Kairos magazine (story on medj)....tsk tsk

KevinSymonds · Post by **KevinSymonds** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:25 pm

I just want to be clear that it was Bishop Ratko Peric, not Bertone, who said:

"Regarding 'pilgrimages to Medjugorje of a private nature', the Congregation maintains that they are allowed 'under the condition that they are not considered an authentication of events still going on, which demand further investigations by the Church'. Hence, nothing new here. Official or church pilgrimages are not allowed, nor are 'private' visits allowed that have the intent of proving that the so-called 'apparitions' and alleged 'messages' are authentic! Therefore the official position of the local Bishop is the same official position of the Bishops' Conference of 1991.

And both priests and the faithful as Catholics should adhere to this position!"

He wrote this on July 21st, 1998.

-KJS

KevinSymonds · Post by **KevinSymonds** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:56 pm

On the question of whether or not Fr. Dowling went to authenticate the events of Medjugorje, I will only ask one thing.

Why would Fr. Dowling go to a severely out of the way hamlet in the middle of a war-torn country?

MarieT · Post by **MarieT** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:24 pm

Sean O L wrote:

I for one am not privvy to Fr. Dowling's thoughts and intentions prior to his "pilgrimage" -

Sean O L

hiya again sean,
yes you are privy to his thoughts....fr dowling wrote an article on his thoughts and why he went to medj...that was in the first post lol

we only have MarieT's accounts to go by.

no you have the article to go by..written by fr dowling himself lol

Sean O L wrote:Nevertheless, it also appears from her account that they did not involve any Parish or Diocesan organization for his pilgrimage - which, I believe, is a key point to bear in mind.

nope it was fr dowling's account of why he went there (he clearly states in HIS lol..."HIS" being the operative word...ie not MarieT's lol why he went....i didnt write the article ..honest lol

)

By the way, Kevin, I (and, I guess many others) wouls be interested in any developments regarding "Anne, the Lay Apostle:.

this is yet another topic drift....please commence a new section on Anne the Lay Apostle out of the Kairos section.

blessings
marie

MarieT · Post by **MarieT** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:20 pm

Sean O L wrote:
No evidence has been produced regarding Fr. Dowling - simply allegations and predjudice concerning "Kairos" - a prudjudice, I add, that I share. If MarieT does have evidence - then, it ought to be shared.

Sean the evidence has been posted over and over again. Can you not see it? lol...check again if you cant

prejudice is a hard word and not one i would use. Just because I dont agree with Kairos' advertising of medj or priests writing about how wonderful medj is after the local ordinaries negative findings on, that to me is being faithful to the church findings.

As for the other comments, i stand by my "semperfi catholic forum' is a much more interesting place to spend my time reading on Catholic Issues and news rather than kairos magazine. Anyone will agree with this...you yourself have agreed you're not a fan of kairos.

Fr. Dowling has written the article himself. By his own words (not MarieT's lol) he has said that he and his sister joined a group in London to go to Medj...this was not a private visit. He did not go alone or just with his sister.

i've answered this already several times lol

i just posted the relevant sentence, the words were not tampered in any way...you will note no '....." in the middle of any words.

Sean O L wrote:In the meantime, I would say that "people, these days, can say almost anything" - and expect it to be believed.

the evidence was posted lol and claims of 'tampering' have been refuted.

Sean O L wrote:
An example: Ought I be believed or challenged if I were to say that the following is a quote from Scripture?:

"It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the death of your wife."

Well, anyone who knows would say that the statement is fraudulent! But, in fact - while it IS fraudulent - all of the words ARE extracts from scripture. If the statement were written:

"It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for...the death..of your wife."

then, yes, all of the words and phrases can be truly claimed to be from Scripture. The only thing is that they are extracts from widely differing sources in Scripture, and constitute a fraud!

Moderator's warning: This is a gross and disrespectful tampering of Holy Scripture.

moving along:

So it was with MarieT's "quote" which I originally challenged: She left out an elipses [...] which indicates the fact that some words have been omitted. So, what she claimed to be a "quote" was false. Furthermore, she never gave attribution to the origin of the "quote".

your example of you seriously tampering with scripture in your post is a gross disrespect to Holy Scripture and cannot in any way be compared to when i used the exact (and relevant) statement of what constitutes the definition of an illegal pilgrimage..ie 'any group,"

You have taken bits from other sections to change the meaning...i didnt.

ie i did not tamper with the article. That is your opinion and you're entitled to it, but to go on about it ad nauseum when the evidence is produced (and several times reproduced) refuting your allegations, is confusing.

stating again : i do not like to let readers sift thru several paragraphs when all i wanted was the main definition...

By your comments you are suggesting i should put the whole article in its entirety or several paragraphs of the article and leave the poor reader a message stating "its in there somewhere...find the definition yourselves" rofl instead of just pasting the relevant sentence.

Sean O L
NB: For the accurate source of the quote - see my file at http://jloughnan.tripod.com/meddates.htm - where one will find both the elepses and the prime source for verification.

yadda yadda yadda....too long to sift thru when all one needs is one sentence giving the definition. lol

i've answered this already several times lol

lets do it again anyway lol.....

i just posted the relevant sentence, the words were not tampered in any way...you will note no '....." in the middle of any words.

classic hehehe
marie

KevinSymonds · Post by **KevinSymonds** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:49 pm

What happened to Sean's posts?

-KJS

Post by **Denise** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:55 pm

Keven they are all here. Look at the previous pages and the one on the top there. I didn't delete anything.
Denise

KevinSymonds · Post by **KevinSymonds** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:23 am

Ok, I'm losing my mind.......

-KJS

Post by **Denise** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:39 am

Don't lose to much of your mind,

The standard practice here is that if we have to delete a post or a link we mention that we did and why. If someone posts something, such as a link that is not acceptable and no one has viewed the page yet, we PM the author of the post and tell them we are deleting it from their post and why.

Denise

KevinSymonds · Post by **KevinSymonds** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:21 pm

Take a gander over at spiritdaily today and click on the link "In Defense of Medjugorje."

Just watch

-KJS

Johnna · Post by **Johnna** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:21 pm

Kevin, that stuff there is all in support of this false apparition. Exactly what are we supposed to be looking for?

Post by **Denise** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:52 am

The link Brown provides appears to go to that Marian Times pro Medj. site, which is front page news in update form at Catholic Culture once again. Of course they still have the big red mark.

DESCRIPTION
This site exists to promote the unapproved apparitions at Medjugorje. These apparitions have been disapproved of by two successive bishops who are the competent authority. Unless and until an official statement is made in favor of the supernatural origin of the apparitions, it is best to concentrate on apparitions which have been approved, such as those at Fatima.

On the official website of the Bishop of Mostar, under Medjugorje, Bishop Peric says,

So many invalid sacraments, so much disobedience, violence, sacrilege, disorder, irregularities, and not a single "message" from tens of thousands of "apparitions" has been directed towards eliminating these scandals. A very strange thing indeed!

The Church, from the local to supreme level, from the beginning to this very day, has clearly and constantly repeated: Non constat de supernaturalitate! No to pilgrimages that would ascribe a supernatural nature to the apparitions, no shrine of the Madonna, no authentic messages nor revelations, no true visions! That takes care of that!

MarieT · Post by **MarieT** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:26 am

personally, i dont frequent spiritdaily since denise brought to light the questionable articles they post.

with regards to medj, i agree with denise...stick to the official bishop's website.

blessings
marie

KevinSymonds · Post by **KevinSymonds** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:34 pm

I didn't mean for people to take it seriously. I only meant to call attention to yet another bungle of Michael Brown.

-KJS

Johnna · Post by **Johnna** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:11 pm

LOL Kevin! Tone of voice is everything, and it was completely lost to me in that post.

I understand now.