Problems with Medjugorje?

By Paul Baylis. A response to a letter by Anthony Gonzales published on
http://www.stjosephsmen.com/letters/medu.htm

NOTE: Anthony's writing is in ordinary BLACK font, my replies are in RED font.

There is an incident in the life of St. Theresa of Avila who was "plagued" by private visions and revelations. In discussing these things with her spiritual director she was commanded under obedience that when "Our Lord" appeared to her again she was to curse at the apparition and give it a profane gesture telling it to go to hell. St. Theresa obeyed her superior with complete obedience. After having done what her spiritual director had commanded, she looked at the visage of Our Lord with embarrassment and apologized. Our Lord's reaction was significant. He told her she did exactly what she was supposed to do. She was never to obey Him (Jesus) if doing so would go against the direct orders of her superiors. If He wanted her to do a special task and they would not allow it she was to obey them first and He would eventually open their hearts to what He wanted so that they would give her permission to do what. He had requested. Notice, OBEDIENCE to her superiors was the necessary element not obedience to the vision. This, dear reader, has always been the constant teaching of the Church. We do the will of God by obedience to our legitimate superiors.

The mistakes here are:

1. Not being clear on the context of the disobedience, and the subsequent use of a misleading contrast to the obedience of Teresa of Avila
2. Assuming that because of alleged disobedience, the visions are automatically false.
3. Not seeing the bigger picture to understand why it is possible for alleged disobedience to be possible in the first place.
   

Addressing each of the above:

1. The process of determining the validity of the apparitions was put in place. Bishop Zanic, being the local Bishop, was given the first opportunity to study and report on Medjogurje. However, from the outset, it was clear to many parties that his investigations were slanted and, when he produced his report stating that not only was the supernaturality of the visions unproven, but they were categorically NOT supernatural, the Vatican rejected his findings as being based on unfounded opposition. The matter was then handed to the Yugoslav Bishops' conference, whose decision reflected the traditional prudent approach of the vatican with regard to private revelations, i.e. "it cannot yet be proven" - nothing more and nothing less. There was no ban on Catholics privately visiting Medjugorje and pastoral care of the faithful who chose to visit was called for. However, the local bishop continued to try to exercise his authority to declare on issues concerning Medjugorje. Based on his own wishes and findings, he has, to this very day, continuously called for the visionaries to stop having visions and for pilgrims to stop going to Medjugorje. One has to ask where this is coming from. I'm not sure how it is possible for a local bishop to be able to call for things the Vatican is not calling for, and I'm not sure how John-Paul II can openly support Medjugorje while one of his Bishops can openly curse it. Perhaps this is part of the bureacracy that is the Vatican. What this all boils down to is that, yes, perhaps the visionaries and some franciscans did not obey the Bishop's calls, but as as I have just explained, the Bishop did not have the final say. This, coupled with the fact that the word "obedience" had become little more than a weapon during the draw-out Herzegovinian Affair - one using the other's alleged disobedience as evidence that they were not in line. The local Bishop's certainly made it extremely difficult for the Franciscan's to be obedient as much as they wanted to. Regardless, the vatican is the final word and the vatican has been obeyed.
   
   St Teresa's superior did not ban the saint from having anything more to do with the apparitions. The superior commanded Teresa to tell the aparition to "go to hell". Having thus obeyed, and it being resultingly proven that the apparition was not diabolical, the apparitions continued with the blessings of everyone. The situation at Medjugorje was vastly different. First, the Bishop's findings and decisions were based on very little fact and left no room for the proving of the most important issue - whether the apparitions were actually real. The Bishop did not say "Go and tell the apparition to go to hell". If he had done this, it would have shown that he was at least open to the possibility that the apparition was genuine (By the way, right at the beginning of the apparitions, the visionaries gave testimony that they threw Holy Water on the apparition and told it to essentially "Go to hell").
   
   
2. This scarcely needs further commentary and is simply a matter of common sense. Disobedience is a personal matter and usually is not black and white. Jonah was disobedient to God's call and we know what happened to Him. Jesus himself could be said to have been disobedient to his direct superiors by breaking the letter of Jewish law on several occasions. One needs to look at the context of the disobedience. In neither case was the will of God thwarted and he got what He wanted in the end. Despite alleged disobedience and a myriad other personal and group allegations, the visions have not stopped and God is getting what He wants.
   
   
3. Everybody with an interest in Medjugorje, especially those seeking the truth, should read up on the Herzegovina Affair. Here is a link for you to begin. It is heavy reading, but necessary to be completel informed. Some of what happened will immediately open your eyes to how bad things were in the region between the secular and Franciscan clergy and how it is in fact the secular bishops who come off with much of the stains on their own garments. If you're swayed by media reports of Franciscan disobedience and feeling that the secular clergy are all living saints, you might come to see a surprisingly reversed reality. It has led some observers to comment on how it is possible for the secular Bishop to call attention to Franciscan disobedience, when disobedience (and worse) was one of the things the Bishops themselves indulged in. It is highly political with the obedience card drawn like a six-gun as it suited people. It is un-Christian. It is embarrassing to me, personally, as a Catholic, to see grown Catholic men fighting in such a way.
   

When I was studying philosophy and theology at Loyola University one of the main subjects upon which I concentrated was mystical theology. In fact, had I gone for a doctorate in theology it would have been within this field of study? Therefore, whenever there are reports of visions, locutions, stigmata and the like I am always interested in discovering their veracity and authenticity. I would consider myself well informed on this subject. Because of this interest I have followed the events in Medjugorje since they began in 1981. These apparitions were taking place full force while I lived in Rome studying theology. I had several opportunities to go and visit Medjugorje. I opted to stay in Rome. I had heard too many things which disturbed me about these "apparitions" and began to have very severe doubts even back then in the early 80's.

