Medjugorje; the findings of the Ruini report Esteemed by the Pope Francis, the report is positive on the first appearances, much less on the current ones while it proposes to turn the church into a pontifical sanctuary. Doubts from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that discussed the phenomenon in 2016 Pubblicato il 16/05/2017 ANDREA TORNIELLI VATICAN CITY Thirteen votes in favor of recognizing the supernatural nature of the first seven appearances in Medjugorje, one vote against and one “suspensive” ballot, which will give a final answer later. A majority of suspensive votes and many doubts instead, concerning the apparition phenomenon from the end of 1981 to today. These are the results of the work done by the commission on Medjugorje established in 2010 by Benedict XVI and chaired by Cardinal Camillo Ruini. Pope Francis mentioned this report in the press conference on the return flight from Fatima when he revealed the distinction between the first apparitions and the later ones, saying, “A commission of good theologians, bishops, cardinals. Good, good, good. The Ruini report is very, very good. It is well known that the signal emerged from the Pontiff’s words is positive about the spiritual fruits and the conversions (”people who go there and convert, people who meet God, who change life”), but is negative with regard to the current apparitions “I prefer Our Lady Mother, and not the head of the telegraphic office, who sends a message every day”. A commission wanted by Ratzinger From 17 March 2010 to 17 January 2014, a commission chaired by Ruini was set up for the will of Benedict XVI. In addition to the former chairman of the CEI, Cardinals Jozef Tomko, Vinko Puljić, Josip Bozanić, Julián Herranz and Angelo Amato took part. The psychologist Tony Anatrella, the theologians Pierangelo Sequeri, Franjo Topić, Mihály Szentmártoni and Nela Gašpar, the Mariologist Salvatore Perrella, the anthropologist Achim Schütz, the canonist David Jaeger, the speaker of the causes of the saints Zdzisław Józef Kijas, the psychologist Mijo Nikić and the official of the Doctrine of the Faith Krzysztof Nykiel. Their task was to “collect and examine all the material” about Medjugorje and to present “a detailed report” followed by a vote on the “supernatural nature or not” of the apparitions as well as the most appropriate “pastoral solutions”. The committee met 17 times and screened all documents filed in the Vatican, the parish of Medjugorje and the archives of the secret services of the former Yugoslavia. The commission heard all the seers and witnesses involved, and in April 2012, they carried out an inspection in the village of Herzegovina. Positive Findings on First Appearances The commission noted a very clear difference between the beginning of the phenomenon and its following development, and therefore decided to issue two distinct votes on the two different phases: the first seven presumed appearances between June 24 and July 3, 1981, and all that happened later. Members and experts came out with 13 votes in favor of recognizing the supernatural nature of the first visions. A member voted against and an expert expressed a suspensive vote. The committee argues that the seven young seers were psychically normal and were caught by surprise by the apparition, and that nothing of what they had seen was influenced by either the Franciscans of the parish or any other subjects. They showed resistance in telling what happened despite the police arrested them and death threating them. The commission also rejected the hypothesis of a demonic origin of the apparitions. The doubts about the development of the phenomenon With regard to the second phase of the apparitions, the commission took note of the heavy interference caused by the conflict between the bishop and the Franciscans of the parish, as well as the fact that the apparitions, pre-announced and programmed individually for each seer continued with repetitive messages. These visions continued despite the youngsters had said they would end, however that actually has never happened. There is then the issue of the “secrets” of the somewhat apocalyptic flavor that the seers claim to have been revealed from the apparition. On this second stage, the committee voted in two steps. Firstly, taking into account the spiritual fruits of Medjugorje but leaving aside the behaviors of the seers. On this point, 3 members and 3 experts say there are positive outcomes, 4 members and 3 experts say they are mixed, with a majority of positive, effects and the remaining 3 experts claim there are mixed positive and negative effects. If, in addition to the spiritual fruits, the behaviors of the seers is also taken into account, eight members and four experts believe that an opinion cannot be expressed, while two other members have voted against the supernatural nature of the phenomenon. The Pastoral Solution Having noted that Medjugorje’s seers have never been adequately followed on the spiritual side, along the fact that for a long time they have no longer been a group, the commission has endorsed the end of the ban on pilgrimages organized in Medjugorje. In addition, 13 members and experts out of the 14 present voted in favor of the constitution of “an authority dependent on the Holy See” in Medjugorje as well as the transformation of the parish into a pontifical sanctuary. A decision based on pastoral reasons - the care of millions of pilgrims, avoiding the formation of “parallel churches”, clarity on economic issues - which would not imply the recognition