The Miracle of Medjugorje

Originally posted by FlyersFan
I am very familiar with it. Just jumping into deep theology and
contemplation will just confuse you. It takes prayer and the gift
of contemplation (from God) to better understand what the
contemplatives speak of.

I think you may assume too much here. God gave each of us a spirit of love, power and a sound mind. One should never underestimate the ability to understand if one's answers are of God.

It also takes GOOGLE and reading
explainations.

To tell you the truth, when one googles the questions the majority of the sites that would come up are the non-catholic perspective. If I were Catholic, I would consider weeding through the rhetoric. As it is though, there are simpler ways to find answers.

Don't forget ... you are separated from St.
Louis de Montfort by hundreds of years, language differences,
faith differences, and you are also separated by him being
a contemplative and you are not (you are obviously 'in the
world' and not in a prayer retreat).

Hmmm, more assumptions.

He deeply
experienced that his entire life was in the loving hands of Jesus, or as he
would put it, he was the "loving slave of Jesus in Mary," always
understanding "slave" in its New Testament sense of total, loving
dependence, as Mary calls herself the slave girl of the Lord (Lk 1:38) and
as Paul identifies himself as the slave of Jesus Christ (Rom 1:1).

(this quote as well as the rest of your first post, and continuing into the next post)

I have no problem with a call for complete and loving surrender to God. I do however not only question the need for surrender to any but God. I also question the soundness of any teaching which suggests such.

Did you notice that she says 'surrender to
God' and then afterwards 'surrender to me'? Mary always leads people
to God. Always. She told them to surrender to God. When people trust
her she can take them to God.

She didn't call for the surrender to God here. She said, "... let your prayer be a sign ...". You know, something for others or the self to see. God would not need a sign of surrender to him.

As far as honoring Mary, here is a quote from Jesuit Nicholas Russo
in 1886 - In honoring Mary, what else are we doing but imitating the
heavenly messenger who saluted her as full of grace, united to God
('the Lord is with thee'), blessed among women! What are all the
praises which the Church offers to Mary ... but a faint commentary on
the words of the archangel! What is the veneration we have for her
but the fulfillment of the prophecy made by our heavenly Mother herself
when, filled with the Holy Ghost, magnifying the Lord and extolling His
mercy, she exclaimed: "all generations shall call me blessed"?
(luke 1:43). To suppress our feelings, therefore, would not only be
inconsistent with the filial love we should have for her, but also would
contradict the clear teaching of the Gospel.

I have no problem with honoring Mary. However, being ever cautious of spiritual visitations, I have to question if this is indeed Mary. If a spirit said his name was Bob and called for the complete surrender to him and he would take you to God, I would assume you wouldn't trust it. Why would you trust it because it says its name is Mary? Which goes back to a previous point, "I do however not only question the need for surrender to any but God. I also question the soundness of any teaching which suggests such."

She doesn't. The Roman Catholic Church will never approve a visitation
by Mary in which she appears see-through or ghost like. She is not a
ghost. She has already been given her glorified risen body such as we
(who will go to heaven) will receive when we rise from the dead in the
end. Christ walked through walls, traveled distances in the blink of an
eye, and so on with His glorified body. He was a solid person and yet
he moved like this. So does Mary. So will we (if we get to Heaven that
is).

Are the apparitions at Medjugorje able to be seen with any with eyes? If not, I question the existance of a physical body regardless of appearance of solidity.


To recap my questions:

However, if you would like to answer a question concerning her bodily assumption: If Mary was taken Body and Soul to Heaven, why/how does she return to earth without her body during these visitations?

Assuming the apparitions at Medjugorje are able to be seen with anyone with eyes, this question was answered.

Now, I am working from the assumption that the complete surrender I mentioned is indeed refering to the same surrender outlined above. So, I shall ask again, is a call to surrender to any but God wholesome?

We clarified that the complete surrender mentioned was the same as what was outlined by Monfort. However, you have not addressed if such a surrender to any but God is wholesome. (Add to that: needed and a sound teaching) Unless this is the part of the assumptions that it would "confuse" me because he was a contemplative and I am not.

But, if what this apparition of Mary meant was something different from what she said, why did she not say what she meant?

This was also answered through the clarification of surrender vs Monfort (as above).





[edit on 18-5-2005 by Raphael_UO]

Originally posted by Raphael_UO

Don't forget ... you are separated from St.
Louis de Montfort by hundreds of years, language differences,
faith differences, and you are also separated by him being
a contemplative and you are not (you are obviously 'in the
world' and not in a prayer retreat).

