Recently there has been much talk in St. Blogs on Medjugorje and the recent homily given by Bishop Ratko Peric of Mostar-Duvno, in Bosnia-Herzegovina and said that "the flood of so-called apparitions, messages, secrets, and signs do not strengthen the faith, but rather further convince us that in all of this there is nothing neither authentic nor established as truthful."
Rich at A Catholic Dentist (Shouldn’t his blog be called The Way, The Tooth, and the Light?) asked me my opinion on a post he wrote on the subject. I find his take to be right on especially in how he addresses the question of the Pope’s role in this situation. He also makes some good points on the the ordinary magisterium. As an aside I once posted a question as to whether a Catholic dentist is one where instead of gas you were asked to "offer it up" instead.
Kevin Knight at the excellent New Advent blog also has a good post on the subject when he says in relation to the Bishop’s homily.
Fortunately, Bishop Peric has just given us all a way to judge for ourselves:
Therefore I responsibly call upon those who claim themselves to be “seers”, as well as those persons behind the “messages”, to demonstrate ecclesiastical obedience and to cease with these public manifestations and messages in this parish. In this fashion they shall show their necessary adherence to the Church, by neither placing private “apparitions” nor private sayings before the official position of the Church.
It’s a simple litmus test in the Church, confirmed by centuries of practical experience: if the apparitions are true, they’ll stop now.
I would only add that if the apparitions are true that the "seers" themselves will cease publicly talking about them. Obedience is a not a perfect sign in this matter, but disobedience certainly would be.
There was a time before officially coming into the Church that I followed the happenings at Medjugorje fairly closely and even went to a speech given by one of the "seers." I later decided though not to give them much credence. When it comes to private revelation even those that the Church has approved as being consistent with the teachings of the Church do not require that the faithful accept the apparitions themselves. I happen to accept previous apparitions that the Church has approved such as Fatima, Lourdes, etc. When it comes to Medjugorje I am pretty much a skeptic and will remain one unless the Church does approve it at some future point. Regardless though I don’t need any apparition to know that I need to pray and to fast more and if I want to see a miracle I will simply go to Mass.
My man skepticism on Medjugorje is that it certainly doesn’t follow the pattern of previously approved apparitions. Though not definitive proofs in themselves the fact that these messages have gone on for 25 years is rather strange. That none of the "seers" had a calling to priestly or religious life seems to be also telling along with their apparent lack of humility. There has also been much disobedience related in this matter, especially with the Franciscans involved in promoting it. The fact that both bishops of this diocese along with their bishop’s conference have determined that this is not of supernatural origin should be enough to put aside this question. There have of course been previous private revelation that was at first not seen by the local ordinary as of supernatural origin that was later revisited. Or a devotion such as Divine Mercy that was suppressed for a time (mainly because of a bad translation of her writings). In these instances though obedience was always involved and if God it truly behind something then it obviously won’t be suppressed.
Fr. Tucker also posts on the subject.
I have never put any stock in Medjugorje, although I know some fine people who do. To those who ask how good fruit can come from Medjugorje, if it’s a false apparition, I’d simply say that God can draw good from anything, so of course there will be good effects, too.
At any rate, Serge points to this bit of old news that I had never seen before. The Franciscans who are promoting the so-called apparitions at one point brought in a renegade "bishop" to administer Confirmation — and he turned out to be neither Catholic, nor a bishop, nor apparently even a valid priest. Here is the official announcement from the local bishop’s chancery, denouncing the act.
In the last century with many so-called apparitions that were later condemned there was almost always some fruit of conversion. We all have some of the Apostle Thomas in us and we seek signs to confirm our faith. There are those desiring faith and those seeking to strengthen theirs that will go to the sites of these apparitions who when exposed to the sacraments will truly have their faith strengthened and Fr. Tucker is exactly right when he says God will draw good out of anything.
13 comments
Medjugorje
Every year, thousands of people pour into the tiny village of Medjugorje in southern Bosnia and Herzegovina (part of the former Yugoslavia). This summer, I will be one of
“…if I want to see a miracle, I will simply go to Mass.”
AMEN AMEN AMEN!!!
I believe Medjugorje is real. A Pope once, said it was better to believe than not to believe. Mary said she wanted some of the seers to enter religious life, but the choice was theirs. One of them enetred the seminary for awhile before eventually getting married. This is the pattern of the Church downplaying apparitions. There have been many caridinals who are trying to ignore the mesage of Fatima, even though it was approved by the Church. Russia has yet to be consecrated to the immaculate Heart of Mary.
There is an excellent conversation regarding Medjugorje going on here:
http://te-deum.blogspot.com/2006/07/homily-of-bishop-ratko-peric-of.html
Much of the history and the local Bishops past judgements are being discussed.
God bless,
Joseph Johnson
I recall that in 1958, a certain nun’s vision was questioned by the Church. The Pope himself called it heresy. Yet that vision still persisted. Pope John Paul didn’t call it heresy. The Chaplet of Divine Mercy is promoted today. She, who was once a heretic is today a saint. If we are to accept the Church in it’s fullness, we must accept that the Church never forbid pilgrimages to M. The Church continues to study the fruits of this phenomenon to discover it’s roots. Until then, we must give full acceptance to the Church’s ruling, that those who feel the urge to go to Medjugorje can go, but without a Diocesan guide.
My own strong and (so far) permanent intense reconversion was at the hands of Our Lady of Medjugorje and I later was a pilgrim and had a most blessed journey that lives in my heart still.
Yet obedience is imperative! This is indeed a litmus test.
peace
Apparitions, both true and false ones, arouse in us a wonder of the supernatural. They make us curious about our own spirituality. This is the nature of these types of things. However, to attribute the fruits of genuine spiritual self-examination to “Our Lady of Medjugorje”, a hoax, is to give credence to something the Church does not approve of.
Don’t fall into the trap of letting your own private experiences trump the God-given authority of the Church. To do so is to head down the path of Protestantism.
I never used to believe in it until I saw a video of Mirjana receiving a vision. The most ethereal light flooded her. It was beautiful. I personally believe that Mary is appearing in Medjugorje. All of the devout people I know happen to as well
I am skeptical of private revelations. I am cautious about such things. Am glad to finally hear some who agree with me.
Medjugorje disturbs me because it encourages a way of thinking about the interior life and spiritual matters that lacks discernment, prudence and just plain old reason–that great gift of God that distinguishes us so markedly from the rest of His earthly creation. It likewise discourages submission to the authority of the Church as vested in the bishops, sorry lot that they may be at times. I have personally been involved with two rosary prayer groups where this “apparition” has been problematic. One devolved into a dueling apparitions fued at which point I took a hike–who needs this nuttiness with the rosary even if they are devout? The other asked of me tacit acceptance of the presence of the Blessed Virgin Mary in my parish church following the appearance there of one of the “seers” who, in the presence of packed pews had his “visitation” from the “Mother of God” right there and then in the church. What am I to do with that when those I pray with have a heavy emotional, spiritual and, for some, financial, investment in the authenticity of these “apparitions?” It strains our spiritual companionship. I don’t trust what they experience and talk about as their understanding of the Lord’s way in their lives. The fruit is doubt, and not just doubt about these “apparitions” but about our ability to know the Truth that sets us free. None of the ecclesial authorities from pastor to archbishop seemed in the least concerned that the Blessed Mother was reportedly here and that a packed and rapt congregation–something one rarely, if ever, witnesses at Sunday Mass–was in attendence. Frankly, it scandalizes me. Why are my confusion, disorientation and doubt not considered a fruit of this “apparition?”
Oh, Anonymous, your confusion and doubt are considered a “fruit” by me! It is one of the main reasons I no longer believe in Medjugorje–the fruit of intense defensiveness on the part of the followers coupled with disobedience to Church authority and the resulting confusion and doubt is definately a rotten “fruit” as far as I’m concerned.
I think Bishop Ratko’s comments are his personal opinion. The Vatican removed the commission from his authority and appointed a new one under the Croatian Bishop’s Conference. Here is a response of Archbishop Bertone to Bishop Aubry in regards to pilgrimages.
CONGREGATIO PRO DOCTRINA FIDEI
Pr. No 154/81-06419 Citta del Vaticano, Palazzo del S. UffizioMay 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 to the “Congregatio”, presided over by Cardinal Ratzinger)
Soooo… when our local Bishop gives his homily
at a Confirmation mass in our parish church, like
Bishop Peric of Mostar-Medjugorje did on 6-15-06 commanding that the “messages” not be made public anymore, we don’t have to obey what he says or Church authority. yipee!
Comments are closed.