Bishop says Medjugorje apparitions are divisive

[Franimus]

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

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

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

[Franimus]

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

[HollyDolly]

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

[brendan1104]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Edited July 5, 2006 by brendan1104

[Guest Rick777]

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

[Franimus]

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

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

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

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

[Fides_et_Ratio]

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

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

[Jaime]

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

[brendan1104]

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

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

[Lil Red]

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

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

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

[Fides_et_Ratio]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1018192' date='Jul 6 2006, 11:13 AM']
She never said all religions are equal. That is an intentional misquote. What she said was that all people are equal and that some are closer to the truth than others. (I'm paraphrasing)
[/quote]
Uhhh... read the context, "she" said a bit more than that with no clarification to that effect:

From www.medjugorje.org
[quote]October 1, 1981

Are all religions the same? [i]"Members of all faiths are equal before God. God rules over each faith just like a sovereign over his kingdom. In the world, all religions are not the same because all people have not complied with the commandments of God. They reject and disparage them."[/i]

Are all churches the same? [i]"In some, the strength of prayer to God is greater, in others, smaller. That depends on the priests who motivate others to pray. It depends also on the power which they have." [/i]

Why do You appear to us so often and to others who do not follow God's path?* [i]"I appear to you often and in every place. To others, I appear from time to time briefly. They do not yet follow the way of God completely. They are not aware of the gift which He has made them. That, no one deserves. with time, they also will come to follow the right way."[/i]

* This must be about other apparitions in Hercegovina.[/quote]
The answer to the first question is false ecumenism, if anything. Only "in the world" not all religions are the same? Catholicism and Buddism/Hinduism/Taoism/etc-isms will not be the same in Heaven either... If you reject God and His Commandments, you reject your Salvation.

Besides, with all of the hullaballoo over this particular apparition... why hasn't it been clarified in a more recent apparition? Even in the newly approved apparitions from Amsterdam of Our Lady of All Nations, when something (i.e., a phrase in the prayer she offered) was ambiguous and causing disruption, Our Lady clarified and expanded upon what she meant.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' post='1018516' date='Jul 6 2006, 04:40 PM']
Uhhh... read the context, "she" said a bit more than that with no clarification to that effect:

From www.medjugorje.org

The answer to the first question is false ecumenism, if anything. Only "in the world" not all religions are the same? Catholicism and Buddism/Hinduism/Taoism/etc-isms will not be the same in Heaven either... If you reject God and His Commandments, you reject your Salvation.

Besides, with all of the hullaballoo over this particular apparition... why hasn't it been clarified in a more recent apparition? Even in the newly approved apparitions from Amsterdam of Our Lady of All Nations, when something (i.e., a phrase in the prayer she offered) was ambiguous and causing disruption, Our Lady clarified and expanded upon what she meant.
[/quote]


I've read it in context more than a few times in my life Fides. There's nothing stated that goes against Church teachings. Members (that's a key word) of all faiths are equal but their faiths are not. What's the problem? The Church teaches the same.

[quote]839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."325

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People,326 "the first to hear the Word of God."327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God's revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews "belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ",328 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."329

840 And when one considers the future, God's People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.

841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."330

842 The Church's bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:

All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city. . .331

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332

844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:

Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.333

845 To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son's Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is "the world reconciled." She is that bark which "in the full sail of the Lord's cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world." According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah's ark, which alone saves from the flood.334 [/quote]

I can go into VII as well if you like. What is being said that contradicts any of this? Nothing

[quote]Only "in the world" not all religions are the same? Catholicism and Buddism/Hinduism/Taoism/etc-isms will not be the same in Heaven either...[/quote]

There aren't going to be any religions in heaven. One true faith. That'll be it.

Look no one is requiring anyone to believe in what's happening in Medjugorje. But it is quite different to spread untruths about it.

Yeah I've been there. I've personally witnessed the miracles. I have no problems believing that the Blessed Mother is appearing there.

Are there some folks who take it too far? Absolutely. Instead of being an affirmation to their faith, there are some that treat it as the foundation. That's misguided. But if anyone thinks that people didn't take things too far with Lourdes or Fatima, you gots another think coming.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

I've been to Medjugorje as well.. climbed "apparition hill" and sat up with hundreds of other people for the "apparition". I've heard Ivan speak several times (including when I was in Medjugorje). I went to Medjugorje with an open mind, not having read anything about the apparitions, and came away VERY skeptical.

