|
Post by Michael O'Donovan on Jun 12, 2008 22:21:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by guillaume on Jun 13, 2008 0:09:19 GMT
There is an old advertisement in France for a soft drink, called "canada dry". It says "it sounds like alcohol, it tastes like alcohol, but it is not alcohol". Medj is a sham... ? sham, well a spam, to speak like an Emailer ! It sounds real, it looks real (see the videos on www.gloria.tv) and many, many people falls in it. But it is not real. Any tradi, or very few believe in it. Even the Pope Benedict XVI is doubtful about those apparitions :" In fact, Cardinal Ratzinger (before being Pope) said 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 - (O. P., p. 283)." A recent article in the Daily mail said : Vatican denounces group's claim of seeing the Virgin Mary more than 40,000 times as 'work of the devil' By DAILY MAIL REPORTER Last updated at 8:54 PM on 01st June 2008 Comments (0) Add to My Stories The Vatican has denounced a group who claim to have seen the Virgin Mary more than 40,000 times in the past 27 years. The six Bosnian 'seers' attract five million pilgrims a year to their home town of Medjugorje, providing a lucrative trade for local businesses. Hundreds of thousands travel there each year from Britain alone. The Vatican has rejected claims made by the six Bosnian 'seers' that they have seen the Virgin Mary more than 40,000 times over the past 27 years But now one of the most respected voices in the Roman Catholic church has accused the visionaries of perpetuating a 'diabolical deceit'. Andrea Gemma, 77, a bishop and once the Vatican's top exorcist, told a magazine in Italy: 'In Medjugorje everything happens in function of money: Pilgrimages, lodging houses, sale of trinkets. 'This whole sham is the work of the Devil. It is a scandal.' He said the Vatican would soon crack down on the group. The Medjugorje phenomenon began on June 25, 1981, when six children told a priest they had seen the Virgin on a hillside near their town. A church investigation dismissed the vision, and the Vatican banned pilgrimages to the site in 1985. But many Catholics ignored the ban. Today, the seers own smart houses with security gates and tennis courts and expensive cars. One is married to a former U.S. beauty queen. Catholic officials in the U.S. have recently banned the group from speaking on church property during their world tours, on which they allegedly take the Virgin with them.daily mail The recognize Apparitions of our Lady, LOURDES, Fatima,, etc... had created controversy, but not within the Church, to my knowledge. The Church (except recently in Notre Dame du Laus) never waited too long to recognize or not a marian apparition. The Messages are very simple, and naive and repetitive. It is always the same. A bit a catechism, nothing else. For example, the Lady would have said "I don't have all the graces". She would admit that all religions are equal ! Now you gonna tell me : Why so many people fell peace, go to confession and even convert to the catholic faith after a pilgrim to Medj. Well. I would say than God and Mary, despise the spam, have pity on the numerous souls who go there in pure intention and, on somehow, take the "opportunity" to actually try to save souls. But this is not because of the "apparitions", but because of the faith of the pilgrims. Our Lady will sort out this situation, in no time.
|
|
|
Post by guillaume on Jun 13, 2008 5:02:14 GMT
An other Article about the Pilgrimages to Medj (older but still on) : BAN ON MEDJUGORJE TOURS EWTN Staff Press reports of letters from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to bishops regarding Medjugorje have suggested that the ban in place against official pilgrimages to the site of the alleged apparitions extends to private persons and groups. In one publicized letter, to a French bishop, the Congregation's Secretary, Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, quoted the 1991 statement of the former Yugoslavia's bishops' conference which said that "it cannot be confirmed that supernatural apparitions or revelations are occurring here" (in Medjugorje). Archbishop Bertone also repeated the bishops' acknowledgement that the number of Catholics traveling to the site requires the Church to arrange for their pastoral care. He then wrote, "From what was said, it follows that official pilgrimages to Medjugorje, understood as a place of authentic Marian apparitions, should not be organized either on a parish or diocesan level because it would be in contradiction with what the bishops of the ex-Yugoslavia said in their declaration cited above." Speaking on Aug. 21st 1996 in Rome Vatican Press Office spokesman, Dr. Joaquin Navarro-Valls, sought to clarify the status of pilgrimages to Medjugorje. He noted, "You cannot say people cannot go there until it has been proven false. This has not been said, so anyone can go if they want ... When one reads what Archbishop Bertone wrote, one could get the impression that from now on everything is forbidden, no possibility" for Catholics to travel to Medjugorje. But, in fact, "nothing has changed, nothing new has been said ... The problem is if you systematically organize pilgrimages, organize them with the bishop and the church, you are giving a canonical sanction to the facts of Medjugorje ... This is different from people going in a group who bring a priest with them in order to go to confession ... I was worried that what Archbishop Bertone said could be interpreted in too restricted a way. Has the church or the Vatican said no (to Catholics visiting Medjugorje)? NO. ... The difference, in the terms of canon law, is that an official pilgrimage, organized by the diocese with the bishop, is a way of giving a juridical sanction to the facts; you are saying this is true. " While this statement does not address the prudence of going to Medjugorje as a place of alleged apparition, which rests on its credibility according to the norms of reason, it does lay to rest the question of whether it is disobedient in the mind of the Church to do so. The Church, officially, cannot forbid private pilgrimages. This is why there are so many pilgrimages organized in a private way, by private Tour operator. You can see in every catholic papers in Ireland, including the most orthodox ones (Alive !, the Irish Family), a lots of adds for those kind of Pilgrimages. Diocesan Pilgrimages though, organized and/or authorized by the Ordinary (Bishop) is not allowed. The Irish Bishops' Conference, 13th June 1990The Irish Bishops' Conference issued a 5 point statement on the subject of Medjugorje. Point 4 stated "Until the Church gives its decision no one is entitled, on behalf of the Church, to presume a favorable judgment regarding the apparitions in Medjugorje. That is why the Church does not approve pilgrimages and other manifestations organized on the presumption that a supernatural character can be attributed to the facts of Medjugorje."
|
|
|
Post by fergalmj on Jun 15, 2008 11:22:44 GMT
Oh boy how I have really wrestled with this one! How I have lost friends because of my unwillingness to embrace it fully. My heart and mind are in agreement that it is a strange phenomonen, but of what kind I simply do not know. God knows I have prayed to know the truth and at present I am not persuaded that anything supernatural is happening there. I am in agreement with the local Ordinary that all the happenings are both non-constant with the supernatural and constant with the non-supernatural. This is my much tried and much tested conclusion after much research, prayer and mature reflection. I have visited the Parish of Medjugorje twice, once in 1995 at the height of the war and again in 2001. I am very impressed at the devotion on display. I am moved by the lines for Confession and I am a witness to the fact that yes some folk do experience a genuine conversion to God. After all the Blessed Sacrament is there, so Our Lady is there as is the whole of Heaven by.....well........ default. (Please excuse the blandness of this description ) What makes me very uneasy is the way the groups form afterwards, the way they appoint their 'prophets' and the way in which they have Our Lady's birthday celebrated on a different day, August 5th, to the traditional September 8th. The good fruits I have witnessed involve more frequent attendance at Holy Mass, stronger devotion to Our Lady and the Rosary. Some of the bad fruits I have witnessed involve suicide, marriage breakdown, and mental breakdown, something I have never witnessed resulting from any of my pilgrimages to Fatima. Is Our Lady there? Yes! for the same reason she is in every Parish Church, Chapel and Oratory in which the Blessed Sacrament reserved. Is Our Lady appearing there now? No. Did she appear there ever? Maybe. Something supernatural may have happened there in the very beginning, in 1981. I say this because of the nature of the very first messages as opposed to those that are issued now. When I compare the experiences I have had a both Fatima and Medjugorje I simply cannot place them together. I don't think I will ever be able to have a devotion to the Madonna under this title of Medjugorje whether or not the Church approves of it. There again that is my prerogative under Chruch Law.
|
|
|
Post by eircomnet on Jun 15, 2008 16:01:08 GMT
By the rules of mystical theology Medjugorje simply cannot be from God. When the Vision backed the priests against the local bishop that was enough to destroy their credibility. This is apart from other considerations like dubious or ambiguous or plain heretical teaching. Have you heard of the incredible story of "the bloody handkerchief"? Also the sheer number of reported messages, their banality plus their tired uniform endings. In saner times a cursory read would have consigned them to the nearest dustbin never to rise again. Alas for the lack of good mystical theologians like Poulain! This is in no way meant to reflect badly on the many good people who follow the alleged apparitions.
|
|
|
Post by salvaporta on Jun 16, 2008 8:43:34 GMT
I am afraid it is time for the Vatican to draw the curtains on Medjugorje. But, why oh, why is it taking so long.
|
|
|
Post by monkeyman on Jun 27, 2008 0:24:01 GMT
I am afraid it is time for the Vatican to draw the curtains on Medjugorje. But, why oh, why is it taking so long. Salvaporta, It is taking so long because patience is a virtue. As Saint Paul said, "Love is patient, love is kind, love does not put on airs...." That is not the reason why...its because the Churchs hands were effectively tied by the late Popes private admiration for the place...
|
|
|
Post by falconer on Jun 30, 2008 22:05:08 GMT
Medjurogje is as legitimate as all the other string of the same type of sites. Knock one you begin to knock them all. Its the domino effect. Any reasons they come up with to claim Medjurogje is not valid are the same reasons that can be leveled at all the others.
|
|
|
Post by eircomnet on Jul 1, 2008 8:51:41 GMT
Falconer, you cannot deal with this on a superficial level. You need to study mystical theology to deal with these matters really properly but even a basic understanding of what the Catholic Church teaches will often alert us to problems in the alleged messages. False apparitions are not new.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Jul 1, 2008 9:23:10 GMT
Medjurogje is as legitimate as all the other string of the same type of sites. Knock one you begin to knock them all. Its the domino effect. Any reasons they come up with to claim Medjurogje is not valid are the same reasons that can be leveled at all the others. The Catholic Church has a criterion with which to distinguish between what it regards as true and false. Similar criteria was employed in regard to candidates for the sainthood. They could determine if an apparition was false, but the most they would say is that an apparition was 'worthy of belief' - not that it was true, only that it was not incompatible with Catholicism to believe it, but no one is obliged to believe in these phenomena. This applies to Lourdes and Fatima. In the case of Knock, the Church returned an open verdict. In the cases of Medjugorje and Garabandal, the competant authority (i.e. the successive Bishops of Mostar and Santander respectively) have consistently returned negative judgements. Causae finitae sunt.
|
|
|
Post by guillaume on Jul 1, 2008 21:49:42 GMT
The latest on Medj : 27 June 2008 Sarajevo _
The Vatican announced it will form a commission to investigate the apparitions of the Virgin Mary in Bosnia's southern town of Medjugorje.
Local media quoted on Friday Bosnian Cardinal Vinko Puljic saying that this will be the first Vatican commission ever to visit Medjugorje.
In 1991, a Commission set up by the Bishopric Conference in the former Yugoslavia visited the town, but ruled that nothing out of the ordinary ever took place. The Vatican has never investigated the sightings, nor has it recognized them.
Puljic stressed that no swift decision should be expected as the commission will look separately into the apparitions as well as into the work of local clerics. The process of recognition of apparitions by the Vatican usually takes decades.
On June 1981, six young parishioners from Medjugorje reported seeing a white form with a child in her arms on one of the surrounding hills. They interpreted this and other apparitions they reportedly witnessed as the Holy Mary.
The story spread quickly and Medjugorje became one of the most popular pilgrimage sites in Europe, attracting millions of visitors each year. The development has transformed the remote and poor village into one of the most developed and rich small towns in the country.
Though the Vatican's lack of recognition has not stopped the pilgrims, it has nearly created a split within the Roman Catholic Church in Bosnia as local priests have continued providing services in the Medjugorje church even when threatened with expulsion from their order.
Mostar's Bishop Ratko Peri , who is responsible for the southern Bosnia region, still publicly denies any apparitions in Medjugorje.
|
|
|
Post by monkeyman on Jul 15, 2008 0:17:41 GMT
Medjurogje is as legitimate as all the other string of the same type of sites. Knock one you begin to knock them all. Its the domino effect. Any reasons they come up with to claim Medjurogje is not valid are the same reasons that can be leveled at all the others. A colleague of a a family member of mine (this person the friend happens to be actively homosexual and an avowed atheist who officialy recanted his baptism and faith before his bishop) said he has no answer to Fatima and doesnt see how anyone-any thinking person can have an explanation other than a supernatural occurence perhaps. This person could even be a member of www.atheist.ie although I could and probably am wrong. No supernatural occurences of any kind ever took place at Medjugorje though alot of prayer occurs there.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 23, 2008 22:43:07 GMT
As someone who believes Medugorje is as phony as a three-dollar bill, may I say that Donal Anthony Foley's book UNDERSTANDING MEDUGORJE is a very bad presentation of a good case. He does not set out in advance the criteria by which he judges the authenticity of apparitions, but he seems to operate on the basis that Fatima is THE definitive apparition by which all others should be judged (he even treats similarity to Lourdes rather than Fatima as inherently suspicious) and at one point he insinuates that all Catholics are bound to believe in the "canonical" Marian apparitions, which is not the case at all. (For the record - I believe Lourdes was authentic, I haven't investigated the others enough to have an opinion). Foley has a nasty habit of treating the fact that an accusation was made as evidence of its truth (e.g. the fact that the PP asked if the visionaries were on drugs when he first heard their story is cited as "proof" that they were). He cannot set out a narrative of what happened or is alleged to have happened without constant interjections and criticisms, which are so numerous and wearisome that they create a defensive reaction even in a reader favourably disposed to him. There is a good deal of material here which casts the visionaries in a very bad light, but oddly enough he misses out some well-known damaging points (the apparition praising the writings of Maria Valtorta or declaring the innocence of a priest accused of relations with a nun; they subsequently resigned their vows and married) and one point might have been enhanced. Foley notes one visionary describing the vision appearing as a blur and notes as suspicious that the canonical visions are described as simply appearing. He does not realise that this account mimics the cinematic technique known as a "dissolve" which exists precisely to compensate for Hollywood's inability to make objects appear out of thin air - an inability not shared by the Virgin Mary.
|
|
|
Post by faithful on Oct 28, 2008 13:26:41 GMT
Medj is a fraud.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 28, 2009 17:35:21 GMT
|
|