Did Pope Francis show his hand on Medjugorje?

Just rumors for now ...

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2013/10/pope-francis-v-medjugorje/

http://te-deum.blogspot.com/2013/10/did-pope-francis-show-his-hand-on.html

 

Well I have to completely disagree. First off, the 'commission' makes the final judgement, not the Pope.

Secondly, I had lunch with Ivan when he had come directly from Argentina to St. Louis to speak at couple of churches there. He was exhausted. He was very joyful and told us that when he got to Argentina the Cardinal Bergoglio greeted him with a hug and told him to GO THROUGHOUT ARGENTINA AND BRING OUR LADY'S MESSAGE TO EVERYONE THERE. He was invited to stay as long as he wanted and then received the Cardinal's blessing! The Cardinal then went off to ROME to the conclave and the rest is history....Ivan said, "You've never partied like they do in Argentina when their Cardinal becomes POPE!!" We all were FILLED WITH JOY when Ivan said, "Our Lady told me this is a VERY GOOD POPE. HE IS HER POPE."
I wrote it all down at the table as we talked. Word for word.
NUF SAID.

 

It would break my heart if this was so.

It really would. But I'd stay obedient with the grace of God but with much heartache.

 

This is from Cathy Nolan of Marytv in her recent newsletter

Rosie Zubac shared some news with us on Tea with Rosie that I want to share with all of you:

Our parish has officially announced that the parish priest, Fr. Merinko, and a few other Franciscan priests from this diocese have been asked to attend a meeting with Pope Francis in Rome on the 10th of October. Following this meeting there is the Marian Day of Prayer at St. Peter's Square in Rome. Various Marian groups have been asked to attend this meeting. And Medjugorje has not been excluded. So Fr. Merinko and the other priests from this parish will also attend the Marian Day of Prayer on the 12th of October. And the intention of this day of prayer is for special devotion and for the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary. (Tea with Rosie, Episode 57)

It is significant that the Holy Father has invited Medjugorje to be part of this very important Marian Consecration. I believe it signifies that what Our Lady has been doing through Medjugorje is going to flow into the Church and strengthen her as a Sacramental Oasis for the world, a community of God's children!

 

I find it interesting that for some, Pope Francis' opinion on Medjugorje would not matter(if negative), but it really matters (if positive).............

 

Who says that? I don't see it on this forum. Personally, I am expecting the Commission to give a negative verdict (or at least not a positive one - which is slightly different) and, of course, the Pope will support its conclusions whatever they are and so his personal opinion is irrelevant for practical purposes.

Medjugorje is very unusual (probably unique) in the history of apparitions since it has become one of the world's foremost places of pilgrimage but without Church approval. It can be reasonably assumed, I believe, that the several millions who have spent the time and money to go there, or those who have expressed a wish to go there, believe that the claims of the alleged visionaries are genuine. The Pope has expressed his view that the Church as a whole possesses an infallible sense of the truth and it would not be unreasonable to believe that a great majority of those who have an opinion in this matter hold a positive one, so this should count for something if the Commission shared his understanding of infallibility.

Because of the large number of Catholics who hold a positive view, the commission is likely, I believe, to at least acknowledge the positive spiritual impact on pilgrims and others and so not to condemn the claims outright. I believe that it will take the line that the claims are 'unproven' so leaving the door open for those who wish to continue to believe and to visit the village in the future. This won't satisfy many who hold strong views either way, but, if the conclusion is not actually positive and unless the Commission has absolutely damning evidence against, I can't really see that the members will feel that they have much choice than to say 'not proven but feel free to believe/visit'.

 

Well time will tell

 

Normally I would agree that the Vatican would never give the nod to a site where messages are ongoing. It would be like handing the seerers a blank cheque.

But this is a Pope like no other. He is quite capable of making his own rules. Which I like him for. He seems to know time is short..and he is right.



http://www.medjugorjetoday.tv/9174/new-pope-approved-of-medjugorje-visits/

 

Steve...if I was a betting man...and I'm not...I would say the commission will come out with a neutral to positive ruling. My personal belief is that Medjugore is authentic... and these are reasons why. Think about it...what is it ...5 children of different ages from different villages have for 30 years been coherent in what Our Lady says. Prayer and fasting... conversion and reconciliation. No new doctrines...just a call for repentance...and not one of the children has fallen out of step with the others even though they live in different countries as adults. Not even the best of best cons could do this. Our Lady has been with us at Medjugore and lightens our path.

 

I disagree.

I generally do not put much stock in unapproved private revelations, but I have never looked favorably on Medjugorje. I just don't get a good vibe when I watch the seers having their alleged visions. My theory is that they are faking it for commercial reasons, or they are genuinely seeing visions but not of the Virgin. I have always believed there was a demonic component to Medjugorje.

In any event, I do think the Vatican will rule negatively on Medjugorje in what will be a final, definitive ruling.

 

My mother and father never believed and I would say to you, David what I said to them before they died, pay it a visit and see for yourself.

Taste and see that the fruit is good.


Matthew 11:2-5



2 When John heard in prison what Christ was doing, he sent his disciples 3 to ask him, "Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?" 4 Jesus replied, "Go back and report to John what you hear and see: 5 The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor.

 

I'm not sure why you are addressing this to me. I have been there three times, have met two of the visionaries and have experienced some very strange experiences that convince me. Take a look at the thread Some Medjugorje Stories. For some reason I don't care what the Commission say, I wouldn't challenge any decision in any way and I probably will never go there again anyway but, of course, no decision would change what I have seen and experienced (together with my son and wife who have never been there but have stories to tell).

