| Revision as of 14:15, 2 December 2020 editGovernor Sheng (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users21,175 edits →Conflict Resolution Request← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 10:18, 24 September 2024 edit undoEditor1963-a (talk | contribs)4 edits →Intro needs editing: new sectionTag: New topic | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Talk header}} | {{Talk header}} | ||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1= | |||
| {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | |||
| {{WikiProject Catholicism |
{{WikiProject Catholicism |importance=Mid}} | ||
| {{WikiProject Christianity |importance=Low |saints=Yes |saints-importance=Mid}} | |||
| | b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = <yes/no> | |||
| {{WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina |importance=Mid}} | |||
| | b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy --> = <yes/no> | |||
| {{WikiProject Yugoslavia |importance=Low}} | |||
| | b3 <!--Structure --> = yes | |||
| | b4 <!--Grammar & style --> = yes | |||
| | b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = yes | |||
| | b6 <!--Accessibility --> = yes}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Christianity |class=C |importance=Low |saints=Yes |saints-importance=Mid}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina |class=C |importance=Mid}} | |||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |archiveheader = {{aan}} | |archiveheader = {{aan}} | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 150K | |maxarchivesize = 150K | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 7 | ||
| |minthreadsleft = 1 | |minthreadsleft = 1 | ||
| |algo = old(30d) | |algo = old(30d) | ||
| |archive = Talk:Our Lady of Medjugorje/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = Talk:Our Lady of Medjugorje/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{archive box|] ] ]}} | {{archive box|] ] ] ] ] ] }} | ||
| ==Suggestions/discussion to avoid conflict while editing== | |||
| == The article as of Oct. 24, 2020 == | |||
| Editing on Misplaced Pages can be peaceful and harmonious otherwise it is way to stressful. | |||
| {{ping|Slp1}} I opened this up in hopes of creating harmony while Governor Sheng and myself are editing on the same pages. Please comment and offer your suggestions.</br> | |||
| {{ping|Governor Sheng}} please offer your suggestions too. | |||
| *Neither one of us should have to ask permission to add well documented information to a page because no one "owns" a page. | |||
| *We should assume that we both are editing in Good Faith - Ask rather than accuse. | |||
| *Because of the conflict between us, it seems best that if there is a question or suggestion regarding one of our edits, we bring it to the talk page with respect. Avoid reverting, changing or shortening either of our edits without an agreement. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:29, 14 February 2021 (UTC)</span> | |||
| == Intro needs editing == | |||
| There are a couple problems with the article as it stands today. First is unresolved disputes between {{ping|Governor Sheng}} and {{ping|Red Rose 13}}. This is detrimental to the article if you cannot work collaboratively. Secondly, it is riddled with bad grammar and spelling. Someone proficient at English needs to step in and copyedit the whole thing. Thirdly, there are decidedly non-neutral points here. Use of ] such as "claimed", etc, is probably not good for neutrality. Yes, the apparitions are alleged, but we can find neutral wording that does not judge in Misplaced Pages's voice. Fourth and last, there is a ] problem. This article is about an alleged Marian apparition but what we have here is the chronicle of bad behavior of clergy and laity alike. We have a lot of "he said-she said" stuff, we have drama and expulsions and suspensions and ''diktats''. And very little of it is directly related to the apparitions. So I would ask all editors to observe ] and cut this article down to the sourced essentials: talk about the apparition and leave out the drama occuring behind the scenes. If we find it necessary, a split article could occur, although I think others already exist, such as for (former) Fr. Vlasic, etc. We should keep biographical information in biographical articles and avoid needlessly lengthening this one. Thanks. ] (]) 20:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :I have removed myriad unreliable sources, most apparently ] that we cannot use for extraordinary claims such as this apparition. I also replaced the lede infobox image with one that is ... uh... actually related to Medjugorje? ] (]) 20:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Regarding my recent edits, Rose and I have agreed that I'll explain them on the talk page. Which I did. However, nobody was interested enough to give any comments. So, I included some edits by myself. Note to be taken, Rose objected me rewording the whole article, however, Misplaced Pages is free, and anyone can edit. I didn't know I need to consult other editors so I could expand the article (I haven't reworded it, as I did previously, a month or so ago). As far as I understand, expanding articles is a positive thing here. Rose was well aware of my edits, since I added nothing new. All I added two days ago, was included in the article a month or so ago. Rose read those parts and deleted them. She knew them and commented nothing on them. Other editors, as far as talk page is concerned, simply don't give a damn. --] (]) 21:18, 24 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| The first four paragraphs are clumsy and it is not until the last sentence of the fourth paragraph that Vatican approval of the apparitions is mentioned. All four paragraphs need editing, with the last sentence of paragraph four moved up to the first paragraph and some other content cut. It is clear the information was added sequentially over time by multiple editors and should be rewritten to reflect the most recent events. ] (]) 10:18, 24 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| I really don’t want to criticize anyone for their beliefs, however, judging by the , I can conclude that {{ping|Red Rose 13}} is biased. Long ago she deleted my comments claiming that I could not rearrange the complete article without consulting other contributors. | |||
| I complied with her request. Red Rose, when removing my changes, read them and is very familiar with them. She left no comments on my changes but simply . | |||
| And now she has the freedom to comment, however she has not done so for more than two months. | |||
| It saddens me to have to conclude that Red Rose, because of her bias, is honestly not interested in the opinions of other contributors, as much as my changes not to be included in the article at all. I am of the opinion that her insistence on the opinion of other users is aimed at procrastination. Other contributors had more than two months to comment, including Red Rose. They haven't. --] (]) 22:11, 24 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you Elizium23 for your reasonable and logical suggestions. I noticed some of the references were in the Croatian language and impossible for English speaking people on this English Misplaced Pages site to refer too. It seems to me the references should be from the English language.] (]) 01:04, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::That is wrong. Sources don't need to be in English, however, those in English are preferable. However, in today's world, we have tools that make translations much easier. Readers can always use google translate. It's a good tool. --] (]) 01:09, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::G Sheng we see things differently but it makes it difficult to collaborate with you when you make it personal. You accuse me of (1) being biased, (2) When I removed something today, I left a comment on the edit and you accused me of not leaving a comment, (3) In the previous post you said, " I'll sort that out in few days. Can't work right now on this article. --Governor Sheng 15:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)" I haven't seen anything until today when you came in with no explanation and made huge changes to the page. That is not collaboration, that is taking over on your own. (4) When I read comments on your talk page, it was obvious that you are biased against this page. In moving forward I suggest you revert your edits and we start from the beginning. I think it is important to use references in English that would support this English based page. English speaking researchers need to be able to read the reference. We can work together gathering reliable references. Also, I agree with Elizium23 when he/she says this is a "chronicle of bad behavior of clergy and laity alike. We have a lot of "he said-she said" stuff, we have drama and expulsions and suspensions and ''diktats''. And very little of it is directly related to the apparitions." Elizium23 please feel free to remove all of it. ] (]) 01:04, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::Ok, let's try to sort things out. What I meant is you left no comment on this talk page for two months. And you knew my changes very well as you read them. I understand me stating "I can't work on this article" made you ignore the whole thing. Understandable. However, on my talk page, you cannot find my comments about this article. Those are the comments of a fellow user, whom I asked about his oppinion on the matter. --] (]) 01:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Also Elizium23 thank you for uploading the correct photo! :) ] (]) 01:06, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::{{u|Red Rose 13}}, {{u|Governor Sheng}}, well, I agree that anyone who proposes a complete overhaul of an article (or an addition of 12k of wikitext) should gain consensus first, because that's a major, major change. So don't be surprised if huge revisions are reverted for your discussion first. | |||
| ::: | |||
| :::Also, it is good to have sources in Croatian because they are close to the primary events. Of course, we prefer English sources, but ] in English on Medjugorje? Not very much from which to choose, compared to Croatian! ] (]) 01:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::{{ping|Elizium23}}, I note that I waited two months for comments (as you can see in the section above). Red Rose didn't bother one bit to comment on anything further. She was satisfied with the status quo. --] (]) 01:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I don't know if a short description like that is sufficient to give notice to editors of huge changes. If it would be contentious, I would say put it in a sandbox first (best) or propose sections at the talk page for comment (second best). | |||
| ::::: | |||
| :::::Once you make a very large, ] edit and it's reverted, then you begin to discuss the constituent parts in a civil way. ] (]) 01:22, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Agreed. We'll do so. --] (]) 01:26, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::G Sheng... I didn't think it was necessary to comment because you said you weren't ready to edit. I assumed you would comment when you were ready.] (]) 01:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Elizium are you going to take out the contentious statements that have nothing to do with the page?] (]) 01:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::I think it is best to clean up the page first, then add new content.] (]) 02:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Again G Sheng you are doing your own thing. I reverted your edits. I have been waiting for Elizium to comment about what he intends to do. We are not in a rush on Misplaced Pages. Why in the world did you delete content that Elizium said needs a reference? To fulfill the reference is not an instant. We all have other lives. Bring your proposed edits here. ] (]) 23:36, 27 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :Also when words are in quotes, we do not change anything in it.] (]) 00:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::This is just plain silly. Of course I'm gonna fix typos and similar errors in quotes. --] (]) 00:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::As I read and re-read this article, I realize that it is out of balance and quite a mess. Certain subjects are out of place and unnecessary. We should restructure the article while at the same time cleaning out unrelated issues that don't relate to the visions at Medjugorje and are quite mundane and of no significance.] (]) 00:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::What subjects? What is there in article that is not related to the alleged apparitions? --] (]) 00:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|Red Rose 13}}, if you think that conflict between the bishop and Franciscans is unrelated to the apparitions, I strongly disagree. The Ruini commission examined heavily those messages relating to the conflict, and because of it found them to be incredible. The Franciscan issue is very much related to the alleged apparitions, as it is one of the main arguments against the authenticity of the apparitions and should be discussed very broadly in the article. --] (]) 01:04, 28 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| I reached out to Elizium23 to come help us with this page. Let give him time respond.] (]) 01:19, 28 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :{{ping|Red Rose 13}}, you are free to discuss the proposed chapters bellow any time. --] (]) 12:10, 29 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::I researched this subject and am looking at other encyclopedias and their presentation. The structure of this page is not clear or balanced. Also, the focus needs to be on the visionaries and the Lady. When difficulties arise they can be included but not too much information... just basics. I suggest looking at how it is presented in other respected online encyclopedias. And we can then discuss how to restructure this article and clear out unnecessary info. Hopefully, in the meantime {{ping|Elizium23}} will join us] (]) 18:40, 29 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::The focus is on the visionaries and the Lady, however, all sides need to be presented. Some major problematic issues must be discussed in the article, and these are controversial messages and many other things, that need to be included in future. --] (]) 15:28, 30 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Also one of the encylopedia articles has a long list of references which we can include in this article.] (]) 18:43, 29 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::I was studying the page and your new edits. The author Bulat and his words quoted for the footnotes are all in English. Did you translate it? Or is the book available in English. And what is Bulat's bio and in English? I am not sure we can use this reference if we cannot read it or read study his credentials?] (]) 20:50, 29 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::{{ping|Red Rose 13}}, I translated his text but will revert it to original Croatian, as I did elsewhere later. Regarding Bulat, he was a member of the first two commissions created by Bishop Pavao Žanić. Bulat was a native of ] and was a Catholic priest and professor of theology at the Archdiocese of Split-Makarska. He died in 1990. --] (]) 15:26, 30 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I think we should start by you removing the recent edits you added. I notice you have them in your sandbox. And then we can see what else needs to be cleaned out. Then we first need to explain briefly about Medjugorje the town then what happened. Then explain who Our Lady of Medjugorje is and explain who the seers are. When telling a story, one needs to first tell the story. In wikipedia we need to remain neutral and not use words like controversial or problematic. We just give facts and the reader decides for themselves. Also we don't need to go into great detail regarding every single issue. I will also be working on other related pages to clean them up as well. In regards to the Croatian language have you noticed that there are many Misplaced Pages pages in other languages. The one we are working on is the English version. Your thoughts?] (]) 23:16, 30 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::First of all, we should agree about the structure of the article, before removing anything. Regarding the structure. I agree we should first explain about Medjugorje, both its religious as well as political situation. By religious situation, I mean explaining the whole situation regarding the ], and regarding the political situation, we should mention that at the time, Medjugorje was part of communist Yugoslavia and so forth. Now, the problematic part is explaining who "Our Lady of Medjugorje" is. We don't know. That's why I think we should rather explain what the "seers" claim to have seen and compare that with other facts. Regarding this issue, I think the first several "apparitions" should be discussed chronologically. We can insert both claims of the "seers" and other witnesses, the people who talked to them, and so on. Then, the controversial issues should be discussed, such as the "seers'" or "Our Lady's" messages for bishop in the Herzegovina Affair (this is an important issue since those messages were thoroughly discussed by all commissions organised by the diocese or the Vatican). This subject cannot be avoided. It's an important element in understanding what Medjugorje is. Since it is an important issue for all sides, it must be discussed in this article as well. Also, we should mention other controversial messages. We can also discuss some other messages the "seers" allegedly received, such as prayers, fasting, and so forth. Then, I think we should discuss the commissions and their results, then the official position of the Church on the issue. Afterwards, we can talk about other aspects, both political and economic. And lastly, we can add short bios of the "seers". | |||
| :::::I agree that we, as an encyclopedia must be neutral. However, words like "problematic" and "controversial" aren't biased. According to Merriam-Webster, "controversial" is something relating to or arousing controversy, and the same dictionary defines "controversy" as a discussion marked especially by the expression of opposing views. We have two views of these messages, with both sides giving them a different interpretation. Thus, they are, by defintion, controversial. Problematic is something that is "difficult to resolve". Some aspects are difficult to resolve, and are thus problematic. There's no clash with neutrality here. | |||
| :::::We can use Croatian sources for the English Misplaced Pages. There's no question about it. This is a non-issue. --] (]) 19:12, 31 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::I just reread the guidance from {{ping|Elizium23}} at the top of this discussion. His words copied from above: "This article is about an alleged Marian apparition but what we have here is the chronicle of bad behavior of clergy and laity alike. We have a lot of "he said-she said" stuff, we have drama and expulsions and suspensions and ''diktats''. And very little of it is directly related to the apparitions. So I would ask all editors to observe ] and cut this article down to the sourced essentials: talk about the apparition and leave out the drama occuring behind the scenes." You can remove it all or I will need too. Your choice. ] (]) 01:28, 1 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::I won't have any ultimatums from you. This is an important issue, regardless of what Elizium said (I believe in good intention). This is clear from the work of all commissions formed. The commissions examined this issue, so they should be discussed in the article. His premise is obviously wrong. Saying that "very little of it is directly related to the apparitions" is plain wrong. The apparitions directly dealt with the ], many messages were produced on the issue, the tree commissions discussed this as well... Elizium couldn't be more wrong. --] (]) 02:33, 1 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :I reverted the rest of your edits that I meant to revert when I reverted your other edits. We can now discuss how to enhance the page. I moved a number of things around to give it more continuity and structure. We should add the photos of each seer to the page and represent each seer just like it has been done for Vicka. We need to give the account of each seer when they first saw her and how this has affected their lives. We should also add a section Influence to list how this event has helped others. Also, I read where Pope John Paul II held Medjugorje in high regard and this needs to be added. We can add the controversies to this page under one section which can include the skepticism section. I noticed you have already created a page for one of your controversies and we can add a sentence or two on this page and then refer the reader to that page. No he said she said stuff however.] (]) 05:00, 1 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::We cannot add photos of the "seers", as we don't have any. We should return the section about controversies, this cannot be avoided. Influence can include many other things, such as economical and political aspects, and should take the bottom of the page. These, I agree, should be included. Skepticism section, I don't know what to do about it. The official position of the Church obviously, I believe, we agree, should be included. These include the work of all the commissions so far; comments from the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith and so on. These in itself include many skeptical aspects. Maybe the "Skepticism" subsection could be renamed, such as "Scientific aspect" or something like that. I don't know. The Church itself is skeptical enough. If you believe other non-Catholic skeptics should be included, I'm fine with that. Don't have any opinion on it. I consider it of little relevance. --] (]) 20:56, 1 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::P.S. If you by "a page for one of my controversies" think about Herzegovina Affair, yes, we should include that in the section about controversies. I believe in a form of summary, and we could agree on a common text about it. However, this issue is way bigger than Medjugorje. I cannot possibly talk about Medjugorje in the ] article, because, for the whole affair, Medjugorje is just a minor part. The issue is 140 years old. So greater emphasis on this subject should be given in the article about Medjugorje, than in the article about the Affair itself. Whatever the case, the section "Controversies" should direct to the Affair "(See also: Herzegovina Affair)". --] (]) 21:00, 1 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Regarding images, these I believe, are all free for use. So be my guest. --] (]) 21:16, 1 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :Question how does the 140 year old Herzegovina Affair relate to Our Lady of M.? Thanks for the photos I will work on that as a secondary research. In regards to the info we should only put in Medjugorje in the box with a more details explanation in the body of the text. I know the visionaries had visions in other countries when they traveled but the main source in Medjugorje. The word Controversy somehow doesn't fit on Misplaced Pages. I researched for synonyms but none of them would work. What other title can we give area? What subjects do we need to have there exactly? ] (]) 23:50, 1 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::I notice you are using news article from Yugoslavia and there is no way that we English speakers can read the article or check the news source for validity. This is a problem and the only way I can see resolving this, is for you to find valid references that are in English and that are verified as a reliable reference. Otherwise we will need to remove the reference and the information from it. ] (]) 01:25, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::Of course there's a way. You can use google translate. It will be good enough. You cannot demand this. Sorry. Remove them, and I'll report you to admins. --] (]) 01:29, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Google translate is not a solution because it can be terribly inaccurate. If anyone is using Google to translate, that is a serious problems. Consider the situation at the Scots language Misplaced Pages. It was discovered that someone who created and edited a huge number of their articles had no knowledge of the language; they were using computer translation. That has been a disaster. I don't have a problem with non-English sources, although English is preferred, as pointed out above. But I have concerns about whether these sources are being accurately reflected in the edits. I wonder if we could find an independent person who has skills in the Croatian language to verify the edits made from those sources. Perhaps someone from ] or another wikiproject. I encountered a similar issue in another article that had several sources in Spanish. It turns out that either the sources were not being properly translated or (worse) being misrepresented. ] (]) 01:34, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::{{ping|Sundayclose}}, be my guest. But Red Rose will not remove anything. --] (]) 01:36, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Thank you Sundayclose. There is another problem. (1) G Sheng first put in footnotes that he either translated or used Google translate and now I believe some of the footnotes and references are all in Croatian. This is a problem for the English focused Misplaced Pages. (2) I also noticed they seemed off. (3) Also he picks and choosea words from the reference and they seem out of context. I always go to the article that is reference to check for that. I suggest he find the reference in English and post that.] (]) 01:49, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Well, you're not correct. Sorry. I'm able to speak Croatian, so I don't use google translate at all. Nothing's out of context. Point me something that I wrote and that was misused, either deliberately or accidentally. I'm very careful about that. I requested native speakers to come and check my sources. If I misquoted something, and I haven't, I'll gladly remove everything. --] (]) 01:53, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::{{ping|Governor Sheng}} Whether or not you speak Croatian is irrelevant to the issue of whether sources are being accurately represented in the article. I'm fluent in a second language, but that doesn't mean anyone on Misplaced Pages is obligated to trust whether I am accurately presenting the content of a source in that language. Translation is ] unless it can be verified that the information is being "]". Also note, according to ] (a part of the core policy of ]), "if a dispute arises involving a citation to a non-English source, editors may request a quotation of relevant portions of the original source be provided, either in text, in a footnote, or on the article talk page". There are translators available for some languages on Misplaced Pages at ]. So I am now requesting that you provide the original text and the translation for any non-English sources that you have used in a separate section on this talk page. Then we can seek someone to verify the translation. I'm not accusing you of intentional mistranslation, but with the dispute here it is reasonable for you to demonstrate accurate translation. ] (]) 02:17, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::Oh, I'll gladly do so. :) I'll create a separate section, and then we'll get to work. {{ping|Sundayclose}} --] (]) 02:21, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Check ]. | |||
| {{quote|'''Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Misplaced Pages.''' However, because this project is in English, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance. As with sources in English, '''if a dispute arises involving a citation to a non-English source, editors may request a quotation of relevant portions of the original source be provided, either in text, in a footnote, or on the article talk page.'''}} | |||
| Wanna quote, Red Rose? --] (]) 01:35, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Boris Rašeta, whom I quoted several times, is a well-known Croatian journalist, while ] is one of the most reliable newspapers in Croatia. --] (]) 01:39, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|Red Rose 13}}, {{ping|Sundayclose}}. I requested a native speaker. ] and ] :) --] (]) 01:46, 2 November 2020 (UT | |||
| :As I mentioned above the long list of future physical locations where the visionaries went and had visions, is not representative of the headquarters of the Lady of Medugorje visions. They started here in 1981 and have continued for 35 years. It will confuse readers to have it there. Also to not confuse the reader, you will need to explain each location and what happened at each location.] (]) 02:12, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::There's no such thing as the "headquarters of the visions". It's your own invention. Some of the visionaries live for example in Boston, and he has daily apparitions. Apparently. So the visions occur there every day. It is a site of apparitions. It's not only Medjugorje. I don't see why readers would be confused? Boston is as good as headquarters of the visions as Medjugorje. --] (]) 02:18, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::The investigations are completely about what happens at Medjugorje, the church is in Medjugorje, Mirjana is still to this day receiving regular visions in Medjugorje. It is fine to list where the visionaries had visions outside of Medjugorje but not in the info box. The info box is not meant for that. Plus if you want this list it is important to explain each vision and the physical locations where it happened. Most visionaries are not receiving any visions or if they are it is once a year and that is important to state in your list. It is impossible to add this information in the info box. ] (]) 02:25, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::"The investigations are completely about what happens at Medjugorje"? Says who? They aren't. The investigations encomass all the visions, not only those in Medjugorje. There are churches in Boston as well, I believe. Ivan Dragičević and Marija Pavlović receive their visions in Boston and Milan... So what? Mirjana is just one of the alleged seers. I don't need to explain everey single vision that happened. There are 40k+ of them. Are you serious? --] (]) 02:39, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I saw the quotes from the Kutleša's book and your translation. One thing I noticed about the book, is that the author adds his opinions about the so called facts. A true journalist would only give facts and leave it to the reader to decide and that is what Misplaced Pages expects. We also need to see where the author gets his information... the sources. To me the book is not a credible source. ] (]) 20:04, 3 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::See the references in his book. He is a credible source. An archbishop who served as a member for the Congregation of Bishops and Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. He became a ], by the decision of ]. He is a reliable source. Of course some conclusions are his opinion. It's his book (]: "the main purpose of a monograph is to present '''primary research and original scholarship''' ascertaining reliable credibility to the required recipient"), isn't it? He doesn't write for ]. It's impossible to write your own monograph without any conclusions on your own. It's just silly to assert otherwise. Sorry. --] (]) 05:37, 4 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::I am sorry but I read the whole report used as a reference on this page and it is completely about Medjugorje - Here a quote from the Pope After examining the Ruini report and the opinions of the members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Pope decided to entrust to the Polish Archbishop Henryk Hoser a “special mission of the Holy See” to “acquire more in-depth knowledge of the pastoral situation “In Medjugorje, and “above all, the needs of the faithful who come to pilgrimage” to “suggest any pastoral initiatives for the future.” He is talking about the pastoral situation in Medjugorje and the needs of the faithful who come to pilgrimage.Red Rose 13 (talk) 03:24, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::It seems to me you're trying to connect unrelatable things. Are there appearances outside Medjugorje or not? Daily appearances? --] (]) 05:39, 4 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :The visionary BIO section should be in alphabetical order. You mentioned it should be in the order of most important but in reality they are all important. To have names in alphabetical order give order and avoids confusiion to the page and is easier to find a particular person. Please put the names back in order.] (]) 16:13, 6 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::I had the whole day to edit and I did a tremendous amount of research, found references where needed and I put in a lot of time on this page. I think you will be happy with everything I did. If not, please let me know here and we can discuss it. I spent a lot of time improving the page, adding photos and some new information. Let me know what you all think. Also no one has been around for a couple of days. ] (]) 02:02, 9 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::G Sheng you reverted all of my edits without reading them all and named them all as onesided. If you revert them all again, I will be forced to invite more editors to join us.Also come here and explain your problem.] (]) 21:06, 9 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::"Stop being borderline hypocritical". We agreed that there will be no major inclusions without discussing them first. I read your edits very well. Stop talking in such a threatening tone. You're not in a position to give any ultimatums to anyone. Include it again, and be assured, I'll include those parts you one-sidedly removed a few days ago. They are one-sided as they were written only by you. Get serious. --] (]) 23:51, 9 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Investigations == | |||
