Rorate Caeli

At long last: Vatican Commission to formally investigate Medjugorje (UPDATED POST)

From Rome Reports:





March 5, 2010. Benedict XVI has formed a commission to investigate if Our Lady truly appeared in Medjugorje, a small town in Bosnia.


The commission is part of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Cardinal Camillo Ruini will preside over the commission. Ruini is the pope’s former vicar of Rome’s diocese. Ruini goal will be to explain to the pope what’s happening at the sanctuary which has become the third most visited in Europe.

Allegedly, at least 6 people have witnessed the Virgins apparitions there since 1981. Aside from the large crowds of pilgrims who visit the sanctuary, the Vatican has not commented on the alleged apparitions, but in 1991 the local bishops said they were not aware of any supernatural apparitions.

This investigation will put an end to any doubts and it’ll be critical for the millions of pilgrims who visit this shrine every year

BR/MC



UPDATE TO OUR MARCH 6 POST :
The Vatican has finally confirmed the rumored investigation of the alleged Medjugorje apparitions:
ESTABLISHMENT OF INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON MEDJUGORJE
VATICAN CITY, 17 MAR 2010 (VIS) - The Holy See Press Office today published the following communique:
"An international investigative commission on Medjugorje has been constituted, under the presidency of Cardinal Camillo Ruini and dependent upon the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Said commission - made up of cardinals, bishops, specialists and experts - will work privately, submitting the results of its work to the authority of the dicastery."

72 comments:

Jordanes said...

We shall have to wait and see if this rumor is true. It will be good for the Holy See to take up the work of the former Yugoslav bishops and finally issue the firm condemnation that these spurious apparitions require.

Richard Friend said...

If you go to the diocesan website, you will read that the Vatican (through Msgr Bertone et al) has intervened several times in past -

http://www.cbismo.com/index.php?mod=vijest&vijest=101


C – The Interventions of the Holy See

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, intervened four times through two of its Secretaries, while Cardinal Ratzinger also made an important statement.

In 1985, Msgr. Bovone notified the Secretary of the Bishops’ Conference of Italy not to organize official pilgrimages to Medjugorje.

In 1995, Msgr. Bertone wrote to the bishop of Langres, Msgr. Taverdet, and repeated the same to Msgr. Daloz of Besançon, who were interested in knowing the position of the Holy See on Medjugorje.

Finally, in 1998, the same Secretary wrote to Msgr. Gilbert Aubry, bishop of Reunion. All these letters emphasized that pilgrimages, whether private or public, are not allowed if they presuppose the authenticity of the apparitions, since this would be in contradiction to the declaration of the Bishops’ Conference of Yugoslavia. Nevertheless, the supporters of the events of Medjugorje hold fast to the word “pilgrimage” and neglect the conditio sine qua non: that they do not presuppose the authenticity of the apparitions.

Ratzinger’s “frei erfunden”. In 1998, when a certain German gathered various statements which were supposedly made by the Pope and the Cardinal Prefect, and then forwarded them to the Vatican in the form of a memorandum, the Cardinal responded in writing on 22 July 1998: “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.[27]

Ad limina visit 2006. During my official visit to the Holy Father Benedict XVI, I not only expressed my doubts but also my disbelief in the “apparitions” of Medjugorje. The Holy Father, who prior to his election was the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, replied with this thought: “We at the Congregation always asked ourselves how a believer could possibly accept as authentic, apparitions that occur every day for so many years?”[28]

Anonymous said...

Carlos,

"were not aware" in English means merely a lack of knowledge...when in fact the local ordinaries have always stated that there is no evidence at all of the supernatural there, and the conference of bishops in the locale has also said the same...

its not that they are not aware of the supernatural, they are aware that it is not supernatural...

Familias católicas said...

For spanish
www.infocatolica.com/?t=noticia&cod=5717
and articles related

Anonymous said...

The moment of truth has come for Medjugorje.

Let's hope we can put this nonsense to rest.

So much needs to be clarified,not for those of us who believe the apparitions are false, but for those who still believe they are true.

WLMS said...

Medjugoogoo

W.C. Hoag said...

I suspect that a negative decision from the CDF may result in the exodus of some persons from the Church.

Ogard said...

The Commission can’t possibly claim that no apparitions took place or are taking place, because one cannot prove the negative. They will certainly say that there is no evidence for it, but that has been stated long time ago by the bishops of Mostar, who are after all the sole competent authority, and by the episcopate of the ex Yugoslavia, and now Bosnia.

On the other hand, there is no way of stopping the miracle-seekers from going there; even Jesus found that phenomenon difficult to handle. They can always claim that the Commission’s negative statement doesn’t mean that there are no miracles. Some have even bought the property there.

Furthermore, one should expect resistance of local population. It is an economically passive region, and the “pilgrims” are their livelihood.

The Holy See should intervene at sources. The main trouble are not local Franciscan dissidents, but the parishes throughout the world in which these “pilgrimages” are unofficially organized or provided with facilities to organize themselves; and they go frequently accompanied by priests.

Bishops are also known to have visited the site, openly or incognito, or encouraged the people to go, which is a great act of discourtesy toward the local Ordinary - their brother in the Episcopate, as well as interference in internal affairs of the Diocese of which they are not in charge.

So, unless the Holy See does something to stop the bishops and priests at the source, nothing would stop this scandal from continuing indefinitely.

Much can be done to discredit the “visions” by finding out how the “messages” are made public. Who it is who puts them down in writing? Is there a procedure of double-checking the text by asking the “visionary” to repeat the “message” without reading the first record, for example.

And then the content of the “messages”. I am in possession of a set of such “messages” in English (who is involved in “translations”, I wonder?) in which “Our Lady” has clarified a doctrinal point, on which Pius XII refrained to pass judgement in his Bull Munificentissimus Deus. We now definitely “know” that Our Lady was assumed alive, i.e. that she did not die. So, the Bull can be amended.

In theory, only local investigators who know both Croatian language and the local circumstances can examine these problems. But the challenge is overwhelming for the poor diocesan resources: they are both powerless, and, to put it mildly, discouraged by the passivity of the world episcopate.

Brian said...

If the commission comes to the conclusion that Our Lady has not appeared at Medjugorje, will the Pope risk alienating the millions of charismatic pilgrims who flock there by declaring the alleged apparitions are false?

If the commission comes to the conclusion that Our Lady may be appearing at Medjugorje, will Traditionally minded Catholics reject that endorsement as Vatican II shenanigans?

