Julia Kim – “Mary’s Ark of Salvation”

 


JUNE 15, 2013

 

Julia Kim – “Mary’s Ark of Salvation”

 

TWO OF SEVERAL LETTERS THAT I RECEIVED CONCERNING THE “SEER” OF NAJU:

From:
ML
To:
Michael Prabhu
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 8:36 AM Subject: Our Lady Weeps…!

During the overnight prayer meeting in Naju on December 31, 2005-January 1, 2006, the Blessed Mother shed tears of blood for the first time since 1992. From June 30, 1985, to January 14, 1992, she had wept for a total of exactly 700 days through her statue in Naju, Korea. This resumption of her tears of blood is a powerful sign of her immense sorrows over our failure to accept her messages, to repent of our sins, and to reform our lives.
Please
keep the Blessed Mother moving from house to house. Let us pray for the conversion of mankind.  This picture was forwarded to me which is sent to you as it is. 

 

From:
Name Withheld
To:
michaelprabhu@vsnl.net
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 8:21 AM

Subject: Re: Alleged apparitions at Naju in Korea

Dear Michael,
I read in one of the reports on the net that the Archbishop of Kwangju diocese in which Naju is located, released the
letter from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith.
In that letter the CDF agreed with the stand taken by the local bishop. I am unable to locate this letter on the net.
Would it be possible for you to somehow locate this letter?
My curiosity about this was aroused, when a person I know handed me a scapular from Naju, supposedly blessed with a fragrance when it was kept in the so-called mystic’s presence. I also heard that there are regular pilgrimages from Goa to Naju. After some initial study on the net I came to the conclusion that whatever was happening in Naju, was in direct disobedience to the local bishop. That was when I decided to delve deeper, so as to write to the organizers of these pilgrimages. I am very new to this kind of study but I do not know of any other apparition site, where the local bishop has issued a decree excommunicating all those who even visit the alleged apparition site. Thanks for all your help once again.

 

Julia Kim, Naju, Korea 1985 -Current (Our Lady of Naju)

http://www.catholicrevelations.org/PR/julia%20kim%20naju.htm
EXTRACT

Status: Supernatural evidence not established and not excluded (Non constat de supernaturalitate)

Episcopal Remarks: Theological Commission: “In the so-called “Messages of Our Lady of Naju” which Julia claims to have come from Our Lady, there are several human and artificial elements involved. Because of this, there are several parts which appear to be lacking in genuineness and credibility” (Victorinus K. Youn, Archbishop of Kwangju Archdiocese, Declaration Of Most Rev. Victorinus Youn Of Archdiocese Of Kwangju Concerning “The Phenomena And Messages Which Happened To Julia Youn Of Naju And Her Statue Of The Blessed Mother, January 1, 1998);

“The so-called “The messages of the Blessed Mother of Naju” are seen as the results of Mrs. Julia Youn’s personal experience or meditation, and do not bear evidence that they are private revelations” (Ibid);

“Various strange phenomena which happened to Mrs. Julia Youn and in her circumference (phenomena arising from her body, and the statue of the Blessed Mother), personal vision also produce
no evidence which prove that they are truly supernatural and thus from God
” (Ibid);

“For the sake of one’s personal interest, to consider the alleged disturbing phenomena like “the events arising in Naju” and insist them as supernatural is regarded as an act breaking the unity of the Church’s faith” (Ibid) “I, as Ordinary, have asked Julia Youn to discontinue the memorial function which has been held on the memorial day of the first weeping of the statue of the Blessed Mother, and not to spread her personal experiences and the so-called “The messages of the Blessed Mother of Naju” which were erroneously asserted as supernatural phenomena and private revelations” (Ibid);

“Do not insist that the personal experiences are supernatural and not to propagate them as supernatural “(Archbishop Choi, Ending the Holy Month of Mary, letter sent to all archdiocesan parishes, May 24) (See Documentation Here)

1.

 

Corroboration by Other Seers:
Fr. Gobbi
*, the founder and seer of the Marian Movement of Priests (MMP) is a supporter of the events at Naju

*Another unapproved/discredited “visionary”; see FR STEFANO GOBBI-MARIAN MOVEMENT OF PRIESTS

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/FR_STEFANO_GOBBI-MARIAN_MOVEMENT_OF_PRIESTS.doc

 

Julia Kim
Negative decision
A NEGATIVE DECISION IS GIVEN BY THE LOCAL ORDINARY

http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/statements/index.html#naju

January 1, 1998 – Declaration concerning “The phenomena and messages which happened to Julia Youn of Naju and her statue of the Blessed Mother” [more]

May 5, 2001 – Pastoral Letter of Archbishop Andreas CHOI of Kwangju [more]

May 5, 2005 – ADMONITION FOR A TRUE AND SINCERE DEVOTION BY THE ORDINARY OF THE KWANGJU ARCHDIOCESE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH – A PASTORAL ADMONITION FOR NAJU JULIA YOUN AND MATTERS RELATED TO HER [more]

June 29, 2007 – Bishop Warns Catholics On Activities Related To Naju Marian Shrine [more]

November 19, 2007 – The Position of the Archdiocese of Kwangju in relation to the Matter of Julia Yoon of Naju and its related Phenomena [more]

January 21, 2008 – Decree by the Ordinary of the Catholic Archdiocese of Kwangju [more]

 

Admonished and warned against but, still, SUPPORT FOR THE ALLEGED SEER FROM A KOREAN BISHOP

1. Eucharistic Miracle in Naju, South Korea, September 22, 1995
Testimony of Julia Kim

Bishop Roman Danylak of Toronto, Ontario (Canada) celebrated Mass on the mountain together with Fr. Joseph Peter Finn, S.T.D., from Ontario, Canada, and a Korean priest. Sixteen lay people attended the Mass. We received Communion under both species. The moment I received both species in my mouth, I felt the Host and the Precious Blood become mixed and the Host beginning to swell. At the same time I smelled a strong odor of blood, and the Sacred Host began moving. One of the faithful saw this and reported it to Bishop Danylak. The bishop observed this phenomenon together with the others present. A while later Bishop Danylak instructed me to swallow the Host. I swallowed the Host with much difficulty, because it had changed into a piece of flesh, and had become larger. We were crying and entered into prayerful meditation; a light came down from heaven and the voice of Jesus, at once warm and loving, and full of dignity and majesty, made itself heard, even though I could not see Him.
Words of Jesus> “My beloved little soul! The greatest treasure in My Church is My most holy Mother Mary. My Mother is the Queen of the Universe, the Mother of Heaven and also your Mother. This is why My Mother Mary loves you as I have loved you; and she can do anything that I can do, through me and by my grace. Today My Mother, who is the Mother of Heaven and your Mother, and through this my little and inadequate soul (Julia) is now revealing and showing My Heart to a bishop, who seeks to follow Me and My Mother as a child, so that he can make ever more known that I am really present in the Eucharist, the sublime mystery of faith and love. If my priests, who celebrate Mass daily, would truly believe in and seek to experience this Presence with their whole heart and would live the sublime and marvelous Divine Reality such as it is, numerable souls would be purified and would live in my merciful heart with a grace that is beyond all expectations. Make haste to make my real Presence known. Apostasy and infidelity are bringing this world to the brink of ruin; too many of my representatives continue to sleep. In truth, my representatives even allow themselves to be seduced by false prophets. The present disorders continuously torment me; they rend my heart; they become the lashes that endlessly tear the Sacred and Immaculate Heart of My Mother. O souls whom I have called! You will experience incomprehension and persecutions within my Church that has been wounded and divided; but I shall always abide in you to encourage and to help you. I shall always remain at your side. You need not fear; but only trust in me and proclaim Me who live in the Eucharist.
There are many priests and a great number of my children who claim to know that I live and breathe in the Eucharist, that I am present body and blood, with my soul and my divinity; but they do not really know me well. They were shown my living presence several times through my little soul (Julia). Notwithstanding this, even now those of my children, who follow Me are very few. Many ecclesiastics want to make me known through sophisticated arguments and complex reasoning, forgetting the Eucharist, which is My substance, and the sublime simplicity of the Gospels which I proclaim. This is like throwing mud at simple people.
My dearly beloved children, do not reject My plea which I make under this form, Me, who am truly present in the Eucharist.
If people, notwithstanding everything, – do not want to understand the signs (that I am giving), – do not follow My Will to bestow Love upon them, -if they deny the divine character (of God’s manifestations) then they will face the wrath of God the Father. Because My Mother’s loving and kind words for the past several centuries have been ignored, sin has reached a saturation point even in the Church.
Make haste to begin living a life of devotion through prayer, sacrifices, penance, so that you may attain the final victory and to make acts of reparation for the most abominable sins of blasphemy that have been committed. And if you follow My Mother Mary in order to restore My honor, that has been trampled upon, you will not be lost even in the dark maze of life in this world. My Mother Mary is the short cut to Me, a shining dawn of My renewed Church, and the ark of a new covenant.
My children who follow and proclaim My messages, proclaim me, and as you pray do not worry about what your critics may think. Their thoughts will dispel as quickly as clouds in the sky, when the hand of God rests over you. I bless you and all those who are dear to you.”
Julia Yun September 23, 1995

 

 

2. Our Lady weeps tears of blood again in Naju, South Korea.
During the overnight prayer meeting in Naju on December 31, 2005-January 1, 2006, the Blessed Mother shed tears of blood for the first time since 1992. From June 30, 1985, to January 14, 1992, she had wept for a total of exactly 700 days through her statue in Naju. This resumption of her tears of blood is a powerful sign of her immense sorrows over our failure to accept her messages, to repent our sins, and to reform our lives.
The Story of the Miracle of Naju, The Eucharistic Miracle of Naju (The Sacred Heart of the Divine Victim)
It looked like a heart when we first examined the photos taken September 22, 1995 during the Mass celebrated  in a valley among  the Naju hills in Korea. Some time in November, 1995, I showed the photos taken to a pediatrician, Dr. Helen Owen. After attentive examination, she said the heart in the photo was the size and had the exact configurations of the heart of an infant.
Sebastian, the layman present during the celebration with his camera, calculated the thickness of the host turned heart in the mouth of Julia against a twig he had in hand. The heart was about 5 mm. thick. The pediatrician further noted the various particulars, the lines of the veins in the heart and other features. It was a perfect human heart, not like a valentine, but a real human heart, the size of the heart of a child.
It was Friday, September 22, 1995, when two priests, Fr. Joseph Finn and Fr. Aloysius Chang and I had concelebrated the Eucharist in an out-door celebration amidst the Korean mountains at 5 p.m. There were sixteen Korean Catholic faithful present with Julia Kim, the Korean visionary, and ourselves, participating in this Mass. We had prepared the large white host and the number of small white hosts together with the wine for the Eucharist. The three of us had concelebrated Mass a week before, Friday, September 15 an hour later, at 6 p.m.   And we had to finish the celebration by car light; it was pitch dark.
After that first Mass Julia came up to me with a question. She had seen a rainbow in the night sky at the time of the consecration, and asked me what could be its significance. The thought that occurred to me and that I shared with Julia through our translator, was that first biblical rainbow after the great flood. God used it as a memorial to the first covenant he established between Himself and renewed mankind. We had just celebrated the memorial of the final covenant in the Divine Liturgy or Eucharist when Julia saw her rainbow.
For me it was the culmination of the day. I had been looking forward to this celebration with expectation, not in view of witnessing a miracle, but just to offer my daily Mass. The only communications we had with Julia during the week were through her Korean translator, Raphael; our life in Naju was lived from moment to moment .We never knew what each day would bring. We could plan nothing.
Friday, September 22, 1995 turned out to be a day of celebration. Fr. Finn and I were treated to a festive fish dinner at a sea-side restaurant near the Pacific. Julia and the group of the little community in Naju went all out to celebrate our visit, together with Korean sashimi and squirming fresh squid. After lunch we boarded our vans and continued to travel with me wondering when we would celebrate Mass. It was after 4 p.m. when we drove into the compound of the valley. It was only when we finally entered the valley that I knew we were to celebrate Holy Mass.
None of us even dreamed of this other celebration that the Lord and His Mother were preparing, a heavenly love feast at the Eucharistic banquet of the Lord at one of the most awesome miracles granted by Our Lord in the twenty centuries of the history of the Church; to witness the awesome transformation of the consecrated host and wine into the very Body, nay the very Heart, and the Precious Blood of Jesus Christ, through the intercession of His Mother.
The rest of us received the Eucharistic Body and Blood of Christ, but in Julia’s mouth the Eucharistic species of the Host, the wafer, and the species of the wine in the chalice, changed to the species of flesh and blood. The rest of us savoured the taste of wafer and wine as we received Holy Communion. We knew with divine faith that these were the very Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist. We were joined to the living and glorified Christ, renewing His mystical and real oblation, offering Himself as the Divine Victim and His Mystical Body to the Father. As Julia experienced the commingling of blood and flesh, the flesh expanding and moving in her mouth and the strong odour of blood, Fr. Finn observed the white of the host disappearing and changing into the dark red of living flesh.
In Julia’s mouth the species of unleavened bread changed to the species of flesh and the species of wine changed into the species of blood. In the twilight of 5.30 p.m. that momentous Friday the rest of us observed the moving flesh on her tongue and the blood brimming under her tongue and filling the creases of her lips. It was only later, as we examined the photos, that we began to apprehend the full magnitude of the miracle. The host had changed into a living and vibrant heart.
For the first time, human eyes saw the living Heart of Our Lord and Saviour, the Heart that had so loved the world that It offered Itself in holocaust that we might live and not be lost. All those present at this memorable evening shared the same sentiments. We were one in mind and heart. It was two months later, in November, that I finally received and read the text of the message of Jesus to Julia during her communion, in the French translation of Fr. Spies.  As I read this message from our Lord during the time of communion, I became aware that the words of Jesus confirmed our conjecture. “My Mother is now showing and revealing My heart to a bishop…” What we had viewed that September evening was the very heart of Jesus.
The reactions of others to this phenomenon, with whom I shared the pictures and my account of our experience – well, that was another thing. They covered a vast gamut from incredulity and  disbelief, cynicism and indifference to silence, wonderment and awe before this mystery of faith; a profession of faith in the Eucharist, in the Catholic Church, in the sacrament of the priesthood, of conversion and Christian faith.

3.

 


Remarks included, “How gross!” and questions, “How was a photographer so conveniently present?”  Accusation,” Julia slipped a heart she had hidden on her person into her mouth!” Denial, “This is private revelation; I don’t have to believe it!”  And from still others, there was a total lack of responsiveness. Such were some of the negative comments and reactions.
However, I was invited to share our experiences the following weeks in the home of a Seoul business man before a group of 15 Koreans, largely Catholics. Our hostess, a Buddhist, who had some exposure to Christian and Catholic teachings, believed immediately and forthwith decided to take Catholic instruction and to be baptized in the Catholic Church. Her Korean Methodist friend believed immediately and resolved all the questions she still entertained about the Catholic Eucharist and the celibate Catholic clergy.
On the other hand, others:  priests, theologians, bishops and Catholic laity to whom I showed the photos, bogged down by their theologies, remained indifferent or were even horrified before this new evidence of their Catholic or Christian faith.
“This is My Body; this is My Blood”, said Christ as He distributed the first Eucharist to His apostles, fulfilling the promise He had given after the multiplication of fishes and loaves on the north shore of Lake Genesareth. Jesus is the Bread of Life; He who comes to me will never be hungry, he who has faith in Me will never thirst.” (Jn.6, 15)
And five times Jesus repeated and underlined and stressed that His flesh is real food, and His blood is
real drink for eternal life, and that whoever eats His flesh and drinks His blood, has life everlasting in Him, and He will raise us up on the last day.
The theology and the doctrine of the Catholic and the Orthodox Churches have been constant to the present day. Bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ. This promise of Christ became a stumbling block for the Jews and scandal to the gentiles.  It has remained so to liberal Catholics, theologians, laity and even priests and a scandal to the Protestants, even to the present day.
Yet Jesus’ words are clear and He never retracted them.  As the Pharisees and Sadducees, and even His disciples left Jesus – only His twelve apostles remained – the Lord, heavy-hearted, turned to His apostles with the question, “Will you also leave me?”
And from those banks of the sea of Tiberias, He scanned  the ages even to this our present age, and watched as those who had come to know Him through His Church, turned  away in disbelief and incredulity. His lament and His accusation of the neo-modernist intellectuals in the Church continues. “Will you also leave me?”
Jesus poured out His heart to Julia: “Many ecclesiastics want to make me known through sophisticated arguments and complex reasonings, forgetting the Eucharist, which is my very substance, and the sublime simplicity of the Gospels, which I proclaim. This is like throwing mud at simple people.” (Cf. Message to Julia Kim, September 22, 1995)
Observers of the pictures and of the story of the miracle have raised two specious theological counter-arguments. The first invokes the authority of the Council of Trent. The Eucharist contains the glorified and immutable body of Christ. How can the Eucharist bleed or change into living bleeding flesh, still less, change into a living heart? Secondly, what purpose can such a miracle serve?
The history of the Church records more than one hundred and sixty approved Eucharistic miracles. I invoke two. The miracles of Lanciano and Bolsena in Italy.
At the beginning of the eighth century a Basilian monk of Lanciano (near Chieti in Italy) was tormented by doubts after pronouncing the words of consecration during Mass. Before his eyes the Sacred Host visibly changed into flesh, except in the centre where the sacramental species remained intact. The consecrated wine changed into a bright red blood, that coagulated into five small clots. This miraculous host and blood have been preserved to the present day. The popes of that period confirmed the authenticity of the miracle. And in our own days the Holy See commissioned a group of scientists for laboratory research in 1970.
L’Osservatore Romano of April 3, 1971 reported their findings, which confirmed that the blood is real blood and the flesh is real flesh composed of cardiac muscle tissue.  The flesh is heart tissue. Both the host and the blood belong to the same person. This miracle continues now for 1200 years. (For a more complete report cf. the May 1972 issue of IMMACULATA, Kenosha, Wisconsin) Popes Leo X, Clement X, Leo XIII, and others have confirmed the authenticity and the veneration or cult given to this Miraculous Eucharist.
The second miracle is the story of an unknown monk, Peter of Prague. It was the time of the Eucharistic controversies of the thirteenth century. The priest monk Peter was celebrating Mass at the main altar in the church of Saint Christina in Bolsena some time in 1263. The story goes that he was assailed by doubts in the truth of the Eucharist. He continued to celebrate.  He pronounced the words of consecration over the host and elevated the host, the unleavened bread turned into flesh and began to bleed profusely. News reached Rome quickly and the pontiff, Pope Urban IV, who was in Orvieto at the time, set out for Bolsena. At the request of the pope the local bishop went to bring him the miraculous host. The Pope was so eager to observe and to venerate the miracle that he hastened to meet the returning processions. They met at the Bridge of the Sun at the entrance to Orvieto. The Pope fell to his knees in adoration of the Eucharistic Lord, whose bleeding Eucharistic Body lay on the corporal. The corporal has been preserved in the Orvieto cathedral to this present day. The following year, August 1264, the Pope instituted the feast of Corpus Christi in honour of the Blessed Sacrament and he commissioned St. Thomas Aquinas to write the office of the feast. St. Thomas’ are the hymns O Salutaris Hostia and Tantum Ergo.
The Church has acknowledged the authenticity of these Eucharistic Miracles and many others.  It has acknowledged similar miracles, the bleeding of the Eucharist, in Venezuela and elsewhere in this decade.

4.

 

There were nine significant Eucharistic miracles at Naju itself that preceded the miracle I am now presenting. The miracles began with the appearances of images of the Eucharist or the chalice in pictures taken of the weeping statue of Our Lady in Naju. Later, the Host received in communion by Julia changed in bleeding flesh, as testified by the priests and faithful present at communion. The papal pro-nuncio to Korea, Mons. Giovanni Bulaitis, was present when an invisible hand (of St. Michael the Archangel, as Julia later explained) placed the large host in her mouth.
Although the diocesan commission of Kwangju has not yet spoken on the twelve Eucharistic miracles that have taken place to date in association with Julia Kim, two bishops, Archbishop Giovanni Bulaitis, the papal pro-nuncio to Korea and I, have authenticated our own experiences. Archbishop Bulaitis, Apostolic pro-nuncio to Korea has been following the events of Naju and has presented his findings to Pope John Paul II. And to the astonishment and dismay of skeptics, the Holy Father himself was privy to the same miracle of the Eucharistic host becoming a living heart during the celebration of the Eucharist in his papal chapel in the Vatican, when Julia Kim received communion from his hands. Although the Pope has not spoken of this himself, a recent publication in English of the messages and miracles of Naju includes the report on the miracle and the texts of the messages of the Blessed Virgin.
Another difficulty I encountered with the theologians was, “what purpose could such a phenomenon serve?”  We have to ask the Author of this phenomenon and miraculous event in the first place, not Julia or me.  Who are we to dictate to the Author of these Miracles, the Eucharistic Lord Himself, what He is to do with the mystery of the Eucharistic miracles?  In His infinite compassion for us and for the countless numbers who had and continue to have problems with the Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist, Jesus Himself gives us His heavenly confirmation.  The Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of Christ, present under the species of bread and wine.
He gave us the miracles of the weeping and bleeding statue of His Blessed Mother beginning on June 30, 1985.  And now He gives us these Eucharistic miracles to confirm the Catholic faith in the Eucharist and the authenticity of the heavenly messages communicated to us through Julia Kim. Heaven is serious in its warnings and calls us to repentance and to return to the fount of Divine Mercy before it is too late.
These miracles, and especially the Eucharistic Miracles, are the last appeal of Divine Mercy.  Jesus wants to forgive and to save us, even at this eleventh hour of the loss of faith and growing apostasy, from the horrendous punishments that hang over the world and this sinful generation, especially of those who still claim the name of Catholic and Christian. In His message of Sep. 22, 1995, Jesus laments over His priests; “If my priests who celebrate Mass daily, would truly believe in and seek to experience this Presence with their whole heart and would live the sublime and marvellous Divine Reality …innumerable souls would be purified and would live in My merciful heart with a grace that is beyond all expectation.”
He laments about our theological head trips and the lack of a living love response. “There are many priests…who claim to know that I breathe and live in the Eucharist, that I am present body and blood, soul and divinity, but they do not really know me well.”  He is speaking of those who were shown “my living presence several times (the earlier Eucharistic miracles in Naju) through my little soul (Julia)”. Yet notwithstanding this, He continues, “Those of my children who follow me are few.” He laments about our theological sophistries: “Many ecclesiastics want to make me known through sophisticated argument and complex reasons, forgetting the Eucharist which is my substance, and the sublime simplicity of the Gospels that I proclaim. This is like throwing mud at simple people”. And Jesus concludes: “Make haste to begin to live a life of devotion through prayer, sacrifices, penance so that you may attain the final victory and to make acts of reparation for the most abominable sins of blasphemy that have been committed.”
A young American woman who was on the same Marian cruise through the Caribbean in March, 1996 as I, approached me the last day of the cruise. She told me the Lord had given me this message to her in locutions. Why would the Lord reprimand me with such hard words? I had given witness to Him earlier that week with my account of the miracle of Naju; and now what is He telling me? As I reflected again on the message, the words of Jesus resounded in my ears: “Apostasy and infidelity are bringing this world to the brink of ruin; too many of my representatives continue to sleep. In truth, my representatives even allow themselves to be seduced by false prophets. The present disorders continuously torment me; they rend my heart, they become the lashes that endlessly tear at the Sacred and Immaculate heart of My Mother.”
“Have mercy on me and I shall have mercy on You.” These words received a strange confirmation on Friday June 30, 1996.  I had called Lubbock, Texas and was speaking with Patricia Devlin’s daughter, Eileen. When she recognized me, she continued. “Bishop, do you remember the message you received during the cruise: “Have mercy on Me and I shall have mercy on you”?  How could I forget these words?  Eileen continued. “Jesus, the Divine Infant of Prague had uttered these same words to a priest who had found the mutilated body of the statue after the sack of the Carmelite convent in Prague. And as he pulled the statue out of the heap he heard the words, “Have mercy on Me, and I shall have mercy on you.”
In her message to Julia during the papal Mass, the Blessed Mother recapitulates: “The visible change of the Eucharist today was to show that Jesus came to you through the Sacrifice of the Holy Eucharist, which is a repetition of the Sacrifice completed on Golgotha to wash away the sins of the world with His precious Blood…Let all know the Sacred Real Presence of the Lord in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass…” (Message of October 31, 1995)
The unusual events around Julia, her messages and the phenomena are private revelations, that must be discerned by the Church. The weeping and bleeding in tears of the statue of the Virgin, though of the order of private revelation, are first and foremost observable phenomena, that can be perceived by our senses and by scientific examination as well. The Eucharistic phenomena are also observable facts, witnessed and testified by many, including bishops and priests. The Eucharist which changed into the flesh of the human heart and blood is an observable phenomenon, but it is also a reality to be accepted by divine faith. We believe with divine faith that every host and every drop of wine that has been validly consecrated become the Body and Blood of Our Lord. The consecrated species are signs of the substantial presence of the living Christ.

 

A second miracle took place in Naju; the transubstantiated species of bread and wine were further transformed into the species of blood and flesh or heart, that are also the signs of the Eucharistic substantial presence of Christ. All these are supernatural events that could be actualized only by the power of God, present in the mystery of the Eucharist.
There is one last lesson to be learned from this Eucharistic miracle of Naju. Jesus has chosen to transform the host, a sign of the Divine Bread of life, into the sign of His love, His heart. If He appeared to Saint Gertrude in the middle ages, to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque in the 1600’s, to reveal to them the mystery of His love, Jesus has chosen, in these our times, to reveal to us the living reality of that Heart that so loved us;  and not only of His own heart, but the infinite and eternal dynamic and living love of the Blessed Trinity that gives Itself to us in the Incarnation of Jesus, the living love of Jesus Himself, the Incarnate Word of God who is all love, all heart, in His Eucharist, in His Eucharistic Heart.  Too often even those who believe in the Eucharist, continue to think of it as merely a sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus. We find it difficult to connect this sacramental presence with the real and mystical presence of the Whole Jesus, of the Incarnate Word of God, who is Love and Who has chosen this means to become present to us, not only in sign but in His awesome divine reality. He wants to abide in us and us in Him as He abides in the Father and the Father in Him in His love, through His Eucharistic Heart. Jesus is the very Heart of the Trinity.
A contemporary mystic, and too often maligned, Maria Valtorta, describes this mystery of Love. She places in the lips of John the beloved disciple, this ecstatic vision of the mystery of Christ, the Incarnate Son of God.  “You are in the bosom of the Fire that is the eternal Love of the Most Holy Trinity, its Nature, its Essence, its Real Essence….  You are the Second Person of the ineffable mystery, which is God and which I penetrated because God has drawn me to Himself…You, God the Son, You are like the Father, You, God like the Holy Spirit, You, centre of the Trinity…because if You were not the love of the Father and the love for the Father, then the Love, the Divine Love would be missing, and the Divinity would  no longer be Triune and it would lack the most becoming attribute of God, His love…” (Maria Valtorta, The Poem of the Man-God, vol. 2, p. 95)  And it is this love that gives itself to those that wish to receive it in the mystery of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus, the Divine Victim of Love.

+Roman Danylak
Titular Bishop of Nyssa

 

The information in this section, from page 6 to page 21, is arranged chronologically

The messages of Julia Kim of Naju, Korea: True or False?

An Evaluation of the messages of Julia Kim of Naju, Korea (www.najumary.org) – Part 1

www.catholicplanet.com/apparitions/false47a.htm

By Ronald L. Conte Jr., November 21, 2006

1. False Signs and Wonders
[Matthew]
{24:11} And many false prophets will arise, and they will lead many astray.
{24:24} For there will arise false Christs and false prophets. And they will produce great signs and wonders, so much so as to lead into error even the elect (if this could be).
{24:25} Behold, I have warned you beforehand.
There are false private revelations in the world today, and false visionaries, who have received messages as well as deceitful signs and wonders, from fallen angels posing as Jesus or Mary. One type of false sign given by them is a perverse imitation of Eucharistic miracles. These false Eucharistic miracles are, of course, not true miracles from God, but only apparent miracles, brought about by the action of fallen angels or by human deception.
The apparitions to Julia Kim are a good example of false signs and wonders. All of these apparent miracles can be explained by the abilities of fallen angels. And all of these signs and wonders differ in substance from true miracles of the Eucharist. For true miracles of God always reveal something of who God is to us. True miracles are therefore always teaching miracles, even if the primary purpose of a miracle is not to teach a lesson, nevertheless, when it is God who acts, His goodness always shines through. Not so with the false miracles, which are mere imitations of Divine action. The perverse lessons implicit in such feigned signs reveal their true author.

 

2. True versus False Eucharistic Miracles
In Lanciano, Italy, in the 8th century, there was a true miracle of the Eucharist. After the consecration, the consecrated blood turned into visible blood and the consecrated bread turned into visible flesh. This was in response to a monk’s doubts about the Real Presence. The coagulated blood and the flesh (heart tissue) are still preserved to this day in that city. Whenever a true miracle of the Eucharist involves the consecrated wine or the consecrated bread turning into visible blood and visible flesh, the Eucharist in this form is never consumed; it is reserved for the prayerful consideration of the faithful, because it is a teaching miracle.
The Eucharist is not merely flesh and blood; it is the glorified body of Christ (the physical part of His human nature, glorified) and His soul and His Divinity, united in the one real living person of Jesus Christ. The meaning of any true miracle of the Eucharist is NOT that we literally eat a bleeding lump of flesh or mere human blood (that would be cannibalism), but that Christ is truly present, including his glorified flesh and blood. But not so with false Eucharistic miracles, as will become clear below.

 

3. A Bloody Lump of Flesh
When Julia Kim visited Lanciano, Italy, she experienced a claimed miracle of the Eucharist.

 

 

June 2, 1992
[Julia:]
Then, I swallowed the Host. But a tiny piece of the Host remained on my tongue and was becoming larger. I was so surprised that I showed it to my husband, Julio. Other people also came and saw the small piece of the Host growing bigger and becoming bloody. They were crying loudly.

There are a number of indications here that this is a false miracle. First, she states that she already swallowed the consecrated host. So the actual Eucharist is not involved in this sign. Second, she felt something remaining on her tongue after swallowing the host, but this kind of deception of the senses is within the ability of fallen angels, especially with someone who is open to deception. Third, her senses tell her that the small piece has become larger, and has turned into a lump of flesh that is bloody. But an increase in the size of a host does not occur in any true miracle of the Eucharist. Fourth, the flesh and blood are not preserved for the consideration of the faithful, as in the true miracle of Lanciano, Italy in the 8th century. Instead, Julia consumes the bloody lump of flesh. The implicit lesson is not one about the Real Presence, but a perverse lesson, as if consuming the Eucharist was an act of consuming mere flesh and blood (rather than consuming Jesus in His glorified body, united with His soul and His Divinity, in the One Person of Christ). This pattern is repeated in numerous false Eucharistic miracles associated with Julia Kim.

June 1, 1992 (Rome)
When I received Holy Communion, I smelled blood. My husband, Julio, the priest and others saw the Host bleeding in my mouth.

When the host seems, to her senses and to the senses of others, to bleed, she then consumes the blood.

June 5, 1988
I received Holy Communion and, when I was coming back to my seat supported by Philip and Mark, I felt my mouth being filled with the Body and Blood of Jesus. I was smelling blood, too.
May 16, 1991
When I received the Holy Eucharist, I immediately tasted blood in my mouth. When I came back to my pew and showed it to Rufino, who was sitting next to me, he saw the Host on my tongue being of a yellow-to-light brown color at first and, soon, turning into a blood-red color starting from the edge. This was reported to the priests and all the faithful present there were able to see it…. The Host continued bleeding and soon my mouth was filled with Blood.

These above examples of claimed miracles of the Eucharist all fit the same pattern. The host seems, to the senses, to be bleeding, so much so that she thinks her mouth is filled with blood. Then she consumes the blood. This pattern is not at all like the true miracles of the Eucharist known in the history of the Church. In those miracles, any hosts which change, do so in order to teach a lesson about the Real Presence, and the changed hosts are preserved for the adoration and edification of the faithful. But in each of her claimed miracles, when the host seems to change, she then consumes what seems to be a lump of flesh or a mouthful of blood; nothing is reserved for the faithful.
Also, since she claims to have consumed the lump of flesh or the blood, it cannot be examined by medical or scientific experts, as was the case with the true miracle of the Eucharist in Lanciano, Italy. It is not that she is lying, but rather than she, and those around her, have had their senses deceived by fallen angels. This type of deception of the senses is well within the capability of fallen angels.

September 22, 1995
Fr. Chang and I returned to Julia. The Host had changed to dark red, living flesh and blood was flowing from it. After Mass, Julia shared with us that she experienced the Divine Flesh as a thick consistency and a copious flowing of blood, more so than on the occasion of previous miracles of the changing of the host into bleeding flesh…. After some moments I asked Julia to swallow and consume the Host. And after the Mass Julia explained that the Host had become large and fleshy; and that she consumed it with some difficulty. The taste of blood remained in her mouth for some time.

Again, the host does not seem to change until it is in Julia’s mouth. The host is not reserved for examination or for the consideration of the faithful. And again Julia consumes what appears to be a bleeding lump of flesh. This is not a true miracle of the Eucharist because the lesson of a true Eucharistic miracle is that of the Real Presence of Christ in His glorified body, soul, and Divinity. Whereas the lesson implicit here is as if to say that we are consuming, not the whole of Christ, not the glorified body, but rather a piece of his bleeding flesh, as if torn from His body before He was glorified. The lesson is false, so the miracle is false.

September 24, 1994
After receiving Holy Communion, I came back to the pew and began meditation. At that moment, I clearly smelled Blood in my mouth and asked Rufino and Andrew sitting next to me to take a look. They were surprised and hastily informed the priest. Fr. Orbos and others gathered around me and some began crying loudly after witnessing what was happening. They saw the Sacred Host becoming yellowish brown from the edge and, then, thin blood veins appearing all over the Host. The blood was filling my mouth. After a while, Fr. Orbos told me to swallow the Host, which I did.
June 30, 1995
After receiving Communion, I went back to my seat. As I was about to begin meditation, I smelled blood from the Eucharist and asked a lady beside me to take a look. People around me also saw this and began shouting, “It’s blood!” A priest from Japan (92 years old), who was holding my hand, also saw it.

Notice that these two events occurred after she received Communion and had begun to meditate. Therefore, she had already swallowed the consecrated host. But she then feels something in her mouth, which seems to the senses to be a lump of flesh, with veins, oozing blood. (Again, this does not resemble any of the true miracles of the Eucharist known in the history of the Church.) Julia then swallows the bleeding lump of flesh.

7.

 

 

 

September 22, 1995
When I received Communion, the Sacred Host in my mouth turned into a mixture of Flesh and Blood and became larger. I smelled a strong odor of blood. The Sacred Host also began moving. One of the laymen saw this and reported to Bishop Danylak. The bishop witnessed this phenomenon followed by other people. A while later, Bishop Danylak instructed me to swallow the Host. I swallowed the Host with much difficulty, because it had become a lump of Flesh and larger.
October 31, 1995
When I received Communion, there was a strong fragrance of roses and a strong smell of blood. The Sacred Host in my mouth was becoming larger, too.
October 19, 1996
I received Holy Communion in both species and began meditation. I suddenly smelled a strong odor of blood and felt that the Sacred Host in my mouth was becoming larger. Other people around me saw the Eucharist in my mouth turning into visible Blood and Flesh.

Now in this example, again she eats “a lump of flesh” (in her own words) and finds it difficult to do because it has supposedly grown larger. This growth in size is also claimed in some of the other examples cited above. This feature is unlike any true miracles of the Eucharist. What lesson is taught by this growth of the lump of flesh, or by its movement, as if it were alive? None of the true miracles of the Eucharist known to the Church have had a growing lump of flesh which is moving and oozing blood. Rather, this is a perverse imitation of a miracle of the Eucharist. God’s true miracles have a certain subtle, yet profound wisdom to them. But these false ones are crass and ostentatious and ultimately devoid of truth.

 

4. Deception of the Senses
Here is an even more bizarre claimed miracle of the Eucharist, which clearly demonstrates that this claimed miracle is nothing other than a deception of the senses of Julia and others by fallen angels.

January 1, 2002
At about 10 a.m., I was praying together with several helpers under the Crucifix…. When I touched Jesus’ feet with my hands, I saw a drop of blood formed on the middle toe on His right foot, which seemed about to fall at any moment. I was surprised and screamed, “Ah!” As I was looking up from under the Lord’s feet, the drop of blood dripped down toward my mouth, changing into the Eucharist. I was surprised and screamed again. I was wearing a flu mask because of the cold and windy weather, but Jesus in the Eucharist went through the mask and landed on my tongue…. This all happened in the blink of an eye.

So Julia sees a drop of blood forming on the toe of a statue of Jesus on the Cross. Then the drop of blood supposedly flies through the air, changes into a Eucharistic host in mid air, and then flies right through the flu mask that she was wearing and lands on her tongue. Again, she consumes the ‘miraculous’ host. Observers saw the blood, but that was all they reported seeing.
Julia speaks as if this host she received from the statue was a real consecrated host. But real consecrated hosts begin with bread, which is then consecrated during a Mass by a priest. There was no bread, but a statue. And how can drops of blood from a statue turn into consecrated bread, without real bread, or a Mass, or a priest, or the words of consecration? Who consecrated the statue’s blood? And what sort of lesson would this claimed miracle teach? A statue drips blood that turns into hosts which fly through the air and through a flu mask, and this teaches us what? As a claimed miracle, this makes no sense at all and does not resemble the true miracles known to the Church.
But as false sign and wonder it does make sense. Fallen angels deceive the senses of Julia, and of those around her. They like their false miracles to be showy and sensational. She thinks she sees the statue bleeding, she thinks she sees the drops of blood turn into hosts and fly through her flu mask. She is deceived into thinking that she feels the host in her mouth. Others standing near her reported seeing the blood. They were looking at the statue and were right next to her, but they did not report seeing a flying host pass through her flu mask. It is a mere deception of the senses. It is a senseless sign, with no lesson, nor any implicit revelation of the goodness of God. It is an impressive illusion, like that of a human magician: entertaining, but not miraculous. And it is not indicative of the subtle yet profound wisdom of God.
“It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” (Macbeth 5, 5)
Here is another example of this bizarre claimed miracle:

July 1, 1995
[Elisabeth:]
On July 1, 1995, I heard a sound of some liquid dripping from the Crucifix above the Blessed Mother’s statue in the Chapel. When I looked, I saw Our Lord’s Precious Blood turn into white Sacred Hosts and descend to the altar before the Blessed Mother’s statue.
Elisabeth Ok-Ryun Ki, Bupyeong, Incheon, Korea

July 1, 1995
[Julia:]
Then, the Blood that was flowing from the Seven Wounds of Jesus gradually turned into Sacred Hosts and were falling down. I had been listening to the reading of the Lord’s message holding hands with Fr. Su from Malaysia. I was surprised and jumped up and tried to receive the Hosts. But the Hosts fell so forcefully that they passed by my hands. I was standing speechless. Everyone in the Chapel heard the sounds of the Hosts falling on the altar before the Blessed Mother’s statue.

Again, a statue seems to bleed. Again, the blood drops seem to turn into hosts in mid air. This time the hosts land on the altar. There were seven hosts. Who consecrated these hosts? No one. Where did they come from? If the story is to be believed, drops of blood turned into Christ’s Real Presence in a consecrated host, without any bread or Mass or priest or consecration.

 

 


It is directly contrary to the clear and definitive teaching of the Church about the Sacrament of the Eucharist to claim that the Eucharist can be produced without bread, without a priest or Bishop, and without the words of consecration. This claimed miracle teaches an heretical lesson. It is a heresy against the Most Blessed Sacrament to claim that the Eucharist can be created in any other way than at the First Eucharist: bread and wine, a male priest, words of consecration.
For in truth, the Eucharist can only be produced by the consecration of bread or wine by a priest who says the words of consecration (during Mass).

