Chat with other believers about Medjugorje.

Moderators: TimHaley, MedjAdmin, Management

#231890
This is a Google translation of a post published recently on the blog of Italian journalist David Murgia:

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But there are some totally unpublished extracts, never published, and in some upsetting ways that could better help the faithful who seek the Truth - both those who do not believe in Medjugorje and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 ”.

It's still:

"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 ".

And therefore:

“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.
Last edited by bluecross on Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#231891
Nothing new in your post... also you posted the same thing twice so you might want to clean it up. and Again you did not leave a link to the source. The only thing that could be considered "new" is that Ivan was viewed less favorablly than the other visionsionaries but not to the extent that it caused any major problems.. Also it is important to point out that the first seven apparitions were deemed to be true in nature ...Please provide a link thanks
#231892
Of course there are new details ––and it’s not my post but Murgia’s –– you just don’t want to admit to them Stephen. But should we be surprised?

If Murgia’s post is accurate (and he uses several quotes from the Commission report), it raises serious questions aganst the ongoing credibility of some, if not all the visionaries.

It also explains why Pope Francis has raised his own personal concerns about the vailidity and claims of the ongoing apparitions and is in no rush to approve even the first seven appritions which the commission deemed “intrinsically credible”.

And the article also gives an insight as to why the ‘authorities’ have requested to stop distributing footage of Mirjana during her ‘apparitions’.

Looks like the claims of so-called ‘secrets’ just ain’t going to be be supported by the Church, which kind of pulls the rug from under all those who thrive on promoting and speculating on them.

As I’ve mentioned before, Fr Petar will not be the priest announcing any secrets to the world on behalf of Mirjana.
#231893
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".

Supposing Mirjana does start disclosing the so-called ‘secrets’ in her lifetime, I wonder how many would need to be fulfilled before they could “enjoy ecclesiatical approval”?

And didn’t Mirjana once say she would happily disclose the ‘secrets’ to the Pope at the time of announcement if he wanted, or was she joking about this? I would imagine if only the first three or four secrets were fulfilled the Pope would be first in the queue to know what else was coming down the line.

But even the first seven apparitions have still yet to receive ecclesiatical approval. It’s almost four years since the Commission submitted its report to Pope Francis stating the Commission members had given a majority vote to believing that the first seven apparitions at Medjugorje were “intrinsically credible”.
#231895
bluecross wrote: Wed Feb 12, 2020 9:51 pm I wonder how many would need to be fulfilled before they could “enjoy ecclesiastical approval”?
If you extrapolate this from the position that the whole Medjugorje event (all 40 years of it) is true and bone-fide, then it follows that Mary is in full control of how it plays out, especially since by her own admission this is her final visitation ("in this way") to us. One has to feel that since this is her grand finale, she would leave nothing to chance.

To me, this means whether the secrets are revealed to the pope or not is also within her control. In short, it will happen if it is part of her overall plan.

For the secrets to receive ecclesiastical approval they first would have to be divulged to a Vatican body charged with studying them. But to what end? How does one "approve" of a prediction of the future? Like any prophecy, you choose to either believe it or not. But your decision about it can not certify its authenticity.

And if the secrets are revealed to the pope and his commission, what will they do with them? It does no good if they decide to announce them to the world if they have not approved them, because if they announce them with no editorial comment, our next question to the Church will be "Are they true?". On the other hand, if they decide to keep them secret it just creates more controversy a la the Third Secret of Fatima.

So to my way of thinking, revealing the secrets to the pope serves no purpose.

And once Mirjana starts revealing the secrets via her own method, and they actually start to happen, ecclesiastical approval becomes immaterial.
#231897
Apparently, the copy of the final Ruini report produced by the Medjugorje Commission is a slim volume containing just 30 pages. The Italian journalist David Murgia published passages from the leaked report some seven days ago, but there is likely more to come if he is allowed to continue his revelations.

In what has been published so far there is positive and disconcerting features and both protagonists and opponents of Medjugorje will milk and twirl the information for what they can to fuel their propaganda efforts.