I would be surprised if "this investigation will put an end to any doubts" about Medjugorje.

LeonG said...

The final decision will mean the ruin of many reputations.

Anonymous said...

"This investigation will put an end to any doubts..."

If the author of this report knows in advance that the investigation will end doubts about the alleged apparition, then the "investigation" itself is superfluous.

If this truly is an investigation, then the article should read, "This investigation will either put an end to any doubts, or confirm them."

Personally, I believe that the apparitions-mania of many Catholics leaves them little room for theological study. An example: Puritan theologians of the past wrote hundreds of dense tomes in Latin. Many of these have been or will be soon translated into English and published for the benefit of Protestant intellectuals.

Meanwhile, the writings of Bellarmine and Suarez, to name but two giants of Catholic theology, remain almost entirely marooned in Latin-only volumes because most Catholics can't be bothered to read these profound apologetics.

M. A. said...

I hope the commission will quickly do its job. This hoax has been going on for too long, deceiving countless of souls.

A verdict from the highest authority would be an act of mercy for those deceived. They will finally be able to set themselves free from the diabolical deception.

Its about time.

Anonymous said...

IMHO, the anti-Medjugorje hysteria is only pushing more people to believe in these alleged apparitions, as most of what is often claimed to discredit them is invariably found to be false or unrelated to any of the seers' responsibility. Why can't we just wait for the Church's pronouncement?

1) Yes, the Vatican has spoken on Medjugorje before, and it was to CONTRADICT the local bishop who had declared the non-supernaturality of the alleged phenomena and to prohibit pilgrimages. Then Abp. Bertone, CDF secretary under Card. J. Ratzinger, wrote explicitly that such position was only the Bishop's "personal opinion" and not that of the Church, which of course has no position (or hysterical prejudice) on this, as for any other apparition before their final "approval". You'd think a bishop would know the difference between "constat de non supernaturalitate" and "non constat de supernaturalitate", unless local issues unknown to most of the commentators are at play here.

And, CDF repeated that pilgrimages are of course allowed, on condition that such permission is not considered as a declaration of authenticity. Card. Bertone and others have since repeated that Medjuogrje is a legitimate place of Marian devotion, even in case of the impossibility to ascertain the truth on the alleged apparition.

Of itself and in itself, that the fact that Our Lady would appear so often and for such a long time is hardly a negative indication and certainly not a first in the history of the Church. The latest case is that of Laus, France, which was granted recognition in 2008 (and the cause of beatification of the seer - B. Rencourel, proclaimed Venerable by Blessed Pope Pius IX - is on its way to finalization), where Lady appeared for almost 60 years.

Interestingly, in Italy the hatred towards Medjugorje - while distinctive of some "traditionalist" quarters around the world - is a trademark of liberals, which only makes lots of solid Catholics lean toward Medjugorje. Let it be said "sine ira ac studio", having more people believe in Medjugorje before it was prudent to do so will go down in the history of our sad times as another damage inflicted by the self-appointed guardians of orhtodoxy to the cause of the restoration of sound doctrine and sound liturgy.

Anonymous said...

here's the letter I spoke of in my previous comment:

CONGREGATIO
PRO DOCTRINA FIDEI
Pr. No 154/81-06419

Citta del Vaticano, Palazzo del S. Uffizio
May 26, 1998
To His Excellency Mons. Gilbert Aubry,
Bishop of Saint-Denis de la Reunion

Excellency:

In your letter of January 1, 1998, you submitted to this Dicastery several questions about the position of the Holy See and of the Bishop of Mostar in regard to the so called apparitions of Medjugorje, private pilgrimages and the pastoral care of the faithful who go there.

In regard to this matter, I think it is impossible to reply to each of the questions posed by Your Excellency. The main thing I would like to point out is that the Holy See does not ordinarily take a position of its own regarding supposed supernatural phenomena as a court of first instance. As for the credibility of the "apparitions" in question, this Dicastery respects what was decided by the bishops of the former Yugoslavia in the Declaration of Zadar, April 10, 1991: "On the basis of the investigations so far, it can not be affirmed that one is dealing with supernatural apparitions and revelations." Since the division of Yugoslavia into different independent nations it would now pertain to the members of the Episcopal Conference of Bosnia-Hercegovina to eventually reopen the examination of this case, and to make any new pronouncements that might be called for.

What Bishop Peric said in his letter to the Secretary General of "Famille Chretienne", declaring: "My conviction and my position is not only 'non constat de supernaturalitate,'but likewise, 'constat de non supernaturalitate' of the apparitions or revelations in Medjugorje", should be considered the expression of the personal conviction of the Bishop of Mostar which he has the right to express as Ordinary of the place, but which is and remains his personal opinion.
Finally, as regards pilgrimages to Medjugorje, which are conducted privately, this Congregation points out that they are permitted on condition that they are not regarded as an authentification of events still taking place and which still call for an examination by the Church.

I hope that I have replied satisfactorily at least to the principal questions that you have presented to this Dicastery and I beg Your Excellency to accept the expression of my devoted sentiments.

Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, Secretary


And in a more recent book, the now Secretary of State of His Holiness repeated:

"The statements of the Bishop of Mostar reflect a personal opinion, they are not a definitive and official judgment of the Church. Everything must be referred to the Apr. 10, 1991 declaration of Zara of the bishops of the ex-Yugoslavia, that leaves the door open to further investigations. The examination must therefore go on. In the meantime, private pilgrimages with the pastoral assistance to the faithful are allowed. Besides, all Catholic pilgrims can go to Medjugorje, a place of Marian devotion where it is possible to express all devotional forms."

all of which is consistent with what then Card.Ratzinger said, for instance in the "Ratzinger report" when asked about these matters.

Can't we just wait and pray that the truth is finally discerned? I wonder what some people would do should the Church "approve" these apparitions.

Jordanes said...

Ogard said: The Commission can’t possibly claim that no apparitions took place or are taking place, because one cannot prove the negative.

No, that's not right. It is possible for the Church to decide that a claimed apparition is constat de non supernaturalitate, which means the apparition didn't happen at all, since a genuine apparition is necessarily supernatural.

At this time, the judgment of the local ordinary, which must be respected and which the Church has never done a thing formally to oppose, is constat de non supernaturalitate, whereas the bishops of the former Yugoslav conference only went as far as non constat de supernaturalitate.. But either judgment means the Church does not approve of the alleged apparitions at Medjugorje. Cardinal Bertone's oft-quoted letter and statements are not a definitive and official judgment of the Church, but reflect the cardinal's personal opinion. Unless Rome decides otherwise, at this time Medjugorje remains an unapproved apparition that faithful Catholics need to keep clear of.

