Scots Bishop, John Keenan of Paisley, Publicly Supports Medjugorje Hoax…

The Editor writes… 

The stated judgment of the local, investigating Bishop, the Church authority on alleged apparitions, is that the claimed “apparitions” at Medjugorje are not true     Note: the Vatican investigation was launched only because the defiant “seers” refused to accept the decision of their Bishop.

Still, we find “pilgrimages” being organised against the stated wishes of the local Bishop, with priests and bishops setting very bad example by going there and giving credence to what is, effectively, the Devil’s answer to Fatima.  Click here to read the local Bishop’s statement about NOT giving publicity and credibility to this hoax. 

It’s shocking, therefore, but not too surprising to us, to have to report that one of the Scottish Bishops – Bishop John Keenan of Paisley – has defied the wishes of the local Ordinary by accompanying a group called Mary’s Meals (which, from my own, personal – albeit limited – experience of them is up to its neck in Medjugorje) to that diabolical “shrine”. 

Bishop Keenan said: “I was very glad that my first experience of Medjugorje was at the invitation of Mary’s Meals, in order to bless the new centre. We gathered here as a family; Mary’s Meals supporters from Croatia, from the Czech Republic, from Spain, from Italy, from Bosnia-Herzegovina, from Austria, from Scotland and some from Ireland as well.
“As the Mary’s Meals movement grows bigger, there is this sense of the need to return to the source – the wellspring of Mary’s Meals. Therefore, the new Mary’s Meals centre locates itself in Medjugorje where everything began. It allows many people from different countries to be introduced to Mary’s Meals and hopefully take the movement back to their own countries.”

Read the whole report here – unashamedly posted on the website of the Diocese of Paisley. 

Comments invited especially from those who continue to insist that Bishop Keenan is “the orthodox Scottish Bishop,” to which I unfailingly reply:  Yeah, right!  About as “orthodox” as his mentor, Pope Francis.  Yip. THAT orthodox… 

Can’t resist adding that every time I remember Bishop Keenan saying, on his episcopal appointment, that he wanted to “bring Pope Francis’ vision of the Church to Paisley” I have a quiet smile to myself, as I look forward to the spiritual, religious and moral cartwheels he’ll have to turn  if when we get a really sound, traditional pope.  That WILL be fun and worry not, I’ll devote an entire thread to it, be assured…  

82 responses

  1. I meant to say in the introduction that I think we must assume that Bishop Keenan actually believes that Our Lady is appearing at Medjugorje and thus, that he believes all the statements she has made which contradict infallible Catholic teaching. This is shocking. Here is a summary of the problem with this scandalous “apparition” – unless he publicly disavows this hoax, he’s part of it.
    http://www.catholicapologetics.info/catholicteaching/privaterevelation/medjugo.html

    Oh, and before anyone jumps in to ask how I could possibly question Mary’s Meals since it does great work, blah blah. Well…

    Martin Luther used the Bible to kick-start his schism. The Devil isn’t fussy about how he gets his work done, as long as it’s done. He’ll use anything and anyone, specifically, any useful idiot on hand, to achieve his diabolical end.

    • Editor,

      I wonder what the Bishop of Mostar thinks about random bishops turning up and concelebrating Mass?

    • Editor,

      I didn’t realise that the problem with the Franciscans at Medjugorje went back over a hundred years. They’ve been disobedient for a long time. I also didn’t know that one of the priests was laicised after he admitted telling lies about the apparitions and having an affair with a nun. You couldn’t make it up.

      I also think collegiality is a big part of the problem. The Bishop of Mostar was overruled because the rest of the Croatian, Bosnian, yugoslavian , whatever they are these days, bishops voted in favour of Medjugorje. The diocesan bishop’s ruling was then dismissed as his private opinion! It’s shocking.

      • Whistleblower,

        I didn’t know that the rest of the bishops are going along with this nonsense. At one time they were united in denouncing it. I bet they’ve had the screws turned to force them to conform. The whole thing is a diabolical scam, and a money making scam at that.

    • Editor,

      Martin Luther using the bible is a really good way to drive home the fact that the devil uses anything he can to attack the faith. Mary’s Meals is just another example.

    • Editor,

      I’ve been in contact with Bishop Keenan today and I don’t think it’s fair to say that he believes in Medjugorje. I asked him if he believes in Our Lady is appearing and he said he always waits for the approval of the Church.

      He explained that the Holy See had appointed a bishop delegate to oversee the pastoral issues at Medjugorje. I asked him if he thought this was to circumvent the established rules for approval of private apparitions but he said he didnt really know anything about it.

      I asked him if it was fair to say that by visiting Medjugorje he believed in the apparitions and he was quite strong in saying that this wasn’t the case and he was only there to open the centre.

      • Petrus,

        Whether or not the Bishop himself believes in this hoax is neither here nor there. I doubt if he believes very much, to be frank, of Catholic doctrine since he’s taken Pope Francis for his model and we all know how much HE believes – goodness, not even in “a Catholic God” – i.e. the God of divine revelation, Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

        So, Bishop Keenan’s take on Medjugorje is not the issue: the issue is two-fold.

        Firstly, he is misleading the already misguided people who have fallen for this nonsense; if the Bishop goes there, must be true. Thus the simple, gullible faithful are either led into this serious error or confirmed in it. And remember, this “lady” has spouted heresy, which they have imbibed. I could stop here and ask him if he really feels happy about this aspect of his trip to Medjugorje. I wonder how he would respond?

        Secondly, the rest of us are scandalized that he has gone there and given credibility to the place. I am personally shocked. Thus, he has damaged MY faith because I cannot take seriously anything this bishops says from now on. I mean, to be honest, I didn’t have him on my list of canonisable episcopal saints for future reference anyway, but this really does mean that he has nothing of any worth to say to any informed Catholic about the Faith.

        Medjugorje is a truly diabolical phenomenon and any bishop worthy of his office would not only be steering well clear of it, but explaining loud and clear why he is steering well clear of it. Especially to the simple, gullible faithful who are fanatically following it.

        Bishop Keenan can make all the excuses he likes; the fact that the Pope has appointed a bishop to oversee the [non existent] “pastoral issues” at Medjugorje won’t make a fig of a difference at his judgment any more than “I was only following orders” will excuse either Nazi soldier-killers of Jews or doctors who murder unborn babies.

        At our judgment, we will be judged on how our words and actions accord with the graces we have been given to enable us to do God’s will and fulfil His plan of salvation in our lives. Is the Bishop actually saying that God is NOT giving him that grace, not to mention the grace of his important office, in order that he may know how to distinguish true from false apparitions, the importance of respecting the authority of the local Ordinary in another diocese, where questionable apparitions are allegedly occurring? Really?

        I’m thinking of moving to Paisley and claiming visions. With not only no shortage of simple gullible faithful around but a bishop who seems easy enough to convince, I could make a fortune. Watch this space…

      • Petrus,

        It is reassuring to hear Bishops Keenan mentioned waiting for approval from the Church. However, by visiting at all he seems to lends credibility to the hoax, even if indirectly.

        I think his heart is in the right place, but he tries to be everything to everyone.

  2. This is the problem with Mary’s Meals. It clearly does a lot of good work feeding poor children, but was founded at Medj and never misses a chance to promote Medj as its guiding inspiration. The devil often mixes up good and bad things, to lead the more people astray. Because of this, I’d never support it.

    Why wasn’t such an organisation founded at Fatima and promoted like this? Because the devil wants Fatima ignored. Also, Youth 2000 has its origins in Medj and some other groups as well. The disobedience and disorder there has to be seen to be believed. All sorts of religious groups and orders have set up shop there without the approval of the local Ordinary.

    • Would I be correct in thinking, when you say “I’d never support it ” that your mean supporting Mary’s Meals ?

      • That’s correct. There are other excellent Catholic agencies to donate to, that feed the hungry, not founded in Medjugorje and avidly promoting it, and they are the ones that I would support. I would never support anything that has its roots in Medjugorje.

        • Westminster Fly,

          I couldn’t agree more. I wouldn’t give a penny to Mary’s Meals, using Our Lady in that way – Medjugorje seems to be more about money than anything else, one way or another.

      • Dano,

        I wouldn’t support Mary’s Meals either or anything else that is connected to the Medjugorje hoax. Would you?

      • Dano

        Would I be correct in thinking that you aren’t going to reply to my question, posed in the “Honduras” thread? Just to remind you, it was: how many “homeless” or refugees have you taken into your own home? I’m truly interested, because you often pop up in discussions – always on the attack – and I’m interested to know if your self-righteous tone is justified, or only talk.

          • Nonsense. Of course it can be justified. Self-righteousness is defined as convinced of one’s own righteousness especially in contrast with the actions and beliefs of others.

            Given that the entire UK is geared up for some highly self-righteous behaviour at Germany’s expense as we approach 11 November, your comment is, to put it mildly, a tad poorly times 😀

          • Dano

            You’re a born politician; never answer a question, just keep posing them. Judge and condemn others, never oneself. Assume the high ground always. Self-delusional.

            You are not fooling anyone.

    • I guess it’s the devil appearing as an Angel of Light! There are plenty of organisations that offer humanitarian relief. If they don’t have the faith, their good works will count for very little. “The poor will be with you always”.

    • I really doubt very much,that the Devil would want to promote the adoration of Our Lady, whether in Fatima, Medjugorje or elsewhere.

  3. Before Vatican II, the Church had 4 marks: one, holy, catholic and apostolic. Since Vatican II and the Freemason/Communist-redesigned Church, it seems the human element of those 4 marks has been altered, in order to:obscure the true marks (i.e. marks ==> Marx):

    Pluralistic, profane, local, irreligious.

        • Whistleblower,

          There IS only one Church but with the Pope and cardinals talking about making a “better Church” the impression is given – quite deliberately it seems to me – that we have, or soon will have, a new Church. So, I think MM could be forgiven for her slip.

          Take a decko at the with-it cardinal on the Groovy Cardinal thread for an illustration of what the “new Church” looks like – not pretty… 😀

  4. True the devil wants Fatima ignored and therefore the Consecration of Russia left undone. I had not been aware that Mary’s Meals had been founded at Medjugorje and I also will not be supporting them.

  5. (18 mars 2010 à 20h20) I do not understand that one persists in supporting, as if nothing had happened, a phenomenon several times formally condemned by the Bishop of Mostar-Duvno; only the Ordinary of the place is empowered to rule on the issue, as it is of tradition in the Church concerning all “apparitions”. The Bishop of the diocese is quite competent in this matter, if only because of his proximity to the events.
    Pilgrimages have also been banned by the successive Bishops of Mostar-Duvno, especially since some priests are illegally ministering there since then they are suspended by their Bishop. People who go on a pilgrimage to Medjugorje therefore show a schismatic behaviour.

