years of suppression of the most fundamental, distinctly Catholic expressions of faith (frequent Mass, Confession, Rosary, Adoration, penitential works etc.). During these past 40 years, we have suffered with banal homilies, ambiguous homilies, and even some erroneous homilies.
You and I, while perhaps on different ends of the spectrum on authenticity, will probably agree, that Medjugorje is proof that many of the faithful are generally starved for those most fundamental, distinctly Catholic expressions of our faith. We would probably also agree that this is a huge lesson for our priests and bishops as to what they should be fostering in their dioceses and parishes (I’m grateful that Abp Vigneron in Detroit held the first Corpus Christi procession in 40 years and shows deep devotion to the Eucharist and to Mary – a trend I am seeing among newer bishops).
The biological solution is taking care of dissidents who promoted this lack of love for the Eucharist, for Mary, and discouraged us from using Confession. They and the fluff they tried to pass off as sermons all these years are retiring and going to their Maker very quickly. There were many faithful priests during this period who fought a valiant effort to keep those distinctly Catholic things alive, some of them successfully and some suffering greatly in the process.
All this having been said, my good and faithful priest (as I truly believe you are), the lambs, as hungry as they are , ought not be lead into believing that something is authentic ahead of the Church’s approval
If the unthinkable happens, and the Holy See, after a careful examination of the local Bishop’s case, upholds his position and makes it the position of the Church, what then? How many will choose “gospa” over Church (I have read accounts online expressing this very thing, should Rome rule negatively).
Are you lending credibility to authenticity ahead of the Church by publishing messages on your website that the bishop asked not be published? Do you lend credibility to this phenomena through other words and actions in your parish and on your pilgrimages?
I’ll bet, like with many priest who are pro-Medjugorje, you give rock solid, orthodox homilies (hopefully, without promoting something not yet deemed worthy of belief by Holy Mother Church). You definitely need the assistance of the Mother of God to aid you in this regard, but do you need “gospa” who is has not been accepted yet by the Church to be Our Lady?
I would ask you this….why not foster Marian and Eucharistic devotion, and urge confession and penitential works without mixing Medjugorje in there. You have an arsenal of saints to draw from (Church Fathers, Doctors, Mystics, etc.).
These most fundamental and distincly Catholic things belong to the Church. They were with the Church before Medjugorje, and they will remain with Her long after Medjugorje.
If the Church approves it, by all means, promote it, but why not wait for that approval?
There is no risk in suspending further promotion of something not yet deemed worthy of belief by the Church. There is substantial risk to the spiritual well being of souls who put stock into such a thing, if the events themselves (not the fruits) are ever condemned as not supernatural.
All the same good fruits were seen at Bayside and Necedah. How then, could you explain those condemnations, if good fruits were the only concern.
This says nothing of the bad fruits, of which there are plenty.
God bless and prayers.
I have been to Medjugorje two times and I have witnessed the good fruit that is evident among the pilgrims that come to Medjugorje. I have seen the long Confession lines, the deep devotion of pilgrims as they pray the Rosary and attend Mass, the many spiritual conversations among pilgrims,and the stories of young men who feel called by the Virgin Mary to follow a vocation to the priesthood.
I’ll wait for Church officials to make a pronouncement on whether the reported visions and messages at Medjugorje are authentic. The Church won’t be making any official pronouncement on these reported visions and messages until after they cease. Until then, we as Catholics my continue to make a pilgrim to Medjugorje to receive benefit from the good fruit that is present there.
Because there hasn’t been any official pronouncement on Medjugorje yet, the tempation is for individuals to attempt to make an ‘official’ judgment for or against Medjugorje.
I am confident that the Holy Spirit can lead the Church to a pronouncement when the right time comes that will be of great benefit to the Church.
Diane:
I don’t know what good fruit you have seen coming from Necedah. When I visited Necedah some years ago, I witnessed much division among Catholics in the area, a strong stand against Catholic Church authority figures, a unhealthy mixture of religious and secular propaganda through published booklets and pamphlets, Catholic families that were divided, and a deliberate attempt at trying to keep a dying ‘shrine’ alive.
The Church won’t be making any official pronouncement on these reported visions and messages until after they cease
This a common misunderstanding. The Church can never APPROVE an alleged apparition while ongoing because an event could occur in the future to disprove it’s authenticity.
Alleged apparitions are condemned while ongoing all the time. The most recent example (Nov 2009) is that which is related to Holy Love Ministries in the Cleveland Diocese.
Here is what the statement of condemnation on events looks like:
Declared that the alleged apparitions and locutions to Maureen Sweeney Kyle are not supernatural in origin
You know what happened as soon as the “apparition” found out the local bishop said it was not supernatural?
