"The Holy Father has recently made statements about Medjugorje that have got people talking. Now, these negative statements by the Holy Father have another side to them, as he also made remarks about the possible legitimacy of the earliest messages there. It is also being speculated that the statement the Holy See will eventually release will allow for pilgrimages to Medjugorje as a place of prayer. We have yet to see if such an uncertain trumpet call will be issued, so we cannot comment on it here.
The editorial policy of Catholicism.org runs consistently against the Medjugorje phenomenon, as several postings on our site reveal, the most important of which, because of its doctrinal nature, is “Medjugorje: Another View,” by Robin C. Poe. Miss Poe’s piece exposes the indifferentist nature of messages that been attributed by the seers to the “Gospa” (the Serbo-Croatian word for “Lady,” and the way the visionaries refer to the Blessed Virgin). Brian Kelly has weighed in on the copious “secrets” which have emanated from the phenomenon in his “Scorecard for the Visionaries of Medjugorje.”
There is one point I would like to deal with here, and it addresses a fairly consistent claim I have heard from devotees of this phenomenon in Bosnia-Herzegovina: “But you cannot argue against the fruits of Medjugorje! The conversions, the confessions, the changes in lives and families are too numerous and cannot be gainsaid. You must judge a tree by its fruits, as Our Lord says, and the fruits of Medjugorje are good.”
Read the whole article.
Amazing that this idiotic plague is still enjoying popularity. A sad commentary on the intellectual capacity of far too many Catholics who fall for this junk.
11 comments:
A GREAT final comment you offer. You make my heart soar-like-eagle!
so sad. you really think you know something.
This is bad fruit for them mad-trads ?
May 25, 2017
Thirty five thousand children brought for Adoration before the Blessed Sacrament by Irish pilgrim to Medugorje : discovers new ministry
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/05/thirty-five-thousand-children-brought.html
May 25, 2017
Pope's envoy in Medugorje extremely positive on Medugorje, place of profound prayer and global spiritual fruits - Mark Miravalle
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/05/popes-envoy-in-medugorje-extremely.html
Dear Catholic Mission:
Many thanks for your response.
I am not quite sure what you are driving at but if you mean that some good has come from this demonstrably false apparition, which I contend is preternatural not supernatural, then you may want to give the whole article a re-read. It explains this incongruity rather well.
My great worry over all this is when the whole Medjugorje edifice finally comes crashing down what will that do to the faith of the many Catholics who bought into it?
I do not think the apparitions are false but I think that the reports on the apparitions by the traditionalists are false.It is a kind of ' a party line' they all have to follow to be trads with a particular group.
The mad trads interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational premise and then conclude it is a break with the past.This is normal for them.This is not a doctrinal issue when they use this deception knowingly or unknowingly.They can easily interpret Vatican Council II without the irrational premise and then the Council will be in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus , according to Fr. Leonard Feeney or the missionaries in the 16th century.
They do not do this even after being informed. Since they want to protect their financial and other interests from being hit by the Left and they also do not want to admit that they were wrong all these years on Vatican Council II.
Then they talk about Our Lady at Medugorje not being correct on salvation theology and doctrine.They are not affirming the dogma EENS in line with Vatican Council II and they want Our Lady to be in step with them. They also want her to be doctrinally out of step with the magisterium, who also like the trads, interpret the Council and the dogma EENS with the same false premise..
I have been to Medugorje and I have personally asked the Spiritual Director of the visionaries if Our Lady said that all religions are equal. He denied it. I have reported this many times. But this is ignored. Since they, bad trads, want to criticize Medugorje since it is the party line.They also have to criticize the Neo Catechumenale Way to be one of the group.
It was Archbishop Lefebvre who did not notice the false premise in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. So now every one makes the same mistake to be a traditionalist. Without thinking they all interpret invisible baptism of desire as being a visible exception to all needing to be members of the Church for salvation.They would want Our Lady at Medugorje to say the same thing.
So on what basis can they say that Medugorje is a false apparition when theirtheology and doctrines, as traditionalists, is irrational and heretical? They do not even have the integrity to admit it in public once they are informed about it.
Medugorje is today one of the biggest Catholic movements.Our Lady has brought hundreds of thousands of Catholics back to the Faith.Her influence in Italy is tremendous.It is there throughout Europe and the world.She is seen here as a loving Mother who also mentions Hell and calls for prayers and fasting. The intensity of the three hours of evening prayer in the Church is extraordinary. You would not say it is pretenatural.Many people wonder why we cannot have prayers like this when they go back home.
Why are there such long lines at Confession in Medugorje and the same is not seen at churches where they have the Tridentine Rite Mass, for example, in Rome? I could go on....
Dear Catholic Mission:
Thank you again for the comment.
For someone who is so informed on the Medjugorje deception I am rather surprised you make no reference to the numerous, scholarly and well-reasoned debunkings of this nonsense. As you know there are two sides to every story; you have decided to ignore one and embrace the other.