    • WF,

      I’ve heard about that “ecstasy” before – and the ridiculous “explanation” of the movement, that she thought Our Lady was about to drop the infant Jesus and that’s why she moved (to save the Infant…) The fact that the Medj fanatics would buy such nonsense speaks volumes about their intellect and lack of discernment.

  6. Yes, lack of discernment – I agree. A (novus ordo) priest of my acquaintance has started going there annually and I told him all the truth about Medjugorje and sent him all the hard evidence from the local Ordinary and various websites, but he is in absolute denial that he is doing anything wrong at all. You might as well bang your head against a brick wall. I think part of the problem is that this priest is part of a largely moribund religious order, and I think all he sees is signs of decay and indifference over here, in his order and in local parishes. But at Medjugorje he is finding apparent (although illusory) signs of life – even though it is based on a falsehood, one can’t deny the large numbers of people who go there, and that’s what I thinks partly attracts him to it. That, and the protestantised ‘charismatic’ aura of the place, which also often appeals to the novus ordo mentality. “Crowds have never thirsted after truth. Whoever can give them illusions easily masters them.” (Gustave Le Bon, Psychology of Crowds 1895). https://www.marcocorvaglia.com/medjugorje-en I remember a friend of mine going there in the mid-1980’s even though I advised against it. When she came back she said ‘never again!’. She was shocked at the charismatic goings-on, the guitar Masses and ‘slain in the spirit’ malarkey (people swooning all over the place) and the general anti-Catholic feel of it all – despite the so called ‘good fruits’ such as confessions and rosaries etc. The bad fruits like ‘Our Lady’ supposedly defending priests who got nuns pregnant etc, was concealed until some time after that, but even though the whole sordid truth came out in the end, these people still won’t listen.

    The sad fact is that it is also undeniably having an impact on those who go to Fatima. I sometimes watch the livestream rosary and candlelight procession on TV on the vigil of the 13th from May to October. Aerial shots of the sanctuary area show an alarming drop in figures attending – one month this year there was hardly anyone there. I remember in the mid 1980’s before Medjugorje really took off, that it was packed on these occasions – and that was even before a third of the sanctuary area had been taken up with the monstrous new basilica. All very sad. I’ve also recently discovered that it looks as though the Bishops Conference of Bosnia-Hercegovina has sold out (possibly under pressure from the new ‘saviour’ of Medjugorje, Pope Francis). The old website used to contain varied condemnations of Medjugorje in several languages, coming from the local Ordinary and his Chancery. A new website is now in place, and I can’t find any of these documents any more. If they are still on the website, they’re very well hidden. Strangely enough, the website is in English as well. I’m even wondering how ‘official’ it really is. And lo and behold – I found a pro-Medjugorje video on it, with two priests sitting in front of St James’ Church, Medjugorje, titled ‘St Padre Pio predicted Our Lady will come to the Mostar Diocese (future tense)’ which I don’t believe for one moment. Go to http://cbismo.com and scroll down.

  7. Right up front I will state for the avoidance of doubt that I am very, very, sceptical regarding the supposed apparitions at Medjugorje. However this article is utterly misleading in almost every respect.

    Your headline states,”Scots Bishop, John Keenan of Paisley, Publicly Supports Medjugorje Hoax”. This is simply not true. Keenan made no comment whatsoever regarding the veracity of the apparitions. His comments were confined to the Mary’s Meals charity. You should withdraw your headline and apologise, because it is simply not true. In fact a less forgiving man might consider a defamation action against you for what is clearly an untruth.

    Bishop Keenan is quoted by you as stating that this was his first visit to the town, so your implication that he has travelled there on an illicit pilgrimage is accepted by all to be false. Keenan was present at a Mary’s Meals event sponsored by Archbishop Hoser, the Apostolic Visitor for Medjugorje, who was appointed by The Holy Fathrer in February 2017. Your implication that Bishop Keenan went there without permission or authority, without “respecting the authority of the local Ordinary in another diocese” is also materially false

    • Chris McLaughlin,

      And what about the headline in last week’s Scottish Catholic Observer? POPE BRIEFED ON SCOTLAND’S CATHOLIC SCHOOLS SUCCESS…

      I would look for your name in this week’s letters page but I won’t for two reasons. Firstly, I only read the rag when someone gives me a used copy, so can’t be sure from one week to the next if I’ll be given one, OR I can be bothered checking it online. Secondly, I know there won’t be a letter from you since – like all of our critics – you reserve your righteous wrath for Catholic Truth… soft targets are always the easiest.

      So, have I “defamed” Bishop Keenan by interpreting his trip to Medjugorje as “support” for the hoax? Let’s see.

      Would Bishop Keenan have attended a Tommy Robinson rally? Yes? No? If not, why not? Clue follows…

      I’ve named “Tommy Robinson” because he is the only unpopular figure that unites the looney left right now, and I can’t think of any other individual or group that Bishop Keenan would shy away from supporting – or appearing to support – with his attendance at a public event. I mean, ecumenism, inter-faith activities, “charities” – you name it, if he’s invited, he’ll go : unless there is a PC reason why it would be better not to go. So, I think we can agree that Bishop Keenan would not be seen dead or alive at an event promoting Tommy Robinson. Why? … Well…

      Public attendance at an event signifies support. That’s a generally accepted rule of thumb these days. It’s why public figures will sometimes withdraw from an event when they discover that another participant is, in their view, undesirable for whatever reason. So, less of the semantics. Bishop Keenan would not have gone to Medjugorje – Mary’s Meals or no Mary’s Meals – if he had any problem with the false apparitions.

