In my first of 2 articles on this matter, I proved that John Carpenter is completely without any credibility on anything having to do with Marian apparitions including (but not limited to Medjugorje). So anyone trying to refute my arguments cannot use him as a source. You have to use someone credible and with standing. I have proven that he is not.
That someone is also not Donald Hartley. He has proven that he absolutely cannot be objective on the subject of Medjugorje. He is too emotionally invested to be objective.
In my second article I proved that the Ruini report is not recognized by the Catholic church as an approval of Medjugorje and even it declares more than 99% of the alleged Medjugorje apparitions (all of them from July 4th, 1981 to today) to be false. Nevertheless, the positive vibes of even those seven are obviously hard to justify within the context of the entire report. The report is schizophrenic and absurd and the CDF and the Pope will never approve it.
Let's be clear. Medjugorje is a diabolical fraud motivated by money and Satan's pride. It has nothing to do with genuine Catholicism and that is not the real Mary who has appeared there. Not even once.
In this article, I am going to make the leave-no-doubt case that all of the Medjugorje apparitions- every single one of them- are frauds and that Mama Mary has no more appeared in Medjugorje than Elvis, Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster.
The Bible says that they are Blessed who do not see, yet believe. This is the definition of faith and trust. A central part of our faith is to understand the infallible teaching authority of our church to bind and loose. Sadly, some persons reject the church's authority so they must see for themselves.
For them, the fact that Medjugorje has been condemned 4 times means nothing. The fact that that the last of those condemnations has stood for better than 30 years also doesn't convince them. For me, the authority of the church alone is enough.
Nevertheless, I will now prove:
That the condemnations were all made after investigations by competent bodies acting in good faith.
That the facts of the case made approval impossible.
That the Ruini report is wildly flawed and cannot be taken seriously.
That the so-called "visionaries" are widely described (even in the Ruini report) as being dishonest, evasive actors addicted to money.
That the condemnations have been upheld and will always be.
In short, I am about to prove that the evidence clearly shows that Mother Mary is not appearing in Medjugorje and never has. Not for 47,000 visits or 7 visits or even 7 seconds. I will also disprove Garabandal.
I cannot continue without expressing my deep appreciation to Donal Foley and Patrick Coffin.
The condemnations were all made after investigations by competent bodies acting in good faith.
Obviously, people can interpret the same facts in different ways. One point of agreement is that Bishop Paolo Zanic was at first positive about the alleged events in Medjugorje before turning against. The two competing interpretations of this are that:
A) he was unduly pressured in some way by the communists to change his position and gave in to that pressure.
B) His investigation of the actual facts and messages and his interviews with the "visionaries" caused him to determine they were not genuine.
From where I sit, option A) is the kind of insolent, spoiled-brat nonsense you get from the pro-Medjugorje side. Baseless. I will not even justify it with a response. The other side is more than welcome to try and make this case with evidence. If they can provide any evidence to support this absurdity, I will respond.
Don't hold your breath.
The B) scenario can be made on a time-tested rule often employed in the rule of law. An example where this comes into play is in self-defense scenarios where a person felt threatened. The rule of thumb I will employ is a question based on the same line of thinking. In this situation, we put ourselves in the shoes of the witness and ask
"What would a reasonable person conclude, based on the evidence?"
This process is very beneficial in determining both the veracity of the alleged events and the credibility and objectivity of the person doing the investigation.
First, we applied this standard to John Carpenter and Donald Hartley. The results so far have been that their arguments have proven to be without credibility and they are anything but objective. I, myself, on the other hand, have been totally objective and determined to follow the facts where they lead. If the facts exonerate Medjugorje, I would be only too eager to follow it. However, if the facts condemn Medjugorje, I am willing to accept that as well. Donald Hartley is compromised because he went there twice and has an emotional need for it to be true. John Carpenter is compromised because he has spent 10 years writing and reporting false information and is trying to avoid the consequences of being exposed.
It is pretty difficult to understand the argument that a person such as myself, who is deeply committed to Our Blessed Mother, would have something to gain by Medjugorje being either true or false, except in wanting to follow the truth.
If that is true in my case, it is impossible to see why Bishop Zanic, a devoutly Marian Priest would have anything to gain by opposing Medjugorje unless led there by the objective facts. Carpenter and Hartley (and the whole pro-Medjugorje side, for that matter) have dedicated countless pages and hours to assertions but have provided very little real objective evidence to back them up.
Let's be clear. Support of Medjugorje is based on emotion and nothing more. Opposition to Medjugorje is based on facts and nothing less. The more you know the facts, the more you simply cannot believe this nonsense and the more angry the other side will get at you.
Bishop Zanic had to rule on facts.
Fact: All 6 "visionaries" were adamant that the visions would end on July 3rd, 1981. They did not. This was proven to not be credible.
Fact: The visionaries were caught in multiple, indisputable lies. Even Ruini admits this.
Fact: The visions certainly did not follow the patterns of previous approved events. The greed and lack of entrance into religious life of the seers is just one example.
Fact: Though the overwhelming majority of the messages (probably over 90%) fell into the category of banal but not offensive, there were some that were undeniable heretical and even blasphemous.
The facts are very inconvenient for those truing to prop up the Medjugorje cult so they try to impugn the good people who made the decisions to reject this diabolical fraud. It isn't plausible. To many good people and too many condemnations.
The site catholicapologetics.info gives a good summation.
It is the duty of the local bishop of the diocese in which supposed supernatural events take place to study and confirm or deny the legitimacy of the claims being made. The bishop in the diocese to which Medjugorje belongs, Msgr. Zanic of Mostar, remitted this duty by forming a diocesan commission to do an impartial inquiry into the events that had been taking place since 1981. After a few years of thorough and intense investigative study, which the Church always exercises to determine an unmistakable decision in these matters, the Bishop issued a statement in 1986 giving the results of the study. In the statement, Msgr. Zanic condemned the apparitions as not made by the most Holy Virgin Mary and he forbade the pilgrimages set up from the beginning without ecclesiastical approval by the pastor of Mostar.
1) The second Diocesan Commission, which worked from 1984 to 1986, voted explicitly on 2 May 1986, by an overwhelming majority for the Non constate de supernaturalitate (11 negative votes, 2 positive, 1 in nucleo, 1 in abstention).
2) The declaration of the Episcopal Conference of 1991 stated: "On the basis of studies conducted so far, it cannot be affirmed that supernatural apparitions and revelations are occurring."
...My conviction and my position is not only Non constat de supernaturalitate, but also Constat de non supernaturalitate as regards the apparitions or revelations of Medjugorje. --Msgr. Ratko Peric, Bishop of Mostar, Letter of October 2, 1997, to M. Thierry Boutet, Editor of the journal Edifa.
In a resulting interview given by Fr. Deleclos of the Libre Belgique, Msgr. Zanic was asked: "Are you, as a matter of principle, against apparitions?" The Bishop replied: "Quite the contrary! I myself have been eight times to Lourdes and I have organized pilgrimages. I have done much for the devotion to the Most Holy Virgin. I was even in Banneux, in Beauraign (Belgium), and Syracuse (Italy), three places where the apparitions of Mary had been stated as authentic."
"However, you are not convinced of this in Medjugorje?" Reply: "I should really be glad to have a Lourdes in my diocese. It would be something grandiose. But I cannot before God, before my conscience and before the Church proclaim these apparitions are authentic and supernatural. I am certainly a sinner and unworthy to be a bishop, yet I believe it would be the worst of all the sins of my life to let this falseness pass for truth, knowing that it is a lie." Despite these words of the Bishop, which the faithful should accept as a decision from God, people continued to flock to Medjugorje and the priest did not desist from organizing pilgrimages as ordered.
Another committee on the national level, composed of 20 bishops, was organized to decide on the "apparitions". This committee also spent several years in patiently studying the matter and finally in November 1990 issued a statement which concluded that there is no proof that Marian apparitions have occurred at Medjugorje. This statement was approved nearly unanimously, with 19 bishops in favor and one abstaining. A Vatican doctrinal official said the bishops' statement against defining the apparitions as supernatural should be accepted by the faithful around the world.
Regardless of these testimonies by the most competent authorities in the Church, many refuse to heed the Church's decision and persist in going to Medjugorje. One wonders what authority would be sufficient to convince these travelers of the truth of the Church's clear and emphatic declaration. It is also disturbing to consider that, if the "apparitions" are not from God, from whence do they originate?
Medjugorje: Condemned by Tradition
In the last article, we addressed John Carpenter's silly claim that 10-20 years of social media is what has negatively impacted Medjugorje. let's revisit that claim to see if it holds up.
1986 Medugorje condemned by Bishop Zanic led commission
1986 Medjugorje condemned by second commission with 11 out of 15 votes
1991 Episcopal conference votes to condemn
1991 Yugoslav Bishop's conference votes to condemn with 19 out of 20 Bishops agreeing and one astaining
1997 Bishop Peric states past condemnations did not go far enough in saying that the Supernaturality has not been established. The Bishop says the Non-Supernaturality has been established.
All of those decisions (unlike the Ruini Commission Report) were made by authorities with binding jurisdiction. All were well before the 2002- present explosion of Social Media.
To believe Carpenter and Hartley, you would have to believe;
Bishop Zanic was incompetent and/or compromised AND
Bishop Peric was incompetent or compromised AND
The majority of the Episcopal Conference was incompetent or compromised AND
19 of the 20 members of the Yugoslav Bishop's commission were incompetent or compromised.
Not only would all of these things have to be true, the Vatican would have to be unwilling to censure any of those individuals or even acknowledge any incompetency or improper behavior.
This kind of kooky conspiracy theorizing is on the level of flat earthers and 911 truther nuts.
Oh, and how much evidence do the peanut brothers give to support this lunacy?
That's right. Not one speck of evidence to support anything improper by any ecclesiastical leader or prominent figure in opposition to Medjugorje. All you get is calumny and conspiracy nonsense from the peanut brothers.
I ask again....
"What would a reasonable person conclude, based on the evidence?"
Ah, but what about the credibility of the other side?
Father Vlasic, spiritual director to the "visionaries" was defrocked then excommunicated. Among the serious charges were violations of the 6th commandment. (Sexual sins). His sexual deviancy came to be known to (then) Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger who forced him to leave Medjugorje for this and for the conjuring up of evil spirits. He is now a full fledged promoter of the occult/new age and a promoter of UFO conspiracies.
Vlasic's fellow Franciscans- Frs Vega and Prussina- led a mob to evict the clergy from a Mostar church. The Bishop (Zanic) suspended them.
The "Gospa" told the seers that the Bishop was to blame and that the dissident Priests were to ignore the Bishop's directive. (This naked disobedience is something the REAL Mary absolutely could not be a part of).
Over the nest few months, the Devil with a blue dress on said that the Priests should stay in the diocese and continue to hear confessions and give Communion even though they had no faculties!
The so-called Gospa (demon) then said the Bishop (A DEVOUTLY MARIAN BISHOP) had "no love of God in his heart" . The demon continued that the defrocked priests had "no faults!"
Vega's faultlessness took a bit of a hit when he was- like Vlasic- defrocked for sexual indiscretions (he impregnated a nun)
Their Franciscan brother, (and central Medjugorje figure Father Jozo Zovko) was also defrocked for insubordination and allegedly molesting Medjugorje pilgrims.
Later, the Franciscans were involved in the kidnap of Bishop Peric, who had to be rescued from his abduction!
So, while Donald Hartley is fond of saying that those opposed to Medjugorje are a "peanut gallery", those on the pro-Med side look more like a chain gang.
Here is an apparently recent picture of the pro-Medjugorje contingent in Bosnia :)
So, again I ask...
"What would a reasonable person conclude, based on the evidence?"
The facts of the case made approval impossible.
I will concede up front that a few Rosaries have turned gold but that's really about it. Rosaries turned gold in the condemned apparitions of Necedah, Wisconsin too but it was still condemned.
Bishop John Treacy of Necedah investigated the alleged apparitions and ordered all activities stopped in 1950 by saying, “All claims regarding supernatural revelations and visions made by the aforementioned Mrs. Van Hoof are false. Furthermore, all public and private religious worship connected with these false claims is prohibited…” In 1969 Bishop Treacy was succeeded by Bishop Frederick Freking, who ordered another investigation. The new bishop ordered the shrine closed, but Mary Ann told her followers that they must obey “Our Lady of Necedah” rather than the bishop. In 1972 the bishop informed Mary Ann that he would take sanctions if his directives were not followed.
Bishop John Treacy of Necedah investigated the alleged apparitions and ordered all activities stopped in 1950 by saying, “All claims regarding supernatural revelations and visions made by the aforementioned Mrs. Van Hoof are false. Furthermore, all public and private religious worship connected with these false claims is prohibited…” In 1969 Bishop Treacy was succeeded by Bishop Frederick Freking, who ordered another investigation. The new bishop ordered the shrine closed, but Mary Ann told her followers that they must obey “Our Lady of Necedah” rather than the bishop. In 1972 the bishop informed Mary Ann that he would take sanctions if his directives were not followed.
Of course, as if to never miss an opportunity to promote a condemned apparition, Carpenter still promotes Necedah.
"What would a reasonable person conclude, based on the evidence?"
In fact, a striking thing has happened with John Carpenter's promotion of Medjugorje. Almost without exception, Carpenter relies on the alleged events and testimonies of other condemned events to support Medjugorje. Garabandal, Spain is one example. South Korea is another.
Conceding the golden rosaries (and a few subjective pictures), what other supernatural events can be tied to Medjugorje? Pretty much, nothing. Pretty incredible after 40 years.
Not one documented miraculous cure verified by the Lourdes medical bureau.
Not one publicly released, peer-reviewed scientific study.
Not one verifiable prediction that has ever come to pass.
Not one sanctioned Bishop or body of the Bosnian Catholic church that has issued an approval.
Not one visionary that has entered the religious life.
On the contrary, the visionaries are contexed, even by the Ruini report as untrustworthy, spiritually immature and going through the motions. All 6 of them are filthy rich, living off money from lectures, pilgrimages, books and on-demand appearances of the Gospa producing endless, banal Hallmark Card-ish messages that show no progression, no depth and do not even touch the great moral issues of the day such as abortion, sex trafficking, pornography, drugs, violence etc...
Sunday, February 21, 1982
"Be together, and do not argue, do not be disorderly. My angels, I will make you attentive. I will guide you on a sure way."
Jakov lives in a mansion in the Boston suburbs estimated to be worth $1 Million. Ivan lives lavishly exclusively of funds made from the apparitions. Vicka has been proven to be dishonest, manipulative and without credibility.
Just look at this video.
This video was featured on Church Pop which is a very reputable catholic site and offshoot of EWTN. The catholic standing of EWTN does not even need to be stated.
When confronted by this video evidence, the reactions of both John Carpenter and Donald Hartley were startling to say the least.
Neither one of them claimed the video was a fake or that it was altered or even that the quotes and descriptions of the events were inaccurate in any way. They simply said something to the effect of it being 'one little mistake that doesn't undo 40 years of apparitions' or some such nonsense. I will leave it to them to explain and context their position.
I will also leave it to your own eyes and ears to witness what you see here. Nothing Carpenter and Hartley can say can make you unsee this and unhear it. You cannot walk away from this seeing Vicka as anything but a fraud. Her story about the possibility of the Blessed Mother actually dropping Jesus is a damning indictment against this diabolical monstrosity. The very suggestion is absurd and blasphemous.
Watch the video. Watch it again. Then try to reconcile it with Donald Hartley's rhetoric that all who disbelieve Medjugorje are unduly influenced by the peanut gallery. See if Donald Hartley and John Carpenter can convince you that your own eyes and ears are lying to you. Watch them personally insult your intelligence by claiming this video proves nothing.
My guess is that their gaslighting will not persuade you.
It is often speculated that Bishop Zanic turned from Medjugorje supporter to detractor as a result of communist pressure. Donal Foley has a much better explanation in his book "Medjugorje Complete" (page 113). The passage has to be seen to be believed.
Mr. Foley is spot on. This message alone (which is not disputed) either shows Ivan the "visionary" as a complete pinhead or this message came straight from the Devil. Straight-up, those are your only two options.
The "Gospa" of Medjugorje is producing quite a record of accomplishments.
About to drop baby Jesus
Defending sexual predators
Encouraged defrocked Priest to hear confessions and celebrate Communion
Encouraged disobedience to the Bishop
Threatening the that he better get onboard the Pro-Med train and ignore the "negative" sides.
If this sounds like the Mother of Jesus to you, I'd suggest you get professional help.
Oh, but there is so much more.
The Medjugorje "Gospa" (devil):
endorses the ''poem of the Man God" which is condemned by the Vatican.
nearly brought about the end of the world over a handkerchief.
claims all religions are equal before God. (October 1, 1981)
Overturns the history of the church for some 1600 years and the testimony of at least 5 canonized saints in claiming the birthday of the Mother of Jesus is in August, not September.
Is indecisive in visions.
Makes predictions, none of which have come true.
becomes filthy from the sins of reprobates putting their hands on her (pure blasphemy to suggest this could happen to the Mother of God.
Appears on-demand to "visionaries" who make thousands of these "visions", drive luxury cars and live in mansions.
Tells the visionaries not to pray for themselves (16 Sep 1984)
That all people in heaven have a soul and a body (May 6, 1982)
Praised Father Vlasic for his work (Feb 8, 1982)
Souls receive a new body. The old body rots in the earth never to rise again.(July 24th, 1982)
Apparently, Mary has even become a protestant!
Saturday, September 4, 1982
"Jesus prefers that you address yourselves directly to Him rather than through an intermediary. In the meantime, if you wish to give yourselves completely to God and if you wish that I be your protector, then confide to me all your intentions, your fasts, and your sacrifices so that I can dispose of them according to the will of God."
I could go on and on all day. Unlike John Carpenter and Donald Hartley, I don't give you second hand quotes. These messages are from the actual Medjugorje transcripts not the "peanut gallery" sources they use.
Should I keep going?
How about:
Mirjana being associated with the formation of the Caritas of Birmingham group that was condemned as a heretical cult? She is still associated with it!
Undeniable ties to the protestant charismatic movement with Monatist undertones?
Gnosticish secrets that they would not reveal evento the Vatican or the Commission!
Vicka saying that all inhabitants of hell have horns and tails? (Foley, p 200)
The "Gospa" saying that all skeptics of Medjugorje were "Disbelieving Judases"! (Even Mary of Fatima wouldn't say that)
Medjugorje apologist Father Laurentein changing the above to "doubting Thomases" to soften it?
These messages are sheer lunacy and not in keeping with any approved apparition or anything remotely credible.
I ask you....
"What would a reasonable person conclude, based on the evidence?"
The Ruini report is wildly flawed and cannot be taken seriously.
I have linked the report and stated that the CDF was incredulous about it. It is a mass of contradictions that simply isn't workable. The commission obviously did very sloppy work.
Among the priceless duplicities:
Ivan has no credibility but we need to believe his testimony re; the first 7 visions.
The first 7 visions are credible but the only prediction made during that time turned out wrong.
The visionaries are spiritually immature and need direction but the Mother of God has been appearing to them for 30+ (now 40+ years)
The visions after day 10 are a real problem and the visionaries are clearly going through the motions but we must believe they are sincere about the first 10 days.
It's no wonder the CDF was incredulous and asked for the entire report to be thrown out.
The so-called "visionaries" are widely described (even in the Ruini report) as being dishonest, evasive actors addicted to money.
Vicka's favorite game was to claim the "Gospa" 'paused' the visions to her whenever the scientific teams showed up. The "visions" would conveniently restart after they left. Not one visionary entered the religious life. All of them are rich, living in mansions and driving luxury cars.
Please compare to:
Saint Bernadette
Saint Juan Diego
Saints Lucia, Jacinta and Francisco.
The condemnations have been upheld and will always be.
Folks. Let's face it. The Vatican has had 31 years to overturn the Yugoslav Bishops. 12 years since the Ruini Commission opened. 5 years since it closed. There is literally nothing that suggests the Ruini Commission results or any manner of a full or partial approval of Medjugorje will ever happen. Medjugorje is done. There is no Medjugorje.
"What would a reasonable person conclude, based on the evidence?"
He would conclude the truth...that Medjugorje is false!
So is Garabandal. The same crazy messages, the same unfulfilled predictions.
From EWTN...
The Alleged Apparitions at Garabandal Author: Bishop Jose Vilaplaua
The Alleged Apparitions at Garabandal, Spain
Msgr. Jose Vilaplana, Bishop of Santander, Spain
In answer to questions about the alleged Marian apparitions at Garabandal, Spain, Bishop Jose Vilaplana sends the following response to inquirers.
Diocese of Santander Santander, Some people have been coming directly to the Diocese of Santander (Spain) asking about the "alleged apparitions" of Garabandal, and above all for the position of the hierarchy of the Church concerning these apparitions.
I must communicate that: 1. All the bishops of the diocese from 1961 through 1970 asserted that the supernatural character of the said apparitions, that took place around that time, could not be confirmed. [no constaba].* 2. In the month of December of 1977 Msgr. del Val, Bishop of Santander, in union with his predecessors, affirmed that in the six years of being Bishop of Santander there were no new phenomena. 3. Not withstanding, the same Msgr. del Val, the first years having passed in which there was confusion to enthusiasm, initiated an interdisciplinary study in order to examine with greater profundity these phenomenon. The conclusion of this study coincided with the previous findings by the bishops, which is to say, that it does not prove [no consta] the supernaturality of said apparitions. 4. This study concluded during the days in which I took possession of the diocese in 1991. Taking advantage, in that same year, of a trip to Rome for the motive of making the ad limina visit, I presented said study to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and asked for guidance for pastoral activity concerning the case. 5. On Nov. 28, 1992, the Congregation sent me its response, consisting in, that after having examined attentively the mentioned documentation, it did not consider it opportune to intervene directly, removing the ordinary jurisdiction of the Bishop of Santander, this subject that belongs to him by right. Previous declarations of the Holy See agree in this finding. In the same letter it was suggested, if I find it opportune, to publish a declaration in which it is re-affirmed that the supernaturality of the referenced apparitions was not proven, making my own the unanimous position of my predecessors.
6. Given that the declarations of my predecessors, who studied the case, have been clear and unanimous, I do not find it necessary to have a new public declaration that would give notoriety to something which happened so long ago. However, I find it opportune to redact this information as a direct response to the persons who ask for direction concerning this question, which I give finally, accepting the decisions of my predecessors and the direction of the Holy See.
7. In reference to the celebration of the Eucharist in Garabandal, following the dispositions of my predecessors, I only allow that it be celebrated in the parish church without reference to the alleged apparitions and with the permission of the current pastor, who has my confidence. With the wish that this information is helpful to you, receive my cordial greeting in Christ, Jose Vilaplana Bishop of Santander
It is time to reject the heresy of these false apparitions and the false pied pipers who peddle them. Garabandal also promised signs and miracles that never have (and never will) take place.
Nonsense such as "The Warning" and "The Illumination of Conscience" are not Catholic. Jesus warned us to be ready and not caught sleeping, not to listen to false teachers with heretical theology and Psuedo-apocalyptic nonsense.
