Medjugorje: believe it or not!

1. Check this 1 minute video:

Our Lady of Peace cried for our sins in Honduras 2006 at the yard of the Catholic University, with dozens of witnesses and was covered by the press. The image is a replica from Our Lady of Peace in Medjugorje (Bosnia) where our Mother is appearing right now (as well as in Salta and San Nicolas, both in Argentina and probably other parts of the world).

Something similar, even with tears of blood, happened in:
·         Civitavecchia, Italy, 1995 (human blood)
·         Córdoba, Argentina, 2005
·         Mendoza, Argentina, 2005 (blood)
·         Marigliano, Italy, 2006
·         Caracas, Venezuela, 2008

2. Pope John Paul II asked for the statue of Our Lady of Civitavecchia which cried tears of blood (copy of the one in Medjugorje) to be taken to the Vatican, prayed in front of her, blessed it and signed a document certifying all this!

3. Pope John Paul II recommended Medjugorje in handwriting

4. Ratzinger rejected the objections of the local bishop of Medjugorje (who recommended his successor because he was against Medjugorje too, among other reasons).

5. Benedict XVI prayed in front of the image of Medjugorje.
This was reported and spread by VATICAN Radio:

6. Why does the Vatican encourage further investigations when local bishop objects the apparitions?
After formal investigations, bishops can declare apparitions as one of the following:
1)      constat de non supernaturalitate (established as not supernatural)
2)      non constat de supernaturalitate (evidence reviewed so far don’t seem to support the supernatural)
3)      constat de supernaturalitate (established as supernatural)

It is very important to understand the historic order of events:
  1. Successive local bishops have reached the conclusion of non constat de supernaturalitate.
  2. THEN the Yugoslavian bishop’s conference confirmed this view.
  3. As proven above, The Vatican, under both John Paul II and Benedict XVI, has always encouraged further investigations and sent indirect hints that the apparitions are true. The Vatican respects the hierarchical order and does not make a formal statement which is still in the hands of the Episcopal Conference of Bosnia-Herzegovina (which inherited the authority of the dissolved Yugoslavian bishop’s conference).
For instance, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, currently the Vatican Secretary of State and one of the highest-ranking officials in the Church, in his "The Last Secret of Fatima," published in 2007, said the bishop's declarations are not the definitive and official judgment of the Church. He clarified that personal pilgrimages are permitted to the site, as the investigations continue.

Regarding declarations of the current bishop of Mostar, where Medjugorje is located:
For wrong reasons, he has publicly declared his opinion of constat de non supernaturalitate (i.e. people shouldn’t believe in the apparitions). It is very important to clarify that this is only his personal opinion, NOT AN OFFICIAL ONE, since the bishop can’t open an official enquiry of something which is now in the hands of the bishop’s conference. Anyone omitting this clarification, makes the bishop of Mostar’s statement look not prudent, disordered, out of line, defying a higher authority and making it appear that the bishop is claiming an authority which he has not.
Even more, the bishop’s conference claims it is now in the hands of the Vatican.

One of the wrong reasons the bishop used to dismiss the apparitions is that the seers shouldn’t know beforehand when our Lady will appear. If the bishop considers this a reason to suspect the apparitions, then he would have to dismiss Fatima, since the three shepherds were told exactly when Our Lady would appear (and that very day happened the miracle of the sun).
This bishop also forbids pilgrimages to Medjugorje which “presuppose the authenticity of the apparitions”. If this isn’t a bad translation, the bishop is wrong: it is obvious good Catholics don’t put themselves over the Church formal approval just as the pilgrims to Fatima or Lourdes weren’t defying authorities by going there until it was finally approved even decades later. The Vatican made that very clear (see above Bertone’s quote): pilgrimages are allowed.
Let’s pray for the bishops of Bosnia-Herzegovina so that they promptly issue a true statement on Medjugorje.

Further reading from EWTN, the largest Catholic media network in the world, reaching 150 million souls, founded by a cloistered nun and providentially founded on donations (if 20 million dollars per year isn’t a miracle, then what!!!):

7. Pope Benedict XVI wants to make a pilgrimage to Medjugorje, says Cardinal Schoenborn.
Schoenborn is member of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) and president of the Austrian Bishop’s Conference. He celebrated the Mass on the feast of the Mother of God at midnight of the 12/31/2009 AT MEDJUGORJE. He says it’s like Lourdes in the beginning and that the tree is good since the fruits are good.
He explains that, the same as in Fatima or Lourdes, even if the apparition is trustworthy, the CDF and the Pope never make statements on apparitions till they are over.
He explains that since, there was no formal declaration of supernaturality, the dioceses can’t organize official pilgrimages. Notwithstanding, it is correct that the Church gives spiritual and pastoral support to the pilgrims, since the former Yugoslavian Bishop’s Conference never denied that the apparitions could be of supernatural origin.
Also, he said that, to deny that a river of graces flows from Medjugorje you have to shut your eyes… while comparing Medjugorje to Lourdes, as a place where hearts are converted.
Schoenborn, who has personally met the Pope after his pilgrimage, says Benedict XVI may also make a pilgrimage to Medjugorje:

8. Apparitions of Salta, Argentina confirm Medjugoje.
The seer from Salta, María Livia travelled to Medjugorje where in a message there she confirmed Mary’s real birthday on August 5th (as indicated by Our Lady in Medjugorje). This message (and all the rest until 1997) has received the nihil obstat imprimatur declaration by the Salta Archbishop Blanchoud, who endorsed the apparitions, though did not issue a formal statement (his successor upon his death hasn’t approved the next messages yet, let’s pray for him).
Messages at:
Note: my 4 year old born-deaf nephew recovered perfect hearing and I personally know healings of leukemia, brain degenerative disease, scoliosis, heart problems, etc.

9. The history of the approved apparition of La Salette: a true seer can go astray and that’s why the Church usually waits to confirm an apparition.

10. Important information
Former Medjugorje Priest Laicized [2009-07-29]
Superior: Not a Judgment on Pilgrimage Site

Watch this impressive videos of Medjugorje:
(if Firefox does not work try with Internet Explorer)

  • May 26, 1998 - Letter by Archbishop T. Bertone to Mgr. Gilbert Aubry, Bishop of Saint-Denis de la Reunion [ more ]
  • January 7, 2000 - Msgr. H. Brincard, Bishop of Puy-en-Velay, Association of Marian organizations; From the official bulletin of the French Episcopal Conference [SNOP], No. 1,064 [printed in Documentation Catholique of 7 January 2000]. [ more ]
  • JULY 3, 2001 - Zenit News Agency Article: Medjugorje: 20 Years Later, the Questions Linger - Church Has Not Ruled on Reported Apparitions [ more ]
  • February 17, 2004 - MEDUGORJE: SECRETS, MESSAGES, VOCATIONS, PRAYERS, CONFESSIONS, COMMISSIONS Msgr. Ratko Peric Bishop of Mostar-Duvno, BiH From a talk given at Maynooth, Co. Dublin [ more ]

“Blessed are those who believe without seeing…” Jn 20,29

Woe to those who work against Our Lady’s work. Isaiah 5,20

His Holiness, Pope Urban VIII (1623-44) declared:
"In cases like this (apparitions), it is better to believe than not to believe, for, if you believe, and it is not proven true, you will be happy that you have believed, because Our Holy Mother asked it. If you believe, and it should be proven false, you will receive all blessings as if it had been true, because you believed it to be true."

In "Lumen Gentium", Vatican II, CH. 12, we read:
"Such gifts of grace, whether they are of special enlightenment or whether they are spread more simply and generally, must be accepted with gratefulness and consolation, as they are specially suited to, useful for, the needs of the Church... Judgments as to their genuineness and their correct use lies with those who lead the Church and those whose special task is not to extinguish the spirit but to examine everything and keep that which is good. (confer 1 Thess 5, 19-21)" ["Extinguish not the spirit. Despise not prophecies. But prove all things; hold fast that which is good". (1 Thess 5, 19-21)

"Since the abolition of Canon 1399 and 2318 of the former Canonical Code by Pope Paul VI in AAS 58 (1966) 1186, publications about new appearances, revelations, prophecies, miracles, etc., have been allowed to be distributed and read by the faithful without the express permission of the Church, providing that they contain nothing which contravenes faith and morals". [This means that no IMPRIMATUR is necessary.]

In obedience to the decrees of Pope Urban VIII and other sovereign Pontiffs, the writer declares that the graces and other supernatural facts related in this text, rest on human authority alone ; and in regard thereto, as in all things else, the writer submits himself without reserve to the judgment of the Apostolic See, which has power and authority.

F. Nazar