Can you name holy stuff that ONLY happened in catholicism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fabio_rocha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

fabio_rocha

Guest
I’ve heard that incorruptible corps and Eucharistic miracles only happened in Catholicism. Is it true? I also thought that stigmas only appeared to catholic people but unfortunately that’s not true. Do you guys know more stuff like this?
 
This is a very complex consideration. Extensive research by you would be appropriate. I would imagine that to answer these questions correctly, one would have to have a extremely strong body of knowledge in this area. I would never use the word “stuff” regarding Catholic premises. From my readings I believe stigmas can be experienced by any truly devote Christian. This is Gods choice, not mans. I would also like to see others comment on this very interesting topic. …Give and Forgive…Jim
 
Things like Our Lady of Fatima, or Guadalupe. Purely Catholic ideas AFAIK.
 
Depending upon how broadly you mean “Catholicism”, I feel safe to say that only the Real Presence in the Eucharist occurs here.

In such terms, I include the Orthodox and other churches with valid Holy Orders.
 
Depending on how broad “holy stuff” is…

The list of books that are considered to be the Word of God (the Canon of Scripture) happened only in Catholicism (in 382 AD).
 
I’ve heard that incorruptible corps and Eucharistic miracles only happened in Catholicism. Is it true? I also thought that stigmas only appeared to catholic people but unfortunately that’s not true. Do you guys know more stuff like this?
I don’t think you’ll find supernatural manifestations that are exclusively Catholic or Christian. Two reasons: one is that Satan, who was an angel before he rebelled, can imitate such things - remember that Pharoah’s magicians could replicate the signs that Moses gave. The other reason is good, not evil - the Holy Spirit is not limited by human divisions and definitions. Remember the scene in the New Testament where the Apostles had stopped someone who wasn’t one of their group but was performing exorcisms in Jesus’ name?

Also, St. Paul warns against desiring/seeking the “show-off” gifts, reminding us that the greatest gifts are faith, hope and charity . . .

Sally
 
If you are suggesting that the truth of Catholicism can be proven by some sort of uniqueness here I thin you may be out of luck.
Even Buddha was said to be conceived without sex. Catholic apologists have always said this was a legend and ours is not. But then Buddhists no doubt opine the same so that is no argument if we start out as agnostic.
 
I’ve heard that incorruptible corps and Eucharistic miracles only happened in Catholicism. Is it true? I also thought that stigmas only appeared to catholic people but unfortunately that’s not true. Do you guys know more stuff like this?
Mystical experiences, for one, a la those of many of the saints, seems to be largely a Catholic phenomena, as far as the reporting of them goes.
 
Mystical experiences, for one, a la those of many of the saints, seems to be largely a Catholic phenomena, as far as the reporting of them goes.
Surely you have heard of the Priests and Holy Men/Women of other religions and ancient civilsations who go into trances/ecstacy and prophecy, levitate,heal etc etc.

Even the Sistine Chapel has icons of the Delphic Sybils of Greece.

Christian apologists of course wouldn’t give them the name of “mystic experiences”, probably call them witchcraft or black magic or voodoo or something … yet that is clearly what they are … a culturally based analogue of what we European Christians call “mystical experience.”
 
Surely you have heard of the Priests and Holy Men/Women of other religions and ancient civilsations who go into trances/ecstacy and prophecy, levitate,heal etc etc.

Even the Sistine Chapel has icons of the Delphic Sybils of Greece.

Christian apologists of course wouldn’t give them the name of “mystic experiences”, probably call them witchcraft or black magic or voodoo or something … yet that is clearly what they are … a culturally based analogue of what we European Christians call “mystical experience.”
I’m going by the Catholic traditional usage-which refers to experiences specifically orchestrated by God-not merely supernatural.
 
I’m going by the Catholic traditional usage-which refers to experiences specifically orchestrated by God-not merely supernatural.
I don’t know of a “traditional Catholic usage” that sounds like this definition.

I think if you look up the traditional meaning of “supernatural” there is not any “merely” about it. Nothing trumps a supernatural experience - not even praeter-natural phenomena.
 
I don’t know of a “traditional Catholic usage” that sounds like this definition.
Then I’d study more about it-perhaps starting with Catholic mystics such as Teresa of Avila. The Catholic Encyclopedia has some general info on it as well.
I think if you look up the traditional meaning of “supernatural” there is not any “merely” about it. Nothing trumps a supernatural experience - not even praeter-natural phenomena.
I didn’t say anything trumps it. But a supernatural experience could be demonic, so a supernatural experience alone isn’t necessarily one that would be respected, coveted, or sought after by a believer regardless of its profundity.
 
Then I’d study more about it-perhaps starting with Catholic mystics such as Teresa of Avila. The Catholic Encyclopedia has some general info on it as well.
FH I was politely asking you to detail/define what you understand by “I’m going by the Catholic traditional usage”. I believe your understanding is somewhat subjective and spiritualist/new-age and in fact not traditional Catholic at all.
But a supernatural experience could be demonic, so a supernatural experience alone isn’t necessarily one that would be respected.
And this statement reinforces my observation. I don’t think you really understand what the Catholic Church traditionally means by “supernatural” at all.

You are actually confusing preternatural with supernatural.
It may be of help for you to also look up the difference between “gratiae gratis datae” and sanctifying grace.
 
I have no idea how you could go from this:
Mystical experiences, for one, a la those of many of the saints, seems to be largely a Catholic phenomena, as far as the reporting of them goes.
And this:
I’m going by the Catholic traditional usage-which refers to experiences specifically orchestrated by God-not merely supernatural.
To this:
I believe your understanding is somewhat subjective and spiritualist/new-age and in fact not traditional Catholic at all.
And since all grace is supernatural-and the means to Catholic mystical experiences in any case-it makes no difference at this point to even bring this up:
It may be of help for you to also look up the difference between “gratiae gratis datae” and sanctifying grace.
 
I have no idea how you could go from this:

And this:

To this:

And since all grace is supernatural-and the means to Catholic mystical experiences in any case-it makes no difference at this point to even bring this up:
Never mind, you obviously have more theology degrees than I and there is nothing I can help you with.
 
Never mind, you obviously have more theology degrees than I and there is nothing I can help you with.
Try anyway-I’ve honestly not figured out what you’re meaning to say. How do you distinguish between mystical experiences? How is the union with God, sought after or in any case experienced by some Christians believers, similar to experiences in other religions? Are they all a matter of grace-are they supernatural or not?
 
I believe your understanding is somewhat subjective and spiritualist/new-age and in fact not traditional Catholic at all.
Or let me pose a question: Was St Paul’s Damascus Road experience, especially the vision and revelation given, or Peter’s revelation in Matt 16:16, “subjective and spiritualist/new-age” because they, alone, experienced them?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top