Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Rome Makes A Statement On A Medjugorje Priest


Guest KevinSymonds

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Ziggamafu' post='1645526' date='Sep 2 2008, 03:54 PM']In any case, I'm under the impression that the secrets are supposed to come to pass within the visionaries' lifetimes, beginning as soon as the final secret is shared with the final visionary. So, if true, it would seem that peculiar things should start happening within the next decade or so...[/quote]
most likely next year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the article in Medjugorje Magazine, Fr. Vego WAS still a priest, and he WAS still a Franciscan, who did on rare occasions wear his habit, when he impregnated his Sister co-worker.

The Bishop is right to feel that the disobedience of the seers and their Franciscan hangers-on is the strongest proof against authenticity. Everyone always brings up Catherine of Siena and Pope Gregory when they want to be disobedient or wag their tongues against legitimate authority. Rad Trads do it, leftist dissenters do it, all to justify what is really unjustifiable, and what a horrible fate for St. Catherine to be abused so.

Jesus Christ Himself in the divine economy gave authority over souls to Bishop Zanic (and also to his successor, who incidentally also wants the seers to stop promoting the messages). When he raises his voice to govern, feed, or teach his flock, it is the voice of Christ HIMSELF. We ought to run, to fall over each other in hurrying to obey the sweet commands Our Lord gives us in the person of our bishop. All of the great saints knew and know this. St. Catherine herself constantly urged obedience to the ecclesiastical authorities; she once wrote that the Pope was "Christ on earth, whom you are all obliged to obey even to the point of death. Whoever refuses to obey him is ... living in damnation." There is a difference between criticism, exhortation and disobedience. Our Lady would [b]never[/b] incite disobedience against Bishops and priests.

A good contrast to the Medjugorje debacle can be found in the life of St. Pio. Although he suffered a great deal from his religious superiors who were embarrassed by the public furor over his stigmata and other gifts, St. Pio was always a model of obedience.

In 2006 the Bishop called on the seers and others to once and for all demonstrate ecclesastical obedience. He asked them for the [i]bare minimum[/i] of ceasing to publicize the messages they were supposed to be getting from Our Lady. I myself had taken more of an ambivalent attitude toward the alleged apparitions until I read that article. I thought to myself, "well, he's laying down the gauntlet, the proof will be in the pudding." Needless to say his request was ignored.

Is it possible that the Church will declare Medjugorje worthy of belief? Certainly. Please don't get me wrong, I would actually hope so, the more Marian apparitions the better! :) But that wouldn't imply approval of all the scandal, division and disobedience that has poured from there over the years.


[quote name='Deb' post='1645496' date='Sep 2 2008, 03:47 PM']There were a lot of problems with the Bishop and the Franciscans which had been occurring off and on for years prior to Medjugorje. Fr. Vega was actually defrocked in January of 1982 and it had nothing to do with getting a nun pregnant. It had everything to do with the problems that had been going on between the Bishop and the Franciscans since 1968. If while he was no longer a Franciscan or a priest, he got a nun pregnant, it has no bearing on Medjugorje in any way.
An objective statement about what the Blessed Mother may have or may not have said is below. To imply that the Blessed Mother would have approved of a priest getting a nun pregnant is really offensive.