As to what the Pope himself said, it is a matter of public record that, on 7 September, this was said:

“There is another group of Christians without Christ: those who look things that are kind of rare, a bit special, who chase after some private revelations,” whereas instead revelation was concluded with the New Testament. The Holy Father warned about the desire of such Christians to go “to the spectacle of revelation, to hear some new things”. But – and this is the exhortation that Pope directed to them – “Pick up the Gospel!”

Although, it is only rumoured that he specifically linked his comments to Medjugorje and that it is not easy to be absolutely clear what the Pope means when he speaks, I would read this as a comment about Medjugorje. If these are his views, he is hardly going to be very enthusiastic about Medjugorje which appears to 'fit the bill', at least for some of its adherents (unfortunately).

 

Padraig,

I do not doubt that many people have had many good experiences visiting Medjugorje.

But this pretty much sums up how I feel about Medjugorje:

 

I will listen to this prayerfully tomorrow David, with the grace of God, an open heart and respond.

Thank you.

 

Steve...I was just saying you think the verdict will be negative to nuetral and I was commenting I thought the verdict would neutral to positive and gave some gut feeling reasons as to why. I may be totally wrong...but I put my discernment in the court of nuetral to positive. If Francis is a Marian priest... surely he will recognize Mary's handiwork.

 

A couple of points on all this ...
i) on the Pope's Casa Santa Marta sermon of September 7, the Osservatore Romano report's statement that revelation concluded with the New Testament (which is not a direct quote from Pope Francis's words) needs to be interpreted carefully. It clearly does not mean that the Pope regards private revelation as invalid per se - otherwise why would he be consecrating the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary on October 13 in commemoration of the private revelation given in Fatima? What he is critiquing, quite justifiably, is the sensationalist attitude of certain people who are interested in novelty rather than encountering Christ. That has nothing to do with whether any specific private revelation is genuine or not (including Medjugorje) - obviously, even authentic apparition sites can be and frequently are visited with inappropriate or immature motivation.

ii) I would caution very strongly against attaching weight to the views of the author of the video embedded above. I say this after having read E Michael Jones's work in other contexts and having grave reservations about its scholarly quality and intellectual integrity, a prime example being his book 'Dionysos Rising: the birth of cultural revolution out of the spirit of music'. Although it is certainly stimulating and written with undeniable literary flair, when examined rigourously for factual accuracy and logical consistency, there is a great deal that is tendentious, built on half-truths and marred by ethnic stereotypes. It is this unfortunate tendency towards racism which has in recent years caused the author to lose a great deal of credibility
-in 2004 he was "unequivocally condemned" for anti-Semitism by the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights (he has quoted Holocaust deniers in his writings)
- in 2006 Cardinal Miloslav Vlk of Prague mentioned him by name in a statement against political extremism
- in 2008 the Catholic University of America cancelled his appearance as a lecturer for espousing ' views that are contrary to the mission and values of a Catholic University.'

iii) a definitively negative as opposed to neutral verdict on Medjugorje would create a logical problem for the Church. This is perhaps not well-known (and I have no idea whether Cardinal Ruini's commission is aware of this), but the one of the very first of the messages received in 1994 by Maria da Carmo and Edson Glauber in connection with the Marian apparitions of Itapiranga in Brazil expressed approval of Medjugorje. As discussed elsewhere on this forum, the 1994-1998 Itapiranga apparitions were approved by local Bishop Carillo Gritti as 'supernatural in origin' (a very rare verdict) in 2009 after a long inquiry.

 

Ah well I will not listen to him, life is too short.

But I do try to be open minded

 

Peter B,

I don't know about E. Michael Jones's other writings. I do agree with him on Medjugorje. I think a lot of people are going to be very disappointed when the Vatican ruling comes down on Medjugorje. That's too bad but that is what happens when one puts stock in an unapproved apparition that has been looked upon negatively by the local bishop from the get go.

With regard to the demonic aspect of Medjugorje, many people seem to be unaware that one of the charges brought against laicizied priest Tomislav Vlasic, the primary Medjugorje publicist, was trafficking in spirits ("dubious doctrine, the manipulation of consciences, suspect mysticism and disobedience towards legitimately issued orders" was the fulll charge). Hence, the demonic infestation at Medjugorje. As St. John of the Cross said, "The devil rejoices when people seek private revelations." That is so because they are so easy to fabricate.


Bishop of Mostar Ratko Peric, responsible for Medjugorje, has stated, "The numerous absurd messages, lies, falsehoods and disobedience associated from the beginning with the events and 'apparitions' of Medjugorje, all refute every claim of authenticity."

Until the Vatican ruling comes down, I will remain obedient to the local bishop.

 

It was my understanding the pope took it out of the local bishop's hands. Am I wrong?

 

All this has been addressed in great detail and with full documentation at
http://www.medjugorje-apologia.com/
Naturally where one stands on all of this depends on who you believe. While the jury is still out, consider the evidence for yourselves (including the reports from the neuroscientific teams and video of solar phenomena shot from multiple angles over several years that is available on YouTube) and draw your conclusions... All I can say is that among all the critics, however vociferous, as opposed to the 'neutrals' I see nobody of the stature of supporters of Medjugorje such as John Paul II, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Belgian Primate André Leonard and Fr. Gabriel Amorth. So if those of us who are inclined to be positive on this turn out to be wrong, we'll at least have been in some very good spiritual company.