The truth both frees us and binds us
There
are a good number of the faithful throughout the world who strive for
the purity of the faith, respecting the Church's magisterium and bearing
witness to the spuriousness of the "visions" at Medjugorje.
One of them is Michael Davies of London. When I assumed responsibility
for the diocese of Mostar, I came to know Mr Davies, who is Welsh, and
his wife Maria, who is Croatian. They were friends of my predecessor,
the late Bishop Pavao Zanic, who died on 11th November 2000. I must thank
Michael for the efforts that he has made to follow and criticise the unbelievable
claims made about the events at Medjugorje, a theme that he develops in
this book, Medjugorje after 21 Years.
Why do I as the local bishop not accept the "visions" at Medjugorje
as worthy of credence? I begin from the premise that I would truly like
to believe that the "visions" are authentic, and that Our Lady
truly appeared there. Indeed, not only there. Yet the truth both frees
us and binds us! As I followed the events at Medjugorje in recent years,
I was driven to the following conclusions.
Firstly, the story dating back to 1981 of the so-called "visions"
of the six "seers" of Medjugorje, half of whom still see visions
on a daily basis, while the other half only see them once a year, has
long since spread beyond the borders of the parish and the diocese both
by rumour and by reason of the travels through the world of the "seers"
and their supporters.
There can be no doubt that the "visions" have made converts
in the ranks of commercial travellers, who had a "vision" of
very tangible benefits for themselves, whence they spread to the ranks
of religious enthusiasts, who travel thousands of miles to make their
confessions and say the rosary at Medjugorje! The "visions"
have not however been recognized by the Church, so no-one is any way bound
to believe in them.
Secondly, some Franciscans in Herzegovina as well as a number of priests
throughout the world promote the concept of Medjugorje as the site of
"supernatural visions and messages". A number of the faithful
moreover persist in visiting Medjugorje, not only so as to bear witness
to how "Our Lady appears" despite the Church's cautious stance,
but also to bring pressure to bear on the Church authorities, not excluding
even the very highest, to recognise the events at Medjugorje as visions
worthy of credence.
I have to ask how the Christ's Church could on the basis of such pilgrimages
to a single parish, motivated by a range of emotions from mere curiosity
to fanatical zeal, proclaim such "visions" to be supernatural,
when three ecclesiastical commissions of inquiry into the events at Medjugorje
lawfully constituted on the direction of Bishop Zanic, the local bishop,
and the Conference of Bishops [of the former Yugoslavia] in 1991 confirmed
that they could find no proof that there had been "supernatural visions
and messages"? How could the Church, which is the pillar and support
of the truth, recognize such more than questionable "visions"
under pressure from such petitioners?
Thirdly, it is most puzzling why such priests and faithful as really thirst
for visions and messages do not drink their fill from the sources of visions
that have been recognized as authentic, for example, Lourdes and Fatima,
though there are others besides, but instead turn to the unrecognised
"visions" at Medjugorje, where "Our Lady" supposedly
"appears" sine fine. The Church recognized some of the seers
of Lourdes and Fatima as saints or as blessed after their deaths, but
the champions of Medjugorje seem to be in competition with one another
to see who can go the most times to a place where the Church has not merely
declined to recognize the authenticity of the "visions" but
has even forbidden private or public pilgrimages if they are based on
the authenticity of the unrecognised "visions".
If indeed some bishops from other parts of the world come and stay at
Medjugorje (some twenty kilometres from Mostar) for several days, yet
do not even feel the need to make themselves known to their local counterpart,
whether during or after the war [between Croatia and Serbia] then such
servants of the Church show neither episcopal collegiality nor solicitude
for the universal Church (1 Cor. 11, 28) but rather a strange curiosity
to see what "visions" there might be to be seen on the stony
hillsides of Herzegovina. Yet we bishops and priests constantly pray to
God in the Canon of the Mass to confirm his Church in faith and charity
on its way through this world.
Fourthly, the mere fact that many people, though they are believers, hold
something to be true does not make it true, perhaps even the contrary.
Christ the Lord stood alone, but for his Mother and one disciple, at Gabbatha
and on Golgotha. He was the only Truth opposed by the nameless masses,
the superior and inferior clergy, and the national and international establishment
in Jerusalem.
When Christ proclaimed that He was the truth, Pilate gave their jesting
answer "What is truth?" (John, 18, 38), which is to say, that
for them personal advantage, political position and a temporary triumph
were more important than any truth, human or divine!
Though the Truth died on that Good Friday, it rose again on the third
day. Truth is not therefore necessarily in the greater number. So all
the valid confessions, communions and rosary prayers at Medjugorje, though
they confer grace as efficaciously as in other parishes, no more and no
less, do not of themselves in any sense demonstrate the truth of the "supernatural
apparitions" in that parish.
Fifthly, the "seers" who see visions on a daily basis and the
endless apparitions themselves (33,333 to date, nor it there any risk
of my being mistaken, for there is no end to the numbers or the "visions")
are more in the nature of a religious show and a spectacle for the world
than a true and faithful witness to the peace and unity of the Faith and
love for the Church. Who can fail to see that these endlessly multiplying
numbers should not be taken seriously? Shall we change our Catholic orthodoxy
for fantastical superstition?
Sixthly, the many "messages" pronounced in the early years by
the mouths of the so-called "seers", especially those that praised
the disobedience of some Franciscan priests in Mostar, and berated the
local bishop who conscientiously abided by Canon law, that belittled the
highest decisions of the Church regarding the administration of the diocese,
which as such were obviously inspired by worldly considerations and not
by heaven, brought far greater disorder and conflict than true peace and
order to the Church. This is a very particular chapter in the history
of the diocese of Mostar and Duvno.
Seventhly, our Croatian Franciscans, who accept Medjugorje as a place
of "supernatural apparitions" have never, alas, distanced themselves
publicly from this bad and untruthful message to the Church in Herzegovina.
Some Franciscan fathers have performed many invalid confirmations. One
of them, who falsely purported to confirm with a mitre on his head in
the parish of Capljina in 1997, claimed to come from Medjugorje and openly
supported schism in that community by his sacrilegious and invalid confirmations.
Now that he has been expelled from the Franciscan order, he has forcibly
occupied the parish of Grude, where, two days ago, on the feast of Whitsun,
2004, according to a photograph which appeared in the daily papers, he
once again carried out invalid confirmations, but this time without a
mitre.
If the "seers" with their "visions" tolerate such
schismatic scandals, without in any way admonishing those involved, and
likewise those who support the "seers" and act as their public
relations men, without ever distancing themselves from or condemning such
local schisms, then in the name of the Mother of God, the Queen of Peace,
yea, in the name of the Holy Trinity, one God, might that not be a sign
that those involved in propagandizing in support of the supposed credibility
of such "visions" do not have the Divine will at the forefront
of their thoughts?
A group of Franciscans (eight living, one deceased) who have been expelled
from their Order for their notorious disobedience to the decisions both
of their own superiors and of the Holy See with regard to matters of ecclesiastical
administration in the diocese, have forcibly taken over a number of parishes
in which for some years now they have been administering invalid confessions,
and officiating at invalid marriages, some even carrying out invalid confirmations,
and generally carrying on in defiance of Canon Law, all in the immediate
or general neighbourhood of Medjugorje, as the place where tens of thousands
of "visions" have occurred.
It is indeed astonishing that the "apparition", which has passed
on messages to thousands of the curious, even including American President
Ronald Reagan, and Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev, and its supporters,
have not yet expressed concern, whether about the blasphemy perpetrated
against Christ's sacraments, or the damage to the unity of the Church
in the diocese of Mostar-Duvno. It is certainly remarkable that people
come from all over the world to make their confessions in Medjugorje,
but the expelled Franciscans and a few others who are in a state of disobedience
to the Holy See, their Order and the local Church authorities, give thousands
of invalid absolutions in the very neighbourhood of Medjugorje.
When this group of Franciscans, who even now wear Franciscan habits even
though they have been canonically expelled from the Order of Friars Minor
in 2001, blasphemously and sacrilegiously sinned against the sacraments
of the Eucharist and of confirmation by summoning an Old Catholic deacon
(!) a schismatic not in communion with the Catholic Church, to celebrate
an invalid Eucharist and to "confirm" hundreds of candidates
in three parishes, Grude, Capljina and Ploce-Tepcici, that deacon falsely
held himself out to be a bishop, saying "both the friars and I believe
in the Marian apparitions at Medjugorje".
Alas, we heard not a word and saw not a sign of disapproval of such pronouncements.
On the contrary, some still defend the visitation of the uncatholic deacon
who proclaimed himself to be a bishop. One of his colleagues, who lived
in the same community for some time, tells how this deacon celebrated
"mass" in honour of the BVM in a church in Switzerland on the
feast of the Assumption, all dressed in black! A requiem for the Mother
of God on the day of her Assumption into heaven! What folly! A man who
cannot celebrate mass at all, since he is not a priest, so insults Our
Lady, who reached a higher state of holiness than any other human being,
yet he claims to "believe in the Marian apparitions at Medjugorje",
and comes along to "confirm" Catholic children in Herzegovina.
Yet that same colleague of his has given written testimony that this "bishop"
does not recognize the sacrament of confirmation administered according
to the Catholic rite, so he "confirmed" his friend a second
time!
The scandal of disobedience, concerning which we have not heard a word
of criticism from the "oasis of peace" at Medjugorje, has grown
to such a level that some of the above-mentioned former Franciscans asked
an Old Catholic bishop in Switzerland to consecrate one of them as bishop!
So that the schism in the diocese should deepen?
The Holy Father John Paul II, who has never mentioned Medjugorje in any
of his allocutions, has frequently summoned the superiors of the OFM to
resolve the Herzegovinian question.
So, for example, on 16th June 2003, the Pope once again asked the members
of the General Chapter of the Franciscan Order to carry into effect the
decision of his predecessor, Pope Paul VI, going back to 1975:
"Your missionary activity will prove fruitful in so far as it is
fulfilled in harmony with the lawful pastors to whom Our Lord has entrusted
responsibility for his flock. Bearing that well in mind, I once again
warmly remind you of the efforts that have been made to overcome the difficulties
that have long existed in certain areas. It is my heartfelt wish that,
with co-operation on every side, that understanding with the diocesan
authorities sought by my worthy predecessor, Pope Paul VI, should be fully
attained. It has become apparent that such an understanding is a prerequisite
for effective evangelisation."
It would be desirable to have an unambiguous response from the Franciscan
side to this exhortation by the Pope.
For my part, I have never publicized the immorality or the financial scandals
associated with Medjugorje. There are other well publicized disorders
and evidence that sufficiently disprove the supposedly supernatural nature
of the "visions" and lead to the conclusion that it would be
better to conclude "constat de non supernaturalitate" rather
than "non constat de supernaturalitate".
This book seeks to describe chronologically, analyse logically, and explain
faithfully the many facts connected with the more than questionable "visions"
at Medjugorje. May the true Queen of Peace help the author by her intercession
with the most Holy Trinity.
Mostar, on the feast of the BVM, Mother of the Church,
31st
May 2004,
+
Ratko Peric, Bishop