medjugore on NBC...

you guys watching? What does everyone think?

Personally, I thought it was very fair. No cheap shots or editorializing. Franciscan University theologian as the main expert in the report. Good job, Stone Phillips!

I was pleasantly surprised by NBC’s show on miracles.

I thought the NBC Stone Phillips guy was a bit stupid when he asked about proof of miracles and Lourdes. Does he not do any background research for the stories he covers? I also thought that the woman should have said more about how there was much medical evidence about people’s condition before they came to Lourdes and healings that occurred when there, at least that was the case closer to the beginning of the miracle there. I remember seeing stories in a book about it once, and the evidence was overhwelming.

I also wish they discussed more about Fatima than Medjugore, but I missed the beginning. It seemed odd that a show about miracles did not talk about the miracle fo the sun at Fatima, whihc was covered in so many newspapers at the time, and probably the first modern miracle associated with an apparition

I realize Medjugore is more recent, but there weren’t miracles reported so much from there that could be proven (at least not in the documentary, but also it seemds in general most people talk about inner healing they received there), and they they failed to mention the huge controvery of those apparitions, with the French expose that was released about a year ago.

I wonder too, why more is not said about the apparition and healings that were associated with the apparition of Our Lady of Zeitoun in Egypt during the 1960s, as that was in so many papaers and has video footage available too…was it proved a fraud later? Nothing was mentioned in the NBC documentary. I only recently learned of that story and want to learn more.

I think Dateline did a great job considering it is a news program and probably secular.

What I liked was that it didn’t go the way so many of these tv networks go for scandal. It was a very straightforward peice and gave Medjugorie the attention it deserves.

My favorite story they showed was on St. Benedicta and her intercession for the little girl named after her. That was a true miracle.

“You may be only one person in the world, but you may also be the world to one person.”

Jesus, Mary and Joseph, I love you. Save Souls.

I thought it was fair and balanced. I was so greatful they didn’t do some kind of expose on the “children” who Mary chose to show herself to. It seems the media always wants to get their digs in by doing that type of thing, showing some flaw in their personal lives. All in all, I thought non-Catholics might have come away not discounting it.

For NBC, it was really pretty good. Thought it was wonderful to have a theologian from Steubenville.

Curious that they put the Episcopal priest, who disbelieved in miracles. What was the point of that guy?

Anyone know the background of the woman they kept showing, the one who talked about Lourdes? I think they said she was a history professor somewhere, but I wonder what her faith is.

Wish they had hit a little more on the attempted assasination, specifically on the path the bullet took, and that JPII felt it was Mary’s hand guiding it.

As far as Stone Phillips background research, I would assume he had more information than his questions demonstrated, but that he starts with the assumption his audience knows nothing, so has to build it up from scratch for them. Which for the most part, was probably true.

Loved the segment on Benedicta.

I was pleasantly surprised…. I thought Stone Phillips did a very good job…things were fair and balanced. I especially liked the part on Benedicta. My only concern was that Medjegore (sp) was picked, especially since the apparitions have yet to be approved…
It sort of reminded me of Garabandal…
Anyone else share this concern?

I just caught some of it while flipping channels but I quickly left when I found out they were covering medjugore as it is not an approved apparition.

I see you are all saying the coverage was “fair and balanced” so am I correct in assuming that they covered the fact that medjugore is not approved and the continued disobedience of the franscians there?

The woman was a professor at Oxford University. I appreciated her positive spin onthings, unlike the Episcopal bishop Song, but I think she should have said more about the proof that exists at least to demonstrate miracles have occurred at Lourdes…the could have shown the wall full of crutches and wheel chairs at least.

*** for the Mudjugore story, I don’t think they sated anything about the church’s stance on it, but how could they really when the church’s policy is not to take a stance until it is finished.

There was a segment on the show that talked a little about the criteria of miracles needed to consider some one a saint for cannonization, but most of the program was not concerned about any church’s official stance towards any apparitions. It was instead a collection of interviews from individual people, which I found refreshing, and what they ebleived about miracles and apparitions a and why.

[quote=ByzCath]I just caught some of it while flipping channels but I quickly left when I found out they were covering medjugore as it is not an approved apparition.

I see you are all saying the coverage was “fair and balanced” so am I correct in assuming that they covered the fact that medjugore is not approved and the continued disobedience of the franscians there?
[/quote]

I’m not sure what to think of Medjugorie. My aunt has been there several times and is a fervent believer in the apparitions. She is also extremely orthodox. Her point is that the Church cannot declare apparitions as authentic until they are finished, as is stated above.

I’ve also seen some reports that JPII had leanings toward believing, but who knows how seriously to take them?

What has been officially declared about it? I know some dioceses are unable to officially sponsor a pilgrimidge, but again I thought that was because it wasn’t officially recognized, so they can’t officially sponsor anything. But to my knowledge it hasn’t been officially condemned either. Is that correct?

… i watched it, and was amazed that no one dumped on the catholic church… usually they go out of their way to demystify holy sites… yep, i liked it and thought they did a pretty good job…

now, if they would quit repeating themselves and reduce the commercials from 5 minutes to 2, then the show would have been over in 15 minutes… sheese:eek:

Peace:thumbsup:

Should we not email the network to show our appreciation?

[quote=rayne89]Should we not email the network to show our appreciation?
[/quote]

I think that’s a good idea. Let them know they have an audience for this type of quality and positive programming. Too often it seems the specials/psuedodocumentaries are only concerned with family members who cut each other into litle bits an stuff them somewhere.

I am trying to be more positive in my communication. For me at least, I am so much more easily motivated to write some where and complain when something offends me, than to send a letter of appreciation.

I saw the very last part of it. I had no idea what they were talking about…medjugore??? I’ve read about it, but I have no idea how to pronounce it…some help???

Thanks

[quote=ames61]What has been officially declared about it? I know some dioceses are unable to officially sponsor a pilgrimidge, but again I thought that was because it wasn’t officially recognized, so they can’t officially sponsor anything. But to my knowledge it hasn’t been officially condemned either. Is that correct?
[/quote]

Well the local bishops have consistently ruled that nothing supernatural has occured.

After the first bishop ruled in such a manner the Vatican, for some unknown reason, went against tradition and removed this from the local bishop and asked the the local national conference of bishops to rule (that was the national conference of bishops of Yugoslavia) which ruled that they would wait. Now that Medjugore is not part of Yugoslavia anymore, I do not know who has the jurisdiction to make a ruleing.

For me the issues with Medjugore are the on going apparitions even after the “visionaries” said that Mary gave them a date when the messages would stop, which is now long past. In every other apparition where Mary has given a date for the end of the messages, they have stopped on that date.

The messages that the “visionaries” say they have from Mary telling them to lie to the local bishop and to be disobedient. In every other apparition Mary has said to be obeident to the Church even when the Church was wrong in its ruleing which it later corrected.

The on going disobedience of the local franscians.

The apparent messages on-demand that the “visionaries” do at Marian conferences they go to.

That is just a few off the top of my head.

And let me say one last thing, even if it is approved someday (which I highly doubt) I still will not follow it as it seems off to me.

There are to be no sponsored pilgrimages becuase it is not approved.

I would caution against using the term “as yet to be approved” as that carries along an idea that it will be approved someday. The local bishops have ruled but, as I said earlier, the Vatican removed that power from them and gave it to a body that now does not have any jurisdiction over Medjugore.

Forum rules prohibit discussions of unapproved private revelation, a category which Medjugorje falls into.

This thread is closed.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.