IN OTHER NEWS:
I could not resist posting this video too. I loved it. Remember Timmy: Be careful!
"Jeepers!" says Jay, "It's time 
for Catholic Carnival 175!"
Adoro sent along this site for interesting art.
C. said that Catholiculture.org reviews Catholic web sites' strengths and weaknesses. In her estimation they are pretty on the target and C. is usually pretty on mark herself.
N.B. Would those of you who are coming to the Adam's Ale Vatican event please send me an Email to confirm. I would like to make final plans before my life becomes even more of a whirlwind than it is.
8 comments:
People told that guy for years that rabid wolverines and cars don't mix; maybe now he'll listen!
I'd love to come to Adam's Ale's Vatican event, but it's not possible. I'll be wishing everyone a wonderful time, tho'.
(Carol)
Father, I am SO there! (You know that already). :-)
On the Catholic Culture site, there ARE a few biases, so I look over the reviews on the "red" sites just to weed out the bias. It's pretty obvious...they don't like Medugourjie (sp?), so if a site mentions it, it gets a yellow or a red rating. But overall, their reviews ARE on target. One of the sites they review, for example, Fisheaters.com, is a wonderful site but it carries a warning because of some of their anti Vatican II stuff and anti Novus Ordo comments. But their information on devotions can't be beat!
YES - uncle jim & aunt rozann coming to vatican exhibit
I'll be there - seeing if my parents, sister & nephew are also coming. We have season tickets to the museum - I'll check to see if this will cover the cost of the Vatican exhibit - sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.
Looking forward to seeing everyone!
LM
Yes, adoro.. Let's see if I can do this without making a downright url of it.. if you type w w w trincomm dot org slash about slash president dot cfm (without spaces) you'll find the creator of Catholic Culture which was Trinity at one time, then Peter'sNet. Regarding every website, there is a *paper* trail online, too, which is occasionally interesting or important to follow. As one can see, a rating is mostly that of one layman, without imprimaturs--and tho' Dr. M is indeed pretty darned good at it all, one keeps all things in perspective.
Sorry --that was from me (Carol)
I’m about to invite a firestorm, but here goes:
The Medjegorje “seers” have been condemned by both Bishop Zanic and Bishop Peric who have had jurisdiction since the visions began.
The seers said that Mary told them:
- to start a coed religious community (they did – Rome ordered it dissolved)
-that one seer would become a priest (he flunked out of seminary, married a Boston beauty queen, lives in a mansion with a customized Mercedes Benz from money he makes doing lectures and having visions on a daily schedule)
-that the seers are free to disobey the bishop
-that all religions are the same
- that Jesus prefers that our petitions be made directly to Him rather than through her
Pilgrimages to Medjegorje are formally forbidded by the Church.
Franciscans at Medjegorje expelled for disobedience: Fr. Peter Barbaric, Fr. Ivan Pursina, Fr. Bozo Rados
Franciscans at Medjegorje forbidden to celebrate mass: Fr. Ljudevit Rupcic, Fr. Jozo Zovko, Fr. Ivica Vego
These disciplined priests continue to confer illicit and sometimes invalid sacraments at Medjegorje.
French cameraman Jean-Louis Martin filmed one seer, Vicka, flinching back from his jab during an “ecstacy”.
There are no medically verified healings. People that have been promised cures by “Our Lady” have ignored doctors’ advice and died.
Rome cannot make a formal decision until the “visions” cease, but the “seers” children are even having “visions” now.
There is much, much, more, but the fact that the local Bishop condemns the “visions” should be enough.
Actually, the jurisdiction for Medjugorgie has been transferred to the Vatican, and is not under the authority of the local Bishop. The fact that the local ordinary has condemned it is a moot point.
I personally don't feel called to go there, I have my reservations, but I have seen true conversions come about from people who have gone there...true and lasting conversions.
Thus, I and all should have reservations about ALL sources regarding the apparitions, including the Catholic Culture website, the apparitions themselves, the alleged messages, the good things, and the complaints. Because it can't be verified.
I"m sure there was controversy over Fatima and Lourdes, too, but they did not last as long so it was not so intense.
I don't get into it; we aren't obligated to believe even approved apparitions, and people are way up at arms about Medugourgie, and there's misinformation on all fronts.
I've been told I "need" to go there. I don't have $3,0000, and if I did, I'd go to the Holy Land or Rome. Period.
Now..let's otherwise keep this post on track instead of getting off on the alleged merits or dismerits of the apparitions at Medugourgie. (which I still can't spell and I'm too lazy to look up)
As far as pilgrimages go, it's completely normal for them to be "formally forbidden", meaning that they cannot be orgainzed by, say, an Archbishop or a representative of the Church, which would be a conflict of interest given the state of ongoing investigation. It does not mean that individuals and private groups, even involving priests and bishops, cannot go. There IS a difference.
Yeah, I have issues with what's going on there, too, but I'm pretty neutral about it...because I can see both the good and the bad, as well as alleged endorsements of certain Popes who have ALSO mentioned the good arising out of pilgrimages to that location.
We need to be very careful about what we do and don't endorse, and as the Vatican has not condemned the site, we also have no right to do so. We need to wait and watch and discern on our own whether we should go...but we also need to be prepared for the truth when the final decision comes...after the apparitions end. (Remember...Fatima was approved prior to the death of Sr. Lucia)
Post a Comment