Even when Christ consecrated the Eucharist at the Last Supper, this same way of producing the Sacrament was used. Christ did not turn drops of His own blood into hosts. Rather, He turned bread and wine into Himself. To claim that the Eucharist is produced in any other way is abject heresy.
A better explanation of these events, one that accords with faith and reason, is that the senses of those who observed this were deceived by fallen angels, and these same fallen angels merely dropped unconsecrated hosts (previously hidden from view) from the air. Fallen angels cannot consecrate hosts, nor can they turn blood into bread, nor can anyone turn blood into the consecrated bread of the true Eucharist. But fallen angels can move objects, they can affect the physical world, and they can deceive the senses.
Julia and her supporters assumed that these hosts which dropped out of the air were consecrated hosts, even though no priest had consecrated them. Neither can it be said that Christ somehow consecrated them himself, because Christ performed only one consecration, once for all, at the Last Supper, and because even Christ himself used real bread and real wine in order to consecrate the Eucharist. Blood drops cannot be turned into consecrated hosts, not even by Christ (because He does not do what is senseless or contrary). So these hosts are unconsecrated and do not come from Heaven, but from fallen angels.
Now consider what happened next. The seven hosts which fell from the air, supposedly created from blood drops turning into hosts in mid air, were kept until the next day. Then they held a ceremony, which was NOT a Mass. There was no consecration of these hosts.

July 2, 1995
So, we selected seven people and began the Communion ceremony at 9:30 p.m. The ceremony was presided over by Fr. Francis Su from Malaysia and Fr. Pete Marcial from Guam. The first Sacred Host was received by Fr. Su, the second by Fr. Marcial, the third by myself, the fourth by Rufino Park, the fifth by Lawrence Choi, the sixth by Andrew Park, and the seventh by Julia. When I received Communion, I smelled the fragrance of roses. When Julia received the Sacred Host at about 11 p.m., It changed into visible Flesh and Blood in her mouth. As the Sacred Host was turning into visible Flesh and Blood, it also became larger.

This ceremony described above is Satanic. They held a ritual where unconsecrated hosts given to them by fallen angels were consumed in a Church. Notice that the same false miracle as on other occasions, where Julia eats a lump of bloody flesh, also occurs here. These hosts cannot possibly have been consecrated. There was no priest who consecrated them; they fell from the air, supposedly having been created out of the blood drops from a statue. But the true Eucharist is never produced in this way. This was a false Eucharist, consumed in a ceremony that these seven persons and those who were with them invented. It is false worship associated with devils. It is a foreshadowing of the abomination of desolation.

 

5. More Hosts dropping out of the Air

November 24, 1994
As I stretched out my hands, St. Michael the Archangel, who was not visible, brought the Holy Eucharist in the middle of a powerful light. When I received the Eucharist, I fell down to the floor because of the strong light. When I regained consciousness and got up, I saw the Apostolic Pro-Nuncio, the Monsignor, Fr. Spies, my husband and others around me…The Sacred Host in my hands had the images of a cross and the letters Alpha and Omega on it and was already broken into two. One was in my left hand and the other in my right hand.

This claimed miracle is similar to some of the ones described above, in that a supposedly-consecrated host comes down to Julia out of the air. She claims that an Angel brought her the host, but she also says that she did not see this Angel, only a strong light. Now it is well within the abilities of fallen angels to move physical objects or to display a bright light, so an unconsecrated host could easily be dropped from the air, with a strong light shining, to Julia.
Notice the effect on Julia: she loses consciousness. This kind of effect is not associated with true miracles of the Eucharist. God does not knock us unconscious, but rather He speaks to our minds and hearts, respecting our free will. When Saul (St. Paul) was struck by a blinding light on the way to Damascus and knocked to the ground, he did not lose consciousness, nor was he physically injured. As we shall see in the other articles in this evaluation of Julia Kim, she is frequently seriously injured during her supposedly mystical or miraculous experiences.

June 12, 1997
When the Bishop was saying, “If Eucharistic miracles occur again, (the Sacred Hosts) must be preserved,” light began radiating from the Crucifix. Then, the Bishop said, “Let’s pray together.” At that moment, a white object descended. I tried to receive it in my hands, but it was so sudden that I could not receive it. The white object fell on the altar before the Blessed Mother’s statue making a clearly audible sound. The Bishop, the priest, and others present heard the sound of the white object falling on the altar and went closer to the Blessed Mother’s statue. Rufino shouted, “Oh, the Eucharist! The Eucharist!”

9.

 

 

Now one of the problems with Julia Kim’s claimed Eucharistic miracles is that the bleeding lump of flesh that the host supposedly turned into is not preserved for examination. So the Bishop tells them to preserve any hosts from such claimed miracles. Fine, but what happens next is that hosts drop out of the air. These hosts do not have any sign of a Eucharistic miracle, such as blood or flesh seen within the host; they are merely hosts. They assume that such hosts are consecrated, but there was no act of consecration. These can only be unconsecrated hosts. Nor can it be said that God or holy Angels might have carried consecrated hosts from somewhere else. God and His Angels would not do so, because there were plenty of priests in that place to consecrate bread into the Eucharist. The true miracle of the Eucharist is only this: the changing of the substance of ordinary bread into the body of Christ in His Real Presence. But hosts dropping out of the air does not teach the lesson of the transubstantiation of bread into Christ. Rather, it teaches the false lesson of amazement at meaningless signs and wonders. The lesson is false, so the miracle is false.
Here are some additional examples of this kind of false miracle of the Eucharist:

July 13, 1997
A monsignor from Rome visited the Blessed Mother’s House (the Chapel) in Naju. While he was praying before the Blessed Mother’s statue and looking at photographs and conversing with others about the Blessed Mother, a Eucharist descended from above and a bright light radiated from the Crucifix and the Blessed Mother’s statue, which had wept, upon all those who were present.
January 6, 2002
At that moment, a very powerful light poured down from above. When I looked up, two Sacred Hosts were coming down enwrapped in the light. I tried to catch the Sacred Hosts before they fell to the floor, but the two Sacred Hosts landed on a little table with a candlelight, which was used as a makeshift altar for the Liturgy of the Word.

The host comes from the air, not from the consecration of bread. The assumption that the host is a consecrated host is unfounded, because there were no words of consecration said by a priest during a Mass.

 

6. Blood dropping out of the Air
Now there is yet another kind of claimed miracle, related to Eucharistic miracles, where supposed drops from the blood of Christ appear. Sometimes the drops of blood come from a statue of Christ on the Cross. At other times these drops of blood simply drop out of thin air. Even though these drops of blood are not the Eucharist, they are treated by Julia Kim and her supporters as if they were the Eucharist. In some places, where these drops of blood fell on rocks, they have surrounded the rocks with a plastic cover and have set a up a place for the faithful to venerate or adore what they are calling the Precious Blood.

January 27, 2002
[Julia:]
While he was praying, a drop of the Lord’s Precious Blood suddenly came down from above making a clearly audible sound when it hit the ground. I was so surprised that I cried out, “Oh, my!” A man who was standing near me also saw the Blood and shouted, “Oh, it is blood!” …

[Jesus:]
“The reason why I am revealing My Love even by shedding blood for you is to wash away your sins thoroughly and perform a transfusion.”

Jesus already shed His blood for us, once for all, on the Cross of Calvary, so He would not shed additional blood onto the ground ‘to wash away your sins.’ He already washed away our sins through the Cross, and through the Sacraments, which apply the graces of the Cross. Also, the concept of a ‘transfusion’ does not make any sense theologically. Therefore, this message is not from Jesus.

January 5, 2002
At the Twelfth Station, I saw a vision of Jesus breathing His last on the Cross and a Roman soldier piercing the Lord’s right side with a spear…. Jesus stretched out His arms and bestowed light upon all of us. I [Julia] said loudly, “Receive the light!” The light that poured out of Jesus’ both hands was shining upon everyone’s head. Seconds later, the light turned into drops of blood and dripped upon everyone’s head.
January 18, 2002
There were many fresh blood marks on the paved areas on the Way of the Cross (constructed for the handicapped). At the Twelfth Station, we saw fresh blood marks scattered all over on the ground. There also were splash marks made when the blood dripped on the ground. We found fresh blood marks all the way from the Seventh Station to the Thirteenth Station.

This claim that light turned into the blood of Christ cannot be true. The Eucharistic blood of Christ comes from wine consecrated by a priest with the words of consecration, all of which are lacking here. Jesus does not turn beams of light into literal blood. His body is now glorified, so it no longer bleeds. Also, God would not turn light into blood, not because He lacks the power, but because He does not exercise his omnipotence in ways that are foolish or senseless or useless. God teaches us that ‘it is in weakness that power reaches perfection.’ (2 Cor. 12:9) And this teaching itself is based upon the way that God himself acts. He does not create blood out of light because there is no need or reason to do so. He does not use excessive or unnecessary force, when a more subtle miracle would teach just as well. Therefore, these drops of blood cannot have been created by God out of beams of light.
Furthermore, Christ would not take His own precious blood (as is claimed here) and literally drop it on top of everyone’s head and on the ground. The Church teaches us to treat the Eucharist with the utmost respect and with adoration, so if this were the blood of Christ (which it is not), Christ would not give us a bad example by treating His own blood with such disrespect by dropping it onto the ground, or onto the top of people’s heads.

 

10.

 

 

June 11, 2002
Oh! What a wondrous sign. . . There were fresh blood marks on the ground, around a table on which photographs of the Eucharistic miracle on September 22, 1995 were being displayed. Blood on some rocks was thick and moving as if breathing.
June 11, 2002
When I dipped my finger in the fresh Precious Blood, the Blood continued to pulsate, pulling my finger rhythmically and with some force, like a living person’s heart. At one moment, the Blood even splashed up. We counted the pulse in the Blood, and it was 87 times per minute. My pulse was 72. Pulses were different among those who were present (Some of them came to the mountain later). Especially when Julio, my husband, touched my finger, the Precious Blood on it momentarily splashed up even making a sound.

Notice that Julia and her supporters are not merely claiming that this is blood, nor even merely that it is the blood of Christ, but moreover that Christ himself is alive in the blood. The blood is said to be ‘moving as if breathing’ and to pulsate … like a living person’s heart. They even say that the blood splashed upward of its own accord. This blood cannot be the Precious Blood of Christ, meaning the Eucharist, because the Eucharist is consecrated from bread and wine by a priest and the words of consecration, all of which are lacking in these cases of blood dropping out of the air. Also, the Eucharist does not pulsate or splash around or beat like a heart.
This effect of having something drop from the air is accomplished by fallen angels, who, obtaining blood from any number of places (perhaps even from Julia herself, who frequently is injured to the point of bleeding), are able to move it and drop it wherever they wish. This claimed miracle is similar to the hosts which dropped out of the air. It is not truly miraculous because even human persons can move an object above a location and then drop it.
This effect is a false sign and wonder, not a true miracle from God.

“For false Christs and false prophets will rise up, and they will present signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if it were possible, even the elect.” (Mk 13:22).

 

Claims of Private Revelation: True or False?
An Evaluation of the messages of Julia Kim of Naju, Korea (www.najumary.org) – Part 2: A Bloody Statue

http://www.catholicplanet.com/apparitions/false47b.htm

By Ronald L. Conte Jr., December 10, 2006

It is well-known among the faithful that some true private revelations are accompanied by miraculous signs, such as an image or statue of the Virgin Mary crying tears, or even tears of blood. However, false private revelation is often accompanied by false signs and wonders, which seek to imitate the truly miraculous signs. Sometimes these false signs are the result of human deception, but more often these are the result the action of fallen angels. (Most false apparitions and messages come from fallen angels.)
So then, how can the faithful tell the difference between a statue that miraculously weeps tears or blood, and one which is a false sign? One way is to examine the messages associated with the claimed private revelation, if the messages are false, then so are the signs. Now sometimes these false signs may be very convincing. But then it is like an audience being entertained by a highly-skilled magician; you might not be able to figure out how each and every trick is done, but you still know that it is a trick. False messages mean false signs. If the messages are contrary to the true Gospel of Jesus Christ, then even great signs and wonders should leave true faithful souls unimpressed and unconvinced.
Another way is to examine the way that the sign is presented. False signs and wonders tend to be presented in an overly-dramatic, attention-seeking, exaggerated manner, that is, in a manner which is incompatible with the subtle wisdom of God and the humility of the Virgin Mary. The case of a statue of Mary associated with the false private revelation to Julia Kim is very instructive in this regard. Her statue does not merely weep tears or weep blood:
1. blood from the eyes does not flow gently from the corners of the eyes, like true tears
2. blood also reportedly flows from the nose of the statue
3. mucous reportedly flows from the nose of the statue
4. sweat reportedly is exuded from the statue
5. blood reportedly spurts from the mouth of the statue
6. the messages explain the blood flow from the mouth of the statue by claiming that Mary is vomiting blood and screaming until her throat bleeds
7. there are claimed signs of water from a spring turning into breast milk
8. the messages portray Mary as if she were asking people to drink from the milk of her breasts
9. there was even a statue of Jesus with water reportedly flowing from between its toes
Notice that these features of Julia Kim’s statue are unlike any of the true miracles known throughout the history of the Church. Instead of a statue of the Virgin Mary shedding a modest amount of tears of blood as a teaching miracle, we are presented with a statue that has blood flowing from the eyes and nose, and spurting from the mouth. Instead of a lesson about the true and deep sorrow of Mary over sin, we are told (supposedly by Mary) that she is vomiting blood at our sins and screaming until her throat bleeds. Does this sound like the meek and humble Mother of God to you?
The additional alleged signs of mucous and sweat coming from the statue are also unlike any known true private revelation.

True miracles of this kind would be teaching miracles. But what lesson is learned by mucous and blood coming from the nose of a statue of Mary? Or what lesson is learned by a statue exuding sweat, or by water flowing from between the toes of a statue? There is no lesson. It is merely an attempt to draw attention to the signs themselves, for their own sake. Such signs are lacking in modesty and humility, so they cannot be from the modest and humble Virgin Mary.

 

 


As for the alleged sign of water turning into breast milk, this again is unlike any sign or miracle in the history of the Church. There have been many Saints and Blesseds who have received miraculous signs from God. But water turning into the breast milk of the Virgin Mary is not found among them. The whole idea is offensive to Christian modesty. And it would be unnatural for an adult human being to drink any woman’s breast milk. The idea that God would perform a miracle to turn water into breast milk is absurd. The lesson taught by this claimed miracle is false, therefore the claimed miracle is false. Yet the messages of Julia Kim repeatedly portray the Virgin Mary as if she were asking people to drink her breast milk.
The following is a selection of some of the messages to Julia Kim on this subject. There are other messages on this same topic, but I will spare you from them. I will briefly comment on these messages.

January 1, 1988
The Blessed Mother’s statue shed blood from her eyes and nose from about 10:15 a.m.
May 8, 1990
At Julio’s pressing words, I looked at the Blessed Mother’s statue and saw her shedding tears of blood profusely. She also had much blood under her nose. It was about 11:20 p.m. She continued shedding tears of blood until about 1:20 a.m.
July 2, 1995
Chong-Won Kang, Gimpo, Gyeonggi Province, Korea:
What he saw was tears on the Blessed Mother’s statue outside the Chapel. I was very amazed and looked closely at the Blessed Mother’s face. She indeed was shedding tears from her eyes, mucous from her nostrils, and sweat from her face.

The blood from the eyes, as is clear from the pictures of the statue on Julia Kim’s official website, does not flow like tears from the corners of the eye, but seems to drop from the eyes in other places.
http://www.najumary.org/img/messages/1213-8.jpg

Also, a statue with a supposedly miraculous bloody nose does not make any theological or spiritual sense. The claim is made that mucous miraculously flowed from the nose of the statue. False signs often try to imitate true miracles, but they do not have the same wisdom underlying the sign, so they end up presenting what is foolish, rather than what is wise, an empty sign, rather than a teaching miracle. These false signs are merely an attempt to do as many startling and attention-getting things with the statue as possible.

October 19, 1986
Today, the Blessed Mother [i.e. her statue] shed copious amounts of dense tears of blood.
October 29, 1986
The Blessed Mother’s statue looked so miserable with lots of blood and tears on her face. I had never seen her looking so miserable.
October 29, 1986
After the Blessed Mother finished speaking, the Pastor came with another priest and asked me to wipe the tears of blood from the Blessed Mother’s statue. I felt so sad, but wiped the tears of blood from the statue beginning from the face down to the feet, contemplating the Blessed Mother’s words that we should practice obedience.
October 14, 1989
After the blessing, we went to the Chapel and saw that the Blessed Mother had shed tears of blood copiously, making the cloth under the statue very wet.

The sheer volume of tears and blood and other fluids coming from the statue is another indication that this sign is false. Often this statue is described as being covered in blood and fluids from the face down to the feet. The Virgin Mary is meek and humble, but these signs are not. The Virgin Mary partakes of the subtle and profound wisdom of God. But these signs are neither subtle, nor wise. Also, the Virgin Mary in Heaven may truly be said to be deeply sorrowful over our sins, but she cannot truly be said to be miserable. For despite our sins, Mary is now always with God in Heaven, seeing God as He truly is. She cannot be miserable.

November 5, 1986
Mary: Do you see the blood flowing out of my throat? God the Father’s just anger is overflowing. Because I love you all, I am holding on to you all even to the extent of vomiting blood . . . in order to save even one more soul that is failing.
March 4, 2006
Julia Kim: On March 4, 2006, First Saturday, at about 7:30 p.m., when we were entering the vinyl chapel on the Blessed Mother’s Mountain, carrying her statue which was exuding much fragrant oil, blood suddenly spurted out of her mouth.
November 24, 1994
Mary: My Heart is burning so much that I am throwing up blood, because I wish to spread my voice to the world through my daughter in this urgent time, but this is being blocked because of narrow-minded insistence on habitual ways by human thinking. I cannot wait any longer, because a total disaster is possible due to the schemes of the Freemasons.
February 16, 2003
Jesus: Make haste to wake up from sleep, rush to Me through My Mother, and make strenuous efforts so that all the children in the world may practice the messages of love that My Mother and I have been screaming to them until Our throats start bleeding and be saved.

February 3, 1994
Mary: How blind and deaf they are and how stubbornly they are refusing to follow me! I have been screaming until my throat bleeds, asking them to repent quickly before the cup of God’s wrath, which is already filled, starts overflowing.

October 31, 1995
How numerous are the clergy who do not defend truth but keep silent for fear and remain as spectators because of face-saving and the eyes of others, even when they see errors and despite my messages of love that I have been screaming (to you) until my throat bleeds!

 


July 13, 1997
(What I want is) that my messages of love, which I have been screaming to you until my throat begins bleeding and which I have been pleading with you (to accept) shedding tears and tears of blood and squeezing fragrant oil out of all of my body, be accepted by the Church as soon as possible; that numerous herds of sheep that have been scattered return; and that Masses be celebrated in the Basilica of the Mary’s Ark of Salvation.
December 31, 2005
If you do not listen carefully to my pleas of tears and tears of blood and my screams that I make with the voice of love until my throat starts bleeding, giving you love by squeezing my whole body, and compromise with this world filled with pride and poison, God’s response will be stern, and the flames of disaster, burning with justice, will fall again on various places.

The Jesus and Mary described in the Gospels do not speak or act in the way that these messages portray them. Jesus does not scream until his throat bleeds. The Virgin Mary would not express her love by saying that she was vomiting blood. The lack of peacefulness and wisdom of such a saying is in direct contrast to the true qualities of the Mother of God. The Virgin Mary would not express the burning of her heart by saying that she is throwing up blood. Notice how ‘Mary’ seems frustrated and angry and indignant; she complains so loudly that she screams until her throat bleeds. Is this the Virgin Mary that you know from the Gospels and from the teaching of the Church? The Mary that I know is not at all like the Mary of these messages. These messages say the words ‘messages of love,’ but in truth they are no such thing.

June 30, 2002
[statue of Jesus on the Cross]
I wiped Jesus’ tears and sweat with cotton and collected His sweat flowing down to His toes in a small bottle. When a man saw this and said, “Isn’t this plain water?” the tears and sweat suddenly stopped flowing down. Instead, water began flowing from between the toes. This water kept flowing down, even though I wiped it repeatedly.

Since it is already clear that these signs of fluids coming from statues is not a true miracle from God, how are these false signs accomplished? Such signs are produced by fallen angels, who, like all angels, have a natural ability to interact with the natural world. The exact way that they accomplish this is unimportant; even if you do not know how a skillful magician does a particular trick, you can still know that it is a trick. Toe water is not a miraculous sign from God.
This next alleged miraculous sign is very offensive to Christian modesty, but it must be mentioned so that the full measure of the perversity of these messages and claimed signs can be known.

June 2005
On the first day in Naju, we entered the Chapel, smelling a strong fragrance of roses. We also saw that the Blessed Mother’s milk had come down on the Chapel floor. Everyone in the pilgrimage group wept, realizing that the Blessed Mother had been waiting for the boy.
I asked the boy’s mother to collect the Blessed Mother’s miraculous water. I first filled my bottle with water, and, then, the boy’s mother filled her bottle with water. When her bottle came full, the water in the bottle was not clear but milky. First, we wondered if some polluted water came out of the spring, but soon realized that it was the Mother’s milk. The boy’s mother and I were so surprised and trembled wildly. I said to the boy’s mother, “Make haste to give it to your son. The Blessed Mother is giving her milk to your son. He will be healed.” A while later, Julia came and embraced the boy. She rubbed his head and kissed it. Immediately, the boy, who had not been able to speak, made the Sign of the Cross and said, “Alleluia!”

The first claim of this message is that breast milk came down from the statue onto the floor of a Chapel, miraculously. Does this seem like a sign from God to you? Why would God miraculously produce breast milk from a statue, and why would He then let it fall to the floor? Next they go to a spring that is called miraculous (but it is just a spring of water). When they collect the water into a bottle, it turns milky. They then claim that God has turned water into the Mother of God’s breast milk. This claim is offensive because a mother’s breast milk is reserved only for her infant children. Neither God nor Mary would permit such an offense.
Finally, the claim is made that this boy would be healed. We are not told any details about his illness. (This is a common tactic used by false private revelation when claiming miraculous healings.) The claim is made that he had not been able to speak, but perhaps he was able to say a word or a few words. (Even severely physically handicapped persons can often speak to a limited extent.) He then says only one word. We are not directly told that he was now healed; we are not given any kind of update of his condition. It is an empty claim.

September 2, 2000
Jemma Kang, from Samdeok Parish Church in Taegu City
I got some Water from the Springs at that time…. Next day she found that color of water changed milk-like color…. In addition, I tasted it tasty exactly mother’s milk-like…

October 4, 1990
Mary: Suck the spiritual milk from my breast that is flowing out like a spring…

In the first quote above, we are told that someone actually tasted this water changed into milk. The claim is made that it tasted like breast milk. And note the words of the message, supposedly from Mary. The true Virgin Mary would not speak in such a crass and worldly manner. Nor would God change water into Mary’s breast milk for someone to taste. There would be no spiritual purpose to such an alleged miracle, and it offends against the proper order of nature, created by God, wherein a mother’s breast milk is solely for her infants to drink. The above message pretends as if this has some kind of profound symbolic meaning, yet the alleged miracle is literal; someone claims that they drank this milk. Finally, there is no wisdom attached to the claimed miracle; it is an empty symbol.

13.

 

 


Conclusion
This set of claimed miracles does not resemble the miracles known to the Church over the last 2,000 years. Although weeping images or statues of the Virgin Mary are known to the faithful, this set of claimed miracles is very different. The weeping is not merely tears or tears of blood, but copious amounts of tears, blood, mucous, sweat, oil, water, and even breast milk. These claimed signs are ostentatious and attention-seeking, but they lack true wisdom; these are not teaching miracles. The character of these alleged signs is diametrically opposed to the meek and humble character of the Virgin Mary. And the lack of meaning behind these exaggerated signs is not indicative of the subtle and profound wisdom of God. Finally, the alleged sign of breast milk is so offensive to Christian modesty and the natural order that it cannot possibly be anything other than a false sign; it is impossible for such an offense against God to come from Mary or from God.

Claims of Private Revelation: True or False?
An Evaluation of the messages of Julia Kim of Naju, Korea (www.najumary.org) – Part 3: Another false sign involving blood

http://www.catholicplanet.com/apparitions/false47c.htm

March 16, 2007

Julia Kim and her supporters claim that ‘The Precious Blood’ of Jesus has descended from Heaven to land on Julia Kim’s bed and mattress, forming large lumps of partially-coagulated blood which move as if breathing. They claim that this blood appears miraculously, and is literally the blood of Jesus. They had the blood tested for blood type, and it was said to be type AB (the same blood type as the Shroud of Turin). They have placed this blood on an altar, next to the Eucharist.
http://www.najumary.or.kr/mary/recent-2006/preciousblood2006.htm

Here is a photo of the alleged blood:

Now I ask you, does this seem like the Precious Blood of Jesus to you? Do you really think that this lump of partially-coagulated blood is a miraculous sign from Heaven? Have you never seen and received the true Precious Body and Blood of Jesus in the Eucharist? If so, then how could anyone fool you into thinking that this red lump is really the Precious Blood? If you have ever received the real Precious Blood of Jesus in the Eucharist, how is it that you are still fooled, as if you had never received the real food and real drink of the Most Blessed Sacrament?
This claimed sign from Heaven is certainly a false sign, for several reasons.



First, Jesus in His human nature, including his body and blood is now glorified in Heaven. His body and blood are in resurrected and glorified form, much as our bodies will be after the general resurrection at the last day. A glorified body is not the same as an ordinary earthly body:
[1 Corinthians]
{15:40} Also, there are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. But while the one, certainly, has the glory of heaven, the other has the glory of earth.
{15:41} One has the brightness of the sun, another the brightness of the moon, and another the brightness of the stars. For even star differs from star in brightness.
{15:42} So it is also with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown in corruption shall rise to incorruption.
{15:43} What is sown in dishonor shall rise to glory. What is sown in weakness shall rise to power.
{15:44} What is sown with an animal body shall rise with a spiritual body. If there is an animal body, there is also a spiritual one.
{15:45} Just as it was written that the first man, Adam, was made with a living soul, so shall the last Adam be made with a spirit brought back to life.
{15:46} So what is, at first, not spiritual, but animal, next becomes spiritual.
{15:47} The first man, being earthly, was of the earth; the second man, being heavenly, will be of heaven.
{15:48} Such things as are like the earth are earthly; and such things as are like the heavens are heavenly.
{15:49} And so, just as we have carried the image of what is earthly, let us also carry the image of what is heavenly.
{15:50} Now I say this, brothers, because flesh and blood is not able to possess the kingdom of God; neither will what is corrupt possess what is incorrupt.

 

 


Thus, the body of Jesus, now glorified, is heavenly and not earthly, for earthly flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God. So it is also that the Eucharist is Christ’s glorified body and blood, not his earthly flesh and his earthly blood. Otherwise, we could not eat his body and drink his blood without sin.


Second, God would not take the true Precious Blood of Jesus Christ, drop it out of the air, let it fall on a bed, and then let it soak into the bedding. Such disrespect for the Precious Blood is incompatible with the will of God. Therefore, this is not a true miracle, nor is this the true Precious Blood.


Third, the true Precious Blood of the Eucharist is not mere blood; it is actually all of Jesus Christ: his whole human nature, united to His Divine Nature, in one Person. The idea that Christ’s blood all by itself (and in an earthly, non-glorified form) is ‘the Precious Blood’ is false.


Fourth, this blood by itself is said to move and to breathe, as if it were alive. This is not a characteristic of the true Body and Blood of Jesus, which is the Eucharist, nor is it a characteristic of earthly blood when it is shed, such as when Christ shed his earthly blood on the Cross for our salvation.

Fifth, all of these events in this alleged sign are things which can be accomplished by fallen angels. A true miracle is generally something which can only be accomplished by God. Fallen angels can manipulate physical objects: they can obtain ordinary blood from some unfortunate human being, they can carry the blood and drop it from the air, and they can make the blood appear to move.

Sixth, I ask you, is this the kind of sign that Jesus Himself performed when He was on earth? Certainly not! This claimed miracle does not resemble the miracles of Jesus Himself in the Gospels, nor does it resemble any of the miracles obtained by the Saints throughout the ages, nor does it resemble the miracles associated with known true private revelations.

Seventh, if you are convinced by such obvious fakery to follow this false prophetess, Julia Kim, who has the audacity and the stupidity to claim that a moving lump of partially-coagulated blood is ‘The Precious Blood,’ then you deserve all the sufferings that no doubt will befall you, as you are led away from the path of true salvation set forth by the holy Catholic Church. The sheep of Jesus Christ know His voice and they (we) follow Him. If, instead, you follow a false voice, such as that of Julia Kim or other false prophets, then you shall be punished by God.

If anyone turns away from Jesus Christ and His one holy Catholic Church, merely because they see false signs and wonders, a curse on such persons. Again, I say a curse. No one can follow and believe in the messages and signs of false prophets, such as Julia Kim, and still also remain a faithful Catholic. All such persons are on the path to heresy and schism from the Church. Anathema sint.

Korean bishop cracks down on controversial Marian shrine

http://www.cathnews.com/news/707/103.php

July 18, 2007

A Korean bishop has warned Catholics in his diocese not to join activities at a controversial Marian shrine founded by a woman who claims to have experienced the Eucharist changing into a lump of bloody flesh in her mouth on several occasions.
UCA News reports that Bishop Boniface Choi Ki-san of Incheon has released a pastoral directive forbidding Catholics from joining Naju shrine devotees, who held a Mass in his diocesan territory, just west of Seoul.
The Church in 2005 rejected the alleged miracles associated with the shrine, which began more than two decades ago in Naju, 285 km south of the capital.
Despite earlier warnings, Bishop Choi said in his pastoral directive, “some 700 followers of Julia Kim Youn Hong-sun of Naju joined a liturgical event in Bucheon celebrated by a Korean priest from Atlanta diocese, in the United States.”
Fr Andrew Pak Hui-jung, canon law professor at Incheon Catholic University, told UCA News that even if Youn and her followers firmly believe in their cause, it is not good to go against Church guidance.
“Nobody knows what the Blessed Mother’s will is. Church recognition of her revelations cannot be done in a short time. The devotees need to wait and see what happens next, while obeying the bishops’ directives,” he said.

The Korean Church needs to be more active in banning the activities of Youn and her followers, he continued. “Priests from Indonesia and the Philippines have come to Naju and celebrated Masses with the followers.”
Youn insists she has received private revelations through her Marian statue in Naju since it “started weeping” in 1985. Many Catholics including several local and foreign bishops have visited the statue since then.
The woman insists her statue has shed tears of blood and fragrant oil, and given her revelations. Another claim is that the Eucharist fell “from heaven” at times when visiting bishops and her group had Mass in her private chapel.
Youn and her group further claim the Eucharist changed into a lump of bloody flesh in her mouth several times, including once in 1995 when Pope John Paul II gave her Communion at the Vatican. The Naju website maintains the late pope saw this but said nothing.

 

 


In 1998, however, Archbishop Victorinus Youn Kong-hi declared there was “no evidence that proves” the alleged visions and strange phenomena concerning Youn and the Marian statue are “truly supernatural and thus from God.” At the time, the now retired prelate headed Kwangju archdiocese, which covers Naju.
Photo: Julia Kim (Hong-Sun Youn) allegedly suffering the pains of the crown of thorns on Good Friday, najumary.or.kr
SOURCE Bishop Warns Catholics On Activities Related To Naju Marian Shrine (UCAN, 17/7/07)
LINKS
Signs from Naju, Korea – Julia Kim’s website

 

Sect excommunicated for ‘lies’ about the Pope

http://archive.catholicherald.co.uk/article/1st-february-2008/4/sect-excommunicated-for-lies-about-the-pope

By Simon Caldwell, February 1, 2008

An archbishop has excommunicated a mystical seer who allegedly encourages her followers to drink her urine to cure their illnesses.

Julia Youn has constructed a huge sect around herself since she began to claim that she had seen a statue of the Virgin Mary weeping blood at her home in Naju, South Korea.

Since the first apparition in 1985, the housewife also claims to have developed the stigmata and says she has bled from the head as if she was wearing a crown of thorns.

She often enters into ecstatic raptures during which she receives divine messages from Jesus and Mary urging the world to repent of the “murder” of abortion, and claims to have witnessed a number of “Eucharistic miracles”.

But Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou of Kwangju has declared Mrs Youn, 60, a fraud. He issued a decree excommunicating Mrs Youn and her sect and strictly forbidding all Catholics from taking part in any of their religious rituals, threatening automatic excommunication if they do.

The decree comes just a fortnight after neighbouring Archbishop John Choi Young-soo of Daegu warned worshippers to avoid the sect.

He issued a pastoral letter in which he said the cult “is not Catholic but defames the Catholic Church”. He wrote that the followers “collect much money and do superstitious activities like using or drinking Youn’s urine for a cure”.

Archbishop Choi Changmou said that he had no choice but to expel Mrs Youn from the Church after she ignored a final warning to stop her claims two years ago.

The last straw was when Youn and her followers declared that her bizarre claims had the approval of Pope Benedict XVI. “They speak as if the Holy Father approves them,” Archbishop Choi Chang-mou said. “They libel me, the Korean bishops and the Korean Church through their publications and the internet.”

These actions prove “Julia Youn and her followers have no will to reconcile with the Catholic Church”, he said.

The archbishop said he wanted to help to prevent Catholics from “straying into a groundless and blind faith”.

The sect which calls itself Mary’s Ark of Salvation — is based at “Blessed Mother’s Mountain” in Naju.

The archdiocese issued directives in 1998, 2003 and 2005 banning Catholics from visiting the site, but has failed to stem the flow of pilgrims.

Mrs Youn’s followers even include a local priest who was ‘subsequently suspended by the archbishop.

Fr John Chrysostomus Kim Kye-hong, chancellor of Kwangju archdiocese, said that the sect was on the verge of becoming an international phenomenon. ‘They are reach ing beyond our archdiocese’s boundary, and making this the problem of the whole Church,” he said. “That is the main reason for issuing the decree.”

Mrs Youn’s followers responded to the excommunication by denouncing it as the “worst measure” and a “heretical error”.

Peter Kim Jae-seok, a spokesman for the sect, told UCA News agency that the decrees were fundamentally ineffective and the “Kwangju archbishop commits a crime by spreading such errors, abusing his power and threatening the faithful with such illegal punishment”.

Although the excommunications were not ordered by the Pope they come as part of wider crackdown by the Catholic Church on a boom in the numbers of claims of so-called “private revelations”.

Last year the Vatican denounced as “hysterical” the claims of Patricia de Menezes* who says that the Virgin Mary has been visiting her in her garden in Surbiton, Surrey, for more than 20 years.

It also announced the excommunication of members of the Army of Mary, a sect in Canada which follows Marie Paule Giguere, a woman who claims to be the reincarnation of the Virgin Mary.

At present, the Vatican is investigating claims that the Virgin Mary has appeared to six seers in Medjugorje, Bosnia Herzegovina, more than 30,000 times since the early 1980s.

*PATRICIA DE MENEZES-THE COMMUNITY OF DIVINE INNOCENCE

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/PATRICIA_DE_MENEZES-THE_COMMUNITY_OF_DIVINE_INNOCENCE.doc

 

Korean bishop excommunicates phony mystic

http://catholiclight.stblogs.org/archives/2008/02/korean-bishop-e.html

By Richard Chonak, February 4, 2008, 7 Comments

For years, the Korean bishops have been trying to stop the activities of would-be mystic Julia Kim (now Julia Youn) at Naju, Korea. She claimed to have a weeping statue of Our Lady; she claimed to suffer the stigmata; she claimed that the Eucharist turned into visible, bloody flesh in her mouth, including in 1995 when she received the Sacred Host from Pope John Paul II.

 

 

 

The Archdiocese of Kwangju issued several declarations against the claims of supernatural miracles in the case, and on January 21 of this year, the confrontation reached a decisive point when the Archbishop of Kwangju declared Youn and those who participate in her activities excommunicated for grave disobedience.

Although my sympathies are with the bishop, parts of the canonical decree seem odd: e.g., I’m not sure that canon law allows for a latae sententiae excommunication for the sort of disobedience the Archbishop cites. (E.g., see the SJF’s discussion of c1371.) On the other hand, the decree seems to treat adherence to Mrs. Youn’s claims as a matter of schism. Perhaps Pete Vere or Ed Peters (keeper of the “Excommunication Blotter“) will be able to clarify this for the good of the faithful.

A press report is on-line at Mirifica, and also follows after the jump…

UCAN (Union of Catholic Asian News) reports:

Archbishop Declares Excommunication against Julia Youn and Followers*

SEOUL (UCAN) 28 January 2008 — The archbishop of Kwangju has declared that a woman and her followers who have insisted on so-called divine miracles centering around her have incurred latae sententiae excommunication.

Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou issued the decree on Jan. 21, saying “for Christians’ healthy faith life, and the unity and communion of the Church, I declare as such, though my heart grieves.”

Latae sententiae means the excommunication is not imposed by judgment but automatically results from an action that places one outside the community of faith.

The archbishop explained that he met Youn, 60, and her husband in person in Naju in 2003 and later gave a final warning in 2005, but they have not modified their actions. “Rather, they speak as if the Holy Father approves them,” the bishop said. “They libel me, the Korean bishops and the Korean Church through their publications and the Internet.”

These actions prove “Julia Youn and her followers have no will to reconcile with the Catholic Church,” he said.

“Therefore those clergy, Religious and laity who preside at or participate in sacraments and liturgical ceremonies in their ‘arbitrarily-called chapel’ and ‘Marian shrine’ in Naju, which I have banned, incur automatic excommunication,” he declared, based on canons 1336 and 1364 of the Code of Canon Law.

According to the website created by Youn’s followers ([Vous devez être
inscrit
et
connecté
pour voir ce lien]
(www.najumary.or.kr), Youn has received Marian “revelations” since her statue of the Blessed Mother “started weeping” in 1985. After that, Youn and her followers established “Blessed Mother’s Mountain” in Naju, 285 kilometers south of Seoul.

However, the archdiocese issued directives in 1998, 2003 and 2005 banning Catholics from visiting and participating in ceremonies there. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Korea has explicitly supported the archdiocese.

Father John Chrysostomus Kim Kye-hong, chancellor of Kwangju archdiocese, sent the decree of excommunication to all dioceses in the country as well as to secular and Church media on Jan. 23.

In a related press release, he asked all dioceses to carry the decree in diocesan bulletins and websites to help prevent Catholics from “straying into a groundless and blind faith.”

Father Kim told UCA News on Jan. 24 that despite a televised news report in November 2007 refuting the authenticity of Youn’s miracle claims, people have continued to gather at Naju.

Youn and her followers “insist that the Holy See recognizes the miracles,” the chancellor said. “So now they are reaching beyond our archdiocese’s boundary, and making this the problem of the whole Church. That is the main reason for issuing the decree,” he explained.

Father Kim noted that Father Aloysius Chang Hong-bin, an archdiocesan priest who has supported Youn’s disobedience, had incurred automatic excommunication too. “Also in the decree he was ex-cardinated (removed) from the archdiocese and lost his clerical state,” Father Kim elaborated, adding that “there was no consultation with the Vatican before issuing the decree, but we will send related materials.”

Meanwhile, even before the decree, Archbishop John Choi Young-soo of Daegu issued a pastoral letter on Jan. 13 appealing to his faithful not to visit or participate in liturgical ceremonies in Naju, which “is not Catholic but defames the Catholic Church.” He wrote that that “they collect much money and do superstitious activities like using or drinking Youn’s urine for a cure.”

Also, he asserted the Kwangju archbishop’s ban would never be repealed “even though some people spread a rumor that the Vatican may overrule it.” Archbishop Choi lamented that although his archdiocese too had issued directives several times on the matter, some priests and lay Catholics continuously visit Naju and support Youn.