| I propose adding this section to the article, with the content as ]. --] (]) 01:35, 25 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :Investigations is already under Official position of the Church - lets delete this section] (]) 16:59, 6 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Position of the Church == | |||
| I propose adding this section to the article, with the content as ]. --] (]) 01:37, 25 October 2020 | |||
| :This section is not needed because we already have Official Position of the Church. Please delete | |||
| == Headquarters of the visions == | |||
| Please, discuss the issues you have with this here before removing anything. Your recent edits are quite frivolous. What's the headquarters of the visions? I never heard of the expression anywhere. Your interpretations are your own. The infobox talks about the location of the apparitions, and there are many of them. Not only Medjugorje. Infobox should reflect this. --] (]) 01:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :Without regard to the "headquarters" issue, my objection to including a long list of locations is that it is inappropriate for an infobox, which needs to be as brief as possible. I attempted to link in the infobox the list of other locations, but you (or perhaps someone else) removed it. Until this issue is settled, please restore that link. Thanks. | |||
| :By the way, {{u|Governor Sheng}} and {{u|Red Rose 13}} if you have not already violated the letter of the law for edit warring (]), you have violated the spirit of the policy. Please stop reverting each other until there is discussion here. Otherwise you both may end up unable to edit. ] (]) 02:26, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::The investigations are completely about what happens at Medjugorje, the church is in Medjugorje, Mirjana is still to this day receiving regular visions in Medjugorje. It is fine to list where the visionaries had visions outside of Medjugorje but not in the info box. The info box is not meant for that as Sundayclose has pointed out. Plus if you want this list it is important to explain each vision and the physical locations where it happened. Most visionaries are not receiving any visions or if they are it is once a year and that is important to state in your list. I think your list is important to include but it is impossible to add this information in the info box. Red Rose 13 (talk) 02:25, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::"The investigations are completely about what happens at Medjugorje"? Says who? They aren't. The investigations encompass all the visions, not only those in Medjugorje. There are churches in Boston as well, I believe. Ivan Dragičević and Marija Pavlović receive their visions in Boston and Milan... So what? Mirjana is just one of the alleged seers. I don't need to explain everey single vision that happened. There are 40k+ of them. Are you serious? --] (]) 02:42, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Anyway the info box is not the place to put this list according to the Misplaced Pages guidelines. Also why would you want to start listing visions if there are 40 thousand of them.If you list them, you need to explain them. Also according to the Our Lady of Medjugorje page the investigations are completely related to Medjugorje. ] (]) 02:57, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::No. Nowhere does the article states that "the investigations are completely related to Medjugorje". They are related to the alleged apparitions. For example, the Ruini's commission had a task to "collect all the material", which doesn't say its located completely in Medjugorje. The same commission examined all the alleged apparitions after July 1981, which included daily apparitions in Boston. Stop making things up, please. --] (]) 03:03, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Here is the link to the reference used for the Ruini commission. It is completely about Medjugorje. ] (]) 03:14, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Lol, it's not. That's the title because we all know the apparitions as Medjugorje apparitions, however, they occurred at other locations as well. One thing is how we refer to the phenomenon, the other is where it ocurred. --] (]) 03:16, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :I am sorry but I read the whole report and it is completely about Medjugorje - Here a quote from the Pope After examining the Ruini report and the opinions of the members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Pope decided to entrust to the Polish Archbishop Henryk Hoser a “special mission of the Holy See” to “acquire more in-depth knowledge of the pastoral situation “In Medjugorje, and “above all, the needs of the faithful who come to pilgrimage” to “suggest any pastoral initiatives for the future.” He is talking about the pastoral situation in Medjugorje and the needs of the faithful who come to pilgrimage.] (]) 03:24, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::So? Are there not daily apparitions in Boston? Or in Monza? Or you're calling the seers liars? --] (]) 13:42, 3 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::Obviously not. Anyway, the issue of the infobox that Sundayclose also said, is that the Infobox needs to be as brief as possible. So once again I will be moving the long list into the text of the article in accordance with Misplaced Pages guidelines. If you choose to oppose this, I will then ask for other editors to come to this page and vote on what is correct. I am not sure why you don't want to follow Misplaced Pages rules. Your list has not been deleted just relocated. Also, the list won't make sense without a brief explanation next to each location.] (]) 19:42, 3 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::The term I agree to is "Medjugorje and a number of other locations". --] (]) 18:18, 4 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Croatian sources == | |||
| This is the version we'll be using - . (It's the latest one) | |||
| === Chronicle of Apparitions and Vicka's diaries === | |||
| Bulat's book is available | |||
| Ref. no. 21 | |||
| "fra Tomislava Vlašića, koji postaje kapelan i duhovni vođa vidjelaca, te zapisuje u Kroniku ukazanja što su djeca vidjela i doživjela na tim “ukazanjima” i njemu priopćavala..." | |||
| "''Friar Tomislav Vlasic, who became a chaplain and a spiritual director of the seers, and notes in the Chronicle of the Appartions what the children have seen and experienced in those "apparitions and what they told him"....''" | |||
| Ref. no. 22. | |||
| "Dio Kronike ukazanja, koji smo dobili, fotokopiran odmah u početku rada, obuhvaća razdoblje od 11. kolovoza 1981. do 15. listopada 1983. Kroniku je pisao fra Tomislav Vlašić, izuzevši neke dane kad je bio odsutan. Bilježio je što se zbivalo svaki dan u svezi s liturgijskim činima i “ukazanjima” tako da se stječe dojam neposrednosti mjesta, događaja i svjedočenja očevidaca. Taj efekt neposrednosti postignut je izričajima: “Isti prizor kao i jučer”, “Večeras”, “I ove večeri”, “Ove večeri grupi se pridružila i Ivanka...”, “Jakov, Vicka i Marija i ove večeri bili su s Gospom”. Ovakvi i slični izričaji, koji su upotrijebljeni na mnogo mjesta, govorili bi u prilog da je upravo te večeri i sve zabilježeno u Kroniku i da to daje vjerodostojnost i Kronici i događajima. Međutim u samoj Kronici ima mjesta koja ne dopuštaju da se izvede takav zaključak." | |||
| "''The part of the Chronicle of the Apparitions, which we received, photocopied immediately at the beginning of the work, covers the period from 11 August 1981 to 15 October 1983. The Chronicle was written by Fr. Tomislav Vlašić, except for some dates when he was unavailable. He recorded what happened every day in connection with liturgical acts and "apparitions" so that one gets the impression of the immediacy of the place, events, and eyewitness testimony. This effect of immediacy was achieved by the expressions: "The same scene as yesterday", "Tonight", "This evening too", "Ivanka joined the group this evening ...", "Jakov, Vicka and Marija this evening as well were with Our Lady ”. Such and similar expressions, which have been used in many places, would speak in favor of the fact that on that very evening everything was recorded in the Chronicle and that this gives credibility to both the Chronicle and the events. However, there are places in the Chronicle itself that do not allow such a conclusion to be drawn.''" | |||
| Ref. no. 23. | |||
| "Slično je zabilježeno 20. siječnja: “Petero djece i ovu večer imalo je viđenje Majke Božje.” Vidioci su postavili i pitanje: “Što će raditi fra Ivica Vego i fra Ivan Prusina sad kad su istjerani?” Radi se o dvojici neposlušnih kapelana koji su suspendirani, tj. zabranjeno im je bilo vršiti svećeničke dužnosti i otpušteni su iz Reda OFM (primjedba N. B.). Gospa je odgovorila: “Oni nisu krivi. Biskup se u odluci prenaglio. Neka ostanu.” Ova nas činjenica ovdje zanima samo stoga jer su dvojica spomenutih kapelana otpuštena iz Reda tek 29. siječnja 1982. Čin otpuštanja iz Reda OFM dvojice spomenutih kapelana zabilježen je u Kroniku 9 dana prije nego li su bili otpušteni. To nam jasno govori da formulacija: “Petero djece i ovu večer...” (kurziv N. B.), tj. 20. siječnja, nije točna, jer to se nije zbilo te večeri niti je moglo biti zapisano te večeri, kad su kapelani otpušteni 9 dana kasnije." | |||
| "'A similar record was made on 20 January: "Five children had a vision of the Mother of God this evening as well." The seers also asked the question: "What will Fr. Ivica Vego and Fr. Ivan Prusina do now that they have been expelled?" These are two disobedient chaplains who were suspended, i. e. they were forbidden to perform priestly duties and were dismissed from the Order of Friars Minor. Our Lady replied: “They are not guilty. The bishop was hasty in his decision. Let them stay. ” This fact interests us here only because the two mentioned chaplains were dismissed from the Order only on 29 January 1982. The act of dismissal from the Order of the two mentioned chaplains was recorded in the Chronicle 9 days before they were dismissed. This clearly tells us that the phrase: "Five children this evening as well...", i. e. 20 January, is not correct, because it did not happen that evening nor could it have been written that evening when the chaplains were fired 9 days later.''" | |||
| Ref. no. 24. | |||
| "Kad je fra Tomislav Vlašić počeo pisati Kroniku ukazanja čiju fotokopiju imaju članovi Komisije? Teško je dati precizan odgovor. Sigurno je da to nije bilo prije svršetka listopada 1981. Iz već navedenih činjenica i onoga što je kroničar napisao kao neki uvod i objašnjenje na početku Kronike, čini se da | |||
| je to bilo krajem veljače 1982. Na početku Kronike piše : “Ono što je vezano uz ukazanja donekle je zabilježeno ovdje. Djeca su mi govorila važnije događaje, a svaki dan nisam mogao mirno razgovarati s djecom te zabilježiti sve po redu (u nekim mjesecima samo je nekoliko dana zapisano nešto o viđenjima, primj. N. B.). Uglavnom djeca su mi rekla da ukupno od 24. 06. 1981, do 20. 02. 1982. samo u pet dana Gospa im se nije ukazala.” Ono što je napisano na početku Kronike služi kroničaru kao neki uvod, pa spominje što se do tada događalo onako općenito, sumarno, od početka ukazanja do 20. veljače 1982. To bi bilo neko “objašnjenje” onoga što se već dogodilo i uvod u ono što će se još zbivati. Na toj prvoj stranici stoji datum 25. 02. 1982. i potpis kroničara fra Tomislava Vlašića. Zašto je ovaj “uvod” u Kroniku napisan baš 25. veljače 1982. a ne prije, jer Kronika počinje 11. kolovoza 1981., ima smisla jedino ako je upravo tada počelo pisanje Kronike." | |||
| "''When did Fr. Tomislav Vlašić start writing the Chronicle of Apparitions, a photocopy of which the members of the Commission have? It is difficult to give a precise answer. It is certain that this was not before the end of October 1981. From the facts already stated and what the chronicler wrote as some sort of an introduction and an explanation at the beginning of the Chronicle, it seems that it was written at the end of February 1982. At the beginning of the Chronicle, it is written: “What is connected with the apparitions is to some extent recorded here. The children told me more important events, and every day, but I could not talk calmly with the children and record everything in order (in some months only a few dates regarding the visions were recorded). The children told me that from 24 June 1981 to 20 February 1982, Our Lady did not appear to them in just five days." What was written at the beginning of the Chronicle serves the chronicler as a sort of an introduction, so he mentions what happened until then in general terms, as a summary, from the beginning of the apparition to 20 February 1982. This would be an "explanation" of what had already happened and an introduction to it. On that first page is the date of February 25, 1982, and the signature of the chronicler, Fr. Tomislav Vlašić. Why this "introduction" to the Chronicle was written on 25 February 1982 and not before, since the Chronicle begins on 11 August1981, makes sense only if the writing of the Chronicle began just then.''" | |||
| Ref. no. 25. | |||
| "Prvi dnevnik obuhvaća razdoblje od početka “ukazivanja”, tj. od 24. lipnja 1981. do 6. rujna 1981. na preskok. Zapisano je ponešto samo u 26 dana, i to: u lipnju 2 dana; u srpnju 8 dana; u kolovozu 10 dana; te u rujnu 6 dana. Ovaj dnevnik koji smo primili odmah u početku bio je pisan pisaćim strojem. Tek puno kasnije - 30. svibnja 1985. - Vicka mi je predala jedan mali notes u kojem je bilo rukopisom napisano sve ono što se nalazilo otipkano pisaćim strojem u Prvom drveniku. Otipkani primjerak i rukopis slagali su se gotovo u svemu." | |||
| "''The first diary covers the period from the beginning of the "visions", i. e. from 24 June 1981 to 6 September 1981 on the leap. Something was recorded in just 26 days, namely: 2 days in June; in July 8 days; in August 10 days; and in September 6 days. This diary we received right at the beginning, was typewritten. Only much later - on 30 May 1985 - Vicka handed me a small notebook in which everything that was typewritten in the first diary was handwritten. The typewritten copy and manuscript matched in almost everything.''" | |||
| Ref. no. 26. | |||
| "Interesantno je što je Vicka rekla u razgovoru s fra Jankom Bubalom kad ju je pitao o „znaku“: Janko: - U nekoj bilježnici (koju zovu tvojom) stoji da vam je Gospa 26. X. 1981. sa smiješkom rekla da se nekako čudi što je više za znak ne pitate. Ali da će vam ga ona sigurno ostaviti, da se ništa ne bojite… Vicka: - Dobro je to. Ali mislim da to nije bilo njezino prvo obećanje da će nam znak stvarno ostaviti. Janko: - To je točno jer u nekoj maloj bilježnici, koju je bilježila tvoja sestra Ana (radi se o rukopisu Prvoga dnevnika, primj. N. B.), zabilježeno je tri puta da vam je Gospa rekla već potkraj kolovoza da će svoj znak ‘brzo’ ostaviti, a evo, to se oteglo... Vicka: - Ja to ne znam. Ja nisam nikada tu bilježnicu čitala, a nisam ni Ani to govorila. Mora da je to neko drugi govorio (kurziv N. B.). Janko: - Mislim da su joj to govorili Jakov i Ivanka..." | |||
| "''It is interesting what Vicka said in a conversation with Fr. Janko Bubalo when he asked her about the "sign": Janko: - In a notebook (which they call yours) it says that Our Lady told you on 26 October 1981 with a smile that she was somehow surprised that you don't ask her about the sign anymore. But that she will leave it to you, that you shouldn't be afraid at all. Vicka: - That's good. But I don’t think it was her first promise that she would really leave a sign to us. Janko: - This is true because in a small notebook, which was recorded by your sister Ana (it is a manuscript of the First Diary, note NB), it is recorded three times that Our Lady told you in late August that her sign will be left "soon", and here, it dragged on ... Vicka: - I don't know that. I never read that notebook, and I didn't tell Ana that either. Someone else must have said that (italics N. B.). Janko: - I think Jakov and Ivanka told her that''" | |||
| Ref. no. 27... | |||
| Well... It's kinda long. You have a PDF available above, so serve yourself. :) Sorry. | |||
| Ref. no. 28... | |||
| Same... | |||
| Ref. no. 29. | |||
| Same... | |||
| Ref. no. 30. | |||
| Same... | |||
| --] (]) 02:35, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| We'll continue other sections tomorrow. --] (]) 02:40, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :{{ping|Governor Sheng}} Please provide your English translation for each passage. ] (]) 02:55, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::My English translation? Why though? Aren't other editors supposed to do that or you're gonna rely on me? I'm gladly gonna do so tomorrow if it is a must. Some are already translated in the article, as you can see. --] (]) 02:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::Because I want to know ''your'' translation before someone else fluent in the language translates, for comparison. That's the only way we know if your translation supports the edits to the article. I've been through this in another article. An editor was making bold claims about his translation of Spanish, and someone else fluent in Spanish corrected him. Any of us with little knowledge of the language can go to the source, look at a computerized translation, identify the relevant passage, and copy-paste it here as you have done. We need to see your translation as well as someone else fluent in the language. If you're fluent in both languages translation should not be difficult. ] (]) 04:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::There, it's translated. The rest can be compared to the PDF I left. --] (]) 12:28, 3 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| === Biographies of the alleged seers === | |||
| ==== IVAN DRAGIČEVIĆ (pp. 33-35) ==== | |||
| "Ivan je rođen u Mostaru, 25. svibnja 1965., a njegovi roditelji Stanko i Zlata borave u Bijakovićima u župi Međugorje. Završivši osnovno obrazovanje, pohađao je prvi razred srednje škole u Čitluku, ali ga nije položio. U kolovozu 1981. javio se u sjemenište kao kandidat Hercegovačke franjevačke provincije, već poznat po svojim "viđenjima". Poslan je u gimnaziju u Visoko. I u sjemeništu je imao gotovo svakodnevna "ukazanja". Budući da u Visokom prve godine nije uspio, ni nakon dva pokušaja, položiti popravni ispit, smatralo se da će biti uspješniji u školi ako prijeđe u dubrovačko sjemenište. Tako je ujesen 1982. iz franjevačke gimnazije u Visokom bio je premješten u dubrovačku humanističku. Dao se na učenje povijesti i drugih predmeta, a još više na "ukazanja". Međutim, ni u Dubrovniku se nije pokazao dostatno zainteresiranim za školu koju je napustio u siječnju 1983. I otišao kući. | |||
| Ivan ima svakodnevna "ukazanja" od 24. lipnja 1981. do dana današnjega. | |||
| Neuobičajena nauka. Dok je bio u Visokom, 2. rujna 1981. pitao je "pojavu" za svoje kolege i za sebe kako će im biti. Ona da je rekla, a on zapisao: "Vi ste moja djeca i ostajete. Pošli ste Isusovim putem, i tu vam ne može nitko zasmetati da širite Isusovu vjeru." | |||
| Kad smo već kod sjemeništa, Ivan piše kako mu se 5. rujna i 12. rujna 1981. "Gospa" obraća našim kršćanskim pozdravom: "Hvaljen Isus i Marija"! | |||
| - Malo je čudno da preponizna Gospa i samu sebe tako pozdravlja? Ona, učiteljica poniznosti. | |||
| K tomu 13. rujna 1981. piše: "Svi mi, djeca sjemeništa, bili smo poslije ispovijedi na molitvi. I molili smo cijelu krunicu. Došla je na Isusovu sliku i rekla je: ’Ovo je vaš otac, anđele!’ | |||
| - Kakva je to nauka? To naša Gospa nije nikada rekla za Isusa, ni u Bibliji ni u Predaji. To Isus nikad nije rekao za sebe da nam je on Otac. On je apostole i nas zvao "braćom" (Iv 20, 17), jer je i sam "prvorođenac među mnogom braćom" (Rim 8,29). A sam naučavaše: "Ni ocem ne zovite nikoga na zemlji jer jedan je Otac vaš - onaj na nebesima" (Mt 23,9). | |||
| Pojava je Ivanu pričala svoj život punih pet mjeseci, od 22. prosinca 1982. do 22. svibnja 1983. | |||
| Ivan je poslao mjesnom biskupu Žaniću više pisanih "poruka" na koje ćemo se osvrnuti na drugom mjestu u ovoj knjizi. | |||
| Ženidba. Ivan se, 10-ak godina kasnije, 23. listopada 1994., oženio s bivšom miss Massachusetts Loreen Murphy. Na dan vjenčanja u župi sv. Leonarda u Bostonu u SAD-u, u prostoriji pokraj crkve, imao je uobičajeno "viđenje", upravo kao u Međugorju, Visokom i Dubrovniku. Ukazala mu se ona ista "pojava".2 Ivan s Loreenom ima troje djece. Dio godine Ivan provodi u Međugorju, a ostale mjesece u Bostonu. | |||
| I tako on godinama do danas iznosi priče o "ukazanjima" svjetskim dolaznicima u Međugorje i po svijetu. Do sada je imao devet "tajna" i jedno 7000 dnevnih "ukazanja". Sada neki kažu da nije uopće važno ukazuje li se ili ne ukazuje; važno je da ljudi dolaze na mjesto tzv. ukazanja i da se na temelju takvih takozvanih "ukazanja" mole. | |||
| "Bogati mladić". Piše jedan znanac iz svijeta biskupu, 1997.: "Ovih dana Ivan Dragićević u susretu s 'hodočasnicima' vozi svoj novi luksuzni BMW srebrne boje, s onim širokim športskim gumama, izvan serije, kao posebna narudžba iz Njemačke - vrijedi možda oko 150.000 DM!" | |||
| Ne znamo stvarno ni koliko to luksuzno vrijedi, ni koje je boje, ni serije. Ali Ivanu, kao bivšem sjemeništarcu, slobodni bismo bili uputiti skromnu poruku kad ih je on već toliko uputio biskupu Žaniću da se obrati "ukazanjima" u Međugorju. | |||
| Preporučujemo mu da se okani tih pustih dječjih priča oko Blažene Djevice Marije i preraste u punoljetnu zbiljnost! Već je troje drugih "anđela" svelo svakodnevna na jednogodišnje "ukazanje"! Od 365 godišnjih odjednom su 364 svedena na jedno! Doduše, doživotno! Treba početi uvoditi novu praksu - iznijeti svu istinu na sunce! Da nas istina oslobodi!" | |||
| ;{{red|TRANSLATION}} | |||
| "Ivan was born in Mostar on 25 May 1965, and his parents Stanko and Zlata live in Bijakovići in the parish of Medjugorje. After finishing elementary school, he attended the first grade of high school in Čitluk, but did not pass it. In August 1981, he entered the seminary as a candidate of the Franciscan Province of Herzegovina, already known for his "visions". He was sent to the grammar school in Visoko. And in the seminary he had almost daily "apparitions." Since he failed to pass the remedial exam in Visoko in his first year, even after two attempts, it was thought that he would be more successful in school if he moved to the Dubrovnik seminary. Thus, in the autumn of 1982, he was transferred from the Franciscan Gymnasium in Visoko to the Dubrovnik School of Humanities. He devoted himself to learning history and other subjects, and even more to "apparitions." However, even in Dubrovnik, he did not show enough interest in the school he left in January 1983 and went home. | |||
| Ivan has daily “apparitions” from 24 June 1981 to the present day. | |||
| Unusual doctrine. While in Visoko, on 2 September 1981, he asked for an “appearance” for his colleagues and for himself how they would be. She said this, and he wrote it down: "You are my children and you remain such. You have gone the way of Jesus, and there no one can bother you to spread the faith of Jesus." | |||
| Speaking of the seminary, Ivan writes that on 5 September and 12 September 12, "Our Lady" addressed him with our Christian greeting: "Praised be Jesus and Mary"! | |||
| - Is it a little strange that Our too-humble Lady greets herself like that? She, the teacher of humility. | |||
| In addition, on 13 September 1981, he wrote: "All of us, the children of the seminary, were in prayer after confession. And we prayed the whole rosary. She came to the image of Jesus and said, "This is your father, angel!" | |||
| - What kind of doctrine is that? Our Lady never said this about Jesus, neither in the Bible nor in Tradition. Jesus never said of himself that he was our Father. He called the apostles and us "brothers" (Jn 20:17), because he himself is "the firstborn among many brothers" (Rom 8:29). And he himself taught: "Do not call anyone on earth even a father, because one is your Father - the one in heaven" (Mt 23: 9). | |||
| The appearance told Ivan her life for a full five months, from 22 December 1982 to 22 May 1983. | |||
| Ivan sent several written "messages" to the local bishop Žanić, which we will refer to elsewhere in this book. | |||
| Marriage. Ivan, about 10 years later, on 23 October 1994, married former Miss Massachusetts Loreen Murphy. On the wedding day in the parish of St. Leonard in Boston, USA, in a room next to the church, had the usual "vision", just like in Medjugorje, Visoko and Dubrovnik. The same "appearance" appeared to him. Ivan and Loreen have three children. Ivan spends part of the year in Medjugorje, and the other months in Boston. | |||
| And so, for years to this day, he tells stories about "apparitions" to world visitors to Medjugorje and around the world. So far, he has had nine "secrets" and some 7,000 daily "apparitions". Now some say it doesn’t matter at all whether it there are apparitions or not; it is important that people come to the place of the so-called apparitions and that on the basis of such so-called "apparitions" they pray. | |||
| "Rich young man." An acquaintance from the world writes to the bishop, 1997: "These days Ivan Dragićević, in a meeting with 'pilgrims', drives his new luxury silver BMW, with those wide sports tires, out of series, as a special order from Germany - maybe worth around 150,000 DM!" | |||
| We don't really know how much this luxury is worth, or what color it is, or the series. But to Ivan, as a former seminarian, we would be free to send a modest message when he has already sent so many to Bishop Žanić to address "apparitions" in Medjugorje. | |||
| We recommend him to give up these empty children's stories about the Blessed Virgin Mary and grow into an adult reality! Already, three other "angels" have reduced every-day to a one-year "apparition"! Out of 365 annuals, 364 were reduced to one at once! Admittedly, for life! We need to start introducing a new practice - bringing all the truth to the sun! May the truth set us free!''" | |||
| {{red|'''From Rašeta's article:'''}} https://express.24sata.hr/top-news/vidjelice-iz-me-ugorja-imaju-milijune-hoteli-vile-auti-22384 - express.24sata.hr | |||
| "Ivan Dragičević, jedan od vidjelaca, također je dobro unovčio svoje vizije, pisao je Goran Pandža za Tačno.net. Dok po svijetu prenosi "Gospine poruke", Dragičevićeva žena, bivša Miss Massachusettsa, Loreen Murphy, rukovodila je turističkom agencijom za hodočasnike u Međugorje." | |||
| Novinari talijanske TV emisije "Piazza Pulita" obišli su ulicu u Međugorju u kojoj živi četvero od šestero vidjelaca. Lokalci taj kvart zovu Beverly Hills. Tamo su pokušali razgovarati s obitelji Ivana Dragičevića, ali njega nisu mogli pronaći. Pronašli su, doduše, jednu stariju gospođu koja se predstavila kao Ivanova majka i novinarima je tad pokazala hotel koji navodno pripada Mirjani Dragičević-Soldo. | |||
| U prilogu je navedeno i kako je Ivan Dragičević otvorio hotel u Međugorju te kupio nekretninu s bazenom vrijednu milijun dolara. Otišli su zatim i u Krehin Gradac, mjestašce udaljeno dva kilometra od Međugorja. Tamo su snimili žutu vilu okruženu visokim zidovima i nadzornim kamerama. Ona pripada vidjelici Vicki Ivanković, ali nje u tom trenutku nije bilo kod kuće." | |||
| ;{{red|TRANSLATION}} | |||
| "Ivan Dragičević, one of the seers, also cashed in his visions well, thus wrote Goran Pandža for Tačno.net. While he carries the Madonna's messages around the world, Dragičević's wifre, former miss Massachusetts, Loreen Murphy, managed a tourist agency for pilgrims in Medjugorje." | |||
| Journalists of the Italian TV show "Piazza Pulita" visited a street in Medjugorje where four of the six visionaries live. Locals call the neighborhood Beverly Hills. There they tried to talk to Ivan Dragičević's family, but they could not find him. However, they found an elderly lady who introduced herself as Ivan's mother and then showed the journalists a hotel that allegedly belonged to Mirjana Dragičević-Soldo. | |||
| The article also states that Ivan Dragičević opened a hotel in Medjugorje and bought a property with a swimming pool worth a million dollars. They then went to Krehin Gradac, a town two kilometers from Medjugorje. There they filmed a yellow villa surrounded by high walls and surveillance cameras. She belongs to the seer Vicka Ivanković, but she was not at home at that time." | |||
| --] (]) 13:23, 3 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==== IVANKA IVANKOVIĆ (p. 36. Kutlesša) ==== | |||
| "Ivanka, zvana i Ivica, rođena je u Bijakovićima, župa Međugorje, 21. lipnja 1966., od oca Ivana i majke Jagode. Stanovala je i pohađala srednju školu u Mostaru. | |||
| Ukazivačka pojava pričala joj je svoj život od 7. siječnja do 22. svibnja 1983. Točno stotinu i četrdeset dana. | |||
| Posljednji redoviti susret s nebeskom pojavom bio je 7. svibnja 1985. Nikada u životu nije vidjela "Gospu" nježniju i ljepšu kao toga dana. "Danas je imala najljepšu haljinu koju sam ikad vidjela u životu. Ta je haljina svjetlucala na srebro i zlato." U istim haljinama bila su i dva anđela koja su pratila "Gospu". Pitala je Ivanku što bi "željela". "A ja sam zamolila da vidim svoju majku." Nakon grljenja i poljubaca viđenje je nestalo. I onda poruka: "Drago moje dijete, danas je naš zadnji sastanak. Ne budi žalosna, jer ću ti dolaziti na svaku godišnjicu, osim ove. Dijete moje, nemoj pomisliti da si nešto pogriješila, te ti zbog tog neću više dolaziti. Ne, nisi! Planove koje je imao moj sin i Ja, Ti si prihvatila svim srcem i izvršila… Ivanka, milosti koje si dobila ti i tvoja braća, nije dobio nitko na zemlji do sada!" | |||
| Nakon sat vremena viđenja, razgovora, Ivanka je poljubila pojavu koja je sa svojim anđelima vinula u nebeske visine. | |||
| Ivanka ima "ukazanja" samo jednom godišnje, 25. lipnja, na obljetnicu "Gospinih ukazanja". Njoj nije potrebno više, jer je ionako dobila milosti kao "nitko na zemlji do sada". | |||
| Povjerena joj je i 10. tajna, 6. svibnja 1985. | |||
| Udala se za Rajka Eleza s kojim ima troje djece. Živi u Međugorju." | |||
| ;{{red|TRANSLATION}} | |||
| "Ivanka, also known as Ivica, was born in Bijakovići, Medjugorje Parish, on 21 June 1966, to father Ivan and mother Jagoda. She lived and attended high school in Mostar. | |||
| The appearing phenomenon told her its life from 7 January to 22 May 1983. Exactly one hundred and forty days. | |||
| The last regular encounter with the celestial apparition was on 7 May 1985. She had never in her life seen "Our Lady" softer and more beautiful than that day. "She had the most beautiful dress I've ever seen in my life today. That dress sparkled in silver and gold." In the same dresses were also two angels who accompanied "Our Lady". She asked Ivanka what she would "like". "And I asked to see my mother." After hugs and kisses, the apparition disappeared. And then the message: "My dear child, today is our last meeting. Don't be sad, because I will come to you for every anniversary, except for this one. My child, don't think that you did something wrong, and because of that, I will not come to you again. No, You did not! The plans that my son and I had, You accepted with all your heart and carried out... Ivanka, the graces that you and your brothers have received, no one on earth has received so far!" | |||
| After an hour of seeing, talking, Ivanka kissed the apparition that soared with its angels to the heights of heaven. | |||
| Ivanka has "apparitions" only once a year, on 25 June, on the anniversary of "Our Lady's apparitions". She doesn’t need it anymore because she’s received graces like “no one on earth so far” anyway. | |||
| She was also entrusted with the 10th secret, on 6 May 1985. | |||
| She married Rajko Elez with whom she has three children. He lives in Medjugorje." | |||
| --] (]) 13:45, 3 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==== JAKOV ČOLO (p. 37 Kutleša) ==== | |||
| "Jakov, zvani Jakša ili Jakiša, rođen je 6. ožujka 1971. u Bijakovićima, od oca Ante i majke Jake. | |||
| Od 25. lipnja 1981. imao je gotovo svakodnevna "ukazanja" do 12. rujna 1998. | |||
| Pojava mu je pričala svoj život od 7. siječnja do 11. travnja 1983. | |||
| U jednome intervjuu 1993., u jeku rata, kaže: "Gospa me i danas, kao i kao i svaki dan posljednjih dvanaest godina, tražila da se molim za mir u bivšoj Jugoslaviji. Djevica me uvjerila da mogu zaustaviti rat svojim molitvama…" | |||
| S putovanja po Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama, dne 12. rujna 1998. javio se u Međugorje, u župni ured, ističući da mu se toga dana Gospa "ukazala" posljednji put. Viđenje je trajalo pola sata: od 11,15 do 11,45. Ta mu je pojava rekla da će mu se od sada ukazivati samo jednom godišnje, i to licem na Božić. Povjerila mu je 10. "tajnu". I dok mu je to povjeravala, bila je "tužna". A njega je ipak blago tješila: "Nemoj biti tužan, jer kao majka ja ću biti uvijek s tobom i kao svaka prava majka nikada te neću ostaviti". | |||
| Oženio se Talijankom Anna-Lisom Barozzi, 11. travnja 1993. Imaju troje djece. Živi u Međugorju." | |||
| ;{{red|TRANSLATION}} | |||
| "Jakov, aka Jakša or Jakiša, was born on 6 March 1971 in Bijakovići, to father Ante and mother Jaka. | |||
| From 25 June 1981, he had almost daily "apparitions" until 12 September 1998. | |||
| The appearance told him her life from 7 January 7 to 11 April 1983. | |||
| In an interview from 1993, during the war, he said: "The Madonna today, as every other day of the last 12 years, asked me to pray for peace in former Yugoslavia. The Virgin convinced me that I could stop the war with my prayers." | |||
| On a trip to the United States of America, on 12 September 1998, he reported to Medjugorje, to the parish office, emphasising that Our Lady "appeared" to him for the last time that day. The vision lasted half an hour: from 11.15 to 11.45. This apparition told him that from now on she would appear only once a year during Christmas. She confided to him the 10th "secret." And while she confided it to him, she was "sad." And yet she comforted him mildly: "Don't be sad, because as a mother I will always be with you and like any real mother I will never leave you." | |||
| He married Italian Anna-Lisa Barozzi on April 11, 1993. They have three children. He lives in Medjugorje." | |||
| --] (]) 13:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==== MARIJA PAVLOVIĆ (pp. 28-32; Kutlesa) ==== | |||
| Marija, zvana i Marina, rođena je 1. travnja 1965. u Bijakovićima, župa Međugorje, od oca Filipa i majke Ive. Srednju je školu pohađala u Mostaru. Darovala je bubreg svomu bratu da mu spasi život. "Vidjelica" je od drugoga dana "ukazanja", 25. lipnja 1981. | |||
| R. Laurentin bio je čak uvjeren da će Bog nju kao poseban međugorski plod pozvati k sebi: "Ali u prosincu 1984., primjećuje msgr. Franić, Marija je imala pred-infarkt koji začuđuje u njezinoj dobi. Možemo se pitati priprema li se ona, kao i Vicka, da prerano napuste ovu zemlju: nešto što je uopće ne bi koštalo jer nema druge želje doli one da dođe k Bogu i Gospi". | |||
| U vezi s pokušajem življenja u samostanu, Marija je nedavno, na upit jednoga talijanskog novinara: "Zašto od vas nitko nije postao svećenik ili redovnica. Petero vas se vjenčalo. Znači li to da je danas važno stvarati kršćanske obitelji?", ispripovjedila ovu svoju odluku: | |||
| "Kroz tolike sam godine mislila da ću biti časna sestra. Bila sam počela posjećivati jedan samostan, želja da tamo pođem bila je vrlo jaka. Ali mi je časna poglavarica rekla: 'Marija, ako kaniš doći, dobro došla; ali ako biskup odluči da ne smiješ govoriti o Međugorju, moraš slušati.' U tom trenutku počela sam razmišljati da je možda moje zvanje u tome da svjedočim ono što sam vidjela i osjetila, i da ću moći tražiti put svetosti također izvan samostana". | |||
| Međutim, ipak je pokušala biti u "samostanu" nekoliko mjeseci. "Poslije 26. veljače 1988. - piše Laurentin -, Marija je pošla s fra Tomislavom Vlašićem u Parmu s jednom skupinom od 15-ak mladića i djevojaka koji su bili izabrani u Međugorju. On ih je poveo na petomjesečne duhovne vježbe, posvećene isključivo molitvi. Sve je otpočelo u zanosu i posvemašnjoj predanosti. Ipak, bio je to neuspjeh. Tomislav je vodio svoju zajednicu prema porukama Agnes Heupel, Njemice, koja je izliječena u Međugorju. Marija, čije su se mjesečne poruke našle na rubu, nije se s time slagala. Paolo Lunetti, koji se već pošteno bio zaljubio u nju, i koji će je 5 godina kasnije uzeti, izgladio je taj njezin spor, podupro je njezin izlazak iz zajednice i pomogao joj da objavi jedno otvoreno pismo koje je izazvalo veliku senzaciju u Italiji."3 U zajednicu fra Tomislava Vlašića, "Kraljice mira, potpuno smo Tvoji, po Mariji k Isusu", Marija je ušla svršetkom veljače 1988. i izišla iz nje u srpnju iste godine. Zašto je došlo do raskida? | |||
| Fra Tomislav Vlašić, koji od 1987. nije više član Hercegovačke franjevačke provincije, našao se u Italiji gdje je, zajedno sa spomenutom međugorskom "obraćenicom" i "ozdravljenicom", Agnes Heupel, kao neki mistični par, osnovao mješovitu duhovnu udrugu s navedenim naslovom. Izdao je i brošuru, u kojoj se poziva na to da je, na temelju "Gospina" odgovora preko Marije Pavlović, ta udruga pravo djelo Gospino. On piše: "Između ostaloga postavio sam pitanje Gospi preko Marije Pavlović. Marija mi je donijela odgovor Gospin, od 8. ožujka 1987: "Ovo je Božji plan".4 Na kraju brošure i Marija je donijela svoje svjedočanstvo. U njemu između ostaloga ona piše: "Kao što vidite, Gospa je dala program za zajednicu: 'Kraljice mira, potpuno smo Tvoji, po Mariji k Isusu' i vodi ovu zajednicu preko o. Tomislava i Agnes, preko koje dolaze poruke za zajednicu." | |||
| Međutim na Vlašićevu rečenicu, i na to svoje "svjedočanstvo", osvrće se Marija u svojoj izjavi od 11. srpnja 1988. i niječe da je ikada bilo ikakvih "poruka" preko nje za tu zajednicu i za to "djelo Božje". | |||
| Marija doslovno piše: Osjećam moralnu obavezu da, pred Bogom, Gospom i Crkvom Isusa Krista, dam slijedeće izjave: | |||
| 1) Iz tekstova 'Jedan poziv u Marijanskoj godini' i iz svijedočanstva koje nosi moj potpis, proizlazi da sam ja donjela Gospin odgovor na jedno pitanje fra Tomislava V. Taj odgovor bi bio: 'Ovo je Božji plan', odnosno proizlazi da sam ja s Gospine strane dala fra Tomislavu V. potvrdu i izričito odobrenje ovog Djela i programa započetog u Italiji sa molitvenom grupom iz Međugorja. | |||
| 2) Sada izjavljujem da nisam nikada pitala Gospu bilo koju potvrdu za ovo Djelo započeto od fra Tomislava V. i Agnes Heupel. Nikada nisam izričito pitala Gospu za sebe da li trebam imati udjela u ovom Djelu i nikada nisam primila od Gospe bilo kakvu uputu vezanu za grupu, osim što je svatko od nas trebao biti slobodan da napravi izbor za vlastiti život. | |||
| 3) Iz tekstova i iz svjedočanstva koje nosi moj potpis proizlazi da mi je Gospa ukazala da zajednica i program fra Tomislava V. i Agnes Heupel, su put Božji za mene i za ostale. Sada ponavljam da nikada nisam od Gospe primila ni dala fra Tomislavu ili bilo kojoj drugoj osobi jednu takvu potvrdu i uputu s Gospine strane. | |||
| 4) Moje prvo svjedočanstvo, takvo kakvo je objavljeno na hrvatskom i talijanskom jeziku, ne odgovara istini. Osobno nisam imala nikakvu želju da dajem bilo kakvu pismenu izjavu. Fra Tomislav V. mi je savjetovao, naglašavajući to više puta, da napišem kao vidjelica jedno svjedočanstvo koje svijet očekuje | |||
| 5) Trebam također izjaviti, da sadržaj pisma kako je prikazan i moj potpis izazivaju neka pitanja. Ja za sada na sva moguća pitanja mogu dati ovaj jedinstven odgovor, kojeg dajem, to ponavljam, pred Bogom, pred Gospom i Crkvom Isusa Krista: Sve ono što može biti shvaćeno kao potvrda i izričito odobrenje ovog Djela fra Tomislava V. i Agnes Heupel, od strane Gospe preko mene, apsolutno ne odgovara istini i isto tako istini ne odgovara ideja da sam ja imala spontanu želju da napišem ono svjedočanstvo. | |||
| 6) smatram, kao svoju moralnu obavezu, da ponovim, ponovno pred Bogom, Gospom i Crkvom, slijedeće izjave: | |||
| Nakon sedam godina svakodnevnih ukazanja, iza najintimnijeg iskustva kojeg imam o nježnosti i razboritosti Gospinoj, iza svega onoga što se mogu sjetiti o Gospinim savjetima i Gospinim odgovorima na moja osobna pitanja, mogu izjaviti da nije održiva ideja da Nebeski plan i globalna Gospina poruka u Međugorju imaju za svetu posljedicu i proces željen od Gospe ovo Djelo i program započet u Italiji od strane fra Tomislava V. i Agnes Heupel. | |||
| Takođe je neophodno nadodati ovoj izjavi da se svakodnevna ukazanja nastavljaju. | |||
| Ovu izjavu potpisujem pred Presvetim Sakramentom i namjenjujem je svima onima koji su srcem vezani za "Djelo" Gospe u Međugorju | |||
| 11. 7. 1988. Marija Pavlović. | |||
| O Marijinoj udaji za spomenutoga Paola Lunettija opširno su izvijestile dnevne novine. Obitelj Lunetti posjetila je Međugorje 1987. i upoznala se s Marijom. Vjenčala se s Paolom na blagdan Male Gospe u milanskoj crkvi "Santissimi Apostoli e Nazaro", 1993. "Mladenci su na bračno putovanje otišli na francusku Azurnu obalu, a živjet će u šesterokatnoj palači u Monzi",7 obznanili su radoznali novinari u samim naslovima. | |||
| Marija do sada ima devet "tajni". "Viđenja" ima svakoga dana. Preko nje iz Milana ili iz Međugorja "Gospa" šalje mjesečne "poruke" međugorskoj župi i svemu svijetu. Takve su "poruke" najprije prolazile kroz ruke fra Tomislava Vlašića, zatim pokojnoga fra Slavka Barbarića, a nakon njegove smrti kao posrednik javio se jedan sadašnji međugorski kapelan. | |||
| Marija s Paolom ima troje djece. | |||
| ;{{red|TRANSLATION}} | |||
| "Marija, also known as Marina, was born on 1 April 1965 in Bijakovići, Medjugorje Parish, to father Filip and mother Iva. She attended high school in Mostar. She donated a kidney to her brother to save his life. She's the "seer" from the second day of the "apparition", 25 June 1981. | |||
| R. Laurentin was even convinced that God would call her to himself as a special Medjugorje fruit: "But in December 1984, notes Msgr. Franić, Marija had a pre-infarction which is astonishing at her age. We can wonder if she is preparing, as well as Vicka, to leave this country too soon: something that would not cost her at all because she has no other desire than to come to God and Our Lady". | |||
| Regarding the attempt to live in a convent, Mary recently, when asked by an Italian journalist: "Why none of you became a priest or a nun. Five of you got married. Does that mean that it is important to create Christian families today?" explained her decision: | |||
| "For so many years I thought I would be a nun. I had started visiting a convent, the desire to go there was very strong. But the nun said to me, 'Marija, if you intend to come, welcome; but if the bishop decides that you must not talk about Medjugorje, you must listen.' At that moment, I began to think that perhaps my vocation was to witness to what I had seen and felt and that I would be able to seek the path of holiness also outside the convent." | |||
| However, she still tried to be in the “convent” for a few months. "After 26 February 1988 - Laurentin writes - Marija went with Fr. Tomislav Vlašić to Parma with a group of about 15 young men and women who were elected in Medjugorje. He took them to five months of spiritual exercises, dedicated exclusively to prayer. It all started with enthusiasm and utter devotion, but it was a failure, and Tomislav led his community according to the messages of Agnes Heupel, a German woman who was healed in Medjugorje, and Marija, whose monthly messages were on the brink. Paolo Lunetti, who was already fairly in love with her, and who would take her 5 years later, smoothed out her dispute, supported her exit from the community, and helped her publish an open letter that caused a great sensation in Italy." In the community of Fr. Tomislav Vlašić, "Queen of Peace, we are completely Yours, through Mary to Jesus", Marija entered at the end of February 1988 and left it in July of the same year. Why did the break up occur? | |||
| Fr. Tomislav Vlašić, who has not been a member of the Franciscan Province of Herzegovina since 1987, found himself in Italy where, together with the aforementioned Medjugorje "convert" and "healer", Agnes Heupel, as a mystical couple, founded a mixed spiritual association with the aforementioned title. He also published a brochure, in which he states that, based on "Gospa's" answer through Marija Pavlović, that association is the real work of Gospa. He writes: "Among other things, I asked Our Lady through Marija Pavlović. Marija brought me the answer from Our Lady, dated 8 March 1987: "This is God's plan." At the end of the brochure, Marija also gave her testimony and writes: "As you can see, Our Lady has given a program for the community: 'Queen of Peace, we are completely Yours, through Mary to Jesus' and leads this community through Fr. Tomislav and Agnes, through whom messages for the community come." | |||
| However, Marija refers to Vlašić's sentence, and to her "testimony", in her statement of 11 July 1988, and denies that there were ever any "messages" through her for that community and for that "work of God." Marija literally writes: "I feel a moral obligation to make the following statements before God, Our Lady and the Church of Jesus Christ: | |||
| 1) From the texts 'One Call in the Marian Year' and from the testimony bearing my signature, it follows that I brought Our Lady's answer to one question of Fr. Tomislav V. That answer would be: 'This is God's plan', ie it follows that I, from Our Lady, gave Fr. Tomislav V. confirmation and explicit approval of this Work and program that began in Italy with a prayer group from Medjugorje. | |||
| 2) I now declare that I have never asked Our Lady any confirmation for this Work begun by Br. Tomislav V. and Agnes Heupel. I never explicitly asked Our Lady for myself if I should have a share in this Work and I never received from Our Lady any instruction regarding the group, except that each of us should have been free to make a choice for our own lives. | |||
| 3) From the texts and from the testimony carried by my signature, it follows that Our Lady pointed out to me that the community and program of Fr. Tomislav V. and Agnes Heupel are the way of God for me and for others. I now repeat that I have never received or given such confirmation and instruction from Our Lady to Fr. Tomislav or any other person. | |||
| 4) My first testimony, as published in Croatian and Italian, does not correspond to the truth. Personally, I had no desire to make any written statement. Tomislav V. advised me, emphasising this many times, to write as a seer's a testimony that the world expects. | |||
| 5) I should also state that the content of the letter as shown and my signature raise some questions. For the time being, I can give this unique answer to all possible questions, which I give, I repeat, before God, before Our Lady and the Church of Jesus Christ: All that can be understood as confirmation and explicit approval of this Work by Br. Tomislav V. and Agnes Heupel, by Our Lady through me, absolutely does not correspond to the truth and also does not correspond to the truth the idea that I had a spontaneous desire to write that testimony. | |||
| 6) I consider, as my moral obligation, to repeat, again before God, Our Lady and the Church, the following statements: | |||
| After seven years of daily apparitions, behind the most intimate experience I have of Our Lady's tenderness and prudence, behind everything I can think of Our Lady's advice and Our Lady's answers to my personal questions, I can say that the idea of a Heavenly Plan and Our Lady's Global Message in Medjugorje having as the sacred consequence and process desired by Our Lady this Work and program begun in Italy by Br. Tomislav V. and Agnes Heupel is not viable. | |||
| It is also necessary to add to this statement that the daily apparitions continue. | |||
| I sign this statement before the Blessed Sacrament and dedicate it to all those who are heartily attached to the "Work" of Our Lady in Medjugorje. | |||
| 11 July 1988. Marija Pavlović | |||
| Marija's marriage to the aforementioned Paolo Lunetti was extensively reported in the daily newspapers. The Lunetti family visited Medjugorje in 1987 and met Marija. She married Paolo on the Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Milan's Santissimi Apostoli e Nazaro Church in 1993. | |||
| Marija has nine "secrets" so far. There are "visions" every day. Through it, from Milan or Medjugorje, "Our Lady" sends monthly "messages" to the Medjugorje parish and the whole world. Such "messages" first passed through the hands of Fr. Tomislav Vlašić, then the late Fr. Slavko Barbarić, and after his death, a current Medjugorje chaplain appeared as a mediator. | |||
| Mary and Paolo have three children." | |||
| --] (]) 18:15, 4 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == The article as of Nov. 9, 2020 == | |||
| {{rfc|reli|rfcid=0663D8A}} | |||
| There are several issues that need addressing from a third-party. --] (]) 15:02, 19 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Started a new section because it was getting too long to add a comment. {{ping|Sundayclose}} {{ping|Elizium23}} {{ping|Governor Sheng }} | |||
| I copied and pasted my comments on 11/9 from The Article as of Oct 24th discussion see below: | |||
| :I had the whole day to edit and I did a tremendous amount of research, found references where needed and I put in a lot of time on this page. I think you will be happy with everything I did. If not, please let me know here and we can discuss it. I spent a lot of time improving the page, adding photos and some new information. Let me know what you all think. Also no one has been around for a couple of days. Red Rose 13 (talk) 02:02, 9 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::G Sheng you reverted all of my edits without reading them all and named them all as onesided. If you revert them all again, I will be forced to invite more editors to join us.Also come here and explain your problem.Red Rose 13 (talk) 21:06, 9 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::Of course, I reverted them, as we have agreed - no major inclusions without discussion. What you are doing is a definition of being hypocritical. You insisted that I discuss my edits BEFORE adding them to the article, which I did. Not only that, but I also took so much time to actually TRANSLATE my sources, because something "felt off" to you. I assure you, nothing's off nor I misused my sources, but because of your insistence, I agreed to translate them. I gave so much effort to that. And you, coming again doing the thing you told me I shouldn't and telling me that I should discuss "my problem" with your edits is effing hypocritical. Invite the whole Misplaced Pages if you like. Even better. Moreover, I demand a quote from your sources. --] (]) 23:59, 9 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|Red Rose 13}}, please be careful not to break the 3rr rule. --] (]) 00:09, 10 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::yes and the same rule applies to you! ] (]) 00:14, 10 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Don't worry. --] (]) 00:16, 10 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::I just wrote a very long response that got kicked off by your addition comment. So I have to start over. You are doing blanket reverting. You are reverting edits that include, spacing, spelling, researching and adding photos, sizing photos and placing, etc. I researched and added two new facts along with their references that you reverted which is against Misplaced Pages Guidelines. I think you should study my edits and find the part that is bothering you and bring it here so we can discuss. It was the editor Sundayclose who insisted you provide your translations from Croatian and the he insisted you find a native Croatian to check your editing. I did however agree with. No need to provide a quote from my sources because if you had read the edits you would have already seen them. ] (]) 00:24, 10 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Happend to me many times. I also researched and added few new facts and referenced them. You removed them. Which is, of course, against WP Guidelines. You should study my edits and tell me what is bothering you, and I'll listen to you. I need a quote from your sources, especially part about Fatima you included. It's a c/p from the internet. --] (]) 00:30, 10 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Ok agreed I will go through all of your additions that I see as a problem and bring them here. This will take some time so in the mean time I am placing your Controversial section at the end of the article. '''Be specific about what you need - provide a link'''. ] (]) 00:44, 10 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|Red Rose 13}}, I'm still waiting for a quote from Sister Emmanuel's book. What I noticed is that it's a c/p from the internet. Please provide a reliable quote. --] (]) 12:10, 11 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|Governor Sheng}} I am now repeating what I need in order to give you the quote - '''Be specific about what you need - provide a link.''' Thank you ] (]) 15:20, 11 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::I am going to be adding to the section about Sister Lucia. Leave it as it is. I incorporated some of what you added.] (]) 15:57, 11 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Misplaced Pages guides us to create a balanced article.] (]) 16:16, 11 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Funny to see how you completely went to rampage considering that previously you wanted me to discuss my edits before incorporating them. However, be assured, all of your edits will be reviewed properly and your sneaky edits will not go unnoticed. Stop removing Ratzinger's statement about John Paul's alleged sympathies towards Medjugorje. He was referring to those quotes you mentioned. --] (]) 15:56, 16 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Regarding Sister Emmanuel Maillard's claims. Provide a quote from the book which supports your edits. I noticed that your quote is mostly a c/p from the internet. Quote it properly. Second. This cannot be included as a special section. An extraordinary claim such as this interestingly enough cannot be found anywhere else except in her book. Neither do supporting websites of the Medjugorje phenomenon mention this ever! Maillard isn't a good scholarly source, as she is never quoted in any other scientific paper, as far as I may notice, nor is her claim mentioned by anyone else. Moreover, even Cardinal Ratzinger said that the list of quotes about him and Pope John Paul is a "mere fabrication" or "complete invention", depends how you translate the German term "frei erfunden". She's highly questionable as a source. --] (]) 15:56, 16 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Still you have not given me the quote in question. Either copy and and paste it here or provide a link. Emmanuel is not the only reference supporting this quote. The quotes are from confidantes of Pope John Paul II. They did not come from list. Again the person editing here is pushing his own point of view which is against Misplaced Pages guidelines.] (]) 21:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| {{quote|Lucia's nephew, Father Salinho, who is a Salesian priest and lives in Portugal, reported that Sister Lucia had not only continued receiving visions of Fatima but she also confirmed the apparitions of Our Lady of Medjugorje. In some of these apparitions, the Virgin Mary spoke to Sister Lúcia of her continued work in Medjugorje. Pope John Paul II confirmed what the Virgin Mary said when he told Bishop Hnilica, "...Medjugorje is the continuation and it is the completion of Fatima!"}} | |||
| This is the part. --] (]) 23:15, 16 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Now, regarding Ratzinger's rebuke of Sister Emmanuel's claims. He said that all the quotes collected by Emmanuel in connection to Pope's and his statements are false. This includes writing of Bishop Hnilica and Murilo Sebastiao Ramos Krieger. | |||
| I'll also ask you to provide me quotes for these edits. | |||
| {{quote|Privately to a number of Catholic friends Pope John Paul II confided on how he felt about Medjugorje. Monsignor Murilo Sebastiao Ramos Krieger, Archbishop of Florianopolis in Brazil was going on a pilgrimage to Medjugorje for a fourth time and Pope John Paul II confided and confirmed to Krieger that "Medjugorje is the spiritual center for the world!" Cardinal Frantisek Tomasek, Archbishop Emeritus of Prague, heard Pope John Paul II say that, if he wasn't pope, he would have liked to have been in Medjugorje helping with the pilgrimages.}} | |||
| --] (]) 23:18, 16 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :Gov Sheng is making up things to promote his own point of view. The quote above came from the book "Why He is a Saint." If you had looked at the references he would have known that. Apparently Ratzinger was not a confidante of Saint Pope John Paul II and these three people were. These were PRIVATE documented exchanges that Ratzinger would no nothing about. There are hundreds if not thousands of people that have their view about this. But these were PRIVATE exchanges. Gov Sheng is stretching the truth in order to fit his own point of view.] (]) 00:21, 17 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :: In regards to Father Salinho which is also documented in Why He is a Saint - that is why I put the reference there. Here is the quote: "Medjugorje is he continuation of Fatima, it is the completion of Fatima." which is actually in the Article.] (]) 00:36, 17 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :{{u|Red Rose 13}}, I have removed your additions (I believe there were two paragraphs) from the JPII article and request that you justify them here before re-adding and before returning to the edit-war with Governor Sheng. Consider yourself outnumbered. | |||
| : | |||
| :The JPII quotes are sensationalistic and there is a good chance they have been manufactured. There is a great traffic in dead saints false quotations, I have seen it with Mother Teresa time and again. Therefore, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. I would like to see at least three independent, reliable secondary sources that support the material. Nothing self-published, nothing by vanity presses or mom-and-pop Medjugorje-cottage-industry presses. We need solid sourcing for this. With more and better sources I would be unable to stand in your way; hopefully it would also satisfy Governor Sheng. But I have a very thin skin for true believers in a condemned apparition such as this one, and so mark my words, I will be watching these pages for shenanigans and stepping in where necessary. ] (]) 06:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :: I have been editing on Misplaced Pages for about 8 years now and know how to provide references. I've researched Sister Emmanuels background and found her to be credible. I can provide what I found if that would be helpful, (2) Bishop Hnilica shares this conversation on his tape "Fatima". (3) I think you might have missed the third reference "Why He Is A Saint." Also you are mistaken about me, I am not a Catholic nor have I ever been. And I am not involved in shenanigans. I take editing on Misplaced Pages very seriously, I suggest you ask questions rather than accuse a fellow editor. Sorry but your bias is showing when you make statements like "condemned apparition" when in reality Pope Francis says to reporters ..."the original apparitions more than three decades ago deserve further study, but voiced doubt in the supposed ongoing visions." It is far from settled and my intensive research is showing me this. I welcome your input from a neutral, unbiased intent. ] (]) 08:19, 19 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| The book "Medjugorje: The 90's" by Sister Emmanuel is not self published and is published by Queenship Publishing Company She has written 5 other books. | |||
| The book "Why He Is A Saint" published by Rizzoli International Publications, NY. Authors: Monsignor Slawomir Odor, Judicial Vicar of the Appelation Tribunal of the Vicariate of Rome. and Saverio Gaeta Editor in chief of Famiglia Christiana and authored books on major Catholic figures, including Mother Teresa and Padre Pio.] (]) 08:53, 19 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| I found the little pdf created by Don Dražen Kutleša. You are quoting from a PDF not a published book. (1) I think your reference is not acceptable. (2) Plus you are using google translate to post on Misplaced Pages. (3) On top of that from page 283 using google translate, like you are: all it says it is a memorandum of various alleged The Pope and his statements on Medjugorje We have no idea which statements or even if all are included. (4) Another book, my reference, has the same information (5) these are three PRIVATE conversations with the pope that Ratzinger would have NEVER known about. (6) It seems to me Kutlesa is biased. ] (]) 01:09, 17 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :Kutlesa's pdf looks like it is self-published and only 3000 copies were made. I used google translate just like Govenor Sheng is doing to read some of the document. We need all references on this page to be held at the same standard. ] (]) 09:00, 19 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::Lol. It's not self-published. It's not a pdf. It's a book. :) It's published by the Episcopal Ordinariate in Mostar. . The Ordinariate just uploaded it in a pdf form. That's it. Also, saying Kutleša is biased while presenting a Medjugorje agitator as a reliable source is really funny. :) His book was used as a source for scholarly works () at ] (Prague, Czechia ), ] (Osijek, Croatia ), and ] (], Turkey ). Sister Emmanuel's books weren't used anywhere as a reference at any higher education institutions as far as I'm aware. I'm not using google translate. I speak Croatian very well. Ako mi ne vjeruješ, zovni nekoga od hrvatskih wikipedista da ti to posloži u glavi. Mogu pričat dijalektom: po dalmatinski da ti rečen po stoti put da rvacki vrlo dobro govorin ili buš po zagorski kak da ti velim da hrvatski dobro govorim. --] (]) 10:17, 19 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::If Ratzinger rebuked those statements, we should hold him as a reliable source. He was a close associate of John Paul's. This must be mentioned in the article. All of the statements collected by Sister Emanuel were rebuked by Cardinal Ratzinger as "mere fabrications". That's a fact. Also, the Vatican's State Secretariate itself rebuked Hnilica's claim as well. So, we're not dealing only with Ratzinger here. Thus, Hnilica's claim is highly, highly questionable. --] (]) 10:22, 19 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|Red Rose 13}}. Again. I'm asking you to provide me full quotes from the sources I told you about. --] (]) 10:26, 19 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Thank you for calling other editors to this page. I have given you the full quotes already not sure why you can't find them. I am off to an appointment and will continue the discussion when I return. Hopefully the coming editors will read the full talk page before moving forward. I will be presenting a BIO on Sister Emmanuel when I return. Also bear in mind that Ratzinger was never with the Pope in all of his meetings or with him 24/7 and has no idea about whether it happened or not. You can put his statement in but it doesn't relate to the Popes personal feelings. Perhaps Ratzinger was coming from the "official" church statements not the Pope personal ones.] (]) 16:49, 19 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Provide full quotes from Oder's book as well as Maillard's book. You're avoiding to provide a full quote. I think you're finding random quotes on the Internet, and just use the source their using. ( as an example) --] (]) 19:28, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Red Rose 13's misue of sources == | |||
| {{ping|Red Rose 13}} has misused sources on several occasions. They are finding random quotes on the Internet and uses the sources from the Internet as if they checked them and read them themselves. | |||
| '''Case 1 - Sister Emmanuel Maillard's book.''' | |||
| They used her book as a reference claiming that Sister Lucia's nephew told that his aunt has visions of Our Lady of Medjugorje. | |||
| Example - | |||
| Comparison - | |||
| The internet: | |||
| {{quote|According to Sister Lucia’s own nephew, Father Salinho — a Salesian priest who lives in Portugal — Sister Lucia continued receiving visions of the Virgin Mary long after 1917, and some of these apparitions of the Virgin spoke to Sister Lucia of the Madonna’s continued work in Medjugorje. This report of Father Salinho’s was documented by the French author Sister Emmanuel Maillard in her book Medjugorje, Triumph of the Heart! (Queenship, 2004), a revised edition of Sister Emmanuel’s earlier popular work, '''Medjugorje: the 90s.''' Pope John Paul II met with Sister Emmanuel, was given a copy of her earlier book, and therefore this knowledge – between Fatima’s main visionary and the apparitions in Medjugorje – may not have been foreign to the Vatican.}} | |||
| Red Rose: | |||
| {{quote|Her nephew, Father Salinho, who is a Salesian priest and lives in ], reported that Sister Lucia had not only continued receiving visions of Fatima but she also confirmed the apparitions of Our Lady of Medjugorje. Some of these apparitions of the Virgin Mary spoke to Sister Lucia of the her continued work in Medjugorje.}} | |||
| In this case, Red Rose cites page 71 (out of blue), and references the same page where they mention that Bishop Hnilica quoted Pope John Paul II. . | |||
| :'''***Here you are accusing me again. Assume good faith - Assuming good faith (AGF) is a fundamental principle on Misplaced Pages. It is the assumption that editors' edits and comments are made in good faith. WP:GF You see I did not get this information from the internet. I have the book in my hands. Page 71 is the actual page in the book.'''] (]) 20:43, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::And the quote about Hnlica? Also p. 71? Why not provide a full quote as I asked you? --] (]) 21:12, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::Are you actually asking me to type up the whole page and place it here? ] (]) 22:25, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I'm not. I'm asking you to write a few sentences. A paragraph. That notwithstanding, You assumed bad faith against me, so I translated, not a paragraph, but several pages. :) --] (]) 23:21, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Remember it was another editor who asked you to do the translation not me. Stop accusing people! ] (]) 23:43, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| '''Case 2 - Slawomir Oder's book''' | |||
| Example - | |||
| Comparison - | |||
| The Internet: | |||
| {{quote|John Paul II commented to the Archbishop of Slovakia, Pavel Hnilca: “Medjugorje is the continuation of Fatima, it is the completion of Fatima.” ('''Slovimir Oder, Why He is a Saint p. 169''')}} | |||
| Red Rose: | |||
| {{quote|Bishop Hnilica went to Russia on March 25, 1984 with Mother Teresa's rosary, to be present in Russia when Pope John Paul II in Rome consecrated Russia and the whole world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. This consecration fulfilled Our Lady's request in Fatima. When Hnilica returned to Rome, ] invited him to lunch and they shared a three hour lunch talking about the consecration. During that meeting the Pope said, "...Medjugorje is the continuation and fulfillment of Fatima!"}} | |||
| Here, they found somewhat detailed report about Hnilica having a discussion with the Pope , and misused the source they found on the internet]. They also referenced Maillard's books' p. 71 like in Case 1. The same page as a reference for both edits or a mistake? If the first premise is correct, then please, provide a full quote with context, if the latter premise is correct, fix the page number and provide a quote. | |||
| '''Yes I found the error and corrected the page numbers to bring clarification. Thanks for pointing out my error. Again are you actually asking me to type up pages from this book? I have never heard of such a thing. By the way thanks for new quotes and a new online reference!'''] (]) 23:16, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Also because of the difficulties on this page, I bought this book too.] (]) 23:43, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :You're welcome. However, be aware, those links are unreliable as sources. :) You can read them all you like. It was my pleasure. --] (]) 23:23, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::I haven't looked closely to see if they are reliable yet but I will.] (]) 23:39, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| '''Case 3 - Inside the Vatican''' | |||
| Example - | |||
| Comparison - | |||
| The Internet: | |||
| {{quote|In line with Roman Catholic tradition, Pope John Paul II considers the Medjugorje phenomenon an issue for the local hierarchy. It is, however, common knowledge, that the Pope is sympathetic to the Marian site. In a meeting with Bishop Paul Hnilica, the Pope reportedly said: "If I were not the Pope, I would probably have visited Medjugorje by now." During a meeting with the Superior General of the Franciscan Order, the Holy Father asked: "All around Medjugorje bombs have been falling, and yet Medjugorje itself was never damaged. Is this not perhaps a miracle of God?" | |||
| '''This article was taken from the November 1996 issue of "Inside the Vatican." Subscriptions: Inside the Vatican, Martin de Porres Lay Dominican Community, 3050 Gap Knob Road, New Hope, KY 40052, 1-800-789-9494, Fax: 502-325-3091.'''}} | |||
| Red Rose: | |||
| {{quote|During a meeting with the Superior General of the Franciscan Order, the Holy Father asked: "All around Medjugorje bombs have been falling, and yet Medjugorje itself was never damaged. Is this not perhaps a miracle of God?"}} | |||
| Once again, I'm asking you to provide me full quotes with correct pages, for all of the 3 cases I mentioned. --] (]) 20:03, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| '''Please change the title of your little presentation to show good faith. Right now it is accusatory saying that I misused the references when in fact I did not.'''] (]) 23:39, 20 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| '''To the reader be sure to read this whole thing and notice GSheng didn't realize I actually have two of the books he is referring to. Not sure why he keeps accusing me of wrong doing. I did make a mistake on the page numbers which I quickly corrected.'''] (]) 17:58, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :By puting your comment first, this becomes your presentation. Stop vandalising my effing little presentation! :) Now, give me the quotes, I beg you. --] (]) 23:46, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Emmanuel Maillard == | |||
| A simple search on Google Scholar doesn't give any hints about her, nor her book. Her books aren't used by any scientific paper as a reference. | |||
| Emmanuel Maillard is highly unreliable as an author. She listed several quotes attributed to Pope John Paul II as well as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. Ratzinger refuted her claims as "frei erdunden" (or mere fabrications). | |||
| Not only that, but the book {{user|Red Rose 13}} is quoting - Medjugorje gli anni ‘90 (original edition in Italian) was sold with tissues so the readers may wipe away tears (!). What serious literature is being sold with tissues so the readers may wipe their tears? | |||
| The author is some sort of a charismatic. She heads the organisation called Children of Medjugorje dedicated to delivering "five simple messages from Our Lady in Medjugorje" (fasting, praying and so forth). Thus, she can be considered biased on the subject. (At least according to her web-site - https://sremmanuel.org/about-us/]. | |||
| This book nor author cannot be considered reliable. --] (]) 16:20, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :If exist some problems with RS there is a ] where the quality of the source can be determined. I don't follow this topic so I'm not very helpful in this case. ] (]) 18:10, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you Mikola22 for your source. Very useful. ] (]) 19:22, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Looking through her website I notice a number of things : | |||
| *She started Children of Medjugorje, Inc. in France in 1990 with the name, “Les Enfants de Medjugorje” “Children of Medjugorje (COM). Sister Emmanuel created “Children of Medjugorje, Inc.” as a not-for-profit 501 (c) 3 organization. | |||
| *It has been in existence for 30 years! | |||
| *The organization has expanded to fifteen countries - Children of Medjugorje Apostolates around the world | |||
| *Some of her books have been translated into twenty-two languages. | |||
| *The quotes attributed to Saint Pope Paul II are through his close friend and confidante Bishop Hnilica that the Vatican organization would know nothing about. Many other authors are also quoting Hnilica and even a direct interview. | |||
| It seems to me that you may have a bias which is not allowing you to see clearly. You seem to think your way of seeing this is the only way and reject anything else. | |||
| Try using your rationale in looking at your own reference by Dražen Kutleša. I have been able to read a number of quotes from this PDF and there seems to be a lot of interpretation going on with a biased outlook. | |||
| I challenge your reference. I don't think it is neutral. Clearly onesided.] (]) 19:22, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :Maillard also attributed quotes to Cardinal Ratzinger himself. Not just the Pope. Does he knows not what he said? There are many other quotes, bisede Hnilica's that she attributed to both the Pope and the Cardinal. --] (]) 19:31, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::If you are going to accuse a living person of wrongdoing, then you need to back up your accusation. What did Maillard say regarding Ratzinger? Ratzinger and the Pope were not joined at the hip.] (]) 18:06, 22 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::I have no idea what she said about him, all I know that some of the statements were attributed to him, as Ratzinger specifically talks about statements attributed "to Pope '''and to me'''". I don't have this list of statements before me. All we know it was compiled by Maillard. --] (]) 12:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::The only place Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) was mentioned in her book was about Cardinal Ratziner was when he removed Zanic from Medjugorje after he turned in a negative report. ] (]) 22:15, 29 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==Editor Governor Sheng sabatoging & holding the page hostage == | |||
| Governor Sheng, We clearly need to bring these issues to the talk page. Deleting and adding is very disruptive to the page. You are holding the page hostage by using your beliefs. If on this talk page we are unable to agree then we need to ask for help. Do not delete my edits until we can settle the issue.] (]) 23:13, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :What are you talking about? Of course, we should discuss things first. Remember when you deleted my edits without any prior explanation on the talk page? Remember when you requested that we discuss everything before we insert my edits from my sandbox to the article? Then you started a rampage, editing daily, adding new sections, modifying the article - all of that without prior discussion? Hypocrisy at its best! But of course, I agree, we should discuss the issues. :) --] (]) 23:24, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::you were off wikipedia for a good number of days. Most of what I did was structure the page and added information that explains about what has and is happening. Readers expect to come to a page and learn about the subject.] (]) 16:05, 24 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::I wasn't. I'm editing on a daily basis. If I'm gone, it's 24 hrs at most. Remember your comments on me asking you to explain your vacancy for over a few months? "We have other things to do". Stop being hypcritical. Alright? --] (]) 19:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yes I remember you saying that and do you remember my response? You said you were not ready and I was waiting for you to respond.] (]) 19:44, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::When we use a direct quote from someone, we are not allowed to change the wording. You did this here for the 2006 quote. I went to your link, read it all and found the ACTUAL quote and corrected your mistake.] (]) 16:05, 24 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::What quote? --] (]) 19:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::This one 2006. Yesterday I also looked back in the history and found where you changed it. ] (]) 19:44, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::"Like to the Pope John Paul II, many statements affirmative towards Medjugorje were ascribed to Pope Benedict XVI while he was still a cardinal, which he dismissed as "mere fabrications"? That one? --] (]) 21:55, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::The only place Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) was mentioned in her book was about Cardinal Ratziner was when he removed Zanic from Medjugorje after he turned in a negative report. ] (]) 01:48, 26 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :I gave you the link twice already. So here are the actual words from the quote - "We at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith have always wondered how credible apparitions can be for one believer every day and for so many years."{{sfn|Nacional}} | |||
| :And this is how you changed it - We at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith always asked ourselves how can any believer accept as authentic apparitions that occur every day and for so many years?".{{sfn|Nacional}} ] (]) 01:23, 26 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==The article as of Nov. 22, 2020== | |||
| Governor Sheng, I am not sure what you want exactly but hopefully this will help. | |||
| *When Hnilica had lunch with Pope John Paul II, 'the pope took him to his private library and showed him the book by Father Rene Laurentin in which a number of messages from the Queen of Peace were quoted, commenting, "Medjugorje is the continuation of Fatima, it is the completion of Fatima."' | |||
| Why He is a Saint | |||
| *The pope then showed his visitor into his library. He picked up a book by Father Laurentin, read some messages of the Gospa, and said, "You see Pavol, Medjugorje is the continuation and fulfillment of Fatima." | |||
| Medgugorje - The 90's | |||
| ] (]) 17:40, 22 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Does Oder uses a reference for this passage in particular? --] (]) 12:43, 23 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::From the preface of "Why He is a Saint" page 7, Slawomir Odir was appointed as the postulator (an official who presents a plea for beatification or canonization in the Roman Catholic Church) of the cause of beautification and canonization of Pope John Paul II. Cardinal Camillo Ruini informed him on May 13, 2005. | |||
| Here is Oder's reference, four condensed volumes of Positio : In Chapter: A Tribute to the Truth - "The declarations from 114 persons were heard: 35 Cardinals, 20 archbishops & bishops, 11 priests, 5 religioius, 3 nuns, 36 lay Catholics, 3 non-Catholics, and a Jew. Their declarations, along with other documents and writings, filled the thousands of pages of the Copia Pubblica from which were drawn the four condensed volumes of Positio." ..."To gather and evaluate all this material, as well as to listen to the witnesses who took part in this process, has been for me and for my colleagues a truly demanding job. Without doubt, it was also indispensable, for it allowed us to corroborate the reputation for saintliness of John Paul II, providing a precious tribute to the truth. A truth that, thanks to the voices of those who have helped to preserve it intact, now shines incontestable and brilliant." ] (]) 19:12, 23 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :Oders book has more testimonials which I am adding to the Popes section. I am assuming it is alright with you.] (]) 19:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::You didn't understood me. I was asking for this specific statement. I'm not asking about Oder himself. I'm asking did he use Sister Emmanuel Maillard as a reference for the Pope's statement as a reference. --] (]) 19:18, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::First,clearly if you read both quotes, it is obvious that he did not. Secondly, being the postulator in charge of the beatification or canonization of Pope John Paul II appointed by Ruini on May 13, 2005, it is obvious that he used ''direct'' testimonies.] (]) 20:03, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Obvious to whom? --] (]) 21:54, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::To anyone reading both quotes that are stated above.] (]) 20:04, 29 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| I am bringing all of the references to the reference section. I am about half way through. Some references were left orphaned. ] (]) 20:04, 29 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Sister Lucia and Medjugorje == | |||
| {{see also|Misplaced Pages:Fringe theories}} | |||
| "If discussed in an article about a mainstream idea, a theory that is '''not broadly supported by scholarship''' in its field must not be given undue weight, and '''reliable sources must be cited that affirm the relationship of the marginal idea to the mainstream idea in a serious and substantial manner'''. | |||
| Misplaced Pages is not and must not become the validating source for non-significant subjects. For writers and editors of Misplaced Pages articles to write about controversial ideas in a neutral manner, '''it is of vital importance that they simply restate what is said by independent secondary sources of reasonable reliability and quality'''. | |||
| The governing policies regarding fringe theories are the three core content policies, Neutral point of view, No original research, and '''Verifiability'''. Jointly these say that '''articles should not contain any novel analysis or synthesis, that material likely to be challenged needs a reliable source''', and that all majority and significant-minority views published in reliable sources should be represented fairly and proportionately. Should any inconsistency arise between this guideline and the content policies, the policies take precedence." | |||
| --] (]) 19:46, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :"Misplaced Pages articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject." | |||
| :"A common argument in a dispute about reliable sources is that one source is biased and so another source should be given preference. Some editors argue that biased sources should not be used because they introduce improper POV to an article. However, biased sources are not inherently disallowed based on bias alone, although other aspects of the source may make it invalid. Neutral point of view should be achieved by balancing the bias in sources based on the weight of the opinion in reliable sources and not by excluding sources that do not conform to the editor's point of view." | |||
| :Sister Emmanuel Maillard's book documents what Bishop Hnilica said that the Pope John Paul II told him - "You see Pavol (Hnilica's first name), "Medjugorje is the continuation and fulfillment of Fatima". This statement was corroborated in the book "Why is He a Saint" written by Slawomir Odir who was appointed as the postulator (an official who presents a plea for beatification or canonization in the Roman Catholic Church) of the cause of beautification and canonization of Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Camillo Ruini on May 13, 2005. Note that Bishop Hnilica was alive and able to give his testimony. Also when the Bishop was interviewed about Medjugorje | |||
| :Oder's reference, four condensed volumes of Positio : In Chapter: A Tribute to the Truth - "The declarations from '''114 persons were heard''': 35 Cardinals, 20 archbishops & bishops, 11 priests, 5 religious, 3 nuns, 36 lay Catholics, 3 non-Catholics, and a Jew. Their '''declarations''', along with other documents and writings, filled the thousands of pages of the Copia Pubblica from which were drawn the four condensed volumes of Positio." ..."To gather and evaluate all this material, as well as to '''listen to the witnesses''' who took part in this process, has been for me and for my colleagues a truly demanding job. Without doubt, it was also indispensable, for it allowed us to corroborate the reputation for saintliness of John Paul II, providing a precious tribute to the truth. A truth that, thanks to the voices of those who have helped to preserve it intact, now shines incontestable and brilliant." | |||
| :Clearly a very solid reference.] (]) 23:34, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==Kutleša, Dražen and Ogledalo Pravde== | |||
| Been reading this when you add it as a reference and what I have seen: | |||
| :1.Personal opinions and judgements and bias against the apparitions - Here are just three, I can provide '''much''' more. | |||
| ::*"unfortunately, they do not abuse of the name of the Holy Father." page 257, | |||
| ::*Bishop Zanic, said, I ''constantly'' thought that the previous Medjugorje "apparitions" and Medjugorje "messages" do not have a supernatural ::character. page 283 | |||
| ::*This little pdf seems picks a side in the struggle and is against the Franciscan monks. That in itself reeks of a biased source. In the editors note page 9 "...the six “seers” were introduced Bishop Pavao Žanić, on the one hand, as responsible in judging such events, and some Franciscan fathers, pastoral employees in Medjugorje, and some other supporters of Medjugorje phenomenon, on the other hand." What is important to note here is that '''Cardinal Ratzinger took the dossier from Msgr. Zanic and put the matter in the hands of the Yugoslavian Bishops Conference'''.<ref name="U of Dayton">{{Cite web|url=https://udayton.edu/imri/mary/m/medjugorje-apparitions-current-status.php |title= All About Mary: Medjugorje, Bosnia and Hercegovina|website=University of Dayton|language=en|access-date=9 November 2020}}</ref> This document Ogledalo Pravde (The Mirror of Justice)is an outdated, old, replaced document. And in regards to '''Bishop Peric also a skeptic who took over for Zanic''': Archbishop ], the Secretary to the ] that was presided over at the time by Cardinal ], wrote in a letter to the ] that '''"what Bishop Perić said in his letter …is and remains his personal opinion" which does not represent the official position of the church'''.<ref>] Pr. No 154/81-06419 (26 May 1998) To His Excellency Mons. ], , udayton.edu, 9 December 2013.</ref> | |||
| :2. This report is old now and outdated - almost 20 years old. | |||
| :3. This investigation has been replaced by the Ruini report and Archbishop Hoser. | |||
| :4. In May 2018, Hoser was sent as “Apostolic Visitor” by Pope Francis for an undetermined time to the Saint James parish in Medjugorje, in Bosnia-Herzegovina, run by the Franciscan friars. | |||
| :5. And Archbishop Hoser told the Polish Catholic news agency, KAI, "All indications are that the revelations will be recognized, perhaps even this year." He added, "Specifically, I think it is possible to recognize the authenticity of the first apparitions as proposed by the Ruini commission. Besides, it is difficult to get another verdict, because it is difficult to believe that six seers will lie for 36 years. What they say has been consistent. They are not mentally incompetent. A strong argument for the authenticity of the apparitions is their faithfulness to the doctrine of the Church." | |||
| :6.This page needs to be kept up-to-date with the Popes investigations. Adding information from a 20 year old study is ok in a history section of how the church evolved through the investigations. Right now Gov Sheng is using this old and outdated reference throughout the article. There is a lot of "he said she said" and biased statements. | |||
| I suggest we either delete the reference completely or the ways it is being used. On Misplaced Pages we are to present accurate up-to-date information as well as the history. The old investigations should be confined to a History section. Right now it seems Govern Sheng is coming from an extremely biased perspective. If he was looking for truth, he would welcome documentation of truth from all views.] (]) 23:05, 25 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Personal opinions are normal in an ]. What report is outdated? There's no report in Kutleša's book. --] (]) 12:10, 1 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Perosonal talk == | |||
| Such personal talk in particular was denied by the Vatican... Writing it as "however", looks like these private talks were somehow not denied by the Vatican and only certain official statements were denied. Private talks were denied. Get it? --] (]) 12:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :The only problem is, is that these private talks were PRIVATE and shared publicly and most with Slawomir Odor who as you know was appointed as the postulator (an official who presents a plea for beatification or canonization in the Roman Catholic Church) of the cause of beautification and canonization of Pope John Paul II. Cardinal Camillo Ruini informed him on May 13, 2005. ] (]) 16:07, 1 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::How is someone designated to promote someone as a saint unbiased? I don't mind Oder as an author, I'm just wondering whom is he using as a reference. Surely, he either talked to Hnilica (who was way dead when he wrote the book, or to Maillard, or he just read her book?) --] (]) 14:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==Conflict Resolution Request== | |||
| I am going to submit help to solve this conflict. We need steady guidance of a Misplaced Pages expert. | |||
| We can request this together which show a good intent to resolve the issues. ] (]) 15:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :I have proposed this on your talk page way ago, no reply from you. . | |||
| :I'll give you a summary of your weird behavior. | |||
| :'''1)''' You ask me to discuss my edits before changing the article. '''2)''' I agreed and brought all my proposals to the talk page. '''3)''' You start your rampage; editing here and there, rearranging the entire article, moving sections, adding new ones - all of that ''without any previous discussion whatsoever!''. | |||
| :What was your reasoning for doing so? How hypocritical! Of course, I'll ask for arbitration here. I'm happy that you confirm that you're aware of my arbitration proposal. --] (]) 16:04, 1 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yes I had to think about it but I see no other way to resolve these problems. I would like a non-biased, neutral, knowledgable, calm expert editor help us to resolve the conflicts here and create a well balanced article. When you submit your request be sure to share that we both want the help and are open to resolution. Try to communicate our needs here without blaming. ] (]) 16:11, 1 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Also when I am having a discussion on a talk page of an article, I don't respond to messages left on my personal talk page. The discussions are happening here. ] (]) 16:32, 1 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Interesting that you are telling me not to edit war as you revert my original edits and created the new edit war] (]) 18:26, 1 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|Red Rose 13}}, let's refrain ourselves from editing until the arbitration is over. Ok? --] (]) 14:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==Google Translating to English?== | |||
| I have noticed a number of odd wording throughout this page. Here is one example: Dragičević wrote several books, including an autobiography titled Moje srce će pobijediti (My heart will win) | |||
| It seems you might be using google or another translater to translate from Croatian to English. ] (]) 03:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm not. --] (]) 13:59, 2 December 2020 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 10:18, 24 September 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Our Lady of Medjugorje article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
Suggestions/discussion to avoid conflict while editing
Editing on Misplaced Pages can be peaceful and harmonious otherwise it is way to stressful.
@Slp1: I opened this up in hopes of creating harmony while Governor Sheng and myself are editing on the same pages. Please comment and offer your suggestions.
@Governor Sheng: please offer your suggestions too.
- Neither one of us should have to ask permission to add well documented information to a page because no one "owns" a page.
- We should assume that we both are editing in Good Faith - Ask rather than accuse.
- Because of the conflict between us, it seems best that if there is a question or suggestion regarding one of our edits, we bring it to the talk page with respect. Avoid reverting, changing or shortening either of our edits without an agreement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Red Rose 13 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Intro needs editing
The first four paragraphs are clumsy and it is not until the last sentence of the fourth paragraph that Vatican approval of the apparitions is mentioned. All four paragraphs need editing, with the last sentence of paragraph four moved up to the first paragraph and some other content cut. It is clear the information was added sequentially over time by multiple editors and should be rewritten to reflect the most recent events. Editor1963-a (talk) 10:18, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
Categories:- C-Class Catholicism articles
- Mid-importance Catholicism articles
- WikiProject Catholicism articles
- C-Class Christianity articles
- Low-importance Christianity articles
- C-Class Saints articles
- Mid-importance Saints articles
- WikiProject Saints articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- C-Class Bosnia and Herzegovina articles
- Mid-importance Bosnia and Herzegovina articles
- All WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina pages
- C-Class Yugoslavia articles
- Low-importance Yugoslavia articles
- WikiProject Yugoslavia articles