It went spastic. Not only did the “apparition” turn on the bishop, but it started spewing all kinds of scary apocalyptic “messages”. It even made a power point a few days later showing this. It wanted the people to be obedient to it. The whole affiar was so ridiculous, that I don’t even think Satan would be that stupid.
Bottom line: The Church condemned it while it was in progress.
I got all kinds of emails from supporters, several people telling me that they had masters degrees in theology and saw nothing doctrinally wrong with any of the messages that they followed for years. Those folks need to go back and ask for a refund for their degree if they were being truthful.
– Here is the full Decree on Holy Love, and introductory statement by Bishop Lennon
– Here was the initial reaction of the “apparitions” of Holy Love to being condemned by the Bishop of Cleveland (who was prompted by the Holy See to act)
– Here is the post I made containing a snapshot of the “powerpoint” made by the “apparitions” of Holy Love
– Catholic Apologist, Michelle Arnold, about how one should proceed in the wake of such a condemnation
Y’know, I’m willing to believe that some of the favorable statements attributed to Pope John Paul II on Medjugorje are probably authentic. After all, there are witnesses, people of good will, who attest to them.
It’s not surprising if Pope John Paul believed in the alleged apparitions, especially during the early years, in the 1980s when he saw the struggle against Communism as a work of God in the world, and the fulfillment of Fatima. Yet he made no official act of governance or judgment in its favor; Pope John Paul never treated Medjugorje as if it were a shrine and never went there.
It’s not really clear that any of those alleged statements is reliable. In 1998, Cardinal Ratzinger said: “The only thing I can say regarding statements on Medjugorje ascribed to the Holy Father and myself is that they are complete invention (‘frei erfunden’)”. I guess we can take that denial as solid, at least regarding statements attributed to the current Holy Father.
But if Pope John Paul II did think that Medjugorje was authentic — and I used to think so too — it may be just an example of how even saintly people such as John Paul II or Bl. Teresa or myself :-) can be personally wrong about discerning mystical phenomena. Some saints even personally _experienced_ erroneous mystical phenomena. In the end, the Church decides whether to permit the faithful to give them credence.
Contrary to Fr. Buchlein, I think Cardinal Schönborn’s much-publicized visit has changed some things: it has brought to light the Holy Father’s intention to appoint a commission; it has certainly dramatized the need for a pastoral intervention at the highest level.
Also, I don’t agree that there is a “lack of recognizing the ‘fruits’ of what has been taking place.” There is plenty of publicity of “fruits”: testimonials in the Catholic press, etc.
What are unrecognized are the “anti-fruits”: the phony mystics in this country whose careers were inspired by a visit to Medjugorje; the charlatans who lured people into exploitative apocalyptic cults in the name of Medjugorje; the one-time converts who became religious celebrities but then slid back into their old lives of sin; the war in Yugoslavia, fed by nationalism, which — on the Croatian side — was boosted by Medjugorje.
No, I don’t suppose that supporters like to think about those fruits: it’s more pleasant to look for the “positive” and downplay the “negative”. But to shy away from facts and only think of what is emotionally pleasing is not a life of Christian faith.
Tim J. said: When I visited Necedah some years ago, I witnessed much division among Catholics in the area, a strong stand against Catholic Church authority figures, a unhealthy mixture of religious and secular propaganda through published booklets and pamphlets, Catholic families that were divided, and a deliberate attempt at trying to keep a dying ‘shrine’ alive
The same “good fruits” are seen at all these places. Pious people are naturally attracted to these phenomena in this way and Satan knows it.
If you hadn’t used “Necedah”, I would have thought you were talking about Medjugorje. While the parish is not dying in Medjugorje and is thriving, there is well-documented:
– division by Catholics in the area
– a strong stand against Catholic Church authority figures
– a unhealthy mixture of religious and secular propaganda through published booklets and pamphlets
– Catholic families that were divided
It still seems that people do not understand that no official pronouncement can be made while the alledged apparitions are still taking place. Yes, it certainly would be incorrect for PJPII to have made any type of pronouncement about Medjugorje as to it’s authenticity.
I think it is absolutely wonderful that there may be a new commission appointed to study what has been happening. If anything were to come out it may be that it would be definitively pronounced as a Shrine.
Regarding this quote, “The only thing I can say regarding statements on Medjugorje ascribed to the Holy Father and myself is that they are complete invention (‘frei erfunden’)”. I guess we can take that denial as solid, at least regarding statements attributed to the current Holy Father. I am not familiar with this and wonder where you acquired it from since you do not give a source.