Youn’s followers have responded to the excommunication decree by denouncing it as the “worst measure” and a “heretical error.” A Jan. 25 statement sent to UCA News insists that Archbishop Choi’s decree has nothing to do with the pope and the universal Catholic Church.

The statement from Peter Kim Jae-seok, public manager of Blessed Mother’s Mountain, added that the banning directives are fundamentally ineffective and the “Kwangju archbishop commits a crime by spreading such errors, abusing his power and threatening the faithful with such illegal punishment.”

Canonical

 

*Archbishop Declares Excommunication against Julia Youn and Followers

http://forumarchedemarie.forumperso.com/t2767-le-decret-d-excommunication-de-la-voyante-de-naju

Korean woman and her followers claiming visions excommunicated

The New Leader, Chennai, February 16-29, 2008

 

 

 

 

Vatican supports archdiocese’s ruling on alleged visionary

http://www.heraldmalaysia.com/news/Vatican-supports-archdiocese%E2%80%99s-ruling-on-alleged-visionary-64-10-1.html and other links, Seoul, Italy, etc.

February 27 to March 8, 2009, UCAN: Kwangju archdiocese has dispelled rumours that its declaration on an alleged Marian visionary would be overturned by the Vatican.
The archdiocese on Feb 24 released its statement, The Position of the Archdiocese of Kwangju in relation to the Matter of Julia Youn in Naju. In the statement, the archdiocese quoted a letter from the Vatican-based Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith saying it respects the archdiocesan decision on the alleged visionary as the official position of the universal Church.
The Vatican letter was dated April 24, 2008.
Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou of Kwangju had declared in January 2008 that Youn and her followers, who had insisted on so-called divine miracles revolving around her, had incurred latae sententiae excommunication. This means the excommunication is not imposed by judgment but automatically results from an action that places one outside the community of faith.
According to the website created by Youn’s followers, the Catholic laywoman started receiving Marian “revelations” after her statue of the Blessed Mother “started weeping” in 1985. After that, she and her followers established “the Blessed Mother’s Mountain,” the name they gave to their centre in Naju, located in Kwangju archdiocese.
Kwangju archdiocese, however, issued directives in 1998, 2003 and 2005 banning Catholics from visiting and participating in ceremonies there. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Korea in its biannual plenary assembly in February 2008 supported the archdiocese’s declaration of excommunication.

Youn’s followers, however, have insisted that the Vatican has different views regarding Youn. According to their website, Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of the Vatican-based Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, had urged the Korean bishops to recognize Youn during their ad limina visit to Rome in November 2007. It reported that Cardinal Dias had sent a letter to this effect to the Korean Catholic bishops in February 2008 and another to the archdiocese in August that year.*

Fr John Chrysostomus Kim Kye-hong, Kwangju archdiocesan chancellor, said that the local Church recently decided to disclose the Vatican letter. This was done in consultation with the apostolic nunciature in Korea because Youn’s followers were “distorting” the “private” concerns of Cardinal Dias, he said.

*See CARDINAL_IVAN_DIAS_PROMOTES_CONTROVERSIAL_MARIAN_APPARITIONS

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/CARDINAL_IVAN_DIAS_PROMOTES_CONTROVERSIAL_MARIAN_APPARITIONS.doc


“Naju visionary” excommunication: Korean archdiocese says it has Vatican backing

http://www.catholicnews.sg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2573&Itemid=79

The Catholic News, March 15, 2009

South Korean Julia Youn, right, who is alleged to have experienced Marian miracles and other supernatural phenomena, is pictured with Theresa Hwang in this Jan 29, 1988, photo. The Kwangju Archdiocese in South Korea has ruled against the alleged supernatural events and in a Feb 24, 2009 statement said that the Vatican respects the decision of the local diocese as the official position of the universal Church. CNS/UCAN photo

SEOUL, South Korea – The Kwangju Archdiocese said it has the backing of the Vatican for its decision that an alleged Marian visionary had been automatically excommunicated.

In a Feb 24 statement, the archdiocese quoted an April 2008 letter from the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith saying it respected the archdiocesan decision on the alleged visionary as the official position of the universal Church. The statement was reported by the Asian church news agency UCA News.

Father John Chrysostomus Kim Kye-hong, Kwangju archdiocesan chancellor, told UCA News Feb 26 that the local church recently decided to disclose the Vatican letter. He said this was done in consultation with the apostolic nunciature in Korea because the alleged visionary’s followers were “distorting” the “private” concerns of Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, who had urged the Korean bishops to recognize Julia Youn, the alleged visionary.

However, the archdiocesan statement reminded Catholics that the doctrinal congregation was the only authority competent to rule on the issue.

In January 2008, Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou of Kwangju declared that Youn and her followers, who had insisted on so-called divine miracles revolving around her, had incurred “latae sententiae” excommunication. This means the excommunication was not imposed by judgement but automatically resulted from an action that places one outside the community of faith.

According to the website created by Youn’s followers, the Catholic laywoman started receiving Marian “revelations” after her statue of the Blessed Mother “started weeping” in 1985. After that, she and her followers established “the Blessed Mother’s Mountain”, the name they gave to their center in Naju, located in the Kwangju Archdiocese.

However, in 1998, 2003 and 2005 the archdiocese issued directives banning Catholics from visiting and participating in ceremonies there. The Korean bishops’ conference supported the archdiocese’s declaration of excommunication.

 

 

 

 

Priests alerted to activities by ‘visionary’

http://www.ucanews.com/2010/04/22/priests-alerted-to-activities-by-%E2%80%98visionary%E2%80%99

SEOUL (UCAN), April 22, 2010 — Kwangju archdiocese has issued a letter warning its priests of activities by supporters of an alleged Marian visionary who has incurred excommunication.

In its letter, sent on April 15, the archdiocese said supporters of Julia Youn have recently distributed leaflets and DVDs in parishes without approval. The archdiocese has asked parishes to dispose of them.

Youn and her supporters claim that the Catholic laywoman started receiving Marian “revelations” after her statue of the Blessed Mother “started weeping” in 1985. She and her followers then established “the Blessed Mother’s Mountain,” the name they gave to their center in Naju, located in Kwangju archdiocese.

According to the archdiocesan letter, Youn’s recently distributed DVD claims she experienced a “second Eucharistic miracle at the Vatican” during which a communion host allegedly turned into a bloody lump of flesh in her mouth.

An archdiocesan priest, Father Thomas Park Seong-yeol, told UCA News that June 30 is the 25th anniversary of alleged miracles claimed by the group. He surmised that Youn’s followers are expanding their activities to get official recognition from the Church on this occasion.

Kwangju archdiocese had rejected the supernatural claims of the group, and issued directives in 1998, 2003 and 2005 banning Catholics from visiting and participating in ceremonies at their center.

In January 2008, then Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou of Kwangju declared that Youn and her followers who had insisted that divine miracles had taken place, had incurred latae sententiae excommunication.

This means the excommunication is not imposed by judgment but automatically results from an action that places one outside the community of faith.

The Vatican had also said it respected the archdiocese’s decision on Youn. Her followers, however, insist that the Vatican supports them.

According to Father Park, Youn’s DVD contains an interview with the retired Archbishop Giovanni Bulaitis, former apostolic nuncio to Korea, in Rome. In it, he allegedly said that the ban on liturgical activities at Youn’s center was “absurd,” and that Archbishop Choi had “no authority” to make this declaration.

Father Park pointed out that Archbishop Buliatis expressed his own opinion, and that it was not the Vatican’s position.

Vatican supports archdiocese’s ruling on alleged visionary
Bishops Say Followers Of Excommunicated ‘Visionary’ Can Be Reconciled With Church
Learning Lessons From The Julia Youn Excommunication

COMMENTS

You’d better remove the above posted photo, it is violate Julia’s portrait rights due to we did not provide any photo, even they (Kwangju Archdiocese) trying to intentionally distort the facts and truth that occurred in Naju and through her,
If they really wanted to post her, Julia’s photo, they had many other photos, but they choosed the photo poses with Theresa Hwang who was disapproved by local church, and eventually by the Vatican.
Kwangju Archdiocese is afraid of the approval of Naju by the Church, not by local church, but by the VATICAN.
Learn more www.najumary.org,
http://www.najumary.org/board/bbs/board.php?bo_…
Peter Suh

I believe this; I have been to Naju several times and have seen the miracle there. Every time I go to Naju I wish I could stay longer to pray and be with the people there. I always come home feeling more at peace and spiritually stronger… Mary Nguyen

Current Cardinal Ivan Dias, the prefect of Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples said that “Excommunication is too ridiculous and he has no authority to do so”. Pope said that “I am favorable on NAJU” during the audience with His Eminence Cardinal Ivan Dias just prior to Easter. Peter Suh

 

Vatican says ‘visionary’ is far from faith

http://www.ucanews.com/news/vatican-says-visionary-is-far-from-faith/14769

May 2, 2011

The Vatican has reaffirmed that the so-called divine miracles argued by an alleged Marian visionary are not “true Christian teaching,” Kwangju archdiocese noted yesterday.
Archbishop Hyginus Kim Hee-jung of Kwangju said in his statement that the Pontifical Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith had sent its letter to the archdiocese on March 30.

The Vatican congregation noted in the letter that the so-called “divine miracles revolving around Julia Youn in Naju, South Korea” that she and her followers had sent to the congregation are “far away from true Christian faith,” said Archbishop Kim.
It also pointed out that some of her followers have confused Catholics by saying “the Vatican will support their argument and approve it soon.” But “the Vatican will never change its position on the alleged visionary,” the archbishop noted.
Archbishop Kim claimed that the Vatican letter has reconfirmed that “the Vatican has taken the same stand with Kwangju archdiocese” on the alleged Marian visionary.
He explained that he issued the statement because “some of Catholics still follow Youn” though the archdiocese issued directives in 1998, 2003 and 2005 banning Catholics from participating in ceremonies organized by her.
Meanwhile, Youn and her supporters have maintained that since 1985 there were several “miracles” around her and her Marian statue, but the archdiocese issued the three directives to deny it.

 

Finally, Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou of Kwangju had declared in January 2008 that Youn and her followers had incurred latae sententiae excommunication.
And at their biannual plenary assembly in 2008, Korean bishops agreed they would respect that decision.
But Youn’s followers have insisted the Vatican has different thought on Youn, referring to
Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, who, they said, urged the Korean bishops to recognize Youn during their Ad limina visit to the Vatican in 2007.
However, the archdiocese then reminded Catholics that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is the only competent authority to rule on the issue, criticizing they are “distorting” the “private” concern of Cardinal Dias who had urged better pastoral efforts in this regard.
Related report: Vatican supports archdiocese’s ruling on alleged visionary

 

Headache for the Archbishop of Kwangju

http://catholicamericaneyesinkorea.blogspot.in/2011/05/headache-for-archbishop-of-kwangju.html

May 3, 2011

We hear again about the events in Naju Korea. The Catholic Times featured the story on the front page, including the official announcement concerning Naju by the archbishop of Kwangju. Those who are followers of this private revelation to Julia Kim are publicizing it as having the approval of the Vatican and they list the names of those who have given credibility to the events of Naju. The three ordinaries of the archdiocese have made it clear where they stand, but this has not received credibility among the Catholics because those in Naju are saying that John Paul II and Benedict, along with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, have looked favorably on the miracles.  

The followers of Naju are saying the beatification of John Paul II is “an implicit and certain confirmation of the Holy See’s positive stance.”  
In the official announcement in response to the events in Naju, the archbishop’s statement makes clear there has been no change in the way the archdiocese looks upon the events. The supporters have spread their rumors throughout the country and the archbishop feels that another official statement is warranted. 
The news that the Vatican is positive on the events at Naju is upsetting the Catholic faithful. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has accepted the decision of the two previous ordinaries and the present ordinary. The present archbishop of Kwangju, on his visit to the Congregation in July of last year, was informed that nothing has changed. In conclusion, the archbishop says that he has been in communication with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and is notifying all the Catholics of this fact. 
The problem arises because of the publicity that events in Naju is getting on the internet. Many in Rome have been quoted as being favorable to Naju and this is continually being emphasized. This has made the position of the ordinaries awkward when the promoters of Naju continue to use the words of the Popes in favor of the events.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has given permission for the official proclamation of the archbishop of Kwangju. The Congregation said, “That what the supporters of Julia have sent to the Congregation concerning the miracles of Naju bear little resemblance to Christlike spirituality. And, concerning the miracles of Naju, the Congregation is not thinking of changing its stance, which makes their position no different than that of the archbishop’s. Hopefully, this will see the end of the dispute. 
Check the previous blog for reasons why the problem continues to annoy the Korean Church.                                    

Vatican agrees with excommunication warning to South Korean “visionary” Julia Youn and her followers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EpNwbeNI4s, 1:14 min.

 

Vatican backs Korean archbishops’ warnings on ‘visionary’

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=10201

May 3, 2011

The Vatican has warned that the messages of a self-styled Korean “visionary” are not “true Christian teaching.”

Archbishop Hyginus Kim Hee-jung of Kwangju has said that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has confirmed his judgment rejecting the claims of miracles reported by Julia Youn, and finding that Youn’s public teachings are “far away from true Christian faith.” The Kwangju archdiocese has issued several warnings against Youn, and in 2008, Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou announced that she and her followers had incurred the penalty of excommunication.

Nevertheless, some of the Youn’s supporters have persisted in saying that the Vatican will eventually approve her teaching. Archbishop Kim emphatically rejected that argument, saying that “the Vatican will never change its position on the alleged visionary.”

 

Vatican asks followers of Julia Youn, a self proclaimed “visionary” to have caution

http://www.romereports.com/palio/modules.php?name=News&file=article&newlang=english&sid=4217


				

May 26, 2011

The Vatican says it agrees with the stern warning a South Korean Archbishop gave to a self proclaimed ‘visionary.’

The Catholic Church has warned Julia Youn on several occasions. But according to Archbishop Hyginus Kim Hee-jung, those warning have been ignored.  Youn and her followers now face the penalty of excommunication from the Church.

20.

 

 

Youn claims to have seen several miracles since 1985, including tears of blood stemming from a Marian statue she had in her home. The archdiocese issued three directives denying the claim, but still some Catholics follow her, believing she has a divine connection.

On several occasions, Archbishop Kim Hee-jung said her claims were unfounded, highlighting that she and her followers are “far away from true Christian faith.”
Still, some of her followers weren’t convinced on the Vatican’s opposition. They argued the Holy See would “support their argument and approve it soon.”
The Archbishop clearly discredited those followers. In a statement he said “The Vatican will never change its position on the alleged visionary.”

 

The Roman Catholic Church’s teaching on Apparitions

http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/MedjugorjeRome..htm
EXTRACT

By Mark Waterinckx, November 29, 1996

Conclusion:

For Medjugorje, Garabandal, San Damiano, Vassula, Naju, Marpingen, Little Pebble, Palmar de Troya, Bayside, Ladeira, Heroldsbach, Schio, Onkerzele, Dozulé, Montichiari, Necedah, Penablanca, Mère Marie-Claudine, Eisenberg, Manduria and so many others, the legal judgement of the diocesan bishop was time and again negative. What was the consequence? Rebellion and disobedience of many deceived faithful against the local bishop.

Some people even say: If the Pope does not acknowledge ‘the apparitions’, then I will no longer acknowledge the Pope! Sectarian fanaticism instead of Christian faith… Satan, the father of lies (Jn 8, 44) allows with pleasure that many will ‘convert’ in places were false apparitions occur, if only he can disengage the faithful from the Pope and from Rome…

We have the Bible, the Credo, the Holy Mass, the Sacraments. Why chasing for sensation? Authentic visionaries are not recognized by signs, wonders, conversions, healings, prophecies, but only by their heroic virtues, primarily obedience and humbleness. Let us be humbly obedient to the teaching authority of the Church of Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit shall never leave her and be with her always. (Jn 14:16 and Mt 16:18)

 

The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Korea and the Bishops of Korea speak [chronologically]:

1. January 1, 1991-Declaration concerning “The phenomena and messages which happened to Julia Youn of Naju and her statue of the Blessed Mother”

http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/statements/naju_1998-01-01.html

Source: http://www.ucanews.com/search/show.php?q=Naju&page=archives/english/1998/01/w3/wed/ko9132dw.txt,
http://www.kjcatholic.or.kr/naju/gong1998e.html

The matters concerning Mrs. Julia Youn (the events arising in Naju city, located in the district under Kwangju archdiocesan jurisdiction) that started with the weeping statue of the Blessed Mother on 30th July 1985 have developed into various events which are being widely circulated, including the so-called miracles such as the Blessed Mother’s statue shedding bitter tears, fragrant oil, its moving backward and forward in the niche, and rose fragrance from Julia’s body, her physical suffering for the sins of abortion and other sins that flood the world, and the most recent miracles of the Eucharist, etc.

Mrs. Julia Youn, realizing the fact that those who are interested in such phenomena and believe them as reliable are numerous, insists that the so-called “messages of the Blessed Mother of Naju” she says she has heard from the Blessed Mother are authentic and therefore they are truly private revelations.

As all Christians know, revelation and the Eucharist are the heart of the Orthodox Catholic Faith. For that reason, the matters related to them must be definitely discerned through the teachings of the Orthodox Catholic Faith.

The Naju Investigation Committee, which I, the Ordinary, Archbishop of Kwangju Archdiocese, formed on 30 December, 1994, has examined carefully with the eye of faith and from a multilateral standpoint the so-called “Phenomena and Messages which happened to Julia Youn of Naju and her statue of the Blessed Mother.”

After its first meeting on 9 January 1995, I published the interim report of the Investigation Committee with the undersigned name of Chairman of Naju Investigation Committee (Reverend Father Augustinus Kim Jai-Young) on 16 June 1995.

During this time, the Naju Investigation Committee has held 15 meetings. Examination of the faith and inspection of the phenomena by analyzing all contents and the process of their formation in all the related books and printed materials have been carefully made. In parallel with these the committee has on five occasions sought testimonies from 14 people, including Mrs. Julia Youn, who are central to “the events arising in Naju.” The members of the Committee have also visited Julia’s house to examine not only the place of the Blessed Mother’s statue but also the hall where it is enshrined.

1. Based on the results of the investigations, I, the Archbishop of Kwangju archdiocese, pronounce my public judgment on the so-called “events arising in Naju,” since I have an episcopal magisterium to give an authoritative interpretation (cf. “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” 75-87; “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation,” Dei verbum, 10) on the results of the investigations carried out by the Investigation Committee.

1.1. In the so-called “Messages of Our Lady of Naju,” which Julia claims have come from Our Lady, there are several human and artificial elements involved. Because of this, there are several parts which appear to be lacking in genuineness and credibility.

21.

 

 

 

In the first place, in the contents there are parts comparable to imitations, plagiarism and quotations from recognized books such as of Father Gobbi’s “To the most beloved priests of the Blessed Mother” and “The message of the Sacred Heart” published by the Catholic Publishing House, Seoul.

There are also parts which appear to be purposely manipulated, omitted or inserted as the result of the influence of people around [Mrs. Julia Youn] and according to the circumstances. Examples of this are: the appearance of miraculous water, making a Sanctuary, building a Basilica. In addition, there are discrepancies between Julia’s own handwritten diaries and published materials. Moreover, the content that owing to Mrs. Julia Youn, [God] the Father seems to delay the final time (cf. the content which seems to be regarded as “The Word of the Father” heard on 16 July 1995), which is already decided and thus only the Father knows (cf. “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” 1040) obviously contradicts the teaching of the Orthodox Catholic Faith.

Therefore, the so-called “messages of the Blessed Mother of Naju” are seen as the results of Mrs. Julia Youn’s personal experience or meditation, and do not bear evidence that they are private revelations, although Mrs. Julia Youn and her followers insist that they are authentic, private revelations.

1.2. The phenomenon alleged as the miracle of the Eucharist falling from heaven is contradictory to the doctrine of the Catholic Church which says that only through a legitimately ordained priest’s consecration does the Sacrament of the Eucharist begin to exist (cf. “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” 1411; Denzinger-Schonmetzer collection of Church documents, DS, 902) even when the priest is in grave sin, because when the Sacraments are celebrated properly in accordance with the intention of the Church (ex opere operato “from the action performed”), Christ and His Holy Spirit operate in them (cf. “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” 1128; DS 793-794).

Furthermore, the alleged phenomenon that as soon as Mrs. Julia Youn received the Eucharist, it changed into a lump of bloody flesh in her mouth is also contrary to the doctrine of the Catholic Church which says that even after the bread and wine are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ with the formula of a priest’s consecration, the species of bread and wine remain (cf. Pope Paul VI’s 1966 encyclical on the Holy Eucharist, “Mysterium Fidei;” DS 782, 802, 1321, 1640-1642, 1652).

Such phenomena do not enhance the faith of people in the Eucharist existing under the species of bread and wine. On the contrary, they seem to act as an element which causes great confusion and embarrasses the people’s faith in the Eucharist.

1.3. Various strange phenomena said to have happened in the vicinity of Mrs. Julia Youn (phenomena arising from her body and the statue of the Blessed Mother) and her personal vision also produce no evidence to prove that they are truly supernatural and thus from God. Perhaps, they can be said to show some preternatural power.

2. I, the Archbishop of Kwangju archdiocese, as the authentic teacher of the faith and legitimate shepherd, sincerely ask all the priests, Religious and the faithful in the diocese and those who are involved in “the events arising in Naju” to receive these pastoral instructions in the spirit of obedience to the authentic teaching authority.

2.1. For the sake of one’s personal interest, to consider the alleged disturbing phenomena like “the events arising in Naju” and insist on them as supernatural is regarded as an act of breaking the unity of the Church’s faith. So publication or dissemination of all materials for propaganda relating to “the events arising in Naju” (e.g. printed or published literature, audio/video tapes, photos, etc.) is officially forbidden (cf. “The Code of Canon Law,” 823, 1), and it is also my request that the relevant documentation not be seen or viewed.

2.2 Therefore, I, as Ordinary, have asked Mrs. Julia Youn to discontinue the memorial function which has been held on the memorial day of the first weeping of the statue of the Blessed Mother, and not to spread her personal experiences and the so-called “messages of the Blessed Mother of Naju,” which were erroneously asserted as supernatural phenomena and private revelations. This advice remains in effect and thus obedience to the teaching authority is again required.

2.3. The previous prohibition of saying Mass, or celebrating liturgies or the Sacraments at any private places related to Mrs. Julia Youn is also still valid. Such communal assemblies as vigils assuming the form of liturgies of the word and Hora Sancta, and the other internal prayer meetings which are held on every Thursday and first Saturday of every month in Mrs. Julia Youn’s hall that enshrines the statue of the Blessed Mother are forbidden as well. People around Mrs. Julia Youn (especially volunteer helpers) are, therefore, requested to obey the Magisterium, to return home and exercise authentic devotion to the Blessed Mother.

2.4. The previous measure through which I have given this directive is still in effect as follows: except for the parish priest who has jurisdiction, other priests who have been acting as supporters should now refrain from playing any further role. It is also desired that pastors and priests keep their mind on the faithful’s simple interest in the so-called “events arising in Naju,” so that these do not permeate the general devotional life of the parishes or Catholic institutions for which the priests are responsible.

Lastly, I hope and pray that all the members of Kwangju archdiocese may hear and receive such Catholic teachings that “… true devotion consists neither in sterile nor transitory affection, nor in a certain vain credulity, but proceeds from true faith” (“Dogmatic Constitution on the Church,” Lumen Gentium, 67) and “Extraordinary gifts are not to be rashly desired, nor is it from them that the fruits of apostolic labors are to be presumptuously expected” (“Lumen Gentium,” 12), and spend their time and energies in promoting devotion to the Blessed Mother, in the many forms which have been approved by the Catholic Church.

Through sincere and genuine devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, in the mystery of Christ and the Church, we will all be more deeply united to Christ who is “the source of all truth, sanctity and piety” (Lumen Gentium, 67).

22.

 

 

As the devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary “takes its origin and effectiveness from Christ, finds its complete expression in Christ, and leads through Christ in the Spirit to the Father” (Introduction to Pope Paul VI’s “Marialis Cultus”), we also note that “the ultimate purpose of devotion to the Blessed Virgin is to glorify God and to lead Christians to commit themselves to a life which is in absolute conformity with his will” (“Marialis Cultus,” 39).

“May the heart of Mary be in each Christian to proclaim the greatness of the Lord; may her spirit be in everyone to exult in God” (Saint Ambrose, “Expositio Evangelii Secundum Lucam,” 1, 26).

On the 1st January 1998, The Feast of Mary, the Mother of God

Victorinus K. Youn

 

2. Bishop Warns Catholics on Activities Related To Naju Marian Shrine

http://www.ucanews.com/story-archive/?post_name=/2007/07/17/bishop-warns-catholics-on-activities-related-to-naju-marian-shrine&post_id=6134

July 17, 2007, SEOUL (UCAN) A Korean bishop has warned Catholics not to join activities organized by devotees of a controversial Marian shrine, and he urged priests to educate parishioners on the matter.

Bishop Boniface Choi Ki-san of Incheon on June 29 released a pastoral directive forbidding Catholics from joining Naju shrine devotees, who held a Mass in his diocesan territory, just west of Seoul. The Church in 2005 rejected the alleged miracles associated with the shrine, which began more than two decades ago in Naju, 285 kilometers south of the capital.

The bishop also released a 14-page letter titled “Theological and Pastoral Reflection and Directive Related to Julia Youn of Naju.” In it he urges priests to use homilies to educate parishioners on the matter as well as on proper Marian devotion.

Despite earlier warnings, Bishop Choi said in his pastoral directive, “some 700 followers of Julia Youn Hong-sun of Naju joined a liturgical event in Bucheon celebrated by a Korean priest from Atlanta diocese, in the United States.”

They held a night vigil on June 16 at a wedding hall in Bucheon. An unidentified ethnic Korean priest from the United States celebrated a Mass for them, according to the shrine’s website (www.najumary.or.kr). They also held a prayer rally and listened to Youn preach.

Father Andrew Pak Hui-jung, canon law professor at Incheon Catholic University, told UCA News on July 16 that even if Youn and her followers firmly believe in their cause, it is not good to go against Church guidance.

“Nobody knows what the Blessed Mother’s will is. Church recognition of her revelations cannot be done in a short time. The devotees need to wait and see what happens next, while obeying the bishops’ directives,” he said.

The Korean Church needs to be more active in banning the activities of Youn and her followers, he continued. “Priests from Indonesia and the Philippines have come to Naju and celebrated Masses with the followers.”

Youn insists she has received private revelations through her Marian statue in Naju since it “started weeping” in 1985. Many Catholics including several local and foreign bishops have visited the statue since then.

The woman insists her statue has shed tears of blood and fragrant oil, and given her revelations. Another claim is that the Eucharist fell “from heaven” at times when visiting bishops and her group had Mass in her private chapel.

Youn and her group further claim the Eucharist changed into a lump of bloody flesh in her mouth several times, including once in 1995 when Pope John Paul II gave her Communion at the Vatican. The Naju website maintains the late pope saw this but said nothing.

In 1998, however, Archbishop Victorinus Youn Kong-hi declared there was “no evidence that proves” the alleged visions and strange phenomena concerning Youn and the Marian statue are “truly supernatural and thus from God.” At the time, the now retired prelate headed Kwangju archdiocese, which covers Naju.

His successor, Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou, issued two pastoral directives on the matter, in 2001 and 2005. They warn that all who fail to follow the directives are to be considered as willfully opposing the magisterium, the Catholic Church’s divinely guided authority to teach true doctrine.

 

3. Message on the Problem of “Julia Kim (alias Julia Yoon) in Naju”

http://www.cbck.or.kr/bbs/enewsletter.asp?board_id=e5100&bid=13001656

http://omijapankorea.net/en/delegationnews/005.doc

November 2007

The Archdiocese of Kwangju issued a message on the problem of “Julia Kim in Naju.” With this message the Archdiocese of Kwangju reaffirmed that everything which had been practiced by Julia Kim and her followers in the name of Catholic faith was totally wrong and had nothing to do with the Catholic Church, as the Archdiocese had continuously said in its notifications on this matter, issued in 1998, 2001 and 2005 respectively.

This Archdiocesan message condemned the priest who testified in favor of Julia Kim in a documentary program about “Julia Kim in Naju” aired on November 13, 2007, on MBC, a Korean TV station. Actually this program showed that what Julia Kim has done amounts to a religious fraud.

The Archdiocesan message ended with the teaching of our Lord Jesus about our brother who committed sins against us, citing Matthew 18:15-18.

Julia Kim (her autonym is Hong-sun Yoon) has never followed the admonition of the Archdiocese of Kwangju, and she still alleges openly that she receives messages from St. Mary (“private revelation”) and performs “miracles.” What makes the matter worse is the fact that one priest of the Archdiocese of Kwangju has continued to help Julia Kim even now although he was officially suspended from his ministry by an Archdiocesan decision on June 12, 2007. Such a situation has caused much disappointment for both Catholics and non-Catholics in Korea. They demand more rigorous measures against Julia Kim and her followers.

 

 

4. The Position of the Archdiocese of Kwangju in relation to the Matter of Julia Yoon of Naju and its related Phenomena

http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/statements/naju_2007-11-19.html

Source: http://www.kjcatholic.or.kr/naju/gong2007e.html

November 19, 2007

Confession of Faith and Life of Faith

1. “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits” (Matt. 7, 15-17). These words in the Bible were the teaching of Jesus to his people to make them know a criteria to discern true prophets and false prophets. For us, Christians of today, who confess and announce Jesus as our Savior and the Light of the World, these words are the guidance for our right confession of faith and balanced life of faith because they are urging us to continual self-examination and renewal.

2. The balance and harmony between the confession of faith and the life of faith are achieved in the unity and communion with the Church community, on the basis of the self-examination of each faithful. For this, the Church community celebrates the liturgy in virtue of Christ’s priesthood (cf. Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium, n.7), serves the faithful to make them live what they received in faith through the Magisterium, namely “listening to the word of God devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit.” (Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation Dei Verbum, n.10), and recommends piety activities, which correspond to the Church’s law and rules and are in harmony with the liturgy (cf. Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium, nn.10.13). The early Christian communities “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers (…) praising God and having the good-will of all the people” (Acts 2,42-47).

 

False realities and efforts for discernment
3. The report of MBC TV program on current affairs, ‘PD Sucheop (notebook)’, which was broadcasted on November 13, 2007, with the title of “Is it a miracle or a fraud? – the truth of the Blessed Mary Garden in Naju) can be meaningful because it showed us, even partly, the false realities of the matter of Julia Yoon of Naju and its related phenomena, of which the Archdiocese of Kwangju has had a concern and asked for God’s mercy. In fact, a good few many Catholics and non-Catholics have expressed their disappointment about the Catholic Church and the Archdiocese of Kwangju in relation to the way of coping with the matter and urged strong measures of the Archdiocese to punish some priests who support and side with Julia Yoon of Naju.

4. The Archdiocese has coped carefully with the false phenomena from the beginning that is to say the rumor of strange phenomenon (since June 1985) of the Blessed Mother Statue possessed by Julia Yoon and her sister, through the propaganda of the so-called ‘miracle’ and ‘the message of Our Lady’, to the diffusion of the so-called ‘Holy Eucharistic miracle’, which had been increasingly spread. For some, this prudence of the Archdiocese is sometimes interpreted as a laissez-faire, non confrontation or powerlessness. Respectively, Julia Yoon of Naju and her surrounders have strengthened their position by presenting their arbitrary interpretation mobilizing all kinds of theological theories and by using purposely the curiosity and generosity of some priests through Mass Communication. Unfortunately, in spite of the official position and instruction given by the Holy See and the Archdiocese of Kwangju regarding to this matter, they have distorted or refused the fact. One priest who belongs to the Archdiocese of Kwangju and some priests from the other dioceses or religious orders (including foreigners) as well as some laity (most of them are mobilized from other regions) side with them and attend their regular gatherings.

5. The Archdiocese has taken a series of measures: 1) the announcement of a notification (on the basis of the result from the Investigation Committee established in 1995) made in 1998 by the Most Rev. Youn Kong-hi, the Archbishop of the day; 2) the announcement of second notification; 3) three times of meeting and talking of the present Archbishop Andrea Choi Chang-mou with Julia Yoon and her husband in 2003 (in the Naju Church, in the Archdiocesan Curia, and in the place which is the so-called ‘chapel’ and the ‘Blessed Mary Garden’, where the Archbishop Choi demanded them the obedience to the notifications, the stop of gatherings and ceremonies, the observance of the faithful’s duty and the opening of the money collected from the faithful and its expenditure to the public.); 4) the Archbishop’s third notification in 2005 (which defines the disobedience to the Ordinary Bishop as having nothing to with the Catholic Church and as an act destroying the unity of the Church). Together with this, from 2001 to 2005 the parish priest and the faithful of the Naju Church carried out the discernment work of false acts of Julia Yoon and her surrounders despite their disturbance activities, by establishing a commission executing the Archbishop’s notifications, by publishing a booklet titled ‘The reason that the matters related to Julia Yoon’s Blessed Mary Statue have nothing to do with the Catholic Church’, and by promoting the historical site of Martyrs in Naju. That was the best efforts made by the Archdiocese as a community of faith. In this process, an incardinated priest who follows Julia Yoon and adheres to the related situation was placed under suspension of sacramental ministries and promised his bishop to break the relationship with them. However, this promise was not kept and the priest continued to have relationship with them. After all, he was put into the situation of ‘waiting’ (limits of pastoral care) by the appointment announcement (of June 12, 2007, N.4) of the diocesan priests in 2007. Nevertheless, this priest believes and follows the allegation of Julia Yoon and her surrounders, and furthermore manifests his will to die as a martyr. (His statement in the Diocesan Chapter on June 1, 2007 and in the talking with the Ordinary Bishop on June 21, 2007).

24.

 

 


“The fruit of the light is found in all that is good and right and true. Try to find out what is pleasing to the Lord. Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. For it is shameful even to mention what such people do secretly; but everything exposed by the light becomes visible, for every thing that becomes visible is light.” (Eph 5,9-13)

The Wish of the Archdiocese for the right and balanced Life of Faith

6. “The cult of the people of God toward Mary wonderfully increased in veneration and love, in invocation and imitation. (…) This cult, as it always existed, although it is altogether singular, differs essentially from the cult of adoration which is offered to the Incarnate Word, as well to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and it is most favorable to it. (…) Let the faithful remember moreover that true devotion consists neither in sterile or transitory affection, nor in a certain vain credulity, but proceeds from true faith” (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium, nn.66-67).

1) The Archdiocese of Kwangju reconfirms that the matter of Julia Yoon and its related phenomena, all gatherings and ceremonies carried out arbitrarily by Julia Yoon and her surrounders in the so-called ‘chapel’ and the ‘Blessed Mary Garden’, out of the boundary of the Church where the official liturgy of the Catholic Church is celebrated have no connection with the Catholic Church. It defines these acts inappropriate because they make a pretense of acts of faith, disregard and disobey the Magisterium of the Church, and deviate from the right acts of faith by their false belief.

2) The Archdiocese deplores the reaction of Julia Yoon and her surrounders, who do not follow the recommendation of the Ordinary Bishop’s pastoral exhortation, but instead abuse it with an arbitrariness and ignorance. The Archdiocese wants them to recover the way that the believers should be and return to the communion and unity of the Church Community as soon as possible, which comes from the one holy catholic and apostolic Church.

3) The Archdiocese will bring the incardinated priest to book in an appropriate way, who expressed on TV program ‘PD Sucheop (notebook)’ his belief in so-called ‘miracle water’ and ‘Yul-sin-aek’ (the  which springs out the so-called ‘Blessed Mother Garden’ Yul-Sin-Aek (the liquid through the kidney of Julia = the urine of Julia) and ‘the phenomena related with Julia Yoon’. (Any priest who makes an interview under a false name and celebrates an illegal ceremony on the spot commits an unjust act against the Magisterium).

4) The Archdiocese reaffirms what is said in the notifications of the Ordinary Bishop, which were announced three times (See ‘the Church’s teaching related with Julia Yoon on the diocesan website.). The Archdiocese clarifies that the allegation and diffusion of the so-called ‘miracle’ or ‘private revelation’ have no connection with the Catholic Church, and warns that the visiting to the place and the celebration of ritual acts of any clergy, religious or laity, no matter which diocese or religious order they belong to, are the acts destroying the Church law and the hierarchical order, and thus announces a ban of all visitings and ritual acts on the spot.

7. “While Christ, holy, innocent and undefiled (Hebrews 7, 26) knew nothing of sin, (2 Cor. 5, 21), but came to expiate only the sins of the people, (Hebrews 2, 17), the Church, embracing in its bosom sinners, at the same time holy and always in need of being purified, always follows the way of penance and renewal” (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium n.8). The Archdiocese will do its best as a community of faith for the balanced life of faith of the faithful and pray for Julia Yoon and her surrounders so that they can recover the way that the believers should be. It also urges some clergy, religious and laity, who adhere to Julia Yoon and the related phenomena with a just curiosity or a personal belief, to make an evangelical discernment deriving from the sense of faith (fidei sensus) and to accept the pastoral guideline contained in the notifications with their faith.

“If your brother sins (against you), go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector. Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt 18,15-18)
Archdiocese of Kwangju

 

5. Decree of the Archbishop of Kwangju

http://www.catholicplanet.com/apparitions/pdf/2008-Julia-Kim-decree.pdf

January 21, 2008

Décret d’excommunication de la voyante de Naju

http://lepeupledelapaix.forumactif.com/t7436-decret-d-excommunication-de-la-voyante-de-naju
[Emphases theirs]

par p13843 le Sam 7 Aoû 2010 – 4:57

Decree of the Archbishop of Kwangju
I, Andreas Choi Chang-mou, Archbishop of Kwangju, exercising this episcopal office according to the gracious concern and mandate of the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, and thanking God always for His mercy and grace, promulgate, after serious reflection, the following decree for the unity and communion of the ecclesiastical community (Cf. Can. 391):

First , I judge that ‘those who believe in Julia Youn in Naju and all related phenomena’ no longer have the intention to be in unity and harmony with the Catholic Church , because they have not acceded to and have opposed archdiocesan notifications (on January 1, 1998 and on May 5, 2005) and pastoral directives (on May 5, 2001 ). When between March and August 2003 I and accompanying witnesses visited the place of Julia Youn Hong-sun and her husband Julio Kim Man-bok and talked with them, I asked them to lead a normal life of faith ay Mass at the parish, to receive the Sacrament of Penance and Holy Communion (Cf. Can. 920,989), and to donate the denarius cultus to the parish] and I presented directives (to submit records of fund raising and of all gifts and goods received).

25.

 

 

They, however, have ignored these requests and directives. Moreover, they have not acceded to the final warning of the archdiocese in February 2005. Instead they have continuously claimed that ‘Julia Youn in Naju and all related phenomena’ are a ‘private revelation’ or ‘miracles’. They have also raised money for the construction of an alleged ‘temple’. They have pretended to be recognized by the Roman Pontiff or the Apostolic See. Through printed materials and online media (such as public relations brochures, publications, newspaper articles, the internet, and so on), they have libeled the Archbishop of Kwangju, and the Korean bishops, and even the entire Catholic Church in Korea.
Therefore, I am led to the final conclusion that their actions and attitude are not in accord with Catholic practice and thought and that they are not promoting a sound devotion and cult.
Thus, I declare that the clergy, religious, or laity who preside over or attend the celebration of the sacraments or sacramentals, against my prohibition, at any alleged ‘oratory’ or the ‘hill of Our Lady in Naju’ incur a latae sententiae excommunication
(Cf. Can. 1336, 1364). In doing so they are disobeying the pastoral directives and judgement of the Ordinary and they are thereby breaching Canon Law (Cf. Can. 1369, 1371, 1373) and destroying ecclesiastical unity and communion. This decree binds all the clergy, religious, and laity in the Archdiocese of Kwangju as well as all the faithful in the Catholic Church.


Second, I confirm that Fr. Aloysius Chang Hong-bin, a priest of the Archdiocese of Kwangju, no longer has the intention to be in unity and harmony with the archdiocesan presbyterium, because he claims that ‘Julia Youn in Naju and all related phenomena’ are a ‘private revelation’ and ‘miracles’ and that following them is a matter of choice that the faithful make in accord with their ‘conscience’. Also on several occasions he has not observed the solemn promise of obedience to his Ordinary that he made at ordination. He has not changed and defended his opinion regarding ‘Julia Youn in Naju and all related phenomena’ in two meetings with the Archdiocesan College of Consultors (on June 1, 2007 and on January 15, 2008). Thus, he has shown himself as ‘one of those who believe in Julia Youn in Naju and all related phenomena’ rather than a diocesan priest who observes the obligation of obedience to his Ordinary (Cf. Can. 273,278).
Therefore, Aloysius Chang Hong-bin no longer possesses the title and rights of a priest of the Archdiocese of Kwangju, and all ‘common faculties attaching to diocesan priests in Korea’ previously bestowed by sacred ordination are revoked (Cf. Can. 194, 1333, 1336, 1371).


I pray to God that, through His infinite mercy and grace, Julia Youn in Naju and her followers may recognize their errors as quickly as possible and through the Sacrament of Reconciliation return to the Catholic Church, the only place where they can participate in a true divine cult with the blessings of harmony and unity. May Mary in her Immaculate Conception, as the Mother of our Redeemer and our Mother also, and Saint Joseph, the Patrons of the Church in Korea, and all the Korean Saint martyrs, pray for us.

January 21, 2008

On the Feast of St. Agnes, Virgin & Martyr

Archbishop Andreas Chang-mou CH

Archdiocese of Kwangju

Le décret d’excommunication de la voyante de Naju

http://forumarchedemarie.forumperso.com/t2767-le-decret-d-excommunication-de-la-voyante-de-naju

par admin2 le Sam 7 Aoû 2010 – 3:55 [as above]

 

6. Decree by the Ordinary of the Catholic Archdiocese of Kwangju

http://www.marys-touch.com/truth/update20080124.htm
[Note: This is a pro-Julia Kim page]

UPDATE
January 24, 2008

Archbishop Andrew Chang-Moo Choi of the Kwangju Archdiocese in Korea issued the following document on January 21, 2008, which contains extremely serious contents.

 

I, Archbishop Andrew Chang-Moo Choi, carrying out the duty of the Ordinary of the Catholic Archdiocese of Kwangju by virtue of the mercy and grace from God and the generous consideration and order of the Holy Father, the successor of the Apostle Peter, though it pains my heart, have no choice but to make the following pronouncement to defend the sound faith life of the Christians and the unity and fellowship in the Church community (cf. Canon #391).

First, I have reached the judgment that ‘Julia Yoon of Naju and those who believe in the phenomena associated with her do not have the intention to form unity and harmony with the Catholic Church any longer. They continue refusing to follow the Ordinary’s declarations (January 1, 1998 and May 5, 2005) and pastoral directives (May 5, 2001) and only raise objections to them. They have not followed my request and command which I made during my personal visits to the home of Julia Hong-Sun Yoon and her husband, Man-Bok Kim, together with several witnesses (March to August 2003), that they resume their ordinary faith life (such as attending Sunday Masses, going to Confession before major feast days like Christmas and Easter, and making offerings to the parish church) and present their financial records on all the funds received. They have not responded to my ultimatum in February 2005, either. They continue promoting ‘the phenomena associated with Julia Yoon of Naju’ as ‘private revelations’ or ‘miracles’, predicting the construction of the so-called ‘basilica’ to raise money, spreading the misleading information that the Holy Father and the Holy See recognize (Naju), and criticizing me, the College of Korean Bishops, and the Korean Church through printed matter and electronic media. (cf. their promotional pamphlets, books, newspapers, and Internet sites).

26.

 

 

I make my final confirmation that such deeds of theirs are by no means the correct and balanced attitude of the faithful; nor are they the acts of sound devotions or ceremonies of worshipping God. Accordingly, I declare that the clergy, religious and lay people who hold or participate in the administration of the Sacraments or the celebrations of the Sacramentals, which I have prohibited, at the unauthorized ‘chapel’ or ‘the Blessed Mother’s Mountain’ incur the penalty of automatic excommunication (cf. Canon #1336 and 1364). As these are acts of disobedience against the Ordinary’s pastoral directives and judgments, violations of the Canon Law (cf. Canon #1369, 1371, and 1373), and refusals to form unity as well as inflictions of damage to the fellowship in the Church community, this (penalty) applies not only to the faithful who belong to the Kwangju Archdiocese but also to any of the clergy, religious, and lay people in the Catholic Church.

Second, I have confirmed that Fr. Aloysius Hong-Bin Chang of my diocese, who asserts that ‘the phenomena associated with Julia Yoon of Naju’ are ‘private revelations’ and ‘miracles’, obstinately argues that (his decision) has been ‘a choice based on his conscience’, and repeatedly reverses (his words) and violates his duty of obedience to the Ordinary, which he vowed at his ordination, depending on the circumstances, has no intention to form unity and harmony with the body of priests in the Kwangju Archdiocese any longer. In both of the personnel committee meetings (June 1, 2007 and January 15, 2008), he did not concede his assertions but was intent only on defending his own position, which revealed that he is ‘one of the believers of the phenomena associated with Julia Yoon of Naju’ rather than a priest of the diocese who is faithful to the duty of obedience that he vowed to the Ordinary (cf. Canon #273 and 278).

Accordingly, Fr. Aloysius Hong-Bin Chang no longer retains the status and rights of a priest who belongs to the Kwangju Archdiocese and all of the special faculties for diocesan priests, which are uniform nationwide, bestowed on him at his ordination are withdrawn (cf. Canon #194, 1333, 1336, and 1371).

I pray to God that, through His infinite mercy and grace, these people will realize their past mistakes, return to the Catholic Church, receive the blessings of harmony and unity through the Sacrament of Reconciliation, and participate in the correct ceremonies of worshipping God as soon as possible. Holy Mary, Mother of the Savior and our Mother, Patroness of the Church in Korea and conceived without original sin; St. Joseph; and all the martyred Saints of Korea, pray for us.

January 21, 2008
Feast of St. Agnes, virgin and martyr

Signed by Most Rev. Chang Moo Choi
Archbishop Andrew Chang-Moo Choi
Ordinary of the Catholic Archdiocese of Kwangju

 

[Following, is the response to Archbishop Andrew Chang-Moo Choi of Kwangju from Julia Kim‘s supporters]

A Comment

On December 8, 2007, just a few days after the Korean Bishops returned from their ad limina visit to the Holy See, Archbishop Andrew Chang-Moo Choi of Kwangju told several priests and Sisters during lunch about the trip.  Fr. Aloysius Hong-Bin Chang was one of the priests at the lunch, as he had been obligated to stay in the Kwangju Archdiocesan building as a punishment for his support of Naju.  The following is what Archbishop Choi revealed:

During his visit to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the Holy See, a Bishop and several priests in that Congregation asked Archbishop Choi why he was not approving Naju and urged him to do so.  On the last day of the ad limina visit, December 3, all of the Bishops from Korea (more than 20) attended a meeting with Cardinal Ivan Dias, Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.  The Cardinal came with a large pile of document, which he said was information about Naju, and asked Archbishop Choi why he was not accepting Naju.  Archbishop Choi answered that there still was something he was not sure of.  The Cardinal asked what it was.  Archbishop Choi said that he could not understand how the Eucharist could fall from the sky.  The Cardinal answered that there had been a number of miraculous Communions in the past.  Archbishop Choi also told the priests and Sisters that he was “kicked” by the Holy See because of Naju.  From a different source, we have heard that Cardinal Dias became quite upset by the inappropriate and irresponsible answers and excuses by Archbishop Choi.  We have also learned that the Korean Bishops’ dinner meeting with the Holy Father did not take place this time, which is very unusual as the dinner with the Pope normally is an important part of the ad limina visit.  It is widely perceived that the Holy Father is deeply concerned about the unresolved situation regarding Naju and the modernist errors affecting many priests in Korea (and elsewhere).

From the above information, we can see that the Holy See made it very clear to the Korean Bishops that the Holy Father and other prelates in the Vatican are not happy with the work of the Kwangju Archdiocese on Naju so far and want a change.

When Archbishop Choi was revealing the above information to the priests and Sisters of his diocese, it seemed possible that he was in a conciliatory mood, willing to make some changes to comply with the Holy See’s advice.  Archbishop Choi even said to other priests, “The priests in our diocese are in need of repentance.  Fr. (Aloysius) Chang here even gave up golf and prays a lot.  I wish the priests in our diocese would imitate him.”  Fr. Chang later testified that, when he heard this from the Archbishop, he thought it was a signal of a positive change coming to Archbishop Choi’s thinking and policy. 

Things are not turning out that way, however.  Obviously, Archbishop Choi was soon swayed by the powerful liberal priests surrounding him.  The Archbishop’s attitude hardened again.  During a personnel committee meeting on January 15, 2008, Archbishop Choi asked Fr. Aloysius Chang.  “Do you still believe in the authenticity of Naju?”  Fr. Chang said, “Yes, I do.”  Archbishop Choi said, “But I don’t and other priests don’t.  You are being disobedient.  Why don’t you leave the Archdiocese at your own will?”  Fr. Chang said, “Before, you said that I was free to believe in Naju.  Now you say that I am disobedient because of my belief.  I have no intention of leaving the diocese.”  After the meeting, Fr. Chang wrote a long letter to Archbishop Choi entreating and urging him again to change his unreasonable policy toward Naju and delivered it to the Archbishop on January 19.  Then, on January 21, Archbishop Choi gave a document to Fr. Chang.  Instead of being a favorable answer, it was the above formal decree with extremely serious contents that seemed to signal that the Kwangju Archdiocese is abandoning even its appearance of unity with and obedience to the Holy See.  The inner defiance and disobedience in the minds of many of the liberal clergy in Korea had long been suspected.

 

In his decree shown above, Archbishop Andrew Choi apparently went against the advice of the Holy See to change its reckless course concerning Naju by declaring that all the priests, religious and laity who participate in the religious activities in Naju are automatically excommunicated and that this applies not only to those who are in the Kwangju Archdiocese but also to anyone in the Catholic Church.  By stating that the penalty of automatic excommunication is applied to anyone in the Catholic Church, Archbishop Choi is gravely exceeding his legal authority as a diocesan bishop and is invading the area of jurisdiction that belongs to the Pope. 

Then, in the morning of January 24, 2008, the contents of Archbishop Choi’s decree appeared in most of the major daily secular newspapers in Korea.  The hands of the Kwangju Archdiocese are suspected in this nationwide campaign to spread the negative information about Naju.  As a result of this campaign, Archbishop Choi’s condemnation of Naju is now a widely-accepted common knowledge in Korea.  The public opinion in Korea had already been turning strongly against Naju because of the recent video produced by MBC TV in Seoul, which was filled with false accusations and distorted facts as infused into its reporters by the priests of the Kwangju Archdiocese.  The liberal clergy in Korea must be feeling exuberant about their enormously powerful influence in Korea.  They completely dominate Korea concerning the Naju question and other important religious issues like the loyalty to the Holy See, Eucharistic and Marian devotions, and many more, as they can manipulate the minds of the Korean people in whatever ways they like.  They must be laughing with satisfaction and arrogance, especially because, in their opinion, there does not seem to be anything that the Holy See can do to change the situation in Korea.    

Of course, details of the recent development in Korea are being reported to the Holy See, and it seems possible that the Holy See will intervene more forcefully than ever this time.  It has already seen enough of the abuses of power and deviations from the orthodox faith and morals by the liberal clergy and their followers in Korea.  And now it clearly sees their brazen display of defiance against the supreme authority of the Holy See and against the orthodox Catholic Faith.  This simply cannot be tolerated. 

While praying and waiting for the Holy See’s action, this seems to be a good time for all of us to do some reflection and adjustment.  One of the main reasons why errors are so rampant in this world is that we are not firm enough about learning, defending, and spreading the truths; and one of the main reasons why there are many misuses of authority is that we are often too lenient to such misuses as though the entrusted authority is something absolute, which stands above God’s Will and His teachings and commandments instead of being a servant (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church #86).  Authority is a sacred instrument entrusted by God to defend His truths and justice and to promote the well-being of His people.  When those in power distort God’s teachings and gloss over His moral commandments, we must protest forcefully not as people of authority but as witnesses of what has only been entrusted to us by God and still belongs to Him.  The current problem in Naju is not a problem exclusively of Korea.  Negligence in preserving the truths and observing the moral commandments is a worldwide problem and is the fundamental cause of all of the human disasters.  It provides an ample and ideal playground for the devils to wreak havoc in the lives of human individuals and their societies.  Now, we must become more serious and humble before the true teachings of the Catholic Church as children of God and students of His truths; we must become more diligent and correct about observing the Commandments from God; we must take more seriously the supernatural signs and messages when God gives them to us for our own benefit instead of despising and neglecting them; and we must become more zealous in spreading God’s Kingdom so that His truths, justice, and charity may prevail on earth and bring us true peace and prosperity.  In doing all these, the examples we look to should be the Saints of the Catholic Church rather than the successful achievers of worldly fame, power, and wealth.  If we can draw a valuable lesson from the ongoing disaster in Korea, it may turn out to be a blessing after all. —    Benedict Sang M. Lee

P.S.:  The following statement in Archbishop Choi’s Decree above is not true and is a false accusation: Julia and her supporters are predicting the construction of the so-called ‘basilica’ to raise money.  Also, the reason for Julia’s being unable to go to the Mass at Naju parish church is the pastor’s requirement that she declare that all the messages and miracles were fabricated before she can come back to the parish church, which, however, for Julia would be a betrayal of the Lord and the Blessed Mother as well as of her own conscience.  Archbishop Choi has been made aware of this, but he still accuses Julia for not coming back to the church. 

 

7. Admonition on the Matters Related to Julia Youn of Naju

http://english.cbck.or.kr/news/1951

August 27, 2009

The Archdiocese of Kwangju issued a letter of admonition, entitled ‘The Position of the Archdiocese of Kwangju in Relation to the Matter of Julia Youn of Naju and Its Related Phenomena II’ on February 24, 2009.

This is the sequel of the ‘The Position of the Archdiocese of Kwangju in Relation to the Matter of Julia Youn of Naju and Its Related Phenomena’, issued on November 19, 2007. With this letter, the Archdiocese of Kwangju made it clear that it reaffirmed its existing position, manifested in ‘The Position of the Archdiocese of Kwangju in Relation to the Matter of Julia Youn of Naju and Its Related Phenomena’ as of November 19, 2007.

This time, the Archdiocese maintained that the CBCK supported the position of the Archdiocese of Kwangju at its Spring General Assembly, held from February 25 to 28, 2008, deciding “to publish the Decree of the Archdiocese of Kwangju (January 21, 2008) properly in each diocese, so that the faithful can clearly understand this matter.” It also revealed that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith had affirmed, with a letter to the Archdiocese of Kwangju as of April 24, 2008 (Prot. No. 112/1993-27066), that the decision of the Most Rev. Victorinus Youn Kong-hi, Archbishop emeritus of Kwangju, was the official position of the Church, which was manifested in his declaration, entitled “Declaration Concerning ‘the Phenomena and Messages which Happened to Julia Youn of Naju and Her Statue of the Blessed Mother'” as of January 1, 1998. In this declaration, Archbishop Youn declared, “Various strange phenomena which happened to Mrs. Julia Youn …… produce no evidence which prove that they are truly supernatural [non constat de supernaturalitate] …”

28.

 

In conclusion, the Archdiocese of Kwangju strongly urged the faithful not to follow the members of the group, who try to do damage to the relationships between the Apostolic See and the CBCK, as well as the Archdiocese of Kwangju. The Archdiocese also admonished those who promoted the so-called ‘Julia Youn and the related phenomena’, to stop disturbing the proper faith of the faithful and agitating for their false hope.

 

8. Notification on the Matter of Julia Youn of Naju
http://english.cbck.or.kr/index.php?mid=news&page=5&document_srl=3699

May 23, 2011Notification on the Matter of Julia Youn of Naju

The Most Rev. Hyginus Kim Hee-joong, Archbishop of Kwangju, issued a notification on the matter of Julia Youn of Naju on May 1, 2011, the second Sunday of Easter and Divine Mercy Sunday.

In his notification, Archbishop Kim said, “Some people have tried to cause confusion among the faithful and even deceive them asserting that the Holy See would support their causes and soon approve their position.

However, I would like to make it clear that the Holy See has never changed its position as it was manifested in the letter of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith as of April 28, 2008.”

The Archdiocese of Kwangju has issued many notifications and decree on the matter of Julia Youn of Naju and admonished Julia Youn and her followers to obey the ecclesiastical authority and the teachings of the Church. However, they are stubbornly showing their disobedience to the admonition of the Church.

The said notification was prepared with the prior consultation and confirmation of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith.

 

THE NAJUITES REJECT THEIR ARCHBISHOP [AND THUS TOO THE CHURCH] AND “DEFEND” THE “MIRACLES” [This a lengthy “defense” that is concluded on page 49 of the present report]:

DOCTRINAL ERRORS IN THE KWANGJU ARCHBISHOP’S DECLARATION IN LIGHT OF SOME PRECEDENTS IN CHURCH HISTORY

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/20050311.htm
[All emphases theirs]

Precedents are useful in secular courts as they can help in maintaining consistency in the interpretation and application of the laws. Likewise, they can throw much light on the discernment of the reported cases of special revelations (sometimes called “private revelations”) in the Church. Probably precedents are particularly important in the Church, as consistency that transcends the vagaries of the times and the differences in local traditions is a vital hallmark of the Catholic teachings. (Cf. Can. 19 CIC 1983; A legal aphorism: De similibus idem est iudicium, there is a same judgement about similar things.)

If a custom or an express prescript of universal or particular law is lacking in a certain matter, a case, unless it is penal, must be resolved in light of laws issued in similar matters, general principles of law applied with canonical equity, the jurisprudence and practice of the Roman Curia, and the common and constant opinion of learned persons. (Can. 19 CIC)

A legal aphorism: De similibus idem est iudicium, there is a same judgement about similar things.

Many of the faithful including some clergy have already found and explained some obvious and serious doctrinal errors contained in the Declaration on Naju issued by the Kwangju Archdiocese in Korea on January 1, 1998. The purpose of this write-up is to briefly review this Declaration in light of some precedents involving the cases similar to those in Naju.


1. The Declaration says: “The content that owing to Mrs. Julia Youn, the Father seems to delay the time of the end of the world (according to the message on June 16, 1995), which is already decided and thus only the Father knows obviously conflicts with the teachings of the orthodox Catholic Faith.”

From the context of the message received by Julia, it is clear that the time mentioned in this message is the time of chastisement and not the time of the end of the world. In Church history, we find many examples of a threatened chastisement being delayed or removed thanks to the reparations offered up by people:

—God the Father said to St. Catherine of Siena: “I am delaying the chastisement of the world because of you.”  (The Dialog of St. Catherine of Siena)

—Jesus said to St. Faustina: “I bestow many graces only because of you. I also withhold My punishments only because of you. You restrain Me, and I cannot vindicate the claims of My justice. You bind My hands with your love.”  (The Diary of St. Faustina)
“If you did not tie my hands, I would send down many punishments upon the earth. My daughter, your look disarms My anger.”  (
The Diary of St. Faustina)

—In the Old Testament, God said to Abraham that He would not destroy Sodom and Gomorrah if He could find even ten just men there.

—In the book of Jonah, God said through Jonah that He would punish the Nineveh people. But He removed the planned punishment because they repented.

Considering the above precedents, we do not see any conflict between the message that Julia received and the Church teachings.


2. The Declaration also says: “The phenomenon alleged as a miracle of the Eucharist fallen from heaven is contradictory to the doctrine of the Catholic Church that says that only through the legitimately ordained priest’s consecration does the sacrament of the Eucharist begin to exist and even though the priest is in grave sin, because when all the sacraments are justly celebrated in accordance with the intention of the Church, Christ and His Holy Spirit operate in them.

 

“Only validly ordained priests can preside at the Eucharist and consecrate the bread and the wine so that they become the Body and Blood of the Lord.”  (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1411)

The declaration misinterprets the catechism which stipulates who is eligible to consecrate the Eucharist, “ordained priests can preside at the Eucharist and consecrate the bread and the wine” and changes the meaning to focus on the constitutive requisite for the consecration of the Eucharist, “only by the priest’s consecration can the Eucharist come to be.

According to the declaration, the events/phenomena whereby many saints received the Holy Eucharist from the Lord and angels, is against the teachings of the Church. (For instance, it would be against church teaching for an angel to distribute Holy Communion to the three Fatima children.)

When judging matters regarding the faith, church authority is bound to present exactly the Church teachings as they are without any change in point of fact. This principle must also be applied to the Archbishop of Kwangju who changes the expression of the authentic teaching of the Church in order to condemn and reject the Eucharistic miracles that happened in Naju.

The following are similar examples of the Eucharist received in extraordinary ways:

—St. Clement, Bishop of Ancyra (4th Century), received Communion from Our Lord, while in prison awaiting martyrdom.

—St. Bonaventure (d. 1274) received Communion from an angel.

—St. Catherine of Siena (d. 1380) received Communion from Our Lord and also from angels.

—St. Columba of Rieti (d. 1501) received a fragment of the Eucharist that an angel brought to her spiritual director.

—St. Pascal Baylon (d. 1592) received Communion from an angel many times.

—St. Mary Magdalen de Pazzi (d. 1607) also received Communion from the Lord.

—St. Laurence of Brindisi (d. 1619) and his Capuchin brethren received Communion from the Lord.

—In Fatima, an angel brought a chalice and a Sacred Host to the three children (1917).

—A Seraph gave Holy Communion to St. Faustina on many occasions.

The Declaration also implies indirectly that the message concerning St. Michael the Archangel taking the Eucharist from a priest who was in sin is in conflict with the Church teaching. However, according to the message, the Eucharist was taken from the priest after the consecration, and, therefore, valid consecration was never denied. Archbishop Giovanni Bulaitis, the Apostolic Nuncio, who witnessed the miracle, testified that when the two halves of the Sacred Host were put together, a small corner of one of the halves was missing, indicating that the Eucharist was taken from the priest just before he was about to consume It. We also see the following precedents in Church history:

—We read in the book: City of God written by Venerable Mary of Agreda about her vision of the Last Supper where an angel appeared and took the Eucharist away from the mouth of Judas Iscariot, who was in sin.

—During the life of St. John of the Cross, when a man in mortal sin received Communion and was dying, an angel came and took the Eucharist from his mouth and brought It to the Saint’s room.

—“One day Jesus said to me, “I am going to leave this house… because there are things here which displease Me.” And the Host came out of the tabernacle and came to rest in my hands and I, with joy, placed it back in the tabernacle. This was repeated a second time, and I did the same thing. Despite this, it happened a third time, but the Host was transformed into the living Lord Jesus, who said to me, “I will stay here no longer!” At this a powerful love for Jesus rose up in my soul. I answered, “And I, I will not let You leave this house, Jesus!” And again Jesus disappeared while the Host remained in my hands. Once again I put it back in the chalice and closed it up in the tabernacle. And Jesus stayed with us. I undertook to make three days of adoration by way of reparation.” (The Diary of St. Faustina)

3. The Declaration also says: “The alleged phenomenon, that as soon as Mrs. Julia Youn received the Eucharist, it was changed into a lump of bloody flesh in her mouth is also contrary to the doctrine of the Catholic Church that says that even after the bread and wine are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ with the formula of priests’ consecration, the species of bread and wine remain.

In the original text of the Declaration in Korean, the last part of the above statement is made stronger by inserting the word: “must” before the verb: “remain“; thus: “the species of bread and wine must remain“. The official doctrine of the Church only teaches that the priest’s consecration effects changes in the substances of bread and wine into the flesh and blood of Our Lord without any concomitant changes in the species. It is clear that this teaching is about the effects of the priest’s consecration and is not intended to be applied to the cases of miraculous changes in the species through a special intervention by God. This distortion of the Church teaching by the Kwangju Declaration is a grave perpetration of the divine sanctity of the Church teaching on the Blessed Sacrament and also completely blocks the possibility of any Eucharistic miracles. It makes the numerous Eucharistic miracles that the Church already approved—in Lanciano, Bolsena-Orvieto, Siena, Ferrara, Santarem, Amsterdam, and elsewhere inconsistent with Church teachings. Is it possible that the Kwangju Archdiocese has the authority to alter the Church teachings and to override the past decisions of the Church?

We have a full trust in the Lord’s guarantee that the purity of His doctrines will always be preserved in His universal Church especially through the charism of infallibility given to the Holy Father and the Ecumenical Councils in union with the Holy Father when they make formal pronouncements concerning faith and morals. This guarantee, however, does not extend to individual bishops, priests, and laity when they are not in union with the Magisterium of the Church. Actually, errors in teachings and aberrations in the Liturgy have occurred many times in Church history at the local and individual levels, causing grave harms to the faithful. First of all, we need to pray hard for those who err and also arm ourselves by diligently learning and meditating on the authentic teachings of the Church and the examples of the Saints and by remaining in union with the shepherds and fellow lay people who are faithful to the authentic Teachings and Traditions of the Church.

30.

 

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/truth/truth.htm, http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/truth/review.htm:

Archbishop of Kwangju Archdiocese covering Naju made it official on January 1, 1998, that the events in Naju contradicted the Church doctrines and, therefore, could not be recognized as true revelations from God.

Serious questions remain, however, because it has become clear that the Naju Investigating Committee in the Kwangju Archdiocese did not conduct any substantive investigation and based its negative recommendation on an incorrect presentation of the Church teaching.

The Kwangju Declaration states that the species of bread and wine must remain unchanged even after the consecration of bread and wine by priests and, therefore, that the Eucharistic miracles in Naju do not conform to the Church doctrine.

By distorting the authentic Church teaching, this assertion precludes the possibility of divine intervention to reveal the true reality of the Blessed Sacrament, which is the substantial presence of the Lord’s Body and Blood together with His Soul and Divinity in the Eucharist and, therefore, in effect rejects all of the Eucharistic miracles in Church history.

If all the Eucharistic miracles are rejected, people’s faith in the Church teaching on the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist will also weaken.

Thus, the Kwangju Declaration on Naju contains an encroachment on the Church teaching on the Eucharist itself.

 

A Review of Archbishop Youn’s Declaration

His Excellency Victorinus Kong-Hee Youn of the Archdiocese of Kwangju (=Gwangju) in Korea made it official as of January 1, 1998, that his position on “the events arising in Naju” is negative. His grounds for this position were that (1) the messages “lacked genuineness and credibility,” (2) “the phenomena alleged to be Eucharistic miracles were contradictory to the doctrine of the Catholic Church,” and (3) “various strange phenomena arising from the statue of the Blessed Mother and Julia’s body produced no evidence that could prove that they were truly supernatural and thus from God.” Based on this judgment, the Archbishop issued pastoral instructions that prohibited public services and promotional materials regarding Naju in his Archdiocese.

As in all cases of the successors of Christ’s Apostles exercising their teaching authority, we read Archbishop Youn’s Declaration with filial love and respect. We also understand that his pastoral directives are being faithfully implemented in his Archdiocese.

At the same time, we could not help noticing some interpretations and applications of the Church teachings contained in the Declaration that seem to be incorrect. The Church says that her teaching authority is to be obeyed by the Christian faithful (Code of Canon Law, #212, Section 1), but also that this authority is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #86). In other words, the proper function of the teaching authority in the Church in discerning matters concerning faith and morals is not to confer truthfulness or falsehood on them but to find out whether they truly originate from God or not. For this reason, the authority in the Church must be exercised in the spirit of humility and faithfulness to the Will of Christ, Who entrusted His authority to His Apostles and their successors so that His Truth may be transmitted without distortion throughout Church history. Christ protects His Church by preserving the Holy Father and the bishops of the world in union with the Holy Father from errors, when they pronounce official teachings. This also means that individual bishops must make constant efforts to remain in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #85) and with other bishops who are in union with the Bishop of Rome in order to avoid deviating from the true spirit of Christ. The faithful have the obligation to be obedient to their bishops, but, at the same time, expect from them spiritual nourishment that is free from errors. For this reason, the Church states that the faithful have the right and, sometimes even a duty, to make known to their sacred pastors and fellow Christians their spiritual needs and opinions for the good of the Church (Code of Canon Law, #212, Sections 2 and 3).

It is in the spirit of respect and obedience to the teaching authority in the Church, desire to be faithful to the Truth, and concern for the good of the Church that this review is written. The following are the major areas of our concern regarding the Statement.
 

MISREPRESENTATION OF THE CHURCH DOCTRINE ON THE EUCHARIST (1)

It is indicated in the Statement that “the phenomenon of the Eucharist changing into a lump of bloody flesh in Julia’s mouth is in conflict with the doctrine of the Church that says that even after the bread and wine are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ with the formula of priests’ consecration, the species of bread and wine remain.(The underline is added.) In the original Korean text of the Statement, the underlined portion is presented as the species of bread and wine should remain. The English text does not have the word “should,” but implies the same by the context in the Declaration. This addition of “should,” which is not part of the Church doctrine, seems to have been intended to deny the possibility of Eucharistic miracles. It is a grave matter to insert a meaning that is not contained in the words of the doctrine and, thereby, alter the original meaning of the doctrine.

The true meaning of this doctrine is that, at the moment of consecration by a priest, the substance of bread and wine changes into the substance of Christ’s Body and Blood, but the accidents or appearances of bread and wine remain unchanged.. This doctrine explains the effects of the consecration by a priest and does not explain what is to happen after the consecration. It certainly does not say or imply anything about the possibility of Eucharistic miracles performed by God Himself after the consecration by a priest and, therefore, must not be used to preclude that possibility. Also, if we deny the possibility of miracles, we are also denying that God is all-powerful, which is another Church doctrine. The Declaration, therefore, seems to be in conflict with two Church doctrines, one regarding the Holy Eucharist and another regarding God’s omnipotence. Also, if the doctrine really means that the external appearances of bread and wine must not change after the consecration, then, what about the change of the Sacred Host in our body after Communion? Can the change of the Sacred Host in our body also be in conflict with the Church doctrine?

 

 

In order to help the faithful accept the inner reality of the Eucharist, God has allowed Eucharistic miracles many times throughout Church history. Many of them have already been officially recognized by the Church: the miracles in Lanciano, Italy (the 8th Century), Santarem, Portugal (early 13th Century), Bolsena-Orvieto, Italy (1263), Paris, France (1274 and 1290), Siena, Italy (1330 and 1730), Morrovalle, Italy (1560), Bordeaux, France (1822), and many more. If what is mentioned in the Declaration were correct, all of these Church approvals would have been contradictory to the Church doctrine. All the actions taken by the Popes such as granting indulgences to pilgrims to the sites of Eucharistic miracles and making visits to such places themselves would have been mistakes also.
 

MISREPRESENTATION OF THE CHURCH DOCTRINE ON THE EUCHARIST (2)

It is also mentioned in the Declaration that “the phenomenon alleged as a miracle of the Eucharist fallen from heaven is contradictory to the doctrine of the Church that says that only through the legitimately ordained priest’s consecration does the sacrament of the Eucharist begin to exist.”

Against the Waldensians, who rejected the hierarchy and claimed equal powers for all the faithful, the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) declared, “Surely no one can accomplish this sacrament except a priest who has been rightly ordained according to the keys of the Church which Jesus Christ Himself conceded to the Apostles and to their successors.” (DS 802) Against the Reformers’ teaching of the general lay-priesthood, the Council of Trent defined the institution of a special priesthood, to which the power of consecration is reserved solely. What this doctrine means is that people who are not validly-ordained priests cannot and ought not consecrate this Sacrament (DS 794). It certainly does not imply preclusion of direct intervention by God Himself. The Eucharist is not a lifeless object but the living Christ Himself, Who is in Heaven with His full Humanity and Divinity. We have no right to limit what God wills to do and can do. Jesus in Heaven is identical to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament except the external appearances. It is not necessary for Jesus in Heaven to undergo any substantial change to directly come to us in the form of the Eucharist. Transubstantiation of bread and wine into Christ’s’ Body and Blood, on the other hand, requires consecration by a priest.

On two occasions (July 1, 1995 and July 1, 1996), Julia saw the image of Jesus on the Crucifix in the Chapel in Naju turn into the live Jesus, Who was bleeding from His Seven Wounds (two hands, two feet, head, side and Heart). Soon, Julia saw the Precious Blood changing into white Hosts and coming down. On July 1, 1995, seven Sacred Hosts landed on the altar in front the Blessed Mother’s statue and, on July 1, 1996, the Hosts entered Julia’s mouth. One of the seven Hosts that was received by Julia on July 2, 1995 turned into visible Flesh and Blood in her mouth, confirming that these Hosts were truly the Body and Blood of Christ. It is noteworthy that, sometimes, the Sacred Host turned into visible Flesh and Blood in Julia’s mouth and, some other times, the Precious Blood turned into white Sacred Hosts. In both cases, the changes that occurred were changes in the external appearances only, even though the directions of the changes were opposite — sometimes from the Sacred Hosts to visible Flesh and Blood and other times from the Precious Blood to the Sacred Hosts. By miraculously changing the external appearance of Himself, Christ is reminding us that He and the Eucharist are identical in substance despite the different external appearances.

Sometimes, the Eucharist was also brought by an angel from a church as in Fatima. According to Archbishop Giovanni Bulaitis, who visited Naju as the Apostolic Pro-Nuncio in Korea and personally witnessed two Eucharistic miracles on November 24, 1994, the Sacred Host in Julia’s hands was already broken into two parts and one part had a corner part missing. Archbishop Bulaitis says that this corresponds to the breaking of the Host and placing of the fragment into the Chalice in the Mass before Communion, which seems to indicate that the Host was brought from a church. Julia received a message from the Blessed Mother that the Sacred Host was indeed brought by St. Michael the Archangel from a priest.
 

INCORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF THE MESSAGES IN NAJU (1)

In connection with the subject discussed above, the Declaration also states that the Sacrament is validly celebrated, even when the celebrating priest is in grave sins according to the Church doctrine. This is a correct understanding of the Church teaching, but is not properly applied to what happened in Naju on November 24, 1994, when the Apostolic Pro-Nuncio experienced Eucharistic miracles. The Declaration asserted that “the events in Naju,” referring to what happened on that day, contradicted this doctrine. However, St. Michael the Archangel brought the Sacred Host after consecration by a priest and, therefore, valid consecration of the Host was never questioned.
 

INCORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF THE MESSAGES IN NAJU (2)

The Declaration also indicates that the part of the messages in Naju (July 16, 1995) “that seems to delay the final time” by the Father is in conflict with the Church teaching which says that the final time is already set and is known to the Father only.

According to Julia’s writing, she was in severe suffering, almost dying, on that day. She attended Mass in Fr. Raymond Spies’ chapel lying on a sofa. During the Mass, her soul was taken to Purgatory. Jesus asked Julia if she was willing to walk through the fire in Purgatory, as she had repeatedly tried to lay down her cross despite her promise to live a life of reparation. Julia said, “Yes,” and walked through the fire, which she said was indescribably hot and painful. Then, Julia was taken to Heaven and stood before God the Father, Who asked Julia if she wanted to see an immediate chastisement of the world because it was so filled with sins. Julia was frightened and begged God the Father not to punish the world, promising to work harder to spread the messages and offer up reparations. Julia’s soul was sent back to the world, and she woke up from the ecstasy.

32.

 

 

It is clear from Julia’s description that God the Father was only reminding her of the seriousness and urgency of the situation in the world and was encouraging her to continue working hard. It is a distortion of facts to say that God the Father was postponing the final time for the world which had already been set.

It was not mentioned in the Declaration, but the messages in Naju have been criticized by some of the committee members for frightening people with predictions of an impending end of the world. The term “end of the world” was not mentioned or implied in the messages in Naju. If one focuses attention on when and how the world will end or when and how the chastisement will come and on how to prepare for it, he is missing the true essence of the messages, which is repentance of our sins and sanctification of our lives. Of course, the messages in Naju warn us of God’s punishment, if we persist in sins and rejection of the Faith, but this is a teaching in the Gospels also. The messages in Naju are full of hope, as they mention that “new buds will sprout even on the burnt ground,” “everything will become beautiful again,” and “the Second Pentecost will come.” They seem to coincide with Our Lady’s prediction in Fatima that a period of peace will be granted to the human race after the triumph of her Immaculate Heart. The messages in Naju does refer to the present age as “the end time,” but it is obvious from the above-quoted messages that this only means the end of an era before the opening of a new era.
 

INVOCATION OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE MAGISTERIUM IN THE STATEMENT IS INAPPROPRIATE

In Item 2.3 of the Declaration, the authority of “the Magisterium” was invoked in requesting obedience from “people around Julia.”
“The Magisterium” refers to the Holy Father and all bishops in union with the Holy Father who can exercise the charism of infallibility in official teachings on faith and morals. A bishop can participate in this infallibility by remaining in union with the Holy Father and other bishops in the Church. The full authority of the Magisterium, however, cannot be invoked by an individual bishop.
 

BISHOP DOES NOT HAVE TO “PROVE” THE SUPERNATURAL ORIGIN OF PRIVATE REVELATIONS

In Item 1.3 of the Declaration, it is said that the “various strange phenomena which happened to Julia and in her circumference produce no evidence which prove that they are truly supernatural and thus from God. Perhaps, they can be said to show some preternatural power.” This remark discounts the importance of all the signs in Naju. The fact of the matter, however, is that a bishop is not called to prove anything with regard to private revelations. An official recognition of a private revelation does not mean that the bishop is positively confirming actual occurrences of certain apparitions, messages, and miracles. It only means that the bishop recognizes (1) the absence of anything in the reported events that contradicts the teachings of the Church or any other evidences that indicate insanity, pride, frauds or diabolic involvement and (2) the likelihood of such events to produce positive fruits for the spiritual advancement of the faithful. This is why positive decisions on private revelations do not impose an obligation on the faithful to accept them as articles of faith. An official recognition of a private revelation still leaves room for individuals to deal with it as a personal matter between themselves and God. Private revelations do not bring us new truths, but function as catalysts for revitalizing our faith and invigorating our efforts to sanctify our lives and spread the Truth. The contents of the private revelations must not only conform to the official teachings in the Church but also reinforce them and expedite their implementation in the lives of the faithful. As such, private revelations are essential parts and signs of the unfolding of God’s Plan for Human Salvation. A good example of this is the conversion of almost ten million people in Mexico from idolatry to the Catholic Faith in the 16th Century, when the local bishop and the faithful accepted the miraculous image of Our Lady and her messages as true signs from God.
 

QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE SOUNDNESS OF THE INVESTIGATION

In the case of Betania, Venezuela, the local Bishop and his investigating committee interviewed thousands of people about their experiences. The Bishop was able to make his conclusion, when a Eucharistic miracle finally occurred. The Sacred Host on which some bleeding occurred is being preserved in a monstrance. The events in Betania were officially approved.

In the case of Naju, only fourteen people were interviewed. The committee members made just one brief visit to the Chapel in Naju. The test results from the medical laboratory at Seoul National University regarding samples of cloth that had absorbed tears of blood from the Blessed Mother’s statue were never considered. Neither were the doctors’ statements on Julia’s stigmata examined. The committee did not order any new scientific examinations, either.