Hmmm, more assumptions.

No. No assumption there. You are on a computer. You are
'in the world'. So am I. Neither of us is sitting in a cloister
someplace contemplating God 24/7. Neither of us is cloistered
away from the distractions of the world. You are 'in the world'.
So am I. I didn't say that you were 'of the world' ... I said that
you are 'in the world'. Two different things. No assumption.
It's very obvious. If it were otherwise, you wouldn't be on-line
right now reading this.

Also, it is not 'assumption' that St. Louis De Montfort and you live
with many years difference, with a faith difference, and with a
difference in where you live. You have two different reference
points. That's not assumption. That's just fact. This is 2005.
St. Louis de Montfort lived hundreds of years ago in France.
He spoke and wrote old French. BIG difference - not an assumption.

Originally posted by Raphael_UO
However, being ever cautious of spiritual visitations ... Why would
you trust it because it says its name is Mary?

Good! Glad to hear it. Everyone should always question if they have
a spiritual visitiation. Test the spirits, toss what is bad, keep what is
of God. The question is are you tossing it just because it's 'catholic'
or because you don't like what it says?? If it's just because it's
'catholic' then you certainly have a right to do so, but that is silly.
If you toss it because you don't like what it says, then that's just
fine because it isn't necessary for your salvation, is it?

The Catholic church, and the true seers who have had visitations,
certainly QUESTION a lot. They don't trust 'just because it says
it's name is Mary'. Certainly not. The one visited asks MANY
questions of the spirit or soul. The Church will not approve ANY
apparition until it is over and it can be completely investigated.

Originally posted by Raphael_UO
Assuming the apparitions at Medjugorje are able to be
seen with anyone with eyes, this question was answered.

Mary is seen by those who God wishes her to be seen by. When
Christ walked into the Upper Room after He rose from the dead,
the people in the Upper Room saw Him, however, there is no mention
of others in the house or in the street seeing Him walk up to the
house, or walk through the wall. God allowed those He wished to
see Christ. God allows those He wishes to see Mary.

When we were there, there was a family with a small child. I'd say
about 2 years old. The child was crying and crying during the prayer
service. All of a sudden he stopped and held out his hands and smiled
and laughed. He did this for several minutes. At the end of the
prayer service, the dad asked the toddler why he stopped crying.
The toddler said that the 'pretty lady started singing to me'. Of course,
none of us saw the 'pretty lady' except this little 2 year old boy.

However, you have not addressed if such a surrender
to any but God is wholesome.

Some naughty children have a difficult time going to their father and
telling him what they have done. They have a difficult time and they
cry and are afraid to go and hug their father and tell them that they
still love him and that they are sorry. Moms will come to the child,
take them by the hand, and say 'sweetie, I love you, come with me,
I will be by your side and I'll take you to your father, trust me.' Their are
times when a child will trust the mother and the mother will lead the
child to the father.

To surrender to Mary is to surrender to being taken to God.
(no, Mary isn't God, she is the one who takes us to Him - her Son)
Yes, this is wholesome and needed by some people.

Originally posted by Raphael_UO
One should never underestimate the ability to
understand if one's answers are of God.

And one should never overestimate their understanding
of God and His ways -

2 Peter 3:16 - St. Paul said - 'certain things are hard to be
understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest (distort),
as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.'

And we see the wisdom of the Ethiopian who understood that
there are learned men who can interpret scripture better than
others - Acts 8:26-40 - the Ethiopian is trying to read and
understand Isaias and when asked by Philip if he understands
it the Ethiopian replys - 'how can I, unless some man show me?'
Philip then taught the Ethiopian.

Reading scripture on your own is great and wonderful. Sometimes
intrepretation is required. Interpretation by those who understand
better. The Catholic church has had 2,000 years to interpret
scripture. The best and most holy minds - Like St. Anthony and
St. Augustine and others have contemplated and been given
prayerful insights. To dismiss them for our own nuevo interpretations
would be much as if the Ethiopian had told Philip to take a hike and
that he'd figure it out on his own.

Read - yes. Listen to what God says to you - yes. But don't over
estimate your own ability to interpret scripture. Things will be
missed.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
you are separated from St.
Louis de Montfort by hundreds of years, language differences,
faith differences, and you are also separated by him being
a contemplative and you are not

con·tem·pla·tion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kntm-plshn)
n.
The act or state of contemplating.
Thoughtful observation or study.
Meditation on spiritual matters, especially as a form of devotion

med·i·tate ( P ) Pronunciation Key (md-tt)
v. med·i·tat·ed, med·i·tat·ing, med·i·tates
v. tr.
To reflect on; contemplate.
v. intr.