Of itself and in itself, that the fact that Our Lady would appear so often and for such a long time is hardly a negative indication and certainly not a first in the history of the Church. The latest case is that of Laus, France, which was granted recognition in 2008 (and the cause of beatification of the seer - B. Rencourel, proclaimed Venerable by Blessed Pope Pius IX - is on its way to finalization), where Lady appeared for almost 60 years.

There's absolutely no comparison between Laus and Medjugorje. At Laus, Our Lady almost always appeared privately to the seeress, who only shared or wrote down a very, very small fraction of her visions. The seeress also didn't have apparitions every single day for almost 60 years, nor did she transmit a message every day at the exact same time as the pseudo-seers of Medjugorje purport to do. The Medjugorje industry is simply unprecedented in the history of Marian apparitions. Furthermore, Laus was not attended by disobedience and immorality, nor were any false prophecies and heretical statements attributed to Laus, all quite unlike the Medjugorje scam.

I wonder what some people would do should the Church "approve" these apparitions.

We don't have to worry about that.

Carlos Antonio Palad said...

"Carlos,

"were not aware" in English means merely a lack of knowledge...when in fact the local ordinaries have always stated that there is no evidence at all of the supernatural there, and the conference of bishops in the locale has also said the same..."

It is not our policy in Rorate to edit news articles that we are merely citing or reproducing.

Agnes of Prague said...

My first reaction was Praised be Jesus and Mary! Then I wondered, didn't they used to say they couldn't investigate them until the apparitions were supposed to have stopped? Was that true then?

Angelo said...

"Medjugorje after Twenty-One Years - The Definitive History" by Michael Davies

Mr Davies' book provides the most definitive English-language account available of the events which have been taking place since 1981 at Medjugorje in Herzegovina. Michael's wife Marija, who is Croatian, and his son Adrian, who is bi-lingual, have given him considerable help by translating material from the original Croatian, and the two bishops of the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno during the past twenty-years have made all the necessary official documentation available to him. The former bishop, Dr. Ratko Peric, wrote with regard to the fourth edition of the book:

"You write with Catholic conviction and Christian frankness ... it is quite clear that you are driven by a desire for the truth in your investigations into the phenomenon of Medjugorje ... Three episcopal commissions as well the entire Bishops' Conference have already been convinced that on the basis of the investigations that have been carried out to date it is impossible to confirm that there have been supernatural manifestations and messages in Medjugorje, but various superstitions are spreading. In your book you base yourself upon the official documents and teaching of the Church. There are far too many inaccurate versions of events spread throughout the world, above all by the efforts and the agency of those in the service of the so-called apparitions at Medjugorje."

Jacob said...

Whatever else has gone on before both at the local level and in Rome with the CDF, I am confident that, if this is true, a commission led by Cardinal Ruini will sort it out with official finality.

B. said...

Agnes of Prague:
Then I wondered, didn't they used to say they couldn't investigate them until the apparitions were supposed to have stopped?

I don't know who you mean with "they", people from the Vatican or Medjugorje adherents.

The legend that no decision can be made until the apparitions stop is of course entirely false and patently absurd. That would mean that anyone who claims having apparitions couls blurt out heresy after heresy and the Church couldn't do anything against it. Of course there have been lots of fake or demonic apparitions that were clearly condemned while they were still going on, e.g. Palmar de Troya and Bayside.

The claim that no judgement could be made until the apparitions stopped was invented by Medjugorje propagandists in order to discredit the judgement of both the Bishop of Mostar and the Yugoslavian Bishop's conference.

Anonymous said...

This is about twenty-five years overdue.

Who in their sane mind could believe that such nonsense would ever come out of Our Lady's mouth, punctuated by millions of "Thank you for having responded to my call"?

If the Commission says it is an authentic apparition, I'll know for sure that the Church has gone bye-bye.

Delphina

Anonymous said...

If the Commission says it is an authentic apparition, I'll know for sure that the Church has gone bye-bye.

quod erat demonstrandum. The apparitions may or may not be true, but at least the alleged seers know what "indefectibility" means. Many of their obsessive critics, not so much.

Anonymous said...

If the Commission draws its principles of analysis from St. John of the Cross' Ascent of Mt. Carmel, it can quite easily issue an instruction that will satisfy everyone, for it has been long established in Catholic theology, that to seek visions, miracles locutions or depend upon them is a very unsound and dangerous spirituality, since the fallen angles can quite easily mimic such things.

The Holy Father need only recall the followers of that apparition to the doctrinal truths of real spirituality.

On that basis an analysis of what actually took place can quite easily show that not only it was not supernatural, but that it contains elements which are diabolical, false, and has in many ways opposed the teaching and established doctrine of the Church, elements which are formally promoted by the very same groups and authorities which promote the entire apparition.

So its not a case like Lourdes, where other individuals had strange or dubious visions after the main set of apparitions, but where these were never given credence.

If anything, those who promote Medjugorie have shown a complete lack of discernment, and deserve to be reubked for it.

None of this touches the fact that many with right faith have gone their, and dispite all of this, might have received some favors from the Lord and Our Lady, not on account of the alleged supernatural cause being the apparitions, but because of their own faith and God's Mercy, and Our Lady's true solicitude for Her children in an age, when she has few children willing to help Her in this problem of discernment of spirits.

Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Ralph Roister-Doister said...

Michael Davies drew a bead on the phoniness of Medjugorje over twenty years ago. There was nothing "hysterical" in his research, and anyone who read his conclusions with a shred of objectivity could find not anything much to criticize.

It is the villianization of reason and measured objectivity in popularizations of the various Marian apparition stories that has made the pronunciation of any "discouraging words" about the maypole dance of indifferentistic spirituality that is Medjugorje so difficult today. It isn't just a question of communitiarian anti-liturgy -- Catholicism itself these days has assumed a "People of God" indifferentist flavor that Medjugorje exploits to the hilt.

And yet one deep thinker says that one ought not to get "hysterical" about any of this. Fair enough. Perhaps one may be permitted to get damn good and mad about it.

Jordanes said...

The apparitions may or may not be true,

No, they're not at all true.

but at least the alleged seers know what "indefectibility" means.

What evidence do we have of that?

Many of their obsessive critics, not so much.