But more leaks will probably follow, so any claims made now without full knowledge of what the document contains seems premature. It took five years of investigation to produce the report originally commissioned by Pope Benedict XVI. Murgia’s ‘exclusive’ is not the full story. The ‘good news’ contained for the pro-Medjuorje camp may be continued to be countered by further negative information about the visionaries or ‘witnesses’ as decribed in the report.

There are vested interests by some promoters of Medjugorje to keep the show on the road. But every oasis is surrounded by the desert that can often encroach on the ‘sanctuary’ – often driven by a financial motive, a temptation the Ruini report hinted at in the case of the Medjugorje ‘witnesses’ –– “Church authority must keep watch over the economic activities of the alleged seers connected with the Medjugorje phenomenon…”

While “the little seed bears great fruits”, seeds of doubt have also been sown – tares, or darnel, among the wheat, so to speak.

Parable of the darnel...

Jesus put another parable before his disciples: The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field. While everybody was asleep his enemy came, sowed darnel all among the wheat, and made off. When the new wheat sprouted and ripened, the darnel appeared as well. The owner’s servants went to him and said, “Sir, was it not good seed that you sowed in your field? If so, where did the darnel come from?” “Some enemy has done this” he answered. And the servant said, “Do you want us to go and weed it out?” But he said, “No. because when you weed out the darnel you might pull up the wheat with it. Let them both grow till the harvest; and at harvest time I shall say to the reapers: First collect the darnel and tie it in bundles to be burnt, then gather the wheat into my barn.”
Matthew 13 : 24-30
#231898
I remember that the following was
said by the Vatican some years ago:

The report will be leaked to the public.

So there will be no Vatican
investigations on who leaked,
because this leak was planned
and on purpose.

Find yourself served.
#231902
Hey that is a great coincidence indeed. :(
Looks like a well prepared setup.
Money scheme like something.
#231904
Many of those in favour of Medjugorje didn’t take too kindly to the Pope’s seemingly negative but personal comment he made three years ago about the status of the ongoing apparitions at Medjugorje, but now we know from the leaked Commission Report this week that doubt was also expressed by the Medjugorje Commission.

Here’s what Pope Francis said at the time during the press conference on the Papal flight returning from Fatima to Rome, Saturday, 13 May 2017.


source: vatican.va
Mimmo Muolo of Avvenire

Good evening, Your Holiness.  Let me ask you a question in the name of the Italian group.  Yesterday and today at Fatima we saw with you a great testimony to popular faith.  The same faith is found, for example, at other Marian Shrines too such as Medjugorje.  What do you think about those apparitions – if there were apparitions – and about the religious fervour they have evoked, seeing that you have decided to name a bishop delegate for the pastoral aspects?  And if I may be permitted a second question, which I know is close to your heart, as well as for us Italians.  NGOs have been accused of collusion with smugglers, human traffickers.  What do you think about this?  Thank you.

Pope Francis
I’ll start with the second one.  I read in the newspaper that I page through in the morning that there was this problem, but I also do not know what the details might be.  So I cannot offer an opinion.  I know that there is a problem and that investigations are under way.  I hope that they continue and that the whole truth comes out.  The first?  Medjugorje.  All apparitions or presumed apparitions belong to the private sphere; they do not form part of the public ordinary magisterium of the Church.  As for Medjugorje, a commission was set up headed by Cardinal Ruini.  Benedict XVI set it up.  At the end of 2013 or the beginning of 2014, I received the results from Cardinal Ruini.  The commission was made up of good theologians, bishops and cardinals.  Good, good, good people.  The Ruini report is very, very good.  Then, there were some doubts at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and the Congregation judged it appropriate to send each member of the feria quarta meeting the entire documentation, even the things that seemed contrary to the Ruini report.  I was notified about this; I recall that it was late on a Saturday evening.  It didn’t seem right to me; it was like putting the Ruini report up for auction – sorry for this word – a report which had been done very well.  On Sunday morning, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith received a letter from me, in which I asked him to tell them that instead of sending their opinions to the quarta feria, they should send them to me personally.  These opinions were studied, and all of them stress how substantial the Ruini report was.  Yes, mainly, three things need to be distinguished.  About the first apparitions, when [the “seers”] were young, the report more or less says that the investigation needs to continue.  Concerning the alleged current apparitions, the report expresses doubts.  Personally, I am more “mischievous”: I prefer Our Lady to be a Mother, our Mother, and not a telegraph operator who sends out a message every day at a certain time… this is not the mother of Jesus.  And these alleged apparitions have no great value.  I say this as my personal opinion.  Who thinks that Our Lady would say: “Come tomorrow at this time and I will give a message to that seer”; no.  [In the Ruini report] a distinction is made between the two apparitions.  Third, the real core of the Ruini report: the spiritual fact, the pastoral fact, the people go there and are converted, the people who meet God, who change their lives… For this there is no magic wand, this spiritual-pastoral fact cannot be denied.  Now, in order to look at matters with all these findings, with the responses sent to me by the theologians, a Bishop has been named – a good one, good because he is experienced – in order to take a look at how the pastoral part is going.  And at the end, something will be said.
#231911
Vatican investigation into Medjugorje has been released. Findings hugely positive.

