Friday, October 1, 2010

Medjugorje - The construction of the “Lady of Medjugorje”

From Louis Bélanger:

"..For now, let us be reminded that Medjugorge’s promoters and critics do agree on the formulation of the said Norms and on the need to enact them with a certain rigour.

Let us be reminded also that the competent ecclesiastical authority was able to acquire more certainty on the Medjugorje phenomenon and that it proceeded to render a decision of non constat de supernaturalitate” in 1986, reaffirmed in 1991, and still valid in 2010.

Yet Medjugorje promoters apparently do not want to understand what “non constat” does mean. According to them, the 24-year old decision was and should be of “constat de supernaturalitate”. The protagonists-promoters-players behave as if the Virgin Mary is appearing in Medjugorje… and in St. Stephen’s Cathedral in Vienna, with the benevolent permission of Cardinal Schönborn.

Unfortunately, while knowing the rules of the game and showing the apparent intention to apply them, key protagonists-promoters-players have engaged in duplicity by breaking them so seriously that their credibility has to be questioned. Attached to the non constat is a precise pastoral directive that has been first published in 1987:
“it is not permitted to organize either pilgrimages or other religious manifestations based on an alleged supernatural character attributed to Medjugorje’s events.”
The Hidden Side of Medjugorje, p. 140
I repeat: —  religious manifestations — based on an alleged supernatural character — attributed to Medjugorje’s events.

Is it not clear that each of the religious manifestations organized with or without the visionaries in Medjugorje with the Lady of Medjugorje presented as the supernatural character “Gospa” constitutes a mighty coup de force [takeover by force] against the competent authority that formulated the directive? One is looking already to a religious war here…"


The credibility of the Lady of Medjugorje (LoM)

The credibility of the LoM has been tainted a few times over the first days, in particular when she “spoke” of incredulous Judases. We know that Fr. Svetozar Kraljevic and the theologian Mark Miravalle have tried to “help” her as they corrected incredulous and changed it for the adjective unfaithful. Moreover historian René Laurentin changed the name of Judas into Thomas because, as he told me in a 1988-08-04 telephone conversation: « un historien doit tenir compte des lapsus » [“an historian must take lapsus into account”].

But the credibility of the LoM is most questionable when she overrides her announcement of her apparitions’ termination for the 3rd of July, 1981, by continuing to manifest herself during the following days. That breach of truthfulness and coherence seemed too “human”. One had to correct that blunder. Consequently, the pastoral personnel and René Laurentin, among other promoters, decided to silence the mistake of the LoM. I will show it very soon with the help of authentic documents that reveal the historical falsification...

1 comment:

Fr. John Mary, ISJ said...

This whole thing "stinks" of Satan...I'm sorry...but I'm not convinced at all because of all the shenanigans (yeah, I'm part Irish!) that have gone on all these years.
And the most recent spectacle, sponsored by Card. Shoenborn is just "off the top"...I don't get it...
just a stupid monk, I guess.