On May 2nd, the day of the liturgical memorial of the great bishop and scholar of the universal Church, St. Athanasius of Alexandria, we recall in the Dioceses of Herzegovina the 46th anniversary of the episcopal ordination that was held in the parish church of St. Peter and Paul in Mostar, during which Bishop Petar Čule together with Archbishop Smiljan Čekada of Sarajevo and Archbishop Frane Franić of Split-Makarska, ordained as bishop, Father Pavao Žanić a priest of the Archdiocese of Split-Makarska and Rector of the Minor Seminary. He was appointed as coadjutor bishop, that is, successor of Bishop Čule on 9 December 1970. He took over the administration of the Dioceses nine years later, on the feast of the Exaltation of Holy Cross, 14 September 1980, thereby becoming the residential bishop of the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno and the Apostolic Administrator of the Diocese of Trebinje-Mrkan. His episcopal motto was the same as the one he used for his ordination to the priesthood: In Faith, Hope and Charity. Between 3 November 1988 and 14 January 1990, he was appointed by St. John Paul II, to also care for the Diocese of Dubrovnik as its Apostolic Administrator.
Upon reaching the age of 75 (born on 20 May 1918), the Holy Father accepted his resignation. On 23 July 1993, he retired to his hometown of Kaštel Novi, Croatia. He died in Split on 11 January 2000 and was buried in his family’s tomb in his home parish cemetery.
From the beginning of his episcopal ministry as coadjutor and cooperator of Bishop Čule in Mostar, he was actively involved:
- In the construction and completion of the Cathedral of Mary Mother of the Church in Mostar (1975-1980);
- In the many pastoral activities of the dioceses: Confirmations in all the parishes, Parochial Missions in many parishes, Visit to missionaries in Africa in 1983, Pastoral visits throughout Herzegovina;
- In the pastoral care for the family, also as the President of the Council for the Family of the Bishops’ Conference of Yugoslavia (1973-1990);
- In caring for the clergy from the minor seminary onwards: between 1980 to 1993 he ordained 29 priests; he sent 8 to continue studies in Rome and elsewhere, another 2 were sent to other faculties to study literature and music in Zagreb, and during his episcopal ministry 8 of his priests were in the missions in Africa, while 18 were in Croatian parishes and missions abroad. He also held recollections and spiritual retreats to priests, seminarians and religious sisters;
- In monitoring religious life in the dioceses;
- In promoting healthy Marian devotion by preaching on Mary in the parishes, especially at the Shrine of the Queen of Peace in Hrasno (Diocese of Trebinje-Mrkan), then as the leader of ten pilgrimages, usually by train, to Lourdes and Fatima;
- In launching “Crkva na kamenu” - “The Church on the Rock”, in the 1980’s, the diocesan monthly pastoral periodical, in which he often wrote many articles;
- In establishing the Diocesan Caritas of the Dioceses of Mostar-Duvno and Trebinje-Mrkan in 1982, thereby empathizing with the sufferings of the marginal and the poor;
- In constructing a retirement home for priests in Bijelo Polje between 1982 and 1984;
- In presiding over the celebrations of the Millennium of the Diocese of Trebinje-Mrkan in 1984, by dedicating the centuries-old parish church in Trebinje on 17 June that year, and asking the Holy See to raise the same church by formal decree to the dignity of a cathedral;
- In establishing a Theological Institute in Mostar in 1987, which the communists immediately banned under that name, however whose title was restored in 1991;
- In introducing a mandatory marriage preparation course lasting several days, for engaged couples in 1987;
- In celebrating on 2 June 1991 in Mostar, the 50th anniversary of his ordination to priesthood: 1941-1991, and the Silver Jubilee of his episcopal ordination on 5 May 1996 in Mostar: 1971-1996.