Regarding the “anti-fruits” yes, there are since “Satan is alive and well.” Have you ever gone to celebrate the Sacrament of Reconciliation and then went and committed the same sin again? Yes, people do slide back into their old ways of sin. They know what they are doing and “the ball is in their court.” I am sure I have many “backsliders” in my parish but the Church is a place for sinners.
In the “big picture of things” it does not really matter what you or I have to say about the alledged apparitions. God is in control and our hopes and dreams either positive or negative won’t influence what happens. I’m in the business of saving one soul at a time and I wouldn’t want to do anything else.
About the “frei erfunden”:
In May 1998, a German religion journalist, Luitpold A. Dorn, wrote to Cdl. Ratzinger and sent him a published list of quotations attributed to Pope John Paul II and to him, from the German newsletter “Schwarze Brief”.
The reply from Cdl. Ratzinger, signed and dated 22 July 1998, thanked the writer and said: “Ich kann dazu nur sagen, dass die dem Heiligen Vater und mir zugeschriebenen Äusserungen über Medjugorje frei erfunden sind.” (Translation: “On that subject, I can only say that the statements attributed to the Holy Father and to me are complete fabrications.”)
The letter is mentioned in various documents on the web, and was published first, as far as I know, in the book “Mirror of Justice” (Mostar Diocese, 2001).
Thanks for the clarification. What about the “no comment on comment?”
I don’t know what you’re referring to. Is that some message you got from the system while trying to post a comment? If you have a technical problem, send an e-mail; I’d rather not clutter the page with tech-talk.
Re: Vatican Laicizes Ex-Spiritual Director.
I have neither the authority nor expertise to judge whether of not the Marian apparitions at Medjugorje are authentic. However, this article should give Medjugorje enthusiasts pause for examination of this phenomenon.
The Medjugorje Faithful are dear people and more active and devoted than the average Catholic. However, Jesus urges us to be discerning and wary of the seeming supernatural. (1 John 4:1 NIV)
“Pope Benedict XVI has laicized a Franciscan priest who served as spiritual adviser to the Marian visionaries in Medjugorje.” Fr. Vlasic in February of 2008 hindered an inquiry into the allegation that he was preaching heresy and was advocating schism from the legitimate authority of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. There are also allegations that he impregnated a nun and tried to cover it up. The minister general of the Franciscans in the Adriatic area declared that Father Vlasic was “responsible for conduct harmful to ecclesiastic communion both in the spheres of doctrine and discipline.”
(Fidelity Press on line)
Don’t you think that if Our Blessed Mother was appearing to the, then children, she would have alerted them to the dangers of associating with Fr. Vlasic? Also Mary appeared to the children at Fatima only six times but, delivered world shaking revelations. Our Lady appeared at Lourdes on only 18 occasions. Is it realistic that the Virgin needs to appear at Medjugorje over 40,000 times?
There are many reports of rosaries turning gold, the sun radiating colors and some cures. However these phenomena do not necessarily authenticate the visions. Just the belief of the pilgrims that they are in a holy place can cause trusting Christians to experience healings and mystical visions.
Jesus told us how to discern true prophets from the false: “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.” (Matt 7:15-20 NIV)
BISHOP PERIC OF MOSTAR: “Medjugorje, considered as a location of presumed apparitions, does not promote peace and unity but creates confusion and division, and not simply in its own diocese. I stated this in October 1994 at the Synod of Bishops and in the presence of the Holy Father, and I repeat it today with the same responsibility.” (Fidelity Press on Line)
We may be in the end times and we must all be careful and discerning in whom we place our trust. Jesus predicted a great falling away from the faith and questioned if there would be anyone who still believed, “I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:8)
“At that time if anyone says to you, ‘look, here is the Christ!'{Or claiming to be from Christ} or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it, for false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible. See, I have told you ahead of time.” (Matt 24:23-25 NIV)
The Bishop who has authority over Medjugorje has forbid organized trips by parishes or dioceses to Medjugorje (although individuals may go.) If the Bishop represents the Holy Father, and the pope represents Jesus the Christ on earth, are we disobeying Jesus and committing sin by ignoring this edict?
Maybe it is time to return to the Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist and place as preeminent Marian apparitions of the Blessed Virgin that have been approved by the Church.
[Note: This blog includes an article about the laicization of Fr. Vlasic. –RC]
Fr. Buchlein said: It still seems that people do not understand that no official pronouncement can be made while the alledged apparitions are still taking place.
It didn’t post right away, so please go up and read my response to this at 3:09pm on January 24, 2009.
There is a misconception.
Apparitions which are deemed to be not supernatural can be condemned any time, even while ongoing (to cease any further following).
I give an excellent case of one that was condemned in November of 2009 in my post at 3:09.
The Church is currently permitting the faithful to make private pilgrimages to Medjugorje.
We need to leave it to the Vatican to make the decisions.The apparitions will not be accepted or rejected by the local Bishop until they are directed by Rome on how and when.
———————————————–
Diane:
You said:
“I think it is more likely that man will walk on Jupiter before it is every deemed worthy of belief.”
Well I would like to ask you (and quote you):
“Pardon me for asking this, but has God granted you extraordinary powers to know that that they will *not* deemed of supernatural origin?”
————————————————
Richard Chonak:
I did a Goggle search.Nothing came up:
German religion journalist, Luitpold A. Dorn,
“Schwarze Brief”.
And the book “Mirror of Justice” is written by Mgr Ratko Peric, Bishop of Mostar.The Bishop seems at the center of the whole controversy so can we really use his book as a source to cite??
“But if Pope John Paul II did think that Medjugorje was authentic…it may be just an example of how even saintly people such as John Paul II or Bl. Teresa…can be personally wrong about discerning mystical phenomena.”
Are you kidding me.Are you really going to go there??
It is all so very simple: if the bishop of a diocese in which a genuine apparition occurs does decide after examination that the apparitions are not authentic, then the faithful in humble obedience must accept his rendered decision.
Genuine apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary are from the hand of God. If God wishes a suppressed discredited apparition to be recognized, He is surely capable of doing an end run around the local bishop.
The answer, as always, is to be faithful to the spirit of approved apparitions, quietly and peacefully obey the decision of the local bishop, and allow God to show His hand if, indeed, an apparition is authentic.
Jesus taught us above all to be humble. The opposite of humility is pride, the latter belongs to satan as humility belongs to God.
Most people, it seems have forgotten what hmble means and thus no apologies will be forthcoming. Instead we will prefer to be divided, through pride.
My dear Friends:
I think you should read very carefully what Cardinal Saraiva dos Santos, who worked very close with Pope John Oaul II and Benedict XVI says about all this.
I have nothing more to say. He said everything.
Here follows the link.
http://sanctepater.blogspot.com/2010/01/medjugorje-skeptic-cardinal-saraiva.html
And to me, we are, the lay people and some Ministers too are making of this what it shouldn’t be at all: it’s dividing the Christian Community.
“And a if a house is divided against itself, it cannot stand. And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but is coming to an end. But no one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man; then indeed he may plunder his house.” Mark 3:25-27
This has obviously caused great division within the Church on all levels. Either this thing is going to be ended and be dismissed, or the Church will be bound by the error of this apparition and be plundered. Not going to happen. There are too many contradictions and errors in these messages for the Church to accept them. Basically, if this commission gives approval then they’ve got a lot of “esplaining” to do with the 40,000+ messages. When should I look for the official celebration of Mary’s birthday to be changed to the “correct” one?
DH said in reference to my statement:
Diane:
You said:
“I think it is more likely that man will walk on Jupiter before it is every deemed worthy of belief.”
Well I would like to ask you (and quote you):
“Pardon me for asking this, but has God granted you extraordinary powers to know that that they will *not* deemed of supernatural origin?”
It’s like comparing apples and oranges because I qualified my statment with the words, “I think”, which makes it my personal opinion.
First, we are all entitled to our own personal opinion (for or against). Supporters feel it is “ok” to speak favorably of Medjugorje, with an exclusive focus on “good fruits”. It is clear that supporters feel discussion of “bad fruits” is something we should not do. In other words, they have it backwards. The church discourages promotion of ANY (not just Medjugorje), but ANY phenomena not yet deemed worthy of belief. It is perfectly legitimate to discuss conflicts with the Catholic faith found in “messages” and behaviors in all that is related to Medjugorje. It ought not be “suppressed” by the “tell me [only] something good” approach to life.
The original quote I was referencing came across as a statement of fact (…”there will be investigations of Medjugorje until one declares the apparitions to be of supernatural origin”…). This is entirely presumptuous – that what the Church has not yet deemed worthy of belief, WILL be approved. I did not state that it WOULD NOT be approved, but that I did not believe it would be approved.
You will notice that I left room for the individual to clarify their original statement, if I misunderstood.
And the book “Mirror of Justice” is written by Mgr Ratko Peric, Bishop of Mostar. The Bishop seems at the center of the whole controversy so can we really use his book as a source to cite??
You can bet on the Holy See using everything his puts out. If he is in error on a point of fact, or in his application of theology in pointing out errors, then this will come out.
Unlike most supporters I know, the Holy See WILL read all that the Bishop puts out.
Therefore, I ask everyone reading this thread, again…..why not spend some time reading his latest study: The Questionable Signs Surrounding the “Great Sign”.
Print it out, sit down with a highlighter and pencil, and read it through once or twice, Then come back here and tell me which points of facts, or application errors in theology he made in his presentation. I really don’t care to debate anyone who won’t give the man enough courtesy to read his argument.
My guess is that many supporters are afraid of what they might find in that study and that unwillingness to read what this apostolic successor has to say, is just another bad fruit.
One thing that I think needs to be remembered by all of us is that statements by any member of the hierarchy that are not “official” need to be taken with discernment. The fact that JPII publicly stated that Maciel was an “efficacious guide for youth” will forever give me pause when listening to Church authorities’ unofficial statements.
Officially, no Pope has said anything about Medjugorje. We need to remember that and unless and until a Pope or his own commission does, the local bishop is the authority. Or, in this case, the commission that he requested to investigate.
I think that the distinction made earlier about no positive pronouncement being made while apparitions are still occurring versus negative pronouncements being possible at any time to be important.
It has also been stated that the Vatican makes no pronouncements about apparitions unless they disagree with the opinion of the local bishop. We need to keep in mind that Bayside, Necedah, etc. have had no statements from a Pope, only a local bishop. If we accept those pronouncements, we should also accept those of the TWO local bishops who have made pronouncements about Medjugorje.
what’s the point of all this – most of the visions occur well away from the mostar diocese and will continue so to do , if the ‘faithful’ have any say.
so the question is ” how does the vatican stop visions ? ”
the bishop has been unsuccessful after all these years – why ? because he cannot do it physically .
thats the only reason the vatican is involved . so expect a fudge along existing lines and hope it’ll all die down . no one surely expects a sign – do they ? i’m still awaiting the garabandal one .
let commonsense prevail – put yourself in the popes shoes [ or any cardinal’s] . the faithful are yearning for something like this . the church’s opinion counts for nothing [ the bishop is the church in this case ] but people are locked on to the gospa .
the franciscans have no control over the seers – so where will this end , whether validated or not .
in a huge chastisement – is that what we, the faithful , really want or desire ?
I have been to Medjugorje in 1989. When I got there I remember the peace I felt there when I arrived. I never went away from home before for any length of time without my children, and I cried the whole trip to Medjugorje.
I wasn’t sure why I was there except that I wanted to see all the miracles that were happening and everyone was talking about the Visionaries too. I was there for 2 weeks. I had been away from the Church approx. 25 years. I didn’t even remember the prayers for the rosary anymore. The first week I expected to see miracles and there were none,but I really got involved in going to Church and re-learning how to pray the Rosary. I actually forgot about the miracles and found myself wanting to know God even more then ever before in my life! The more I found God in my heart the less it mattered about the miracles or for that fact, I think the only thing that did matter was the Eurchist and knowing that Jesus was TRULY present disgusied in the bread & wine. I didn’t actually experience the miracle of the sun until 2 days before I left.And that’s when it hit me! Our Lady wasn’t bringing us to the miracle of the sun, She was bringing us to Her Son!
Now, as I was reading the comments, I notice someone was talking about people who back slide. Well, I am one of those people and I am not proud of it either. I was going thru a lot. My husband was an acholic,and being Catholic, I did not believe in divorce.I thought I could help him overcome his acholism, but this was to no avail. I started Alanon to try to learn how to live with his addiction.
Then after 25yrs of marriage he left me for another woman. I have 2 children one of my children moved out and the other got married and left all in the same year. And for the first time in my life I was alone. I was married right out of high school. I was scared and lost hope, and yes I back slid. I stopped going to Church and I was not interested in the Rosary anymore. I couldn’t understand why God let this happen, but I found out later it was for a better good.
But I don’t belive that that makes Medjugorje a false apparition. It was my free will and my lack of faith that made me back slide,because I am human and not perfect.
Since then I have had my faith restored again thru Our Lady of Medjugorje and am back on track again.
The fruits there are miraculous. But God does not interfere with our free will. It is up to us to answer Our Lady’s Call. Its just like a child, a mother can warn her children of certain dangers, but if they don’t listen to her that doesn’t make her a bad mother.
So when you consider the good fruit and the bad fruit, I think the good out ways the bad.
I believe Satan would do anything he could to discredit the Appritions in Medjugorje, he has infiltrated the Church already with all the scandles.
I just pray that the Church does approve Our Lady’s Appritions, because without them I would still be away from the Church, Our Lady and Her Son, JESUS!