Mary at Lourdes, Fatima and Medjugorje

In Lourdes, in 1858, Mary appeared to a young girl named Bernadette Soubirous eighteen times.  She gave Bernadette a number of messages.  In one of those visits she told Bernadette to go drink and wash her face in the spring.  There was no spring.  But one sprung up in the spot indicated and many miraculous cures have been attributed to those waters.  The Catholic Church has officially declared sixty five of these as genuine miracles.

At Fatima, she appeared to three shepherd children in 1917.  For months, many flocked to Fatima to hear what Mary had to say and, hopefully, to witness miracles.  Probably the best known miracle is known as the miracle of the sun.  During the last visit, the sun was seen by many to change colors, rotate, zigzag and fall toward the earth only to return back to it’s normal position.  Three visions were left with the children by Mary.

Another well known modern appearance of Mary is at Medjugorje, where she has been seen frequently since 1981.  Many messages have been given at Medjugorje, mainly warning that our time is almost up and we need to pray to get and work together for peace and to save the world.  Note: the visions at Medgugorje have not been approved as legitimate by the Catholic church.

There have been other appearances, but those are the major ones of the last two centuries.  I may delve into some of them more deeply at another time. I just wanted to bring them up at this time when the Pope has just reiterated that woman are second class persons  not qualified to serve as priests.  Although they are qualified to be saints and, in the words of the Catholic prayers, “Mother of God”.  In my opinion, saying that women cannot be priests is saying women are second class persons.


20 Comments Add yours

  1. Reverend Harold Boulette says:

    I added a line to the article stating that.  Thanks for the info.

  2. Reverend Harold Boulette says:

    Due to some comments that indicated that I said the Pope called women second class, I reworded part of the article to correct that impression and I apologize for the confusion.  I do stick with my opinion that telling women they cannot be priests and a bishop who ordains one will be excommunicated is telling women they are not as good as men, therefore, second class.

  3. Reverend Harold Boulette says:

    I agree that not everyone has the right to be a priest.  There are many reasons why a person may be denied the privilege.  I just don’t agree that being female is one of those reasons.  You have, however, touched on something that may be closer to the truth that the “all the apostles were men” argument.  Since many pagan religions had priestesses, early church leaders, wishing to deny any connection to them decided that priests would be men only.  You are the second person who stated that God ordained that priests would be men.  Neither of you provided any evidence of that.

  4. Reverend Harold Boulette says:

    I respectfully disagree.  Telling women they can’t be priests is no different than a corporation having a “Glass Ceiling” for women employees, and I think most believe now that is wrong.  As to wanting to have my own way, I am neither a woman or a Catholic so it doesn’t benefit me in anyway if the Church changes it’s policy.  I am simply voicing an opinion which others are free to disagree with (and I’m surprised at how many have considering I don’t get that many readers).  Remember that this started with Catholics partitioning the Pope to change the policy, it didn’t start with me.   As for allowing priests to marry, you may be right.  That is not a subject I have done any research on so I won’t attempt to argue that point.

  5. Vin says:

    I have heard the “Jesus was bound by the norms of His time” used to answer why he only chose men to be apostles many times. Being God, did He not have the ability to see the trouble this would cause in the future? Apparently it was not His wish to anoint women. That was and is His right. Perhaps He wanted to make sure children would have the full attention of Mom? Just because our society no longer appreciates large families or “woman’s work” is not a reason to turn a blind eye to the truth. It’s sad that women no longer fell fullfilled in the role they were created for, but that doesn’t mean we should change things to accomodate them. God Bless

  6. Clare A says:

    There is no ‘right’ to the priesthood – it is a calling and a privilege.

    The ancient world knew priestesses very well – the Romans and Greeks had them. Christ was not exactly afraid of change, he was criticised by the Sanhedrin for ‘healing people on the Sabbath’ for example. As the Messiah promised by the God of Abraham he wouldn’t have let the Jewish all-male priesthood constrain him; if he had wanted women priests, he would have appointed a female apostle. The male-only priesthood is not culturally conditioned but ordained by God.

  7. Medjugorje is not approved by the Church and its local Bishop has consistently made negative statements on it. As recent as 2006, both Pope Benedict XVI and Medjugorje’s Bishop have spoken negatively on it. Msgr. Angelo Amato, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s secretary, told the Bishops of Tuscany in 2007 to read the 2006 Confirmation homily of Bishop Peric (Medjugorje’s Bishop) in 2007. That homily explictly called the alleged ‘visionaries’ to obedience and stop the alleged visions.

    Sadly, most of this has gone unreported.

  8. Laura says:

    Reserving priesthood for men in no way makes women 2nd class persons. Jesus had a high regard for women, especially for a first-century Jew. He had His reasons for not making women priests. The Church followed His actions and has said that because of how Jesus Himself did things, it is impossible to change that and make women priests. It in no way implies that women are second class. Anyone who insists that it does is just stubbornly refusing to see the truth because they want their own way.

    The argument that the Church should allow priests to marry because we would get more and better priests is also spurious. The seminaries that are growing are the ones who stick to the true teachings of the Church, not the ones who advance the liberal agenda. Besides, how would being distracted by the responsibilities of a wife and children make a priest a better priest? Check out the burn-out rates of Protestant ministers and the comments of Orthodox priests (who are allowed to marry) to see that having married priests is not a good idea.

  9. Reverend Harold Boulette says:

    I never said that the Pope, who I admire in many ways, said that women were second class.  I said that by denying them the right to be priests and fully participate in the church, he is effectively making them second class.  As to the idea that “God said women can’t be priests, not the Pope”, obviously, I disagree with that.

  10. Reverend Harold Boulette says:

    I agree about letting priests marry also.  It may cause some short term problems, but in the long term, would help the Catholic Church get better priests.

  11. Reverend Harold Boulette says:

    Interesting that it would be a man who believes telling women they cannot fully participate in their church is not calling them second class.  Of course, at the time and place of Jesus 2000 years ago, the Jews did not allow women as priests so naturally Jesus choose only men.  Times have changed, as Mary has recognized, which is why she is the one making all these appearances in recent times, not Peter, or Paul.  But if the criteria for being a priest is to be based on who the apostles were than blue-eyed blonds should be banned from becoming priests because Jesus choose none of them to be apostles.  He also didn’t choose and Native Americans or Chinese, so should they be banned also?  Of course not.  You can say, “well there were no Chinese or Native Americans in Judea at the time” and that is probably true.  There were, however, many Romans, yet Jesus choose none of them.  So does that mean Italians should be banned for all time form being priests?  I don’t think so.

  12. Barbara Stephens says:

    More hate provoking!

    The pope has never called women “secoond class” anything.
    Quite the contrary, the pope has always referred to the dignity of women and has encouraged us to be all that God has created us to be.
    Shame on you,Father. You seek recognition by pandering to the disgruntled who always seek the “cause” for their disatisfaction outside of themselves.

    How disappointing that anyone would give 5 seconds to seriously contemplating these ridiculous remarks.

  13. Maria says:

    It is apparent you haven’t a clear understanding of the Catholic Faith. Not being able to serve as a priest does not make a woman a “second class person” in the church. Oh, how I feel bad for those who do not know the love of Mary. She was THE perfect disciple of Christ and is a prayer warrior to all of us, her children. I marvel at the criticisms thrown at the Catholic Church. 99% of them are rooted in ignorance.

  14. Michael says:

    The snide comment “second class persons” shows a complete lack of understanding of the nature of the Sacred Priesthood. Who knows, may be some Jewish tribes may have uttered such nonsense to the Levites?