Your criticisms of what you term "trads/madtrads," etc. are so off-base and poorly informed that it leads me to no other conclusion that you have failed to read let alone study the wiser heads in this situation and have fallen back on sentimental views which perfectly fit the pro-Medjugorje narrative. And if I might remind you, prior to 1970 there was no such thing as a "traditionalist". All Catholics were simply Catholics. If you are suggesting that things in the Church have improved since that unnecessary and divisive Council then I frankly would not know where to begin to have a rational discussion with you.
Thanks again for writing.
Dear Catholic Mission:
Thank you again for the comment.
For someone who is so informed on the Medjugorje deception I am rather surprised you make no reference to the numerous, scholarly and well-reasoned debunkings of this nonsense. As you know there are two sides to every story; you have decided to ignore one and embrace the other.
Lionel: Nearly every year I keep responding to the same arguments and they ignore mine. The latest nonsense was on Church Militant.I responded there.I could cut and paste that reply here.
If there are two sides then when will I see my side in these bad trad reports.
_________________________
Your criticisms of what you term "trads/madtrads," etc. are so off-base and poorly informed that it leads me to no other conclusion that you have failed to read let alone study the wiser heads in this situation and have fallen back on sentimental views which perfectly fit the pro-Medjugorje narrative.
Lionel:
Neither you nor the trads have addressed the issue of how an invisible for us baptism of desire can be a visible exception to the dogma EENS. So how can there be anything in Vatican Council II which contradicts EENS and the Syllabus of Errors. If you can make such a fundamental error in theology and doctrine why are you criticizing Medugorje for doctrinal reasons? When will I get a response to this point ?
_________________________
And if I might remind you, prior to 1970 there was no such thing as a "traditionalist". All Catholics were simply Catholics. If you are suggesting that things in the Church have improved since that unnecessary and divisive Council then I frankly would not know where to begin to have a rational discussion with you.
Lionel:
There can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II(Cushingism and Feeneyism). Cushingism is the divisive Council.For me the Council can only be Feeneyite.So I agree with you. There are no traditionalists as such, there are only Catholics.But then those who interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism, with an irrational premise to create a non traditional conclusion,also consider themself Catholics.These Catholics reject Vatican Council II and call themself Catholics and the others accept Vatican Council II with Cushingism and also call themself Catholics.
Thanks again for writing.
I have a hard time believing that SOME of the apparitions are valid, but the rest are not. Such a wishy-washy response!
Our God is not a God of confusion and doubt. These traits are from the Evil One.
The messages of the Blessed Mother that the Church has approved (Fatima, Lourdes) are not confusing. The message is always clear.
Some of the messages from these visions are simply trite and in some cases, silly.
Satan sent his least clever demons to spit these out of the mouths of the visionaries because he knew that human beings will buy a sack of manure, if it is wrapped in attractive paper and bow.
The whole business ( and I do mean "Business") needs to be closed down.
Regarding the "fruits" of the visions: Satan used a lovely piece of fruit as a method to lead mankind into the Original Sin. That "fruit" got us to where we are today.
Simply and beautifully stated, Anon.
Anonymous( who cannot affirm his Catholic name)
Still the points I have raised here are not answered.They have not been answered when I have written directly to the St.Benedict Centers, Church Militant TV and the others who keep repeating that doctrine is important.
I keep pointing out again and again that invisible forus baptism of desire cannot be a visible exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus .So as Chris Ferrara agrees, there can be no practical exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So it means that in Vatican Council II there are no practical exceptions to EENS(LG 16 etc are not explicit and known in personal cases in 2017). So why do the St. Benedict Centers interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with the dogma EENS? I do not do this .Is this not a doctrinal error for the traditionalists ? Are they not following the error of the present liberal magisterium? Yes or No for you?
The Society of St. Pius X, also traditionalists, reject the dogma EENS according to the missionaries of the 16th century. For them there is a development with Vatican Council II (LG 16 is a visible exception to EENS).They are critical of Feeneyism too on their website. So how can the SSPX claim like the present magisterium of Pope Francis and Benedict that doctrinally they affirm the salvation dogma(EENS)? Are they not following the error of the present liberal magisterium ? They are rejecting EENS ( Feeneyite) and they are rejecting Vatican Council II (Feeneyite).They interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism and reject that too.Is this not massive heresy and doctrinal confusion among those who should safeguard doctrine-the traditionalists?!
So here here are bad trads who interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism, with an irrationality instead of without the innovation, and they are complaining about Our Lady at Medugorje not being in step with all their non sense on salvation?
Where are the comments on this point ?
Then I have stated many times that I spoke personally to Fr.Slavko Barbaric ofm, the late Spiritual Director of the visionaries and I asked him if Our Lady said that all religions are equal. He denied it.This is not reported by the traditionalist who hold faulty doctrine on EENS and Vatican Council II.
Also Medugorje has a spokesman. He speaks English. They can call him and clarify this issue.If he said Our Lady said all religions are equal as a theology I would reject it. If she said that she loves all people and all people are her children I would understand it and welcome that statement as being Catholic and coming from the Blessed Mother.
The messages are not trite for millions of people who follow them. They are not trite but helpful for even the seers in their personal life.
-Lionel
Dear Lionel:
I'll make a deal with you. You can go ahead and live in your incoherent fantasies (which bore us to tears) and I'll promise to delete any additional garrulous and useless comments from you.
ap
Post a Comment