Make of it what you will, but if, as he claims, Murgia has had access to the report, then he brings to light some interesting details. Murgia is pro-Medjugorje.
+++ REPORT ON MEDJUGORJE, THE TOP SECRET REPORT OF THE PONTIFICAL COMMISSION: "EXCLUDING DEMONIC ORIGIN. NO HANDLING. REAL FIRST SEVEN APPARITIONS. BANALI THE MESSAGES OF GOSPA AND THE SO-CALLED SECRETS HAVE NO ECCLESIASTICAL APPROVAL. SEVERALS HAVE AN AMBIGUOUS RELATIONSHIP WITH MONEY (ESPECIALLY IN ONE CASE). A NEW SANCTUARY IS NEEDED "
Date: 7 February 2020 Author: David Murgia
You will remember that some time ago I told you that I received a package regarding Medjugorje.
Basically I had in my hands the final report of the International Commission of Inquiry into the phenomena of Medjugorje - also called the report of the Ruini commission because it is chaired by Cardinal Camillo Ruini - that is, the final document drawn up by the pontifical commission established by Benedict XVI to give a judgment on supernaturality or less of the phenomena that happen there.
Now everyone knows my position on the facts of Medjugorje: as a skeptic I passed a very favorable judgment because I went (even several times) and saw what happened in Medjugorje and still happens.
After verifying it, I read the Report entirely and many times and I am not exaggerating if I confide in you that my hands were shaking.
A true masterpiece. A real investigation that for methodology and research should be studied and proposed as a model in universities.
Especially because at a time like this marked by documents, tissue papers, books and anything else that tries to tarnish the good name of the Holy See, the Popes and the hierarchy, this Report shows how there are people in the Church (and they are the majority). exceptional that in complete concealment work for the good of the Church and create true masterpieces.
In part, something had already leaked out of this document, partly because Pope Francis himself had spoken publicly about it in more than flattering terms.
But there are some totally unpublished extracts, never published, and in some upsetting ways that could better help the faithful who seek the Truth - both those who do not believe in Medjugorje and those who believe it as myself - in their discernment.
To avoid controversy, I have removed the personal references in the Report and the underlining and bold lines are not present in the text.
Some people will like these extracts. To others much less. But these are the official results to which the experts of the pontifical commission have arrived.
The Commission - I remind you - has drawn up this report from 2010. It has worked for almost four years and a total of 17 plenary meetings have been held. 13 members were joined by 4 experts. The final report is made up of about thirty very clear and effective pages.
In the wake of what has already been learned in part about the extraordinary nature of the phenomenon in recent years, I only add that the Commission:
"Once the specific formal and material object has been identified, capable of offering and outlining the physiognomy of a religious fact of specific interest from the point of view of its possible supernatural origin, it can therefore be recognized, sufficiently and reasonably, in the first seven presumed apparitions, which is testified from June 24 to July 3, 1981 in Ivanka Ivanković, Mirjana Dragičević, Vicka Ivanković, Ivan Ivanković, Milka Pavlović and Ivan Dragičević (it must be said that the visionaries Marija Pavlović and Jakov Čolo, still part of the 6 visionaries were added on 25 June 1981, while Milka Pavlović and Ivan Ivanković "left" the group of visionaries ")".
Not only. For the Commission "the hypothesis of a demonic origin of the beginning of the phenomenon appears free and unfounded ... for the positive fruits derived from the phenomenon itself".
So: “On the basis of these data, the International Commission believes it can affirm with reasonable certainty that the first 7 apparitions are intrinsically credible, because they are capable of arousing in those who lived them an awakening of faith, a conversion of the way of life and a renewed sense of belonging to the Church ".
The supernaturality of the beginning of the phenomenon - the beginning of the phenomenon, that is "not attributable only to human dynamics but having a supernatural origin" - was voted by 15 present, of which 13 expressed themselves positively, 1 in a negative way and 1 in a expected way .
But the International Commission has also had to study the whole phenomenon, up to the present day. And “it can therefore be said that the thirty-year history following the original events has branched out in such extension and in such depth to exclude an individual or mass manipulation. Thus we are faced - albeit with every possible caution for this analogy - with the dynamics of the small seed that bears great fruits ”.
The point that most - in my opinion - will cause some abdominal pain is that relating to the behavior of the presumed seers. And not only because of the "Sxxxxxxxxx dossier", an information that has been unknown and remained secret for decades of which I will write in the coming days, but as regards the so-called messages, the alleged "Life of Mary", the "big sign" and the so-called "ten secrets ".