For this occasion, Pope John Paul II on 21 May 1991, sent these words to the Bishop: “We are aware of the hardships and troubles of your pastoral ministry that have made your burden even more bitter, however, you have never been deprived of fearless faith; indeed, your love for everyone, as well as your great devotion and your diligence in choosing and educating young men who are called to the Lord’s service have grown to a great extent.” On 29 May 1991, Cardinal Jozef Tomko, Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, sent him a telegram that contained the following words: “While whole-heartedly uniting myself to the exalted message sent by the Vicar of Christ to you, dear Bishop, on the happy occasion of your two decades of suffered and yet fruitful episcopal ministry, directed entirely towards the good of the two beloved Churches of Mostar-Duvno and Trebinje-Mrkan as well as elsewhere where the supreme trust of the Holy Father invited you to generously dedicate your apostolic efforts under the heavenly intercession of the Most Holy Virgin Mary, Mother of the Redeemer, whom you have always gently loved and preached on to your beloved faithful as the Mother and Helper of God...”.
Then Bishop Žanić experienced the tragedy of the war from 1991 to 1993:
Several thousand of his faithful were killed, tens of thousands had to go into exile, leaving behind destroyed property. He experienced the burning down of the diocesan chancery building, the destruction of the cathedral, the damaging, destruction or demolition of more than 100 parish and affiliated churches, rectories, offices, monasteries and cemeteries.
From 1980 to 1993, as his first concern, he followed “The Herzegovinian case”. During the turbulent times in the history of this country under the communist regime, he led the dioceses with true love for the Church and in faithfulness to the Holy See. This was recognized by the Holy See, which entrusted to him for some time, the governance over three dioceses: Mostar-Duvno, Trebinje-Mrkan and Dubrovnik.
From 1981 to 1993, he followed the “Medjugorje phenomenon” by establishing the First Commission from 1982 to 1984, followed by an extension of the same from 1984 to 1986.
As a Marian bishop, he was at first open to the “apparitions”. In his first statements, he defended the priests before the communist attacks as well as the possibility of Marian apparitions. He believed that the “visionaries” were having some inner experiences, but he was very careful that their subjectivity would not be replaced by supernatural “apparitions”.
That is to say, the so-called “apparition” in Medjugorje, known as “Our Lady” from the first moments of the so-called apparitions, appeared not only in a very strange fashion, but also in a way completely unworthy of the Immaculate Virgin Mary. This behavior became even more worrisome in the following months when the “apparition” launched - through the self-proclaimed seers of Medjugorje - a series of charges against this faithful servant of the Church and very devout son of the Mother of God.
In response to many demands of the faithful regarding the behavior of the Medjugorje “apparition” during the initial period of the apparent apparitions in St. James parish, located in this diocese, as his successor, I feel obliged to present this faithful servant of the Church, thereby defending him from many lies and slander. What follows is a collection of documentation between the period of December 1981 and January 1983, relating to a truly strange phenomenon that the “apparition” of Medjugorje, according to the documented statements of the “visionaries” and their “spiritual leader” Fr. Tomislav Vlašić, OFM (who in 2009, due to serious offenses and misdeeds was dismissed from the Franciscan, OFM, order and laicized), directed various sharp threats and attacks against Bishop Pavao Žanić of Mostar-Duvno, while at the same time placing under its protection two Franciscans known for their disobedience towards the decisions of their Religious superiors and the Holy See.
These interpretations, based upon authentic documents kept in the Archives of the Diocesan Chancery Office in Mostar, are necessary due to the serious and unjust attacks and defamation of the bishop, who was a humble and faithful minister of the Church, who can only defend himself through his writings and works. All of this especially in the light of the “pastoral activities” of the former Franciscan Tomislav Vlašić, OFM, “the mystic and charismatic magician”, founder of a new venture in the style of New Age called “Nucleo Centrale” (Central Nucleus) which from 2012 with the help of modern means of communication now operates globally, and also in the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno.
I. – “THE HERZEGOVINIAN CASE”
As an introduction to the article, I present only a few lines on “The Herzegovinian case”, of which an entire study has been drafted for the time frame from 1881 to 1980.
What is understood by the “Herzegovinian case” is the distribution of parishes between the Franciscan friars and the Diocesan priests in the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno (currently with 177,000 believers), excluding the Diocese of Trebinje-Mrkan (currently with 20,000).
The Solemn Decision / Decisio solemnis. At the time of the creation of a regular Church hierarchy in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1881, this diocese had only one secular priest from Dalmatia, Fr. Klemo Sumić (1877-1923). How the Franciscan friars succeeded in acquiring a monopoly on the pastoral ministry over the centuries in the area that today covers the local Church of Mostar-Duvno – we will not interpret here. At the request of the Holy See, the Franciscan Bishop Paškal Buconjić, OFM, after 18 years of hesitation, along with the Franciscan Provincial Father Luka Begić, OFM, proposed a distribution of the parishes that was approved by the Holy See by Solemn Decision / Decisio solemnis in 1899 and officially proclaimed in Mostar only in 1908. According to this distribution:
24 of the existing and affluent parishes remained under the Provincial religious administration / pro mensa regulari, i.e., about 2/3 of the faithful and territory of the Diocese;
12 existing parishes listed by name, were destined for the future diocesan clergy;
12 parishes listed by name, however non-existent at the time, were left to the bishop’s free disposal, i.e., the bishop could entrust them to the diocesan clergy.
The Decree. Leaving aside the various troubles and resistances, as well as the more or less successful outmaneuvering of the Decision, we wish to emphasize that the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, under whose jurisdiction this Diocese remained until 2006 (having heard the opinions of other Dicasteries involved), on 6 June 1975 issued a Decree entitled Romanis Pontificibus, approved by Pope Paul VI in a special form / sub forma specifica. According to this Decree, the Franciscans were supposed to leave to the free disposition of the bishop, 8 parishes (designated in the Decision of 1899), and, moreover, allow the division of the parish entrusted to them in Mostar so that a cathedral parish could be created. The Decree was not published in Latin or in Italian, but only the “official version in Croatian” was disclosed. The Franciscan General Administration in Rome published the Latin text in its Acta, only 15 years later, in 1989. Today the text can also be found in English.
The Provincial Administration of the OFM Franciscans of Mostar responded in 1976 to the Pope with their explicit: We cannot / Non possumus, implement the Decree of 1975.
The Holy See responded by removing the Provincial Administration that same year. The imposed local administration was only considered as “ad instar”, i.e., the Minister General of the Order managed the Province from Rome with his delegate or sub-delegate, and then through the “ad instar” provincial, from 1976 to 2000.
The Cathedral Parish in Mostar. According to the Decree Romanis Pontificibus, a cathedral parish was to be established in Mostar by dividing the only existing city parish of St. Peter and Paul, that had been entrusted to the Franciscans before and after. After the erection of the cathedral of Mary Mother of the Church, which was consecrated on 14 September 1980 by Cardinal Franjo Šeper, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a significant part of the Franciscans in the Province considered the Decision on the Cathedral Parish as well as the Decree of 1975 as unjust. Some Friars in Mostar, supported by groups of fellow supporters, showed excessive disobedience by taking over chapels in cemeteries belonging to the new parish, thereby disrupting the diocesan priests of the cathedral in their ministry. Amongst these were two Franciscan chaplains (associate pastors) of Mostar, Fr. Ivan Prusina, OFM, (today pastor of a Croatian mission in Switzerland), and Fr. Ivica Vego, OFM, (who left the Franciscan Order and the Priesthood in 1988).
II. – “MESSAGES” AGAINST BISHOP ŽANIĆ IN THE MEDJUGORJE “APPARITIONS”
Bishop Žanić inherited “The Herzegovinian case” as coadjutor and as the Ordinary of Mostar-Duvno. Since he was fully confident in the decisions and decrees of the Holy See, he sought to resolve this intricate case, to devote himself to other pastoral activities. Hence, upon taking over the administration of the diocese and remaining loyal to the Successor of Peter, he insisted with the Holy See that these decisions be effectively enforced in Herzegovina. St. John Paul II showed such understanding of the situation presented by Bishop Žanić, that he invested his authority by allowing the Congregation for Consecrated Life to dismiss from the Order of the Friars Minor, those who would not obey the decisions of their Religious superiors and the Holy See, without allowing them the opportunity to appeal to ecclesiastical courts.
Amongst the ranks of the Franciscan fathers, the two previously mentioned associate pastors in Mostar were particularly disobedient regarding the Church decisions. They were at the forefront in impeding the pastoral life of the new cathedral parish in Mostar. It is precisely here that in a strange way, the voice of the “apparition” of Medjugorje entered the scene by attacking Bishop Žanić, who was faithful to the Holy See, while defending the two disobedient chaplains in Mostar.
- 24 June 1981 - After the commencement of the story of the Medjugorje phenomenon, in the village of Bijakovići located in the parish of Medjugorje, a group was formed of four girls: Vicka and Ivanka Ivanković, Mirjana Dragićević and Marija Pavlović, and two boys: Ivan Dragićević and Jakov Čolo, aged 10 to 16, claiming to have apparitions of Our Lady every day. Fr. Jozo Zovko, OFM, was the pastor of Medjugorje and Fr. Zrinko Čuvalo, OFM the associate pastor. Thus, the “Medjugorje phenomenon” began and accompanied “The Herzegovinian case”.
Among the first “messages” of these “apparitions” was one that immediately supported the Franciscans with regard to “The Herzegovinian case”. From December of that same year, the “apparition” openly sided with the disobedient Franciscans, and thereby against the diocesan bishop Pavao Žanić, who was the competent Church authority.
1. At the very beginning of the “apparitions” - Bishop Žanić wrote to the Vice-President of the Bishops’ Conference of Yugoslavia – “Fr. Nikola Radić, OFM, the delegate of the Superior General of the OFM Order for Herzegovina, told me a few days after the beginning of the ‘apparitions’ in Medjugorje: ‘A friar from Široki Brijeg swept in and said that Our Lady has appeared in Medjugorje and that she said that the Friars are right!’ The Friars defending Medjugorje have turned this into a defense of their disobedience to the bishop and the Holy See and in defense of their material interests.”
Despite this and despite various other inconsistencies, deceptions and manipulations, Bishop Žanić was open in the first months of the alleged “apparitions”, yet always careful with regard to the subjectivity or supernaturalness of the “apparitions”.
However, when this “apparition”, called “The Gospa [Madonna] of Medjugorje” began blaming the bishop himself, who was always devotedly Marian to the highest degree, the bishop took a stance of open denial against the authenticity of the “apparitions”. We now present the chronological course of the attacks of the “apparition” of Medjugorje on the Bishop:
2. 19 December 1981 – The “seer” Vicka, wrote in her Agenda: “I asked about the Herzegovinian problem, especially regarding Fr. Ivica Vego. Our Lady said that bishop Žanić is to blame for the entire mess, regarding Fr. Ivica Vego she said that he was not guilty, but that the bishop has all authority. She told him to stay in Mostar and not to leave there.”
- On the same day, Fr. Tomislav Vlašić, OFM, in the Chronicle of the Parish of Medjugorje, questions the “seer” Vicka and writes: “What did Our Lady say exactly: Did she say that the bishop was to blame for the mess in the diocese or, in the recent cases, (related to Ivica [Vego] and Ivan [Prusina]) he made some wrong moves? Vicka told me that Our Lady said that the bishop made some wrong moves, but that she cannot literally repeat it.” While carefully keeping in mind the difference suggested by Fr. Vlašić, Vicka repeats the phrase as suggested by Fr. Vlašić. She heard it from “Our Lady” yet she cannot “literally repeat it”!
3. 3 January 1982 - In Vicka’s Agenda we read: “The bishop is not keeping order and therefore he is to blame. He will not be bishop forever. I will show justice in the kingdom”, “Our Lady” threatens the diocesan bishop through her “seer”.
- On the same day in the Chronicle written by Fr. Vlašić, the following entry appears: “The children had a vision. The most important thing is what the bishop later specifically dealt with. That is, following my proposal, to verify the truth of Our Lady’s response on 19.12.81. regarding the chaplains, I asked the visionaries to inquire about this once again.
The replies of the seers:
- Our Mother told the dear bishop that he was a bit rash in his decision and that he should think this over again and listen to both sides. She asks him to be just and patient.[...] The bishop is making a mess and therefore he is guilty. He will not be Bishop forever, I will show justice in the Kingdom.”
4. 11 January 1982 we read in the Chronicle of the parish: “They asked again about the two chaplains of Mostar and Our Lady repeated twice what she told them before”. Hence, even what she said about the bishop.
5. 14 January 1982 – The “seer” Vicka openly lies to Bishop Žanić. In the Appendix to the “Information” section of the Official Diocesan Bulletin of the Dioceses, after having spoken with the “seers”, which was tape-recorded, Bishop Žanić writes: “On 14 January 1982, the children came to me saying that Our Lady sent them (V.[Icka] I.[vanković], M.[arija] P.[avlovic], and J.[akov] Č.[olo].
- Our Lady said that you acted rashly in some things. That’s all she said. [...]
- Someone told me that you had a message for the chaplains of Mostar [the Bishop said].
- We did not ....
- You did not? [The bishop said surprisingly].
- Which chaplains?
- Those in Mostar.
- It’s nothing.
- I guess others told me incorrectly [the bishop added]
- Somebody misinformed you and your misheard it.
During the conversation, I asked the children several times: Is there anything else concerning the bishop? ... Try to remember something else that would concern me ... The answer was negative.”
6. 20 January 1982 - According to Vicka’s Agenda: “Our Lady, what is it with the bishop? Will he change his position? - Our Lady answered, I will not rush. I’m waiting to see if he will ease up according to my messages, which I sent through you”.
- According to the Chronicle on the same day, “Our Lady” proclaimed: “The bishop was too rash in his decision”.
7. 3 April 1982 - Bishop Žanić published what he recorded on the tape-recorder:
“On 3 April 1982. V.[icka] I.[vanković] and J.[akov] Č.[olo] came to me as directed by Our Lady.
- Our Lady reproached us for not telling you everything the last time... She spoke about this case and smiled, and said that she herself would calm all this down.... I have no idea what it’s all about... and then she smiled. (...) [said Vicka].
- Why didn’t you mention the names of those Franciscans they want to throw out? [the Bishop asked].
- Regarding these Friars she said that they too like to work in the Church, as do all the others, to say Mass, the priests are not guilty of anything, she gave them names, and I did not know them and later I saw them...
Prusina and Vego.
She said that they are not guilty of anything, and repeated this twice.
And J.[akov] heard it, and M.[arija] was there also.
- Did she tell you about them before you were with me the last time (14 January 1982), and therefore reproached you for not telling me? [the Bishop asked]
- Yes! That’s why he reproached me three times for not coming, for not saying...
- Once again, we haven’t understood each other. (I insist, in order to emphasize the contradiction found in the answer of 14 January 1982).
- The last time you were with me, did Our Lady tell you before we met to tell me this?...
- Yes! But I did not say this, so she reproached me for not doing my duty, and I was talking a lot, but I could not remember... Then [the Madonna] said, I think it’s a great shame this unheard-of quarrel between the Franciscans and the Diocesans. The people are making peace but it’s all in vain for them (the priests)...
- Jakov: She said it was a big blow to the Church ...
- Vicka: Every day she tells us something... and about you, that you did not act justly.
- Jakov: That you also made this mistake by doing what you did.
- Vicka: That there are some mistakes, but what do I know...
- Wherein? [the Bishop asks].
- In this Franciscan case.
- So what do you think I did wrong and thereby was mistaken?
- Jakov: She said something about the Franciscan case between Friars and Diocesans.
- And do you know what this is about?
- Jakov: I don’t know.
- I would like to resolve this if I knew what I did wrong, but I listen to the Pope and whatever the Pope orders me to do, I do [said the bishop].
- Vicka: You also must obey someone, but I would rather listen to Our Lady than my own mother... I would surely love to listen more to Our Lady rather than the Pope, certainly!
- Our Lady cannot speak out against the Pope... You yourself must also be very careful and suspicious if she says something against the bishop [the bishop added].
- Vicka: There are no doubts here. I hear this the same way I hear you now (recorded).”
Then Bishop Žanić continues: “When I told this to Fr. Tomislav Vlašić OFM, who was ministering in Medjugorje, he told me that V.[icka] was temperamental, that she can be impulsive... ‘At one point, sometime between Christmas and the New Year, she told me that Our Lady said that the bishop was to blame for everything in Herzegovina.
I told her that this cannot be...’
I then told him: ‘You shouldn’t have spoken to her at all, but sent her to the bishop. This is manipulating with the children...’” [the bishop said to Father Vlašić].
- These lies of the “seer” and the manipulations of the manipulator Vlašić, were clear proof for Bishop Žanić to take a firm stance regarding the inauthenticity and fabricated nature of the Medjugorje phenomenon.
8. 15 April 1982 - In the Agenda of 1983, we find an entry with “Our Lady’s” words written in Vicka’s handwriting: “The bishop is to blame for this, and there are many who support him.”
- The Chronicle is missing the date of 15 April 1982, which was not delivered to the Chancery Office.
9. 26 April 1982 – In Vicka’s Agenda we read:
- “The bishop - [‘Our Lady’] says – has no real love of God for the two of them”;
- “What the bishop is doing, is not according to God’s will”;
- “The bishop is not acting according to God’s grace”.
- The Chronicle is missing the date of 26 April 1982.
10. 27 June 1982 – The Chronicle states: “To the question: The bishop objects to the fact that you said that Fr. Ivica Vego OFM and Fr. Ivan Prusina OFM are not guilty. He thinks that you are not the true Madonna because you do not respect the decisions of the superiors. Will you explain your position to us? She replied: ‘The superiors should be respected and listened to. But they also make mistakes; they need to seek forgiveness and correct them. The bishop, and even more those who are encouraging him, with their stance are harming the faith...’.”
11. – It is not entirely clear in this whole affair, what the role was of the Slovenian Jesuit priest Radogost Grafenauer, who Bishop Žanić quotes in his booklet:
“Towards the end of January 1983, Fr. Grafenauer, SJ, came to me with the intention of investigating the phenomenon of Medjugorje. He listened to about twenty tapes and then said he would not go to Medjugorje because there is no Madonna there. Following my suggestion, he then went, and after a couple of days he returned as a ‘convert’ of Fr. Vlašić. He brought me a few pages of text, threw it on the table and said:
‘Here bishop, is the Madonna’s message to you’.”
We now quote from the booklet, the conversation between Fr. Grafenauer and the “seer” Vicka Ivanković:
“Graf.: You told the bishop that he was guilty, and that these two (Vego and Prusina) are not guilty and that they can perform their priestly duties (ministries).
Graf.: Can they hear confessions, is this what Our Lady said?
Graf.: If Our Lady said this and the Pope says they cannot...
Vicka: The Pope can say what he likes, I say it the way it is.”
From the conversations of Father Grafenauer and the “seer” Marija Pavlović:
“Marija Pavlović “seer” – We present here a transcript of the tape-recordings of the conversation that Fr. Grafenauer held with her:
Graf.: Did Our Lady say the bishop is guilty?
Graf.: Did she say that Vego and Prusina are not guilty?
Graf.: As soon as Our Lady says that the Bishop is guilty, a person immediately can start doubting that this is not Our Lady... That is, that the seers are spreading the news that the Bishop is guilty...
Marija: That’s what Our Lady told us.
Graf.: This is creating a revolt in Herzegovina and these are not good fruits. People will be angry with the Bishop and they will slander him, and how can Our Lady do something like this... The Church knows that Our Lady is good and she would not do this.
Marija: Our Lady told us so.”
Conclusion. From these elaborated points, based upon the precise words of the children who present themselves even today as “seers” of the same “Madonna” and from the words of their “spiritual leader”, the result is that the “apparition” of Medjugorje attacked the courageous messenger of the truth of the same Mother of God, and on the other hand, defended various forms of disobedience and immorality. Furthermore, she continued doing this up until 1985 (at the end of August 1982; 29 September 1982; 17 January 1984; 14 November 1984; 5 January 1985).
Bishop Žanić, in his 23 years of episcopal ministry, presented himself as a man of complete moral integrity, a preacher of the truth who people gladly listened to, an untiring administrator of the holy sacraments and a brave shepherd, ready to die for the truth and for his faithful flock.
It is undignified to use Our Lady as a “post-office manager” to answer the various inappropriate and manipulative questions of the “seers” and their “spiritual leader” on the “Herzegovinian case” that has lasted a century.
The Madonna is not honored by presenting her as one who manipulates her own holy person, by interfering in the regular administration of the Holy See and the Diocesan bishop of Mostar-Duvno regarding the jurisdiction of the pastoral activities of the priests.
It is undignified that Vicka revised her diary, by writing her imaginative experiences from 1981 and from the first half of 1982 in the 1983 Agenda.
It is undignified that the “seers” are giving, as they gave from the first days of “apparitions,” very disturbing statements that do not correspond to the truth but only deceive the faithful.
Mostar, 2 May 2017
+ Ratko Perić, bishop
 Pavao Žanić, Liber intentionum, 1959-1982: The pontifical appointment of Father Pavao Žanić was made on 9 December, communicated on 28 December 1970, and published on 4 January 1971.
 Tomo Vukšić, editor, Istina oslobađa. Zbornik biskupa Pavla Žanića, [The Truth sets us free. Miscellenea of Bishop Pavao Žanić, Mostar, 1992.
 Ilija Drmić, „Srebrni biskup jubilarac“ [The Bishop's Silver Jubilee], in: Crkva na kamenu, n. 5/1996., pp. 5 and 12.
 T. Vukšić, op.cit. pp. 35-40.
Raspeta Crkva u Bosni i Hercegovini. Uništavanje katoličkih sakralnih objekata u Bosni i Hercegovini, [The Church in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Destruction of Catholic Sacred Sites in Bosnia-Herzegovina], Banja Luka, Sarajevo, Mostar, Zagreb, 1997, p. 208.
 Cf. http: //www.md-tm.ba/clanci/il-dodicesimo-anniversario-della-morte-del-ve ...
 According to Vicka’s Diary (III), dated 28 February 1982, “Our Lady” told the “seers”: “You can thank very much Tomislav for guiding you so beautifully”. Copy in the Chancery Office in Mostar.
 P. Žanić, The current (unofficial) position of the Diocesan Chancery in Mostar relating to the events of Medjugorje, 30 October 1984, n. 22.
 In 2012 Tomislav Vlašić after being laicized, announced that he was a member of the group called “Nucleo Centrale” [Central Nucleus], of 49 beings in the universe chosen by God, along with his associate called Stefania Caterina.
 Marko Perić, Hercegovačka afera [The Herzegovinian case], Mostar, 2002. The diocesan web-link, in Croatian: http://www.md-tm.ba/sites/default/files/hercegovacka_afera.pdf.
Glas Koncila, [The Voice of the Council] 14/1975, p. 4.
 Latin original Romanis Pontificibus published in: Acta Ordinis Fratrum Minorum, Rome, II /1989, p. 85-89.
 The Decree Romanis Pontificibus, in English: http://www.cbismo.com/index.php?mod=vijest&vijest=648
 Archives of the Franciscan Province of Herzegovina, n. 160/76, 10 May 1976.
 Dražen Kutleša – Editor, Ogledalo Pravde, [Mirror of Justice, The Diocesan Chancery in Mostar on the alleged apparitions and messages of Medjugorje], Mostar, 2001, passim, http://www.cbismo.com/files/file/ogledalo_pravde.pdf
 Bishop Pavao Žanić to Archbishop Alojzije Šuštar, Vice-President of the Bishops’ Conference of Yugoslavia, Letter dated 24 November 1983, prot. 1172/1983.
Agenda (1983) of Vicka Ivanković, who entered the date 19.XII.1981. in the Agenda of 1983.
V. Ivanković, Agenda 1983. It regards an 11-page photocopied calendar with Vicka’s own handwritten notes on the “messages” of the “apparition” to the disobedient religious priests, Ivan Prusina OFM and Ivica Vego OFM, the chaplains of Mostar with the following nine disordered dates: 19-XII-1981; 3-I-1982; 11-I-1982; 20-I-1982; 26-IV-1982; 29-IX-1982; end of August 1982; 15-IV-1982; 16-IV-1982. The copy was consigned by Vicka to the Chancery of Mostar on 17 May 1983 and is found in the Diocesan Archive of Mostar. See: Nikola Bulat, Istina će vas osloboditi [The truth will set you free], Mostar, 2006, pp. 52-56 and 99. The entire text in Croatian compared to the extracts of Fr. Radogost Grafenauer, Ivi, pp. 100-114.
 Tomislav Vlašić, Kronika ukazanja u župi Međugorje, [Chronicle of the Apparitions in the Parish of Medjugorje], 1981-1983. This regards the Chronicle kept and written by Fr. Tomislav Vlašić from 11 August 1981 to 15 October 1983; The original is in the Parish Rectory of Medjugorje, while a copy was submitted by the author to Bishop Žanić on 16 November 1983, and is kept in the Archives of the Chancery Office in Mostar. Regarding the authenticity of the Chronicle, see the article of N. Bulat, op. cit., pp. 23-33. The book can be found on the portal: http://www.cbismo.com/files/file/bulat_istina.pdf
 “Dodatak ‘Informacijama’” [“Appendix to the ‘Information’”], in: Službeni Vjesnik [Official Bulletin], 2/1982, p. 2. Published as a brochure in: Croatian, French, English, Italian, German; Cf. P. Žanić, Medjugorje, in English, Mostar, 1990, n. 7, p. 4-5.
 Appendix to the “Information” in: Službeni Vjesnik [Official Bulletin], 2/1982, 2-3, Cf. P. Žanić, Medjugorje, Croatian, 1990, n. 8, p.5.
 V. Ivanković, Agenda 1983, 15. IV.1982.; N. Bulat, op. cit., p. 105-106.
 Radogost Grafenauer came from Medjugorje to Mostar on 2 February 1983, and gave Bishop Žanić various quotes taken from documents available in Medjugorje, referring to the “Herzegovinian case” and the two Mostar chaplains. See text in Croatian N. Bulat, op. cit., p. 57-59.
 P. Žanić, Medjugorje, in Croatian, Mostar, 1990, n. 9, p. 5.
 P. Žanić, Medjugorje, in Italian, Mostar, 1990, no. 10, p. 6.
 P. Žanić, Medjugorje, Mostar, 1990, n. 12, p. 7.