To engage in devotional contemplation, especially prayer.
To think or reflect, especially in a calm and deliberate manner.


While I don't know what Raphael_UO does throughout their day, your anwers appears to suggest that an ordinary person cannot do what Loius de Montfort did.

I meditate and contemplate on what the Bible says, contains and means. If you ask God to reveal Himself and what certain parts of the Bible mean and what He desires for your life, He will certainly answer a person. For that is what He desires, to have a personal one on one relationship with everyone as a Father would have with a son or daughter.

How do I know this because I live it. That's what I do and He responds and more often than not initiates what He wants me to meditate on. And when I say meditate I don't mean emptying my mind but the opposite, filling it up with what the Bible says and then dwelling on it throughout the day. So I have to politely disagree.

Originally posted by dbrandt
So I have to politely disagree.

Ahhhh I see we have a difference of what the words mean.
Okay ... Now I see .... let me explain.

In CATHOLIC terms - ST. Louis de Montfort was a contemplative.
That is someone who is not 'in the world' like you and I are. They
live separate. Usually in a cloister or a hermitage. They don't
have to earn a living, have a family, have earthly distractions.

Also, Contemplation is (in CATHOLIC terms) also a gift that comes
from the Holy Spirit. So yes, you can contemplate things, but when
I said contemplation was a gift, I ment the by going by the
Catholic term... the gift that comes from heaven as well as the
lifestyle of St. Louis De Montfort.

Using Catholic theological terminology - you and I are not
contemplatives, although we can contemplate things. We
meditate on things, but the gift of contemplation is something
separate that comes from the Holy Spirit and a 'contemplative'
is someone who lives separate.

I think this is just a matter of terminology being used. There
was no disrespect ment on my end of this conversation.

Now, back to the subject - MEDJUGORJE

"DATELINE" NBC May 18 "Miracles" program at 7pm CST with Ivan - the visionary was interviewed by Stone Phillips in Medjugorje for this special - and inquiry into April 2, 2005 and Pope John Paul II

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Now, back to the subject - MEDJUGORJE

"DATELINE" NBC May 18 "Miracles" program at 7pm CST with Ivan - the visionary was interviewed by Stone Phillips in Medjugorje for this special - and inquiry into April 2, 2005 and Pope John Paul II

Thanks for that!!!

www.msnbc.msn.com...

On assumptions:
One does not need sit in a closet 24/7 to contemplate God. God's love can be observed in the world though it is not of the world. The time, the place, and the religion also do not regulate one's ability.

On testing:
I would deny that all of the "true seers" have questioned a lot. In fact, based on what some have come to believe, I question if they questioned at all.

On the body:
Lack of mention in the bible is a lack of evidence. One should not be quick to say that lack of evidence is lack of an event happening.

On understanding:
Not underestimating one's ability does not equate in overestimating one's ability. Neither of the scripture you quoted refuted what I said, as it did not entail understanding scripture without assistance. What I said involved two people, one who did not know and one who does.

On surrender:

Some naughty children have a difficult time going to their father and
telling him what they have done. They have a difficult time and they
cry and are afraid to go and hug their father and tell them that they
still love him and that they are sorry. Moms will come to the child,
take them by the hand, and say 'sweetie, I love you, come with me,
I will be by your side and I'll take you to your father, trust me.' Their are
times when a child will trust the mother and the mother will lead the
child to the father.

Is this a teaching that says if you don't trust in God, trust in someone who is not God?

Surely it is wholesome for one to trust in another member of Christ's body who can teach one to trust in and love God. But the surrender to Mary bears with it everything: each thought, the movements of the soul, the hidden riches, the inmost self. All—on to the final breath—is committed to her that she may expend it all for God.

If one surrenders to Mary in such a complete manner, how does one surrender to God "with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength"? Surely all minus anything equals less than all. How can any man serve two masters?

God has sent the Virgin Mary to us in an effort to make peace! Now stop this silliness and just listen to it! Now every1 go watch the movie gospa

Originally posted by FlyersFan

I think this is just a matter of terminology being used. There
was no disrespect ment on my end of this conversation.

Also when I post things you don't know someone's tone so when we discuss things I do not do so out of anger or to irritate so please remember that. Although we will not agree I'm not trying to be a jerk.

From another post what happened on April 2, 2005. And could you briefly define the Holy Spirit's role from the Catholic perspective and including where He is.

Originally posted by FlyersFan


In CATHOLIC terms - ST. Louis de Montfort was a contemplative.
That is someone who is not 'in the world' like you and I are. They
live separate. Usually in a cloister or a hermitage. They don't
have to earn a living, have a family, have earthly distractions.


I said contemplation was a gift, I ment the by going by the
Catholic term... the gift that comes from heaven

We all have to live "in the world" but we don't have to be "of the world" and have it's mindset.

I can see what you are trying to say about the distraction part, but I certainly believe this man faced distractions. The mind can wander very easily. I'm sure he got sick sometimes and faced problems like everyone.

I also see a benefit of these distractions. As we are distracted and our mind not focused on God, The Holy Spirit will make us sensitive to that fact, and we learn to overcome distractions.

Example I work at walmart and have contact with alot of coworkers and alot of customers. Not everybody is in a good mood all the time and some people are down right rude and rude to the sense that it's part of their personality. If you do something that is irritating to someone(not that it was on purpose or necessarily is an irritating thing but rubs them the wrong way) they might get a quick little jab into you. The natural response is to get a quick little word jab into them instead of turning the other cheek and letting it slide. Or because of this jab treat them different. This would certainly be a distraction that if you returned it, it would not be making you into the likeness of Christ. But, because you experienced this and if you listen to the prompting of the Holy Spirit, you learn to overcome the temptation to return the jab and instead replace it with understanding, and compassion and love and learn to not let what others say create an unforgivng spirit or the need to get even so you can feel good.

I see quiet and alone time with God, to focus on God, beneficial and we all can make that time, but I certainly don't know how long Mr. de Montfort did it(hours a day, and years in length) but if he wasn't in the world to apply what he learned and the processing of trying to perfect it, it could certainly hinder growth.

It's like learning to drive a car. You can get the drivers rule manual and sit behind the wheel on an unrunning car, but until you get out in traffic your missing something.

[edit on 18-5-2005 by dbrandt]

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Now, back to the subject - MEDJUGORJE

"DATELINE" NBC May 18 "Miracles" program at 7pm CST with Ivan - the visionary was interviewed by Stone Phillips in Medjugorje for this special - and inquiry into April 2, 2005 and Pope John Paul II

I watched it. I had no idea that she appeared in Rwanda also. I new of the tragedies that went on there but I did not know she appeared there too. I nearly cried when I saw that mans body go down the waterfall and a bomb explode in Bosnia.

Please listen to Mary. Please just fallow the love she preaches.

Originally posted by Croat56
I had no idea that she appeared in Rwanda also.

Allegedly appeared. This doesn't have church approval and
i doubt it ever will. The 'seers' have been lost in the wars
there. There is no way to ever investigate. This 'appearance'
will be in limbo. No closure will happen.

Originally posted by dbrandt
I also see a benefit of these distractions....
but until you get out in traffic your missing something.

We all have distractions and overcoming them
are helpful. Contemplatives have their own
distractions and short comings to work out
while in the cloister or hermitage. I will not
argue with you the merits of the lifestyle of
contemplatives. The reason I posted the
information was to show that there is a
difference in the DEFINITION. Non-Catholics
are usually not aware that we can all be
contemplative (verb) but that there are
some called to be contempatives (noun).
Medjugorje is basically a Catholic subject
and therefore I am making the non-Catholic
readers aware that there are Catholic terms
to be aware of.

Another Catholic term - religious.

In the world - a person can be religious
(adjective). The Catholic term 'religious'
also applies to men and women who have
taken religious vows - Cloistered nuns and
priests who belong to religious orders.
NOT nuns who teach and work in hospitals
and not priests who run a parish. Religious
(Noun) are those who are separate from the
world and are sometimes also contemplatives.

Terminology .... definitions ...

Originally posted by dbrandt
could you briefly define the Holy Spirit's role from
the Catholic perspective and including where He is.

Ya' know .. this is really starting to get off topic from
Croat's Medjugorje discussion. Do you want to start
another thread about the Holy Spirit? That would be
good I think. Make it a Holy Spirit thread and inviting
for all to participate instead of us sort of tagging it
onto a Medjugorje thread. What do you think??

Originally posted by Raphael_UO
One does not need sit in a closet 24/7 to contemplate God.

You can contemplate God. I can contemplate God. (verbs)
However, God does call some to be 'contemplatives' (noun).
He calls them to the cloistered or hermitaged life. He did it
in the bible (check out Elijah and those others) ... He did it then
and He does it now.

I would deny that all of the "true seers" have questioned a lot.

True. Mary didn't ask much of the Angel Gabriel did she? She didn't
check him out .. do a back ground check ... ask for references at all.
She also didn't seem very surprised to see him which makes me think
she probably saw angels quite often. It was just the greeting that
surprised her, not the actual visit. hmmmmm

Is this a teaching that says if you don't trust in God, trust in someone who is not God?

Raphael, I understand your caution, but I think you are drowning in
a glass of water. Sometimes people are timid about approaching
God. Mary, His handmaid and the mother of Jesus, says that she
will hold your hand while you approach Him and then when you get
there, she lets you walk on your own. You don't require this help.
Great. Others do. And you answered this question when you made
the following statement -

Surely it is wholesome for one to trust in another member of Christ's body who can teach one to trust in and love God.

Raphael. You are cautious. I appreciate that. I myself don't believe
much of what people say to me. I'm getting old and I have seen too
many lies in the media and what not. You don't require help in
going to God. Wonderful. I am VERY happy for you. Really. But
the fact is that some DO require it. That's why Jesus sent out his
Apostles .. to bring people to God. That's why Mary helps her Son.
To bring people to God. If you don't buy it .. fine. But she really
does lead people to Jesus and to do that you have to take her
hand and allow her to do so. Conversions to God are AMAZING
when she really appears.

When Mary appeared in Guadalupe Mexico, it was a MAJOR place
for human sacrifice to false gods. 8 million Mexicans converted
and now know the One True God and worship Him. 8 million -
because God sent Mary with the message of Christ.

On contemplatives:
I said, "One does not need sit in a closet 24/7 to contemplate God. God's love can be observed in the world though it is not of the world. The time, the place, and the religion also do not regulate one's ability."

You attacked the use of verbs versus nouns.

So, I will simply respond by saying, "One does not need sit in a closet 24/7 to be a contemplative. God's love can be observed in the world though it is not of the world. The time, the place, and the religion also do not regulate one's ability."

The limit you set for the word is a result of custom, not a result of its definition.

On conversions:
I addressed that issue before when I said "And, still being ever cautious, I would argue that some spirits that are not of God are extremely patient. If they could corrupt but one soul, even while others are brought to faith, they would have accomplished their goal. If the corruption was then seen as holy, it would only work in their favor the next time, as they would be more likely to be accepted. "

Originally posted by FlyersFan
"Is this a teaching that says if you don't trust in God, trust in someone who is not God? "
Raphael, I understand your caution, but I think you are drowning in
a glass of water. Sometimes people are timid about approaching
God. Mary, His handmaid and the mother of Jesus, says that she
will hold your hand while you approach Him and then when you get
there, she lets you walk on your own. You don't require this help.
Great. Others do. And you answered this question when you made
the following statement -
"Surely it is wholesome for one to trust in another member of Christ's body who can teach one to trust in and love God. "

I agreed to the premise to an extent. The extent to which I did not agree was not addressed in your replies.

My first and primary concern with this and possibly other visitations, is the "complete surrender" to Mary.

Point one: (hyperdulia does not cross certain lines)

(Emphasis added)
(66) ... The various forms of piety toward the Mother of God, which the Church within the limits of sound and orthodox doctrine, according to the conditions of time and place, and the nature and ingenuity of the faithful has approved, bring it about that while the Mother is honored, the Son, through whom all things have their being (302) and in whom it has pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell,(303) is rightly known, loved and glorified and that all His commands are observed.

From: The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium 21 Nov 64


Point two: (The Good Book is good.)

Mat 22:36-40
Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?

Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.


Point three: (complete surrender to Mary)

But the surrender to Mary bears with it everything: each thought, the movements of the soul, the hidden riches, the inmost self. All—on to the final breath—is committed to her that she may expend it all for God.

Taken from Jesus Living in Mary: Handbook of the Spirituality of St. Louis de Montfort.


My question(s):

How is a call for complete surrender to any but God wholesome?

How can any man serve two masters? If one surrenders to Mary in such a complete manner, how does one surrender to God "with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength"? Surely all minus anything equals less than all.




[edit on 19-5-2005 by Raphael_UO]

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Allegedly appeared. This doesn't have church approval and
i doubt it ever will. The 'seers' have been lost in the wars
there. There is no way to ever investigate. This 'appearance'
will be in limbo. No closure will happen.

Oh right right, but then that whole waterfall of bodies thing you know. Your probably right though. I just had no idea there was an alledged one there.