Some of the Eucharistic miracles in connection with Naju and Julia were personally witnessed by Archbishop Giovanni Bulaitis, the Apostolic Pro-Nuncio in Korea (November 24, 1994), Bishop Roman Danylak (September 22, 1995), Bishop Dominic Su (September 17, 1996), Bishop Paul Kim (June 12, 1997), a monsignor from the Vatican (July 13, 1997) and Father Raymond Spies (August 27, 1997), but their opinions were not sought. Bishop Roman Danylak and Bishop Dominic Su already issued written statements acknowledging what they personally witnessed as “Eucharistic miracles.” Archbishop Giovanni Bulaitis has repeatedly spoken and written favorably on the revelations in Naju. Bishop Paul Kim has also been consistently positive about Naju. While the Blessed Mother was still shedding large amounts of tears of blood from her statue in Naju, Bishop Daniel Chi of the Wonju Diocese in Korea stayed several days in Naju and wrote his testimony before leaving: I clearly saw and firmly believe.

In September 1995, the Holy Father sent Msgr. Vincent Thu, his personal secretary, to Naju to comfort Julia. About a month later, on October 31, 1995, Julia visited the Vatican and attended Mass celebrated by the Holy Father in his private chapel. During Holy Communion, another Eucharistic miracle occurred through Julia which involved a change of the Sacred Host into visible Flesh and Blood of Our Lord.

 

 

The Holy Father saw this miracle and gave blessing to Julia. Later, the Holy Father reportedly said to several bishops that he had seen the Eucharistic miracle through Julia. He also said to the visiting Korean bishops in the spring of 1996 that he wanted the Koreans to share this wonderful grace with others in Asia.

In addition, there are many other bishops and priests around the world who accept the messages and signs in Naju as authentic revelations from God. The number of people who experienced healings of their souls and bodies may be hundreds of thousands. All these fruits were ignored by the Committee.

Also, Item 1.3 of the Declaration hints a possibility of “the various strange phenomena” in Naju such as tears, tears of blood, fragrant oil, stigmata, and Eucharistic miracles occurring by “some preternatural power.” When a question of such a grave nature remains unanswered, the investigation must continue until a satisfactory finding can be obtained. A conclusion based on a suspicion or unconfirmed accusation cannot be objective. Our Lord Himself was accused of performing miracles by the power of the devil (Matthew 12:24).
 

GOD SENDS US MIRACULOUS SIGNS TO STRENGTHEN OUR FAITH

There seems to be a tendency among many to discount the importance of miracles, even when they are genuine signs from God. Of course, our focus should always be on the correct understanding and faithful practicing of the eternal truths revealed through Christ. At the same time, we need to be open and alert to the continuing signs from God, because God uses them to strengthen our faith and stimulate our efforts to reform our lives. To be able to appreciate the value of the miraculous signs from God, we must make efforts to penetrate their fascinating external aspects and understand God’s messages contained in them. If they are genuine signs from God, the meanings contained in them will clearly and beautifully resonate with the eternal teachings that Our Lord entrusted to His Church for the sake of the whole human race. Saying that our faith is healthy, while rejecting the signs from God, may be a symptom of our pride and, ironically, lack of faith. The Church teaches us on the meaning of the miraculous signs:

In order that the “obedience” of our faith should be “consonant with reason,” God has willed that to the internal aids of the Holy Spirit there should be joined external proofs of His revelation, namely: divine facts, especially miracles and prophecies which, because they clearly show forth the omnipotence and infinite knowledge of God, are most certain signs of a divine revelation, and are suited to the intelligence of all. Wherefore, not only Moses and the prophets, but especially Christ the Lord Himself, produced many genuine miracles and prophecies; and we read concerning the apostles: “But they going forth preached everywhere: the Lord working withal and confirming the word with signs that followed” (Mark 16:30). (The Vatican Council, 1869-1870: DS 3009)

The Church also emphasizes the need for discernment of the special graces among her members as well as the need for keeping and protecting the genuine ones for the common good in the Church:

Charisms are to be accepted with gratitude by the person who receives them and by all members of the Church as well. They are a wonderfully rich grace for the apostolic vitality and for the holiness of the entire Body of Christ, provided they really are genuine gifts of the Holy Spirit and are used in full conformity with authentic promptings of this same Spirit, that is, in keeping with charity, the true measure of all charisms. It is in this sense that discernment of charisms is always necessary. No charism is exempt from being referred and submitted to the Church’s shepherds. Their office is not indeed to extinguish the Spirit, but to test all things and hold fast to what is good, so that all the diverse and complementary charisms work together for the common good. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #800 and #801)

 
 

THE FAITHFUL ARE IN NEED OF ASSISTANCE FROM THE CHURCH
Thus, many of the faithful are finding themselves in a painful dilemma between the need to be obedient to the teaching authority in the Church and the need to be faithful to the Truth. Discrediting the words and decisions by the Church leaders is the last thing they want. At the same time, they do not want to compromise the Truth, because, if they do, they will be betraying the Lord, from Whom all Truth originates. St. Paul emphatically reminds us that misrepresentation of the Church teachings is a serious matter and is not acceptable, whether they come from humans or even an angel: “Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!” (Galatians 1:8)

The faithful need an explanation of how the contents of the Statement on Naju can be in conformity with the Church teachings. If they are not, a re-investigation of Naju is necessary — hopefully, at the Vatican level to minimize the risk of prejudice and errors and as urgently as possible, because too much precious time has been wasted already. The Blessed Mother said in her message on July 13, 1997 that the signs in Naju are for the whole world and the entire Church. Then, it will be most fitting that the subject of Naju be considered and responded to at an international level.

The Blessed Mother’s tears are signs for the Church. They testify to the fact that there is a Mother in the Church and the world.

Oh, the Mother of tears! Look down with your mercy upon the sufferings in the world and see those who are in agony, forgotten and in despair. Wipe away tears from the eyes of those who have become victims of all forms of cruelty. Intercede for all for the grace of tears so that they may experience a new surge of God’s Love, open their hearts, repent their sins and resolve for a new life. Help all so that they may shed tears of joy after experiencing the deep love in the Mother’s Heart. Praise be to Jesus Christ! Amen! — Pope John Paul II, while visiting Syracuse, Italy, on November 6, 1994

Mary’s Touch By Mail, P. O. Box 1668, Gresham, OR 97030, U. S. A.
February 11, 1998, The Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes


 
 

 

Another Deviation from the Truth on the Eucharist

Fr. Ri presents a new theology of the Eucharist in an attempt to defend Archbishop Youn’s Declaration on Naju

Fr. Sun-Song Ri, who is the secretary general of the Naju Investigating Committee and a theology professor at Kwangju Archdiocesan Seminary, contributed an article to the March 1998 issue of “The Pastoral Care,” a monthly magazine published by the Korean Bishops’ Council. The title of his article is (translated from Korean) “A Correct Understanding of ‘the Transubstantiation in the Blessed Sacrament’ mentioned in the Kwangju Archbishop’s Declaration.” This article is of a special importance and will undoubtedly attract much attention, because it is the first theological defense of Archbishop Youn’s recent declaration on Naju by a leading member of the Naju Investigating Committee. The importance of this article is further enhanced by the fact that it appeared in a magazine published by the Korean Bishops’ Council.

The focus in Fr. Ri’s article is on the concept of “the Transubstantiation in the Blessed Sacrament.” He makes it clear that the Eucharistic phenomena in Naju involving changes in the Eucharist into visible Flesh and Blood are incompatible with his understanding of “the Transubstantiation.

The questions that promptly arise in the readers’ minds are what Fr. Ri’s theological explanation of “the Transubstantiation” is and whether or not it conforms to the official Church teaching on the Eucharist. If it does, Fr. Ri has a strong case in support of Archbishop Youn’s declaration. If it does not, his article will further weaken the credibility of the Archbishop’s declaration.


Fr. Ri directs our attention to the many debates on the Eucharist in the past and present

Fr. Ri devotes six of the ten pages of his article (in Korean) to a narration of many different theories on the Eucharist including the views of Ratramnus in the 9th Century, Berengarius in the 11th Century, and Luther, Zwingli and Calvin in the 16th Century. Fr. Ri notes that the dogma of “the Transubstantiation” was defined by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 and reconfirmed by the Council of Trent in 1551, but also adds that this dogma did not include a detailed philosophical and theological explanation. He says that debates on the Eucharist are still continuing even among Catholics. At the end of his narration of the different theories on the Eucharist, Fr. Ri makes the following conclusion:

If there exists today a foundation for a comfortable meeting between Catholics and Protestants, it must be their common understanding of Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist. Both (Catholics and Protestants) have reached a deeper understanding that the Real Presence does not refer to any object but is a personal presence. In addition, both share a common view that Christ is present in the Eucharist not only as the giver of salvation but as the gift of salvation itself, which is unique to the Eucharist.

Fr. Ri adds that theologians are looking for more appropriate ways of explaining the Real Presence without rejecting the traditional doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

 

Fr. Ri emphasizes unity

Fr. Ri also states the following:

The Transubstantiation in the Eucharist of course requires faith as the premise but is something that needs to be understood theologically. It certainly has “unity among Christians,” that is, unity between Catholics and Protestants and among all Catholics, as the major premise. In the Kwangju Archbishop’s Declaration, it is stated that the phenomena of the Eucharist changing into lumps of flesh and blood in Julia’s mouth are in conflict with the Church teaching that says that the external appearance of the Eucharist must remain unchanged even after the Transubstantiation through the consecration by a priest. This expression must be understood in the above-mentioned theological context. However, many people still do not have the correct understanding of “the Transubstantiation” and, thereby, are leaning toward disunity in faith. The purpose of this writing is simple. It is unity between Catholics and Protestants and among all Catholics in the faith and theological understanding of the Eucharist.
 

A CRITIQUE OF FR. RI’S ARTICLE

1. Unity among people at the expense of the truth?

Fr. Ri says that unity between Catholics and Protestants and among all Catholics is the major premise in the theological consideration of the Eucharist. In other words, a good theology of the Eucharist is one that is acceptable to both Catholics and Protestants. How is this possible? Can we say that we do not deny Our Lord’s physical presence in the Eucharist but, at the same time, say that Christ’s presence is only a personal or spiritual one? God is infinitely truthful and infinitely simple. He cannot contain conflicts in Himself or reveal conflicts to creatures. He does not expect us to be double-minded, either. Our Lord said, “Let your ‘Yes’ mean ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No’ mean ‘No.’ Anything more is from the evil one” (Matthew 5:37). Our Lord also said that He came to the world not to give peace but to give division (Matthew 10:35-36; Luke 12:49-53). What Our Lord means is that peace for the sake of peace and unity for the sake of unity at the expense of truth are false. To Pilate who was asking the Lord if He was the king, He answered, “I came into this world to testify to the truth” (John 18:37). He climbed Mt. Calvary and was crucified instead of pleasing the world at the expense of the truth.

Fr. Ri’s basic error lies in that he regards “unity among people” instead of the teaching authority in the Church as the basis for determining the authenticity of supernatural truths. It is even possible that the question of authenticity does not mean much to Fr. Ri, because “unity among people” can hardly be a source of any supernatural authenticity. Or is Fr. Ri forgetting about the supernatural nature of the truths regarding the Eucharist?

35.

 

 

2. Fr. Ri’s new theology denies the physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist

Fr. Ri says that he does not deny “the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist” but is rejecting that bread and wine turn into real flesh and blood of Christ through the consecration by a priest. To him, Christ is really present in the Eucharist but only in a personal and spiritual way. Is this what the Church teaches about the Eucharist? Is this what Christ said to His disciples? Our Lord said, “I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world … For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink” (John 6: 51, 56). Many of Our Lord’s followers understood this literally and complained among themselves: “This saying is hard; who can accept it?” (John 6:60) They left Jesus and no longer accompanied Him (John 6:66). If Our Lord only meant His “flesh” and His “blood” in a symbolic or spiritual way, He would have called the Jews back, explaining that they misunderstood Him. But He didn’t call them back, and even challenged His twelve apostles to leave, if they could not accept His words: “Do you also want to leave?” (John 6:67) Throughout the 2,000-year history of Church, it has always been the authentic understanding of Our Lord’s words that He meant His physical presence in the Blessed Sacrament by means of His flesh and blood. Also, because His flesh and blood are living flesh and blood, His soul and Divinity necessarily exist together with His flesh and blood. This is how the totality of the Person of Christ exists in the Eucharist. Therefore, this personal presence of Jesus is not merely a spiritual one but is through His physical presence, just as God the Son became physically present in the world through the human nature of the Baby born of the Virgin Mary. Our Lord said, “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him” (John 6:56). There cannot be a separation between Our Lord’s personal presence and His physical presence in the Eucharist.

If one cannot believe in Christ’s physical presence in the Eucharist, it will be impossible for him to accept Eucharistic miracles, because they are signs of Christ’s physical presence in the Eucharist through His Flesh and Blood.

 

3. Can theologians alter Church teachings?

The proper role for theologians is to study and explain the meaning and implications of the revealed truth as clearly as possible. In doing so, they can utilize scientific reasoning and even speculation but they must humbly follow the enlightenment by the Holy Spirit and remain obedient to the teaching authority in the Church. Their reasoning and speculation cannot take on their own authenticity but are subject to discernment by the teaching authority in the Church. Our Lord has entrusted the charism of infallible teaching not to theologians but to Peter and his successors and to other apostles and their successors in union with Peter and his successors. If theologians cross over this line, they are in revolt against the Divine authority.

 

4. There is nothing new about the new theology

The implication of Fr. Ri’s new theology does not end with rejecting Eucharistic miracles. The primary effect of the new theological thinking is to dilute and destroy our recognition of Our Lord’s physical presence in the world — in other words, the reality of God the Son’s Incarnation. According to the new theology, God is present among us only in a spiritual way. Two thousand years ago, many people were believers in God, but did not recognize God when He physically came down to the world and began dwelling among them as one of them. The reality of God’s Incarnation was revealed to those who were simple in heart, but remained hidden to those who were spiritually blind because of their self-righteousness. Those who only saw the humanity of Jesus became indignant at His claim to Divinity and crucified Him. It was only the beginning of human rejection of God’s Incarnation, which is continuing even today.

In the 16th Century, the Protestant reformers believed in Christ as the Savior, but denied His continuing physical presence and redemptive work through the Church. They also rejected what is derived from and connected with this physical presence of God among us, such as the infallible teaching authority, seven Sacraments (except baptism), the essential role of the Blessed Mother for our salvation, the communion of the Saints, the need for penance, the rosary, statues, and so on. To Protestants, Christ came to the world, but left soon afterwards without establishing any means of continuing His physical presence and redemptive work on earth. They believe in Christ as the Savior but do not recognize His physical presence on earth prior to His Second Coming. The Catholic Church is the sole bearer and witness of Christ’s physical presence, divine teaching authority and redemptive work on earth continuing until the end of the world. Especially, the Holy Eucharist is the focal point of Christ’s physical presence. Through this Sacrament, the reality of God the Son’s Incarnation among us is essentially the same now as two thousand years ago. It is no wonder that the Eucharist has been the prime target of the devil’s attacks throughout Church history. To the devil, God the Son’s physical presence and activity in the world is the greatest threat to his efforts to control and ruin humans. So, he employs all the possible means to promote doubts about and denials of Christ’s physical presence in the Eucharist.

St. John gives us the following admonition as a reminder that the reality of God the Son’s Incarnation among us forms the foundation for God’s Plan of Human Salvation:

Beloved, do not trust every spirit but test the spirits to see whether they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can know the Spirit of God: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh belongs to God. (1 John 4:1-2)

 

5. We cannot appreciate the signs in Naju, until we truly return to God’s Teachings

The messages and signs in Naju do not add any new truths to or alter any of what the Church already received from her Founder. They are, however, powerful reminders, warnings and encouragement for us to return to the truths in the Church.

36.

 

 

So many of us are still resisting, not because the events in Naju are in conflict with Church teachings, but because we have fallen away from loyalty to the true teachings of Our Lord through His Church. Dogmas are no longer studied or believed in a faithful way. Liturgies and church buildings have become more and more deprived of what inspires our yearnings for God and His supernatural gifts. Traditional devotions have been deemphasized. What is going on is a compromise with the secular spirit. It is a denial of the reality of God’s Incarnation and of the supernatural destiny that God has conferred on humans.

Naju could be quickly approved and, then, pushed into history and neglect, like many other heavenly signs in the past (that have been authenticated). Maybe it is better that Naju remains unapproved, unless we truly repent and kneel before the Lord, begging for His mercy. God and Our Lady do not want to see it wasted this time. The problem is that we may be running out of time. 

— From Mary’s Touch, Special Issue 1998 #2


Fr. Ri’s New Theology of the Holy Spirit and the Church

Fr. Sun-Song Ri, who is a theology professor at Kwangju (=Gwangju) Catholic University and the secretary general of the Naju Investigating Committee, contributed another article to the Theological Outlook (the spring 1998 issue) published by the same university. The title of the article is (translated from Korean): The Relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Church. The following are excerpts from this rather long, 15-page article.

Fr. Sun-Song Ri:

“‘Ruahu‘ (a Hebrew word found in the Old Testament), which can be translated into ‘the Spirit of God,’ created Adam and gave him life. It is a breath that creates everything and keeps it alive. It is the source of life.”

“The life-giving power of Ruahu is a mysterious one that cannot be controlled by anything in nature. The presence of Ruahu can be recognized by its sign of wind. God’s Ruahu is a power of creation. It is the power of God that cannot be resisted by anything.”

“We must understand that God’s Ruahu and God’s Word are necessarily united with each other and work together.”

“The theology of Bellarmine (Fr. Ri says ‘Bellarmine’ instead of ‘St. Bellarmine’) has much influenced the understanding of the relationship between the Church and the Holy Spirit both theoretically and practically even until the Second Vatican Council and still remains influential. According to his theology, the Church was established by Jesus Christ and faithfully performs the functions stipulated by Him. The central vehicle for this performance is the hierarchy, through which the Holy Spirit ratifies, sanctifies and gives power and authority to its activities. In other words, whatever the Church stipulates and does is done by the Holy Spirit.

If one’s mind is permeated by this theology, a preposterous misunderstanding can result. The activities stipulated and performed by humans are believed to have a seal of approval by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is made responsible for what humans do. Until now, the Church has been under the influence of this theology. If the relationship between the Church and the Holy Spirit is discussed without being liberated from this theology, the Holy Spirit cannot be recognized as the Founder or Creator of the Church or the cause of what the Church stipulates and does. To use an extreme expression, the Holy Spirit is not in that Church. The Church only thoroughly uses the Holy Spirit for the purpose of justifying herself.

We, on the other hand, firmly believe that the Holy Spirit is the Creator of the Church. This faith does not rely on the theology of Bellarmine and the like and, especially, not on the traditional theology of the Trinity, but is based on the revelation.”

“The writers of the New Testament emphasize that the Holy Spirit is superior to Jesus Christ as a divine being and is the one who fills Jesus Christ (with His life-giving power).”

“The Holy Spirit first forms the apostles and, through them, the community. This community is not a community of students who study the catechism taught by the Apostles or a group of newcomers who just entered the church organization. Members of the community undergo new experiences for themselves. Each community is formed by the people who share experiences with the Holy Spirit.”

“The Gospel according to Luke clearly shows that the Church did not originate directly from Christ or from His activities during His lifetime, when He was mortal.”

“The origin of the Church was prepared not by Jesus, who resurrected and appeared to the disciples, but by the Holy Spirit Whom the disciples experienced as a real being and began living by.”

“If one tries to understand the Church only according to the stipulations about the Mystical Body, there will be left no room to talk about the role of the Holy Spirit.”

“Christ’s mission in history is that the Holy Spirit come, be poured upon all flesh and, through communion with the eternal life, revitalize all beings that are mortal, transform them in the eternal light, and fill them with the all-embracing love. On the other hand, the Holy Spirit’s mission in history is to revive everything eschatologically toward the eternal glory and, thus, recreate it. In other words, the communion between the Holy Spirit and Christ that can be understood in the Mystery of the Trinity is essentially the origin as well as the end of creation.”

“The Church has been created to reveal the Word and the Holy Spirit and let Them be experienced. Through the Church one begins his relationship with the Holy Spirit who alone gives life. Therefore, the Church is the sign and instrument of the Spirit who gives life.”

“Therefore, the Church must thoroughly understand that the Church cannot monopolize the activities of the Holy Spirit; that the Holy Spirit is not limited by the Church; and that what is important to the Holy Spirit is not the Church but rebirth and re-creation of all creatures in God’s Kingdom together with Israel and the Church. In other words, the activities of the Holy Spirit are not dictated by the activities of the Church. The Holy Spirit blows in whatever direction He wants to, not according to what the Church wants. Therefore, the Church must follow the Holy Spirit who blows in whatever direction He wants to blow. The Church can find her place only in that following.”

 

 

“The Church should not be an entity that wants to remain comfortably as an organized church for which so many people criticize her. The Church is not a society of classes that insists on the order of ranks which so many people criticize as clericalism. The Church is not a body that clings to her organization which numerous people prophetically deplore as an absolute monarchy, a dictatorship and an ‘un-Churchlikeness.’ If the Church insists on remaining as such an entity, she will be committing the most typical sin against the Holy Spirit. A sin against the Holy Spirit is an attempt to use the Holy Spirit for pursuing one’s own interest, thus, blocking the activities of the Holy Spirit, His creative power, life-giving power, vitality and guiding power, and, thereby, distorting the truth. In the Third Millennium, the Church must become the people of God of her own accord and lead a life of obedience to the Holy Spirit alone.”

(The above is excerpted from Fr. Sun-Song Ri’s article:
The Relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Church
.)

 

FR. RI’S THEOLOGY IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CHURCH TEACHINGS

Fr. Sun-Song Ri already published another article: A Correct Understanding of ‘the Transubstantiation in the Blessed Sacrament’ mentioned in the Kwangju Archbishop’s Declaration (in the Pastoral Care magazine, the March 1998 issue published by the Korean Bishops’ Council in Seoul) as a theological defense for Archbishop Youn’s negative judgment on the Eucharistic miracles in Naju. In that article, Fr. Ri says that Christ’s Real Presence in the Holy Eucharist does not refer to any object but a personal presence and that this “correct” understanding will promote unity not only among Catholics but also between Catholics and Protestants. In other words, Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist does not really involve a substantial change of the bread and the wine into Christ’s flesh and blood but is only a personal and spiritual presence and, therefore, the Eucharistic phenomena in Naju could not be approved. This new theology of Fr. Ri is clearly in conflict with the Church Teaching and also contradicts what is stated in The Decree on Ecumenism
(Unitatis Redintegratio) issued by the Second Vatican Council:
Nothing is so foreign to the spirit of ecumenism as a false irenicism which harms the purity of Catholic doctrine and obscures its genuine and certain meaning.”

Fr. Ri’s new theology of the Real Presence in the Eucharist prompts us to suspect that his basic mindset about all of the Church teachings probably does not resonate with the mind of the Magisterium. The contents of Fr. Ri’s new article: The Relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Church confirm that such suspicions are more than just suspicions. Because his writings have already been published, they no longer concern Fr. Ri only but the whole Church.

 

PROBLEMS IN FR. RI’S NEW THEOLOGY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

Fr. Ri quotes many verses in the Old Testament to arrive at the conclusion that the Holy Spirit is the sole source of the life-giving power. Then, he bases his whole theology of the Holy Spirit and the Church on that conclusion. He says that the Holy Spirit is not only the Creator of the universe but also the Creator of the Church and the one who continuously gives vitality to the Church. The following is a brief critique of Fr. Ri’s article.

1. Fr. Ri’s assertion that the Holy Spirit alone gives life is in conflict with the Church teaching that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are not three principles of the creature, but one principle (Council of Florence, DS 1331).

2. Fr. Ri’s theology that the Holy Spirit is the sole giver of life ignores the reality that humans lost their supernatural life through sin and need redemption by Christ for restoration of the supernatural life.

3. Fr. Ri denies that the Church is the Mystical Body of Christ that was established by Christ to continue the reality of His Incarnation and Redemptive Work until the end of the world. He also ignores that all the graces that the Holy Spirit bestows upon us are fruits of the infinite merits that Christ earned through His sufferings. That the Church was established by Christ is a dogma (The First Vatican Council, DS 3050) and was reconfirmed by Pope Pius XII (Mystici Corporis Christi). Fr. Ri does not accept this teaching.

4. Fr. Ri’s denial of the Church being the Mystical Body of Christ leads him to reject the hierarchy and teaching authority in the Church. Fr. Ri says that we must obey the Holy Spirit only. Against the Protestant reformers of the 16th Century, the Church defined that, in the Catholic Church, a hierarchy has been instituted by divine ordinance, which consists of the bishops, priests, and ministers (The Council of Trent, DS 1776).

The Archbishop of Kwangju declared a negative judgment on Naju in the name of his teaching authority, based on the recommendation by his Naju Investigating Committee. Now, the secretary general of that committee, who is also a key theologian in the committee, rejects the divine origin of the hierarchy and the teaching authority in the Church. He even says that the Holy Spirit is not in a church that relies on the hierarchy. This is an outright inconsistency.

5. Wherever the fact of the Incarnation of God the Son is obscured, so is the role of the Blessed Mother. This is because the Incarnate God and the Blessed Mother are inseparable from each other. God could have used a different method to send the Savior, but He didn’t. He chose to send His own Son as our Savior through the Blessed Mother. The Blessed Mother’s role was not limited to Christ’s Conception and Birth. She was Christ’s most intimate companion and helper throughout His life on earth, even until the moment of His Death on the Cross. Now, she is the mother to all who love and follow Christ and is, therefore, the Mother of the Church. She is the essential channel and associate in God the Son’s Incarnation and Redemptive Work. That we love and follow the Blessed Mother is the surest sign that we accept, love and follow Christ, the Incarnate God and His Church. However, we do not find any mentioning of the Blessed Mother’s role in the articles published as theological support for the negative declaration on the Blessed Mother of Naju. It cannot be a coincidence.

A CORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF GOD’S PLAN OF HUMAN SALVATION AND A CORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF NAJU GO TOGETHER

38.

 

 

The reason why many people still do not understand what the Blessed Mother’s efforts in Naju seems to be that they do not have a firm comprehension of God’s Plan of Human Salvation. If they clearly understand that the reality of God the Son’s Incarnation and Redemptive Work is continuing through the Church and also accept what Jesus said: Whoever wishes to come after me, must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me (Matthew 16:24), they will not have much difficulty in understanding the essence of the messages and signs in Naju: the need for self-renunciation, sacrifices, reparations and love; the meaning of the tears and tears of blood that the Blessed Mother sheds especially for her children who still refuse to accept the Incarnate God and His Mother; and the Blessed Mother’s repeated pleas that priests be holy and remain loyal to the Holy Father. They will also be grateful to God for the repeated Eucharistic miracles in Naju as God’s help for us to more firmly believe in Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist instead of belittling them as “phenomena that promote confusion in faith.”

Therefore, the understanding of the eternal truths from God and the understanding of what has been happening in Naju go together. Through such an understanding, we should be able to stem the trend of secularization in the Church and enkindle anew the spirit of a true missionary and a martyr in defense of the eternal truths from God. This must also be how we can be truly faithful to the Holy Spirit.

Sang M. Lee
April 16, 1998


Messages and Signs in Naju are powerful antidotes against Modernism in the Church

From a reliable source we hear that the Vatican has good favor towards Naju. We have no doubt that Naju will be eventually approved by the Church and will become a shining star of God’s love for people all over the world. Filled with hope, let us continue praying and spreading the truth. Julia is refraining from public activities at this time. She continues a life of fervent prayers and severe sufferings for the conversion of sinners. She received messages from Our Lord and Our Lady on January 4 (reported in the Special Issue 1998 #1), February 2, and April 12 (both reported in this issue) of this year. Many pilgrims are still coming to Naju, even though there are no services. In Naju, they can attend Mass in the parish church and pray in the Chapel. The spot on the floor in the Chapel where the Eucharist landed on August 27, 1997, continues to give off a strong fragrance of roses. As of May 1998, nine months after the miracle, the fragrance is as strong as on the first day of the miracle. On April 8, 1993, the Blessed Mother said that this fragrance is a gift from God and represents her presence, love and friendship for us.

More information is becoming available about how the negative judgment on Naju was made by the Kwangju (=Gwangju) Archdiocese, as the key members of the Naju Investigating Committee have published articles with the intention of defending the Declaration. As already discussed in this paper, Fr. Sun-Song Ri, the secretary general of the Committee, said that the Eucharistic miracles in Naju could not be approved, because they contradicted his theology of the Eucharist, according to which Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist is not through His physical Body and Blood but is a personal and spiritual one. In another article, Fr. Ri rejected the hierarchy in the Church on the ground that the Church should be a community of people who obey the Holy Spirit only (Theological Outlook, spring 1998 issue). It is ironic that a negative judgment on Naju was made in the name of the teaching authority in the Church, and, at the same time, the key theologian of the Investigating Committee is refusing to recognize the hierarchy and teaching authority in the Church.

In still another article, Fr. Ri said that the shamanistic rituals in Korea could be incorporated into the Catholic Liturgy (Theological Outlook, winter 1996 issue). Fr. Je-Min Ri, another key member of the Committee and also a theologian at the Kwangju (=Gwangju) seminary, supported the female priesthood (Theological Outlook, spring 1998 issue), which the Holy Father had already rejected in a definitive way. These may be just a few examples of widespread problems in the Church all over the world, which are threatening to destroy our true faith. What we are facing is not just the question of Naju being approved or not approved, but a question about the condition of the whole Catholic Church. The approval of Naju, the strengthening of our loyalty to the traditional teachings of the Church, and the eradication of modernism, secular spirit, and all other errors from the Church are all connected together.

Then, what is our duty? In Naju, the Blessed Mother wept tears and tears of blood for a total of 700 days as powerful signs of her love for us and her sorrows over our sins. If we are her true children, we cannot possibly ignore these signs. Some say that the Blessed Mother is in Heaven and, therefore, cannot suffer any more. Of course, she cannot suffer in Heaven, but she was assumed into Heaven with both her soul and her body and now, without leaving Heaven, is present among us with her soul and body. This makes the Blessed Mother’s presence on earth somewhat different from the apparitions of the angels and other Saints. The Blessed Mother used the expression that she came to Korea, her youngest child. She came with both her glorified soul and body united together in order to be with us and to help us. This is how she can actually weep, sweat, suffer, give us fragrant oil and have live pulses through her statue. Her tears, blood and oil are not just symbols but a physical reality of her sorrows, pains, joys, mercy and love. The Blessed Mother suffers the cruel pains of her Divine Son’s Crucifixion again and again, whenever we commit sins and refuse to return to God. And, she wants us to be united to her presence and her Heart and, through this union, become united with her Son’s Physical Presence and Redemptive Work through His Church. The supernatural reality in Naju can be a powerful antidote against the venom of false teachings that tempt us to move away from the reality of God the Son’s Incarnation and Redemptive Work. By waking up to the messages and signs in Naju, we will also wake up to God’s teachings for our salvation.

Therefore, we must stop being spectators. At the time of judgment, God will not ask us how much we know or how much we received but how we actually responded to the graces from Him. We may think of ourselves and our world doing just fine. But the Blessed Mother, who knows far better, is weeping tears of blood. We need to wake up and conform ourselves to the Blessed Mother’s requests. On January 4, 1998, the Blessed Mother told us through Julia:

 

 

You will see my Immaculate Heart surely achieving victory through my invisible presence and with help from you who are my helpers.

The keys to Our Lady’s victory are her presence and our help.

— From Mary’s Touch, Special Issue 1998 #2


The Eucharistic Miracles in Naju are not in conflict with the Church Teaching

There have been numerous reports of supernatural phenomena throughout Church history. Only those which seemed to have a special significance have been investigated by the Church. Some have been approved, while others have not. When negative decisions were made, the usual reason cited was that, despite investigations, it was not possible to recognize supernatural origin of the alleged phenomena.

The case of Naju, Korea, seems to be unique in that the events in Naju were rejected in the local diocese without any substantial investigation by the committee on the ground that they already contradicted the Church teaching. A Korean monsignor said soon after the Declaration: What’s the point in investigating (the events in Naju), when they are in conflict with the Church teaching?

If something truly contradicts the Church teaching, it has no place in the Church, because the supreme mission of the Church is to propagate the eternal truth from her Founder without errors. When the Church declares that certain messages, apparitions, miracles, theories, assertions, devotions or liturgical practices do not conform to the authentic teachings of the Church, it normally means a definite end to them as far as their standing in the Church is concerned.

In fact, the current atmosphere regarding Naju in Korea is serious. There is a perception among many Korean Catholics that Naju is not to be visited, promoted, studied, or even discussed. Some Korean pastors even threaten their parishioners saying that they must go to Confession after they come back from Naju. Being associated with Naju in any way is a sin against the faith and obedience according to many in Korea.

But the essential question to ask here is whether the teaching authority in a local church can be exercised while lacking unity with the universal Church and conformity with the authentic teachings of the Church. Why did the diocese in Kwangju hastily make the negative decision on Naju without consulting with the Holy Father and five other bishops who personally witnessed Eucharistic miracles in connection with Naju and Julia and without interviewing most of the many priests and lay people who also witnessed the signs in Naju? The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

The bishops’ authority must be exercised in communion with the whole Church under the guidance of the Pope, (#895)

and also:

This Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. (#86)
 

The Declaration in Kwangju misrepresents the Church doctrines

(1) It was stated in the Declaration in the Kwangju(=Gwangju) Archdiocese: The alleged phenomenon, that as soon as Mrs. Julia Youn received the Eucharist, it was changed into a lump of bloody flesh in her mouth is also contrary to the doctrine of the Catholic Church that says that even after the bread and wine are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ with the formula of priests’ consecration, the species of bread and wine remain. Such phenomena do not enhance the faith of people in the Eucharist existing under the species of bread and wine. On the contrary, they seem to act as an element which causes a great confusion and embarrasses the peoples’ faith in the Eucharist. (underline added)

Thus, the Declaration in Kwangju(=Gwangju) says that it is a Church doctrine that the species, in other words, the appearances and other external characteristics, of bread and wine must remain unchanged even after the consecration by the priest (Note: The word “must” is not in the English text of the Declaration but is in the original Korean text. In the English text also, the meaning of this word is clear by the context). Therefore, the Declaration concludes that the changes of the Eucharist into visible flesh and blood in Julia’s mouth contradict this Church doctrine. Our question, then, is if this really is what the Church teaches about the Holy Eucharist. Does the Church really say that the Eucharist must remain unchanged in its appearance and other external properties even after the priest has completed the consecration of bread and wine? Then, what about the change that occurs to the Eucharist inside our body after we receive Communion? What about the slow but gradual change in the Sacred Hosts, when they are stored in the tabernacle for a very long period of time? What about all the Eucharistic miracles involving the change in the external appearances of the Eucharist into those of flesh and blood, many of which have already been recognized by the Church and several sites of which have been visited by the Popes? (For example, in 1976, Pope Paul VI visited the shrine of a Eucharistic miracle in Bolsena, Italy, and raised it to the level of a Minor Basilica. — Eucharistic Miracles, Joan Carroll Cruz, Tan Books & Publishers)

The correct Church doctrine on this subject reads as follows:

If anyone says that in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist there remains the substance of bread and wine together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ and denies that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the entire substance of the wine into the blood, the species of the bread and wine only remaining, a change which the Catholic Church most fittingly calls transubstantiation, let him be anathema. (Council of Trent, DS 1652)

The portion of this doctrine that says: the species of the bread and wine only remaining means that, even though the Eucharistic consecration has the effect of changing the substances of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Our Lord, it has no effect on the species of bread and wine.

40.

 

 

 

This phrase does not contain the meaning that the species of the bread and wine must remain unchanged after the consecration. Therefore, if a change occurs in the species of bread and wine after the consecration through a special intervention by God, it does not contradict this doctrine at all. During the Eucharistic miracle in Lanciano, Italy, in the 8th Century, the species of bread and wine changed into those of flesh and blood as soon as the priest said the words of consecration (Eucharistic Miracles, Joan Carroll Cruz). This has never been considered a conflict with the Church teaching. As St. Thomas Aquinas said, such miracles are no deceptions but represent the truth that Christ’s Body and Blood are truly in the Blessed Sacrament (Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 76, Article 8).

The problem in the Declaration in Kwangju(=Gwangju) lies in that (i) it adds to the Church doctrine on the Eucharist a new meaning that the species of bread and wine must remain unchanged after the consecration, as though the consecration has two effects — one changing the substances of bread and wine and another keeping the species of bead and wine from changing — and (ii) it applies the Church doctrine that explains the effects of the Eucharistic consecration to the condition of the Eucharist after the consecration. The truth of the matter is that the Church has never stated any doctrine that explains what should happen to the condition of the Eucharist after the consecration and that, therefore, precludes the possibility of Eucharistic miracles that involve changes in the external appearances of the Eucharist after the consecration.

(2) The Declaration in Kwangju(=Gwangju) also states: The phenomenon alleged as a miracle of the Eucharist fallen from heaven is contradictory to the doctrine of the Catholic Church that says that only through the legitimately ordained priest’s consecration does the sacrament of the Eucharist begin to exist.

When the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) declared, “Surely no one can accomplish this sacrament except a priest who has been rightly ordained according to the keys of the Church which Jesus Christ Himself conceded to the Apostles and to their successors” (DS 802), its purpose was to refute the Waldensians, who rejected the hierarchy in the Church and claimed equal powers for all the faithful. Against the Reformers’ teaching of the general lay-priesthood, the Council of Trent defined the institution of a special priesthood, to which the power of consecration is reserved solely (DS 1764). What this doctrine means is that people who are not validly-ordained priests cannot and ought not pretend to consecrate this Sacrament. It certainly does not imply preclusion of direct intervention by God Himself. The Eucharist is not a lifeless object but the living Jesus Christ Himself, Who is in Heaven with His full Humanity and Divinity. In other words, the Eucharist and the living Jesus Christ in Heaven are identical, except that in the Eucharist on earth the glory, beauty, majesty and power of Our Lord are hidden. The Eucharist is not something that carries the presence of Jesus but is Jesus Himself. At the Last Supper, Our Lord did not say, “This bread contains My Body,” or “This wine contains My Blood,” but “This is My Body,” and “This is My Blood of the new covenant” (Matthew 26:26,28). Saying that the Eucharist begins to exist only through a priest’s consecration ignores this fact that the Eucharist is Our Lord Himself and also contradicts Our Lord’s omnipotence.

Regarding the Eucharistic miracles in Naju that involved the descent of the Holy Eucharist, there may be three possible explanations:

(i) The Eucharist was brought by an angel from a tabernacle in a church. This was the case when a large Sacred Host suddenly appeared between Julia’s fingers during the Apostolic Pro-Nuncio’s visit to Naju on November 24, 1994. The Blessed Mother confirmed in her message that the Eucharist was brought by St. Michael the Archangel from a Mass.

(ii) Our Lord Himself consecrated bread and wine into the Eucharist. This would be no problem to Our Lord, as He is the Supreme and Eternal Priest, Who established the Holy Eucharist.

(iii) Our Lord in Heaven came by assuming the external appearance of the Sacred Host. In this case, a priest’s consecration would not be necessary, as there was no transubstantiation involved. For example, on July 1, 1995, Julia saw Our Lord on the Crucifix turning into the live Jesus, bleeding from His Seven Wounds. Then, she saw the Blood turning into seven white Hosts, which landed on the altar before the Blessed Mother’s statue. Many people in the Chapel saw the falling Hosts and heard the sounds of the Hosts landing on the altar. In obedience to the local Archbishop’s instruction, the seven Sacred Hosts were consumed the next day. The last one received by Julia turned into visible Flesh and Blood on her tongue. Fr. Francis Su from Malaysia dipped his finger in the Blood and wiped it on a white cloth. Later the blood stain on the cloth was put to a DNA test at a medical laboratory in Seoul and was found to be human blood.