How do you get "many" out of "one" commenter at Rorate Caeli?

LeonG said...

"Non constat de supernaturalitate" which is the current situation at Medjugorje is the most likely outcome.

However, many will continue to rebel, while many others will be disillusioned. This could undo the fragile basis of the faith of some whereas for others we may hope & pray they find the traditional church and all it has to offer which is true for salvation.

Anonymous said...

"If the commission comes to the conclusion that Our Lady may be appearing at Medjugorje, will Traditionally minded Catholics reject that endorsement as Vatican II shenanigans?"


Catholics who believe in Medjugorje would more likely live with Rome's decision if it were said to be negative than it would be for Traditionalists to accept it if it were positive.

Anonymous said...

Catholics who believe in Medjugorje would more likely live with Rome's decision if it were said to be negative than it would be for Traditionalists to accept it if it were positive.

Please do not dump all "traditionalists" in the same category of self-appointed infallible judges of charisms. I for one don't know whether Medjugorje is true or not. I know I don't feel attracted by it, even though I know quite a few TLMers who go there regularly, but I also know that should the Church OK it many would be perfectly comfortable with such a determination. But it is sadly true that the kind of "traditionalists" who have caused so many troubles - such as causing Summorum Pontificum to happen 25 year later than it would have been possible without their obtusity - would have a hard time reconciling their ideologically shaped faith with a pro-Medjugorje ruling, just like liberals. The adjectives and authors they cite might be different, but the hermeneutic of discontinuity, the "l'eglise-c'est-moi" ecclesiology, the lack of trust in the successor of Peter is the same.

Anonymous said...

Having read many of the extremely trite and silly "messages" purportedly spoken by the BVM with such frequency and urgency, I've always wondered what possible attraction there was to Medjugorje. It is equally baffling why only now a formal investigation is about to begin. Does anyone remember those pilgrimage tours and daily bulletins? Excuse me but I found the whole business creepy.

Anonymous said...

The disobedience of the visionaries and the Franciscans is a huge red flag.

Yet countless souls have come to conversion or vocations because of the alleged appartitions. So many good people, who love Our Lady, embrace this phenomenon.

Obedience to official ruling is key, no matter which way it goes.

Luiz said...

Scaring! The people shown in the video are singing a very popular song sung during masses here in Brazil.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous writes that obtuse Traditionalists cause trouble and delayed the SP.

I think you are living in a fantasy. There would be no SP at all if it were not for the so called stubborn ones. YOu don't mention names so I presume you mean the SSPX.

How is your TLM going by the way? Good luck with that.

ben Joyce said...

let me say for the record that I read this site all the time and that I highly favor the LM and Church tradition.

Let me also say for the record that those people who think the aparitions at Medjugorje are false or from the devil are wrong.

I have been their twice, and both times to a retreat with Fr. Sudac who has the stigmata, including a cross on his forhead (the devil can do this I know, but in his case it is from God, he has been checked out in Rome)

Pope John Paul II who has a Phd in Mystical Theology AND was POPE has supported the phenomenon and did NOT allow it to be condemned by the local bishop. Pope B.16 is also doing the same.

Medjugorje is the most frequented Marian Shrine in the world. You have to admit that the apparitions have been going on for so long (The Blessed Mother can stay as long as she wants- Do you prefer to kick her out and shut down the largest Marian shrine in the world, whose fruits include untold thousands of conversions, millions communions and rosaries, and thousands of vocations)

John Paul II (who knew more than you do) moved to protect Medjugorje and called it "A continuation of Fatima"

Many traditionalist act as if all Marian activity stopped around 1961 and that there must not be any good fruits post Vatican II and absolutely no good fruits of the Novus Ordo Mass. But God can use all circumstances to do good.

As "Our Lady of Medjugorje" states concerning those who speak against Medjugorje, "they do Satan a favor"

Fr. Gobbi of the Marian Move. of Priests in locution from the Blessed Mother states "the children of Medjugorje to whom I am appearing". So if Medjugorje is false than so it Fr. Gobbi. But Fr. Gobbi was invited to Pope John Paul II's private Mass once a year for many years (8+?)to concelebrate Mass. Is this the mark of a false mystic? I think not.


Many traditionalist, because of their hardness of heart over what became manifest in the Church approx. post 1960 are rejecting the Movement of the Holy Ghost. They attempt to stiffle the Holy Ghost which scripture commands against

What we will see soon is the sequence of the Warning, the miracle, and then perhaps the Chastisment. We will see the truth then and those who have spoken agains Medjugorje will deeply regret having obstructed Grace from God, through the Blessed Mother.

John L said...

'This could undo the fragile basis of the faith of some.'

Well too bad!

Anonymous said...

At long last: Vatican Commission formally to invesitage those who split their infinitives. Now there's something for which a return to the auto-da-fé would be appropriate.

P.K.T.P.

Jordanes said...

Let me also say for the record that those people who think the aparitions at Medjugorje are false or from the devil are wrong.

So you think. Authentic apparitions, however, do not make false predictions and do not endorse the error of religious indifferentism.

I have been their twice, and both times to a retreat with Fr. Sudac who has the stigmata, including a cross on his forhead (the devil can do this I know, but in his case it is from God, he has been checked out in Rome)

And what was Rome's public declaration and judgment regarding the authenticity of Fr. Sudac's stigmata?

Pope John Paul II who has a Phd in Mystical Theology AND was POPE has supported the phenomenon and did NOT allow it to be condemned by the local bishop.

Whatever private support John Paul II may have given Medjugorje, he never officially supported it in the exercise of his papal ministry, and never acted to prevent the local ordinary from declaring his negative judgment or to overturn that judgment. Medjugorje remains condemned and rejected by the local ordinary, and unapproved by the wider Church.

Pope B.16 is also doing the same.

How?

Medjugorje is the most frequented Marian Shrine in the world.

False. According to the Catholic Church, Medjugorje is not a Marian shrine at all.

You have to admit that the apparitions have been going on for so long

No, all we have to admit is that is has been claimed that Mary has been appearing there for a long time. The Church has found no evidence to support those claims, however.

As "Our Lady of Medjugorje" states concerning those who speak against Medjugorje, "they do Satan a favor"

Satan can appear as an angel of light.

Fr. Gobbi of the Marian Move. of Priests in locution from the Blessed Mother states "the children of Medjugorje to whom I am appearing". So if Medjugorje is false than so it Fr. Gobbi.

True, his claimed apparitions and supernatural allocuations may be spurious as well. After all, we know he made a false prediction that Mary told him that in 1987 some of the events predicted by Our Lady of Fatima would be fulfilled that year. None of those events happened in 1987, however. It's inadvisable to put trust in Fr. Gobbi.

But Fr. Gobbi was invited to Pope John Paul II's private Mass once a year for many years (8+?)to concelebrate Mass. Is this the mark of a false mystic? I think not.

Concelebrating Mass with the Pope is hardly an official papal approval of a claim of apparitions.

Many traditionalist, because of their hardness of heart over what became manifest in the Church approx. post 1960 are rejecting the Movement of the Holy Ghost. They attempt to stiffle the Holy Ghost which scripture commands against

Is is for the Church to say if the Holy Spirit is moving at or through Medjugorje. She certainly has never said so. Consequently, one cannot accuse anyone of "stiffling" or stifling the Holy Spirit simply because they accept the Church's guidance and instruction in this matter.

What we will see soon is the sequence of the Warning, the miracle, and then perhaps the Chastisment. We will see the truth then and those who have spoken agains Medjugorje will deeply regret having obstructed Grace from God, through the Blessed Mother.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the Church to approve alleged apparitions that include the false prediction of 9 May 1982, when Ivan Dragicevic wrote that a sign would occur in June that year? No such sign ever occurred. Dragicevic later predicted on 7 March 1985 that the sign (which he had written would be a great shrine in Medjugorje in honor of the alleged apparitions) would occur in June 1985 -- it didn't happen then either.

You can believe the Church and the truth, or you can believe in Medjugorje, but you can't do both. As Elijah asked Israel at Mount Carmel, how long will you bow down between two opinions?

Jordanes said...

So, has this recurring rumor in the Italian press that the Pope has appointed a commission to formally investigate Medjugorje been authenticated yet? Has the Holy See confirmed it? Do we know if they've informed Bishop Peric about this alleged commission?

Anonymous said...

Pope's brother unaware of abuse in choir

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/popes-brother-unaware-of-abuse-in-choir-20100308-pqsv.html

Anonymous said...

As someone noted earlier in the thread, this is just a rumor! I have seen nothing that substantiates the claim of a new commission. People keep beating this dog.

Ogard said...

Bishop of Mostar has put forward his "constat de non supernaturalitate" as his firm opinion, not more, and Abp. Bertone – a lesser authority on this issue than Bishop of Mostar – did not contradict him, but only asserted that the Bishop’s opinion was not to be understood as a position taken by the Church, which is true and the Bishop himself does not deny it. He, however, surely knows what he was talking about because he had the first hand knowledge of local people and circumstances. No authority of the Church knows the facts and circumstances known to him, and his opinion is based on that knowledge which he can’t possibly make public without discrediting in public those involved, including information on their personal life; which he as a Christian cannot do.

It is a bit strange that the “messages” have been going on and on, so repetitive that they amount to a waffle, while “Our Lady” shows no slightest interest in two great evils that affect the Church: liturgical circus, and contraception. Her sole concern seems to be the promotion of pro-medjugorje hysteria. And that against the position taken up by the local bishop - the successor of those chosen by her Son.

If I am not mistaken, all visitors to Medjudorje are, according to Canon Law, under jurisdiction of the Bishop of Mostar and owe him obedience; while "Our Lady" incites them to disobedience.

I see no useful purpose the alleged commission – if it exists - can serve that couldn’t be accomplished more competently by the local hierarchy. The latter has already declared “non constant de supernaturalitate”, and the commission cannot possibly claim more apart from expressing an agreement with the local bishops.

One has to distinguish between negative assertions that refer to the very nature of things, and are impossible absolutely – even God cannot make them possible – like somebody’s claim of having a vision of two hills without valley between them; and those which are not absolutely impossible, like having a vision of Our Lady. The former can be denied without evidence; the latter can be declared more or less likely or unlikely on the basis of available evidence, and thus confirmed with certainty, but it can never be denied with certainty.

Alexander said...

ben Joyce:

1. Fruits mean nothing if they are mixed.

2. I know this is going to sound insane but a Pope's opinion can be… wrong! JPII might not have had all the information he needed in forming his private opinion.

3. No one is saying that Marian apparitions stopped in 1961.

4. Finally, read Davies’ material on this subject, you will see the lies, well documented. I have seen no one refute it.

Anonymous said...

While I'm happy Rome is finally going to act, I'm afraid it's too late. After viewing the video, the people and the town have too much invested in this charade. A mini-schism is coming. They'll end up like the Old Catholics.

Brian said...

One has to distinguish between negative assertions that refer to the very nature of things, and are impossible absolutely – even God cannot make them possible – like somebody’s claim of having a vision of two hills without valley between them; and those which are not absolutely impossible, like having a vision of Our Lady.

It is logically impossible for Our Lady to say something heretical.

If any visionary claims that Our Lady said something that is heretical, it is absolutely impossible that those words were spoken by Our Lady.

Anonymous said...

There would be no SP at all if it were not for the so called stubborn ones. YOu don't mention names so I presume you mean the SSPX.
Not just them, but also others who have not formally committed the folly of schismatic acts but speak and act as if they were the only true Church. However, that SP was made possible by SSPX's attitude - which could only end in schism as history has proved - is the Lefebvrite narrative they'd like us to buy into, to add insult to the many injuries we all have suffered over the years in defense of sound liturgy agaisnt modernist fascism.

Besides, at first they were trying to save the 1965 Missal, and not the 1962 one, with all the prayer of the faithful nonsense and so forth. Secondly whatever merit they might have had for voicing opposition to the liturgical shipwreck back in the 70s, they completely wasted it by serving their pride and not the Church with their nearly sedevacantist claims and their attitude that made us loose the support of lots of people of good will, including a few bishops and officials of the Roman curia. SP was made possible by Benedict XVI whom they have defamed for 30 years, and by - yes - John Paul II who was about to issue a similar MP himself, he who made J. Ratzinger the prefect of CDF and with his help stopped the 1970's marxist takeover of the Church and the world and prepared the ground for a true renewal of the Church. We owe SP to all those who DESPITE the discredit fallen on all sincere liturgical traditionalist because of fanatics, have resisted for all these years. Of course we owe it mainly to the grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ, who - despite what certain alleged guardians of "tradition" seem to think, or at least imply - is still firmly in control of His Church, and is Church is still the one visible in His Vicar and the Hierarchy, in spite of all human weaknesses and betrayals.

