Denis Nolan, Letter to the Editor

An unholy madness has seized certain sections of the Catholic media when it comes to all things Medjugorje.  Any stick is good enough to beat the reported apparition.  Its visionaries are too this-worldly and too mystical.  Its messages are too banal and too “different.”  Its followers are too “common” and too elitist.  As the critics see it, arguments are not worth wasting on the apparition.  Ridicule, sarcasm and relentless flippancy are all that it deserves.  A perfect example of this august genre is the recent hit piece on Medjugorje from John Gerardi, the editor-in-chief-emeritus of the Rover. [Editor’s note: Gerardi’s piece can be found online at the Rover’s website under Volume 10 Issue 7.] Like others of its kind, the article demands less a reasoned response than an exorcism.
But since I am not an exorcist, I will confine myself to the deliverances of reason.   I should start by noting that the article seems unfamiliar with any of the central sets of evidence in favor of Medjugorje.  Let’s consider just five:

  • The entirely extraordinary phenomenon of six individuals transfixed by someone “other” at a specific time every day over a period of decades (today only two continue to receive the daily apparitions)—remember they were tested by skeptical scientists with noises, lights, brain scans and the like during the ecstasies.
  • The staggering volume of pilgrimages to Medjugorje and the multitude of conversions and healings.  Pilgrims included thousands of priests, nuns, bishops and cardinals—a traditional sign of the authenticity of a supernatural event.
  • The testimony of three great spiritually sensitive leaders to the authenticity of Medjugorje—Pope John Paul II, Mother Teresa and Fr. Gabriel Amorth.  Fr. Amorth is the world’s most active exorcist with 30,000 exorcisms to his credit.  To those who say that Medjugorje is a deception of the devil, Fr. Amorth, who knows more about the devil than most, says that Medjugorje is a fortress against Satan.
  • The unique standing of Medjugorje in the history of apparitions, given that the Vatican has directly taken over its investigation.  Critics had predicted for years that the Vatican was on the verge of condemning it only to be confounded when Rome appointed its own distinguished panel to investigate it:  a sign of its universal magnitude.   At the same time, the Church permitted (and permits) private pilgrimages to Medjugorje.
  • The Pharisee-Sadducee axis:  Jesus was attacked by the ultra-orthodox Pharisees and the ultra-liberal Sadducees but embraced by the common people.  Medjugorje is attacked by the ultra-conservatives and the ultra-liberals with the arguments used by each group canceling out the arguments used by the other.  Only the common people (who are disdained by both ultra-conservatives and ultra-liberals much as the Pharisees and the Sadducees dismissed the masses) embrace Medjugorje because they see with open minds and open hearts without being blinkered and blinded by pre-set conditions and biases.

As noted, Mr. Gerardi addresses none of this.  In his blog, he does repeat an apocryphal tale from veteran Medjugorje critic E. Michael Jones about one of the visionaries being startled during an apparition by someone present, an allegation cooked up by Jean Louis Martin, a notorious critic of Medjugorje, without any substantiation.  Mr. Gerardi also says that since John Paul II was wrong about Fr. Maciel of the Legion of Christ, his positive judgment on Medjugorje is meaningless, even though Medjugorje is a matter of supernatural discernment as opposed to an appraisal of the sincerity of another human being (Jones had similarly dismissed John Paul’s opinions on the matter). Jones, whose arguments are wittingly or unwittingly used by Mr. Gerardi in his piece, recently made the comment that “the Jews rejected Christ, and in rejecting Christ they rejected Logos, and in rejecting Logos—the Reason for the universe and its redemption—they became, not only as St. Paul puts it, ‘enemies of the entire human race,’ but foes of the moral and political order of the universe. As a result, the Jews engage in continual anarchy against reason and truth” (http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=476).  If Mr. Gerardi agrees that Jones has gone beyond the pale here, can he still support Jones’s judgment on Medjugorje?

So what is the nub of Mr. Gerardi’s argument?

“Most importantly, there’s no way that Mary has said some of the things these people claim she has said. Apparently, Mary has encouraged disobedience to the local diocesan bishop some 13 times. Given that the most famous things Mary ever said were 1. silence, and 2. “Let it be done to me according to Thy will,” I’m guessing that disobedience to lawful authority isn’t generally her cup of tea. Also something Mary probably wouldn’t do: threaten a local bishop. Apparently she threatened that she and her Son would punish the local bishop if he didn’t approve the apparition. The Medjugorje seers seemed to wise up after these “declarations” received bad press; they then began publishing messages from Our Lady that tread much safer ground: e.g., that Mass, the Rosary, the Eucharist, and Confession are Good Things. Wow, thanks Mr. Obvious!”

Mr. Gerardi is a third year law student but the tone and content here are unlikely to hold water in a court of law.  “Apparently” the Blessed Mother has encouraged disobedience.  But we are not given any actual instance of what is the “most important” part of his argument.  The visionaries have been exemplary in their obedience to the Bishop despite being maliciously attacked and slandered by their Shepherd.  And they have never said that the Bishop would be punished for not approving the apparition. Yes, Vicka expressed sympathy for the Franciscans in the early days of the apparition.  If Sister Lucia could ask the Popes to take certain actions since almost the start of Fatima, is it unbecoming of Vicka to express her opinion about a relatively small matter to her Bishop? (And Vicka turned out to be right.  More than 10 years later, on March 27, 1993, in case No. 17907/86CA, the highest tribunal of the Holy See—the Apostolic Signatura Tribunal—declared the bishop’s actions against the Franciscans to be unjust and illegal.)

Mr. Gerardi also makes much of the fact that none of the Bishops of Mostar have nice things to say about Medjugorje.  He seems not to know that this is entirely irrelevant and actually cuts the other way.  In an unprecedented action, the Vatican removed Medjugorje from the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Mostar, an action that indicated what the Vatican thought of the opinion of the Bishop of Mostar.  And surely Mr. Gerardi is aware that the Bishop of Mostar was initially in favor of Medjugorje and abandoned this favorable position under pressure from the Communist authorities (although this was known for years, the supporting documentation is now available).

Mr. Gerardi’s other salvoes are too cringe-worthy to repeat.  He should study a history of Marian apparitions if he wants to try to understand what is going on at Medjugorje.  For instance, not every visionary became a priest or a nun.  St. Bernadette and Sr. Lucia are two who did but there are plenty who did not.  Marriage happens to be a sacrament and the family is the foundation of society.

As a penance for his piece, may I humbly suggest that Mr. Gerardi prayerfully reflect on Marija’s testimony which can be found at www.marytv.tv.

Denis Nolan is a graduate of Notre Dame and the author of several books on Medjugorje.including Medjugorje and the Church (Queenship Publishing) which carries a Nihil Obstat and contains testimonies from Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta and hundreds of bishops and cardinals, including eight letters written by Blessed Pope John Paul II.  Denis is the founder of MaryTV, an internet television ministry (www.marytv.tv) dedicated to spreading the messages of Our Lady of Medjugorje.