The assertion that the Hosts which descended in Naju were unconsecrated hosts does not stand on any valid ground but on a conjecture which lacks faith and trust in the power and love of God. It can also involve a risk of sacrilege. The only way for this assertion to be valid would be to establish that the descents of the Host in Naju were fabricated by humans. There isn’t even remote evidence of that. That Our Lord came to us directly in the form of the Eucharist represents a solemn act on His part of coming to us. When the Lord comes, we are free to welcome or reject Him, but will not be free from the consequences of our choices. Throughout Church history, there have been numerous cases of miraculous receptions of the Eucharist. The following are just a few examples (Eucharistic Miracles, Joan Carroll Cruz):

(i) St. Clement, Bishop of Ancyra (4th Century), received Communion from Our Lord, while in prison awaiting martyrdom.

(ii) St. Bonaventure (1274) received Communion from an angel.

(iii) St. Catherine of Siena (1380) received Communion from Our Lord and also from angels.

(iv) St. Pascal Babylon (1592) received Communion from an angel many times.

(v) St. Mary Magdalen de Pazzi (1607) also received Communion from Our Lord.

(vi) In Fatima, an angel brought a chalice and a Sacred Host to the three children (1917).

(vii) The Eucharist miraculously appeared on the tongue of Therese Neumann (1962) on numerous occasions.

These miracles seem very similar to the descent of the Eucharist to Julia’s mouth on November 24, 1994, and July 1, 1996.

41.

 

Other miracles in Naju which involved the descent of the Eucharist to the altar in the Chapel or to the floor in the Chapel seem to be unique, because the Sacred Hosts in these miracles came down in a form in which they could be preserved, even though some of them have been consumed. Two small pieces of the large Eucharist and the whole of the small Eucharist that came down during the Apostolic Pro-Nuncio’s visit to Naju on November 24, 1994, are being preserved in Fr. Raymond Spies’ chapel in Gwachon near Seoul. The large Sacred Host that came down during Bishop Paul Kim’s visit on June 12, 1997, and another identical Sacred Host that descended during Fr. Spies’ visit on August 27, 1997, were taken to the Kwangju Archdiocesan office.

Another factor that reinforces our belief that the Eucharist that came down in Naju is truly the Eucharist is God’s infinite truthfulness. When the Eucharist descended to the Chapel in Naju with no natural explanation whatsoever, the only possible understanding in the minds of the people who were present there was that it was from God. If God sent us unconsecrated hosts under such circumstances, He can be said to have misled us. Why would God confuse us by sending unconsecrated hosts when the circumstances were such that people could only perceive the hosts as the true Eucharist? What would be the point in God’s sending us unconsecrated hosts? God will never send us signs that are meaningless for our salvation or are misleading. Saying that God sent unconsecrated hosts contradicts the Church doctrine that God cannot deceive or be deceived (DS 3008).

The doctrinal misrepresentation in the Declaration in Kwangju is not a trivial matter. The official teaching of the Church is God’s teaching for His people through the Church and cannot contain any error. Individual bishops, priests, theologians, or anyone else have no authority to change the Church doctrines or the interpretation thereof. The doctrinal errors in the Kwangju Declaration need to be corrected urgently and unambiguously. The faithful should be obedient to the teaching authority in the Church, but also expect purity of the faith in the exercise of this authority.
 

It is the modernist forces in the Church that are resisting and blocking Naju

Rev. Sun-Song Ri, who is a professor of dogmatic theology at the major seminary in Kwangju (=Gwangju) and the secretary general of the Naju Investigating Committee, published an article in the March 1998 issue of The Pastoral Care, a monthly magazine published by the Korean Bishops’ Conference, in an attempt to present a theological defense for the Declaration. Its title was, “A Correct Understanding of ‘the Transubstantiation in the Blessed Sacrament’ mentioned in the Kwangju (=Gwangju) Archbishop’s Declaration.” In this article, Fr. Ri denied the physical presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist and justified his position by saying that it would promote unity between Catholics and Protestants. He seems to need a reminder of the Vatican II document on ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio:

Nothing is so foreign to the spirit of ecumenism as a false irenicism which harms the purity of catholic doctrine and obscures its genuine and certain meaning.

In another article published also in the spring of 1998, Fr. Ri rejected the hierarchy and teaching authority in the Church, saying that the Church is a community of people who obey the Holy Spirit only (“The Relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Church” in Theological Outlook published by the Kwangju major seminary). The Naju Investigating Committee relied on the teaching authority of the Church to block Naju, but Fr. Ri and other leading members of the Committee are rejecting the teaching authority in the Church.

Fr. Je-Min Ri, another leading member of the Naju Investigating Committee and former professor at the Kwangju major seminary, also published an article titled: “Is the Catholic Church Catholic?” in the May 1998 issue of The Common Good magazine in Korea, defiantly repeating his modernist ideas despite repeated warnings from the Holy See.

Modernist inclinations are deeply rooted in Korea (and around the world). While there also are many clergy, religious and lay people who remain faithful to the authentic teachings of the Church and loyal to the Holy Father, they have usually been overpowered in many dioceses and parishes by those who are determined to continue liberal reforms based on their incorrect interpretations of the Vatican II documents. These modernist forces continue advocating female priesthood, which the Holy Father already rejected in a definitive way, abolition of celibacy for priests, mixing the Catholic Liturgy with shamanistic rituals, and many other measures to make the Church more acceptable to the secular world. They continue insisting that the Church dogmas must change as the world conditions change and infusing in people’s minds the idea that morality is a personal matter, making such concepts as sin, repentance and reparation meaningless. Accordingly, the meaning of sanctity has also become obscured. To the modernist priests and their followers, Naju is nothing but an obstacle, because the messages and signs in Naju constantly draw us to the authentic teachings and devotions in the Church.

The Church on earth is the Church Militant. A constant, fierce spiritual battle is inevitable between the army led by the Blessed Mother and the other army led by the devil. At stake is the eternal fate of countless souls. It seems that this spiritual war is now nearing its climax. To participate and assist in the Blessed Mother’s coming victory over evil, we must arm ourselves with fervent prayers, self-denial, and the purity of the faith and devote ourselves totally to serving Our Lord and Our Lady. As the Blessed Mother said in Naju, there is no time to hesitate (October 7, 1998).

Even among some of those who are favorable toward Naju, there seems to be a perception that the events in Naju are just another help for our personal devotion. Actually, they are much more, as the focus in Naju is not just on the repentance of sins and amendment of life at the individual level but also on overcoming a major crisis of faith and morals in the whole Church. By means of the many messages and signs in Naju, God is giving us a stern warning as well as an effective cure. Our Lord seems to be saying to us what He already said to St. Francis in the 13th Century, “Rebuild my Church.” He does not mean a new Church but His same Church that is in need of purification from the secular spirit and restoration of the splendor of truth and holiness that can only come from Our Lord Himself through the Blessed Mother. Whether there will be a terrifying chastisement or an outpouring of God’s blessings depends on how we respond.

— from Mary’s Touch, Special Issue – 1998 #3

 


In Defense of the Truth and Teaching Authority in the Church

As many of our readers know already, the local Archbishop in the Naju area made it official on January 1, 1998, that the events in Naju contradicted the Church doctrines and, therefore, could not be recognized as true revelations from God.

Serious questions remain, however, because it has become clear that the Naju Investigating Committee in the Kwangju (=Gwangju) Archdiocese did not conduct any substantive investigation and based its negative recommendation on an incorrect presentation of the Church teaching (See our Special Issues, 1998 #1, #2 and #3 for more details). No one is questioning the legitimacy of the teaching and pastoral authority of the bishop in Kwangju in his diocese and his responsibility to the universal Church. Regardless of the current situation, we have a deep respect and love for him as a true successor of Our Lord’s Apostles. However, we cannot keep our consciences closed, when we see the Lord’s truth misrepresented and the facts ignored. When Our Lord was condemned by the religious and civil authorities two thousand years ago, most of His followers ran away, which caused more pain to Our Lord. We must not fear criticism, because the truth comes from God and must be defended at all costs.

By seeking conformity between the exercise of the teaching authority and the authentic teachings of the Church, we can truly defend the teaching authority in the Church, because deviation from the true teachings of God is so harmful to the integrity of the teaching authority. The Church teaches
that the role of the teaching authority in the Church is to guarantee the faithful the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error (The Catechism of the Catholic Church, #890) and that the teaching authority is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant; it teaches only what has been handed on to it (#86). The Church also states that the faithful have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and they have a right to make their opinion known to the other Christian faithful (Code of Canon Law, Article 212, #2 and #3).

The subject of Naju still is the responsibility of the bishop in Kwangju (=Gwangju) and also the Korean Bishops’ Conference under the guidance of the Holy See. Of course, the episcopal authority is always subject to the supreme authority of the Pope. Through several channels, we have learned that the Holy See is very well informed of the situation in Korea and is deeply concerned. We have no doubt that the current problems will be corrected with the unfailing help of Our Lady.

However, this does not mean that we can relax and just wait for the official action to be taken by the Church. It is essential that we continue responding to the Blessed Mother’s requests, practicing and spreading her messages. Without devoted work and fervent prayers by the faithful, God’s blessings through His signs as well as the official recognition by the Church can be delayed. Active participation in this work is needed not only in Korea but in all parts of the world. On July 13, 1997, the Blessed Mother made it clear that the signs in Naju are for the whole Church. In fact, until now, the Blessed Mother’s messages and signs in Naju have been better accepted outside Korea.

 
 

The Kwangju Declaration in effect rejects all of the Eucharistic miracles in Church history

As explained in our recent Special Issues, the Kwangju (=Gwangju) Declaration states that the species of bread and wine must remain unchanged even after the consecration of bread and wine by priests and, therefore, that the Eucharistic miracles in Naju do not conform to the Church doctrine. By distorting the authentic Church teaching, this assertion precludes the possibility of divine intervention to reveal the true reality of the Blessed Sacrament, which is the substantial presence of the Lord’s Body and Blood together with His Soul and Divinity in the Eucharist and, therefore, in effect rejects all of the Eucharistic miracles in Church history. If all the Eucharistic miracles are rejected, people’s faith in the Church teaching on the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist will also weaken. Thus, the Kwangju (=Gwangju) Declaration on Naju contains an encroachment on the Church teaching on the Eucharist itself.

In fact, the leading theologian of the Naju Investigating Committee revealed the true motive behind the Committee’s rejection of the Eucharistic miracles in Naju in an article published soon after the Declaration (See our Special Issues – 1998, #1, #2 and #3). He did not reject the term: “the Real Presence,” but interpreted it only as a personal and spiritual presence. He defended his view saying that it would promote unity between Catholics and Protestants. This kind of assertion clearly contradicts the authentic Church teaching on the Eucharist, which explains Our Lord’s Real Presence in the Eucharist as a substantial and total presence of Our Lord including His true Body and Blood. Pope Paul VI stated that Our Lord’s presence in the Eucharist is a “physical reality” and a “bodily presence” (Mysterium Fidei, September 3, 1965). Through the Eucharist in the Church, the awesome reality of God the Son’s substantial presence with us in our physical world, which began at the moment of His Incarnation through the Virgin Mary, still continues.

Also, on January 26, 1996, when Julia was summoned to the Committee in Kwangju (=Gwangju), a leading member of the Committee questioned her, “To come down to earth, the Blessed Mother will have to come through the sky. But how can she, when it is so cold up there?” It sounds like he does not accept any of Our Lady’s apparitions. The Kwangju (=Gwangju) Declaration states that the “strange” phenomena (such as shedding tears and tears of blood and oozing the fragrant oil) that happened to the Blessed Mother’s statue were “perhaps by some preternatural power.” The Committee could say the same thing about all other similar miracles in Church history, some of which have already been officially approved. Of course, we should not forget that several priests in the Kwangju (=Gwangju) Committee remain firmly loyal to the Church teachings and positive on Naju, but their views were overridden by the liberal priests in the Committee.

— From Mary’s Touch, January 1999 Newsletter

 

An Essay on the Holy Eucharist and the Eucharistic miracles in Naju

1. THE CONTINUING NEGLECT OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST

43.

 

 

A few months ago, during a Marian conference in California, a lady gave a photograph of a Eucharistic miracle in Naju to a priest who was one of the speakers. The priest thanked her and walked away. A few minutes later, someone else saw the same priest tearing the photograph into pieces and throwing them away.

A few years ago, a Catholic publisher told me on the phone: “A bleeding Eucharist is the most superstitious phenomenon in Catholic history.” A few days later, when we were talking again on the phone, he said that he was a former priest and asked for prayers.

Almost fifty years ago, in late June 1950, when North Korea invaded the South, some of the Communist soldiers entered Myoungdong Cathedral in Seoul and desecrated the Holy Eucharist by trampling the Sacred Hosts which they took out of the tabernacle.

Our Lord, Who comes to us in the form of bread and wine because He loves us so much, continues to be neglected and humiliated even by many Catholics. On July 2, 1995, Julia Kim of Naju, Korea, wrote down what she saw in a vision:

Many priests were celebrating the Mass in the state of sin. Many of the religious and lay people were eating up the Eucharist without any reverence, not even being conscious of the sinful state of their souls!

Surveys in Korea and elsewhere show that fewer than 30% of the Catholics go to Sunday Mass and even fewer believe in the true, substantial presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist. That there is a serious lack of knowledge of the catechism among Catholics nowadays is a well-known fact, but this problem seems to be particularly acute regarding the Holy Eucharist. Numerous people are approaching the Blessed Sacrament in a careless manner, out of habit, because they do not clearly understand the most important Sacrament in the Catholic Church.

The confusion about the Holy Eucharist actually began two thousand years ago when Our Lord explained it to the Jews for the first time. The Scripture tells us that many of His disciples, after hearing His announcement about the Eucharist, murmured among themselves, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” (John 6:60) and they returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him (John 6:66). This is also mentioned in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (#1336):

The first announcement of the Eucharist divided the disciples, just as the announcement of the Passion scandalized them. The Eucharist and the Cross are stumbling blocks. It is the same mystery and it never ceases to be an occasion of division. “Will you also go away?” (John 6:67): the Lord’s question echoes through the ages. . .

Disagreements about the Holy Eucharist have surfaced again and again in Church history and still are a major cause of division among Christians. Much of the debate on Naju is also about the Holy Eucharist. The Declaration in the Kwangju (=Gwangju) Archdiocese rejected the Eucharistic miracles in Naju, because, according to the doctrinal presentation in the Declaration, the eucharistic species must remain unchanged even after the consecration. The leading theologian of the Naju Investigating Committee revealed that the real reason for rejecting the Eucharistic miracles in Naju was to promote unity between Catholics and Protestants. His remark seems to be an admission that the theologians in Kwangju (=Gwangju) were more eager to be accommodating to the Protestants than to determine the genuineness of the Eucharistic miracles in Naju. The debates on the Holy Eucharist are of vital importance to individual Catholics as well as the entire Church. The scope of deviation among many Catholics from the traditional Church teaching on the Eucharist is alarming. However, Our Lord guaranteed that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church (Matthew 16:18). Therefore, we need not doubt that the truth will be preserved and triumph.
 

2. CHURCH TEACHINGS ON THE HOLY EUCHARIST

Do the widespread disagreements regarding the Holy Eucharist mean that the Church has not clearly defined and explained her teaching on the Holy Eucharist yet? We can see that such is not the case by reviewing the Church documents. The following are the key doctrines on the Eucharist declared by the Council of Trent (1551) with the authority of infallibility, which all Catholics are to accept with the obedience of faith.

a. If anyone denies that in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist there are truly, really, and substantially contained the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore the whole Christ, but shall say that He is in it as by a sign or figure, or force, let him be anathema (DS 1651).

b. If anyone says that in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist there remains the substance of bread and wine together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denies that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the entire substance of the wine into the blood, the species of the bread and wine only remaining, a change which the Catholic Church most fittingly calls transubstantiation: let him be anathema (DS 1652).

By this doctrine, the contention by Luther that bread and wine coexist with the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist was rejected. Also, the opinion adopted by several theologians in the 17th and 18th Centuries (Emmanuel Maignan, John Saguens and others), which denied the physical reality of the species of bread and wine in the Eucharist and claimed that they were mere illusions, could be rejected based on this doctrine.

c. If anyone denies that the whole Christ is contained in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist under each species and under every part of each species, when the separation has been made: let him be anathema (DS 1653).

By this doctrine, the views of the Hussites as well as the Protestant reformers, who demanded Communion under both species, were rejected. This doctrine also means that we must treat every little piece of the Sacred Host and every drop of the Sacred Blood with utmost reverence and care. If one lacks faith in the true, substantial presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist and in every part of the eucharistic species, he is likely to treat the Eucharist carelessly.

44.

 

 

d. If anyone says that after the completion of the consecration that the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ is not in the marvelous sacrament of the Eucharist, but only in use, while it is taken, not however before or after, and that in the hosts or consecrated particles, which are reserved or remain after communion, the true body of the Lord does not remain: let him be anathema (DS 1654).

e. If anyone says that in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist the only-begotten Son of God is not to be adored even outwardly with the worship of latria (the act of adoration), and therefore not to be venerated with a special festive celebration, nor to be borne about in procession according to the praiseworthy and universal rite and custom of the holy Church, or is not to be set before the people publicly to be adored, and that the adorers of it are idolators: let him be anathema (DS 1656).

The traditional teachings of the Church on the Eucharist were reconfirmed in Pope Paul VI’s encyclical, Mysterium Fidei (1965), in which Christ’s Presence in the Eucharist is referred to as “a new reality” in which “Christ, whole and entire, in His physical ‘reality’ is bodily present“. Paul VI also warned against the modernist view which was silent about the Transubstantiation and tried to explain the changes in the bread and wine as changes in significance and goals only. According to this view, the changes in bread and wine are not real but symbolic, like a kitchen knife becoming a tool of crime if used by a robber and a white towel becoming a sign of surrender or truce, if waved during a war. This modernist view is basically the same as the Calvinists.


3. THE REALITY OF GOD THE SON’S INCARNATION CONTINUES THROUGH THE BLESSED SACRAMENT

The essence of the Church teaching on the Holy Eucharist is that, even though the Eucharist has the external properties of bread and wine, it is not bread or wine at all but truly the whole, living Jesus Christ with His divinity, soul, body and blood. This teaching lies at the heart of the Catholic Faith.

This doctrine also means that we need not envy the Lord’s disciples who were with Him two thousand years ago, because we can also be with Him in a true, physical, and intimate way. Of course, there is a difference in the ways Our Lord was physically present then and is now. Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist does not conduct any external physical activity, as it is not the purpose of this sacrament to extend His external activity on earth. He already completed His mission on earth two thousand years ago, revealing all the supernatural truth that is necessary for our salvation, sanctifying human life by living it Himself, suffering and dying in reparation for human sins, and overcoming death by resurrection. However, these historical works of Christ did not fade away into the past but are made present to every human being in all ages (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1085). Through the Holy Eucharist, Our Lord’s substantial presence continues for an intrinsic union with us; through the Mass, His Sacrifice on the Cross becomes present for us, with the graces from it flowing into our souls; in the Sacrament of Confession, our sins are truly forgiven by the merit and authority of Christ; and, His teachings with divine authority and purity are available to us through the Church. In this perpetual reality of God the Son’s Incarnation and Redemptive Work through His Church, the Holy Eucharist occupies the central position.

4. THE REASONS WHY OUR LORD IN THE EUCHARIST HAS THE APPEARANCES OF BREAD AND WINE

Why does Our Lord conceal His true appearance behind the species of bread and wine in the Holy Eucharist? There may be two reasons.

First, the Eucharist is God the Son Who became incarnate in our world. The infinite dignity proper to His divinity demands that we approach Him with the deepest possible respect and faithfulness. In the Blessed Sacrament, however, Christ is concealing His glory and dignity behind the humble appearances of bread and wine, because He does not want to appeal to our vanity and selfishness but to our genuine faith and love. He is presenting Himself to us in a simple way, because He seeks a childlike response which is not motivated by self-interest but by total trust and love. When we really trust and love the Lord, we can easily overcome the lowliness of the appearances of bread and wine and recognize the most beautiful, holy, and loving Lord with our spiritual eyes. Also, if we have failed to love Him by violating any of His Commandments, it will be our courtesy worthy of Him to make up for it through sincere repentance and Confession before receiving Him in Communion.

Second, Our Lord has the appearances of bread and wine to make it easier for us to receive Him. As bread and wine are foods for our bodies, it seems appropriate that our spiritual food is represented by the signs of bread and wine.
 

5. THE EUCHARIST AS A PERPETUAL MIRACLE

When Archbishop Giovanni Bulaitis, the former Apostolic Pro-Nuncio in Korea, came to Naju on November 24, 1994, the Blessed Mother gave us the following message:

Today I called you, whom I love most dearly, in a special way to this place where you will experience the Lord’s presence and mine as heroic and faithful witnesses so that the Mystery of the Holy Eucharist may be made known all over the world. So, help me hurriedly to save the sheep that have been lost.

I have repeatedly said that the Mystery of the Holy Eucharist, which is the Bread of Life from Heaven, is a spring that never dries and a medicine that gives you salvation. But only very few are making preparation before receiving Him. If my numerous children only knew that the Eucharist is truly the Life, the everlasting spring, the Manna and a perpetual miracle that is no less than the miracles of the Creation of the Universe and of the Redemption, they would not be walking toward hell. . . . The Holy Eucharist is the center of all the supernatural events, but is being trampled by so many children through sacrilege, insult and humiliation. Therefore, my messages of love must be spread all over the world more vigorously so that the time of the Lord, Who is present in the Eucharist and of the New Pentecost may be advanced.

 

 

A concept in the above message that is considered here is that the Eucharist is “a perpetual miracle” or “a continuing miracle.” How is the Eucharist a perpetual miracle? A miracle is a phenomenon in the physical world that occurs by the power of God in a manner that surpasses the natural laws of the physical world. During every Mass, a great miracle occurs at the time of the priest’s consecration of bread and wine, when the substances of bread and wine turn into the substances of Our Lord’s Body and Blood. This phenomenon is not visible to our eyes, but is a true physical reality that occurs by the power of God, which is totally beyond natural laws or human capabilities. These miraculous conversions of bread and wine into Our Lord’s Body and Blood are phenomena of changes that occur instantaneously, resulting in a new physical reality. Then, what is meant by “a perpetual miracle“?

Normally, the appearance (by the appearance or the species is understood everything that is perceived by the senses, such as size, extent, weight, shape, color, taste, and smell) of bread is inseparable from the substance of bread; and the appearance of wine is inseparable from the substance of wine. In easier words, bread looks like bread and wine looks like wine. In the Blessed Sacrament, however, the appearances of bread and wine continue, while the substances of bread and wine are absent, because the substances of bread and wine have been replaced by the substances of Our Lord’s Body and Blood. The appearances of bread and wine cannot be said to inhere in and be sustained by the substances of Our Lord’s Body and Blood, because the appearances of bread and wine are not proper to the substances of Our Lord’s Body and Blood. Therefore, the appearances of bread and wine in the Eucharist continue without a subject (The Roman Catechism II 4, 13), which is naturally impossible. This amazing condition is made possible only because it is being sustained by a special intervention by God, not just for one moment or a short period of time but as long as the appearances of bread and wine in the Eucharist continue. In other words, the external signs of bread and wine in the Blessed Sacrament are not sustained naturally but by a special and continuing intervention by God. It seems to be in this sense that the Blessed Mother in Naju referred to the Eucharist as “a perpetual miracle”. Therefore, when we are before the Blessed Sacrament, we should have a profound sense of awe and gratitude, because we are facing an ongoing miracle of God Who calls us to overcome the external appearances of bread and wine with faith and recognize and accept the incarnate God the Son with love and adoration.

So, when a Eucharistic miracle occurs, it may be thought of as “a suspension of the perpetual miracle in the Eucharist.” In other words, during a Eucharistic miracle, God discontinues to sustain the appearances of bread and wine in the Eucharist in order to expose the inner reality of the Sacrament, which is the Body and Blood of Our Lord. Thus, a Eucharistic miracle is a sign from God as His own testimony to the awesome true reality of the Eucharist. St. Thomas Aquinas wrote on this subject as follows:

This is not deception, because it is done to represent the truth, namely, to show by this miraculous apparition that Christ’s body and blood are truly in this sacrament. (Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 76: Of the Way in Which Christ is in This Sacrament, Article 8)
 

6. DO THE MIRACULOUS CHANGES IN THE EUCHARISTIC SPECIES CONTRADICT THE CHURCH TEACHING?

The Declaration on Naju by the Kwangju (=Gwangju) Archdiocese included the following statement regarding the Eucharistic miracles in Naju:

The alleged phenomenon, that as soon as Mrs. Julia Kim received the Eucharist, it was changed into a lump of bloody flesh in her mouth is also contrary to the doctrine of the Catholic Church that says that even after the bread and wine are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ with the formula of priests’ consecration, the species of bread and wine remain. (cf. Pope Paul VI’s Mysterium Fidei; DS. 782, 802, 1321, 1640-1642, 1652) (Underline added)

Among the Church documents mentioned above as the grounds for rejecting the Eucharistic miracles in Naju, the most relevant one is the doctrine declared by the Council of Trent (DS 1652):

If anyone says that in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist there remains the substance of bread and wine together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denies that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the entire substance of the wine into the blood, the species of the bread and wine only remaining, a change which the Catholic Church most fittingly calls transubstantiation: let him be anathema. (Underline added)

The validity of the negative judgment on the Eucharistic miracles in Naju by the Kwangju Archdiocese crucially depends on whether the above-quoted doctrinal presentation in the Kwangju Declaration conforms to the above-quoted doctrine by the Council of Trent. The following is a discussion of the probable problems.

(1) The Kwangju Declaration says that the species of bread and wine remain even after the transubstantiation of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ by the priest’s consecration. The doctrine issued by the Council of Trent says that the entire substances of bread and wine change into the body and blood of Christ, the species of the bread and wine only remaining. Are these two statements essentially the same? They can be, if no other connotations are added that alter the original meaning of the doctrine.

In the Kwangju Declaration, the connotation that the species of bread and wine must remain after the consecration is present. In the Korean text of the Declaration, the Korean equivalent of “must” is in the sentence itself, while it exists only in the context in the English text. In both texts, the meaning that the species of bread and wine must continue to be unchanged even after the consecration is clear, because the miraculous changes in the eucharistic species in Naju were rejected on the basis of this doctrinal presentation in Kwangju.

46.

 

 

 

Then, is this meaning of “must” present in the doctrine issued by the Council of Trent? The correct answer has to be “No”. This doctrine was intended to explain the effects of the priest’s consecration, which are the changes in the substances only without any changes in the species. The doctrine means that the appearances of bread and wine remain unchanged despite the consecration. In other words, the consecration does not have the power to alter the species of bread and wine. Obviously, this is different from saying that the species of bread and wine must continue even after the consecration. If this latter statement were correct, even the natural changes in the Eucharist inside our bodies after Communion may also have to be denied.

(2) In the 8th Century, a priest was celebrating Mass in Lanciano, Italy, while strongly doubting the presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist. As soon as he said the words of consecration, the appearances of the Eucharist changed into those of flesh and blood. This miracle has been officially approved by the Church. It would, however, be in conflict with the Church teaching as presented in the Kwangju Declaration, because the species of bread and wine did not remain after the consecration in that miracle in Lanciano. If the changes in the eucharistic species occurred by the power of the priest’s consecration, that would violate the Church doctrine. However, if such changes occurred by a special intervention by God, they cannot be in conflict with the Church teaching.

Likewise in Naju, the Eucharistic miracles cannot be said to have violated the Church doctrine, because it has never been claimed or perceived that these miracles involving changes in the eucharistic species occurred by the power of the priest’s consecration. It is not right to reject the possibility of God’s special work on the basis of a Church doctrine that explains what normally happens in a Sacrament. Or is it a reluctance to recognize that God sometimes does use miracles as special ways of communicating with His people? Such a reluctance is not mentioned in the Kwangju Declaration, but there seems to be an inclination to deny even the possibility of Eucharistic miracles, because, according to the doctrinal presentation in the Kwangju Declaration, all of the Eucharistic miracles in Church history would violate the Church teaching. A reluctance to be open to the possibility of miracles would be a reluctance to accept the following Church doctrine issued by Vatican Council I:

If anyone shall have said that miracles are not possible, and hence that all accounts of them, even those contained in Sacred Scripture, are to be banished among the fables and myths; or, that miracles can never be known with certitude, and that the divine origin of the Christian religion cannot be correctly proved by them, let him be anathema (DS 3034).

(3) The Kwangju Declaration does not contradict the Church teaching that Our Lord is truly, substantially present in the Eucharist, as the doctrine of transubstantiation is mentioned in the Declaration. However, the Declaration seems to represent a weakening of the faith in the traditional Catholic teaching on Christ’s substantial presence in the Eucharist, because it rejects the miracles that reveal the true inner reality of the Blessed Sacrament and also says: Such phenomena do not enhance the faith of people in the Eucharist existing under the species of bread and wine. On the contrary, they seem to act as an element which causes a great confusion and embarrasses the peoples’ faith in the Eucharist. Besides, the leading theologian in the Naju Investigating Committee said in an article in Pastoral Care, a monthly Catholic magazine in Korea that the real reason for the rejection of the Eucharistic miracles in the Kwangju Declaration was to promote unity between Catholics and Protestants. Therefore, it seems that the Kwangju Declaration had been influenced by a thinking that does not correctly defend the traditional Catholic Faith in the Eucharist.


7. CAN THE SACRED HOSTS THAT DESCENDED TO THE CHAPEL IN NAJU BE UNCONSECRATED HOSTS?

There has been another kind of Eucharistic miracle in Naju, involving descents of the Sacred Hosts. On November 24, 1994, during the visit to Naju by Archbishop Giovanni Bulaitis, the Apostolic Pro-Nuncio in Korea at that time, the Eucharist descended twice in the Chapel. Most of the first Eucharist was consumed by the people present in the Chapel. A small remaining part and the whole second Eucharist are being preserved in the chapel at Fr. Raymond Spies’ residence near Seoul. On July 1, 1995, during the overnight prayer meeting, seven Sacred Hosts descended together. On July 1, 1996, several Sacred Hosts descended and entered Julia’s mouth. During Bishop Paul Kim’s visit on June 12, 1997, a large Eucharist descended and later on the same day was taken to the Kwangju (=Gwangju) Archdiocesan office. On July 13, 1997, a large Eucharist descended again, this time while a monsignor from Rome was visiting. This Eucharist was consumed by the monsignor. On August 27, 1997, a large Eucharist descended during Fr. Spies’ visit and was later taken to the Kwangju Archdiocesan office. This last descent of the Eucharist was videotaped with two cameras on the ceiling in the Chapel, which are turned on when there are important events like overnight prayer meetings and visits by bishops. All together, the Eucharist descended seven times in Naju between July 1, 1995 and August 27, 1997.

A question has been raised regarding whether what came down in the Chapel in Naju were unconsecrated hosts. First, if the descents of the hosts were fabricated by humans, they can be unconsecrated hosts. However, according to hundreds of witnesses and the video recordings and still photos taken during the miracles, there is no indication whatsoever that these descents of the hosts were human works. Second, could it be the devil’s work? It is unthinkable that the devil brings the real Eucharist. Then, can he bring unconsecrated hosts? It seems improbable that God will allow such confusing events to happen, but the possibility cannot be rejected entirely. Has there been any evidence for believing that the descents of the hosts in Naju were not caused by the devil?

The seven hosts that descended on July 1, 1995, were consumed the next day in obedience to the Kwangju Archbishop’s instruction. The host that was received by Julia turned into visible flesh and blood in her mouth a few seconds after she received it. When a priest dipped his finger in the blood on Julia’s tongue and blessed a dying baby girl in her mother’s arms, she was cured. Some of the blood stains collected on a piece of white cloth was later subjected to a DNA test in a medical laboratory at Seoul National University and was found to be human blood.

 

 

Also, usually immediately prior to a descent of the Eucharist, Julia saw Our Lord suffering and bleeding on the Cross and His Blood turning into white Sacred Hosts, which then descended to the Chapel. The descent of the Sacred Hosts was witnessed by many in the Chapel.

In the Kwangju Declaration, it is stated that the hosts that descended in Naju cannot be recognized as the real Eucharist, because there is no evidence that they were consecrated by priests. However, according to the above-mentioned vision seen by Julia, Our Lord’s Blood turned into the Eucharist, which was a change in the species only without any change in the substance. This change in species was not a transubstantiation. Therefore, it did not require consecration by a priest. It is also possible that the Eucharist was brought from a tabernacle by angels as happened in other similar miracles in Church history.

Lastly, if the miracles in Naju occurred by the power of God, is it possible that He sent unconsecrated hosts? This would be impossible in view of God’s truthfulness. If unconsecrated hosts were sent when people would perceive them as the real Eucharist, confusion would have resulted. This would contradict the dogma that God is infinitely truthful and is the truth itself.

Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion regarding these miracles is that true Eucharist came down to the Chapel in Naju.


8. WERE THE EUCHARISTIC MIRACLES IN NAJU “INTENTIONAL”?

Some say that the alleged Eucharistic miracles in Naju are suspected of being intentional, because some of them occurred in the presence of the Pope and Bishops. Then, do they mean that miracles can be genuine only when they occur accidentally and randomly to anybody? We are not talking about just “strange phenomena” but the signs which occur by the Providence of God Who is leading the history of human salvation. Then, in order for the signs and miracles to be genuine, they must occur by God’s Will, namely, His Intention. Apart from God’s Will and Plan, there cannot be genuine miracles. The Incarnation of God the Son, the miracle in Cana, the coming back to life of Lazarus, Our Lord’s Resurrection and Ascension, the Blessed Mother’s Assumption, the Blessed Mother’s apparitions in Paris, Lourdes and Fatima, . . . none of these were accidental or apart from God’s intention. It should not be difficult for anyone to understand why God has been showing special signs to the Pope, Bishops and priests who are pastors of His people. Through Moses, God showed miracles repeatedly to Pharaoh, the King of Egypt. Through Juan Diego in Guadalupe, God gave the Miraculous Image of Our Lady to Bishop Zumarraga. We need not suspect the special signs that God sent to His ministers because they seemed to be “intentional.”


9. THE CHURCH ALLOWS FREEDOM OF CHOICE TO THE FAITHFUL REGARDING HOW THEY RECEIVE COMMUNION

It was about 1,200 years ago, the 9th Century, when Catholics began receiving Communion on the tongue only, receiving Communion in the species of bread only, and using unleavened bread out of their deep respect for the Blessed Sacrament and the priesthood. Only a few decades ago, the Apostolic See gave permission to the bishops’ conferences in several countries allowing Communion in the hand. The intention was not to discourage the traditional way of Communion on the tongue but only to allow Communion in the hand as another way of receiving Communion. In some countries like Korea, however, Communion in the hand has practically become the rule. Those who try to receive Communion on the tongue, even including visitors from abroad, are asked to receive Communion in the hand instead. Pope John Paul II remarked about this practice in his encyclical: Dominicae Cenae, February 24, 1980, addressed to all the Bishops in the world:

In some countries the practice of receiving Communion in the hand has been introduced. This practice has been requested by individual episcopal conferences and has received approval from the Apostolic See. However, cases of a deplorable lack of respect towards the eucharistic species have been reported, cases which are imputable not only to the individuals guilty of such behavior but also to the pastors of the church who have not been vigilant enough regarding the attitude of the faithful towards the Eucharist. It also happens, on occasion, that the free choice of those who prefer to continue the practice of receiving the Eucharist on the tongue is not taken into account in those places where the distribution of Communion in the hand has been authorized. . . To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist. It is obvious that the Church can grant this faculty to those who are neither priests nor deacons. . .


10. CONCLUSION

The greatest task facing us in the Church now is to expel the modernist errors and tendencies from the Church and restore the splendor of the authentic Catholic Faith. The first requirement in achieving this goal would be to re-establish a firm trust in the revealed truth—namely, the authentic Church teachings. The totality of these teachings must be recognized as gifts from God Himself rather than human works. Especially the widespread confusion about the Holy Eucharist must be overcome. At the same time, a profound trust in and love for the Blessed Mother, who is the essential companion to the Lord in His Work of Human Salvation, must be restored. God willingly chose Mary as the (secondary and, yet, essential) principle of God’s the Son’s Incarnation. Then, we must accept God’s will and follow His way by also relying on Mary in following Christ and His teachings and in pursuing an intimate union with Him in our daily lives. A lady belonging to a Protestant denomination told her Catholic friend: “When I get sick, I go to a doctor, not to his mother.” However, we go to a doctor in this world for a limited purpose of receiving treatment of our physical illness.

 

48.

 

 

Our relationship with doctors, lawyers, technicians, businessmen, and so on is a limited, businesslike one. Our relationship with the Lord, on the other hand, involves total dedication, love and trust. God is our Father, our Lord and our everything. Also, God’s world is a kingdom and a family. In a kingdom, there are a king and a queen as well as subjects. In a family, there are a father and a mother as well as children. If we can imagine the emptiness and lack of warmth in a family without the mother, we should also be able to understand how necessary the Blessed Mother is to each one of us in the Church, which is truly God’s family. Besides, God has so filled the Blessed Mother with His Love and Holiness that she has become the surest help and guide for us to come closer to God. If we truly believe that the Eucharist is Our Lord, it should not be difficult for us to realize that Our Lady is the Mother of the Eucharist.

—Sang M. Lee (from Mary’s Touch, October 1999 newsletter) [Concluded; this section was commenced on page 29]

 

THE LEADING NAJUITES IN INDIA

Those visiting Naju and promoting Julia Kim as a genuine mystic are:

1. Most Rev. Stephen Lepcha, Bishop of Darjeeling

2. Edmund Antao, The Association of Crusaders for Jesus with Mary, Vasco, Goa

3. Fr. Jose Antonio Costa, Parish Priest of St. Andrew’s Church, Vasco, Goa

4. Fr. Joseph Anthony Mazarello, Goa

4. Fr. Jagdish Parmar SJ, Nanchi, Sikkim, Diocese of Darjeeling

5. Fr. Augustine, Ariyalur, Kumbakonam, Tamil Nadu

 

All the following information is sourced from the official Naju, Korea web site unless otherwise mentioned

 

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2009/2009-7-4_firstsaturday.htm:

JULY 4, 2009


Fr. Augustine from India giving his testimony. He brought a chasuble with an image of Our Lady of Naju as a gift to Naju.

 

Beloved sister Julia Kim and dear friends,

Thank you very much for the warm welcome that you have given me and the prayers said for me. I am happy to be here at the feet of Our Mother in Naju. It is the providence of God that I am here. I’m a Roman Catholic priest of the diocese of Kumbakonam, India, a pilgrim who, out of love for the Blessed Mother, taken this pilgrim journey with the help of my bro. Rock Paul.

I came to know about the signs from heaven in Naju from him. He handed over some copies of the “Messages of Love” to my sister Caroline to be distributed. She gave me a book and some pictures. It was in 1999, bro. Rock Paul brought me a statue of Our Blessed Mother from Naju, which I was keeping it in my room.

In 2002, we had a Marian convention. To prepare the parish of Michael Patti for this convention, along with Fr. E. Adaikalasamy, Assistant, we planned to take the statue of Our Mother to each home, keep her for 24 hours and make the home abode by Our Mother. The suggestion was welcomed by the people. To welcome Our Mother, every house was decorated, invited the near and dear ones to their home to pray for the whole day and night. During her visit to the houses, she gave abundant blessings to all the family members. The people experienced her loving presence.

On the first day of her visit to a house, she began her ministry of healing. A small child of 6 months had to be operated on the following day. The parents were afraid and they brought the child and placed him in front of Our Mother’s statue and remained there for the whole day praying for the miraculous touch of Our Mother. Next day the child was taken to the hospital, and the doctor was astonished to see that the child was healed. This message of healing of Our Blessed Mother spread far and wide and all the families of the parish wanted to invite Our Blessed Mother to their homes. Hence we approached the Carmelite Convent in Kumbakonam, received another statue of Our Blessed Mother which was in their Chapel. With two statues of Our Blessed Mother, we were able to cover more than 300 families, 10 substations and 15 parishes of the vicariate.

49.

 

 

 

In one house till midnight, prayer was conducted. They wanted to rest a while, that they might rise again at 3 am to pray while the woman was still awake, she saw Our Blessed Mother walking inside the house visiting all the rooms blessing the home. In another house Our Blessed Mother turned her head towards a woman and smiled at her.

A son of a widow was lost for more than two years and she did not know where about, and even gave up searching for him. When we had taken Our Blessed Mother’s statue to her home, she asked me to pray for her son that she might see her son soon.

After the prayers I told her that she would have a message from her son within two days. Next day she rushed to inform me that she had received the message from her son.

There were so many other miraculous happenings during her visit to the houses. Due to her visit a spiritual renewal was given to the parish.

1. Many of the broken families were brought to reunion.

2. Earlier there were many suicides in the Parish. After Our Blessed Mother’s visit in six years there was only one suicide.

3. A man who was drinking illicit liquor for more than 18 years stopped drinking from the day of Our Mother’s visit. This is just one example of many such changes.

4. Through our preaching, we made our people understand that abortion is to kill a person and go against God’s plan.

5. Most of the families enjoyed Our Blessed Mother’s real presence.

6. The Marian convention was conducted in a grand manner. It was attended by more than 7,500 people from all over the vicariate for three full days. Teaching on Mary, the Rosary, the adoration and Eucharist celebration were part of the daily programme. The whole parish involved in all the programmes.

7. Everything was due to Our Blessed Mother.

In short, the whole parish enjoyed peace and serenity thanks to the Blessed Mother’s visits to their homes.

Ever since I read the Messages of Love, I began to love Our Lord in the Eucharist ardently and love Our Mother as her Son would have loved her.

Fr. Augustine, Ariyalur – DT, TN, India

 

Our Lady of Naju put in the Madonna Retreat Center in India

 

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2010/2010-5-16.htm:

MAY 16, 2010, Anniversary of the first Eucharistic miracle – Indian pilgrimage came to Naju for the anniversary.


 

The pilgrims from India expressing their homage to the Lord’s Precious Blood which had descended to the floor in the Blessed Mother’s Chapel in Naju

50.

 

The pilgrims from India made a deep bow to the Lord and the Blessed Mother as a sign of gratitude as soon as they entered the Blessed Mother’s Chapel in Naju.


Edmund Antao

51.

 

A testimony by Mr. Edmund Antao

Alleluia, Alleluia, Alleluia!

My dear friends, and my dear peoples who loves Jesus and Mary so much. We bring greetings today to you from India. We came from a part in India call Goa and this is birth place of Cardinal Ivan Dias who is supporting Naju so much. And so God of brother here in order to encourage you and also to help make Our Lady of Naju known. You may be going through lots of difficulties don’t worry. Darkness of the devil may seem to be all around us but remember, victory is close by and I pray to God I pray to God that with this night of prayer, tonight! Direction of in changed to moves ahead the church’s recognition.

Dear friends! in the Bible many times during night time God has worked the victories. Remember in night time God took Israelites out of Egypt. St. Paul was in jail during night time in mid night God brought earthquake and the jail shook, all the doors flew open. Again it was during time that our savor was born. I pray today night is that beginning, new beginning for Naju. Alleluia!

We are catholic lay people coming from Goa. We belong to an Association, we love Mother Mary very much. And although we live in Goa, We do work of Jesus for Jesus all of India. Some of our work is to conduct big public convention. Some of work is to conduct retreat, for youth for many peoples even for the priest all of India and So Our Lady brought us here today in order to test more of love of Jesus.

My dear friends!

We came to Naju like the 3 kings who came searching for baby Jesus. We came to Naju because we want to see power the glory of God in our own lives what God has done here in Naju. And when we landed in south Korea, we were wondering why did God work this miracle here only in Korea.

Bu tin the last two days we got the answer.

Last two day we saw Korean people are a very brave and encouraged peoples

They will shed their blood, and they produced martyrs like Andrew Kim they will not give up. And so God knew that despite all difficulties peoples of Naju would stand up and wouldn’t give up. So whole places God find it decided to do this great things here in Naju.

 

52.

 

 

Dear friends! We also came here because Our Lady promised whoever come to Naju I will wash them clean we needed God to wash us. Don’t think because I am speaking to you we are big Saints, we are a sinners we need God’s washing and we believe Our Lady has washed us to coming to Naju. And we have been moved by the love of our Lady here and what she has done we can see the love even in volunteers all had it with us we really moved.,

Now look up ahead dear friend Bible said one door is closed God open the other door. After coming to Naju we have been convinced that more of India should know about what is happening here in Naju. The Message of Naju is very important for the whole world. There is no time to loose, there is no time to loose now. There is no time for delay now. We have to do it as soon as possible. As you all say Ppali Ppali or Quickly. Alleluia, Alleluia, Alleluia!

And therefore, we have decided to invite Julia Kim to visit India as soon as possible. God willing this visit will take place before the end of this year.

We will organizes the programs we will bring the people we want Julia to come and speak and say what is happening in Naju and we will say we have seen with our eyes. We will spread Naju in India more powerfully which means that more than more peoples from India would be coming here to see for themselves and increase their faith.

Dear friends! Prayer can do very much. Prayers more powerful than the bomb.

One door was closed and look how God through your payers has opened another door now. Alleluia Alleluia

Don’t be discourage Naju, don’t be discourage we are behind you. Through prayer let’s keep the faith. Let’s trust in God who never let us down. This nice experience last 10 years though here taken problems here never ever for the faithful God. When we decided to come to Naju only 35 given the name by the time we finish to registration number has come to 55 And then after that another 15 came and Please we want to come. 70 have to come today. Alleluia!

Korean Embassy in India for some reason little problem I take to get a visa easily. But two hours shock in surprise in the case of the 70. We were cleared by the Embassy that is the power of God.

If you ask many among the 70, they had a lot of financial problem and another problem to come here to Naju. Each of them has a testimony to give of miracles how the Lord opened the way and resolved problems and here they are in Naju.

That is why say to you. Dear friends! God is faith. It is real feel God.

25 years ago when Naju the first miracle took place, I, in India didn’t even know God. I didn’t believe in God at that time. I was a person who is to make fun of God. I was suffering also from sickness and because of that I was so sick body was abnormal. And I was angry with God. I didn’t know him. I didn’t believe him. Then, this Blessed Lady one day suddenly changed my life. On a day that I was supposed to commit a suicide she intervened. I all my second life was with Blessed Mother. And again and again Our Lady’s has come to help me. That’s why I love Our Lady much and The Association, all of us love Our Lady very, very much. When you come to Our Lady She will always lead you Her Son Jesus. This is nice experience last few years. So my hearts are burning inside to reach Naju. And hearts are big sad because one more day only and then we are going back.

But It is not the end. With help of God we are going go ahead now. (That means the invitation of Julia Kim to India)

Pray dear friends! Pray dear friends! We may succeed in India.

And whether the devil close one door, another door opened by God and Naju will go ahead the recognition of the Church

God bless all of you! God Bless Naju! God Bless Korea! Alleluia, Alleluia!!!

You know we need to say Alleluia louder. This will not even reach to this road

Alleluia! Alleluia has reach the Church Authority in Korea and reach to Rome

Alleluia, Alleluia! Let’s give big clap to Our Lady! Thank you so much. Alleluia!

(Coordinator General) Edmund Antao, The Association of Crusaders for Jesus with Mary
Ground Floor, St. Andrew’s Residency, Opp. KTC Bus Stand – Mundvel, Vasco da Gama-Goa 403 802 INDIA      

May 16, 2010

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2010/2010-5-16.htm:

Fr. Augustine visited to Naju last year and received the Precious Blood on his soutane

53.

 

 

Fr. Jagdish Parmar SJ

A testimony by Fr. Jagdish Parmar SJ

This is deposited by his testimony during the Vigil of 19th anniversary of Eucharistic miracle on May 16 2010, held in Naju Alleluia! Praise the Lord!

My dear friends in Christ I’ve never dreamt of coming to Naju.

When Bro. Edmund came to Sikkim to give a retreat for the youth and he just mentioned he was planning to come to Naju. I just mentioned I know Our Lady of Naju, because 5 years ago had read about Our Lady of Naju. And from that day, I had included the Name of Our Lady of Naju in the Litany of Our Lady. I was praying to Our Lady of Naju daily. She has told me that she will take me to Naju. But I don’t believe at that time.

Anyway, now I am here Naju even if it was a lot of difficulties for me to come to Naju. I am a Marian priest and I know that Our Lady has made me a priest and brought me here in Naju.

I came here to give you just one message.

Nothing is impossible for our Lady, as Our Lady made me became a priest, Naju will be approved by the Vatican.

Alleluia!

Fr. Jagdish Parmar S.J
St. Peter’s Catholic Church, Diocese of Darjeeling
Namchi-737126, South Sikkim, India

 

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2011/2011-04-21.htm:

APRIL 21, 2011

The group of Naju pilgrims from Goa, India

The chaplain of pilgrimages, Father Joseph Anthony Mazarello who is classmate of Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of Congregation for the Evangelization of peoples and he made this trip for his 53 rd anniversary of his ordination of priesthood. Father Joseph Anthony Mazarello gave us encouragement in his testimony and specially said “We all of us 72 pilgrims saw that Julia Kim received the extreme sufferings and it is great graces for us and myself especially. The reason why I came to Naju is to confirm and witness the signs that I had read and watched in my country then, all these came true to me. Now I have a lot of things to say and teach to many peoples in Goa, India.”

[…] Father Joseph from Goa, India picked up one of the stones wetted with fragrant oil.

54.

 

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2013/2013-05-16.htm:

MAY 14, 2013

His Excellency Bishop Stefano from the Darjeeling Diocese in West Bengal, and Fr. Antonio* with 43 lay pilgrims from Goa, India came to Naju on May 14, 2013.  They spent 4 days in Naju (until May 17) witnessing the evidence of numerous miracles, praying fervently in the Blessed Mother’s House and on her Mountain, and receiving abundant graces of the Blessed Mother’s Love and of repentance.  They also participated in the prayer meeting in the vinyl chapel on May 16, 2013, the 22nd anniversary of the Eucharistic Miracle that had occurred in the Naju Parish Church.

The Eucharistic miracle on May 16, 1991 was that involved a change of the Eucharist into the visible Flesh and Blood.  God sent these miracles repeatedly in Naju to awaken those who do not believe in the Real Presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist and to strengthen the faith of those who already believe it. 

Bishop Stephen Lepcha and a priest from India* … and lay pilgrims praying under the Crucifix at Mt. Calvary

The pilgrims from India were amazed by seeing and touching the drops of the body fluid formed at the hems of St. John’s clothes

[Bishop Stephen Lepcha of Darjeeling] Procession with the Blessed Mother’s statue toward the vinyl Chapel on the Blessed Mother’s Mountain

 

[Bishop Stephen Lepcha of Darjeeling] The procession into the vinyl Chapel.

The Blessed Mother’s statue is being placed in a model of the Ark of Salvation helped by His Excellency Bishop Steven [Bishop Stephen Lepcha of Darjeeling]
and a priest from India*

[Bishop Stephen Lepcha of Darjeeling]
and priests bring flowers and candles to Julia so that she may offer them before the Blessed Mother of Naju

*https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=529656263763749&set=a.529654630430579.1073741826.236494666413245&type=3&theater The priest is Fr. Jose Antonio Costa, Parish Priest of St. Andrew’s Church, Vasco, Goa This information is from the Facebook pages of
Edmund Antao‘s
Crusaders…”.

56.

 

The Holy Mass concelebrated by the Bishop
[Bishop Stephen Lepcha of Darjeeling]
and four priests

The Bishop [Bishop Stephen Lepcha of Darjeeling] from India consoles and thanks Julia

The Bishop from India
[Bishop Stephen Lepcha of Darjeeling]
giving his testimony to the graces that he received in Naju

 
 

57.

 

The Bishop
[Bishop Stephen Lepcha of Darjeeling], priests, and lay people from India and the Korean pilgrims praising the Lord and the Blessed Mother with songs and dances united as one at the end of the prayer meeting

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=529662643763111&set=a.529654630430579.1073741826.236494666413245&type=3&theater
This photo is from the Facebook pages of
Edmund Antao‘s
Crusaders


 

“DESCENT OF THE EUCHARIST”

The first alleged occurrence on the “Descent of the Eucharist” was on November 24, 1992.

Please see the Catholic interpretation of these phenomena by Ronald L. Conte on pages 6 ff.

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2008/2008-12-6.htm:


Near the end of the Mass celebrating the First Saturday on December 6, 2008, a Sacred Host came down from above

 

The Sacred Host that came down during the Mass on December 6, 2008 was slightly larger and harder than the hosts that are normally made in the convents in Korea and used in the churches in Korea. There was an image of the cross in the middle. Some thought that this Sacred Host was not made by humans but was formed directly by Jesus.

Night vigil Anniversary of Fragrant Oil & Descent of the Eucharist

NOVEMBER 24, 2010

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2010/2010-11-24.htm

Today is anniversary of Eucharistic miracle that experienced former pro-nuncio Archbishop Giovanni Bulaitis. During the time big Host came down and Julia received the Host actually from St. Michael the Archangel it was from the priest who was about to consume, already consecrated, but because of sinfulness he was not well disposed so St. Michael the Archangel took away from him and gave it to Julia Kim.

This big Host already broken two halves one is Alpha and the other one is Omega. Alpha was given Raymond Spies who is a spiritual director and Omega to Archbishop Bulaitis.

It was first Priest to help Julia and also to spread the message of love, Omega given to Archbishop Bulaitis, it means he has continue to end this phenomena of Naju.

Now Archbishop Bulaitis is in the Vatican in Rome together with former Pro-nuncio of Korea that is Cardinal Ivan Dias. Both of them, both former Pro-nuncio of Korea are working for Naju very hard in the Vatican in Rome.

So do not worry at all because God is control of every situations and it allows so many things happen to all of us.

Let us persevere continue to come together and to pray together for the triumph of Immaculate Heart of Mary and the reign of the Eucharist Heart of Jesus. That’s why we are here in the mountain in Naju.

 

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2011/2011-03-05.htm

MARCH 5, 2011

The Lord performed the immeasurable miracle which is the descent of the Body of Christ- Three Holy Eucharists descended during the Liturgy of the Eucharist just before Consecration.

One of the altar boys found that a host fell down on the floor near the altar table. Father Lawrence Jung picked it up and put it in the ciborium. He continued to say the mass and thought that the host that came down on the floor might have fallen down from being swept by the right sleeve of his robe. So he continued saying mass thinking that more Sign will happen if it is really the Holy Eucharist instead of just being an unconsecrated host.

Jesus performed and confirmed that the Holy Eucharist that came down was truly His body, not just an unconsecrated host. He did this by giving us another sign. Father Jung was astonished when as he was about to pick up the ciborium to distribute holy communion, he saw two Holy Eucharists on the corporal when there should be nothing in there because he had already broken the large Holy Host and put them into the 5 ciboriums.

There was a little bit of commotion as the two priests for awhile stared at it in utter amazement. Father Jung said that the possibility of a host to be swept by the sleeve of his robe is unlikely because the ciborium is not closely packed but only 90% filled and even these were situated afar from him.

 

 

 

Father Jung asked Julia Kim to discern whether these were really the Holy Eucharist. After praying deeply, Julia Kim confirmed that both the hosts which came down on the floor and the two hosts on the Corporal are authentic.

My beloved children! Clearly tell everyone that the Mystery of Salvation is being realized through Me Who is present in the Holy Eucharist.
(Message from Jesus Nov 2, 1994)

The three Holy Eucharists that came down were thinner compared to the hosts on the altar consecrated by the two priests.

The Holy Eucharist that came down on November 24, 2001 and Jan 1, 2002 were also thinner than the hosts that we ordinarily consume at communion. At the moment of announcement that “The Holy Eucharist truly descended and it is a Eucharistic miracle”, all the pilgrims were deeply moved and praised the Lord giving boundless gratitude to the Lord and the Blessed Mother for reminding us once more that the Eucharist is truly the living Body of Christ.

 

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2011/2011-06-04.htm

June 4, 2011

On April 16, two Sacred Hosts descended during the prayer meeting for the volunteer helpers on the Blessed Mother’s mountain. To show His living presence in the Holy Eucharist ,Two Hosts bled on May 6, 2005 the day after the Declaration issued by Archbishop Choi Chang Mou.

In addition, Jesus gave us a large Eucharist on October 24, 2006 in the Blessed Mother’s House. The high priest, Jesus Christ gave us these Eucharistic blessings through these two miraculous hosts. Where else can we experience these graces of receiving these blessings with the living Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist but in Naju? [See p. 71]


All the following information is sourced from EDMUND ANTAO‘S “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY“, Goa, web site unless otherwise mentioned

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/:

Head Office

Ground Floor, St. Andrew’s Residency, Opp. KTC Bus Stand, Mundvel, Vasco da Gama, Goa, Tel. No: 0832-2516455
Head Office email: cjesusaves@gmail.com

POSTAL ADDRESS

P.B No 1122, Vasco da Gama Goa – India 403 802

North Zone Office

1st Floor, Martins Apartments, Behind Ananas Hotel, Caranzalem, Panaji, Goa, Tel. No: 0832-2432610
Media Centre email: cjesusmedia@gmail.com

Crusaders Media Centre

Shop No. 7, Ground Floor, Casa de Sessoes, Communidade Bldg., Mangor – Vasco da Gama, Goa-403 802, Tel. No: 0832-2532610

WEEKLY PRAYER MEETING VENUES

Panjim Zone – Goa
St. Inez Church, Every Sunday 11.00 am to 1.00 pm
Vasco Zone – Goa
St. Andrew’s Church Hall, Every Wednesday (Eng) 5.45 pm to 7.45 pm, Every Saturday (Konkani) 5.45 pm to 7.45 pm
Margao Zone – Goa
Chapel of St. Theresa, Laar ( Behind BPS Club), Every Thursday 5.30 pm to 7.30 pm

60.

 

 

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/publications/:

The Crusaders Herald is the monthly news bulletin of the ACJM

The Crusaders’ Voice is the bi-monthly Organ of the ACJM:

Crusaders Voice, P.B No. 1122, Vasco da Gama, Goa-403802
Magazine email:
crusadersvoice@gmail.com

 

PROGRAMMES GIVEN BY THE “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM FOR THE “JESUS YOUTH

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/:

Disciple Training Programme

January 2013 – Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu

PHOTO: Participants of the
Jesus Youth
seen here partaking of the Holy Eucharist after making confessions during the Disciple Training Programme conducted by the Crusader Team

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf:

5 day Residential Growth Retreat at Christ College for Jesus Youth (October 2004).

5 day (stay-in) Discipleship Training Programme,
members of Jesus Youth, Gujarat (May 2006)

4 day (stay-in) Youth Retreat for 400 youth held at Renewal Retreat Centre,

Bangalore, organized by the Jesus Youth Bangalore (November 2006)

5 day residential retreat conducted for the Jesus youth at Ryshivana retreat centre, Mangalore (April 2007)

3 day retreat conducted for the Jesus Youth at Delhi followed by a 3 day Disciple Training Programme (DTP) for leaders of the Jesus Youth in Delhi (May 2007)

3 day Residential retreat for the Jesus Youth at Erode (February 2008)

3 day Residential retreat for the Jesus Youth at Chennai (February 2009)

3 day residential retreat for Jesus Youth leaders of Karnataka State held at Vidyavahan Ashram (August 2009)

4 day residential retreat for the Jesus Youth at Renewal Retreat Centre (RRC) (May 2011)

4 day Disciple Training Programme held at Ahmedabad for members of Jesus Youth, Gujarat (August 2011)

3 day Disciple Training Programme held at Coimbatore for members of the Jesus youth, Tamil Nadu (January 2013)

 

PROGRAMMES GIVEN BY EDMUND ANTAO‘S “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM FOR THE CATHOLIC CHARISMATIC RENEWAL

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf:

5 day residential retreat at Navjyoti Diocesan Retreat Centre, Calicut, at invitation of Kerala Service Team, (Calicut Branch) (June 2003)

4 day Residential Retreat for priests/nuns/religious at NRC (Nirmala Retreat Centre), Kulathuvayal run by MSMI of Fr. C.J. Varkey (February 2005); The Kerala Service Team Chairman from EMMAUS also attended this retreat.

4 day Growth Retreat at invitation of Kerala Service Team (Trivandrum Branch) at Our Lady of Lourdes Church, Thiruvananthapuram (July 2005)

4 day (stay-in) higher Growth Retreat held for the Bangalore Service Team, teams of retreat preachers of the Logos Retreat Centre (run by the Vincentian Congregation) in Bangalore. (June 2006)

 

PROGRAMMES GIVEN BY EDMUND ANTAO‘S “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM AT THE DIVINE RETREAT CENTRE, MURINGOOR

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf:

3 day Residential Retreat conducted for Kerala State Government employees at Divine Retreat Centre (DRC), Muringoor – Potta (September 2010)

 

LIST OF BISHOPS SUPPORTING EDMUND ANTAO AND THE “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:

The ACJM involves itself in Missionary Outreaches, particularly in North East India at the behest of the local Bishops. […]

The ACJM has thus far regularly held missionary campaigns in dioceses of Arunachal Pradesh, Darjeeling (W. Bengal), Sikkim, Kohima (Nagaland) & in Tripura. The impact of these campaigns have been tremendous and teams from the ACJM now regularly travel to the North East to conduct retreats there, particularly for the youth, students and married people.

PHOTO:

Most Rev. P.K George, Bishop of Miao (Arunachal Pradesh) & from the CCBI National Proclamation Commission inaugurating the 7th General Assembly 2010 of the ACJM, along with priests from Goa and other parts of the country at the ‘Fr. Alcantra, Raimundo and Lilia Gracias Auditorium, Agnel Ashram, Verna – Goa’ renamed ‘Blessed Joseph Vaz Nagar’ for the occasion. (July 11, 2010)

PHOTO:

The Crusaders (ACJM) Leadership seen at the end of their conclave with Rt. Rev. Alwyn Barreto, Bishop of Sindhudurg at Navsarni Retreat Centre, Sawantwadi (Maharashtra).

61.

 

 

PHOTO:

The Crusaders (ACJM) Team seen with Rt. Rev. Paul Chittillapally, Bishop of Thamarassery (Kerala) on the occasion of a retreat by Crusaders for prayer group leaders of parishes in Kerala

PHOTO:

ACJM Coordinator General Edmund Antao in discussion with Rt. Rev. Stephen Rotluanga Bishop of Aizawl (Mizoram)

PHOTO:

Retreat Team with Rt. Rev. Stephen Lepcha, Bishop of Darjeeling (West Bengal) where the Crusaders (ACJM) conducted a sustained campaign in Parishes besides conducting retreats for the youth

PHOTO:

Rt. Rev. Bishop Thomas Bhalerao of Nashik (Maharashtra), with the team during the retreat conducted by the Crusaders (ACJM) at Nashik

PHOTO:

Bishop of Karwar, Rt. Rev. Derek Fernandes greeting the retreatants at the conclusion of a retreat conducted by the Crusaders (ACJM)

PHOTO:

Most Rev. V. Abraham, Archbishop of Nagpur addresses the retreatants at the start of a Youth Leaders convention in Nagpur (Maharashtra) conducted by the Crusaders (ACJM)

PHOTO:

The Crusaders (ACJM) team seen here with Rt. Rev Agnelo Gracias, Bishop of Mumbai, after it conducted a series of Lenten retreats in several churches of Mumbai Archdiocese

PHOTO:

Rt. Rev Lumen Monteiro, Bishop of Agartala (Tripura) with the Crusaders (ACJM) team during the Tripura village evangelization campaign conducted by them

PHOTO:

Sharing a point with Rt. Rev. Thomas Macwan, Bishop of Ahmedabad (Gujarat) at the start of Youth Leaders retreat conducted by the Crusaders (ACJM)

 

PILGRIMAGES ORGANISED BY EDMUND ANTAO‘S “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM TO UNAPPROVED/CONTROVERSIAL MARIAN “APPARITION” SITES

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:

The Pilgrimage division of the ACJM regularly organizes faith-building pilgrimages to places of religious significance around the world… The ACJM has thus far conducted international pilgrimages to Marian Apparition sites in Europe (Fatima and Lourdes) & to Rome, to the Holy Land including Biblical sites in Egypt and Jordan, to Naju – South Korea (the site of many supernatural signs relating to the Eucharist) besides annual pilgrimages to Our Lady of Good Health in Vailankanni, Tamil Nadu.

 

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/picture-gallery/:

Pilgrimage to Naju (South Korea) in May 2010 & 2011

Naju – South Korea, a tiny town where the Blessed Virgin Mary has been shedding tears of water and blood through a statue belonging to a protestant-turned-catholic, Julia Kim. Besides this, other supernatural occurrences have also taken place such as the descent of Hosts, turning of the host into the flesh of Jesus, wounds of Jesus appearing on Julia Kim etc. A group of Crusader pilgrims from Goa-India accompanied by a priest make a pilgrimage to this town, and experience conversion of hearts and re-kindling of their faith.

May 2012

A memorable God-experience at Medjugorje in Bosnia where the mother of Jesus has been appearing as the Queen of Peace marked the beginning of this tour to Europe spanning 12 days and across 3 countries (Croatia, Bosnia & Italy)…

Also see:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.386666274729416.87244.236494666413245&type=3

 

A letter from a Naju devotee sent to Pope Benedict XVI:

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/testimonies/theappeal.htm
[From the Naju, Korea site] EXTRACT:

Your Holiness,

My name is Susanna Eun-Kyung Park, 31 years old and living in the City of Daegu in the Republic of Korea. I am a medical technologist. I had been living in darkness and misery without any hope or joy, but began a new life of resurrection through the Blessed Mother of Naju. I present this petition to Your Holiness, the Father of the Church, as those who have received much grace through their pilgrimages to Naju are now suffering severely because of the recent broadcast by the MBC TV with a thorough distortion of the facts of Naju and also the ruthless decree pronounced by the Archbishop of Kwangju directed at the clergy, religious and laity in the whole world warning them that any of them who visits Naju will be automatically excommunicated. […] By Archbishop Choi’s decree which is dated January 21, 2008 and is reported by the secular mass media as supported by the Holy See, Naju is publicly condemned as a heresy; Fr. Aloysius Hong-Bin Chang, who loves and believes in the Blessed Mother of Naju, has been reportedly excommunicated; and whoever makes pilgrimages to Naju, whether he or she is from Korea or any other country in the world is automatically excommunicated…

Susanna Eun-Kyung Park, February 9, 2008

 

 

 

MY LETTERS TO BISHOPS WHO ARE NAMED ON THE JULIA KIM-NAJU/CRUSADERS SITES:

1. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
Bishop George Pallipparambil
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 8:56 AM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. GEORGE PALLIPPARAMBIL, SDB

BISHOP OF MIAO [ARUNACHAL PRADESH]

Dear Bishop George,

It is a long time since we heard from you. I pray that you are well and that your people are being greatly blessed through your pastoral care.

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa who leads the “Crusaders for Jesus with Mary” team.

It has been brought to my attention that he promotes and conducts pilgrimages to the centre of Julia Kim in Naju, Korea, who has been declared as false in a Decree issued by the Archbishop of Kwangju, Korea, on January 21, 2008.

I quote from a letter written to the Pope on February 9, 2008 by Susanna Eun-Kyung Park, herself a devotee of Julia Kim/Naju:

Naju is publicly condemned as a heresy; Fr. Aloysius Hong-Bin Chang, who loves and believes in the Blessed Mother of Naju, has been reportedly excommunicated; and whoever makes pilgrimages to Naju, whether he or she is from Korea or any other country in the world is automatically excommunicated.

Edmund Antao also conducts pilgrimages to Medjugorje which once again has been declared as false by the local Ordinaries for more than twenty-five years, right from the very first reported “apparitions”. 

While preparing a report for our web site, I found several references on Edmund Antao‘s web site that document the retreats conducted by him in your diocese at your invitation, see below. Recently, he has been using the platform of his retreats to promote his tours to these two banned sites. I thought that you may be unaware of all this and so I have brought it to your kind attention.

Even if there is a possibility that the local Ordinaries have erred on the side of caution and that the manifestations and messages are genuinely of God — and not of fallen angels which is the opinion of some Catholic apologists — one is in duty bound to obey the local Bishop who speaks for Rome in matters of private revelation and not openly defy and flout his authority by leading “pilgrimages” to such places. This not only sends a wrong signal to the entire Catholic community, but it promotes disharmony in the Universal Church and a disrespect for the teachings of Rome in general.

It is a matter of utmost seriousness and an act of gross disobedience when Catholic leaders and preachers who call their retreat ministries as charismatic, collect ignorant Catholics and shepherd them to an alleged apparition site which the local bishop himself has condemned in the gravest possible way and pronounced excommunication on those who disobey him/the Church.

It is my opinion that such preachers and ministries must be banned from ministering to Catholics in all dioceses by informing a central authority in each of the Bishops’ Conferences.

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful.

With fond love and prayers,

Angela and Michael Prabhu

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:

The ACJM involves itself in Missionary Outreaches, particularly in North East India at the behest of the local Bishops. […]

The ACJM has thus far regularly held missionary campaigns in dioceses of Arunachal Pradesh, Darjeeling (W. Bengal), Sikkim, Kohima (Nagaland) & in Tripura. The impact of these campaigns have been tremendous and teams from the ACJM now regularly travel to the North East to conduct retreats there, particularly for the youth, students and married people.

PHOTO:

Most Rev. P.K George, Bishop of Miao (Arunachal Pradesh) & from the CCBI National Proclamation Commission inaugurating the 7th General Assembly 2010 of the ACJM, along with priests from Goa and other parts of the country at the ‘Fr. Alcantra, Raimundo and Lilia Gracias Auditorium, Agnel Ashram, Verna – Goa’ renamed ‘Blessed Joseph Vaz Nagar’ for the occasion. (July 11, 2010)

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf:

1. An 8 – day mission conducted in parishes of Tirap District in the Miao Diocese in conjunction with the local Bishop. (June 2009)

2. A 3 day residential youth retreat for youth from all over Miao Diocese, conducted at Don Bosco School, Neotan. (April 2010)

3. A 16 day mission conducted in Parishes of Khonsa District in the Miao Diocese in conjunction with the local Bishop (Nov-Dec 2010)

4. Two retreats of 3 days each conducted for the youth of Kanubari & Changlang of the Miao Diocese (May 2011)

 

2. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
archbpgoa@gmail.com
Cc:
Diocesan Centre for Social Communications Media – Goa ; loiola50@gmail.com ; jlpereira_50@yahoo.co.uk
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 9:21 AM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

 

63.

 

 

MOST REV. FILIPE NERI FERRAO

ARCHBISHOP OF GOA AND DAMAN AND PATRIARCH “ad honorem” of the East Indies [GOA]

Vice-president, Conference of Catholic Bishops of India (CCBI)

Dear Archbishop Filipe Neri Ferrao,

Below is the reproduction of a letter that I have commenced sending to archbishops and bishops who have invited Edmund Antao to preach retreats in parishes and institutions coming under their jurisdictions.

This letter is addressed to you because Edmund Antao is operating out of Goa since 2001, and his “Crusaders for Jesus with Mary” ministry web site conveys the impression that it has archdiocesan approval. Could you please either confirm or deny this?

QUOTE

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful. UNQUOTE

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu

Cc: ARCHBISHOP’S SECRETARY:
Rev. Fr. Joaquim Loiola Pereira
  

Cc: Diocesan Centre for Social Communications Media, Goa, Fr. Francisco Caldeira/Fr. J. Loiola Pereira

 

3. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
bishopdj@sify.com ; bishoplepcha@gmail.com
Cc:
bishop.darjeeling@gmail.com

Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 9:56 AM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. STEPHEN LEPCHA

BISHOP OF DARJEELING

Dear Bishop Stephen,

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful. UNQUOTE

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu, Catholic apologist, CHENNAI

PS.: The websites of Edmund Antao as well as that of Julia Kim/Naju inform viewers that they received approbation from you when you accompanied the former along with Fr. Jose Antonio Costa, the parish priest of St. Andrew’s Vasco, Goa, and 42 others, celebrated Mass and “gave testimony to the graces that you received at Naju”, just a month, ago on May 14, 2013.

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:

The ACJM involves itself in Missionary Outreaches, particularly in North East India at the behest of the local Bishops. […]

The ACJM has thus far regularly held missionary campaigns in dioceses of Arunachal Pradesh, Darjeeling (W. Bengal), Sikkim, Kohima (Nagaland) & in Tripura. The impact of these campaigns have been tremendous and teams from the ACJM now regularly travel to the North East to conduct retreats there, particularly for the youth, students and married people.

PHOTO:

Retreat Team with Rt. Rev. Stephen Lepcha, Bishop of Darjeeling (West Bengal) where the Crusaders (ACJM) conducted a sustained campaign in Parishes besides conducting retreats for the youth

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf:

1. An 8 – day expedition to the diocese of Darjeeling with meetings at various places in the diocese in conjunction with the local Bishop. (February 2007)

2. 10-day mission conducted in various parishes of Darjeeling and Sikkim Dioceses in conjunction with the local Bishop (October 2009)

3. A 3 – day residential retreat for Youth of Sikkim Diocese held at Don Bosco, Malbasey -Sikkim (January 2010)

 

MY LETTER TO THE JESUS YOUTH:

From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
Manoj Sunny
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

Dear Brother Manoj,

Below is the reproduction of a letter that I have commenced sending to archbishops and bishops who have invited Edmund Antao to preach retreats in parishes and institutions coming under their jurisdictions.

This letter is addressed to you because Edmund Antao has been ministering to your Jesus Youth [JY] groups [see collated information at the bottom of this letter].

I am also greatly concerned because a number of JY middle-level and some fairly senior leaders are already die-hard supporters of a number of these unapproved/discredited/banned mystics, their messages and their devotions, for example Fr. Stefano Gobbi and the Marian Movement of priests, Maria Valtorta and the Poem of the Man-God, Vassula Ryden, Maureen Sweeney’s Holy Love ministries, etc. I have read/recorded all this over the years on/from social networking sites as well as in transcripts of [sometimes heated] JoyNet [JY yahoo group forum] discussions sent to me by JY prayer group members themselves.

QUOTE

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

 

 

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful. UNQUOTE

Yours sincerely,

Michael Prabhu

PROGRAMMES GIVEN BY THE “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM FOR THE “JESUS YOUTH”

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/:

Disciple Training Programme

January 2013 – Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu

PHOTO: Participants of the Jesus Youth
seen here partaking of the Holy Eucharist after making confessions during the Disciple Training Programme conducted by the Crusader Team

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf:

5 day Residential Growth Retreat at Christ College for Jesus Youth (October 2004).

5 day (stay-in) Discipleship Training Programme,
members of Jesus Youth, Gujarat (May 2006)

4 day (stay-in) Youth Retreat for 400 youth held at Renewal Retreat Centre,

Bangalore, organized by the Jesus Youth Bangalore (November 2006)

5 day residential retreat conducted for the Jesus youth at Ryshivana retreat centre, Mangalore (April 2007)

3 day retreat conducted for the Jesus Youth at Delhi followed by a 3 day Disciple Training Programme (DTP) for leaders of the Jesus Youth in Delhi (May 2007)

3 day Residential retreat for the Jesus Youth at Erode (February 2008)

3 day Residential retreat for the Jesus Youth at Chennai (February 2009)

3 day residential retreat for Jesus Youth leaders of Karnataka State held at Vidyavahan Ashram (August 2009)

4 day residential retreat for the Jesus Youth at Renewal Retreat Centre (RRC) (May 2011)

4 day Disciple Training Programme held at Ahmedabad for members of Jesus Youth, Gujarat (August 2011)

3 day Disciple Training Programme held at Coimbatore for members of the Jesus youth, Tamil Nadu (January 2013)

Letters to Bishops continued on page 67 onwards

 

MY LETTERS TO THE CRUSADERS OF JESUS WITH MARY:

1. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
cjesusaves@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 10:46 AM

Subject: KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU

Dear Edmund Antao,

I am a Catholic lay person in fulltime ministry since 1995.

I understand that you too are a lay Catholic in fulltime ministry.

I visited your web site and read that you promote and conduct pilgrimages to Naju, Korea. After that I went to the Naju web site.

I quote therefrom a letter written to the Pope on February 9, 2008 by Susanna Eun-Kyung Park, herself a devotee of Julia Kim:

Naju is publicly condemned as a heresy; Fr. Aloysius Hong-Bin Chang, who loves and believes in the Blessed Mother of Naju, has been reportedly excommunicated; and whoever makes pilgrimages to Naju, whether he or she is from Korea or any other country in the world is automatically excommunicated.

Source: http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/testimonies/theappeal.htm

Could you please explain how, in those circumstances, you are promoting and conducting these tours? 

Thanks and God bless,

Michael Prabhu, Chennai. 044 2461 1606

 

2. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
cjesusmedia@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 10:58 AM

Subject: KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU

Dear Edith,

I thank you for clarifying to me over the ‘phone just a couple of minutes ago that you stock and sell two Naju-related CDs, one in English and one in Konkani prepared by your Crusaders for Jesus with Mary ministry.

I am a Catholic lay person in fulltime ministry since 1995.

I visited your web site and read that you promote and conduct pilgrimages to Naju, Korea. [Rest, as above]

 

3. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
crusadersvoice@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 11:00 AM

Subject: KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU

Dear Crusaders for Jesus with Mary ministry,

I am a Catholic lay person in fulltime ministry since 1995. [Rest, as above] [Response on pages 70, 73]

 

MY LETTERS TO THE CATHOLIC CHARISMATIC RENEWAL:

1. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
kccrsemmaus@yahoo.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:21 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

Kind Attention: Fr Shajan Thermadom,
Kerala Catholic Charismatic Renewal Services, (Emmaus), Ernakulam

65.

 


Dear Rev. Fr. Shajan,

Below is the reproduction of a letter that I have commenced sending to archbishops and bishops who have invited Edmund Antao to preach retreats in parishes and institutions coming under their jurisdictions.

This letter is addressed to you because Edmund Antao has been ministering to the Kerala Service Team [see collated information at the bottom of this letter].

QUOTE

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful. UNQUOTE

Yours sincerely,

Michael Prabhu

PROGRAMMES GIVEN BY EDMUND ANTAO’S “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM FOR THE CATHOLIC CHARISMATIC RENEWAL, KERALA

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf

5 day residential retreat at Navjyoti Diocesan Retreat Centre, Calicut, at invitation of Kerala Service Team,
(Calicut Branch) (June 2003)

4 day Residential Retreat for priests/nuns/religious at NRC (Nirmala Retreat Centre), Kulathuvayal run by MSMI of Fr. C.J. Varkey (February 2005); The Kerala Service Team Chairman from EMMAUS also attended this retreat.

4 day Growth Retreat at invitation of Kerala Service Team (Trivandrum Branch) at Our Lady of Lourdes Church, Thiruvananthapuram (July 2005)

 

2. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
frbritto@bccrs.org.in ; frbrittojacob@yahoo.com
Cc:
VERGHESE JOSEPH ; cherian ; simonrodrigues.associates@gmail.com ; brendanrodricks@bccrs.org.in
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:40 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

Fr A. Britto Jacob CSsR, Spiritual Director, Bangalore Service team [BST], Bangalore

Simon Rodrigues, Chairman, BST, Bangalore

Cherian Ramapuram, Member, BST, Bangalore

Verghese Joseph, Member, BST, Bangalore

Brendan Rodricks, Member, BST, Bangalore

Dear Rev. Fr. Britto and others,

Below is the reproduction of a letter that I have commenced sending to archbishops and bishops who have invited Edmund Antao to preach retreats in parishes and institutions coming under their jurisdictions.

This letter is addressed to you because Edmund Antao has been ministering to the Bangalore Service Team [see information at the bottom of this letter].

QUOTE

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful. UNQUOTE

Yours sincerely,

Michael Prabhu

PROGRAMME GIVEN BY EDMUND ANTAO’S “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM FOR THE CATHOLIC CHARISMATIC RENEWAL, BANGALORE

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf

4 day (stay-in) higher Growth Retreat held for the Bangalore Service Team, teams of retreat preachers of the Logos Retreat Centre (run by the Vincentian Congregation) in Bangalore. (June 2006)

 

3. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
kalistfrancis@gmail.com ; cyriljohn@vsnl.net
Cc:
nco ; charisindia@gmail.com ; charisindia ;

dcrsoffice@gmail.com ; shajikp2000@gmail.com ; National Charismatic Office
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:56 PM

Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

Dear Bishop Francis Kalist and Cyril John,

Below is the reproduction of a letter that I have commenced sending to archbishops and bishops who have invited Edmund Antao to preach retreats in parishes and institutions coming under their jurisdictions.

This letter is addressed to you because Edmund Antao has been ministering to the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Service Teams in Kerala and in Bangalore [see collated information at the bottom of this letter].

QUOTE

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful. UNQUOTE

Yours sincerely,

Michael Prabhu

PROGRAMMES GIVEN BY EDMUND ANTAO’S “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM FOR THE CATHOLIC CHARISMATIC RENEWAL, KERALA

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf

66.

 

 

5 day residential retreat at Navjyoti Diocesan Retreat Centre, Calicut, at invitation of Kerala Service Team,
(Calicut Branch) (June 2003)

4 day Residential Retreat for priests/nuns/religious at NRC (Nirmala Retreat Centre), Kulathuvayal run by MSMI of Fr. C.J. Varkey (February 2005); The Kerala Service Team Chairman from EMMAUS also attended this retreat.

4 day Growth Retreat at invitation of Kerala Service Team (Trivandrum Branch) at Our Lady of Lourdes Church, Thiruvananthapuram (July 2005)

PROGRAMME GIVEN BY EDMUND ANTAO’S “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM FOR THE CATHOLIC CHARISMATIC RENEWAL, BANGALORE

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf

4 day (stay-in) higher Growth Retreat held for the Bangalore Service Team, teams of retreat preachers of the Logos Retreat Centre (run by the Vincentian Congregation) in Bangalore. (June 2006)

 

MY LETTER TO THE DIVINE RETREAT CENTRE:

From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
divineretreatcentre@gmail.com ; augustinevallooran@gmail.com ; fraugustine@dvnonline.org ; augustinedivine@gmail.com ; frmichaelvc@gmail.com
Cc:
divineyouthblr@gmail.com ; Prasad Naik ; marjesan@rediffmail.com ; sangeetha.maria@gmail.com ; divineyouth.drc@gmail.com ; preena.joelrodriguez@gmail.com ; divineyouth.drc@gmail. com
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:08 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

Dear Rev. Fr. Augustine Vallooran, VC, and Rev. Fr. Michael Payyapilly, VC,

Below is the reproduction of a letter that I have commenced sending to archbishops and bishops who have invited Edmund Antao to preach retreats in parishes and institutions coming under their jurisdictions.

This letter is addressed to you because Edmund Antao has been ministering at Divine Retreat Centre [see information at the bottom of this letter].

QUOTE

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful. UNQUOTE

Yours sincerely,

Michael Prabhu

PROGRAMME GIVEN BY EDMUND ANTAO’S “CRUSADERS FOR JESUS WITH MARY” TEAM AT THE DIVINE RETREAT CENTRE, MURINGOOR

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/retreats_-conducted_25012013.pdf:

3 day Residential Retreat conducted for Kerala State Government employees at Divine Retreat Centre (DRC), Muringoor – Potta (September 2010)

 
 

Continued from page 65

MY LETTERS TO BISHOPS WHO ARE NAMED ON THE JULIA KIM-NAJU/CRUSADERS SITES:

4. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
sindhudioc@rediffmail.com ; alwynbarreto@rediffmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:28 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. ALLWYN BARRETO

BISHOP OF SINDHUDURG [MAH.]

Dear Bishop Allwyn,

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa who leads the “Crusaders for Jesus with Mary” team.

It has been brought to my attention that he promotes and conducts pilgrimages to the centre of Julia Kim in Naju, Korea, who has been declared as false in a Decree issued by the Archbishop of Kwangju, Korea, on January 21, 2008.

I quote from a letter written to the Pope on February 9, 2008 by Susanna Eun-Kyung Park, herself a devotee of Julia Kim/Naju:

Naju is publicly condemned as a heresy; Fr. Aloysius Hong-Bin Chang, who loves and believes in the Blessed Mother of Naju, has been reportedly excommunicated; and whoever makes pilgrimages to Naju, whether he or she is from Korea or any other country in the world is automatically excommunicated.

Edmund Antao also conducts pilgrimages to Medjugorje which once again has been declared as false by the local Ordinaries for more than twenty-five years, right from the very first reported “apparitions”. 

While preparing a report for our web site, I found a references on Edmund Antao‘s web site that documents his ministering in your diocese at your invitation, see below. Recently, he has been using the platform of his retreats to promote his tours to these two banned sites. I thought that you may be unaware of all this and so I have brought it to your kind attention.

Even if there is a possibility that the local Ordinaries have erred on the side of caution and that the manifestations and messages are genuinely of God — and not of fallen angels which is the opinion of some Catholic apologists — one is in duty bound to obey the local Bishop who speaks for Rome in matters of private revelation and not openly defy and flout his authority by leading “pilgrimages” to such places. This not only sends a wrong signal to the entire Catholic community, but it promotes disharmony in the Universal Church and a disrespect for the teachings of Rome in general.

 

 

It is a matter of utmost seriousness and an act of gross disobedience when Catholic leaders and preachers who call their retreat ministries as charismatic, collect ignorant Catholics and shepherd them to an alleged apparition site which the local bishop himself has condemned in the gravest possible way and pronounced excommunication on those who disobey him/the Church.

It is my opinion that such preachers and ministries must be banned from ministering to Catholics in all dioceses by informing a central authority in each of the Bishops’ Conferences.

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful.

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu, Catholic apologist, CHENNAI

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:
PHOTO:

The Crusaders (ACJM) Leadership seen at the end of their conclave with Rt. Rev. Alwyn Barreto, Bishop of Sindhudurg at Navsarni Retreat Centre, Sawantwadi (Maharashtra).

 
 

5. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
paulchittilapilly@hotmail.com; Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:35 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. PAUL CHITTILAPILLY [KERALA]
BISHOP EMERITUS OF THAMARASSERY

Dear Bishop Paul,

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful.

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu, Catholic apologist, CHENNAI

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:
PHOTO:

The Crusaders (ACJM) Team seen with Rt. Rev. Paul Chittillapally, Bishop of Thamarassery (Kerala) on the occasion of a retreat by Crusaders for prayer group leaders of parishes in Kerala

 

6. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
mzbhouse@rediffmail.com ; steverta@rediffmail.com ; steverta@yahoo.com

Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:55 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. STEPHEN ROTLUANGA CSC

BISHOP OF AIZAWL [MIZORAM]

Dear Bishop Stephen,

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful.

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu, Catholic apologist, CHENNAI

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:
PHOTO:

ACJM Coordinator General Edmund Antao in discussion with Rt. Rev. Stephen Rotluanga, Bishop of Aizawl (Mizoram)

 

7. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
nashikdiocese@gmail.com ; lourdesdaniel@vsnl.net ; lourdnadadaniel@gmail.com ; bishopofnasik@rediffmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 4:03 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. THOMAS BHALERAO

BISHOP EMERITUS OF NASHIK [MAH.]

Dear Bishop Thomas,

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful.

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu, Catholic apologist, CHENNAI

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:
PHOTO:

Rt. Rev. Bishop Thomas Bhalerao of Nashik (Maharashtra), with the team during the retreat conducted by the Crusaders (ACJM) at Nashik

 

8.
From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
bishopkwr@sancharnet.in ; karwardiocese@gmail.com ; derekfds@rediffmail.com

Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 4:07 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. DEREK FERNANDES

BISHOP OF KARWAR [KAR.]

Member, CBCI Special Commission for Evangelization

Dear Bishop Derek,

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

68.

 

 

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful.

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu, Catholic apologist, CHENNAI

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:
PHOTO:

Bishop of Karwar, Rt. Rev. Derek Fernandes greeting the retreatants at the conclusion of a retreat conducted by the Crusaders (ACJM)

 

9. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
abpabrah_ngp@bsnl.in ; viruthak@gmail.com ; abraham@nagpurdiocese.com

Cc:
secretary@nagpurdiocese.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 4:12 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. ABRAHAM VIRUTHAKULANGARA

ARCHBISHOP OF NAGPUR [MAH.]

BISHOP’S SECRETARY: secretary@nagpurdiocese.com;

Dear Archbishop Abraham,

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful.

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu, Catholic apologist, CHENNAI

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:
PHOTO:

Most Rev. V. Abraham, Archbishop of Nagpur addresses the retreatants at the start of a Youth Leaders convention in Nagpur (Maharashtra) conducted by the Crusaders (ACJM)

 

10. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
St.Pius College ; agnelorg@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 4:17 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. AGNELO GRACIAS

AUXILIARY BISHOP OF BOMBAY [MAH.]

Chairperson, Theology and Doctrine Commission, Conference of Catholic Bishops of India

Dear Bishop Agnelo,

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful.

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu, Catholic apologist, CHENNAI

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:
PHOTO:

The Crusaders (ACJM) team seen here with Rt. Rev Agnelo Gracias, Bishop of Mumbai, after it conducted a series of Lenten retreats in several churches of Mumbai Archdiocese

 

11. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
Lumen Monteiro ; lumenmonteiro@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 4:22 PM

Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. LUMEN MONTEIRO

BISHOP OF AGARTALA [TRIPURA]

Dear Bishop Lumen,

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful.

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu, Catholic apologist, CHENNAI

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:

The ACJM involves itself in Missionary Outreaches, particularly in North East India at the behest of the local Bishops. […]

The ACJM has thus far regularly held missionary campaigns in dioceses of Arunachal Pradesh, Darjeeling (W. Bengal), Sikkim, Kohima (Nagaland) & in Tripura. The impact of these campaigns have been tremendous and teams from the ACJM now regularly travel to the North East to conduct retreats there, particularly for the youth, students and married people.

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:
PHOTO:

Rt. Rev Lumen Monteiro, Bishop of Agartala (Tripura) with the Crusaders (ACJM) team during the Tripura village evangelization campaign conducted by them

 

12. From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
adctam@gmail.com ; thomas macwan
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 4:27 PM Subject: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

MOST REV. THOMAS IGNATIUS MACWAN

BISHOP OF AHMEDABAD [GUJARAT]

 

69.

 

 

 

Dear Bishop Thomas,

I am writing this letter to you in the matter of Edmund Antao of Goa […]

I am confident that you will arrange to do the needful.

Yours obediently,

Michael Prabhu, Catholic apologist, CHENNAI

http://www.crusadersforjesus.com/about-us/:
PHOTO:

Sharing a point with Rt. Rev. Thomas Macwan, Bishop of Ahmedabad (Gujarat) at the start of Youth Leaders retreat conducted by the Crusaders (ACJM)

 

RESPONSES

1. From:
Manoj Sunny
To:
Michael Prabhu
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:38 PM Subject: Re: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

Dear Michael,

I have already sent a note to our leaders regarding this – I don’t know him personally – but we haven’t received any concerns about his teachings. Thank you for the mail.

Regarding Medjugorje, I know that the Holy See has appointed a commission for detailed enquiry and asked the local ordinary to avoid making any statement until they come with a guideline. I don’t know the present status – but Medjugorje is still a well promoted pilgrim place – especially in Europe and US church. 

I just reached Manchester for a leaders’ program.

I fully understand your concerns and suggestions. I know that there was a tension between the Franciscans (who run the Medjugorje parish) and the local bishop which ended up in taking a strong stand against Medjugorje. According to my understanding, the Holy See never approved the apparitions – but took a positive stand towards using it as a pilgrim centre. I will also try to check the present situation. 

Really appreciate the work you are doing in service of the Church.

God Bless, Manoj 

 

2. From:
Name withheld
To:
Michael Prabhu
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 11:36 PM Subject: Re: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

Thanks, Brother Michael. I was present at the Logos Centre retreat bro. Edmund and team conducted. However I wasn’t aware of anything inappropriate at that time. CCR Leader, Bangalore

 

3. From:
Crusaders Media Centre
To:
Michael Prabhu
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 11:30 AM [See page 65, 73]

Subject: Re: KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU

Dear Bro. Michael,
What you have read is not the full truth and have read the negative aspect of without taking the trouble to know the truth. The Korean bishop is against it
and they issued
the statement of Excommunication
which was revoked by Cardinal Ivan Dias. Both the past popes were very favorable as this miracle also took place in the Vatican itself. The truth is that no investigation has been conducted by the Korean bishop or any inquiry done. Even in Medjugorje the story is the same. Fatima & Lourdes also had to go through the same thing for quite a long time. They have clarified on their website on this issue. Lots of bishops and priests have visited and have given positive opinions. I have been there two times and after the visits I have grown to love Our Lady and the Holy Eucharist even more. People have experienced conversion of life and are leading good Catholic life so I don’t understand in what way it is heresy. May the good God open their minds to see the truth. God Bless you.

The unsigned letter is probably written by Edith who I talked to on the ‘phone, see page 65. What she ignores is that the self-condemnatory lines that I cited therein [in red] are from the Naju web site and are written by a devotee of Julia Kim! She accepts that the local archbishop is against the alleged apparition site, but still defends it as “truth” — a clear case of disobedience to the bishops and Church authority. -Michael

 

4. From:
George Pallipparambil
To:
Michael Prabhu
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 11:56 AM Subject: Re: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

Dear Michael,

Thank you for the letter and the note of caution.

I had got in touch with the Crusaders four years ago. Now I am not a member of the National Team for Proclamation. Of course, I am the chairman for the north east.

Before I let the Crusaders come this side, I had a clear talk with Archbishop Philippe of Goa who had nothing negative about them. I have introduced them to all the Dioceses of North East and ever since they have been conducting wonderful retreats and programs in this region. Probably they are in Tripura as I write this.

Last year I came to know of their closeness to so-called mystic of Korea. But as we have nuns form Korea who have give us a clear picture of the Korean situation along with letters from the Bishops there, no one has gone with them to Korea or the Korea apparitions do not form part of their retreats and preaching here.

70.

 

 

In fact on two occasions they had offered me to accompany their group to Korea, I declined and the president of our Regional Bishops’ council Abp. Dominic Jala also advised me not to go. I refused to send Priests from this region also to go along.

In May 2012 I had been to Korea in connection with the FMSS sisters and there, they told me very clearly about the position of the church in Korea and we here in Miao and North East are in full conformity with it.

As long as we know for sure that their programs do not contain any doctrinal error, I do not think it is just for us to ban them from preaching and doing such a good work just because they go to Korea.

Thank you for alerting us. Be sure of my prayers. Please do pray for us all.

+George Pallipparambil sdb

Bishop of Miao [Arunachal Pradesh]

 

From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
George Pallipparambil
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 8:56 PM Subject: Re: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

Dear Bishop George,

I thank you for your prompt, detailed and frank reply.

I am happy to hear that you and Archbishop Dominic Jala stand firmly with the Church and the Korean bishops on the Julia Kim issue. It is how it should be.

While I respect your views as a bishop on the ministry of the Crusaders, and while I accept that you find no problem with their teachings, please permit me to share my thoughts.

It still remains that

i) The Crusaders can be expected to propagate “devotion” to the alleged “Our Lady of Naju” during their programmes, and to induct people into their future “pilgrimages” to Naju;

ii) They are in disobedience to the Church.

The Archbishop of Kwangju has spoken for the Church. He and he alone, unless the CDF issues a statement, is the authority to take a decision on the genuinity of the site.

I have received a letter from the Crusaders’ Goa office. It says that the Church [the Archbishop] is wrong and that Julia Kim and they alone know the “truth” which they pray the Church will soon accept. That is a very un-Catholic attitude for a ministry that claims to be Catholic and has the approval of most of the North East [and some other] bishops.

My being in lay Catholic ministry for almost two decades, I see it from that perspective.

Your being a bishop yourself might visualise yourself exchanging places with the Archbishop of Kwangju who has spoken decisively negatively about the “seer” and the site, and evaluate your predicament when a group of Catholics from another country organize “pilgrimages” to the site under your episcopal jurisdiction, claiming you to be wrong and the “seer” and the site – and themselves — to be correct!

I am flummoxed as to how a ministry that dismisses and refutes an Archbishop’s official proclamation can be trusted to have fidelity to other bishops and the universal Church. The two positions are irreconcilable.

I trust that the picture that I painted here for you will help you see why I suggest that the Crusaders be banned from conducting ministry – as long as they hold that Naju is genuine and as long as they promote Naju in defiance of the Archbishop of Kwangju and the Korean Bishops’ Conference.

Yours obediently, Michael [CONTINUED ON PAGE 75]

 

MY COMMENTS

1. On page 60, I have quoted the Naju site as asking “Where else can we experience these graces of receiving these blessings with the living Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist but in Naju?

Where else? At every Eucharistic celebration, that’s where! No further comment is necessary.

 

2.
Cardinal Ivan Dias. He was the Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.

Cardinal Ivan Dias appears to be the trump card for the Najuites. They cite his support for their cause at every media opportunity. Edmund Antao’s Crusaders also claim his support for Naju. To get a clear picture, I am going to now reproduce every instance wherein he has been named in this report:

 

2.1 Vatican supports archdiocese’s ruling on alleged visionary

http://www.heraldmalaysia.com/news/Vatican-supports-archdiocese%E2%80%99s-ruling-on-alleged-visionary-64-10-1.html and other links, Seoul, Italy, etc. EXTRACT

February 27 to March 8, 2009, UCAN: [Julia Kim]’s followers, however, have insisted that the Vatican has different views regarding [her]. According to their website, Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of the Vatican-based Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, had urged the Korean bishops to recognize Youn during their ad limina visit to Rome in November 2007. It reported that Cardinal Dias had sent a letter to this effect to the Korean Catholic bishops in February 2008 and another to the archdiocese in August that year.

Fr John Chrysostomus Kim Kye-hong, Kwangju archdiocesan chancellor, said that the local Church recently decided to disclose the Vatican letter. This was done in consultation with the apostolic nunciature in Korea because [Julia Kim]’s followers were “distorting” the “private” concerns of Cardinal Dias, he said

71.

 

 

2.2 “Naju visionary” excommunication: Korean archdiocese says it has Vatican backing

http://www.catholicnews.sg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2573&Itemid=79
EXTRACT

The Catholic News, March 15, 2009

In a Feb 24 statement, the archdiocese quoted an April 2008 letter from the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith saying it respected the archdiocesan decision on the alleged visionary as the official position of the universal Church. The statement was reported by the Asian church news agency UCA News.

Father John Chrysostomus Kim Kye-hong, Kwangju archdiocesan chancellor, told UCA News Feb 26 that the local church recently decided to disclose the Vatican letter. He said this was done in consultation with the apostolic nunciature in Korea because the alleged visionary’s followers were “distorting” the “private” concerns of
Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, who had urged the Korean bishops to recognize Julia Youn, the alleged visionary.

 

2.3 Priests alerted to activities ‘visionary’

http://www.ucanews.com/2010/04/22/priests-alerted-to-activities-by-%E2%80%98visionary%E2%80%99
EXTRACT

SEOUL (UCAN), April 22, 2010

A READER’S COMMENT

Cardinal Ivan Dias, the prefect of Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples said that “Excommunication is too ridiculous and he has no authority to do so”. Pope said that “I am favorable on NAJU” during the audience with His Eminence Cardinal Ivan Dias just prior to Easter. Peter Suh

 

2.4 Vatican says ‘visionary’ is far from faith

http://www.ucanews.com/news/vatican-says-visionary-is-far-from-faith/14769
EXTRACT

May 2, 2011

[Julia Kim]‘s followers have insisted the Vatican has different thought on Youn, referring to Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, who, they said, urged the Korean bishops to recognize Youn during their Ad limina visit to the Vatican in 2007.
However, the archdiocese then reminded Catholics that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is the only competent authority to rule on the issue, criticizing they are “distorting” the “private” concern of Cardinal Dias who had urged better pastoral efforts in this regard.

 

2.5 Decree by the Ordinary of the Catholic Archdiocese of Kwangju

http://www.marys-touch.com/truth/update20080124.htm
[Note: This is a pro-Julia Kim page] EXTRACT

UPDATE
January 24, 2008 […]

[Following, is the response to Archbishop Andrew Chang-Moo Choi of Kwangju from Julia Kim‘s supporters]

A Comment

On December 8, 2007, just a few days after the Korean Bishops returned from their ad limina visit to the Holy See, Archbishop Andrew Chang-Moo Choi of Kwangju told several priests and Sisters during lunch about the trip.  Fr. Aloysius Hong-Bin Chang was one of the priests at the lunch, as he had been obligated to stay in the Kwangju Archdiocesan building as a punishment for his support of Naju.  The following is what Archbishop Choi revealed:

During his visit to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the Holy See, a Bishop and several priests in that Congregation asked Archbishop Choi why he was not approving Naju and urged him to do so.  On the last day of the ad limina visit, December 3, all of the Bishops from Korea (more than 20) attended a meeting with Cardinal Ivan Dias, Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.  The Cardinal came with a large pile of document, which he said was information about Naju, and asked Archbishop Choi why he was not accepting Naju.  Archbishop Choi answered that there still was something he was not sure of.  The Cardinal asked what it was.  Archbishop Choi said that he could not understand how the Eucharist could fall from the sky.  The Cardinal answered that there had been a number of miraculous Communions in the past.  Archbishop Choi also told the priests and Sisters that he was “kicked” by the Holy See because of Naju.  From a different source, we have heard that Cardinal Dias became quite upset by the inappropriate and irresponsible answers and excuses by Archbishop Choi. 

 

2.6 http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2010/2010-5-16.htm
EXTRACT

MAY 16, 2010

A testimony by Mr. Edmund Antao

My dear friends and my dear peoples who loves Jesus and Mary so much. We bring greetings today to you from India. We came from a part in India call Goa and this is birth place of Cardinal Ivan Dias who is supporting Naju so much.

 

2.7 http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2011/2011-04-21.htm EXTRACT

APRIL 21, 2011

The chaplain of pilgrimages, Father Joseph Anthony Mazarello who is classmate of Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of Congregation for the Evangelization of peoples and he made this trip for his 53 rd anniversary of his ordination.

72.

 

 

 

2.8 Night vigil Anniversary of Fragrant Oil & Descent of the Eucharist

NOVEMBER 24, 2010

http://www.najumary.or.kr/English/recent/recent-2010/2010-11-24.htm
EXTRACT

Today is anniversary of Eucharistic miracle that experienced former pro-nuncio Archbishop Giovanni Bulaitis. During the time big Host came down and Julia received the Host actually from St. Michael the Archangel…

Now Archbishop Bulaitis is in the Vatican in Rome together with former Pro-nuncio of Korea that is Cardinal Ivan Dias. Both of them, both former Pro-nuncio of Korea are working for Naju very hard in the Vatican in Rome.

 

2.9 From:
Crusaders Media Centre
To:
Michael Prabhu
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 11:30 AM [See pages 65, 70]

Subject: Re: KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU

Dear Bro. Michael,
What you have read is not the full truth and have read the negative aspect of without taking the trouble to know the truth. The Korean bishop is against it
and they issued
the statement of Excommunication
which was revoked by Cardinal Ivan Dias.

2.9.1 From:
Michael Prabhu
To:
cjesusmedia@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 10:35 PM

Subject: Re: KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU

Dear Edith,

Thank you. I would greatly appreciate if you could send me the revocation of the Kwangju archbishop’s excommunication of Julia Kim which you say was issued by Cardinal Ivan Dias. I am not able to locate it anywhere on the Internet.

With regards, Michael

2.9.2 From:
Crusaders Media Centre
To:
Michael Prabhu
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 11:08 AM

Subject: Re: KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU

Dear Bro. Michael,
You do your research on the net and see the official website on http:/www.najumary.or.kr.  You and I should know that official documents are not meant for the web. There you will find also the official letter send by Pope Emeritus Benedict Sixteen inquiring about her health. One of the Eucharistic miracles happened in the presence of Pope John Paul the II and he blessed her. After seeing so many proofs let us not harden our hearts. Thank you.

Edith, of the Crusaders’ Media Centre in Goa does not sign her name in both her emails to me. She does not give me the document of the revocation of the Kwangju archbishop’s excommunication of Julia Kim which they say was issued by Cardinal Ivan Dias. Her responses are hedged and defensive. On behalf of Edmund Antao’s Crusaders, she insists on calling the alleged occurrences as “Eucharistic miracles” which is a grave misrepresentation since Rome and the local ordinary have categorically denied the same. I did not find on the http:/www.najumary.or.kr
site the claimed statement of Cardinal Ivan Dias. An enquiry from a Pope concerning an individual’s health does not constitute a certification of the person’s holiness or his/her being a mystic. Pope John Paul II
did not utter a single word when the alleged phenomenon is reported to have occurred in his presence. The Crusaders and Julia Kim have no case. The Church has spoken.

 

Cardinal Ivan Dias of India who was Apostolic Nuncio to Korea from June 1987 to October 1991 is embroiled in controversy in regard to the Naju phenomena. But that’s not all. He has recently written the Foreword — in which he lists a number of other such banned/unapproved sites — to a book on Marian apparitions. See CARDINAL_IVAN_DIAS_PROMOTES_CONTROVERSIAL_MARIAN_APPARITIONS

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/CARDINAL_IVAN_DIAS_PROMOTES_CONTROVERSIAL_MARIAN_APPARITIONS.doc

 

In the light of the support that Julia Kim is receiving from Edmund Antao’s Crusaders, a Cardinal, bishops and priests, let us refresh our minds on the Naju problem with some news items/articles:

1. God Bless Bishops with Courage

Rwanda, Julia Kim, Father Fernando Suarez, Christina Gallagher, Medjugorje

http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/seerExcommunicated.htm
EXTRACT

By Richard Salbato, 2-4-2008

Julia Kim

Another case of a good and courageous bishop is the South Korean Archbishop Chang-mon, who excommunicated Julia Kim. Just in case some think this was a drastic step of some liberal Archbishop, look at the history of disobedience of the people who promoted Julia Kim.

On January 9, 1998,
Archbishop Victorinus Young Kong-hi declared that Julia Kim’s claims were not supernatural and thus not from God.
This did not stop Julia Kim.

In 1996 the Kwangju Archdiocese warned against the claims of French Father Rene Laurentin and Belgian Father Raymond Spies regarding the apparitions in Korea, that they were not the authority. This did not stop Julia Kim.

On January 9, 1998 again the Archbishop said that the miracles and messages in Naju were not supernatural and thus not from God. This did not stop Julia Kim.

 

 

 

 

On April 1, 1998 the Catholic Bishops Conference of Korea confirmed that the claims of Julia Kim were false.
They also added again that the claims of Theresa Hwang were false. They banned the religious institutes of Hwang and banned private liturgy and dissemination of materials for Julia Kim. This did not stop Julia Kim.

On June 5, 2001,
the Archbishop warned Catholic clergy, religious and laity against helping or joining any group whose claims of miracles and apparitions have been rejected by the Church. Again this did not stop Julia Kim and her followers.

On May 13, 2005,
Archbishop Choi issued an ultimatum to Julia Kim to stop propagating her claims of private revelations. This also included Catholic priest and laity from outside Korea. This did not stop Julia Kim and her followers.

On July 17, 2007 Bishop Boniface Choi Ki-san forbad Catholics from joining in Naju devotions and condemned a Korean priest from the United States for offering mass without the local bishop’s approval. This did not stop Julia Kim and her followers.

Julia Kim and followers excommunicated

Unlike the bishops most of you read about who make pronouncements and then do nothing after people fail to obey them, these bishops in Korea continued to exercise their authority and finally excommunicated Julia Kim.

Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou of Kwangju
issued the decree January 21, saying “for Christians’ healthy faith life and the unity and communion of the church, I declare as such, though my heart grieves.”
Archbishop Choi said he
met with Julia Youn, 60, and her husband in Naju in 2003 to warn them against promoting the alleged apparitions and later gave her a final warning in 2005, but they did not modify their actions. The excommunication was not imposed by judgment but automatically results from an action that places one outside the community of faith, Archbishop Choi said.
“Rather, they speak as if the Holy Father approves them,” the archbishop said. “They libel me, the Korean bishops and the Korean church through their publications and the Internet.” These actions prove “Julia Youn and her followers have no will to reconcile with the Catholic Church,” he said.
“Therefore those clergy, religious and laity who preside at or participate in sacraments and liturgical ceremonies in their … chapel and Marian shrine in Naju, which I have banned, incur automatic excommunication,”
he said.
ALL SUPPORTERS OF JULIA KIM STAND AUTOMATICALLY EXCOMMUNICATED -MICHAEL

 

2. Bishop Warns Catholics about Naju Marian Shrine

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=52483

http://www.vaticans.org/index.php?/archives/377-Bishop-Warns-Catholics-about-Naju-Marian-Shrine.html

http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.in/2007/07/korean-bishop-cracks-down-on.html

Seoul, South Korea, July 19, 2007 (CINS/UCAN) A Korean bishop has warned Catholics not to join activities organized by devotees of a controversial Marian shrine, and he urged priests to educate parishioners on the matter. Bishop Boniface Choi Ki-san of Incheon on June 29 released a pastoral directive forbidding Catholics from joining Naju shrine devotees who held a Mass in his diocesan territory, just west of Seoul. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Korea in 1998 rejected the alleged miracles associated with the shrine, which began more than two decades ago in Naju, 285 kilometers south of the capital. The bishop also released a 14-page letter titled “Theological and Pastoral Reflection and Directive Related to Julia Youn of Naju.” In it he urges priests to use homilies to educate parishioners on the matter as well as on proper Marian devotion.

Despite earlier warnings, Bishop Choi said in his pastoral directive, “some 700 followers of Julia Youn Hong-sun of Naju joined a liturgical event in Bucheon celebrated by a Korean priest from Atlanta diocese, in the United States.” They held a night vigil on June 16 at a wedding hall in Bucheon. An unidentified ethnic Korean priest from the United States celebrated a Mass for them, according to the shrine’s website (www.najumary.or.kr). They also held a prayer rally and listened to Youn preach.

Father Andrew Pak Hui-jung, canon law professor at Incheon Catholic University, told UCA News on July 16 that even if Youn and her followers firmly believe in their cause, it is not good to go against Church guidance.

“Nobody knows what the Blessed Mother’s will is. Church recognition of her revelations cannot be done in a short time. The devotees need to wait and see what happens next, while obeying the bishops’ directives,” he said.

The Korean Church needs to be more active in banning the activities of Youn and her followers, he continued. “Priests from Indonesia and the Philippines have come to Naju and celebrated Masses with the followers.”

Youn insists she has received private revelations through her Marian statue in Naju since it “started weeping” in 1985. Some Catholics have visited the statue since then, even though Korean bishops in March 1998 agreed to respect and observe Kwangju archdiocese’s bans on private liturgy and the dissemination of materials related to the revelations.

The woman insists her statue has shed tears of blood and fragrant oil, and given her revelations. Another claim is that the Eucharist fell “from heaven” at times when visiting bishops and her group had Mass in her private chapel.

Youn and her group further claim the Eucharist changed into a lump of bloody flesh in her mouth several times, including once in 1995 when Pope John Paul II gave her Communion at the Vatican. The Naju website maintains the late pope saw this but said nothing.

 

 

 

In 1998, however, Archbishop Victorinus Youn Kong-hi declared there was “no evidence that proves” the alleged visions and strange phenomena concerning Youn and the Marian statue are “truly supernatural and thus from God.” At the time, the now retired prelate headed Kwangju archdiocese, which covers Naju.

His successor, Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou, issued two pastoral directives on the matter, in 2001 and 2005. They warn that all who fail to follow the directives are to be considered as willfully opposing the magisterium, the Catholic Church’s divinely guided authority to teach true doctrine.

 

3. Vatican sustains ruling on Korean visionary

http://www.speroforum.com/a/18310/Vatican-sustains-ruling-on-Korean-visionary#.UbpqVFtK2XY
EXTRACT

Julia Youn and her followers have claimed visions of the Virgin Mary and alleged divine miracles. They were declared excommunicate by the Archdiocese of Kwangju, and the Vatican has sustained the ruling.

By Asia News, February 27, 2009

Kwangju archdiocese has dispelled rumors that its declaration on an alleged Marian visionary would be overturned by the Vatican. The archdiocese on Feb. 24 released its statement, “The Position of the Archdiocese of Kwangju in relation to the Matter of Julia Youn in Naju.” In the statement, the archdiocese quoted a letter from the Vatican-based Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith saying it respects the archdiocesan decision on the alleged visionary as the official position of the universal Church. The Vatican letter was dated April 24, 2008.

Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou of Kwangju had declared in January 2008 that Youn and her followers, who had insisted on so-called divine miracles revolving around her, had incurred latae sententiae excommunication. This means the excommunication is not imposed by judgment but automatically results from an action that places one outside the community of faith…
Kwangju archdiocese, however, issued directives in 1998, 2003 and 2005 banning Catholics from visiting and participating in ceremonies there. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Korea in its biannual plenary assembly in February 2008 supported the archdiocese’s declaration of excommunication.


Youn’s followers, however, have insisted that the Vatican has different views regarding Youn. According to their website, Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of the Vatican-based Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, had urged the Korean bishops to recognize Youn during their ad limina visit to Rome in November 2007. It reported that Cardinal Dias had sent a letter to this effect to the Korean Catholic bishops in February 2008 and another to the archdiocese in August that year.
However, the archdiocese’s statement reminded Catholics that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is the only competent authority to rule on the issue. Hence, it urged Catholics not to be confused by “those who try to damage relations between the Vatican, and the Korean bishops and Kwangju archdiocese.”

From the information that we have examined we conclude that those who propagate the alleged mystic Julia Kim and her messages, those who conduct pilgrimages to Naju, and those who argue on her behalf as well as on the behalf of her supporters in defiance of the bishops’ pronouncements, are guilty of being “not in union with magisterium“:
“… all who fail to follow the directives are to be considered as willfully opposing the magisterium, the Catholic Church’s divinely guided authority to teach true doctrine.”
In effect, they have incurred automatic excommunication.

 

CORRESPONDENCE WITH BISHOP GEORGE, CONTINUED FROM PAGE 71

From:
George Pallipparambil To:
Michael Prabhu
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 11:32 PM Subject: Re: EDMUND ANTAO OF GOA PROMOTES BANNED KOREAN “MYSTIC” JULIA KIM OF NAJU, AND THE MEDJOGORJE “SEERS”

Dear Mike,

Thank you for the prompt response.

Thank you for the clear ideas. If they have written anything against the official stand of the Korean church, please let me have it.

They do not have any patronage from the Bishops of the North East. We have just allowed them to conduct retreats. We will not any compromise on the stand of the church. In fact, I have made it clear that no one from NE will be taken to Korea.

If required we will not hesitate in banning them in the region.

+ George SDB, Bishop of Miao

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See

NORMS REGARDING THE MANNER OF PROCEEDING IN THE DISCERNMENT OF PRESUMED APPARITIONS OR REVELATIONS
PAUL VI/CDF FEBRUARY 25, 1978 & DECEMBER 14, 2011

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/NORMS_REGARDING_THE_MANNER_OF_PROCEEDING_IN_THE_DISCERNMENT_OF_PRESUMED_APPARITIONS_OR_REVELATIONS.doc

NORMS REGARDING THE MANNER OF PROCEEDING IN THE DISCERNMENT OF PRESUMED APPARITIONS OR REVELATIONS 02
CDF MAY 29, 2012

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/NORMS_REGARDING_THE_MANNER_OF_PROCEEDING_IN_THE_DISCERNMENT_OF_PRESUMED_APPARITIONS_OR_REVELATIONS_02.doc

MARIAN APPARITIONS

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/MARIAN_APPARITIONS.doc

PRIVATE REVELATION

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/PRIVATE_REVELATION.doc

PRIVATE_REVELATION-CRITERIA_FOR_DISCERNMENT-RICHARD_SALBATO

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/PRIVATE_REVELATION-CRITERIA_FOR_DISCERNMENT-RICHARD_SALBATO.doc

PRIVATE REVELATION-RULES FOR DISCERNMENT OF PHENOMENA-FR FELIX BOURDIER

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/PRIVATE_REVELATION-RULES_FOR_DISCERNMENT_OF_PHENOMENA-FR_FELIX_BOURDIER.doc

 

CARDINAL IVAN DIAS PROMOTES CONTROVERSIAL MARIAN APPARITIONS

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/CARDINAL_IVAN_DIAS_PROMOTES_CONTROVERSIAL_MARIAN_APPARITIONS.doc

 

AKITA, JAPAN-ARE THE SUPERNATURAL EVENTS GENUINE?

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/AKITA-JAPAN-ARE_THE_SUPERNATURAL_EVENTS_GENUINE.doc

CHRISTINA GALLAGHER-THE HOUSE OF PRAYER

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/CHRISTINA_GALLAGHER-THE_HOUSE_OF_PRAYER.doc

FALSE PRIVATE REVELATION OF MICHAEL DIBITETTO – RON SMITH

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/FALSE_PRIVATE_REVELATION_OF_MICHAEL_DIBITETTO-RON_SMITH.doc

FR STEFANO GOBBI-MARIAN MOVEMENT OF PRIESTS

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/FR_STEFANO_GOBBI-MARIAN_MOVEMENT_OF_PRIESTS.doc

GARABANDAL

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/GARABANDAL.doc

MARIA DIVINE MERCY-THE WARNING SECOND COMING AND THE BOOK OF TRUTH

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/MARIA_DIVINE_MERCY- THE_WARNING_SECOND_COMING_AND_THE_BOOK_OF_TRUTH.doc

MARIA VALTORTA-POEM OF THE MAN-GOD

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/MARIA_VALTORTA-POEM_OF_THE_MAN-GOD.doc

MAUREEN SWEENEY-HOLY LOVE MINISTRIES

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/MAUREEN_SWEENEY-HOLY_LOVE_MINISTRIES.doc

MEDJUGORJE

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/MEDJUGORJE.doc

MEDJUGORJE-CAREY WINTERS

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/MEDJUGORJE-CAREY_WINTERS.doc

MEDJUGORJE-JOHN LOUGHMAN

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/MEDJUGORJE-JOHN_LOUGHMAN.doc

PATRICIA DE MENEZES-THE COMMUNITY OF DIVINE INNOCENCE

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/PATRICIA_DE_MENEZES-THE_COMMUNITY_OF_DIVINE_INNOCENCE.doc

QUO VADIS PAPA FRANCISCO 02-MEDJUGORJE

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/QUO_VADIS_PAPA_FRANCISCO_02-MEDJUGORJE.doc

VERONICA LUEKEN-OUR LADY OF THE ROSES

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/VERONICA_LUEKEN-OUR_LADY_OF_THE_ROSES.doc

Advertisements


Categories: False Mystics

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

fergymisquitta

The greatest WordPress.com site in all the land!

ephesians-511.net Testimonies

EPHESIANS-511.NET- A Roman Catholic Ministry Exposing Errors in the Indian Church Michael Prabhu, METAMORPHOSE, #12,Dawn Apartments, 22,Leith Castle South Street, Chennai – 600 028, Tamilnadu, India. Phone: +91 (44) 24611606 E-mail: michaelprabhu@vsnl.net, http://www.ephesians-511.net

EPHESIANS-511.NET- A Roman Catholic Ministry Exposing Errors in the Indian Church

Michael Prabhu, METAMORPHOSE, #12,Dawn Apartments, 22,Leith Castle South Street, Chennai - 600 028, Tamilnadu, India. Phone: +91 (44) 24611606 E-mail: michaelprabhu@vsnl.net, http://www.ephesians-511.net

%d bloggers like this: