to some questions
on the negative rumors about Naju
Dear Mrs. ***,
Thank you for your recent letter with some questions about Naju.
Such questions give us an opportunity to clarify the true facts and
to expose the falsehood of the rumors and fabrications.
I also admire your unshaking faithful devotion to Our
Lord and Our Lady, which is a precious example and encouragement to us and
The organization: “CatholicNews”,
which had printed the pages you sent me, is located in Singapore and has
its website named: www.catholicnews.sq. I
have seen their several reports in the past and noticed that they have
been consistently and briskly critical on Naju.
It is a sad and deplorable situation where this organization, which
also has public responsibility to consciously discern the correctness of
the information before sending it out to the public, is neglectful about
this responsibility. As a
result, many priests and countless lay people especially in the South-East
Asian countries have been absorbing the negative incorrect information
about Naju and have been giving up their hopes and plans to explore the
facts of Naju.
Actually, we need not be shocked or depressed by this
difficult reality, as the critical spiritual war between Our Lady and
Satan, which will decide the fate of the world and the humanity has been
going on throughout the Church history (cf. Genesis 3:15) and is rapidly
intensifying in the current end time (“end” here does not mean the
final end of the world, but the conclusion of the spiritual war between
Our Lady and Satan). According
to the vision seen by St. John the Evangelist, “The serpent spewed a torrent of water
out of his mouth after the woman to sweep her away with the current.
But the earth helped the woman and opened its mouth and swallowed
the flood that the dragon spewed out of its mouth.
Then the dragon become angry with the woman and went off to wage
war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments
and bear witness to Jesus” (Apocalypse 12: 15-17).
Here “the torrent of water” means the
lies and incorrect rumors that Satan spreads to confuse people and make
their discernment between truths and untruths more difficult.
As long as we are humble, firmly loyal and devoted to Our Lord and
Our Lady, and constantly learn from the teachings and examples of the
Saints, we will not be derailed from the right way leading us to the
The following are our responses to the
problematic reports by CatholicNews
“Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou
of Kwangju had declared in January 2008 that Youn (Julia) and her followers had
incurred latae sententiae
Archbishop Andrew Choi of the Gwangju Archdiocese
issued a Decree in January of 2008 under strong pressure by the liberal
priests in the same Archdiocese. The
main contents of this Decree were (1) that Fr. Aloysius Chang, who had
been supportive of Naju since 1991, was expelled from the Gwangju
Archdiocese, which also meant that he could not function as a priest any
longer and (2) that any person, regardless of nationality or position,
will be automatically excommunicated, if he or she visits Naju. This
implies that even a Bishop or the Pope will also be excommunicated if he
Expelled from the Archdiocese, Fr. Aloysius Chang soon
visited Cardinal Ivan Dias, Prefect of the Congregation for the
Evangelization of Peoples at the Holy See, who had the highest authority
over the Catholic Church in Korea regarding the pastoral issues.
Even before he heard Fr. Chang’s appeal, His Eminence already
knew what was going on in Korea and promised that he would send a letter
to the Gwangju Archbishop to fully restore Fr. Chang’s priestly
functions. Also during the
same visit to the Holy See, Fr. Chang received an urgent message from Naju
that the liberal priests in Korea were pushing the Bishops at the Korean
Catholic Bishops’ Conference to pass the motion that condemns Naju in
the name of the Korean Bishop’s Conference.
Cardinal Dias also received the same message from the Nunciature in
Seoul and immediately sent an order to the Bishops in Korea to stop
considering this motion. Later,
in March 2010, Cardinal Ivan Dias said to the visitors from Naju that the
Archbishop of Gwangju did not have the authority to excommunicate the
pilgrims to Naju.
Thus, the information stated by CatholicNews that Julia and her
followers incurred the automatic excommunication is very incorrect. How
could a diocesan Bishop condemn what was still being investigated by the
Congregations of the Holy See? This
probably was the main reason why the Gwangju Archdiocese threatened the
pilgrims with excommunication but avoided excommunicating Julia and her
helpers. Also, the prompt and
decisive reactions by Cardinal Dias, restoring Fr. Chang’s priestly
functions and ordering the Korean Bishops to stop passing the motion of
condemnation of Naju show us clearly that the Holy See does not approve of
the efforts of the Gwangju Archdiocese to destroy Naju.
“Archbishop Kim (of
Gwangju) claimed that the Vatican letter has reconfirmed that “the
Vatican has taken the same stand with Kwangju archdiocese” on the
alleged Marian visionary.”
Ever since the Gwangju Archdiocese announced the
Declaration condemning Naju on January 1, 1998, the Gwangju priests
claimed that they were in unity with the Vatican regarding the Declaration
and Naju. This also is untrue.
In the late 1997, the liberal (Modernist) priests of
the Gwangju Archdiocese sent the draft copies of the Declaration for
condemning Naju to the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples (the
CEP) to receive its approval before publicizing it.
The CEP examined the draft and refused to approve it and sent it
back to the Gwangju Archdiocese. The
Gwangju priests made a few minor corrections and presented it again to the
CEP, but the CEP did not approve it again and asked the Gwangju Archbishop
to bring a unanimous agreement by all of the Korean Bishops.
The Gwangju priests knew that this was impossible because several
of the Korean Bishops were strongly against the Declaration.
As their final effort, the Gwangju priests sent the draft copies to
Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, Secretary of the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith (the CDF) instead of sending them to Cardinal Joseph
Ratzinger, the Prefect of the CDF, as they knew that Cardinal Ratzinger
would not approve their Declaration on Naju.
The Gwangju priests succeeded in receiving Archbishop
Bertone’s approval and announced the Declaration to the whole world on
January 1, 1998, also claiming that they were in unity with the Holy See.
Certainly, they were in unity with Archbishop Bertone, but not with
the Holy See. Just one
Archbishop cannot represent the Holy See, especially when the CDF Prefect,
the CEP Prefect, and Pope John Paul II were not positive on the idea or
act of condemning Naju. This
means that the Gwangju Archdiocese lied to the world and the CatholicNews reported this lie.
In May 1998, Archbishop Bertone visited Japan to participate in the
ceremony of the 81th anniversary of Our Lady’s apparition in Fatima.
After the ceremony, Archbishop Bertone made a side trip to Busan,
Korea, to meet Archbishop Victorino Youn of the Gwangju Archdiocese.
Archbishop Bertone obviously was very anxious to make sure that the
Archbishop of Gwangju would remain firm in guarding the Declaration on
Naju which he approved. So
far, the Gwangju Archdiocese has been very loyal to Archbishop Bertone
(later, Cardinal and Secretariat of the Holy See) and his interest.
There also is another important reason why the
information spread by the Gwangju Archdiocese and CatholicNews is false. The
official stance of the CDF and the Holy See in general regarding Naju has
been “Non constat de
supernaturalitate”, translated as: “Not confirming that it is
supernatural”. This does not
mean condemnation but that the investigation is still in progress.
For condemnation, there is a different formal announcement: “Constat de non supernaturalitate”.
Thus, the Holy See’s official stance on Naju is that
the investigation has not been completed yet and therefore needs more
observation of the evidences, testimonies, and fruits.
During this ongoing investigation, the Holy See will allow free
visits, inquiries, and experiences by individual priests and lay people.
If the Gwangju Archdiocese wishes to be truly in unity with the
Holy See, they should respect and follow the Holy See’s stance of “Non
constat de supernaturalitate” and allow individuals’ visits,
studies, and speaking and writing testimonies.
Because the Gwangju Archdiocese has been treating Naju as already
condemned since January 1, 1998, they have been contradicting and
violating the Holy See’s official stance.
Despite this, the opponents of Naju have been shouting to the whole
world that Julia and her followers have
been condemned. Numerous
clergy and laypeople have been deceived, misled, and turned their backs
against what has been going on in Naju since 1985.
“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.”
priests do not acknowledge the continuing intervention by God and His
heavenly servants in the human lives.
Most of the time, this intervention is for individuals, but,
sometimes, especially when there are serious crises in the world or the
Church, God’s intervention can be very clear and powerful.
Many priests in Korea seem to be infected with Modernism of Fr.
Teihard Chardin and the like and despise miracles and revelations from
God. Below is the Church
Teachings regarding this subject:
Pope St. Pius X requested all clergy and theologians to swear
to reject the Modernist errors (September 1, 1910).
One of the required oaths was as follows:
I accept and acknowledge the external
proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and
prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian
religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the
understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time.
Oath Against Modernism, given by His Holiness St. Pius X, September 1,
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. (The Vatican
The liberal priests at the Gwangju Archdiocese have strained
themselves to make it appear that their Archdiocese is loyal to the Church
Teachings whereas Naju is remote from and contradictory to the Church
Teachings. For example, they
stated in the Declaration of January 1, 1998 that the alleged Eucharistic
miracles in Naju contradict the authentic Church Teaching.
Actually, this could have been the most powerful justification for
the Gwangju Archdiocese’s condemning Naju, if there version of the
Doctrine were correct.
The Gwangju Declaration distorted
and thus insulted the Church Teachings for the purpose of making their
condemnation of Naju appear correct. The
Gwangju Declaration stated that “the alleged
Eucharistic Miracle in Naju violated the Church Teaching that the species
of bread and wine of the Eucharist must remain unchanged even after the
this version of the Doctrine were correct, all of the Eucharistic miracles
in the Church history, including those already approved by the Church,
must be thrown away as violations of the Church Teachings.
What the Church Teaching really means is that when the priest
consecrates bread and wine, the substances of bread and wine completely
change into the substances of the Flesh and Blood of Our Lord without
concomitant changes in the species of the bread and wine.
This teaching of the Church does not say that the species of the
Eucharist must remain unchanged even after the consecration.
This Gwangju Archdiocese’s insistence does not make any sense, as
the species of the Eucharist naturally change inside our body soon after
Communion. Several other
serious distortions of the Church teachings are explained in the website:
According to the Church’s Canon
Laws, when the clergy insist on erroneous doctrines, they are
automatically excommunicated (cf.: Can. #1364 (1) & #1336 (1)).
The clergy who lead the Gwangju Archdiocese must openly correct the
doctrinal errors in their Declaration as soon as possible to avoid the
Sang M. Lee