1978 CDF Document On Apparitions

In 1978 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued an instruction containing norms for the evaluation of reported apparitions.

This document has generally not been circulated publicly, but it seems that someone in France got a copy of it, and I found an unofficial English translation online.

Reading the document, it struck me as having the ring of authenticity. This is written the way that the CDF would have done such a document, and I assume that it’s genuine.

I’ve placed the translation in the below-the-fold section of this post and may be able to interact with it some in future posts. For now, I’d like to see what kinds of questions it raises in folks’ minds.

Continue reading “1978 CDF Document On Apparitions”

That’s About The Size Of It

I normally don’t read Jeff Rense’s site because . . . well, because he’s a nut. I used to find his show interesting because of all the crazy people he would talk to (like on Art Bell’s show, only crazier), but after 9/11 he went off of a deep end that soured me on the whole thing.

I was therefore quite surprised when I was reading Jerry Pournelle’s blog Chaos Manor and saw him make this recommendation:

Go see
http://www.rense.com/general72/size.htm
. You’ll be glad you did.

I clicked the link and discovered Jerry was right.

Cool presentation!

BTW, be sure to check out Chaos Manor. Jerry Pournelle’s been blogging since before there were blogs and has a bunch of interesting stuff to say.

Medjugorje

I normally don’t write much about apparitions–particularly ones that have not been either approved by the Church or specifically condemned as incompatible with the faith, but there is currently going around the blogosphere a statement by Bishop Peric of Mostar-Duvno regarding the apparitions reported at Medjugorje, which is in his diocese.

I’m not going to address the question of whether the apparitions reported at Medjugorje are real or not. I haven’t yet done the kind of research I would need to in order to satisfy myself on that question. But it’s worth noting the way that the topic is presently being handled on the official level.

DIANE OVER AT TE DEUM HAS THE FULL TEXT OF A HOMILY THE BISHOP GAVE ON THE SUBJECT, ALONG WITH HER OWN COMMENTARY.
(CHT to those who e-mailed.)

YOU CAN ALSO READ IT DIRECTLY ON THE DIOCESE OF MOSTAR WEBSITE.

Poking around the Mostar website, I also discovered

THIS BACKGROUNDER AND STATEMENT ON MEDJUGORJE BY THE BISHOP.

NOTE: Both the homily and the backgrounder are translations and so it should not be assumed that everything they say has the same force in the original language as it does in English. Things in the original may be stronger or weaker than they come across in translation.

Here is the nut of what the bishop said in the homily:

The judgements of the bishops, after all the canonical investigations made thus far, can be summarized in these following points:

1 – Medjugorje is a catholic parish in which liturgical and pastoral activities are carried out, just as in all the other parishes of this diocese of Mostar-Duvno. No-one except the official Church authorities is then authorized to attribute the formal title of “shrine” to this place.

2 – On the basis of Church investigations of the events of Medjugorje, it cannot be determined that these events involve supernatural apparitions or revelations. This means that till now the Church has not accepted, neither as supernatural nor as Marian, any of the apparitions. 

3 – Priests who canonically administer this parish of Medjugorje or those who come as visitors, are not authorised to express their private views contrary to the official position of the Church on the so-called “apparitions” and “messages”, during celebrations of the sacraments, neither during other common acts of piety, nor in the Catholic media.

4 – The Catholic faithful are not only free from any obligation to believe in the authenticity of the “apparitions” but they must also know that church pilgrimages are not allowed, whether official or private, individual or group, or from other parishes, if they presuppose the authenticity of the “apparitions” or if by undertaking them attempt to certify these “apparitions”. 

5 – As the local Bishop, I maintain that regarding the events of Medjugorje, on the basis of the investigations and experience gained thus far, throughout these last 25 years, the Church has not confirmed a single “apparition” as authentically being the Madonna.

He then makes the following dramatic appeal:

Therefore I responsibly call upon those who claim themselves to be “seers”, as well as those persons behind the “messages”, to demonstrate ecclesiastical obedience and to cease with these public manifestations and messages in this parish. In this fashion they shall show their necessary adherence to the Church, by neither placing private “apparitions” nor private sayings before the official position of the Church.

I can’t help wondering if that’s also tied to something else he said:

The fact that during these 25 years there has been talk of tens of thousands of “apparitions” does not contribute any authenticity to these events, which according to the words of our current Pope, who I encountered during an audience on 24 February this year, commented that at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith they always questioned how all these “apparitions” could be considered authentic for the Catholic faithful.

This sets off my spider sense a little bit. I’m thinking that there may be a connection between these two events.

In his pontificate, B16 has been quietly (or not so quietly) dealing with issues that appeared to drift during the pontificate of John Paul II. He reined in the Franciscans in Assisi; he reined in the Neocatechumenal Way; he dealt with the Fr. Maciel matter. I’m wondering if the discussion he had with Bishop Peric included an initiative to clarify where the Church is regarding the subject of Medjugorje.

If it didn’t then I’d say that Bishop Peric made a big mistake repeating what B16 told him in private. This is a sensitive matter, and if the pope hasn’t authorized you to disclose his private views on a matter then it is a big mistake to do so.

He also would be making a mistake to call on the seers to cease their public activities in the parish unless he had reasonable assurances that he would be backed up on this point if he were challenged on it.

I don’t have any proof here–I’m just speculating–but I’m wondering if his discussion with B16 didn’t involve the subject of a new iniative to more forcefully clarify the Medjugorje situation and seek greater pastoral control over it since, as the bishop reports:

[I]n this local Church of Mostar-Duvno, there exists something similar to a schism. A number of priests that have been expelled from the Franciscan OFM Order by the Generalate of the Order, due to their disobedience to the Holy Father, for years now have been forcefully keeping a few parish churches and rectories along with church inventory. They have not only been illegally active in these parishes, but they have also administered the sacraments profanely, while others invalidly, such as Confession and Confirmation, or they have assisted at invalid marriages. This type of anti-ecclesial behaviour is shocking to all of us. At the same time, this scandal of sacrilegiously administering the sacraments, especially of the Most Holy Body of Christ, must shock all the faithful as well who invalidly confess their sins to these priests and participate in sacrilegious liturgies. We pray to the Lord that this scandal and schism be uprooted as soon as possible from our midst. 

If I were B16, that’s the kind of situation I would want to get sorted out.

The Sailing Monks

Landingship

What do you do with a World War II Nazi landing ship? Uh, well, you could convert it to other shipping purposes…. You could create a WWII museum…. You could turn it into scrap metal….

Too tame.  Let’s think outside the box (or the ship, as the case may be).

How about turning it into a floating monastery?  Sort of.

"Croatia’s defense ministry has donated a World War II Nazi ship to a local Roman Catholic monastery, which will turn it into a sailing church, the Jutarnji List daily newspaper reported Tuesday.

"The landing ship DTM-219 was used by Nazi Germany to transport tanks and infantry. It was given to communist Yugoslavia after 1945 as part of war compensation, [the newspaper] said.

[…]

"It will be used as sailing church for the young, who will be able to sail the Adriatic, pray and meditate as part of church-sponsored religious cruises, the daily said."

GET THE STORY.

Of course, I must warn the monks that, in Catholic Answers’ experience, not everyone will be keen on the idea of religious cruises.

How To Avoid Running Dry

A reader writes:

Given all you cover here (blog) and Catholic Answers, what works best to keep you keep from running dry?

Hm. I haven’t really thought of it in those terms. I assume that the reader is asking this to try to figure out what works for me so that he can apply similar techniques himself, so I’ll try to answer from that angle.

Usually the problem is not running out of things to say. I’m constantly on the lookout for new material on my own, and many folks write in with questions or send links. The problem is more like not having the time needed to say all of the things I could. I have to force myself not to blog more than I do because I need to spend time on other things (like having a life).

That said, there are some things that help keep me going. One is the feedback I get in the combox and via e-mail. That tells me that I’m making a connection with the readers and that they’re interested (whether they agree or not) with what I have to say. If nobody was interested in what I was saying, I’d get disappointed and quit.

The links that I get from other blogs and seeing my blog doing well in the rankings also show interest in the work I’m doing, and that’s positive reinforcement as well.

Beyond that, it’s just trying to maintain a healthy curiosity about all kinds of things and keeping an eye out for good material

If I had to summarize, I’d suggest these points:

1) Pace yourself. Figure out how much time one could afford to spend and then don’t exceed it.

2) Look for what kind of positive reinforcement you can get and take satisfaction in it.

3) Stay curious about things. Always try to be learning something new.

4) Keep on the lookout for good material. Always be pre-planning what you’re going to do next.

Hope these help!

Revamping JimmyAkin.Com

Since JimmyAkin.Org is my most active site these days, not much attention has been paid to JimmyAkin.Com of late. For time reasons and for technical reasons that I won’t go into, I haven’t been able to update it for some time. (Think: Years.)

I’ve left the files up there, warts and all, figuring that they’d do more good than harm, but I’m frankly embarrassed by the state of the site and would very much like to get the files moved to a location where I can more easily manage and update them.

But I need help.

I may need a little css help, but what I mainly need is assistance in getting the files transferred from the current JimmyAkin.Com site to the new site.

This will not involve doing real html coding. It will mostly just be copying and pasting text from the current files into a web form.

So I’m asking for volunteers!

If you’d be interested in helping out with the project, please e-mail me or let me know your interest and e-mail address in the combox.

I’m not asking for long-term commitments, just what time people feel they can affort to volunteer. I also don’t think it’ll take that long to get the site converted to the new location once we start.

Hopefully, a number of folks will be interested in helping out and we’ll be able to debut the new, revised, and updatable JimmyAkin.Com very soon!

Thanks much, folks!

Bryce Zabel Comments

Bryce_zabelLast week I did a post on the proposal to reboot the Star Trek universe that Bryce Zabel and Joe Straczynski wrote and sent to Paramount.

The post generated a number of comments in the combox, as well as a comment via e-mail from Bryce Zabel himself (who gave permission to use his name). He writes:

Thanks for the mention in your blog… you must have a very popular one because I got a lot of referrals.  I also agree with the comments that a reboot, for those who freak out at the exact word, could simply be to tell the Star Trek story in an existing alt.universe. Anyway, all best to you, Jimmy…

I think that Bryce’s point (and that of other commenters) is a good one about presenting a rebooted Star Trek universe as an alternate timeline.

If a reboot ever goes forward, it might even be possible to deflect some concern by fans by showing the point of divergence for the two timelines or having them interact with each other in some way (via an interdimensional gateway or a timeline jumping means like in that great episode where Worf was jumping timelines accidentally). This would show the fans that all of their favorite, beloved stories were still "real" and still "existed out there"–just not in the timeline or universe that was in focus in the reboot.

As I mentioned in last week’s post, Mr. Zabel runs his own blog, and he frequently discusses matters of the television and movie industry, including science fiction and related genres, so be sure to

CHECK OUT HIS BLOG.

If you’d like to know more about the man himself,

HERE’S HIS IMDB PAGE

HIS BIO ON IMDB IS ALSO QUITE INFORMATIVE

AND HERE’S INFO ON HIS SERIES DARK SKIES.

Thanks for stopping by, Bryce! Hope to see you around the cyberspace!

Political Ad From The Twilight Zone?

Vernon_robinson

The Republican candidate for congress in Winston-Salem, North Carolina is a gentleman named Vernon Robinson.

Whatever else one might say about the man (and I know basically nothing else about him), he’s got moxie. . . . or gumption . . . or chutzpah . . . or audacity . . . or whatever you want to call it.

Why do I say that?

Because he’s released one of the most provocative political ads in recent memory. (CHT to the reader who e-mailed.) It’s gotten noticed, gotten people stirred up, gotten talked about, and it’s going to get talked about more.

WATCH THE AD. (WARNING: Content may be disturbing/offensive.)

Whether Robinson wins this year with this kind of message will be interesting to see.

MORE ON VERNON ROBINSON.

Adam, Eve, Dinosaurs, And Cavemen

A reader writes:

I have a daughter who will be in middle school next year. She asked me a question yesterday that I didn’t have an answer for.

Basically, she wanted to know this:

Assuming that the Bible story of Adam & Eve is true, then where do dinosaurs and cavemen fit in?  What is the explanation for them?

There are basically two possibilities here, depending on whether the six days of creation are understood literally or figuratively.

If they are understood literally then the dinosaurs (I assume that you mean the land-living dinosaurs, not the aquatic or avian ones, who would have been created on the Fifth Day) would have been created on the Sixth Day, the same as mankind. They then died out at some point, the most commonly cited reason being the Great Flood.

(And who could blame Noah if he didn’t want to try to get Tyrannosaurs and Brontosaurs onto the Ark?)

Cavemen  (or at least those cavemen who were truly humans), by contrast, would presumably be descendants of Adam and Eve who took to living in caves since they didn’t have the Garden of Eden to live in anymore.

Other, not-quite-human cavemen who later died out presumably were created on the Sixth Day, along with the land animals and mankind.

If one takes the Six Days figuratively–so that they tell us what God did without telling us precisely when God did it–then presumably the common evolutionary account is what happened: God created live and allowed and guided its development over millions of years until eventually the dinosaurs arose. Then they all died (except for those that fought in the Civil War–that’s a joke!) and new life forms developed, leading eventually to the primates, which included not only monkeys and apes but also some species that were quite simliar to humans physically.

Then God took one of these (perhaps at the time of conception, and perhaps with a few new genetic changes) and endowed it with a rational soul to produce the first human.

Some of the almost-humans who didn’t have rational souls may have been some of the cavemen, but also–after the Fall–some true humans also undoubtedly inhabited caves and thus were cavemen, too, before they started building cities to live in.

Hope this helps!