Unfortunately, this writer, contrary to his self-promotion, appears to be completely misinformed. He did not get past Michael Davies. On one hand he prides himself on researching matters thoroughly to arrive at the truth. Yet, he refers to things he has "heard" as being enough to give him very severe doubts. For those like him to tend to believe the media, here is evidence of how desperate some sections of the media are to destroy Medjugorje. It is scary stuff and shows how the evil one is working.

4 Investigations

There have been 4 official investigations by the Church, 3 of which were official Commissions set up to investigate the alleged apparitions and claims of supernatural events at Medjugorje. The first was set up and completed by Bishop Pavao Zanic who was the bishop of the diocese in which the village of Medjugorje is found. The findings of this bishop and his commission were both negative in regards to the events at Medjugorje. His commission found that the events at Medjugorje were not from God. He discovered that during his personal investigation, 4 of the Visionaries had bold facedly lied to him and to others many times.

I have addressed much of this above. People should not be misled as to what happened with the first two commissions and why it went to a third commission. Here is more information for those who are still unclear.

However, on the subject of the visionaries bold-facedly lying to the Bishop, again, one has to look at the context and what was being asked and demanded by the Bishop, remembering that the visionaries already knew full well that the Bishop was seeking to rubbish them and destroy Medjugorje. How does one open up to such a person? What prisoner of war feels a natural inclination to openly disclose information that could lead to their destruction or the destruction of their colleagues? If it had been an intimate chat between two trusting and trustworthy adults, as between Teresa of Avila and her superior/confessor, it would have been a different story. The visionaries had learned to look upon the Bishop as the enemy. A reading of the Herzegovinian Affair and the Mostar Affair will enlighten readers as to how this could have been possible. Regardless, lying of itself has never been grounds to invalidate something. Poor St Peter lied three times in one night and yet Jesus made him the first Pope. I'm not saying that the visionaries did not lie as we know that they have, through their own admission. HOWEVER, it should be noted that the Virgin Mary herself has had to show holy patience towards a couple of visionaries. At least one visionary has admitted to being admonished by the Virgin for telling untruths. What does this tell us? It draws a clear line between the personalities and the apparitions, i.e the apparitions cannot be stained by the misdeeds of the players. It shows that we are human and react to perceived threats in certain normal ways. It tells us that even the holiest people are subject to human weakness and God will often just allow that to happen. God himself provides for such human weakness. But, he will get what He wants regardless of these things.

Subsequent to his negative findings he has been accused of being a Communist sympathizer, at best, by those who wish to believe the "visionaries". This is patently untrue. Bishop Zanic himself has suffered at the hands of the Communists. He would have suffered again at their hands but not for the sake of what he considered a sham.

The negative findings of Bishop Zanic were first and foremost rejected by the Vatican. This is what everyone is forgetting, particularly detractors who try to paint a picture of a cult movement defending itself and its followers. The writer appears to have been swept up in the intrigue of Michael Davies and hasn't gone beyond. The writer is making is seem like a holy crusade by the Bishop. One needs to look deeper. The Bishop speaks very vociferously and this makes people believe he speaks from a position of authority on Medjugorje. Please read this letter from the Vatican which tries to make it clear that the views and opinions of the Bishop of Mostar are NOT the views of the Vatican.

The Franciscan priests in the parish at Medjugorje were very hostile to their legitimate superior, defying him at every turn.

Please read the truth about the Herzevoginian Affair before spreading this type of rubbish.

One of these priests has subsequently left the priesthood and has had a child from an ex-Nun. I wonder if anyone has ever considered the possibility that these priests could have actually been Communist plants. There was never a persecution of the children by the Communists. Notice how the Communists basically left Medjugorje alone. Why shouldn't they? They have made a mint in revenues from all the tourists. Medjugorje was quite a lucrative deal for the government before the war since all tourist money went into government coffers.

The notion of the Fransicans being communist plants is scraping the bottom of the barrel. It should be relatively easy to find out whether the main Fransiscan players are genuine priests or communist plants.

Because the visionaries, parish priests and the people continued to refuse to obey their legitimate superior, 2 more commissions were established - one by the Yugoslavian National Conference of Catholic Bishops and another by the Vatican.

Outright lies and disinformation which people are going to read and be led by. I hope the writer will update his story. I don't know where he got this information from. It is false. The genuine story is summarised again below:

1. Bishop Zanic's findings of Constat de non-supernaturalite (nothing supernatural) rejected by the Vatican
   
   
2. Feeling that Zanic's investigations were less than objective, the Vatican hands the matter to the Yugloslav's Bishop's conference to determine the validity of Medjugorje
   
   
3. Yugloslav Bishop's conference confirms that it simply cannot YET be PROVEN that the events are supernatural.
   
   
4. Door is left open for future investigations and, indeed, there is another investigative commission being formed at the time of this writing (October 2006).

Both commissions found no evidence of the supernatural involved in the alleged apparitions despite the fact that they had years and years of gathered facts and supposed evidence.

As I have stated, one cannot declare an event as supernatural (i.e. "of God") without a single event that makes it clearly "of God". Science confirms something unexplainable is happening, but there is still a small possibility that it is of satan, not of God. Mary promised a great sign that would take away this final doubt. We are keenly awaiting this sign. Thus, in the meantime, it is completely natural and prudent for the Vatican to resist calling it "of God".

Page 3 >>

Return to index of subjects on Medjugorje