At the beginning, Bishop Zanic had also believed in the apparitions. He had stated publicly, "The children are not lying". In his statement in 1984 he admits that he, for his part, had thought, "If the scandalous "Herzegovina-Case" .... could not have been solved with human means then maybe God wanted to send us Our Lady to bring the disobedient back to obey and love the Church". But what then brought about this change of mind in him? Here the case of the two Franciscans Ivica Vego and Ivan Prusina plays an important role. Both chaplains were suspended by Bishop Zanic because of disobedience and, as a result of his pressure, they were expelled from the Order. In this matter, the Gospa supposedly said that the bishop had acted too hastily, that both were innocent. From there on, it seems, the bishop turned into a radical opponent of Medjugorje. In the statement of 1984, he writes, "The attacks of Our Lady against the bishop and the defence of the ex-Franciscans of Mostar were the strongest proofs against the authenticity of the apparitions". Thus, in short, his train of thought is: A mother of God, who criticizes a bishop, cannot be the Mother of God! To this, I want to make two comments. From the history of the Church, we know enough examples when prophets criticized high and the highest officials of the Church. For example, what the saintly prophetic women, Birgitta of Sweden and Catherine of Siena, told Pope Gregory XI. on behalf of God in order to induce him to leave Avignon and return to Rome, by far surpasses any criticism and admonition that Bishop Zanic got to hear. But one should note that these messages were handled very discretely, as personal messages by the Franciscans and the visionaries and were never published. Bishop Zanic did this himself. Probably because he thought that this was the strongest proof against the authenticity of the apparitions. Everyone can judge for himself how effective this argument is. The second comment: In the case of the two Franciscans Vega and Prusina, Rome's judgement is quite interesting: They were treated unjustly and were expelled without the necessary procedure. Doesn't this almost sound like what the Gospa supposedly had said, that the bishop had acted too hurriedly?

Oh, that also is from Medjugorje.org[/quote]

Edited by Maggie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Church is holy. It's members are sinners. Always look at the fruits.

What bothers me the most and I have said this many times, is that there are people out there who adamantly work hard to tear down Medjugorje. I believe that to be the workings of Satan who has very little ground there.
I would be surprised if everyone in and connected with Medjugorje never sinned. That would truly be a miracle.
I can't be completely objective because Medjugorje is where I was brought when I was a non believer, a sinner and living in despair and God came to me there and brought me to him. The Blessed Mother used people around me to get me there to begin with. So, I firmly believe the Gospa is there and will remain there until the work she is doing for Our Father has been accomplished.

As for when that happens, only the visionaries know. Three of them still do not have all ten secrets. Mirjana will be the one to give the secrets to Fr. Peter during her lifetime. She turned 43 this year. Mirjana says though, do not give one second to worrying or wondering about what is to come. You could die tomorrow. Live your life for the Lord every day. :saint:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest KevinSymonds

Many people claim that if you speak against Medjugorje, you are working for the devil. Medjugorje is not an approved apparition site so people are free to express their positive or negative view of Medjugorje.

It is a two-way street that many proponents of Medjugorje often forget. They tell those with negative views of Medjugorje, "the Church hasn't ruled on it so don't say it is not of God."

It's a two-way street.

Is stigmatizing someone as an agent of the devil a "fruit" of Medjugorje? Should we be demonizing people who have a different take on the subject?

A serious problem with discernment of apparitions nowadays is people viewing "the fruits" as the end-all, be-all authority and actually use it synonymously as "The end justifies the means." That is a moral proposition explicitly condemned by the Catholic Church.

"Fruits" have their place in the discernment of apparitions, according to Rome. Both Cardinal Ratzinger as well as the CDF's 1978 document indicate this fact.

No matter the conversions, no matter how many rosaries are claimed to turn to gold, no matter how many flying pilgrims (I exaggerate to make a point), etc., is not enough to justify us to turn our minds against the rampant disobedience that occurs [i]every minute[/i] in Medjugorje. It is certainly not enough to demonize Medjugorje's bishop who, I would add, has remained steadfast in telling the simple history of Medjugorje from the ecclesiastical end of things.

But wait, he is against Medjugorje so he is an agent of the devil.

Alas...who should we turn to for the truth?

Oh, yes, the "visions."

-KJS

Edited by KevinSymonds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You only show your ignorance and hostility towards something you do not understand by making statements like, [b]rampant disobedience that occurs every minute in Medjugorje[/b]

The Bishop in Mostar is not involved in Medjugorje and has not been for a long time. The matter was taken out of his hands (by the Vatican) and handed to a national commission headed by Cardinal Puljic'. It was Cardinal Ratzinger who rejected the document by the Bishop of Mostar that condemned Medjugorje to begin with. That was done 22 years ago!

Response from Bishop Bertone(the secretary to the congregation presided over by Cardinal Ratzinger) to Bishop Aubry in 1998 laid out the following:

1 -The declarations of the Bishop of Mostar only reflect his personal opinion. Consequently, they are not an official and definitive judgment requiring assent and obedience.
2 - One is directed to the declaration of Zadar, which leaves the door open to future investigations. In the meanwhile private pilgrimages with pastoral accompaniment for the faithful are permitted.
3 - All pilgrims may go to Medjugorje in complete obedience to the Church.

From Cardinal Schonborn,
Cardinal Christoph Schönborn comments:

“The letter of Archbishop Bertone to the Bishop of Le Reunion sufficiently makes clear what has always been the official position of the hierarchy during recent years concerning Medjugorje: namely, that it knowingly leaves the matter undecided. The supernatural character is not established; such were the words used by the former conference of bishops of Yugoslavia in Zadar in 1991. It really is a matter of wording, which knowingly leaves the matter pending. It has not been said that the supernatural character is substantially established. Furthermore, it has not been denied or discounted that the phenomena may be of a supernatural nature. There is no doubt that the Magisterium of the Church does not make a definite declaration while the extraordinary phenomena are going on in the form of apparitions or other means. Indeed, it is the mission of the shepherds to promote what is growing, to encourage the fruits which are appearing, to protect them -if need be- from the dangers which are obviously everywhere. As with Lourdes and other apparition sites, it is also necessary to see to it that the original gift is not stifled by unfortunate developments. Medjugorje is not invulnerable. That is why it is and will be so important that Bishops also publicly take under their protection the pastoral pronouncement of Medjugorje so that the obvious fruits that are in that place might be protected from any possible unfortunate developments. I believe that the words of Mary at Cana: “Do whatever He tells you,” make up the substance of what She says throughout the centuries. Mary helps us to hear Jesus. She desires with her whole heart and with all her strength that we do what He tells us. This is what I wish for all the communities of prayer which were formed from Medjugorje; this is what I wish for our diocese and for the entire Church.

Perhaps personally, I have not yet gone to Medjugorje; but in a way I have gone there through the people I know or those I have met who, themselves, have gone to Medjugorje. And I see good fruits in their lives. I should be lying if I denied that these fruits exist. These fruits are tangible, evident. And in our diocese and in many other places, I observe graces of conversion, graces of a life of supernatural faith, of vocations, of healings, of a rediscovering of the Sacraments, of Confession. These are all things which do not mislead. This is the reason why I can only say that it is these fruits which enable me, as bishop, to pass a moral judgment. And if as Jesus said, we must judge the tree

1998: Returning from a mission in Romania, Sister Emmanuel had the opportunity to attend a breakfast with Cardinal Shonborn in Vienna. There Cardinal Schonborn recounted an interesting meeting he had with Cardinal Ratzinger. Sister reports: “During the late 90s, as Cardinal Schonborn was visiting Cardinal Ratzinger in Rome, he told Cardinal Ratzinger: “If one day you close down Medjugorje, I'll have to close down my Seminary in Vienna because the great majority of my seminarians received their calling through Medjugorje.” Cardinal Ratzinger replied immediately: "We have no plan to close down Medjugorje!"



I will form my opinions, in obedience with my Church and base it on my own personal revelations and the fruits of my own life, the quality of the people who live in Medjugorje and the hundreds of people I know who have been there and whose lives were altered forever by it. Feel free to take yours from...??????????? Oh, a bad priest was there.

Pope John Paul II had great love for Medjugorje and the visionaries. That alone is good enough for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest KevinSymonds

There is another claim of Medjugorje supporters that often comes out when someone is trying to have a constructive conversation on the topic of Medjugorje. That claim is often, "You don't know what you are talking about."

It has been my experience that this particular claim is oftentimes without basis. Those people who tend to be the leading questioners of Medjugorje are quite educated and are conversationally fluent in the facts and history of Medjugorje. They are all quite good people and I know this because I personally know or have corresponded with a few of them.

However, the above people suffer from the stigma of being agents for the devil because they look at the Church's history, tradition and criteria for discernment of private revelation and believe they have found discrepancies between that tradition and the claims of Medjugorje. When they try to publicize this knowledge, they are ruthlessly attacked by Medjugorje supporters (and/or the Medjugorje establishment) in the worst way possible--their good names are slandered and their characters assassinated.

They have tasted the bitter fruits of Medjugorje. It is really sad and I think these people deserve better than what they receive from Medjugorje supporters.

Investigating could save the Medjugorje supporters' souls.

Instead, supporters give credence to documents whose original meanings and contexts have been spun around by what is called the "Medjugorje propaganda machine" that these documents are practically unrecognizable anymore.

A fundamental fact of any document that is published on Medjugorje is that any statement from 1991 onwards refers back to a declaration made in Zadar, 1991. This document written in 1991 is what I call the "ruling document" on Medjugorje.

This document is often cited by later documents. Yet a key element that is terribly neglected by Medjugorje's supporters is what the document said regarding pilgrimages to Medjugorje.

In short, Zadar 1991 was explicit in saying that no pilgrimages are allowed to Medjugorje with the intent of proving them authentic or with the understanding that they are considered as authentic by the Church. Even the pro-Medjugorje web site medjugorje.org accepts this interpretation (however so they don't observe it).

Logically speaking, this clause in Zadar 1991 forbids about 90-99% of all pilgrimages to Medjugorje. Why? Well, ask yourself...why do people go to Medjugorje?

Because it is a popular vacation resort spot? No.

Because it is a beautiful area that is just ideal for newlyweds? No (although I confess that the area is beautiful, speaking as one who was in Medjugorje 11 years ago).

Because people are claiming the Mother of God appears there? [b]Yes! Again and again: YES![/b]

People go to Medjugorje because they believe the Mother of God appears there and they hear stories that are all based in these alleged visions. That is a direct violation of Zadar 1991's terms and is grounds for the accusation of disobedience.

It is futile and utterly ridiculous to argue otherwise why people--[i]en masse[/i]--go to Medjugorje. There is no other reason why "millions" of people go there every year. If someone can create an argument that 2 million people go to Medjugorje each year simply because they are curious or wish to take a vacation there from a brochure they read in their local travel agent's office, I'd be glad to see such an argument made.

Meanwhile, I take private statements that are attributed to John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger very lightly. The Church is governed by public documents. I pick up a copy of Denis Nolan and Sr. Immanuel's book "Medjugorje: What Does the Church Say?" and thumb through it. To be quite honest, I just shake my head. It is not about official Church documents. Instead, this book is a collection of alleged private statements (many of which can not be verified without considerable effort) and must be taken on simple trust by those who say the Pope or Ratzinger told me "X" about Medjugorje.

Othertimes I will take the comments and question them so as to understand the precise meaning of the person who is said to have made the statement. For instance, I have read on the Internet that Cardinal Ratzinger once remarked to Cardinal Schonborn of Austria, "We have no plans to close down Medjugorje!" This is on the testimony of Cardinal Schonborn himself, who I may add, has no authority whatsoever on the subject of Medjugorje. Any statement attributed to him is [i]his own personal, private statement[/i]. At any rate, I ask myself, what did Ratzinger mean?

Did he mean Rome supports and believes in Medjugorje against the evil Bishop of Mostar-Duvno?

Did he mean that Rome is taking the "wait and see" approach typical of Bishops in order to discern the events?

Or are people simply making more of the "quote" than meets the eye?

I will let people decide for themselves based upon legitimate criteria and knowledge of the faith, not to mention a little common sense. Just start with the simple question, "What did Ratzinger mean?" or "What was the context?"