1. First seven apparoition real and credible
2. The Most Powerful Finding in Vatican Investigation into Medjugorje: “Gospa, manifests and maintains an indissoluble link with Christ.”
3. Official parish travel to Medjugorje allowed.
#231913
Also from the Commission Report:
The International Commission notes, in any case, that the events subsequent to the first seven apparitions constitute a real problem, which makes very difficult an evaluation in conformity to that which can be recognized in the original sign.
more on this at the link : https://gloria.tv/post/SqiPAmonfksQ4fA8SNMnjxLPo
#231915
from page 6 1.2 The reasons for identifying two phases The International Commission has considered it necessary to examine the influence that living environments may have had on the protagonists and has tried to identify, in their experience, the situation potentially freer from unconscious influences, starting from the statements made by the alleged visionaries. Based on this interpretation of the beginning of the Medjugorje phenomenon, aimed at allowing the recognition of the physiognomy of the event and therefore the object of the theological evaluation requested from the Commission, the events that the witnesses declare to have occurred on Mt. Podbrdo have been identified as those that respond better to a situation free from improper elements of influence. These are the first five alleged apparitions/Mariophanies. The following elements are essential to their dynamics of event, experience and communication of she who appears/manifests herself: • it is the Mother of Christ who awaits the visionaries; • the “phenomenon” (the Gospa, the Figure) stands before the visionaries, always in the same place; • in the visionaries there is an exact memory of the place and time of the first apparition; • the message is not addressed to individuals, but to all present (visionaries/perceivers); • the phenomenon occurs “suddenly” and by surprise; • the phenomenon causes fear and disturbance in the souls of the visionaries. Always taking into account the given testimonies, the International Commission has decided to consider, together with the events said to have happened on Mt. Podbrdo, also two other alleged apparitions: • that of Cerno, a few kilometers from Medjugorje, where the then adolescents had been brought by car by officials of police; • the one that took place in the parish house of Medjugorje, where the witnesses were in some way “sought refuge” after their previous “taking over,” certainly not benevolent, by state officials. The International Commission justified this choice, bearing in mind:
• the martyrdom dimension connected with the events of Cerno, not attributable to the choices of the then adolescents and nevertheless accepted by them (the reactions of parents and friends, police interrogations); • the understandable desire of the alleged witnesses to avoid unnecessary risks for themselves and their families–a desire that in itself does not conflict with the demands of authentic martyrdom, where witnesses do not try to provoke their opponents and their reaction–connected with the moving from Mt. Podbrdo to the parish house of Medjugorje. Precisely the movement of the alleged apparitions/Mariophanies to the parish house of Medjugorje, however, also marked the transition to a new phase of the phenomenon, to an objectively less spontaneous and free situation than the previous one, loading the events (and the alleged visionaries themselves) of a series of expectations and needs absolutely not present in the first seven apparitions. Furthermore, the given testimonies show how, starting from this local and symbolic shift, the same reported phenomenon has assumed a different physiognomy/communication form compared to the first seven apparitions: • the Gospa is “privatized”: that is, she addresses the visionaries separately; Vicka Ivanković, MarijaPavlović, MirjanaDragičević, IvanDragičević and JakovČolo say that Our Lady continues to appear to them even today, with different regularity but on set dates, for someone every day. The apparitions are no longer linked to the place, as they were in the past, but to the person of the alleged visionary. In fact, the visionaries themselves no longer form a group and each independently enjoy the alleged apparitions. • there is no longer fear or surprise, in relation to an event that is partly exciting and partly enigmatic; • the Gospa is awaited and her arrival is indeed “scheduled” at a determined time.
#231916
from page 10
In concrete terms, the subsequent history to the first seven alleged apparitions offers the attestation of multiple Gospel fruits: the abundant conversions, the frequent return to sacramental practice (Eucharist and reconciliation), the flowering of numerous vocations to the priestly, religious and matrimonial life. In the experience of those who lived them, these fruits retain a strong link with the place of Medjugorje, rather than with the people of the alleged visionaries: in this sense they can legitimately be connected to the original events and constitute a particular form of memory. It should also be noted that this memory is expressed in a particular way in the pilgrimage to the place of the original events, which is far superior, in quality, intensity and quantity, to the flow of people who today go to meet the alleged visionaries—to attend the alleged current apparitions—in the various parts of the world in which they are invited by the most varied ecclesial subjects. It can be affirmed, therefore, that the succeeding thirty-year history since the original events has spread so far and in such depth as to exclude an individual or mass manipulation.
#231917
from page 11
2.2 Outcome of the vote regarding the effects of the phenomenon regardless of the behavior of the alleged visionaries Called to express itself by voting on the effects of the phenomenon in the history following its beginnings, regardless of the behavior of the alleged visionaries, the International Commission, adopting the five alternatives proposed by the Cardinal President (“positive”, “negative”, “mixed” effects—without further specifying—“predominantly positive mixed” and “predominantly negative mixed”), pronounced as follows, out of 14 present and voting (10 Members and 4 Experts):
• 3 Members and 2 Experts for “positive”;
• 4 Members and 2 Experts for “mixed, mainly positive”;
• 3 members for “mixed”.
With this vote, the collegial reflections on the effects of the Medjugorje phenomenon are closed regardless of the behavior of the alleged visionaries.
#231918
from page 16
1.2 Outcome of the vote on present bans on pilgrimages to Medjugorje The International Commission has decided to proceed to a vote on the issue of current bans on pilgrimages to Medjugorje, choosing from the following proposals: “the current bans on pilgrimages to Medjugorje should be removed”; “The current bans on pilgrimages to Medjugorje must be maintained”.
The 14 present and voting (11 Members and 3 Experts) expressed themselves as follows:
• 10 Members and 3 Experts: “the current bans on pilgrimages to Medjugorje must be removed”;
• 1 Member: null vote.
#231919
from page 18
2.2 Results of the votes regarding the forms in which ecclesiastical authority is to be exercised in Medjugorje On this basis, the International Commission proceeded to vote, by secret ballot, on the question of the forms in which to exercise the authority of the Church in Medjugorje, choosing from three options: “diocesan bishop”, “authority directly dependent on the Holy See” (leaving open the question whether this authority should be exercised through the erection of a pontifical sanctuary), “new ecclesiastical district.” The 16 present and voting (12 Members and 4 Experts) expressed themselves as follows:
• 7 Members and 3 Experts: “authority dependent on the Holy See”
• 4 Members: “diocesan bishop”
• 1 Member and 1 Expert: “new ecclesiastical circumscription.”

With quarantines and stay-at-home orders becoming […]

March 25, 2020 "Dear children! I am with yo[…]

Prayers please

Please pray for Lenny May who threw himself of a b[…]

Secrets

From this website: In the past, Mirjana has said,[…]