Day: November 4, 2020

November 5, 2020 Reflection – Seek first His Kingdom!

Seek first His Kingdom! November 5, 2020 Dear Family of Mary! Today is Thursday!  It is a special day for Our Lady.  One of the reasons why it is special is because she asked us to something unusual on every Thursday: Thursday, March 1, 1984  (To Jelena) “Each Thursday, read again the passage of Matthew 6: 24-34, before the most Blessed Sacrament, or if it is not possible to come to church, do it with your family.” It seems to me that this passage from Matthew’s Gospel must be pretty important, for Our Lady to recommend that we read it every Thursday!  As far as I know it is the only Gospel passage she has recommended in this way! But I find that Our Lord’s words in this passage are essential as a defense against the temptations of the world, especially in our time.  How easy it is for us to get caught up in the things of this world!  With the internet and social media, we can become almost enslaved to the worries, desires, and anxieties of society. Our Lady warned us of being attached to the earth and to earthly things in this message: May 25, 2012 “Dear children! Also today I call you to conversion and to holiness. God desires to give you joy and peace through prayer but you, little children, are still far away – attached to the earth and to earthly things. Therefore, I call you anew: open your heart and your sight towards God and the things of God – and joy and peace will come to reign in your hearts. Thank you for having responded to my call.” Open your heart and your sight towards God and the things of God!  This is the answer to the temptations and anxieties of the world.  Open our hearts in prayer and love for God and open our eyes to His presence, and we will fall in love with the things of God, which have nothing to do with the world because they so far surpass the world in every way. So here is Matthew 6: 24-34!  Read it, and pray it today and every Thursday, or even every day!! It is a heavenly tonic to dispel all the fears and anxieties, the earthly things that can so overwhelm us. Matthew 6: 24-34: “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon. “Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you shall eat or what you shall drink, nor about your body, what you shall put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? And which of you by being anxious can add one cubit to his span of life? And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin; yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O men of little faith? Therefore do not be anxious, saying, `What shall we eat?’ or `What shall we drink?’ or `What shall we wear?’ For the Gentiles seek all these things; and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well. “Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Let the day’s own trouble be sufficient for the day.  (Mt 6:24-34) Amen!! Alleluia!! In Jesus, Mary and Joseph! Cathy Nolan ©Mary TV 2020   PS. Here is our Donate link! The matching grant is still active!! Donate  

November 3, 2020 Update from Denis – Exposing today’s Crisis Article

The Church has spoken! An August 6, 2019 Catholic News Service headline said it all: “Vatican confirms Medjugorje approval by joining youth festival.” (c)Mary TV November 3, 2020 Dear Apostles of Our Lady of Medjugorje Crisis Magazine published an article today that needs to be exposed: Exposing “Medjugorje – A Cult Exposed” Julie Stannus, a traditionalist Catholic, has dredged up an old and long-discredited charge against the most popular Marian apparition destination in the world. She makes no secret of her view of this apparition given her choice of title – “Medjugorje – A Cult Exposed.” She does not argue for her novel thesis that Medjugorje is a cult. She simply takes it as her starting point. This is her approach throughout an article which substitutes invective for argument. Her approach is no different from that of the Fundamentalists who start of with the assertion that the Catholic Church is a cult and buttress their charges with accounts of the “bad popes.” Yes, there were bad popes but that has no bearing on Christ’s promise of the Church’s infallibility and the truth of the constant teaching of the Church. Analogously, every major authentic apparition of the Virgin attracts crazies who use it to push their own agendas. Check out, for instance, the Fatima groups who “excommunicated” John Paul II or claimed that the Sr. Lucia who met with outsiders was an imposter. Yet we do not (or at least should not) judge Fatima on the basis of the hangers-on who try to manipulate it to push their own agendas. The basic fallacy of Medjugorje polemicists like Stannus is a pre-meditated refusal to distinguish between the Medjugorje phenomenon itself – namely the visionaries and their messages – from peripheral events and individuals. If some of the Franciscans who supported the visionaries were later guilty of sexual immorality, why should this be laid at the feet of the very visionaries who are calling the world to repentance and purity?! If Pope Alexander VI had several mistresses, why should this be thought off as an argument against the truth of the Nicene Creed? Vlasic was clearly a bad actor and he thrust himself into activities surrounding Medjugorje in its early days. The visionaries took him at face value but once his malicious manipulation became apparent, they cut off all contact with him. Fortunately, in Fr. Slavko Barbaric the visionaries had a holy and intellectually sophisticated spiritual director. Stannus, of course, fails to mention this. Again she talks about the unfortunate acts of certain of the Franciscans but says not a word about the thousands of conversions attributed to Medjugorje. Nor does she mention the perspectives of two saints, Pope John Paul II and Mother Teresa, who both prayed to Our Lady of Medjugorje. Worst of all, she has the temerity to suggest that Medjugorje could be diabolic when the world’s foremost exorcist, Fr. Gabriele Amorth, proclaimed that Medjugorje is a “fortress against Satan!” Stannus’ potted history too is rife with error. One serious error of fact is her claim that Fr. Jozo Zovko was laicized. Not so. Although he had indefensible run-ins with some in the hierarchy, he remains a priest in good standing. Another equally serious error is her claim that the Franciscans, with particular reference to Fr. Zovko, first nurtured and “promoted the Medjugorje cult.” As a matter of fact, as any history of Medjugorje will tell you, Fr. Zovko was skeptical and it was the Bishop of Mostar who was the fervent supporter of the “cult”. The Bishop sought to change Fr. Zovko’s views. Of course, this “inconvenient truth” does not fit in with Stannus’ narrative where the Bishop is portrayed as the champion of truth against the cult. (She never defines “cult” or explains how Medjugorje can be thought off as a cult.) Her seemingly innocuous comments about the tense history between the Bishop of Mostar and the Franciscans ignores the well-known fact that the local Bosnian Catholics had a deep attachment to the Franciscans who stayed and served during the long Ottoman reign in contrast with the ecclesial hierarchy who fled to safer pastures. When the area regained its independence and the hierarchy returned to take over, there was understandable friction between the hierarchy and the Franciscans. Stannus also says that the Medjugorje defenders portrayed Bishop Zanic of Mostar as “a Communist collaborator with no interest in the truth about the apparitions.” She adds “Nothing could be more unfair to Bishop Zanic.” Here she is either ignorant or allergic to the truth. When Fr. Zovko was imprisoned by the Communist authorities for defending Medjugorje, Bishop Zanic wrote to him saying that he could not help him for fear of being imprisoned himself. This is when he changed his stance on Medjugorje. The correspondence exists. John Paul II had plenty of experience dealing with the Communists. This is why he turned down the Bishop’s request to condemn the apparition and removed his jurisdiction over the phenomenon – a first in the history of the Church. Like every other relevant fact, this little tidbit failed to show up in Stannus’ hit piece. The Stannus article is a slipshod work of polemics that seeks to manipulate its readers much as Vlasic sought to manipulate the visionaries. It is a surprise that a publication like Crisis would publish it. Denis Nolan (c)Mary TV