There are words but then there is how they are used. Context determines meaning. Think about it. No one needs their own personal revelations to figure out common sense and form their own opinion.

Also, for many years now I keep hearing that the Bishop of Mostar-Duvno has been stripped of his authority to judge Medjugorje or that he is no longer involved in the discernment.

Can anyone please provide the Vatican's letter with the protocol number on it that states the Bishop's authority was removed? I have yet to see this letter signed in Ratzinger's own hand and I would be very glad to finally see a copy of it.

Also, if Bishop Peric is no longer involved, why did Rome ask him to publish this knowledge concerning Fr. Vlasic instead of just publicizing the document on its own authority?

-KJS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ziggamafu' post='1646821' date='Sep 3 2008, 10:39 PM']Seconded.

And an interesting debate it might be![/quote]

I agree :) Although it is a debate that has been gone through before....

I recently read a wonderful story about St. Margaret Mary, one of my patronesses, that has some application here. If you remember the story of the Sacred Heart you know that St. Margaret Mary did not have an easy time with her religious superiors.

[quote]St. Margaret Mary Alacoque was told by her Superior not to do something ordered to her in a vision. She consulted Our Lord next time He appeared, who told her:

"Therefore not only do I desire that you should do what your Superiors command, but also that [b]you should do nothing of all that I command without their consent[/b]. I love obedience, and without it no one can please me." ("Autobiography" # 47).

He also told her (ibid. # 57): "Listen, My Daughter, and do not lightly believe and trust every spirit, for Satan is angry and will try to deceive you. So do nothing without the approval of those who guide you. Being thus under the authority of obedience, his efforts against you will be in vain, for [b]he has no power over the obedient[/b]."[/quote]

Edited by Maggie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saint Therese

I've heard a lot of very inspirational "conversion" stories of people who went to Medjugorje.
However, I've also heard that several of the "seers" have become wealthy off their so called visions. Also, priests have acted in defiance of Rome; all this makes me question seriously the legitimacy of the apparitions.
Our Lady at Lourdes repeated strict instructions to Bernadette that she was not to recieve any form of payment whatever for any reason due to the apparitions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what one considers rich. I have seen no evidence in the four I have seen. They are married, spouses work, they all take in pigrims, but they don't make a lot of money off that.
The Church is holy, it's members are not. There will always be those, priests or lay people or whomever who will not always be doing the will of God. Take a look at the history of the Church. I can't even believe some of the stuff I have read about people who were supposed to be leading the flock.
The fact that the Vatican took the matter entirely out of the hands of the Bishops there says a lot, to me at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest KevinSymonds

Can the Vatican's letter with the official protocol number on it be provided that states Bishop Peric's authority was removed/stripped?

-Kevin Symonds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='KevinSymonds' post='1649090' date='Sep 6 2008, 11:32 AM']Can the Vatican's letter with the official protocol number on it be provided that states Bishop Peric's authority was removed/stripped?

-Kevin Symonds[/quote]


Why don't you write the Vatican and ask them or the Commission in Bosnia-Herzogovina? I have a life, I don't have time to do your homework for you. Gaining your belief in Medjugorje is not the prime objective in my life. It really isn't even an objective in my life.

Please, don't worry about my soul, I don't. God is my life. There is nothing in this world that could or would ever change that. I spend almost every moment of my life, when I am not working, in his presence. I would die before I would ever fail him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest KevinSymonds

Deb, you made the claim that the Bishop's authority was removed. The burden of proof is upon you to back up your statement.

If you are unwilling to back it up, then you should not have stated your opinion. At the risk of looking bad, you should not say publicly what you are not willing or unable to defend.

I have done nothing but provide the facts and back up what I have said all along. If you do not want to match that then there is only a couple of ways to read you and none of them good.

If you know one thing from my discussion so far, I am quite fluent in discussing Medjugorje's history and facts. If you need further proof of this, please read my article that was just published by the Malta Independent Online.

I have done my homework.

Have you?

-KJS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...