    Lourdes, Fatima and Akita are the major apparitions of our time. And obedience and conversion from sin are the constant theme. OBEDIENCE is the toughie…

  15. Ted says:

    This article clearly showed a lack of investigation into the true messages of each one of these appearances of the Blessed Mother of God. It also shows a real ignorance and lack of understanding of the teachings of the church concerning women and their roles within society and the church and even more importantly it lies about the opinions and teachings of the present Pope Benedict regarding women in the church and their role in history. This Pope has been a huge proponent of women and their importance in the church and has he never suggested them to be 2nd class citizens in any way shape or form. I pose a question to the arrogant Harold Boulette who obviously has an ax to grind when it comes to the Catholic church. Why would Jesus Christ himself not will or even allow his own Mother to become a priest or Bishop in his church when he began? Was their anyone more worthy than she to be his 1st priest? Jesus instead picks a man “Peter” who betrayed him on his way to calvary to be the 1st Pope? The Holy Spirit revealed to Peter his mission from God the Father directly and Jesus agreed? Does this make sense when his own Mother stayed loyal and followed him to the foot of the Cross? Jesus was a trend setter – he didn’t care about women’s roles he only cared about the heart of a person! He could have very easily made his Mother a priest! Why didn’t he? Maybe it is because he knew it was not the will of his Father “God in Heaven” whom he always obeyed! Remember Jesus appeared 1st to Mary Magdalen a well known prostitute when he rose from the dead. Why didn’t he allow Mary Magdalen to become a priest? If she was important enough for him to appear to her 1st because of her great love for him and also following him all the way to calvary! Jesus didn’t believe the role of priest to be for a woman – not because they were not worthy but because this was not God’s will! Your issue Harold is not with Pope Benedict but with God himself. Take it up with God and pray and ask God why he doesn’t want women to be priests. I am confident if you seriously and humbly ask God he will reveal to you a better understanding. The key is humbly asking him – trusting that he will let you know the truth. Pope John Paul II wrote Apostolic letters regarding the subject of women in the priesthood entitled, “On reserving ordination to men alone” and “Letter of Pope John Paul II to Women” he in addition wrote the encyclical “Mother of the Redeemer” which all tell about the important roles of women and how special, unique, and necessary they are. In no way are they ever referred to as 2nd class citizens and in fact after reading about them one would conclude that they were in fact just as important and maybe even more blessed and graced by God in many ways then even men! Read and learn – it is too easy to be critical these days! Regarding the appearances of the Blessed Mother – if you were to research all of the approved appearances you would quickly note that

  16. FRJTK says:

    “I just wanted to bring them up at this time when the Pope has just reiterated that woman are second class persons”
    Could you provide a reference to this statement? I would be happy to disuss the truth, but I believe this is an error on your part.

  17. Will Allen says:

    Obviously you do not know/understand the teaching of the Catholic Church. I would suggest you join one of the New Agey ones with women as priests.
    I am not going to dignify this old canard of lack of dignity of women in the Catholic Church.


  18. Cetus Smith says:

    I agree with your sentiments, Rev Boulette, and would declare that the way forward for Catholicism is for Holy Orders to be extended to women, without any restriction based on gender; the Catholic Church must have women priests to survive.
    Further, priests must be allowed to marry, in the conventional sense of a bonding of man and woman, and this of course would include the new women priests. I cannot think of anything in scripture that forbids women priests and would point out, unlike the representations of the Last Supper in Art, that women were there in the upper room and I suspect took a full and active part in the proceedings as well as being present on many occasions through Christ’s life on Earth.

  19. Lourdes & Fatima are officially approved. Medjugorge is not, & to link these 3 together implies that they all are approved, thus having the possibility of misleading unsuspecting people of all faiths.

  20. Rob says:

    I wonder if Mary was upset that her Son didn’t make her a priest? I would think that Christ would have chosen ONE woman for His apostle if this was His mind and also if He knew about this future article. It has nothing to do with making women second class citizens – duh.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *