As long time readers of CMR are aware, we discuss almost every thing on this blog. Almost. There is one topic not to be discussed here, until now. The M-word. Yes, Medjugorje.
Our general policy is that there is not much to be gained by discussing it as most people’s perceptions of the claims are set and dialogue between the two camps tends toward civil war. This coupled with the fact that there is little actual “news” out of Medjugorje these days leads us to the prudent decision to leave this topic alone.
But now, we actually have some news coming out of Medjugorje. Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna and member of the CDF spent the last five days in Medjugorje. Medjugorje supporters have steadily hinted in advance of the visit that the Cardinal coming was a tacit endorsement of Medjugorje while detractors said that is no such thing since this is merely a “private visit”.
Of course, a private visit in and of itself is no endorsement, tacit or otherwise. However, while in Medjugorje the Cardinal said Mass in the Church and gave a public speech. While careful to note that the status of Medjugorje has not changed (neither approved or disapproved) and that a final decision on the phenomena will not be reached until the alleged apparitions end, it is hard to view some of his comments as anything other than tacit (if personal) approval. Emphases mine.
“I know about Medjugorje for many years, not personally because I have never been here before, but in our Diocese and even farther, I do experience fruits of Medjugorje. I always used to say what Jesus has said in the Gospel: “You will recognise the tree by its fruits.” When I see the fruits of Medjugorje back at home I can only say that the tree is surely good.
Speaking, furthermore, about Medjugorje in the Church, the Cardinal added: “Supreme authority in the Church is the Holy See, the Holy Father and his Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and that is the highest authority in all of the issues of faith and morality. Supreme authority of the Church gave us clear guidelines, not directly from Holy Father himself, but from Congregation on the Doctrine of the Faith that had clearly confirmed what the bishops from Yugoslavia once said, and that undoubtedly is applicable in Medjugorje. I have always repeated that. Those texts are very much known. There are three elements that are valid still today, and I can place my visit to Medjugorje within those guidelines. In that sense, my visit is not something that is unusual at all. The Holy See, in accordance with the Statement of Bishops from 1991, says the following:
“First: Non constat de supernaturalitatae. [HERE HE DESCRIBES WHAT THAT MEANS – SEE Transcript for complete text]
“Second: no official pilgrimages are to be organised, which means that I can not organise pilgrimage of my diocese to Medjugorje. That is logically related to what was mentioned in the previous point. So, there is no official recognition yet, but in that formulation it is also said that supernaturality is not excluded. The Church has clearly said it is not excluded. It is not confirmed, but it is not excluded.
“Third thing that church doctrine clearly states is also in accordance to the statement of Yugoslavian Bishops, that the faithful journeying to Medjugorje require attention and pastoral care. …
I would advise for patience. The Mother of God is so patient with us that for nearly 29 years here, in a very direct way. She is showing Her vicinity and care for the parish of Medjugorje and numerous pilgrims. We can peacefully wait and have patience! Twenty nine years is a long period of time for us, but not such a long period to our God!”
While not a ringing endorsement, it is arguably a tacit and very surprising one and I am not the only one who thinks so. Bishop Peric, Bishop of the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno, is not happy with the Cardinal. While emphasizing that his visit, in and of itself is no endorsement, he confronts the Cardinal in a direct way for what has transpired and the obvious impression it will leave with many. Bishop Peric, after listing the events and communication that led up to the Cardinal’s visit, says this:
On December 29th, the Cardinal arrived in Medjugorje. He was followed by the media over the next few days. Reports say that he gave a speech in the church of St. James the Apostle, and noting the mercy of God, said: “Who could make these things up? Who could invent this thing? Man? No, this is not a human act.” On December 31st a journalist [blogger] wrote: “While some had expected the cardinal’s visit to Medjugorje to be private, he has instead surprised the town by being very visible. He has spent his time concelebrating Mass at St James Church, climbing Apparition Hill with visionary Marija Lunetti, praying in silence at Adoration, and, perhaps most notably, giving his talk today in the parish church with the Franciscan friars at his side”
5)In all this I have to admit that I personally, as diocesan bishop of the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno, remain surprised. I understand that the Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church enjoys the right to profess and preach the Gospel throughout the Catholic Church. But with regard to public appearances outside their own diocese there also exists a certain etiquette in the Church: the bishop or cardinal who intends to come to another diocese publicly, first informs the local bishop, which is encouraged by the Church and by prudence. This understanding in the church and specific caution should be applied especially in this case.
6)I am surprised because Cardinal Schonborn’s office to the publication of this statement, no one has reported, and assuming that the Cardinal knows the position of the Church, based on the results of the commission’s research that no one can say that these are “supernatural apparitions or private revelations.” His visit to Cenacolo and with Sr. Elvira, who, by the way, as a religious nun with no permission to reside and operate in the territory of this diocese, could be interpreted as supportive. And, not only her, but a growing number of new communities and disobedient associations of the faithful in Medjugorje, which can be read as an encouragement for their ecclesiastical disobedience.
…[Here he lists his complaints about Medjugorje and the local Franciscans and then finishes]…
8)The Cardinal is excited by the many confession s in Medjugorje, where the Father’s mercy is manifested. We believe that the mercy of the heavenly Father, as reflected in Medjugorje is also in each and every parish of his diocese, both before and after the phenomenon of Medjugorje. Just look at the long lines of faithful before the confessional in all the parishes, especially for Christmas, for Easter, for holidays, or for Confirmation. Many say these confessions in Medjugorje are strong evidence that the Lady “appears”. According to this conclusion on the numbers making confessions, Our Lady would appear in all our parishes, not just those three people once a year in Medjugorje and the other three every day, in fact most outside of Medjugorje, and apparently in the cathedral in Vienna! All together now: about 40,000 “apparitions”! Indeed, one gets the impression that some “visionaries” determine where and when the Lady “comes” since the appearance happens when and where they want. Is this not an inadmissible manipulation of Our Lady and the Sacred in general?
As the diocesan bishop with this statement I want to inform the faithful that the visit of Cardinal Christoph Schonborn does not imply any recognition of the authenticity of the “apparitions” related to Medjugorje. I regret that the Cardinal, with his visit, appearance, and statements, brings something new to the present suffering of the local Church which does not contribute to peace and unity so necessary.
This episode is quite remarkable. The Cardinal’s comments and actions in and on Medjugorje are very surprising. While they are certainly nothing approaching official endorsement, they are sure to excite Medjugorje supporters and infuriate Medjugorje detractors. This is so clearly the case that Bishop Peric has publicly called out Cardinal Christoph Schönborn for his words and deeds.
Did the Cardinal really do all this without talking with Bishop Peric? Wow!
We don’t take sides on this blog on Medjugorje, but since they added mud-wrestling to the attraction, we just couldn’t stay away!
Note: Please try not to destroy the furniture here at CMR discussing this one.
January 5, 2010 at 11:01 pm
"Intuitively though, who would go to Medjogorie when they can tour London or Paris?"
Based upon his writings on the subject alone, I believe St John of the Cross would agree. After all, the Cathedral of Notre-Dame is AWESOME!
January 6, 2010 at 2:37 am
Medjugorje is a complete fraud. Our Lady would never promote religious indifferentism, deny Catholic dogma, or encourage disobedience to the legitimate authorities of the Church.
These visions are surely demonic.
January 6, 2010 at 4:43 pm
Deirdre, I figured since we already had several of the hot-button issues in here, I'd throw in LoC…go for the trifecta 😉
Rick, you miss my point. Yes, God can write straight with crooked lines (whatever that really means…I'd think it'd be better said that God can draw straight lines using a bent ruler or something…whatever.) My point, though, is that good fruits alone aren't sufficient to prove anything. There were many vocations and a great devotion among those involved with LoC/RC, and many peoples' spiritual formation and growth was greatly helped by their involvement. But those fruits don't offset the wrongs done by the founder, which calls into question the charism of the Legions.
So pointing out the fruits is a distraction. We're aware of the good that people have experienced through their personal pilgrimages to Medjugorje. Those experiences have nothing to do with the concerns some have with regards to the visions, and do nothing to offset those concerns.
One important thing for people to remember is that, in all cases, any bad in the beginning doesn't destroy the good that came from it. Priests who answered God's call in part because of LoC are still priests. People who returned to the Church (and the Sacraments) because of Medjugorje experiences will still be in the Church no matter what the final decision is. A Legion of Christ priest doesn't somehow lose his ordination if LoC is suppressed. A confession and absolution received during a pilgrimage to Medjugorje will remain valid and healing…the absolution isn't undone if the ultimate decision is against validity of the visions.
I personally make no assertion one way or the other. Are the visions genuine? I have no idea. I can speculate all sorts of things, but I have no basis for making a firm decision. In such a case, I put my trust in the Church, in the local Bishop, in the CDF.
January 6, 2010 at 5:10 pm
I actually found an explanation of the 'crooked lines' saying that makes sense–
It DOESN"T mean that "God brings good out of bad things"
It's supposed to mean "Even the small, seemingly meaningless tasks God gives us can contribute to the greater purpose when done well."
The writer I saw used it in reference to the show 'Joan of Arcadia.' — **SPOILERS***God often gives her tasks that seem pointless or meaningless (join the cheerleading squad! Build a boat!) that contribute to a larger plan that she can't understand until it's over. (Get help for the girl who just delivered a baby! Bring your disabled brother and your dad together on a project!)
So, rather than "Even if the visions are demonic, they have good fruits!" it means "That phonecall from Great Aunt Martha that just interrupted my morning prayer served some greater purpose in God's plan that I can't know yet."
The 'crooked lines' are the tasks we see as interruptions from our 'Big Purpose' (a kid's bloody nose as we try to get things ready for Christmas dinner, a neighbor who asks for a ride to the grocery store when we WANTED to mow the lawn), but that are from God nonetheless. So when we do those LITTLE tasks with great love, we contribute to the 'Straight Line' God is drawing.
Darn that Therese of Lisieux! She keeps popping up EVERYWHERE these days……
January 6, 2010 at 5:12 pm
Anyway, I like that interpretation of the proverb better than the one that's more common. Because the "Sin leads to good things!" varient is, frankly, pretty crummy theology.
So, Maciel's perversions and Medj.'s disobedience are NOT 'crooked lines.' They're just sin.
BUT the poopy diaper that's calling me from this VERY IMPORTANT discussion?
January 6, 2010 at 8:16 pm
Good from sin? How about Joseph being sold by his brothers and ending up in Egypt to become instrumental in saving God's people?
January 6, 2010 at 8:42 pm
How about good in spite of sin? (Whew!)
January 6, 2010 at 9:27 pm
Rick– of course, if his brothers hadn't sold him in the FIRST place, his family wouldn't have LEFT the promised land, and so wouldn't have needed to be brought back…….
God can cause everything to work to the good, but that doesn't excuse the tradgedy that is sin.
Or, to put it even more clearly, THE ENDS DON'T JUSTIFY THE MEANS. It is not OK to do something bad just because it happens to result in something good.
Also, just because something APPEARS to be a good fruit at first glance, doesn't mean that it IS one. And we can't know what BETTER things God might have done if we hadn't sinned in the first place. It is a good thing to commit a sin and repent, but it's a better thing to avoid the sin all together!
It's hard to imagine what human history would look like if Abraham had trusted God's promise, instead of taking a concubine, if Jacob hadn't been cheated, if Joseph's brothers had avoided envy……
Think of all the bad things that came from each person's sin! A lot of the old testament illustrates the fact that one man's sin can affect the lives of many, even if it seems like a small thing at the time!
Joseph's brothers are not to be emulated– they're a warning. (and the good that results comes from Joseph's decision to forgive them and welcome them— not from the sin itself!)
January 6, 2010 at 9:58 pm
Deirdre – I like that point about Joseph's brothers. Absolutely they are not to be emulated. And I think another point to the story was God had big plans for Joseph. And regardless of how his brothers tried to derail them, God was still able to use Joseph to his potential and individual talents to fulfill his plan.
Tying this back to Medj, we have a good family friend who went 2 years ago and never stops talking about it– and she's not the most religious person in the world (pretty close to a Christmas and Easter Catholic). She does pray the rosary much more often after the visit, which many Medj-minions might point at as one "fruit". Yet one has to wonder if there would have been much more commitment to Catholicism as a whole had this been a true apparition.
It reminds me of the debate Kruschev had with one of Stalin's biographers after his death. The biographer extolled Stalin's reign, saying that he brought Russia into the nuclear age and made it a world power. Kruschev countered saying something like, "Think of how much more powerful Russia would be today if we hadn't killed off or exiled our top scientists and military strategists." So, what seems "good" or at the very least "acceptible" could be a mere shadow of what could be. This is how I would characterize the "fruits" of Medj.
January 6, 2010 at 11:58 pm
Deirdre,
Your posts have been most interesting (as an aside, I'm still cleaning the coffee off of my screen on the "poopy diaper".
Back to your statement about THE ENDS DO NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS…
Consequentialism, which is what it is called, is precisely what many want to yield to in the case of Medjugorje. The disobedience, the deception, the attacks against the local bishop are means that are justified (or treated with indifference), for the sake of the "good fruits".
One thing that caught my eye was that in one of the post-visit interviews, Cardinal Schonborn spoke about the "sensus fidelium" or "sense of the faithful".
Here is one reporter pointing this out at the end of his blogpost:
"Now for that theological twist: in his statement in Vienna, Schönborn played down the usual pro-versus-con apparitions argument and urged Catholics to see Medjugorje “in the light of the Second Vatican Council” by looking to the sensus fidelium (”sense of the faithful”) about it. This concept focuses more on what Catholics in the pews actually believe rather than on the dogmas involved. His stress on the “fruits of the tree” rather than its roots fits with this approach. Given the standoff over Church approval for the Medjugorje apparitions, is Schönborn trying to move the theological goalposts to break the standoff and win recognition for them after all?"
I just can't imagine, that under the papacy of Pope Benedict XVI, the lies and deceptions would get a free pass because people like to pray there.
Any thoughts?
January 7, 2010 at 12:02 am
David Alexander – I am hoping to get your thoughts on that comment by Cdl Schonborn on the "sensus fidelium" as well.
I meant to add that the reason I don't think such an approach will get a free pass is because Pope Benedict XVI has been waging a solid battle against relativism and consequentalism, both of which are very much at play in this whole affair.
January 7, 2010 at 12:48 am
BTW– Catholic Light blog has a post up about the 'Great Sign':
http://catholiclight.stblogs.org/archives/2010/01/bp-peric-on-the.html#more
It seems like Bshp. Peric is getting more and more vocal about the problems with Medagorje. Would he be doing that if the CDF was about to declare the apparitions valid? I'm guessing he knows that Levada and Benedict are going to back him up on this./….
January 7, 2010 at 1:06 am
Going to what Deirdre is saying about the bishop being more vocal, it all started to roll with his homily in 2006, which gained traction when the Bishops of Tuscany, Italy were told by the CDF to share it with the priests and faithful of the diocese. Here is a copy of that notice from the Tuscan Bishop's conference, which I just posted yesterday.
Also, here is a live link to the translation of The Questionable Games Surrounding the 'Great Sign' at Richard's blog. It was actually released in Italian on the bishop's website on December 11th, but with the holidays, and the sheer length of the document, it just took time to get into English.
January 7, 2010 at 1:08 am
I meant to point out that the Tuscan bishops did this back in 2007 following the ad limina visit that year.
January 7, 2010 at 2:26 am
"Would he be doing that if the CDF was about to declare the apparitions valid?"
It's more likely that the Bishop of Mostar is being more vocal, to counter the confusion resulting from nuts like Schönborn running around loose, and treating the "sensus fidelium" as if it were a novel concept originating with Vatican II, which it did not.
Peric isn't holding his breath on the Holy See cranking out an approval, and neither should you. We can count on one hand the number of appearances at Fatima, and approval happened in less than a lifetime. At last count, Medjugorje has been the sight of over ten thousand messages!!! (That's would be a one, with four zeros after it.) Also, Benedict XVI is not John Paul II. The current pope is likely to be more cautious, not less, with regard to mystical experiences.
And that's without taking into account the other shenanigans.
January 7, 2010 at 2:30 am
Diane:
I think you're right. Peric isn't sticking his neck out without knowing he's covered.
January 7, 2010 at 2:32 am
Cardinal Schonborn is for an atheist homoerotic artist:
http://members7.boardhost.com/TrueCatholic/msg/1262756821.html
But he is against pro-life rallies (and forbids a fellow bishop from attending one in his diocese):
http://en.gloria.tv/?media=33117
Yet is adamantly in favor of a diabolical–anti Catholic–apparition site:
http://hospitallers.blogspot.com/2009/09/medjugorje-divine-intervention-or.html
What does this all tell you?
January 7, 2010 at 2:53 am
David:
It's well past 10,000 messages.
It is now over 40,000 messages.
And, as the bishop points out in his statement on the Cdl Schonborn visit, at no point does the "gospa" acknowledge the chaos and disorder in the local church, with the many suspensions/dismissal of priests, communities being set up without ecclesial permission.
There was even a physical attack upon the bishop himself by supporters of one parish usurped by some of those renegade Franciscans he speaks of in his statement dismissed by their Superior General in Rome.
Here is the account explained by E. Michael Jones:
Bishop Peric knows that you don't cross the Medjugorje crowd with impunity. In April of 1995, the bishop was attacked by a mob in his chancery; his pectoral cross was ripped from his person; he was beaten up by the mob and then forced into a car and driven to an illicit chapel run by the Medjugorje Franciscans and held hostage for 10 hours. It was only when the mayor of Mostar showed up with UN troups that the bishop was released.
January 7, 2010 at 3:21 am
Wow, that would be a four with four zeros. This one could take a while.
January 7, 2010 at 2:30 pm
Sorry about the delay; real life is pretty busy, at the moment… 🙂
Rick wrote, on January 4, 2010 6:10 PM:
@Paladin: I like your explanation. I too chase apparitions. (emphasis added)
I think you misunderstood me, here. I do not chase apparitions, in general, and I avoid unapproved apparitions like the plague, until such time as the Church sees fit to approve them unequivocally. In particular, I'm completely convinced that the alleged "apparitions" at Medjugorje are false apparitions, and that–whatever is really happening–the Blessed Virgin is not appearing to those alleged "visionaries", and I strongly doubt that she ever did. No "apparition" so rife with disobedience from top to bottom can come from my Mother Mary, Who was the most obedient human being who ever lived.
In my mind, if our Mother took the time to visit, I should be there if I could.
Fine. Then go to Lourdes, or Fatima, or to the shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe, or Akita, or some approved apparition where the Blessed Mother actually DID visit. Surely it follows that, if Motehr Mary did NOT visit a particular site, you wouldn't feel a desire to go there for a "Marian Pilgrimage"?
I went to Conyers, GA. Despite the fact that it was judged to be not approved, I believe I was blessed. My visit there propelled set me to become a pro-life activist because I felt that our Lady and our Lord are grieved the most by this on-going slaughter.
Praise be to God for what He did through that event! But I want to be clear, again: God can work anything to good (cf. Romans 8:28), but God forbid that we use that as an excuse to be willy-nilly about embracing "apparitions" which might well be hoaxes, delusions, or even demonic counterfeits! (Cf. Romans 6:1-2) Throwing ourselves into dubious "apparitions" while saying to ourselves, "God will make all things right!" is called the sin of presumption. We might as well throw ourselves down from the parapet of the Temple, since–after all–God has commanded His angels to guard us in all our ways!
Seriously: guard your heart, Rick, and don't give it away to any specific apparition! Give it directly to Our Blessed Mother, and let the Church handle the "bells and whistles"!