The Marian Apparitions

Very occasionally I am asked about what I think about the phenomena occurring in Medjugorje and whether the Orthodox Church believes they are genuine.  Orthodoxy officially has “no comment” about what occurs outside of its own canonical boundaries, considering it to be, strictly speaking, none of its business.  So questions like “Can Salvation Army people receive sacramental grace even though they do not have any sacraments?” receive more of a shrug than an authoritative answer.   

This goes for the events regularly occurring in Medjugorje.  But the fact that Orthodoxy does not offer a verdict with the same conviction that it holds for truths defined by its ecumenical councils does not mean that clergy like myself do not have an opinion.  And my opinion is this:  I do not believe for a minute that the Theotokos is appearing in Medjugorje and sharing messages.  And my guess (in the absence of taking a poll) is that my fellow Orthodox clergy do not believe it either.  If further pressed to explain the phenomena, I would quietly add that it sounds more demonic than genuine.  Please allow me to elaborate.

The alleged appearances of Mary in Medjugorje (a little village in Bosnia-Hercegovina) form part of pattern of such appearances such the famous ones in Lourdes (1857) and Fatima (1917).  Though the Mother of God has appeared to saints in the earlier history of the Orthodox Church (such in visions to St. Gregory the Wonderworker who died about 270 and to St. Seraphim of Sarov who died in 1833), these later Roman Catholic appearances (often called “apparitions”) differ dramatically from them in important and crucial ways.

In the history of the Orthodox Church, the Theotokos appeared only to saints—that is, to those whose disciplined sanctity, spiritual discernment, and humility fitted them for the task of receiving the visions.  The genuineness of the visions was rooted in the acknowledged sanctity of the saints who had them:  they were those who had miraculous spiritual gifts, such as that of healing and prophetic clairvoyance, and their testimony as to the genuineness of the vision was considered sufficient.

Further, they were visions, like the other visions given to saints.  For example, prior to his death by stoning, St. Stephen gazed intently into heaven and had a vision of Christ standing at the right hand of God (Acts 7:55-56).  Note:  Christ did not appear visibly or physically to others.  It was a vision, not an apparition (the distinction is crucial), and it was not seen by anyone else present.  The vision was manifest in Stephen’s heart and mind alone, the Holy Spirit enabling him to see heavenly realities.  Christ did not come down to earth and appear to men as an apparition.  The Holy Spirit, working within the saint, allowed Stephen to see into heaven where Christ remained. 

To state it differently, a vision is not a visit.  Necromancers or mediums at a séance might try to affect a visit from someone formerly absent, bringing into our gathered midst some historical person, such as your dear departed Aunt Agatha.  (The visit of Samuel to Saul through the witch of Endor was such; see 1 Samuel 29:15.)  But a vision is different.  Christ did not leave heaven to drop in at Stephen’s trial and be seen by him.  Christ remained in heaven and Stephen’s vision, like all visions, allowed him visual access to heaven.  Such visions are in the key of ascent, not descent.  In true visions of the Theotokos, she does not come down; the visionary saint goes up.

Furthermore, the visions of the Theotokos given, for example, to St. Gregory the Wonderworker or St. Seraphim, give guidance or healing for local situations and help to local people.  They are not messages for the world or for unbelievers.  They are not intended to save the world or bring the world to Christ.  That task is reserved for the Church Militant.  Such evangelism is no longer her task; it is ours. 

And anyway, such apparitions generally do not convince unbelievers.  The Lord warned us of this very thing.  A rich man burning in Hades asked that the departed Lazarus leave his festive table in the afterlife to go and appear as an apparition to convert the rich man’s worldly brothers.  The Lord declared it was unnecessary and that the Scriptures, heard by them every Sabbath, were enough to convert them.  “No,” objected the rich man, “but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!”  The notion was waved away:  “If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead” (Luke 16:27-31).  True conversion is not affected by visual phenomena or by supposed miracles, but by the Spirit of God acting upon the human heart when the Church on earth preaches the Gospel.  An apparition of Lazarus would have accomplished nothing.

Further, when the Theotokos appeared in a vision to the saints, she did not play games, hide her identity, make promises or offer secrets.  Rather she told them directly what they needed to know now for their life.  Offering a succession of secrets or promises for the future sets up a psychological dependence on the one doing the offering, as well as fostering a sense of specialness on the part of the one receiving.  Neither are conducive to spiritual health.

       We note further that the Mother of God was instantly recognized by the saint having the vision, because the vision was the result of the Holy Spirit acting directly upon the heart.  In such direct illumination, there is no room for doubt as to the identity of one seen in the vision.  The appearance of Jesus to Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus was the exception that proves the rule:  Saul did not know it was Jesus because he did not yet have the Holy Spirit (see Acts 9:17).

Finally, the genuine visions of the Theotokos come as needed by the moment, and not by a schedule, like a bus arriving on time at a bus station.  St. Seraphim did not have bi-weekly staff meetings with the Mother of God every Thursday at noon.  She appeared to him when she willed and as need demanded.

When we compare the visions of the Theotokos to the saints in Scripture and Church history with the occurrences at Medjugorje and previous apparitions such as Lourdes and Fatima, we see that none of these historical precedents obtain.  These differences should not be minimized, for the legitimacy of the occurrences depend entirely upon the modern Marian apparitions conforming to the older historical ones.   That is what is meant by “Tradition”, which alone determines spiritual legitimacy.  Innovations and deviations from past experiences betray an alien spirit.  It matters not a whit if the miraculous is present (i.e. if those receiving the apparitions really saw something supernatural).  It also scarcely matters if the apparition said some things which were true, for the Enemy always mixes truth with error.  But let us look more closely at some examples of the modern Marian apparitions.  (For more details, see the two-volume work Mary:  A History of Doctrine and Devotion by Hilda Graef.)

In the apparition at Lourdes Bernadette saw “something white in the shape of a girl” described by her as “like a little girl” which she continued to address as “Aquero”, meaning “this thing”.  It was not until many encounters and several months that “this thing” identified itself in response to Bernadette’s repeated questions about who it was by saying, “I am the Immaculate Conception” (declared by the Roman Catholic Church as a dogma four years earlier). 

In the case of the Fatima apparition, it is said that three children, aged ten, seven, and nine, saw a flash of lightning from a clear sky and running to shelter under a tree saw “a pretty little lady” standing above it.  When asked where she came from, she replied, “From heaven” and then told the children that she wanted them to come to the same place on the 13th of each month for the next six months, and “then I will tell you who I am and what I want”.  It was not until several months that the lady revealed who she was.

We note too the reactions of the children receiving the apparition:  Bernadette fell into an ecstasy, grew pale and ceased to move.  One of the children of the Fatima vision, Lucia, went pale and cried out in terror—supposedly from receiving a vision of hell.

We note too that the promises that were given often involved international events:  if Orthodox Russia was consecrated to the Virgin, its conversion from Orthodoxy to Roman Catholicism was promised unconditionally. 

In the Medjugorje apparitions messages purporting to be from Mary have been received regularly since 1981, and the place has become a site of pilgrimage.  It is said that six “visionaries” have been receiving messages regularly: Vicka, Ivan, and Marija receive daily apparitions and messages; Mirjana receives apparitions each year on March 18; Ivanka receives apparitions every year on June 25, and Jakov every year on Christmas Day.  The six visionaries also each receive ten secrets about events that will occur on earth in the near future.

The apparition has said that “I have come to tell the world that God exists. He is the fullness of life and to enjoy this fullness and peace, you must return to God.”  A Medjugorje website summarizes her messages thus: “She has come to earth to reeducate us and help us convert and recenter our lives back to God.”

The contrast between these supposed apparitions and those given to saints in the early history of the Church could hardly be starker.  The Medjugorje messages (and the commercialization of pilgrimage to the area) have transformed what in the early Church was a private experience of a few saints into a profitable and ongoing institution with regularly scheduled messages of a rather banal nature.  A Roman Catholic commission established to investigate the phenomena deemed the later visions to be “pre-announced and programmed” and also found that there were not miraculous healings connected to the apparitions.

As an Orthodox I have no hesitation in declaring against the legitimacy of the so-called Marian apparitions, either at Medjugorje or its famous predecessors at Lourdes and Fatima.