[quote]I've read it in context more than a few times in my life Fides. There's nothing stated that goes against Church teachings. Members (that's a key word) of all faiths are equal but their faiths are not. What's the problem? The Church teaches the same.[/quote]
You're still ignoring [i]"in the world"[/i] part. That phrase adds a great deal of meaning which you will not find elsewhere Church doctrine, Catechism or Vatican II. Yes, it may be "nit-picky" and trite to harp on a tiny phrase... however, early Christological Councils had bishops beating each other up over phrases and even single words!

I don't disagree at all the persons all hold equal value and dignity. But religions do not, whether "in the world" or not. There will only be one religion in Heaven. Nonetheless, this is still a very ambiguos answer....
Such that my last paragraph still stands. In all the confusion that followed, there is no clarification. Why would Our Lady not take pains to eradicate this confusion and contention among Catholics over one of her messages? Why does she not address the disobedience and other concerning circumstances surrounding her apparitions? This is very uncharacteristic of her other authentic Apparitions.

[michaelorapronobis]

[mod]edited by Ice Princess: Catholic vs Catholic Debate
A post or comment that results in doctrinal debates that might cause scandal among the faithful. *Effective immediately, any negative criticism of religious or the current Magisterium will result in deletion, and a warning from the moderators. This includes but is not limited to criticism of the Novus Ordo mass and/or our Holy Father.[/mod]

[Resurrexi]

The NO Mass is also free from error. When said with the 1st Eucharistic prayer, ad orientam, without any lay people reading scripture, in Latin, with incence and bells, with Gregorian Chant, without EMHCs, kneeling for Communion, no hand-holdng during Pater Noster, with the sign of peace not extended to the people, the NO can be very pleasing and traditional.

I do, however, perfer the reading cycle in the Tridentine Rite and I perfer the Tridentine offeratory and Non sum dignus thrice and the Canon said in a quiet voice.

Edited July 8, 2006 by StThomasMore

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Michael' post='1019553' date='Jul 7 2006, 08:48 PM']
[mod]Edited by moderator: edited by Ice Princess: Catholic vs Catholic Debate
A post or comment that results in doctrinal debates that might cause scandal among the faithful. *Effective immediately, any negative criticism of religious or the current Magisterium will result in deletion, and a warning from the moderators. This includes but is not limited to criticism of the Novus Ordo mass and/or our Holy Father.[/mod]
[/quote]

First of all, just because something isn't dogmatically defined- much of what we believe has not been- does not mean we are not bound by the Magisterial teaching of the Church not to believe in it.

Secondly, Catholics who are bound solely to the Council of Trent. We are not stuck in the 1500's. The Mass is not from Trent, Michael! There are at least 25 other Catholic rites- Eastern and Western. That alone proves that the so-called 'Tridentine' Mass, is not the 'true' Mass! Also, the Mass is not from Trent. The Mass is from Jesus Christ, it is His Sacrifice. The Missals published in '58, and '62 were not Tridentine, strictly speaking because though it was largely the text that Trent codified- not created or dogmatically approved- it underwent several revisions until 1965.

Thirdly, Please give up this rad-trad propaganda. [u]And we do not criticize the Magisterium, the Pope, and the Mass on Phatmass.[/u] I'm suprised you haven't been suspended or warned already.

Finally, and most importantly, here is an excerpt from the Vatican II documents and an address of Pope Paul VI which prove that the Second Vatican Council and the Novus Ordo are binding.

All 16 documents all end with the following -or very similar- words:

[quote][u][b]“EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THE THINGS SET FORTH IN THIS DECREE HAS WON THE CONSENT OF THE FATHERS. WE, TOO, BY THE APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY CONFERRED ON US BY CHRIST, JOIN WITH THE VENERABLE FATHERS IN APPROVING, DECREEING, AND ESTABLISHING THESE THINGS IN THE HOLY SPIRIT, AND WE DIRECT THAT WHAT HAS THUS BEEN ENACTED IN SYNOD BE PUBLISHED TO GOD’S GLORY... I, PAUL, BISHOP OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.”[/b][/u][/quote] (Walter M. Abbott, The Documents of Vatican II, p. 366, etc.)

Here is an excerpt from an address of Paul VI:

Paul VI, May 24, 1976: [quote]“It is so painful to take note of this: but how can we not see in such an attitude – whatever may be these people’s intentions – [b][u]the placing of themselves outside obedience and communion with the Successor of Peter and therefore outside the Church? For this, unfortunately, is the logical consequence, when, that is, it is held as preferable to disobey with the pretext of preserving one’s faith intact, and of working in one’s way for the preservation of the Catholic Church, while at the same time refusing to give her effective obedience.[/u] And this is said openly. [u]It is even affirmed that the Second Vatican Council is not binding that the faith would also be in danger because of the reforms and post-conciliar directives, that one has the duty to disobey in order to preserve certain traditions.[/u]: What traditions?[/b] It is for this group, not the Pope, not the College of Bishops, not the Ecumenical Council, to decide which among the innumerable traditions must be considered as the norm of faith! As you see, Venerable Brothers, [b][u]such an attitude sets itself up as a judge of that divine will which placed Peter and his lawful successors at the head of the Church to confirm the brethren in the faith, and to feed the universal flock, and which established him as the guarantor and custodian of the deposit of faith… [/b][/u]

[u][b]“The adoption of the new Ordo Missae is certainly not left to the free choice of priests or faithful.[/b] [/u] The instruction of 14 June 1971 has provided for, with authorization of the Ordinary, the celebration of the Mass in the old form only by aged and infirm priests, who offer the divine Sacrifice sine populo [without people]. [u][b]The new Ordo was promulgated to take the place of the old[/b], [/u] after mature deliberation, following upon the requests of the Second Vatican Council. [b][u]In no different way did our holy predecessor Pius V make obligatory the Missal reformed under his authority, following the Council of Trent…[/b][/u][/quote]

Edited July 9, 2006 by Lil Red

[michaelorapronobis]

[quote]
The NO Mass is also free from error.
[/quote]

How do you know this?

[quote]
When said with the 1st Eucharistic prayer, ad orientam, without any lay people reading scripture, in Latin, with incence and bells, with Gregorian Chant, without EMHCs, kneeling for Communion, no hand-holdng during Pater Noster, with the sign of peace not extended to the people, the NO can be very pleasing and traditional.
[/quote]

How often does this ever happen?

Even when it is said like that, there are still problems. Much of the Sacrificial language has been removed from the liturgy. This action parallels that of the 16th-century reformers, Luther and Cranmer who had removed any specific reference to sacrifice in their Eucharistic services in order to signify their denial of the Mass as a Sacrifice. In the New Mass there is no mention of the Divine Victim in what purports to correspond to the Offertory. In fact, in the General Instruction of the New Mass, there is no mention of an Offertory, as this has been replaced by the Preparation of the Gifts i.e. of bread and wine. So the emphasis has been shifted from the Divine Victim to the produce of the earth and work of human hands. The traditional Offertory prayers - which emphasised the true nature of the Holy Sacrifice in an unmistakable manner - have been suppressed and what remains has been modified to such an extent that their Catholic expression has compromised.

[Resurrexi]

The offering of the Victim to God immediatley after concecration if replaced by the memorial acclemation of the death and ressurection of Christ. It may not be exactly the same, but it is close.

As for the offering of the bread and wine, it may not be pleasing, as it does not please me, but you should know that in the early Church, the only offeratory prayer was the secret?

[Franimus]

*grabs the wheel and turns it back to Medjugorje*

Let's get back on topic, shall we?
Obviously, the Medjugorje apparitions are divisive, we are all witnesses of this right now in this thread.

so... as pointed out before, this lack of prophecy thing does really bother me... But, they haven't declared themselves Pope yet! Gotta give them credit for that......

[p0lar_bear]

There have been enough questions and enough things that just don't make sense that I [i]seriously[/i] question the authenticity. One of the major factors is the lack of docility to the local bishop. Leaders and supporters of the Medjugorje apparitions seem too inclined to disregard or contradict the local bishops, which definitely smacks of inauthenticity in my book.