      Indeed, “Bishop Keenan said: “I was very glad that my first experience of Medjugorje was at the invitation of Mary’s Meals…

      Clearly, since there is no mention of this being his first and last visit to Medjugorje, there could be others. And I’m willing to bet my last bar of chocolate before Lent, that he’ll return. He’s now one of the darlings of the corrupt project that makes its name and money out of effectively mocking Our Lady. He should be ashamed to be, in any way, a part of it. But he’ll be back. You can be sure of it.

      Your disingenuous attempt to put words into my mouth, claiming that I implied an “illicit pilgrimage” is close to being comical. ALL pilgrimages to that place are illicit and if you’d read the local Ordinary’s list of restrictions and prohibitions, which I’ve linked, you would have known that.

      The only reason that there is any Vatican official in the place is because the alleged seers have been utterly disobedient from the outset, refusing to accept the Bishop’s judgment – yet it is hardly surprising that he decided there is nothing supernatural happening there, given that he caught the “seers” lying from day one.

      For Bishop Keenan to not know this (which I don’t believe) and to go there, whether in ignorance (which again I don’t believe) or because he was flattered at having been invited to make the (all expenses paid) trip (which I could easily believe…) the whole thing is disgraceful. Whatever his reason for going there, it’s – to put it mildly – not good enough.

      Any why DID he go? To bless the Mary’s Meals outfit’s new centre… Eh?

      Was the Vatican Archbishop or one of the local priests incapable of doing that?

      Listen, if you don’t mind being treated as if you’re thick, that’s your choice. It’s a free(ish) country. But, I’m not thick. I know that “blessing a centre” is a very thin excuse for accepting a freebie, but the awful thing is that he has now left himself open to being (further) manipulated by the Medjugorje fanatics who run Mary’s Meals.

      Finally, talk about shooting yourself in the foot. In your craze to prove that my headline is false, you point out that Bishop Keenan “…made no comment whatsoever regarding the veracity of the apparitions.

      Er… quite. Had he gone there to bless this daft centre, notwithstanding the fact that any priest can bless, and then taken the opportunity to explicitly condemn the scam that is causing so much division and scandal within the Church, then my headline, trust me, would have been very different – and your heart would have been singing…

      If only, Bishop Keenan. If only…

      • 1. I notice you don’t dispute that Bishop Keen didn’t actually say anything supporting the claims of the supposed seers. Perhaps you would like to take the opportunity put that on record formally, as it is the 180 degree opposite of the import of your headline.

        2. The Tommy Robinson notion is a false analogy. Tommy Robinson is a person who comes from Luton. There is a world of difference between attending some event with Tommy Robinson, and going to the town of Luton. Had Bishop Keenan attended some event with one of the would-be seers, then you would have had a case. The thing is though, he didn’t. He merely visited the town the would-be seers come from. Just like going to Luton, as opposed to meeting Tommy Robinson.

        3. “Public attendance at an event signifies support”. I agree, it usually does. Bishop Keenan attended a Mary’s Meals event, which he supports. Had he shown support by attending the same Mary Meals event had it been held in Dallas, that would not necessarily have meant that he supported shooting visiting US presidents.

        4. “And I’m willing to bet my last bar of chocolate before Lent, that he’ll return.” So now you’re condemning him for something you agree he hasn’t done yet, but imagine he probably will. Ed: bad language removed. Please do not use bad language on this site.

        5. I’m glad you now agree that Bishop Keenan did not improperly visit Medjugorje, but was invited there by a properly authorised church authority. In fact that particular authority far from being undermined chose to concelebrate Mass with Bishop Keenan,

        • Wrong. Bishop Keenan wasn’t invited by any Church authority. He was invited by Mary’s Meals, a charity imbued with the spirit of Medjugorje, described as a “fruit of Medjugorje” by it’s crazy founder. Supporting Mary’s Meals is support for the hoax apparitions. It’s a bit like saying supporting the Orange Order doesn’t really signify support for Protestantism! Logic, my boy, logic! Use that brain of yours!

          The legitimate authority is the Bishop of Mostar. Bishop Keenan did not concelebrate Mass with the Bishop of Mostar. I don’t think reading comprehension is a strong point for you either.

          • Bishop Keenan was there with the permission of Archbishop Henryk Hoser, the Apostolic Visitor appointed by the Pope. His presence in the town was in no way illicit.

            “Supporting Mary’s Meals is support for the hoax apparitions.”. No it isn’t. You’re simply wrong. Driving a Volkswagen doesn’t mean you support Nazism, just because the company happened to have been Adolf Hitler’s idea.

            • Archbishop Hoser exercises no episcopal jurisdiction in Medjugorje. He’s a papal envoy who is there is offer counsel and assess the pastoral situation. Jurisdiction is exercised by the Bishop of Mostar. Did Bishop Keenan have permission from the local ordinary?

        • 1) you clearly have problems with simple comprehension. I have made the point very clearly that it is precisely BECAUSE the bishop passed no comment on the hoax happenings at that site, that he is causing scandal. Do you really not GET that?

          2) Analogies are always difficult. If you don’t understand the point, just ignore it.

          3) If the Bishop only wanted to show support for Mary’s Meals, they do have a Scottish address, I’ve just checked. He could go there if he just wanted to show support for their charitable work. To go to Medjugorje, shows support for that place.

          4) I am anticipating that he has left the door open so to speak (not a real door, just left open the possibility) that he will go back. That’s not “condemning” Who taught you English at school? You ought to sue.

