Mary KennyDespite lack of Vatican endorsement, pilgrims remain devoted to apparition site, writes Mary Kenny
The question of Medjugorje has drawn controversy since the phenomenon was first reported in 1981, and I think any Pope, or even any thoughtful visitor to the shrine, might find it a delicate matter to judge.
On the one hand, Rome has shown a reserved attitude towards the claimed apparitions at this place of pilgrimage in Herzegovina, and the local Bishop, Dr Ratko Peric, has given as his opinion that nothing supernatural has taken place there.
But on the other, Medjugorje draws an enormous numbers of pilgrims each year – about one and a half million – and they are palpably sincere.
When I visited Medjugorje myself in the 1990s, I could sense the sincerity of the pilgrims – very many of whom were Italian, and the majority of whom were women.
And I felt that even if Rome does not endorse Medjugorje as a place of Marian apparition – why rain on these pilgrims’ parade? Prayers, Confession, a sense of the transcendence with the Medjugorje visionaries – surely all these things are positive, and certainly do no harm.
Many Irish pilgrims are very devoted to Medjugorje, and return there repeatedly – drawing a spiritual strength from the experience
The subject was, however, a source of some marital discord between my late husband Richard and myself. He was a specialist in Balkan history and insisted that Medjugorje was sited on a highly sensitive religious fault-line that had played its part in sparking off the many Balkan troubles as between Serbs, Croats, Bosnians, Herzogovenians – Catholics, Orthodox and Muslims.
“The Blessed Virgin might as well be appearing at Crossmaglen!” he’d say, thinking of a trouble-spot in Ireland.
“No better place!” I’d reply.
He believed a strong Catholic presence would “foment” more trouble at that Balkan crossroads.
However, I cannot see that Medjugorje itself has advanced more troubles in the Balkans, which, if anything have achieved a greater tranquillity in recent years.
Rome may continue to withhold judgement. But “by their fruits ye shall know them” is surely a wise guide to any phenomenon.
Sad to see Clerys close
Like every Dubliner, and so many people outside of Dublin, I am very sad about the news of Clerys closure. It’s awful for the staff, who, in my experience, have always been outstandingly helpful and friendly.
For all our lifetimes, Clerys has been an iconic Dublin landmark – before the days of the mobile phone, friends would arrange to meet “under the clock” at Clerys. But it was also an excellent store for two commodities: millinery and corsetry. The hats were terrific, and in the corsetry department, meticulous attention was paid to fitting (always important in the matter of undergarments).
In the basement, there was a tremendous range of religious items.
We know times change, but surely there is always a place for a fine department store? Please let Clerys survive, and revive.
The influence of the Magna Carta
When I recently encountered the distinguished Professor Donnchadh Ó Corráin of UCC – a renowned specialist on Mediaevel Ireland – I asked him whether the Magna Carta, signed in 1215, had been beneficial for Ireland. After all, it did diminish the power of the English King, John, and that would have been a good thing.
Yes, but it increased the power of the Anglo-Norman barons, said Prof Ó Corráin, and that wasn’t particularly beneficial for Ireland, as they plundered their merry way around the country.
The Magna Carta is being much celebrated in England this week, it being the 800th anniversary of its signing at Runnymede. It is said to be the basis of modern citizens’ legal rights.
If the reader will allow me to refer to the family again, my son Ed West has written a short and I think witty guide to the Magna Carta, 1215 and All That, available from Kindle at 99p or its Euro equivalent.
1215 – and the centuries preceding – was a pretty brutal period and King John, who actually owned Ireland personally, was something of a bad egg. He was irreligious – “borderline atheist”, according to Ed – and disgraced himself by going on an alcoholic bender in Waterford. Even by the standards of the time, he was horribly cruel – he executed 28 sons of Welsh princes who had rebelled against him.
But what stung the barons into reducing the King’s power was his obsession with taxing them (and the Church, and torturing Jews for their money), and this seems to have been one of the wellsprings of Magna Carta. Stephen Langton, the then Archbishop of Canterbury, is credited with much of the authorship of the document.
And it’s the Americans who took up Magna Carta big-time. It was the American Association of Lawyers who, in 1957, decided to dedicate Runnymede on the Thames to its memory. Well, lawyers are certainly the beneficiaries of the rule of law!