P
- Status
S
SongofShepherds
Guest
relevantradio.com/NETCOMMUNITY/Page.aspx?pid=635&srcid=641 Catholic RadioUmmm…I don’t think so.
Professor Judith Gentle, Anglican Theologian: she makes this statement on the April 25, 20008 Drew Mariani show and it set me back when I heard this, this show is in the archives and will be available for some time online.
Now, I’ve got to listen to the whole thing again…I do not find this confirmed on the web, but I believe she says this here.
S
SongofShepherds
Guest
Researching it this morning, I wonder if she may have meant to say Luther who I am led to believe kept this devotion but one can hear it for themselves and this radio program will be in the archives I would guess for another 10 days for certain.
P
peary
Guest
S
SongofShepherds
Guest
I wondered when she said this, and if she did about it on the relevant radio program.
On this subject, none of us should forget Calvinists poisoned St. Louis De Montfort, so known in the devotion of the Rosary, the poison did not kill him, but it broke his health according to the Montfort Missionaries movie.
R
Righteousone
Guest
Didn’t know that…those mean Calvinists.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
All I’m suggesting is
- 1. that for some reason apparitions never - or hardly ever - seem to occur to people who are unlikely to accept them as valid - & that
- 2. these things seem seldom or never to happen to people whose choices have massive influence on the rest of the world
**It’s true that neither objection is water-tight: Jesus was pretty unimportant in the greater scheme of things too, yet God was Incarnate as a Jewish peasant, not as an Emperor - but it doesn’t follow that the objections have nothing in them. **
Maybe she’s a class warrior. **When she appears only to people of a certain kind, people whose testimony can be explained by their own character or circumstances at that, such a characteristic of the apparitions does not increase confidence that the alleged apparitions are indeed supernatural; they can be explained & accounted for too readily to carry conviction
Real apparitions should be harder to account for - & apparitions to people with sharply-honed critical skills would fall into that class. But an apparition to three Catholic shepherd-children ? The wonder would be for them not to believe it genuine. And that raises its own problems.As for the dancing sun, etc. - is it quite certain that 70K is the correct (or nearly correct) figure ? What in fact did happen ? The occurrences deserve to be subjected to the same rigorous scrutiny as any other event said to have been witnessed by many - that it is religious, does not alter this; though such an enquiry will have problems of its own, arising from the nature of its subject-matter.
Is there any reason why (some of) these apparitions cannot have been purely internal, visible only (?) **
to the eyes of the mind or soul ? To put it another way: if an apparition of the BVM is said to be genuine, does that amount to saying the BVM was spatially present to the recipient ? If not, how does that differ from saying an apparition was a purely intellectual vision, a thing “in the mind” of the recipient ? This aspect of the matter needs more discussion than it has so far received. **
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
**Why would materialists do that ? **
It could always be said in reply, that God could work in them so that they would believe.
The problem is, that every possibility imaginable is open to objection. ISTM this whole issue of apparitions is part of the far more complicated reality of Providence
Including moral agency, & much much much much more.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
A few points:
**1. Children are often anything but “pure” or “innocent” - that was as true in the past as now BTW. Is God so powerless that He cannot cause the BVM to appear to anyone else ? It would not be right to sentimentalise them - for they are as capable of sin as we are. **2. For the young to "[p]ossess “information beyond their learning” used to be regarded as a sign of witchcraft (or of possession - I forget which)
**3. That is your guess - & only a guess, though a plausible one. **
**4. As it is a guess, it does not explain the facts adequately for certain; it *may *explain them adequately, or not: something dodgy can often be given an explanation that, unknown to the explainer, makes it look innocent when it is not
****Why should an unfavourable explanation be out of the question ? Children are often great attention-seekers - & this may be the explanation for claims to have been given “secrets”. **
P
peary
Guest
All I’m suggesting is
**The Gospel is spread through through the heart of one individual to another, then to another, and then another until a group of believers is formed; hence, the Gospel is spread through the Church. Those who belong to the Church are the ones who influence the rest of world. The Church does this on a massive scale. ****
- 1. that for some reason apparitions never - or hardly ever - seem to occur to people who are unlikely to accept them as valid - & that
- 2. these things seem seldom or never to happen to people whose choices have massive influence on the rest of the world
**
**So is it really too much for the BVM to appear to one or or two of those unimportant, God-forsaken, politicians, every so often ? She seems - apart from anything else - to have an extremely pronounced bias against such people
Politicians do not sense God. Usually they sense their political careers.
When she appears only to people of a certain kind, people whose testimony can be explained by their own character or circumstances at that, such a characteristic of the apparitions does not increase confidence that the alleged apparitions are indeed supernatural; they can be explained & accounted for too readily to carry conviction
It doesn’t raise any problems at all. Children have less mental garbage to consider when confronted by a theophany such as an appearance of the Blessed Mother. They do not have the theological know-how to begin interpreting what they hear; it is a matter of fact transmittance. And, even the Bible quotes Jesus as saying, “Let the little children come to Me, for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven” and "Unless you become as little children you will not enter the Kingdom."
As for the dancing sun, etc. - is it quite certain that 70K is the correct (or nearly correct) figure ? What in fact did happen ? The occurrences deserve to be subjected to the same rigorous scrutiny as any other event said to have been witnessed by many - that it is religious, does not alter this; though such an enquiry will have problems of its own, arising from the nature of its subject-matter.
This has been already been dealt with in both a theological and scientific way for the past 90 years. The result has always been that something occurred with the sun over a thirty-five square mile area around Fatima that was seen, not only by the estimated 70,000 people who showed up on October 13th, 1917 for the promised Miracle, but also the thousands who saw the solar phenomenon within that area around Fatima. No explanation is possible.
**Is there any reason why (some of) these apparitions cannot have been purely internal, visible only (?) **
Some are.
** if an apparition of the BVM is said to be genuine, does that amount to saying the BVM was spatially present to the recipient ? If not, how does that differ from saying an apparition was a purely intellectual vision, a thing “in the mind” of the recipient ?** This aspect of the matter needs more discussion** than it has so far received. **
**Scientifically, we do not know how the mind is able to pick up seemingly nonphysical appearances such as this. They cannot be just “in the mind” of the recipient since there are others involved (i.e., the 3 children at Fatima who saw the Virgin at the same time and instant; the 2 children of LaSalette; the group of people at Knock, the children of Pontmain, Beauraing, Banneux, Kibeho, and even nonapproved appearances at Garabandal, or Medjugorje. This lends, for the most part, authenticity.
I would say that appearances are spatial (in time and space but yet not affected by it). **
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
FWIW:
- Calvin-bashing is OTT
- That page is about as fair-minded & accurate to him as (say) the Chick site is to Catholics
**If people simply must discuss or vilify Calvin or Calvinists or Calvinism, why can’t they do so on another thread ? **
As for the suggestion in this one, his commentary on Luke 1.26-33 is not the work of a man who thought of 1.28 as a prayer - so the OP is probably thinking of Luther:
- ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom31.ix.vi.html
Aren’t apparitions meant to lead to our own conversions, rather than to help us remember injuries, real or no ? How does keeping such things in mind help us, or glorify God ?
L
LilyM
Guest
They wouldn’t dismiss her as the devil, then, but perhaps as a mere unreal hallucination instead of a quite real supernatural being.**Why would materialists do that ? **
It could always be said in reply, that God could work in them so that they would believe.
The problem is, that every possibility imaginable is open to objection. ISTM this whole issue of apparitions is part of the far more complicated reality of Providence
And God could work on them only if they were willing to let Him! He’s not rude enough to let His mother appear nor stay where neither He nor she are welcome. :nope:
Given they didn’t believe in God at all, they probably wouldn’t acknowledge an apparition if it bit them on the nose.
C
Charlie_Zeaiter
Guest
The gospel is all about faith. Why would an apparition occur for somebody who wouldn’t have enough faith to believe it?**… So is it really too much for the BVM to appear to one or or two of those unimportant, God-forsaken, politicians, every so often ? She seems - apart from anything else - to have an extremely pronounced bias against such people
What’s next? You’ll probably ask for Jesus to appear to non-Christians so that they may believe too.
P
peary
Guest
**By that logic, Jesus shouldn’t have appeared after the resurrection either, since His words were all about faith. Why did He appear to his disciples? Didn’t they have enough faith to believe it? And what about Thomas? Appearances are a gift and grace from God. For those to whom the saints appear, and even Christ Himself, they are the faithful. **
S
SongofShepherds
Guest
"Yet while assured of the bishop’s staunch backing, Saint Louis had no relief from the hateful torments to which he had become so well accustomed. Much to the contrary, both Jansenism and Calvinism proved mighty forces to be contended with in the La Rochelle district. But when he converted two of this city’s most prominent and vocal Protestants — one of whom entered a convent of Poor Clares — Calvinist rage could not be quieted. Threats were made against both the converts and Louis Marie. Frequently the great priest was greeted with a hail of stones, and more frequently with cries of “Kill Montfort!” One evening a powerful dose of poison was administered to his broth. Though he swallowed but a mouthful before noticing the deadly presence, the wicked deed was accomplished. "Didn’t know that…those mean Calvinists.
C
Charlie_Zeaiter
Guest
I think that’s crazy because Jesus founding Christianity is completely different to Mary appearing to some of the faithful.
And don’t forget what He told Thomas…
John 20:29 - (Jesus said to Thomas) “Do you believe because you see me? How happy are those who believe without seeing me!”
That’s the beauty of Catholicism and Marian Apparitions; They don’t contradict our faith and they don’t add anything to our faith. It’s just an affirmation of our faith.
L
Lilyflower
Guest
Not necessarily, I know of a non-Catholic man who alleges to have had many apparitions of the BVM and also of many Saints.
I am skeptical of any and all alleged apparitions unless they are formally recognised by Mother Church.
P
peary
Guest
All the more reason for apparitions!
U
ufamtobie
Guest
Church Confirms Virgin Mary Apparitions
AP
Posted: 2008-05-04 23:25:30
Filed Under: World News
PARIS (May 4) - A Roman Catholic bishop said Sunday that the church has officially recognized that the Virgin Mary appeared to a 17th-century shepherd girl in the French Alps.
Photo Gallery
Jean-Pierre Clatot, AFP / Getty Images Apparitions Recognized1 of 4 Visitors attend a mass Sunday in the French Alps where the Catholic Church officially recognized that a shepherd girl saw daily apparitions of the Virgin Mary here beginning in the 1664. She said the apparitions asked her to build a church and a house for priests, which she did.
Speaking at Mass in remarks broadcast nationally on France-2 television, Monsignor Jean-Michel di Falco Leandri said he recognized the “supernatural origin” of the apparitions to 17-year-old Benoite Rencurel from 1664 to 1718.
The bishop, in an interview on France-Info radio, said the decision meant the church “has committed itself in an official way to say to pilgrims ‘you can come here in total confidence.’” The recognition process involved a panel of experts including two theologians and an investigating judge, he said.
Officials at Notre-Dame-du-Laus church say that after four months of daily apparitions starting in May 1664, the Virgin Mary asked Rencurel to build a church and a house to receive priests.
Are you surprised the church officially recognized the Virgin Mary sightings from the 1600s?
No 63% 43,514
Yes 37% 25,978
Note on Poll Results
Total Votes: 69,492
Are you surprised the church officially recognized the Virgin Mary sightings from the 1600s?
No 63%
Yes 37%
Ufamtobie
AP
Posted: 2008-05-04 23:25:30
Filed Under: World News
PARIS (May 4) - A Roman Catholic bishop said Sunday that the church has officially recognized that the Virgin Mary appeared to a 17th-century shepherd girl in the French Alps.
Photo Gallery
Jean-Pierre Clatot, AFP / Getty Images Apparitions Recognized1 of 4 Visitors attend a mass Sunday in the French Alps where the Catholic Church officially recognized that a shepherd girl saw daily apparitions of the Virgin Mary here beginning in the 1664. She said the apparitions asked her to build a church and a house for priests, which she did.
Speaking at Mass in remarks broadcast nationally on France-2 television, Monsignor Jean-Michel di Falco Leandri said he recognized the “supernatural origin” of the apparitions to 17-year-old Benoite Rencurel from 1664 to 1718.
The bishop, in an interview on France-Info radio, said the decision meant the church “has committed itself in an official way to say to pilgrims ‘you can come here in total confidence.’” The recognition process involved a panel of experts including two theologians and an investigating judge, he said.
Officials at Notre-Dame-du-Laus church say that after four months of daily apparitions starting in May 1664, the Virgin Mary asked Rencurel to build a church and a house to receive priests.
Are you surprised the church officially recognized the Virgin Mary sightings from the 1600s?
No 63% 43,514
Yes 37% 25,978
Note on Poll Results
Total Votes: 69,492
Are you surprised the church officially recognized the Virgin Mary sightings from the 1600s?
No 63%
Yes 37%
Ufamtobie
L
Lilyflower
Guest
Sixtus once postulated that the BVM is here with her Son’s Church and has been since her assumption into Heaven, so too many Saints ‘who continue to walk with men’ much the same way the Lord was with us after His Resurrection.
Sixtus postulated that actually the Church on earth and the Church at rest were fundamentally not only one but so closely linked that the barrier between them [death] was almost transparent, that is: you could almost see through it.
That God had almost tongue in cheek allowed His Church present and past to be one. The invisible barrier almost non-exstent except for the fact the Church present has yet to pass through it. That was its only reality.
I have no idea if Sixtus was right or wrong. But if he was right then it suggests that the BVM most of the Saints and Holy men and women while enjoying the privilages of Heaven are not only interceding for us but are also present among us to comfort us.
- Status