          5) What part of BISHOP KEENAN SHOULD NOT HAVE GONE TO MEDJUGORJE do you not understand? Doesn’t matter if Pope FRANCIS invited him, he still should not have gone. Get it, now?

          Finally, watch your language. If you cannot express yourself without swearing, go somewhere else. Er… with all due respect, of course…

          • 1. The (now accepted fact) fact That Bishop Keenan not only did not endorse the apparitions, but did not even acknowledge them, is worthy of note. I would call that a snub.

            2. I understand the analogy fine, clearly better than you do.

            3. I’m sure Bishop Keenan supports Mary’s Meals in all manner of ways and places. Attendance at a place is not an endorsement of everything ever done in a place.

            4. Why not just focus on the facts of what has actually occurred, rather than speculate on hypotheticals?

            5. Again, I’m glad you agree that it is factually incorrect that Bishop Keenan had disobeyed the ban on pilgrimages to Medjugorje. (Which in any event was lifted in December 2017.)

            I didn’t swear. We both know what I said, and your assertion gives a false impression. The word which I was used by Our Lord in Matthew 7:6.

            • You are not a person with whom it is possible to debate in good faith. You are dishonest, as when you claim that “[I] agree that it is factually incorrect that Bishop Keenan had disobeyed the ban on pilgrimages…” I have not said anywhere that Bishop Keenan was on a pilgrimage. Nowhere. You must not twist what I say to fit your own agenda – that is shockingly dishonest.

              You ignore the facts, offer your own interpretation of the events and ignore the key point which is the scandal caused by the Bishop’s visit to a place of diabolical renown, where Our Lady is mocked. Nowhere in any of your responses have you addressed this scandal.

              Our Lord has never called any individual “a swine”. That is what you called me. To distort Sacred Scripture to justify that, is unconscionable. Do you EVER say that you just might be wrong?

              Finally, although I love a good discussion, as forthright as can be, I detest discussing – whether orally or in writing – with people who do not address the issues honestly.

              Sadly, I find you to be duplicitous, and I am now at the stage of making very short and anything but sweet responses, if I can be bothered replying to you at all. Indeed, the subject – as far as your contribution is concerned – is now exhausted, so I suggest you go put your feet up and read something – say, a few back copies of Catholic Truth. If not, and if you persist here, please note that if the twisting of my words continues, one of us will disappear from the scene altogether, and it won’t be me, or, indeed, Lionel take note, moi…

              • Thank you for agreeing that I didn’t swear. I didn’t call you a swine either, I used the sentence “What a swine!” as a sarcastic reference to Bishop Keenan.

                • Chris McLaughlin,

                  I note how you keep saying that editor agrees with you, but I can’t see anywhere that she agrees with you on anything, LOL!

                  I also don’t think you should call anyone names, not even the bishop, LOL!

              • Éditeur,
                Obviously, the fact that an Authority goes on a pilgrimage to this place and moreover without the consent of the local Ordinary, constitutes an extremely serious fault.
                It is a very bad example and to be honest, a real scandal.

    • Here’s a headline you might want to send to Bishop Keenan

      WORLD FIRST AS SCOTTISH SCHOOLS TO ADOPT LGBTI INCLUSIVE EDUCATION…
      https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/scotland/world-first-as-scottish-schools-to-adopt-lgbti-inclusive-education/

      Do you think, for a second that he is going to insist that Catholic schools in his diocese are exempt? Do you think he is going to be bothered about children in Catholic schools in his diocese being corrupted by LGBTI propaganda?

      If so, I’ll fund a trip to Medjugorje for you – there’d be no cure at Lourdes…

  8. One could argue that the bishop shouldn’t even be seen to be supporting Mary’s Meals – rooted as it is in Medjugorje, and still promoting it as its inspiration. Any support of any Medjugorje-spawned organisations – no matter how worthy the works they appear to do – simply lends credence to the phenomenon, and makes it more difficult to disentangle falsehood from truth, and good works from evil ones. To suggest otherwise goes against common sense. If I were a bishop and had been invited to this, I would have declined the offer. Any other course of action would be imprudent. The bishop must have been aware that Medjugorje propagandists will use his presence as a sign of tacit approval, as they have relentlessly done with any high-profile ecclesiastical figure who has attended any event there in the past.

    • WF,

      Exactly. Supporting anything that gives the impression of lending credence to the hoax, must be avoided especially by religious, priests and bishops.

      Common sense – you’ve nailed it. Nobody needs to be a theologian to know that no bishop should be seen in a place where the Devil is mocking Our Lady.

      Goodness, I’ve just read below that the Bishop has a Law Degree. Just underlines the truth that someone, he, she, they, can have all the academic qualifications in the world and lack common sense, not to mention a truly Catholic sense.

      No offence intended Bishop. Just has to be said. Not pleasant work, this, but somebody has to do it 😀

  9. Chris McLaughlin,

    Wind yer neck in, son, and get off your high horse.

    The first idiotic statement I must address is the issue of “defamation”. Get a grip! What lawyer is going to entertain a case which begins, “she said I believe in Medjugorje”? Grow up! I almost fell off my seat laughing.

    Secondly, Mary’s Meals was founded at Medjugorje, has a presence in Medjugorje and is imbued with the spirit of Medjugorje. If Bishop Keenan didn’t believe the apparitions, then he wouldn’t step foot in Medjugorje.