of the supernatural nature of the apparitions. The doubts of the Doctrine of the Faith Francis mentioned them on the airplane. The Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith led by Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller expressed doubts about the phenomenon and about the Ruini report, considered an authoritative contribution to be compared with other opinions and reports. In 2016 a “Feria IV”, the monthly meeting of Dicastry members, was summoned to discuss the Medjugorje case and the Ruini report. Each of the cardinals and bishops who members of the Feria IV received the text of the commission but also other material in the hands of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. During the meeting, members were asked to give their opinions. However, Pope Francis, unwilling to have the Ruini report, which he esteems, to be put up for “auction”, decided that the opinions of the Feria IV members had to be sent directly to him. And that’s exactly what happened. Francis’ decision After examining the Ruini report and the opinions of the members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Pope decided to entrust to the Polish Archbishop Henryk Hoser a “special mission of the Holy See” to “acquire more in-depth knowledge of the pastoral situation “In Medjugorje, and “above all, the needs of the faithful who come to pilgrimage” to “suggest any pastoral initiatives for the future.” By summer 2017 the Polish Archbishop will deliver the results of his work with which the Pope will make a decision. http://www.lastampa.it/2017/05/16/v...ini-report-hvBaZ3ssAeDicjdmEcS3UN/pagina.html
'It was alright back then, it's not alright now; but that doesn't matter if you take it the right way. They were speaking the truth back then but they're not now; but still a lot of good things are coming out of it. If only Our Lady had behaved herself with this daily apparition stuff.' Nuts. There's probably some big word for it. But nuts will do nicely. In the Name of God what kind of logical, coherent message is this to send out to the world? 'It was fine, but now it's not fine, but never mind; somethings worked out fine anyway. Anyway we're keeping an eye on it.' Self serving, contradictory, illogical, balderdash
Will someone tell me this. If Our Lady wants to appear every day why shouldn''t she? What is wrong with this? If Our Lady wanted to appear every hour or every minute ;what is wrong with this? She is Queen of Heaven and Mother of God , I assume she can do as she likes. I also assume she can give as many messages as often as she likes to whomsoever she pleases. Now if you happen to firmly believe, as I do, that Our Lady is appearing there at the moment and Pope Francis has just described her as, '‘Madonna chief of service’, for sending daily messages.” Then Pope Francis has just publically insulted the Mother of God. I wonder how the Blessed Trinity will take that? Not well , I suspect. However I'll leave it at that, For better or worse he's the Pope and I'm not.I guess he can say what he likes I'll write no more on the subject. I feel like screaming. But I'll write no more. (Sound of teeth grinding. Muffled screaming) Obedient Silence
I totally agree with you. Reminds me of all the times Jesus was condemned for healing on the Sabbath. God and Our Lady are to be kept in the box and we have the key. Mariana says we should not worry about anything as Our Lady will look after everything.
I'm not the current Pope's biggest fan, but fail to see how his comments are insulting Our Lady as he genuinely believes that Medj is a hoax. We are not bound to believe any apparitions, not Fatima, not Lourdes - both of those are designated 'worthy of belief', that is, the Church recommends belief that they are true, but we are not bound to believe in any so not believing is not a sin and does not insult Our Lady. For my part, I think there have been too many inconsistencies for me any longer to believe in Medj, although I used to defend it. The pro/con discussion always rapidly becomes heated so I would suggest that whatever we think about this matter, we let it go; there is a whole thread for those who want it. I prefer to stay outside it and concentrate on the parts of the forum that are helpful to me. It is possible to become over-interested in apparitions, for or against, and this can become the spiritual equivalent of fast food. The message of Fatima is repeated so often in other apparitions and reported apparitions: prayer and penance. We have this in Scripture anyway - whether we believe in this or that apparition or prophet, we know that the Kingdom of God is at hand, and it is not of this world. As for prophecies, it's ironic but we can really only be sure after they have been fulfilled (or not). For instance, Fatima's prophecies are astonishing, but at the time they were given the Church would have trodden carefully to see if and how they played out. Now with hindsight we can only marvel at what the three little shepherds saw and heard. With ongoing reported prophecy, the Church advises caution.
I think it is safe to say the commission could not find any messages that are contrary to the doctrine of the faith. If they had such a message or messages they would have been out with those years ago. So Medjugorje passes the first test. Secondly, Pope Francis acknowledges the good fruits of the apparitions. Second test passed. If all anyone can come up with is they don't like Our Lady's timing, them this to me strengthens my belief in the apparitions there., All of them.
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news...rt-released-serious-doubts-about-authenticity Official Medjugorje Report Released: Serious Doubts About Authenticity by Christine Niles, M.St. (Oxon.), J.D. • ChurchMilitant.com • May 16, 2017 58 Comments ROME (ChurchMilitant.com) - The results of the Vatican's official investigation into Medjugorje are in — and they paint an overall negative picture of the authenticity of the alleged Marian apparitions. The final tally on authenticity of apparitions from 1982 onwards resulted in zero votes in favor, two votes against, and 12 votes claiming no opinion could be given. The first seven apparitions, which reportedly took place in 1981, received a generally positive response, with 13 members of the Vatican commission voting yes as to their supernatural nature, one voting no, and one vote suspended. But the second phase — which include the 35 years from 1982 to the present day — received a strongly mixed reaction, including a final tally with zero votes in favor of the supernatural nature of the apparitions. According to Vaticanista Andrea Tornielli, "the commission took note of the heavy interference caused by the conflict between the bishop and the Franciscans of the parish, as well as the fact that the apparitions, pre-announced and programmed individually for each seer, continued with repetitive messages." In 1999, the Franciscans who served as spiritual advisors to the children were expelled from the diocese of Mostar-Duvno by their bishop, Ratko Peric, as well as by the Father General of the Order of Friars Minor, for disobedience. The Vatican approved the joint expulsion. In 2008, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith launched an investigation into Fr. Tomislav Vlasic, spiritual director to the child visionaries, whose bishop suspended him "for the diffusion of dubious doctrine, manipulation of consciences, suspicious mysticism, disobedience toward legitimately issued orders," as well as charges of sexual immorality. Fr. Tomislav Vlasic admitted he's been involved in New Age since 2002 — back when he was still spiritual advisor to the Medjugorje seers. Vlasic was eventually defrocked by Pope Benedict in 2009. In 2012, Vlasic released a video promoting the New Age movement Central Nucleus, and admits he's been involved in this since 2002 — back when he was still spiritual advisor to the Medjugorje seers. On this second phase of the purported apparitions, the Vatican committee voted on two separate issues: (1) spiritual fruits, and (2) the conduct of the seers. On spiritual fruits, six members voted positively, while the remaining 10 said the fruits were a mix of positive and negative. Mirjana allegedly "seeing" Our Lady As to the conduct of the visionaries, 12 members said no opinion could be given, while two voted against the supernatural nature of the alleged visions. Just as significant, the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in charge of overseeing the faithful diffusion of Church teaching, is expressing skepticism over the authenticity of the Medjugorje visions. In Tornielli's words, Cdl. Gerhard Müller's opinion is "considered an authoritative contribution to be compared with other opinions and reports." As critics have noted, the messages include questionable doctrinal content, including the fact that "Our Lady" regularly prays the "Our Father" with the seers — something Our Lady refused to do at the Church-approved apparition of Fatima, because it includes the line "forgive us our trespasses." As the Church teaches, Mary is without sin, so she could not ask for forgiveness of her sins. The Virgin also reportedly said, "All religions are equal before God" — espousing the heresy of indifferentism, explicitly condemned by the Church. She similarly remarked elsewhere, "It is you who are divided on this earth. The Muslims and the Orthodox, like the Catholics, are equal before my Son and before me, for you are all my children." The Virgin also reportedly said, 'All religions are equal before God' — espousing the heresy of indifferentism. She is also said to have offered the very protestant remark: "I do not dispose of all graces. ... Jesus prefers that you address your petitions directly to him, rather than through an intermediary." In spite of the generally negative view of the vast majority of the Medjugorje apparitions, the Vatican must consider how to deal pastorally with the millions of pilgrims who flock to the Bosnian town each year. In this regard, 13 commission members voted in favor of lifting the ban for pilgrimages there as well as establishing the parish as a pontifical sanctuary, with oversight by the Holy See, and which would not denote any recognition of the authenticity of the apparitions. The final decision now rests with Pope Francis, who most recently appointed Poland's Abp. Henryk Hoser to undertake a special mission of the Holy See to "acquire more in-depth knowledge of the pastoral situation" and to "suggest any pastoral initiatives for the future." Hoser is expected to submit his conclusions to the Holy Father this summer, after which Pope Francis will make his decision. On Saturday, on his return flight from Fatima, Portugal, the Holy Father expressed skepticism about Medjugorje. "The report has its doubts, but personally, I am a little worse," he told reporters. "I prefer Our Lady as mother, our mother, and not Our Lady as head of the post office who sends a message at a stated time." He continued, "This isn't Jesus' mother. And these alleged apparitions don't have much value. I say this as a personal opinion, but it is clear. Who thinks that Our Lady says, 'Come, because tomorrow at this time I will give a message to that seer?' No!"
In the article you posted -- two separate messages were synchronized into one -- here are the relevant and controversial messages -- August 31, 1982 "I do not dispose all graces. I receive from God what I obtain through prayer. God has placed His complete trust in me. I particularly protect those who have been consecrated to me. The great sign has been granted. It will appear independently of the conversion of the people." I think the key word in the above message is 'dispose'. September 4, 1982 "Jesus prefers that you address yourselves directly to Him rather than through an intermediary. In the meantime, if you wish to give yourselves completely to God and if you wish that I be your protector, then confide to me all your intentions, your fasts, and your sacrifices so that I can dispose of them according to the will of God." The key word in the above message is 'intermediary' -- don't rely on someone else for your faith. 'our Lady' in the next line tells us to entrust ourselves completely to God and to her maternal protection thus confirming the communion of saints -- No where have I read our Lady has said all religions are equal - in fact she has said the opposite -- Certainly, all religions are not equal, but all men are equal before God, as St. Paul says. --- she has said all persons are equal before God irrespective of their religion. In the same way that my three sons are ell equal in my eyes -- Gods sees all persons as His children. With regard to the Our Father being said -- Jesus taught us and prayed it and He was sinless -- Not looking to start a debate but some of these points do need to be discussed and clarified maybe on another thread.
I merely posted an article that discussed this in more depth. I don't have a dog in this fight because I don't believe in any apparitions, visionaries or locutionists that aren't approved by the Church. I will accept whatever decision the Vatican makes on this.
I am in Medjugorje at the moment! I am just going to Adoration. I will pray for everyone on this forum..
He's entitled to his opinion.. And he did emphasise that it is only his personal view. Even popes are allowed to be wrong. However, a wonderful result from the commission.. Medjugorje is authentic (as many of us know). Praised be Jesus and Mary.
An interview with the papal envoy to Medjugore, the polish archbishop Henryk Hoser, was just published in a croatia's newspaper. This is the Spanish translation, have not found an English translation. Overall his comments are really positive: http://www.centromedjugorje.org/not...versacion-enviado-del-santo-padre-medjugorje/ "The greatest and most important pastoral phenomenon of Medjugore is confession. There are not enough priests to satisfy the need of the faithful, in contrast with other sanctuaries. The witness of confessors and faithful speaks of profound confessions, confessions that imply a powerful experience of conversion. This is I believe a characteristic trait of Medjugore."
I would just like to make one further point about Medj. Unlike almost all other apparitions, many of the pilgrims have, themselves, become 'visionaries' because of the, sometimes, dramatic phenomena that they (millions?) have witnessed including myself, several friends and four family members. This puts us in a very unusual and difficult situation in the event of a negative judgement. Are we expected to deny the evidence of our own eyes? Are we to dismiss them as demonic? I have been to two other sites of apparitions (both given positive judgements) and had no supernatural experiences in those places. Indeed all (except one) such experiences have occurred at Medj. or within the few days before or after a pilgrimage there. If it is not required that Catholics accept the truth of any private revelations (I was in contact with a priest who is indifferent to the Fatima apparitions and is inclined not to believe in them - as he perfectly entitled to do). If positive judgements can be ignored, then can negative judgements be similarly dismissed as a the Church's opinion? At Heede in Germany the claimed apparitions (beginning in 1937 and going on for some years) were dismissed as false by the local Bishop (the NAZI's were in charge so such a judgement was much safer for the bishop than the other alternative - just as it was with the Communists in charge in the then Yugoslavia in 1981). Anyway, as at Medj. the supernatural phenomena was not limited to the visionaries and dozens of people who had personally experienced various phenomena rejected the Church's judgement and were excommunicated for doing so. The excommunications were eventually lifted and the site was later designated a place of pilgrimage. (BTW at Heede, one woman reported seeing the world covered in a spider's web and heard the words 'when the web is broken, there will be chaos'. This was in the 40's before anyone had even thought of the World Wide Web.)
Having "experiences" is no proof of an authentic apparition from God. The devil loves to provide experiences for people seeking them. In fact we are not supposed to seek supernatural experiences. Many Catholics are unaware of this. We are not supposed to desire them because the devil loves to provide them for us. St Ignatius was having the most wonderful late night experiences where he was enraptured in what he thought was a supernatural ecstasy. He would spend his nights staying up late to have these experiences. It turns out it was the devil keeping him up late so he would be tired in the morning for his studies. We must be very wary of these types of things.
Who said that we sought them? And where is your source for this assertion anyway? Saint Paul positively tells us to seek spiritual gifts especially prophecy but also tongues which would involve something supernatural. I am reading the classic mediaeval spiritual work 'The Cloud of Unknowing', the whole basis of which is to seek mystical experiences. I am aware that supernatural experiences are not proof of apparitions but they are not something that can be denied if they actually occurred and they are certainly an indicator. And what of those who experienced them even though they previously thought such experiences to be impossible and certainly did not seek them (I know such people)? Have you ever experienced anything supernatural? (Not asking for details) If not, you are not really in a position to provide advice/instructions to those who have? (Just a btw but, as a bit of a classicist in my youth, I was surprised at your choice of name, the Praetorian guard were the 'softies' of the Roman Army who lived easy lives near the emperors and never went on exercises and rarely went into action. Because of their lack of hard training and action, when they did fight they were usually massacred.)
