Bayside

[Cathurian]

I saw some of the stuff on Bayside and it almost scared the pants off me.

Literally, as that's one of the things spoken against: females in anything but skirts and dresses.

But anyway, they say it wasn't looked into fully. They say the Bishop of Brooklyn who condemned it did NOT follow proper procedure, and if you call down there and request the full investigative report, they don't have it.

So...you know. Is it so?

[StColette]

Here's the Bishop's letter about the "Bayside Apparitions"

In recent months, doubts have been raised by members of the so-called "Bayside Movement" concerning the official position of the Diocese of Brooklyn on the alleged "apparitions" of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and other heavenly beings, to a woman by the name of Vernica Lueken.

Moreover, erroneous claims have been made by a number of followers of Mrs. Lueken concerning the legitimacy of their position, in order to justify their activities on behalf of the "Movement." These have taken the form of statements in their publications that "since Articles 1399 and 2218 of (the 1917 Code of) Canon Law were abrogated by Pope Paul VI in 1966, no ecclesiastical permission is required, neither can anyone incure censure, for the publication or dissemination of information dealing with revelations, visions or miracles, provided these do not endanger Faith or morals."

As a result of the above-mentioned doubts and claims, a number of Christ's faithful continue to attend the regularly-scheduled "vigils" held at Flushing Meadow Park, and to disseminate or receive propaganda literature on this matter.

I, the undersigned Diocesan Bishop of Brooklyn, in my role as the legitimate shepherd of this particular Church, wish to confirm the constant position of the Diocese of Brooklyn that a thorough investigation revealed that the alleged "visions of Bayside" completely lacked authenticity.

Moreover, in view of the confusion created by published reports of messages and other literature by this "Movement," I consider it my obligation to offer Christ's faithful pastoral guidance, lest their faith be endangered by "messages" and "teachings" relayed by "visionaries," which are contrary to the Faith of our Catholic Church.

Therefore, in consultation with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I hereby declare that:

1. No credibility can be given to the so-called "apparitions" reported by Veronica Lueken and her followers.

2. The "messages" and other related propaganda contain statements which, among other things, are contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church, undermine the legitimate authority of bishops and councils and instill doubts in the minds of the faithful, for example, by claiming that, for years, an "imposter (sic) Pope" governed the Catholic Church in place of Paul VI.

3. Those who persistently maintain that "no ecclesiastical permission is required for the publication or dissemination" of information concerning "revelations, visions or miracles," are erroneously interpreting the directives of the Holy See when they attempt to justify the publication of the propaganda literature on the "Bayside Messages."

In view of my declaration concerning the authenticity of the "visions of Bayside," the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has confirmed that the principles governing the publication of such religious material still maintain authoritative moral value prohibiting the endangering of faith and good morals (Cf. Response of SCDF of June 14, 1966, in AAS 58, 1186).

As a result, those publishing or disseminating this propaganda literature are acting against the judgment of legitimate Church authority.

4. Because of my concern for their spiritual welfare, members of Christ's faithful are hereby directed to refrain from participating in the "vigils" and from disseminating any propaganda related to the "Bayside apparitions." They are also discouraged from reading any such literature.

5. Anyone promoting this devotion in any way, be it by participating in the "vigils," organizing pilgrimages, publishing or disseminating the literature related to it, is contributing to the confusion which is being created in the faith of God's people, as well as encouraging them to act against the determinations made by the legitimate pastor of this particular Church (c.212, para. 1).

It remains my constant hope that all the faithful spend their time and energies in promoting devotion to our Blessed Lady, in the many forms which have been approved by the Catholic Church.

(Signed):

Bishop John Mugavero, Bishop of Brooklyn

---------

Now personally I've read about the supposed Bayside Apparitions and some of the things that were said there make me turn away from it. There's something quite not right with it.

God Bless,
Jennie

[cmotherofpirl]

Here are the approved ones:
[url="http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/approved_apparitions/index.html"]http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_appari...ions/index.html[/url]

[Brother Adam]

Simply put: Bayside is false. I experienced what the movement has caused first hand before becoming Catholic.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

I read some stuff on the Bayside "apparitions" that kind of debunked the whole thing. The "messages" didn't contain the best Catholic theology and were worded in odd ways that a Catholic would not use in describing his/her beliefs.

[popestpiusx]

Bayside has the same status as Medjugorje: false. Both have ben condemned by the local ordinary. Both are dangerous.

[musturde]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Oct 3 2004, 12:06 AM'] Bayside has the same status as Medjugorje: false. Both have ben condemned by the local ordinary. Both are dangerous. [/quote]
Medjugorje is false? I thought they didnt even finish (or start) researching it yet.

[MrsFrozen]

Yeah, I've never heard that Medjugorje was false!

[the_rev]

ONCE again I will reiterate when I hear people bashing Medjugorje, that there have been several miracles, healings, etc. etc.

The apparations have yet to end, and therefore they can not be be approved or disapproved. It is left soley to the person and what they believe of Medjugorje.

[SonOfMary]

I will be going to Medjugorje this coming summer with Rev, and I do believe also Medjugorje is true. It shall stand the test of time.

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='SonOfMary' date='Oct 3 2004, 10:50 AM'] It shall stand the test of time. [/quote]
The test of time, now that is interesting. It seems that time never runs out for these people. They don't want it to end. As long as it keeps going they can put off any official Vatican investigations and keep the pilgrims (read:money) rolling in.

Two consecutive bishops have condemned it. Two of the priests who organized the thing are now shacked up with ex-nuns. The "Blessed Virgin" has taught open heresy.

Sorry to disappoint, but it is a false apparition.

Edited October 3, 2004 by popestpiusx

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='the_rev' date='Oct 3 2004, 10:04 AM'] ONCE again I will reiterate when I hear people bashing Medjugorje, that there have been several miracles, healings, etc. etc.

[/quote]
Miracles and healings? Yes, so do televangelists. Keep in mind the warning of St. John of the Cross that such things can also be accomplished by Satan. And don't give me the conversion thing either. People can be touched by God's grace anywhere, even in the midst of a false apparition. The fact that people have converted there does not prove the apparition true.

[Crusader_4]

Medjugorje personally, i think i am very critical of it. I am waiting for the apparations to end and the Vatican to research it so i know what to believe about it.

[Theoketos]

More proff please.

[popestpiusx]

I have given it once before. Let me see if I can't find that thread.

[cmotherofpirl]

[url="http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/unapproved_apparitions/index.html"]http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_appari...ions/index.html[/url]

no decision rendered.

[popestpiusx]

I do have one question for anyone who would like to answer it. On a site like this where many people have what is often an extremely broad or exagerated view of obedience to the local ordinary, why do many of those same people refuse to submit to the clear direction of two successive bishops directly over Medjugorje, direction that has been upheld by Rome? What happened to obedience?

[Crusader_4]

Actually Popestpiusx that why i am very wary of it. Because i had herad the local bishop from a number of sources gave some warnings about it.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

It was condemned by the local bishop but Ratzinger said to wait on the judgement. There is much more to the story (biases, etc.)...

[Paladin D]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Oct 3 2004, 03:58 PM'] The "Blessed Virgin" has taught open heresy.

Sorry to disappoint, but it is a false apparition. [/quote]
I'm not challenging you, but I'm just curious.

What has she said that you believe is heresy?