    Anyway, the real scandal here is his lack of prudence. He’s set a terrible example, even scandal, by associating himself with an unapproved apparition.

    • John Kennan has a degree in law from the University of Glasgow, he knows exactly how defamation works, and so do I.

      You say, “If Bishop Keenan didn’t believe the apparitions, then he wouldn’t step foot in Medjugorje.” That’s an interesting point, in that it demonstrates your utter detachment from rational thought. If visiting a location is entirely indicitive of agreement with belief systems which emerge from it, then presumably Saints Peter and Paul were agreeing with Roman paganism when they traveled to Rome to found the church there.

      What I think is the most interesting thing about Bishop Keenan’s trip to Medjugorje is precisely what he DIDN’T say and where he DIDN’T go, something none of you seem to have picked upon at all. I think it says rather a lot that he traveled all the way across Europe to a town whose only claim to notoriety is alleged Marian apparitions, and he pointedly snubbed the issue altogether – he didn’t mention the apparitions whatsoever, nor the supposed seers. It’s as if a planespotter went to Heathrow airport and gave a speech taking about how good the coffee on sale was.

      • “then presumably Saints Peter and Paul were agreeing with Roman paganism when they traveled to Rome to found the church there.”

        Oh sorry, I didn’t realise Bishop Keenan was following in the footsteps of St Peter and Paul and going to convert the followers of the false apparition! Silly me.

        Again, your comment about defamation made me laugh. You’re being idiotic and I would hope Bishop Keenan wouldn’t stoop to your level of idiocy.

      • Chris,

        Let the Bishop sue me. Somehow, given the secularism now endemic in the Catholic soul these days, I wouldn’t be surprised. It would be great for uniting the modernist Church in Scotland and Papa Francis would be delighted. He hates “rigid” folk like me who are “fundamentalists”. Yes, I’ll await the court summons. I’ll need a new outfit, but I can justify that – the High Street needs as much support as possible these days (and yes, I DO visit the High Street from time to time so I CAN claim to “support” it but a new outfit for court would give it an even bigger boost. Almost like having a bishop with me when I go shopping…)

        I’ve often wondered, mind you, why the great patron saint of priests, St John Vianney, didn’t sue the girl who made false allegations against his purity. I wonder why he chose to remain silent, pray and not sue? Any ideas?

        Oops! Just thinking – he struggled with Latin (and probably other academic subjects, I’m not sure) so he wouldn’t have had a Law Degree. What was he thinking … priests in those days really didn’t have it together did they? Priorities all wrong…

        • Read the comments on this thread with interest. Am not a Medjugorie Fan nor was I against as it’s a Free Country and one can think as they please ( well it used to be ) . The one thing as far as my simple intellect is concerned is that were Medjugorie Really True without a doubt it would unite Catholics and not divide us . As for Bishop Keenan av never met the Man but he comes across as Mealy Mouthed to me ( no sarcasm to M.Meals intended) . His job first and foremost is to lead by Example and Action. That he most Definitely will absolve the S N P for their Horrible LGBTQ2WXYZ Education in our Catholic Schools to Our Catholic Children is scandalous.
          On a PS I personally myself have not got a Degree in Law or otherwise what I most certainly will say is I have Without a Doubt got a Doctorate on Life . I have met many many People with Degrees of whom I wouldn’t trust to make a Hard Boiled Egg . One such person in my Humble Capacity as an Engineer nearly blew me up . As such ad rather Judge ( am not a fan of Francis sayings either) a person by their attitude and actions rather than at the end of the day that which is only a piece of paper. Of course that’s only my opinion and on that alone ( at least on here ) i will be judged.

        • At least your name would maybe be in The Daily Record if he sued you . I think it would make for a great Headline. Something probably like this. Bishop Keenan Of Paisley Sues Alt Right Wing Catholic Truth Editor . 🍩

  10. Editor,
    By the way, do you know that Google translates all posts in French? and it is fairly good, for instance:

    l’éditeur dit:
    Le 9 novembre 2018 à 18h24
    Non, Chris, cela ne fait pas de vous un calviniste, mais votre faible compréhension de ce qui constitue un sens véritablement catholique et de l’absence de toute notion de gravité du scandale, vous met dans la course pour le calvinisme.

    Or:

    l’éditeur dit:
    Le 9 novembre 2018 à 18h30
    Chris,
    Laissez l’évêque me poursuivre en justice. D’une certaine manière, étant donné la laïcité endémique dans l’âme catholique de nos jours, je ne serais pas surpris. Ce serait formidable pour l’union de l’Église moderniste d’Ecosse et Papa Francis en serait ravi. Il déteste les gens «rigides» comme moi qui sont des «fondamentalistes». Oui, j’attendrai la convocation du tribunal. J’aurai besoin d’une nouvelle tenue, mais je peux justifier cela – la rue principale a besoin de tout le soutien possible ces jours-ci (et oui, je visite la rue de temps en temps pour que je puisse prétendre la “soutenir” mais une nouvelle tenue pour la cour lui donnerait un coup de pouce encore plus grand, presque comme si j’avais un évêque avec moi quand je faisais les courses…)
    Vous vous êtes souvent demandé pourquoi le grand patron des prêtres, saint Jean Vianney, n’avait pas poursuivi en justice la fille qui avait fait de fausses allégations contre sa pureté. Je me demande pourquoi il a choisi de rester silencieux, de prier et de ne pas poursuivre en justice? Des idées?
    Oops! Juste en train de penser – il se débattait avec le latin (et probablement d’autres matières académiques, je ne suis pas sûr) pour ne pas avoir obtenu un diplôme en droit. À quoi pensait-il… Les prêtres de l’époque ne l’avaient pas vraiment ensemble, n’est-ce pas? Les priorités sont toutes fausses…

    YOU CAN DELETE AFTER READING

  11. That the medjugorje hoax rumbles on is a disgrace. I honestly think its got to the stage where those responsible are scared to make a decision because of the danger of making so many people look like fools over it.

