On Bayside:
The following is basically a Facebook note in very rough composition form on May 14, 2018 that was not finished for publication ready for various reasons. I decided recently to finish and publish it. My words will be in regular font.
The Church never condemned Bayside, Ryan. The word condemned was never used.
Mel you are engaging in private judgment on this matter. It is not required to use the word "
condemned" to condemn an apparition. It suffices for the bishop to (i) call them inauthentic, (ii) theologically problematical, (iii) erroneous on doctrine, (iv) lack moral certitude, (v) discourage publication, dissemination, and distribution of the apparitions. If that does not constitute a condemnation of the content of said apparitions, then you do not know what the concept entails!
The truth is that the bishops of the Dioceses of Brooklyn have done all of these things been very clear as to the status of this "apparition" many times and the current Bishop of Brooklyn
just reiterated the stance of his predecessors:
Anyone who can read either the above decision or the
one from 1986 and somehow think that the diocesan bishops of Brooklyn (whom I might add are the competent authorities on these matters in their dioceses) did not condemn the apparition are only fooling themselves.
Shawn, will you please verify, for me, that Bishop Mugavero did a Church-ruled investigation??
Only when you verify for me that these prophecies from "Our Lady" courtesy of Veronica Leuken were not false prophecies:
Prophecy #1:
“Please, My children, pray for your Holy Father, the Pope. You must not lose him, for the one who comes after him will destroy if he can – he will attempt to destroy Pope John Paul II.” [“Our Lady” of Bayside aka "Our Lady of the Roses", June 18, 1988 from Our Lady of the Roses (Blue Book), p. 108.]
The pope who came after John Paul II was Benedict XVI and far from destroying him actually proclaimed him venerable, beatified him, and before he re-signed was pressing for his canonization.
Prophecy #2:
"Pray for your Vicar (Pope John Paul II). There will be another attempt upon his life." ["Our Lady of the Roses", June,30, 1984]
There were no further attempts on the life of Pope John Paul II after 1981.
Prophecy #3:
"Your Father, in the eternal city of Rome, Pope Paul VI, your Holy Father, is a blessed man, for he carries his cross. Your Holy Father is a blessed man, for he shall be martyred." ["Our Lady", June 18, 1977]
Pope Paul VI died of natural causes in 1978. Furthermore, this "prophecy" contradicts earlier and absurd statements claiming that Pope Paul VI was replaced in 1975 or thereabouts by an imposter pope.
Prophecy #4:
“Within two years or less, there will be a great crash of the market. The whole world’s monetary systems will be paralyzed. That, My child, is why you had to come this evening to the grounds.” [“Our Lady” of Bayside aka "Our Lady of the Roses", June 18, 1988 from Our Lady of the Roses (Blue Book), p. 108.]
There was no great crash of the market within two years or less of June 18, 1988.
Prophecy #5:
“Do not be affrighted, My child; you must see this, for it is important. Within this century this Ball will be sent upon mankind… It is almost too late… a Ball that is fast hurtling towards earth! It will be here within this century, if not sooner.” [“Our Lady” of Bayside aka "Our Lady of the Roses", June 18, 1988 from Our Lady of the Roses (Blue Book), p. 108.]
Where was this Ball of Chastisement prior to the year 2000 (aka the last year within the century of when the above prophecy was uttered)?
I could post more but frankly,
even one of these false prophecies is enough to discredit Bayside and Veronica Leuken.
And, how come a former Bishop, in the New York area, told a Nun that The Apparitions were never condemned??
There is a lot of circumstantial statements there. I am privy to a communique from the Secretary To Public Information of the Diocese of Brooklyn who stated frankly that (paraphrased):
"'Bayside' was and is absolutely condemned by Bishop Mugavero and confirmed by the 2 subsequent Bishops. Stay away from it! Yes, it's OK to Pray the Rosary but (DIS)OBEDIENCE is the key word at play here. etc."
And there is of course these words from Bishop Mugavero circa 1986 (reaffirmed by the current diocesan bishop of Brooklyn in March of 2014):
"No credibility can be given to the so-called "apparitions" reported by Veronica Lueken and her followers...Because of my concern for their spiritual welfare, members of Christ's faithful are hereby directed to refrain from participating in the "vigils" and from disseminating any propaganda related to the "Bayside apparitions." They are also discouraged from reading any such literature. Anyone promoting this devotion in any way, be it by participating in the "vigils," organizing pilgrimages, publishing or disseminating the literature related to it, is contributing to the confusion which is being created in the faith of God's people, as well as encouraging them to act against the determinations made by the legitimate pastor of this particular Church (c.212, para. 1)."
I am aware of proponents of this "apparition" who try and claim that the bishop did not use a proper process or something along those lines but even if that claim was true, it would not justify disobedience. If there is a case that the bishop acted contrary to canon law, then the proponents of Bayside should appeal to Rome and in the meantime be obedient to the decision of the diocesan bishop until directed otherwise by Rome. Failing to do that and merely stating on their own authority that the process was flawed and using this pretext to disobey the bishop's directives and to promote these "apparitions" is an attitude that is neither Traditional nor Catholic.
