The Church’s Official and Unofficial Position: Part II

The Church’s Official and Unofficial Position (Part 2)

Despite all the negative factors, in the end attendance at Medjugorje remained at a level similar to the number of pilgrims to Fatima. 

During this same period, the Holy See also received the negative information that came from Bishop Zanic, with accusations against the morals of the first two parish priests of Medjugorje, two priests who exercised great spiritual influence. 

One of them had been accused of a fault committed in the past, which was denied by the mother of the child whose paternity had been attributed to him. The other was accused of serious ambiguity in his relations with women. 

The first of the two accused was Tomislav Vlasic, who on principle did not defend himself, reserving his defense for God alone. The second, Friar Jozo Zovko, maintained that it was a calumny. Following these cases and producing documentation, the renowned Mariologist René Laurentin addressed both of them, outlining some coherent and positive hypotheses about these two figures of eminent spiritual worth, who had been the victims of certain traps, acts of imprudence, and calumnies. 

Today the country of Yugoslavia and its Episcopal Conference no longer exist; the document of the Yugoslav bishops is merely a testimony to their difficult agreement, but it is nevertheless the only official document to which the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith refers in answering the questions raised by bishops: an ambiguous answer given to Archbishop Taverdet and to other bishops. 

The good fruits of the pilgrimage to Medjugorje drew a large number of bishops to Herzegovina, often under the influence of their own diocesan faithful. Some came on private visits, others in a more official capacity. Many celebrated Mass there and exercised their ministry for their own faithful or for assemblies of pilgrims. Others, for their part, visited Bishop Zanic and Bishop Peric to share their positive conviction about the apparitions. 

Numerous testimonies about Medjugorje have been published and widely spread through today’s ever faster channels of communication. This brings the count to more than a hundred bishops. All of this therefore constitutes a great collegial testimony that their spiritual concerns led them to that place. If many went there despite the strong pressure of post-conciliar collegial solidarity, it should also be stressed that many of them had consulted Pope John Paul II for some time. 

As far as is known, it was Saint John Paul II who encouraged a large number of bishops to go there. Some went incognito, and the diplomatic delegation (ambassador bishops) that accompanied the Pope on his visit to Sarajevo in 1997 left him alone for twenty-four hours in order to make this famous pilgrimage. It seems clear to us that these people did not do so without first discreetly consulting the Holy Father on the matter. 

So what was the Pope’s position? 

Saint John Paul II obviously took no official position. He held to a very solid principle, inherited from the Polish bishops: that the authority of the Pope or of the bishops, which is of divine right, must preserve all its freedom while at the same time respecting the mechanisms of administration. Despite this, the Pope discreetly received numerous seers, who found easy access to him. Among them were the seers of Medjugorje, in particular Vicka, Mirjana, and Marija. He acknowledged the good fruits of Medjugorje very openly. More than once he spoke, with a smile on his lips, of the bishop’s opposition, which he still respected. 

Church authority maintains a reserved but open position, respectful of the Christian freedom of private pilgrimage, yet concerned that pilgrims be accompanied by priests or bishops, even if privately and unofficially.

Archbishop Zanic asked him:

“When will you come to Sarajevo?”

John Paul II answered with a smile:

“Oh! I thought he was going to ask me: When will you come to Medjugorje?” 

As a result of this dialogue, which had taken place in February 1995, in April of the same year a Croatian delegation led by Vice President Radie, representing President Tudjman, together with Cardinal Kuharic, officially invited the Pope to visit Croatia, and received this reply, which was also an expression of his own wish:

“I want to go to Split, to Marija Bistrica (a Marian shrine, which he did visit), and to Medjugorje [where in the end he did not go.]”

In 1996, Don Roberto Cavallero, rector of the Marian shrine of Orta di Chiavari, who was returning from Medjugorje, was asked this question by the Pope after Mass:

“Do you believe?” He replied with another question: “And you, Holy Father, do you believe?” After a brief silence, the Holy Father answered in the affirmative: “I believe, I believe, I believe.” 

This dialogue has no official value; it is not an act of the Magisterium declaring the supernatural character of the alleged apparitions of Medjugorje, but we must acknowledge that the Pope obviously retains his freedom of expression in private.

The analysis of ecclesiastical positions on Medjugorje benefits from the framework offered by John Paul II’s encyclical Redemptoris Mater, which sets out the theological principles for understanding Mary’s role in the history of salvation and in private revelations.

Delve deeper into your studies: explore Mariology, Marian Theology, Marian apparitions, and the Postgraduate Program in Mariology.