    As I understand it, Mary’s Meals was the result of the experiences of the founder after visiting Medjugorje.

    I think the attitude of the Church is that a hoax is tolerable, if it is inspiring good works. I think that is a very dangerous attitude to take.

    • Gabriel Syme,

      That attitude IS very dangerous. As others have said, there’s no shortage of charities looking for donations to help the needy, so there’s no need to support one which will lead people into error. I only know ONE person who is involved with Mary’s Meals and he’s a complete fanatic about Medjugorje. Last time I saw him – quite some time ago now – he was wearing a very “loud” Medjugorje T shirt.

      Complete the following sentence…

      There’s no fool like…. *

      *…a MEDJUGORJE fool …

      • Editor,

        What surprises me about it is the kinds of people who end up caught up in the hoax, often people who seem sincere / orthodox.

        I believe you spoke to the priest at St John the Baptist uddingston about this once (?).

        Years ago, I remember discovering his parish has an adoration chapel which functions to 9pm on many evenings. I thought that sounded like a great chance to go to adoration, but then was shocked to see his advertise a group he was taking to Medjugorje (and so from being appealing I suddenly wondered is it the kind of place to visit at all?)

        • Gabriel Syme,

          I don’t think I spoke to the priest, but I did write to him, without, of course, receiving any reply. The former Bishop of Motherwell, however, (Bishop Devine) who was advertised to attend an event alongside Ivan, the Medjugorje “millionaire seer” (my nickname for him!) in that parish did decline to attend said event, after I sent him the documentation from the Bishop of Mostar, in which he asks that these “seers” not be invited into dioceses; I asked Bishop Devine if he really intended to insult a brother bishop by going against his wishes in this way.

          I’d written from my home in England at the time, but a couple of members of the Catholic Truth team went along to the packed church to see what would happen, to check if the Bishop did attend despite my letter and documentation.

          Hilariously, the PP came out before the “apparitions” began to offer the Bishop’s apologies. Despite the fact that “Our Lady” would be present in the church that night (as ever, at Ivan’s beckoning) the Bishop had remembered a previous engagement, so he couldn’t come after all. Priceless!

          So, no, I would not visit that church even if I were offered a free pilgrimage to… Medjugorje! I should mention, however, that I don’t know if that same priest is serving in that same parish. Might be worth checking.

  12. It is worth challenging these things. Although the CDF has told dioceses to stop hosting events on Catholic premises featuring the Medjugorje ‘seers’ having ‘apparitions’, if any bishop does let them come, then he should be put on the spot. If an alleged apparition has occurred in a parish church in his diocese, then it becomes his duty as the local Ordinary to discern the authenticity of it. Of course, because this scandal is global now, most bishops drop it like a hot rock and the ‘seers’ never get invited again – so please, if this happens in your diocese, hold the bishop to account. It worked twice when I did it. The wealthy ‘seer’ Ivan – he who advocates fasting three times a week on bread and water as the ‘Gospa’ allegedly told him to, but is somewhere in the morbidly obese category (funny that . . . ) once came to the Shrine of Our Lady of Consolation in West Grinstead. The mandatory ‘apparition’ took place, and I wrote to the local Ordinary at the time (I think it was +Cormac Murphy O’Connor) and I can’t remember the exact response, but it was clear that he wanted to disown the whole thing. This event was never repeated. Likewise the annual Medjugorje Days of Prayer at Aylesford. For a couple of years we put pressure on Archbishop Bowen (the then local Ordinary) to declare on the authenticity of the alleged ‘apparitions’ occurring at Aylesford. Again, the event was quietly dropped. Then it disingenuously changed its name to ‘Our Lady Queen of Peace Day of Prayer’, while still promoting Medjugorje as a genuine phenomenon, and shuffled over to Walsingham, where it has remained entrenched to this day, coinciding with the ghastly Medj-spawned Youth 2000 weekend – despite complaints to the local Ordinary and Shrine Director. Well, you can’t win ’em all.

    • Petrus,

      Phew! I am stunned. So stunned that I scrolled up to remind myself of the identity of the blogger who had come on here, as he does occasionally, to challenge, on this occasion my headline. This is what Chris McLaughlin wrote on 9 November at 1.05pm:

      Your headline states,”Scots Bishop, John Keenan of Paisley, Publicly Supports Medjugorje Hoax”. This is simply not true.

      Well, Mr McLaughlin, you take a wee listen to that interview and tell me that you stand by your assertion that Bishop Keenan does not “publicly support the Medjugorje hoax”.

      He is positively BRIMMING with enthusiasm about his “pilgrimage”, enthusing that “The Catholic Church and the Catholic Faith is vibrant” in Medjugorje and “the most special part of [his] pilgrimage was having met the “visionary”, Mirjana.

      I put the buzz words in inverted commas, NOT because the Bishop did that – nope, he spoke about his pilgrimage, the visionary (and how Mirjana explained the “vision”) showing that he has no reservations at all – he manifestly believes in this hoax.

      He finishes the interview speaking of encouraging Catholics to come to Medjugorje “as they come to other shrines”, thus equating this hoax with the approved shrines of Fatima and Lourdes, and he concludes by blessing “the work of Medjugorje” and “the work of this radio station.”

      I could write much more but will allow others to hear it first hand and marvel at the insanity of it all. This, remember, is one bishop who is frequently named to me by “orthodox” Catholics who think he’s as sound as the proverbial bell.

      Yeah right.

      • Editor,

        I’m sure the blogger in question will (a) find a Jesuitical way to deny what he said earlier, and (b) continue to question the Bishop’s “pilgrimage” as such. Let’s see: what word can we come up with that means “pilgrimage” but sounds like something completely different…?!

        Reminds me of a blogger in the States I knew years ago, a rank papolotrist, who, when confronted with the infamous picture of JPII kissing the Koran, said, “Did he really know what he was kissing?”

        • RCA Victor,

          Yet again, you hit the nail on the head. No matter how clear is the Bishop’s support for that hoax, unless he says the words “I support, I believe in the Medjugorje apparitions” the Catholic hoi polloi just won’t accept it.

          Delusional, I think it’s called. Delusional.

      • I hope that Chris McLaughlin will have the common decency to come on here and apologise to you, Editor.

    • That interview with Bishop Keenan is truly shocking. I would never have thought any bishop could be so totally dishonest.

      He was originally giving the impression that he was only there to bless the new Mary’s Meals centre, but in that interview, he’s come out as a full blown Medjugorje fanatic.

      I just don’t know what to say that’s not already been said here, except I agree with RCA Victor that the bishops (and the Pope) “have lost all their credibility, and our trust – completely and utterly.”

      This is not the attitude to the Faith that I wanted to pass on to my family so I’m very sad indeed. I wonder if we are seeing the very last generation of properly catechised Catholics, in fact.

  13. That’s a shocking interview. Bishop Keenan is obviously a believer in Medjugorje. How cynical of him to use the appointment of the Vatican person to justify that and to say it will encourage others to go to Medjugorje. That is obviously how the Medjugorje fanatics use the Archbishop but you expect the rest of the hierarchy to know why he was appointed and to disapprove of the disobedience and money-making that is going on at this “shrine”.

    I am appalled that a Scottish bishop could be so dishonest.

    • Margaret Mary,

      It certainly is appalling, but dishonesty (blatant or otherwise) seems to be the stock-in-trade of the vast majority of the hierarchy these days – including the Pope. They have lost all their credibility, and our trust – completely and utterly.

  14. A reader from England has just emailed Bishop Keenan’s Facebook page where he advertises an evening of talks about Medjugorje in St Mary’s Parish, Paisley. Click on the photo to read the Bishop’s Facebook page…

    Totally shocking. Read the three comments below (at time of this posting) – any reputation he has held as an orthodox/traditional Bishop is now in tatters.

    And any notion that he just went there to “bless” the new Mary’s Meals centre is for the birds. The ones that can’t fly…

  15. Why is everyone getting so het up about Bishop Keenan’s obvious support of Medjugorje? He is simply yet another, albeit outwardly orthodox, bishop who is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. They are all the same one way or another and I wouldn’t waste my beauty sleep on them and their general apostasy. I bet the bishop of Mostar is a modernist too and I bet he is just as much a traitor as the rest of them. Any half baked Catholic knows that vatican approval is need to confirm that an apparition is genuine so why all the fuss?

    Does the bishop and all the deluded out there really think that a visionary would continue to live a worldly life? If I saw the mother of God I’d never get off my knees! Every other visionary in history has dedicated his life one way or another to God, not driven around in mercedes cars and not live in luxury.

    I believe the apparitions ARE real but diabolical in nature and the bishop must be very naive not to see that.

  16. Just a few points Helen:

    a) ‘Why is everyone getting so het up” – because souls are being led astray by falsehood and error. “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”. So it is quite justified to get ‘het up’ and bring this to people’s attention.
    b) I think it is unfair and uncharitable to state that Bp Ratko Peric is a ‘traitor’ when there is nothing to suggest that. He works under extremely difficult circumstances – he has even been physically attacked and kidnapped by Medj supporters.
    c) Vatican approval is NOT needed to confirm an apparition is genuine. The responsibility lies with the local Ordinary and sometimes can be referred to the Bishops Conference. In certain cases it can be referred to the CDF as well, but the rules state that the local Ordinary makes the decision, and then the Vatican usually adopts that as a default position (unless something is really untoward). The respective bishops of Lourdes and Fatima approved the apparitions, the Holy See merely accepted their findings.

    The CDF issued the following statement in 1996: Regarding the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, the Congregation states:

    1) The interpretation given by some individuals to a Decision approved by Paul VI on 14 October 1966 and promulgated on 15 November of that year, in virtue of which writings and messages resulting from alleged revelations could be freely circulated in the Church, is absolutely groundless. This decision actually referred to the “Abolition of the Index of Forbidden Books”, and determined that – after the relevant censures were lifted-the moral obligation still remained of not circulating or reading those writings which endanger faith and morals.

    2) It should be recalled however that with regard to the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, canon 823 §1 of the current Code remains in force: “the Pastors of the Church have the … right to demand that writings to be published by the Christian faithful which touch upon faith or morals be submitted to their judgement”.

    3) Alleged supernatural revelations and writings concerning them are submitted in first instance to the judgement of the diocesan Bishop, and, in particular cases, to the judgement of the Episcopal Conference and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.”

%d bloggers like this: