Crackdown On Medjugorje

[picchick]

I wonder what Mary is doing in heaven everytime something comes out on Medj...I wonder if she gets a kick out of it...I know I do.


I am not really a follower of Medj. just out of laziness. I am caught up with my own prayer and whatnot...so I have nothing against them...I just am lazy I guess. However, it is funny to me how it is so controversial.

Edited September 5, 2008 by picchick

[StColette]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1648184' date='Sep 5 2008, 01:05 PM']There is nothing wrong with marrying a former beauty queen, or being married. The problem is that if you are seeing the Madonna every single day of your life it's not likely you are going to be interested in living a "fast" life, owning expensive cars and tennis courts and so on and so forth. The reporter probably included the bit about the former beauty queen to suggest that that particular seer is using the Madonna to get women. A crass suggestion given that he did in fact marry her.

But in any case their behavior is not usual and does not find any adequate comparison in the history of apparitions. For instance Sr. Lucia never seemed to want to acquire a "smart executive house." When visionaries are getting rich off their messages it is a sign something is wrong. Can you say Benny Hinn.

I think this article is from London's Daily Mail? Which is a paper that is famous for it's rather, ahem, opinionated and not neccesarily accurate reporting. The headline itself editorializes more than it reports. You can guess how the people running the paper (or I should say at least the copy editor's desk) feels about Medjugorje. Just the inclusion of the word "finally" in the headline and you can practically hear the exasperated sighs from the journos.[/quote]

The fact is do we know the full details of how they acquired such things and if they do in fact have these things. The media likes to spin things, so I would be curious as to see what the visionaries actually have and how they acquired them. For all we know the houses, etc. could have been left to them from relatives or who knows what. They could have also acquired these
larger houses because they host many pilgrims within their own homes. The fact is I don't believe we should be jumping to conclusions about people when we aren't near them, nor have most of us been around them and witnessed for ourselves what type of living situation they are in.

[StColette]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1648210' date='Sep 5 2008, 01:13 PM']+J.M.J.+
and i want to add that those of us that do not believe Medjugorje to be 'real' (not the word i want but my brain is befuddled right now) are not in any way less orthodox or less obedient to the Holy See. [/quote]

lol I didn't think that had to be said since my statement was aimed at the supposed statement that the then Cardinal Ratzinger banned pilgrimages, which is not the case. Dr. Miravalle, while he may be a Medj. advocate, isn't one to go against the Holy See. But upon further investigation the writer of this article has falsified information coming from the Cong. for the Doctrine of Faith in order to make it say what they want it to say. That itself discredits the article in my opinion.

[Lilllabettt]

I don't get the Medjugorje thing. I don't know, I'm just not interested. I say to myself, why mess with this stuff that might or might not be legit, when there are plenty of 100% approved Marian apparitions out there, eg. Fatima, Lourdes, etc.

I know of Bayside people who split with the Church over that. And believe me, they didn't start out with the intention of ever doing that, but their personal experience overcame them. People who feel they're strong enough that this wouldn't be a problem, then alright. But as for me, I'm not going to mess with it.

[Maggyie]

[quote name='StColette' post='1648216' date='Sep 5 2008, 02:17 PM']The fact is do we know the full details of how they acquired such things and if they do in fact have these things. The media likes to spin things, so I would be curious as to see what the visionaries actually have and how they acquired them. For all we know the houses, etc. could have been left to them from relatives or who knows what. They could have also acquired these
larger houses because they host many pilgrims within their own homes. The fact is I don't believe we should be jumping to conclusions about people when we aren't near them, nor have most of us been around them and witnessed for ourselves what type of living situation they are in.[/quote]

The visionaries don't really need a tennis court to house pilgrims on I doubt they inherited the fast cars and why you would feel a need for a luxury automobile when you get to look the Blessed Virgin in the face I don't know. You are right that the media likes to spin things but it is a long standing criticism of the visionaries which even a semi-accurate rag like the Daily Mail can not conjure out of thin air. Their lavish lifestyles are a well-established fact. Maybe there are some facts that are unseen to the public eye that would explain all of this but frankly that would be pretty incredible.

Interestingly with regard to the married vocation of some of the visionaries, the Medjugorje.org site publishes [url="http://www.medjugorje.org/faq.htm#no2"]a FAQ which includes this question:[/url]

[quote]Why didn't any of the visionaries become priests or nuns?

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, and asked for Our Lady's blessing. Our Lady gave Ivanka her blessing, and added that she had chosen a harder path for her life than being a nun would have required. I know Marija, Vicka, and Ivan all seriously considered a religious vocation, but after much prayer, discerned that their vocation was married life. We should not consider the decision to be parents and to bring life into the world a less important or holy vocation than a religious vocation.[/quote]

The paragraph is accurate that we shouldn't consider parents to be inferior to religious. But they say themselves that Our Lady told them [b][i]she would like them to become priests and nuns. [/i][/b] And they didn't do it. Now what the heck is that. Talk about having the ultimate vocation director in Our Lady GIVE YOU the answer to your question and then you just say no? It's correct that we all have free will and God is not going to stop loving us and saving us if we say no, but rejecting a vocation is rejecting part of God's will and turning down a boatload of grace.

If the Mother of God came to me and said, "I would like you to be a nun," after I recovered consciousness I sould say, "Okaaaaay." I would not reply "You're wrong, Immaculate Queen! My vocation is to married life!"

Maybe that is what the reporter is refering to obliquely when he brings up the seers' spouses.

[goldenchild17]

mmm controversy. I like it. yum

If benedict actually comes out and condemns that "mushy mud pie"-hole some day I will be thoroughly impressed.

[goldenchild17]

wow and to think I went out of my way to find a word that wouldn't be censored... this almost looks worse now

[StColette]

Something tells me this will be moving soon to a Debate Table near you. lol For the record, I don't believe having a tennis court equals living a lavish lifestyle or part of having a lavish lifestyle. One of my bridesmaids grew up having a tennis court in her backyard and they definitely were not a very lavish, flashy life having family. Her dad was a doctor, so yes they had money, and they had a nice house but they are also some of the humblest people that I know and most devout. So again, I'm not going to pass judgment on someones humility based on what material possessions they have.

As for the visionaries vocations, that's their business and the business of their spiritual director(s) we don't know the entire case here. The youngest, Ivan, actually entered into the Seminary and stayed for some time, but he did not have the book learning or ability to learn all that Seminary requires. He tried and he left Seminary because he could not understand/learn what he was being taught.


Also for the record, I don't have a yes or no opinion about Medj. I see good things and some things that I don't particularly care for. Until the Holy See rules, I'll continue to keep an open mind. But I have no respect for a newspaper or writer who falsely portrays the words of the then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger.

[Lilllabettt]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1648284' date='Sep 5 2008, 03:00 PM']The paragraph is accurate that we shouldn't consider parents to be inferior to religious. But they say themselves that Our Lady told them [b][i]she would like them to become priests and nuns. [/i][/b] And they didn't do it. Now what the heck is that. Talk about having the ultimate vocation director in Our Lady GIVE YOU the answer to your question and then you just say no?[/quote]

Good grief. Well, that tears it.

[the_rev]

This is the rebuttal I wrote on my facebook and will now share it with you all:

There has been quite a ruckus in the Catholic world the past few days about the alleged Marian Apparition of Medjugorje in Bosnia-Hercegovina. Today The Daily Mail, a newspaper in the UK, can be equivocated to the National Enquirer in the United States. But let me offer a critique on the article itself along with some clarification. The article in question can be found at this link: [url="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1052230/Pope-finally-launches-crackdown-worlds-largest-illicit-Catholic-shrine-suspends-dubious-priest.html"]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/...ous-priest.html[/url]

"The Pope has begun a crackdown on the world’s largest illicit Catholic shrine – by suspending the priest at the centre of claims that the Virgin Mary has appeared more than 40,000 times. Benedict XVI has authorised ‘severe cautionary and disciplinary measures’ against Father Tomislav Vlasic, the former ‘spiritual director’ to six children who said Our Lady was appearing to them at Medjugorje in Bosnia."

It needs to be noted that Fr. Tomislav Vlasic has not been associated with the apparition site for more than 20 years, so to insinuate that because of these disciplinary measures the Pope is cracking down on Medjugorje would be false. Many may confuse Vlasic with the current priest of the parish (Saint James) whose first name is also Tomislav; however his name is Fr. Tomislav Pervan.
When I immediately read this I knew that people would use this as an attack against Medjugorje when it really is not that at all.

As a follower of Medjugorje, a place where in 2005 I encountered the love of God and witnessed the faith of many, and a place where I recently pilgrimage to this past summer, I have read the numerous articles by Simon Caldwell of the Daily Mail in the UK. What he always does is leaves out information pertinent to Medjugorje. He always gives the side about condemning the apparition.

As a reader and to those who do not know much about Medjugorje, Fr. Tomislav Vlasic's interdict imposed by the Vatican is about his community of Mary Queen of Peace in Italy, NOT in Medjugorje. The communities he is a part of follows Medjugorje and has devotion to Medjugorje but in no way does it have any foundation in the village of Medjugorje itself.

If Fr. Vlasic meets the conditions the interdict will be lifted by the CDF and the Vatican will disclose that if it is to occur. In the midst of all of this, we should be praying for Fr. Vlasic, for his reunion with the Church, yes the Church is right in Her judgment of "condemnation" for lack of a better word, but we ourselves should not condemn him, rather love him and pray for him.

The last eight paragraphs of the article is where Caldwell loses it and doesn't support what he says with any sources. In an article in the Daily Mail a few months ago he argued the Vatican Condemned the apparition because the former Vatican Exorcist Bishop Andrea Gemma, made a statement against Medjugorje. However, Gemma does not speak officially for the Vatican as Caldwell claimed in that article.

Specifically his last three paragraphs are attacks against the visionaries and their personal life styles which is a bad form of journalism in my own opinion.
Additionally, it seems Caldwell missed the Memo from the Vatican as well by taking the apparition site out of the hands of the Bishop in June and having direct authority over it.

If we look at the photos captured in Medjugorje, one cannot but recognize People are being converted and are returning to the Church. Priests are hearing confessions of penitents who haven’t been to confession for 40 or 50 years. Vocations are being born. (It is in this writers opinion, if the Church were to ever rule against Medjugorje, he would accept the ruling but still believe in the fruit of Medjugorje, for he himself, was one of the fruit.) Also, the core messages calling for conversion, to go to Mass, to pray the Rosary, to read the Bible, to go to Confession, are not things that are BAD!

In the end in regards to this article from the Daily Mail, to say the Vatican has damned Medjugorje because of the actions of one priest who was there many years ago makes no sense. A similar statement would be that all Catholic Churches who had a priest involved in the sex scandal are now false churches because of that priest’s sinfulness. Or I’m friends with a sinner (in this case let’s say a criminal guilty of murder), that means then I too, am guilty of murder because of my association. Tomislav Vlasic’s relationship with Medjugorje at one time does not necessary equate that the interdict rendered upon Medjugorje but rather on himself as an individual. In the meantime as we await the Church’s official ruling, I’ll wait until a statement is released by the Vatican saying “We condemn Medjugorje and declare it false” rather than reading what Simon Caldwell of the Daily Mail declares.


For further inquiry about Medjugorje (if you’re still reading this) I’d encourage you to read Dr. Mark Mirvalle’s article on “Is Medjugorje Real?” This isn’t an article by some random Medjugorje supporter who has no background in theology. Rather, Dr. Mark Mirvalle holds a doctorate in Mariology and is a professor at the Franciscan University of Steubenville. However, he does hold belief in the apparitions at Medjugorje. You can read it here: [url="http://medjugorje.wordpress.com/2008/06/29/is-medjugorje-real/"]http://medjugorje.wordpress.com/2008/06/29...edjugorje-real/[/url]

[Guest KevinSymonds]

Simon Caldwell is NOT one of those people I would trust with a story on Medjugorje. You should completely disregard him.

Though I must say, however, that the focus right now is not Caldwell's article. It is about Rome's recent letter. Many Medjugorje supporters will want to place the crux of the issue against Caldwell and detract from the momentum of the Vatican's document.

Caldwell is doing nothing but screwing everything up so the best thing to do is pay no attention to him.

-KJS

[jmjtina]

Since the attack is on the family in this culture of death, I don't see why a married visionary is a bad thing.

The fact that they are living a family life, complete with mother and father and more than 1.5 kids is a huge statement in a world where one child is enough and marriage between a man and a woman is looked on as the scarlet letter.

Let's remember: there ARE saints that have been married. To say that they shouldn't be married is ridiculous.

We shouldn't judge the whole apparition on a single man.

Let's keep things in context and not distort the truth.

[jmjtina]

The great thing is free will.

We shouldn't be so quick to judge the visionaries unwillingness to become religious. The last time I checked, we all still go to confession for not following direct orders from God.

[Ash Wednesday]

*sigh*

[Lilllabettt]

[quote name='jmjtina' post='1648477' date='Sep 5 2008, 07:01 PM']The great thing is free will.

We shouldn't be so quick to judge the visionaries unwillingness to become religious. The last time I checked, we all still go to confession for not following direct orders from God.[/quote]


Yeah, you're right, I have to confess that all the time.

On the other hand, the Mother of God has never appeared to me and told me my calling in life, and I never heard that and told her no.

I don't think evaluating the veracity of a vision in light of the seers submission to the known will of God is out of line at all. I think that's the usual course of events in these things; Sr. Margaret Mary's spiritual director determined the authenticity of her visions by her behaviour ... Sr. Faustina, Bernadette, Lucia, Francisco, Jacinta ... all their claims were so tested.

I'm not passing judgment on anyone. This is something they are saying themselves: the Blessed Mother appeared to us, asked us to be religious, and we didn't do it.

It just sounds really funny to me. Funny as in strange, not ha-ha.