How is your TLM going by the way? Good luck with that
Oh, it's going extremely well, thank you, absolutely beyond all rosiest expectations. It's well attended, mostly by young people, mostly people who are not from our old traddie circles but have simply discovered the traditional liturgy and were not put off by the "sour grape award" attitude that has been for decades the trademark of our groups. The choir is superb and more and more bishops and officials of the curia keep coming to celebrate for us. More kids will receive their first communion and confirmation soon, and with God's help more and more people will discover that traditionalist are just normal Catholics who want to be what their fathers were, and not a bunch of pains in the neck at war with anyone not sharing even the details of their romanticized idea of 1950. It's going so well that I oftne wonder if I am dreaming, especially when I think of how it was around here, back when SSPX had made a desert all around us. And after 1988 I really thought it was all over barring a miracle. Then we had a miracle.

However, this is all way off topic and I apologize for contributing to this drift from the real subject of this discussion.

Anonymous said...

I agree with anonymus 08 March, 2010 11:49

"Of course we owe it mainly to the grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ, who - despite what certain alleged guardians of "tradition" seem to think, or at least imply - is still firmly in control of His Church, and is Church is still the one visible in His Vicar and the Hierarchy, in spite of all human weaknesses and betrayals"

My concern with SSFX is that they are too rigid to reality that the Catholic church could not stay in 1950's the Pastoral approach that priests from the 1950's and the SSFX
take towards the faithful is more than dogmatic but judgemental we are all sinners and many of you writing in this blog no matter how much you defend tradition are not saints many of you have given into the sins that most the human race commits from envy to covetting your neighbor's wife and goods,to giving into all kinds of sins and to even having someone in your family that might have behaviors or tendencies not accepted by the Church.

I went to a Mass of SSFX and I saw all this women wearing dress and head gear or vail I thought it was all very cultish and the reality for me at least is that I recognize my weakness but I don't want to be hypocrite ignoring that yes I fall and that I am not perfect. I pray to the Almighty to help me lead a good life being faithful as much as possible to Christ recognizing that I am a sinner but through his grace and a serious act of repentance through the sacrament of confession I will return to the be in friendship with Our Lord Jesus Christ. I have to say to me no matter how much many Traditionalist in this blog may pout and try to correct me you are not innocent holy angels, definately not in the world we live in.

I can't believe that Our Lord as many Sedevacantist claim left his Church without the guide of the Holy Spirit, The Pope is still the Pope and SSFX not only dissobeys but also through various websites that seem to be not related to the Society but are either run by members of the society Saint Pius X or by the society itself claim that the seat of Peter is empty and there has not been in the Chair of Peter a Pope since Pius XII.

I personally believe that even though most of the Cardinals might be traitors to the Faith some even if only one in the entire Church is faithful the Holy Spirit has not left it and SSFX to me until the Pope or when and if the Pope recognizes it, The SSFX are still very arrogant and dissobedient to the point of making Archbishop Lefebrev the only authority of Tradition.

One more thing with the respect of the blog regulators I hope they don't ignore my message or block it from being published.
The SSFX seems to ignore that women have contributed greatly to society in different fields since Vatican II and even though I might seem to support the extreme abuses of Vatican II no I am not but I appreciate the opportunity given to women to have careers and men to help around the home instead of being the sole authority in the family or the so called God given right to be the only providers or even use that excuse to abuse their wives like many men did before the 1950's. My impression is that for the fraternity and many Traditionalist women should go back to stay home moms,or become teachers and nurses the only careers acceptable for women in mentallity of the Church of the middle ages and the earlier part of the 20th century.

I believe in respect for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass but SSFX and its unrealitic way of thinking about many issues bring me serious concerns.

Dan the Old Rite Man. said...

Anonymous,

The FSSPX are not "stuck" in the 1950's.
They are "stuck" in the whole history of Catholicism.
The Church and Her Mass are called Catholic, which means "universal" or for all time and everywhere, not just for a mere 10 years from 1950-1960.
Women wear veils and dresses in the Mass at FSSPX and many other non FSSPX Catholic Masses because Christ and purity demand modesty.
Veils are worn because St Paul commanded all women to cover their heads during Mass and all men to bare their heads during Mass.
This is a law of the Church and is written into the Code of Canon Law, which is still in effect, else men would now allowed to be wear hats in church.
Would you describe it as "cultish" to see women in every decade of the Churches history wearing hats or veils at Mass?
This is how it always was at Mass and the FSSPX are just doing what the Church has always and everywhere has done.
God bless you.

Anonymous said...

In response to Dan the Old Rite Man

"They are "stuck" in the whole history of Catholicism."
Well I have no problem with that, except that my point about being stuck in the Middle Ages or in the 1950's, it is still valid.
SSFX as well as many Traditionalist are very good at judging.

Human beings change not the Teaching of the Church not its dogma but maybe just maybe Christ wanted his church to change its Pastoral way of dealing with the faithful in a more realistic and maybe less judgemental way and less rigid, hyporcritical and even pharasaic way.

Christ said
-You shall not commit adultery.
But I say to you,
everyone who looks at a woman with lust
has already committed adultery with her in his heart"

How many men in todays world or even in the middle ages run to the confessionary to confess this sin when you see a women walking down the street whether she is wearing a dress or pants?

Dan this is my question to you as well in response to your comment:
"Women wear veils and dresses in the Mass at FSSPX and many other non FSSPX Catholic Masses because Christ and purity demand modesty."

Christ also said: If your right eye causes you to sin,
tear it out and throw it away.
It is better for you to lose one of your members
than to have your whole body thrown into Gehenna.
And if your right hand causes you to sin,
cut it off and throw it away.

How many of us or you have done that?

In charity I have responded to the best of my ability to your response to my earlier comment.
I am a woman who God is my witness I live a good life not perfect but I pray constantly, I go to confession every two days or once a week to keep myself in a state of grace, I pray at night, I pray at work, I pray when I run, pray my rosary while I drive, I praise God I thank Him, I go to Adoration and I try to practice charity as much as possible for the love Him who reedeem me.

But I love being confortable and no I will not go alone with some old and unnecessary traditions.

SSFX and Traditionalist can pout and stomp the ground with their feet I will still continue wearing my pants, blue jeans, etc.
I dress clean, decent, but confortable and no I will not wear a veil just because SSFX, judging Traditionalists say so. I wearing a veil it's not what is going to gain me access to heaven.
God alone will be the Judge of my actions and I don't need to convice the readers of Rorate Caeli of how much I try to lead a good life in this difficult times for Christianity.

If I gave details of how I live my life it is so that I can make a point that GOD's grace has not left us just because things in the Catholic Church are not like they used to.

We human beings don't stay the same, circumstance, situations make a difference in every age. If we did not accept some of the inventions and technology that were invented in the 20th century, many may I point invented with the help and aid of women in different fields of the industry we could not be commenting in this blog today.

Some customs regarding head gear for women or only wearing a dress etc, or like I read in some of the previous posts in Rorate about the Sedia Gestatoria, to me personaly is obssesive and plainly absurd, it reminded me of when the Pharasees ask Jesus why his disaples didn't wash their hands or why did He heal on the Sabath.

Feel free to disagree again with me, but you will not change my mind as I know I will not change yours.

May the peace of Christ be with you.

PS:Traditionalists believe that God is only going to purify through fire those that don't agree with them, they, will just get a free pass to Heaven but maybe God has allowed the liberalism within the Church so that some of the old traditions like women just staying at home, wearing a veil or only wearing dresses or any other sins and abominations the Traditionalist find in others can be question as well and why not even change it, if need be.

God is still in control don't forget that.

Anonymous said...

Some comments are off topic but necessary to hear and read to ponder on.

Anonymous said...

in response to the comment made by Dan the Old Rite Man

"Women wear veils and dresses in the Mass at FSSPX and many other non FSSPX Catholic Masses because Christ and purity demand modesty."

Then I say men should have their eyes pluck or tear out since many men are so visual that even a broom with skirt put around it, seem to be enough for men's imagination to go wild.

In response to "Veils are worn because St Paul commanded all women to cover their heads during Mass and all men to bare their heads during Mass."

I haven't seen the heavens fall down to the ground because women don't wear a veil to go to Church anymore.

In my opinion veils for women should be something that they could choose to wear instead of being obligatory, some people can't wear things on their head or just simply don't like it, I don't imagine God being so offended for not wearing a veil to Church.
That is something like SSFX would say wear a veil or you will go to hell for you are offending God for not being modest. The devil will get you.

Dan the Old Rite Man. said...

Anonymous,

What is this group that you continue to refer to SSFX"?

I assume that you are not primarily an English speaker and we are having some difficulties in translation here.
Of course the skies do not fall down when a woman does not bare her head during the Sacrifice, or if a man wears his fedora during Mass,
nether does the earth normally open up and swallow men when one commits a sacrilige.
This does not mean that not wearing a head covering at Mass for a lady or wearing a hat in church for a man is acceptable.
It is not, and has always been the case in the history of the Church all the way back to the catacombs in Rome.
No one has ever said that you will go to hell if a woman does not wear a hat in Church for it is only a venial sin, and does not destry sanctifying grace.
Rather it is a norm and a discipline of the Church SSPX or not.
Anon,
My foreign languages are not that good, but if you want to email me with any questions you have about the Faith I would be happy to answwer them if I can
My email is
danphunter1@aol.com
God bless

Tominellay said...

"Anonymous" (06 March, 2010 15:11): are you a.k.a. Fabrizio?

Anonymous said...

In response to Dan the Old Rite Man
Try to avoid the point by focusing of my mispelling of the SEVERE Judgemental Schismatic Society of Saint Pius X.

To make you happy whether I speak a foreign language or not it's not the point if you responded to my previous comments you understood very well that I was refering to SSPX.
God Bless you Dan.

Tim said...

Off topic, here is an extremely interesting interview (in French) with SSPX Superior General Msgr. Fellay concerning the ongoing discussions in Rome:

http://www.laportelatine.org/archives/entret/2010/FellayRome100308/Fellay100308.php

Ogard said...

Brian (March 8, at 11:38): “It is logically impossible for Our Lady to say something heretical.”

The example given comes, like the example of “two hills without valley between them”, under the heading of “negative assertions that refer to the very nature of things, and are impossible absolutely” (March 8, at 5:51).

But, one has to distinguish a message as communicated by somebody, from its content as communicated by a visionary. The former can be genuine in spite of the latter (i.e. its content as communicated by the visionary) being false. - A visionary can misunderstand a genuine message, communicate it inadequately, or deliberately distort an well-understood message. Furthermore, the message can be distorted in the process of editing, transmission, or translation from original records, and the records themselves can be inaccurate.

So, while what you say is true, it doesn’t logically follow that a person who claims to have received a message the content of which can be proved to be heretical (just for interest: is there any heretical message on record?), received no message at all or had no vision at all, on that and any other occasions.

One heretical “message” does indeed put in doubt authenticity of all of them, but does not rule them all out. They would all have to be heretical to be ruled out.


Jordanes (March 6 at 15:56): “It is possible for the Church to decide that a claimed apparition is constat de non supernaturalitate, which means the apparition didn't happen at all, since a genuine apparition is necessarily supernatural.”

Makes no sense! Could we have it in the form of syllogism so that the premises may be verified, and conclusion: “It is possible for the Church…etc” seen clearly and confirmed.

I doubt that the Church has ever declared a phenomenon as "constat de non supernaturalitate", without qualification. Bishop Peric hasn’t done it either. So, I do not expect from the supposed commission anything new.

Jordanes said...

“It is possible for the Church to decide that a claimed apparition is constat de non supernaturalitate, which means the apparition didn't happen at all, since a genuine apparition is necessarily supernatural.”

Makes no sense! Could we have it in the form of syllogism so that the premises may be verified, and conclusion: “It is possible for the Church…etc” seen clearly and confirmed.


What makes no sense would be to claim that a genuine apparition isn't supernatural. One of the possible verdicts the Church can render is constat de non supernaturalitate, which necessarily entails that there is nothing heavenly about it, since that's what constat de non supernaturalitate means.

http://medjugorjedocuments.blogspot.com/2008/09/apparitions-types-of-decisions-church.html

Brian said...

A visionary can misunderstand a genuine message, communicate it inadequately, or deliberately distort an well-understood message.

St. Teresa of Avila makes it clear that a genuine locution cannot be understood and is not forgotten. Are you saying that Our Lady would repeatedly appear to one who deliberately distorts her message?

Jordanes said...

As for the concern about trying to prove a negative -- one way to prove something isn't supernatural is to prove that it IS something that is not supernatural or not of heaven. If a claimed apparition is established by the evidence to have a natural, or even a demonic, explanation, then the Church can declare that no heavenly apparitions took place.

finecrown said...

Please be careful not to split infinitives--don't join yourselves willy-nilly to those to whom it is indifferent.

Dymphna said...

There's going to be open schism which is fine because we've had a schism in all but name for some time now. The Medjugorje industry will not go down without a fight. Too many people make their livings off this thing.

Diane M. Korzeniewski, OCDS said...

It may be of interest to readers here, that Patrick Coffin will be hosting Patrick Madrid on March 24th on Catholic Answers Live and the topic will be.... Medjugorje.

You can get to the schedule here, and find a station or get streaming info from that page.

Audio will be archived so you can listen after the fact.

Patrick Coffin dives into this thread, I think on page 2 to explain.

Anonymous said...

There has been no confirmation from the Vatican on the formation of the commission.

go to:
http://www.eurasiareview.com/2010/03/32238-vatican-reportedly-to-investigate.html

Anonymous said...

The Catholic Answers show has been cancelled at the request of EWTN.

How many times must this ludicrous and bogus circus be investigated? It is obviously a fraud, and I wonder how many of its' cult members will walk out of the Church when they pronounce it as so.

Delphina

antonio said...

Father Thwaires S.J. has published time ago a pamphlet on fake and true seers. It's on the web. Read

Anonymous said...

"The Catholic Answers show has been cancelled at the request of EWTN."

Thank God! The last time I saw it, two former protestants now "Catholics" were talking about how speaking in "tongues" may not be officially supported by the Church but is a great "witness" to the Faith.

Where do they come up with these guys?

Jordanes said...

It wasn't "The Catholic Answers" show that has been canceled, but the abovementioned "Catholic Answers show about Medjugorje," scheduled for March 24, involving Patrick Coffin and Patrick Madrid.

Anonymous said...

From Vaticaniksti Andrea Tornelli comes extra information about the members of the commission and Ruini´s stance:

http://blog.ilgiornale.it/tornielli/2010/03/18/il-vaticano-indaga-su-medjugorje-e-si-affida-a-ruini/

The Vatican is investigating Medjugorje. It relies on Ruini

In the paper today I speak of the news confirmed yesterday by the Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi, who announced the start of the work of the Committee on the apparitions of Medjugorje, led by Cardinal Camillo Ruini. Lombardi did not say anything about the composition of the group led by the Vicar of Rome. As learned the newspaper, committee members are the cardinal Vinko Pulijc, archbishop of Sarajevo Josip Bozanic, archbishop of Zagreb, Julian Herranz, a former president of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts. He was called to join Tony Anatrella, French Jesuit and psychologist, along with other experts in Mariology. Among the members there are also the laity. But the most significant news is the absence in the list of around twenty people chosen guided by Cardinal Ruini, the current bishop of Mostar, Ratko Peric, strongly object to the authenticity of the apparitions, and convinced that nothing supernatural happens in village of Herzegovina. You can not make predictions on the time taken to reach a verdict, but the intent of ruins is not to lose time and arrive at a first glance at the end of 2010.
The former Vicar of Rome's ruling on the case Medjugorje positions: his secretary - now Bishop - Mauro Parmeggiani, had gone there with some pilgrims, and the same cardinal close to him emotionally involved in this phenomenon.
The fundamental starting point, however, is the opposition expressed by both the bishops who succeeded in leading the diocese of Mostar since the beginning of the apparitions, in contrast to what happened for example in Lourdes, where it was the diocesan bishop to recognize 'authenticity of the visions of Saint Bernadette Soubirous. The bishop of Mostar at the time of the apparitions, Pavao Zanic, had come to Medjugorje to define "the greatest scam in the history of the Church." But in April 1991, the Yugoslav Bishops' Conference had been far more cautious and had used in its declaration, the classic expression of prudence, not being able to either approve or to reject, a sign that if there was enough evidence to say "yes" , there was no evidence that this was a scam as championed by the Bishop: 'Based on the research made so far, we can not conclude that these apparitions and supernatural phenomena. "
According to several witnesses, however, Pope John Paul II was personally convinced of the authenticity.

Anonymous said...

In this long series of comments I believe that the truest observations lie not with the truth or falsehood of what is happening at Medjugorje, but the enormous economic investment in the place. The 'apparitions' have transformed the local economy and to declare them false will bring economic ruin to many. If declared false, will those who have built substantial houses there in order to be close to the Gospa move on? If so, who will buy their houses? Who will stay in the hotels? Without the Gospa Medjugorje has few attractions. This is peasant opportunism at its worst.

I have only been once but while finding many aspets of the life there edifying, I was amazed by the religious infantilism and superstition of many otherwise intelligent and balanced pilgrims. Eg 'Do you smell the violets? Padre Pio is with us.' 'Our Lady will be reading our letters now.' And so on. Good things happen there but I cannot help believing that they are based on falsehood. While all around lie the ruins caused by the recent civil war. Horrible.

Jordanes said...

But the most significant news is the absence in the list of around twenty people chosen guided by Cardinal Ruini, the current bishop of Mostar, Ratko Peric, strongly object to the authenticity of the apparitions, and convinced that nothing supernatural happens in village of Herzegovina.

The absence of Bishop Peric from the commission is neither significant nor surprising. The bishop has already issued his own judgment on the matter and reiterated it constantly. Since he has already reached a judgment, he cannot serve on a commission intended to impartially examine the evidence and render a final verdict.

What would be surprising is if this commision reaches a verdict that is less than the one reached by the bishops of the former Yugoslavia -- one might see an even more severe verdict (i.e. Bishop Peric's), but approval of Medjugorje is extremely unlikely given all of the irregularities, heresies, and false prophecies that the "seers" have been involved in.

LeonG said...

In my earlier posting I stated over 30,000 apparitions but a recent report claims over 40,000 so the bandwagon rolls on with ever-increasing speed. It could well be "constat de non supernaturalitate". This is a mockery of Our Blessed Lady. How would She ever countenance such disobedience?

Ralph Roister-Doister said...

I see the foolish, infantile acceptance of every word, every gesture, every burble of every pope -- particularly "The Great", superfabulous, ultra-astounding JP2 -- in the remarks of many of the 69 comments above. I don't know if this is stupidity, mental laziness or pure naivete, but it is not part of any Catholic teaching I have ever seen, nor wish to see.

Anonymous said...

"I don't know if this is stupidity, mental laziness or pure naivete"

It's pride. The Pope's doing it, so we're excused and don't have to use conscience anymore.

john konnor said...

http://medjugorje1.blogspot.ca/