Monday, March 22, 2010

Medjugorje - Pope Benedict Sympathetic

Finally, after all the he-said-she-said, we have something that appears to accurately reflect the current pope's thoughts and feelings on Medjugorje, leading up to this new investigation.

Medjugorje News has just run an article which states the following:

Archbishop Allessandro D’Errico, Apostolic Nuncio to Bosnia and Herzegovina, gave statement about Medjugorje on March 18th at the end of 48th Bishop’s Conference of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In the statement broadcasted by Radio Mir Medjugorje, he amongst other things said: “Whenever I would meet Holy Father, he was always very much interested in Medjugorje. He was involved in everything, starting with the time when he was Head of Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He is aware that this is the issue of special importance, and he, as supreme authority of the Church, needs to give his precise statement about that matter. Holy Father is very much familiar with Medjugorje phenomenon; he even mentioned that to me personally. He is aware of huge amount of positive and good influence of local priests, religious, Franciscans, lay people, and therefore, it is very difficult for him to perceive that there can be so many opposing information about the same matter. That is why he wanted to establish this Commission that is on really high level. He wanted to establish this Commission in order for him to have broad picture about this matter, but according to the people who have highest qualities and skills. That is why he invited Cardinals, Bishops and experts from different parts of the world to be part of this Commission.

Now, can we finally accept this, coming in an official statement from a high-ranking Vatican official, as truthful and valid? Let's see if this applies any kind of brake mechanism to the incessant forward shoving from Medjugorje detractors. Let's see if this silences the poison blogs of the likes of Richard Salbato, E Michael Jones, Robert Sungenis and the email pestilence from the likes of Mark Waterinckx.

The speech made the pertinent remark:

it is very difficult for him [Pope Benedict] to perceive that there can be so
many opposing information about the same matter

Well, if Pope Benedict had seen what I have from the gentlemen mentioned above, and many more of their cronies, he would not be so surprised. Each of these gentleman claims proudly to have a more or less direct link to Bishop Ratko Peric. This might explain a lot. We still don't know what Bishop Peric's problem with Medjugorje truly is, but I sincerely think it has very little to do with the visions themselves and is more likely something personal and culturally entrenched. I almost hope there is more to it than that because none of us wants to continue thinking poorly of an appointed bishop of Christ. I hope all his objections are thoroughly aired and dealt with. And if the new commission finds that any of his objections are founded, then all the better.


  1. I see now what's up with you blog. You only post pro Medjugorje replies.

  2. That's one thing I don't do. I don't even vet the comments. All comments should go live immediately.

  3. I'm not a Medjugorje hater just a non-believer.

  4. And I am not a Medjugorje promoter. I'm just sick and tired of seeing people, who are within their rights to get excited about Medjugorje, having wet blankets thrown all over them by way of rumour, innuendo and false witness - things every Christian should know not to do. We've had enough warnings haven't we? Matt 7:1 "Judge not lest ye be judged". 8th commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

  5. From what I've read it appears to me that Waterinckz has personal antagonism that he's experienced with the likes of Fr. Joso.

    You're not a promoter? What is the heading I see about Bendedict sympathetic to the Medjugorje phenomena? It's just he said she said all over again. With every sympathetic view I can show you many that are not.

    Please. It's OK to promote it if you believe it it's your blog but don't pretend that you don't promote.

    Could you please tell me why one of the most foremost early Mariologists on the subject, Fr. Laurentin has backed off on whether he ever said the apparitions are authentic?

  6. Don't be ridiculous. This blog is where people can come to find hope that Medjugorje is not the pit of evil that Waterinckx, Salbato, and all the rest, try to say it is. I have received a dozen or more emails from anti-M campaigners saying that Benedict denounced Medjugorje. I have thrashed this out with Richard Salbato who states on his website that Benedict opposed Medjugorje. HERE IS SOMETHING THAT SAYS THE OPPOSITE. Here is something that is clear. Benedict IS sympathetic to Medjugorje. It's NOT everything these slime-balls say it is.

  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

  8. As for Laurentin, sheesh you people operate on half the information that is available to you - probably by choice. But that doesn't help create a fair playing field does it. If you want to make a noise that has the potential to spoil God's harvest, you better have accurate information.

    According to this report, Laurentin defends Medjugorje in no uncertain terms, all these years later!

  9. This is from an interview with "Petrus". You can read the whole article with the interview here:

    Father Laurentin, what you are saying seems to be a step backward: you have written books upholding the thesis of the authenticity of the apparitions of Medjugorje...

    "I say it again: I have never expressed judgments on the authenticity, at least of the apparitions; my studies are merely a small contribution to the Church and to the faithful..."

    And to think Medjugorje is on the map creating huge divisions amongst the people in the Catholic Church because of his favorable opinions for the last 20 years or so.

  10. Mr Baylis, Here's something for you.

    A "theological" question and a non-theological answer I guess you could call it:

    5/6/1982 in the Medjugorje parish Chronicle we read: "This evening the young people posed a theological question and received the answer. They asked: 'Are the people in Heaven present only with the soul, or with the soul and the body?' They are present with the soul and the body: that was their answer."

    From Christian terminology we know that man, composed of soul and body, constitutes the [human] person; that the rational souls in Heaven are not fully persons, for they are lacking their bodies. And from the Faith we know that in Heaven are only the saved souls, until the final Judgment, excepting Jesus the Lord who arose with a transfigured body, and the Blessed Virgin Mary who was assumed, soul and body into celestial glory. And at the last Judgment there will be the "resurrectio carnis", when we will be complete persons anew, with soul and body. And, see, now here's a new doctrine on the part of the "seers" of Medjugorje and their spiritual director: that the saved souls in Heaven not only have their souls but also their bodies. From experience we know that the human bodies of the dead are buried in the earth, in the tomb, and that the buried bones of men are discovered several centuries later, even the bones of Saints. Why are they not in Heaven yet?

    Do you believe these preposterous statements?
    I've been to a few Shrines in my lifetime and have seen with my eyes the uncorrupted body of some saints, for instance St. Bernadette in Nevers. I believe she is in heaven but her body is down here. Doesn't this go directly about what these supposed 'seers' gave us?

  11. "I say it again: I have never expressed judgments on the authenticity, at least of the apparitions; my studies are merely a small contribution to the Church and to the faithful..."

    I don't know why you think this statement helps your cause in any way. This is Laurentin supporting Medjugorje, just not wanting to appear as prematurely authenticating it, something he has been accused of, just like JPII, Shoenborn and many others, who love and believe in Medjugorje but can't go around saying it's authentic until the Vatican finally approves it.

  12. Re your theological question: I was always under the impression that we received a new body in heaven, and probably not a organic body as we know it. I have absolutely no idea though. I imagine the saints are in heaven with a "body", i.e. some outward form, but not of this world.

  13. I have a question for you. Do you believe the Catholic Church's teaching is contrary to the phenomenon of necromancy?

  14. In response to Anonymous about the souls in heaven being seen as souls and bodies.. That is the way they are 'seen'as to be identified, but it is only the soul that is in heaven and they have made this clear.


Share This