Bishop says Medjugorje apparitions are divisive

[the_rev]

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter." Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church." With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."

Strange how the report confirms many of the answers Brendan may be seeking. Yes, Medjugorje is divisive! But it is the Bishop himself who is the opponent, along with a few supporters. The so-called ‘schism’ is created by him and not the Franciscans or even the Church. If the Church felt at any time in 25 years that Medjugorje was truly schismatic then it would have taken steps by now to close it down.

What is strange to read is that both Popes have backed the Bishop’s judgement. Yet there has been no move for the Vatican to shut everything down. The truth is that both Popes have never backed the Bishop in his judgement. In fact the opposite. The matter was taken out of the Bishop’s jurisdiction by, guess who?, Cardinal Ratzinger!

Also true is that the Vatican has stated that any comment on Medjugorje by the bishop is purely his own opinion and not that of the Church, and that he should refrain from making such comments.

And then this report quotes the bishop as saying, “while recognizing the Holy Father's right to give a final decision”. This after earlier saying the Pope backed him!

Notice, too, how the bishops words are not definitive: ‘similar’ to a schism... while recognising the Holy Father’s right to give a final decision (on the validity)... they particularly do not seem to be authentic...

These are all back-covering, get-out clauses, just in the wind starts to blow the other way and the apparitions are accepted by the Church.

As to the reference that Medjugorje is not a shrine: In August 1993, Cardinal Kuharic, who headed the new commission after it was taken out of the hands of the local bishop, said: We bishops, after a three-year long commission study, accept Medjugorje as a holy place, AS A SHRINE. This means that we have nothing against it if someone venerates the Mother of God in a manner also in agreement with the teaching and belief of the Church. Therefore we are leaving this to further study. We are in no hurry.“

The Holy See’s press office also stated in 1996: “The Vatican permits pilgrimages to Medjugorje as long as they are not regarded as authentication of events still taking place, which still call for an examination by the Church. Neither has the Church suppressed discussion on Medjugorje.”

While the bishop accuses the faithful and many priests of being disobedient, he also should question his own stance when it comes to the matter of obedience.

I have no problem him expressing his own opinion. But it was a great pity that he expressed this opinion in such a way to make a personal attack on the visionaries during his Corpus Christi confrimation homily. By their fruits you shall know them. Read the entire homily here: [url="http://te-deum.blogspot.com/"]http://te-deum.blogspot.com/[/url]

The matter of Medjugorje is in the hands of Rome. No Pope has condemned it. I understand that the current Pope twice visited Medjugorje on a personal visit when a Cardinal.

It is unlikely that the Vatican will make any pronouncement until the apparitions are over. Perhaps they may even wait for the permanent sign. Then everything will speak for itself and there will be no doubt.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

No offense intended Eddie, but I think very dangerous to claim that the Bishop is causing schism. EVEN IF the Bishop were in the wrong, his office must still be respected and with it, the judgments he makes. This bishop, and the previous bishop have responded with concern regarding Medjugorje and thus so should the faithful. What cause has the Bishop given you for doubting his faithfulness to the Magisterium?

Miracles of the sun that occur everyday? I was in Medjugorje for a week and neither saw nor experience any such solar miracle.

(I don't think this belongs in the Debate Table, as we shouldn't be debating over a faithful Bishop's judgment)

Edited July 5, 2006 by Fides_et_Ratio

[brendan1104]

I'm going to finish this once and for all. What I've shown is how the Catholic Church- its Pope and one/two of the bishops have proven Medjugorje false. For a great book/site on Medjugorje by a now-deceased (September, 2004) indult traditional Catholic writer who until his death was friends with Cardinal Ratzinger- now Pope Benedict XVI- visit: [url="http://www.mdaviesonmedj.com"]http://www.mdaviesonmedj.com[/url]

1. Quoting the Catechism in your attempt to justify a personal sense of solemnly defined Catholic dogma- if the 'Madonna' of Medjugorje has spoken otherwise/one of the seers, was definitely wrong.

2. Joaquin Navarro-Valls (a known public liar to the press and I can prove this) who resigned last month, has no ecclesial authority- no theology studies, not a priest nor a bishop or a pope. Leaving his lay status aside, I agree with him. But there is nothing wrong with going [u]anywhere[/u] to seek conversion. But what about confession and Communion? Sacraments which the semi-schismatic Franciscan priests of St. James' parish have been known to reserve to only those who believe in the 'apparitions' of Medjugorje. The sacraments that the current Pope has urged to be given to anyone, regardless of their stance on these "visitations."

[quote]"We at the congregation felt that priests should be of service to those faithful who seek Confession and Holy Communion, leaving out the question of the authenticity of the apparitions."[/quote] - Pope Benedict XVI

3. Eddie, the devil too has been known to deceive through "healings" and seemingly "answering" prayers. These messages while good in emphasizing prayer, penance, and Marian devotion leading to Jesus are also schismatic and heretical in some cases, as I have proven in previous posts.

4. The Catechism also teaches that the Orthodox/protestants are also heretical- in denying papal primacy and universal authority, as well as the Filoque and in some places the Immaculate Conception. The protestants deny more, but you focused on the Orthodox, so do I.

5. The Bishop is the authority over/in the diocese - or 'Church' - Vatican II- of Medjugorje. He is the pope's representative, and a successor to the Apostles. His supporters are truly knowledgeable and faithful Catholics.

6. Again, and again I say this: the Church can't make a final, definite, public decision/statement until these 'apparitions' conclude. And as the Pope and the bishop agree. And, furthermore, one of the reasons the Pope doesn't believe in Medjugorje is because they have been so lengthy- in many places, many dates and times, etc.

[quote]"We at the Congregation [for the Doctrine of the Faith] always asked ourselves, how can any believer accept as authentic apparitions that occur every day and for so many years? Are they still occurring every day?" [/quote] - Pope Benedict

[quote]"Up till now there have been about 35,000 'apparitions' and there is no end in sight!"[/quote] - Bishop Peric.

7. Medjugorje is divisive because it is a false apparition/diabolical deceit. One of the marks of God and the Church is unity, whereas division is of the devil.

8. The Vatican can't shut Medjugorje down. It's a municipality with public property and private houses that the 'visions' have occured in/on.

9. Obviously our Holy Father has backed Bishop Peric, as can be seen in the report.

10. Show me the Vatican's statement that the bishop's opinion is only his own, and private, and that he should refrain from preaching and teaching and guiding the diocese- which is a bishop's duty!

11. Of course the pope has the final decision, which Bishop Peric will support him in, because they both know it is false, but a decision is still to be made- see above.

12. He used the words to mean almost or similar to a schism, because schism is very definitely defined in the CCL- Code of Canon Law. But in laymen's terms, let's call it a knowing separation from the Pope/Catholic hierarchy and teaching authority.

13. Of course pilgrimages to renowned Churches and sites are to be commended, as is Marian devotion. But, that doesn't mean that Medugorje is real or true. If people want to visit there because they feel that particular area inspires conversion or re-version, prayer and penance so be it. But what about Fatima and Lourdes? Approved, time-tested, visionaries-who-have-been-canonized/beatified sites. And exactly my point- the Vatican only permits pilgrimages to Medjugorje as long as people don't authenticate Medjugorje themselves, or claim that the Magisterium has approved/authenticated that site of false visions.

14. The bishop(s) have been and are perfectly obedient. They have the authority to jude, because they are the shepherds of Medjugorje/the surrounding area.

15. As for preaching at Confirmation/Corpus Christi, good! Excellent opportunities when the faithful are largely gathered. A wonderful chance to teach and to preach, especially by the local bishop.

16. Once again, the Vatican can't decide until these false seers give up their lies and claims. Pope Benedict may have visited Medjugorje out of curiosity/investigating. Obviously he's come to his own personal decision- both as head of the CDF and the Church. Our Lady is not appearing at Medjugorje or under the title of Our Lady of Peace to these 'visionaries' who now live all over the world. I understand that some of them have made some not-so-wise choices, as well. Why would Our Lord/Lady allow this, since they are Their 'instruments/'voices' in the world?

17. You're right on your final statement, too. There will be no more doubt, once the Vatican/Pope is allowed to publicly state and decree the truth: this was at least terrible lies and claims. It was a deceit of the devil; these 'visions' 'locutions' and 'apparitions' are false.

Edited July 5, 2006 by brendan1104

[the_rev]

edit by me for uncharitability, (if that's a word)

Edited July 5, 2006 by the_rev

[michaelorapronobis]

I believe Medjugorje is a work of Satan. Either that or an [i]extremely[/i] well-done hoax. Many supernatural events have happened there, but let us remember that God is not the only supernatural source of power. Satan can mock God and draw people away from Him by performing his own miracles. Most people don't even consider [i]that[/i] possibility.

I cannot believe that Our Lady is appearing at Medjugorje. Apart from the extremely unscriptural things she has been saying, things which contradict almost 2,000 years of Church Tradition, many dodgy things have happened there.
Compare the Medjugorje visionaries with the those whom the Church has recognised as seeing true visions of Our Lady - Bernadette Soubirous and Lucia dos Santos. Bernadette, in ecstacy, was unaware of a hatpin being stuck into her hand, but Medjugorje's Vicka must invent a preposterous story to explain her flinching when a French reporter made like he was going to poke her in the eyes. Bernadette and Lucia both entered convents and lived out their lives in obscurity, humbling themselves as nuns. The Medjugorje seers, on the other hand, have built mansions and one has married a beauty queen. Not one of them has entered a convent or monastery! Bernadette found that her brother had accepted a small toy from a pilgrim and, horrified at the prospect of gain, made him promise to return it. Imagine, if you can, Bernadette driving Ivan's BMW. It's hard, isn't it? Bernadette would never have exalted herself the way the Medjugorje seers have. The children of Fatima were never known to tell a lie; those of Medjugorje seem to specialize in it. Obedience characterized the behavior of Lucia, Bernadette, Mélanie Calvat... and, for that matter, Padre Pio. Disobedience is so rampant at Medjugorje that it could be called the predominant characteristic.

"Our Lady" prays with the "seers" at Medjugorje. However, she prays the "Our Father" with them. At Lourdes, Fatima and other approved apparitions, she did not do this. At Lourdes, the Blessed Mother prayed only the "Glory Be" in the Rosary with St. Bernadette. By praying "forgive us our trespasses" with the seers, whatever is appearing there is subtly denying the Immaculate Conception, for Our Lady [i]has[/i] no trespasses. It also denies the Assumption, for Holy Scripture states, "There shall not enter into it [heaven] any thing defiled" (Apocalypse 21:27).

There is also the case of the Franciscan priest Ivica Vego. He impregnated a nun and was suspended [i]a divinis.[/i] He then continued to celebrate Mass and spent time with his mistress. "Our Lady" at Medjugorje insists that Vego is innocent and the Bishop is wrong. Vego's prayer book is still sold at Medjugorje.

About the supposed 'fruits' of Medjugorje. I don't buy the claims of all the converts ... where are they all? If there were as many as they say it would be apparent. It's like the "New Springtime" John Paul II insisted we are in the middle of. Many of them are "on fire" for a while and then fall from the faith. And those who have come back to the Church and attending Mass again, what types of Masses are they attending? Mostly charismatic Masses overflowing with abuses. I think that this is a small trade-off for Satan. Satan is willing to tell the truth 95% of the time to deceive you by the other 5%. Has [i]any[/i] Medjugorje convert started to attend the Tridentine Mass, the true Mass of the Church?
Bishop Zanic wrote that "there have been mentioned 50 miraculous healings, then 150, 200, 300 and so on. Laurentin chose 56 dossiers and sent them to the Bureau medical de lourdes. Dr. Mangiapan responded in his Bulletin of April 1984 that these dossiers have no practical value" (1990 Statement). Not one healing has been authenticated. On the other hand, Visions on Demand points out that the injuries and deaths resulting when elderly and unwell pilgrims are urged to climb the mile-high, rock strewn Mount Krizevac remain unreported.

I think it's obvious that it's not the Blessed Mother of God who is appearing here. For more information see [url="http://www.catholictradition.org/Mary/medjugorje.htm"]http://www.catholictradition.org/Mary/medjugorje.htm[/url]

[Franimus]

VERY interesting thread... I haven't heard too much official stuff about it, just know that my sister visited there while in Europe, (even though) FUS doesn't want you to go there while studying in Austria presumably due to local turmoil, and that they were still occurring regularly. I'm googling medjugorje to see what I can find... and I found the "official" (dunno if it's labeled as such) [url="http://www.medjugorje.org"]website[/url]. Some interesting stuff:
From the overview: "When each of the six visionaries has received all ten "secrets", Our Lady will stop appearing to them on a daily basis. Currently, Marija, Vicka, and Ivan have received nine secrets, and Our Lady still appears to them every day, wherever they are, at 5:40pm during daylight savings time, and 6:40pm the rest of the year, Medjugorje time. Mirjana, Jakov, and Ivanka have received all ten secrets, and Our Lady appears to them once per year, and will do so for the rest of their lives. For Ivanka who received her 10th secret on May 7, 1985 it is on the anniversary of the apparitions, June 25 each year. For Jakov who received his 10th secret on September 12, 1998, it is on Christmas day each year. And for Mirjana who received her 10th secret on Christmas 1982, it is on her birthday, March 18 each year. Our Lady has also been appearing to Mirjana on the 2nd of each month since August 2, 1987 for the express purpose of praying for all unbelievers. Mirjana tells us that it is very important that all of us pray for the unbelievers in the world, who are defined as those who do not yet know God's love. Sometimes these appearances on the 2nd of each month are in apparitional form, and sometimes as locutions. No one knows when Our Lady will give the tenth secret to Marija, Ivan, and Vicka.

There will then be three secrets revealed as warnings to the world. Mirjana will witness the warnings and they will ocurr on the earth. Ten days before each of the warnings, she will advise the priest of her choice (Father Petar Ljubicic), who will then fast and pray for seven days. Then, three days before the warning is to take place, he will announce to the world what, where, and when the warning is to take place. Fr. Petar has no choice and must reveal each warning. Mirjana's testimony will be a confirmation of the validity of the apparitions and an incentive for the conversion of the world. After the first warning, the others will follow within a rather brief period of time. So it is that people will have time for conversion. After the three warnings, the permanent visible sign will be left on the mountain where Our Lady first appeared in Medjugorje. Those who are still alive will have little time for conversion. For that reason, the Blessed Virgin calls for urgent conversion and reconciliation. The permanent sign will lead to many healings and conversions before the messages become reality."
Sounds to me like another fun theory of Revelation or of the end of the world... Verses comes to mind, "You know neither the day nor the hour" "He will strike like a theif in the night". Also, I read on that catholictradition.org site something that pointed out how regular and exact the apparitions are. However, I am not crediting too much of the information on that site, merely because I want to use the pro-medjugorje stuff to refute it, and use the anti-medjugorje stuff to prove it (what better test could there be when you aren't sure of the facts?)
Also from the overview: "Our Lady is also giving us 5 Stones or Weapons we can use to defeat satan. They are:

Daily Prayer (Of the Rosary)
Fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays
Daily Reading of the Bible
Monthly Confession
Holy Communion" "Fast strictly on Wednesdays and Fridays" - Aug 14, 1984
It seems odd that fasting on two particular days (what's so special about wednesdays?) is one of these. Also, the stress on praying the Rosary makes it seem that all you need to pray is the Rosary. I think I posted (or someone posted that I agreed with) in another thread about the Rosary that it must be prayed correctly; one must take care to not "babble as the pagans do", but use it as a form of meditation to reflect on the mysteries or on the prayers of the Rosary themselves. Again, the thing about numbers being thrown in there... We're not Jewish, we're Christians. The Old Testament has lots of numbers and such since the Jews received "the letter of the law", but Christ helped us understand "the spirit of the law" and as such much of the stuff in Deuteronomy we don't [u]religiously[/u] adhere to, but practice anyways (such as the hygiene stuff) (Also I remember Jesus mocking the numbers "Not seven times but seven times seventy" - forgive endlessly, not exactly 490 times).
Feb 25, 1989 "If you pray, Satan cannot injure you, not even a little, because you are God's children and He is watching over you." I thought Satan could still hurt us regardless? If Satan couldn't hurt us if we pray, then whoever prays is perfect because Satan can't hurt them!
"The best fast is on bread and water. Through fasting and prayer one can stop wars, one can suspend the natural laws of nature. Works of charity cannot replace fasting... Everyone except the sick, has to fast." (July 21, 1982) This seems to imply that it is of one's own power, and not God's power that these things will happen. Also, who says the sick cannot fast? Sick people fast all the time from doing fun things, such as going out with friends. Fasting is not only from food.
"Let the Holy Mass be your life." (April 25, 1988) - Isn't there a reason we're only allowed to receive the Eucharist twice per day? We're supposed to get out there and do other stuff besides go to Mass all day (for those who live in an area such as Steubenville where this is actually possible)
I will grant that there does seem to be some pretty good stuff here too, such as: "You do not celebrate the Eucharist as you should. If you would know what grace and what gifts you receive, you would prepare yourselves for it each day for an hour at least." (1985)"There are many of you who have sensed the beauty of the Holy Mass... Jesus gives you His graces in the Mass." (April 3, 1986)"Do not go to confession through habit, to remain the same after that. No, it is not good. Confession should give an impulse to your faith. It should stimulate you and bring you closer to Jesus. If confession does not mean anything for you, really, you will be converted with great difficulty." (November 7, 1983)
Something I didn't catch the first time looking at it, until I was pasting the above quotes: '"Whoever has done very much evil during his life can go straight to Heaven if he confesses, is sorry for what he has done, and receives Communion at the end of his life." (July 24, 1982)
The Western Church (United States) has disregarded confession and its importance. Our Lady said:
"Monthly confession will be a remedy for the Church in the West. One must convey this message to the West." (August 6, 1982)' Since when was the US the Western Church? Roman Catholicism extends much farther than the US last I checked. I might agree with the statement if it said something like "Those in the US", but not referring to the US as "The Western Church". The point I was originally going to bring up about that quote: Somewhere here I saw a post relating the need for Purgatory which was a story about Rev Somebody and a drunkard sitting next to each other on the bus right before they both died. The story basically said that the drunkard, even though repentant for his sins, still does not go straight to Heaven. Also, this quote implies that those who do not do the above go to Purgatory (or that there is no Purgatory), including those who die in a state of mortal sin (such as suicide?), which I thought meant you went to Hell for (God's unknown/infinite amount mercy aside)
So far, there is a bunch of kinda bad stuff, but nothing insanely bad.
From the FAQ: "Second, we know that an evil that faced the world, which was contained in the 7th secret was eliminated due to prayer and fasting." Can anybody figgure out what this evil is? Is it like a person who's evil, like Hitler, or an evil act, like... I dunno?
"Our Lady told the visionaries in the early days that she would like them to become priests and nuns but told them that they had complete free will to choose. Our Lady asked that they strive to be a good example in whatever vocation they chose. Ivanka was the first to decide that her calling was marriage...I know Marija, Vicka, and Ivan all seriously considered a religious vocation, but after much prayer, discerned that their vocation was the married life." More from the FAQ, Our Lady should know what their vocations are, since she is in Heaven, right? She should also want what God wants, right? What God wants us to do in life is our vocation, right? So shouldn't Our Lady have wanted them all to be married, since that is apparently their vocation and what God wants for them? [url="http://www.medjugorje.org/vickamarries.htm"]Vicka's interview[/url] about her marriage is good though (Who is "the Gospa", in the last paragraph? another typo?
FAQ: "While it is true that believing in any Marian apparition is not required as part of our faith..." I thought we're required to believe in the ones that're approved by the Church?
FAQ: "Let me first say that the Holy See and Pope John Paul II have kept a close watch on the messages of Medjugorje over the last 23+ years. They have never found anything that contradicts scripture or the Church." Granted, no sources of papal statements given, but it's something.
More FAQ stuff, regarding the much-heard-of Bishop Zanic: "It is unclear why in the months to follow that Bishop Zanic changed his mind...[insert theory here]...Others say that a reported comment from Our Lady regarding a wrong judgement the Bishop had made with a Franciscan priest infuriated the Bishop." It was brought up, either here or on the catholictradition.org site, about a Bishop making such a wrong judgement. This is really the main thing which sticks out for me in the anti-Medjugorje case. Continuing: "But regardless the ultimate outcome was that the Bishop turned against Medjugorje.
Then in 1984, a commission of 14 people was formed by Bishop Zanic that consisted mainly of members that had already declared themselves to be against the alleged events. They made two statements which basicly said that they agreed with the Holy See that a decision should not be rushed. Then in 1987 Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger entrusted the investigation into the hands of the Yugoslavian bishops' conference. After three years of study the former Bishops' Conference of Yugoslavia on April 10, 1991 published their declaration in which among other things it states:
"On the basis of investigations up till now it cannot be established that one is dealing with supernatural apparitions and revelations."
This statement does not mean that there is no apparition, but only that it is not yet established or proven." Great. So we're back to the start.
I've seen this quoted quite a bit: "We bishops, after a three-year-long commission study accept Medjugorje as a holy place, as a shrine. This means that we have nothing against it if someone venerates the Mother of God in a manner also in agreement with the teaching and belief of the Church. . . Therefore, we are leaving that to further study. The Church does not hurry." (Glas Koncila, August 15, 1993). This, to me, doesn't really say anything more than the previous statement, despite what the website implies.
Unfortunatly, the website is not updated (or thoroughly proofread), and still lists JPII as the current Pope.
Ahhh, the long-awaited answer to the question: "One one of the messages said that all faiths are equal. Isn't this against the Catholic Church's beliefs?
There was a question asked of Our Lady in October 1981 which was: Are all religions the same? Our Lady answered: "Members of all faiths are equal before God. God rules over each faith just like a sovereign over his kingdom. In the world, all religions are not the same because all people have not complied with the commandments of God. They reject and disparage them."
The difficulty that some Catholics have had with this answer is based on the belief that the only salvation is within the Catholic Church. But the Catholic Church does not believe this. In fact, Vatican II in its Dogmatic Constitution on the Church "Lumen Genitum" says this: "Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God, and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life."
I think that pretty much says it all. Who are we to judge who goes to heaven and who does not? Unfortunately those bent on destroying Medjugorje will use any tactic to accomplish their goal. Those who do not know their faith are many times unknowingly misled by these people."
Now researching Ivica Vego... This may take a little bit.

[Franimus]

Sorry for the numerous quotes in the previous post... Here are some URLs to my Ivica Vego research:
[url="http://www.medjugorje.org/conflict.htm"]http://www.medjugorje.org/conflict.htm[/url] - From the site I used in my previous post, this mentions nothing of the nun, and, although I got somewhat confused reading it, I think it paints the situation in a way that shows Vego (and some other guy) as being victims of a political thingimajig, where they're two scapegoats because of laity refusing to leave a group of Franciscans to join the new parish Bishop Zanic created for them. Here, the Franciscans followed the Bishop, but these two priests refused to obey, claiming something or other and filing appeals. It convienently ends "To Be Continued" right when it realizes that this situation will either prove or disprove the apparitions.
[url="http://www.medjugorje.org/svetletter.htm"]http://www.medjugorje.org/svetletter.htm[/url] - This is from the same site, but is written by a different author, and is a letter to refute somebody's opposition to Medjugorje. It states that Vego was on suspension before the nun incident happened. It also emphasizes sin staying in the confessional, and nobody talking about it (even if it's already public? On another note, has anybody condemned Vego himself? Everything I've read hasn't actually condemned Vego...(just the apparitions)).
I'm still looking for sources regarding this: " I told him about the case of the ex-franciscan priest Ivica Vego. Due to his disobedience, by an order of the Holy father the Pope, he was thrown out of his franciscan religious order OFM by his General, dispensed from his vows and suspended "a divinis". He did not obey this order and he continued to celebrate Mass, distribute the sacraments and pass the time with his mistress. It is unpleasant to write about this, yet it is necessary in order to see who Our Lady is speaking of. According to the diary of Vicka and the statements of the "seers", Our Lady mentioned 13 times that he is innocent and that the bishop is wrong. " - from The Truth About Medjugorje by Bishop Zanic
I finally found something regarding Our Lady praying the Our Father; it was prayed for other people and thus not for herself.
I found another forums site ([url="http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=59439&page=2"]forums.catholic.com[/url], who'd've thunk it?) with a good quote to think about: "When Catholics begin nitpicking at the Ordinary, and spreading rumors, inuendo, and outright calumny, that too, is a fruit of Medjugorje." There's many other good discussions in that thread too.

[HollyDolly]

I really don't know what to think about Medjugorje in regards to its messages etc.
I personally would like to visit Lourdes someday,or some of the older Marian shrines like Our Lady of Montserrat,Rocamadour,Einselden,Laon,etc. They still have their pilgrams,and may not be flashy,but they are simple and more to my liking. wish I could go on a pilgramage to Santiago de Compastelo,the famous shrine in Spain to St.James.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Michael' post='1017359' date='Jul 5 2006, 04:25 AM']
Has [i]any[/i] Medjugorje convert started to attend the Tridentine Mass, the true Mass of the Church?
[/quote]

Michael, like you, I was up-until-very-recently convinced of the radical traditionalist position. I also thought that the Tridentine Mass was the only true Mass of the Church.

But, reflect on this: there were many, many, many Western/Latin rites until Trent. After Quo Primum was issued (remember, unless it is Sacred Tradition/the deposit of the Faith/the living Magisterium/dogmatic, it doesn't bind successive pontiffs) and even now-a-days,
there were/are still numerous Latin and Eastern, Catholic liturgical rites- let's focus on some of the Western: Carthusian, Carmelite, Dominican, Gallican, Sarum, Ambrosian, Braga, Mozarabic, etc.

Therefore you can't call the rite of Mass last-published in 1962 the only true Mass of the Church.

The Mass is the Mass- the Sacrifice of Christ as long as there is valid form, matter and intention. It doesn't matter whether it begins with "Introibo ad Altarae Dei" or "Confitemini Domino quoniam bonus," or the 'Lord be with you' or 'Peace be with you' etc. as long as it is valid, licit, and reverent.

If there is a valid Consecration, that Liturgy is always acceptable- to God the Father, and that's all that counts- because His Son is sacrificed and is our Lamb and Victim Who is always infinitely pleasing.

We don't criticize any Catholic rite of Liturgy or the Magisterium/Pope on Phatmass. I'm telling you this now. If you persist in doing so or spreading rad-trad propaganda, you will be labelled 'phishy' as I was, warned, and possibly suspended/banned.

Oh and by the way- don't call me a Novus Ordo-ecumenical-protestantized heretic because I attend the Tridentine Mass weekly- if not more often, as it is awesomely and reverently celebrated according to the Ecclesia Dei indult. How do I know there aren't abuses? I serve, emcee and sing in the schola as well- all positions which help to ensure a worthy and beautifuly Sacrifice of the Mass.
Remember: we're charitable and Catholic, here. Be the same.

Edited July 5, 2006 by brendan1104

[Guest Rick777]

We should just stick to the already approved apparitions. Why risk it?

[Franimus]

[quote name='Rick777' post='1017846' date='Jul 5 2006, 08:32 PM']
We should just stick to the already approved apparitions. Why risk it?
[/quote]
That's what I'm thinkin... For now, I'm going to avoid Med. and wait for the Church, which has not only the authority but also the ability to research it and make a decision regarding it. Currently, however, I am in the process of reading the messages from 1984 to 2006... 85 pages... So far, I'm up to 1986, and it's the same thing over and over again: "[always starts with] Dear Children, Today [99/100 times] I am calling you to pray.... [these are examples of body text] Pray the Rosary to defeat Satan... Surrender yourselves to me... This parish is special and different from all the others... I am guarding this parish against all the works of Satan... Thank you for your sacrifices [?? Said several times, no clue what exactly it refers to].... [this is the oddest line I've seen, and I made sure to copy it exactly:] Dear children, you are forgetting that I desire sacrifices from you so I can help you and drive Satan away from you... Please respond to my call.... [always ends with: ] Thank you for having responded to my call." So far, I've seen nothing really harmful... Just some statements that almost seem slightly odd to me, most of which I included above as examples. Then again, I've heard dogmatic statements that -at first- strike me as somewhat odd. Also, if I'm interpreting symbolic Revelation (around chapter 17 I think?) anywhere near correctly, the Woman isn't the one destroying the Beast... the Dragon is the one chasing the Woman around, and the Woman is not on the offensive. However, in these messages it's clear to me that "Our Lady" has Satan in a headlock and is trying to pummel him to death, with help from our sacrifices and surrenderring ourselves to her of course. I should reiterate, however, that most of the messages are good, and that they are calls for constant conversion, for more prayer, for more love, for peace, and such. Another phishy thing: "I bless you" (25 Jan 1997.. I started skipping around)... I thought only God blesses us? When priests bless us (or when we bless each other), we say "God bless you", never have I heard "I bless you" unless followed by "in the name of" etc., which this was not. Could somebody help me with this one?
It is odd to me that there is a lack of fulfilled prophecies. For instance, you'd think there'd be some mention of the huge conflict in Bosnia, or perhaps a slight mention of Sept. 11? Nothing of the sort. Anything that might be construed as references them happens only after the event (e.g. Aug 25,2001 is the regular call for holiness, but Sept 25, 2001 talks of Satan wanting war and hatred). The messages do follow the seasons, such as talking about Summer, Spring, Lent, New Year's, and Christmas, but, what's odd to me is the neglection of days like Ascension , although it does mention some feast day (not sure of what... would have to look it up) and anniversary day (presumably of the apparitions), and of October being a month dedicated to Mary (although not until the end of the month was it mentioned).

In conclusion (for now), these messages seem to me to be mostly harmless despite fostering (again, what seems to me) some sort of cultish (although this word is too strong to use here imo, couldn't think of another one) devotion to Mary.

PS I saw a message (25 June 04) that mentions prayer groups; it'll take some time to find where the messages first mention these prayer groups and how they're instituted, if indeed it refers to the current Med. prayer groups being started in parishes worldwide.

PPS I know I said I was just going to avoid it and such, but for some reason I just can't ignore it now that the subject came up. It's like I have to know, since if it's something bad it needs to be squelched, although I'm sure the Church would tell us more explicitly if something that bad is going on there, which is a point I intend to bring up.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

[quote name='Rick777' post='1017846' date='Jul 5 2006, 09:32 PM']
We should just stick to the already approved apparitions. Why risk it?
[/quote]
If all Catholics had done that, we wouldn't have any approved apparitions.

However, with Medjugorje, it seems that something is amiss if Our Lady is making ambiguous statements that do not jive with Catholic theology (like "all religions are equal"), and the Bishop has spoken out against the apparitions, AND there are problems with disobedience. I have trouble reconciling an image of the Blessed Mother supporting and appearing to those who would undermine the authority of the Church she mothers.

[Jaime]

She never said all religions are equal. That is an intentional misquote. What she said was that all people are equal and that some are closer to the truth than others. (I'm paraphrasing)

[brendan1104]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1018192' date='Jul 6 2006, 10:13 AM']
She never said all religions are equal. That is an intentional misquote. What she said was that all people are equal and that some are closer to the truth than others. (I'm paraphrasing)
[/quote]

Correction, hot stuff. She didn't say anything at all, because Our Lady isn't appearing there!

[Lil Red]

[quote name='the_rev' post='1017127' date='Jul 4 2006, 11:12 AM']JP2 expressed his desire in a Wednesday Audience to go to Medjugorje.

In addition Vatican Spokesman (Navarro, etc. no idea....) said there is no wrong in going to Medjugorje to seek conversion of heart.[/quote]
give me proof that this was actually said.

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' post='1017258' date='Jul 4 2006, 08:22 PM']No offense intended Eddie, but I think very dangerous to claim that the Bishop is causing schism. EVEN IF the Bishop were in the wrong, his office must still be respected and with it, the judgments he makes. This bishop, and the previous bishop have responded with concern regarding Medjugorje and thus so should the faithful. What cause has the Bishop given you for doubting his faithfulness to the Magisterium? [/quote]
AMEN! thank you Fides!