Here the Commission was headed. Here is what he writes: “The International Commission has had to point out the repetitive banality of some communications that witnesses declare to have received from the Gospa, as well as the lack in them of the components of non-deductibility and excess which is proper to the supernatural character - while remaining the content of such communications generally in line with fides Ecclesiae ".
And still further on we read in the Report:
"The way in which the alleged witnesses talk about these realities recalls the function assumed by elements for certain similar aspects both in the course of phenomena authenticated by the Church - first of all, Fatima - and in the context of phenomena not recognized as such by the competent ecclesiastical authority but which continue, in one way or another, to have credit with certain sectors of the Christian people. The International Commission felt that it could not order the presumed seers to reveal the contents of the 'secrets', also because it does not have the power to make decisions itself ... In addition, the presumed seers describe them as hidden realities which, by order of the Gospa, must not be revealed until the right time, which will be indicated to them exclusively by Our Lady ".
So in the judgment of the International Commission the "secrets" of which the alleged seers speak, the "life of Mary" and any similar texts "cannot enjoy any ecclesiastical approval".
"The linguistic formulation of the presumed messages of Our Lady - advise the Members - should take place in the presence of the priest in charge of the spiritual accompaniment of the presumed seer".
And then there is the delicate question of the current credibility of the alleged seers. Here is what the International Commission writes about various "widespread and repeated arguments":
"What the International Commission has been able to ascertain, with regard to the accusation of a possible search for profit, is that the witnesses of the supernatural sign originally addressed to them now actually have a somewhat ambiguous relationship with money (and with that which, in general, can be called concern for one's "well-being"). This ambiguity, however, rather than being on the side of immorality, is located on the side of personal structure, often devoid of solid discernment and coherent orientation, also because they lacked a reliable and continuous spiritual guide, during the course of these thirty years. If anything, there are many indications of spiritual protagonists exhibited and of pastoral relationships that have failed ”.
"In other words, it must be recognized that, for long years, neither the bishops of Mostar-Duvno, nor the community of Franciscan friars of Medjugorje have established relationships with these people of sufficient attendance and deep discernment of the meanings of the facts that they attest and they still attest to experience. This circumstance has probably accentuated the current "impermeability" of the witnesses: in some respects naive and in other respects built, through the protection of repetitive formulas and stereotypes of defense of their "Mariofanic" experience ".
“This lack of spiritual and human accompaniment is certainly one of the causes of certain ambivalences and ambiguities that have arisen among the protagonists of the phenomenon in progress. This negative dynamic reaches its peak in the case of OMISSIS whose continuous meetings and conferences on the phenomenon of Medjugorje seem to be his only work and support. OMISSIS also lied several times and is less credible also in the way he talks about his experiences with the Gospa ".
Although it must be said that in the following pages the pontifical commission softens the tone a little:
"The presumed seers appeared substantially credible in their testimony of the first seven apparitions, and even for the presumed subsequent apparitions it does not seem that their subjective good faith cannot be denied, regardless of the judgment on the reality of the incident. However, this positive assessment does not extend to OMISSIS, on whose credibility serious and proven reservations have emerged. Also with regard to moral behavior and in particular the issue of quaestus lucri, the position of OMISSIS is more compromised than that of the other alleged seers ".
Precisely on this point, the Commission requests that "the ecclesiastical authority must supervise the economic activities of the alleged seers connected with the phenomenon of Medjugorje, especially in the case of OMISSIS".
For this reason, in the judgment of the International Commission "the attention and pastoral care towards them must be directed above all to the development and deepening of their spiritual life and their sense of belonging to the Church. In fact, they do not appear mature neither in their faith nor in their ecclesiality, and in some ways not even in their psychological consistency. The fact that none of them was actually followed by a spiritual director on their personal journey can at least partially explain these shortcomings ".
Even if - to be honest - “it must be recognized that the present seers in their public interventions do not intend to replace the Church and recall its doctrine in a sufficiently balanced way. However, there are strong tendencies to focus attention on them and on their current presumed visions, rather than on the Christocentric and ecclesial substance of Marian spirituality ".
Finally, some practical advice for the parish of Medjugorje: although "the Franciscans ensure good pastoral care in Medjugorje", this must however be "integrated and strengthened (if necessary with a greater contribution also from non-Franciscans)". "The catechesis of the Franciscans - we read - is very well conducted, especially from a pedagogical point of view".
Just as "the confessionals must be increased, guaranteeing the external conditions for the respect of secrecy", and "a precise discipline of the confessors must be ensured, checking their identity and suitability".
Furthermore, given the large number of pilgrims, "an extension of the size of the parish church" would be desirable.