Medjugorje - Slippery Slope for Patrick Madrid

Patrick Madrid must be feeling chuffed with all the buzz he has generated over Medjugorje on his blog. Now he's got a new banner which reads "Medjugore True or False?". These types of banners and headlines have appeared everywhere since the 1990's, invariably from people without day jobs who won't just leave it to the Vatican, whose daily business it is to sort the truth from the lie in regard to private revelation. The purpose is mischievious and uncalled-for. It is cleverly disguised as an invitation to question or even debate, but then begs the question with a negative verdict already clearly indicated in the premise.

There will be a price to pay. Certainly we are all entitled to our point of view. But, that doesn't absolve us from any spiritual mischief we cause in the process of airing that opinion to the world.

Patrick veils his obvious anti-M stance with such statements as:

If I am wrong about this, and if the Medjugorje phenomena are truly the apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary, then I will rejoice to have my error corrected.

Sorry, it doesn't quite work that way. If you don't believe in Medjugorje, and you still want to be able to rejoice in your error if proven wrong, better not burn your bridges by promoting only the anti-Medjugorje side of the story. That might be like Judas expecting Jesus to freely permit him to rejoice in his resurrection having handed him over to his enemies.

I have not seen any article on Madrid's blog which gives credence to Medjugorje. I haven't seen much in the way of a "on one hand...yet on the other hand" mediatory/conciliatory tone. I have only seen comments and articles that paint Medjugorje in various shades of dark grey, using quotes and articles from highly dubious sources. He sounds exactly like what we hear from the same tight-knit anti-Medjugorje group we keep hearing from on the internet and which is so obviously feeding him. He isn't doing Medjugorje, or himself, any favours. Why should he rejoice in the glorious sunrise of Medjugorje when scattered along the road behind him are confused wet-blanketed Catholics and unbelievers who never converted in time because they ignorantly fell for all the innuendo, half-truth and poor logic.

Speaking of poor logic......

A recent post on Madrid's blog (the very same article in which he added the disclaimer that he would gladly be proven wrong and join in the rejoicing) spotlights the error of judgment by John Paul II concerning Fr Maciel - a red herring which the anti-M promoters are calling "The Maciel Effect" and which they are using to poison the Medjugorje well. Madrid, now apparently having both feet planted in the anti-Medjugorje camp, displays a preparedness to abandon discretion for one of the weakest arguments I've seen and to allow this argument to propagate across the mega-audience that is the world wide web. Hardly discrete and hardly indicative of an openness to being wrong. And hardly something you would do right before hoping to rejoice if proven wrong.

Madrid summarises:

We might think of this as the "Maciel Effect," which applies to Medjugorje and can be expressed in the form of the following argument:

"If even a good and holy pope can be deceived and be utterly wrong in his sincere personal opinion about the character of Fr. Maciel, then how much more so is it possible that you could be sincerely wrong in your personal opinions about Medjugorje?"

I'm not sure if I should forward this argument to one of his long-time debating opponents, Dr James White, to give him hope that Madrid, without the support of other apologists, could be found rather wanting in the debating arena.

In strictly debating terms, this summary statement commits a number of logical fallacies, including poisoning the well, non-sequitur, begging the question, red herring and probably a few more. This false reasoning comes together and can be summarised in the following expression:

One pope made one error of judgement:

• in a single case


• which was unrelated to Medjugorje


• concerning an invidividual


• for which little contrary information was available

Therefore, because of this single error of judgement, we should question our belief in Medjugore based on JPII's approval of it, even though JPII's approval concerns an event (not a person):

• which could be closely monitored over a quarter of a century


• which was closely studied by three scientific teams and found to be inconsistent with hoax


• during which he had many opportunities to meet, and establish the credibility of, a wide variety of involved individuals (including franciscans, seers and others)


• about which literally thousands of other high-ranking officials, cardinals, bishops, priests and nuns have formed exactly the same opinion as John Paul II, compared to those genuinely opposed to Medjugorje, who can be counted on one hand.


• about which all of the informed world had the same information and thus are in more or less the same position as JPII to make a judgement


• about which by far the majority of JPII's colleagues have made the same positive judgement.

This is truly shameful. With very little foresight, this man, Patrick Madrid, whom we would expect to deliver more reason, logic and insight, has done Pope John Paul II an injustice and tainted many other Catholics' feelings towards him. Notwithstanding the fact that he has muddied the waters and poisoned the well of Medjugorje even further by attempting, via this flawed logic, to cast Medjugorje in a greyer light.

Come on Patrick. You can do better!